Advertisement

Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry

, Volume 135, Issue 1, pp 763–786 | Cite as

A review of concentrating solar thermal collectors with and without nanofluids

  • Evangelos BellosEmail author
  • Christos Tzivanidis
Article

Abstract

Solar concentrating solar thermal collectors are promising technologies for various applications which demand medium- and high-temperature levels. The objective of this work is to review the recent trends in the solar concentrating collectors and to give the emphasis on the performance enhancement methods which applied to the concentrating technologies. Optical and thermal enhancements methods are investigated for the following collector types: compound parabolic concentrator, parabolic trough collector, linear Fresnel reflector and solar dish concentrator. The emphasis is given to the utilization of nanofluids as working fluids because a lot of research has been focused on them in the last years. Moreover, the use of internal fins and inserts in the flow, the use of modified absorbers, as well as various optical design optimizations are included in this review. The final conclusions of this work clearly indicate the most effective enhancement methods in the concentrating solar collectors, as well as the future fields that have to be investigated.

Keywords

Solar energy Nanofluids Concentrating collectors Parabolic trough collector Efficiency enhancement 

List of Symbols

A1

Coefficient of Eq. 5 (Pa s)

A2

Coefficient of Eq. 5 (Pa s)

C

Concentration ratio of the collector (–)

ck

Coefficient of Eq. 4 (W m−1 K−1)

cp

Specific heat capacity (J kg−1 K−1)

k

Thermal conductivity (W m−1 K−1)

Greek Symbols

η

Efficiency (–)

μ

Dynamic viscosity (Pa s)

ρ

Density (kg m−3)

φ

Volumetric concentration of nanoparticles (–)

Subscripts and superscripts

bf

Base fluid

ex

Exergy

nf

Nanofluid

np

Nanoparticle

th

Thermal

Abbreviations

CNT

Carbon nanotube

CPC

Compound parabolic concentrator

EG

Ethylene glycol

EXP

Experimental study

LFR

Linear Fresnel reflector

MWCNT

Multi-wall carbon nanotube

ORC

Organic Rankine cycle

PEC

Performance evaluation criterion

PTC

Parabolic trough concentrator

SDC

Solar dish concentrator

SWCNT

Single-wall carbon nanotube

Notes

Acknowledgements

Dr. Evangelos Bellos would like to thank “Bodossaki Foundation” for its financial support.

