Desalination 359 (2015) 82–91

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Desalination
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/desal

The effect of the water depth on the productivity for single and double
basin double slope glass solar stills
T. Elango a, K. Kalidasa Murugavel b,⁎
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Udaya School of Engineering, Vellamodi 629201, Tamil Nadu, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Engineering College, K. R. Nagar 628503, Tamil Nadu, India

H I G H L I G H T S

• Single and double basin double slope glass solar stills are fabricated and tested.
• Both stills are with same basin area and tested.
• Performance study conducted for different depths with and without insulation
• Insulated double basin still is more efficient.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents a new approach to enhance the productivity of the solar still by introducing glass as the basin
Received 9 September 2014 material. Single and double basin double slope solar stills of same basin area were fabricated using glass. The ex-
Received in revised form 6 December 2014 periments were carried out by varying the water depths from 1 to 5 cm under both insulated and un-insulated
Accepted 23 December 2014
conditions. The production of single basin is more than the double basin during the heating period and double
Available online 31 December 2014
basin is more during the cooling period. The performance of the double basin double slope solar still was higher
Keywords:
than the single basin double slope solar still under insulated and un-insulated conditions. The productivity of the
Solar still stills was more at the lowest water depth of 1 cm. Of the two sets of experiments which were conducted under
Glass still insulated and un-insulated conditions, insulated stills gave more production. At 1 cm water depth, double basin
Double slope insulated and un-insulated stills gave 17.38% and 8.12% higher production than the single basin still.
Double basin © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Specific production
Total average radiation

1. Introduction Murugavel et al. [4] reviewed different passive methods to improve

Solar still is an eco-friendly, small scale, cheap equipment which uti-
lizes the natural solar energy and is the best solution to purify water [1].
Potable water can be produced by the solar still at a reasonable cost [2].
Solar desalination is the solution for purifying the impure water in re-
mote locations. It is the suitable method to purify water where there
is only saline water and ample amount of solar energ\y is available [3].
Because of the low thermal efficiency, low yield and location based
solar intensity dependence; conventional solar stills are not being in
use [1]. A solar collector and a still integrated with each other are classi-
fied into active and passive stills. Single and double basin stills are the
different types of solar stills named based on their construction. In single
basin solar stills, only part of the solar intensity absorbed by the basin
liner is used for distillation while the rest is lost to the environment.
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: kali_vel@rediffmail.com, kkmmech@nec.edu.in (K. Kalidasa
Murugavel).
the effectiveness of the single basin solar still. They reported that, the di-
rection and inclination of the transparent cover, cover material, thick-
ness and temperature are responsible for the performance of the still.
Water depth and materials used in the basin also affect the performance
of the still. One of the solar devices which can be used for fresh water
production is single slope solar stills. Due to the low amount of distilled
water produced by the single basin still, it is not accepted in some in-
stances. Therefore there is a need to improve the efficiency of such
type of stills [5]. Multi-wick passive stills possess two or more stages,
where reutilization of latent heat of condensation occurs [6]. In order
to minimize the convective and radiation losses, double-basin type
still is fabricated. It possesses an additional transparent sheet of material
fixed in between the basin liner and the glass cover [5]. Ghoneyem and
Ileri [7] carried out experiments with different thickness glass covers
and reported 16.5% more production in 3 mm thickness cover plate.
Murugavel et al. [8,9] and Rajaseenivasan et al. [10] concluded the
considerable effect of energy storing and wick materials on the produc-
tivity of the solar still. Provision of additional glass basin is another

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.12.036
0011-9164/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 T. Elango, K. Kalidasa Murugavel / Desalination 359 (2015) 82–91 83

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of a single basin double slope glass based solar still.

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of a double basin double slope glass based solar still.

Fig. 3. Experimental view of double and single basin double slope glass based solar stills.

method for increasing the productivity by means of latent heat recovery

[11–13]. Tiwari and Mohamed Selim [14] reported that FRP multi-wick
solar still is the more economical and efficient one than the conven-
tional still. Cappelletti [3] experimentally studied the performance of Table 1
Calibrations and error limits for various measuring instruments.
the double basin solar still fabricated with Plexiglas. It gave a maxi-
mum productivity of 1.7–1.8 l/m2/day with the efficiency about SI. no Instrument Accuracy Range % error
0.16. Phadatare and Verma [15] experimentally investigated the per- 1 Thermometer +1 °C 0–100 °C 0.25%
formance of the single slope single basin plastic solar still. The sides 2 Thermocouple +0.1 °C 0–100 °C 0.5%
of the still were made up of 3 mm black acrylic sheets and insulated 3 PV type sun meter +1 W/m2 0–2500 W/m2 2.5%
with 2.5 cm glass wool. At 2 cm water depth, maximum distillate 4 Anemometer +0.1 m/s 0–15 m/s 10%
5 Measuring jar +10 ml 0–1000 ml 10%
production of the still was 2.1 l/m2 day.
84 T. Elango, K. Kalidasa Murugavel / Desalination 359 (2015) 82–91

Fig. 4. Variation of solar radiation and atmospheric temperature.

In this work, single and double basin double slope solar stills were
entirely fabricated with cheaply available window glass. The experi-
ments were conducted to study the effect of water depth on the produc-
tivity of the stills under insulated and un-insulated conditions. The
productivity of the single basin glass still was compared with the pro-
ductivity of the double basin glass solar stills.
2. Experimental setup
Two double slope, single and double basin glass based solar stills were
fabricated using a 0.008 m thick window glass. The size of the stills
was 0.9 m × 0.9 m × 0.01 m. The thermal conductivity, density and spe-
cific heat of the window glass are 0.96 W/m °C, 2700 kg/m3 and
0.84 kJ/kg °C. The glasses were pasted using silica gel as a bonding mate-
rial. The top basin made with 0.004 m glass was temporarily kept on the
supporting strips permanently fixed with the side walls. Window glass of
0.004 m was used as the transparent cover with 30° inclination at the top
of the still. The schematic diagrams of the single and double basin double
slope glass based solar stills are shown in Figs. 1 and 2.
The inner bottom of the lower basins of both single and double basin
stills was black coated to improve the radiation absorption. However, in
the double basin double slope still, the upper basin was left uncoated in
order to maintain the transparency of the still. Equally spaced seven ver-
tical glass strips of 0.05 m height and 0.003 m thickness were provided
at both slopes of the upper basin for the stagnancy of the water. The top
window covers and the upper basin can easily be assembled and
reassembled, which aids cleaning and black coating an easier one. In
order to avoid the higher thermal energy loss at the bottom of the
basin, heavily thickened thermocol of 0.127 m was used for insulation.
The sides of the basins were insulated well with 0.0508 m thickness
thermocol. V-shaped collecting troughs were provided below both the
transparent cover to collect the condensate. Distillate outlets were pro-
vided to drain and store the condensate in the jars. Provisions to supply
saline water and to drain the basin water were made. Thermocouple
insertions were also made to read the temperatures. The total experi-
mental setup was arranged in a way to face the south direction to re-
ceive the maximum solar radiation. A silicon rubber sealant was used
to seal the glass covers with the body of the still, to prevent leakage of

Fig. 5. Variation of wind velocity.

 T. Elango, K. Kalidasa Murugavel / Desalination 359 (2015) 82–91 85

Fig. 6. Production rate of a single basin solar still.

