Accepted Manuscript

Experimental investigation of a solar still with composite material heat storage:

Energy, exergy and economic analysis

A.E. Kabeel, Gamal B. Abdelaziz, Emad M.S. El-Said

PII: S0959-6526(19)31734-2
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.200
Reference: JCLP 16965

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 25 August 2018

Revised Date: 15 May 2019
Accepted Date: 18 May 2019

Please cite this article as: Kabeel AE, Abdelaziz GB, El-Said EMS, Experimental investigation of a solar
still with composite material heat storage: Energy, exergy and economic analysis, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2019), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.200.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Experimental Investigation of a Solar Still with Composite Material
Heat Storage: energy, exergy and economic analysis

A.E. Kabeel1, Gamal B. Abdelaziz2, 3, Emad M.S. El-Said4

1 Mechanical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
kabeel6@hotmail.com.com, kabeel6@f-eng.tanta.edu.eg
2 Mechanical Department, Faculty of Industrial Education, Suez University, Egypt

PT
3 Higher Institute of Engineering and Technology, Kafr Elsheikh, Egypt.
gbedair@gmail.com
4 Mechanical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Fayoum University, Fayoum, Egypt

RI
emadsaad@fayoum.edu.eg

ABSTRACT

SC
In the present paper, comparative study of solar still with internal reflector and composite
black gravel-phase change material for thermal heat storage (THS) was presented

U
experimentally. Two operating modes were prepared with different THS; composite material
(SS-CM) and PCM (SS-PCM). The experimental model was tested in the climatic conditions
AN
of the Birkat Elsab City, Monufia, Egypt (Latitude of 30° 38' 19.28'' N, Longitude of 31° 4'
52'' E). The solar still economic feasibility, energy and exergy efficiency performance and
M

water yield for the two operating modes were analyzed. The solar still water yield by utilizing
the composite black gravel-phase change material is 3.27 L/m2 with augmentation by 37.55 %
D

rather than utilizing phase change material only with improvement in energy and exergy
TE

efficiency about 38 % and 37% respectively. The water cost of one liter produced from SS-
CM was about 0.0014 US$/m2 with reduction about 27 % less than SS-PCM. The composite
heat storage material from paraffin wax and black gravel has a noticeable effect on SS
EP

productivity and performance.

Keywords: Solar still; PCM; Heat storage; Cost analysis; Exergy analysis.
C

1. Introduction
AC

About 20 percent of the world's people live in areas that don't have enough water for their
demands or to maintain their lives in healthy levels [2]. Utilizing higher capacity, thermal
desalinating technologies for low population areas face many restrictions such as lack proper
resources to operate these systems [3]. For example, reverse osmosis units are available in
small scale installations worldwide, but sometimes fail due to lack in suitable operating
requirements [4]. So, the solar energy utilization for water desalting processes driven by the
thermal energy is considered a pioneer application in renewable energy research sector.
Desalinating units driven by solar energy are a hopeful application for fresh water production
1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
in isolated and sunny areas [5]. So, the utilizing of a sustainable and simple desalinating
method such as SSs considers a suitable solution for many water problems in zones without
needing a special or expensive preparations [6]. Solar energy is available throughout the world
and is adequate to fulfill all human energy requests. Nonetheless, it is weakened and
discontinuous. In this manner, energy storage systems must be integrated with solar energy
collecting devices to cover energy needs [7].

PT
Many efforts were presented during the last years to review the studied about SS
development methods [8-13]. Panchal [14] and Shukla et al. [15] presented a review in the

RI
different THE materials to improve the SS yield.

Shalaby et al. [16] studied experimentally a solar still (SS) with v-corrugated absorber

SC
integrated with PCM heat storage bed. Their results showed that the utilizing of PCM causes a
little decrement in the daylight water yield with a considerable increment in the still overnight

U
yield. The daily water yield of the SS with PCM was 12% and 11.7% better than those without
the PCM and with the PCM utilizing wick, respectively. They found that the cost of one liter
AN
for SS without PCM, with PCM and with PCM utilizing wick were about 0.07182, 0.08369
and 0.09558 $ respectively. Kabeel et al. [17] studied experimentally a modified pyramid solar
M

still (MPSS) with both v-corrugated absorber plate and PCM. Their results showed that the
daily water productivity for MPSS was higher than that of the conventional pyramid still. The
D

daily water productivity record about 6.6 L/m2 ad 3.5 L/m2 for MPSS and conventional
TE

pyramid still respectively with enhancement about 87.4%. Their cost estimation showed that
the costs of fresh water produced from MPSS and conventional pyramid still were about
0.0236 $ /L and 0.0262 $/L respectively. Al-harahsheh et al. [18] presented an investigation of
EP

a SS, assisted by PCM and integrated with a solar driven water heater. They found that their
unit was capable of daily production about 4.3 l/m2, about 60% was produced during the
C

sunrise period. Shanmugana et al. [19] studied the yield augmentation of SS by PCM and
AC

