ISSN 0003701X, Applied Solar Energy, 2012, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 212–217. © Allerton Press, Inc., 2012.

SOLAR ENERGY
CONCENTRATORS

Thermal Modeling of a Concentrator Pipe Composed

with Direct Steam Generation1
R. LugoLeytea, M. SalazarPereyrab, A. TorresAldacoa,
H. D. LugoMéndeza, and A. ValdésPalaciosc
aUniversidad Autonoma Metropolitana Unidad Iztapalapa
b
Technology of Higher Education of Ecatepec
cAutonomous University of Mexico City, Mexico

Received April 5, 2012

Abstract—Deflections along the pipes of solar concentrators used for direct steam generation in thermosolar
plants lead to some structural problems, due to temperature gradients in radial and angular directions. In this
work, a thermal analysis of an absorber coppersteel pipe is made, based on the solution of heat transfer equa
tions in stable and transient state, for the solution of model was used the finite differences method. Radial and
angular temperature distributions are presented, as well as the instant at which the system reaches the station
ary state under the studied conditions. The considered absorber pipe is a composed walls system of 20% Cu
and 80% Steel, constituted by commercial copper pipe of type k with 61.849 and 66.675 mm of internal and
external diameter respectively; and a steel pipe of schedule 160 with 66.7 mm of internal diameter and
88.9 mm of external diameter. The properties in the composed wall are favorable because achieves an isother
mal state with a maximum gradient of 50°C/m. Therefore, the composed pipe proposed offers greater resis
tance to the deflection provoked by the direct steam generation.
DOI: 10.3103/S0003701X12030103

1 1. INTRODUCTION
Parabolic trough technology is the most advanced
for the solar thermal application, however, the major
disadvantage of the system result from the characteris
tic of the heattransfer fluids, generally synthetic oils.
These are more viscous and have lower specific heats
and thermal conductivities than water, therefore, an
excellent option is the direct generation of steam, due
to that increases the thermal efficiency [1–3].
The PTCs transform solar radiation energy to
internal energy of the transport medium. The major
component of any solar system is the solar collector.
This is a device which absorbs the incoming solar radi
ation, converts it into heat, and transfers this heat to a
fluid (usually air, water, or oil) flowing through the col
lector [4]. In order to deliver high temperatures with
the good efficiency a high performance solar collector
is required. Systems with light structures and low cost
technology for process heat applications up to 400°C
could be obtained with parabolic through collectors
(PTCs). PTCs can effectively produce heat at temper
atures between 50 and 400°C [5, 6]. PTCs are made by
bending a sheet of reflective material into a parabolic
shape. A metal black tube, covered with a glass tube to
reduce heat losses, is placed along the focal line of the
receiver. The deflection has been associated with the
thermal gradient produced by stratified twophase
1 The article is published in the original.
flow formed during the boiling of water [7, 8]. For
example, Ivan Martinez and Rafael Almanza pre
sented a study experimental and theoretical analysis of
the thermal behavior of a temperature gradient around
the absorber tube under steadystate conditions and
with low flow, for this analysis, the finitedifference
numerical method was used with the purpose of pro
posing a solution and obtaining a temperature profile
[8]. The result verifies that the heat transference from
the pipe to the liquid phase of the fluid is not constant
and could depend on the liquid film thickness.
Parabolic trough power plants are currently the
most commercially applied systems for CSP power
generation. One option is the utilization of
water/steam in the solar field, the socalled direct
steam generation (DSG) [9]. The DSG in solar con
centrators avoids the use of heat exchangers, reducing
plant operation costs. Thomas A. presents a review
various aspects of solar steam generating systems with
parabolic trough concentrators using and the opera
tional problems [10]. Where, he have discussed poten
tial applications for direct steam generating systems in
developing countries and concluded that such systems
can operate effectively in the agrobased industries of
developing countries. The other authors have con
ducted an experimental study of direct steam genera
tion in line focus solar collectors. They present results
penetrating to the stability and performance of direct
steam generating PTCs and concluded that direct
steam generating PTCs have great potential but should

212
 THERMAL MODELING OF A CONCENTRATOR PIPE 213

θ=π Absorber
Reference pipe
Steel axe
copper
q'' Solar
hs radiation
Steam Parabolic
glass
θ = π/2
Liquid

h1
r = Ri
r=R θ=0

Fig. 1. Position of the system in operation. Fig. 2. Geometry of the solar energy collector system.

