American Journal of Energy Science

2016; 3(6): 40-50

http://www.openscienceonline.com/journal/energy

Evaluation of Mathematical Models for Solar

Thermal System
A. M. Abd El Rahman1, A. S. Nafey2, M. H. M. Hassanien1
1
Department of Petroleum Refining and Petrochemicals, Faculty of Petroleum and Mining Engineering Suez University, Suez, Egypt
2
Department of Engineering Sciences, Faculty of Petroleum and Mining Engineering, Suez University, Suez, Egypt

Email address
Eng.Ahmed_AbdElRahman10@yahoo.com (A. M. Abd El Rahman)
*
Corresponding author

To cite this article

A. M. Abd El Rahman, A. S. Nafey, M. H. M. Hassanien. Evaluation of Mathematical Models for Solar Thermal System. American Journal
of Energy Science. Vol. 3, No. 6, 2016, pp. 40-50.

Received: September 18, 2016; Accepted: October 11, 2016; Published: October 28, 2016

Abstract
Energy is one of the building blocks of modern society. The growth of the modern society has been fueled by cheap, abundant
energy resources. Solar energy is a form of renewable energy which is available abundantly and collected unreservedly. In Oil
Industry there is an energy problem due to energy losses of fuel consumption, refinery losses and electricity consumption in a
way that reduces the net profit of the industry. This thesis presents a solar energy heating system that can be used in the next
research for heating applications in oil industry. Firstly choosing the most appropriate solar system that can be used in such
applications was done. Four different Mathematical Models for prediction of optical efficiency and thermal losses for the
chosen system have been analyzed and then computerized using Software program for comparison based on numerical data
and also practical comparison using real input data from experimental and actual solar plants.
Keywords
Solar Energy, Mathematical Modeling, Parabolic Trough Solar Collector

