Energy 172 (2019) 57e67

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Numerical investigation and optimization of an experimentally

analyzed solar CPC
D.N. Korres*, C. Tzivanidis
School of Mechanical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Zografou, 157 73, Greece

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

Article history: In this study a compound parabolic collector (CPC) taken from literature was investigated optically and
Received 30 November 2018 thermally through simulation. The collector was tested at different transversal and the longitudinal
Received in revised form incident angles and the results showed us a total agreement between the present and the previous study
16 January 2019
where TracePro software was used. In addition, a new optical efficiency relationship was proposed and it
Accepted 19 January 2019
was found that diverges significantly from the commonly used relationship as the reflector's shape losses
Available online 23 January 2019
and/or the absorber's diameter increase. Also, the CFD analysis results were validated from the previous
study experimental data (4.2% mean divergence in thermal efficiency), something that reveals how
Keywords:
CPC
sufficiently the real problem has been approached. Finally, an optimization process was followed in order
Experimental to improve the collector's optical performance, while the novel CPC resulted from the optimization was
Flow simulation compared with the initial design for the typical conditions of the 11th of June in Athens from 08:00 to
Validation 16:00, in order to examine the effect of different solar irradiation intensities in the comparison process. It
Optimization was revealed that the novel design exceeds the initial one in all the examined hours. The design and the
Solidworks simulation of the collector were conducted via Solidworks Flow Simulation software.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction experimental tests. Korres et al. [5] investigated experimentally and

Concentrating and evacuated tube collectors are nowadays of
considerable interest since they are able to cover a significant range
of hot water supplies from domestic and industrial applications up
to massive electricity production. The continuous and the rapid
development of the specific technologies has set them on the
foreground of solar thermal systems. The particular collectors have
been investigated experimentally, numerically and through CFD
analysis by researchers regarding their thermal and optical char-
acteristics [1]. For instance, Haiping et al. [2] investigated the
operation of a novel thermo-photovoltaic with compound para-
bolic reflectors adjusted on it both numerically and experimentally,
while Patil et al. [3] examined alternative receiver designs for
parabolic trough collectors.
There are few studies on Compound Parabolic Collectors (CPCs).
For example, Li et al. [4] examined optically and thermally a CPC
with a U pipe evacuated tube and developed a mathematical model
to validate the thermal efficiency of the collector arisen from
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: korres@central.ntua.gr (D.N. Korres).
numerically the operation of a U-type evacuated tube collectors’
array with mini compound parabolic concentrators and managed
to estimate the thermal efficiency and the outlet as well as the
receiver temperature in each module. The same author [6] analyzed
the operation of a CPC using the nanofluid Syltherm-800/CuO and
the base fluid Syltherm-800 and found that the thermal efficiency
enhancement by using the nanofluid is up to 2.76%. A mini com-
pound parabolic collector with an optically optimized reflector and
a cylindrical absorber was investigated by Korres and Tzivanidis
[7,8] and it was revealed that the specific design exceeds in optical
performance two respective geometries from literature. Korres and
Tzivanidis [9], also, conducted a whole year analysis comparing the
particular configuration to an identical with an asymmetric
reflector under the same operating conditions and they found that
the asymmetric configuration provides highest optical perfor-
mance in most cases and generally for the whole year.
Furthermore, Korres et al. [10] examined the optical and the
thermal performance of a mini CPC with a flat receiver, while Bellos
et al. [11] carried out a detailed analysis of a compound parabolic
collector with an evacuated tube where two different working
mediums were tested and the optical performance was optimized
by modifying the reflector's geometry. Adsten et al. [12] examined

