ARTICLE IN PRESS

Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076

www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Two-phase flow modelling of a solar concentrator applied as ammonia

vapor generator in an absorption refrigerator
N. Ortegaa,, O. Garcı́a-Valladaresb, R. Bestb, V.H. Gómezb
a
Posgrado en Ingenierı´a (Energı́a), Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Privada Xochicalco s/n, Temixco, Morelos 62580, México
b
Centro de Investigación en Energı´a, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Privada Xochicalco s/n, Temixco, Morelos 62580, México
Received 9 January 2007; accepted 30 November 2007
Available online 28 January 2008

Abstract

A detailed one-dimensional numerical model describing the heat and fluid-dynamic behavior inside a compound parabolic
concentrator (CPC) used as an ammonia vapor generator has been developed. The governing equations (continuity, momentum, and
energy) inside the CPC absorber tube, together with the energy equation in the tube wall and the thermal analysis in the solar
concentrator were solved.
The computational method developed is useful for the solar vapor generator design applied to absorption cooling systems. The effect
on the outlet temperature and vapor quality of a range of CPC design parameters was analyzed. These parameters were the acceptance
half-angle and CPC length, the diameter and coating of the absorber tube, and the manufacture materials of the cover, the reflector, and
the absorber tube. It was found that the most important design parameters in order to obtain a higher ammonia–water vapor production
are, in order of priority: the reflector material, the absorber tube diameter, the selective surface, and the acceptance half-angle.
The direct ammonia–water vapor generation resulting from a 35 m long CPC was coupled to an absorption refrigeration system model
in order to determine the solar fraction, cooling capacity, coefficient of performance, and overall efficiency during a typical day of
operation. The results show that approximately 3.8 kW of cooling at 10 1C could be produced with solar and overall efficiencies up to
46.3% and 21.2%, respectively.
r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Compound parabolic concentrator; CPC; Ammonia–water mixture; Direct vapor generation; Absorption refrigeration; Mathematical model

1. Introduction and cooling demands without increasing greenhouse gases

The majority of the developing countries have power
generation capacity problems, that tend to increase as the
need for energy intensive conventional air conditioning
and refrigeration also increases. Alternative cooling
methods are required to decrease the power demand,
and the conventional high global warming potential
(GWP) and ozone depletion potential (ODP) refrigerant
usage. In addition, developed countries need new refrigera-
tion technologies as an alternative to conventional
compression refrigeration to meet their air-conditioning
Corresponding author. Tel.: +52 55 56 22 97 36;
fax: +52 55 56 22 97 91.
E-mail address: noa@cie.unam.mx (N. Ortega).
emissions [1].
Solar energy has the evident advantage that cooling is
generally required when solar radiation is available [2].
This is the main reason for sustained research into solar
cooling devices for at least three decades. These studies
include the combination of solar energy technologies with
thermal refrigeration technologies (as absorption, adsorp-
tion, and desiccant) to produce cooling and refrigeration
using medium to high-temperature solar technologies
(from 80 to 250 1C) [2–6].
Solar concentrator designs applied to steam generation
are found in diverse development stages, from evaluation
and improvement of solar devices, to full systems in test
stage for power generation [7,8]. In addition, some solar
concentrators applied as generators for intermittent
absorption refrigerators have been developed [9,10].

0960-1481/$ - see front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2007.11.016
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
N. Ortega et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076 2065

Nomenclature Z efficiency, dimensionless

j angle of involute generation, degree
Aa absorber tube heat transfer area, m2 m viscosity, kg/(m s)
Ac cover heat transfer area, m2 yC acceptance half-angle, degree
Ar reflector heat transfer area, m2 r density, kg/m3
At fluid flow cross section area, m2 s stefan–Boltzman constant, ( ¼ 5.6697  108 W/
Atabs absorber tube cross-section area (p(D2outD2in)/4), (m2 K4))
m2 u wind velocity, m/s
C area concentration ratio, dimensionless z effectiveness, dimensionless
COP coefficient of performance, dimensionless Dx spatial discretization step, m
Cp specific heat, J/(kg K) Dt temporal discretization step, s
D diameter, m F two-phase frictional multiplier, dimensionless
f friction factor, dimensionless
FR flow ratio, dimensionless Dimensionless numbers
g gravitational constant, ( ¼ 9.81 m/s2)
Gbn beam irradiance normal to the plane, W/m2 Pr prandtl number, ( ¼ mCp/l)
h enthalpy, J/kg Re reynolds number ð¼ rV~D=mÞ
H height, m
I solar irradiance, W/m2 subscripts
k thermal conductivity, W/(m K)
L length, m a absorber tube wall
m mass, kg c cover
m_ mass flow rate, kg/s co conductive
p perimeter, m en environment
P pressure, bar EV evaporation
q heat flow per unit area, W/m2 ex external
qu useful energy gain per absorber unit area, W/m2 f fluid
q0u useful energy gain per length unit, W/m g gas
qwall heat flux per absorber unit area from fluid to GE generation
wall, W/m2 i inlet
R thermal resistance, (m2 K)/W in inner
S solar absorbed energy per unit area, W/m2 inv involute
t time, s j number of control volume
T temperature, K l liquid phase
UL overall heat loss coefficient, W/(m2 K) o outlet
V volume, m3 out outer
~x
V velocity in the axial direction, m/s par parabola
w cover width, m r reflector
x axial coordinate ra radiative
xg vapor quality, dimensionless s saturation
X ammonia weight concentration, dimensionless sk sky
tp two-phase
Greek letters
Superscripts
a heat transfer coefficient, W/(m2 K))
b inclination angle of absorber tube, degree – arithmetical average over a CV
e emittance, dimensionless  integral average over a CV
eg void fraction, dimensionless o value of previous instant
f generic dependent variable

Flat plate collectors have been applied to direct
refrigerant evaporation in solar-assisted heat pumps, where
a two-phase refrigerant flows through the collectors instead
of utilizing a heat exchanger between the collector and the
evaporator [11].
Since 1990, parabolic trough solar concentrators have
been used to evaporate water to produce steam directly on
the absorber tube [12]. The technology developed is known
as direct steam generation (DSG), where the vapor
produced is mainly applied for power generation. DSG
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2066 N. Ortega et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076
presents many advantages compared to the heating oil-
based technology, since DSG eliminates costly synthetic
oil, intermediate heat transport piping, special type
equipment to run the high-temperature oil, and the oil
for steam heat exchanger [13].
Compound parabolic concentrators (CPCs) are a good
choice for applications in direct evaporation, since these
stationary collectors have a good quality rate between cost
and performance at medium temperature levels [14].
Based on the main advantages of DSG, a CPC was
designed in order to directly generate ammonia from an
ammonia–water solution. Ammonia vapor would be
utilized in an ammonia–water absorption solar refrigera-
tor. Other applications not analyzed here could be the use
of the CPC as a heat source for a direct ammonia–water
solution evaporator for applications in combined power
and cooling thermodynamic cycles, as proposed by
Goswami and Xu [15].
In an attempt to reduce heat losses and demonstrate its
feasibility, a CPC was modelled and designed in order to
generate ammonia vapor inside its absorber tube. The
theoretical analysis of the evaporation process inside the
CPC was emphasized, through a detailed one-dimensional
numerical simulation of the thermal and fluid-dynamic
behavior of two-phase flow. The CPC model was coupled
to a complete single-stage absorption refrigeration cycle
model in order to calculate the theoretical cooling capacity
and coefficient of performance (COP) under different
working conditions.
To our knowledge, solar concentrators have not been
applied as direct ammonia vapor generators in a contin-
uous thermal refrigeration system.
1.1. A brief description of the CPC models
Initially, the models developed to describe CPC optical
and thermal performance were restricted to the flat
absorber type [16]. In these models, convective heat
transfer was usually represented by flat plate film
coefficients. The simplest models for CPC with tubular
absorber have not considered absorption of high wave-
length over reflective surfaces [16].
Hsieh developed the mathematical formulation for the
thermal processes in a tubular CPC, where heat exchange
between components was predicted [17]. Chew et al. [18]
developed a finite-element model for a CPC with tubular
absorber; they considered that the absorber tube and the
cover were isothermic, while the reflectors were considered
as adiabatic boundaries.
Eames and Norton [16] developed and validated a
two-dimensional model in steady state in order to simulate
the optical and thermal behavior of a through-type
CPC. Ray tracing and finite-element analysis of convection
heat transfer were applied. Solar beam and diffuse
radiation were considered in the optical analysis, irradiance
and absorption were assumed homogeneous, and that
the energy reaching the absorber tube was completely
absorbed. The study included reflector conduction, high-
wave radiative interchange, and heat removal in the
tubular absorber.
Tchinda et al. [19] analyzed the heat exchange in a CPC
collector, where axial heat transfer in the tubular absorber
was included. They developed an explicit expression in
order to calculate the fluid temperature as a function of the
coordinate space in the flux direction and the time-
dependent solar intensity.
In this paper, a simple method was carried out in order
to establish the energy balances in a CPC, where the
absorber tube operates as an ammonia–water mixture
direct vapor generator in a solar absorption refrigerator.
The evaporation process was studied in order to fulfil the
thermal and fluid-dynamic characterization inside the CPC
absorber tube.
The system under investigation consisted of a trough-
type CPC with a steel tubular absorber without an
evacuated glass shell. Thermodynamic equilibrium between
the liquid and vapor phases was supposed. A one-
dimensional numerical simulation of the thermal and
fluid-dynamic behavior of two-phase flow was developed.
The governing equations (continuity, momentum, and
energy) inside the tube, together with the energy equation
in the tube wall and the thermal analysis in the solar
concentrator, were solved iteratively in a segregated
manner. The discretized governing equations in fluid flow
were coupled using an implicit step-by-step method in the
flow direction.
By means of the model results, a CPC module was
designed and theoretically evaluated as ammonia generator
in an ammonia–water absorption solar refrigerator.
1.2. CPC module
In a previous work [20], a mathematical model was
developed in order to evaluate the temperature distribution
of a CPC array proposed to be used as a vapor generator in
an absorption ammonia–water refrigeration system.
It was established that the mixture temperature increases
and wall absorber tube temperature decreases when the
ammonia–water mixture reaches saturation conditions,
which improves the heat transfer process.
Ortega et al. [21,22] developed a more accurate model,
where the thermal and fluid-dynamic behavior of evapora-
tion process at the solar concentrator absorber tube
was numerically simulated. This analysis was made
with a control volume (CV) method on the absorber tube,
and the discretized equations were coupled using a fully
implicit step-by-step method in the flow direction.
The conduction in the internal tube wall was solved
using the TDMA algorithm. A separated flow model was
applied and two different two-phase flow convective
heat transfer coefficients were used. A CPC prototype of
2 m length, 0.66 m width and 0.84 m height was designed,
with a solar concentration of 3.5  and an aperture
angle of 151.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
N. Ortega et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076
In this paper a final CPC model was developed and used
for the design analysis. An auxiliary heater was added to
the complete refrigeration system in order to maintain a
constant refrigeration load. The study consists of the
thermal analysis of the CPC performance during a typical
operating day. A new subroutine was developed to
simulate the final CPC model coupled with the absorption
ammonia–water refrigerator.
2. Ammonia–water absorption refrigerator
Fig. 1 shows the single-stage ammonia–water absorption
solar refrigerator. The proposed solar refrigerator includes
the following components: a generator (CPC), a rectifier, a
condenser, an evaporator, an absorber, a flash tank, an
economizer, a pre-cooler, a pump, and two expansion
valves. A model for steady-state single-stage ammonia–
water absorption refrigeration system was developed to
simulate the results obtained by the CPC model in order to
evaluate the performance of the complete cycle.
2.1. Operative description
Following the schematic diagram in Fig. 1, ammonia
vapor (99.5 wt%) leaves the rectifier as overheated vapor at
state 4, at the high pressure of the system. The refrigerant
vapor is cooled and liquefied in the condenser as saturated
liquid, at state 5; it is then subcooled in the pre-cooler
(state 6) and thereafter passes through an expansion valve,
where the pressure is reduced, giving as a result a cooled
Fig. 1. Ammonia–water absorption solar refrigerator with a CPC as vapor generator.
2067
two-phase mixture at state 7. Liquid ammonia enters the
evaporator, where on extracting heat from the cooling
water, it is converted into vapor, producing the refrigerat-
ing effect, and then exits as saturated vapor in state 8. It is
then superheated in the pre-cooler (state 9). The relatively
cold ammonia vapor then enters the absorber, where it is
condensed and absorbed by the weak ammonia–water
solution. The absorption of ammonia is exothermic, so a
heat exchange equipment in the absorber is needed in order
to cool the hot solution and improve its absorption
capacity. The strong ammonia solution leaves the absorber
at state 10 and enters the pump, leaving at high pressure at
state 11. It is then introduced in an economizer, where it
receives heat and leaves state 12. It then enters the CPC
generator, where it receives solar generated heat, reaches
the saturation point, and vaporizes, leaving state 13 as a
vapor–liquid mixture. If additional heat is necessary it is
added to the mixture by the auxiliary heater in order to
reach the operating conditions at state 1. The two-phase
high-pressure mixture, enters the flash tank where liquid
and vapor are separated, the liquid phase is mixed with the
condensed vapor originating from in the rectifier (state 3).
This weak ammonia solution enters the economizer at state
14, where heat is extracted, and leaves state 15. It then
passes through an expansion valve, where the pressure is
reduced (state 16) in order to enter the absorber. The vapor
coming from the flash tank separator enters the rectifier, in
which through heat removal and partial condensation,
water, leaving state 4 is removed. In this way the operation
of the cycle is completed.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2068 N. Ortega et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076

2.2. Methodology for the complete cycle energy analysis 3. Coupling between the CPC model and a single-stage
absorption system model
The purpose of the calculation sequence presented here
is to obtain the operation conditions of the ammonia– A numerical analysis was carried out for the designed
water absorption solar refrigerator system shown in CPC illustrated in Fig. 2, which has the geometrical and
Fig. 1. An overall energy balance has been applied to optical characteristics established from the parametric
all the components of the system (with the exception analysis shown below. A 35 m long row is considered as a
of the CPC model, where a detailed numerical simulation CPC module in this calculation, which could be scaled up.
has been developed). The following assumptions have The calculations were made for a non-tracking CPC,
been made: installed in Temixco, Morelos, México (18150.360 N,
99114.070 W). The CPC analyzed had an inlet temperature
 The high and low pressures of the system are 11 and according to the inlet generation temperature obtained
2.8 bar, respectively. Pressure drop through elements is with the absorption cycle simulation, and a generator
neglected (with the exception of the CPC model). pressure of 11 bar.
 Fluid leaves the condenser as saturated liquid (state 5). The study consists of the thermal analysis of the CPC
 A saturated vapor (state 8) exits from the evaporator. performance during a typical operation day (March 15th,
 Ammonia vapor (99.5 wt%) leaves the rectifier (state 4). 1996).
 Expansion valves are considered isenthalpic.
 The pre-cooler has an effectiveness of 0.5 and an
economizer of 0.86. 4. Mathematical formulation
 The ammonia–water solution pump driving power is
negligible. Fig. 3 shows the absorber tube cross-section. Subcooled
ammonia–water mixture enters the tube at position 0 with
The energy balance analysis over each component of the a mass flow m,_ and an inner temperature Tf,i. The absorber
system is coupled with the CPC model previously devel- tube receives a useful energy gain qu. Ammonia–water
oped in order to evaluate the performance of the complete mixture starts to evaporate at a certain length Ls, where
ammonia–water absorption refrigeration systems through saturation temperature Tf,s is reached. Finally, the two-
the calculation of the COP, the flow ratio, the solar phase mixture is out at position L with an outside quality
fraction, and the solar and overall efficiencies. xgf,o and temperature Tf,o.
The COP for cooling is defined as the ratio between the
cooling capacity (evaporation heat extracted inside the
evaporator, QEV) and the generation heat (QGE): Ac
L
Q W
COP ¼ EV . (1) O
QGE
The flow ratio, FR, is the ratio between the solution flow in θC
the circuit constituted by the generator and the absorber
H
_ 1 ), and the refrigerant flow in the main circuit that joint
(m
the condenser and the evaporator (m _ 4 ). This ratio indicates
D
the strong ammonia solution mass flow needed to produce N Ar
a unit of refrigerant vapor, in this case, ammonia vapor: M
Aa
_1
m
FR ¼ . (2) Fig. 2. CPC section showing acceptance half-angle yC, aperture area Ac,
_4
m
tubular absorber area Aa, reflecting area Ar, reflector segments MN and
Solar fraction was defined as the percentage of the total NO, absorber tube diameter D, concentrator height H, width W, and
energy required to generate the ammonia that was achieved length L.
by the CPC.
Solar efficiency is the ratio between the useful energy
r quΔx
gain obtained by the absorber tube area (Arqu) and the
solar irradiance that reaches the aperture area (AaI):
QGE Ar qu m
Zsolar ¼ ¼ . (3) x
Aa I Aa I
xgf,o,Tf,o
Overall efficiency is the product of COP and solar Tf,i 0 x x+Δx Ls Tf,s L
efficiency:
Fig. 3. Absorber tube cross-section showing one-phase and two-phase
Zoverall ¼ Zsolar COP: (4) zones of ammonia–water mixture.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
N. Ortega et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076 2069

The study was divided in three subroutines: fluid flow 4.2. Solar thermal analysis
inside the absorber tube, heat transfer in the wall tube, and
solar thermal analysis. The useful energy gain per CPC length unit q0u , expressed
in terms of the local absorber temperature Ta and the
4.1. Fluid flow inside the absorber tube absorber solar radiation per aperture unit S, is [23]
Ac S Aa U L
Taking into account the characteristic geometry of q0u ¼  ðT a  T en Þ. (8)
L L
the absorber tube (diameter, length, roughness, and angle),
the governing equations have been integrated assuming the The useful energy gain can be obtained from the last
following assumptions: expression as
Qu ¼ Ac S  Aa U L ðT a  T en Þ. (9)
 One-dimensional flow: P(x, t), h(x, t), T(x, t), etc.
Then, the useful energy gain per unit of absorber area qu is
 Non-participant radiation medium and negligible radi-
obtained as
ant heat exchange between surfaces.
 Axial heat conduction inside the fluid was neglected.
qu ¼
Ac
S  U L ðT a  T en Þ ¼ CS  U L ðT a  T en Þ. (10)
Aa
The semi-integrated governing equations over a finite Cover and absorber tube area were defined as
CV have the following form:
Ac ¼ wL; Aa ¼ pDout L. (11)
 Continuity: The useful energy gain depends on the absorbed solar
radiation S that is equal to the cover incident solar energy
qm reduced by optical losses in the concentrator [23]; thermal
_ jj1 þ
½m ¼ 0. (5) losses in the cover, the reflector, and the absorber tube are
qt
represented as the overall heat loss coefficient UL.
 Momentum: Absorbed solar radiation S is a function of the radiative
properties of the CPC components (reflectance, emittance,
absorptance, and transmittance) and environmental con-
qm~_ ditions that depend on solar time (solar radiation, solar
_ g ng jj1 þ ½m
½m _ l nl jj1 þ Dx
qt position, and ambient temperature). Absorber solar radia-
¼ ½Pjj1 At  t~ p Dx  mg sin b. ð6Þ tion was calculated with the method presented by Duffie
and Beckman [23].
The overall heat loss coefficient UL depends on the
 Energy: temperatures of the CPC components through the indivi-
qmg dual heat loss coefficients:
~_ l j þ ½m
m½e _ g ðeg  el Þjj1 þ ð~eg  e~l Þ 
j1
qt Rcen Rren
q~eg q~el qP~ UL ¼
þ mg þ ml  At Dx Rcen þ Rren þ Rrc
qt qt qt  1 )1
qm ~ 1 1
þ ð~el  ēl Þ ¼ q_ u p Dx, ð7Þ þ þ , ð12Þ
qt Rac þ Rcenr Rar þ Rrenc
where f ~ represents the integral volume average of a
where
generic variable f over the CV and f̄ its arithmetic
average between the inlet and outlet of the CV. The Rren Rrc
Rrenc ¼ ,
subscript and superscript in the brackets indicate Rcen þ Rren þ Rrc
½X jj1 ¼ X j  X j1 , i.e., the difference between the Rcen Rrc
Rcenr ¼ , ð13Þ
quantity X at the outlet section and the inlet section. Rcen þ Rren þ Rrc
and finally
In the governing equations, the evaluation of the shear
stress is performed by means of a friction factor f. This Rcen ¼ ðaco;cen þ ara;csk Þ1 ,
factor is defined from the expression: t ¼ F(f/4)(G2/2r), Rac ¼ ðaco;ac þ ara;ac Þ1 ,
where F is the two-phase factor multiplier. The one-
dimensional model also requires the knowledge of the two- Rren ¼ ðaco;ren þ ara;rsk Þ1 ,
phase flow structure, which is evaluated by means of the Rrc ¼ ðaco;rc þ ara;rc Þ1 ,
void fraction eg. Finally, heat transfer through the absorber
Rar ¼ ðaco;ar þ ara;ar Þ1 . ð14Þ
tube wall and fluid temperature are related by the
convective heat transfer coefficient a, which is defined as The convective heat transfer coefficient between the
a ¼ q_ wall =ðT wall  T fluid Þ. reflector and the cover aco,rc was fixed at a constant value
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2070 N. Ortega et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076

of 5 W/(m2 K), as it has been previously evaluated by two well-defined sections: subcooled liquid region and
Prapas et al. [24] and Hsieh [17]. equilibrium liquid–vapor region, a slope change is ex-
The convective heat transfer coefficients between the pected, due to the use of different empirical heat transfer
cover and the ambient, and between the reflector and the correlations and their magnitudes for both regions. Thus,
ambient are, respectively, [23] after comparing different empirical correlations presented
Ac in the technical literature, the following ones have been
aco;cen ¼ ð5:7 þ 3:8uÞ , (15) selected:
Aa

Ar 4.3.1. Subcooled liquid region

aco;ren ¼ ð5:7 þ 3:8uÞ , (16) The Gnielinski [25] correlation was used to calculate the
Aa
heat transfer coefficient assuming constant heat flux in the
where the reflector area Ar was calculated by
" # case of laminar flow:
Z fpar
j2 1 ðp=2Þ þ yC þ j  cosðj  yC Þ af;l ¼ maxðaf;l ; 4:364Þ, (27)
Ar ¼ Dout Dx inv þ pffiffiffi dj .
4 2 finv ½1 þ sinðj  yC Þ3=2
where
(17)
ðf =8ÞðRe  1000ÞPr k
The convective heat transfer coefficients between the af;l ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  , (28)
1 þ 12:7 ðf =8Þ Pr2=3  1 Din
absorber tube and the reflector and between the absorber
tube and the cover were expressed, respectively, by [17]
f ¼ ð1:82log10 Re  1:64Þ2 . (29)
ðT a  T r Þ
aco;ar ¼ 3:25 þ 0:0085 , (18) The friction factor was evaluated from the expression
2Dout proposed by Churchill [26]. In the subcooled boiling region
ðT a  T c Þ (if it exists) the heat transfer coefficient was estimated
aco;ac ¼ 3:25 þ 0:0085 , (19) according to Kandlikar [27].
2Dout

Ar 4.3.2. Equilibrium two-phase region

ara;rsk ¼ r sðT 2r þ T 2sk ÞðT r þ T sk Þ , (20) In the two-phase flow region the void fraction was
Aa
estimated from the equation of Rouhani and Axelsson [28].
Ac For the convective heat transfer coefficient the flow boiling
ara;csk ¼ c sðT 2c þ T 2sk ÞðT c þ T sk Þ , (21)
Aa model proposed by Zürcher et al. [29] was applied.
The friction factor was calculated from the same
sðT 2c þ T 2r ÞðT c þ T r Þ Ar equation as in the case of subcooled liquid flow using
ara;rc ¼ , (22)
ð1  c Þ=c þ ðð1  r Þ=r ÞðAc =Ar Þ Aa a correction factor (two-phase frictional multiplier F)
according to Friedel [30].
sðT 2a þ T 2c ÞðT a þ T c Þ
ara;ac ¼ , (23)
ð1=c Þ þ ðAc =Aa Þðð1=a Þ  1Þ 4.4. Evaluation of ammonia–water thermodynamic and
thermophysical properties
sðT 2a þ T 2r ÞðT a þ T r Þ
ara;ar ¼ . (24)
ð1  r Þ=r þ ðð1  a Þ=a ÞðAr =Aa Þ Temperature, mass fraction, and all the thermophysical
The temperatures of cover and reflector a necessary in properties were calculated using matrix functions of the
order to solve Eq. (10). Both were determined by means of pressure and enthalpy obtained using the REFPROP
the energy balances in each CPC component: version7.0 [31], i.e.
ðara;ac þ aco;ac ÞT a þ ara;csk T sk þ aco;cen T en þ ðaco;rc  ara;rc ÞT r f ¼ fðP; hÞ where f ¼ T; xg ; r; . . . (30)
Tc ¼ ,
ara;ac þ aco;ar þ ara;csk þ aco;cen þ aco;rc  ara;rc Transport properties (viscosity, thermal conductivity, and
(25) surface tension) were calculated with the correlations
proposed by Conde [32].
ðara;ar þ aco;ar ÞT a þ aco;ren T en þ ara;rsk T sk þ ðaco;rc  ara;rc ÞT c
Tr ¼ .
ara;ar þ aco;ar þ aco;ren þ ara;rsk þ aco;rc  ara;rc
5. Numerical resolution
(26)
Numerical analysis was carried out by means of a CV
method. The discretized equations were coupled using a
4.3. Evaluation of empirical coefficients fully implicit step-by-step method in the flow direction.
From the known values at the inlet section and guessed
The mathematical model of fluid flow inside the absorber values of the wall boundary conditions, the variable
tube requires some additional local information obtained values at the outlet of each CV were iteratively obtained
from empirical correlations. Since the fluid flow presents from the discretized governing equations. This solution
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
N. Ortega et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076 2071

(outlet values) was the inlet values for the next CV. The
procedure was carried out until the end of the absorber
tube was reached.
The governing equations discretized for each CV are
presented for the fluid flow, the absorber tube, and the
solar analysis.
5.1. Fluid flow analysis
For each CV, a set of algebraic equations is obtained by
a discretization of the governing Eqs. (5)–(7). The transient
terms of the governing equations are discretized using the
following approximation: qf/qtffi(ff1)/Dt, where f
represents a generic dependent variable (f=h, P, T, etc.);
superscript ‘‘o’’ indicates the value of the previous instant.
The averages of the different variables have been estimated
by the arithmetic mean between their values at the inlet and
~ ffi f̄  ðf þ f =2Þ.
outlet sections, that is: fj j j jþ1
Based on the numerical approaches indicated above, the
governing Equations. (5)–(7) can be discretized to obtain
the value of the dependent variables (mass flow rate,
pressure, and enthalpy) at the outlet section of each CV.
The final form of the governing equations is given below.
The mass flow rate is obtained from the discretized
continuity equation
At Dx
_j ¼ m
m _ j1  ðr̄tp  r̄otp Þ,
Dt
where the two-phase density is obtained from the relation
rtp=egrg+(1eg)rl.
In terms of the mass flow rate, gas and liquid velocities
~g þ ð1  xg ÞV
b ¼ ½xg V ~l 2  g sin bDx þ hj1 ,
j1
o o
c ¼ 2ðP̄j1  P̄j1 Þ  r̄otp ðhj1  2h̄j1 Þ
 ðr̄V ~o2 Þ.
~2  r̄o V ð35Þ
j1 j1
The above-mentioned conservation equations of mass,
momentum, and energy are applicable to transient two-
phase flow. Situations of steady flow and/or single-phase
flow (liquid or gas) are particular cases of this formulation.
Moreover, the mathematical formulation in terms of
enthalpy gives generality of the analysis (only one equation
is needed for all the regions) and allows dealing in easy
form with cases of ammonia–water mixtures. In this study
the model was solved considering steady state.
5.2. Absorber tube wall
The conduction equation has been written assuming
one-dimensional transient temperature distribution.
A characteristic CV is shown in Fig. 4, where P represents
the central node, E and W indicate its neighbors. The CV
faces are indicated by e, w, n, and s. Integrating the
conduction equation over this CV, the following equation
was obtained:
qh~
ðq~ wall ps  q~ u pn ÞDx þ ðq~_ w  q~_ e ÞAtabs ¼ m
, (36)
qt
(31) where q~ wall was evaluated using the convective heat transfer
coefficient and temperature in the fluid flow (q¯_ wall ¼
aðT wall  T fluid Þ), and the conductive heat fluxes were
evaluated using the Fourier law:

are calculated as qT a qT a
q~_ e ¼ ke ; q~_ w ¼ kw . (37)
" #   qx e qx w
~ _
mx g ~ _  xg Þ
mð1
Vg ¼ ; Vl ¼ , (32) The following equation was obtained for each node of the
rg g At rl ð1  g ÞAt grid:
The discretized momentum equation is solved for the outlet aT a;j ¼ bT a;jþ1 þ cT a;j1 þ d, (38)
pressure: where the coefficients were
(
Dx f̄ m ¯_ 2 ke Atabs kw Atabs
Pj ¼ Pj1  pDin F b¼ ; c¼ ,
At 4 2r̄tp A2t Dx Dx
 j Atabs Dx
m_ a ¼ b þ c þ af;j ps Dx þ r Cp;
þ ~ ~
ðxg V g þ ð1  xg ÞV l Þ Dt
Dx j1 Atabs Dx
 d ¼ ðaf;j ps T̄ f;j þ qu;j pn ÞDx þ r CpT ow;j . ð39Þ
¯_  m
m ¯_ o Dt
þrtp At g sin b þ . ð33Þ
Dt The coefficients mentioned above are applicable for
2pjpN1; for j ¼ 1 and j ¼ N adequate coefficients were
From the energy Equation (3) and the continuity Equation
(1), the following equation is obtained for the outlet
enthalpy:
ð2pDin DxÞqwall  am _ j þ bm _ j1 þ cAt Dx=Dt W w P n e E
hj ¼ , (34)
m_j þm _ j1 þ r̄otp At Dx=Dt j-1 j j+1

where s
x
qwall ¼ af ðT a;j  T̄ f;j Þ,
a ¼ ½xg V~g þ ð1  xg ÞV ~l 2 þ g sin bDx  hj1 , Fig. 4. Discretized absorber tube wall.
j
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2072 N. Ortega et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076
used taking into account the axial heat conduction or
temperature boundary conditions. The set of heat conduc-
tion discretized equations was solved using the TDMA
algorithm [33].
5.3. Numerical solver
The solution process was carried out on the basis of a
global algorithm that solves in a segregated manner the
fluid flow inside the absorber tube, the heat conduction in
the absorber tube wall, and the heat transfer in the solar
concentrator. The coupling between the three main
subroutines was performed iteratively following the proce-
dure described below:
(1) For fluid flow inside the absorber tube, the equations
were solved considering the absorber tube wall
temperature distribution as a boundary condition,
and evaluating the convective heat transfer in each
fluid CV.
(2) In the absorber tube wall, the temperature distribution
was re-calculated using the fluid flow temperature and
the convective heat transfer coefficient evaluated in the
preceding step, and considering the useful energy gain
as boundary condition.
(3) The useful energy gain was obtained by means of the
thermal analysis carried out on the CPC components,
and the absorber tube wall temperature distribution
calculated in the previous steps.
Global convergence was reached when between two
consecutive loops of the three main subroutines a strict
convergence criterion was verified for all the CVs in the
domain.
6. Results and discussion
The CPC model developed was applied to analyze the
effects of design parameters; these included: the acceptance
half-angle and length of the CPC, the diameter and
selective surface of the absorber tube, and the material
properties of the cover, the reflector, and the absorber tube.
The calculations were carried out for 57 without-
tracking CPC configurations installed in Temixco,
Morelos, México (18150.360 N, 99114.070 W, altitude
1219 mosl), on March 15th at solar noon, with a solar
irradiance of 991 W/m2, and a solar absorbed energy per
aperture unit area of 649.3 W/m2.
The inlet temperature, pressure, and mass flow rate of
the ammonia–water solution were considered to be 81.7 1C,
11 bar, and 0.0483 kg/s, respectively. The aperture area was
maintained constant at 23.2 m2 by varying the truncation
percentage and length of the CPC configurations, in order
to have the same energy input in all study cases.
The acceptance half-angles selected for the analysis were
151, 211, 271, 301, and 401; the absorber tube diameter was
between 21.3 and 101.6 mm. Three different coatings on the
absorber tube were considered: a commercially available
selective surface, cermet, and a commercial black paint.
Three different cover materials were analyzed: temperate
glass, a polycarbonate, and glass with antireflective surface.
The reflectors studied were: mirror quality stainless steel,
highly polished aluminum, and highly polished aluminum
with a protective layer. The three absorber tubes evaluated
were: carbon steel, stainless steel, and aluminum, since
ammonia–water mixture is corrosive to copper.
6.1. Effect of tube diameter
Fig. 5 shows the fluid temperature and vapor quality
distribution along the CPC for seven different carbon steel
absorber tube diameters, with a commercial selective
surface and acceptance half-angle of 151. The difference
between the minimum and the maximum absorber tube
diameter (21.3 and 101.6 mm) in the outlet fluid tempera-
ture was around 3.4 1C, from 90.1 to 93.5 1C, respectively.
For the vapor quality, the difference was 0.0117, from
0.0730 to 0.0847. The best result for both fluid temperature
and vapor quality were obtained for an absorber tube
diameter of 73.0 mm (outlet temperature of 93.9 1C and
vapor quality of 0.0897), which practically had the same
behavior as at 60.3 mm; both were followed by 101.6 mm.
The 21.3 mm tube presented a higher vapor quality than
26.7, 33.4, and 48.3 mm, resulting from a higher pressure
drop that helped the evaporation process. Numerical
results obtained with stainless steel and aluminum as
absorber tube had the same tendencies. The fluid tempera-
ture reached is directly proportional to the tube diameter;
this is not so for the exit vapor quality. Therefore, a
compromise exists between the heat transfer area (that
depends directly on tube diameter) and the pressure drop,
which affects the fluid temperature and the vapor quality
distribution, in favor of one or the other.
Fig. 5. Vapor quality and fluid temperature distribution along the CPC
for seven different diameters of the carbon steel absorber tube. One label
for each y-axis that is ordered from the top curve to the bottom curve is
shown.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
N. Ortega et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076 2073

The slope change of the fluid temperature at approxi- Table 1

mately 2 m2 of aperture area is because at this point the Geometrical characteristics of the CPC configurations with several
aperture half-angles
fluid changes from subcooled liquid to two-phase flow.
Due to this, the evaluation of the heat transfer coefficient yC (deg) L (m) W (m) % Truncated area C Creal
between both regions has abrupt changes that produce this
tendency. Moreover, the use of different empirical heat 15 35.0 0.66 46.13 3.86 3.50
21 100.5 0.23 84.85 2.79 1.22
transfer correlations for both regions produces a disconti-
27 100.5 0.23 76.44 2.29 1.22
nuity in the CV where the transition occurs. This tendency 30 100.5 0.23 71.76 2.00 1.22
appears in all the following figures when the evaporation 40 100.5 0.23 53.90 1.56 1.22
process takes place.

6.2. Effect of acceptance half-angle

Fig. 6 shows the fluid temperature distribution and

vapor quality for five CPC acceptance half-angles. The
carbon steel absorber tube diameter was 60.3 mm for all the
cases. It was observed that 151, the lowest acceptance half-
angle that corresponds to a real concentration ratio of 3.5,
offered the best results in both variables, with an outlet
fluid temperature of 93.9 1C, and outlet vapor quality of
0.0890. As can be seen in Table 1, in order to maintain a
constant heat input it was necessary to modify the other
CPC dimensions.

6.3. Effect of absorber coating and reflector material

Fig. 7 shows the vapor quality and fluid temperature

distribution along the CPC for three coatings of the carbon
steel absorber tube, and three manufacture reflector
materials. The absorber tube and cover material properties
were also analysed, but no important effect on the results
were found. All the curves were analyzed with temperate
glass as cover, and carbon steel as absorber tube. The
combination of highly polished aluminum with protective
layer as reflector, and cermet as selective surface offered the
best results, with an outlet fluid temperature of 95.4 1C, and
outlet vapor quality of 0.1083. On the other hand, the
Fig. 6. Vapor quality and fluid temperature distribution along the CPC
for five different acceptance half-angles.
Fig. 7. Vapor quality and fluid temperature distribution along the CPC
for three coatings of the carbon steel absorber tube, and three different
reflector materials. The close captions are distributed as reflector/coating,
where HPA-PL means highly polished aluminium with a protective layer,
HPA means highly polished aluminium, MQSS means mirror quality
stainless steel, CSS means commercial selective surface, and CBP means
commercial black paint.
worst results of the cases shown in Fig. 7 were obtained for
the case with mirror quality stainless steel, and commercial
selective surface, whose outlet fluid temperature and vapor
quality were 91.8 1C, and 0.0617, respectively. This curve
reveals that the most important influence in the quantity of
vapor obtained by a CPC is the reflector material, followed
by the coating of the absorber tube.
From the analysis of the last three figures, a design CPC
module with the geometrical and optical characteristics
presented in Tables 2 and 3 was chosen to be coupled with
a single-stage absorption system model. A 60.3 mm
absorber tube diameter was selected since, together with
the 73.0 mm one, if provides the best results in vapor
quality and temperature rise, but with the advantage of a
more compact CPC device and better wetting inside the
diameter tube, since the fluid flow is relatively low. The
simulation was carried out considering a carbon steel
absorber tube, highly polished aluminum reflector, com-
mercial selective surface, and temperate glass cover. The
use of highly polished aluminum with protective layer
reflector was not contemplated as this material must
be imported and the total manufacture cost increases.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2074 N. Ortega et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076

Table 2
Geometric characteristics of the CPC collector

yC (deg) Creal Dout (mm) Din (mm) H (m) W (m) L (m)

151 3.5 60.3 52.5 0.76 0.66 35

Table 3
Radiative properties of the CPC components

Components Absorptance Emittance Reflectance

Carbon steel absorber/commercial 0.91 0.38 0.09

selective surface
Temperate glass cover 0.03 0.94 0.05
Highly polished aluminum 0.11 0.05 0.87
reflector

Fig. 8. Vapor quality and temperature distribution along the designed

CPC (March 15th at solar noon).
The commercial selective surface was selected over cermet
because of its lower cost and easier application.

6.4. Temperature distribution and vapor quality inside the

CPC module

Fig. 8 shows the distribution of the temperatures of the

reflector, the cover, the absorber tube wall, and the
ammonia–water mixture, as well as the vapor quality
along the design CPC module for May 15th at solar noon.
The ammonia–water mixture enters the CPC with a
subcooling degree of 5.4 1C. The outlet vapor quality
obtained was 0.0891, which represents an ammonia vapor
production of 0.0043 kg/s. The abrupt change in the
absorber tube temperature when the ammonia–water
mixture begins to evaporate is because, as explained
before, the convective heat transfer coefficient from the
subcooling liquid region and the two-phase flow presents a
discontinuity, due to the use of different empirical heat
Fig. 9. Vapor quality and fluid temperature distribution along the CPC
transfer correlations for both regions. for a typical day of operation.
Fig. 9 illustrates the fluid temperature and vapor quality
distribution for a typical day during seven operation hours.
As expected, the outlet vapor quality increases with an Some refrigeration variables were analysed, such as
increase in solar radiation, reaching a maximum of 0.0891 cooling capacity, cooling COP, refrigeration efficiency, and
(ammonia vapor production of 0.0043 kg/s for the solar flow ratio.
noon). Also a minimum quality of 0.0316 (ammonia vapor Table 4 shows the values obtained by coupling the CPC
production of 0.0015 kg/s) is observed for 10:00 h. At 9:00 module and the absorption refrigeration system for the
and 15:00 h there was no vapor production, but a fluid seven cases analyzed during a typical operation day. It can
temperature rise of 1.2, and 2.9 1C was obtained, respec- be seen that for the CPC module, the outlet temperature
tively. Due to the lower vapor production estimated at varies, from 92.6 1C for the baseline case at 11:00 h to lower
9:00, 10:00, 14:00, and 15:00 h, an auxiliary heater is used values at 9:00, 10:00, 14:00, and 15:00 h, of 82.9, 89.5, 89.7,
in series after the CPC in order to reach the required outlet and 84.5 1C, respectively. At 12:00 and 13:00 h the outlet
temperature and the vapor production obtained around temperature increases to 94.1 and 92.7 1C, respectively. The
11:00 h, and therefore obtaining a reasonable cooling CPC module efficiency is 43.4% for the baseline case at
capacity for the complete system. The objective is to 11:00 h, and lower at 9:00, 10:00, 14:00, and 15:00 h. The
improve the cooling capacity and efficiency of the solar fraction, fixed as 100% at 11:00 h, is only 3.2% at
ammonia–water absorption solar refrigerator, according 9:00 h, 51.7% at 10:00 h, 55.5% at 14:00 h, and 7.6% at
to the simulation results by coupling the CPC model and a 15:00 h. The cooling capacity is 3.81 kW and is higher
single-stage absorption system model simulator. at 12:00 and 13:00 h, being 4.79 and 3.90 kW, respectively.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
N. Ortega et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076 2075

Table 4
Results comparison of a refrigeration system operated during a typical day coupled with the designed CPC

Time (h)

9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00

Ammonia concentration (kg NH3/kg sol)

Refrigerant (4) 0.995 0.995 0.995 0.995 0.995 0.995 0.995
Strong solution (10) 0.387 0.387 0.387 0.387 0.387 0.387 0.387
Weak solution (13) 0.363 0.363 0.363 0.357 0.362 0.363 0.363
Pressure (bar)
Condensation 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
Evaporation 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8
Mass flow rate (kg/s)
Refrigerant (4) 0.0033 0.0033 0.0033 0.0041 0.0033 0.0033 0.0033
Strong solution (10) 0.0483 0.0483 0.0483 0.0483 0.0483 0.0483 0.0483
Weak solution (13) 0.0448 0.0448 0.0448 0.0438 0.0447 0.0448 0.0448
Main temperatures (1C)
Inlet evaporator (7) 10.80 10.80 10.80 10.80 10.80 10.80 10.80
Inlet condenser 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00
Inlet generator (12) 81.65 81.65 81.83 83.30 81.94 81.65 81.65
Outlet CPC (13) 82.87 89.46 92.60 94.12 92.74 89.70 84.54
Outlet generator (1) 92.60 92.60 92.60 94.12 92.74 92.60 92.60
Outlet absorber (10) 39.19 39.19 39.19 39.19 39.19 39.19 39.19
CPC
Solar energy (kW) 7.154 13.968 20.120 22.601 20.120 13.968 7.154
Useful energy gain (kW) 0.278 4.514 8.731 10.455 8.896 4.844 0.660
Solar efficiency (%) 3.889 32.317 43.398 46.257 44.213 34.683 9.224
Energetic behaviour
Flow ratio (FR) 14.85 14.85 14.85 11.82 14.51 14.85 14.85
Auxiliary energy (kW) 8.45 4.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.89 8.07
Solar fraction (%) 3.18 51.70 100.00 100.00 100.00 55.48 7.56
Cooling capacity (kW) 3.81 3.81 3.81 4.79 3.90 3.81 3.81
Cooling COP 0.437 0.437 0.437 0.458 0.439 0.437 0.437
Overall efficiency (%) – – 18.94 21.19 19.40 – –

The COP of the refrigeration cycle is between 0.437 and
0.458 at 10 1C. The overall efficiency (Eq. (4)) is 18.9%
for the base case at 11:00 h, with a maximum of 21.2%
at 12:00 h.
7. Conclusions
A detailed one-dimensional numerical simulation of the
thermal and fluid-dynamic behavior of two-phase flow
inside a CPC used as an ammonia–water vapor generator
has been developed. The numerical analysis was made with
a CV method on the absorber tube, and the discretized
equations were coupled using a fully implicit step-by-step
method in the flow direction.
The numerical algorithm solves, in a segregated manner,
three subroutines: fluid flow inside the absorber tube, heat
conduction in the absorber tube wall, and the useful energy
gain in the solar concentrator. Coupling between the three
main subroutines was performed iteratively until conver-
gence was reached.
This numerical model can be used to simulate the
generation process of any refrigerant–absorbent mixture at
the CPC whenever the mixture thermodynamic properties
are known.
The effect on the results of a range of design parameters
was analyzed. These parameters were the acceptance half-
angle, the diameter and coating of the absorber tube, and
the manufacture material of the cover, the reflector, and
the absorber tube.
It was found that the most important design para-
meter is the reflector material selection, followed in
order of priority by the absorber tube diameter and
coating, and the acceptance half-angle. The material
of the absorber tube and cover are not significant in the
production of ammonia vapor, although corrosion
could represent a problem inside the absorber tube,
therefore, material selection must be done carefully.
Once the previous design parameters are established,
CPC length must be selected for a specific refrigeration
application in order to obtain certain ammonia vapor
production.
The system analysis (CPC model coupled to an absorp-
tion refrigeration system) was carried out for a typical
operation day for 7 h (boundary conditions) in order to
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2076 N. Ortega et al. / Renewable Energy 33 (2008) 2064–2076
predict the solar fraction, cooling capacity, COP, and
overall efficiency.
It is theoretically possible to directly produce ammonia–
water vapor in a 35 m long CPC module coupled to a
single-stage ammonia–water refrigeration system. The
system analyzed can produce more than 3.8 kW of cooling
at 10 1C. For larger cooling needs a number of CPC
modules can be connected in parallel to produce the
ammonia–water vapor required.
A CPC ammonia–vapor outlet temperature of around
93 1C can be theoretically achieved with a CPC efficiency of
over 43%. The calculated overall efficiency of the system at
solar noon can reach 21.2%.
Acknowledgments
This work had been financed by DGAPA-UNAM
through the PAPIIT project IN105602-3, and by CON-
ACyT project U44764-Y. The authors thank CONACyT,
México, for the support provided for the student scholar-
ship 118090.
References
[1] Mendes LF, Collares-Pereira M, Ziegler F. Supply of cooling and
heating with solar assisted absorption heat pumps: an energetic
approach. Int J Refrig 1998;21:116–25.
[2] Syed A, Maidment GG, Missenden JF, Tozer RM. An efficiency
comparison of solar cooling schemes. In: Proceedings of ASHRAE
transactions, part I, vol. 1, 2002, p. 877–86.
[3] Best R, Ortega N. Solar refrigeration and cooling. Renew Energy
1999;16:685–90.
[4] Schweiger H, Mendes J, Benz N, Hennecke K, Prieto G, Cusı́ M.,
et al. The potential of solar heat in industrial processes, a state of the
art review for Spain and Portugal. In: Proceedings of ISES-Europe
conference, EuroSun, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2000.
[5] Henning HM, Erpenbeck T, Hindenburg C, Santamaria IS. The
potential of solar energy use in desiccant cooling cycle. Int J Refrig
2001;24:220–9.
[6] Ziegler F. State of the art in sorption heat pumping and cooling
technologies. Int J Refrig 2002;25:450–9.
[7] Eck M, Zarza E, Eickhoff M, Rheinländer J, Valenzuela L. Applied
research concerning the direct steam generation in parabolic troughs.
Sol Energy 2003;74:341–51.
[8] Flores V, Almanza R. Behaviour of the compound wall copper–steel
receiver with stratified two-phase flow regimen in transient states
when solar irradiance is arriving on one side of receiver. Sol Energy
2004;76:195–8.
[9] Erickson DC. Intermittent solar ammonia absorption cycle refrig-
erator. Report no US 4744224, Patent and Trademark Office, Box 9,
Washington, DC, 1988.
[10] Rivera CO, Rivera W. Modelling of an intermittent solar absorption
refrigeration system operating with ammonia–lithium nitrate mix-
ture. Sol Energy Mater Sol C 2003;76:417–27.
[11] Aziz W, Chaturvedi SK, Kheireddine A. Thermodynamic analysis of
two-component, two-phases flow in solar collectors with application to
a direct-expansion solar-assisted heat pump. Energy 1999;24:247–59.
[12] Almanza R, Lentz A, Jiménez G. Receiver behaviour in direct steam
generation with parabolic troughs. Sol Energy 1997;61:275–8.
[13] Odeh SD, Morrison GL, Behnia M. Modelling of parabolic through
direct steam generation solar collectors. Sol Energy 1998;62:395–406.
[14] Collares-Pereira M. CPC type collectors and their potential for solar
energy cooling applications. In: Proceedings of the second Munich
discussion meeting on solar assisted cooling with sorption systems,
Munchen, 1995, paper no 5.
[15] Goswami DY, Xu F. Analysis of a new thermodynamic cycle for
combined power and cooling using low and mid temperature solar
collectors. J Sol Energy Eng 1999;121:91–7.
[16] Eames PC, Norton B. Validated, unified model for optics and heat
transfer in line-axis concentrating solar energy collectors. Sol Energy
1993;50:339–55.
[17] Hsieh CK. Thermal analysis of CPC collectors. Sol Energy 1981;27:
19–29.
[18] Chew TC, Tay AO, Wijeysundera NE. A numerical study of natural
convection in CPC solar collector cavities with tubular absorbers.
J Sol Energy Eng 1989;111:16–23.
[19] Tchinda R, Kaptouom E, Njomo D. Study of the CPC collector
thermal behaviour. Energy Convers Manage 1998;39:1395–406.
[20] Ortega N, Best R. Modelling of a compound parabolic concentrator
with direct vapour generation for refrigeration applications. In:
Proceedings of the 11th international SolarPACES symposium,
Zurich, Switzerland, 2002, p. 621–7.
[21] Ortega N, Garcı́a-Valladares O, Best R. Two-phase flow modelling in
a solar concentrator with ammonia evaporation. In: Proceedings of
the third international symposium on two-phase modelling and
experimentation, Pisa, Italy, 2004, agc06.
[22] Ortega N, Garcı́a-Valladares O, Best R. Thermal analysis of a
compound parabolic concentrator designed to evaporate ammonia.
In: Proceedings of the world renewable energy congress VIII, Denver,
Colorado, USA, 2004, paper ST59.
[23] Duffie JA, Beckman WA. Solar engineering of thermal processes. 2nd
ed. New York: Wiley Interscience; 1991. p. 174, 251, 351–4.
[24] Prapas DE, Norton B, Melidis PE, Probert SD. Convective heat
transfers within air spaces of compound parabolic concentrating
solar-energy collectors. Appl Energy 1987;28:123–35.
[25] Gnielinski V. New equations for heat and mass transfer in turbulent
pipe and channel flow. Int Chem Eng 1976;16:359–68.
[26] Churchill SW. Frictional equation spans all fluid flow regimes. Chem
Eng 1977;84:91–2.
[27] Kandlikar SG. Heat transfer characteristics in partial boiling, fully
developed boiling and significant void flow regions of subcooled flow
boiling. J Heat Transfer 1998;120:395–401.
[28] Rouhani Z, Axelsson E. Calculation of volume void fraction in the
subcooled and quality region. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 1970;13:
383–93.
[29] Zürcher O, Thome JR, Favrat D. Evaporation of ammonia in a
smooth horizontal tube: heat transfer measurements and predictions.
J Heat Transfer 1999;121:89–101.
[30] Friedel F. Improved friction pressure drop correlation for horizontal
and vertical two-phase pipe flow. In: Proceedings of the European
two-phase flow group meeting, Ispra, Italy, 1979, paper E2.
[31] REFPROP version 7.0. Reference fluid thermodynamic and trans-
port properties. NIST standard reference database 23. Gaithersbug,
MD, USA: NIST; 2002.
[32] Conde M. Thermophysical properties of {NH3+H2O} solutions for
the industrial design of absorption refrigeration equipment. /http://
www.mrc-eng.com/aquaammonia.htmS; 2004.
[33] Patankar SV. Numerical heat transfer and fluid flow. London: Taylor
& Francis; 1980. p. 52–4.