Research Papers

Single-Phase Flow Analysis: An Attempt to Mitigate Particle Deposition on the Glass Window of a Fluidized Bed Solar Receiver

[+] Author and Article Information
M. Shahabuddin

The School of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Adelaide,
Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia
e-mail: shahabuddin.suzan1@gmail.com

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Solar Energy Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF SOLAR ENERGY ENGINEERING: INCLUDING WIND ENERGY AND BUILDING ENERGY CONSERVATION. Manuscript received August 5, 2015; final manuscript received March 9, 2016; published online April 19, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Nesrin Ozalp.

J. Sol. Energy Eng 138(4), 041004 (Apr 19, 2016) (9 pages) Paper No: SOL-15-1250; doi: 10.1115/1.4033068 History: Received August 05, 2015; Revised March 09, 2016

The problem of particle deposition on the glass window of a solar receiver has restricted its continuous operation by reducing solar radiation transmission. A rigorous attempt has been made in this analysis by exploring the understanding of particle deposition mechanisms and their mitigating strategies. A simplified form of a fluidized bed solar receiver (FBSR) having the same flow phenomena of FBSR is chosen for the numerical analysis. In the numerical analysis, the turbulent flow in the receiver is investigated by renormalized group (RNG) theory based k–ε models. The validation of the numerical model is carried out by measuring the turbulent flow properties using a turbulent flow instrumentation (TFI) Cobra probe. The results of this analysis revealed that mass flow into the secondary concentrator of the receiver was reduced significantly when the ratio between the outlets and inlet areas was 0.5, and the ratio between the aperture and receiver diameter was 0.41. When using window shielding jets, only 5% of the inlet mass as a window jet was sufficient to prevent any particle deposition on the glass window, however, the number of jets was found to be an important factor. At a constant mass flow rate, increasing the number of window shielding jets reduced the suction pressure from the core to the aperture, which helped to restrict the inlet flow in the secondary concentrator.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Lenert, A. , and Wang, E. N. , 2012, “ Optimization of Nanofluid Volumetric Receivers for Solar Thermal Energy Conversion,” Sol. Energy, 86(1), pp. 253–265. [CrossRef]
Pacheco, J. E. , 2001, “ Demonstration of Solar-Generated Electricity on Demand: The Solar Two Project,” ASME J. Sol. Energy Eng., 123(1), p. 5. [CrossRef]
Romero, M. , Buck, R. , and Pacheco, J. E. , 2002, “ An Update on Solar Central Receiver Systems, Projects, and Technologies,” ASME J. Sol. Energy Eng., 124(2), pp. 98–108. [CrossRef]
Gokon, N. , Ono, R. , Hatamachi, T. , Liuyun, L. , Kim, H.-J. , and Kodama, T. , 2012, “ CO2 Gasification of Coal Cokes Using Internally Circulating Fluidized Bed Reactor by Concentrated Xe-Light Irradiation for Solar Gasification,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 37(17), pp. 12128–12137. [CrossRef]
Lucas, D. , Beyer, M. , Szalinski, L. , and Schütz, P. , 2010, “ A New Database on the Evolution of Air–Water Flows Along a Large Vertical Pipe,” Int. J. Therm. Sci., 49(4), pp. 664–674. [CrossRef]
Rodat, S. , Abanades, S. P. , and Flamant, G. , 2009, “ High-Temperature Solar Methane Dissociation in a Multitubular Cavity-Type Reactor in the Temperature Range 1823−2073 K,” Energy Fuels, 23(5), pp. 2666–2674. [CrossRef]
Osinga, T. , Olalde, G. , and Steinfeld, A. , 2004, “ Solar Carbothermal Reduction of ZnO: Shrinking Packed-Bed Reactor Modeling and Experimental Validation,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 43(25), pp. 7981–7988. [CrossRef]
Zhang, H. , and Ahmadi, G. , 2000, “ Aerosol Particle Transport and Deposition in Vertical and Horizontal Turbulent Duct Flows,” J. Fluid Mech., 406, pp. 55–80. [CrossRef]
Gordillo, E. D. , and Belghit, A. , 2011, “ A Bubbling Fluidized Bed Solar Reactor Model of Biomass Char High Temperature Steam-Only Gasification,” Fuel Process. Technol., 92(3), pp. 314–321. [CrossRef]
Rodat, S. , Abanades, S. , Sans, J.-L. , and Flamant, G. , 2010, “ A Pilot-Scale Solar Reactor for the Production of Hydrogen and Carbon Black From Methane Splitting,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 35(15), pp. 7748–7758. [CrossRef]
Kogan, A. , and Kogan, M. , 2002, “ The Tornado Flow Configuration—An Effective Method for Screening of a Solar Reactor Window,” ASME J. Sol. Energy Eng., 124(3), pp. 206–214. [CrossRef]
Steinfeld, A. , Brack, M. , Meier, A. , Weidenkaff, A. , and Wuillemin, D. , 1998, “ A Solar Chemical Reactor for Co-Production of Zinc and Synthesis Gas,” Energy, 23(10), pp. 803–814. [CrossRef]
Jaya Krishna, D. , and Ozalp, N. , 2013, “ Numerical Investigation of Particle Deposition Inside Aero-Shielded Solar Cyclone Reactor: A Promising Solution for Reactor Clogging,” Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow, 40, pp. 198–209. [CrossRef]
Ozalp, N. , and Kanjirakat, A. , 2010, “ Lagrangian Characterization of Multi-Phase Turbulent Flow in a Solar Reactor for Particle Deposition Prediction,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 35(10), pp. 4496–4507. [CrossRef]
Ozalp, N. , Chien, M.-H. , and Morrison, G. , 2013, “ Computational Fluid Dynamics and Particle Image Velocimetry Characterization of a Solar Cyclone Reactor,” ASME J. Sol. Energy Eng., 135(3), p. 031003. [CrossRef]
Ozalp, N. , and JayaKrishna, D. , 2010, “ CFD Analysis on the Influence of Helical Carving in a Vortex Flow Solar Reactor,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 35(12), pp. 6248–6260. [CrossRef]
Shilapuram, V. , Jaya Krishna, D. , and Ozalp, N. , 2011, “ Residence Time Distribution and Flow Field Study of Aero-Shielded Solar Cyclone Reactor for Emission-Free Generation of Hydrogen,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 36(21), pp. 13488–13500. [CrossRef]
Ozalp, N. , and Devanuri, J. , 2010, “ CFD Analysis of Multi-Phase Turbulent Flow in a Solar Reactor for Emission-Free Generation of Hydrogen,” Chem. Eng. Trans., 21, pp. 1081–1086.
Litterst, T. , 1992, “ Investigation of Window Damage by Hot Particles in Solar Heated Circulating Fluidized Beds,” Sixth International Symposium on Solar Thermal Concentrating Technologies, Mojacar, Spain, Sept. 20–Oct. 4, Vol. 1, pp. 359–369.
Wang, Q. , Lu, J. , Yin, W. , Yang, H. , and Wei, L. , 2013, “ Numerical Study of Gas–Solid Flow in a Coal Beneficiation Fluidized Bed Using Kinetic Theory of Granular Flow,” Fuel Process. Technol., 111, pp. 29–41. [CrossRef]
Tian, Z. , 2006, “ Numerical Modelling of Turbulent Gas-Particle Flow and Its Applications,” Ph.D. thesis, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.
Yakhot, V. , and Orszag, S. , 1986, “ Renormalization Group Analysis of Turbulence—I: Basic Theory,” J. Sci. Comput., 1(1), pp. 3–51. [CrossRef]
Raffel, M. , Willert, C. E. , Wereley, S. T. , and Kompenhans, J. , 2007, Particle Image Velocimetry: A Practical Guide, 2nd ed., Springer, Berlin.
Z'Graggen, A. , Haueter, P. , Trommer, D. , Romero, M. , de Jesus, J. C. , and Steinfeld, A. , 2006, “ Hydrogen Production by Steam-Gasification of Petroleum Coke Using Concentrated Solar Power—II: Reactor Design, Testing, and Modeling,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 31(6), pp. 797–811. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Mesh distribution for the upper part of the receiver

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Cross section of the modeled geometry (dimensions are in millimeter)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Typical total velocity measurement using Cobra probe

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Experimental arrangement for measuring flow properties

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Axial velocity versus radial position at axial location y = 1826 mm, using the window shielding jets for Re = 26,000

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Solution procedures for numerical simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Axial velocity versus radial position at axial location y = 1766 mm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Axial velocity versus radial position at axial location y = 1886 mm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Mean velocity versus radial position using different Reynolds numbers: (a) 18,000 and (b) 26,000

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Color map of the axial velocity at aperture section: (a) Re = 18,000, (b) Re = 22,000, and (c) Re = 26,000

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Effect of outlet diameters on the normalized mass flow rate at the aperture section when the outlets are placed at y/d = 13, 14, and 15

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Normalized mass flow rate at the aperture section when the outlets are placed at y/d = 15

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

The mean velocity vector without jet condition: (a) the bottom part, (b) the middle part, and (c) the CPC

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

The total velocity vector using outlet diameter of 30 mm: (a) 5% of the inlet mass using two jets and (b) 5% of the inlet mass using four jets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Normalized mass flow rate in the CPC with respect to different Aout/Ain ratios and the number of jets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Normalized mass flow in the CPC and the mean velocity at the aperture with respect to aperture diameter



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