the evaporated vapor. The basins of the stills were cleansed fre-
quently to avoid the deposition of salts and foreign particles. The
stills were tested for productivity under both insulated and un-
insulated conditions at varied water depths of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 cm.
Fig. 3 shows the experimental setup of the double and single basin
double slope glass based solar stills.
Experiments were conducted at Energy Park, National Engineering
College, Kovilpatti (9° 11′ N, 77° 52′ E) Tamil Nadu, India during the
month of March–April 2014. The output was measured at 1 h interval
from morning 6 AM to the next day 6 AM.
PV type sun meter, digital anemometer and mercury thermometer
were used to measure the global radiation, wind velocity and ambient
temperature respectively. K-type thermocouples were used to measure
the basin, basin water, lower and upper glass cover and condensate
temperatures. The calibrations and error limits for various measuring
instruments are given in Table 1. All the experiments were conducted
thrice. The solar radiation, atmospheric temperature and wind velocity
observed on the maximum sunshine days of the experimental period
are shown in Figs. 4 and 5. Statistical analysis was performed to study
the insignificant differences in the climatic condition.
3. Results and discussion
Figs. 4 and 5 show the variation in solar radiation, atmospheric tem-
perature and wind velocity on the maximum sunshine days of the exper-
imental period. Statistical analysis of the solar radiation, atmospheric
temperature and wind velocity values on the different experimental
days was performed. It clearly shows the insignificant differences in the
climatic conditions as the values lie within X  2σ limits.
Fig. 6 shows the production rate of an insulated (I) and un-insulated
(U-I) single basin double slope solar still. At 1 cm water depth, the maxi-
mum production of insulated single basin still was 590 ml at 2 PM and un-
insulated still was 555 ml at 1 PM. For both the insulated and un-insulated
stills, more production was occurred at a minimum water level of 1 cm.
The best output was obtained from 11 AM to 8 PM for single basin still.

Fig. 7. Production rate of a double basin solar still.

86 T. Elango, K. Kalidasa Murugavel / Desalination 359 (2015) 82–91

Fig. 8. Cumulative production rate of single and double basin double slope solar stills.

Fig. 7 shows the production rate of a double basin double slope solar
still. The maximum production of 525 and 405 ml at 1 cm was occurred
at 2 PM and 1 PM for insulated and un-insulated double basin stills. For
both the insulated and un-insulated stills, more production was oc-
curred at a minimum water level of 1 cm. The best output was obtained
from 12 PM to 11 PM for the double basin still.
Fig. 8 shows the cumulative production rate of the single and double
basin double slope solar stills. At 1 cm water depth, double basin insulated
and un-insulated still gave 17.38% and 8.12% higher production than the
single basin still. Single basin insulated still at 1 cm water depth gave
30.86% higher production than the single basin un-insulated still at
5 cm water depth. Double basin insulated still at 1 cm water depth gave
41.14% higher production than the double basin un-insulated still at
5 cm water depth. This proves that, double basin still is the best distillate
producer than the single basin.
Fig. 9 shows the variation of temperature distribution for a single
basin insulated and un-insulated still at 1 cm water depth. During
the heating period, all the temperatures of the un-insulated still reached
maximum at 1 PM due to solar radiation and transparency of the glass.
But with non-transparency due to insulation, the temperatures of the
insulated still reached maximum at 2 PM only. During the cooling
period, the un-insulated still released more amount of heat and the
production was continued till 11 PM. Due to insulation, the heat loss
was lesser and the output continued till 1 AM. After 6 PM, the conden-
sation glass temperature reduced than the other temperatures due to
the unavailability of solar radiation.

Fig. 9. Variation of temperature distribution for a single basin still.

 T. Elango, K. Kalidasa Murugavel / Desalination 359 (2015) 82–91 87

Fig. 10. Variation of temperature distribution for an insulated double basin still.

Fig. 10 shows the variation of temperature distribution for an insu-
lated double basin still. The basin temperature for both top and bottom
basins reached maximum at 2 PM. During the heating period from 8 AM
to 11 AM, the temperature of the top basin was more than the bottom
one. The bottom basin temperature was more during the cooling period.
The output for the top basin was best from 8 AM to 1 AM whereas for
the bottom basin, it was from 10 AM to 2 AM. Due to the release of
absorbed latent heat by the bottom basin during evening hours, the
top basin remains heated for a long period. As a result, the production
continued for a long time.
Fig. 11 shows the production rate of a double basin still at 1 cm water
depth. A maximum of 300 and 180 ml was obtained at 1 and 3 PM by the
top and bottom basins of the un-insulated still. However, in the case of
insulated still, the maximum output of 370 and 230 ml was obtained at
2 and 1 PM respectively. A total output of 405 and 525 ml was obtained
by the insulated and un-insulated stills at 1 and 2 PM. The curve clearly
shows that, insulation and the reused latent heat energy improve the ef-
fect of productivity of the solar still.
Fig. 12 shows the overall productivity of the single and double basin
solar stills. The overall productivity of the double basin still was higher
than the single basin. The single basin and double basin insulated stills
gave more production than the un-insulated one. The productivity
was decreased as the depth of the water increased. This proves that,
lower water depth and insulation have a good effect on the productivity
of the still.
Fig. 13 shows the production difference in the single and double
basin solar stills. The production difference for the insulated single
basin still was 140 ml at 1 PM for 5 cm water depth. For the un-
insulated condition, the maximum single basin yield difference of
150 ml was reached at 1 PM for 1 cm water depth. At both insulated
and un-insulated conditions, the production of the single basin was
best between 8 AM and 3 PM. The production difference for the

Fig. 11. Production rate of a double basin still.

88 T. Elango, K. Kalidasa Murugavel / Desalination 359 (2015) 82–91

Fig. 12. Productivity of single and double basin solar stills.

insulated and un-insulated double basin stills was 190 ml and 180 ml at
7 PM for 1 cm water depth. The best production was achieved between
3 PM and 12 PM for the insulated double basin still. The production con-
tinued up to 2 AM for 1 cm water depth and up to 5 AM for 5 cm water
depth. But, for the un-insulated condition, the production continued up
to 12 AM for 1 cm water depth and up to 2 AM for 5 cm water depth. The
curves clearly show that, the production difference of the single basin is
more than the double basin during the heating period and the double
basin is more during the cooling period.
Fig. 14 shows the day and night productivity of an insulated and un-
insulated single and double basin solar still at 1 and 2 cm water depth.
As depth of the water increases, productivity was also increased during
night time due to the availability of the absorbed thermal energy. The
insulated double basin still gave more production during day and
night time. But, the un-insulated single basin still gave more production
during the day time than the un-insulated double basin still because of
the quick absorption of radiation due to transparency. The reason for the
best production at the lowest of 1 cm water depth may be due to the

Fig. 13. Production difference in single and double basin solar stills.
 T. Elango, K. Kalidasa Murugavel / Desalination 359 (2015) 82–91 89

Fig. 14. Day and night productivity of single and double basin solar stills.

minimum volume of the basin water. Because, basin water temperature
depends on volumetric heat capacity of basin. Appearance of dry spot at
the very minimum water level may decline the production whereas;
higher water level decreases the production. The optimum water depth
for more production was found to be 1 cm.
Fig. 15 shows the variation of specific production of the single and
double basin solar stills. Specific production depends upon the total pro-
duction and total average solar radiation. Specific production of the dou-
ble basin is higher than the single basin still for both insulated and un-
insulated conditions. Water depth also plays a major role in specific pro-
duction. The production was higher at 1 cm water depth followed by the
others.
The experiments were conducted under insulated and un-
insulated conditions at different water depths on different experi-
mental days. The values were recorded at 1 h interval from morning
6 AM to the next day 6 AM. Total output, total average radiation, and
specific production values for the single and double basin double
slope solar stills were calculated. The values were mentioned in
Tables 2 and 3.
4. Conclusions
➢ Single and double basin double slope glass stills have been fabricat-
ed. The stills were studied under insulated and un-insulated condi-
tions for their production at various water depths of 1, 2, 3, 4 and
5 cm.
➢ Although fabrication of the double basin increased the manufactur-
ing cost a little, high yield of the distillate made it a better one.
➢ The output was high at the lower water depth of 1 cm for both single
and double basin double slope solar stills.
➢ A maximum of 4.315 l/0.81 m2 day (5327/m2 day) was obtained at
1 cm water depth by the insulated double basin double slope glass
still. But, the insulated single basin double slope still gave only
3.565 l/0.81 m2 day (4.401 l/m2 day).

Fig. 15. Variation of specific production of single and double basin solar stills.
90 T. Elango, K. Kalidasa Murugavel / Desalination 359 (2015) 82–91

Table 2
Variation in operating parameters under insulated condition.

