Side-by-side comparisons of evacuated compound parabolic concentrator and flat plate solar collector systems

Technical Report · Sat Oct 01 00:00:00 EDT 1983

DOI:https://doi.org/10.2172/6318519· OSTI ID:6318519

McGarity, A. E.; Allen, J. W.; Schertz, W. W.

Three liquid-based solar heating systems employing different types of solar collectors were tested side by side near Chicago, Illinois for one year. The three different types of collectors were: a flat plate collector with a black-chrome coated absorber plate and one low-iron glass cover; an evacuated-tube compound parabolic concentrator (CPC) with a concentration ratio of 1.1, oriented with tubes and troughs along a north-south axis; and an evacuated-tube CPC collector with a concentration ratio of 1.3 and one low-iron glass cover, with tubes and troughs oriented along an east-west axis. Results indicate that the flat plate collector system was the most efficient during warm weather, but the CPC systems were more efficient during cold weather, but the CPC systems were more efficient during cold weather, and the CPC systems operated under conditions too adverse for the flat plate collector. The computer simulation model ANSIM was validated by means of the side-by-side tests. The model uses analytical solutions to the storage energy balance. ANSIM is compared with the general simulation TRNSYS. (LEW)

• Research Organization: Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States)
• DOE Contract Number: W-31-109-ENG-38
• OSTI ID: 6318519
• Report Number(s): ANL-82-81; ON: DE85004833
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

14 SOLAR ENERGY
EVACUATED TUBE COLLECTORS
COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS
COMPOUND PARABOLIC CONCENTRATORS
FLAT PLATE COLLECTORS
COMPUTERIZED SIMULATION
PERFORMANCE TESTING
VALIDATION
EQUIPMENT
EVACUATED COLLECTORS
SIMULATION
SOLAR COLLECTORS
SOLAR CONCENTRATORS
SOLAR EQUIPMENT
TESTING
141000* - Solar Collectors & Concentrators