Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Exergy and energy analysis of a novel type solar collector under steady
state condition: Experimental and CFD analysis
Dawit Gudeta Gunjo, Pinakeswar Mahanta, Puthuveettil Sreedharan Robi*
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Guwahati, Assam, 781039, India

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

Article history: Computational fluid dynamics model for a flat plate solar collector was developed to predict the per-
Received 25 January 2017 formance of a single bent riser tube attached to an absorber plate. The model was validated by carrying
Received in revised form out experiments. The exergy and energy efficiencies, overall heat loss coefficient, outlet water and
12 July 2017
absorber plate temperature of the solar collector were investigated. Maximum thermal efficiency of 71%
Accepted 14 July 2017
was obtained with 60
C outlet water temperature for the investigated solar collector. Comparison of
Available online 24 July 2017
numerical values with the experimental results indicated minimal deviation error. The low values of
deviation error establish the confidence in the predictive capabilities of the developed model. Effects of
Keywords:
Exergy efficiency
various operating parameters such as mass flow rate, working fluids, ambient temperature, inlet water
Energy efficiency temperature, collector heat loss factor and solar insolation on exergy and energy efficiencies were also
Overall heat loss coefficient investigated. Parametric study revealed increase in exergy efficiency of the collector with increase in
Collector heat loss factor collector heat loss factor, solar insolation and decreases with rise in ambient temperature.
Absorber plate temperature © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
CFD

1. Introduction straight tube SWHS experimentally and numerically based on first

law of thermodynamics. The result revealed good agreement be-
The sharp rise in oil cost and the environmental concern due to tween numerical and experimental values. Zhao et al. [5] carried
fossil fuels, researchers in the area of energy sector across the world out performance analysis SWHS and obtained a maximum tem-
are focusing their attention towards non-conventional energy perature of 72
C at a flow rate of 5.1 l/min. Comparison study of
sources and technologies, viz., solar energy, bio-energy, wind en- SWHS with and without tile-shaped cover by He et al. [6] revealed
ergy, geothermal energy, and nuclear energy. Among these sources, higher efficiency for the tile-shaped SWHS. Kumar and Rosen [7]
solar energy is widely accepted as a clean, environmental friendly, investigated the thermal performance of a solar water heater
cheap, having higher potential and un-limited source of renewable with corrugated absorber surface. Khalifa [8] conducted parametric
energy compared to other conventional energy sources [1]. Solar and performance studies on locally made FPC and reported effi-
energy can be converted to heat energy using solar collectors. Flat ciency of the collector in the range between 21 and 35%. Dharuman
plate collector (FPC) is the simplest and common type of solar et al. [9] experimentally investigated the performance behavior of a
collector used in Solar Water Heating System (SWHS). Kalogirou [2] solar water heating device under various operating conditions.
discussed environmental benefits of renewable energy and per- Mohsen et al. [10] numerically estimated the long term perfor-
formed economic and environmental life cycle analysis of SWHS. mance of SWH and compared the values with experimental results.
Keyanpour-Rad et al. [3] reported the economic feasibility and life Dagdougui et al. [11] studied the heat transfer behavior in a FPC
time of SWHS for specific applications. The performance of the under different cover configurations. The result revealed that
SWHS can be carried out based on energy analysis and/or exergy increasing the number of covers decreases the overall heat loss
analysis. coefficients and increases the thermal performance of the collector.
Gunjo et al. [4] carried out thermal performance analysis for The above literature indicates that the thermal performance was
carried out based on first law of thermodynamics (energy). The first
law alone does not include all the internal losses from the solar
collector [12]. Analysis by second law of thermodynamics (exergy)
* Corresponding author. is useful to quantify the various losses in the solar collector and will
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (D.G. Gunjo), [email protected]
assist in estimating efficiency of system [13]. Park et al. [14]
(P. Mahanta), [email protected] (P.S. Robi).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.07.072
0960-1481/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
656 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669

reviewed the energy and exergy analysis for various renewable developed to predict the temperature of the absorber plate and
energy systems and stated that performing exergy analysis would outlet water for the bent tube solar collector. Results using the
be beneficial in quantifying various heat losses compared to energy simulation were used for predicting the exergy efficiency, energy
analysis. Okamura et al. [15] optimized the operating parameters of efficiency and over all heat loss factors. The CFD results are then
a solar collector using exergy analysis and validated with experi- validated with the experimental results. The influences of important
mental results. Tyagi et al. [16] evaluated the performance of a solar parameters on the exergy and energy efficiencies for the investigated
collector using exergy analysis. The exergy output is optimized with solar collector were also discussed. The originality of the present
respect to the inlet fluid temperature and determined the collector work lies in the facts that: (i) it deals with fabricating novel bent tube
efficiency. The thermodynamic analysis based on output exergy, solar collector and developing numerical model, (ii) it validates the
entropy generation and exergy efficiency for a solar collector is experimental results with numerically developed model using en-
reviewed in depth by Liu et al. [17]. Kurtbas and Durmus [18] re- ergy analysis (1st law of thermodynamics) and exergy analysis (2nd
ported high exergy efficiency with increase in flow rate and lower law of thermodynamics), (iii) it presents parametric study to identify
heat transfer area for a solar collector. the factors which affect the thermal performance, and (iv) using this
Comparison study by Chow et al. [19] on exergy efficiency of a solar collector for heating feedstock in biogas production for ther-
thermal collector with and without glass cover revealed minimal mophilic microbes (T > 50
C) could be regarded as a good solution to
error between experimental and numerical results. Torres-Reyes improve the anaerobic digestion process. In addition, installing this
et al. [20] performed design optimization techniques to maximize collector in the house and building can at least reduce the cost of
the outlet water temperature based on exergy analysis. Bejan [21] domestic hot water needs.
employed entropy generation minimization method to optimize
the mass flow rate, collector temperature, and geometry of FPC. 1.1. Bent tube flat plate collector
Xiaowu and Ben [22] carried out theoretical study using exergy
analysis for domestic solar water heater and highlighted various The bent tube FPC developed for the present study consists of
losses in the heater using exergy analysis. Bellos et al. [23] carried brazed bent riser and header pipes, plate material, glass cover, and
out theoretical investigation based on exergy and energy analysis insulated casing. The brazed bent riser and header pipe assembly is
for parabolic trough solar collector using gas as the working fluid. illustrated in Fig. 1.
Testing of various parameters under different climatic condi- It consists of two headers and 10 vertical tube risers. The risers
tions using experiments is time consuming and costly. The use of were connected to the headers by drilling and brazing. The absorber
computational tools prior to experiment saves a number of ex- plate material consists of copper sheet attached with riser tubes. The
periments and time. surface of the absorber was coated with special coating to maximize
Lecoeuche and Lalot [24] used neural network technique to the absorbance of the radiant energy. The heat loss due to convec-
estimate the efficiency of FPC. Shariah and Shalabi [25] applied tion, conduction and re-radiation was reduced by providing an
transient simulation program to optimize design parameters for acrylic glass cover at the top of the collector. The bottom and side of
maximizing the performance of FPC. Analysis by Selmi et al. [26] for the collector was insulated with glass wool and the cold water
a single glazed FPC for solving the equations of fluid flow, heat storage tank was insulated with polyethylene material. The cold
transfer and radiation reveals that the CFD results are in agreement water was circulated through the pipes using a 0.25 hp pump.
with the experimental data. Gertzos et al. [27] developed a 3-
dimensional CFD model to predict water temperature of FPC and 1.2. Experimental setup
found good agreement with the experimental data. Gadi [28]
designed a solar water heater and performed both experimental Fig. 2 illustrates the experimental setup of the closed loop solar
and numerical study using CFD. The result indicated good agree- water heating systems used for the present study.
ment. Al-Ansary and Zeitoun [29] carried out CFD simulation to find In this system, the cold water is fed to the collector from a cold
the conduction and convection heat loss from the parabolic trough water reservoir. As the cold water circulates through the collector, it
collector. Fac~ao [30] conducted both experimental and CFD analysis absorbs heat energy and as a result, its temperature increases. Hot
to optimize the flow rates in riser and header arrangement FPC. water flows from the collector to the Latent Heat Storage (LHS) by
The motive behind the present study is to fabricate bent tube forced circulation. A thermostat is fitted on hot water storage tank,
FPC and utilizing it in a biogas production unit as heat source. The which permits the water to flow from the collector to the storage
breakdown of organic wastes in biogas digester through anaerobic tank if temperature attains the required value. A solenoid valve is
digestion with the help of microbes occurs in a wide range of inserted in the connection between the LHS and the hot water
temperature. These microbes are: (i) phsycrophic microbes in storage which is activated by the thermostat. When the water
which the required temperature is less than 20
C, (ii) mesophilic temperature reaches the thermostat set value, the solenoid valve is
microbes in which the required temperature range varies from activated and water flows from the collector through the LHS to the
30
C - 45
C, and (iii) thermophilic microbes in which the required storage tank. Similarly, when the temperature of the storage tank is
temperature varies in the range from 50
C - 60
C. As per reported higher/lower than the range, the outlet water from the solar col-
result of [4], since the maximum outlet water temperature ach- lector passes through the shell and tube LHS and the solenoid valve
ieved using straight tube FPC was 50.8
C, utilizing this collector diverts the flow to the reservoir.
will not meet the temperature requirement for the growth of This setup is primarily developed to use the SWHS in biogas
thermophilic microbes. But it could be regarded as an alternative production applications by replacing the storage tank with biogas
solution for the growth of mesophilic microbes. Hence, designing of digester. For the present investigation, the experiments were per-
a flat plate collector with new geometry is necessary to provide the formed without filling the shell and tube heat exchanger with
required temperature range for the growth of thermophilic mi- thermal storage material and without controlling mechanism such
crobes. The developed bent tube FPC is investigated experimentally as using thermostat and solenoid valve in order to check its per-
and numerically using water as working fluid before working on formance before implementing in actual cases.
biomass in the actual model. The solar radiation from the collector surface was measured
In the present work, a 3-dimensional CFD model has been using pyranometer. T-type thermocouples were used to measure
the absorber plate, ambient, glass, outlet and inlet water
 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669 657

Fig. 1. Shows (a) schematic diagram and (b) photograph of the of bent riser and header pipe.

Fig. 2. Photo of the experimental setup.

temperatures. The flow rate of water was measured using a rota-

meter. The entire data during the experiment were measured at S ¼ h0 I (1)
intervals of 10 s using a data acquisition system. The solar collector The optical efficiency (h0 ) of the glass is expressed by:
was placed at local latitude of 26.13
N and longitude 91.73
E. The
experiment was carried out during the period January - February h0 ¼ ta (2)
2016.

2. Theoretical model 2.2. Energy analysis

The energy and exergy equations for steady state flow condi-
The useful heat gain (Q_ u ) as a function of outlet and inlet water
tions were used for the model. The pressure drop inside the col-
temperature is expressed as:
lector was assumed to be negligible. The theoretical analysis
comprises of: optical analysis, energy analysis, and exergy analysis.
Q_ u ¼ mc
_ p ðTo  Ti Þ (3)
The heat gained as a function of plate temperature is expressed
2.1. Optical analysis
by Ref. [31]:

 
It is known that the entire solar energy is not absorbed by the Q_ u ¼ Ap S  U Tp  Ta (4)
solar collector. The radiation flux over the absorber plate surface is
determined by: The heat gained as a function of inlet water temperature is
658 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669

expressed by Ref. [32]:  0 

To  Ta  S=U F UAp
¼ exp (17)
Q_ u ¼ Ap FR ½S  UðTi  Ta Þ (5) Ti  Ta  S=U _ p
mc

The heat removal factor is determined by Ref. [33]: Substituting for To from Eq. (17) in to Eq. (14), the expression for
thermal efficiency can be obtained as:
  0 
_ p
mc F UAp    0  
FR ¼ 1  exp (6) S F UAp
Ap U _ p
mc _ p
mc Ti  Ta  exp 1
U _ p
mc
The total heat loss coefficient (U) of a FPC comprises of three h¼ (18)
Ap I
terms, viz., top heat loss, bottom heat loss and side heat loss. Since,
the value of side loss is very small compared with other two losses,
this term is neglected. The total heat loss coefficient (U) is obtained
by:
2.3. Exergy analysis
U ¼ Ut þ Ub (7)
The heat loss from the top of the absorber plate (Ut ) is deter- For the given control volume, the first law of thermodynamics
mined by Ref. [33]: can be expressed as:
2 3    dE X _ X X
s Tp þ Ta Tp þ Ta ¼ Qk  W_ þ b 
m_ i h be
m_ e h (19)
1 1 i
Ut ¼ 4 þ h ie 5 þ  1 1þf þ0:133εp dt
hw C Tp Ta
εp þ 0:00591hw þ 1
Tp 1þf εg As per the second law of thermodynamics,
(8)
ds X Q_ k X X
¼ þ m_ i si  m_ e se þ S_gen (20)
where, dt Tk
  Neglecting the heat transfer to the surroundings, the work done
f ¼ 1  0:07866 1 þ 0:089hw  0:1166hw εg (9)
by the system (Ẇ) can be expressed as:
!
Xn   X  
0:00005 _ ¼  d ðE  Ta SÞ þ Ta _ b  Ta S
C ¼ 520 1  (10) W 1 Qk þ m_ h
b2 dt
k¼1
Tk i
X  
   m_ hb  Ta S  Ta S_gen (21)
100
e ¼ 0:43 1  (11) e
Tp
The entropy generation Ṡgen in a reversible process is zero. Ac-
Similarly, top heat loss coefficient can be expressed as a function cording to Eq. (21), the ambient condition must be known to
of sky and glass cover temperature and is given by the relationship determine the exergy. The maximum reversible work (Ẇrev) or
[32]: exergy is determined by the expression:
 

hw Tg  Ta þ sεg Tg  Tsky Xn   X  
W_ rev ¼  d ðE  Ta SÞ þ 1
Ta _
Qk þ b  Ta S
m_ h
Ut ¼ (12) dt Tk
Tp  Ta k¼1 i
X  
where,  m_ hb  Ta S (22)
e
Tsky ¼ Ta  6 (13)
Under steady state condition, the exergy balance equation is
The heat loss from the back of the absorber plate (Ub ) is expressed as:
expressed as: X X X
_ _ out ¼ _
Ex in  Ex Ex dest (23)
ki P_
Ub ¼ (14) The total inlet exergy rate ( Ex in) comprises of the exergy of the
db
_ in.f) and the exergy of absorbed heat from the sun
inlet fluid (Ex
The convective heat loss coefficient as a function of wind speed _ in.rad). The exergy of the inlet fluid and the solar radiated exergy
(Ex
(V) is expressed by Ref. [4]:
are obtained by:
hw ¼ 2:8 þ 3V (15)  
_ Ta
Ex rad ¼ IAp 1  (24)
The thermal efficiency (h) of the solar collector is defined as the Ts
ratio of the output useful energy to the absorbed solar energy. It is
  
expressed as: Ti
_
Ex ¼ _
mc p T  Ta  Ta ln (25)
in:f i
Ta
Q_
h¼ u (16) _ out.f) can be determined by:
The exergy of the outlet fluid (Ex
Ap I
  
The relationship between of temperature distribution on the To
_
Ex ¼  _
mc T  T  T ln (26)
surface of the solar collector in the direction of the fluid flow is out:f p o a a
Ta
determined by the expression [31]:
 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669 659

The exergy loss from the FPC is determined from the difference
between the inlet and outlet fluid exergies by the expression:
  
_ _ To
Ex out:f  Exout:f ¼  _
mc p To  Ti  Ta ln (27)
Ta
The absorbed exergy by the FPC absorber plate is determined
by:
 
_ Ta
Ex abs ¼ h0 IAp 1  (28)
Tp
The exergy content of heat transfer rate due to the temperature
of the exergy source and ambient temperature can be expressed by
Ref. [17]:
  Fig. 3. Model geometry of a bent tube with plate.
_ Ta
Ex heat ¼ Q 1  (29) solar collector depends on the flow distribution in the riser tubes.
Ts
CFD and experimental study by Fac~ ao [30] revealed that low Rey-
where, Ts is the sun temperature of the exergy source which is 75% nolds number (laminar flow) would give uniform flow and ho-
of the black body temperature of the sun which is approximately mogenous temperature distribution. The present CFD model was
around 4350 K [34]. The destruction exergy comprises of three developed to predict the outlet and absorber plate temperature for
terms. The first term is caused by the temperature difference be- a single bent riser tube attached at the bottom of an absorber plate.
tween the absorber plate and the solar radiation. This destruction The predicted temperatures were used to determine the exergy
of exergy is determined by subtracting Eq. (28) from Eq. (24) and is efficiency, energy efficiency and top heat loss coefficients of the
expressed as: solar collector based on the correlation mentioned in section 2.
Since 10 riser tubes were used, the flow rate in each riser tube was
X  
_ :s ¼ IAp 1  h þ h Ta  Ta 1/10th of the total flow rate in the header tube.
Ed 0 0 (30)
Tp Ts The simulation of the developed model was based on the
following assumptions:
The second part of exergy destruction is leakage exergy caused
by heat leakage from the absorber plate to ambient conditions. The i) Water is incompressible and continuous,
heat leakage from the absorber plate to the ambient is determined ii) Heat loss from the bottom side of the absorber plate and tube
by: is by convection which depends upon the wind speed, and
  iii) The thermal and physical property of the absorber plate, riser
Qleak ¼ UAp Tp  Ta (31)
tube and water are constant during the flow.
The leakage exergy can be obtained by:
  The continuity equation is obtained by the expression:
  Ta
_
Ed leak ¼ UAp Tp  Ta 1 (32)
Tp vu vv vw
þ þ ¼0 (36)
The third part of exergy losses is caused by the heat transfer
vx vy vz
processes from the absorber plate to the fluid. The exergy trans- The momentum equations in x, y and z directions are given by
ferred from the absorber plate to the working fluid is: the expression:
 
_ Ta " #
Ex p:f ¼ _
mc ðT
p o  Ti Þ 1  (33) vu vu vu vp v2 u v2 u v2 u
Tp ru þ rv þ rw ¼  þ m 2 þ 2 þ 2 (37)
vx vy vz vx vx vy vz
_ during the heat transfer process
The destruction exergy (Ed)
from the plate to the working fluid is determined by:
 
_ p ¼ mc To To  Ti
Ed _ p Ta ln  (34)
Ti Tp
^ of the FPC is the ratio of the increase in
The exergy efficiency (E)
the flow exergy to the total inlet exergy and can be obtained from
Eq. (24) and Eq. (34) by the relationship:
h
i
_ p ðTo  Ti Þ  Ta ln TTo
mc
^¼
E h i i
(35)
Ap I 1  TTas

3. Methodology

The temperature of the outlet water and absorber plate of the Fig. 4. Meshed part of the computational domain.
660 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669

The energy equation for the collector part is expressed by the

relationship:
" #
v2 T v2 T v2 T
þ þ ¼0 (41)
vx2 vy2 vz2

For modeling purpose, absorber plate length 1.65 m, absorber

plate width 1.1 m, tube diameter 0.0125 m and tube thickness
0.007 m were considered for the present investigation which was
similar to the designed and fabricated collector.
The velocity and temperature field for the water flow in the
riser tube and temperature field on the absorber plate was
determined by solving the equations of continuity, momentum
and energy. The grid independency test was done to check the
quality of mesh on the solution. The solutions converged when the
values of residuals in the computational domain fell below
1  106. Further grid refining resulted in an error which was less
than 0.8%. The number of elements for the computational domain
consisting of water, water tube and absorber plate was 1,200,000.
The developed model and magnified meshed part of the model are
shown in Figs. 3 and 4.
A constant heat flux was applied on the top surface of the
absorber plate. The bottom surface was set as convective wall
boundary. The convective heat transfer coefficient of the bottom
and side surface of the collector was obtained by Eq. (15). The
outlet water and absorber plate temperature was computed using
CFD software. The heat transfer due to convection at the faces and
fluid zones were solved by coupling the energy and momentum
equations. The second order upwind was used for discretization
energy and momentum equations and first order upwind for the
pressure.

3.1. Input parameters

Fig. 5. Variation of inlet water temperature, ambient temperature and solar insolation
vs time a) m_ ¼ 0.0083 kg*s1 b) m _ ¼ 0.0167 kg*s1. The input parameters for the computational model are solar
insolation (I), ambient temperature (Ta), inlet water temperature
" # (Ti), and mass flow rate. The steady state simulation carried out in
vv vv vv vp v2 v v2 v v2 v
ru þ rv þ rw ¼  þ m 2 þ 2 þ 2 (38) this model used the measured data at 1-h interval. Fig. 5 illustrates
vx vy vz vy vx vy vz the results of the experiment carried out using bent tube FPC at
flow rates of 0.0083 kg*s1 and 0.016 kg*s1 for time periods from
" # 8:00 h to 16:00 h. The solar insolation (I) on the surface of the
vw vw vw vp v2 w v2 w v2 w
ru þ rv þ rw ¼ þm þ 2 þ 2  rgZ collector showed a parabolic path with peak value attaining during
vx vy vz vz vx2 vy vz the mid-day which subsequently decreased with increase in time.
(39) The solar insolation increased from the morning and reached the
maximum value of 915 W*m2 at 12:00 h for the above mentioned
The energy equation for the fluid part is expressed as: flow rates. The inlet water temperature increased from the morning
" # and reached a peak value at 13:00 h. Similarly, the ambient tem-
vT vT vT v2 T v2 T v2 T peratures increased from 8:00 h and reached the maximum value
rcp u þ rcp v þ rcp w ¼K þ þ (40)
vx vy vz vx2 vy2 vz2 at (a) 13:00 h for the flow rate of 0.0083 kg*s1 and (b) 14:00 h for
flow rate of 0.0167 kg*s1.

Fig. 6. Variation of (a) water temperature along the riser tube and (b) absorber plate temperature at 12:00 h.
 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669 661

4. Result and discussions the inlet water absorbs heat as it moves upward through the riser
tube.
4.1. Model validation Fig. 6(b) shows the variation of temperature at the top surface of
the absorber plate. The temperature variation across the length of
Steady state simulation was carried out to predict the outlet the absorber plate indicates a difference of 38 K between the inlet
water and absorber plate temperature by using inlet water tem- side and outlet side of the plate. Since heat is absorbed by the cold
perature, ambient temperature, solar insolation and flow rate as the fluid flowing through the riser tube which is in contact with the
input parameters. Study was carried out using mass flow rates of absorber plate, there is a variation of around 6 K across the plate
0.0083 kg*s1 and 0.016 kg*s1. The results obtained were used to width.
determine the exergy efficiency, energy efficiency and heat loss
coefficient of the solar collector. Validation of the model was per-
formed by comparing the simulation results with the experimental 4.1.1. Validation of outlet water temperature
values. Plots of simulation and experimental results of outlet water
The variation in the outlet water temperatures: (i) along the temperatures at mass flow rates of 0.0083 kg*s1 and 0.0167 kg*s1
riser tube and (ii) at top of the absorber plate at 12:00 h for mass are shown in Fig. 7. The error between simulation values (Xsim) and
flow rate of 0.0083 kg*s1 obtained from the CFD analysis is shown experimental results (Xexp) is determined by Ref. [4]:
in Fig. 6.  
Xsim:  Xexp: 
The variation of water temperature along the riser pipe Fig. 6(a) Error ð%Þ ¼  100 (42)
indicates higher outlet water temperature at the upper portion of Xsim:
the collector compared to the lower portion. This is expected since
The maximum relative error of 1.1% for the outlet water tem-
perature among the two flow rates indicates good agreement of the
CFD model and experiment.

Fig. 7. Variation of predicted and experimental outlet water temperature vs time for a) Fig. 8. Variation of predicted and experimental plate temperature vs time at a)
m_ ¼ 0.0083 kg*s1 and b) m _ ¼ 0.0167 kg*s1. m_ ¼ 0.0083 kg*s1 and b) m_ ¼ 0.0167 kg*s1.
662 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669

Fig. 10. Variation of predicted and experimental energy efficiency vs time at a)

m_ ¼ 0.0083 kg*s1 and b) m_ ¼ 0.0167 kg*s1.

_ ¼ 0.0083 kg*s1
Fig. 9. Variation of predicted and experimental exergy vs time at a) m
and b) m _ ¼ 0.0167 kg*s1.
predicted outlet water temperature, which was higher than the
experimental values whereas the experimental exergy efficiency
4.1.2. Validation of absorber plate temperature was determined from experimental outlet water temperature. The
Plots of experimental and simulation values of absorber plate maximum relative error obtained between experimental and
temperatures vs time for the two mass flow rates are shown in simulation result was 11%. The exergy obtained in the present study
Fig. 8(a) and (b). was higher compared to the reported result [32] even at smaller
The experimental value of plate temperature was higher than collector area. Hazami et al. [35] reported similar trend of the
the simulation values for both flow rates. Since the simulation was exergy efficiency and energy efficiency curve.
based on the assumption of a perfect contact between the absorber
plate and the tube, high heat transfer occurred between the plate 4.1.4. Validation of energy efficiency
and the tube compared to the actual case. Due to this, the simulated Fig. 10 depicts the variations in the values of experimental and
absorber plate temperatures were lower than that of the experi- simulation energy efficiency vs time for the two mass flow rates.
mental values. The maximum relative error obtained between ex- The maximum relative error obtained between simulation and
periments and simulation results on the surface of the absorber experimental results was 6% for the mass flow rate of 0.0167 kg*s1
plate was 4.8%. and 10% for the mass flow rate of 0.0083 kg*s1.

4.1.3. Validation of exergy efficiency 4.1.5. Validation of heat loss coefficient

Fig. 9 illustrates the variations in experimental and simulated The heat loss coefficient from the collector depends upon the
exergy efficiency vs time for two different mass flow rates. The plate temperature. The CFD predicted plate temperature was used
figure indicates that the simulated values of exergy efficiency were to predict the heat loss coefficient based on Eqs. (7)e(15). The
higher than experimental values for all flow rates. This was due to variations in experimental and simulation values of heat loss co-
the fact that exergy efficiency was determined by taking the CFD efficient vs time for the two mass flow rates are illustrated in Fig. 11.
 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669 663

Further, it was observed that both the inlet and outlet water tem-
peratures increased almost linearly and followed the same trend.
The variation of thermal efficiency vs time is plotted in Fig. 12
(b). The values of the thermal efficiency obtained for a straight
tube flat plate collector reported in Ref. [4] is also superimposed in
the figure for the purpose of comparison. In the present study using
bend tube FPC, the peak solar thermal efficiency of 71% was ach-
ieved at around 10:30 h and the peak outlet water temperature of
60
C was achieved. The maximum solar thermal efficiency for the
straight tube FPC reported in Ref. [4] was 59% at around 10:40 h and
the peak outlet water temperature achieved was 50.8
C. Moreover,
the daily average thermal efficiency in the present study was 54%
whereas it was 47% for the straight tube FPC reported in Ref. [4]. The
solar thermal efficiency was decreased rapidly after 15:00 h. This
was expected since the difference in water temperature
(DT ¼ ToTi) decreased due to the decrease in solar insolation.

4.3. Determination of collector efficiency based on ASHRE standard

The thermal efficiency of the solar heating collector depends

upon the mean temperature (Tm) of water across the collector,
ambient temperature, and solar insolation. The efficiency of the

Fig. 11. Variation of predicted and experimental heat loss coefficient vs time at a)
m_ ¼ 0.0083 kg*s1 and b) m _ ¼ 0.0167 kg*s1.

The maximum relative error obtained between simulation and

experiment was 9%. The simulated heat loss coefficient was smaller
than the experimental values. This was due to the lower simulated
plate temperature compared to the experimental values.

4.2. Measured thermal efficiency of the bent tube solar heating

systems

The measured experimental results of inlet water temperature,

outlet water temperature, thermal efficiency, and solar insolation of
the bent tube solar collector is depicted in Fig. 12.
It is evident from Fig. 12 (a) that the solar insolation received on
the collector surface showed a parabolic path with maximum value
of 864 W*m2 at 12:00 h and latter it decreased as the time
increased. The inlet and outlet water temperatures increased from
8:00 h to 16:00 h. The inlet water temperature increased contin-
uously from 28.8
C in the morning to 53
C. Similarly, the outlet Fig. 12. The measured result of bent tube solar heating system (a) Ta, Ti, To, I and (b)
water temperature increased continuously from 35.1
C to 60
C. thermal efficiency vs time.
664 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669

section 2. The parameters were working fluids, back insulation

thickness, inlet water temperature, ambient temperature, solar
insolation, mass flow rate, optical efficiency and heat loss coeffi-
cient. The input data used for the present studies were solar inso-
lation 800 W*m2, plate temperature 323 K, ambient temperature
300 K, wind speed 4 m/s, collector tilt angle 22
, conductivity of the
insulation material 0.004 W/m*K, emissivity of the glass 0.9, and
collector area 1.65. These data were taken from the experiments.

4.4.1. Effect of fluid flow rate and collector loss factor on the exergy
efficiency
Fig. 14 illustrates the 3D plot of the variation of exergy efficiency
vs mass flow rate of water and collector loss parameter (TiTa)/I
using Eq. (35). As the difference between inlet water and ambient
temperature increases, the exergy efficiency of the collector in-
creases. This was due to the increase in the absorber plate tem-
perature and corresponding inlet water temperature.
It can also be observed that the exergy efficiency of the collector
decreases sharply with increase in the mass flow rate especially in
the range from 0.001 to 0.005 kg*s1. For a fixed mass flow rate,
increasing the collector loss factor from 0.001 to 0.1 m2*K*W1
Fig. 13. h vs (TmeTa)/I relation for bent tube solar water heating.
resulted in an increase in exergy efficiency from 1% to 14%. Since at
collector was estimated by the loss parameter ((TmTa)/I). The lower water flow rate, the plate temperature increases which re-
system efficiency h was determined using the straight line rela- sults in the increase of heat transfer between the absorber plates to
tionship [6]. the working fluid. Further, increasing the mass flow rate increases
the exergy destruction due to the decrease in the absorber plate
ðTm  Ta Þ temperature. The relationship between plate temperature, mass
h ¼ h0  a0 (43)
I flow rate and inlet water temperature are discussed in detail in
subsection 4.4.7. Apart from the heat loss factor, the main reason of
where, h0 represents the thermal efficiency and a0 is the slope of exergy loss in FPC is the change in temperature between the plate
loss parameter. Fig. 13 shows h vs (TmTa)/I plot for the bent tube (Tp) and the sun (Ts). As the absorber plate temperature increases,
collectors obtained from experiments. The intercept of the fitted the temperature difference increases which ultimately decreases
line was 0.7 while its slope was 9.6. The root mean square (RMS) the collector exergy loss.
deviation value was 0.91.
4.4.2. Effect of fluid flow rate and collector loss factor on energy
4.4. Parametric study efficiency
Plot of energy efficiency vs mass flow rate and collector loss
The parametric study was carried using equations presented in factor (TiTa)/I based on Eq. (18) is illustrated in Fig. 15.

Fig. 14. Variation of exergy efficiency vs mass flow rate and collector heat loss factor (TiTa)/I.
 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669 665

Fig. 15. Variation of energy efficiency vs mass flow rate and collector heat loss factor (TiTa)/I.

The figure elaborates that increasing the collector loss factor 4.4.3. Effect of fluid type on exergy and energy efficiency
decreases the energy efficiency of the solar collector. The increase An important parameter in FPC is the working fluids. The effect
in flow rate of water leads to the decrease in plate temperature of collector loss parameter (TiTa)/I on the exergy and energy ef-
which consequently decreases the overall heat loss coefficient from ficiencies of the collector was investigated by varying the inlet
the collector. This leads to the increase in energy efficiency of the water temperature from 300 K to 350 K, using water and ethylene
collector. For a fixed mass flow rate, increasing collector heat loss glycol as working fluids. Fig. 16 shows the results obtained based on
factor from 0.001 to 0.1 m2*K*W1 leads to decrease the energy Eq. (18) and Eq. (35) for mass flow rate of 0.0167 kg*s1, ambient
efficiency from 82% to 40%. Similarly, for fixed collector loss factor temperature 300 K and solar insolation 800 W*m2. It is evident
of 0.001 m2*K*W1, increasing the mass flow rate from from the figure that the energy efficiency of the collector decreases
0.001 kg*s1 to 0.1 kg*s1 increases the efficiency from 65% to 82%. with increase in heat loss parameter for the two working fluids.

Fig. 16. Variation of exergy and energy efficiency vs collector heat loss factor (TiTa)/I for water and ethylene glycol.
666 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669

Fig. 17. Variation of exergy and energy efficiency vs back insulation thickness.

Similarly, exergy efficiency increases with heat loss parameter of the decrease of the exergy efficiency.
the working fluid. Higher exergy and energy efficiencies are ob-
tained when ethylene glycol is used as a working fluid whereas the
least exergy and energy efficiencies are obtained with water.
It was also observed that 3% less exergy efficiency of the col- 4.4.6. Effect of solar insolation on exergy efficiency
lector with water as the working fluid compared to ethylene glycol. Plot of exergy efficiency vs solar insolation based on Eq. (35) at
It is common knowledge that water is cheap and abundantly mass flow rate 0.0167 kg*s1, ambient temperature 300 K, and inlet
available working fluid as compared to ethylene glycol. Water can water temperature 320 K is shown in Fig. 19. The plot indicates that
be used as a substitute working fluid for ethylene glycol in terms of increasing the solar insolation from 110 W*m2 to 1060 W*m2
small difference in exergy efficiency, cost and availability. However, increases the exergy efficiency by 4.0%e6.5%. Increase in solar
in cold climates, problem may encounter due to freezing if water is insolation leads to the increase in heat gain and collector heat
used as the working fluid. transfer rate which subsequently increases the exergy efficiency.

4.4.4. Effect of back insulation on exergy and energy efficiencies

Fig. 17 illustrates the exergy and energy efficiencies vs back
insulation thickness based on Eqs. (7), (8) and (14) at 0.0167 kg*s1
mass flow rates, inlet water temperature 330 K, ambient temper-
ature 300 K and solar insolation 800 W*m2.
The figure indicates that increasing the insulation thickness
from 1 cm to 5 cm resulted in an increase in the exergy efficiency by
52% and energy efficiency by 45.9%. Increase in the insulation
thickness from 5 cm to 20 cm resulted in further increase in exergy
efficiency by 4.7% and energy efficiency by 1.85%.

4.4.5. Effect of ambient temperature on exergy efficiency

Fig. 18 shows the plots of exergy efficiency vs ambient temper-
ature at inlet water temperature 330 K, mass flow rate
0.0167 kg*s1 and solar insolation 800 W*m2. As the ambient
temperature increases from 300 K to 320 K, the exergy efficiency
decreases from 6% to 1%. It is evident from Eqs. (4) and (7) that with
the increase in ambient temperature, the collector heat loss de-
creases which leads to the increase in energy efficiency of the solar
collector. Also at higher ambient temperature, the collector receives
more heat from the solar radiation as well as from the surrounding
atmosphere which leads to the increase in exergy destruction
component between the plates to the working fluid. This results in Fig. 18. Variation of exergy efficiency vs ambient temperature.
 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669 667

Fig. 19. Variation of exergy efficiency vs solar insolation. Fig. 21. Variation of exergy efficiency vs optical efficiency.

4.4.7. Effect of flow rate and inlet water temperature on overall heat
loss coefficient and plate temperature
Fig. 20 illustrates the plots of plate temperature and overall
collector heat loss coefficient vs mass flow rate and inlet water
temperature. These are plotted using Eqs. (7)e(14). Fig. 20(a) shows
a decrease in the absorber plate temperature from 350 K to 320 K
and overall heat loss coefficient from 6.8 W*m2*K1 to
4.7 W*m2*K1 as the mass flow rate increases from 0.01 kg*s1 to
0.1 kg*s1. This is due to the decrease in plate temperature with
increasing water flow rate.
The variation of collector heat loss coefficient and plate tem-
perature vs inlet water temperature is depicted in Fig. 20(b). It is
evident from Fig. 20(b) that increasing the inlet water temperature
from 300 K to 350 K increases the overall heat loss coefficient from
4.7 W*m2*K1to 6 W*m2*K1 and increases the plate tempera-
ture from 325 K to 355 K. This reduces both the exergy and energy
efficiencies of the solar collector.

4.4.8. Effect of optical properties of the glass on exergy efficiency

Plot of exergy efficiency vs optical efficiency at 0.0167 kg*s1
water flow rate, 300 K ambient temperature, 320 K inlet water
temperature and solar insolation of 800 W*m2 is depicted in
Fig. 21. It is evident from Eq. (4) that as the optical efficiency in-
creases, there is an increase in heat transfer by the solar collector.
The result reveals that, increasing the optical efficiency from 0.1 to
1 increases the exergy efficiency from 0.5% to 7%.

5. Conclusions

In this study, the performance of a novel bent tube solar col-

lector is investigated using exergy and energy analysis. The nu-
merical model was validated with the experimental results. The
following conclusion can be drawn from the study:

 The developed simulation model of the collector was predicted

the outlet water temperature, absorber plate temperature, en-
ergy efficiency and overall heat loss coefficient with maximum
Fig. 20. Variation of U and Tp vs a) mass flow rate and (b) inlet water temperature. error of 9%.
668 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669

 The fabricated bent tube solar collector exhibited 71% thermal Subscripts
efficiency and 60
C of outlet water temperature. Using this b bottom
collector higher performance achieved compared to the re- w wind
ported result in the literature. i inlet
 Since the required temperature for growing thermophilic mi- e exit
crobes is in the range from 50
C - 60
C, this collector could be m mean
regarded as heat source for growing thermophilic microbes for
anaerobic digestion during biogas production process.
References
 The parametric study using MATLAB revealed that the perfor-
mance of the collector is affected by key parameters, including [1] S.A. Kalogirou, Solar thermal collectors and applications, Prog. energy
inlet water temperature, ambient temperature, solar insolation, Combust. Sci. 30 (3) (2004) 231e295.
[2] S.A. Kalogirou, Thermal performance, economic and environmental life cycle
mass flow rate, working fluids, insulation thickness and collec-
analysis of thermosiphon solar water heaters, Sol. Energy 83 (1) (2009)
tor heat loss factor. 39e48.
[3] M. Keyanpour-Rad, H.R. Haghgou, F. Bahar, E. Afshari, Feasibility study of the
application of solar heating systems in Iran, Renew. Energy 20 (3) (2000)
333e345.
Nomenclatures [4] D.G. Gunjo, P. Mahanta, P.S. Robi, CFD and experimental investigation of flat
plate solar water heating system under steady state condition, Renew. Energy
106 (2017) 24e36.
hw Heat transfer coefficient of the bottom surface, [5] X. Zhao, Z. Wang, Q. Tang, Theoretical investigation of the performance of a
W*m2*K1 novel loop heat pipe solar water heating system for use in Beijing, China, Appl.
V Wind speed, m*s1 Therm. Eng. 30 (16) (2010) 2526e2536.
[6] W. He, X. Hong, B. Luo, H. Chen, J. Ji, CFD and comparative study on the dual-
I Solar insolation, W*m2 function solar collectors with and without tile-shaped covers in water heating
S Solar insolation on the surface of the collector, W*m2 mode, Renew. Energy 86 (2016) 1205e1214.
Ṡ Entropy, W*K1 [7] R. Kumar, M.A. Rosen, Thermal performance of integrated collector storage
solar water heater with corrugated absorber surface, Appl. Therm. Eng. 30 (13)
^
h Enthalpy, J*kg1 (2010) 1764e1768.
Qi Heat energy absorbed by the solar collector, W [8] A.J.N. Khalifa, Thermal performance of locally made flat plate solar collectors
used as part of a domestic hot water system, Energy Convers. Manag. 40 (17)
Ap Effective collector area, m2
(1999) 1825e1833. ̨
U Over all heat loss coefficient, W*m1*K1 [9] C. Dharuman, J.H. Arakeri, K. Srinivasan, Performance evaluation of an inte-
FR heat removal factor grated solar water heater as an option for building energy conservation, En-
F0 Collector efficiency factor ergy Build. 38 (3) (2006) 214e219.
[10] M.S. Mohsen, A. Al-Ghandoor, I. Al-Hinti, Thermal analysis of compact solar
h Thermal efficiency water heater under local climatic conditions, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf.
Q Heat absorbed by the water, J 36 (9) (2009) 962e968.
m_ Mass flow rate, kg*s1 [11] H. Dagdougui, A. Ouammi, M. Robba, R. Sacile, Thermal analysis and perfor-
mance optimization of a solar water heater flat plate collector: application to
Ti Inlet water temperature, K Tetouan (Morocco), Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15 (1) (2011) 630e638.
To Outlet water temperature, K [12] S. Farahat, F. Sarhaddi, H. Ajam, Exergetic optimization of flat plate solar
Ta Ambient temperature, K collectors, Renew. Energy 34 (4) (2009) 1169e1174.
[13] I. Luminosu, L. Fara, Determination of the optimal operation mode of a flat
Tp Absorber plate temperature, K solar collector by exergetic analysis and numerical simulation, Energy 30 (5)
Tm Mean temperature, K (2005) 731e747.
[14] S.R. Park, A.K. Pandey, V.V. Tyagi, S.K. Tyagi, Energy and exergy analysis of
typical renewable energy systems, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 30 (2014)
105e123.
Greek symbols [15] H. Okamura, I. Oshida, Application of exergy concept to the analysis of opti-
mum operating conditions of solar heat collectors, J. Sol. energy Eng. 109
s Stefan boltzmann constant, W*m2*K4 (1987) 337.
εp Emissivity of the glass [16] S.K. Tyagi, S. Wang, M.K. Singhal, S.C. Kaushik, S.R. Park, Exergy analysis and
εg Emissivity of the plate parametric study of concentrating type solar collectors, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 46
(12) (2007) 1304e1310.
a Absorptivity [17] G. Liu, Y.A. Cengel, R.H. Turner, Exergy analysis of a solar heating system, J. Sol.
t Transmissivity energy Eng. 117 (3) (1995) 249e251.
b Collector tilt angle [18] I. Kurtbas, A. Durmus, Efficiency and exergy analysis of a new solar air heater,
ki Conductivity of the insulation material, W*m1*K1 Renew. Energy 29 (9) (2004) 1489e1501.
[19] T.T. Chow, G. Pei, K.F. Fong, Z. Lin, A.L.S. Chan, J. Ji, Energy and exergy analysis
db Insulation thickness, m of photovoltaicethermal collector with and without glass cover, Appl. Energy
Ẇ Work, W 86 (3) (2009) 310e316.
Ẇ rev Reversible work, W [20] E. Torres-Reyes, J.J. Navarrete-Gonzalez, A. Zaleta-Aguilar, J.G. Cervantes-de
Gortari, Optimal process of solar to thermal energy conversion and design of
^
E Exergy efficiency irreversible flat-plate solar collectors, Energy 28 (2) (2003) 99e113.
u,v,w Velocity along x, y and z direction, m/s [21] A. Bejan, Second-law analysis in heat transfer and thermal design, Adv. heat
Transf. 15 (1982) 1e58.
r Density, kg*m3 [22] W. Xiaowu, H. Ben, Exergy analysis of domestic-scale solar water heaters,
m Viscosity, N *s*m2 Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 9 (6) (2005) 638e645.
P Pressure, N*m2 [23] E. Bellos, C. Tzivanidis, K.A. Antonopoulos, I. Daniil, The use of gas working
fluids in parabolic trough collectorseAn energetic and exergetic analysis,
g Gravity, m*s2 Appl. Therm. Eng. 109 (2016) 1e14.
Z Distance from the datum, m [24] S. Lecoeuche, S. Lalot, Prediction of the daily performance of solar collectors,
K Conductivity of the tube, W*m1*K1 Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 32 (5) (2005) 603e611.
ho Optical efficiency [25] A. Shariah, B. Shalabi, Optimal design for a thermosyphon solar water heater,
Renew. energy 11 (3) (1997) 351e361.
cp Specific heat of water, J*kg1*K1 [26] M. Selmi, M.J. Al-Khawaja, A. Marafia, Validation of CFD simulation for flat
Xsim Simulated value plate solar energy collector, Renew. energy 33 (3) (2008) 383e387.
Xexp Experimental value [27] K.P. Gertzos, S.E. Pnevmatikakis, Y.G. Caouris, Experimental and numerical
study of heat transfer phenomena, inside a flat-plate integrated collector
Tsky Sky temperature, K storage solar water heater (ICSSWH), with indirect heat withdrawal, Energy
Tg Glass temperature, K Convers. Manag. 49 (11) (2008) 3104e3115.
 D.G. Gunjo et al. / Renewable Energy 114 (2017) 655e669 669

[28] M.B. Gadi, Design and simulation of a new energy-conscious system (CFD and solar collectors, Renew. Energy 56 (2013) 55e63.
solar simulation), Appl. energy 65 (1) (2000) 251e256. [33] K. Zelzouli, A. Guizani, R. Sebai, C. Kerkeni, Solar thermal systems perfor-
[29] H. Al-Ansary, O. Zeitoun, Numerical study of conduction and convection heat mances versus flat plate solar collectors connected in series, Engineering 4
losses from a half-insulated air-filled annulus of the receiver of a parabolic (12) (2012) 881.
trough collector, Sol. Energy 85 (11) (2011) 3036e3045. [34] R. Petela, Exergy of heat radiation, ASME J. Heat. Transf. 86 (2) (1964)
[30] J. Fac~
ao, Optimization of flow distribution in flat plate solar thermal collectors 187e192.
with riser and header arrangements, Sol. Energy 120 (2015) 104e112. [35] M. Hazami, S. Kooli, M. Laz^aar, A. Farhat, A. Belghith, Energetic and exergetic
[31] J.A. Duffie, W.A. Beckman, Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes, John Wiley performances of an economical and available integrated solar storage col-
& Sons, 2013. lector based on concrete matrix, Energy Convers. Manag. 51 (6) (2010)
[32] F. Jafarkazemi, E. Ahmadifard, Energetic and exergetic evaluation of flat plate 1210e1218.