(Al2O3) nano-particles as an absorbing material in water trough. Their results showed that,
summer and winter the daily yield of the augmented PCM and nano-particles with a SS is
whole circadian concentrate yield was 7.46 and 4.120 kg/m2 respectively. Faegh and Shafii
[20] experimentally studied the storing ability of the PCMs as a thermal latent heat storage of
condensing vapor in SSs. They found that the water productivity increments by 86% as
compared to the conventional SS and reaches to 6.555 kg/m2 per day with the efficiency of
50%. Al-Hamadani and Shukla [21] introduced a study of SS assessed by two types of thermal
heat storage materials; Lauric acid and Myristic acid. They showed the water yield and overall

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
thermal efficiency of the SS with Lauric acid were enhanced by 22% and 15.12 %,
respectively, more than in the case of Myristic acid. Also, their results indicated that the
exergy efficiency values in cases of Lauric acid and Myristic acid were 0.29% and 0.74%
respectively.

Asbik et al. [22] presented an exergy analysis of a SS, assisted by a heat storage medium
to estimate the amount of exergy losses during the heat storage/retrieve time. They found that

PT
the latent heat storage increments the water yield and decrements the exergy efficiency.
Sarhaddi et al. [23] study the influence of PCM storage on the thermodynamic performance of

RI
the stepped SS. They found that highest value of the first and second law efficiencies of SS
without PCM were 76.69% and 6.53%, respectively. However, the highest energy and exergy

SC
efficiencies of the SS with PCM were 74.35% and 8.59%, respectively. Sharshir et al. [24]
presented a review about the different types of SSs thermal performance and exergy analyses

U
to focus on design and optimization methods.
AN
According to the above review, the main motivation points of the present study are: (1)
composite heat storage bed in solar stills and its effect on efficiency increasing, (2) water cost
reduction of product water, (3) sustainability aspects achievement. So, the present work
M

presents a novel development study of SS depends on the following concepts:

• Maximize the solar energy storage by utilizing a composite heat storage material from
D

a PCM (paraffin wax) and black gravel as a latent and sensible TES respectively.
TE

• Minimize the water producing cost by utilizing low cost material and increment the SS
performance.
EP

The proposed model is tested in two operating modes to: (1) estimate the water yield, energy
and exergy efficiencies of the two SS operating modes, (2) know the economic viability of
two SS operating modes, (3) asses the performance of of two SS operating modes compared to
C

similar unit studied in previous works based on energy, exergy and economic parameters.
AC

2. Experimental Facilities
2.1. Solar still
In he present study, the solar still consists of main three parts; water trough, wooden
box, glass cover and composite material. As presented in Figures (1 and 2), the inside walls of
the water trough made from black painted copper sheets with 1.5 mm thickness. The water
trough dimensions are 100 ×40 cm2 and with 5 cm height. The internal SS cavity in covered
by 3 mm thickness mirrors which utilized to increment the solar heat directed to the water

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
trough by reflecting the solar radiation. A 132 ×75 cm2 wooden box with thickness 3 cm is
utilized as supported frame of the SS. The CSM is surrounded the water trough with direct
contact with its outer surfaces. The thickness of the CSM in all-sides and bottom face are kept
at 10 cm and bounded by galvanized steel shell with thickness 1.5 mm. To reduce the thermal
heat waste from galvanized steel shell walls to outside, 5 cm thickness glass wool insulating
material is utilized to insulate the outer galvanized steel shell walls. A commercial glass with

PT
thickness 3 mm is utilized as a cover of the SS and tilted by 30˚ to the south. The fresh water
droplets on the glass wall is flowed trough guides and then collected in fresh water tank.

RI
2.2. Composite thermal heat storage bed
As mentioned before, a composite thermal heat storage material consists of a black

SC
gravel and a paraffin wax mixture is utilized in the SS to enhance its thermal productivity and
minimize the fresh water cost. As a result, the CSM becomes more effective than the paraffin

U
wax through the time of low sun radiation after nightfall. This due to the augmentation in the
thermal properties of the CSM increments the thermal energy storage capacity during the time
AN
of high solar radiation intensity. The paraffin wax is considered a low thermal conductivity
PCM, which has conductive heat transfer ability estimated by about 0.24 W/m.˚C. Hence, a
M

mixture of black gravel and paraffin wax was utilized with mixing ratio 2:3 by volume to
augment the CSM thermal conductivity due to its ability to transfer the thermal heat by
D

conduction which is 1.69 W/m.˚C. Table (1) illustrates the properties of a paraffin wax and
TE

black gravel utilized in the present study.

2.3. Instrumentation devices

EP

To compare the performance of both single-basin still with CSM and single-basin still
with PCM the solar radiation intensity, trough water temperature, ambient temperature, PCM
temperature, CSM temperature, glass cover temperature, and distillate water productivity are
C

measured for each hour. The specifications of all measuring devices utilized in the current
AC

experimental work are listed in Table (2). The standard uncertainty of measurements and the
uncertainty of the thermal efficiency, exergy efficiency and water yield were calculated with
the aid of Holman [25]. It is found that the uncertainty of the thermal efficiency, exergy
efficiency and water yield are 6.8 %, 5.48 and 0.56 % respectively.
Figure (3) shows the system boundary around (dotted line) was performed for the purpose
of presenting the system disposal (brine) and product pure water in addition to the energy
source (solar energy and feeding water (saline water).

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
2.4. System operation and data collection
In this study a conventional SS with a blend of black gravel and paraffin wax as a
composite thermal heat storage material (CSM) was designed, manufactured, and tested under
Egyptian actual climatic conditions as shown in Figure (1). The experiments are carried out in
Birkat Elsab City, Monufia, Egypt (Latitude of 30° 38' 19.28'' N, Longitude of 31° 4' 52'' E),
and the system operating during 24 hours, starting at 5:00 a.m. during the period from 10-14

PT
May 2018.
For all runs, the operating steps, based on Figure (1) are: (1) filling the trough with

RI
saline water utilizing floating valve (VF) to control the required water depth, (2) hourly
measuring the trough water temperature as an average reading of three thremocuples group

SC
(A) located in the trough, glass cover temperature as an average reading of three thremocuples
group (B) located on the glass, PCM or CSM temperature as an average reading of three
thremocuples group (C) located in the bed as shown in Figure (1), (3) also, the ambient

U
temperature, solar intensity, wind velocity and amount of distilled water are measured every
AN
hour.
M

3. Performance parameter calculation method

In the current study, the SS thermodynamic performance was evaluated by their energy
D

and exergy efficiencies.

TE

3.1. Energy efficiency

The energy efficiency of the SS is defined as the ratio of the transferred thermal heat for
EP

water evaporation to the total net solar energy over the SS trough surface area. The daily energy
efficiency is determined as [26]:

∑ (m& × L)
i =t
C

η Eg = i =1
AC

i =t ………………………...……………….…........……….…...…..… (1)
Atr × ∑ I t × 3600
i =1

Where L latent heat of vaporization of water respectively.

3.2. Exergy efficiency

Energy efficiency gives a quantitative view of the of energy effectively utilized
desalinating process. In the other hand, exergy efficiency introduces a qualitative view of
highest possible useful energy that can be produced from the SS under the operating condition

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
relative to the ambient temperature as a reference [27]. The Exergy efficiency of the SS is
given by the ratio of the exergy output of evaporation to the exergy input from solar energy
[28]. Exergy efficiency is given by [27]:
m& L   Ta 
1 −  

Exergy output of solar still 3600 T
  w,tr 
η Ex = = ……………………..… (2)
Exergy input to solar still  4 T  1T 
4

Atr I t 1 −  a  +  a  

PT
 3  Ts  3  Ts  

4. Economic feasibility study

RI
The economic feasibility study in the current investigation as reported in Kabeel et al. [29].

SC
The costs of each component utilized in experimental models in addition to the installation
and testing expenses (capital cost, CC) are listed in Table (3) which totaled by 200 US$
according to 2018 prices. The total cost (TC) is summation operating cost (OC), maintenance
cost (MC) and fixed charges cost (FC) as follows;
U
AN
TC = OC + MC + FC ………………..………….……………...……...….……..…....…… (3)
FC = CRF × CC …………………………………….…………….….……..……..…….… (4)
M

Where CRF is the capital recovery factor in the annual rate of interest (i) and during the life
expectancy (n), which is given by [30]:
D

i (1 + i )
n
CRF =
TE

………..………………….………..………………………….….….… (5)
(1 + i )n − 1
The OC and MC are assumed to be 20% of FC [31].
EP

The product water cost based on the daily water yield through available operation days per
year, is given by [32]:
C

TC
AC

PWC = i =t
………………….……..………………...……...….….…...… (6)
n × 365 × f × ∑ m&
i =1

Where f is SS availability
The n and f are assumed to be 10 years and 93% [33].

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
5. Results and Discussions
The impact of feed water salinity on the water yield is not considered in the present
investigation [34-36]. So, the feed water was taken as brackish water with 3000 ppm and
water depth in the trough equal 3 cm.
Figures (4) and (5) present the ambient temperature and solar intensity varies with operating
time, respectively of the SS-PCM for a typical summer day 10-14/05/2018 and SS-CM for a

PT
typical summer day 20-25/05/2018. Figure (4) shows that the peak of solar radiation intensity
was about 1086 W/m2 at 12:00, which corresponded to the peak of ambient temperature at

RI
41.5 ˚C as illustrated in Figure (5).
Figure (6) presents that the maximum trough water temperature reached 65 ˚C and 67.3˚C

SC
for SS-PCM and SS-CM respectively, with 60 min lag time caused by the thermal capacity of
water, THS material and trough walls. Figure (7) shows that the increment in the trough and
THS material temperatures is affected by the input solar energy, which is similar to the solar

U
radiation variation profile. The THS material temperature incremented gradually with time up
AN
until reaching 53.8˚C and 54.4˚C for SS-PCM and SS-CM respectively at 17:00. The PCM
and CM stored the surplus input solar energy, which keeps the system operating after sunset.
M

As shown in Figure (8), after 18:00 the THS material temperature values are higher than the
trough water temperature, which signs to the beginning of the heat energy discharge process
D

from THS material in the trough water. The reducing in trough water temperature during the
discharge process decrements the driving force between evaporation and condensation. Figure
TE

(8) illustrates the instantaneous variation of glass cover temperature for SS-PCM and SS-CM.
The glass cover temperature approximately reaches the maximum values for all test cases
EP

between 11:00 and 16:00. Figure (9) shows a comparison among variation of bed, glass cover,
ambient and trough water temperatures with time for SS-PCM and SS-CM through one day of
C

each case. This figure shows that the difference in temperature between the glass cover and
trough water is decreasing after 19:00 until the next morning. This decreasing cause the water
AC

yield is also decreasing as follows in the next sections.

Figure (10) displays the hourly water yield collected for SS-PCM and SS-CM. For both
operating modes, it is shown that the freshwater yield affects the solar intensity during sunrise
and by discharge process from THS material after sunset and reaches the maximum values at
midday. The highest hourly water yield in cases of SS-PCM and SS-CM are about 323.6
mL/m2 and 364 mL/m2 respectively. The water yields produce per day from SS-PCM and SS-
CM are about 2.44 L/m2 and 3.27 L/m2 respectively as shown in Figure (11). Figure (12)

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
introduces the daily water yield of SS-PCM and SS-CM. This figure explains that the utilizing
of the CM increments the SS yield higher than PCM. This due to the high heat storage
capacity of CM compared to PCM. Also, CM has a larger heat discharge to the trough water
so it heats up the salty water more than PCM increments the water evaporation rate after
sunset, which it leads to an increment in producing of fresh water. As mentioned above, the
effect of glass cover temperature was taken into in the present study. There was an inverse

PT
relationship between the glass cover temperature and the water vapor condensation rate. The
average enhancement in water yield of SS-CM compared to SS-PCM is about 37.56 %.

RI
A comparison between the daily energy efficiency is estimated based on Eq. (1) for two
operating modes (SS-PCM and SSCM) is presented in Figure (13). This comparison

SC
concluded that the utilizing of the CM increments the energy efficiency. As shown in Figure
(13), the maximum daily energy efficiency of the SS-PCM changes between 41.35 % and

U
48.22 % and for SS-CM between 57.05 % and 66.87 %. This indicates that the average SS
AN
energy efficiency with PCM is augmented by about 38 % with utilize the CM.

An exergy analysis for SS-CM and SS-PCM is performed according to Eq. (2). Figure
M

(14) presents the change in exergy efficiency for SS-CM and SS-PCM. The exergy efficiency
for SS-CM is higher than for SS-PCM. This due to exergy or energy, low availability related
D

to the heat of evaporation process according to the lower SS temperature, i.e. trough water
temperature in the case of CM, which is considered less than the other case of PCM. The
TE

highest daily energy efficiency of the SS-PCM changes between 2.13 % and 3.08 % and for
SS-CM between 2.98 % and 4.05 %. The comparison between exergy efficiency for SS-PCM
EP

and SS-CM showed that the SS average exergy efficiency is augmented by 37 % by utilizing
CM.
C

Figure (15) presents the product water cost of SS-PCM and SS-CM. The water cost of the SS-
AC

PCM changes from 0.00189 to 0.00227 US$/L.m2 and for SS-CM from 0.0014 to 0.00163
US$/L.m2 based on the SS water yield. So, the SS-CM operating mode reduces the cost of
fresh water per 1 m2 of trough effective area by about 27 % less than SS-PCM

Tables (4), (5) and (6) show the determined energy efficiency, exergy efficiency, water cost
respectively, of the current study with the previous works in the literature according to the
fresh water productivity. The comparison of calculated performance parameters and system
water productivity of the present work with previous results shows that the present work
provides a considerable improvement in SS-CM.

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
6. Conclusion
In this paper, two models for pair of thermal heat storage materials were utilized to
enhance the SS water yield. The SS energy, exergy and economic analysis and yield were
investigated. Our experimental results indicated that the composite heat storage material from
paraffin wax and black gravel has a noticeable effect on SS productivity and performance. The
SS productivity, energy efficiency and exergy efficiency by utilizing CM were about 3.27

PT
L/m2, 48.22 % and 3.08 % with enhancement about 37.56 %, 38 % and 37 % respectively
higher than SS-PCM. Also, we found that the cost of distillate water of SS-CM is varied from

RI
0.0014 to 0.00163 US$/L.m2 which less than SS-PCM by about 27 %. The comparison of the
present work performance parameters and water yield with previous results showed a

SC
considerable improvement in SS-CM.

Nomenclatures

U
Latin Symbols
AN
A Area, m2
CRF Capital recovery factor, %
TC Total cost, US $
M

FC Fixed cost, US $
MC Maintenance cost, US $
CC Capital cost, US $
D

WC Water cost, US $
I Actual absorbing radiation, solar energy, W/m2
TE

m& Hourly water yield, kg/hr

f System availability ,%
T Temperature, K
n Unit life expectancy, yr.
EP

i Annual rate of interest, %

t 1.
time, hr
C

Greek Symbols
AC

η Efficiency, dimensionless
L Latent heat, kJ/kg.

Subscripts

s Sky
w Water
a Ambient
tr Trough
Eg Energy
Ex Exergy
t Time

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Acronyms
PCM Phase Change Material
CM Composite material
MPSS Modified Pyramid Solar Still

References

PT
[1] Bigas H., The Global Water Crisis: Addressing an Urgent Security Issue. Papers for
the InterAction Council, Hamilton, Canada: UNU-INWEH. 2012.

RI
[2] Kabeel A.E., El-Said E.M.S., Water production for irrigation and drinking needs in
remote arid communities using closed-system greenhouse: A review, Engineering

SC
Science and Technology, an International Journal 18 (2015) 294-301.
[3] Kabeel A.E., El-Said E.M.S., Technological aspects of advancement in low-capacity

U
solar thermal desalination units, International Journal of Sustainable Energy 32 (5)
AN
(2013) 315-332.
[4] Kabeel A.E., El-Said E.M.S., A hybrid solar desalination system of air
humidification dehumidification and water flashing evaporation: A comparison
M

among different configurations, Desalination 330 (2013) 79–89.

[5] Kabeel A.E., E.M.S. El-Said, Hybrid solar desalination system of air
D

humidification–dehumidification and water flashing evaporation: part I. A

TE

numerical investigation, Desalination 320 (2013) 56–72.

[6] Kabeel A.E., El-Said E.M.S., Development strategies and solar thermal energy
utilization for water desalination systems in remote regions: a review, Desalination
EP

and Water Treatment (2013) 1–18.

[7] Stutz B., Pierres N.L., Kuznik F., Johannes K., Barrio E.P., Bédécarrats J., Gibout
C

S., Marty P., Zalewski L., Soto J., Mazet N., Olives R., Bezian J., Minh D.P.,
AC

Storage of thermal solar energy, Comptes Rendus, Physique 18 (2017) 401–414.

[8] Panchal H., Mohan I., Various methods applied to solar still for augmentation of
distillate output, Desalination 415 (2017) 76–89.
[9] Prakash P., Velmurugan V., Parameters influencing the productivity of solar stills
— a review, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 49 (2015) 585–609.
[10] Kumar P.V., Kumar A., Prakash O., Kaviti A.K., Solar stills system design: A
review, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 51 (2015) 153–181.
[11] Abujazar M.S.S., Fatihah S., Rakmi A.R., Shahrom M.Z., The effects of design

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
parameters on productivity performance of a solar still for seawater desalination: A
review, Desalination 385 (2016) 178–193.
[11] Sharshir S.W., Yang N., Peng G., Kabeel A.E., Factors affecting solar stills
productivity and improvement techniques: a detailed review, Applied Thermal
Engineering 100 (2016) 267-284.
[12] Selvaraj K., Natarajan A.I., Factors influencing the performance and productivity of

PT
solar stills – A review, Desalination 435 (2018) 181–187.
[13] Omaraa Z.M., Abdullahb A.S., Kabeel A.E., Essa F.A., The cooling techniques of

RI
the solar stills' glass covers - A review, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
78 (2017) 176-193.

SC
[14] Panchal H.N., Use of thermal energy storage materials for enhancement in distillate
output of solar still: A review, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 61
(2016) 86–96.

[15]
U
Shukla A., Kant K., Sharma A., Solar still with latent heat energy storage: A review,
AN
Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 41 (2017) 34–46.

[16] Shalaby S.M., El-Bialy E., El-Sebaii A.A., An experimental investigation of a v-

M

corrugated absorber single-basin solar still using PCM, Desalination 398 (2016)
247–255.
D

[17] Kabeel A.E., Teamah M.A., Abdelgaied M., Abdelaziz G.B., Modified pyramid
TE

solar still with v-corrugated absorber plate and PCM as a thermal storage medium,
Journal of Cleaner Production 161 (2017) 881-887.
EP

[18] Al-harahsheh M., Abu-Arabi M., Mousa H., Alzghoul Z., Solar desalination using
solar still enhanced by external solar collector and PCM, Applied Thermal
Engineering 128 (2018) 1030–1040.
C

[19] Shanmugana S., Palanib S., Janarthanan B., Productivity enhancement of solar still
AC

by PCM and Nanoparticles miscellaneous basin absorbing materials, Desalination

433 (2018) 186–198.
[20] Faegh M., Shafii M.B., Experimental investigation of a solar still equipped with an
external heat storage system using phase change materials and heat pipes,
Desalination 409 (2017) 128–135.

[21] Al-Hamadani A.A.F., Shukla S.K., Experimental Investigation and Thermodynamic

Performance Analysis of a Solar Distillation System with PCM Storage: Energy and

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Exergy Analysis, Distributed Generation& Alternative Energy Journal, 29 (4)
(2014) 7-24.
[22] Asbik M., Ansari O., Bah A., Zari N., Mimet A., El-Ghetany H., Exergy analysis of
solar desalination still combined with heat storage system using phase change
material (PCM), Desalination 381 (2016) 26–37.

[23] Sarhaddi F., Tabrizi F.F., Zoori H.A., Mousavi S.A.H.S., Comparative study of two

PT
weir type cascade solar stills with and without PCM storage using energy and
exergy analysis, Energy Conversion and Management 133 (2017) 97–109.

RI
[24] Sharshir S.W., Elsheikh A.H., Peng G., Yang N., El-Samadony M.O.A.,
Kabeel A.E., Thermal performance and exergy analysis of solar stills – A review,

SC
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 73 (2017) 521–544.
[25] Holman J.P., Gajda W.J., Experimental Methods for Engineers, McGraw-Hill, 1978.

U
[26] Kabeel A.E., Abdelgaied M., El-Said E.M.S., Study of a solar-driven membrane
AN
distillation system: Evaporative cooling effect on performance enhancement,
Renewable Energy 106 (2017) 192-200.
[27] Arif H., A key review on exergetic analysis and assessment of renewable energy
M

resources for a sustainable future. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews 12 (3)
(2008) 593-661.
D

[28] Petela R., Exergy of undiluted thermal radiation, Sol. Energy 74(6) (2003) 469–488.
TE

[29] Kabeel A.E., Abou-Elmaaty T., El-Said E.M.S., Economic analysis of a small-scale
hybrid air HDH-SSF (humidification and dehumidification-water flashing
EP

evaporation) desalination plant, Energy 53 (2013) 306-311

[30] Y. Jaluria, Design and optimization of thermal systems. 2nd Ed. CRC Press;
2007. p. 398.
C

[31] El-Dessouky H.T., Ettouney H.M., Fundamentals of salt water desalination. 1st
AC

ed. ELSEVIER; 2002. p. 514

[32] Elshamy S.M., El-Said E.M.S., Comparative study based on thermal, exergetic and
economic analyses of a tubular solar still with semi-circular corrugated absorber,
Journal of Cleaner Production 195 (2018) 328-339.
[33] Kabeel A.E., Hamed A.M., El-Agouz S.A., Cost analysis of different solar still
configurations, 35 (7) (2010) 2901-2908.
[34] Nafey A.S., Fath H.E.S., S.O. El-Helaby, A. Soliman, Solar desalination using

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
humidification–dehumidification processes. Part II. An experimental investigation,
Energy Convers. Manag. 45 (2004) 1263–1277.
[35] Nafey A.S., Mohamad M.A., El-Helaby S.O., Sharaf M.A., Theoretical and
experimental study of a small unit for solar desalination using flashing process,
Energy Conversion and Management 48 (2007) 528–538.
[36] Yamal C., Solmus I., A solar desalination system using humidification–

PT
dehumidification process: experimental study and comparison with the theoretical
results, Desalination 220 (2008) 538–551

RI
[37] Rahmani A., Boutriaa A., Hadef A., An experimental approach to improve the basin
type solar still using an integrated natural circulation loop, Energy Conversion and

SC
Management 93 (2015) 298–308
[38] Rajasekhar G., Eswaramoorthy M., Performance Evaluation on Solar Still Integrated
with Nano-Composite Phase Change Materials, Applied Solar Energy 51 (1) (2015)
15–21.
U
AN
[39] Methre V.K., Eswaramoorthy M., Exergy Analysis of the Solar Still Integrated
Nano Composite Phase Change Materials, Applied Solar Energy 51 (2) (2015) 99–
106.
M

[40] Sivakumar V., Sundaram E.G., Assessment of convective heat transfer coefficient
and mass of water evaporated from a single slope passive solar still by different
D

thermal models: An experimental validation, International Journal of Ambient

TE

Energy 38 (7) (2016).

[41] Vaithilingam S., Esakkimuthu G.S., Energy and exergy analysis of single slope
passive solar still: an experimental investigation, Desalination and Water Treatment
EP

(2014) 1–12.
[42] Khalifa A.N., Exergy Analysis of Modified Solar Still, Int. J. of Thermal &
C

Environmental Engineering, 10 (2) (2015) 149-154.

AC

[43] Arunkumar T., Kabeel A.E., Effect of phase change material on concentric circular
tubular solar still-Integration meets enhancement, Desalination 414 (2017) 46–50.

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table (1): Thermo-physical properties of used black gravel and paraffin wax.
Property Value
Black gravel
Density, kg/m3 2800-3000

Thermal conductivity, W/m.oC 1.69

PT
Specific heat capacity, J/kg.oC 1230

Paraffin wax

RI
Density (Liquid/Solid), kg/m3 760/818
Thermal conductivity, W/m.oC 0.24

SC
Specific heat capacity (Solid/Liquid), kJ/kg.˚C 2.95/2.51
Melting temperature, C 56

U
Latent heat, kJ/kg 226
AN
Table (2): Technical specifications of sensors and probes.
M

Sensor/Type Reference Description Accuracy

Digital thermometer (TM-82N) Tenmars Temperature 0.05%±
D

Digital air flow meter (Davm +) Supco Wind speed ±3 %

Solar power meter (TM-206) Tenmars Solar radiation ±5%
TE

Calibrated flask (0 – 2000 ml) Local Water yield ± 0.88 %

EP

Table (3): Fabrication cost of SS system.

Item Price (US $)
C

15
Metal supports 18
AC

Wooden box 16
Glass cover 20
Reflectors 11
Water copper basin 25
Fresh water tank 2
Feed water tank 8
Insulation material 10
Paraffin 18
Installation and testing 35
Valves and pipes 12
Galvanized steel box 10

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Total cost 200

Table (4): Energy efficiency of similar distillation systems.

Daily productivity, Energy efficiency,
Process Power Reference
L/m2 %
SS-PCM Solar 2.44 48.22 Present work
SS-CM Solar 3.27 66.87 Present work

PT
SS Solar 3.72 45.15 [37]
SS Solar 2.8 38 [38]

RI
SS Solar 0.69 49.29 [39]
SS Solar 1.52 30.07 [40]

SC
SS Solar 1.485 30.96 [16]
SS Solar 3.32 34.8 [41]

U
Table (5): Exergy effecienciy of similar distillation systems.
Daily productivity, Exergy
AN
Process Power 2 Reference
L/m efficiency, %
SS-PCM Solar 2.44 3.08 Present work
M

SS-CM Solar 3.27 4.05 Present work

SS Solar 3.46 1.6 [42]
D

SS Solar 0.69 9.48 [39]

SS Solar 1.52 3.67 [40]
TE

SS Solar 1.485 3.48 [16]

EP

Table (6): Fresh water cost of similar distillation systems..

Daily productivity, Cost,
Process Power Reference
L/m2 $/L.m2
C

SS-PCM Solar 2.44 0.00189 Present work

AC

SS-CM Solar 3.27 0.0014 Present work

SS Solar 5.8 0.0331 [43]
SS Solar 3.32 0.09558 [41]

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Glass cover

Thermocouples group (A)

Floating valve
(VF)

Thermocouples group (B)

PT
Thermocouples group (C)

RI
U SC
AN
Fig.1: Schematic of solar still with composite material bed.
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

(b)
(a)
ater trough, composite bed, and
ssembled system
reflectors
Fig.2: Photo of solar still.

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Solar energy

Feed Product
Saline water Solar Still Pure water

PT
RI
Brine
Fig.3: Schematic of proposed system boundary.

U SC
AN
Solar radiation, (W/m 2)

M
D
TE
EP

20:00
21:00
22:00
23:00
24:00
01:00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
10:00
11:00
12:00
13:00
14:00
15:00
16:00
17:00
18:00
19:00
C

Time (hr)
AC

Fig.4: Solar intensity change with operating day time.

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Ambient temperatue, (˚C)

PT
Water temperatue, (˚C)

05:00

RI
05:00
06:00

Fig.5: Ambient temperature change with operating day time.

06:00
07:00 07:00

SC
08:00 08:00
09:00 09:00
10:00

U
10:00
11:00 11:00

AN
12:00 12:00
13:00 13:00
14:00

M
14:00
(a) SS-PCM.

15:00 15:00
16:00 16:00
Time (hr)
18

D
17:00 17:00
18:00

TE
18:00
19:00 19:00
20:00 20:00
21:00
EP
21:00
22:00 22:00
23:00 23:00
C

24:00 24:00
01:00
AC

01:00
02:00 02:00
03:00 03:00
04:00 04:00
05:00 05:00
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig.6: Trough water temperature change with operating day time SS-PCM and SS-CM.

PT
Bed temperatue, (˚C) Water temperatue, (˚C)

RI
05:00 05:00
06:00 06:00
07:00 07:00

SC
08:00 08:00
09:00 09:00

U
10:00 10:00
11:00 11:00

AN
12:00 12:00
13:00 13:00

M
14:00 14:00
(a) SS-PCM.

(b) SS-CM
15:00 15:00
16:00 16:00
Time (hr)

Time (hr)
19

D
17:00 17:00

TE
18:00 18:00
19:00 19:00
20:00 20:00
EP
21:00 21:00
22:00 22:00
23:00 23:00
C

24:00 24:00
AC

01:00 01:00
02:00 02:00
03:00 03:00
04:00 04:00
05:00 05:00
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig.7: Heat storage bed temperature change with operating day time for SS-PCM andSS-CM.

PT
Glass cover temperatue, (˚C) Bed temperatue, (˚C)

RI
05:00 05:00
06:00 06:00
07:00 07:00

SC
08:00 08:00
09:00 09:00

U
10:00 10:00
11:00 11:00

AN
12:00 12:00
13:00 13:00

M
14:00 14:00
(a) SS-PCM.

(b) SS-CM
15:00 15:00
16:00 16:00
Time (hr)

Time (hr)
20

D
17:00 17:00

TE
18:00 18:00
19:00 19:00
20:00 20:00
EP
21:00 21:00
22:00 22:00
23:00 23:00
C

24:00 24:00
AC

01:00 01:00
02:00 02:00
03:00 03:00
04:00 04:00
05:00 05:00
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig.8: Glass cover temperature change with operating day time for SS-PCM and SS-CM.

PT
Temperatue, (˚C) Glass cover temperatue, (˚C)

RI
05:00 05:00
06:00 06:00
07:00 07:00

SC
08:00 08:00
09:00 09:00

U
10:00 10:00
11:00 11:00

AN
12:00 12:00
13:00 13:00

M
14:00 14:00
(a) SS-PCM.

(b) SS-CM.
15:00 15:00
16:00
Time (hr)

Time (hr)
16:00
21

D
17:00 17:00

TE
18:00 18:00
19:00 19:00
20:00 20:00
EP
21:00 21:00
22:00 22:00
23:00 23:00
C

24:00 24:00
AC

01:00 01:00
02:00 02:00
03:00 03:00
04:00 04:00
05:00 05:00
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Fig.9: Comparison among change of heat strage bed, glass cover, ambient and trough water

PT
Water yield, (mL) Temperatue, (˚C)

RI
05:00 05:00
06:00 06:00
07:00 07:00

SC
temperatures with time for SS-PCM and SS-CM.
08:00 08:00
09:00 09:00

U
10:00 10:00
11:00 11:00

AN
12:00 12:00
13:00 13:00
14:00

M
14:00
(a) SS-PCM.

(b) SS-CM
15:00 15:00
16:00
Time (hr)

Time (hr)
16:00
22

D
17:00 17:00
18:00

TE
18:00
19:00 19:00
20:00
20:00
21:00
EP
21:00
22:00
22:00
23:00
24:00 23:00
C

01:00 24:00
AC

02:00 01:00
03:00 02:00
04:00 03:00
05:00 04:00
05:00
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
Water yield, (mL)
Water yield, (mL)

Fig. 10: Hourly water productivity change for SS-PCM and SS-CM.

RI
05:00
05:00 06:00
06:00 07:00

SC
07:00 08:00
08:00 09:00
09:00

U
10:00
10:00
11:00

AN
11:00
12:00
12:00
13:00
13:00

M
(a) SS-PCM.

14:00

(b) SS-CM.
14:00
15:00 15:00

Time (hr)
23

16:00

D
16:00
Time (hr)

17:00 17:00

TE
18:00 18:00
19:00 19:00
20:00 20:00
EP
21:00 21:00
22:00 22:00
23:00 23:00
C

24:00 24:00
AC

01:00 01:00
02:00 02:00
03:00 03:00
04:00 04:00
05:00 05:00
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
Water yield, (mL)

Fig. 11: Accumulated water yield change with time for SS-PCM and SS-CM.

RI
Water yield, (mL)
05:00
06:00

SC
Fig. 12: Daily water yield for SS-PCM and SS-CM.

07:00
08:00
20/05/2018
09:00

U
10/05/2018 10:00

AN
11:00
12:00
21/05/2018
13:00

M
11/05/2018 14:00

(b) SS-CM.
15:00
24

16:00

Time (hr)
23/05/2018
Day

17:00

TE
12/05/2018 18:00
19:00
20:00
24/05/2018
EP
21:00
13/05/2018 22:00
23:00
C

24:00
25/05/2018 01:00
AC

14/05/2018 02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
Exergy effeciency, (%) Energy effeciency, (%)

Fig. 13: Daily energy efficiency for SS-PCM and SS-CM.

SC
Fig. 14: Exergy efficiency for SS-PCM and SS-CM.

20/05/2018 20/05/2018
10/05/2018 10/05/2018

U
AN
21/05/2018 21/05/2018
11/05/2018 11/05/2018

M
25

23/05/2018 23/05/2018

D
Day

Day
12/05/2018 12/05/2018

24/05/2018 TE 24/05/2018
EP
13/05/2018 13/05/2018
C

25/05/2018 25/05/2018
AC

14/05/2018 14/05/2018
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
Water cost, (US$/m 2)

SC
Fig. 15: Water cost for SS-PCM and SS-CM.
20/05/2018 2.44 L/d

U
10/05/2018 3.27 L/d

AN
21/05/2018 2.22 L/d

M
11/05/2018 3.083 L/d
26

D
23/05/2018 2.028 L/d

Day
TE
EP 12/05/2018 2.82 L/d

24/05/2018 2.093 L/d

13/05/2018 2.91 L/d
C

25/05/2018 2.33 L/d

AC

14/05/2018 3.20 L/d

 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlight

• A comparative study of solar still with composite black gravel-phase change material was
investigated.
• Two different heat storage bed; composite material and PCM were studied.

PT
• The desalination rate enhanced by using composite material by 37.55%.
• Thermal and exergy efficiencies are augmented by 38 % and 37% respectively.

RI
• The water cost by using composite material is 0.0014 US$/m2.

U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC