Renewable Energy 74 (2015) 727e736

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Design, manufacture, and test of a prototype for a parabolic trough

collector for industrial process heat
Gianluca Coccia a, *, Giovanni Di Nicola a, Marco Sotte b
a
b

Marche Polytechnic University, Department of Industrial Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, Via Brecce Bianche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Studio Associato Master Tech, Viale del Lido 15, 63900 Fermo, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 27 March 2014
Accepted 29 August 2014
Available online 20 September 2014

The manufacture of low-cost parabolic trough collectors (PTCs) for industrial process heat applications
ranging from 70 to 250
C is crucial for the widespread availability of this solar technology. Thus, we
present a prototype of a PTC with a 90
rim angle and a small concentration ratio of 9.25 built in
berglass and extruded polystyrene, called UNIVPM.01. Fiberglass is used as the external shell and
extruded polystyrene as the inside ll component. The receiver is an aluminum pipe of circular crosssection, contained within a low-iron glass envelope. The tracking system is based on a solar-position
computer program. The main features of this prototype are its cost-effectiveness, low weight, high
mechanical resistance, and ease of manufacture. First, we show the design and manufacturing process in
detail. Then, we describe the test bench used to evaluate the collector thermal efciency. Tests were
performed following the directives of ASHRAE Standard 93-2010 and using demineralized water for
temperatures up to 85
C. Results show that the equation for thermal efciency is comparable to that of
other similar collectors available in the literature: the intercept is 0.658 and the slope is 0.683.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Solar energy
Fiberglass
Extruded polystyrene
Low-cost
Thermal efciency
PTC

1. Introduction
In OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries, industry accounts for 30% of overall energy
consumption. In EU (European Union) countries, two-thirds of this
consists of heat rather than electrical energy. Studies conrm that
about 50% of this industrial heat demand is located at temperatures
of up to 250
C: in 2000, this energy demand in the EU-15 was
estimated at about 300 TWh [1]. Among solar technologies suitable
for satisfying this heat demand, concentrating solar collectors such
as PTCs (parabolic trough collectors) are one of the most promising.
The development of low-cost PTCs plays a decisive role in the
spread of this technology. This objective can be reached only by
studying and testing profoundly innovative prototype designs. For
this reason, a research program called PTC.project has been started
at the Marche Polytechnic University regarding the development of
PTCs for industrial heat production in the range of 70e250
C.
The systematic study of PTC design began several decades ago.
In his paper of 1976, Treadwell [2] considered how optical and
thermal effects inuence the efciency of a PTC. He found that rim

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 39 0712204277; fax: 39 0712204770.

E-mail addresses: g.coccia@univpm.it, coccia_gianluca@hotmail.it (G. Coccia), g.
dinicola@univpm.it (G. Di Nicola), marcosotte@gmail.com (M. Sotte).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.08.077
0960-1481/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

angles of 90
minimize the maximum distance between the parabolic reector and the focus. Since the receiver diameter is proportional to this distance, thermal losses, which are proportional to
the diameter itself, are reduced.
In a detailed work published in 1992, Thomas and Guven [3]
outlined the main structural design requirements for a PTC. A PTC
should: a) provide and maintain the correct optical shape of the
reective surfaces; b) maintain its shape within the specied tolerances during operations; c) protect the reective surfaces under
extreme weather conditions; d) withstand long-term environmental exposure. In other words, the stresses and deections
experienced by the receiver and the reector must remain below
specied levels under gravitational, wind, and thermal loads. On
the other hand, the choice of materials depends on environmental
stability, durability, mechanical and physical properties, suitability
of the construction method, tness for high production rates, low
total weight, and cost. The authors also state that a sandwich
structure is a good design, but high precision moulds are required
in order to successfully fabricate high quality PTCs.
In 1994, Kalogirou et al. [4] presented a PTC design with high
stiffness-to-weight ratio and a low-labor manufacturing process.
The structure is made of polyester resin and woven berglass cloth,
with plastic conduits that provide reinforcement. In a paper published the same year [5], the authors outlined an optimization of
the design based on three parameters: a) collector aperture; b) rim

728

G. Coccia et al. / Renewable Energy 74 (2015) 727e736

angle; c) receiver diameter. They also proposed a tracking mechanism with a control system consisting of three light-dependent
resistors.
The EUROTROUGH project [6] carried out in 2001 proposed a
torque box design with lower weight and less collector deformation
than other designs. This technology presents different advantages:
a) the possibility of connecting more collector elements on one
drive, so that their number, in addition to costs and thermal losses,
is reduced; b) reducing the torsion and bending increases the optical performance and wind resistance. A torque box structure was
also used by Brooks et al. [7] with a mix of advanced and less sophisticated technologies to manufacture a reector made of stainless steel sheets covered with aluminized acrylic lm. This solution
grants accessibility, accuracy, ease of fabrication, and cost
reduction.
In 2007, Valan Arasu and Sornakumar [8] presented a simple,
low-cost hand lay-up method for manufacturing PTCs based on the
previous work of Kalogirou et al. [4]. The design proposed consists
of a smooth 90
rim angle, reinforced parabolic trough made of
layers of polyester resin and chopped strand berglass.
In 2011, Rosado Hau and Escalante Soberanis [9] illustrated the
production of a water-heating system based on PTC technology
limited to a maximum temperature of 55
C. The collector presented uses a sheet of polished stainless steel. The receiver is a
copper tube coated with a thin black paint, and shielded by a polycarbonate glass; it is not evacuated.
In their work of 2012, Venegas-Reyes et al. [10] described a light
but robust structure of aluminum made only using hand tools. This
PTC has a rim angle of 45
and, since it is designed for low-enthalpy
steam generation and hot water, it presents an unshielded receiver
without a glass cover in order to reduce costs. In another work
published in 2013 [11], the authors presented ve PTCs for the same
purpose; three of them have a rim angle of 90
and the other two
have a rim angle of 45
.
The main feature of the PTC prototype presented in this work is
the parabolic support structure: it is a composite of berglass (used
as an external shell) and extruded polystyrene (XEPS, as inside ll
component). These two materials have been chosen for different
reasons: a) cost; b) weight; c) resistance to atmospheric agents; d)
ease of manufacturing. This solution is preferred to the simple
berglass structure because it offers extremely high structural
performances and low weight. The prototype has also been tested
and has shown a performance similar to different PTCs reported on
by other authors.
The present work is organized as follows. Section 2 presents the
geometrical and structural characteristics of the PTC prototype. We
also describe the manufacturing technique adopted to construct
the collector, the tracking system used and an estimate of the initial
cost. In Section 3, we illustrate the methodology and test bench
used to carry out experimental investigations. The thermal efciency and other relevant aspects useful in dening the performance of a PTC are outlined in Section 4. In Section 5.1 we provide
the experimental results and a detailed comparison with other
collectors available in the literature. Finally, we discuss the results
obtained in Section 6.
2. Design and manufacture
Two important factors to be considered in the construction of a
PTC are the accuracy of the parabolic shape and the torsional
resistance of the collector [3]. Since PTCs are generally arranged in
lines parallel to each other and each line is rotated in the middle,
the weight of the collectors and external forces, mainly wind loads,
can generate large moments on the section next to the rotating
system.

These two key issues are usually solved via different solutions:
 a metallic frame running through each line provides the
necessary torsional rigidity to hold each module at the right
angle;
 an accurate parabolic shape, which is obtained by anchoring
small (typically 1.5 m2) pre-shaped glass or metal mirrors to the
frame.
In the case of a parabolic chord between 4 and 6 m (common in
PTC plants for electric power production), this method has several
advantages: e.g., the movement of small parts rather than big
sections and the possibility of adjusting the position of each
reective surface with respect to the frame, which is necessary to
obtain the desired accuracy on a large parabolic arch. But this
approach is time consuming and expensive. For smaller chord
values (0.5e2.5 m), it is useful to adopt a structure that considers
both the parabolic shape and the frame, thus ensuring a very accurate parabolic prole and a highly resistant mechanical structure.
For this reason, the present project has led to a PTC prototype
called UNIVPM.01 realized with a sandwich of berglass and
extruded polystyrene. The advantage in using a sandwich lies in its
mechanical properties, and berglass is a very common component
of such composite materials.
2.1. Design of the PTC prototype
The PTC designed is quite small. It presents a focal length of
0.25 m and a rim angle fr of 90
. This particular rim-angle value
was chosen to minimize slope and tracking errors [2,12].
Other characteristics of the concentrator are reported in Table 1.
Since the prototype is to be used for testing, the supports for the
receiver were designed to allow the position of the receiver itself to
be adjusted (both in terms of height and angle with respect to the
origin of the parabola). This was done in order to be able to test
different receivers on the same parabolic reector. The present
study makes use of one particular receiver with the geometrical
characteristics reported in Table 2. The receiver is an aluminum
pipe of circular cross-section: the outer surface is painted with a
black high-temperature-resistant paint. It is contained in a low-iron
glass envelope (the same glass used for evacuated tube collectors).
We used a receiver made of aluminum for the following reasons: it
is light, ductile, and easy to be coated with paint. Bending was
avoided because the PTC prototype was tested for temperatures up
to 85
C.
Three teon rings hold the glass in place on the aluminum
receiver. Small holes were drilled in the rings to allow air circulation inside the annulus and prevent condensation on the glass. A
schematic of the receiver is shown in Fig. 1, while the thermal/
optical properties of the materials used are provided in Table 3.
With such a receiver, the concentration ratio C, i.e., the ratio
between the aperture area of the collector Aa and the absorber
outer surface Ar, is [14]:
Table 1
Characteristics of the UNIVPM.01 concentrator.
Characteristic
Focal length (m)
Length (m)
Aperture (m)
Mirror length (m)
Mirror aperture (m)
Aperture area (m2)
Total sandwich thickness (m)
Rim angle (
)

Symbol

Lc
Aa

fr

Value
0.250
2.100
1.000
2.000
0.925
1.85
0.050
90

G. Coccia et al. / Renewable Energy 74 (2015) 727e736

729

Table 2
Characteristics of the UNIVPM.01 receiver.
Characteristic

Symbol

Value

Inner absorber diameter (m)

Outer absorber diameter (m)
Inner cover diameter (m)
Outer cover diameter (m)
Length (m)
Absorber outer surface area (m2)

Dai
Dao

0.025
0.030
0.046
0.048
2.100
0.20

Ar

Fig. 2. Mould realized with nine pieces of light plastic.

Fig. 1. Schematic of the receiver. Note the RTD (resistance temperature detector)
inserted at the far end of the receiver.