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.01.119
0360-5442/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
58 D.N. Korres, C. Tzivanidis / Energy 172 (2019) 57e67
Nomenclature
General parameters
A Aperture surface area, m2
Cp Fluid specific heat, kJ/(kg K)
G Solar irradiation per unit area, W/m2
h Wind heat transfer coefficient, W/(m2 K)
H Daily solar energy per unit area, kWh/m2
KT Daily clearness index
LCR Local concentration ratio
LASII Local absorbed solar irradiation intensity, W/m2
m_ Mass flow rate, kg/s
Q Power, W
R Shape losses coefficient
T Temperature,
C
t Time, h
V Velocity, m/s
w width, m
Greek symbols
a Absorptance
ε Emittance
h Efficiency
Q Angle of incidence, (
)
r Reflectance
six different set ups with special asymmetrical reflectors so as to
determine the optimum case that provides the highest optical ef-
ficiency while Souliotis et al. [13] analyzed asymmetrical CPC for
integrated solar systems with one tank inside the collector. In
addition, Kessentini and Bouden [14] developed a numerical model
to study the thermal performance of a double tank integrated
collector storage system (ICS) accompanied by asymmetric CPC
reflectors. The truncation effect on the performance of a CPC was,
also, evaluated analytically by Ustaoglu et al. [15], while Lu et al.
[16] investigated experimentally the utilization of water/CuO
nanofluid in a CPC and it was found that 1.2% nanoparticle con-
centration is able to improve the thermal efficiency of about 30%
Parabolic Trough Collectors (PTCs) have, also, been investigated
through simulating process, numerical methods or experimentally.
For instance, Tzivanidis et al. [17] investigated a parabolic trough
collector regarding its thermal and optical performance conducting
both CFD and numerical analysis for several different operating
conditions, while Cheng et al. analyzed a PTC optically [18] and
developed a new modeling method for concentrating systems [19]
by using the Monte Carlo ray-tracing method. Abad et al. [20]
conducted an experimental analysis on a parabolic trough collector
and they filled the absorber with metal foam in order to improve
the heat transfer and to increase the efficiency of the collector,
while Kaloudis et al. [21] applied Al2O3/water nanofluid in a PTC
and found that a concentration of 4% increases the thermal effi-
ciency of the collector up to 10%. Marrif et al. [22]. found that water
performs better than therminol in such systems, while Akbar-
imoosavi and Yaghoubi [23] concluded that the higher the thermal
conductivity of the absorber's material the more the thermal effi-
ciency. Moreover, Tsai and Lin [24] optimized a variable focus
parabolic trough concentrator and compared it to the classical PTC
and the semi-cylindrical configuration. Furthermore, Bellos et al.
[25] simulated a PTC by using thermal oil and Al2O3/thermal oil
nanofluid and found that the use of the nanofluid enhances the
thermal efficiency by 4.25%. In addition, a wavy-tape was inserted
t Transmittance
Subscripts
a Ambient
a Aperture
abs Absorbed
daily Mean daily
eff Effective
exploited Exploited
f Working medium
fin Aluminum fin
g Glass
i Inlet
o Outlet (for T) Extraterrestrial (for G, H)
opt Optical
p Absorber
R Reflector
s Solar
sky Sky
T Perpendicular to aperture (for G, H) Transversal (for
Q)
u Useful
U-pipe Copper U-pipe
w wind
th Thermal
in the flow tube of a PTC application by Zhu et al. [26] and it was
found that the Nusselt number was enhanced significantly, while
the heat losses were reduced by at least 17.5%.
Regarding the Evacuated Tube Collectors (ETCs) Iranmanesh
et al. [27] examined experimentally the effect of graphene non-
aplatelets/distilled water nanofluid on the thermal performance of
an ETC. More specifically, it was found that the thermal efficiency
increases with the concentration of the nanoparticles in the water.
Moreover, Liang et al. [28] analyzed a U-pipe ETC experimentally
and validated the results through a mathematical model they
developed. Particularly, they compared a finned absorber configu-
ration to a filled one and they found that the filled material en-
hances significantly the collector's thermal performance. In
addition, Papadimitratos et al. [29] applied a Phase Change Material
(PCM) in a heat pipe application and they managed to enhance the
thermal efficiency up to 26% as far as the normal operation is
concerned.
In this work the thermal and the optical performance of a CPC
with a U-pipe evacuated tube taken from literature (Li et al. [4]) was
investigated through CFD analysis and ray tracing process. The
main goal was to optimize optically the examined collector. This
optimization was conducted by modifying the reflector's geometry
and, thus, two novel reflector's designs were revealed, while the
secondly proposed design was considered to be the most suitable
for the examined case. Furthermore, the selected design was
compared with the initial one for the typical conditions of the 11th
of June in Athens from 08:00 to 16:00, in order to examine the
effect of different solar irradiation intensities in the comparison
process. It was revealed that the novel design exceeds the initial
one in all the examined hours. The simulation results were, also,
validated from the experimental data that was available from the
previous study, while the heat transfer fluid of the CFD analysis is
Therminol 55. Moreover, a new detailed optical efficiency rela-
tionship for CPC applications was proposed in this study and it was
found that diverges significantly from the commonly used
 D.N. Korres, C. Tzivanidis / Energy 172 (2019) 57e67
relationship as the reflector's shape losses and/or the absorber's
diameter increase.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Examined model
The examined model is a compound parabolic collector taken
from literature (Li et al. [4]) with a U-type evacuated tube and a
geometrical concentration ratio of 3.06. The collector's design as
well as the main dimensions of the reflector and the evacuated tube
(in mm) is presented on Fig. 1.
In Fig. 1 the geometry of the reflector and the evacuated tube is
depicted in detail. Regarding the last one it is clear that it consists of
a double glass pipe with an aluminum fin snapped at the interior of
it. The selective coating has been deposited on the outer surface of
the inner glass tube while the copper U-pipe contacts with the fin
through the two circular slots formed at the last one's body.
Hence, the solar rays pass into the outer glass tube and impinge
on the selective coating where the major percentage of them is
being absorbed. Then, a significant part of the absorbed energy
passes through the inner glass tube to the aluminum fin and to the
U-pipe via conduction and finally ends up in the working medium
inside the tube through convection. At the interior of the gap
formed between the inner and the outer glass tube vacuum regime
prevails leading to the elimination of an important part of the re-
ceiver's heat losses.
2.2. Simulation parameters
In the particular subsection the main simulation parameters
regarding the present CFD analysis are given. The specific collector
was adjusted in Solidworks Flow Simulation environment [30]
where a detailed thermal and optical analysis took place. This
simulation tool has been used for the analysis of a wide range of
solar thermal collectors' applications and it has been validated
through theoretical and experimental results [5e11,17,25,31e33]. It
is important to mention that the solar heat flux was not taken as a
uniform distribution around the receiver but the real solar con-
centration process was performed since in the specific tool the
optical, the thermal and the fluid dynamic simulation can be con-
ducted at the same time. In the following table the main charac-
teristics of the collector's components are presented.
Before moving on the main body of the paper, the basic as-
sumptions that have been made in order to proceed to the optical
and the CFD analysis should be mentioned.
Assumptions:
1. Conditions: Stead-state.
2. Wooden mold: perfect thermal insulator.
Fig. 1. Collector's design and main dimensions.
59
3. Glass envelope and reflector: zero absorptance of solar
radiation.
As regards the thermal analysis part, the effect of the reflector's
and the glass's absorptance in the thermal efficiency was taken into
account by applying the specific losses on the receiver's absorp-
tance coefficient.
The grid of the computational domain of the present CFD
analysis reaches the number of 1.77 million elements where 0.56
million of which correspond to the fluid region. It is obvious that a
significant part of the mesh grid belongs to the fluid region and that
because several refinements regarding the fluid cells and the fluid
to tube interface have been conducted. Moreover, the grid on the
receiver was, also, refined, in order to ensure that all the incident
solar irradiance is going to be taken into consideration. It is sig-
nificant to mention that the particular grid structure was revealed
after a severe sensitivity analysis where several different grids were
examined.
3. Optical analysis
In this section the optical performance of the examined collector
is going to be investigated in several different operating conditions.
Particularly, the collector's operation is going to be examined at
various incident angles of solar rays both in longitudinal and in
transversal direction.
3.1. Optical efficiency and reflector's losses
At this point it is essential to define the optical efficiency
through Eq. (1) which is presented next [7].
aQ ,Qp;Q
hopt;Q ¼ (1)
Qs;Q
It should be stated that, the optical efficiency could be defined as
the quotient between the absorbed energy and the maximum
incident on the aperture solar energy. However, in this work it was
defined according to the previews study in order to execute prop-
erly the necessary comparisons. Variable Qp,Q is the total energy per
unit time that reaches the absorber's surface and it is expressed
through Eq. (2) while Qs,Q expresses the incident solar power on the
aperture plane regarding the angle of incidence. Іn Eqs. (3) and (4),
Qp,R,Q and Qp,s,Q is the power that arrives on the receiver's surface
from the reflector and directly from the sun respectively, while QR,Q
in Eq. (5) is the solar energy that impinges on the reflector's surface
per unit time. The RQ parameter in Eq. (3) represents the losses of
the reflector due to its shape. More specifically, it expresses the
reflected rays that are not going to reach the absorber in relation to
the total reflected rays. In other words, it is the reflected solar po-
wer that is getting lost in the environment both directly and via
secondary reflections (rQˑQR,losses,Q) divided from the total reflected
solar power (rQˑQR,Q) as Eq. (6) suggests [4,7].
Qp;Q ¼ Qp;s;Q þ Qp;R;Q (2)
Qp;R;Q ¼ tQ ,rQ ,ð1  RQ Þ,QR;Q (3)
wp;Q
Qp;s;Q ¼ tQ , ,Q (4)
wa;Q s;Q
60 D.N. Korres, C. Tzivanidis / Energy 172 (2019) 57e67

