Solar Power

March 2010
Manuel Silva
Seville University
CSP Training
Lesson 2: Parabolic Trough
See also CPV
CONCENTRATING
PHOTOVOLTAICS
Advantages, Interviews,
Video
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/concentrating-photovoltaics
Solar Thermal Power Plants.
Parabolic Trough Technology
Manuel A. Silva Prez
Group of Thermodynamics and Renewable Energy
ETSI University of Seville

silva@esi.us.es
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/csp-training-course-lesson-2-linear-focus-technologies
4
Main Concentrating Technologies
Central Receiver / Heliostats
Parabolic troughs
Parabolic dishes
Linear Fresnel Reflectors
5
6
Solar Thermal Power Plant.
Basic configuration
Beam irradiance
Concentrator
Receiver
Thermal
Storage
Concentrated irradiance
Electricity
Power
conversion
system
Thermal energy
Boiler Fossil fuel
Biomass
Generator
7
PT power plant configuration
8
Collector
9
Collector
10
Main elements of the collector
Reflector (mirror)
Receiver tube
Structure
Tracking system
Connecting elements
Control system

11
Applications
Process heat STP plant
12
The reflector
Thin glass mirror (0.8
mm) Thick glass mirror (3 -5 mm)
13
Alternative reflecting surfaces

Aluminum
Alanod
Reflective films (polymers)
Reflectech, 3M
14
Structure
15
Receiver tube
Selective coated steel tube

Glass envelope
'Getter for vacuum maintenance
Expansion bellow
Glass pin for evacuation of gases
Vacuum between glass
and steel tubes
Glass metal welding
16
Receiver tubes
Schott PTR-70 Solel UVAC-2 y UVAC-3
17
Heat transfer fluid
Thermal oils
Caloria (SEGS I and II, <300C)
Therminol VP-1 (<400 C)
Syltherm (Dow Chemical,
>400C)
Water / Steam
>400 C
DISS Project
Molten salts
Archimedes - ENEA facility
Gasses
PSA Research Facility

State of
the art
18
Tracking mechanisms
Electrical motor -
gearbox Hydraulic
19
Connecting collectors
Flex hoses
Rotating joints
20
Solar field configuration (I)
1 SCA 150 m
12 SCE
1 Drive Pylon
10 Middle Pylon
1 End Pylon
1 Shared Pylon (shared with next SCA)
Cold
Oil
Hot
Oil
End Pylon
Drive Pylon
Middle Pylon
Shared Pylon
SCE
150 m
150 m
21
Solar field configuration (2)
Cross Over
Pipes
1379 m
1
2
4
8

m

Loop of
6 SCAs
Headers
SEGS Power Block
80 MW Rankine Cycle
22
A) Direct return
B) Reverse return
C) Central

Thermal losses
Higher cost
AP balanced
Lower consumption
Thermal losses
unbalanced AP
Higher consumption
Shorter pipelines
Better access to collectors
unbalanced AP
Solar field configuration (3)
23
X
Y
N
S
E
O
Z
S
C
Sol
X
Y
N
S
E
O
Z
S
C
Sol
b) N-S tracking a) E-W tracking
Solar field orientation (Northern
Hemisphere)
Maximum efficiency
at noon.
Maximum yearly
energy generation
Incidence
angle
never 0 at
noon
More balanced
seasonal generation
24

Dimetro , D
Rayo solar
Angulo de apertura , |
Angulo de aceptancia , u
Reflector
Parabolic
External receiver diameter
D
Sun rays
Aperture angle |
Acceptance angle ,
u
b) Acceptance angle, u a) Concentration ratio, C

Aperture, A
Absorber tube
Basic design parameters
Length, L
25
Beam irradiance
interception factor,
,
Selective-coated steel tube
(Absortivity = o)
Glass envelope
(Transmissivity = t)
Parabolic mirror
(Reflectivity = )
q
o,peak
= t o
Energy balance. Optical losses
26
Sun
Sun
Side view
Plant view
Shaded
area

Reflecting surface
Absorber tube
L = concentrator length
= incidence angle

F = focal length
Sol
F
ED
L
b) Loss of effective collector length
a) Shading losses
A
f
= W x ED = W x F x tan()
Geometrical losses
27
Loss of effective collector length
W
ED
28
)
( )
amb abs abs
conv - cond abs, rad abs,
abs L
T - T L D
Q + Q
= U
t
[W/m
2
abs
C]
U
L)col
= U
L)abs
/ C
Q
v,abs.

Q
abs,rad.

Q
abs,cond/conv.

Q
amb,rad

Q
amb,conv

Glass envelope
Absorber tube
Thermal losses
29
eff
eff
( ) cos = I A Q
c sol
( )
in out eff
h h M Q =
th opt global
K q q q =
0 ,
Energy balance (solar to thermal)
30
95
96
97
98
99
100
A
v
a
i
l
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

-

%
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
III IV V VI VII 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

[
%
]

0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
D
i
r
e
c
t

N
o
r
m
a
l

R
a
d
i
a
t
i
o
m

[
W
/
m
]

05:00 07:00 09:00 11:00 13:00 15:00 17:00 19:00 21:00

Solar to Electric
Efficiency (gross)
Direct Normal Radiation
Thermal Solar
Field Efficiency
-
Solar Efficiencies Measured at SEGS VI
on July 1997 by KJC Operating Company
Typical operation curve
(clear day, no thermal storage)
31
Andasol-type plants
(thermal storage and auxiliary boiler)
32
SEGS 30 MW
33
Costs
Difficult to evaluate
Confidentiality of contracts
Volatility of prices
Only 2 3 providers of key elements
O&M experience restricted to US (SEGS
Plants)

34
Costs (w/o TES)
Approx. 3.5 4 /kWe
35
Costs Solar field
36
Electricity cost
Depends on different factors
Solar Resource
TES Capacity
Labour cost
Financial
Etc.
Spain 2010: LCOE < 250 /MWh
SW USA: LCOE = 120 /MWh?
37
PT Technology today, pros & cons.
Pros:
Mature technology;
Comercially proven, over 500 MW installed capacity;
Extensive operational record: 9 plants operating for
20 years in USA
Easy to finance (in Spain!)
Cons:
Few manufacturers of key elements (recievers,
mirrors) -> limited competence
Limited maximum temperature -> limited efficiency
Costly, hazardous HTF
Limited TES options
38
More
http://www.nrel.gov/csp/troughnet/
Sargent & Lundy Assessment of CSP
http://www.nrel.gov/csp/troughnet/pdfs/34440
.pdf
Look for movies at youtube, e.g:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysDXwvNGHeM
&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OLjooHY1VA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDWSW8BAM
3U&feature=related
And more


Solar Power

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Solar Power

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

March 2010

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi