CFD analysis of the performance impact of geometrical shape on volumetric absorbers in a standard cup
Renewable Energy, ISSN: 0960-1481, Vol: 201, Page: 256-272
2022
- 4Citations
- 8Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
The effect of three geometrical parameters of volumetric absorbers in a standard cup –height of the chamfer, the angle of the chamfer and the height of the straight protruding side– on the air temperature at the receiver outlet, the receiver's thermal efficiency and the temperature of the interface between the absorber and the cup are analysed. For the study, 126 different geometrical configurations have been checked in a two-dimensional CFD model. A silicon carbide (SiC) ceramic foam volumetric absorber was selected for the study, and the numerical model adopted includes the simulation of the performance of both the porous media and the cup body. The modelling strategy used was implemented in the commercial CFD code STAR-CCM+ v16.02.009® with a local thermal non-equilibrium model and the Rosseland approximation for the volumetric absorber. The results conclude that different sets of geometrical parameters can produce similar results in terms of air temperature at the cup outlet, thermal efficiency of the system and temperature at the interface between the volumetric absorber and the cup. Emphasizing that the larger the chamfer height the lower the air temperature at the outlet and that the effect of the protruding absorber parameter is influenced by two possible boundary conditions, inlet fluid velocity and wall, and the latter produces the higher air outlet temperature.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960148122015257; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.10.032; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85140953393&origin=inward; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0960148122015257; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.10.032
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know