Solar Energy, Vol. 30. No. 3, pp. 225-235, 1983 0038-092X/83/030225-11503.

00/0
Printed in Great Britan. Pergamon Press Ltd.

THE MULTIPLE LAYER SOLAR COLLECTOR

J. P. KENNA
Solar Energy Unit, University College, Cardiff CF2 ITA, Wales

(Received 4 December 1981; accepted 22 April 1982)

Abstract--The Multiple Layer Solar Collector is a proposed design in which the working liquid passes through
several successive transparent layers. It has low reflection losses and operates in a once-through mode thereby
ensuring that the outer layer is near ambient temperature.
A mathematical model of this collector is developed. It is shown that the performance depends on three
parameters (a) the number of layers (b) the heat transfer coefficientacross each layer (c) the absorption properties
of the working fluid.
Thermal performance predictions are made and compared with a selective flat plate collector operating in a
once-through mode. For all practical designs the multiple layer collector is inferior to the selective surface
collector.
A further design is considered in which two liquid layers are insulated with an air gap. Computer predictions
show that this design cannot improve on the flat plate collector. These predictions are confirmedwith experimental
tests carried out on flat plate and two layer solar collectors. It is concluded that the multiple layer solar collector is
not a viable design.

1. INTRODUCTION interface is minimal. The collector operates in a once-

Several novel solar collector designs have been con-
sidered in recent years[l-3]. The objective of these
studies has been to develop a more efficient or cost
effective design then the conventional flat plate collector,
An analysis of energy losses from a flat plate collector
shows two areas for an improvement in performance. (a)
Increasing the proportion of incident radiation absorbed
by the working fluid. (b) Reducing the thermal Losses
from the outer surface of the collector.
If the solar collector steady state efficiency is given by
the Hottel-Whillier equation[4]:
= 77° - U T *
with T * = (T,,, - Ta)/G, then (a) can be identified with
increasing o and (b) with reducing the collector loss
coefficient U.
Generally, attempting to improve one of these
parameters results in a reduction in the other one. For
example reducing the outer cover temperature (and
hence thermal losses) by use of several glazings also
increases the reflection and absorption losses. The pro-
portion reflected depends on the incidence angle of the
solar radiation. For cloudy environments, such as the
U.K., with a large percentage of the radiation at high
angles of incidence this proportion can be high. Two
glass covers have a reflectance of 24 per cent at an
incidence angle of 60° (which is an approximation to the
reflectance for diffuse radiation[5]),
To overcome this increased reflection loss a novel
solar collector was proposed by Caouris et a/.[l]. This
design attempts to reduce the heat losses from the front
cover without increasing reflection losses. The heat
transfer liquid circulates between the inner glazings (Fig.
1). Since the refractive indices of the working fluid (e.g.
water n = 1.33) is close to that of the transparent plate
(e.g. acrylic n = 1.5) the reflection from each liquid/plate
through mode, the cold liquid entering at the outermost
layer, thereby keeping the cover at a temperature close
to ambient.
A mathematical model of this collector has been
reported by Caouris et a/.[1] but this makes the assump-
tion that each layer can be characterised by a single
nodal temperature. While this assumption is perfectly
adequate for collectors operating in a conventional mode
(high flow rate with small temperature rise across the
collector) it may not be reasonable for collectors operat-
ing in a once-through mode where the flow rate is
reduced to obtain high outlet temperatures. Con-
(1) sequently a more detailed model has been developed
which solves numerically the differential equations des-
cribing each layer. The model has been used to identify
the most important design parameters of this collector
and compare its performance with flat plate collector
characteristics.
2. THEMULTIPLELAYERCOLLECTOR
The design of Caouris et a/.[1] is shown in Fig. 1.
Several transparent plates are placed above an absorber
plate. The working liquid enters into the top (outermost
layer) and travels down to the absorber through suc-
cessive layers. Solar radiation enters the collector and is
partially transmitted by the outer liquid layers. Any
radiation absorbed by the working liquid has not been
lost. The transmitted radiation is absorbed by the
blackened plate, which then transfers heat to the inner
liquid layer by convection and conduction. The absorb-
ing surface does not have to be selective because any
infra red radiation emitted will be absorbed by the inner
liquid layer.
Each transparent plate acts as a thermal barrier be-
tween adjacent liquid layers thus reducing the transfer of
heat from the absorber to the outer cover. Since the
liquid is in complete contact with the absorber there are

