Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy Focus

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ref

The energy and exergy analysis of a combined parabolic solar

dish – steam power plant
Ali Basem a,⇑, Mohammed Moawed b, Mohammed H. Abbood c, Wael M. El-Maghlany d
a
Air Conditioning Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Warith Al-Anbiyaa University, Iraq
b
Mechanical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering at Shoubra, Benha University, Egypt
c
Mechanical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Kerbala University, Iraq
d
Mechanical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University, Egypt

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this paper, a new system was designed and built to generate electrical power using solar energy. A
Received 20 November 2021 parabolic solar dish was designed with a diameter of 3 m and aperture area reach of 7.1 m2. It was
Revised 12 January 2022 equipped with a sun tracking system which allowed movement on two axes. Its primary function was
Accepted 14 January 2022
to generate water vapor as an alternative to the steam boiler used in steam power stations. Many mod-
Available online 24 January 2022
ifications were made in order to allow the new system to work according to the Rankine cycle system for
power generation. Generated steam has to pass through a steam turbine to rotate it, this connected to an
electric power generator. The steam then exits through the condenser and is recycled using the pump.
The implementation of the new station included experimental work to ensure its suitability for different
climatic conditions which impact the systems’ components, including changes in the amount of solar
radiation, wind velocity, air temperature and other climatic conditions. The results showed how success-
ful the new system was in generating electricity within a range of 800–1000 W. Steam temperatures
reached to 400.1 °C with a total cycle efficiency ranging between 32 and 42%. A statistical analysis of
the system was also carried out using a SPSS software, application of Artificial Neural Network (ANN)
showed for the effective role of useful energy in solar heater on power output. Thus, the outcomes
acquired during this study, provided an accurate view of the system. Finally, the paper strategy can be
applied to different processes of solar system. Also, the results showed a high accuracy as the maximum
value of coefficient of determination (R2) of 91.3%.
Ó 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Introduction The Parabolic Dish Solar Concentrator (PDSC), or the so-called

The use of renewable energy, including solar energy, is one of
the most prominent issues for mankind this century because of
the substantial amount of emissions resulting from burning fossil
fuels, most notably for the generation of electricity. Two different
approaches are used to generate electricity using solar energy,
the first directly through photovoltaic cells, the second through
concentrating solar radiation and heating a specific fluid such as
water, oil or molten salt. Systems that focus solar radiation are
some of the most promising technologies that can be employed
to generate electrical energy for example the use of lenses and mir-
rors to focus sunlight from a large area into a small spot. There are
many techniques available to use to concentrate the sun’s rays, the
most important of which are the solar tower, the parabolic trough
and the solar dish [1,2].
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ali.basem@g.uowa.edu.iq (A. Basem).
parabolic collector, is a modern technology that focuses the sun’s
rays to a single point. The shape of the parabolic provides the
means to reflect incoming solar rays, this parallel to the axis in
the direction of the focus, regardless of where it falls on the dish.
In this way, almost all incident solar rays are reflected. However,
there are some losses most of which are due to reduced reflection
or from inside the absorber after reflection. Regarding the design of
the parabolic dish, a receiver is placed at the center of the dish
which absorb heat from incident solar radiation and converts it
into thermal energy. One of the advantages of the solar dish is its
high efficiency which can reach 85% when used with a tracking
system, in parallel with the high temperatures generated in the
receiver, up to 750 °C. Parabolic solar dish are used to generate
electricity [2–6], used for cooking [7–9] and heating water
[10,11] as well as water desalination and distillation [12,13]. Para-
bolic solar dishes can produce between 7 and 25 kW of electricity
per unit. Although this capacity is considered small due to design
limitations i.e., the size and the weight of the available receiver

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ref.2022.01.003
1755-0084/Ó 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al. Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68

Nomenclature

Aconc. Aperture Area of the Dish, m2 S Surface Area, m2

Arec: Aperture Area of the Receiver, m2 S Specific Entropy, kJ/kg. k
C Concentration Ratio T cav : Cavity Temperature, °C
Cp Constant Specific Heat, kJ/kg. °C T1 Ambient Temperature, °C
Dcon: Concentrator Diameter, m T sun The Sun’s Blackbody Temperature, °C
Drec: Receiver Diameter, m To Environment Temperature, °C
D Depth of the Dish, m Vw Wind Speed, m/s
Exrec: Receiver Exergy, W X_ dest: Exergy destructed, W
Excon: Dish Exergy, W
Fsh Un-Shading Factor Greek Symbols
F Focal Length, m w Rim Angle
Gr Grashof Number h Acceptance Angle
hconv, nat Natural Convective, W/m2 K hz Solar Incidence Angle
hconv, forced Forced Convective, W/m2 K b Surface Tilt Angle
hext., cav. External Surface of the Receiver, W/m2 K qm Concentrator Mirror Reflectance
h1 Specific Enthalpy Inlet to Solar Heater, KJ/Kg C Solar Interception Factor
h2 Specific Enthalpy Inlet to Turbine, KJ/Kg aeff Effective Absorbance of The Receiver
h3 Specific Enthalpy Inlet to Condenser, KJ/Kg r Steven-Boltzmann Constant
h4 Specific Enthalpy Inlet to Pump, KJ/Kg e Emissivity
IBn Direct Normal Irradiance, W/m2 c Receiver Tilt Angle
K rec: Thermal Conductivity of the Receiver, W/m K gII Second Law Efficiency
k1 Thermal Conductivity of the Air, W/m K w Exergy rate, W
kins: Thermal Conductivity of the Insulation W/m K
m_ Mass Flow Rate, kg/s Subscripts
Qu Useful Energy, W amb. ambient
Qrec. Energy on the Receiver Surface, W
i inlet
Qloss Total Heat Losses, W o outlet
Qrad. Radiative Heat Losses, W con. concentrator
Qconv. Convective Heat Loss, W
rec. or r receiver
Qcond. Conduction Heat Loss, W abs. absorber
Q lt Total Heat Losses in the Turbine, W ref. reflector
Q lc Total Heat Losses in the Condenser, W G Generator
Q lp Total Heat Losses in the Pump, W
Re Reynolds Number

or the Stirling engine, enhanced capacity can be achieved by using
a collection of small units in a dish farm. The first PDSC was built in
the Sandia National Laboratories in the 1980’s and comprised a
number of solar dishes with a total area of approximately 400
m2 , located at the Australian National University campus, a further
7 m dish in Shenandoah [14].
There has been much research on the design of solar dish con-
centrator parameters such as the material for the reflector, the
aperture area and size of concentrator, focal length of the reflector
concentrator, focal point diameter (receiver) and concentration
ratio. Matthew R. Devlin [15], built a large-scale, concentrated
solar thermal plant Finite element method (FEM) software was
used to analyze and simulate the structural safety of the dish.
The results showed that the maximum outlet temperature from
the receiver was 423°C., meaning that a solar dish of this type gave
good performance across all three parameters: structural, optical
and thermal. A.Z. Hafez et al. [16], studied the effect of solar dish
design parameters and factors that affect PSDCs such as reflective
material, diameter of the concentrator and receiver, rim angle
and the concentration ratio. Yaseen H. Mahmood et al. [17], inves-
tigated the effect of reflector material using two different reflectors
with the same solar dish diameter, under the same weather prop-
erties. El Ouederni et al. [18] studied a 2.2 m parabolic dish with
reflecting layer, its reflectivity measured at 85%. The temperature
obtained in the receiver was near to 380 °C. This solar equipment
is highly recommended as it can extract up to 27 % of direct solar
energy, converting this into thermal energy that can be used
directly across several applications. Y. Rafeeu [19], tested three
56
different models with various geometrical sizes, using a 0.5m
diameter solar dish. His study revealed the effect of different geo-
metrical factors on the performance of solar dish concentrators. He
found that increasing the depth of the dish concentrator and mak-
ing use of effective reflective material will increase thermal effi-
ciency. Toygar et al. [20], described a new design of solar dish
reflector by using a flat mirror system (Solarux) with a two-axis,
low cost, tracking system. The purpose of this study was to test
planar mirrors instead of parabolic mirrors, in order to decrease
costs and design a system that could be easily manufactured.
Other research has dealt with receivers. Kumar et al. [21],
examined three types of receiver shape; a cavity receiver, semi-
cavity receiver and a modified cavity receiver, using numerical
modelling. They found that the modified cavity receiver experi-
enced lower convection heat losses than the other receivers. As
such, a modified cavity receiver is proposed for the current solar
dish collector system. Daabo et al. [22] investigated three different
geometries of receivers; cylindrical, conical and spherical, his
results proving that a conical receiver, absorbed a higher amount
of reflected flux energy than the other shapes. In similar research,
Loni, et al., [23] examined the thermal performance of a solar dish
concentrator with different cavity receivers; cubical, cylindrical
and hemispherical. The cubical and hemispherical cavities were
the most efficient.
Many designers have discussed solar dish concentrators with
tracking systems, M. Mohamed et al., [24], using a two-axis control
tracking system to increase the intensity of the solar radiation.
They found that using this increased the energy collected by
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al.
20–30 % as compared to a fixed concentrator. Shanmugam et al.’s
[25], theoretical study presented a dual tracking system using
visual BASIC.
Based on the aforementioned review, the use of the solar dish as
a solar heater instead of the boiler in the steam power plant to gen-
erate electrical energy is a new idea. Where the work of previous
researchers was limited to the use of Sterling Engine to generate
electric power or through its use as an auxiliary part in steam
power plant. Many modifications were made in order to adapt
the new system to work according to the Rankine cycle system
for power generation. This paper describes the development of
the components of an experimental parabolic solar dish concen-
trating (PSDC) – steam power plant, designed to generate electric-
ity. The solar dish was built and designed according to the amount
of radiation expected to fall on the dish under different weather
conditions, and to produce enough thermal energy to generate suf-
ficient steam to rotate a turbine and electric generator, and thus
generate electricity.
Description of the parabolic dish/steam power station
A parabolic solar dish concentrator was used to work as the
solar heater in a steam power plant cycle instead of a boiler. Gen-
erated steam passes through a steam turbine to rotate the blades,
the turbine connected to an electric motor power generation head.
The steam exits into the condenser and is finally recycled using the
pump. However, the use of a solar dish which relies on solar energy
that changes during the day as well as seasons of the year, creates
problems which have to be solved in order to guarantee continuity
of production. These changes start with the size and area of the
solar dish in order to provide the correct amount of steam required
to rotated the turbine. An increase in area means an increase in the
initial costs. An appropriate pump had to be sourced that could
provide the required pressure and mass flow rate in accordance
with the guidance. An increase in mass flow rate means the possi-
bility of the solar parabolic dish being unable to generate steam,
while a less than adequate flow rate cause an increase in pressure
and temperature which is not commensurate with the require-
7 6
8
5
4
1. The solar dish concentrator 2. The receiver
5. Pump 6. Condenser
Figure 1. Parabolic solar dish -steam power plant components.
57
Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68
ments of the turbine. It is also important to source a pump that
does not require high amounts of electricity and to bear in mind
that when the system shuts down at sunset, it will need an electric
converter with a battery, to re-start the pump at sunrise (Figures 1
and 2).
By storing a portion of the produced energy in batteries, the
pump is started using an electric converter thus circulating the
working fluid (water). Because the amount of solar radiation falling
on the device in the morning makes it difficult to obtain steam, it
was necessary to fit a three-way valve to prevent the formation
of water droplets on the turbine. When there is enough pressure
(10–12 bar) and a high enough temperature (180–550 °C) to gener-
ate steam, the three-way valve opens and the steam enters the tur-
bine. It begins to rotate, as does the generator, this producing
electrical energy. The water then comes out from the turbine into
the condenser and into the pump one more time. After the solar
radiation decreases again in the afternoon round about sunset,
steam stops entering the turbine and the valve is closed. The sys-
tem operates between 10:00 h and 15:00 h each day.
PDSC systems: Steam power plant components and design
parameters
The main parts of the system are as follows: solar heater, tur-
bine, generator, condenser and pump. The rest of the system com-
prises parts to connect the main components and to control them
and provide the best working mechanism.
Solar dish
Solar dish systems can be divided in three main parts: the solar
dish concentrator (reflector) and supporting structure, the receiver
and the solar tracking system. All three parts constitute the general
elements of the system. It works by receiving intense solar beams,
via the reflector, which is covered with mirrors or lenses to reflect
solar rays onto a focus point. This then converts solar energy into
thermal and mechanical energy to generate electricity, or any other
form of energy, according to the type of application. The tracking
3
3. Tracking System 4. Turbine with Generator
7. Tanks 8. Electrical converter with
Battery
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al. Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68

Figure 2. Schematic of a parabolic solar dish -steam power plant.

system allows the largest possible amount of solar radiation to
enter the system by tracking the movement of the sun using a dual
axis system.
i The solar dish concentrator
Many studies have been conducted on the structure of the dish
and supporting elements to increase performance. These include:
 Enhancing the geometrical design parameters and accuracy of
manufacture.
 Using a reflective cover with as high reflectivity as possible.
 Employment of an efficient and more precise tracking system.
 Accurate calculation of the focal point.
A solar dish was designed and built with the specifications
shown in the following Table 1:
ii The receiver
The receiver is the most important part of the solar parabolic
dish as it connects incoming energy from the concentrator
reflected by the parabolic dish, and the working fluid. As such, it
needs to be efficient enough to reduce heat loss and thus maximize
power output. A conical cavity, stainless steel [20–22] plate at the
focus point of the dish, was used acting as an absorber, the same as
a boiler unit. Two layers of stainless-steel plates of 2 mm thickness,
were used as heated layers, a 5 mm of foam (thermal conductivity
0.03 w/m. k [35]) used to separate them, this acting as an insula-
tion layer to minimize heat loss from the wall, as shown in
Figure 3.
A copper coil was used as an absorber inside the receiver
because copper has a high thermal conductivity, reaching 401 w/
m. k [36]). The coil was 7 m long, of 8mm diameter and 1mm thick-
ness, housed in a conical cavity receiver which had a 30 cm diam-
eter bottom and 5 cm top.
iii Tracking System
A two-axis, automatic tracking system was used in this design.
Horizontal motion was achieved by using a motor with a belt and
power supply connected to the converter. Two light sensors, one
facing east the other west, are exposed directly to the sun. They
produce a small current with the change in voltage as a result of
the change in the movement of the sun, a signal sent to the DC
motor to produce movement.
The vertical angle can be changed by hand through the ball
bearing found between the dish and the structure it is mounted on.
The remaining components and their properties, are presented
in Table 2.
The theoretical model
The theoretical model of the PDSC/steam power plant station
was designed to calculate how much heat energy was collected

Table 1
Specification of the solar dish concentrator design structure

Parameters Value Units Eq. Ref.

Diameter of parabolic dish (Dcon.) 3 m – –
Depth of concentrator dish (d) 0.4 m d¼
D2con: [26]
16f
Focal length of dish (f) 1.41 m f ¼

Dcon:
wrim
 [26,27]
4 tan 2

Material of parabolic dish Glass/silver 2 mm – Reflectivity assumed 90% [16,28]

Aperture area of dish (Acon.) 7.1 m2 ACon: ¼ p4 D2con: [16,26]
( )
The surface area (S) 11.52 m2  2 32 [18,29]
S ¼ 83p f
2
1 þ D4f
con:
1

Rim angle of dish (wrim ) 56 deg. – [30,31]

Diameter of the receiver (Drec.) 0.3 m f h [26]
Drec: ¼ cos wð1þcos wÞ
Aperture area of receiver (Arec.) 0.071 m2 Arec: ¼ p4 D2rec: [32,33]
Geometric concentration ratio (C) 100 – C ¼ AAcon: [13,34]
rec:

58
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al. Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68

Figure 3. Sketch of the receiver and copper coil (Blue line meaning electric wire while black line for pipes).

Table 2
Components of the system.

Component Type Specification

Turbine Impulse turbine single stage, twin nozzle Inlet pressure 10–12 bar
Back pressure 0.1–2 bar
Inlet temperature 180–550 °C
Turbine speed (rpm): 6600–8400
Output (rpm): 3000/3500
Frequency: 50/60 Hz
Maximum energy output about 4 kW
Weight: 7.4 kg
Generator Small electrical generator motor type (Gasoline Generator) Max. power output: 5 kW
Rated power: 4.5 kW
Rotation speed (rpm): 3000/3600
Rated voltage: 220–380 v
Output power Type: AC Single Phase
Frequency: 50 Hz
Weight: 5 kg
Condenser Mainly used in Refrigeration systems, dry cooling by air Inlet pressure: 0.1–2 bar
Inlet temperature: 110–80 °C
Outlet temperature: 40–60 °C
Structure: steel wires welded with Bundy tube
Material: Bundy tube, steel wire, steel plates
Bundy tube: diameter 6.3 mm and 0.7mm thickness
Steel plate: wall thickness 0.5 mm
Pump Water pump Max. pressure Output: 16 bar
Mass flow rate: 0.4–2 L/s
Voltage: 24 VDC
Power: 150–300 W
Size: 140*65.5*89 mm

by the working fluid in the receiver after working out the total heat The useful energy in the receiver (Qu), is defined as the energy
loss from the solar radiation once it had been concentrated by the gained by the working fluid and known as the difference between
reflector. Calculations were then carried out to ascertain how much the energy reflected by the concentrator to the receiver (Qrec.) and
power was generated in the turbine- generator and to find the total the total heat loss (Qloss):
efficiency of the PDSC and system components. This was done by
Q u ¼ Q rec :  Q loss ð1Þ
initially using an energy analysis to evaluate the thermal efficiency,
followed by an exergy analysis to establish the second law of effi-
ciency for the cycle.
 The reflected energy to the receiver is given by Eq. (2) [37]
Thermal analysis of the reflector and receiver
Q rec: ¼ qm CIBn Acon: ð2Þ
A thermodynamic model was used to measure the performance
of the concentrator and receiver system by calculating the output where qm represents the concentrator mirror reflectivity and C the
power and total efficiency, as shown in Figure 4. solar interception factor. It was assumed to vary between 0.9 and
59
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al. Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68

where f ðcÞ is defined as [45]:

f ðcÞ ¼ 0:1634 þ 0:7498 sin c  0:5026 sin c þ 0:3278 sin c ð10Þ
Caballero et al. [46] recommended a receiver tilt angle ‘‘c” of
75°.

 Conduction heat loss (Qcond) is given as [47,48]:

ðT cav  T 1 Þ
Q cond ¼ ð11Þ
lnDro lnDcav
Dri
2pkr Lr
þ 2pkinsDroLins þ hext;cav1Ao;cav

The external surfaces of the cavity and receiver (hext., cav.) are
represented as [49]:
k1
hext:;cav : ¼ 0:148Re0:633 : ð12Þ
Dcav :

Exergy and energy analysis of the system component

Figure 4. Schematic diagram for the thermal analysis of the reflector and absorber.
The system was provided with a set of measurement devices
and sensors, as shown in Figure 5, in order to find the required val-
0.99 [38]. Therefore, in this study, C was assumed to be 0.9, to allow
ues for the design of the thermodynamics model for the system
for the possibility of maximum losses. Ibn denotes the direct inten-
components. Conservation of mass, energy, and exergy equations
sity solar radiation incidence on the parabolic solar dish.
for each component, were applied to calculate losses and efficiency
through the first and second laws of thermodynamics. The first law
 Calculation of the total heat loss of the receiver was carried out
of thermodynamics and the main exergy balance equation respec-
by evaluating three types of loss in the receiver: conduction,
tively, equal [50]:
convection and radiation. !
 The radiative heat loss (Qrad.) consists of two components: X X V2 X V2 X
reflected and emitted radiation. Q_ K þ _ i þ i þ gZ i Þ ¼
mðh _ ho þ o þ gZ o
m þ _
W
2 2

Q rad: ¼ Q rad:;ref : þ Q rad:;emi ð3Þ ð13Þ

The reflected radiation loss is given by Eq. (4) [39] The general exergy balance rate reduces from Eq. 13 steady flow
process to [51]:
Q rad:;ref : ¼ Q rec: ð1  aeff Þ ð4Þ
X To X X X
1 Qk þ _ i wi Þ ¼
ðm _ þ
W _ o wo Þ þ X_ destroyed
ðm
where aeff is the effective absorbance of the receiver and the absorp- T
tivity of the receiver material [40].
ð14Þ
aabs:;r
aeff ¼ 1  ð5Þ Mass, energy, and exergy balances are presented in Eqs. 15, 16
aabs:;r þ ð1  aabs:;r Þ AAcarec:v : and 17. Changes in potential and kinetic energy are disregarded
The emitted radiation loss is calculated as [41]: meaning that any control volume at a steady state can be evaluated
by [52]:
Q rad;emi ¼ rr Arec: ðT 4cav  T 41 Þ ð6Þ X X
_ in ¼
m _ out
m ð15Þ
X X
Q_  W
_ ¼ _ o ho 
m _ i hi
m ð16Þ
 The total convective loss (Qconv) consists of two components:
natural convection heat loss (Qconv, nat) and forced convection X X
heat loss (Qconv, wind) [42]:
_ ¼
X_ heat  W _ o wo 
m _ i wi þ X_ destroyed
m ð17Þ

Q conv : ¼ ðhconv :;nat: þ hconv :;forced ÞAcav ðT cav  T 1 Þ ð7Þ where X_ destroyed is Exergy destruction or destroyed rate.
The net exergy transfer by heat (X_ heat ) at temperature (T) is
Natural convective heat loss (hconv, nat) is effected by the size given by [52]:
and diameter of the cavity and the absorber, the thermal conduc-
X To
tivity of the absorber material, the tilt angle of the receiver and X_ heat ¼ ð1  ÞQ_ ð18Þ
the temperature of the surroundings and cavity. It can be calcu- T
lated as follows [43]: Following this, the total exergy magnitude associated with a
"   Drec: # working fluid stream becomes [52]
0:18 1:120:98ðD Þ
K rec: T cav Drec: cav
:ðcos cÞ :
2:47
hconv ;nat ¼ 0:088:Gr0:333 :
Drec: T1 Dcav X_ ¼ mw
_ ¼m
_ ½h  ho  T o ðs  so Þ ð19Þ
ð8Þ where specific exergy is given by [52]
where c is the receiver tilt angle. w ¼ h  ho  T o ðs  so Þ ð20Þ
Forced convective heat loss (hconv,forced) depends on the receiver
The receiver exergy rate is given by [53]:
tilt angle (cÞ and wind speed (Vw), as follows [44,45]:
 
T
hconv ;forced ¼ f ðcÞ:v 1:401
w ð9Þ _ p ðT out  T in Þ  T a lnð out Þ
Exrec: ¼ mC ð21Þ
T in

60
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al. Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68

Figure 5. Schematic diagram for the measurement devices and the mechanism of the system.

The solar exergy rate, the rate of solar exergy delivered by the Exrec: Exrec:
Exf ¼ ¼
sun (source) to the concentrator, can be expressed as [54 55]: Qu Q rec:  Q loss
" # h i
 4 _ p ðT out  T in Þ  T a lnðTTout Þ
mC
1 T amb: 4 T amb:
Exsun ¼ Acon: It 1 þ  ð22Þ ¼ ð25Þ
in

3 T sun 3 T sun qm CIBn Arec:  ðQ cond: þ Q rad: þ Q conv :Þ

where T sun is the sun’s blackbody temperature [56]. The above equations apply to all parts of the system to evaluate
Dish exergy rate, defined as the rate of exergy from the dish thermal and second efficiency for each component and for a com-
concentrator to the receiver, can be expressed as [57]: plete cycle as shown in Tables 3 and 4 below:
"  #
4
1 T amb: 4 T amb:
Excon: ¼ qm CAcon: It 1 þ  ð23Þ
3 T sun 3 T sun
Result and discussions
Exergy efficiency, the ratio of receiver exergy rate to the dish
exergy rate is given by: The purpose of this work was to produce electricity from solar
h i energy, discussing the results under different weather conditions.
Exrec: _ p ðT out  T in Þ  T a lnðTTout Þ
mC Measurements were taken in winter (December) 2020 when we
gEx ¼ ¼   4
in
 ð24Þ see maximum solar radiation reaching 522 W/m2.
Excon:
qm CAcon: It 1 þ 3 T sun  3 T sun
1 T amb: 4 T amb:
Figure 6 presents the average total beam solar radiation inci-
dence in Iraq through December, while Figure 7 shows the average
The exergy factor is defined as the ratio of receiver exergy rate temperature of the environment and wind speed over the same
to receiver energy rate, and is expressed as [58]: month.

Table 3
Energy equations and thermal efficiency equations for the systems’ components.

Component Energy Balance Thermal efficiency

P
Solar heater Q u ¼ Q con:  _ w ðh2  h1 Þ
Q loss ¼ m gth ¼ totalm_ wsolar
ðh2 h1 Þ
energy
Turbine _ ðh2  h3 Þ  Q lt
Wt ¼ m gth ¼ m_ ðmh_ 2ðhh2 h
3 ÞQ lt
3Þ

Condenser _ ðh3  h4 Þ  Q lc
Q cond: ¼ m gth ¼ 1  m_ ðmh_ 3ðhh3 h
4 ÞQ lc
4Þ

Pump _ ðh4  h1 Þ þ Q lp
W Pump ¼ m gth ¼ m_ ðmh_ 4ðh
h4 h1 Þ
1 ÞþQ lp

61
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al. Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68

Table 4
Exergy equations rate and exergy efficiency equations for the systems’ components

Component Exergy Balance Exergy efficiency

h i
Solar heater _ p ðT out  T in Þ  T 1 lnðTTout Þ
Exrec: ¼ mC gII ¼ Exrec:
Exref :
 
in
 4
Exref : ¼ qm CAcon: It 1 þ 13 TTsun
1
 43 TTsun
1

Turbine _ ðw2  w3 Þ  X_ destroyed;t

Wt ¼ m gII ¼ m_ ðmh_ 2ðwh2 w
3 ÞQ lt
3Þ

Condenser Q condenser _ ðw3  w4 Þ  X_ destroyed

¼m _
gII ¼ 1  m_Xðdestroyed
w3 w4 Þ
Pump _ ðw4  w1 Þ þ X_ destroyed
W Pump ¼ m gII ¼ m_ ðw4 w1 Þ
_ ðw4 w1 ÞþX_ destroyed
m

600

500
Average Solar Radiation (W/m2)

400

300

200

100

0
7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00
AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM
Time

Figure 6. Average total solar radiation through December in Iraq.

300 3.5
Environment Temperature Wind Speed
298
Average Environment Temperature (K)

296 3
294
292 2.5
Wind speed (m/s)

290
288
2
286
284
1.5
282
280
278 1
276
274 0.5
272
270 0
7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00
AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM
Time

Figure 7. Average environment temperature with wind speed through December in Iraq.

The experimental results are produced by an energy analysis of heat loss for each element. The condenser experienced 1090.58 W
the system’s components. Thermal efficiency and maximum load is energy loss, which represents 50.19% percent of the total energy
calculated and discussed in Table 5, the results showing that the lost in the system. The solar heater only lost 498.2 W of energy,
maximum thermal efficiency of the system cycle is 32.7%, at a this accounting for 22.93% of the total lost energy from the cycle.
maximum solar radiation of 520 W/m2 while the maximum tem- It should be noted here that the system starts working at 10:00
perature achieved was 400.1 °C. Table 5 presents the total heat loss h when the solar radiation is 380 W/m2, stopping at 15:00 h at 399
in each component, thermal efficiency and the percentage ratio of W/m2 solar radiation, because a minimum pressure of 10 bars and

62
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al. Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68

Table 5 Table 6
Maximum losses and percentage of heat loss regarding energy balanced with thermal Maximum losses and percentage of heat drop regarding the exergy analysis with the
efficiency. second law efficiency.

Element Maximum losses Q l (W) Percent ratio g1 Element X_ destroyed (W) Percent ratio gII
Solar heater 498.2 22.93 85.2 Solar heater 1268.75 71.82 61.24
Turbine 110.9 5.1 91.2 Turbine 91.23 5.16 93.6
Generator 87.23 4.14 93.4 Generator 87.23 4.94 93.4
Condenser 1090.58 50.19 – Condenser 102.9 5.82 –
Pump 186 8.56 88.65 Pump 17.46 0.99 85.63
Piping 58.4 2.69 – Piping 86.2 4.87 –
Other losses 141.5 6.51 – Other losses 112.89 6.39 –
Cycle 2172.81 100 32.7 Cycle 1766.66 100 41.79

minimum temperature of 180 °C are required to create super-
heated steam. These parameters are not available out with these
times. Table 6 shows the results from the evaluation of the exergy
of the systems components. The results show that the solar heater
lost 1268.75 W, this representing 71.82% of the total exergy losses
in the cycle while the condenser only lost 102.9 W, this covering
5.82% of the total system exergy losses.
Other losses here represent the energy used by the auxiliary
secondary element such as the motor used in the tracking system,
the three-way valve with temperature sensor, the control valve for
mass flow rate and the fan used with the condenser. These were

2000
energy exergy
1800

1600

1400

1200
Losses (W)

1000

800

600

400

200

0
Solar heater Turbine Generator Condenser Pump Piping Other losses Cycle

Figure 8. Energy and exergy losses for each component and the power plant cycle.

100
energy exergy
90

80

70
Efficiency (%)

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Solar heater Turbine Generator Condenser Pump Piping Other losses Cycle

Figure 9. Energy and exergy efficiency for the main components and the power plant cycle.

63
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al. Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68

calculated after evaluating the loss in each system and subtracting
these from the amount of energy extracted from the receiver.
When comparing the two tables shown above, Table 5 shows
that the maximum heat loss occurs in the condenser as revealed
by the energy analysis and the first law of thermodynamics. How-
ever, this set of results does not give a true picture of how much
losses incurred or where. To ascertain this, the findings in Table 6
also need to be considered. Tables 6 shows that according to the
second law of thermodynamics, maximum heat loss is in the solar
heater, this dependent on the temperature of the environment and
the difference in temperature between generated steam and the
solar heater outlet. The second law of thermodynamics is con-
cerned with quality and measures the difference in temperature
between the working fluid relative to the environment as the dif-
ference in temperature between the condenser and the outside
environment is not high. As such, the loss of energy in the con-
denser is very small. In the solar heater, solar radiation provides
a high temperature and a relatively high difference in temperature
between the steam generated and the output from the solar heater
so a large amount of exergy is lost. To minimize heat transfer
exergy losses in the solar heater, the temperature difference should
be reduced in parallel with an increase in the heat transfer area.
Looking at the turbine results, energy and exergy losses range
between 90 and 142.6 W. The more obvious factors causing these
losses include throttling - governing valves, turbine body heat loss,
steam leakage from the glands of turbines and internal irreversibil-
ity’s. In addition, thermal energy and exergy efficiency as defined
for each component and for each cycle in the tables, are also differ-
ent. For a better understanding of this, energy and exergy losses
pertaining to each element and device are shown in Figure 8, while
Figure 9 presents the thermal energy and exergy efficiency for each
component and cycle.
 The effect of the environment’s temperature on exergy
losses
Figure 10 presents the effect of the reference environmental
temperature on exergy losses, the relationship between them

10000

1000
Exergy losses (W)

100

10

Solar heater Turbine Condenser Pump Cycle

1
282 284 286 288 290 292 294
Reference environment temperature (K)

Figure 10. Effect of environmental temperature on exergy losses.

970
965
960
Main power output (W)

955
950
945
940
935
930
925
920
915
150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425
Steam temperature (inlet turbine ) ( )

Figure 11. Effect of changes in steam temperature on generator power.

64
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al. Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68

reversible and in keeping with the condenser as opposed to the
solar heater. In general, the bigger the difference in temperature
between the external environment and the system, the more exer-
getic losses occur this impacting on efficiency. The results show
that maximum exergy losses occurred in the solar heater at 1:00
h, specifically 1268.75 W at a reference environmental tempera-
ture of 293 K while the maximum exergy loss for a cycle is
1766.66 W.
 The effect of the temperature of steam on the main power
output in the generator
Power output is the main goal in the design of any system, this
indicating system efficacy. The power output from the generator
changes according to changes in the inlet turbine steam tempera-
ture. As reported above, the temperature is constantly changing
because of variable solar radiation. Figure 11 presents the relation-
ship between inlet steam temperature changes in the turbine with
the main output power from the generator, after calculating all the
losses in the turbine and generator. The maximum power output in
the generator is 963 W at a main steam temperature of 400.1 °C.
Figure 11 shows that when reducing steam temperature, the
main power output is decreased in both situations meaning that
the relationship between them was positive. An increase in the
main steam temperature leads to an increase in the amount of heat
entering the turbine and consequently an increase in the amount
of energy generated. However, regarding Rankin cycles, the highest
possible value is approximately 550-600 °C due to the inability of
the conveyor tubes and the metal outside the turbine to withstand
higher temperatures, this determining the entry degree. It should

3500
Qu Turbine Generator Pump

3000

2500
Work and energy (W)

2000

1500

1000

500

0
10:00 10:30 11:00 11:30 12:00 12:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00
AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM
Time

Figure 12. Useful energy generated by the turbine, the main power plant in the generator and the work in the pump over time.

Figure 13. ANN model architecture.

65
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al.
be noted here that the highest temperature value for the turbine
used in this system is 500 °C, and as such, the aim here was to
maintain a lower temperature for the turbine.
 Useful energy production with work in the turbine and
mean power output
Figure 12 present the amounts of useful energy produced after
leaving the solar heater, based on the work produced by the tur-
bine and the main power output from the generator. It also shows
how much power the pump uses to recycle the fluid back into the
solar heater. This figure also shows how much steam energy is lost
at the final station. This is shown as power output in the generator
Figure 14. The accuracy of ANN model.
Figure 15. Independent variable importance for Al-Dora ANN model.
66
Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68
and the power that is lost in the pump when used to rotate it.
These losses rise because of the environment temperature, accord-
ing to exergy and the second law of thermodynamics. The results
shown that maximum work produced in the turbine is 1140.02
W, while maximum useful power in the generator reaches 963
W. The pump uses approximately 186 W
Mathematical model prediction
Artificial neural network model (ANN)
ANN model was developed by the SPSS program to predict the
power output (QG) from (solar radiation, useful energy, heat losses,
wind speed, and ambient temperature (I, Qu, Ql, V and T). The num-
ber input data for model is 61 which is divided 42 for training, 10
for testing, and 8 for holdout. The rescaling method for data is stan-
dardization and the hidden layers are three of type hyperbolic tan-
gent [59] . Figure 13 shows the resulted model architecture and the
mathematical expression of model can be written as:
Q G ¼ 0:485  0:012I  0:144T þ 0:185V  0:826Q u þ 0:168Q I
ð21Þ
The predicted values vs observed values plot showed a good
accuracy of the model as shown in Figure 14. The figure represents
the relationship between the real values and the predicted values
obtained from the model in addition to the fitting line with its
equation. The coefficient of determination R2 is shown to be 92.5
%, which mean a good predictive capacity for this model. According
to this model, QG could be predicted under different operational
conditions [60].
To determine the variation in the mode-predicted value for var-
ious independent variable values, the importance of the indepen-
dent variable is used. It appears from Fig 15 that the variable Qu
(useful energy) has the greatest effect on how the solar system
work efficient.
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al.
Table 7
MLR models.
Model R R2 Adjusted R2 Std. Error
1 0.952a 0.906 0.904 4.440
2 0.955b 0.913 0.910 4.303
Multilinear regression model (MLR)
MLR model was developed to predict the power output (QG)
with using (Qu, Ql, I, V and T) as independent variables. The avail-
able data to develop a MLR model was 61 and by using SPSS soft-
ware and adopting a procedure of stepwise regression, two
candidate models were obtained as shown in Table 7.
Model 2 shows the maximum value of coefficient of determina-
tion (R2) of 91.3%. According to the outputs of SPSS software.
Conclusion
A unique and novel steam power station has been built to gen-
erate electricity using a concentrated solar dish. A small station
was built consisting of a solar dish (solar heater), working as a boi-
ler, connected to a turbine which is, in turn, connected to an elec-
trical generator. Outlet working fluid moves into a condenser and
is then recycled back to the solar heater by a pump. The prototype
comprised a solar dish with a diameter of 3 m, aperture area reach-
ing 7.1 m2, and focal length 1.41 m, covered with 2 mm glasses
mirrored/silver tiles.
The experimental data was gathered in winter of 2020–2021.
The experimental results show the possibility of generating elec-
tricity by building a new solar dish-powered steam system which
relies on other main parts found in large steam stations. Auxiliary
elements were used to assist the work of the system and to facili-
tate its protection and operation across all seasons of the year,
under varying climatic conditions. The ensuing results good, with
a power range between 800 and 1000 W.
A statistical analysis presents also by using SPSS software, the
model indicated that the value of QG is proportional to Qu and
the degree of impact is significant. Other parameters have rela-
tively less effect than Qu but are effective in the prediction model.
Also, the results shows that the maximum value of coefficient of
determination (R2) of 91.3%. The suggested statical models have
been tested and evaluated on winter (December) 2020. Over the
range of data size used in evaluation and examine, the develop-
ment of ANN model to predict the power output (QG) from (solar
radiation, useful energy, heat losses, wind speed, and ambient tem-
perature (I, Qu, Ql, V and T). Better predictive and high capability
could be resultant in this model in case of more data have been
collected.
We concluded the following:
1. The maximum temperature of the steam reaches 400.1 °C,
range somewhere between 180 and 550 °C.
2. Losses: these were calculated via energy and exergy equations.
Maximum cycle losses from energy equations were 2172.81 W
while those from exergy equations were 3650.94 W.
3. Efficiency: this was calculated using energy balance and exergy
equations. For energy, the maximum efficiency of a cycle was
32.7% while for exergy, the efficiency of a cycle 41.79%
4. The maximum power output in the generator is 963W.
5. According to statical analysis model, QG could be predicted
under different operational conditions.
67
Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68
References
_
[1] I.H. Yılmaz, A. Mwesigye, Appl. Energy 225 (2018) 135–174, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.05.014.
[2] S.-Y. Wu et al., Appl. Energy 87 (2) (2010) 452–462, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2009.08.041.
[3] M. Abbas et al., Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 36 (7) (2011) 4305–4314, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.12.114.
[4] R. Beltran et al., J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 26 (10) (2012) 3311–3321, https://doi.
org/10.1007/s12206-012-0801-0.
[5] F. Nepveu, A. Ferriere, F. Bataille, Sol. Energy. 83 (1) (2009) 81–89, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.solener.2008.07.008.
[6] C. Zang et al., Structural design and analysis of the dish solar thermal power
system, in: 2nd International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference,
2004, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2004-5645.
[7] A. Balzar et al., Sol. Energy 58 (1–3) (1996) 63–68, https://doi.org/10.1016/
0038-092X(96)00024-2.
[8] M. Grupp et al., Sol. Energy 83 (2) (2009) 276–279, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.solener.2008.08.002.
[9] A.A. Badran et al., Energy Convers. Manage. 51 (8) (2010) 1605–1609, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2009.09.038.
[10] I.L. Mohammed, Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. (IJERA) 2 (1) (2012) 822–830.
[11] V.R. Dafle, N.N. Shinde, Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. (IJERA) 2 (6) (2012) 1179–1186.
[12] K. Srithar et al., Renewable Energy 90 (2016) 157–165, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.renene.2015.12.063.
[13] M.J. El-Kassaby, Renewable Energy 1 (1) (1991) 59–65, https://doi.org/
10.1016/0960-1481(91)90104-W.
[14] J. Dascomb, Low-cost concentrating solar collector for steam generation, thesis
in Florida State University, 2009. https://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/
fsu%3A169015.
[15] Matthew R. Devlin, Investigation of an alpha-parabolic solar concentrator dish,
2008. Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1025. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/
228644503.pdf.
[16] A. Hafez et al., Energy Convers. Manage. 126 (2016) 60–75, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2016.07.067.
[17] Y.H. Mahmood, R.Y. Al-Salih, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. (2018). https://iopscience.iop.
org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1032/1/012006/meta.
[18] A. El Ouederni et al., Revue des Energies Renouvelables 12 (3) (2009) 395–404.
https://revue.cder.dz/index.php/rer/article/view/149.
[19] Y. Rafeeu, M.J.R. Ab Kadir, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (6) (2012) 3826–
3835, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.03.041.
[20] E.M. Toygar et al., Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 54 (2016) 1278–1284, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.085.
[21] N.S. Kumar, K. Reddy, Energy Convers. Manage. 49 (4) (2008) 812–819, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2007.07.026.
[22] A.M. Daabo, S. Mahmoud, R.K. Al-Dadah, Appl. Energy 179 (2016) 1081–1096,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.07.064.
[23] R. Loni et al., Appl. Energy 145 (2020) 783–804, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2016.07.064.
[24] F.M. Mohamed, A.S. Jassim, Shanmugam, W.J. Christraj, J. Sol. Energy Eng. 127
(1) (2005) 156–160, https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1824103.
[26] V. Thakkar et al., J. Mech. Civil Eng. 12 (1) (2015) 101–114.
[27] L. Li, S.J.M. Dubowsky, Mech. Mach. Theory 46 (10) (2011) 1536–1548, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2011.04.012.
[28] J.J. Harrison, Investigation of reflective materials for the solar cooker, Florida
Solar Energy Center, 2001, p. 24.
[29] M. Gwani et al., Int. J. Sci.: Basic Appl. Res. (IJSBAR) 23 (1) (2015) 230–241.
http://gssrr.org/index.php?journal=JournalOfBasicAndApplied.
[30] B.A. Sup et al., Energy Procedia 68 (2015) 45–52, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.egypro.2015.03.231.
[31] S.D. Nazemi, M.J. Boroushaki, Int. J. Renewable Energy Dev. (IJRED) 5 (1)
(2016), https://doi.org/10.14710/ijred.5.1.33-42.
[32] R. Affandi et al., J. Appl. Sci. Agric. 9 (11) (2014) 42–48.
[33] V. Siva Reddy, S. Kaushik, S. Tyagi, Int. J. Energy Res. 37 (11) (2013) 1287–1301,
https://doi.org/10.1002/er.2926.
[34] P.J.M.O.S. Fraser, Energy Convers. Manage. (2008), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2007.07.026.
[35] V. Calmidi, R. Mahajan https://heattransfer.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on
06/30/2019 Terms of Use: J. Heat Transfer (1999). http://www.asme.org/
about-asme/terms-of-use.
[36] P. Nath, K. Chopra, Thin Solid Films 20 (1) (1974) 53–62, https://doi.org/
10.1016/0040-6090(74)90033-9.
[37] Z. Li et al., Appl. Therm. Eng. 31 (10) (2011) 1780–1789, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2011.02.023.
[38] W.B. Stine, R.W. Harrigan, Solar energy fundamentals and design, 1985,
https://www.osti.gov/biblio/5861586.
[39] S. Li et al., Energy. 113 (2016) 95–107, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2016.06.143.
[40] T. Liao, J. Lin, Energy Convers. Manage. 97 (2015) 20–25, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2015.03.027.
[41] K. Chen, W.J.A.e. Chun, Radiation energy transfer and maximum conversion
efficiency. ProQuest Dissertations And Theses; Thesis (Ph.D.)–Princeton
University, 2018. Publication Number: AAT 10823636; ISBN:
9780438049413; Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 79-
10(E), Section: B., p. 269.
A. Basem, M. Moawed, M.H. Abbood et al.
[42] M.E. Zayed et al., Appl. Therm. Eng. 164 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2019.114427 114427.
[43] L.S.M. Castellanos et al., Renewable Energy 135 (2019) 259–265, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.11.095.
[44] R.Y. Ma, Wind Effects on Convective Heat Loss From A Cavity Receiver For A
Parabolic Concentrating Solar Collector, Sandia National Labs, Albuquerque,
NM (United States); California State, 1993.
[45] L. Ma et al., Energy Build. 194 (2019) 218–231, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enbuild.2019.04.014.
[46] G.E.C. Caballero et al., Appl. Energy 204 (2017) 271–286, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.07.053.
[47] M. Zayed et al., Sol. Energy 182 (2019) 382–396, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.solener.2019.02.054.
[48] M.E. Zayed et al., Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 199 (2019) 24–49, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.solmat.2019.04.018.
[49] V.T. Morgan, Adv. Heat Transfer. (1975) 199–264, https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0065-2717(08)70075-3.
[50] S. Kaushik et al., Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15 (4) (2011) 1857–1872, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.12.007.
[51] Y.A. Cengel, M.A. Boles, Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach 6th
Edition (SI Units), The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc, New York, 2007.
68
Renewable Energy Focus 41 (2022) 55–68
[52] I.H. Aljundi, Appl. Therm. Eng. 29 (2–3) (2009) 324–328, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2008.02.029.
[53] D. MacPhee, I. Dincer, Appl. Therm. Eng. 29 (4) (2009) 695–705, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2008.03.041.
[54] R. Petela, Sol. Energy 74 (6) (2003) 469–488, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-
092X(03)00226-3.
[55] A. Mohammadi, M. Mehrpooya, J. Cleaner Prod. 139 (2016) 372–383, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.057.
[56] C. Wyman, J. Castle, F. Kreith, Sol. Energy 24 (6) (1980) 517–540, https://doi.
org/10.1016/0038-092X(80)90352-7.
[57] V. Thirunavukkarasu, M. Cheralathan, Energy. 192 (2020), https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2019.116635 116635.
[58] A. Mawire, S.H. Taole, Energy Sustain. Dev. 19 (2014) 162–169, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.esd.2014.01.004.
[59] S. Bekesiene, R. Smaliukiene, R. Vaicaitiene, Mathematics. 9 (6) (2021) 626,
https://doi.org/10.3390/math9060626.
[60] S. Konishi, Introduction to Multivariate Analysis: Linear and Nonlinear
Modeling, CRC Press, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1201/b17077.