According to International Energy Outlook (2016), In

1. Introduction
In addition to an increase in price of fossil fuel products,
regardless of its current status which has special reasons than
will not be longer valid, the resources will be exhausted in a
relatively short period of time. High prices of fossil fuel
resources are affecting economic and social development
worldwide. The impact of energy crises is particularly felt in
less developed countries as Egypt where a high percentage of
national budgets for development must be diverted to the
purchase of fossil fuel products. [1] According to the World
Energy Outlook 2009 (WEO-2009), the world primary
energy demand is projected to increase by 1.5% per year
between 2007 and 2030, from just over 12,000 million tons
of oil equivalent (Mtoe) to 16.800 Mtoe, with an overall
increase of 40%. Developing Asian countries are the main
drivers of this growth, followed by the Middle East. [2] Also
In 2011 the global energy consumption was around 510
EJ/year compared to 340 EJ/year in 1990. [3]
2012 Coal-fired generation accounted for 40% of total world
electricity generation while Natural Gas shared about 22%.
The use of petroleum and other liquid fuels for electricity
generation continues to decline steadily since 2006 as the
share of total world generation from liquid fuels falls to 5%,
this is due to high prices of oil comparing with other sources
prices. [4] It is important to mention that these three energy
sources are not only used to generate electricity, coal, oil, and
natural gas are also used for heating purposes in air
conditioning or industrial process. In addition, oil is used as a
fuel for the internal combustion engines used to power
almost all transportation vehicles.
In Oil Industry there is an energy problem due to energy
losses in a way that reduces the net profit of the industry.
Energy Losses are due to fuel consumption, refinery losses
and electricity consumption. For example Heating viscous oil
for transportation enhancing and heating crude oil for
preliminary treatment consume a great amount of fuel. Also
in refinery for 100 kbpd crude needs approximately 120 MW
41 A. M. Abd El Rahman et al.: Evaluation of Mathematical Models for Solar Thermal System
to be preheated up to 350°C [5]. A rule of thumb used by
some refiners is that it takes 1 barrel of oil-equivalent energy
to process 10 barrels of crude oil. [6] Petroleum refining in
the United States is the largest in the world, Refineries spend
typically 50% of the cash operating costs. [7] Oil refining,
petrochemicals, ammonia, paper, cement, and steel
production consume about 18% of the primary energy in the
EU.
So there is a great interest towards the Technologies for
Increasing the Energy Efficiency by Reduction of the energy
consumption. The most productive energy-conserving
measures appear to be in the areas of improved combustion,
the recovery of low-grade heat, and the use of process
modifications. Concerning these solutions Romulo, S. de
Lima. et al. (2011) made a comparison between energy
efficiency in Brazilian and United states crude oil refinery
and concluded that increasing the refinery complexity which
means more heat integration inside the plant will lead to
reduction of the energy consumption [8]. To meet the energy
challenges faced by Chinese petroleum refiners. Xiaoyu Liu.
et al. (2011) indicated that upgrading process heaters is
identified as apriority to enable short term energy
optimization [9]. Refineries may be also able to use other
sources of energy, and otherwise wasted heat, to reduce the
combustion of gaseous and liquid fuels. So Fuel substitution
(such as the use of coal in refineries) is an important goal
[10].
Solar energy is introduced in this paper for heating
applications in oil industry which will be discussed in the
next research. Solar thermal energy has been used for
centuries by ancient people's harnessing solar energy for
heating and drying [11]. Nowadays there are a wide range of
solar thermal energy applications depending on the required
temperature. The following applications show that the solar
thermal system is a feasible system that with a few
modifications and upgrading of the technology be used in a
large industrial scale.
For less than 150°C: air conditioning, cooling, and
Table 1. Comparison between concentrating Solar Collectors.
Parabolic Trough
Mid-to high Temperature
Applications
(500°C proven)
Most Proven Solar Concentrating Technology
Best land (specific land area 18-25 m2/kw
Advantages
Lowest Material Demand
Hybrid concept proven &storage capability
The use of oil –based heat transfer media
Disadvantages
restricts operating temperatures today to 400°C.
Through the previous comparison table, parabolic trough
collector presents the most appropriate type of collector to be
used in the discussed solar thermal system for usage in the oil
industry because of the following reasons:
It has been commercially proven.
Operating temperature up to 500°C (400°C
heating of water, oil, or air for industrial use [12] [13]
[14] [15] [16]
For temperatures between 200°C and 2000°C reaching
this high range of temperature enables using in
electrical and mechanical power generation. [17] [18]
For less than 5000°C: solar furnaces for the treatment of
materials at this very high temperature can be done [19]
[20] [21]
For solar thermal system three main elements are required:
a collector, transport media or storage and power Conversion
or heat exchanger depending on the end use of the thermal
energy. Solar energy capture (Solar collectors) is the main
part of the system and the system efficiency depends greatly
on it. Heat transfer fluid is heated through the solar collector
system before transfer heat to the fluid needed to be heated
through heat exchanger.
There are basically two types of thermal solar collectors:
non- concentrating and concentrating. Although there are
great geometric differences, their purpose remains the same
which is to convert the solar radiation into heat to satisfy
some energy needs [22]. For non-concentrating collectors,
there are two types of, the first one is Flat-plate collector
which is a Black surface in an isolated box with a glass cover
and can be used for lower demand hot water systems. The
second type is Evacuated tube collector which is a row of
parallel glass tubes. This type shows a good efficiency even
for temperatures as high as 170°C. Concentrating collectors
are used for high temperature applications and classified to
Point devices and linear devices. Parabolic dish and solar
tower are two types of point devices. Parabolic trough is the
most common type of the linear devices. [23]
Through the survey of the solar collectors, concentrating
type is the appropriate type for heating in oil industry
because of high temperature demand and also it is proven in
actual applications. Choosing the best type of concentrating
collector is illustrated through the following comparison in
Table1 [24].
Parabolic Dish Solar Tower
High temperature 1000°C (565°C High temperature
proven) (560°C proven)
Hybrid operation possible
Hybrid operation possible
Operation experience of first
Storage at high temperatures
prototype
Annual performance values.
Annual performance values.
Investment and operating costs still
Investment and operating costs still
need to be proven in commercial
need to be proven in commercial
operation
operation
specific land area 45-75 m2/kw
commercially proven).
The lowest material demand which reflect. greatly in
the cost of the project.
Best land usage.
For the parabolic trough collector, the literature review has
been categorized on the basis of:
 American Journal of Energy Science 2016; 3(6): 40-50
Performance.
Materials and economics.
Applications of solar energy in oil industry.
Through Studying of more than 30 papers related to the
performance of the PTC collector, researches used one of
three methods for prediction of PTC performance. Three
methods are:
Experimental Prototypes of PTC.
Developing Mathematical Model.
Simulation Model of PTC.
Concerning the first method, experiments have been done
in order to study the output results of the PTC under different
operating conditions in the way that accurate performance
and anticipation of validity of PTC to be used in large scale
can be predicted [25] [26] Most of the researches combine
the first and the second methods for PTC performance
prediction [27] Some researchers used mathematical models
only in their work, but validation is mandatory and this can
be done through comparison with other experimental data or
using simulation tool [28] [29]. Concerning the third method
which is simulation of PTC using simulation program,
TRNSYS software used in most of the cases [30] [31].
For parabolic trough economics researches chose the best
type of mirrors, absorber tube material and heat transfer fluid
[32] [33] [34] [35].
For the applications of solar energy in oil industry,
Researchers studied using solar thermal energy in heating
viscous fuel oil to about 50°C and stored at that temperature
[36] [37], heating crude oil to maintain flow ability during
transportation [38] [39][40] [41] and thermal treatment of
crude oil by heating water in the collector to 85-90°C then
heated water exchanges heat with crude which is heated to
55-60°C [42].
2. Methodology
The evaluation PTC available models can be summarized
in the following points
Description of each model steps, basis, assumptions.
Numerical comparison based on the same input (two
different cases (Table 2, Table 3)) for the four models.
This comparison gives correct image about the validity
of using each model in the next step.
Validation using practical data which is the core of the
evaluation and the most important key for choosing the
best of the four models.
Parabolic trough systems Fig. (1) consist of parallel rows
of mirrors (reflectors) curved in one dimension (i.e. semi-
cylindrical) to focus the sun’s rays. The mirror arrays can be
more than 100 m long with the curved surface 5 m to across.
The heat collectors are stainless steel pipes (absorber tubes)
with a selective coating (designed to allow pipes to absorb
high levels of solar radiation while emitting very little infra-
red radiation). The pipes are insulated in an evacuated glass
envelope. Inside the tube, at the focal point, runs a heat
transfer fluid (usually oil) that absorbs the concentrated sun
irradiation and rises its temperature up to 400°C.
42
The design of Parabolic trough collectors are structurally
simpler than other types of concentrated collectors but it
requires continuous tracking so as to make sure that solar
radiations are concentrated on the absorber tube throughout
the day.
Fig. 1. Parabolic Trough collector.
2.1. Some Available Models for Parabolic
Trough Collector
Through survey of literature review, specially studying
parabolic trough collector performance, a PTC performance
simulation model consists of two parts: an optical analysis
for the reflector system and a thermal analysis for the
receiver system. The two analyses, optical and thermal, can
be carried out completely independent of each other and this,
undoubtedly, brings about a considerable simplification in the
performance simulation modeling.
The state-of-the-art optical models for PTC's were found
to be incomplete; one cannot find a comprehensive
information base. The significant lack was observed to be in
handling of the optical errors. Jeter [43] presented a
mathematical formulation based on the Gaussian function to
calculate the concentrated solar flux density and the optical
behavior of a PTC. Güven and Bannerot [44] established an
optical model which used a ray-tracing technique to evaluate
the optical performance and determined the optical errors by
means of a statistical analysis.
With respect to the thermal model, modeling principle is
based on energy balance between the essential elements of the
heat collection element (HCE) which are the receiver tube, and
the heat transfer fluid [45]. Many works have been carried out
to study the coupled heat transfer problem in the solar receiver
assuming a uniform solar flux. Dudley et al. [46] proposed a
one-dimensional (1D) model to analyze the thermal behavior
and performance of the LS2 SEGS collector.
Foristall [47] implemented both a 1D and a two-
dimensional model (2D) by dividing the absorber into several
segments. This unidimensional assumes that all temperatures,
heat fluxes and thermodynamic properties are uniform
around the HCE circumference. In a bidimensional model, an
estimation of the number of brackets in each subdivision of
the HCE is made instead of use the heat transfer per unit
43 A. M. Abd El Rahman et al.: Evaluation of Mathematical Models for Solar Thermal System
length and summed in a total value.
Four different Mathematical Models for the parabolic
trough heating system have been analyzed and then
computerized using Software program for numerical and
practical validation evaluation.
2.1.1. The First Model (Energy Assessment
of a Parabolic Trough Collector in
North Cyprus)
Olopade [48] Presented the First Model for Energy
Assessment of a Parabolic Trough Collector in North Cyprus.
This Model consists of two main parts. The first part is the
optical model for absorbed radiation calculation then the
second part is the thermal model for the useful energy gained
and exit temperature calculation.
For Absorbed Radiation calculation the prediction of
collector performance requires information on the solar
energy absorbed by the collector absorber plate. This is the
actual quantity of radiation on the receiver and is calculated
by eq (1)
S = Ib Rb [ρ γ τ α] +
Where, lb =incident radiation, Rb=beam radiation,
ῤ=specular reflectance, Ῡ=intercept factor. Ʈ=transmittance,
α=Absorptance, D0=Outer diameter and aperture width w.
With respect to Heat Loss by Radiation calculation there
are two radiation coefficients calculated for a single system
with a glass covert, the natural convection heat transfer
coefficient hr, r-c for the enclosed annular space between a
horizontal absorber tube (receiver) and a concentric cover
and also radiation coefficient between the cover and the
ambient air (hr, c-a). The overall loss coefficient combines
the thermal losses into one coefficient. The coefficient on a
per length basis is calculated through the following equation
UL= + -1
( , ∗ ) , The second part should treat the two-phase flow where the
Where UL=overall loss coefficient (W/m2 K), hw=wind
heat transfer coefficient (W/m2 K), Dc=cover diameter (m).
The coefficient of the heat transfer fluid (hf) is calculated
depending on the Reynolds number of the fluid (Ref). The
overall heat transfer (Uo) is the coefficient of transfer of heat
from surroundings to the fluid, station on the outer diameter
of the receiver pipe.
∗ (
Uo = + +
∗ DNI (direct normal irradiance) and ϴ is the angle of
Where K= thermal conductivity of receiver pipe.
The collector efficient factor (F) can be defined by eq (4)
F =
$
The term FR is called the collector heat-removal factor; it
is an important design parameter since it is a measure of the
thermal resistance encountered by the absorbed solar
radiation in reaching the collector fluid.
%∗&' ()∗*+∗1
FR = ∗ (1 − exp(− )) (5)
()∗*+ %∗&'
Where Cp=Specific heat of the fluid, Ar=Area of the
receiver (π DoLN), L= length of receiver per module.
N=number of modules. The specific heat (Cp) depends on the
HTF temperature.
Because the inlet fluid temperature is usually a known
quality, The following Equation is a convenient expression
for calculating the useful energy gain
2
Q = FR * Aa * (S - * Ul * (Ti-Ta) (6)
2
Where Aa= Area of the aperture (a-a0)L, a is the width of
the aperture, a0=is width of aperture shaded by the receiver,
T=inlet fluid temperature (K).
Following the energy balance the exit temperature can be
determine by equating the heat gained by the fluid to the
useful heat gain rate, this can be described in eq(7)
34
Tfo = Tf+ (7)
567
(1) Where Tfo is the outlet temperature of the fluid and Tf is
the inlet temperature of the fluid
2.1.2. The Second Model (Modeling and
Simulations of Direct Steam
Generation in Concentrating Solar
Power Plants Using Parabolic Trough
Collectors)
Can Uçkun [49] Presents the second model to be studied
for developing appropriate model for the proposed solar
system. This model has special case as it was developed for
direct steam generation mathematical formulation, which
means that the thermal analysis should be divided into two
different sections. One part of the analysis should treat the
one phase flow which consists of liquid water and dry steam.
(2)
heat transfer characteristic of the flow is changing. Our scope
of work presents using only the first part below the saturation
temperature of the working fluid as If the exit temperature
reaches the saturation temperature of fluid.
The maximum amount of solar radiation which is utilized
by a concentrating solar collector is calculated as
Qmax = DNI x COS ϴ (8)
) -1 Where
! (3)
incidence
The total optical efficiency in the model is assumed to be
0.74 so the optical losses can be calculated through eq (10)
(4) Qloss, optical = (1-0.74) x Qmax (9)
Heat losses from the absorber tube can be via radiation to
the glass envelope and by conduction due to residual gases in
the evacuated space. Heat losses from the glass envelope of
the absorber can occur via radiation to the sky and
convection to the surrounding. In [50] S. D. Odeh, a
 American Journal of Energy Science 2016; 3(6): 40-50 44

correlation is proposed in order to calculate thermal heat Ar,ext=π Dr,ext L (14)

losses from an absorber of a DSG solar PTC.
Aap = (W –Dr,ext) L (15)

L is the length of the collector m

W width of the aperture m Dr, ext is the external diameter
of the collector pipes
Hab is the total absorbed heat
The overall heat loss coefficient is one of the most
important parameters and can be found out through the
following eq (16)
Ul = hw +hr,r-a (16)

Fig. 2. Heat losses from the glass envelope of the absorber.
The authors ran many parametric studies in which wind
speed, absorber temperature, ambient temperature, and DNI
were varied.
Qloss, thermal = (a+cV)(Tab–Tamb)+(Tab4–Tsky4)
V is the wind speed in m/s.
The net energy gained by the absorber is calculated as,
Qnet=Qmax-(Qloss, thermal+Qloss, optical) (11)
Following the energy balance the exit temperature can be
determine by equating the heat gained by the fluid to the
useful heat gain rate, this can be described in eq
34
Tfo = Tf+ (11)
567
2.1.3. The Third Model (Experimental and
Theoretical Study of a Parabolic
Trough Solar Collector)
Tadahmun [51] presented an experimental study at Tikrit-
Iraq and also theoretical study using FORTRAN 90 program
that has been conducted to determine the thermal efficiency
of a parabolic trough solar collector.
The calculation of the total incident solar radiation on an
exposed surface involves the determination of the beam and
diffuse radiation, which are computed after estimating the
solar time and position.
As the sun radiation passes through the atmosphere it is
attenuated in proportion to the length of its path according to
an extinction coefficient B, to produce the normal radiance at
the earth surface
8 9
IDN = A1 * exp (- * )
8 : ( )
Where
hr,r-a radiation heat transfer coefficient between receiver
and ambient [W/m2.°C]
hw convective heat transfer coefficient between receiver
and ambient [W/m2.°C]
Following the energy balance the exit temperature can be
determine by equating the heat gained by the fluid to the
useful heat gain rate, this can be described in eq (17)
(10)
34
Tfo = Tf (17)
567
2.1.4. The Forth Model (Thermal Analysis,
Design and Experimental Investigation
of Parabolic Trough Solar Collector)
Yidnekachew Messele [52] presented The HCE
performance model using an energy balance between the
HTF and the atmosphere, including all equations and
correlations necessary to predict the terms in the energy
balance, which depend on the collector type, HCE condition,
optical properties, and ambient conditions.
With the help of Fig. (3), the energy balance equations are
determined by conserving energy at each surface of the HCE
cross-section.
q’12conv = q’23cond (18)
q’35solAbs = q’23cond + q’35conv+ q’34rad (19)
q’Heat Loss = q’35conv + q’3rad (20)
(12)

Where,
Pl/Po is the pressure ratio at location concerned relative to
the standard atmospheric pressure
The theoretical useful energy from parabolic trough solar
collector calculated by eq writing as
2 ,;<=
Qu,th =Aap FR [ Hab – Ul Tfi - Tamb F (13)
2 7 Fig. 3. One-dimensional steady-state energy balance.

Where
45 A. M. Abd El Rahman et al.: Evaluation of Mathematical Models for Solar Thermal System

q’34rad = σ ∏ D2 ε (T34 – T44) W/m (24)

σ= Stefan-Boltzmann constant (5.670E-8) (W/m2-K4)

ε = emissivity of the outer surface tube
D2= the outer surface tube diameter (m)
Fig. 4. Thermal resistance model for a cross-section of an HCE. T3= the outer surface tube temperature (K)
T4= effective sky temperature (K)
Where: Point 1 is heat transfer fluid The actual useful energy collected by fluid is given by
Point 2 is absorber inner surface
2 MN O 2= P P
Point 3 is absorber outer surface q’used =FR ( ) (25)
$
Point 4 is sky
Point 5 is surrounding air Where UL The sum of convection and radiation heat loss
From Newton’s law of cooling, the convection heat from the heat collecting tube
transfer from the inside surface of the absorber pipe to the FR is the collector heat removal factor, defined as the ratio
HTF is of the actual useful energy gain to the useful energy gain if
the entire collector was at the fluid inlet temperature and it is
h1 # NuD1 (21) expressed as:

Where 5R67 P P
FR # ST R SW (26)
h1 =convection heat transfer coefficient inside the tube at VM O P P F
U ST
T1 (W/m2K)
After rearranging the above equation including collector
D1 = inside diameter of the absorber pipe (m)
efficiency factor it becomes
T1 = mean (bulk) temperature of the HTF (°C)
T2 = inside surface temperature of absorber pipe (°C) 5R 67 2= XN
FR # V-exp (- F (27)
NuD1 = Nusselt number based on D1 2= 5 67
k1 = thermal conductance of the HTF at T1 (W/mK)
Where - Cpf Specific heat of the working fluid
Fourier’s law of conduction through a hollow cylinder
mf Mass flow rate of the working fluid
describes the conduction heat transfer through the absorber
wall Tfo = Tf
34
(28)
567
2
q’23cond = 2K23 / ln (D2/D1) W/m K (22)
Note
Where: Qsolar is dependent on the beam interface Ib, aperature area
k23 = absorber thermal conductance Aa of the mirror and the optical efficiency ηoptical
D1 = absorber inside diameter (m)
D2 = absorber outside diameter (m) Qsolar = ηoptical x Ib x Aa (29)
The heat will transfer from the glass envelope to the
The optical efficiency contains complex parameters such
atmosphere by convection and radiation. The convection will
as reflectivity, absorption, transmission and spillage of the
either be forced or natural, depending on whether there is
mirror, the glass envelope and the absorber tube. For
wind. Radiation heat loss occurs due to the temperature
aluminum reflective surface field test shows that the optical
difference between the glass envelope and sky.
efficiency is above 60%
The convection heat transfer from the glass envelope to the
atmosphere is the largest source of heat loss, especially if 2.2. Computer Programs for Different PTC
there is a wind. From Newton’s law of cooling Models
L
h35 = NuD2 (23) After detailed explanation and knowing the steps of the
four models for exit temperature and useful energy gained,
h35 = convection heat transfer coefficient for air calculation software program for each model must be built
k3 = thermal conductance of air (W/mK). for more easy, rapid and accurate calculation of the required
D2 = glass envelope outer diameter (m). output using the same input for the three models.
NuD2 = average Nusselt number based on the glass Software used for the parabolic trough collector
envelope outer diameter. Excel Sheet Program which provide easy interface with the
The useful incoming solar irradiation is included in the model and also easy prediction of errors and results. Fig. (5)
solar absorption terms. Therefore, the radiation transfer There are basic steps which are approximately similar in
between the outer surface of the tube and sky is caused by the the four models for calculation of the required output based
temperature difference between the outer surface of the tube on approximately the same input.
and sky. The net radiation transfer between the glass Input data to the models
envelope and sky becomes Solar Radiation properties.
 American Journal of Energy Science 2016; 3(6): 40-50 46

Air Properties. of the months of October, November and December

Solar collector specification.
Inlet fluid properties.
Output results from the models
Optical and thermal performance (Losses).
Useful energy gained.
Exit temperature of the heat transfer fluid.
2.3. Practical Validation of the Selected
Model
Practical comparison between the four models in order to
validate the selected model is done using actual data from
experimental and actual plants.
Six Actual Cases are used from different location all over
the world especially Egypt.
Case 1: parabolic trough solar field installed on the
rooftop of a hotel in the Dead Sea area using water as a
heat transfer fluid.
Case 2: experimental test have been carried out in
Baghdad with climatic conditions during selected days
(Iraq).
Case 3: experimental test from geographical location in
kurukshetra (India).
Case 4: experimental tests have been carried out in SRT.
(Thailand)
Case 5: experimental tests have been carried out during
the months of April and May 2010 at Shivaji University,
Kolhapur. (India).
Case 6: Integrated Solar Combined Cycle Power Plant
(ISCC) Kuraymat is located about 87 km South of
Cairo, Egypt on the eastern side of the river Nile.
Case 7: Comparison with daily results from solar
parabolic trough collector for salt-water desalination
during period (9.45 A.M to 15.45 P.M) at Daytona
Beach, Florida on February 19, 2014.
Case 8: Comparison with results from solar parabolic
trough collector for salt-water desalination in arid areas
of Saudi Arabia during period from (12 P.M to 17 P.M)
on 8/12/2005.

Fig. 5. Program for the first model which is done also for the other three models.

Table 2. First Case for numerical comparison between the four models. Table 3. Second Case for numerical comparison between the four models.

Specifications Of Mass flow rate 1 Kg/s Specifications Of Mass flow rate 0.09 Kg/s
Heat Transfer Fluid Inlet temperature 300 K Heat Transfer Fluid Inlet temperature 333 K
Width of the aperture 5 M Width of the aperture 1.2 m
Collector
Length of module 12 M Collector Specification Length of module 12 m
Specification
Number of modules 1 module Number of modules 1 module
Receiver Tube Receiver Tube
Receiver inner diameter 0.07 m Receiver inner diameter 0.0315 m
Dimensions Dimensions
Ambient temp 293 k Ambient temp 309.4 k
Air Properties Air Properties
Wind or air velocity 3 m/s Wind or air velocity 3 m/s
Incident Radiation 900 W/m2 Incident Radiation 705 W/m2
47 A. M. Abd El Rahman et al.: Evaluation of Mathematical Models for Solar Thermal System

3. Results and Discussion utilized by a concentrating solar subtracting from it the

thermal and optical losses. Exit temperature is then
3.1. Evaluation of Numerical Results for PTC calculated and Absorber temperature which is firstly.
Models Iteration is continued until the calculated absorber
3.1.1. Optical Model Evaluation temperature equal the assumed value.
Absorbed radiation calculation (Table 4) C. Third Model basis
a) First model absorbed radiation depends on some Equation for useful energy gained in this paper is missed
modifiers as (modified optical efficiency, End effect but it can be calculated with the same sequence as the first
correction and angle of incidence) for absorbed model, then the exit temperature is then calculated by
radiation calculation. Using assumed constants, following the energy balance equating the heat gained by the
absorbed radiation in the first model = 0.6561 x IDN. fluid to the useful heat gain rate.
b) Second model absorbed radiation depends on the D. Forth Model basis
assumption of optical losses to be (1- 0.74) x maximum Following the energy balance the exit temperature can be
amount of solar radiation. So the absorbed radiation to determined by equating the heat gained by the fluid to the
be approximately 0.74 x IDN. useful heat gain rate.
c) Third model absorbed radiation does not depend on Table 5. First Case Useful Energy Gained.
given data for the incident normal radiation but
calculation of the total incident radiation based on the First Second Third Forth
Model Model Model Model
number of the day during the year, the altitude in meters
Useful energy gained KW 22.57 39.94 36.69 31.81
above sea level and solar angles which gives different Exit temperature °C 32.43 36.54 35.76 34.6
values from the incident radiation in first and second
model. The absorbed radiation is then calculated based Table 6. Second case Useful Energy Gained.
on reflectivity of the reflector and the sun altitude angle.
First Second Third Forth
d) Forth model absorbed radiation is dependent on the Model Model Model Model
beam irradiance, aperture area of the mirror and the Useful energy gained KW 0.744 0.755 0.311 0.581
optical efficiency. The optical efficiency contains Exit temperature °C 61.97 62 60.8 61.54
complex parameters such as reflectivity, absorption,
transmission, spillage of the mirror, the glass envelope Trough (Tables 4, 5, 6) it can concluded that the results for
and the absorber tube. For aluminum reflective surface absorbed radiation, useful energy gained and exit temperature
field test shows that the optical efficiency is above 60% for the four model are approximately the same which is the
target of this step in order to use these model in the next step
Table 4. Absorbed Radiation. (Practical validation)
Absorbed Radiation W/m2 3.2. Practical Validation of the Selected
Incident Radiation
First Second Third Forth
W/m2 Model
Model Model Model Model
900 590.5 666 778.5 540
705 602.775 521.7 399 423
Using real input data from experimental and actual solar
plants to the four models and then making comparison
Note: In the third Model for equal basis in the comparison between the other between models results and the actual results giving as
models the number of the day per year is changed for reaching incident
shown in (Table 8)
radiation of 900W/m2 in the first case and 705 W/m2 in the second case
The selection of the studied cases is based on the following
3.1.2. Thermal Model Evaluation criteria
Useful Energy Gained and the Outlet Temperature (Table A. Choosing different locations especially actual case from
5) Egypt to prove the validity of the selected model to be
For exit temperature calculation, firstly the useful energy used later in Egypt for different applications.
gained is calculated. B. The selected cased covers different sizes for the
A. First Model basis parabolic trough collector (Table 7)
Using overall loss coefficient and the absorbed radiation, The comparison between models based on calculation of
the useful energy gained is calculated. Following the energy error% for each model in every case from the actual result as
balance the exit temperature can be determined by equating follow
the heat gained by the fluid to the useful heat gain rate. |_ `; a;:4 = 2 =4 a;:4 =|
B. Second Model basis Error % # %
2 =4 a;:4 =
The net energy gained by the absorber is calculated but
through the maximum amount of solar radiation which is
 American Journal of Energy Science 2016; 3(6): 40-50 48

Table 7. Solar Fields Sizes.

Cases Solar Field Size No of modules Total Area m2

Length m Width m
Case 1 5.09 1.8 1 9.162
Case 2 1.8 1.8 1 3.24
Case 3 1.5 1.8 1 2.7
Case 4 48 5 1 240
Case 5 1.21 1.8 1 2.178
Case 6 12.375 6 1920 142560
Case 7 3.6 1.22 1 4.392
Case 8 2.44 2.21 1 5.3924

Table 8. Summary of the total Results for the four models concerning the first six cases.

Actual First Second Third Forth

Cases Error % Error % Error % Error %
Results Model Model Model model
Case 1 67.25 66.00 0.02 58.50 0.13 67.40 0.00 73.82 0.10
Case 2 139.00 130.00 0.06 171.23 0.23 114.30 0.18 112.93 0.19
Case 3 75.70 70.50 0.07 71.00 0.06 70.27 0.07 215.92 1.85
Case 4 188.00 187.98 0.00 190.23 0.01 139.70 0.26 155.24 0.17
Case 5 29.00 29.10 0.00 28.58 0.01 39.80 0.37 36.34 0.25
Case 6 393.00 385.00 0.02 753.52 0.92 436.00 0.11 NA
Average of error % 3.52 27.36 24.76 64.12

Fig. 6. Case7 results.

Fig. 7. Case8 results.

49 A. M. Abd El Rahman et al.: Evaluation of Mathematical Models for Solar Thermal System
4. Conclusion
Through the above results the 1st Model gives the best
results in five cases (case 2, case 3, case 4, Case 5 and case
6) and also the lowest total error for all cases. The 3rd model
gives best result in only one case and higher error than the 1st
Model for all cases. The 4th model results on the higher error
for all cases. For case 7 fig. (6) the first and the second
models show approximately equal results that are close to the
actual data. In Case 7 fig. (7) the first model shows the best
results. It can be concluded that the 1stModel is the most
appropriate model within the four studied models that can
represent the parabolic trough collector as a solar heating
system that can be used later in the next research as a tool for
developing an economic study about the feasibility and
reliability of using solar energy in oil industry applications
such as Preheating viscous oil for reduction of risks in
pumping through pipelines, preheating of crude oil to about
(100-120°C) for desalting, preheating of water before boilers
for steam generation where steam can be used also for
electricity generation or as process steam and also Preheating
of crude before distillation.
References
[1] Ahmad Khaled, M. Fawzi El-Refaie, Dr. Dirk Dahlhaus,
(2012). Technical and Economic Performance of Parabolic
Trough in Jordan, Pages 17-21.
[2] World Energy Outlook (2009), The International Energy
Agency, Page 9.
[3] Daniel Horst, Adel Kahlil, Ing Jürgen Schmid, Carsten Pape,
(2012). Performance Simulation for Parabolic Trough
Concentrating Solar Power Plants And Export Scenario
Analysis For North Africa, Page 9.
[4] International Energy Outlook (2016), U.S. Energy Information
Administration, Pages (81-98).
[5] WWW.ALFALAVAL.COM, Crude distillation unit (ADU
VDU) - Alfa Laval is a world leader within the key technology
areas of heat transfer, separation and fluid handling.
[6] Industrial Energy Use (Washington, D. C.: U.S. Congress,
Office of Technology Assessment, June 1983), Workshop on
the Petroleum Refining Industry, Chapter 5, Pages 96-99.
[7] Worrell, Ernst Galitsky, Christina (2005), Energy Efficiency
Improvement in the Petroleum Refining Industry.
[8] Romulo S. de Lima, Roberto Schaeffer (April 2011), The
energy efficiency of crude oil refining in Brazil: A Brazilian
refinery plant case.
[9] Xiaoyu Liu, Dingjiang Chen (August 2013), An assessment of
the energy-saving potential in China’s petroleum refining
industry from a technical perspective.
[10] Michael Petrick, Joan Pelligreno (August 1999) Energy
System Division, Argonne National Laboratory, The Potential
of reducing energy utilization in refinery.
[11] Robert Foster, Majid Ghassemi, Alma Cota (CRC Press),
(2010), Solar Energy: renewable Energy and the Environment.
[12] Dan Nchelatebe Nkwetta, Mervyn Smyth (July 2011), The
potential applications and advantages of powering solar air-
conditioning systems using concentrator augmented solar
collectors.
[13] Vishal R. Sardeshpande Ajay G. Chandak (March 2011),
Procedure for thermal performance evaluation of steam
generating point-focus solar concentrators.
[14] khalid A. Joudi, Nabil S Dhaidan (September 2000),
Application of solar assisted heating and desiccant cooling
systems for demotic using.
[15] Mohammed A. Abid, Najim A. Jassim (2015), Experimental
Evaluation of Thermal Performance of Solar Assisted Air
Conditioning System under Iraq Climate, Journal of Energy
Technologies and Policy Vol.5, No.12, 2015.
[16] Arun C A, Sreekumar P C (2016), Modelling and performance
evaluation of a parabolic trough solar collector desalination
system, Materials Today, Science Direct.
[17] Angela M. Patnode (January 2006), Simulation and
performance evaluation of parabolic trough solar power
plants.
[18] Najjar, Y. and Sadeq, J. (Sep 2016), Modeling and Simulation
of Solar Thermal Power System Using Parabolic Trough
Collector, Energy Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)EY.1943-
7897.0000404, 04016056.
[19] F. Sibieude, M. Ducarroir, A. Tofighi and J. Ambriz (May
1981), High temperature experiments with a solar furnace: the
decomposition of Fe3O4, Mn3O4, CdO. Vol, 42. No. 3. pp.
267-272.
[20] R. Levitan, H. Rrosin, and M. Levy (1989) chemical reactions
in a solar furnace-direct heating of the reactor in a tubular
receiver. Solar Energy Vol, 42. No. 3. pp. 267-272.
[21] Bertinho A. Costa, Joao M. Lemos, Emmanuel Guillot (2016),
Control of a Solar Furnace using MPC with Integral Action,
IFAC-PapersOnLine 49-7 (2016) 961–966.
[22] Usha kiranmayee (2012), Review of renewable solar energy,
Presented to Department of Mechanical Engineering,
California State University, Sacramento.
[23] Solar energy perspectives (2011), international energy agency,
Chapter 7, Pages (124-135).
[24] Rainer Aringhoff, Georg Brakmann, Crispin Aubrey, Sven
Teske (October, 2003), (European Solar Thermal Power
Industry Association (ESTIA), Greenpeace International,
Solar Thermal Power Plants, ISBN: 90-73361-82-6.
[25] F Mammadov, U Samadova x O Salamov (February 2008),
experimental results of using a parabolic trough solar collector
for thermal treatment of crude oil, Journal of Energy in
Southern Africa • Vol 19 No 1.
[26] F Mammadov (May 2006), Application of solar energy in the
initial crude oil treatment process in oil fields, Journal of
Energy in Southern Africa, Vol 17 No 2.
[27] Falah Abd Alhasan Mutlak (2002), Design and Fabrication of
Parabolic Trough Solar Collector for Thermal Energy Ap
 American Journal of Energy Science 2016; 3(6): 40-50
[28] Marco Sotte, Prof. Giovanni Latini (January 2012), Design
Test and Mathematical Modeling of Parabolic Trough Solar
Collectors.
[29] M. Ghodbane (2015), Numerical Modeling of a Parabolic
Trough Solar Collector at Bouzaréah, Algeria, International
journal of chemical and petroleum science, Vol 4, No 2
(2015).
[30] Angela M. Patnode (2006), Simulation and Performance
Evaluation of Parabolic Trough Solar Power Plants.
[31] G. C. Bakos, D. Parsa (May 2013), Technoeconomic
Assessment of an Integrated Solar Combined Cycle Power
plant in Greece using line-focus parabolic trough collectors,
ELSAVIER, Renewable Energy Volume 60, Pages 598–603.
[32] Maria Brogrena, Anna Helgessonb, Bj.orn Karlssonb, c, Johan
Nilssonc, Arne Roosa (January 2004), Optical properties,
durability, and system aspects of a new aluminium-polymer-
laminated steel reflector for solar concentrators, Solar Energy
Materials & Solar Cells 82 (2004) 387–412.
[33] Rafael Almanza, PerlaHerna´ndez, Iva´n Martı´nez,
MarcosMazari (May 2009), Development and mean life of
aluminum first-surface mirrors for solar energy applications,
Solar Energy Materials & Solar Cells 93 (2009) 1647–1651.
[34] Mohit Bhargva (July 2012), Modeling, analysis, evaluation,
selection and experimental investigation of parabolic trough
solar collector system.
[35] Daniel M. Blake, Luc Moensa, Mary Jane Halea, Henry
Pricea, David Kearneyb, and Ulf Herrmannc New Heat
Transfer and Storage Fluids for Parabolic Trough Solar
Thermal Electric Plants (2002), Proceedings of the 11th Solar
PACES International Symposium On concentrating Solar
Power and Chemical Energy Technologies, September 4-6,
2002, Zurich, Switzerland.
[36] Ali A. Badran and Mohammed A. Hamdan (March 1996),
Utilization of Solar Energy for Heating Fuel Oil, Mgmt Vol.
39, No. I/2, pp. 105-111, 1998-1997 Elsevier Science Ltd.
[37] Ali A. Badran Bassem A Jubran, Fuel oil heating by a trickle
solar collector (December 2000), Energy Conversion and
Management 42(2001) 1637-1645.
[38] WANG Xuesheng, WANG Ruzhu et al: Applied Research of
Solar Energy for Heating Crude Oil of Transportation, OGST,
2004, 23 (7) 41~45.
[39] Xuesheng Wang, Ruzhu Wang, Jingyi Wu Experimental
investigation of a new-style double-tube heat exchanger for
heating crude oil using solar hot water, Applied Thermal
Engineering 25 (2005) 1753–1763.
50
[40] Zinian He (2013), Shc 2013, Application of solar heating
system for raw petroleum during its piping transport,
international conference on solar heating and cooling for
buildings and industry September 23-25, 2013, Freiburg,
Germany.
[41] Yechao Xi Wang (2013), Solar thermal energy saving
applications in oil and gas fields, Chinese scientific and
technical journals, Pages 22-25.
[42] F. F. Mamedov, U. F. Samedova, O. M. Salamov, and A. A.
Garibov, Heat engineering calculation of a parabolo-
cylindrical solar concentrator with tubular reactor for crude oil
preparation for refining in the oil fields, Applied Solar Energy,
2008, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 28–30. © Allerton Press, Inc., 2008.
[43] Jeter, S. M., Jarrar, D. I. and Moustafa, S. A (April 1982),
"Geometric Effects on the Performance of Trough Collectors,"
Solar Energy, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 109-113, 1983.
[44] Guven, HL. M. and Bannerot, R. B (1985), Determination of
error tolerances for the optical design of parabolic troughs for
developing countries.
[45] Halil M. Gaven Richard B. Bannerot (June, 1984), optical and
thermal analysis of parabolic trough solar collectors for
technically less developed countries
[46] V. Dudley, G. Kolb, M. Sloan, and D. Kearney (December
1994). SEGS LS2 solar collector-test results. Technical report,
Report of Sandia National Laboratories.
[47] R. Forristall (October 2003), Heat Transfer Analysis and
Modeling of a Parabolic Trough Solar Receiver Implemented
in Engineering Equation Solver, NREL/TP-550-34169.
[48] Olopade Olusegun Solomon, Energy Assessment of a
Parabolic Trough Collector in North Cyprus.
[49] Can Uçkun (March 2013), Modeling and simulations of direct
steam generation in concentrating solar power plants using
parabolic trough collectors
[50] S. D. Odeh, G. L. Morrison and M. Behnia (February 1998),
Modeling of parabolic trough direct steam generation solar
collectors, Solar Energy Vol. 62, No. 6, pp. 395–406, 1998©
1998 Elsevier Science Ltd.
[51] Tadahmun Ahmed Yassen (April 2012), Experimental and
Theoretical Study of a Parabolic Trough Solar Collector,
Anbar Journal for Engineering Sciences.
[52] Yidnekachew Messele, Ing. Abebayehu Assefa (February
2012), Thermal Analysis, Design and Experimental
Investigation of Parabolic Trough Solar Collector.