References

  1. 1.
    Sabiha MA, Saidur R, Mekhilef S, Mahian O. Progress and latest developments of evacuated tube solar collectors. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2015;51:1038–54.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Faizal M, Saidur R, Mekhilef S. Potential of size reduction of flat-plate solar collectors when applying Al2O3 Nanofluid. Adv Mater Res. 2014;832:149–53.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fernández AG, Galleguillos H, Fuentealba E, Pérez FJ. Thermal characterization of HITEC molten salt for energy storage in solar linear concentrated technology. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2017;122:3–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mahian O, Kianifar A, Kalogirou SA, Pop I, Wongwises S. A review of the applications of nanofluids in solar energy. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2013;57(2):582–94.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bellos E, Tzivanidis C, Symeou C, Antonopoulos KA. Energetic, exergetic and financial evaluation of a solar driven absorption chiller: a dynamic approach. Energy Convers Manag. 2017;137:34–48.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Choi SU, Eastman J. Enhancing thermal conductivity of fluids with nanoparticles. Lemont: Argonne National Lab; 1995.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Said Z, Sabiha MA, Saidur R, Hepbasli A, Rahim NA, Mekhilef S, Ward TA. Performance enhancement of a Flat Plate Solar collector using Titanium dioxide nanofluid and Polyethylene Glycol dispersant. J Clean Prod. 2015;92:343–53.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rashidi S, Mahian O, Languri EM. Applications of nanofluids in condensing and evaporating systems. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-017-6773-7.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Estellé P, Halelfadl S, Maré T. Thermophysical properties and heat transfer performance of carbon nanotubes water-based nanofluids. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2017;127(3):2075–81.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Akilu S, Sharma KV, Baheta AT, Mamat R. A review of thermophysical properties of water based composite nanofluids. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2016;66:654–78.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khanafer K, Vafai K. A critical synthesis of thermophysical characteristics of nanofluids. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2011;54(19):4410–28.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mahian O, Kianifar A, Heris SZ, Wongwises S. First and second laws analysis of a minichannel-based solar collector using boehmite alumina nanofluids: effects of nanoparticle shape and tube materials. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2014;78:1166–76.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Winston R. Principles of cylindrical concentrators for solar energy. Sol Energy. 1975;17:255–8.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rabl A. Comparison of solar concentrators. Sol Energy. 1976;11:93–111.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang H, Chen H, Han Y, Liu H, Li M. Experimental and simulation studies on a novel compound parabolic concentrator. Renew Energy. 2017;113:784–94.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bellos E, Korres D, Tzivanidis C, Antonopoulos KA. Design, simulation and optimization of a compound parabolic collector. Sustain Energy Technol Assess. 2016;16:53–63.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Momeni F, Ni J. Nature-inspired smart solar concentrators by 4D printing. Renewable Energy. 2018;122:35–44.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Widyolar B, Jiang L, Winston R. Thermodynamics and the segmented compound parabolic concentrator. J Photon Energy. 2017;7(2):028002.  https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JPE.7.028002.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tang F, Li G, Tang R. Design and optical performance of CPC based compound plane concentrators. Renew Energy. 2016;95:140–51.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Korres D, Tzivanidis C. A new mini-CPC with a U-type evacuated tube under thermal and optical investigation. Renew Energy. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.06.054.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jiang L, Widyolar B, Winston R. Characterization of novel mid-temperature CPC solar thermal collectors. Energy Procedia. 2015;70:65–70.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Abdullahi B, Al-dadaha RK, Mouhmud S. Optical performance of double receiver compound parabolic concentrator. Energy Procedia. 2014;61:2625–8.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Souliotis M, Papaefthimiou S, Caouris YG, Zacharopoulos A, Quinlan P, Smyth M. Integrated collector storage solar water heater under partial vacuum. Energy. 2017;139:991–1002.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    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(2):379–87.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Liu ZH, Hu R-L, Lu L, Zhao F, Xiao H-S. Thermal performance of an open thermosyphon using nanofluid for evacuated tubular high temperature air solar collector. Energy Convers Manag. 2013;73:135–43.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ghadirijafarbeigloo Sh, Zamzamian AH, Yaghoubi M. 3-D numerical simulation of heat transfer and turbulent flow in a receiver tube of solar parabolic trough concentrator with louvered twisted-tape inserts. Energy Procedia. 2014;49:373–80.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jaramillo OA, Borunda M, Velazquez-Lucho KM, Robles M. Parabolic trough solar collector for low enthalpy processes: an analysis of the efficiency enhancement by using twisted tape inserts. Renew Energy. 2016;93:125–41.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mwesigye A, Bello-Ochende T, Meyer JP. Heat transfer and entropy generation in a parabolic trough receiver with wall-detached twisted tape inserts. Int J Therm Sci. 2016;99:238–57.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    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.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.10.010.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chang C, Xu C, Wu ZY, Li X, Zhang QQ, Wang ZF. Heat transfer enhancement and performance of solar thermal absorber tubes with circumferentially non-uniform heat flux. Energy Procedia. 2015;69:320–7.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rawani A, Sharma SP, Singh KDP. Enhancement in performance of parabolic trough collector with serrated twisted-tape inserts. Int J Thermodyn. 2017;20(2):111–9.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Diwan K, Sony MS. Heat transfer enhancement in absorber tube of parabolic trough concentrators using wire-coils inserts. Univ J Mech Eng. 2015;3(3):107–12.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Şahin HM, Baysal E, Dal Rıza A, Şahin Necmettin. Investigation of heat transfer enhancement in a new type heat exchanger using solar parabolic trough systems. Int J Hydrog Energy. 2015;40(44):15254–66.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Song X, Dong G, Gao F, Diao X, Zheng L, Zhou F. A numerical study of parabolic trough receiver with nonuniform heat flux and helical screw-tape inserts. Energy. 2014;77:771–82.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Liu Y, Chen Q, Hu K, Hao J-H. Flow field optimization for the solar parabolic trough receivers in direct steam generation systems by the variational principle. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2016;102:1073–81.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chang C, Peng X, Nie B, Leng G, Li C, Hao Y, She X. Heat transfer enhancement of a molten salt parabolic trough solar receiver with concentric and eccentric pipe inserts. Energy Procedia. 2017;142:624–9.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jamal-Abad MT, Saedodin S, Aminy M. Experimental investigation on a solar parabolic trough collector for absorber tube filled with porous media. Renew Energy. 2017;107:156–63.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wang P, Liu DY, Xu C. Numerical study of heat transfer enhancement in the receiver tube of direct steam generation with parabolic trough by inserting metal foams. Appl Energy. 2013;102:449–60.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mwesigye A, Bello-Ochende T, Meyer JP. Heat transfer and thermodynamic performance of a parabolic trough receiver with centrally placed perforated plate inserts. Appl Energy. 2014;136:989–1003.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ghasemi SE, Ranjbar AA. Numerical thermal study on effect of porous rings on performance of solar parabolic trough collector. Appl Therm Eng. 2017;118:807–16.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Reddy KS, Ravi Kumar K, Ajay CS. Experimental investigation of porous disc enhanced receiver for solar parabolic trough collector. Renew Energy. 2015;77:308–19.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Cheng ZD, He YL, Cui FQ. Numerical study of heat transfer enhancement by unilateral longitudinal vortex generators inside parabolic trough solar receivers. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2012;55:5631–41.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Reddy KS, Ravi Kumar K, Satyanarayana GV. Numerical investigation of energy-efficient receiver for solar parabolic trough concentrator. Heat Transf Eng. 2008;29(11):961–72.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Xiangtao G, Fuqiang W, Haiyan W, Jianyu T, Qingzhi L, Huaizhi H. Heat transfer enhancement analysis of tube receiver for parabolic trough solar collector with pin fin arrays inserting. Sol Energy. 2017;144:185–202.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bellos E, Tzivanidis C, Tsimpoukis D. Thermal enhancement of parabolic trough collector with internally finned absorbers. Sol Energy. 2017;157:514–31.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bellos E, Tzivanidis C, Tsimpoukis D. Multi-criteria evaluation of parabolic trough collector with internally finned absorbers. Appl Energy. 2017;205:540–61.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Muñoz J, Abánades A. Analysis of internal helically finned tubes for parabolic trough design by CFD tools. Appl Energy. 2011;88:4139–49.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Fuqiang W, Zhexiang T, Xiangtao G, Jianyu T, Huaizhi H, Bingxi L. Heat transfer performance enhancement and thermal strain restrain of tube receiver for parabolic trough solar collector by using asymmetric outward convex corrugated tube. Energy. 2016;114:275–92.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Huang Z, Li Z-Y, Yu G-L, Tao W-Q. Numerical investigations on fully-developed mixed turbulent convection in dimpled parabolic trough receiver tubes. Appl Therm Eng. 2017;114:1287–99.