ISEC2004
2004 International Solar Energy Conference
MODELING AND DESIGN OF DIRECT SOLAR STEAM GENERATING COLLECTOR FIELDS
M. Eck
German Aerospace Centre (DLR), Institute of Technical
Thermodynamics, Pfaffenwaldring 38-40, 70569 Stuttgart
ABSTRACT
The direct steam generation (DSG) is an attractive option
regarding the economic improvement of parabolic trough
technology for solar thermal electricity generation in the multi
megawatt range. According to [1] and [2] a 10 % reduction of
the LEC is expected compared to conventional SEGS like
parabolic trough power plants. The European DISS project has
proven the feasibility of the DSG process under real solar
conditions at pressures up to 100 bar and temperatures up to
400°C in more than 4000 operation hours [3].
In a next step the detailed engineering for a pre-commercial
DSG solar thermal power plant will be performed. This
detailed engineering of the collector field requires the
consideration of the occurring thermohydraulic phenomena and
their influence on the stability of the absorber tubes.
A design tool has been developed at DLR calculating all
relevant process parameters including pressure drop,
temperature field and stress in the absorber tubes. The models
implemented in this design tool have been validated in detail at
the DISS test facility under real DSG conditions for pressures
between 30 and 100 bar and inner diameters between 50 and 85
mm. The models have been implemented into a MATLAB®
program to allow for a first quick determination of critical
process conditions. Once critical process conditions have been
identified the FEM package ANSYS® is used for a detailed
investigation. This article summarises the models used and
shows the design procedure for a DSG collector field. The
design program has proven to be a reliable tool for the detailed
design of DSG collector fields.
INTRODUCTION
The modelling of the DSG process in parabolic troughs is
of special interest for the detailed design of the collector field.
To identify critical process conditions that may cause e.g. an
overheating of the absorber tubes a tool has been developed
that considers all thermohydraulic aspects relevant for the
design of a collector field such as the flow pattern in the
evaporation section, the pressure loss and the heat transfer.
DETERMINATION OF THE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
A proper design of the collector field has to guarantee that
the stress and the temperature in the absorber tubes do not
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/04/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
July 11 - 14, 2004, Portland, Oregon USA
Proceedings of
2004 Solar Conference
ISEC2004-65040
July 11-14, 2004 Portland, Oregon USA
ISEC2004-65040
W.-D. Steinmann
German Aerospace Centre (DLR) , Institute of Technical
Thermodynamics, Pfaffenwaldring 38-40, 70569 Stuttgart
exceed the limits of the absorber material used. To determine
the stress and the temperature field the most important
boundary conditions such as heat transfer coefficients, phase
distribution, operation pressure, flux distribution and flux
density have to be known. In the subsequent sections the
models for the determination of these boundary conditions will
be presented.
Flow Pattern
In the evaporator section of the collector loop a two-phase
flow occurs. Depending on the process parameters different
flow pattern and thus different phase distribution will occur.
Since the present phase distribution determines the present heat
transfer coefficient the knowledge of the flow pattern is
essential for the calculation of the temperature distribution in
the absorber tubes.
In practice various flow pattern maps are used for the
determination of the present flow pattern. A frequently used
flow pattern map is that of Taitel and Dukler [4]. This flow
pattern map is valid for horizontal and slightly inclined tubes. It
has been developed for a two-phase flow without heat supply.
To consider the effect of heating the models of Taitel and
Dukler have been extended by some empirical equations [5]. At
DLR a different approach was chosen. During the experiments
at the PRODISS and DISS test facility mainly wavy and
annular flow occur (s. Fig. 1). An empirical correlation has
been developed that predicts the transition from wavy to
annular flow. This model has been validated in a wide range of
process parameters including different tube diameters [6]. The
mass flux density where the transition occurs can be calculated
according to Eq. (1).
( )
⎛ q& ⎞
m& t = 46.6 + 0.595 p + 0.0119 p 2 ⎜1 + 1.3 ⎟ (1)
⎝ 56 ⎠
Eq. (1) is an equation between quantities where the pressure
p is given in bar, the heat flux density q is given in kW/m2. The
mass flux density mt is calculated in kg/m2s.
Wetting Angle
In case of annular flow the complete inner circumference of
the absorber tube is wetted by saturated water whereas at wavy
flow the inner circumference is only partly wetted. In this case
1 Copyright © 2004 by ASME
 the boundary between the wetted and the unwetted region is of ⎛ dp ⎞ ⎛ dp ⎞
special interested. This boundary is expressed by the wetting ⎜ ⎟ =R⎜ ⎟ (7)
angle ϕwet (s. Fig. 2). To determine the wetting angle of a wavy ⎝ ⎠ 2 ph
dl ⎝ dl ⎠ 1 ph ,l
flow the liquid level for a fictitious stratified flow is calculated The single phase water flow is calculated according to Eq.
first. Afterwards this liquid level is multiplied by a so called (6) assuming that the complete mass flux is liquid. The two-
wave factor to get the wetting level of a wavy flow. phase flow multiplier is calculated with Eq. (8):
⎛ν g
0.8
⎞
R = A + 3.43 x& 0.685 (1 − x& ) 0.24 ⎜⎜ ⎟
⎟ ⋅
⎝νl ⎠
(8)
⎛η g ⎛ ηg
0.22 0.89
⎞ ⎞
⎜ ⎟ ⎜1 − ⎟ Frl − 0.47Wel0.0334
⎜η ⎟ ⎜ η ⎟
⎝ l ⎠ ⎝ l ⎠
⎛ν g ξ g
0.8
⎞
With A = (1 − x& ) 2 + x& 2 ⎜⎜ ⎟
⎟ (9)
⎝ ν lξl ⎠
(m& ν l )2
Fig. 1: Main flow patterns for Fig. 2: Schematic cross Frl = (10)
g di
direct steam generation. section of an evaporation
tube. m& 2 d iν l
Wel = (11)
σ
At stratified flow the liquid level depends on the void The parameters ξg and ξl are calculated for turbulent steam
fraction ε (the ratio of the cross section occupied by steam to flow (Reg > 1055) as follows:
the total inner cross section of the tube) that is determined by −2
⎡ ⎛ Re g ⎞⎤
the equation of Rouhani [7]. ξ g = ⎢0.86859 log⎜ ⎟⎥ (12)
−1
⎢⎣ ⎜ ⎟⎥
⎡ ⎛ x& 1 − x& ⎞ ⎤ ⎝ 1.964 log(Re g ) - 3.8215 ⎠⎦
⎢(1 + 0.12(1 − x& ))⎜ + ⎟ ⎥
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ρg ρl ⎠ For laminar steam flow (Reg < 1055)
x& ⎢ ⎥
ε= ⎢ ⎥ (2) 64
ρg ⎢ ( (
1.18(1 − x& ) g σ ρ l − ρ g )) 0 .25
⎥
ξg =
Re g
(13)
⎢ + ⎥
⎣ m& ρ l0.5 ⎦ For turbulent water flow (Rel > 1055)
−2
The normalised liquid level hl/di is determined by the ⎡ ⎛ Re l ⎞⎤
implicit equation (3). ξ l = ⎢0.86859 log⎜⎜ ⎟⎟⎥ (14)
⎡ ⎢⎣ ⎝ 1.964 log(Re l ) - 3.8215 ⎠⎥⎦
⎛ ⎛ h ⎞⎞ ⎤
⎢ sin ⎜ 2 arccos⎜⎜ 2 l − 1⎟⎟ ⎟ ⎥ For laminar water flow (Rel < 1055)
⎛ h ⎞ ⎜ ⎟
1 ⎢ ⎝ di ⎠⎠ ⎥
ε = ⎢arccos⎜⎜ 2 l − 1⎟⎟ − ⎝ ⎥ (3) ξl =
64
(15)
π ⎢ ⎝ di ⎠ 2 ⎥ Re l
⎢ ⎥ Fig. 3 displays the local specific pressure loss at different
⎣ ⎦
axial positions of a collector loop for different operation
The wetting angle finally results from Eq. (4).
pressures.
⎛ h ⎞
ϕ wet = arccos⎜⎜ l − 1⎟⎟ (4) 0.03

⎝ di / 2 ⎠ p = 30 bar
p = 60 bar
p = 100 bar
At a wavy flow the wetting angle depends on the wave 0.025
height hw. The ratio of wave height to the liquid level hl is
expressed by the wave factor f which is in the range of 1.7 to 2.
spec. Pressure Loss [bar/m]

h w = f hl (5) 0.02

Pressure Drop 0.015

In the turbulent single phase water or steam flow the

pressure drop is determined by the Blasius equation (6). 0.01

⎛ dp ⎞ 1 ρ 2
⎜ ⎟ =λ w , λ = 0.316 Re − 0.25 (6)
⎝ ⎠ 1 ph
dl d 2 0.005

According to the investigations during the European DISS

project [2] the pressure loss of the occurring two phase flow is 0
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

determined best with the correlations of Friedel. For a two- spez. Enthalpy [kJ/kg]
phase flow the pressure drop is defined as the product of the Fig. 3.: March of the specific pressure loss along the collector
single-phase water flow and the two-phase flow multiplier R. loop (di = 50 mm, M = 1 kg/s)

2 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/04/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 The two-phase flow pressure loss in the bends is determined efficiency has been investigated in [13] where different
by the equation of Chisholm [8] calculating the friction factors equations have been derived for different absorber
according to [9]. configurations. Formulations for the EuroTrough collector are
presented in [14].
Heat Transfer Coefficient 4
x 10
2
The heat transfer coefficient for the single-phase water or q = 20 kW/m2
steam flow is calculated according to the equation of Dittus- 1.75
q = 40 kW/m2
q = 60 kW/m2
Boelter [10].
λ

Heat Transfer Coefficient [W/m2K]

α 1 ph = 0.0235
1.5
Re 0.8 Pr 0.48 (16)
d
1.25
In case of the two-phase water-steam flow three different
heat transfer phenomena with different heat transfer 1
coefficients can be identified.
1. Heat transfer to the steam in the unwetted region 0.75

2. Heat transfer to the water in the wetted and heated region

3. Heat transfer to the water in the wetted and unheated region 0.5

The heat transfer coefficient for the steam phase and the
0.25
water phase in the unheated region can be determined with
equation (16). In the wetted and heated region nucleate boiling 0
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
occurs. According to Gungor and Winterton [11] the heat
spec. Enthalpy [kJ/kg]
transfer coefficient α2ph,l is determined by a first term taking
into account the convective heat transfer αconv and a second Fig. 4: Heat transfer coefficient as a function of the spec.
enthalpy for different heat flux densities. In two-phase region
term for the heat transfer by the nucleate boiling αNB.
only the heat transfer coefficient in the wetted and heated
α 2 ph,l = Eα conv + Sα NB (17)
region is displayed. (p = 100 bar, M& = 1 kg/s, di = 50 mm)
The supression factor S is determined as follows:
[
S = 1 + 1.15 ⋅ 10 −6 E 2 Re1l .17 ]−1
(18)
3.5
x 10
4

The enhancement factor E is calculated according to Eq. (19).

p = 30 bar
E = 1 + 24000 Bo1.16 + 1.37 X tt−0.86 (19) 3
p = 60 bar
p = 100 bar
Heat Transfer Coefficient [W/m2K]

With the boiling number Bo.

q& 2.5

Bo = (20)
mtot (h' '−h' )
& 2

Where m& tot is the total mass flux density. The Martinelli
parameter Xtt is a function of the fluid properties and the steam 1.5

quality x& .
The convective heat transfer coefficient again is calculated 1

according to equation (16). The heat transfer coefficient due to

nucleate boiling is determined according to Cooper [12]. 0.5

Fig. 4 and 5 display the course of the heat transfer

coefficient as a function of the spec. Enthalpy along the 0
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
collector loop for different boundary conditions. spec. Enthalpy [kJ/kg]
At this point all boundary conditions at the inner
Fig. 5: Heat transfer coefficient as a function of the spec.
circumference are defined as function of the known process
Enthalpy for different pressures. In the two-phase region only
parameters, the operation pressure and the fluid mass flux. In
the heat transfer coefficient in the wetted and heated region is
the following sections the boundary condition at the outer
circumference has to be defined. displayed. ( q& = 40 kW/m2, M& = 1 kg/s, d = 50 mm)

Collector Efficiency The typical course of the efficiency of a parabolic trough

Parabolic trough collectors only use the direct normal
irradiation (DNI). The DNI is reflected on the absorber tube.
Due to optical losses at the reflector, the glass envelope and the
absorber surface only a certain fraction of the DNI is absorbed
by the absorber tube. In addition the absorber tube has thermal
losses due to convection and radiation. All these losses are
determined by the collector efficiency. Once the collector
efficiency is known the heat flux on the outer surface of the
absorber tube is known.
Empirical correlations describing the collector efficiency for
several collector models exist. For LS-2 collectors the
collector is displayed in Fig. 6 for a LS-2 collector. The
efficiency of the collector decreases with an increasing
operation temperature and a decreasing DNI. The maximum
efficiency at T-Ta = 0, where no thermal losses occur, is called
optical efficiency.
These functions are valid for an incidence angle of 0° (the
sun is perpendicular to the aperture area of the collector). The
effect of different incidence angles is considered by the
incidence angle modifier (IAM). Again empirical correlations
have been developed for different collectors. The IAM for a LS-

3 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/04/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 2 collector is given in [13]. Functions for a LS-3 collector are maximum and minimum temperature at the outer surface will
given in [3] and [15]. be calculated.
80 4

3.5
70

3
Collector Efficiency [%]

Flux Density [W/cm2]

60
2.5

2
DNI = 1000 W/m
50 DNI = 800 W/m2 2
DNI = 600 W/m2
DNI = 400 W/m2
1.5
40

30 Typical Distribution
0.5 Rectangular Distribution
Gaussian Distribution

20 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360

T - Ta [K] Circumferential Angle [°]

Fig. 6: Collector efficiency as a function of the difference

Fig. 7: Typical heat flux distribution along the outer surface of
between operation and ambient temperature (T-Ta) for
an absorber tube and its approximation by a gaussian and a
different values of the DNI (φ = 0°, Cermet with Vacuum, LS-
2 collector). rectangular distribution with σ = 60°.

Every parabolic trough collector mentioned above can be Temperature on the Medium Centre Line
used for direct steam generation. For the determination of the The analytical calculation of the temperature is based on a
heat input into the absorber tube the designer of the collector division of the cross-section in four segments (s. Fig. 8).
field has to chose the efficiency and IAM curve for the collector 1. Wetted and heated 3. Unwetted and unheated
used. 2. Unwetted and heated 4. Wetted and unheated
In case of the pre-heating and the superheating section with
Flux Distribution on the outer surface the according single-phase flow only two different sections can
Once the heat flux on the outer surface is known its be identified, which are particular cases of the common case.
distribution has to be determined. A typical flux distribution at
the outer circumference of an absorber tube for parabolic
trough collectors is displayed in Fig. 7 (taken from [16]). This
distribution shows a local minimum at an angle of 180° caused
by the shadow of the absorber tube on the mirror facets. This
distribution is similar to a gaussian distribution with a standard
deviation of 60° as displayed in Fig. 7. Additionally the
approximation by a rectangular distribution with its edges at
100° and 260° is presented. In all cases the integral of the curve
is the same.
FEM analyses of the resulting temperature distribution in
the absorber cross section have shown that there is no
significant difference between the temperature distribution Fig. 8: Schematic illustration Fig. 9: Developed view of an
calculated with a flux distribution according to the gaussian of an absorber cross section absorber tube segment for the
distribution and the one calculated with the typical parabolic with the four different derivation of the analytical
trough distribution. Accordingly the gaussian distribution is sections. solution. The depth of the
chosen for the accurate FEM analysis whereas the rectangular Segment is ∆z.
distribution is used for a simplified analytical solution It is assumed that the boundary conditions in the different
presented in the next section. sections are known and constant. For the exact segmentation
into the four sections the wetting angle and the position of the
TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION rectangular heat flux distribution must be known. The position
The maximum temperature of the absorber tube is the most of the heat flux distribution depends on the position of the sun
critical parameter of a DSG collector loop. This temperature that can be determined according to e.g. [18].
may not be higher than 50 K above the fluid temperature [17]. Fig. 9 is used for the derivation of the accounting equations.
To allow for a very fast and reliable determination of the At the outer surface ∆Qsol represents the heat input by the solar
highest absorber temperature a simplified analytical solution for energy, ∆Qconv represents the heat transfer at the inner surface
the calculation of the circumferential temperature distribution and Qλ resp. ∆Qλ the conductive heat transfer to adjacent
on the medium centre line has been developed and segments. It can be written that:
implemented into the design tool. Based on this result the

4 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/04/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 dQ& λ + dQ& conv = dQ& sol (21) The marches of the temperature are very similar in Fig. 10.
The maximum deviation between the two different calculation
d 2T
With: dQ& λ = −λ s ∆z 2 dy (22) procedures is approx. 5 K. For a first rough estimation of the
dy temperature field this deviation is acceptable.
&
dQconv = α ∆z (T − T f ) dy (23) 350
ANSYS calculation
dQ& = ∆z q& dy
sol sol (24) 345
analytical solution

In the heated region the heat flux density is:

340
360
q& sol , h = η col DNI d ap (25)
d m π (ϕ e − ϕ b ) 335

Temperature [°C]
It is assumed that the thermal radiation at the outer surface 330
is constant and equivalent to:
(η opt − η ) DNI d ap 325
q& sol ,unh = − (26)
dm π 320

The differential equation for the determination of the

315
temperature distribution is given by:
d 2T 1 310
− K 2T = − q& sol − K 2T f (27)
dy 2 λs 305
α
0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360

With: K = 2
(28)
λs
And the solution:
q& sol
T ( y ) = C1 cosh( K y ) + C 2 sinh( K y ) + + Tf (29)
α phase-flow, heated from the side).
To determine the two coefficients C1 and C2 two boundary
conditions per segment have to be known. Since the four
sections are connected to each other, the boundary conditions at
the end of one section is the same as at the beginning of the
next section. At this location the according temperatures as well
as their gradient have to be the same. For example:
T1 ( y = l1 ) = T2 ( y = 0) (30)
dT1 ( y = l1 ) T2 ( y = 0)
and = (31)
dy dy
The gradient of the temperature is defined by:
dT1 ( y )
= C1 K sinh( K y ) + C 2 K cosh( K y ) (32)
dy
Accordingly there are eight equations for the determination
of the eight coefficients Ci. It is possible to simplify the
equations by considering the special characteristics of the
hyperbola function:
sinh(0) = 0 (33)
cosh(0) = 1 (34)
The values for the eight coefficients Ci are found by solving
the set of eight linear equations. Knowing the coefficients Ci for
the different segments, it is possible to calculate the
temperature on the medium centre line. By connecting the four
segments the march of the temperature along the medium
centre line of the investigated cross section is determined.
Fig. 10 displays the march of the absorber temperature
calculated with the FEM package ANSYS® and the analytical
solution. For the calculation it was assumed that the liquid
phase has a temperature of 310°C whereas the steam is slightly
superheated to a temperature of 320°C. The circumferential
angle φ is counted clockwise from the crest.
Circumferential Angle [°]
Fig. 10: Comparison of the temperature along the medium
centre line of the absorber cross section calculated with the
FEM package ANSYS® and the analytical solution. (two-
Maximum Temperature
To assess the thermal load of the absorber tube not the
temperature distribution on the medium centre line is of
importance but the maximum temperature at the outer surface
of the absorber tube, which is the hottest point, that can be
determined from the known temperature on the medium centre
line. Therefore it is assumed that at the location with the
maximum temperature the temperature gradient in
circumferential direction is zero. Thus the heat flow in
circumferential direction is zero. Accordingly only a heat flux
in radial direction occurs. The maximum temperature is
determined with the equation for the steady-state heat
conduction in radial direction. Accordingly the maximum
temperature at the outer surface is calculated by:
r
ln o
Tmax,o = Tmax,m +
rm
r
(Tmax,m − Tmax,i ) (35)
ln m
ri
With the help of this simplified procedure a first rough
assessment of a DSG collector loop is possible and critical
process situations can be identified. In a subsequent step critical
situations will be investigated in more detail using the FEM
package ANSYS®.
DESIGN TOOL
The models presented have been implemented in a
simulation tool using the programming environment
MATLAB® allowing for a fast investigation of different
collector loop configurations. Before starting the calculation
run the boundary conditions such as pressure and temperature
at the loop outlet, the direct normal irradiation, the position of

5 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/04/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 the sun and the geometry of the collector loop have to be overall collector field performance the heat balance calculation
defined. In case of the recirculation mode the recirculation rate program IPSEpro® is used. The use of these three programs for
and the use of an injection cooler in the superheating section the investigation of DSG collector fields is presented in the
has to be defined too. The once-through mode requires the following section.
definition of the inlet temperature and the injection mode the
30
definition of the number and distribution of injection cooler
along the collector loop.
For the calculation the collector loop is divided into a Recirculation

Maximum Temperature Difference [K]

25 Once-Through
number of segments with a step size of usually 5 m. Starting Injection

from the end of the collector loop, the collector efficiency, the
specific enthalpy, the pressure loss and the fluid temperature
20
for all investigated collector positions are calculated. Based on
the calculated fluid properties and flow conditions the
distribution of the heat transfer coefficient and the temperature 15
of the absorber tube along the collector loop is determined. In
addition it is possible to display the evaporation path in the
Taitel-Dukler diagram. 10
As an example Fig. 11 displays the pressure and Fig. 12 the
maximum temperature difference along the collector loop for
the three different operation modes. According to Fig. 11 the 5
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
total pressure drop is less than 2 bar for a length of the collector
loop of 500 m and an outlet pressure of 100 bar. Collector Length [m]
Fig. 12: Maximum temperature difference in the cross
102
section along the collector loop for the different operation
101.8 modes (p = 100 bar, Tout = 400°C, di = 50 mm, DNI= 800
W/m2).
101.6

101.4 The investigated collector field is operated in recirculation

mode as proposed in [19]. To guarantee a sufficient cooling of
Pressure [bar]

101.2
the superheating collectors a length of 200 m is chosen for the
101 superheating section. Accordingly the length of the evaporating
100.8
section is 800 m. Since compact small separators applicable for
single rows are at present under investigation in the European
100.6
Recirculation
R&D project INDITEP one state of the art separator vessel is
100.4
Once-Through
Injection
used for the complete collector field. EuroTrough II collectors
with the technical characteristics specified in table 1 are used.
100.2
The main solar field specifications defined in [20] are listed in
100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
table 2.
Collector Length [m] Table 1: Parameters of the ET-II collector
Parabola Width [m] 5,76
Fig. 11: Pressure along the collector loop for the different Overall Length of a single Collector [m] 98,5
operation modes (p = 100 bar, Tout = 400°C, di = 50 mm, Outer Diameter [mm] 70
DNI = 800 W/m2). Inner Diameter [mm] 55
As shown in Fig. 12 in all cases the highest temperatures do Length of connecting pipe between two 4
not occur in the evaporation but in the superheating section. adjacent collectors [m]
This is caused by the occurrence of an annular flow in the Number of 90° elbows in U-bends [°C] 8
evaporation section with the according good cooling of the Peak Optical Efficiency [%] 76,5
absorber wall. Roughness Factor of the Absorber Pipes [m] 4E-05

Lay-Out of a DSG collector loop Table 2: Main Parameters of the Solar Field
In the previous sections the fundamentals of DLR’s design Length of Evaporator [m] 800
tool are presented. This tool is used during the design phase of Length of Superheater [m] 200
DSG collector loops1. The detailed design of collector fields Outlet Pressure [bar] 70
also requires the investigation of the absorber tube and of the Outlet Temperature [°C] 410
interconnecting piping and the necessary fittings in more detail. Electric Power [MW] 5
For the detailed investigation of the absorber tube the FEM Number of parallel rows 7
package ANSYS® and for the piping and fittings and the
The design day is the 21st of June at noon, so the incident
1
angle is 13,7° for the site of Almerìa. The DNI is set to 850
Since parabolic trough collectors operated with a heat transfer fluid such
as oil are similar to the preheating section of a DSG collector loop, DLR’s
W/m2.
design tool is also applicable to oil collector loops.

6 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/04/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 increases with decreasing inner diameter. The total pressure
THERMOHYDRAULIC ANALYSIS drop for the different diameters is listed in table 3. Choosing a
For the investigation of the pressure loss and the maximum diameter of 55 mm will set the pressure at the collector inlet to
temperature difference in the absorber cross section in a single approx. 81 bar.
collector loop DLR’s DSG investigation program is used.
Table 3: Pressure drop for different inner diameters.
Pressure Loss Inner Diameter [mm] Pressure Drop [bar]
The pressure loss of the collector loop is an important 50 16,35
parameter since it determines the maximum working pressure 55 11,17
within the collector loop and the power consumption of the 60 8,04
feed and recirculation pump. The pump power is equivalent to
the parasitic power consumption of the collector field and thus In a next step the simulation package IPSEPro® is used to
influences the net efficiency of the collector field. study the performance of the complete collector field. Fig. 14
shows the simulation set up of a small DSG collector field. To
88
simplify the simulation it is assumed that the set-up of the
86
di = 50 mm
di = 55 mm
collector field is symmetric. Therefore the number of collector
di = 60 mm loops is reduced to 4 instead of 7. IPSEPro® offers the
84
opportunity to investigate the effect of several parallel rows and
82 the interconnecting piping.
In Fig. 14 the feed water from the power block is partly fed
Pressure [bar]

80
at the inlet of the recirculation pump. This reduces the
78
temperature of the recirculated water at the pump inlet from
76 292°C to 230°C thus reducing the thermal load of the pump
significantly.
74
The result of the IPSEPro® simulation regarding the
72 pressure drop is similar to the result of the detailed
70
investigation. In addition to the investigation of a single loop
tubes for the interconnection of the single loops and valves at
68
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 the inlet of each collector loop have been introduced. These
Collectorlength [m] valves are necessary to control the mass flux in each collector
Fig. 13: Calculated march of the pressure along the collector loop, by compensating different pressure losses in the
length for different inner diameters. interconnecting piping. Due to these additional components the
inlet pressure of the collector loop increases from 81 bar to 82,2
The calculated march of the pressure along a collector row bar.
is displayed in Fig. 13. Since so far no reliable information on In Fig. 14 the steam temperature at the collector outlet is set
the pressure drop of the separator used in a commercial to 410°C by the according injection cooler. The steam is cooled
collector field is available, it is set to 2 bar. The absorber tubes down to 409°C at the outlet of the main steam header by the
at the DISS test facility have an inner diameter of 50 mm. In thermal losses of the piping. The thermal loss of the main steam
addition Fig. 13 also shows the pressure loss of inner diameters pipe reduces the live steam temperature to 400°C. The diameter
of 55 mm and 60 mm. for the interconnecting piping is chosen to maintain the flow
As expected the pressure drop over the collector loop velocities that are given as rules of thumb in [21].

Evaporator Superheater

x_s et

1.312 991.26 4.548 3182.9

77.23 230 70.06 408.99
0.1866 992.33
82.54 230.2
5.131 644.43
82.51 151.73 Output
T_feed 127.43 [°C]
T_out 410.00 [°C] 4.005 547.94 4.548 547.94
Input 82.54 129.09 82.54 129.09
P_therm 20.94 [MW] 7.959 3179.7
DNI 850.0 W/m^2 65 404.19
eta_therm 63.67 [%] mass[kg/s] h[kJ/kg]
Irradiation_direct 828.3 W/m2
P_gros 6.60 [MW] p[bar] t[°C]
Ambient Temp. 20.0 °C
eta_gros 20.06 [%]
P_net 6.49 [MW]
eta_net 19.72 [%]

7.959 535.35
2.5 127.43

Fig. 14: IPSEPro Simulation of one half of a 5 MW DSG collector field.

7 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/04/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Maximum Temperature Difference of the Loop Maximum Thermal Stress
The maximum temperature difference in the absorber tubes Within this section it will be investigated whether the
is the most important parameter of a DSG collector field since occurring load of the absorber tubes will exceed the limits of
it determines the maximum working temperature of the the material used. For this purpose the FEM package ANSYS®
absorber tube. The tubes have to be designed to withstand these is used. Within the absorber tubes stress is caused by the
temperatures. Furthermore this temperature has to be lower pressure load and by the thermal load.
than the maximum working temperature of the selective coating
used on the absorber tubes.
For a first estimation of the temperature field in the absorber
tube DLR’s DSG simulation program is used again. Fig. 15
shows the result for the investigated DSG collector field.
According to Fig. 15 the highest temperature differences
occur in the superheating section. The highest temperature
difference calculated is approx. 21 K. This is lower than the
design value of 50 K.

Fig. 16: Simulated temperature field in an absorber cross

section of the superheating section using the FEM package
ANSYS®.

In Fig. 17 the stress in the absorber tube as a function of the

wall thickness as calculated with ANSYS® is presented. The
outer diameter is 70 mm, to have a sufficient safety margin the
pressure is set to 90 bar and the DNI to 1000 W/m2.
Fig. 15: Simulated temperature difference between the medium
centre line and the fluid temperature. 160

140
The maximum temperature of the absorber tube does not
occur on the medium centre line of the absorber tubes but on 120
Pressure
Irradiation
the outer surface of the absorber. Therefore a further detailed Pressure and Irradiation

analysis of the temperature field is necessary. According to Fig. 100

Stress [N/mm2]

15 it is sufficient to focus on the superheating section of the

collector loop. 80

In a second step the FEM package ANSYS® is used for a

60
detailed calculation of the temperature field in the absorbers
cross section within the superheater in order to determine the 40
highest temperature of the absorber tube. For this simulation
the fluid temperature is set to 410°C, the heat transfer 20

coefficient is calculated to 1750 W/m2K, the DNI is set to 850

W/m2 and a gaussian profile is assumed for the irradiation 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

distribution on the outer surface of the absorber tube. The result Wall Thickness [mm]

of the calculation is displayed in Fig. 16.
The maximum temperature calculated is 441°C and thus the
outer surface of the absorber tube is 31 K hotter than the fluid.
The maximum temperature difference of 31 K again is lower
than the design value of 50 K.
This calculation again proofs that the chosen collector
length of 1000 m guarantees a sufficient cooling of the absorber
tube itself. But it is has to be checked whether the maximum
temperature of the absorber tube fulfils the requirements of the
selective coating.
Fig. 17: Absolute value of the maximum Stress in the absorber
tube due to a pure pressure load, a pure thermal load and a
combined pressure and thermal load.
The thermal stress is increased with an increasing wall
thickness, whereas the pressure induced stress decreases with
an increasing wall thickness. In the investigated range of the
wall thickness, the overall stress (pressure and thermal)
decreases with an increasing wall thickness.
In Fig. 18 long time rupture strength of possible absorber
materials is displayed as a function of the working temperature.
The steam temperature at the collector outlet is 410°C. In the

8 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/04/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 last paragraph a maximum absorber temperature of 441°C has the absorber tubes, a moderate pressure drop and a sufficient
been calculated. safety margin against thermal and pressure induced stress of the
proposed system. The investigation of flow instability in the
250
evaporation section shows that flow instabilities might occur
Long Time Rupture Strength [N/mm^2]

St 45.8
under design conditions. The flow instability can be prevented
200
15 Mo3
by installing a control valve or a well defined orifice at the inlet
10CrMo9-10 of every single evaporator loop.
150

100

50

0
350 400 450 500 550 600
Temperature [°C]

Fig. 18: Long time rupture strength of possible absorber

materials [22].

For safety reasons a maximum absorber temperature of

460°C is assumed. According to this assumption and the
information from Fig. 17 and 18 St 45.8 is not a good choice
for the pipe wall material of the superheating collectors. St 45.8 Fig. 19: Stability curve of the evaporation section for different
might be a candidate for the preheating or evaporating inlet temperatures.
collectors. The long time rupture strength of 15Mo3 and
10CrMo9-10 is approx. 200 N/mm2 at a working temperature The used investigation programs have proven to be a
of 460°C. Due to Fig. 17 this strength would allow to reduce valuable tool for the assessment of DSG collector fields. Since
the wall thickness to values lower than 7.5 mm. A wall these tools can easily be adapted to different set-ups they can
thickness of even 5 mm would guarantee a sufficient safety also be used for the assessment and optimisation of different
under design conditions. solar-field set-ups during the detailed engineering phase of the
INDITEP project. Furthermore the IPSEPro tool is used for the
Flow Stability prediction of the electricity production of the solar thermal
From literature it is known that flow instabilities can occur power plant at any site.
in preheating and evaporating systems. Flow instabilities can
occur if ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
∂∆p The authors would like to thank the European Commission
<0 (36) for the financial support given to the first and second phases of
∂m&
In this case a given pressure drop between evaporator inlet the DISS project (contracts No. JOR3-CT95-0058 and JOR3-
and outlet can be fulfilled by more than one mass flux. Fig. 19 CT98-0277) within the framework of the E.U. JOULE
displays the pressure drop of the proposed system as a function Program.
of the mass flux through a single evaporation collector. For the
investigated inlet temperatures of 153°C and 170°C the NOMENCLATURE
condition of equation (36) is fulfilled. With an increasing inlet
temperature the flow becomes stable. Symbols
In [20] a feed water temperature of 153°C is proposed, A Model Parameter [-]
leading to a mass flux of 1.42 kg/s and a pressure drop of Bo Boiling Number [-]
approx. 5 bar in the evaporation section. According to Fig. 19 C Model Parameter [-]
this pressure drop can occur for three different mass fluxes. DNI Direct Normal Irradiation [W/m2]
The instability can be prevented by inserting valves or well E Enhancement Factor [-]
designed orifices at the inlet of every single collector loop. In Fr Froude Number [-]
Fig. 14 valves have been already proposed in order to IAM Incidence Angle Modifier [-]
compensate for the different pressure losses in the K Model Parameter [m-2]
interconnecting pipes. The investigation of stability again M Mass Flux [kg/s]
proofs the necessity of these valves. Pr Prandtl Number [-]
Q Heat Flux [W]
CONCLUSION R Two Phase Flow Multiplier [-]
DLR’s DSG thermohydraulic investigation program, Re Reynolds Number [-]
ANSYS® and IPSEPro® have been used to investigate the S Supression Factor [-]
thermohydraulic behaviour of the preliminary plant design of a T Temperature [°C]
DSG solar field. The investigation shows a sufficient cooling of We Weber Number [-]
X Martinelli Parameter [-]

9 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/04/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 [4] Taitel Y, Dukler A.E.: A model for predicting flow regime
d Diameter [m] transitions in horizontal and near horizontal gas-liquid-
f Wave Factor [-] flow, AIChEJ, Vol. 22, No. 1 (1976) p. 47-55
g Acceleration due to Gravity [m/s2] [5] Ajona J.I., Herrmann U., Sperduto F., Farinha-Mendes J.:
h Height/Level [m] ARDISS Final Report, Final Report of the EU project,
h Spec. enthalpy [kJ/kg] Contract No. JOU2-CT94-0311
l Length [m] [6] Goebel O.: Modelling of Two-Phase Stratified an Annular
m Mass Flux Density [kg/m2s] Flow in Heated Horizontal Tubes, Convective Flow
p Pressure [bar] Boiling Conference, Kloster Irsee (1997)
q Heat Flux Density [kW/m2] [7] Rouhani S.Z.: Modified correlations for void-fraction and
s Thickness [m] pressure drop, AB Atomenergi Sweden, AE-RTV-841
w Velocity [m/s] (1969) p. 1-10
x Steam Quality [-] [8] Chisholm D.: Two-Phase flow in bends, Int. J. Multiphase
y length [m] Flow, Vol. 6 (1980) p. 363-367
z length [m] [9] Beitz W., Küttner k.-H.: Dubbel – Taschenbuch für den
Maschinenbau, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg,
α Heat Transfer Coefficient [W/m2K] New-York, London, Paris, Tokyo, HongKong, Barcelona,
ε Void Fraction [-] Budapest, 18. Aufl. (1995)
η Dynamic Viscosity [kg/ms] [10] VDI ed.: VDI heat atlas, VDI-Verlag, Düsseldorf (1993)
η Efficiency [-] [11] Gungor K.E., Winterton R.H.S: A general correlation for
λ Heat Conductivity [W/mK] flow boiling in tubes and in annuli, Int. J. Heat and Mass
λ Friction Factor [-] Transfer, Vol. 29, No. 3 (1986) p. 351-358
ν Kinematic Viscosity [m2/s] [12] Cooper M.G.: Saturation nucleate pool boiling. A simple
ξ Model Parameter [-] correlation, 1st UK National on Heat Transfer, Int. Chem.
ρ Density [kg/m3] E. Symposium Series, Vol. 2, No. 86 (1984) p. 785-793
σ Standard Deviation [°] [13] Dudley V.E., Kolb G.J, Mahoney A.R., Mathews C.W.,
σ Surface Tension [N/mm2] Sloan M., Kearney D.: Test Results SEGS LS-2 Solar
φ Angle [°] Collectors, Sandia Report SAND94-1884 (1994)
[14] NN: EuroTrough II – Final Report of the European
Subscripts Project, ERK6-CT1999-00018 (2003)
‘ Saturated Water i Inner [15] Gonzales L., Zarza E., Yebra L.J.: Determinacion del
‘’ Saturated Steam l Liquid Modificador por Angulo de Incidencia de un colector
1ph Single Phase m Mean solar LS-3, incluyendo las peridas geometricas por final
2ph Two Phase max Maximum de colector, Internal Report of the DISS Project, Doc. ID.
NB Nucleate Boiling o Outer DISS-SC-SF-29, (2001)
a Ambient opt optical [16] Eck M., Steinmann W.-D., Rheinländer J.: The Influence
ap Aperture out Outlet of a Tilted Absorber Tube on the Maximum Temperature
b Begin sol Solar Difference, Energy, Vol. 29 (2004) p. 665-676
col Collector t Transition [17] Technische Regeln für Dampfkessel (TRD):
conv Convective tot Total Festigkeitsberechnung von Dampfkesseln – TRD 300, Carl
e End tt turbulent-turbulent Heymanns Verlag, Köln (2001)
f Fluid unh unheated [18] Kreider J.F., Kreith F.: Solar Energy Handbook, McGraw-
g Gaseous w Wave Hill Book Company, New York, St. Louis, San Francisco
h Heated wet Wetting (1981)
[19] Eck M., Zarza E.: Assessment of Operation Modes for
λ conduction Direct Solar Steam Generation in Parabolic Troughs, 11th
International Symposium on Solar Thermal Concentrating
REFERENCES Technologies, Zurich (2002) p. 591-598
[1] Price H., Lüpfert E., Kearney D., Zarza E., Cohen G., Gee [20] Tamayo F.: Modular System Preliminary Plant Concept,
R., Mahoney R.: Advances in Parabolic Trough Solar INDITEP Document INDITEP-EN-WP1.1-03 (2003)
Power Technology, Journal of Solar Energy Engineering, [21] Lobscheid H.: Babcock-Handbuch Dampf, Deutsche
Vol. 124, May (2002) Babcock & Wilcox-Dampfkesselwerke, Oberhausen
[2] Zarza E. (Ed.): DISS phase II - Final Project Report, EU- (1965)
Project No. JOR3-CT980277 (2002) [22] Witte U.: Steinmüller Taschenbuch
[3] Eck M., Zarza E., Eickhoff M., Rheinländer J., Valenzuela Dampferzeugertechnik, Vulkan Verlag Essen, 25th
L.: Applied Research concerning the Direct Steam Edition (1992)
Generation in Parabolic Troughs, Solar Energy, Vol. 74
(2003) pp. 341-351

10 Copyright © 2004 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/04/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use