UME801

CAPSTONE PROJECT

WATER DISTILLATION USING SOLAR ENERGY WITH THE HELP OF PARABOLIC TROUGH
COLLECTOR

Submitted by

Manan Shah (101208068)

Mayank Joshi (101208072)

Navraj Singh (101208075)

Pranav Lakhina (101208086)

Vasu Sharma (101208142)

Under Guidance of:

Mr. Sumit Sharma

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Thapar University
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The success and final outcome of this project required a lot of guidance and assistance from many people and
we are extremely fortunate to have got this all along the completion of our project work. Whatever we have
done is only due to such guidance and assistance and we would not forget to thank them.

We respect and thank Mr. VP Agrawal for giving us an opportunity to do the project work in “Water
Distillation by Solar Energy using Parabolic Trough Collector” and providing us all support and guidance
which made us complete the project on time. We are extremely grateful to him for providing support and
guidance whenever needed though he had busy schedule.

We owe our profound gratitude to our mentor Mr. Sumeet Sharma, who took keen interest in our project work
and guided us all along, till the completion of our project work by providing all the necessary information for
developing a good system.

We would not forget to remember Mr. Sandeep Kumar and Mr Mahup Mittal for their encouragement and
more over for their timely support and guidance till the completion of our project work.

We heartily thank our Senior Mr. Rupinder for providing us guidance and helping us throughout our project.

We are thankful to and fortunate enough to get constant encouragement, support and guidance from all the
teaching staff of Mechanical Engineering Department which helped us in successfully completing our project
work. Also, I would like to extend our sincere regards to all the non-teaching staff of department of
Mechanical Engineering for their timely support.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction……………………………………... 1
1.1 Working Principle
1.2 About our Product
1.3Functional Analysis
2.0 Need Analysis………………………………… 2
3.0 Functional Details………………………………… 3
3.1 Parabolic Trough Collector……………… 3
3.2 Pump……………………………………… 3
3.3 Heat Exchanger(Evaporator)………………4
3.4 Condenser………………………………… 4
3.5Carrier Fluid……………………………… 5
4.0 Material Selection…………………………………6
5.0 Design Aspects……………………………………..8
6.0 Analysis and Calculations…………………………33
7.0 CAD Models……………………………………...40
8.0 Drawings……………………………………... 45
9.0 Fabrication and Assembly Details……………… 59
10.0 Results…………………………………….. 60
 1. INTRODUCTION

The system consists of a parabolic solar trough collector which will be used to concentrate solar energy on its
focal length where the carrier fluid will be heated. The trough collector will be made from sheet metal (MS or
Al) which will be bended to form the desired concave shape. In addition, heat reflecting materials like Al
sheets or Al foil will be pasted to increase the effect. The carrier fluid Therminol VP 1 will be circulated along
the system consisting of a heat exchanger wherein dirty water will be heated to vapour and then condensed to
give distilled water. The heat exchanger will consist of copper tubing system in which the carrier fluid will
flow and use the heat absorbed from the trough collector to felicitate evaporation. The steam thus formed will
flow to the condenser through copper coils. In that container, condensation will occur giving distilled water.
 2. NEED ANALYSIS

Motivation (Why water distillation?)

About 70% of the planet is covered with water, yet only around 2% is fresh water, and of that 2%, about 1.6%
is locked up in polar ice caps and glaciers. So of all of the earth’s water, 98% is saltwater, 1.6% is polar ice
caps and glaciers, and 0.4% is drinkable water from underground wells or rivers and streams. And despite the
amazing amount of technological progress and advancement that the current world we live in has undergone,
roughly 1 billion people, or 14.7% of the earth’s population, still do not have access to clean, safe drinkable
water. A few of the negative results of this water crisis are:
• Inadequate access to water for sanitation and waste disposal
• Groundwater over drafting (excessive use) leading to diminished agricultural yields
• Overuse and pollution of the available water resources harming biodiversity
• Regional conflicts over scarce water resources
In addition to these problems, according to Water Partners International, waterborne diseases and the absence
of sanitary domestic water is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. For children less than 5 years old,
waterborne disease is the leading cause of death, and at any given moment, roughly half of all hospital beds
are filled with patients suffering from water-related diseases. Clearly, having affordable potable water readily
available to everyone is an important and pressing issue facing the world today.

Why Solar Energy?

While a majority of the world's current electricity supply is generated from fossil fuels such as coal, oil and
natural gas, these traditional energy sources face a number of challenges including rising prices, security
concerns over dependence on imports from a limited number of countries which have significant fossil fuel
supplies, and growing environmental concerns over the climate change risks associated with power generation
using fossil fuels. As a result of these and other challenges facing traditional energy sources, governments,
businesses and consumers are increasingly supporting the development of alternative energy sources and new
technologies. Renewable energy sources such as solar, biomass, geothermal, hydroelectric and wind power
generation have emerged as potential alternatives which address some of these concerns. As opposed to fossil
fuels, which draw on finite resources that may eventually become too expensive to retrieve, renewable energy
sources are generally unlimited in availability.
Solar power generation has emerged as one of the most rapidly growing renewable sources of electricity.
Solar power generation has several advantages over other forms of electricity generation:
Reduced Dependence on Fossil Fuels: Solar energy production does not require fossil fuels and is therefore
less dependent on this limited and expensive natural resource. Although there is variability in the amount and
timing of sunlight over the day, season and year, a properly sized and configured system can be designed to be
highly reliable while providing long-term, fixed price electricity supply.
Environmental Advantages: Solar power production generates electricity with a limited impact on the
environment as compared to other forms of electricity production.
Matching Peak Time Output with Peak Time Demand: Solar energy can effectively supplement electricity
supply from an electricity transmission grid, such as when electricity demand peaks in the summer
Modularity and Scalability: As the size and generating capacity of a solar system are a function of the
number of solar modules installed, applications of solar technology are readily scalable and versatile.
Flexible Locations: Solar power production facilities can be installed at the customer site which reduces
required investments in production and transportation infrastructure.

3. FUNCTIONAL DETAILS

The system consists of a parabolic solar trough collector which will be used to concentrate solar energy on its
focal length where the carrier fluid will be heated. The trough collector will be made from sheet metal (MS or
Al) which will be bended to form the desired concave shape. In addition, heat reflecting materials like Al
sheets or Al foil will be pasted to increase the effect. The carrier fluid Therminol VP 1 will be circulated along
the system consisting of a heat exchanger wherein dirty water will be heated to vapour and then condensed to
give distilled water. The heat exchanger will consist of copper tubing system in which the carrier fluid will
flow and use the heat absorbed from the trough collector to felicitate evaporation. The steam thus formed will
flow to the condenser through copper coils. In that container, condensation will occur giving distilled water.