225
226 J.P. KENNA

] i Transparent Plates

T+n I/ II j=1 y' ~/

j =2 /
/ t / J ilatJon
/ /
/, # j =n-1
/
/
To /,, //~? j=n-2 i /

'//// //////t///// - "

Fluid Layers Absorber

Fig. l. Vertical section of the multiple layer solar collector.

no fin effects. The multiple layer collector can be corn- (9) The working fluid enters the collector at a tern-
pared to a solar pond with thermal statification achieved perature equal to ambient.
by physical separation of the layers. Consider a collector of n layers and of unit width. An
energy balance for each layer gives the following three
3. ANALYSIS sets of equations of any point x:
Several assumptions are made to simplify the analysis.
(1) Radiation transfer between adjacent liquid layers is 1st layer (j = 1)
neglected. This is a good approximation if glass or suit-
able plastics are used for the transparent plates because dTl
these are opaque to thermal radiation, ranG + h(T2- TI) + hL(Ta - T1) -'~--x ?~lcp = 0 (5)
(2) The heat transfer liquid is considered to be opaque
to thermal radiation since water and most organic fluids 2nd layer to (n - 1) layer (j = 2, n - 1)
are highly absorbing in this region.
(3) Conduction in the counter flow direction is neglec-
ted because the thermal diffusion velocity of the working rajG + h(Tj+l + Tj_~ - 2Tj)- u.+ rhcv = 0 (6)
liquid is typically much lower than the flow velocity.
(Compare the diffusion velocity of water 1.4 x 10 7 ms-~
with a typical flow velocity of 1.4 × 10-4 ms 1). nth layer
(4) Absorption of solar radiation by the transparent
plates is neglected. While this may not be true in practice j=n- 1
it simplifies the analysis considerably and indicates
operating conditions that bear further investigation. ( =~' )
(5) Heat transfer across the transparent plates is r I-' ai G + h ( T , ~ - T , )
assumed to be described by a single coefficient h. This
heat transfer coefficient will be dependent primarily on dT, ' c
the thermal conductivity and thickness of the plate and + hB(T, - T,) - ~ m p = 0. (7)
to a lesser exten[ on boundary layer heat transfer
coefficients between plate and working fluids. [1].
(6) The temperature distribution is assumed to be one Applying the boundary condition TI = Ta at x = 0, the
set of equations can be solved numerically, to yield the
dimensional in the flow direction.
outlet temperature (To) and hence the efficiency:
(7) The absorptance of the blackened plate is taken as
100 per cent. This assumption together with
assumption[4] will lead to higher efficiencies than pos- rncp(To-T.)
sible practically but should not affect the thermal loss rt G (8)
coefficient. It has been shown by Duffle and Beckman[6]
that the effect of absorption of solar radiation by flat
Analysis is simplified if eqns (5)-(8) are re-written in
plate collector covers is to modify the cover trans-
terms of the reduced temperature.
mittance whilst having no effect on the collector loss
coefficient,
(8) Radiative and convective losses from the outer T-T,
cover occur with a constant loss coefficient hL. T* = - -G
 The multiple layer solar collector 227