Equation (7b) is a newly created relationship that it appears first

time in a scientific paper and expresses the optical efficiency of a
CPC. The specific relationship takes into consideration that a part of
solar radiation that reaches the absorber comes directly from the
sun without having been reflected first, something very important
mostly in low concentration ratio applications, where the ab-
sorber's diameter is a significant percentage of the aperture's
width.

3.2. Local concentration ratio (LCR)

In this section the definition of the geometrical local concen-

tration ratio (LCR) for the examined configuration is introduced.
To begin with, an elementary surface from the collector's aper-
ture (dAa) was assumed, while the amount of solar radiation that
passes through it and it is going to reach the receiver (dQs, exploited,Q)
was, also, considered. In addition, the respective elementary
Fig. 2. Solar power distribution inside the collector. absorber area which is going to receive the specific radiation (dAp)
as well as the whole radiation that passes through dAa (dQs,Q) were,
also, taken into account. Equation (9) presents the LCR definition
! [11].
wp;Q
QR;Q ¼ 1 ,Qs;Q (5) . .
wa;Q dQs;expl oited;Q dAp dQs;expl oited;Q dAp
LCRQ ¼  ¼ (9)
dQs;Q dAa Geff ;T;Q
where, wp,Q: absorber's aperture width, wa,Q: CPC aperture width

QR;losses;Q where,
RQ ¼ (6)  
QR;Q dQs;expl oited;Q ¼ c1;Q þ c2;Q ,ð1  RQ Þ ,dQs ;Q (10)
Hence, (QR,Q-QR,losses,Q) is the amount of solar power that is going
to be reflected and then directed to the absorber. Fig. 2 provides a dQabs;Q
detailed depiction of the way how the solar power is being dQs ;Q ¼ (11)
hopt;Q
distributed in several different amounts of power due to the ge-
ometry and the optical characteristics of the CPC.
By solving Eq. (1) with the contribution of Eqs. (2) and (3), as   dQabs;Q
dQs;expl oited;Q ¼ c1;Q þ c2;Q ,ð1  RQ Þ , (12)
bellow, Eq. (7a) is created. Then, further analysis of Eq. (7a) with the hopt;Q
contribution of Eqs. (4) and (5) results in Eq. (7b), which corre-
sponds to the final form of the optical efficiency expression. The numerator of Eq. (9) expresses the elementary gross solar
power that falls on the collector's aperture and is bound to reach
  dAp after having been reduced first through the mirror's and the
aQ ,Qp;Q aQ , Qp;s;Q þ tQ ,rQ ,ð1  RQ Þ,QR;Q glass's optical losses. The denominator represents the effective
hopt;Q ¼ ¼ (7a)
Qs;Q Qs;Q solar radiation intensity. In other words the LCR is the ratio be-
tween the local concentrated and the local effective solar radiation
! ! intensity.
wp;Q wp;Q
hopt;Q ¼ ðtQ ,aQ Þ, þ rQ , 1  ,ð1  RQ Þ It should be mentioned that the dQs, exploited,Q and dQs,Q corre-
wa;Q wa;Q spond to effective amounts of solar power, however, the subscript
 
¼ ðtQ ,aQ Þ, c1;Q þ rQ ,c2;Q ,ð1  RQ Þ (7b) ‘‘eff ” was not used in order to avoid complexity in the equations
format.
Many researchers do not take into account c1,Q and c2,Q pa- Another useful parameter that it should be defined in this sec-
rameters in similar cases and they consider that the optical effi- tion is the local absorbed solar irradiation intensity (LASII) which is
ciency is given through Eq. (8) [4]. presented in Eq. (13). The particular definition was developed by
the authors.

dQabs;Q ð12Þ dQs;expl oited;Q ,hopt;Q ð9Þ LCRQ ,Geff ;T;Q ,hopt;Q
LASIIQ ¼ ¼   ¼   (13)
dAp c1;Q þ c2;Q ,ð1  RQ Þ ,dAp c1;Q þ c2;Q ,ð1  RQ Þ

0
 0
 This parameter expresses the solar power that is being absorbed
hopt;Q ¼ ðtQ ,aQ Þ,rQ , 1  RQ (8) in the elementary receiver's surface dAp and it becomes obvious
0
from Eq. (13) that it is analogous to the LCR.
QR;Q;losses
WhereRQ ¼ Qs;Q ¼ RQ ,c2;Q
 D.N. Korres, C. Tzivanidis / Energy 172 (2019) 57e67 61

3.3. Ray tracing

As far as the ray tracing process is concerned, the optical per-

formance of the collector was examined separately for the longi-
tudinal and the transversal rays by using the absorptance,
reflectance and transmittance values considering the incident
angle change according to the previous study, as Table 2 suggests.
The main parameters were used in the ray tracing simulation are
presented in Table 3
At this point it is essential to describe the methodology of the
particular ray tracing process. For that reason Fig. 3 is introduced in
order to get a clear view regarding the methodology.
It is obvious from Fig. 3 that after having calculate the Qp,Q,ideal,
Qs,Q and c1,Q parameters it was feasible to find the reflector shape
losses coefficient. More specifically, if Qp,Q,ideal is being removed
from Qs,Q then the reflector's shape losses arise, since Qp,Q,ideal ex-
presses the power that reaches the absorber in the case where the
reflector and the glass do not introduce any optical losses in the
analysis (tQ ¼ 1, rQ ¼ 1). In other words, the difference between Fig. 4. Transversal and longitudinal angle of incidence.

Table 1
these two parameters expresses the amount of solar power that is
Main characteristics of the collector's components. going to reach the concentrator and to get lost in the environment
after the reflection. After that, the optical efficiency was finally
Component Length(m) Thermal properties Optical properties
calculated with the contribution of Table 2 where the optical
Outer glass tube 1.5 εg ¼ 0.88 t ¼ 0.88 (for Q ¼ 0ο) properties of the collector's components are given. The fact that the
Inner glass tube 1.5 kg ¼ 1.2 W/m/K e ̶
optical efficiency was found through the reflector's shape losses
Aluminum fin 1.5 kfin ¼ 236 W/m/K e ̶
Copper U-pipe 3 kU-pipe ¼ 307 W/m/K e
̶ coefficient is the main characteristic of the specific methodology. In
Selective coating 1.5 εp ¼ 0.06 a ¼ 0.93 (for Q ¼ 0ο) Fig. 4 the longitudinal and the transversal angles of incidence (QL
Reflector 1.5 e̶ r ¼ 0.94 and QT) are introduced.

Table 2 3.4. Optimization methodology

Variation of the optical properties due to the incident angle [4].
The procedure was focused on the geometrical optimization of
Optical parameters Incident angles (Q)
the existing reflector as regards its optical performance for the
0
20
40
60
80o transversal incident angles. Three geometrical parameters were on
aQ 0.93 0.92 0.91 0.84 0.56 the scope of the present optimization process. These parameters
tQ 0.88 0.87 0.84 0.75 0.36 correspond to three dimensions of the reflector's body in the
rQ 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94
transversal direction and in the present analysis these are going to
be the control dimensions CD1, CD2 and CD3, regarding the
geometrical modification of the reflector as Fig. 5 suggests. It
Table 3
should, also, be emphasized that the optimization process was
Ray tracing parameters.
conducted considering as main criteria the maximization of the
Parameter Value Units

Solar irradiance 1000 W/m2

Simulated rays 106 rays
Transversal incident angle 40…40 degrees
Longitudinal incident angle 80…80 degrees

Fig. 3. Ray tracing methodology. Fig. 5. Control dimensions for the reflector's geometry.
62 D.N. Korres, C. Tzivanidis / Energy 172 (2019) 57e67

optical efficiency and the superiority range.
The range of the transversal incident angle in which the three
control dimensions were tested was taken values as in the ray
tracing section from 40
to 40
.
The effect of CD1 in the optical performance of the collector was
examined first and then its optimum value was picked out. By
keeping this specific value constant, CD2 was optimized. After these
two optimizations CD3 was tested and the authors ended up in the
two suggested geometries are presented in section 5.3. It should be
mentioned that several different control dimensions values were
examined in each transversal incident angle in order to conclude to
the specific configurations while the method was adopted is an
evolution of the one was followed in study [11] were the effect of
two control dimensions at the zero incident angle case were
examined.
4. Thermal analysis
The collector was tested at five different inlet fluid temperatures
in five different dates from t ¼ 08:00 to t ¼ 16:00 (solar time) in
Shanghai (latitude: 31.14oN) and it was oriented towards the south
by changing the slope after the first three days. The working me-
dium is used is Therminol 55. Table 4 gives the conditions of the
real problem which have, also, been introduced to the simulation
process.
The sky temperature was calculated via Eq. (14) [4], while the
wind heat transfer coefficient (hw) that is given in Eq. (15) [34] it
was found to be 10.4 W/m2/K considering a wind velocity of 2 m/s
according to the previous study.
Tsky ¼ 0:0552,ðTa þ 273:15Þ1:5  273:15
hw ¼ 2:8 þ 3:8,Vw
Regarding the methodology it was followed, we, first, found the
incident on the aperture extraterrestrial solar irradiance directly at
the examined hours of every single day (Go,T) through simulation by
taking into consideration the inclination angle of the collector in
each case. Hence, the daily extraterrestrial solar irradiance on the
aperture (Ho,T) was calculated. Given, also, the values of the daily
incoming effective solar irradiance (Heff,T) arose from the experi-
mental data, it was feasible to determine the effective clearness
index (KT,eff) of each day as Eq. (16) suggests [35].
Heff ;T
KT;eff ¼
Ho;T
More specifically, this determination was done by testing
different daily values of the specific index until the integral of all
the effective instantanuous solar irradiance values (Geff,T), each one
for each examined hour, resulted in the daily incoming effective
solar irradiance on the aperture (Heff,T). The specific index was
finally introduced to the simulation process, while it should be
mentioned that for a single test day it was assumed to be the same
in all hours.
Table 4
Simulation and experimental conditions.
The useful power and the daily thermal efficiency are given
through Eqs. (17) and (18) respectively [4,7].
 
_ p , Tf ;o  Tf ;i
Qu ¼ m,C (17)
ð 16
Qu ðtÞ:: dt
hth ¼ t¼8
(18)
daily
Aa ,Heff ;T
5. Results
In the particular section all the results regarding the optical and
the thermal analysis of the examined CPC are presented. The pro-
posed correlation for calculating the optical efficiency of a CPC is
being compared with the commonly used simplified relationship.
In addition, emphasis is given in the validation of the optical effi-
ciency arises from the present simulation with the respective from
the previous study where TracePro software was used and the
thermal efficiency of the system through the experimental and the
theoretical results of the previous study.
5.1. Evaluation of the proposed relationship
Several different values of RQ and c1,Q were tested, considering
zero incident angles, in order to compare the two optical efficiency
expressions and to define the relevant error of using the simplified
one (see Table 5). The values of r0, t0, a0 parameters were taken
from Table 1.
(14) Table 5 presents the minimum error values of several examined
cases, since Q ¼ 0 ο was considered, where the efficiency value is
(15) much higher than the absolute error value. It is obvious that the
greater the absorber or the shape's losses the higher the divergence
between the two relationships. In our case, R’Q takes the value of
about 0.05 around zero incident angles while c1,Q keeps the value of
0.104 up to QΤ ¼ 30 ο. Hence, the relevant error of h0 opt,0 expression
would be 0.69%, however, the proposed relationship was applied in
order to eliminate any error in the optical efficiency calculation.
5.2. Optical efficiency validation
In Fig. 6, the optical efficiency of the CPC results from the present
and the previews study is presented, as a function of the transversal
(16) incident angle.
It is obvious that the results arising from the simulation fit
perfectly with the respective of the previous study something that
gives us a clear view about the quality of the present ray tracing
conducted in Flow simulation environment. In particular, it is
observed that the present results come in complete agreement
with the previous study since they follow sufficiently even the
abrupt change on the bent of the red curve at 12.5
incident angle,
despite the small divergence is observed there. The mean deviation
Table 5
Relevant error of the simplified optical efficiency expression for Q ¼ 0ο.
0 0 0
c1,0 R 0 ¼ 0.0 R 0 ¼ 0.1 R 0 ¼ 0.2

Date b( )o _ (kg/s)
m

Τf,i ( C)

Ta ( C)

Tsky ( C) 2
Нeff,T (kWh/m ) h opt,0
0
hopt,0 error h opt,0
0
hopt,0 error h0 opt,0 hopt,0 error

17-May 5 0.0342 28.2 24.5 10.3 3.57 0.1 0.769 0.774 0.63% 0.692 0.697 0.70% 0.615 0.620 0.8%
19-May 5 0.0339 51.3 28.3 15.8 3.83 0.2 0.769 0.779 1.26% 0.692 0.702 1.35% 0.615 0.625 1.6%
20-May 5 0.0347 101.8 28.0 15.3 4.12 0.3 0.769 0.784 1.88% 0.692 0.707 2.00% 0.615 0.630 2.3%
02-June 2 0.0342 151.6 26.4 13.0 4.24 0.4 0.769 0.789 2.49% 0.692 0.712 2.64% 0.615 0.635 3.1%
08-June 2 0.0347 201.7 27.8 15.0 4.17 0.5 0.769 0.794 3.09% 0.692 0.717 3.28% 0.615 0.640 3.8%
 D.N. Korres, C. Tzivanidis / Energy 172 (2019) 57e67 63

Fig. 6. Optical efficiency as a function of the transversal incident angle.

Fig. 8. Thermal efficiency validation.

between the two solutions was found to be approximately 2.9%.

with the experiment. Furthermore, the theoretical approach seems
In Fig. 7 below the effect of the longitudinal incident angle in the
that draws back compared to the present study since it has a mean
optical performance of the examined collector is depicted and a
divergence of about 5.3% from the experimental results against the
comparison between the previews and the present results takes
4.2% of the simulation. Hence, the present simulation seems that
place.
approaches more sufficiently the experimental results than the
It is obvious once again how the specific simulation process has
theoretical solution of the previous study, something that declares
ideally fit on the existing results. More specifically, it is remarkable
the reliability of the present solution.
that the significant change at the slope of the red curve that hap-
Generally, the thermal efficiency seems that declines with the
pens approximately around 50
incident angle is followed totally
inlet temperature because as the last one increases the working
from the triangular points correspond to the present study with the
medium is capable to absorb lower amounts of thermal power and
mean deviation between the two solutions to be 1.8%.
the overall heat losses become greater due to the absorber's higher
temperature.
5.3. Thermal efficiency and fluid temperature validation In Fig. 9 the experimental and the simulation results for the
outlet to inlet fluid temperature difference as well as the outlet
In this section. the experimental data from Li et al. [4] is going to fluid temperature at 20-May are depicted
be validated with the simulation results, while the last one are As it could be observed from Fig. 9 the simulation results come
going to be compared with the respective arose from the mathe- in agreement with the experimental ones in the majority of the
matical approach of the previous study. After this section, the col-
lector is going to be optimized in order to maximize its
performance.
Next, in Fig. 8 the comparison among the experimental, the
theoretical and the simulation results is presented.
It is observed that the simulation results are very close to the
experimental data, especially at the first three examined inlet
temperatures where the simulation gives almost identical results

Fig. 9. Experimental and simulation values of a) the inlet to outlet fluid temperature
Fig. 7. Optical efficiency as a function of the longitudinal incident angle. difference and b) the outlet fluid temperature at 20-May.
64 D.N. Korres, C. Tzivanidis / Energy 172 (2019) 57e67

examined hours, except t ¼ 10 h and t ¼ 15 h regarding Fig. 9b. Table 7

Particularly, the specific divergences in the outlet temperature Optical efficiency enhancement.

happen because in these 2 h the inlet fluid temperature takes the Suggested 1
value of 101.17
C and 101.25
C respectively instead of the rest Range of prevalence [-12.5
…-10.2
] [-5.0
…5.0
] [10.2
…12.5
]
hours where Tf,i is almost the same as in the simulation (101.80
C). Range's range 2.5
10.0
2.5

As far as the outlet to inlet temperature difference is concerned in Collector's enhancement 16.2% 4.2% 16.2%
Fig. 9a, the mean divergence of the present solution from the Reflector's enhancement 20.7% 4.7% 20.7%

experimental results is 6.7%. Suggested 2

Range of prevalence [-30.0
…-11.2
] [-8.0
…8.0
] [11.2
…30.0
]

Range's range 18.8
16.0
18.8

5.4. Optimization
Collector's enhancement 6.9% 3.0% 6.9%
Reflector's enhancement 10.4% 3.3% 10.4%
There was a need to improve the performance of the examined
collector in order to complete the present work. Hence, specific
changes were made on the existing model so as to achieve the
the optimization, regarding the specific collector.
desire goal. The three control dimensions (CD1, CD2, CD3), were
The transversal incident angle in all the examined dates and
modified properly and, thus, two novel configurations were
hours is within the range of [-7
…þ7
]. For that reason, Fig. 11 was
revealed and suggested for improving the initial design (see
created providing the LCR of the initial and the secondly proposed
Table 6).
design for 0
, 5
and 7
transversal incident angle (considering
The first suggested design was selected considering the maxi-
QL ¼ 0
) as a function of the receiver's periphery angle (4), in order
mization of the optical efficiency, while the second one by taking
to get a different point of view as regards the comparison between
into account the maximization of the superiority range. Next, in
these two geometries.
Fig. 10 the comparison between the suggested and the previous
As it is observed, the proposed design provides higher LCR
designs is presented.
values regarding the examined range which means that greater
As it is observed both of the suggested geometries exceed in
amount of solar power is being concentrated on the receiver's pe-
optical performance the previous design at three different ranges of
riphery and thus the reflector's shape losses have been reduced.
the examined angles as these are presented in Table 7.
More specifically, significant enhancement occurs in all cases
It is important to mention that the firstly proposed design
something that ensures the superiority of the suggested geometry.
maximizes the optical efficiency of the collector around zero inci-
dent angles and improves it significantly in the other two ranges as
Fig. 10 and Table 7 suggest, however this enhancement occurs in 5.5. Comparison in typical day conditions in Athens (Greece)
very narrow ranges. The second design seems that fulfills both of
the criteria were set at the beginning of the optimization process, In the particular section, the selected design (suggested 2) and
since it ensures a wide range of superiority against the previous the initial one are being compared to each other as regards their
design, by keeping the efficiency close to the maximum possible optical performance during the 11th of June in a time range of
values near the zero incident angles. More particularly, Suggested 2 08:00 to 16:00 (solar time) at the area of Athens in Greece (latitude:
improves by 5.74% on bulk average the optical efficiency of the
collector, in contrast to Suggested 1 where the improvement is
2.20%, considering the operating range of Suggested 2. Hence, the
secondly proposed design seems to be the best choice arisen from

Table 6
Suggested geometries.

Control Dimensions Previous Suggested 1 Suggested 2

CD1 (mm) 114.90 112.50 112.50

CD2 (mm) 29.00 26.00 26.00
CD3 (mm) 150.91 150.91 147.50

Fig. 11. Local concentration ratio for low transversal incident angles of the initial and
Fig. 10. Comparison among the suggested and the original reflector's geometries. the improved design.
 D.N. Korres, C. Tzivanidis / Energy 172 (2019) 57e67 65

900

800

Geff (W/m2) 700

600

500

400
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Solar time (h)

Fig. 12. Effective available solar irradiance.

0,78 10,0%
0,76 9,0%

0,74 8,0%
7,0%
0,72

Enhancement
Suggested design 2 6,0%
0,70
opt

Initial design 5,0%

0,68
Enhancement 4,0%
0,66
3,0%
0,64 2,0%
0,62 1,0%
0,60 0,0%
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Solar time (h)

Fig. 13. Daily optical performance of the compared geometries for the 11th of June.

37.97oN)) for the typical conditions.1 The collectors were oriented
along the East-West axis, while they were titled by 7
towards the
South, in order to bring the incident angle inside to the maximum
efficiency range as much as possible [-8.0ο…þ8.0ο]. This compari-
son is being conducted so as to get a clear view as regards the su-
periority of the suggested design against the initial one and to
estimate the possible enhancement that could be achieved in each
examined time moment. The collectors were tested through a time-
dependent ray tracing process conducted in Solidworks with a time
step equal to 300 s (5 min). The effective solar irradiance for the
examined day is given in Fig. 12, while the solar angles were
available by the software's libraries.
Fig. 13 gives the optical efficiency for the two compared geom-
etries as well as the enhancement by using the improved design for
the whole time range that it was examined.
As it is observed from Fig. 13, the suggested design exceeds the
initial one in daily performance in the whole examined time range.
In particular, the maximum possible enhancement could be
1
The typical conditions for the examined day were calculated as in study [9].
achieved is 4.0% and it can be reached at 09:00 and at 15:00, while
the minimum one appears near the limits of the examined time
range and is equal to 0.7%. In the intermediate time range the
enhancement seems to take values from 2.0% up to 2.6%, while the
mean enhancement for the whole day is approximately 2.4%. Thus,
the suggested design ensures a, remarkably, higher optical perfor-
mance considering a typical daily operation.
5.6. Other allocations
In the specific section several allocations regarding the results
from the thermal and the optical analysis of the examined collector
are going to be presented in order to get a complete overview
around the particular issue.
The local absorbed solar irradiation intensity and the tempera-
ture field around the receiver is presented in Fig. 14 next for the first
experimental point at 17th of May and at the solar noon.
As it could be seen from Fig. 14 the LASII parameter appears a
non-uniform distribution around the receiver since the transversal
solar incident angle in the specific case is not zero and as a result
the solar rays are being concentrated asymmetrically on the
66 D.N. Korres, C. Tzivanidis / Energy 172 (2019) 57e67
Fig. 14. Local absorbed solar irradiation intensity and temperature field around the
absorber for the 17th of May and t ¼ 12:00.
receiver's periphery. The receiver temperature seems that follows
the distribution of the LASII allocation since the more the concen-
trated solar irradiation the higher the receiver temperature.
A more detailed view as regards the solar radiation concentra-
tion around the absorber is given in Fig. 15 through the local con-
centration ratio as a function of the receiver periphery angle (4) for
four examined hours of the 17th of May.
It is obvious from Fig. 15 that the distribution of the local con-
centration ratio around the receiver varies in each examined hour.
More specifically, the LCR appears an asymmetrical distribution in
all the presented cases except for t ¼ 09:00 where a symmetrical
concentration occurs. This happens due to the fact that the trans-
versal incident angle takes a value near the zero one only at
t ¼ 09:00 because of the inclination angle the collector has been set.
Fig. 15. Local concentration ratio for 4 h of the 17th of May.
It is, also, been observed that the distributions at t ¼ 08:00 and
t ¼ 11:00 seem to be equal and opposite between them and that
because at these 2 h the collector confronts the solar rays with
approximately the same transversal incident angle in absolute
value.
6. Conclusions
In the specific work an already experimentally analyzed CPC by
Li et al. [4] was investigated and optimized thermally and optically
respectively. The main concluding remarks were pointed out in
order to provide the readers with a clear overview about the
important outcome of the specific study.
First of all, the new expression for the optical efficiency calcu-
lation was proposed in the present study it was compared to the
commonly used expression and it was found that the greater the
absorber or the shape's losses the higher the divergence between
these two relationships.
Regarding the examined collector, the ray tracing analysis re-
veals the identification between the present and the previous
study's results. In addition, the thermal simulation of the specific
collector ended up in a success since the CFD analysis results seem
that follow the experimental and the theoretical ones coming from
the previous study. Particularly, it was found that the present
simulation diverges 4.2% from the experimental data in contrast to
the theoretical model proposed in the previous study where the
divergence was 5.3%. Furthermore, the outlet temperature as well
as the temperature gain from the inlet to the outlet resulted from
the simulation, for the 20-May, were sufficiently close to the
experimental results with the second to diverge about 6.7% on
average.
Furthermore, the optimization process resulted in two possible
reflector's geometries from which the second one was selected, due
to the fact that it was found to exceed the original design in a wider
incident angle range compared to the firstly proposed design, by
keeping its performance very close to the maximum limits. More
specifically, the selected design improves the collector's and re-
flector's optical efficiency by 5.74% and 8.3% on bulk average
respectively.
Finally, the initial design and the secondly proposed one were
compared to each other as far as their optical performance is con-
cerned, considering a daily operation in the city of Athens (Greece)
for a typical day. The results indicated that the proposed design
exceeds the initial one for the whole day, by 2.4% on average, while
the maximum possible enhancement was found to be approxi-
mately 4.0% and it was achieved at 09:00 and 15:00. Thus, the
suggested design ensures a higher optical performance considering
a typical daily operation.
References
[1] Martínez-Rodríguez G, Fuentes-Silva AL, Picon-Núnez M. Solar thermal net-
works operating with evacuated-tube collectors. Energy 2018:26e33.
[2] Haiping C, Jiguang H, Heng Z, Kai L, Haowen L, Shuangyin L. Experimental
investigation of a novel low concentrating photovoltaic/thermalethermo-
electric generator hybrid system. Energy 2019:83e95.
[3] Patil RG, Panse SV, Joshi JB, Dalvi VH. Alternative designs of evacuated receiver
for parabolic trough collector. Energy 2018:66e76.
[4] Li X, Dai YJ, Li Y, Wang RZ. Comparative study on two novel intermediate
temperature CPC solar collectors with the U-shape evacuated tubular
absorber. Sol Energy 2013:220e34.
[5] Korres DN, Tzivanidis C, Koronaki IP, Nitsas MT. Experimental, numerical and
analytical investigation of a U-type evacuated tube collectors' array. Renew
Energy 2019;135:218e31.
[6] Korres D, Bellos E, Tzivanidis C. Investigation of a nanofluid-based compound
parabolic trough solar collector under laminar flow conditions. Appl Therm
Eng 2019;149:366e76.
[7] Korres D, Tzivanidis C. A new mini-CPC under thermal and optical investi-
gation. Renew Energy 2018;128:529e40.
 D.N. Korres, C. Tzivanidis / Energy 172 (2019) 57e67
[8] Korres D, Tzivanidis C. Optical and thermal analysis of a new U-type evacuated
tube collector with a mini-compound parabolic concentrator and a cylindrical
absorber. In: Proceedings of 29th international conference on efficiency, cost,
optimization, simulation, and environmental impact of energy systems. Por-
toroz, Slovenia: ECOS; 2016. 2016 June 19-23.
[9] Korres D, Tzivanidis C. A symmetric and an asymmetric mini compound
parabolic collector under optical investigation. The role of exergy in energy
and the environment. Green energy and technology. Cham: Springer; 2018.
[10] Korres D, Tzivanidis C, Alexopoulos J, Mitsopoulos G. Thermal and optical
investigation of a U-type evacuated tube collector with a mini-compound
parabolic concentrator and a flat absorber. In: Proceedings of 7th interna-
tional conference from scientific computing to computational engineering.
Athens, Greece: IC-SCCE; 2016. 2016; July 6-9.
[11] Bellos E, Korres D, Tzivanidis C, Antonopoulos KA. Design, simulation and
optimization of a compound parabolic collector. Sustainable Energy Tech-
nologies and Assessments 2016:53e63.
[12] Adsten M, Helgesson A, Karlsson B. Evaluation of CPC-collector designs for
stand-alone, roof or wall installation. Sol Energy 2015:638e47.
[13] Souliotis M, Quinlan P, Smyth M, Tripanagnostopoulos Y, Zacharopoulos A,
Ramirez M, Yianoullis P. Heat retaining integrated collector storage solar
water heater with asymmetric CPC reflector. Sol Energy 2011:2474e87.
[14] Kessentini H, Bouden C. Numerical and experimental study of an integrated
solar collector with CPC reflectors. Renew Energy 2013:577e86.
[15] Ustaoglua A, Okajima J, Zhang XR, Maruyama S. Truncation effects in an
evacuated compound parabolic and involute concentrator with experimental
and analytical investigations. Appl Therm Eng 2018;138:433e45.
[16] Lu L, Liu Z-H, Xiao H-S. Thermal performance of an open thermosyphon using
nanofluids for high-temperature evacuated tubular solar collectors: Part 1:
indoor experiment. Sol Energy 2011;85:379e87.
[17] Tzivanidis C, Bellos E, Korres D, Antonopoulos KA, Mitsopoulos G. Thermal and
optical efficiency investigation of a PTC. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering
2015:226e37.
[18] Cheng ZD, He YL, Cui FQ, Du BC, Zheng ZJ, Xu Y. Comparative and sensitive
analysis for parabolic trough solar collectors with a detailed Monte Carlo ray-
tracing optical model. Appl Energy 2014:559e72.
[19] Cheng ZD, He YL, Cui FQ. A new modelling method and unified code with
MCRT for concentrating solar collectors and its applications. Appl Energy
2013:686e98.
[20] Abad MTJ, Saedodin S, Aminy M. Experimental investigation on a solar
parabolic trough collector for absorber tube filled with porous media. Renew
Energy 2017:156e63.
67
[21] Kaloudis E, Papanicolaou E, Belessiotis V. Numerical simulations of a parabolic
trough solar collector with nanofluid using a two-phase model. Renew Energy
2016:218e29.
[22] Marif Y, Benmoussa H, Bouguettaia H, Belhadj MM, Zerrouki M. Numerical
simulation of solar parabolic trough collector performance in the Algeria
Saharan region. Energy Convers Manag 2014:521e9.
[23] Akbarimoosavi SM, Yaghoubi M. 3D Thermal-structural analysis of an
absorber tube of a parabolic trough collector and the effect of tube deflection
on optical efficiency. Energy Procedia 2014:2433e43.
[24] Tsai CY, Lin PD. Optimized variable-focus-parabolic-trough reflector for solar
thermal concentrator system. Sol Energy 2012:1164e72.
[25] Bellos E, Tzivanidis C, Antonopoulos KA, Gkinis G. Thermal enhancement of
solar parabolic trough collectors by using nanofluids and converging-
diverging absorber tube. Renew Energy 2016:213e22.
[26] Zhu X, Zhu L, Zhao J. Wavy-tape insert designed for managing highly
concentrated solar energy on absorber tube of parabolic trough receiver.
Energy 2017;141:1146e55.
[27] Iranmanesh S, Ong HC, Ang BC, Sadeghinezhad Emad. Thermal performance
enhancement of an evacuated tube solar collector using graphene nano-
platelets nanofluid. J Clean Prod 2017:121e9.
[28] Liang R, Ma L, Zhang J, Zhao D. Theoretical and experimental investigation of
the filled-type evacuated tube solar collector with U tube. Sol Energy 2011:
1735e44.
[29] Papadimitratos A, Sobhansarbandi S, Pozdin V, Zakhidov A, Hassanipour F.
Evacuated tube solar collectors integrated with phase change materials. Sol
Energy 2016:10e9.
[30] Technical reference Solidworks flow simulation 2015. Dassault Systems; 2015.
[31] Korres D, Tzivanidis C. Simulation and optimization of a mini-compound
parabolic collector with a coaxial flow system. The Role of Exergy in Energy
and the Environment. Green Energy and Technology. Cham: Springer; 2018.
[32] Kima T, Choia BL, Han YS, Do KH. A comparative investigation of solar-assisted
heat pumps with solar thermal collectors for a hot water supply system.
Energy Convers Manag 2018:472e84.
[33] Jakica N. State-of-the-art review of solar design tools and methods for
assessing daylighting and solar potential for building-integrated photovol-
taics. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018:1296e328.
[34] Kumar S, Mullick SC. Wind heat transfer coefficient in solar collectors in
outdoor conditions. Sol Energy 2010:956e63.
[35] Duffie J, Beckmann W. Solar engineering of thermal processes. fourth ed. New
York, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2013.