Solar Field and Receiver Model Validation of the Next-CSP MW-Scale Prototype
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52825/solarpaces.v2i.831Keywords:
Solar Field, Central Receiver, Modelling, Measurements, Particle-driven CSPAbstract
This study presents a comparison of both modelling and experimental results obtained on the solar field and the receiver of the MW-scale particle driven CSP unit implemented at the Themis solar tower (France) in the framework of the Next-CSP H2020 European project. At partial load, ~900 kW, the simulated data concerning the incident power at the receiver aperture are consistent with the measured values with less than 5% difference from the experimental results. The difference is higher for the particle temperature and the thermal efficiency as a function of particle mass flow rate. It ranges between 12 and 98°C for measured particle temperature of 430 and 300°C respectively. For the thermal efficiency, the difference varies strongly with the experiments from approximately 12% to 50% (relative). The main cause of discrepancy between the experimental and the calculated results is attributed to the heterogeneity of the solar flux distribution on the receiver tubes.
Downloads
References
1. Flamant, G., Grange, B., Wheeldon, J., Siros, F., Valentin, B., Bataille, F., Zhang, H., Deng, Y., Baeyens, J. Opportunities and challenges in using particle circulation loops for concentrated solar power applications. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 94, 101056, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2022.101056
2. Martin J, Vitko J., ASCUAS: a solar central receiver utilizing a solid thermal carrier. 1982. Albuquerque, NM, and Livermore, CA (United States): https://doi.org/10.2172/5663779
3. Ho CK, Christian JM, Yellowhair J, Armijo K, Kolb WJ, Jeter S, et al. Performance Evaluation of a High-Temperature Falling Particle Receiver. Vol. 1 Biofuels, Hydrog. Syngas, Altern. Fuels; CHP Hybrid Power Energy Syst. Conc. Sol. Power; Energy Storage; Environ. Econ. Policy Considerations Adv. Energy Syst. Geothermal, Ocean. Emerg. E, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1115/ES2016-59238
4. Wu W, Trebing D, Amsbeck L, Buck R, Pitz-Paal R. Prototype Testing of a Centrifugal Particle Receiver for High-Temperature Concentrating Solar Applications. J Sol Energy Eng, 137(4): 041011, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4030657
5. Ebert M, Amsbeck L, Rheinländer J, Schlögl-Knothe B, Schmitz S, Sibum M, et al. Operational experience of a centrifugal particle receiver prototype, AIP Conference Proceedings 2126, 030018., 2019. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5117530
6. Yu Y, Hu F, Bai F, Wang Z. On-sun testing of a 1 MWth quartz tube bundle solid particle solar Receiver. Renewable Energy, 193, 383-397, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.05.036
7. Le Gal A, Grange B, Casanova M, Perez A, Baltus W, Tessonneaud M, Flamant G.
Experimental results of the MW-scale fluidized particle-in-tube solar receiver first test campaign. Solar Energy 262, 111907, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2023.111907
8. Le Gal A, Grange B, Tessonneaud M, Perez A, Escape C, Sans J-L, Flamant G. Thermal analysis of fluidized particle flows in a finned tube solar receiver. Solar Energy 191, pp. 19-33, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.08.062
9. PROMES-CNRS, MESO-STAR SAS. SOLSTICE, SOLar Simulation Tool In ConcEntrating optics, version 0.7.1 (2017) , France, https://www.meso-star.com/projects/solstice.html https://www.labex-solstice.fr/logiciel-solstice.html
10. Grange B. and Flamant G. Aiming Strategy on a Prototype-Scale Solar Receiver: Coupling of TABU Search, Ray-Tracing and Thermal Models. Sustainability 13, 3920, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073920
Published
How to Cite
Conference Proceedings Volume
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Benjamin Grange, Alex Le Gal, Gilles Flamant
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Accepted 2024-04-08
Published 2024-10-15
Funding data
-
European Commission
Grant numbers 727762