1) PARABOLIC TROUGH COLLECTOR

Parabolic-trough solar water-heating systems carry solar water-heating technology a step further by
concentrating the sunlight before it strikes the absorber. Mirrored surfaces curved in a parabolic shape linearly
extended into a trough shape focus sunlight on an absorber tube running the length of the trough. A heat
transfer fluid—usually a solution of water and antifreeze—is pumped around a loop through the absorber tube
of the collector. There it picks up heat and then goes to a heat exchanger where it either directly heats potable
water or heats a thermal storage tank.
2) PUMP
The Pump will be used to circulate the carrier fluid from the glass tube in the trough collector to the heat
exchanger where the fluid will exchange heat with the impure water and then circulate the carrier fluid back to
the trough collector.
3) EVAPORATOR HEAT EXCHANGER
The impure water in the container will be heated by gaining heat from the hot carrier fluid. Thus the water
will evaporate and through a pipe, the steam formed will move to the condenser. The impurities will be
collected out through the drain.
4) CONDENSER
In the condenser, the steam will flow in the copper pipes in the form of coils where it will condense with the
help of a fan. Thus the condensed water will be collected through an opening.
5) CARRIER FLUID
We intend to use Therminol VP-1 as the heat transfer/carrier fluid in our set up because of its good thermal
properties. Also, it is not very expensive and costs about Rs. 400/kg. Therminol VP-1 heat transfer fluid is an
ultra-high temperature synthetic heat transfer fluid designed to meet the demanding requirements of vapour
phase systems or liquid phase systems. Performance benefits of this fluid are:-
1. Superb Heat Transfer Properties - Therminol VP-1 is a synthetic heat transfer fluid which combines
exceptional thermal stability and low viscosity for efficient, dependable, uniform performance in a wide
optimum use range of 12°C to 400°C (54°F to 750°F ). Therminol VP-1 has the highest thermal stability
of all organic heat transfer fluids.
2. Low Viscosity - Therminol VP-1 has a low viscosity to 12°C (54°F). Because of its crystallization point
of 12°C (54°F), this fluid may require tracing in colder climates to avoid operational problems.
3. Vapor Phase Heat Transfer Fluid - Therminol VP-1 is a eutectic mixture of diphenyl oxide (DPO) and
biphenyl. It can be used as a liquid heat transfer fluid or as a boiling-condensing heat transfer medium
up to its maximum use temperature. It is miscible and interchangeable (for top-up or design purposes)
with other similarly constituted diphenyl-oxide (DPO)/biphenyl fluids.
4. Precise Temperature Control - Due to its ability to operate as a vapor phase heat transfer fluid,
Therminol VP-1 is excellent for use in heat transfer fluid systems requiring very precise temperature
control.

4. MATERIAL SELECTION USING STANDARDS

S.No. Components Specifications

1 Heat generating unit with manual
tracking system
Parabolic reflector
 Length 4 ft
 Arc length (perimeter) 6 ft
 Depth 0.68 ft
 Focal length 1.99 ft
 Material SS with mirror film
Sun tracker Single axis (Manual)

Absorber tube
Length 4 ft
Diameter 1 inch
Absorber material Copper, SS
Piping material GI and copper
2 Storage unit

Supply tanks

Capacity 10 ltr (for oil)

Material Storage tank

SS
 2 (one for evaporating and other for
capacity condensing unit)
material 28 ltr
Insulation used SS
Tank insulation thickness Pipe Glass wool with rexene
insulation thickness Working fluid 2cm
1cm
Water and oil
3 Control unit

Pump (for water) 0.1 HP

y Power rating y Head 6m
Pump (for oil) y Power rating y
0.5 HP
Head
10m
Different meters y Thermometers
y Flow meter
y Radiation meter y Anemometer
4 Accessories

 Experimental manual y Tools

for piping and connections
 Oil
 5. DESIGN ASPECTS

Parabolic Trough Collector

1. Collector geometry

The collector, the parabolic trough, is a trough the cross-section of which has the shape of a part of a parabola.
More exactly, it is a symmetrical section of a parabola around its vertex.

Radiation concentration at a parabolic trough

Parabolic troughs have a focal line, which consists of the focal points of the parabolic cross-sections.
Radiation that enters in a plane parallel to the optical plane1 is reflected in such a way that it passes through
the focal line.

Figure 7: Path of parallel rays at a parabolic mirror

A proof of the existence of a focal point is presented in the annex. An appropriate analytic representation of a
parabola is

, (1)

where is the focal length, i.e. the distance between the vertex of the parabola and the focal point.

Parameters for the geometrical description of a parabolic trough

In order to describe a parabolic trough geometrically, the parabola has to be determined, the section of the
parabola that is covered by the mirrors, and the length of the trough.

The following four parameters are commonly used to characterize the form and size of a parabolic trough:
trough length, focal length, aperture width, i.e. the distance between one rim and the other, and rim angle,
i.e. the angle between the optical axis and the line between the focal point and the mirror rim:

Figure 8: Geometrical parabolic trough parameters

The length of the trough is an unproblematic measure and does not need any explanation.

The focal length, i.e. the distance between the focal point and the vertex of a parabola, is a parameter that

determines the parabola completely (in the mentioned mathematical expression of a parabola, , the
focal length f is the only parameter).

Figure 9: Focal length as shape parameter

The rim angle, i.e. the angle between the optical axis and the line between the focal point and the mirror rim,
has the interesting characteristics that it alone determines the shape of the cross-section of a parabolic trough.
That means that the cross-sections of parabolic troughs with the same rim angle are geometrically similar. The
cross-sections of one parabolic trough with a given rim angle can be made congruent to the cross-section of
another parabolic trough with the same rim angle by a uniform scaling (enlarging or shrinking). If only the
shape of a collector cross-section is of interest, but not the absolute size, then it is sufficient to indicate the rim
angle. A proof that the cross-sections of parabolic troughs with the same rim angle are geometrically similar is
presented in the annex.

Two of the three parameters rim angle, aperture width and focal length are sufficient to determine the
cross-section of a parabolic trough completely, i.e. shape and size. This also means that two of them are
sufficient to calculate the third one. can be expressed as a function of the ratio of the aperture width to the
focal length:
 . (2)

or, alternatively, the ratio of the aperture width to the focal length can be expressed as a function of the rim
angle:

(3)

The following diagram represents the a-f ratio in dependence on the rim angle.

Figure 10: Relation between the rim angle and the a/f-value

Geometrical parameters of real parabolic troughs

We will have a look now at the values that take these parameters at real parabolic troughs. First, we see that
the rim angle should neither be too small nor too large. The rim angle is related to the distance between the
different parts of the mirrors and the focal line. Taking a fixed aperture width the following figure represents
this relation:
 Figure 11: Relation between the focal length and the rim angle for a constant trough aperture width

The rim angle is a very important constructive trait of collectors. For instance, it has an effect on the
concentration ratio and on the total irradiance per meter absorber tube [W/m]. Qualitatively, we can
understand in the following way that there must be some ideal rim angle range and that is should neither be
too small nor too large:

- We consider, first, perfect mirrors, disregarding possible slope errors.2

If the rim angle is very small, then the mirror is very narrow and it is obvious that a broader mirror (with a
larger rim angle) would enhance the power projected onto the absorber tube.15 If the rim angle is very big,
then the way of the reflected radiation from the outer parts of the mirror is very long and the beam spread is
very big, reducing, hence, the concentration ratio. A mirror with a smaller rim angle and the same aperture
width would permit a higher concentration ratio.
 Figure 12: Dependence of the focal spot size on the rim angle
(at a given trough aperture width)

Additionally, if we consider real mirrors with a certain degree of geometrical inexactness, then it is important
to maintain a low distance to the absorber also because the effect of these geometrical mirror errors. The
larger the distance to the absorber, the more weight carries the radiation aberration due to mirror slope errors.
Once more, at a given aperture width, very small rim angles as well as very large rim angles imply large
distances between the mirror and the focal line (in the case of very large rim angles for the outer parts of the
mirror) and should be avoided.
 Figure 13: Effects of slope errors in dependence on the rim angle

- Last but not least there is an economical aspect that limits the reasonable rim angle: At high rim angles the
outer parts have a low contribution to the energy yield in relation to the mirror area. That means a high
investment is necessary, which contributes only little to the energy yield.

So, there are several criteria, which together determine the rim angle. The rim angle of real parabolic troughs
is around 80°.

The aperture width of most actual collectors amounts to approximately 6m, the focal length is
(correspondingly to the rim angle and aperture width values) approximately 1.75m, and the module length is
between 12 and 14m. There are some collectors that have smaller (Solarlite) or larger aperture widths
(Skyfuel, Heliotrough) with corresponding different focal lengths.
Mirror area and aperture area

Besides the mentioned linear measures, also surface area measures are important. There is, first, the aperture
area, which is an important constructive measure. At a given DNI and a given Sun position it determines the
radiation capture. The aperture area is calculated as the product of the aperture width and the collector
length :

, (4)

The surface area of a parabolic trough may be important to determine the material need for the trough. The
area is calculated as follows:

. (5)

A derivation of this equation is presented in the annex.

Concentration ratio

The concentration ratio is one of the central parameters of the collector. It is decisive for the possible
operating temperatures of the parabolic trough power plant. The concentration ratio is defined as the ratio
of the radiant flux density at the focal line, or, what is the same, at the Sun image, , to the direct irradiance
at the aperture of the collector, :

(6)
Now, the irradiance is different in different points of the Sun image. That’s why we can consider, first, a
punctual concentration ratio. In this case, has to be determined at a point within the focal line in order to
determine the concentration ratio in relation to that specific point. Or we can consider, second, a mean
concentration ratio taking as the ratio of the mean irradiance at the focal line to the direct normal irradiance.

Concerning the mean concentration ratio (contrary to the punctual one) there is an easy way to specify it
without any measurement: The geometrical concentration ratio is a useful approximation. It is defined as
the ratio of the collector aperture area to the receiver aperture area.

(7)

While it is clear what the collector aperture area is (see above), it is much less clear what has to count as the
receiver aperture. In many cases, the projected area of the absorber tube is chosen. In this case the receiver
aperture area is a rectangle with the area , where is the absorber tube diameter.

Figure 14: Collector aperture area and receiver aperture area

The concentration ratio is, then:

(8)
In the chapter “Solar Radiation” it was demonstrated that the maximal mean concentration ratio in linear
focussing collectors, taking the Sun image area in the focal plane for , is 107.5. The maximal geometrical
concentration ratio in real systems, accepting the projected absorber tube area as

, is 82.

Another possibility is to take the irradiated absorber surface area as the receiver aperture area. In real
parabolic troughs this would mean that the whole absorber tube surface area is the receiver aperture
area3:

. (9)

This definition would lead to a lower geometrical concentration ratio. However, the concentration ratio
according to the projected areas is more commonly used.

HCE Performance Model

The HCE performance model is based on an energy balance about the collector and the HCE. The energy
balance includes the direct normal solar irradiation incident on the collector, optical losses from both the
collector and HCE, thermal losses from the HCE, and the heat gain into the HTF. For short receivers (< 100
m) a one-dimensional energy balance gives reasonable results; for longer receivers a two dimensional energy
balance becomes necessary. All the equations and relationships used in both the one- and two-dimensional
HCE performance models are described in the following sections.

2.1 One-Dimensional Energy Balance Model

The HCE performance model uses an energy balance between the HTF and the atmosphere, and includes 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.
Figure 2.1a shows the one-dimensional steady-state energy balance for a cross-section of an HCE, with and
without the glass envelope intact, and Figure 2.1b shows the thermal resistance model and subscript
definitions. For clarity, the incoming solar energy and optical losses have been omitted from the resistance
model. The optical losses are due to imperfections in the collector mirrors, tracking errors, shading, and
mirror and HCE cleanliness (see Section 2.1.6.1). The effective incoming solar energy (solar energy minus
optical losses) is absorbed by the glass envelope ( q5′SolAbs ) and absorber selective coating (q3′SolAbs ). Some
energy that is absorbed into the selective coating is conducted through the absorber (q23′ cond ) and transferred
to the HTF by convection ( q12′ conv ); remaining energy is transmitted back to the glass envelope by
convection (q34′ conv ) and radiation (q34′ rad ) and lost through the HCE support bracket through conduction
(qcond′,bracket ). The energy from the radiation and convection then passes through the glass envelope by
conduction (q45′ cond ) and along with the energy absorbed by the glass envelope

(q5′SolAbs ) is lost to the environment by convection ( q56′ conv ) and radiation (q57′ rad ). If the glass envelope is
missing, the heat loss from the absorber is lost directly to the environment. The model assumes all
temperatures, heat fluxes, and thermodynamic properties are uniform around the circumference of the HCE.
Also, all flux directions shown in Figure 2.1a are positive.

With the help of Figure 2.1, the energy balance equations are determined by conserving energy at each surface
of the HCE cross-section, both with and without the glass envelope intact.

with the glass envelope:

q12′ conv = q23′ cond (2.1a)

q3′SolAbs = q34′ conv + q34′ rad + q′23cond + qcond′,bracket (2.1b)
q34′ conv + q34′ rad = q′45cond (2.1c)
q′45cond + q5′SolAbs = q56′ conv + q57′ rad (2.1d)
 q′HeatLoss = q56′ conv +q57′ rad +qcond′ ,bracket (2.1e)

without the glass envelope:

q12′ conv = q′23cond (2.2a)

q3′SolAbs = q36′ conv + q37′ rad + q23′ cond + qcond′ ,bracket(2.2b)
q′HeatLoss = q36′ conv + q37′ rad + qcond′ ,bracket (2.2c)

In the case without the glass envelope, Equations 2.1c and 2.1d drop out, and the 4 subscript for the
convection and radiation from the absorber change to 6 and 7, respectively, since the heat loss from the
absorber outer surface escapes directly to the environment instead of through the glass envelope.

Note that the solar absorptance q3′SolAbs and q5′SolAbs are treated as heat flux terms. This simplifies the solar
absorption terms and makes the heat conduction through the absorber pipe and glass envelope linear.

In reality, the solar absorption in the absorber (opaque metal material) and glass envelope

(semitransparent material) are volumetric phenomena. However, most of the absorption in the absorber occurs
very close to the surface (about 6 angstroms) [Ozisik 1973], and although solar absorption occurs throughout
the thickness of the glass envelope, the absorptance is relatively small (α = 0.02). Therefore, any error in
treating solar absorption as a surface phenomenon should be relatively small.

All the terms in Equations 2.1 and 2.2 are defined in Table 2.1. Dotted variables indicate rates and the prime
indicates per unit length of receiver. A double prime will indicate per unit normal aperture area.
a) One-dimensional energy balance

With Glass Envelope Without Glass Envelope

b) Thermal resistance model
conduction

(1)(7)(6) convection conduction convection conduction convection

(1) heat transfer fluid (5) glass envelope outer surface

(2) absorber inner surface (6) surrounding air
(3) absorber outer surface (7) sky
(4) glass envelope inner surface

Figure 2.1 (a) One-dimensional steady-state energy balance and b) thermal resistance model for a
cross-section of an HCE
 Table: Heat Flux Definitions

Heat Flux Heat Transfer Heat Transfer Path

(W/m)* Mode From To
q12′ conv convection inner absorber pipe surface heat transfer fluid
q23′ cond conduction outer absorber pipe surface inner absorber pipe
surface
q3′SolAbs solar irradiation incident solar irradiation outer absorber pipe
absorption surface
q34′ conv convection outer absorber pipe surface inner glass envelope
surface
q34′ rad radiation outer absorber pipe surface inner glass envelope
surface
q45′ cond conduction inner glass envelope surface outer glass envelope
surface
q5′SolAbs solar irradiation incident solar irradiation outer glass envelope
absorption surface
q56′ conv convection outer glass envelope surface ambient

q57′ rad radiation outer glass envelope surface sky

q36′ conv convection outer absorber pipe surface ambient
q37′ rad radiation outer absorber pipe surface sky
qcond′ ,bracket conduction outer absorber pipe surface HCE support bracket
q′HeatLoss convection and heat collecting element ambient and sky
radiation
* Per unit aperture length.
Convection Heat Transfer between the HTF and the Absorber

From Newton’s law of cooling, the convection heat transfer from the inside surface of the absorber pipe to the
HTF is

q 12′ conv = h1D2π(T2 −T1 ) (2.3)

with

h1 = NuD2 Dk12 (2.4)

where h1 = HTF convection heat transfer coefficient at T1 (W/m2-K)

D2 = inside diameter of the absorber pipe (m)

T1 = mean (bulk) temperature of the HTF (oC)

T2 = inside surface temperature of absorber pipe (oC) NuD2 = Nusselt number based on D2 k1 = thermal
conductance of the HTF at T1 (W/m-K)

In these equations, both T1 and T2 are independent of angular and longitudinal HCE directions, as will be all
temperatures and properties in the one-dimensional energy balance model.

The Nusselt number depends on the type of flow through the HCE. At typical operating conditions, the flow
in an HCE is well within the turbulent flow region. However, during off-solar hours or when evaluating the
HCE heat losses on a test platform, the flow in the HCE may become transitional or laminar because of the
viscosity of the HTF at lower temperatures. Therefore, to model the heat losses under all conditions, the
model includes conditional statements to determine type of flow. The Nusselt number used for each flow
condition is outlined in next Section.
 Turbulent and Transitional Flow Cases

To model the convective heat transfer from the absorber to the HTF for turbulent and transitional cases
(Reynolds number > 2300) the following Nusselt number correlation developed by Gnielinski [1976] is used.

NuD2 = +f2128.(7RefD22 −81000(Pr12/)3Pr−11 PrPr12 0.11 (2.5) 1

with

f2 = (1.82log10 (ReD2 ) −1.64)−2 (2.6)

where f2 = friction factor for the inner surface of the absorber pipe

Pr1 = Prandtl number evaluated at the HTF temperature, T1

Pr2 = Prandtl number evaluated at the absorber inner surface temperature, T2

Along with being valid for turbulent pipe flow, this Nusselt number correlation accounts for transitional flow
states for Reynolds numbers between 2300 and 4000. Furthermore, the correlation adjusts for fluid property
variations between the absorber wall temperature and bulk fluid temperature. The correlation is valid for 0.5 <
Pr1 < 2000 and 2300 < ReD2 < 5E6. If used out of this range of validity, the code will display a warning
message. Except for Pr2, all fluid properties are evaluated at the mean HTF temperature, T1. The correlation
assumes uniform heat flux and temperature, and assumes the absorber has a smooth inner surface.

Laminar Flow Case

An option to model the flow as laminar is included in all the one-dimensional versions of the HCE heat
transfer codes. When the laminar option is chosen and the Reynolds number is lower than 2300, the Nusselt
number will be constant. For pipe flow, the value will be 4.36 [Incropera and DeWitt 1990]. For annulus flow,
the value will depend on the ratio between the pipe insert diameter and absorber inside diameter, D p/D2 (see
Section 2.1.1.3). Pipe and annulus flow values were derived assuming constant heat flux. If the laminar option
is not chosen and the Reynolds number is less than 2300, the code will use the turbulent flow model described
in Section, but will display the following warning message: “The result may not be accurate, since 2300 <
ReD2 < (5E6) does not hold. See Function fq_12conv. ReD2 = (value).”

Annulus Flow Case

One possible use of the HCE performance model will be to evaluate HCE testing conducted on an AZTRAK
testing platform located at SNL . The test platform is essentially a scaleddown version of a trough plant.
Unfortunately, the test platform does not have the same volumetric pumping capability and collector lengths
as a trough plant. Therefore, to simulate field heat transfer characteristics, a pipe is inserted in the center of
the HCE [Dudley et al. 1994]. This decreases the crosssectional flow area of the HTF, increasing the flow
velocities, and thus increasing the Reynolds number. To apply to this type of HCE testing, the code is set up
to model the HTF flow as annulus flow when prompted.

The turbulent pipe flow correlations described in Section can be used for annulus flow by substituting the
inside pipe diameter, D2, with the following hydraulic diameter [Incropera and DeWitt 1990].

Dh = 4PAwcs = D2 − Dp (2.7)

where

Acs = flow cross-sectional area (m2)

Pw = wetted perimeter (m)
Dp = outside diameter of pipe insert (m)

D2 = inner diameter of absorber pipe (m)

For laminar flow through an annulus, the Nusselt number depends on the ratio Dp/D2. Table 2.2 lists Nusselt
numbers for various diameter ratios. The table is a modified version of a table for uniform heat flux occurring
at both the inner and outer surfaces of the annulus [Incropera and DeWitt 1990].
 Table 2.2 Nusselt Number for Laminar
Annulus Flow with Uniform Heat Flux

Dp/D2 NuDh
0 4.364
0.05 4.792
0.10 4.834
0.20 4.833
0.40 4.979
0.60 5.099
0.80 5.24
1.00 5.385

Conduction Heat Transfer through the Absorber Wall

Fourier’s law of conduction through a hollow cylinder describes the conduction heat transfer through the
absorber wall [Incropera and DeWitt 1990].

q′23cond = 2πk23 (T2 −T3 )/ln(D3 / D2 ) (2.8)

where

k23 = absorber thermal conductance at the average absorber temperature (T2+T3)/2 (W/m-K)

T2 = absorber inside surface temperature (K)

T3 = absorber outside surface temperature (K)

D2 = absorber inside diameter (m)

D3 = absorber outside diameter (m)

In this equation the conduction heat transfer coefficient is constant, and is evaluated at the average
temperature between the inner and outer surfaces.

The conduction coefficient depends on the absorber material type. The HCE performance model includes
three stainless steels: 304L, 316L, and 321H, and one copper: B42. If 304L or 316L is chosen, the conduction
coefficient is calculated with the following equation.

k23 = (0.013)T23 +15.2 (2.9a)

If 321H is chosen,

k23 = (0.0153)T23 +14.775 (2.9b)

Both equations were determined by linearly fitting data from Davis [2000]. If copper is chosen, the
conduction coefficient is a constant of 400 W/m-K [ASM Handbook Committee 1978]. Conductive resistance
through the selective coating has been neglected.

Heat Transfer from the Absorber to the Glass Envelope

Convection and radiation heat transfer occur between the absorber and the glass envelope. The convection
heat transfer mechanism depends on the annulus pressure [KJCOC 1993]. At low pressures (< ~1 torr), the
heat transfer mechanism is molecular conduction. At higher pressures (> ~1 torr), the mechanism is free
convection. The radiation heat transfer occurs because of the difference in temperatures between the outer
absorber surface and the inner glass envelope surface. The radiation heat transfer calculation is simplified by
assuming the glass envelope is opaque to infrared radiation and assuming gray (ρ = α) surfaces.
 Convection Heat Transfer
Two heat transfer mechanisms are evaluated to determine the convection heat transfer between the absorber
and glass envelope (q34′ conv ), free-molecular and natural convection [KJCOC 1993]. In the HCE performance
model, the larger of the two values is chosen. This results in a smooth transition between the two heat transfer
modes, as shown in Figure 2.2.

Figure 2.2 Chart of heat loss per unit length of receiver as a function of annulus pressure

Vacuum in Annulus

When the HCE annulus is under vacuum (pressure < ~1 torr), the convection heat transfer between the
absorber and glass envelope occurs by free-molecular convection [Ratzel et al.1979].

q34′ conv =πD3h34 (T3 −T4 ) (2.10)

with
This correlation is valid for RaD4 < (D4 / (D4 –D3))4, but slightly overestimates the heat transfer for very small
pressures (~< 0.0001 torr). The molecular diameters of the gases, δ, were obtained from Marshal [1976] and
are shown in Table 2.3. The table also compares the convection heat transfer coefficients (h34) and other
parameters that are used in the calculation for each of the three gases included in the HCE performance
model.

Table 2.3 Heat

Annulus kstd b λ γ δ Transfer

Gas [W/m-K] [cm] [cm] Coefficients and

[W/mh342 -K]
Air 0.02551 1.571 88.67 1.39 3.53E-80.0001115 Constants for
Each Annulus Gas
Hydrogen 0.1769 1.581 191.8 1.398 2.4E-80.0003551

Argon 0.01777 1.886 76.51 1.677 3.8E-80.00007499

T = 300 oC, Insolation = 940 W/m2

1avg

2.1.3.1.2 Pressure in Annulus

When the HCE annulus loses vacuum (pressure > ~1 torr), the convection heat transfer mechanism between
the absorber and glass envelope occurs by natural convection. Raithby and Holland’s correlation for natural
convection in an annular space between horizontal cylinders is used for this case [Bejan 1995].

q34′ conv = 2.425k34 (T3 −(T+4 ()(Pr RaD)33 5()05.4861+ Pr34 ))1 4 (2.14)
1 D3 D4
 RaD3 = gβ(T3αν−T4 )D33 (2.15)

For an ideal gas

β= 1
(2.16)

Tavg

k34 = thermal conductance of annulus gas at T34 (W/m-K) T3 = outer absorber surface temperature
(oC)

T4 = inner glass envelope surface temperature (oC)

D3 = outer absorber diameter (m)

D4 = inner glass envelope diameter (m)

Pr34 = Prandtl number

RaD3 = Rayleigh number evaluated at D3 β = volumetric thermal expansion coefficient (1/K)

T34 = average temperature, (T3 + T4)/2 (oC)

This correlation assumes long, horizontal, concentric cylinders at uniform temperatures, and is valid for Ra D4
> (D4 / (D4 –D3))4. All physical properties are evaluated at the average temperature (T3 + T4)/2.

2.1.3.2 Radiation Heat Transfer

The radiation heat transfer between the absorber and glass envelope ( q34′ rad ) is estimated with the following
equation [Incropera and DeWitt 1990].

q34′ rad = (1ε3 σπ+ (1D−3 (εT434)D−3T4(ε4 )4 D4 )) (2.17)

where

σ = Stefan-Boltzmann constant (W/m2-K4) D3 = outer absorber diameter (m)

D4 = inner glass envelope diameter (m)

T3 = outer absorber surface temperature (K) T4 = inner glass envelope surface temperature (K) ε3 =
Absorber selective coating emissivity ε4 = glass envelope emissivity

Several assumptions were made in deriving this equation: nonparticipating gas in the annulus, gray surfaces,
diffuse reflections and irradiation, and long concentric isothermal cylinders. Also, the glass envelope is
assumed to be opaque to infrared radiation. Not all these assumptions are completely accurate. For instance,
neither the glass envelope nor the selective coatings are gray, and the glass envelope is not completely opaque
for the entire thermal radiation spectrum [Touloukian and DeWitt 1972]. However, any errors associated with
the assumptions should be relatively small.

Conduction Heat Transfer through the Glass Envelope

The conduction heat transfer through the glass envelope uses the same equation as the conduction through the
absorber wall described in Section 2.1.2. The anti-reflective treatment on the inside and outside surfaces of the
glass envelope is assumed to introduce no thermal resistance and to have no effect on the glass emissivity.
This should be fairly accurate since the treatment is a chemical etching and does not add additional elements
to the glass surface [Mahoney 2002]. As in the absorber case, the temperature distribution is assumed to be
linear. Furthermore, the thermal conductance is assumed constant – as explained in Section 2.1 – with a value
of 1.04 (Pyrex glass) [Touloukian and DeWitt 1972].

Heat Transfer from the Glass Envelope to the Atmosphere

The heat will transfer from the glass envelope to the atmosphere by convection and radiation. The convection
will either be forced or natural, depending on whether there is wind. Radiation heat loss occurs due to the
temperature difference between the glass envelope and sky.

Convection Heat Transfer

The convection heat transfer from the glass envelope to the atmosphere ( q56′ conv ) is the largest source of heat
loss, especially if there is a wind. From Newton’s law of cooling

q56′ conv = h56πD5 (T5 −T6 ) (2.18) h56 = k56 NuD5 (2.19)
D5

where

T5 = glass envelope outer surface temperature (oC)

T6 = ambient temperature (oC)

h56 = convection heat transfer coefficient for air at (T(W/m2-K) 5 – T6)/2

k56 = thermal conductance of air at (T5 – T6)/2 (W/m-K) D5 = glass envelope outer diameter (m)
NuD5 = average Nusselt number based on the glass envelope outer diameter

The Nusselt number depends on whether the convection heat transfer is natural (no wind) or forced (with
wind).

No Wind Case
If there is no wind, the convection heat transfer from the glass envelope to the environment will be by natural
convection. For this case, the correlation developed by Churchill and Chu will be used to estimate the Nusselt
number [Incropera and DeWitt 1990].

NuD5 0.60 + [1+ (00..559387RaPr56D5)19616 ]8 27 2 (2.20)

RaD5 = gβ((Tα5 56−νT566 ))D53 (2.21)

β= 1 (2.22)

T56

ν56 (2.23)

Pr56 = α56

where

RaD5 = Rayleigh number for air based on the glass envelope outer diameter, D5 g = gravitational constant
(9.81) (m/s2)

α56 = thermal diffusivity for air at T56 (m2/s) β = volumetric thermal expansion coefficient (ideal gas)
(1/K) Pr56 = Prandtl number for air at T56 ν56 = kinematic viscosity for air at T56 (m2/s) T56 =
film temperature (T5 + T6)/2 (K)

This correlation is valid for 105 < RaDo < 1012, and assumes a long isothermal horizontal cylinder. Also, all the
fluid properties are determined at the film temperature, (T5 + T6)/2.
2.1.5.1.2 Wind Case

If there is wind, the convection heat transfer from the glass envelope to the environment will be forced
convection. The Nusselt number in this case is estimated with Zhukauskas’ correlation for external forced
convection flow normal to an isothermal cylinder [Incropera and DeWitt 1990].

NuD5 = C ReD5m Pr6n PrPr65 14 (2.24)

with

ReD C m
1-40 0.75 0.4
40-1000 0.51 0.5
1000-200000 0.26 0.6
200000-1000000 0.076 0.7

and n = 0.37, for Pr <=10

n = 0.36, for Pr >10

This correlation is valid for 0.7 < Pr6 < 500, and 1 < ReD5 < 106. All fluid properties are evaluated at the
atmospheric temperature, T6, except Pr5, which is evaluated at the glass envelope outer surface temperature.

Radiation Heat Transfer

As will be discussed in Section 2.1.6, the useful incoming solar irradiation is included in the solar absorption
terms. Therefore, the radiation transfer between the glass envelope and sky, discussed here, is caused by the
temperature difference between the glass envelope and sky. To approximate this, the envelope is assumed to
be a small convex gray object in a large blackbody cavity (sky). The net radiation transfer between the glass
envelope and sky becomes [Incropera and DeWitt 1990]

q57′ rad =σD5πε5 (T54 −T7 4 ) (2.25)

where

σ = Stefan-Boltzmann constant (5.67X10-8W/m2-K4) D5 = glass envelope outer diameter (m)

ε5 = emissivity of the glass envelope outer surface

T5 = glass envelope outer surface temperature (K) T7 = effective sky temperature (K)

The sky, especially during less than clear conditions, does not act like a blackbody; however, it is common
practice to model it as such and to use an effective to compensate for the difference as stated by Duffie and
Beckman [1991]. As they stated, “the effective sky temperature accounts for the fact that the atmosphere is
not at a uniform temperature and that the atmosphere radiates only in certain wavelength bands.” Furthermore,
“the atmosphere is essentially transparent in the wavelength region from 8 to 14 µm, but outside of this
‘window’ the atmosphere has absorbing bands covering much of the infrared spectrum.” Several relations
have been proposed to relate the effective sky temperature for clear skies to measured meteorological data;
however, to simplify the model, the effective sky temperature is approximated as being 8oC below the
ambient temperature – as determined in the original HCE heat loss model for an ambient temperature of 22 oC
[KJC Operating Company 1993].

Solar Irradiation Absorption

The optical losses and solar absorption – given the direct normal solar irradiation, solar angle, and optical
properties of the trough mirrors and HCE components – is very difficult to model accurately with a set of
equations that can be solved with a software program like EES. Because of this, optical efficiency terms are
estimated and combined to form an effective optical efficiency, which in turn is used to determine the optical
loss and solar absorption terms.
Optical Properties

The optical properties used in the HCE performance model were obtained from a combination of sources.
Some were determined by SEGS plant performance modeling completed by NREL. Some were determined by
tests conducted by SNL, and Solel Solar Systems Ltd. of Israel – the prime HCE manufacturer. Some were
evaluated and revised with ray tracing software developed by NREL.

Table 2.4 lists terms used to estimate the effective optical efficiencies. The table was generated from data
published in a report by NREL [Price et al. 2002], which in turn was based on field tests [Dudley et al. 1994],
and software performance modeling . The first three terms, ε′1, ε′2, and ε′3, and the last term, ε′6, are strictly
estimates. The clean mirror reflectance ρcl is a known value, and the two dirt effect approximations ε′4 and ε′5
are recommendations by Duffie and Beckman [1991]. The data in the table are valid only for solar incidence
irradiation normal to the collector aperture. An incident angle modifier term is added to account for incident
angle losses, which includes trough end shading, changes in reflection and refraction, and selective coating
incident angle effects.

ε′1 = HCE Shadowing (bellows, shielding, supports) 0.974

ε′2 = Tracking Error 0.994
ε′3 = Geometry Error (mirror alignment) 0.98
ρcl = Clean Mirror Reflectance 0.935
ε′4 = Dirt on Mirrors* reflectivity/ρcl
ε′5 = Dirt on HCE (1 + ε′4)/2
ε′6 = Unaccounted 0.96
* reflectivity is a user input (typically between 0.88 and 0.93)

Table 2.4 Estimates of Effective Optical Efficiency Terms [Price 2001]

In Table 2.4, there are terms for collector geometric effects (shadowing, tracking, alignment), mirror and glass
envelope transmittance effects (mirror reflectance, and dirt), and a term for unexplained differences between
field test data and modeled data. Testing continues to refine all these values and to better understand the optics
of the HCEs. In the EES codes for the HCE performance model, the optical efficiency terms can also be
manually entered (see Section 3).

Another term, incident angle modifier, is needed for cases when the solar irradiation is not normal to the
collector aperture. It is a function of the solar incidence angle to the normal of the collector aperture. The
equation was determined from HCE testing conducted at SNL [Dudley et al. 1994].

K = cos(θ) + 0.000884θ− 0.00005369θ2 (2.26)

Other optical properties include the glass envelope absorptance, emittance, and transmittance; and the
selective coating absorptance and emittance. The glass envelope absorptance and emissivity are constants
(independent of temperature) and are constant for all selective coating types (α = 0.02, ε = 0.86). The
transmittance and the selective coating properties (see Table 2.5) coincide with the selective coating types.
Both the envelope transmittance and the coating absorptance are constants; the coating emittance is a function
of temperature. All the selective coating types listed are included in the EES codes. The “Solel UVAC Cermet
avg” selective coating is the reference value used in all the design study and comparison charts shown in this
report, unless stated otherwise.

Selective Coating Envelope Coating Coating Emittance

Transmittance
Absorptance @ 100oC @ 400oC
Luz Black Chrome 0.935 0.94 0.11 0.27
Luz Cermet 0.935 0.92 0.06 0.15
Solel UVAC Cermet a 0.965 0.96 0.07 0.13
Solel UVAC Cermet b 0.965 0.95 0.08 0.15
Solel UVAC Cermet avg 0.965 0.955 0.076 0.14
 Solel UVAC Cermet 0.97 0.98 0.04 0.10
Proposed a
Solel UVAC Cermet 0.97 0.97 0.02 0.07
Proposed b
Table :Optical Properties for Each Selective Coating
The emittance equations used in the codes are shown in Table 2.6, and coincide with the emittance values in
Table 2.5. For all the coating types, the emittance values between the two reference points, 400oC and 100oC,
are nearly linear. However, more test data were available for the UVAC (Universal Vacuum Air Collector)
Cermets, and thus this emittance is described with a second-order polynomial fit; the other coating emittance
values use linear fits. Also, the two proposed selective coatings (Solel UVAC Cermet Proposed a and Solel
UVAC Cermet Proposed b) were specified by the manufacturer for a single temperature of 400oC; therefore,
the temperature dependency had to be approximated. This was done with a slope and intercept to resemble the
trends of the results for the Cermet tested by SNL.

Coating Type Coating Emittance*

Luz Black Chrome 0.0005333 (T + 273.15) - 0.0856
Luz Cermet 0.000327 (T + 273.15) - 0.065971
Solel UVAC Cermet a (2.249E-7)T2 + (1.039E-4)T + 5.599E-2
Solel UVAC Cermet b (1.565E-7)T2 + (1.376E-4)T + 6.966E-2
Solel UVAC Cermet (1.907E-7)T2 + (1.208E-4)T + 6.282E-2
avg
Solel UVAC Cermet (2.084E-4)T + 1.663E-2
Proposed a
Solel UVAC Cermet (1.666E-4)T + 3.375E-3
Proposed b
* All temperatures are in degrees Celsius.
Table :Temperature-Dependent Emittance Equations
Solar Irradiation Absorption in the Glass Envelope

As stated in Section 2.1, the solar absorption into the glass envelope is treated as a heat flux to simplify the
model. Physically this is not true. The solar absorption in the glass envelope is a heat generation phenomenon
and is a function of the glass thickness. However, this assumption introduces minimal error since the solar
absorptance coefficient is small for glass, 0.02 [Touloukian and DeWitt 1972], and the glass envelope is
relatively thin, 6 mm. Also, an optical efficiency is estimated to calculate the solar absorption. With this
stated, the equation for the solar absorption in the glass envelope becomes

q5′SolAbs = q′siηenvαenv (2.27)

with

ηenv =ε1′ε2′ε3′ε4′ε5′ε6′ρcl K (2.28)

where

q′si = solar irradiation per receiver length (W/m)

ηenv = effective optical efficiency at the glass envelope αenv = absorptance of the glass envelope
(Pyrex glass)

Κ = incident angle modifier (as defined by Equation 2.26)

All terms in Equation 2.28, except for K, are from Table 2.4. The solar irradiation term (q′si ) in Equation

2.27 is determined by multiplying the direct normal solar irradiation by the projected normal reflective surface
area of the collector (aperture area) and dividing by the receiver length. All terms in both equations are
assumed to be independent of temperature.

Solar Irradiation Absorption in the Absorber

The solar energy absorbed by the absorber occurs very close to the surface; therefore, it is treated as a heat
flux (see Section 2.1). The equation for the solar absorption in the absorber becomes
 q3′SolAbs = q′siηabsαabs (2.29)
with

ηabs =ηenvτenv (2.30)

where

ηabs = effective optical efficiency at absorber αabs = absorptance of absorber

τenv = transmittance of the glass envelope

In Equation 2.30, ηenv is the same value shown in Section 2.1.6.2. Again, all terms are assumed to be
independent of temperature.

No Glass Envelope Case

As mentioned in Section 2.1, the HCE is modeled with and without the glass envelope. Most of the equations
discussed so far are for the glass envelope intact case. When the glass envelope is missing, the five energy
balance equations, Equation 2.1, collapse down to three (as shown in Section 2.1). The equations for q12′ conv
and q23′ cond remain unchanged for the two cases. Without the glass envelope, the convection and radiation
heat transfer equations for the absorber are calculated with the same equations given in Section 2.1.5. Also,
the solar absorption term for the absorber is adjusted to account for the solar flux that is no longer lost with
the glass envelope. In this case ηabs equals ηenv as defined in Section 2.1.6.2, without the ε5 term, which
accounted for particulate matter on the HCE.

6. ANALYSIS
Concentration Ratio

Concentration Ratio (C) = Effective Aperture Area/Absorber Tube Area

= (W-D)L/πDL (where W = Aperture Width

D = Outer Dia of Absorber Tube

L = Length of Absorber Tube )

= (W-D)/πD

= (66-1)/π*1

= 20.7

Stress Analysis of Parabolic Trough Collector

A mechanical analysis of the trough was done, this was important to predict if mechanical failure may occur
in any of the components.

As mentioned, the effect of wind on the trough is an important factor that has to be analyzed. The force
produced by wind on the trough can be calculated by the generic formula for actual wind speed:
where:

P is the wind dynamic pressure,

A is the projected area

Cd is the drag coefficient

And per unit length

The weight of the trough will also have a distributed load effect (270 N/m) on the trough as shown in figures 1
and 2, those two figures show the action and reaction forces acting on the trough, in addition to shear force
and bending moment diagram.

Figure 1.The action and reaction forces acting on the trough

 Figure 2. Shear force and bending moment diagrams

EVAPORATOR – CONDENSER CALCULATIONS

1) Evaporator :-

Specific Heat Capacity of water (C) = 4.18 KJ/kgK

Mass of water to be boiled (m)= 1 Kg

Latent heat of Vaporisation of water (L) = 2258 KJ/kg

Total Heat required = mC∆T + mL = 2571.5 KJ

R = VD/υ = 21201.4143 [Carrier Fluid/Inside]

R > 10,000

So Turbulent Flow

Nu = [0.023xR^(0.8)][Pr^0.4] = 157.91

h = K x Nu/D =1575.21
Rayleigh No. =

Rayleigh Number = 1.058 x 10^8 [Water/Outside]

Nusselt No. =

Nu = 65.37

h = K x Nu/D = 3671.615

Total Heat transfer = 2.768 x n x L kJ/s [n: no. of passes L: length of pass]

Time for boiling 1 kg water = 1200 sec (20 min)

Therefore,2.768 x n x L x 1200 = 2571.5

n x L = 0.7739

Suppose n = 4

Therefore Length of each pass = 19.34cm

2) Condenser :-

Rayleigh No. =

Rayleigh Number = 51777933.63

Nusselt No. =

Nu = 54.23

h = K x Nu/D = 2966.83
Mass flow rate of steam = 1/1200 kg/s = 8.33 x 10^(-4)

Total heat lost by steam per second = 2.055 kJ/s

Total Heat transfer = 8.388 x n x L kJ/s [n: no. of passes L: length of pass]

Therefore, 8.388 x n x L = 2.055

n x L = 0.244

Taking n = 5

L = 5cm
 7. CAD MODELS

1) FINAL ASSEMBLY MODEL

2) EVAPORATOR-CONDENSER UNIT
3) PTC FRAME MODEL

4) PARABOLIC ALUMINIUM SHEET

5) ABSORBER AND GLASS TUBE MODEL
 8. PRODUCTION DRAWINGS

1) PTC UNIT DRAWING

2) EVAPORATOR-CONDENSER DRAWING
3) COLLECTOR TUBE DRAWING
4) BASE STAND DRAWING
 9. FABRICATION AND ASSEMBLY DETAILS

1) Parabolic Sheet

Processes Done:-

 Procurement of aluminium sheet from Shera Wala Gate, Patiala

 Bending of angle frame in the shape of the required parabola ( through external source)

 Assembling of the aluminium sheet to the parabolic frame with the help of bolts and nuts.

Problems Encountered:-

 We could not get the aluminium anodized from anywhere in Patiala.

 So we had to use the normal aluminium sheet

2) COLLECTOR UNIT(Absorber Tube and Glass Tube)

Processes Done:-

 Absorber Tube of Mild Steel procured from Bera Road, Patiala

 Chrome Plating applied on to the absorber tube

 Glass tube was procured from Ambala

 Glass tube and absorber tube were then sealed concentric to each other

Problems Faced:-

 We could not get the absorber tube black chrome plated from Patiala or nearby areas because of shortage of
time. We could only get it chrome plated.

3) EVAPORATOR-CONDENSER UNIT

Processes Done:-

 Procured Copper tubes from Patiala.

 Got the tubes U-bended and brazed from an external source.

 Procured MS sheets for the containers of the evaporator and the condenser.

 Assembly of the sheets to form the containers by welding in workshop

 Joining the two containers through brazing (outsourced)

Problems faced:-

 Earlier both evaporator and condenser coils were designed to be placed vertically. But the problem in the
evaporator was that the steam needed to travel a large distance working against gravity which was not
feasible. So we decided to place the evaporator coil horizontally and designed accordingly.
4) PUMP

Process:-

 The Pump was procured from Gudmandi, Patiala.

 Since the thermic oil we had was about 10 litres so we made the pump container of 10*10*10 inches^3

Problems faced:-

 Since the blades of the pump were made of plastic and were not suitable for pumping of the intense hot
thermic liquid, therefore the blades of the pump were rebuilt using Mild Steel (outsorurced)

 While we were peforming the experiment, our pump stopped working properly. So we had to replace the
pump. We got a new pump but that was of lower capacity. So the new pump could provide the head that was
required. Therfore we increased the height of the stand on which the pump was fixed.
5) Thermic Oil

 We received the thermic oil from Prof Sandeep Kumar, Thapar University

6) Stand/ Frame

Processes Done:-

 The MS pipes, shaft and bushing were procured from Bera Road.

 The MS pipes were welded in the workshop to form the basic supporting structure.

 To keep the focus of the parabola fixed at the Collector assembly, the Parabolic Trough and the Collector
assembly were joined together by welding both of them to the shaft which is supported by the basic structure.

Problems faced:-

 Until now, the rotation of the trough collector about the shaft was thought of to be done with the help of a
gearbox using worm gears which enabled self locking. During fabrication, T bolts were thought to be used for
the rotation of the trough collector and its locking at a particular position to reduce cost and time.

MAIN ASSEMBLY

 Hose pipes made of Teflon were procured and all the parts were assembled to form the fial assembly.
 10. TEST RESULTS

Date – 28 April, 2016

Time Temperature (Degree Celsius)

10:00 36
10:15 68
10:30 75
10:45 71
11:00 84
11:15 93
11:30 89
11:45 96
12:00 97
12:15 95
12:30 104
12:45 110
13:00 109
13:15 118
13:30 120
13:45 123
14:00 95
14:15 93
14:30 70
14:45 81
15:00 87
15:15 85
15:30 80