be investigated some problems like efforts and defor 2. METHODOLOGY

mations in the absorber tube. Odeh, et al., determine
circumferential temperature gradient from mathemat
ical models and experimental studies, and for inverse
radiation flow their temperature difference estimation
between the upper and lower parts of the absorber pipe
is 60°C at 60 bar [11]. Similar results are obtained by
Hahne [12], for different bulk flows. Flores Vicente,
Almanza Rafael [13], Valdes Palacios et al. [14],
Rafael Almanza et al. [15] analyze deflection in
absorbers pipes from the receiver parabolic—troughs
supplying cold water to the receiver steel pipe (diame
ter = 2.54 cm). The deflection propagates as a wave
front from the entry to the exit, measuring approxi
mately 6.5 cm at the center of each section (2.9 m of
length) of the parabolic trough collector (14.5 m of
long between 40 and 60°C in the circumferential
direction).
Figure 1 shows the coppersteel absorber pipe of a
parabolictrough concentrator, and Fig. 2 shows the
geometry of the solar energy collector system; this fig
ure also helps to visualize the complete system and the
symmetric reference axe of the absorber pipe.
The mathematical model in cylindrical coordi
nated is obtained like an analysis in an absorber pipe of
wall composed bimetallic of a parabolic trough collec
tor, in the position of the problem are made the follow
ing considerations: (a) twodimensional heat flow in
stationary state to trough of the wall of concentrator
pipe, (b) biphasic flow (liquidsteam) inside of the
concentrator pipe, (c) homogeneous radiation flow,
(d) symmetry axial plane, (f) anisotropic material. As
the system has symmetry in the axial axe, then the
boundary conditions are:

∂T
 = 0
∂θ ∂T
at θ=0 – k  = q'' at r=R
∂r
θ = π
– k ∂T
 = h 1 ( T l – T w ) at r = Ri ∂T = h ( T – T )
– k  at r = Ri
∂r ∂r
s s w

π π
0 ≤ θ ≤   ≤ θ ≤ π
2 2

The mathematical model was approach by finite the heat that is transfered by conduction of the node
differences. The Fig. 3 shows the position of nodes (m – 1, n) to the node (m, n) is equal to:
proposed to study the heat transfer to trough of walls of 2 2
C T m – 1, n + C T m + 1, n + T m, n – 1 + T m, n + 1 – T m, n
the absorber pipe. (1)
2
× ( 2C + 2 ) = 0.
From of a balance of energy on the interior node
(m, n), for twodimensional conditions, the exchange Convective boundary in the direction ris:
of energy is influenced by the conduction of the node
CT m – 1, n + T m + 1, n + T m, n ⎛ C + 1 + hΔθ
⎞
1
(m, n) and its four contiguous nodes, considering that 2C ⎝ C k ⎠
there is no generation of heat. It is supposed that the (2)
heat transfer only occurs by the bands that are guided hΔθ
= T∞.
in the direction θ and r and taking C = Δθ/Δr; then, k

APPLIED SOLAR ENERGY Vol. 48 No. 3 2012

214 LUGOLEYTE et al.

1 Adiabatic boundary between copper and steel

4 2 2 2
3
C k Cu T m – 1, n + C k St T m + 1, n + ( k Cu + k St )
3 (8)
2
× T m, n + 1 – T m, n ( k Cu + k St ) ( 1 + C ) = 0.
4
2 Interior nodes between the copper and the steel
5
1 k Cu + k St⎞
1
T m, n + 1 k Cu C + T m + 1, n k St C + T m, n – 1  ⎛ 

Steam Cu Cu St C⎝ 2 ⎠
6 (9)
liquid k Cu + k St⎞
1 ⎛ ⎛ 1 ⎞
+ T m, n + 1   – T m, n ( k Cu + k St ) C +  = 0.
C⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ C⎠
1 7
The relationships (8) and (9) were developed by
2 Valdés Palacios et al. [14], those which denote the
8
3
contribution of the interface between the different
9 materials (CuSteel). For the twodimensional system
4 in transient state, it should be to solve the following
10 equation:
11
2 2
1 ∂T
 = ∂
T + ∂
T . (10)
Fig. 3. Position of the nodes in the absorber pipe. α ∂t ∂r ∂θ
The transient energy balance equation at the node
For an interior node corresponds to the sum of conduction effects toward
the node. It will be equal to the increase in the internal
2 2 energy of the node; obtained the following expres
C T m – 1, n + C T m + 1, n + T m, n – 1 + T m, n + 1 – T m, n sions:
(3)
2
× ( 2C + 2 ) = 0. αΔt
T m, n = T m, n ⎛ 1 –  2αΔt⎞ + 
2αΔt – 
p+1 p
⎝ 2
( Δr ) ( Δθ )
2⎠
( Δr )
2
Boundary with heat flow q'' described in a wall
p αΔt p αΔt p
× T m – 1, n + T
2 m + 1, n
+ T
2 m, n – 1
(11)
2CT m – 1, n + T m, n – 1 + T m, n + 1 – 2T m, n ⎛ C + ⎞
1 1 1 ( Δr ) ( Δθ )
C C ⎝ C⎠
(4) αΔt p
+ T
2 m, n + 1
.
2Δθ ( Δθ )
= –  q''.
k
Convective boundary in direction r is:
Intersection of convective boundary with adiabatic
T m, n = T m, n ⎛ 1 – 
2αΔt –  2hΔt ⎞ + 
2αΔt + 
p+1 p 2αΔt
edge 2
⎝ ( Δr ) ( Δθ ) cCp ( Δr )
2 2 ⎠ ( Δr )
(12)
CT m – 1, n + T m + 1, n – T m, n ⎛ C + 1 + ⎞ αΔt
1 hΔθ p p p 2hΔt
⎝ k ⎠ × T m + 1, n + 2 ( T m + 1, n + T m, n + 1 ) – T∞.
C C
(5) ( Δθ ) cCp ( Δr )
= hΔθ
T∞. For an interior node:
k
T m, n = T m, n ⎛ 1 – 
p+1 p 2αΔt –  αΔt
2αΔt⎞ + 
Adiabatic boundary of an alone material ⎝ 2
( Δr ) ( Δθ )
2⎠
( Δr )
2
(13)
p p αΔt p p
2 2
C T m – 1, n + C T m + 1, n + 2T m, n – 1 – T m, n × ( T m – 1, n + T m + 1, n ) + 2 ( T m – 1, n + T m + 1, n ).
2
(6) ( Δθ )
× ( 2 + 2C ) = 0.
Boundary with heat flow q'' prescribed in a wall
Intersection of adiabatic boundary with heat flow
T m, n = T m, n ⎛ 1 –  2αΔt⎞ + 
2αΔt –  2αΔt
p+1 p
q'' in direction r ⎝ 2
( Δr ) ( Δθ )
2⎠
( Δr )
2
(14)
αΔt p
CT m – 1, n + T m + 1, n – T m, n ⎛ C + 2⎞ = – Δθq''
2 p p 2q''Δt.
 . (7) × T m – 1, n + 2 ( T m, n – 1 + T m, n + 1 ) + 
C ⎝ C⎠ k ( Δθ ) ΔrρCp

APPLIED SOLAR ENERGY Vol. 48 No. 3 2012

 THERMAL MODELING OF A CONCENTRATOR PIPE 215

0.04 0.04
.8 K
T = 627
.2 K
629 K
T= 629
T= .8 K .7 K T=6
T = 628 627
27.6

Angular position, m
0.02
Angular position, m

0.02 = K
.6 K T
T = 628
0.01 0.01
STEAM STEAM

T
=
0 0

62
LIQUID LIQUID

9K
K
–0.01 8.4 –0.01 .6 K K
T = 627 = 627.57.4 K K
T = 628.8 K 62 8.2 K T = 62 27.3
T = 628.6 K T =T = 62 8 K T 6
T = 627.2 K
–0.02 T = 62 –0.02
T = 627.8 K T=
K
T = 627.6 T = 627.1 K
7.4 K
T = 62
–0.04 –0.04
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
Radial position, m Radial position, m

Fig. 4. Behavior of the pipe absorber Cu (20%)–Steel

(80%) to 10 s. Fig. 5. Behavior of the pipe absorber Steel (100%) to 10 s.

Intersection of boundary convective with boundary Interior nodes between the copper and the steel
adiabatic
( α Cu + α St )Δt ( α Cu + α St )Δt⎞
T m, n = T m, n ⎛ 1 – 
p+1 p
 – 

p+1
T m, n = T m, n ⎛ 1
p 2αΔt – 
–  2hΔt ⎞
2αΔt +  ⎝ ( Δr )
2
( Δθ )
2 ⎠
⎝ 2
( Δr ) ( Δθ )
2 ρCp ( Δr )⎠
(15) p ( α Cu + α St )Δt p p
2αΔt p 2αΔt p 2hΔt T∞. 2
 ( T m – 1, n + T m + 1, n )
× T m, n +  (19)
+ T
2 m + 1, n
+ T
2 m, n – 1
–  2 ( Δθ )
( Δr ) ( Δθ ) ρCp ( Δr )
α Cu Δt p α St Δt p
+ 
T
2 m, n – 1
+ 
2 T m, n + 1 .
Adiabatic boundary of an alone material is: ( Δr ) ( Δr )
T m, n = T m, n ⎛ 1 – 2 – 2⎞
p+1 p 2αΔt 2αΔt The parabolic trough collector that is employed in
⎝ ( Δr ) ( Δθ ) ⎠ this model has a length of 14.5 and 2.5 m of opening,
(16) the focus of the parabola is to 0.625 m. The materials
αΔt ( T p p 2αΔt p
m – 1, n + T m + 1, n ) + T
+  . with those which should be built the absorbers pipes
2 2 m, n + 1
( Δr ) ( Δθ ) used for the comparison of composed wall are copper
and steel, in different proportions. Also, it is taken an
Intersection of adiabatic boundary with heat flow irradiancy mean of I = 1800 W m–2 and a saturation
q'' in funtion the r is: temperature of the water of 623 K.

T m, n = T m, n ⎛ 1 – 2 – 2⎞
p+1 p 2αΔt 2αΔt
⎝ ( Δr ) ( Δθ ) ⎠ 3. RESULTS
(17)
2αΔt p 2αΔt p 2q''Δt The Fig. 4 shows the behavior of the composed
+ T
2 m – 1, n
+ T
2 m, n – 1
+ . pipe of Cu (20%)–Steel (80%) to a time of 10 s shown
( Δr ) ( Δθ ) ΔrρCp
a maximum temperature difference of 1°C, thermal
Adiabatic boundary between copper and steel gradients of 50°C/m in the angular direction and the
radial direction presents negligible gradients. The
( α Cu + α St )Δt ( α Cu + α St )Δt⎞ large thermal gradients are presented nearby regions to
T m, n = T m, n ⎛ 1 – 
p+1 p
 – 
 the interface liquidsteam. Comparing the simple steel
⎝ ( Δr )
2
( Δθ )
2 ⎠
pipe (100%) to the same conditions of the Fig. 5 is
α Cu Δt p α St Δt p observed a maximum temperature difference in the
+ 
T
2 m – 1, n
+ 
2 T m + 1, n (18) pipe of 2.7°C and a thermal gradient in the radial
( Δr ) ( Δr ) direction of 100°C/m in the region of the interface liq
( α Cu + α St )Δt p uidsteam, comparing to pipes shows a better perfor
+ 
2
T m, n – 1 . mance of the composed pipe with thermal gradients
( Δr ) 50% smaller and a maximum temperature difference

APPLIED SOLAR ENERGY Vol. 48 No. 3 2012

216 LUGOLEYTE et al.

0.04 0.04
T=6
T = 627.8 K .2 K 9 K
T = 6 27.7 K 629 62
27.6 T= T=
0.02 T = 628.8 K
Angular position, m

Angular position, m
0.02
T = 628.6 K
0.01 0.01
STEAM STEAM T=
629
0 LIQUID 0 LIQUID
K

–0.01 .6 K
T = 627 627.5 K4 K K .4 K
–0.01 628 28.2 K
T = = 627.627.3 T = 628.8 K =
T T=6
T T = 7.2 K T = 628.6 K T = 628 K
–0.02 2
T=6 –0.02 T = 627.8 K
T = 627.1 K T = 627.6 K
T = 627.4 K
–0.04 –0.04
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
Radial position, m Radial position, m

Fig. 6. Behavior of the pipe absorber Cu (20%)–Steel Fig. 7. Behavior of the pipe absorber Steel (100%) to 15 s.
(80%) to 15 s.

0.04 T=6
28.4
K 0.04
.4 K
629 .2 K
Angular position, m

0.02 = 629
T=
T
T=
Angular position, m

0.02 K
62 T = 629

T
0.01 T

=
STEAM T = 628.8 T = 62 9.8 =

62
K 8.7 K T = 628.5 K 0.01 K 62

9.6
T = 629 T = 628 T = 628 STEAM 9.4
0 K .9 K .6 K K

K
LIQUID T = T = 0
629.2 K 629.1 K
LIQUID
9K

–0.01 T = 629
.3 K
62

–0.01 K
629
T=

–0.02 29.2 K
=
T = 629.6 K 6
.2 K –0.02 T = 629.4 K T = TT= 628.8 K
T = 629 T = 629.1 K 628.9 K
T= .6 K
.8 K T = 628
T = 628 T = 628.4 K
–0.04
–0.04
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
Radial position, m 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
Radial position, m
Fig. 8. Behavior of the pipe absorber Cu (20%)–Steel
(80%) to 20 s. Fig. 9. Behavior of the pipe absorber Steel (100%) to 20 s.

66% smaller. Comparing the performance of the com
posed pipe Fig. 6 and the steel pipe Fig. 7 to the time
of 15 s, is observed a stable behavior of the composed
pipe, it presents a decrease of the maximum tempera
ture difference of 0.5°C, the thermal gradient in the
angular direction reduce it until 25°C/m and the ther
mal gradient in the radial direction is maintained neg
ligible. The steel pipe presents a small decrease of the
maximum temperature difference, the thermal gradi
ent in the radial direction is maintained in 100°C/m
while the thermal gradient in the radial direction had
an important change of almost zero to 100°C/m.
These results continue showing a very favorable
behavior of the pipe composed with respect to the sim
ple steel pipe. The Figs. 8 and 9 show the behavior of
the composed pipe and the simple pipe to 20 s the com
posed pipe presents in this instant a decrease in the
maximum temperature in the pipe, the thermal gradi
ent presents an increase in the region nearby to the
interface of 50°C/m. The simple pipe presents decrease
in the maximum temperature 1°C and a thermal gradi
ent in the angular direction of 200°C/m. Under condi
tions of the simulation the stationary state is reached
time of 20 s Figs. 8 and 9, is not founded changes in the
behavior of pipes after of this time.

APPLIED SOLAR ENERGY Vol. 48 No. 3 2012

 THERMAL MODELING OF A CONCENTRATOR PIPE
4. CONCLUSIONS
The compound absorber pipe of copper (20%) and
steel (80%) presents the thermal gradients generated
by the phase change, in the regions of the nearby pipe
to the interface liquidsteam as show the obtained
results, the properties overall like product of the com
bination of the commercial pipes forming the propor
tion before mentioned, in the wall are favorable for the
composed wall that achieves at isothermal state, with a
maximum gradient of 50°C/m, compared this value
with the gradient that presents the simple steel pipe of
200°C/m, then we can assure that the material experi
enced a smaller mechanical fatigue due to the thermal
efforts, according to the results obtained the maxi
mum gradient from the composed pipe is 75% less
than gradient of the simple pipe in a time of ten sec
onds. Due to the fact that the global mechanical prop
erties of the composed pipe prevail the of the steel, by
this reason the composed pipe proposed offers greater
resistance to the deflection provoked by the direct
steam generation. The results are agree with the
reported by Vicente Flores, Rafael Almanza [7] and
Ivan Martínez, Rafael Almanza [8].
REFERENCES
1. Liang Zhang, Wujun Wang, Zitao, Yu., et al., Solar
Energy, 2012, vol. 86, pp. 911–919.
2. Eck, M. and Zarza, E., Solar Energy, 2006, vol. 80,
pp. 1424–1433.
3. Eck, M., Zarza, E., Eickhoff, M., et al., Solar Energy,
2003, vol. 74, pp. 341–351.
APPLIED SOLAR ENERGY Vol. 48 No. 3 2012
217
4. FernándezGarcia, A., Zarza, E., Valenzuela, L., and
Pérez, M., Renew. Sust. Energy Rev., 2010, vol. 14,
pp. 1695–1721.
5. Zhifeng Wang, Prospectives for China’s Solar Thermal
Power Technology Development, Energy, 2010, vol. 35,
pp. 4417–4420.
6. Kalogirou, S.A., Progr. Energy Combust. Sci., 2006,
vol. 30, pp. 231–295.
7. Flores, V. and Almanza, R., Energy, 2004, vol. 29,
pp. 645–651.
8. Martínez, I. and Almanza, R., Solar Energy, 2007,
vol. 81, pp. 216–226.
9. Feldhoff, J.F., Schmitz, K., Eck, M., et al., Solar
Energy, 2012, vol. 86, pp. 520–530.
10. Thomas, A., Energy Convers. Manag., 1996, vol. 37,
pp. 215–224.
11. Odeh, S.D., Morrison, G.L., and Behnia, M., Solar
Energy, 1998, vol. 62, pp. 395–406.
12. Zarza, H., Two Phase Flows and Heat Transfer with
Application to Nuclear Reactor, Oxford Univ. Press,
1997.
13. Flores, V., Almanza, R., and Análisis, T., Experimental
del Receptor de Pared Compuesta CuFe en Estados
Transitorios con Incidencia Lateral del Flujo de Calor
Durante la GDV, Memoria 25 Semana Nacional de
Energía Solar, San Luis Potos, Mexico, 2001.
14. Valdés, P.A., Almanza, R., Soria, A., and Mazari, M.,
Direct Steam Generation in Parabolic Concentrators,
Proc. 1998 Annu. Conf, Ases, Alburqueque, 1998.
15. Almanza, R., Lentz, A., and Jiménez, G., Solar
Energy,1997, vol. 61, pp. 275–278.