Date 7/3/2014 11/3/2014 20/3/2014 2/4/2014 5/4/2014

Depth of basin fluid 1 cm 2 cm 3 cm 4 cm 5 cm

Operating condition (insulation) Average Is Output Average Is Output Average Is Output Average Is Output Average Is Output

S. B. D. B. S.B. D. B. S. B. D. B. S. B. D. B. S. B. D. B.

Time (kWh/m2) ml ml (kWh/m2) ml ml (kWh/m2) ml ml (kWh/m2) ml ml (kWh/m2) ml ml

6:00 AM 0.156 0 0 0.155 0 0 0.128 0 0 0.144 0 0 0.156 0 0

7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0.483 15 5 0.409 10 0 0.459 0 0 0.484 0 0 0.426 0 0
9:00 AM 30 20 20 15 15 5 10 0 0 0
10:00 AM 0.759 75 75 0.715 65 55 0.736 30 25 0.714 20 15 0.720 5 10
11:00 AM 160 145 135 125 65 75 35 45 25 30
12:00 PM 0.929 290 255 0.926 205 220 0.927 115 165 0.939 85 105 0.933 55 85
1:00 PM 495 415 415 370 375 305 305 210 285 145
2:00 PM 0.902 590 525 0.927 510 480 0.884 465 390 0.882 420 305 0.887 385 255
3:00 PM 560 500 500 465 430 375 395 345 315 325
4:00 PM 0.557 350 455 0.450 320 420 0.412 310 345 0.478 285 320 0.472 275 305
5:00 PM 295 430 285 375 280 335 265 300 250 290
6:00 PM 0.133 210 385 0.134 235 340 0.117 245 305 0.145 255 285 0.137 225 280
7:00 PM 155 345 165 315 200 280 205 270 215 270
8:00 PM 0 125 240 0 130 250 0 165 255 0 165 260 0 185 265
9:00 PM 0 90 205 0 95 210 0 125 220 0 135 235 0 165 255
10:00 PM 0 55 115 0 70 120 0 85 125 0 90 135 0 120 145
11:00 PM 0 40 95 0 45 105 0 60 115 0 70 120 0 90 125
12:00 AM 0 20 55 0 30 65 0 45 85 0 50 90 0 60 95
1:00 AM 0 10 35 0 20 45 0 25 60 0 30 70 0 35 75
2:00 AM 0 0 15 0 0 20 0 5 40 0 10 50 0 15 55
3:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 15 0 5 20 0 10 25
4:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 10 0 0 10
5:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
6:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total output (ml) 3565 4315 3255 4005 3040 3525 2835 3190 2715 3050
Total average radiation (kWh/m2/day) 3.917 3.715 3.663 3.783 3.730
Specific production (ml/kWh/m2/day) 910 1102 876 1078 830 962 749 843 728 818

Table 3
Variation in operating parameters under un-insulated condition.

Date 7/4/2014 11/4/2014 16/4/2014 21/4/2014 28/4/2014

Depth of basin fluid 1 cm 2 cm 3 cm 4 cm 5 cm

Operating condition (un-insulation) Average Is Output Average Is Output Average Is Output Average Is Output Average Is Output