to become: Although the solution of eqns (9)-(11) is possible

analytically, it is tedious and instead the equations have
j= 1 been solved numerically to yield thermal performance
curves as a function of: (1) Number of layers n. (2)
df~ Absorptance of each layer aj. (3) Heat transfer
ra~+h(T*-T*)-hLT*- rh% = 0 (9) coefficient h.
The back loss and top loss coefficients hB and hL were
j = 2, n - 1 held constant for these calculations. The results, shown
in Figs. 2-7 will be discussed later.
,;.aj+h(T*+,+,v* ,~,v*, dT~ .
lj_~--~lj)-- d--~-mcp= 0 (10) 4. PERFORMANCEOF FLATPLATECOLLECTORS
OPERATING IN A ONCE THROUGH MODE
j= n In order to compare multiple layer with flat plate solar
collectors the performance of flat plate collectors
T,,(1 ,=.-ti~=,a,/~+ h(T,_,-T*)* , _. dT*. operating in a once-through mode must be predicted.
- - n B l , - d x - x rn% = 0 This could be done by solving the differential equations
(11) describing the absorber and cover but a much simpler
analytic solution can be derived from the Hottel-Whillier
and equation. Using the derivation given in Appendix 1 the
final solution is
= rhcpT*. (12) UT~
= - ln(1 - UT*I~o) (14)
Solution of eqns (9)-(11) will give the reduced tem-
perature distribution T* as a function of n, r, a, h, hE, where 0 < T* < U/rh). Here, the efficiency of the flat plate
hB, rhcp. Thus for a given collector design (with constant
collector has been expressed in terms of reduced outlet
n, r, a, h, he) and a given outer cover loss coefficient hL, temperature and can therefore be compared directly with
the reduced temperature distribution T*, and hence the multiple layer collector efficiency. A physical inter-
reduced outlet temperature T~, depend only on the
pretation of eqn (14) can be given by expanding the log term
thermal mass flow rate m%. From eqn (12) the collector
to give:
efficiency is then seen to be dependent on thermal mass
flow rate only and by varying the, a performance U( ,,, o /,io
1 U T ~-1/UT~\
, 2 )
characteristic of the collector can be obtained. Each ~ ='0o- I + Z - W - + 5 [ - - £ - - ] . . . . . T~ (15)
thermal mass flow rate corresponds to a different
or
reduced outlet temperature. For comparison with a fiat
"q= ~,,- U~T* (16)
plate collector (see next section) it is instructive to
present the thermal performance characteristic in terms where
of collector efficiency and reduced outlet temperature.
IT;
i.e., =/(r*o). (13)
1UT* I [ U T~o~ 2
Vo =~-(1 + ~ - ~ - o + ~ \ - ~ - o ] . . . . . .

!
. (17)

0.6
a 0./, ~ -.''"'"

0"21/
Thmkness(mm)

Fig. 2. Solar absorptance of water (A M2 spectrum).

228 J.P. KENNA
1 - 0 ~

0-8 \ ,,,
"',%
\\\ ,.,.
\\ ",,

0-6 \ \ ""

- \
\
'"=1= \
o.~. \ ,,

0.2 I

I
Flat Rate C_~lector -- I
I
2 Layers ....
0 5 Layers i .... i" I i J j
o02 0-o~ oo6 oos OlO o12
(TooTaI/G(K m2 w - l )

Fig.3. Effectofincreasinglayers.

10 F

\ ,~ "-...

\ \ "--.
\\ "\ ......
\ "\. "--.....
0.6 \ \.\ "'-.......

o_ \
= \ \
LU
o~ \ \
\
\ \
\ \

02 t \
I
Flat Plate Collector I I
Wm-2K-1 J
h=lO
h: 5 Win_2 K_~ . . . . . . . . . I
h=30 W m-2K -
0 l I ~ j i I
0-02 0.0/. 0.06 008 0.10 032
(To -Ta )IG(K m2 W -1)

Fig. 4. Effect of h for 2 layers.

 The multiple layer solar collector 229

1.(]

0.~

0,6 ",,

c \

ill

0./.

02
h=5 W m -2 K "1 . . . . "
h=lO W m-2K -1 . . . . .
Fk~ Pklle Collectc~
h=30 W m-2 K -1 . . . . . .
I ' ' A , ,.
0 0 02 0.04 006 008 0.10 012
(To-To)/O ( K m 2 W -1 )

Fig, 5. Effect of h for 5 layers.

10

o6 \-
~, \, \
.~ \. ",\
= \
o~ \, \
\ \
0.2 \ \

h=10 W m-2K "1 No Absorption . . . .

h=lO W m - 2 K -1 Water ....
! 1 I I I I,
0.02 O.04 04)5 0.08 0.10 012
{To-To)IG(K m2K I )

Fig. 6. Effect of liquid absorption (2 layers).

230 J.P. KENNA
lo~
0.8 " ~
0.6
0.~
0.2
h:lO W m-2K-1 No Absorption
h:lO W m'-2K°1 Woter
I I
0.02 004
(To-Tol/G (K m2 W"1)
Fig. 7. Effect of liquid absorption (5 layers).
and is an effective loss coefficient which is dependent on
the reduced outlet temperature To*. It can be seen from
eqn (17) that for UT*/'~o'~6 the effective loss coefficient
reduces to - U / 2 which implies that flat plate collectors
operate more efficiently in a once-through mode than in
their conventional operating mode. For this reason the
multiple layer collector should be compared with a flat
plate collector in a once-through mode and not the
conventional fixed flow rate-variable inlet temperature
mode.
An equation of the form of eqn (16) is general to any
collector operating with an inlet temperature equal to
ambient. Thus the performance characteristics of the
multiple layer collector can be examined by assuming an
effective 7o and an effective loss coefficient in just the
same way as for a conventional flat plate collector,
5. MATERIALS
It is instructive to survey the materials that are avail-
able for a multiple layer collector so that appropriate
values of liquid absorptance and heat transfer
coefficients can be used for performance predictions,
5.1 Heat transfer fluids. For practical reasons the most
suitable liquid is water, since for most applications solar
collectors are used to heat water. The multiple layer
collector, operating in a once-through mode, would have
to be used in a direct system, so water is the obvious
choice. Assuming the solar absorption properties of
water used by Rabl[7], the solar absorptance of water is
shown as a function of thickness in Fig. 2.
If heat transfer oils are used in a water heating system
the major disadvantage is that the collector must operate
in an indirect system, and with a multiple layer collector
I I I I
0.06 0.08 0-10 0.12
there would also be the additional expense of a very
efficient heat exchanger, to cool the outlet fluid back
down to ambient temperature. Organic oils tend to be
slightly coloured and consequently have excessive solar
absorption.
5.2 Transparent Plates. The thermal conductivity and
thickness of the plates in a multiple layer collector are
the prime factors governing the heat transfer coefficient
between adjacent layers (h). Clearly h should be as small
as possible to reduce heat transfer from the bottom of
the collector to the top. Glass has a relatively high
thermal conductivity (1 W m-~K 5, so to achieve a
reasonably low h value say 1 0 W m - / K -~, a 100ram
thickness of glass would be required. Transparent plas-
tics typically have thermal conductivities which are five
or six times lower than that of glass, so approximately
20mm of plastic would be required to achieve h =
10 W m -2 K 1.
The plate thickness must have to be a compromise
because the large thicknesses which are required to
minimise "h" result in high solar absorption in the plates
and also in high collector materials cost.
If plastics are selected then attention needs also to be
paid to their compatability with the heat transfer fluid
and their resistance to temperature. For example acrylic
sheets are unsuitable for use at temperatures greater than
90°C and polycarbonate sheets should not be used at
temperatures above 120°C.
6. PERFORMANCEPREDICTIONSFORMULTIPLE
LAYERCOLLECTORS
The predictions discussed below have been made
assuming a top loss coefficient (hD of 25 W m 2 K - ' and
 The multiple layer solar collector
a back loss coefficient (hB) of 0.5 W m-2K 1. The col-
lector performance characteristics are presented as a plot
of efficiency against reduced outlet temperature, (T~)and
to examine the performance it has been assumed that
each curve can be described by an equation of the form:
= rlo- U,T~ (18)
where ~0ois the intercept on the efficiency axis and Ue is
the effective loss coefficient,
6.1 Effect of number of layers (n). Figure 3 shows the
effect of increasing the number of liquid layers from 2 to
5 for an "h" value of 3 0 W m - 2 K -~ (corresponding to
5 mm thick plates with conductivity 0.15Wm 1K-l).
Each water layer was assumed to be 5 mm thick resulting
in solar absorptances of a~= 0.22, ~2 = 0.05, a3 = 0.03,
a4= 0.02 and a5 = 0.02. Also shown in Fig. 3 is the
performance curve for a flat plate collector operating in a
once-through mode calculated from eqn (14). The flat
plate collector parameters were taken as U =
4.67 W m K -1 (i.e. corresponding to a selective surface
collector) and "0o = 0.92 (i.e. a single cover with no ab-
sorption, and a sandwich type absorber with 100 per cent
absorptance. The same absorber assumptions were used
for the multiple layer collector.)
Despite the generous assumption concerning the ab-
sorptive properties of the plates, it can be seen from Fig.
3 that the performance of the multiple layer collector is
inferior to that of the flat plate collector,
The gradients of the curves for the multiple layer
collector are steeper than the gradient of the flat plate
collector curve, indicating that with the assumptions
made above the effective loss coefficient for the multiple
layer collectors is larger than that for the flat plate
collector.
6.2 Effect of heat transfer coel~cient "h". Figures 4
and 5 show the effect of decreasing h from 30 to
5 W m 2 K-l, for both 2 and 5 layer collectors. Again it
has been assumed that water is the heat transfer fluid and
a comparison is made with the same flat plate collector,
It can be seen that decreasing "h" is more significant
than increasing the number of layers. With h =
10Wm 2K-1 the five layer collector has an effective
1 OI
Tin V II
AIR GAP
To ~'/
Fig. 8. Vertical section of the two layer collector.
231
loss coefficient approaching that of the flat plate coltec-
tor. With h = 5 W m -2 K -1 there is an improvement at
high To*. However to achieve these low values of h
would require glass plates of thickness 100-200mm or
plastic plates with a thickness of 20--40 ram. For a two
layer collector it is necessary to reduce h below
5 W m-2K 1, and the only practical way to achieve this
would be to have an air gap between adjacent layers.
This solution is unattractive, however, since it increases
the reflection losses from the collector.
6.3 Effect of liquid absorption. The third parameter
which influences the performance of a multiple layer
collector is the solar absorptance of the working liquid.
Decreasing the absorptance will improve the thermal
performance because the temperature of the outer liquid
layers will be reduced. To examine this effect real col-
lector performance has been compared with that for an
ideal collector containing a heat transfer fluid with zero
absorptance, all solar radiation being absorbed by the
blackened plate and transferred to the liquid by conduc-
tion and convection.
Figures 6 and 7 allow a comparison of performance
between that of the ideal collector and that of 2 and 5
layer collectors using water as the working fluid. A value
of h = 10W m 2 K-, was assumed for these collectors.
For both the 2 and 5 layer collectors the effect is to
decrease the effective loss coefficient, whilst the inter-
cept ('0o) remains the same. The decrease in collector
performance due to solar absorption in the fluid becomes
larger as the number of layers is increased, but for the
two layer collector, performance is still not comparable
with that of a flat plate collector.
7. COLLECTORSWITHAIR GAPS
In the previous section it has been shown that using
materials that are available at the present time the mul-
tiple layer collector has a thermal performance that is
inferior to a typical selective surface flat plate collector.
Comparable performance is achieved only when the
conductive transfer coefficient between adjacent layers is
too low to be achieved by transparent plates. This sug-
gests the use of an air gap to insulate adjacent layers. In
this case there might be no improvement in reflection
1 Transparent plates
~--~/'"// /
/
~. ~ lotion
Absorber
232 J.P. KENNA

Table 1. Optical properties of flat plate and two layer collectors

Flat Plate Two Layer

Cover transmittance 0.84 0.70

Cover absorptance 0.08 0.22

Absorber absorptance 1.0 1.0

losses but the outer cover could be cooled by the incom-
ingfluid at ambienttemperature,
To examine this idea a comparison has been made
between a single glazed flat plate collector and a two
layer collector, a sketch of which is shown in Fig. 8. The
significant parameter here is the heat transfer coefficient
between the absorber and outer layer. Two values have
been chosen, h = 2 and 5 W m -2K -L, corresponding
respectively to an evacuated air gap with a selective
absorber and a selective absorber alone. For the fiat plate
collector, assuming a cover loss coefficient of
2 5 W m - 2 K -t and the back loss coefficients of
0.5Wm -l K -t, this leads to overall loss coefficients (U)
of 2.35 and 4.67 W m 2K '. The optical properties of
each collector are shown in Table 1.
A comparison between the thermal performance of
these collectors is shown in Fig. 9. Two points can be
noted from this graph: (i) The intercept (~7o) for the two
layer collector is higher than the intercept for the flat
plate collector. This is because all radiation absorbed by
the two layer outer cover is assumed to be due to water
absorption only, a situation unlikely to be achieved in
practice. (ii) The effective loss coefficient for the two
layer collector is greater than the effective loss
coefficient for the flat plate collector.
In practice the intercept (~0o) is likely to be similar for
both collectors because the cover materials will have a
similar solar absorptance. In this case the two layer
collector will not match the thermal performance of the
flat plate collector.
7.1 Experimental results. To confirm the computer
prediction a modular collector has been designed where
different absorber types and different cover systems can
be accommodated in the same case. This comprises a
wooden case with an aperture area of dimension 1.18 ×
1.04 m, insulated with 35 mm of isocyanurate foam and
55 mm of rockwool. A two layer collector was assembled
consisting of a copper fin and tube absorber with a
Maxorb (Trademark M.P.D. Technology Ltd., U.K.)
selective foil coating and a twin walled polycarbonate
outer layer with 4mm wide channels (Trade name
Qualex).
Polypropylene headers were attached to the outer
layer. Water entered at the top header and was transfer-

1.0

- ~ -."c~. :~':. :~ . . . . . . . . . . . .

0.1.

0.2
Two Layer h=5 W m-2 K-1 - - - -
Two Loyer h = 2 Win-2 K -1 - - ' -
Flat Plate U =4.67 W m-2 K-1 . . . . .
FI~ Rdm U=235 W m-2 K-1 . . . . . . .
0 i I I I I I
0.02 0-0/. 0.06 008 O10 0-12
(To-T~/G (K rn2 K -1 )

Fig. 9. Comparison of two layer collector with a flat plate collector.

 The multiple layer solar collector
red from the lower header to the selective absorber by
means of a well insulated plastic hose. The spacing
between outer and inner layer was 40 mm.
The collector was tested in the S.R.C. Solar Simulator
at Cardiff[8]. A 4 m high constant head tank was used to
provide a steady flow rate. The inlet temperature was
held constant and close to ambient with an in line tern-
perature controller. Both inlet and outlet temperatures
were measured with platinum resistance thermometers,
Mass flow rate was measured at the outlet with a timer
and weighing tank. The test was carried out under a
nominal irradiance of 900 W m -2, a collector tilt of 450
and an air speed parallel to the outer layer of 4ms 1.
Collector test results obtained in a simulator differ from
those obtained outdoors due to the higher thermal radia-
tion indoors. It is possible to correct the simulator results
to give equivalent outdoor results[8]. For selective flat
plate collectors the correction to the collection efficiency
is usually 2-3 per cent, but results reported here are
uncorrected,
To obtain the performance characteristic whilst main-
taining the inlet temperature close to ambient the mass
flow rate was changed. Steady state conditions were
established for a range of flow rates and measurements
made to give the collector efficiency:
rhcp(To- T~,)
~/- G glazings. A mathematical model of this has been
1.0
O8
:~'~"~""o [] No Wind
.~
W
04
0.2
0 . Simulator Result Flat Plate
[] S~mulator Result Two Layer Collector
I I
0.02 OOZ.,
(To - T a ) / G (K m 2 W -1)
Fig. 10. Experimental performance of two layer and flat plate collectors.
233
and the reduced outlet temperature:
T* = (To- T,)
G
Figure 10 shows a comparison between the two layer
collector and a flat plate collector operating in a once
through mode.
The flat plate collector was formed by replacing the
outer layer of the two layer collector with 4 mm float
glass. A once-through test was carried out to give the
thermal performance characteristic shown in Fig. 10.
The experimental point with no wind indicates that the
performance is very sensitive to the outer cover loss
coefficient (hL). This could be reduced by adding a cover
to protect the outer water layer. To test this idea a 3 mm
acrylic cover was added to the two layer collector and a
further once-through test carried out. The results are
shown in Fig. 11. No improvement in performance was
found however, because the decrease in loss coefficient
was balanced by the increase in reflection loss.
s. CONCLUSION
Reduction in thermal losses from a flat plate collector
can be achieved by multiple glazings. However, this
results in increased optical losses. A novel collector was
proposed by Caouris et al.[1] which overcame this by
passing the heat transfer fluid in between the transparent
r'l\
I
0.06
234 J.P. KENNA

1.0

0.8

¢-
O rn

1.1.1
Or.

0.2

a Simulator Result Two Layers

Simulator Result Two Layers and Ac~Iic Cov~r
0 I I
0.02 O.OZ, 006
ITo-To)/G(Km2 K -1 )

Fig. ll. Experimental performance of two layers and outer cover.

developed. The model indicated that three parameters plate collector but with a much larger absorptance (22
determined the thermal performance of the collector. (1) per cent compared with 8 per cent). This results in higher
No of layers n. (2) Heat transfer coefficient between heat losses.
adjacent layers"h". (3)Absorptanceoftheheattransfer The results of the computer studies have been
fluid a. confirmed by experimental tests on a two layer collector
The sensitivity of thermal performance to these and a fiat plate collector. It was further shown experi-
parameters has been examined and the most sensitive mentally that an additional cover on a two layer collector
parameter was found to be the heat transfer coefficient does not improve the performance.
(h). This study has lead to the conclusion that the multiple
In comparing this collector with a flat plate collector it layer collector is not a viable proposition.
is necessary to make the comparison with both collectors
operating in the once-through mode. If this is done then Acknowledgements--Thanksare given to Dr. W. B. Gillett for
to equal the performance of a typical flat plate collector many helpful comments and discussions.
with a selective surface it is necessary to have a five
layer collector with an "h" value below 10 W m-2K ~. NOMENCLATURE
To achieve this h value with existing materials is not a solar absorptance
practicable because a thickness of plates separating the c~ specific heat, J kg t K-t
layers of over 20 mm would be required. G solar irradiance, W m-2
A second collector was examined consisting of two h heat transfer coefficient between a:ijacent layers,
Wm-ZK-1
liquid layers separated by an air gap. It was found that at hc heat transfer coefficientfrom outer cover, W m 2 K-
high operating temperatures (TD the thermal perfor- hB heat transfer coefficient from back and sides of collector,
mance was inferior to the performance of flat plate W m-2K
collector with a selective absorber. To achieve high m mass flow rate, kgs
outlet temperatures very low flow rates are necessary n refractive index
r/ collectorefficiency
and the outer layer becomes almost stagnant. Under this "00 collector efficiencyfor mean fluid temperature at ambient
condition the outer cover resembles the cover of a flat r solar transmittance
 The multiple layer solar collector 235

T*~ (Tm-T~)/G, KW-~m 2 For collectors operating in a once-through mode the inlet
T~, (Tin- T~)/G, K W -~ m2 temperature will be at or close to ambient temperatures giving
T~ (To- T)/G, K W -~ m 2 T~ = 0. Equation (A2) then becomes:
Tj temperature of jth layer at distance x, K
Tm mean fluid temperature, K "o = F"r/o (A5)
T~. temperature of fluid at collector inlet, K
To temperature of fluid at collector outlet, K The steady state efficiency is also given by:
Ta ambient temperature, K
U collector loss coefficient, W m - 2 K -1 r/= mco(To- T~)/G (A6)
Ue effective loss coefficient, W m -2 K -1
when Tin = Ta.
Defining T~ = (To - Ta)/G the eqn (A6) becomes
REFERENCES
1. Y. Caouris et al., A novel solar collector. Solar Energy 21, r/= inepT*. (A7)
157-160 (1978).
2. J. E. Minardi and H. N. Chuang, Performance of a "Black" By substitution of (A7) into (A4) the flow factor can be
liquid flat plate solar collector. Solar Energy 17, 17%184 expressed in terms of efficiency and reduced outlet temperature
(1975). (To*).
3. P. R. Smith et al., Parametric Studies of the Thermal Trap "11 {. { - UT*\\
Hat Plate Collector. A.I.Ch.E. Syrup. Series 73. No. 164, pp. F" =~-~o~ l - e x p ~ ) ) . (A8)
164-170 (1977).
4. H. C, Hottel and A. Whillier, Evaluation of Hat Platg Collec-
tor Performance. Trans. of the Conference on the Use of Solar Equation (A5) then becomes
Energy. 2. Part 1. University of Arizona Press (1958). ( ( - UT~
5. M. J. Brandemuehl and W. A. Beckman, Transmission of r/= " 0 o \ ~ 1 (A9)
diffuse radiation through CPC and flat plate collector glazings.
Solar Energy 24, 511-513 (1980).
6. J. A. Duffle and W. B. Beckman, Solar Energy Thermal or re-arranging
Processes. Wiley, New York (1974). UT*
7. A. Rabl and C. E. Nielsen, Solar ponds for space heating, r/= (A10)
Solar Energy 17, 1(1975). - l n ( 1 - UT'~"
8. W. B. Gillett et al., Collector Testing Using Solar Simulators. r/o /
UK-ISES Conference C22 Solar Energy Code of Practices
and Test Procedures (1980). A restriction which must be imposed on (A10) is that the
thermal mass flow rate must be positive and finite.
APEENDIX 1 ~ > rhcp > 0
Performance of a solar collector operating in a once-through
mode. Under steady state conditions the thermal performance of or from (AT)
a solar collector is given by the Hottel-WhiUier equation:
~>r//T*>0
"11= r/o- UT*~ (A1)
which leads to the restriction on (A10) that:
If eqn (A1) is assumed to hold for any mass flow rate then two
assumptions are implicit: The collector loss coefficient U is oo< - l n ( l - UT*/r/o) > O.
independent of fluid temperature. The heat transfer from the
absorber to working fluid is independent of mass flow rate, i.e. r/o This imposes limitations on T* of
is constant.
Following a method given by DutSe and Beckman[6] (A1) can
be rewritten in its T~, form: 0 < T* < ~U

r~= F"r/o- F" UT*, (A2) which can be interpeted physically as:
(1) T~' >0. If T~' = 0 then the outlet temperature is equal to
where T*, = (T~n- T,)IG (A3) ambient. This is only possible with an infinite flow rate.
(2) To*< r/o/U. If the mass flow rate is zero then the collector
mep( (~.~cpU)) reaches a stagnation temperature defined by ~o/U. Thus tem-
F " = - - U- 1 - exp . (A,t) peratures above "0o/U are impossible to achieve.

SE Vo130,No. 3--D