Annual performance analysis of adding different nanofluids in stepped solar still


The use of MgO and TiO2 nanofluids at different concentrations was investigated annually to evaluate the distillate output of stepped solar stills. Nanofluids concentrations ranged from 0.1 to 0.2% in the present research work. Results confirm that the stepped solar still distillate output is increased by 45.8%, 33.33%, 20.4% and 4.1% with use of MgO nanofluids (0.2% and 0.1% concentrations) and TiO2 nanofluids (0.2% and 0.1% concentrations). The reason for higher distillate output of MgO nanofluid over TiO2 in stepped solar still is lower specific heat capacity and higher thermal conductivity. Finally, the energy payback time was also calculated, and it was still only 3 months for stepped solar stills with the use of 0.2% nanofluid concentration.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8


  1. 1.

    Kabeel AE, Sathyamurthy R, Sharshir SW, Muthumanokar A, Panchal H, Prakash N, Prasad C, Nandakumar S, El Kady MS. Effect of water depth on a novel absorber plate of pyramid solar still coated with TiO2 nano black paint. J Clean Prod. 2019;213:185–91.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Awasthi A, Kumari K, Panchal H, Sathyamurthy R. Passive solar still: recent advancements in design and related performance. Environ Technol Rev. 2018;7(1):235–61.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Panchal H. Experimental investigation of varying parameters affecting on double slope single basin solar still. Int J Adv Eng Sci. 2011;2(1):17–21.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Panchal H. Life cycle cost analysis of a double-effect solar still. Int J Ambient Energy. 2016;61:86–96.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Panchal H. Performance investigation on variations of glass cover thickness on solar still: experimental and theoretical analysis. Technol Econ Smart Grids Sustain Energy. 2016;1(4):1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Panchal H. Experimental analysis of diesel engine exhaust gas coupled with water desalination for improved potable water production. Int J Ambient Energy. 2018;38(6):567–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Panchal H, Mevada D, Sathyamurthy R. The requirement of various methods to improve distillate output of solar still: a review. Int J Ambient Energy. 2018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Panchal H, Awasthi A. Theoretical modeling and experimental analysis of solar still integrated with evacuated tubes. Heat Mass Transf. 2017;53(6):1943–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Malik M, Tiwari G, Sodha M, Kumar A. Solar energy conversion and photo energy systems. Sol Distill. 1982;2:1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Panchal H, Shah PK. Effect of varying glass cover thickness on performance of solar still in winter climatic conditions. Int J Renew Energy Res. 2011;1:212–23.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Panchal H, Sanjay P. An extensive review on different design and climatic parameters to increase distillate output of solar still. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2017;69:750–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Panchal H, Shah PK. Investigation on solar stills having floating plates. Int J Energy Environ Eng. 2012;3(1):1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Panchal H. Experimental analysis of diesel engine exhaust gas coupled with water desalination for improved potable water production. Int J Ambient Energy. 2018;38(6):567–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Shukla A, Kant K, Sharma A. Solar still with latent heat energystorage: a review. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol. 2017;41:34–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Omara ZM, Kabeel AE, Abdullah AS. A review of solar still performance with reflectors. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2017;68:638–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Celata GP, Annibale FD, Mariani A. Nanofluid flow effects on metal surfaces. Energia Ambiente e Innovazione. 2011;4–5:94–8.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Hirt CW, Nichols BD. Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics of free boundaries. J Comput Phys. 1981;39:201–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Yang Y, Zhang ZG, Grulke EA, Anderson WB, Wu G. Heat transfer properties of nanoparticle-in-fluid dispersions (nanofluids) in laminar flow. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2005;48:1107–16.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Elango T, Kannan A, Murugavel KK. Performance study on single basin single slope solar still with different water nanofluids. Desalination. 2015;360:45–51.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Sahota L, Tiwari GN. Effect of Al2O3 nanoparticles on the performance of passive double slope solar still. Sol Energy. 2016;130:260–72.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Sahota L, Tiwari GN. Effect of nanofluids on the performance of passive double slope solar still: a comparative study using characteristic curve. Desalination. 2016;388:9–21.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Sahota L, Tiwari GN. Effect of Al2O3 and TiO2-water based nanofluids on heat transfer coefficients of passive double slope solar still. Int J Energy Environ Econ. 2016;24:1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Sahota L, Tiwari GN. Exergoeconomic and enviroeconomic analyses of hybrid double slope solar still loaded with nanofluids. Energy Convers Manag. 2017;148:413–30.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Chen W, Zou C, Li X, Li L. Experimental investigation of SiC nanofluids for solar distillation system: stability, optical properties and thermal conductivity with saline water-based fluid. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2017;107:264–70.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    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;57:582–94.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Kabeel AE, Omara ZM, Essa FA. Improving the performance of solar still by using nanofluids and providing vacuum. Energy Convers Manag. 2014;86:268–74.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Sharshir SW, Peng G, Wu L, Yang N, Essa FA, Mohamed SIT, Kabeel AE, Elsheikh AH. Enhancing the solar still performance using nanofluids and glass cover cooling: experimental study. Appl Therm Eng. 2017;113:684–93.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Sahota L, Shyam, Tiwari GN. Energy matrices, enviroeconomic and exergoeconomic analysis of passive double slope solar still with water based nanofluids. Desalination. 2017;409:66–79.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Rashidi S, Bovand M, Rahbar N, Esfahani JA. Steps optimization and productivity enhancement in a nanofluid cascade solar still. Renew Energy. 2018;118:536–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Gupta B, Kumar A, Baredar P. Experimental investigation on modified solar still using nanoparticles and water sprinkler attachment. Front Mater. 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Panchal H, Shah P. Performance analysis of solar still having different plates. Int J Energy Sci. 2016;2(1):1–6.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Hitesh Panchal or Ravishankar Sathyamurthy.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Panchal, H., Sathyamurthy, R., Kabeel, A.E. et al. Annual performance analysis of adding different nanofluids in stepped solar still. J Therm Anal Calorim 138, 3175–3182 (2019).

Download citation


  • Nanofluids
  • Stepped solar still
  • Distillate output
  • Concentration
  • Distillate output