0
Research Papers

Optical Characterization of Nonimaging Planar Concentrator for the Application in Concentrator Photovoltaic System

[+] Author and Article Information
K. K. Chong1

Faculty of Engineering and Science, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Off Jalan Genting Kelang, Setapak, Kuala Lumpur 53300, Malaysiachongkk@utar.edu.my

C. W. Wong, F. L. Siaw, T. K. Yew

Faculty of Engineering and Science, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Off Jalan Genting Kelang, Setapak, Kuala Lumpur 53300, Malaysia

1

Corresponding author.

J. Sol. Energy Eng 132(1), 011011 (Jan 04, 2010) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4000355 History: Received February 24, 2009; Revised July 28, 2009; Published January 04, 2010

The design and construction of miniature prototype of nonimaging planar concentrator, which is capable of producing much more uniform spatial irradiance and reasonably high concentration ratio, were presented in the previous paper. In this paper, we further explore the optical characteristics of the new concentrator that is specially designed to be incorporated in concentrator photovoltaic systems. For this study, we have carried out a comprehensive analysis via numerical simulation based on all the important design parameters, i.e., array of facet mirrors, f/D ratio, receiver size, and the effect of sun-tracking error, which lead to the overall optical performance of the new concentrator.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Conceptual layout design of the nonimaging planar concentrator. Each mirror on the concentrator consists of a finite number of smaller elements called reflective points, and each reflective point is illuminated by a discrete number of subrays arranged in a conic manner (inset).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Cartesian coordinate system (x,y,z), named as the main coordinate system, is defined in the plane of the planar concentrator, with its origin located at the center of concentrator, while the subcoordinate system (x′,y′,z′) is defined at the local facet mirror

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

The simulation results of solar flux distribution for (a) 3D and (b) 2D plots for the case of 21×21 array of mirrors with a focal distance of 170 cm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Graphs to show both the average solar concentration ratio in the uniform illumination area and percentage of total collected energy in the uniform illumination area versus f/D ratio for different cases of (a) 17×17, (b) 19×19, (c)21×21, (d) 23×23, and (e) 25×25 arrays of facet mirrors

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Bar chart to show the comparisons of (a) the average solar concentration ratio in the uniform illumination area and (b) percentage of energy in the uniform illumination area for different cases of 17×17, 19×19, 21×21, 23×23, and 25×25 arrays of facet mirrors

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Spillage loss (solid line) and its corresponding lowest solar concentration ratio at receiver edge (dot line) versus receiver size (square in shape) for the three different focal distances of 120 cm, 170 cm, and 230 cm are plotted in the case of (a) 17×17, (b) 19×19, (c) 21×21, (d) 23×23, and (e) 25×25 arrays of facet mirrors

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

The simulation results of solar flux distribution to show the solar concentration ratio versus the distance for different off-axis angles of 0 deg, 0.2 deg, 0.6 deg, and 1.0 deg in the case of 21×21 array facet mirrors and f=170 cm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Deviation from the center of receiver versus focal distance for different off-axis angles of 0.6 deg and 1.0 deg in the case of 21×21 array facet mirrors

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

The spillage loss as a function of the receiver size for different off-axis angles of 0 deg, 0.2 deg, 0.4 deg, 0.6 deg, 0.8 deg, and 1 deg in the case of 21×21 array facet mirrors and f=170 cm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

The variation in flux distribution within the defined boundary area 8.56×8.56 cm2 due to the sun-tracking error versus off-axis angles from 0 deg to 1 deg with the increment of 0.1 deg for the case of 21×21 array facet mirrors and f=170 cm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Percentage of energy falling into the defined area 10.54×10.54 cm2 in comparison with ideal tracking versus off-axis angle ranging from −1 deg to 1 deg for the case of 21×21 array facet mirrors and f=170 cm

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In