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    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;94:213–22.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bellos E, Tzivanidis C. Assessment of the thermal enhancement methods in parabolic trough collectors. Int J Energy Environ Eng. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s4009.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Chaudhari KS, Walke PV, Wankhede US, Shelke RS. An experimental investigation of a nanofluid (Al2O3 + H2O) based parabolic trough solar collectors. Br J Appl Sci Technol. 2015;9(6):551–7.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Coccia G, Di Nicola G, Colla L, Fedele L, Scattolini M. Adoption of nanofluids in low-enthalpy parabolic trough solar collectors: numerical simulation of the yearly yield. Energy Convers Manag. 2016;118:306–19.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    de los Rios MSB, Rivera-Solorio CI, García-Cuéllar AJ. Thermal performance of a parabolic trough linear collector using Al2O3/H2O nanofluids. Renew Energy. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.01.094.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rehan MA, Ali M, Sheikh NA, Khalil MS, Chaudhary GQ, Rashid T, Shehryar M. Experimental performance analysis of low concentration ratio solar parabolic trough collectors with nanofluids in winter conditions. Renew Energy. 2018;118:742–51.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Subramani J, Nagarajan PK, Wongwises S, El-Agouz SA, Sathyamurthya R. Experimental study on the thermal performance and heat transfer characteristics of solar parabolic trough collector using Al2O3 nanofluids. Environ Prog Sustain Energy. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.12767.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Subramani J, Nagarajan PK, Mahian O, Sathyamurthy R. Efficiency and heat transfer improvements in a parabolic trough solar collector using TiO2 nanofluids under turbulent flow regime. Renew Energy. 2018;119:19–31.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kasaeian A, Daviran S, Danesh Azarian R, Rashidi A. Performance evaluation and nanofluid using capability study of a solar parabolic trough collector. Energy Convers Manag. 2015;89:368–75.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Allouhi A, Amine MB, Saidur R, Kousksou T, Jamil A. Energy and exergy analyses of a parabolic trough collector operated with nanofluids for medium and high temperature applications. Energy Convers Manag. 2018;155:201–17.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Basbous N, Taqi M, Belouaggadia N. Numerical study of a study of a parabolic trough collector using a nanofluid. Asian J Curr Eng Math. 2015;3:40–4.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Basbous N, Taqi M, Janan MA. Thermal performances analysis of a parabolic trough solar collector using different nanofluids. Renew Sust Energy Conf (IRSEC). 2016.  https://doi.org/10.1109/IRSEC.2016.7984006.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Bellos E, Tzivanidis C. Parametric investigation of nanofluids utilization in parabolic trough collectors. Therm Sci Eng Prog. 2017;2:71–9.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Bellos E, Tzivanidis C. Thermal analysis of parabolic trough collector operating with mono and hybrid nanofluids. Sustain Energy Technol Assess. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2017.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Ferraro V, Settino J, Cucumo MA, Kaliakatsos D. Parabolic trough system operating with nanofluids: comparison with the conventional working fluids and influence on the system performance. Energy Procedia. 2016;101:782–9.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Marefati M, Mehrpooya M, Shafii MB. Optical and thermal analysis of a parabolic trough solar collector for production of thermal energy in different climates in Iran with comparison between the conventional nanofluids. J Clean Prod. 2018;175:294–313.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Bellos E, Tzivanidis C, Tsimpoukis D. Thermal, hydraulic and exergetic evaluation of a parabolic trough collector operating with thermal oil and molten salt based nanofluids. Energy Convers Manag. 2018;156:388–402.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Ghasemi SE, Ranjbar AA. Thermal performance analysis of solar parabolic trough collector using nanofluid as working fluid: a CFD modelling study. J Mol Liq. 2016;222:159–66.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Ghasemi SE, Ranjbar AA. Effect of using nanofluids on efficiency of parabolic trough collectors in solar thermal electric power plants. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2017;42(34):21626–34.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Khakrah H, Shamloo A, Hannani SK. Determination of parabolic trough solar collector efficiency using nanofluid: a comprehensive numerical study. ASME J Sol Energy Eng. 2017;139(5):5100–1.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Minea AA, El-Maghlany WM. Influence of hybrid nanofluids on the performance of parabolic trough collectors in solar thermal systems: recent findings and numerical comparison. Renew Energy. 2018;120:350–64.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Mwesigye A, Huan Z, Meyer JP. Thermodynamic optimisation of the performance of a parabolic trough receiver using synthetic oil–Al2O3 nanofluid. Appl Energy. 2015;156:398–412.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    A. Mwesigye, Z. Huan, J.P. Meyer, Thermal performance of a receiver tube for a high concentration ratio parabolic trough system and potential for improved performance with Syltherm 800-CuO nanofluid. In Proceedings of the ASME 2015 international mechanical engineering congress and exposition IMECE2015 November 13–19, 2015, Houston, Texas.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Mwesigye A, Huan Z. Thermodynamic analysis and optimization of fully developed turbulent forced convection in a circular tube with water–Al2O3 nanofluid. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2015;89:694–706.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Mwesigye A, Huan Z, Meyer JP. Thermal performance and entropy generation analysis of a high concentration ratio parabolic trough solar collector with CuTherminol®VP-1 nanofluid. Energy Convers Manag. 2016;120:449–65.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Mwesigye A, Meyer JP. Optimal thermal and thermodynamic performance of a solar parabolic trough receiver with different nanofluids and at different concentration ratios. Appl Energy. 2017;193:393–413.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Mwesigye A, Yılmaz DH, Meyer JP. Numerical analysis of the thermal and thermodynamic performance of a parabolic trough solar collector using SWCNTs-Therminol®VP-1 nanofluid. Renew Energy. 2018;119:844–62.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Sokhansefat T, Kasaeian AB, Kowsary F. Heat transfer enhancement in parabolic trough collector tube using Al2O3/synthetic oil nanofluid. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2014;33:636–44.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Wang Y, Xu J, Liu Q, Chen Y, Liu H. Performance analysis of a parabolic trough solar collector using Al2O3/synthetic oil nanofluid. Appl Therm Eng. 2016;107:469–78.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Zadeh PM, Sokhansefat T, Kasaeian AB, Kowsary F, Akbarzadeh A. Hybrid optimization algorithm for thermal analysis in a solar parabolic trough collector based on nanofluid. Energy. 2015;82:857–64.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Benabderrahmane A, Aminallah M, Laouedj S, Benazza A, Solano JP. Heat transfer enhancement in a parabolic trough solar receiver using longitudinal fins and nanofluids. J Therm Sci. 2016;25:410–7.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Benabderrahmane A, Benazza A, Aminallah M, Laouedj S. Heat transfer behavior in a parabolic trough solar collector tube with compound technique. Int J Sci Res Eng Technol. 2016;5(11):568–75.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Bilal FR, Arunachala UC, Sandeep HM. Experimental validation of energy parameters in parabolic trough collector with plain absorber and analysis of heat transfer enhancement techniques. J Phys: Conf Ser. 2018;953:012030.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Hatami M, Geng J, Jing D. Enhanced efficiency in concentrated parabolic solar collector (CPSC) with a porous absorber tube filled with metal nanoparticle suspension. Green Energy Environ. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gee.2017.12.002.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Kaloudis E, Papanicolaou E, Belessiotis V. Numerical simulations of a parabolic trough solar collector with nanofluid using a two-phase model. Renew Energy. 2016;97:218–29.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Montes MJ, Abbas R, Muñoz M, Muñoz-Antón J, Martínez-Val JM. Advances in the linear Fresnel single-tube receivers: hybrid loops with non-evacuated and evacuated receivers. Energy Convers Manag. 2017;49:318–33.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Montes MJ, Barbero R, Abbas R, Rovira A. Performance model and thermal comparison of different alternatives for the Fresnel single-tube receiver. Appl Therm Eng. 2016;104:162–75.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Moghimi MA, Craig KJ, Meyer JP. Optimization of a trapezoidal cavity absorber for the linear Fresnel reflector. Sol Energy. 2015;119:343–61.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Mathioulakis E, Papanicolaou E, Belessiotis V. Optical performance and instantaneous efficiency calculation of linear Fresnel solar collectors. Int J Energy Res. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1002/er.3925.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Zhu J, Huang H. Design and thermal performances of semi-parabolic linear fresnel reflector solar concentration collector. Energy Convers Manag. 2014;77:733–7.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Rungasamy AE, Craig KJ, Meyer JP. 3-D CFD modeling of a slanted receiver in a compact linear Fresnel plant with etendue-matched mirror field. Energy Procedia. 2015;69:188–97.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Benyakhlef S, Al Mers A, Merroun O, Bouatem A, Boutammachte N, El Alj S, Ajdad H, Erregueragui Z, Zemmouri E. Impact of heliostat curvature on optical performance of Linear Fresnel solar concentrators. Renew Energy. 2016;89:463–74.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Boito P, Grena R. Optimization of the geometry of Fresnel linear collectors. Sol Energy. 2016;135:479–86.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Huang F, Li L, Huang W. Optical performance of an azimuth tracking linear Fresnel solar concentrator. Sol Energy. 2014;108:1–12.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Zhu Y, Shi J, Li Y, Wang L, Huang Q, Xu G. Design and thermal performances of a scalable linear Fresnel reflector solar system. Energy Convers Manag. 2017;146:174–81.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Balaji S, Reddy KS, Sundararajan T. Optical modelling and performance analysis of a solar LFR receiver system with parabolic and involute secondary reflectors. Appl Energy. 2016;179:1138–51.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Bellos E, Tzivanidis C, Papadopoulos A. Optical and thermal analysis of a linear Fresnel reflector operating with thermal oil, molten salt and liquid sodium. Appl Therm Eng. 2018;133:70–80.Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Grena R, Tarquini P. Solar linear Fresnel collector using molten nitrates as heat transfer fluid. Energy. 2011;36(2):1048–56.Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Canavarro D, Chaves J, Collares-Pereira M. New dual asymmetric CEC linear Fresnel concentrator for evacuated tubular receivers. AIP Conf Proc. 2017;1850:040001.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Canavarro D, Chaves J, Collares-Pereira M. A novel Compound Elliptical-type Concentrator for parabolic primaries with tubular receiver. Sol Energy. 2016;134:383–91.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Lin M, Sumathy K, Dai YJ, Wang RZ, Chen Y. Experimental and theoretical analysis on a linear Fresnel reflector solar collector prototype with V-shaped cavity receiver. Appl Therm Eng. 2013;51(1–2):963–72.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Hack M, Zhu G, Wendelin T. Evaluation and comparison of an adaptive method technique for improved performance of linear Fresnel secondary designs. Appl Energy. 2017;208:1441–51.Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Moghimi MA, Craig KJ, Meyer JP. Simulation-based optimisation of a linear Fresnel collector mirror field and receiver for optical, thermal and economic performance. Sol Energy. 2017;153:655–78.Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Prasad GSC, Reddy KS, Sundararajan T. Optimization of solar linear Fresnel reflector system with secondary concentrator for uniform flux distribution over absorber tube. Sol Energy. 2017;150:1–12.Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Qiu Y, Li M-J, Wang K, Liu Z-B, Xue X-D. Aiming strategy optimization for uniform flux distribution in the receiver of a linear Fresnel solar reflector using a multi-objective genetic algorithm. Appl Energy. 2017;205:1394–407.Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Bellos E, Mathioulakis E, Tzivanidis C, Belessiotis V, Antonopoulos KA. Experimental and numerical investigation of a linear Fresnel solar collector with flat plate receiver. Energy Convers Manag. 2016;130:44–59.Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Pauletta S. A solar Fresnel collector based on an evacuated flat receiver. Energy Procedia. 2016;101:480–7.Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Bellos E, Tzivanidis C. Multi-criteria evaluation of a nanofluid-based linear Fresnel solar collector. Sol Energy. 2018;163:200–14.Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Bellos E, Tzivanidis C. Thermal efficiency enhancement of nanofluid-based parabolic trough collectors. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-018-7056-7.Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Coventry J, Andraka C. Dish systems for CSP. Sol Energy. 2017;152:140–70.Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Chandrashekara M, Yadav A. An experimental study of the effect of exfoliated graphite solar coating with a sensible heat storage and Scheffler dish for desalination. Appl Therm Eng. 2017;123:111–22.Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Wang J, Yang S, Jiang C, Yan Q, Lund PD. A novel 2-stage dish concentrator with improved optical performance for concentrating solar power plants. Renew Energy. 2017;108:92–7.Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Przenzak E, Szubel M, Filipowicz M. The numerical model of the high temperature receiver for concentrated solar radiation. Energy Convers Manag. 2016;125:97–106.Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Schmitz M, Ambrosetti G, Cooper T, Steinfeld A. On-sun optical characterization of a solar dish concentrator based on elliptical vacuum membrane facets. Sol Energy. 2017;153:732–43.Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Yu T, Yuan Q, Lu J, Ding J, Lu Y. Thermochemical storage performances of methane reforming with carbon dioxide in tubular and semi-cavity reactors heated by a solar dish system. Appl Energy. 2017;185(2):1994–2004.Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Cohen S, Grossman G. Development of a solar collector with a stationary spherical reflector/tracking absorber for industrial process heat. Sol Energy. 2016;128:31–40.Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Avargani V, Rahimi A, Tavakoli T. Exergetic optimization and optimum operation of a solar dish collector with a cylindrical receiver. J Energy Eng. 2016;146(4):04015049-1.Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Loni R, Kasaeian AB, Askari Asli-Ardeh E, Ghobadian B. Optimizing the efficiency of a solar receiver with tubular cylindrical cavity for a solar-powered organic Rankine cycle. Energy. 2016;112:1259–72.Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Azzouzi D, Boumeddane B, Abene A. Experimental and analytical thermal analysis of cylindrical cavity receiver for solar dish. Renew Energy. 2017;106:111–21.Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Zou C, Zhang Y, Falcoz Q, Neveu P, Zhang C, Shu W, Huang S. Design and optimization of a high-temperature cavity receiver for a solar energy cascade utilization system. Renew Energy. 2017;103:478–89.Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Reddy KS, Vikram TS, Veershetty G. Combined heat loss analysis of solar parabolic dish—modified cavity receiver for superheated steam generation. Sol Energy. 2015;121:78–93.Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Tan Y, Zhao L, Bao J, Liu Q. Experimental investigation on heat loss of semi-spherical cavity receiver. Energy Convers Manag. 2014;87:576–83.Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Loni R, Kasaeian AB, Askari Asli-Ardeh E, Ghobadian B, Le Roux WG. Performance study of a solar-assisted organic Rankine cycle using a dish-mounted rectangular-cavity tubular solar receiver. Appl Therm Eng. 2016;108:1298–309.Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Giovannelli A, Bashir MA. Development of a solar cavity receiver with a short-term storage system. Energy Procedia. 2017;136:258–63.Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Pavlovic S, Bellos E, Le Roux WG, Stefanovic V, Tzivanidis C. Experimental investigation and parametric analysis of a solar thermal dish collector with spiral absorber. Appl Therm Eng. 2017;121:126–35.Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Pavlovic S, Daabo AM, Bellos E, Stefanovic V, Mahmoud S, Al-Dadah RK. Experimental and numerical investigation on the optical and thermal performance of solar parabolic dish and corrugated spiral cavity receiver. J Clean Prod. 2017;150:75–92.Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Daabo AM, Mahmoud S, Al-Dadah RK. The effect of receiver geometry on the optical performance of a small-scale solar cavity receiver for parabolic dish applications. Energy. 2016;114:513–25.Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Loni R, Askari Asli-ardeh E, Ghobadian B, Kasaeian AB, Gorjian Sh. Thermodynamic analysis of a solar dish receiver using different nanofluids. Energy. 2017;133:749–60.Google Scholar
  128. 128.
    Pakhare JN, Pandey H, Selvam M, Jawahar CP. Experimental performance evaluation of a parabolic solar dish collector with nanofluid. book: concentrated solar thermal energy technologies 2018. Berlin: Springer; 2018. p. 115–23.Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    Pavlovic S, Bellos E, Loni R. Exergetic investigation of a solar dish collector with smooth and corrugated spiral absorber operating with various nanofluids. J Clean Prod. 2018;174:1147–60.Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Rajendran DR, Sundaram EG, Jawahar P. Experimental studies on the effect of enhanced thermal conductivity of SiC + water nanofluid in the performance of small scale solar parabolic dish receiver. Int J Nanosci. 2018;17:1760025.Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Toghyani S, Baniasadi E, Afshari E. Thermodynamic analysis and optimization of an integrated Rankine power cycle and nano-fluid based parabolic trough solar collector. Energy Convers Manag. 2016;121:93–104.Google Scholar
  132. 132.
    Alashkar A, Gadalla M. Thermo-economic analysis of an integrated solar power generation system using nanofluids. Appl Energy. 2017;191:469–91.Google Scholar
  133. 133.
    A. Alashkar, M. Gadalla, Performance analysis of an integrated solar-based power generation plant using nanofluids, Int J Energy Res. 2018;1–26.Google Scholar
  134. 134.
    Abid M, Ratlamwala TAH, Atikol U. Performance assessment of parabolic dish and parabolic trough solar thermal power plant using nanofluids and molten salts Int. J Energy Res. 2016;40:550–63.Google Scholar
  135. 135.
    Bellos E, Tzivanidis C. Parametric analysis and optimization of an Organic Rankine Cycle with nanofluid based solar parabolic trough collectors. Renewable Energy. 2017;114B:1376–93.Google Scholar
  136. 136.
    Abid M, Ratlamwala TAH, Atikol U. Solar assisted multi-generation system using nanofluids: a comparative analysis. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2017;42(33):21429–42.Google Scholar
  137. 137.
    Bellos E, Tzivanidis C. Optimization of a solar-driven trigeneration system with nanofluid-based parabolic trough collectors. Energies. 2017;10:848.Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Abu-Hamdeh NH, Almitani KH. Solar liquid desiccant regeneration and nanofluids in evaporative cooling for greenhouse food production in Saudi Arabia. Sol Energy. 2016;134:202–10.Google Scholar
  139. 139.
    Rahman MM, Mojumder S, Saha S, Mekhilef S, Saidur R. Effect of solid volume fraction and tilt angle in a quarter circular solar thermal collectors filled with CNT–water nanofluid. Int Commun Heat Mass Transfer. 2014;57:79–90.Google Scholar
  140. 140.
    Sabiha MA, Saidur R, Hassani S, Said Z, Mekhilef S. Energy performance of an evacuated tube solar collector using single walled carbon nanotubes nanofluids. Energy Convers Manag. 2015;105:1377–88.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Thermal Department, School of Mechanical EngineeringNational Technical University of AthensAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations