Analytical Slope Angle

Analytical investigation of collector optimum tilt angle at low latitude
Ogboo Chikere Aja, Hussain H. Al-Kayiem, and Zainal Ambri Abdul Karim
Citation: Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013); doi: 10.1063/1.4829434
View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4829434
View Table of Contents: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/jrse/5/6?ver=pdfcov
Published by the AIP Publishing
Articles you may be interested in
Design and realization of a novel sun tracking system with absorber displacement for parabolic trough collectors
J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 033108 (2013); 10.1063/1.4807476
Effect of temperature and concentration on commercial silicon module based low-concentration photovoltaic
system
The optimum tilt angle for flat-plate solar collectors in Iran
Optimum sizing of air heating collectors
Determining optimum tilt angles of photovoltaic panels at typical north-tropical latitudes
This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
JOURNAL OF RENEWABLE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 5, 063112 (2013)
Analytical investigation of collector optimum tilt angle

at low latitude
Ogboo Chikere Aja,a),b) Hussain H. Al-Kayiem,a)
and Zainal Ambri Abdul Karima)
Mechanical Engineering Department, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS,
Bandar Seri Iskandar, 31750 Tronoh, Perak, Malaysia
(Received 25 March 2013; accepted 25 October 2013; published online 26 November 2013)
An analytical investigation on the optimum tilt angle for solar collectors at low
latitude, a case study of Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS (UTP), 4.39 N and
100.98 E, Malaysia is presented in this work. The study employed Hay, Davies,
Klucher, and Reindl (HDKR) anisotropic sky model to evaluate the available
hourly solar radiation on inclined surface using the location metrological data.
The tilt angles considered were 0 to 30 in step of 3 with the inclusion of the
location latitude angle. The study employed the ratio of global solar radiation on
tilted surface to the global solar radiation on horizontal surface in the decision of
the optimum tilt. The system equations were converted to MATLAB codes to
solve for the optimum tilt angles. The results show that the optimum tilt varies
monthly but gave zero degree for south facing collector for the months of April to
August; thus, the investigation also considered north facing orientation for the
months of April to September. The optimum annual tilt angle for the location
using the tilt to horizontal radiation ratio was found to be equal to the location
latitude angle. Using the conventional average of the monthly optimum tilt
angles, the annual optimum tilt angle was found to be 9.75 for south facing
collector. Considering seasonal optimum tilt angle for the location using the tilt to
horizontal radiation ratio, 18 facing south was found to be the optimum tilt angle
for rainy season (September to March) and 15 facing north for dry season (April
to August). Employing the average of monthly optimum tilt method, the seasonal
optimum tilt angle was found to be 17 for rainy season and 12 facing north dry
season. The effect of dust on the collector was considered with reference to
literature and the annual tilt angle of 15 facing south was recommended for the
location in the case of large solar collector that cannot be monthly or seasonally
C 2013 AIP Publishing LLC. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4829434]
adjusted. V
NOMENCLATURE
E
i
I
kT
L
LST
LSN
n
a)
equation of time
number of data
solar radiation intensity
clearness index
longitude
local solar time
local solar noon
number of day (January 1st 1)
O. C. Aja, H. H. Al-Kayiem, and Z. A. Abdul Karim contributed equally to this work.

Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail: fajannl@yahoo.com
b)
1941-7012/2013/5(6)/063112/17/$30.00
5, 063112-1
C 2013 AIP Publishing LLC

V
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-2
N
R
t
TC
x
x
Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim
J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)
number of years the data were collected