Aa 1:85
9:25:

Ar 0:20

(1)

2.2. Manufacture of the berglass/XEPS parabola

The parabolic support structure was made with a composite of
extruded polystyrene (XEPS) within a berglass shell. The mechanical and chemical characteristics of berglass are well known:
this material was used for the rst time for the construction of PTCs
by Kalogirou et al. [4]. XEPS, however, is not as common in composite materials, but it has several advantages: a) it is very
economical; b) it is light (its surface density is x200 kg m2); c) it
presents good mechanical properties. It has a high resistance to
compression from evenly distributed forces, so it is very suitable for
use in a sandwich structure. It is widely used in buildings for
thermal insulation and is therefore sold in sheets of various
dimension and thickness. Different varieties of polystyrene are
used in construction, but the extruded one presents the best mechanical properties at a low price (about 2.5 EUR m2 for 40 mm
thick sheets).
The mould for the structure, inspired by the one used from
Kalogirou et al. [4], was constructed by joining nine pieces of light
plastic sheets (13 mm thick) that were water-cut on a computercontrolled machine to obtain a very accurate prole, as shown in
Fig. 2. A stainless steel sheet (0.8 mm thick) was laid on the plastic

pieces and held in place by two transverse wooden beams screwed

to the plastic parts to create a parabolic prole.
For the design of the parabolic support, a 40-mm thick XEPS
sheet was cut into small strips. This allows for adoption of a parabolic shape when all strips are positioned one next to the other on
the mould; the empty spaces were lled with epoxy resin. In two
symmetrical places, two XEPS strips were replaced with aluminum
tubes with rectangular cross-section. These tubes are necessary to
link the concentrator to the support and tracking structure and
were rmly attached to the XEPS with four smaller tubes positioned perpendicularly (see Fig. 3).
After the application of a wax polish on all necessary surfaces,
the rst and second berglass and resin layers were applied to the
stainless steel parabolic surface. Normal mesh berglass tissue was
used: this kind of mesh presents mechanical properties that are
better dened than those of chopped strand berglass, so it is
generally preferred for thin layers, although it is more expensive.
While the compound was still liquid, all the XEPS strips and
aluminum frame pieces were arranged in place. All remaining
surfaces were then covered with two layers of resin and berglass;
it was carefully ensured that the resin penetrated well between the
XEPS pieces.
When the application of the resin was nished, the upper surface was covered with a plastic sheet and three straps were
attached to it. Both the sheet and straps were screwed down to the
supports to ensure perfect adhesion of the new structure to the
mould. Once dry, the structure was removed from the mould and a
highly reective aluminum foil (MIRO-SUN Weatherproof Reective 90 [15]) was glued to the concave surface to create a parabolic
reective surface. The reective foil consists of anodized aluminum
with a specially coated surface on one side studied for outdoor solar

Table 3
Thermal/optical properties of the elements of UNIVPM.01. Optical properties were
evaluated at normal incidence conditions. Note that, with the exception of specular
reectance rn, other properties were derived from the literature.
Property

Symbol

Value

Cover transmittance
Absorber absorptance
Foil specular reectance
Absorber conductivity (W m1
C1)

tn
an
rn
la

0.93
0.95
0.94
237

Fig. 3. Parabolic prole equipped with two aluminum, rectangular-cross-section tubes.

730

G. Coccia et al. / Renewable Energy 74 (2015) 727e736

applications that require high reectance and resistance to atmospheric agents. The use of a replaceable foil allows for certain
exibility in the use of the collector.
The weight of the concentrator is approximately 12 kg. A threedimensional representation of the prototype UNIVPM.01 provided
with the support structure is shown in Fig. 4.
2.3. Tracking system
The tracking system is composed of ve elements:
1. an asynchronous three-phase motor (0.18 kW power, 1320 RPM
speed) with 4/8 poles;
2. an inverter that allows the motor speed to be regulated;
3. three worm drives with gear ratios of 1/60, 1/60, and 1/35;
4. a belt drive with a transmission ratio of approximately 1/5 that
couples the last worm gear to the PTC axis;
5. a 5000 position-per-revolution encoder, coupled to the rotation
axis of the collector.
A picture representing the motor, the worm drives, and the drive
belt is shown in Fig. 5. The motor was attached to the support
structure via four bolts and two plates. This allowed to regulate the
height of the motor with respect to the ground and to set the
correct tension of the belt drive. The presence of the worm drives
was necessary in order to reduce the maximum rotational speed of
the collector: in fact, the motor was too fast and the transmission
ratio of the belt drive too small to guarantee a correct tracking of
the sun. The belt drive also acts as a clutch to prevent torques that
are too high from being transmitted from the PTC to the tracking
system.
The use of a common industrial asynchronous motor and a gear
reduction system is a solution that can easily be scaled up. The idea
is to rotate an entire line with just one motor, for this reason, it is
necessary to adopt a solution that can be adapted to produce a large
torque on the nal axis. Other solutions, such as stepper motors are
easier to adapt to smaller systems, but become very expensive
when a relevant torque has to be produced. Additionally, the nonreversibility of motion in worm drives is an advantage because it
allows the system to be kept in position without powering the
motor.
The encoder and the inverter communicate with a PC through
appropriate electronics. A diagram of the electronic signals is
shown in Fig. 6. A solar-position routine based on Michalsky's algorithm [16] was implemented in LabVIEW to calculate the correct

Fig. 4. The PTC prototype UNIVPM.01.

Fig. 5. A picture of the motor, worm drives, and drive belt used in the tracking system.

rotational speed to be given the PTC at any instant. The date and
time inputs are imported into LabVIEW from the PC operative
system. The routine elaborates the desired position for the collector,
b, with a time-step of 1 s. Even though experimental tests were
carried out with the axis of the collector oriented in the EW
(EasteWest) direction (see Section 5.1), the tracking system is able

Fig. 6. Data ow schematic of the electronic signals.

G. Coccia et al. / Renewable Energy 74 (2015) 727e736

731

to follow the sun with the PTC oriented in two different directions;
e.g., when the PTC axis has an EW orientation, the desired position
is given by [14]:

tan b tan qz jcos gs j:

(2)

Instead, when the PTC axis has a NS (NortheSouth) orientation,

the desired position can be obtained by [14]:

tan b tan qz jcosgPTC  gs j:

(3)

In Eqs. (2) and (3), qz is the zenith angle, gs is the solar azimuth
angle, and gPTC is the PTC axis azimuth angle.
At the instant t, the correct value for the angular speed to track
the sun, u, is:

btDt  bt
;
Dt

(4)

where Dt 1 s. It is worth noting that the angular speed u has a

minimum equal to 4.7  105 rad s1 and a maximum equal to
1.7  104 rad s1 throughout a year: in the present case, for a PTC
axis with NS orientation and situated in Ancona, Italy (latitude
43.5867 N, longitude 13.5150 E), the minimum and the maximum
speed occur, respectively, during the sunrise (or sunset) of summer
solstice and during the solar noon of winter solstice. The rotational
speed of the collector can be adjusted at the minimum and
maximum speed via both on the double speed control of the motor
and on the inverter: in particular, when 8 poles of the motor are
powered and the inverter frequency is set to x23 Hz, the minimum
speed is obtained. Alternatively, when 4 poles are powered and a
frequency of x40 Hz is set, the PTC axis rotates at the maximum
speed. All these settings were automatized in the solar-position
routine.
The proposed tracking mechanism would be correct only for an
ideal collector that was always in focus. In reality, the collector can
be misaligned during normal working conditions, or at the start.
Thus, for each time step the calculated value of b is used as an input
for the motor control system: this compares the desired position, b,
with the current position read on the encoder, bexp. If we introduce
a tolerance position error equal to the resolution of the encoder:

Db

360
0:072+ ;
5000

(5)

three cases are possible (see the ow chart of Fig. 7):

 if b < bexp  Db, the motor is slowed down to the minimum
speed
in order to
regain focus;
 if b <
bexp  Db
, the collector is in focus and the tracking
mechanism previously described is adopted;
 if b > bexp Db, then the motor is accelerated to the maximum
speed to regain focus.
In addition, the LabVIEW environment allows to manually: a)
turn on and off the motor; b) set the appropriate degree of rotation;
c) give a user-dened rotational speed (see Fig. 6). A soft start was
also included in the inverter to avoid damage to the motor or gears.
Computing the solar position has some advantages with respect
to systems that move the PTC based on a feedback signal: there is
no disturbance due to clouds or sky shading and a high precision
can be reached. But there are also some disadvantages: a positioning error in the PTC axis (not pointing due north or east) or
small misalignments or imperfections in the geometry can produce
tracking errors.

Fig. 7. Flow chart of the tracking mechanism.

2.4. Costs
A summary of the initial cost, compared with that of similar
PTCs presented in literature, is provided in Table 4. The mould is
one of the most expensive item because high precision is required
for this element in order to obtain an accurate parabolic prole.
From an industrial point of view, however, this cost can be
amortized by considering that several collectors can be manufactured with a single mould. On the other hand, XEPS is very
economical. Taking into account the price of the mould, the total
cost necessary to realize the PTC prototype is 477 EUR. Considering
an aperture area Aa of 1.85 m2, the cost per m2 of reecting surface
is 258 EUR.
Labor costs for constructing the prototype were added in Table 4
to the nal price and are equal to 125 EUR m2. Note that this cost is
reasonable for a minimum of 100 m2 aperture-area production. In
this way, the total cost is 383 EUR m2. The prot for the manufacturer should be also taken into account to have a more realistic
picture of the total cost of the PTC: therefore, we considered a
reasonable percentage markup of 0.15% which gives a nal cost of
441 EUR m2.
Table 4
Initial cost of the prototype compared with similar PTCs presented in literature. Note
that the costs of the elements of other PTCs were aggregated differently with respect
of the original references.
Item

UNIVPM.01

[11]
(PTC90)

[11]
(PTC45)

[10]

[8]

EUR

USD

USD

USD

INR

Mould
Wax polish
XEPS
Fiberglass
Epoxy resin
Reective foil
Support structure
Glass cover
Absorber
Tracking system
Miscellaneous

104.00
3.00
15.00
37.00
31.00
45.00
47.00
28.00
24.00
128.00
15.00

233.00

206.00

Total
Cost per m2
Cost per m2 (labor)
Cost per m2 (markup)

477.00
258.00
383.00
441.00

379.00

2200
52.00
105.00

52.00
170.00

110.00
302.00

3000
4000

17.00

17.00

35.00
164.00
50.00

800
7000
5000

1040.00
179.53
182.10

22 000
22 000

40.00

40.00

447.00
172.32

485.00
167.47

732

G. Coccia et al. / Renewable Energy 74 (2015) 727e736

3. Testing loop and methodology

Outdoor tests were performed in Ancona, Italy (latitude
43.5867 N, longitude 13.5150 E) and the ASHRAE (American Society
of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers) Standard
93-2010 [17] was adopted as a reference. In order to dene the
thermal efciency of the PTC, the following quantities need to be
_ inlet (T) and outlet (Tfo) uid temmeasured: mass ow rate m,
perature, and direct normal irradiance DNI. The specic heat at
constant pressure of the working uid cp and aperture area Aa must
also be calculated.
The test bench is composed of two parts: the hydraulic circuit
and the signal acquisition and calculation system.

3.1. Hydraulic circuit

The hydraulic system used for the tests is composed of just a
few elements. The heat transfer uid is demineralized water at
atmospheric pressure, which is forced into the PTC by a pump. A
pin valve regulates the desired ow into the collector system. To
more nely adjust the mass ow and to reduce the nominal ow
rate of the pump, which was larger than necessary, a by-pass
provided with a gate valve was installed, as outlined in Fig. 8.
In this way, the ow rate through the pump could be maintained
while adjusting the rate through the PTC. Additionally, since the
ow rate on the by-pass was very large, a certain recirculation of
the uid in the storage tank was obtained to prevent stratication
of the liquid.
The mass ow rate m_ was chosen to be 0.045 kg s1, thus a little
larger than the value suggested by the ASHRAE Standard for liquid
heat transfer uids (0.037 kg s1 for the adopted collector aperture
area). However, this choice does not represent a problem and is
only due to the fact that a turbulent ow in the chosen absorber is
desired.
No cooling system is present in the circuit. To overcome this
absence, a very large storage tank (x300 L) was adopted. In this
way, the increase in system temperature during each acquisition is
so small that it can be neglected. In the most sunny conditions it
was measured to be less than 0.02
C min1. Since the length of
each acquisition was about 5 min, the maximum variation in inlet

temperature during a single acquisition was about 0.1
C. The

maximum operating temperature for the system is about 85
C,
mainly due to restrictions on the materials' maximum
temperature.
3.2. Instruments and computational procedure
The remaining part of the test loop consists of the signal
acquisition and calculation system. Fig. 6 shows a schematic of the
data ow through the instrumentation. Four temperatures, wind
velocity, and two values of direct normal irradiance DNI are
measured. The mass ow rate m_ is acquired only at the beginning of
each measurement and is manually inserted into the calculation
system.
The temperatures measured are: the ambient temperature
Tamb, the temperature in the tank close to the inlet of the pump
Ttank, and the temperature of the heat transfer uid at the inlet (T)
and the outlet (Tfo) of the receiver. The rst two temperatures are
measured with T-type thermocouples, while the temperatures of
the uid entering and exiting the receiver are measured using AA
Class RTDs (resistance temperature detectors). In this way, an
accuracy of about 0.8
C is obtained for the range of measured
temperatures.
An Agilent 34970A data-acquisition unit [18] was used for all
data acquisition and for thermocouple compensation. The two
RTDs for measuring inlet and outlet temperature were inserted in
the double end of the receiver, as shown in Fig. 1.
DNI was measured using two rst-class [19] normal-incidence
pyrheliometers (NIPs) mounted on solar trackers [20]. The calculation system uses the average of the signals produced by the two
instruments.
4. Thermal and optical analysis
The thermal efciency of a PTC, h, is dened as the ratio of useful
energy delivered to the heat transfer uid to the energy collected
from the aperture area of the collector. It is a function of the optical
performance of the PTC and the amount of thermal losses.
When the angle of incidence, q, dened as the angle between
the Sun's rays and the normal to the aperture area of the collector, is
x0 (i.e., when solar rays are nearly parallel to the normal), the
analytic expression relating the parameters mentioned above is (as
derived from Kalogirou [12]):



_ p Tfo  Tfi
mc
DNIAa




U Tfi  Tamb
:
FR ho;n  L
C
DNI

(6)

While the rst ratio in Eq. (6) derives directly from the denition
of thermal efciency and includes experimentally measurable
quantities, the second expression can be obtained by carrying out
an energy balance calculation for the receiver. In the second
expression, ho,n is the optical efciency of the collector at normal
incidence, dened as the ratio of solar radiation reaching the
absorber to the energy collected from the aperture area. It can be
expressed as (adapted from the ASHRAE Standard 93-2010 [17])



ho;n targn 1  Af ;n ;

(7)

where:

Fig. 8. Hydraulic circuit.

 (ta) is the transmittanceeabsorptance product;

 r is the specular reectance of the parabolic mirror;
 g is the intercept factor, the fraction of reected energy that is
directed towards the receiver [21];

G. Coccia et al. / Renewable Energy 74 (2015) 727e736

 Af is the ratio of ineffective area due to geometrical effects [13]

(e.g., shading due to blockages and the receiver, and solar rays
reected from the mirror past the end of the receiver) to the
whole aperture area of the collector.
The heat removal factor FR and the overall loss coefcient UL
depend on heat losses and are independent of the angle of
incidence. In particular, heat loss from the collector is related
to [22]:
 the collector geometry and materials;
 working conditions (inlet uid temperature T, mass ow rate
_ thermophysical properties of the heat transfer uid);
m,
 environmental conditions (ambient temperature Tamb, wind
velocity, relative humidity, direct normal irradiance DNI).
Experimental investigations show that, if thermal efciency h is
plotted against the operative term (T  Tamb)/DNI, the data are
related linearly. Thus, the expression on the right-hand side of Eq.
(6) can be considered as a straight line, with intercept a and slope b
dened as follows:
 a FRho,n;
 b (FRUL)/C.
Actually, the thermal efciency of a PTC is generally given in the
form of a linear equation. If we dene the operative term
T* (T  Tamb)/DNI, we can write

h a bT * :

(8)

We will now show a method derived in a previous paper by the

authors [22] in which experimental data is used to estimate the
optical efciency ho,n and the intercept factor gn at normal incidence conditions, i.e., when q x 0. Let us consider the system of
three equations of variables FR, UL, and F' (see Dufe and Beckman
[14] for further details, and note that we have indicated with la the
thermal conductivity of the absorber pipe):

8
b FR UL =C
>
>
>



>
>
_ p
>
mc
Ar UL F 0
>
< FR
1  exp 
_ p
Ar UL
mc
>
>
>
1=U
>
>
.
 L
:
F0
>
>
:
hf Dai Dao lnDao =Dai =2la
1=UL Dao

(9)

733

5. Results
5.1. Thermal efciency
Fig. 9 shows experimental thermal-efciency data from
UNIVPM.01 for various combinations of inlet uid temperature,
ambient temperature, and direct normal irradiance. Tests were
conducted during clear sky and near-normal incident conditions,
with the PTC axis oriented in the EW direction. By tting the
experimental data, the following equation for the straight line
representing the thermal efciency was determined:

h 0:658  0:683 T * :

(11)

Eq. (11) is shown in Fig. 9 along with the experimental data.

Comparison with efciency expressions, derived from the literature
for collectors equipped with shielded receivers reveals a slope that
is higher than average (see Table 5). This can be justied by the
different concentration ratios employed for the collectors tested. In
fact, if we consider the bC product reported in Table 5, we nd out
that the value assumed by UNIVPM.01 is low. In general, the
parameter bC represents a good way to estimate the thermal
losses of a PTC when FR, and therefore UL, are not available.
From the intercept a and the slope b we may gain insight
regarding the optical efciency ho,n and the intercept factor gn at
normal incidence, as seen in Section 4. In the turbulent regime, the
convective heat transfer coefcient between the absorber and the
uid can be evaluated by considering the Gnielinski [26] correlation
for the Nusselt number:

hf

#
"
lf
l
f =8Re  1000Pr
Nu f

;

Dai
Dai 1 12:7f =81=2 Pr 2=3  1

(12)

valid for 0.5  Pr  2  103 and 3  103 < Re < 5  106. In Eq. (12), lf
is the thermal conductivity of the heat transfer uid, Re is the
Reynolds number, Pr is the Prandtl number, and f is the coefcient
of friction, which can be calculated from the Colebrook equation
[27]. Considering liquid water as the heat transfer uid, we have
used a model based on the IAPWS (International Association for the
Properties of Water and Steam) industrial formulation [28] to
calculate hf 637 W m2
C1. Thus, Eq. (10) yields FR 0.985 and
from the denition of the intercept a, we get:

ho;n

a
0:668:
FR

(13)

In order to solve this system of equations to obtain a more useful

expression for FR, the experimental value b, geometrical (C, Ar, Dai,
_ cp), and material (la) parameters have to be
Dao), process (m,
determined. The convective heat transfer coefcient between the
absorber and the uid hf must be calculated. In this way, by
substituting the expressions for b and F0 in the expression of FR, we
nd that

2
6
6
FR bC 6
4

A
 r
_ p ln 1
mc

3
7

D
D
D
 ao ao ln ao 7
7:
hf Dai 2la
Dai 5
Ar bC

(10)

_ p
mc

Once FR has been determined, the optical efciency at normal

incidence ho,n may be obtained from the expression of the intercept
value a. If we then consider that for q x 0 the contribution of Af,n is
only due to the shading of the receiver on the collector, the intercept factor at normal incidence gn may be calculated from Eq. (7)
when the tn, an, and rn are known.

Fig. 9. Experimental results and t of the thermal efciency of UNIVPM.01. R2 is the

coefcient of determination.

734

G. Coccia et al. / Renewable Energy 74 (2015) 727e736

Table 5
Comparison of different PTC parameters. The symbol () indicates that the receiver considered is unshielded.
Reference

Year

b (W m2
C1)

bC

fr (
)

ho,n

gn

tn

an

rn

FR

UL (W m2
C1)

UNIVPM.01
[11] (PTC90)
[11] (PTC45)
[10]
[9]
[8]
[7] (shielded)
[7] (unshielded)
[23]
[5]
[24]
[25]

2014
2013
2013
2012
2011
2007
2005
2005
1996
1994
1984
1982

0.658
0.613
0.351
0.561
0.054
0.69
0.538
0.552
0.638
0.642
0.65
0.66

0.683
2.302
2.117
2.047
0.189
0.39
1.059
2.009
0.387
0.441
0.382
0.233

9.25
13.3
14.9
14.87
38.84
19.89
16.7
16.7
21.2
21.2
n.a.
16.42

6.32
30.62
31.54
30.44
7.32
7.76
17.69
33.55
8.20
9.36
n.a.
3.83

90
90
45
45
65.56
90
82.2
82.2
90
90
n.a.
90

0.668
0.70
0.48
0.60
n.a.
0.694
0.553
0.601
0.647
0.648
n.a.
n.a.

0.829
0.84
0.58
0.665
n.a.
0.879
0.823
0.823
0.94
0.98
n.a.
n.a.

0.93
e
e
e
0.95
0.9
0.92
e
0.90
n.a.
n.a.
0.9

0.95
0.90
0.90
0.95
0.95
0.9
0.88
0.88
0.90
n.a.
n.a.
0.94

0.94
0.92
0.92
0.95
0.59
0.97
0.83
0.83
0.85
n.a.
n.a.
0.78

0.985
0.88
0.73
0.94
n.a.
0.99
0.97
0.92
0.99
0.99
n.a.
n.a.

6.42
34.98
43.09
32.56
n.a.
7.79
18.23
36.47
8.29
9.44
n.a.
n.a.

Finally, if we consider shading on the collector aperture area due

to the presence of the receiver, Af,n (DaoLc)/Aa 0.03, and from Eq.
(6) and the optical properties of the materials provided in Table 3,
we obtain:

gn

ho;n

 0:829:
tarn 1  Af;n

 2:17541  106 q3 :

(16)

5.3. Wind load

The optical efciency in Eq. (7) is independent of the angle of

incidence but, in reality, it strongly depends on this quantity. Since
ho is difcult to be described analytically and measured for offnormal incidence angles, a factor called incident angle modier,
Kta, is usually provided to take into account the effect of the angle of
incidence. The incidence angle modier is given by [17]:

Kta

Kta 1:00082  4:52462  103 q 9:99349  105 q2

(14)

5.2. Incident angle modier



targ 1  Af
h

 o :

h
o;n
targn 1  Af;n

The regression curve depicted in Fig. 10 is a third order polynomial equal to (q is expressed in degrees):

(15)

Outdoor tests carried out over more than a year have shown that
the prototype is able to operate in average wind speeds of 15 m s1,
a condition that satises the design requirements of the Sandia
Laboratory (as reported in Thomas and Guven [3]). In addition, the
prototype was tested adding weights that correspond to the load
applied by a wind speed of 15 m s1, 30 m s1, and 45 m s1. A
similar method was used by Kalogirou et al. [4]. Table 6 reports the
corresponding deections measured at the center of the concentrator with a dial gage. For a load equivalent to a wind speed of
45 m s1, the maximum deection is 2.3 mm, which can be
considered acceptable.
5.4. Error analysis

For the PTC prototype presented in this work, the incident angle
modier was obtained according to the ASHRAE Standard 93-2010.
Fig. 10 shows the incident angle modier data points plotted
against the angle of incidence; the regression curve is also provided. It is possible to note that Kta decreases rather rapidly with q:
this can be explained by considering that the receiver is not longer
than the concentrator (see Section 2.1). Therefore, end effects [13]
are relevant for higher angles of incidence, and the optical efciency is consequently reduced.

The estimation of the error in the measure of the thermal efciency requires an analysis of the propagation of uncertainty. If we
consider the experimental expression of the thermal efciency (the
rst ratio in Eq. (6)), the corresponding expanded uncertainty, uh, is
in rst approximation given by [29]:

uh

s
u 2 u 2 u 2 u 2 u 2
c
_
A
p
DT
DNI
m
a

;
cp
DT
DNI
Aa
m_

(17)

where the ui are the expanded uncertainties of each measured

quantity (note that DT Tfo  T). When the central limit theorem is
applicable, the distribution of probability obtained with Eq. (17) is
Gaussian even if not all the input quantities have the same distribution [29].
The expressions and the values used to calculate the ui are reported in Table 7. Note that, with the exception of the aperture area,
all the expanded uncertainties are provided as Gaussian distributions with condence intervals of 95%; with this assumption, one
Table 6
Deections measured at the center of the concentrator with weights
corresponding to different wind speeds.

Fig. 10. Incident angle modier curve of UNIVPM.01.

Wind speed (m s1)

Deection (mm)

15
30
45

0.3
1.0
2.3

G. Coccia et al. / Renewable Energy 74 (2015) 727e736

Table 7
Expanded uncertainties of the quantities that inuence the thermal efciency.
Uncertainty

Expression

Distribution

um_ (kg s1)

ucp (J kg1
C1)
uDT (
C)
uDNI (W m2)
uAa (m2)

0.00063
See Section 5.4
(0.20 0.0017(T Tfo))
0.030DNI
0.00084

Gaussian
Gaussian
Gaussian
Gaussian
Uniform

uh,max
uh,m

0.059
0.051

Gaussian
Gaussian

can demonstrate that uh also represents a condence level of 95%

[29]. In Table 7, uh,max is the maximum expanded uncertainty
calculated for h, while uh,m is the mean expanded uncertainty.
It is worth noting that cp was calculated with IAPWS industrial
formulation [28] as a function of the mean temperature
Tm (T Tfo)/2. Therefore, ucp was obtained by [29]:

u cp

vcp
u ;
vTm Tm

(18)

where uTm uDT .

Finally, error bars for h were plotted in Fig. 9. It is possible to
observe that the error is greater when T* increases: this is due to the
temperature error that, as reported in Table 7, is a linear function of
the temperature itself.
6. Conclusions
Although a concentration ratio of 9.25 is quite small, tests show
that the thermal efciency is comparable with that of other similar
collectors available in the literature. The slope of the linear
thermal-efciency equation, which can be associated with thermal
losses and is equal to 0.683, is low when released from the concentration ratio term: this means that the receiver has been well
designed and built. On the other hand, the intercept value (equal to
0.658 and representative of the optical performance) is one of the
best available in the literature. One of the main features of
UNIVPM.01 is its low weight. But this aspect must not be interpreted as a possible source of structural issues: in fact, the prototype has shown good resistance properties throughout the oneyear period of experimental tests. The prototype has conrmed
that the manufacturing process is reliable and the design is functional for industrial process heat applications; therefore, we believe
that the method presented in this work could be used to design and
manufacture small, low-cost, and high-performance parabolic
trough collectors. However, we will work on a prototype with larger
concentration ratio in order to validate the proposed
manufacturing process and design.
Acknowledgments
We wish to thank Dr. Tommaso Recanatini and Dr. Michele
Panni for their contributions to the present work.
Nomenclature

Latin symbols
Aa
aperture area (m2)
Af
ratio of ineffective area to the total aperture area
Ar
absorber outer surface area (m2)
a
intercept of the linear t of thermal efciency
b
slope of the linear t of thermal efciency (W m2
C1)

C
cp
Dai
Dao
DNI
F0
FR
f
hf
Lc
Kta
m_
Nu
Pr
Re
R2
Tamb
T
Tfo
Tm
Ttank
T*

DT
t
UL
u

735

concentration ratio
specic heat at constant pressure (J kg 1
C1)
inner absorber diameter (m)
outer absorber diameter (m)
direct normal irradiance (W m2)
collector efciency factor
heat removal factor
coefcient of friction
convective heat transfer coefcient of the uid
(W m2
C1)
mirror length (m)
incident angle modier
mass ow rate (kg s1)
Nusselt number
Prandtl number
Reynolds number
coefcient of determination
ambient temperature (
C)
inlet uid temperature (
C)
outlet uid temperature (
C)
mean uid temperature (
C)
temperature in the storage tank (
C)
independent variable of the linear t of thermal efciency
(
C W1 m2)
temperature difference between inlet and outlet (
C)
time (s)
overall loss coefcient (W m2
C1)
expanded uncertainty

Greek symbols
a
absorptance of the absorber
b
desired slope angle of the collector (
)
bexp
current slope angle of the collector (
)
Db
tolerance angular position error (
)
g
intercept factor
gPTC
collector axis azimuth angle (
)
gs
solar azimuth angle (
)
h
thermal efciency
ho
optical efciency
q
angle of incidence (
)
qz
Zenith angle (
)
la
thermal conductivity of the absorber (W m1
C1)
lf
thermal conductivity of the uid (W m1
C1)
r
specular reectance of the mirror
t
transmittance of the cover
(ta)
transmittanceeabsorptance product
fr
rim angle (
)
u
tracking angular speed (rad s1)
Acronyms
ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers
EU
European Union
EW
EasteWest
EUR
Euro
XEPS
extruded polystyrene
IAPWS International Association for the Properties of Water and
Steam
INR
Indian Rupee
NIP
normal incidence pyrheliometer
NS
NortheSouth
OECD
Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development
PTC
parabolic trough collector
RTD
resistance temperature detector

736

G. Coccia et al. / Renewable Energy 74 (2015) 727e736

UNIVPM Marche Polytechnic University

USD
United States Dollar
References
[1] Key issues for renewable heat in Europe (K4RES-H) e solar industrial process
heat e state of the Art e WP3, task 3.5. European Solar Thermal Industrial
Federation; 2006.
[2] Treadwell GW. Design considerations for parabolic-cylindrical solar collectors.
In: Sharing the sun: solar technology in the seventies, vol. 2; 1976. p. 235e52.
[3] Thomas A, Guven H. Parabolic trough concentrators e design, construction
and evaluation. Energy Convers Manage 1993;34:401e16.
[4] Kalogirou S, Eleftheriou P, Lloyd S, Ward J. Low cost high accuracy parabolic
troughs construction and evaluation. Renew Energy 1994;5:384e6.
[5] Kalogirou SA, Lloyd S, Ward J, Eleftheriou P. Design and performance characteristics of a parabolic-trough solar-collector system. Appl Energy 1994;47:
341e54.
[6] Lpfert E, Zarza E, Geyer M, Nava P, Langenkamp J, Schiel W, et al. EUROTROUGH collector qualication complete e performance test results from PSA.
teborg, Sweden; 2001.
In: ISES Solar World Congress, Go
[7] Brooks M, Mills I, Harms T. Design, construction and testing of a parabolic
trough solar collector for a developing-country application. In: Proceedings of
the ISES Solar World Congress, Orlando, FL; 2005. p. 6e12.
[8] Valan Arasu A, Sornakumar T. Design, manufacture and testing of berglass
reinforced parabola trough for parabolic trough solar collectors. Sol Energy
2007;81:1273e9.
[9] Rosado Hau N, Escalante Soberanis MA. Efciency of a parabolic trough collector as a water heater system in Yucat
an, Mexico. J Renew Sustain Energy
2011;3.
n-Garca R, Aguilar J, Sosa[10] Venegas-Reyes E, Jaramillo O, Castrejo
Montemayor F. Design, construction, and testing of a parabolic trough solar
concentrator for hot water and low enthalpy steam generation. J Renew
Sustain Energy 2012;4:053103.
n-Garca R, Sosa[11] Jaramillo O, Venegas-Reyes E, Aguilar J, Castrejo
Montemayor F. Parabolic trough concentrators for low enthalpy processes.
Renew Energy 2013;60:529e39.

[12] Kalogirou SA. Solar energy engineering: processes and systems, processes and
systems series. Elsevier Science; 2009.
[13] Jeter SM, Jarrar DI, Moustafa SA. Geometrical effects on the performance of
trough collectors. Sol Energy 1983;30:109e13.
[14] Dufe J, Beckman W. Solar engineering of thermal processes. Wiley; 2006.
[15] Alanod-Solar GmbH & Co. KG. MIRO-SUN. 2010.
[16] Michalsky JJ. The astronomical Almanac's algorithm for approximate solar
position (1950e2050). Sol Energy 1988;40:227e35.
[17] ANSI/ASHRAE Standard. Standard 93e2010, methods of testing to determine
the thermal performance of solar collectors. 2010.
[18] Agilent Technologies. Agilent 34970A data acquisition/switch unit user's
guide. 2006.
[19] ISO 9060-1990. Solar energy e specication and classication of instruments
for measuring hemispherical solar and direct solar radiation. 1990.
[20] The Eppley Laboratory, Inc. ST-1 normal incidence pyrheliometer. 12 Shefeld
Avenue, PO Box 419, Newport, RI.
[21] Gven HM, Bannerot RB. Derivation of universal error parameters for
comprehensive optical analysis of parabolic troughs. J Sol Energy Eng
1986;108.
[22] Coccia G, Latini G, Sotte M. Mathematical modeling of a prototype of parabolic
trough solar collector. J Renew Sustain Energy 2012;4:023110.
[23] Kalogirou SA. Parabolic trough collector system for low temperature steam
generation: design and performance characteristics. Appl Energy 1996;55:
1e19.
[24] Hurtado P, Kast M. Experimental study of direct in-situ generation of steam in
a line focus solar collector. Report Number: DOE/SF/11946-T1. SERI; 1984.
[25] Murphy LM, May EK. Steam generation in line-focus solar collectors: a
comparative assessment of thermal performance, operating stability, and cost
issues. Technical Report. Golden, CO (USA): Solar Energy Research Inst.; 1982.
[26] Gnielinski V. New equations for heat and mass transfer in the turbulent ow
in pipes and channels. NASA; 1975. p. 8e16. STI/Recon Technical Report A 41.
[27] Colebrook CF. Turbulent ow in pipes, with particular reference to the transition region between the smooth and rough pipe laws. J ICE 1939;11:133e56.
[28] Wagner W, Kretzschmar HJ. International steam tables e properties of water
and steam based on the industrial formulation IAWS-IF97. 2008.
[29] Doebelin EO. Measurements systems: application and design. McGraw-Hill;
2004.