S. B. D. B. S. B. D. B. S. B. D. B. S.B. D. B. S. B. D. B.

Time (kWh/m2) ml ml (kWh/m2) ml ml (kWh/m2) ml ml (kWh/m2) ml ml (kWh/m2) ml ml

6:00 AM 0.118 0 0 0.142 0 0 0.156 0 0 0.158 0 0 0.123 0 0

7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0.483 30 20 0.448 20 15 0.497 10 0 0.459 5 0 0.497 0 0
9:00 AM 75 45 40 30 25 15 15 10 10 5
10:00 AM 0.759 120 105 0.733 85 65 0.744 60 50 0.740 45 35 0.746 30 20
11:00 AM 220 185 205 120 110 110 95 90 50 75
12:00 PM 0.945 350 245 0.945 270 210 0.923 205 185 0.942 160 145 0.935 130 120
1:00 PM 555 405 470 355 440 325 370 245 315 210
2:00 PM 0.872 490 395 0.884 465 335 0.873 405 305 0.855 360 285 0.877 325 265
3:00 PM 455 375 440 325 400 295 355 270 305 255
4:00 PM 0.532 250 335 0.490 255 320 0.512 265 280 0.506 280 255 0.481 285 245
5:00 PM 210 310 225 305 245 270 255 235 270 240
6:00 PM 0.133 125 275 0.098 165 265 0.118 170 260 0.134 185 225 0.139 220 225
7:00 PM 70 250 105 245 120 235 135 210 175 205
8:00 PM 0 45 135 0 70 165 0 100 170 0 95 195 0 135 200
9:00 PM 0 35 95 0 55 110 0 75 135 0 85 165 0 100 170
10:00 PM 0 15 80 0 25 85 0 35 95 0 55 105 0 70 115
11:00 PM 0 10 65 0 15 75 0 20 85 0 30 95 0 35 100
12:00 AM 0 0 5 0 0 15 0 5 25 0 5 35 0 10 45
1:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 25 0 0 30
2:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 15
3:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total output (ml) 3055 3325 2910 3040 2690 2845 2530 2630 2465 2540
Total average radiation (kWh/m2/day) 3.841 3.739 3.821 3.793 3.796
Specific production (ml/kWh/m2/day) 795 866 778 813 704 745 667 693 649 669
 T. Elango, K. Kalidasa Murugavel / Desalination 359 (2015) 82–91
➢ The production difference of the single basin is more than the double
basin during the heating period and the double basin is more during
the cooling period.
➢ The performance of the double basin double slope solar still was
higher than the single basin solar still under both insulated and
un-insulated conditions.
➢ It is concluded that, the supplementary basin, lowered water depth,
insulation and glass material of the still have a considerable effect in
increasing the productivity of the still.
References
[1] Gajendra Singh, Shiv Kumar, G.N. Tiwari, Design, fabrication and performance
evaluation of a hybrid photovoltaic thermal (PVT) double slope active solar still,
Desalination 277 (2011) 399–406.
[2] Imad Al-Hayeka, Omar O. Badran, The effect of using different designs of solar stills
on water distillation, Desalination 169 (2004) 121–127.
[3] G.M. Cappelletti, An experiment with a plastic solar still, Desalination 142 (2002)
221–227.
[4] K. Kalidasa Murugavel, Kn.K.S.K. Chockalingam, K. Srithar, Progresses in improving
the effectiveness of the single basin passive solar still, Desalination 220 (2008)
677–686.
91
[5] Salah Abdallah, Mazen M. Abu-Khader, Omar Badran, Effect of various absorbing
materials on the thermal performance of solar stills, Desalination 242 (2009)
128–137.
[6] Hassan E.S. Fath, High performance of a simple design, two effect solar distillation
unit, Desalination 107 (1996) 223–233.
[7] Abdulrahman Ghoneyem, Arif Ileri, Software to analyze solar stills and an experi-
mental study on the effects of the cover, Desalination 114 (1997) 37–44.
[8] K. Kalidasa Murugavel, Kn.K.S.K. Chockalingam, K. Srithar, An experimental study on
single basin double slope simulation solar still with thin layer of water in the basin,
Desalination 220 (2008) 687–693.
[9] K. Kalidasa Murugavel, S. Sivakumar, J. Riaz Ahamed, Kn.K.S.K. Chockalingam, K.
Srithar, Single basin double slope solar still with minimum basin depth and energy
storing materials, Appl. Energy 87 (2010) 514–523.
[10] T. Rajaseenivasan, T. Elango, K. Kalidasa Murugavel, Comparative study of double
basin and single basin solar stills, Desalination 309 (2013) 27–31.
[11] T. Rajaseenivasan, K. Kalidasa Murugavel, Theoretical and experimental investiga-
tion on double basin double slope solar still, Desalination 319 (2013) 25–32.
[12] A.A. Al-Karaghouli, W.E. Alnaser, Performances of single and double basin solar stills,
Appl. Energy 78 (2004) 347–354.
[13] T. Rajaseenivasan, K. Kalidasa Murugavel, T. Elango, R. Samuel Hansen, A review of
different methods to enhance the productivity of the multi-effect solar still,
Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 17 (2013) 248–259.
[14] G.N. Tiwari, G.A. Mohamed Selim, Double slope fibre reinforced plastic (FRP)
multiwick solar still, Solar Wind Technol. 1 (1984) 229–235.
[15] M.K. Phadatare, S.K. Verma, Influence of water depth on internal heat and mass
transfer in a plastic solar still, Desalination 217 (2007) 267–275.