radiation ratio of tilt surface to horizontal surface
time
time correction factor
different hourly solar radiation on horizontal for each mean day for the nine years
mean hourly solar radiation on horizontal for each mean day for the years
Subscripts
b
c
cs
d
g
hz
iso
loc
o
opt
r
sc
s
T
TZ
z
1
2
beam
cover
circumsolar
diffuse
ground
horizon
isotropic
location
extraterrestrial component
optimum/optimum
reflection
solar constant
solar
tilt
time zone
zenith angle
before
after
Greek letters
1
c
d
b
h
x
q
r
latitude
surface azimuth
declination
inclination/tilt/slope
incident angle
hour angle
ground albedo
standard deviation
I. INTRODUCTION
Solar collectors (mainly flat plate collectors) installation may be fixed or tracked depending
of choice and the requirement.1 Tracking mechanism is employed to keep the collector surface
perpendicular to the incident beam radiation but for flat plate solar collector, fixed orientations
are more common because flat plate collectors can absorb both diffuse and direct radiation.
Some other reasons for the choice of fixed tilt for flat plat collectors might be due to architectural integration of solar collectors to other fixed structures like the building roof; the marginal
economic return of a solar collector tracking mechanism may be low for geographic regions
with high percentage of the incident solar radiation.2 The performance of a solar collector is
highly influenced by its orientation towards the incoming solar radiation which is a factor to
determine the available solar radiation to surface.
The intensity of extraterrestrial solar radiation in space is approximately constant but gets
reduced by clouds, dust, and shades on passing through the atmosphere to reach a body
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-3
horizontally fixed or tilted on the earths surface. The solar radiation reaching the earths surface is in the form of direct (beam radiation) and diffuse (scatter radiation) which depends on
the cloudiness or clearness of the sky and seasons at the location.3,4 However, harnessing the
optimum solar radiation available at any location is of primary interest for solar system design
and installation. The quest to access the optimum solar radiation available at a location prompts
the search for best orientation for the installation of fixed tilt solar collectors. Literature has
shown that for fixed oriented solar collector, the rule of the thumb is that the collector should
be mounted such that its tilt angle from the horizontal be equal to the latitude angle of the location and its azimuth angle (c) facing south for location in the northern hemisphere or facing
north for locations in the southern hemisphere but small deviations in azimuth angles of 10 to
20 from due south/north may have little or no effect.2,5 Some studies have shown that optimum tilt and azimuth angles selection are not solely a function of latitude but include the climatic condition of the location with emphasis on weather effects such as cloud cover.2,57
Nijegorodov et al.8 studied the optimum tilt (bopt) of absorber plate, variously orientated at different latitudes and reported that cloud cover has significant effect on determining the optimum
tilt angle of solar collector. Ahmad and Tiwari9 theoretically modeled and evaluated the tilt
angle for the solar flat-plate collectors using daily average solar radiation and found that the tilt
angle has some relationship with the weather (season). Agarwal et al.10 employed average daily
solar radiation model to evaluate the optimum tilt angle for Nandha (Haryana) and Delhi using
solar radiation data from the respective locations and inferred that the weather has effect on the
decision of the optimum tilt angle. Some investigators have made different recommendations
for the optimum tilt, based on the latitude.
Considering location latitude as a factor for optimum tilt angle decision, Gunerhan and
Hepbasl11 found the average annual optimum tilt for collectors in Izmir, Turkey,
(1 38:46 N) to be 35.8 which is approximately the location latitude. Lunde12 suggested optimum tilt angle as (1 6 15 ), Kalogirou1315 suggested optimum tilt angle to be (1 6 10 to
15 ) depending on application; while Duffie and Beckman3 used (1 15 ) 6 15 in their
book. Asl-Soleimani16 reported an annual optimum tilt angle of 30 for maximum yearly energy
generation of a grid connected photovoltaic (PV) at Tehran (35.7 N), which a bit lower than
the local latitude. Sunderan et al.17 used average monthly solar radiation model to theoretically
evaluate the optimum tilt angle for PV modules at Ipoh, Malaysia (4.6 N, 101 E) and their
results reported monthly optimum tilt angle to be 1-d; when bopt is positive, the system should
face South (c 0 ), and when bopt is negative, the system should face North (c 180 ). They
suggested that the PV modules should be aligned facing North for the months of April to
August and face due South for the months of September to March for the location which is
contrary to the conventional orientation which suggests that for location in the northern hemisphere, the collector should face due south all year round. Oko and Nnamchi4 used daily solar
radiation model to evaluate the optimum tilt for collector situated at the low latitude in Nigeria
(4.858 N13.02 N) and found optimum tilt correlation for the different months, season, and annual. The result of the correlation using latitude 4.858 N gave the monthly optimum tilt angle
in the range of 4 to 18.84 , while the seasonal optimum tilt angle was 11.24 for dry/harmattan
season (NovemberMarch), 8.8 for rainy season (April to October), and the annual optimum
tilt angle was found to be 9.4 . Okundamiya and Nzeako18 investigated the effects of orientation on the power generated by a south facing PV for latitudes 6 N to 13.02 N. Their results
indicate 0 as optimum tilt for months of April to August and monthly optimum tilt angle range
of 3 39 for latitude 6 N (between September and March) while they found the annual optimum tilt angle for the location 6 N to be 12 . Elhassan et al.19 experimentally investigated the
optimum tilt angle for Kuala Lumpur using PV modules and inferred that the annual optimum
angle was 15 facing due south. Saadatian et al.20 reported annual optimum tilt angle for Kuala
Lumpur as 10 . Yakup and Malik,21 used monthly average solar radiation model to determine
the monthly, seasonal, and annual optimum tilt for a location at low latitude (Brunei
Darussalam, 4.82 N, 114.77 E) and their result reported annual optimum tilt angle 3.3 . Kacira
et al.22 modeled and estimated optimum tilt angles for a PV panel installed in Sanliurfa,
Turkey using daily solar radiation. Their result showed variation in the monthly optimum tilt
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-4
angle with minimum tilt angle of 13 in June and maximum tilt angle of 61 in December.
Ibrahim23 used daily global solar radiation on a horizontal surface to model the optimum tilt
angle for Cyprus (35.23 N, 33.61 E). The results showed that seasonal variation can give
nearly optimum energy capture where winter months have optimum tilt angle of 48 (1
13 ), summer months 14 (1-21). Elminir et al.24 performed a statistical comparison of accuracy of solar radiation on tilted surface estimation for three anisotropic models
(TampsCoulson, Perez, and Bugler) and used Perezs model to determine the optimum collector slope. Their results inferred that during the winter months, the maximum daily solar radiation was received on a south facing collector with tilt angles around 43.33 , whereas during the
summer, the maximum daily solar radiation was incident on a nearly horizontal surface and the
annual optimum tilt angle from their study was approximately equal to the location latitude
(29.85 N). Ulgen25 used daily solar radiation model to evaluate the optimum tilt angle for maximum solar radiation capture solar collector surface at Turkey (39.2 N, 34.07 E). The study
found that the optimum tilt angle varies between 0 in June and 61 in December. In winter
(December, January, and February), 55.7 tilt angle was recommended, in spring (March,
April, and May) 18.3 , in summer (June, July, and August) 4.3 , and in autumn (September,
October, and November) 43 . The annual optimal tilt using average of monthly optimum tilt
was found to be 30.3 . Another study on optimum tilt by Nijegorodov and Jain26 reported that
the output of the PV arrays could be increased by 20%25% at almost no additional investment
if the collector could be installed at a slope equal to the mean monthly slope for the site location and slope adjusted once in a month. The report of Nijegorodov and Jain26 shows that fixed
tilt favors flat plate collectors. Dust is another design factor that affects the performance of solar collector.
Considering the effect of dust on the performance of solar collectors, El-Nashar27 studied
the effect of dust deposition on evacuated tube solar collectors and found that dust deposition
can cause 10%18% drop in glass tube transmittance which was reported to cause 60% drop
in the collector performance. The reduction in glass transmittance depends strongly on the
dust deposition density in conjunction with plate tilt.28 In similar consideration, ZorrillaCasanova et al.29 inferred that dust deposition changes the dependence on the angle of incidence of solar radiation on surface. In the study on effects of dust on the performance of PV
panels, Sulaiman et al.30 found that dust accumulation on PV surface can reduce the systems
efficiency by about 50%. Similarly, Yaghoubi et al.31 in their study inferred that an amount
of 1.5 g/m2 dust deposition on collector can reduce the instantaneous performance of collectors up to 60% and the average performance during the dust deposition up to 37%.
Investigation on the effect of dust accumulation on tilted collector located in Kuwait by
Sayigh et al.32 showed a reduction in plate-transmittance from 64% to 17% for tilt angles of
0 to 60 , respectively. It can be seen that higher tilt decreases the effect of dust deposition
due to safe cleaning. A review study by Mani and Pillai33 on the impact of dust on solar PV
performance recommended tilt angles higher than the location latitude for locations at the
low latitudeswet tropical with temperature range of 2034 C, so as to reduce dust accumulation. Considering Malaysia which has weather condition characterized by average ambient
temperatures between 26.0 and 32.0 C, relative humidity of 80%90% and daily solar radiation intensity range from 4.21 kWh/m2 to 5.56 kWh/m2,34 wet tropical climate located at the
low latitude, it would be prudent to consider the effect of dust as recommended by Mani and
Pillai.33
Several investigations have been conducted to achieve optimum solar radiation capture at
different locations on the earth surface, while the studies related to Malaysia and other countries in the low latitudes are few. From literature, there are varying reports of optimum tilt
angle for Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia which has same climate with the location of case study.
Similarly, the available works in the literature employed daily and monthly average solar radiation in their models which might reduce prediction accuracy. This work employs hourly solar
radiation model to evaluate the optimum tilt angles (monthly, seasonal, and annual) for the
location. The main objective of this work is to determine the optimum tilt angles for fixed solar
collector for low latitude using hourly solar radiation model.
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-5
II. ESTIMATION OF SOLAR RADIATION ON TILTED SURFACE
The solar radiation reaching a surface in space varies at the range of 63.3% due to variation in sun-earth distance. The extraterrestrial solar radiation reaching a surface in space at any
time of the year can be evaluated from1,3,15,35

360n
coshz ;
Io Isc 1 0:033cos
(1)
365
where Io is the extraterrestrial radiation for a specific day while Isc is the solar constant
(1367 W/m2), n is the days number in the year with 1st January as 1, hz is the zenith angle
of the sun.
The extraterrestrial solar radiation on a horizontal surface per hour was calculated from

12x3600
360n
2px2 x1
Isc 10:033cos
x cos/cosdsinx2 sinx1
sin/sind ;
Io
p
365
360
(2)
where 1 is the latitude of the location, d is declination, x1 and x2 are hour-angle at 30 min
before and after the hour under consideration.
To determine the declination angle and the hour angles, Eqs. (3) and (4) were used,
respectively,

284 n
;
d 23:45 sin 360
365
(3)
x LST LSN 15 ;
(4)
where LST local solar time and LSN local solar noon.
LST is the supposed time of the location considering the location longitude with reference
to the prime meridian while LSN is time when the sun is at the meridian of the observe (the
location of study). To evaluate the solar time and hour angles, it is important to evaluate the
time correction factor from equation of time. The equation of time (E) (in minutes) is an empirical equation employed for the correction of the earths orbit eccentricity and its axial tilt
E 9:87sin2B 7:53cosB 1:5sinB;
(5)
where
B
360
n 1:
365
(6)
The Time Correction Factor (in minutes) accounts for the variation of the LST within a given
time zone due to the longitude variations of the location with the time zone longitude which
also incorporates the equation of time (E),
TC 4LTZ Lloc E:
(7)
The constant 4 stands for time (minutes) as it takes the Earth to rotate 1 , LTZ is the time zone
longitude while Lloc is the location longitude.
LST and LSN can be evaluated using Eqs. (8) and (9), respectively, where tl is the local time
LST tl TC
LSN 12 TC
60
.
60
(8)
(9)
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-6
The incidence angle of beam radiation on a horizontal surface (zenith angle, hz) can be evaluated using
hz cos1 cos / cos d cos x sin / sin d:
(10)
Similarly a relationship for the incidence angle of beam radiation on a tilted surface, hi, can be
evaluated utilizing geometric principles as
hi
cos1 sin / sin d cos b cos / sin d sin b cos c cos / cos d cos b cos x
sin / cos d sin b cos c cos x cos d sin b sin c sin x
(11)
Only some percentage of the extraterrestrial solar radiation impinges on the earth surface due
to cloud and dust in the atmosphere. To evaluate the available solar radiation on a tilted surface
on the earth, the direct radiation (Ib) and diffuse radiation (Id) on horizontal surface are evaluated from the measured global hourly solar radiation I, where global radiation equal to the
sum of diffuse and beam radiations. The usual approach is to correlate the fraction of hourly
radiation on horizontal plane which is diffused, Id/I, with the hourly clearness index kT,3
.
kT I I o ;
8
>
<
for
1 0:09kT ;
Id
2
3
4
0:9511 0:1604kT 4:388kT 16:638kT 12:336kT ; for
>
I
:
for
0:165;
(12)
kT 0:22
0:22 < kT 0:80 ; (13)
kT > 0:80
Ib I Id :
(14)
When the total radiation on a horizontal surface is known, the radiation on a tilted surface can
be estimated (Eq. (15)),3
IT IT;b IT;diso IT;dcs IT;dhz IT;r ;
(15)
where I is the incident radiation, the subscripts b, d, iso, cs, hz, and r represent beam, diffuse,
isotropic, circumsolar, horizon, and reflected radiation streams and subscript, T, denotes the
tilted surface.
The reflected energy terms seem impossible to evaluate in full detail, to account for buildings, ground, trees, etc., the changing solar radiation incident on them and their changing reflectance.3 Adopting a standard practice of assuming one surface reflectance, which is a horizontal
and diffusely reflected ground,3 Eq. (15) can be rewritten as
IT Ib Rb Idiso Fcs Idcs Rb Idhz Fchz Iqg Fcg ;
(16)
where Rb is the ratio of beam radiation on tilted surface to beam radiation on horizontal surface
Rb
IbT Ibh coshi coshi
:
Ibh Ibh coshz coshz
(17)
To evaluate Rb near sunrise and sunset, Eq. (18) was employed,

a
Rb Rb;ave ;
b
(18)
1

x2 x1
p
B sin / sin d cos b cos / sin d sin b cos c
C
180
B
C
C
aB
B cos / cos d cos b sin / cos d sin b cos csin x2 sin x1 C;
@
A
cos d sin b sin ccos x2 cos x1
(19)
0
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-7

x2 x1
p :
cos / cos dsin x2 sin x1 sin / sin d
180

(20)
Approximating the ground as an infinite horizontal surface, an inclined surface to the horizontal
will have a view factor for diffuse sources on the collector from both the sky and the ground.
The view factors for sky and ground are

1 cos b
;
Fcs
2

1 cos b
;
Fcg
2
(21)
(22)
where b represents the collector tilt angle to the horizontal. Ground reflected diffuse radiation
is determined using the total solar radiation incident upon the ground, and the surface albedo or
diffuse ground reflection qg ( 0.2 for bare ground and 0.7 for snow ground).3
For the evaluation of solar radiation incident on tilted surface, IT, many models have been
developed, of varying complexity as the bases for calculating IT which are based on Eq. (15).
The difference in the models is largely in the way the diffuse terms are treated. This paper
employs Hay, Davies, Klucher, and Reindl (HDKR) anisotropic sky model which uses Eq. (23)
to evaluate the diffused radiation. HDKR model predicts results closer to measured values and
it is recommended for collectors with surface azimuth of 0 facing the equator,1,3

Id;T Id 1 Ai

1 cos b
b
1 f sin3
Ai Rb ;
2
2
(23)
where
Ai Ibn
.
Ion
Ib
.
Io
(24)
and
r
Ib
f
:
I
(25)
Substituting the diffused radiation on tilted surface as in Eq. (23) into the global radiation on
tilted surface as in Eq. (16), HDKR anisotropic solar radiation on tilted surface gives

1 cos b
1 cos b
3 b
1 f sin
Iqg
:
IT Ib Id Ai Rb Id 1 Ai
2
2
2
(26)
III. METHODOLOGY
This analytical investigation used HDKR anisotropic solar radiation model to evaluate the
direct and diffuse radiations and subsequently the solar radiation on tilted collector surface
from global solar radiation on horizontal surface data from Ipoh and UTP metrological stations
with focus on achieving the best fixed orientation for a solar air collector system that was to be
installed at UTP (4.39 N and 100.98 E). The solar radiation data from Ipoh metrological station
(4.58 N and 101.083 E) covers seven years (2003 to 2009), while the solar radiation data from
the University Metrological Station covers two years (2010 to 2011). First, the two different
data were checked for consistency in the different years data to know the variation using the
mean days of each month (Table I) for the nine years data. The standard deviation was
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-8
TABLE I. Mean days for each month and the day number in a year calculation.
Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Mean day
17
16
16
15
15
11
17
16
15
15
14
10
Day No.
17
47
75
105
135
162
198
228
258
288
318
344
considered per hour and the maximum value in the standard deviation was about 20% as was
observed close to sunrise and sunsets hours and below 10% at midday using
r
1 XN
xi x2 ;
r
i1
N1
(27)
where
XN
x
x
i1 i
(28)
where r is standard deviation; N is the number of years the data was collected; i is the number
of data, x is the different hourly solar radiation on horizontal for each mean day for the nine
years, and x is the mean of the hourly solar radiation on horizontal for each mean day for the
years.
For this investigation, a computer program was developed in MATLAB to evaluate Eqs.
(1)(26) for the location taking the surface azimuth to be zero degrees (facing due south) for
the initial study and an extended investigation for azimuth angle of 180 for the months of
April to August. The tilt angles were varied within the range 0 to 30 (approximately the location latitude and maximum declination angle of the earth) at an interval of 3 with the location
latitude included in the tilt angles investigation. The reflectivity for the ground (qg) was taken
to be 0.2 (Refs. 1 and 3) as there are no snow fall at the location. The results assume that
future weather conditions will be statistically equivalent to the weather conditions from 2003 to
2011 as the variation in the already existing data considered for the 9 yr was negligible considering the mean hourly solar radiation for mean days of each month. The results are meant to
provide the best information possible in order to assist in the design and installation of fixed tilt
solar systems at the low latitudes.
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The global solar radiation on tilted surface was calculated using Eqs. (1)(26) and the ratio
of available global radiation on tilted surface to global radiation on horizontal surface, Rb, also
evaluated using
Rb
IT
;
Ih
(29)
where IT is the evaluated global radiation on tilted surface and Ih is the measure global radiation on horizontal surface at the location.
Rb was calculated for south facing collector inclined at (3 to 30 ) from the horizontal
position. All calculations were based on the HDKR anisotropic sky diffuse radiation model, and
ground reflection is assumed perfectly diffuse with ground reflectance, qg, value of 0.2. The
result, as in Table II, shows that at high tilt angle during the months of April to August; when
the sun is at the northern hemisphere, Rb was less than one. The ratio of global solar radiation
on tilted surface to global radiation on horizontal surface helps in proper decision of the tilt
angle as it is the ratio of solar radiation that can be received by a tilted surface to that on a horizontal surface at same time of the day.
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-9
TABLE II. Ratio of global radiation on tilted surface to global radiation on horizontal surface for a collector with c 0
for a whole year.
Daily Rb at different Solar collectors tilt angles
Month
0.00
3.00
4.39
6.00
9.00
12.00
15.00
Jan
Feb
1.0000
1.0000
1.1110
1.1431
1.1199
1.1500
1.1298
1.1573
1.1466
1.1692
1.1611
1.1789
1.1736
1.1863
Mar
1.0000
1.1082
1.1094
1.1101
1.1099
1.1075
1.1030
Apr
May
1.0000
1.0000
0.9983
0.9962
0.9957
0.9875
0.9900
0.9770
0.9778
0.9560
0.9636
0.9332
0.9474
0.9087
Jun
1.0000
0.9907
0.9806
0.9684
0.9443
0.9184
0.8907
Jul
Aug
1.0000
1.0000
0.9762
0.9985
0.9669
0.9918
0.9558
0.9834
0.9336
0.9663
0.9097
0.9473
0.8842
0.9265
Sep
1.0000
1.0960
1.0949
1.0931
1.0882
1.0814
1.0725
Oct
Nov
1.0000
1.0000
1.1640
1.1150
1.1685
1.1223
1.1732
1.1302
1.1801
1.1434
1.1848
1.1545
1.1874
1.1635
Dec
1.0000
1.1191
1.1298
1.1352
1.1493
1.1615
1.1716
Rb,ave
% Gain
1.0000
0.00
1.0680
6.80
1.0681
6.81
1.0672
6.72
1.0637
6.37
1.0585
5.85
1.0513
5.13
Rb,opt
b,opt ( )

Month
18.00
21.00
24.00
27.00
30.00
Jan
Feb
1.1838
1.1949
1.1919
1.1943
1.2029
1.1933
1.2015
1.1915
1.1978
1.1893
1.2029
1.1949
24.00
18.00
Mar
1.0964
1.0877
1.0771
1.0644
1.0499
1.1101
6.00
Apr
May
0.9294
0.8825
0.9096
0.8549
0.8880
0.8258
0.8647
0.7954
0.8398
0.7637
1.0000
1.0000
0.00
0.00
Jun
0.8615
0.8307
0.7985
0.7650
0.7303
1.0000
0.00
Jul
Aug
0.8571
0.9040
0.8286
0.8798
0.7987
0.8540
0.7676
0.8266
0.7353
0.7978
1.0000
1.0000
0.00
0.00
Sep
1.0618
1.0493
1.0349
1.0188
1.0010
1.0960
3.00
Oct
Nov
1.1872
1.1704
1.1854
1.1751
1.1811
1.1784
1.1746
1.1778
1.1660
1.1768
1.1874
1.1784
15.00
24.00
Dec
1.1798
1.1860
1.1902
1.1925
1.1924
1.1925
27.00
Rb,ave
% Gain
1.0424
4.24
1.0311
3.11
1.0186
1.86
1.0034
0.34
0.9867
1.33
1.0969
9.69
9.75
From Table II and Figure 1, the analysis of the average ratio of radiation on tilted surface
to horizontal surface (Rb,ave) shows that annual maximum energy for fixed tilted surface facing
due south at the location can be obtained using the tilt angle near or equal to the location latitude as can be seen in the case of tilted angles of 3 to 6 for the location of study (UTP). It
was found from literature, that the decision of annual optimum tilt angle for collectors was
based on average of the monthly optimum tilt angle. For monthly tilt angle variation, optimum
tilt angles for each month are as in Table II. The average of monthly optimum tilt angle normally gives less value of radiation ratio (Rb,ave) compared to considering the average ratio of
radiation on tilted surface to horizontal surface (Rb,ave) for different angles and taking the average for the 12 months of the year. Evaluation using the method from literature (average of the
months optimum tilt angle) showed that the annual optimum tilt angle for a south facing collector at the location (UTP) was 9.75 with Rb,ave of about 1.06 compared to an average maximum
Rb,ave of 1.0681 for tilted collector at an angle equal to the latitude of the location. Considering
dust effect on collector glass transmissivity, this work recommends 15 as optimum tilt for
south facing collector all year round at the location (UTP) as in Table III.
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-10
FIG. 1. Annual average daily solar radiation at different surface tilt for 0 surface azimuth and the ratio of radiation on tilt
surface to radiation on horizontal surface.
The ratio of radiation on tilted surface to horizontal surface of 0 surface azimuth is shown
in Figure 2 for monthly optimum tilt, average optimum annual tilt based on average maximum
radiation ratio, optimum annual tilt based on average of optimum monthly tilt, and recommended optimum tilt for self cleaning of the surface. Figure 2 shows the average daily solar
radiation at the different optimum tilts for a year.
It is important to note that the recommendation of 15 tilt is for self cleaning of the collector and reduction of dust accumulation as the months of April to August falls in the dry season
at UTP, Malaysia. From physic point of view, objects such as the dust particles are more stable
when the tangential component of the center of gravity of the body to the resting surface is
small, which is the case of a body resting on a surface at small inclination angle. The tangential
component will be zero when the surface is horizontal. At higher collector tilt angle, the tangential component of the center of gravity of dust particles is increased; therefore, they can be
toppled off the collector surface under the influence of external natural forces like wind and
rain. The 15 tilt angle will reduce dust accumulation and also achieve near optimum solar radiation capture in the location. This is well described in Figure 3 which shows the daily solar
radiation at the location for collector inclined to the horizontal at angle equal to the location
TABLE III. Predicted monthly and annual optimum tilt of collectors facing due south.
Monthly b,opt ( )
Annual tilt from Rb,ave
Average tilt from months optimum tilt
Recommended annual tilt
Jan
24.00
4.39
9.75
15.00
Feb
Mar
18.00
6.00
Apr
0.00
May
Jun
0.00
0.00
Jul
0.00
Aug
Sep
0.00
3.00
Month
Oct
15.00
Nov
Dec
24.00
27.00
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-11
FIG. 2. Ratio of radiation on tilted surface to horizontal surface of 0 surface azimuth, for collector at 0 (horizontal), 4.39
(location latitude angle), 9 , 15 surface inclination, and monthly optimum tilt angles.
latitude angle, 9 , 15 and monthly optimum tilt variation. It was found that monthly adjusting
the collector to the monthly optimum tilt angle lead to 9.69% gain of solar radiation incident
on the surface but from the month of April to August will surfer some losses due to high deposition of dust on the horizontally set collector. Similarly, using the location latitude angle as
FIG. 3. Daily solar radiation for 0 (horizontal), 4.39 (location latitude angle), 9 , 15 surface inclination, and monthly optimum tilt angles.
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-12
annual optimum tilt as evaluated will achieve 6.81% gain of solar radiation (Table II) but will
face similar problem of dust accumulation all year round. The use of 10 optimum tilt angle
will yield about 6% solar radiation gain while 15 optimum tilt can yield about 5.13% gain of
solar radiation. The tilt angle range of 10 to 15 is good for low latitude, but considering the
dust effect but this work recommend 15% because of the dry seasons associated with locations
at the low latitudes. The average daily solar radiation for some important tilt angles is plotted
in Figure 3.
TABLE IV. Ratio of global radiation on tilted surface to global radiation on horizontal surface for a collector with c 0
for months of September to March and c 180 for April to August.
Month
0.00
3.00
4.39
6.00
9.00
12.00
15.00
Jan
1.0000
1.1110
1.1199
1.1298
1.1466
1.1611
1.1736
Feb
1.0000
1.1431
1.1500
1.1573
1.1692
1.1789
1.1863
Mar
1.0000
1.1082
1.1094
1.1101
1.1099
1.1075
1.1030
Apr
1.0000
1.0839
1.0846
1.0849
1.0838
1.0806
1.0752
May
1.0000
1.0954
1.0974
1.0992
1.1010
1.1008
1.0987
Jun
1.0000
1.0987
1.1033
1.1082
1.1156
1.1209
1.1242
Jul
1.0000
1.0883
1.0958
1.1039
1.1174
1.1289
1.1545
Aug
1.0000
1.1011
1.1057
1.1105
1.1178
1.1267
1.1258
1.0725
Sep
1.0000
1.0960
1.0949
1.0931
1.0882
1.0814
Oct
1.0000
1.1640
1.1685
1.1732
1.1801
1.1848
1.1874
Nov
Dec
1.0000
1.0000
1.1150
1.1191
1.1223
1.1268
1.1302
1.1352
1.1434
1.1493
1.1545
1.1615
1.1635
1.1716
Rb,ave
1.0000
1.1103
1.1149
1.1196
1.1269
1.1323
1.1364
Season 1
1.0000
1.1223
1.1274
1.1327
1.1410
1.1471
1.1511
Season 2
1.0000
1.0935
1.0974
1.1013
1.1071
1.1116
1.1157
Daily Rb at different solar collectors tilt angles

Energy gain
for b,opt %
Month
18.00
21.00
24.00
27.00
30.00
Rb,opt
b,opt ( )
Jan
1.1838
1.1919
1.2029
1.2015
1.1978
1.2029
24.00
20.29
Feb
1.1949
1.1943
1.1933
1.1915
1.1893
1.1949
18.00
19.49
Mar
Apr
1.0964
1.0678
1.0877
1.0584
1.0771
1.0469
1.0644
1.0335
1.0499
1.0182
1.1101
1.0849
6.00
6.00
11.01
8.49
May
1.0946
1.0886
1.0807
1.0711
1.0596
1.1010
9.00
10.10
Jun
Jul
1.1255
1.1536
1.1248
1.1534
1.1221
1.1506
1.1174
1.1455
1.1108
1.1382
1.1255
1.1545
18.00
15.00
12.55
15.45
Aug
1.1253
1.1229
1.1219
1.1164
1.1088
1.1267
12.00
12.67
Sep
Oct
1.0618
1.1872
1.0493
1.1854
1.0349
1.1811
1.0188
1.1746
1.0010
1.1660
1.0960
1.1874
3.00
15.00
9.60
18.74
Nov
1.1704
1.1751
1.1784
1.1778
1.1768
1.1784
24.00
17.84
Dec
1.1798
1.1860
1.1902
1.1925
1.1924
1.1925
27.00
19.25
Rb,ave
1.1368
1.1348
1.1317
1.1254
1.1174
1.1368
18.00
13.68
Season 1
1.1535
1.1528
1.1511
1.1459
1.1390
1.1535
18.00
15.35
Season 2
1.1134
1.1096
1.1044
1.0968
1.0871
1.1157
15.00
11.34
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-13
Maximum radiation for the months of April to August, at the location was at horizontal
surface (0 ) or at low tilt angles close to zero degree. Similar observations has been recorded in
literature for locations in the northern hemisphere during the summer period.811,17,18,21,22,24,25
Some investigations,8,17,21 show tilt angles of negative values for the summer months of April
to August in the northern hemisphere which can be translated as reverse surface azimuth
(c 180 ). This work extended its investigation to study the effect of surface azimuth
(c 180 ) for the months of April to August to find the monthly optimum tilt angles for collector at the location. Contrary to the principle that collectors in the northern hemisphere should
face south, using the ratio of global radiation on tilted surface to global radiation on horizontal
surface, it was found that there is radiation gain when the surface are tilted and surface azimuth
changed to 180 for the months of April to August as can be seen in Table IV. Optimum tilt
angle for monthly adjustment in the location of study is as shown in Table V with the collector
facing north during the months of April to August.
The result shown in Table V evaluated the monthly optimum tilt angle, seasonal optimum
tilt (considering April to August), and annual optimum tilt. Taking average of the optimum tilt
for the months of September to March that are most favoured by surface azimuth of zero
degree, the optimum tilt angle for the season is about 17 and between April and August, the
seasonal optimum angle was found to be 12 facing north. This study in line with the effect of
dust on performance recommends 15 tilt for the seasons and surface azimuth of 180 for April
to August. The result on Table IV gave 18 as the annual tilt considering the maximum radiation ratio average for the year. It was also found that for seasonal evaluation of the radiation ratio, 18 , was the optimum tilt angle for season 1 (September to March) while 15 was the optimum tilt for season 2 (April to August).
Based on the analysis shown on Tables IV and V, selected optimum tilts radiation ratios
are plotted in Figure 4 which emphasizes the energy gained by a surface at different tilt angles.
Using the average of seasonal optimum tilt angle (season 1 17 and season 2 12 ) for the
two seasons, the solar energy gain on tilted surface per year was about 13.60% but in same
analysis it was found that the gain using the radiation ratio optimum tilt (season 1 18 and
season 2 15 ) for the two seasons was 13.77% gain. Also, using a seasonal optimum tilt angle
of 18 for both seasons gave 13.68% gain; a seasonal optimum tilt angle of 15 for both seasons gave 13.64% gain while changing the collector tilt to the monthly optimum tilt angle
yielded 14.55% gain of daily solar radiation. The average daily solar radiation on different tilt
angles are shown in Figure 5.
TABLE V. Monthly, seasonal and annual optimum tilt of collectors at low latitude with seasonal azimuth rotation.
Monthly opt tilt
at c 0
Monthly opt tilt

at c 180
Seasonal tilt
at c 0
Seasonal tilt
at c 180
Suggested seasonal
tilt at c 0
Suggested seasonal
tilt at c 180
Jan
Feb
24.00
18.00
17.00
15
Mar
Apr
6.00
6.00
May
9.00
Jun
Jul
18.00
15.00
Aug
Sep
3.00
12.00
17.00
Oct
15.00
Nov
24.00
Dec
Average
27.00
16.71
12.00
Month
12.00
15
15
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-14
FIG. 4. Radiation ratio for collector seasonal optimum tilt angle.
The result of the monthly optimum tilt angle was compared with already existing work
from literature as shown in Table VI. The result correlates closer to Sunderan et al.17 model
which was a study conducted for a nearby location and also shows similar trend with
Nijegorodov et al.8 model.
Both Sunderan et al.17 and Nijegorodov et al.8 models when deeply inspected are functions
of location latitude and declination angle. But in Nijegorodov et al.,8 the model used multiplier
for the location latitude and increased the declination angle. The results of this work show
closer result to the result of Sunderan et al.,17 which presented the optimum tilt angle to be
equal to location latitude () minus the declination angle.
FIG. 5. Average daily solar radiation for collector seasonal optimum tilt angle.
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-15
TABLE VI. Comparison of present analysis with Nijegorodov et al.8 and Sunderan et al.17
Month
Jan
Nijegorodov et al. model, bopt( )
Sunderan et al. model, bopt( )
Opt. tilt, bopt
0.89 29
32.91
-(20.9 )
25.29
24.00
17.39
6.79
18.00
6.00
Feb
Mar
0.97 17
4
21.17
8.39
-(13.0 )
-(2.4 )
Apr
10
5.61
(9.4 )
5.01
6.00
May
Jun
0.93 24
0.87 34
19.92
30.18
-(18.8 )
-(23.1 )
14.41
18.71
9.00
18.00
Jul
0.89 30
26.09
-(21.2 )
16.81
15.00
12.74
2.39
-(13.5 )
(2.2 )
9.11
2.19
12.00
3.00
Aug
Sep
0.97 17
0.89 2
Oct
12
16.39
-(9.6)
13.99
15.00
Nov
Dec
0.93 25
0.87 34
29.08
37.82
-(18.9 )
-(23.0 )
23.29
27.39
24.00
27.00
V. CONCLUSION
The study considers hourly solar radiation using HDKR anisotropic diffuse-sky radiation
model to evaluate the available solar radiation on inclined surface, and used radiation ratio to
determine the monthly and annual optimum tilt angle for south face solar collector at low latitude. It was found that the optimum tilt for April to August at the low latitudes for south facing
collector was 0 thus this work extended its investigation on evaluating the optimum tilt angle
for April to August by using surface azimuth of 180 (collector facing due north) and the result
shows that during the season when the sun is at the northern hemisphere (passed the latitude of
the location/observer), the surface azimuth should be changed to face due north. The optimum
annual tilt angle for the location using the tilt to horizontal radiation ratio was found to be
equal to the location latitude for a south facing collector located in the northern hemisphere.
Taking average of the monthly optimum tilt gave the optimum tilt for south facing collector for
the location was 9.75 . Considering seasonal tilt angle variation, It was found that the optimum
tilt for the months of September to March has monthly tilt average of 17 facing due south and
12 tilt facing due north for the months of April to August while employing tilt to horizontal
radiation ratio method, the seasonal optimum tilt was 18 facing due south for the months of
September to March, and 15 due north for the months of April to August. The result of the
monthly optimum tilt angle from this work was compared with already existing work from literature as shown in Table VI and the result correlates closer to the model by Sunderan et al.,17
which was a study conducted for a nearby location and also shows similar trend with
Nijegorodov et al.8 model. Objects including dust are more stable when the centre of gravity is
lower, while increase in center of gravity of the object causes overthrow with little external
force. At higher tilt angle, the wind/rain can sweep off the dust particles out of the collector
surface easily. The effect of dust on the collector was considered with respect to literature recommendations; 15 annual tilt due south for the location was recommended for large solar collector that may be difficult to be undergoing monthly or seasonal tilt angle adjustment. It is recommended from the result that monthly manual adjustment of the collector be employed for
collectors that can be adjusted and also considering the surface azimuth change for the months
of August. The result showed that about 14.55% of solar radiation available at the location can
be gained when the collector is tilted monthly to the monthly optimum tilt angle and surface
azimuth orientation for the collector. About 9.7% solar radiation can be gained for a south facing solar collector that is monthly adjusted which does not undergo surface azimuth adjustment.
With an annual optimum tilt angle of 4.39 , the solar radiation gain was 6.81%, while at 9.75 ,
the solar radiation gain was 6% and for 15 optimum tilt angle; the solar radiation gain was
5.13%.
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-16
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS (UTP) for the technical and financial support. The main author appreciates, UTP for supporting his Ph.D. study under
the GA scheme.
1
G. Tiwari, Solar Energy: Fundamentals, Design, Modeling and Applications (Narosa, 2002).
A. Schroder, Determination of annual optimal altitude and azimuth angles of fixed tilt solar collectors in the continental
United States using the National Solar Radiation Database, in American Solar Energy Societys National Solar
Conference Solar 2011, Raleigh, North Carolina, 2011.
3
J. A. Duffie and W. A. Beckman, Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes (John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New
Jersey, USA, 2006).
4
C. Oko and S. Nnamchi, Optimum collector tilt angles for low latitudes, Open Renewable Energy J. 5, 714
(2012).
5
C. Christensen and G. Barker, Effects of tilt and azimuth on annual incident solar radiation for United States locations,
in Proceedings of the International Solar Energy Conference Presented at Solar Energy Forum, Washington, DC,
225232 (2001).
6
M. Lave and J. Kleissl, Optimum fixed orientations and benefits of tracking for capturing solar radiation in the continental United States, Renewable Energy 36, 11451152 (2011).
7
J. Luoma, M. Lave, and J. Kleissl, Optimum fixed orientations considering day-ahead market energy pricing in California, in World Renewable Energy ForumASES National Solar Conference, Denver, Colorado,
2012.
8
N. Nijegorodov, K. R. S. Devan, P. K. Jain, and S. Carlsson, Atmospheric transmittance models and an analytical
method to predict the optimum slope of an absorber plate, variously oriented at any latitude, Renewable Energy 4,
529543 (1994).
9
M. J. Ahmad and G. Tiwari, Optimization of tilt angle for solar collector to receive maximum radiation, Open
Renewable Energy J. 2, 1924 (2009).
10
A. Agarwal, V. K. Vashishtha, and S. N. Mishra, Comparative approach for the optimization of tilt angle to receive maximum radiation, Int. J. Engine Res. Technol. 1, 19 (2012).
11
H. Gunerhan and A. Hepbasli, Determination of the optimum tilt angle of solar collectors for building applications,
Build. Environ. 42, 779783 (2007).
12
P. J. Lunde, Solar Thermal Engineering: Space Heating and Hot Water Systems (John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York,
NY, 1980).
13
S. Kalogirou, The potential of solar industrial process heat applications, Appl. Energy 76, 337361 (2003).
14
S. A. Kalogirou, Solar thermal collectors and applications, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 30, 231295 (2004).
15
S. Kalogirou, Solar Energy Engineering: Processes and Systems (Academic Press, 2009).
16
E. Asl-Soleimani, S. Farhangi, and M. Zabihi, The effect of tilt angle, air pollution on performance of photovoltaic systems in Tehran, Renewable Energy 24, 459468 (2001).
17
P. Sunderan, A. M. Ismail, B. Singh, and N. M. Mohamed, Optimum tilt angle and orientation of stand alone photovoltaic electricity generation systems for rural electrification, J. Appl. Sci. 11, 12191224 (2011).
18
M. Okundamiya and A. Nzeako, Influence of orientation on the performance of a photovoltaic conversion system in
Nigeria, Res. J. Appl. Sci. 3, 13841390 (2011).
19
Z. A. M. Elhassan, M. F. M. Zain, K. Sopian, and A. Awadalla, Output energy of photovoltaic module directed at optimum slope angle in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Res. J. Appl. Sci. 6, 104109 (2011).
20
O. Saadatian, K. Sopian, B. Elhab, M. Ruslan, and N. Asim, Optimal solar panels tilt angles and orientations in Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia, in World Scientific and Engineering Academy and SocietyAdvances in Environment,
Biotechnology and Biomedicine (Tomas Bata University, Zlin, Czech Republic, 2012), pp. 100106.
21
M. A. b. H. M. Yakup and A. Q. Malik, Optimum tilt angle and orientation for solar collector in Brunei Darussalam,
Renewable Energy 24, 223234 (2001).
22
M. Kacira, M. Simsek, Y. Babur, and S. Demirkol, Determining optimum tilt angles and orientations of photovoltaic
panels in Sanliurfa, Turkey, Renewable Energy 29, 12651275 (2004).
23
D. Ibrahim, Optimum tilt angle for solar collectors used in Cyprus, Renewable Energy 6, 813819 (1995).
24
H. K. Elminir, A. E. Ghitas, F. ElHussainy, R. Hamid, M. Beheary, and K. M. Abdel-Moneim, Optimum solar flatplate collector slope: Case study for Helwan, Egypt, Energy Convers. Manage. 47, 624637 (2006).
25
K. Ulgen, Optimum tilt angle for solar collectors, Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental
Effects 28, 11711180 (2006).
26
N. Nijegorodov and P. Jain, Optimum slope of a north-south aligned absorber plate from the north to the south poles,
Renewable Energy 11, 107118 (1997).
27
A. M. El-Nashar, Seasonal effect of dust deposition on a field of evacuated tube collectors on the performance of a solar
desalination plant, Desalination 239, 6681 (2009).
28
H. K. Elminir, A. E. Ghitas, R. Hamid, F. El-Hussainy, M. Beheary, and K. M. Abdel-Moneim, Effect of dust on the
transparent cover of solar collectors, Energy Convers. Manage. 47, 31923203 (2006).
29
J. Zorrilla-Casanova, M. Piliougine, J. Carretero, P. Bernaola, P. Carpena, L. Mora-L
opez, and M. Sidrach-de-Cardona,
Analysis of dust losses in photovoltaic modules, in World Renewable Energy Congress, Sweden (2011), pp.
29852992.
30
S. A. Sulaiman, H. H. Hussain, N. S. H. N. Leh, and M. S. I. Razali, Effects of dust on the performance of PV panels,
in World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology (2011), Vol. 58, pp. 588593.
31
M. Yaghoubi, I. Niknia, P. Kanan, and A. Mahmoodpur, Experimental study of dust deposition effect on the performances of parabolic trough solar collectors, in Proceedings of the 17th Solar Paces Conference, Granada, Spain,
2011.
2
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15
063112-17
32
A. Sayigh, S. Al-Jandal, and H. Ahmed, Dust effect on solar flat surfaces devices in Kuwait, in Proceedings of
the Workshop on the Physics of Non-Conventional Energy Sources and Materials Science for Energy (1985), pp.
353367.
33
M. Mani and R. Pillai, Impact of dust on solar photovoltaic (PV) performance: Research status, challenges and recommendations, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Rev. 14, 31243131 (2010).
34
A. W. Azhari, K. Sopian, A. Zaharim, and M. Ghoul, A new approach for predicting solar radiation in tropical environment using satellite images-case study of Malaysia, WSEAS Trans. Environ. Dev. 4, 373377 (2008).
35
F. Kreith and J. F. Kreider, Principles of Solar Engineering (McGraw-Hill Book Co., NY, 1978).
94.249.41.153 On: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:27:15

Analytical Slope Angle

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analytical Slope Angle

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analytical investigation of collector optimum tilt angle at low latitude

JOURNAL OF RENEWABLE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 5, 063112 (2013)

Analytical investigation of collector optimum tilt angle

O. C. Aja, H. H. Al-Kayiem, and Z. A. Abdul Karim contributed equally to this work.

C 2013 AIP Publishing LLC

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

number of years the data were collected

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

II. ESTIMATION OF SOLAR RADIATION ON TILTED SURFACE

x LST LSN 15 ;

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

sin / cos d sin b cos c cos x cos d sin b sin c sin x

IbT Ibh coshi coshi

To evaluate Rb near sunrise and sunset, Eq. (18) was employed,

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

Daily Rb at different Solar collectors tilt angles

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

Annual tilt from Rb,ave

Average tilt from months optimum tilt

Recommended annual tilt

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

Daily Rb at different solar collectors tilt angles

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

Monthly opt tilt

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

FIG. 4. Radiation ratio for collector seasonal optimum tilt angle.

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

Nijegorodov et al. model, bopt( )

Sunderan et al. model, bopt( )

Opt. tilt, bopt

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

Aja, Al-Kayiem, and Abdul Karim

J. Renewable Sustainable Energy 5, 063112 (2013)

You might also like