New Journal and we have not received input yet 24 (2021) 100932

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thermal Science and Engineering Progress

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/thermal-science-and-engineering-progress

Algorithm for sizing parabolic-trough solar collectors

Fernanda I. Nascimento a, Elí W. Zavaleta-Aguilar a, *, José R. Simões-Moreira b
a
São Paulo State University (Unesp), Campus of Itapeva, Itapeva 18409-010, SP, Brazil
b
SISEA, Renewable and Alternative Energy Systems Lab., Escola Politécnica at University of São Paulo, São Paulo 05508-900, SP, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This work aims at developing a working algorithm to evaluate the necessary parabolic-trough solar collectors
Solar energy (PTCs) sizing for any application, basically, as a function of the thermal load and the demanded operating
Parabolic trough collector temperature. Energy balance and heat transfer accurate estimations were applied to the PTC parts resulting in a
Sizing
set of non-linear equations, which were solved by a commercial software. Result analyses showed that a
Algorithm
maximum relative error of 5.9% in PTCs lengthwise sizing and 6.1% in the thermal efficiency were achieved
when compared to available data in the literature (experimental and theoretical ones), demonstrating that the
algorithm is suitable for dimensioning both evacuated and not evacuated PTCs. Also, the PTC geometry and
thermal efficiency sensitivity were analyzed as a function of relevant parameters, showing the required PTC
length increased and the thermal efficiency decreased as either the following parameters were reduced: the direct
solar irradiation, the PTC width, the receiver absorptivity and the heat transfer fluid (HTF) mass flow rate (in
laminar and transitional flow regime) or the following parameters were increased: the receiver emissivity, the
useful heat and the HTF outlet temperature. Also, three commercial thermal fluids were analyzed along with
pressurized water. It was shown that water had a superior performance up to an outlet temperature of 300 ◦ C. For
temperatures above 400 ◦ C, the required PTC length increased rapidly. The use of an evacuated receiver can
reduce the PTC length between 9% up to 160% depending on the analyzed variable.

concentrating solar power, solar chemistry, solar desalination, solar

1. Introduction
Parabolic trough solar collectors are heat transfer devices constituted
of a parabolic structure coated with a highly reflective material that
reflects the direct solar radiation to a focal line where a thermal radia­
tion receiver (also called absorber) is located. The receiver consists of a
metallic tube externally coated with a selective material that absorbs the
incident concentrated solar radiation, and, therefore, it is heated up and
the heat is transferred to a heat transfer fluid that flows inside the
metallic tube. In typical design assemblies, the metallic tube is encom­
passed by a clear glass tube and the annular space is evacuated to get rid
the convective heat losses. PTCs generally have a one-direction solar
tracking mechanism system, where the PTC cylindrical axis can be ori­
ented in an east-west direction, tracking the sun from north to south, or
in a north-south direction, tracking the sun from east to west [1],
bestowing a one-degree of freedom. Parabolic trough solar collectors
constitute a mature commercial solar thermal technology available on
both small-and large-scale for solar thermal power plant and industrial
vapor production as well as for heating applications. They are used in
cooling [2], pasteurization, evaporation, sterilization [3], and oil pro­
duction [4]. Applications in solar industrial heating processes are in
initial development stage but it has enormous potential for use at tem­
peratures up to 350 ◦ C [5]. Industrial sector uses 74% (85 EJ) of the
energy in heating, being 90% of it provided by burning fossil fuels [3].
PTCs have intermediate concentration rates (10-85) and are mostly
employed in applications requiring temperatures from 60 to 400◦ C [6].
Historically, one of the first high scale PTC to power a water pump
driven by a 100 HP steam machine for irrigation purposes was built by
Shuman in Egypt in 1913 [7].
Dudley et al. [8] evaluated the PTC performance installed in a solar
thermal power plant. In their work, they performed the thermal
modeling to evaluate, per PTC length unit, heat losses and receiver heat
gain with and without a glass covering tube and with and without
vacuum in the annular space between the glass tube and the absorber.
Kalogirou et al. [9] evaluated some optimal values of PTC parameters
(collector aperture, rim angle, and receiver diameter). Sauceda et al.
[10], performed a numerical simulation to design a PTC for an
ammonia-water GAX (generator-absorber heat-exchange) absorption

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: eli.zavaleta@unesp.br (E.W. Zavaleta-Aguilar).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2021.100932
Received 4 December 2020; Received in revised form 2 April 2021; Accepted 8 April 2021
Available online 16 April 2021
2451-9049/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
F.I. Nascimento et al. Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 24 (2021) 100932

Nomenclature β volume expansion coefficient at constant pressure [1/K]

γ intercept factor [–]
A collector opening area [m2] ε total hemispheric emissivity [–]
cp average HTF specific heat at constant pressure [J/kgK] η PTC thermal efficiency [–]
D diameter [m] ηopt optical efficiency [–]
f parabola focal distance [m] θ incidence angle [◦ ]
f friction factor [–] μ dynamic viscosity [kg/ms]
g gravity [m/s2] v kinematic viscosity [m2/s]
h convection heat transfer coefficient [W/m2K] ρ density [kg/m3]
I incident direct solar radiation [W/m2] ρ Reflectivity [–]
k thermal conductivity [W/mK] σ Stefan-Boltzmann constant [W/m2K4]
K incidence angle modifier [–] τ transmissivity [–]
L PTC length [m] ϕr rim angle [◦ ]
Lc Rayleigh number length scale [m]
ṁ HTF mass flow rate [kg/s] Subscripts
( ) 1 into the HTF
Nu Nusselt number [–] Nu = hLk s , Ls relative to the geometry 2, 3, 4, 5 receiver and glass cover surfaces
P pressure [Pa] 6 around the glass cover
( ) 7 sky
Pr Prandtl number [–] Pr = αν
abs absorbed
Q̇ heat transfer rate [W] calc calculated
( )
gβΔTL3
cond conduction
Ra Rayleigh number [–] Ra = α s , Ls relative to the conv convection
geometry eff effective
( ) i inlet
Re Reynolds number [–] Re = VLν s , Ls relative to the o outlet
geometry rad radiation
S receiver radiation absorbed per collector opening area [W/ u useful
m2]
Abbreviations
T temperature [◦ C] or [K]
GUI graphical user interface
V velocity [m/s]
HTF heat transfer fluid
W PTC width [m]
IST Industrial Solar Technology
Greek Symbols PTC Parabolic trough solar collector
α total hemispheric absorptivity [–] SEGS solar electric generating system
α thermal diffusivity [m2/s]

refrigeration cycle. Woldemichael et al. [11], created a GUI (graphical
user interface) software where efficiency, geometric design parameters,
and heat loss were evaluated. Other studies [1,12,13,14,15,16,17] car­
ried out PTC’s efficiency assessment and parametric studies. Recent
works include the use of heat transfer nanofluids (such as Ag/H2O,
Al2O2/H2O) which can increase the thermal efficiency by up to 90%
[18]. Alternative applications of solar parabolic trough concentrator
include thermoelectric generators (Seebeck effect) with global effi­
ciencies ~ 3% which can be improved by cooling the cold plate side with
air or water thermosiphon [19], also, in concentrated photovoltaic
systems cooled by PCM - phase change materials [20].
New projects or retrofit of thermal processes based on PTC for in­
dustrial heating and electrical generation require PTC sizing. This work
aims to develop a parabolic trough solar collector algorithm to calculate

Fig. 1. Schematic of the parabolic trough solar collector cross-section.

2
F.I. Nascimento et al.
the required geometry for any specific thermal application as a function
of the demanded thermal load, operating temperature, optical materials
and thermophysical fluid properties, among others. The algorithm is
validated by experimental and analytical results of other works. After
validation, it is analyzed the sensitivity of PTC geometry as a function of
relevant operational parameters, building materials, and fluid
properties.
2. Methodology
The parabolic trough solar receiver analyzed is formed by four main
surfaces (2, 3, 4, and 5) as shown in Fig. 1. Each surface is considered in
the energy balance between the heat transfer fluid inside the receiver,
the environment, and the incident concentrated solar radiation. It is also
depicted in Fig. 1 the PTC cross-section indicating its main components:
the reflector, the receiver, the glass cover, and the heat transfer fluid. In
that figure, one can see that the direct solar radiation reaching the
reflector surface is reflected to the receiver assembly placed at the linear
focus. The reflected solar radiation reaches the glass cover first, then the
receiver, being Q̇5,abs and Q̇3,abs the radiation that is absorbed by those
two components, respectively. At the receiver, heat radiation is absor­
bed and transferred from the outer surface 3 to inner surface 2 by con­
duction (Q̇32,cond ) and then to the HTF by heat convection (Q̇21,conv ). Heat
losses occur from the surface 3 to surface 4 by convection (Q̇34,conv ) and
radiation (Q̇34,rad ), then from the surface 4 to surface 5 heat is lost by
conduction (Q̇45,cond ). From surface 5, heat is lost to the environment (6)
by convection (Q̇56,conv ) and the sky and surroundings (7) by radiation
(Q̇57,rad ). The energy balances (First Law of Thermodynamics) were
established considering the steady-state regime neglecting kinetic and
potential energies. Thus, the energy balances carried out on surface 5, 4,
3, and 2 correspond to Eq. (1), (2), (3), and (4), respectively.
Q̇5,abs + Q̇45,cond = Q̇57,rad + Q̇56,conv (1)
Q̇34,rad + Q̇34,conv = Q̇45,cond (2)
Q̇3,abs = Q̇32,cond + Q̇34,rad + Q̇34,conv (3)
Q̇32,cond = Q̇21,conv = Q̇u (4)
where, Q̇u is the useful heat transferred to the heat transfer fluid. The
First Law of Thermodynamics applied to the non-phase changing heat
transfer fluid flowing inside the receiver between the inlet and outlet
gives:
Q̇u = ṁcp (To − Ti ) (5)
2.1. Operating Simplifications
Some simplifications are considered to cut the weight of negligible
parameters [6]. On surface 3 the absorbed solar irradiation (Q̇3,abs ) is
considered constant along its diameter and length. On glass surface 5,
the absorbed radiation (Q̇5,abs ) is considered negligible. On surfaces 4
and 5, it is assumed that conduction occurs on a thin wall, with no
significant temperature variation. At the annular region (between sur­
faces 3 and 4), if the vacuum is considered (pressure less than 0.013 Pa),
the heat transfer coefficient is around 0.0001 W/m2K (free molecule
convection), being the heat transfer under such conditions negligible
[8]. Otherwise, if the pressure is larger than 0.013 Pa the heat transfer
(Q̇34,conv ) occurs by natural convection. The sky temperature is consid­
ered similar to that of the environment to calculate the heat transfer by
radiation from the glass cover to the sky. Moreover, a one-dimension
model (1D) in the radial direction is assumed for Eqs. (1) to (4) and
the surface temperatures are considered approximately constant.
3
Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 24 (2021) 100932
Relevant PTC geometric parameters are shown in Fig. 2. Ideally,
when direct solar radiation (in a conical shape with the subtended angle
of 0.53◦ [21]) parallel to the parabola’s axis, impacts on a reflector
point, it is reflected with equal angulation. The reflected radiation
produces an optical image equivalent to a tube with a diameter D3,calc .
The PTC reflector aperture (W), the parabola focal distance (f), and the
rim angle (ϕr ) are related to the receiver diameter (D3,calc ) according to
Eqs. (6) and (7).
( )
4f
(6)
◦
D3,calc = sin0.267
1 + cosϕr
(ϕ )
W = 4ftan r (7)
2
The receiver external diameter (D3 ) used in experimental and nu­
merical works does not follow the Eqs. (6) and (7) as shown in Table 1.
This table indicates that the external receiver diameter used and the
theoretical one ratio (D3 /D3,calc ) varies from 1.38 to 13.63. The same
works show that the glass cover internal diameter and the receiver
external diameter ratio (D4 /D3 ) varies from 1.45 to 1.85. Treadwell [22]
shows that the annular gap must be around 10 mm to have less heat loss.
Moreover, the rim angle is recommended to be 70◦ and 110◦ [23].
Treadwell [22] shows that a rim angle of 90◦ causes the average focal-
reflector distance and thus the reflected beam dispersion and cost are
reduced.
2.2. Optical efficiency
The radiation absorbed by the receiver is defined as:
Q̇3,abs = SA (8)
A = L(W − D5 ) (9)
The radiation absorbed by the receiver per collector opening area
unit is defined by Eq. (10):
S = ηopt I (10)
The optical efficiency is defined as:
ηopt = ρτ5 α3 γK (11)
where, γ is the intercept factor and represents the rays fraction incident
upon the aperture area that reaches the receiver [37], being common
values of γ greater than 0.90 [17] and K is the incidence angle modifier,
which quantifies the effect of the incidence angle (θ) on the parameters:
ρ, τ5 , α3 , γ and depends on the PTC particular geometry. For SEGS LS-2
PTC the incidence angle modifier is defined as [8]:
K = cos(θ) + 0.000884θ − 0.00005369θ2 (12)
2.3. Governing equations
By combining Q̇32,cond , and Q̇21,conv in Eq. (4), it is possible to obtain
the useful heat gain:
Fig. 2. PTC cross-section with some geometrical parameters.
F.I. Nascimento et al. Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 24 (2021) 100932

Table 1
A survey of geometrical parameters of PTC from literature.
Authors f (m) ϕr (◦ ) w (m) rr (m) D2 (m) D3 (m) D4 (m) D5 (m) D3,calc (m) D3 D4
D3,calc D3
Mokhtari et al. [24] 0.880 90.0 3.400 1.760 - 0.070 - 0.125 0.016 4.267 -
Arasu and Sornakumar [25] 0.200 90.0 0.800 0.400 - 0.013 - 0.025 0.004 3.434 -
Gomes and Guedes [26] 70.0 0.500 0.596 0.014 0.015 - - 0.006 2.770 -
Sauceda et al. [10] 0.750 90.0 3.000 1.500 0.020 0.027 0.045 0.050 0.014 1.910 1.685
Venegas-Reyes et al. [27] 0.716 45.0 1.187 0.839 - 0.025 - - 0.008 3.249 -
Macedo-Valencia et al. [28] 0.112 96.0 0.500 0.250 - 0.013 - - 0.002 5.447 -
Tzivanidis et al. [14] 0.300 70.0 0.840 0.447 0.020 0.022 0.032 0.034 0.004 5.281 1.455
Bhujangrao [29] 0.221 134.5 1.030 1.479 0.017 0.019 - - 0.012 1.378 -
Ismail, Zanardi and Lino [30] 0.100 90.0 - 0.200 - 0.025 0.047 0.05 0.002 13.627 1.855
Tijani and Jamarei [31] 1.840 68.4 5.000 2.689 0.065 0.070 0.109 0.115 0.0025 2.793 1.557
Bharti and Paul [32] 0.447 80.0 1.500 0.762 0.021 0.025 - - 0.007 3.579 -
Pavlovic et al. [33] 1.840 68.4 5.000 2.689 0.066 0.070 0.110 0.115 0.025 2.793 1.571
Qu et al. [34] 1.712 80.3 5.770 2.927 0.064 0.070 0.114 0.120 0.027 2.556 1.629
Abbood, Radhi and Shaheed [35] 0.233 77.7 0.750 0.384 - 0.047 - 0.058 0.007 13.118 -
Lamrani et al. [36] 49.4 3.400 2.233 0.066 0.070 0.109 0.115 0.021 3.364 1.557
Xu et al. [2] 1.710 80.2 5.760 2.923 0064 0.070 0.119 0.125 0.027 2.570 -

T3 − 0.5(Ti + To ) ( )
Q̇u = (13) D3 σ T34 − T44 ( ) Q̇
(21)
ln(D3 /D2 )
2π k23 L
+ πD21Lh12 ( ) = ε5 D5 σ T54 − T64 + D5 h56 (T5 − T6 ) − 34,conv
1 D3 1 πL
ε 3 + D4 ε 5 − 1
In previous equation, h12 is the average HTF convection heat transfer
coefficient that is evaluated through the Nusselt number:
Depending on the annular section pressure (P), the inside convective
h12 D2 heat transfer coefficient varies according to Eq. (22) (see also Section
Nu12 = (14)
k12 2.1).

According to [38] the Nusselt number can be evaluated for laminar

(Re12 < 2300) and constant heat flux condition as:

[ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ ( √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ )3 ]1/3

d2 √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ d2
(15)
3
Nu12 = 4.3543 + 0.63 + (1.953 Re12 Pr12 − 0.6)3 + 0.924 3 Pr12 Re12
L L

⎧
⎪
⎪ 0, P < 0.013Pa
For turbulent flow (Re12 > 4000): ⎪
⎨
2πkeff L(T3 − T5 )
[ ( )2/3 ]( )0.11 Q̇34,conv = ( ) , P > 0.013Pa (22)
⎪
⎪ D4
(f /8)(Re12 − 1000)Pr12 d2 Pr12 ⎪
Nu12 = √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ 2/3 1+ (16) ⎩ ln
D3
1 + 12.7 f /8(Pr12 − 1) L Pr2
The effective heat transfer coefficient (keff ) is evaluated by the Eq.
The friction factor is evaluated by:
(23) [39]:
f = [0.78ln(Re12 ) − 1.5]− 2
(17) ( )1/4
Pr34
(23)
1/4
keff = 0.386k34 Ra34
For transition flow (2300 ≤ Re12 ≤ 4000), the Nusselt number is 0.681 + Pr34
evaluated by interpolation between the laminar condition at Re12 =
2300 and the turbulent condition at Re12 = 4000, Where the Rayleigh number of the air is defined as:

(18) gβ(T3 − T4 )L3c

Nu12 = (1 − λ)Nulam,2300 + λNutur,4000 Ra34 = (24)
vα
With
and the length scale of the Rayleigh number is given by:
Re − 2300
λ= (19) 2[ln(D4 /D3 )]4/3
4000 − 2300 Lc = [ ]5/3 (25)
Nulam,2300 is calculated from Eq. (15) at Re12 = 2300 and Nutur,4000
− 3/5 3/5
(D3 /2) + (D4 /2)−
from Eq. (16) at Re12 = 4000. The internal flow Reynolds number is
calculated by: In Eq. (21) the air convection heat transfer coefficient (h56 ) is
calculated by [6]:
4ṁ
Re12 = (20) h56 D5
πD2 μ12 Nu56 = (26)
k56
By combining Eqs. (1) and (2), one obtains:
{
0.4 + 0.54Re0.52
56 , 0.1 < Re56 < 1000
Nu56 = (27)
0.3Re0.6
56 , 1000 < Re56 < 50000

4
F.I. Nascimento et al. Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 24 (2021) 100932

The external flow Reynolds number for the air on the tube is calcu­ This algorithm is designed for sizing a PTC, which must satisfy a
lated by: thermal requirement of a specific thermal process, that has a thermal
ρ56 V56 D5 load Q̇u , with HTF temperature To , type of HTF (including its transport
Re56 = (28) properties), and mass flow rateṁ. Additionally, the meteorological
μ56
variables where the solar collector will be installed are known: direct
By combining Eqs. (3) and (4), yields: solar radiation (I) and the wind speed (V56 ). The diameters D3 , D4 , and
( ) aperture W can be evaluated according to the considerations in Section
πD3 Lσ T34 − T54
SL(W − D5 ) = Q̇u + ( ) + Q̇34,conv (29) 2.1, the reflector reflectivity, as well as the radiation properties and
1 D3 1
ε 3 + D4 ε 5 − 1
thermal conductivity of the glass and the receiver tubes depend on the
types of the materials used [8,38,40]. The algorithm initially assesses
The annular section convection heat transfer rate (Q̇34,conv ) in Eq. the HTF inlet temperature Ti . The temperature T5 (glass cover temper­
(29), is defined according to Eq. (22). The PTC thermal efficiency is ature) is assumed to be 1 K higher than the ambient temperature T6 . To
described as the useful heat gain by the heat transfer fluid, at the continue it is necessary to know whether the collector will be dimen­
receiver and the incident radiation upon the aperture area ratio: sioned considering vacuum or not in the annular region which means
having a pressure below or above 0.013 Pa in this region, respectively. In
η=
Q̇u
(30) vacuum conditions, the convection heat transfer coefficient between the
IA glass cover and the external ambient is evaluated, then the PTC length
and the optical efficiency are evaluated. As the external glass cover
2.4. Algorithm temperature was initially assumed, it is reassessed with Eq. (25), in case
of these temperatures are different, their initial value is changed in ξ.
Given the set of nonlinear of Eqs. (5) to (27), an algorithm was The iteration procedure continues until the T5 temperature difference is
implemented in Matlab Mathworks® software to rate the variables L, T3 , around 0.1 K, in this situation, the collector length (L), the collector
T5 , and η. The algorithm flowchart is shown in Fig. 3. thermal efficiency (η) the external glass cover (T5 ), and the external
receiver temperature (T3 ) are evaluated. Similarly, these parameters are
calculated when there is air in the annular section. To solve this prob­
lem, initially, it is assumed a temperature T5 = T6 + 1, then h56 is
evaluated. At this point, it is necessary to evaluate the natural convec­
tion coefficient in the annular region, which needs the T3 temperature
value, which is initially assumed to be 2 K above ambient temperature.
This temperature is corrected by using Eq. (17). The subsequent pro­
cedure is similar to the vacuum case, however, the convection heat
transfer in the annular section (Eq. (25)) must be considered.
To solve the above equations is necessary the temperature-
dependent fluid transport properties. A Matlab subroutine called these
properties from Excel Microsoft® program file.

3. Validation

The algorithm was conceived to find the necessary PTC length as a

function of the following variables: thermal load, outlet HTF tempera­
ture, besides a set of other operating variables. The model validation was
reached by comparing experimental results obtained by previous re­
searchers for actual operating conditions. The PTC had constructive
variables, such as: the receiver (k23 , α3 , ε3 ), reflector (ρ) and enveloping
glass (τ5 , ε5 ) thermal properties, the geometry (L, W, D2 , D3 , D4 , D5 ), the
heat transfer fluid type, the intercept factor (γ) and the incidence angle
(θ). It was put into operation and process variables, being, direct irra­
diation (I), HTF mass flow rate (ṁ), HTF inlet (Ti ) and outlet (To ),
receiver (T3 ), enveloping glass (T5 ) and ambient (T6 ) temperatures and
air velocity (V56 ), along with the calculated thermal efficiency (η) and
useful heat (Q̇u ). Those variables were separated into input and output
variables. The necessary input variables of this work are: Q̇u , To , ṁ, I, W,
D2 , D3 , D4 , D5 , k23 , ε3 , ε5 , θ, ρ, α3 , τ5 , γ, V56 , T6 and the output variables:
L, T3 , T5 e η.
The algorithm was compared with one experimental work at vacuum
[8] and two other works at non-vacuum [41,42] conditions. The col­
lector [8] consisted of a commercial LS-2 PTC (LUZ Industries, Inc.,
Israel) used in a solar power plant. One PTC was tested at Sandia Na­
tional Laboratories (California, United States [43]) to obtain operating
data, including thermal efficiency, thermal losses and the incidence
angle modifier. Similarly, in [41], a commercial PTC (Industrial Solar
Technology Co., Colorado, United States) used for residential solar
water heating, was analyzed. The collector was tested at Sandia National
Laboratories and operating data similar to [8] were collected. In this
collector selective materials were used on the receiver (black nickel and
Fig. 3. PTC sizing algorithm flowchart scheme.

5
F.I. Nascimento et al. Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 24 (2021) 100932

Table 2 300 1
Specifications of the input variables used from other works.
Variable Units References 250 0.8

PTC lenght, L (m)

[8] [41] [42] [13]
200
Q̇u W 22030 9050 649 23671 0.6
To ◦
C 320.6 107.3 60 146 150
I W/m2 884.6 995.1 928 875 0.4
ṁ kg/s 0.6036 0.6909 0.023 0.2 100
W m 5 2.3 1.1 5 0.2
D2 m 0.066 0.048 0.020 0.066
50
D3 m 0.070 0.051 0.025 0.070
0 0
D4 m 0.109 0.072 0.050 0.109
400 600 800 1000
D5 m 0.115 0.075 0.056 0.115
k23 W/mK 15 16.6 52 54
ε3 - 0.24 0.13 0.08 0.14 Fig. 4. PTC length and thermal efficiency as a function of the direct solar
ε5 - 0.81 0.80 0.82 0.86 irradiation.
θ ◦
0 0 0 0
ρ - 0.93 0.93 0.85 0.93
α3 - 0.95 0.94 0.82 0.906 1
60
τ5 - 0.95 0.91 0.85 0.95
- 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.8
γ
50

PTC lenght, L (m)

V56 m/s 3 2.9 3.2 2
T6 ◦
C 3 11.8 38 25 40 0.6
**
HTF - *[44] [44] Water [45]
* 30
Syltherm ® 800, **Therminol ® VP-1.
0.4
20
Turbulentt
Table 3 0.2
10 Transition
Validation, comparison with the literature.
Laminar
Authors L(m) T3 (K) T5 (K) η 0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Dudley et al. [8] 7.80 - - 0.65
This work 7.34 635.5 314.46 0.69
Abs. rel. deviation (%) 5.9 - - 6.2
Dudley, Evans, Matthews [41] 6.10 - - 0.67
Fig. 5. PTC length and thermal efficiency as a function of the HTF mass
This work 5.82 417.45 299.74 0.70 flow rate.
Abs. rel. deviation (%) 4.6 - - 4.5
Sagade, Aher, Shinde [42] 1.21 342.15 - 0.52
This work 1.22 345.65 313.29 0.55 40 1
Abs. rel. deviation (%) 0.8 1.0 - 5.8
Marif et al. [13] 7.80 449.15 341.15 0.71
This work 7.85 540.5 311.82 0.71 0.8
PTC lenght, L (m)

Abs. rel. deviation (%) 0.6 20.3 8.6 0 30

Global abs. rel. deviation (%) 0.6–5.9 1.0–20.3 8.6 0.0–6.2
0.6
20
black chrome) and on the reflector (without and with solgel) in order to 0.4
increase the thermal efficiency. In [42], a low-cost PTC prototype was
tested, it used aluminum foil at the reflector, mild steel receiver coated 10
0.2
with black proxy material. The authors focused their work on verifying
the thermal efficiency at India climatic conditions. Details of the para­
bolic trough collector’s geometry and process variables specifications 0 0
are indicated in Table 2. 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
After applying the algorithm program along with the input variables
from Table 2 for each PTC specification, this were obtained the output
Fig. 6. PTC length and thermal efficiency as a function of the useful heat gain.
variables shown in Table 3.
It can be seen in Table 3 that the length collector relative deviation
for the experimental works were 5.9%, 4.6% and 0.8%, which indicates 4. PTC sizing parametric sensitivity analysis
that according to the provided input variables, the algorithm is able to
converge and evaluate the required PTC length. Due to the several Parametric analysis was carried out in order to verify the influence of
number of necessary input variables, it is difficult to find in the literature some process (I, ṁ, Q̇u , To , HTF type), geometric (W) and materials (α3 ,
one work that have all of them necessary for the algorithm. The algo­ ε3 ) variables on the PTC sizing. For this, it was used the following input
rithm was compared with one simulation theoretical results [13] shown variables [6]: Q̇u = 23028 W, To = 273.4 ◦ C, ṁ = 0.32 kg/s, I = 680 W/
in Table 3. In that model, the receiver was discretized by finite differ­ m2, W = 3.5 m, D2 = 0.040 m, D3 = 0.050 m, D5 = 0.090 m, k23 = 15
ences. The results of this comparison indicate a deviation of 0.6% in the W/mK, ε3 = 0.92, ε5 = 0.87, θ = 0, ρ = 0.935, α3 = 0.93, τ5 = 0.89,
necessary length, showing that the model of this work, although simple, γ = 0.95, V56 = 5 m/s, T6 = 25 ◦ C. It was used Therminol® VP-1 as HTF.
does not cause significant accuracy loss. The parametric analysis consists of verifying the influence of one
variable, keeping the other constants. All cases considered both vacuum

6
F.I. Nascimento et al. Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 24 (2021) 100932

40
PTC lenght, L (m)
30
20
10
0 0
2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Fig. 7. PTC length and thermal efficiency as a function of the PTC width.
and non-vacuum conditions at the receiver annular region between the
metal tube and the glass cover. In addition, the influence on the PTC
thermal efficiency was verified. The results are shown in Figs. 4-9.
Fig. 4 shows the local direct solar radiation influence on the PTC
dimensioning. It is noted, as one would expect, that the necessary PTC
length increases as the direct solar radiation decreases. This result shows
the importance of verifying whether the PTC installation location has
enough radiation throughout the year. For the same thermal need and
taken a base on a 700 W/m2 location, if the PTC (evacuated receiver) is
installed in a 1000 W/m2 location, the required length would be reduced
by 60%; on the other hand, if the radiation is 400 W/m2, the PTC length
should be increase by 150%. The graphics in Fig. 4 also indicates that the
required PTC length for non-evacuated receiver conditions is longer
1 than for the evacuated receiver at any irradiation level, which can easily
be explained due to the convection heat losses in the annular region.
Those tube length differences (for evacuated and non-evacuated
0.8
receiver) become greater as the irradiation decreases, being 9% for
1000 W/m2, 14% for 700 W/m2 and 43% for 400 W/m2 considering that
0.6 the necessary useful heat and HTF outlet temperature remain at the
same level. The PTC thermal efficiency follows an inverse behavior that
0.4 the PTC length, showing better thermal efficiencies for higher irradia­
tion levels and for evacuated receivers.
Fig. 5 shows the HTF mass flow rate influence on the required PTC
0.2
length. It was kept constant all the remaining variables, except the HTF
inlet temperature (see Eq. (5)), such as the useful heat gain and the HTF
5 outlet temperature. In this figure the required PTC length is longer for
lower HTF mass flow rates (and lower heat transfer fluid), in laminar
conditions until about 0.046 kg/s (Re ≈ 2300). As the HTF mass flow
rate increases, the flow reaches the transition regime, and the necessary
PTC length decreases until the turbulent condition with HTF mass flow
rate of 0.065 kg/s (Re > 4000), after that, the necessary PTC length
becomes nearly constant. This is because for higher HTF mass flow rates
in turbulent conditions, although the HTF convection heat transfer co­
efficient increases, the fluid inlet and outlet temperatures are nearer,
influencing less the receiver temperature. The result indicates that it is
more advantageous to operate in the turbulent regime from the heat
transfer point-of-view. It is also verified that the thermal efficiency
follows the reciprocal behavior of the collector length trend for the
laminar and the transitional flow condition, for the turbulent flow it
does not vary significantly. As expected, an evacuated receiver produces
smaller collector sizes and higher thermal efficiencies.
In Fig. 6 is shown the necessary PTC length dependence on the useful
demanded heat gain. One can notice that the required PTC length

1 40

0.8 Non-vac
Vac 30
Vac
0.6 Non-vac
20
0.4

10
0.2

0 0
0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95

(a) (b)
Fig. 8. (a) PTC length and (b) thermal efficiency, as a function receiver absorptivity and emissivity.

40 1 250
Therm. 59
35
Therm. VP1
0.8 200
PTC lenght, L (m)

PTC lenght, L (m)

30 Water
30
Salt
0.6 150
25
20 22
0.4 100 290 320 350
20
10
0.2 50
250 270 290

0 0 0
100 150 200 250 300 250 300 350 400 450

(a) (b)
Fig. 9. (a) PTC length and thermal efficiency as a function of HTF output temperature (b) PTC length as function of HTF output temperature and HTF type (annular
section in vacuum condition).

7
F.I. Nascimento et al.
increases approximately in direct proportion to the useful heat deman­
ded. Moreover, the PTC lengths for vacuum and non-vacuum conditions
at 5 kW have a difference of 16% (0.75 m) and at 35 kW of 14% (4.2 m)
which indicates that the proportional difference remains approximately
constant. The thermal efficiency increases slightly with the useful heat
rise.
Fig. 7 shows the variation of the PTC length with its width variation.
This figure indicates that the higher the PTC width, the lower the
required PTC length. That behavior is not linear, and the projected
reflector area (L × W) decreases with the width increasing. On the other
hand, the higher width, the higher focal length, which can lead to in­
creases the reflected radiation dispersion, decreasing the radiation
reaching the receiver [6].
Recent researches have addressed coating receivers of medium and
high temperature collectors, in order to find low-cost receivers selective
materials with high spectral absorptivity (> 0.9) in the wave-length
range of 0.25 μm–2.5 μm, and a low spectral emissivity (<0.1) in the
range of 2.5 μm–25 μm, in addition to having thermal and chemical
stability for long periods of use [46]. Fig. 8a shows the required PTC
length as a function of the receiver average absorptivity and emissivity.
It can be noted that, for an evacuated receiver, if increasing the ab­
sorptivity from 0.8 to 0.95 produces a PTC length decrease of 19.6%
(ε = 0.1) and 28.4% (ε = 0.9). While increasing the emissivity from 0.1
to 0.9, the PTC length increases by 53.4% (α = 0.8) and 43.3% (α =
0.95). The PTC length increases if receiver is non-evacuated. The worst
situation is whit a non-evacuated receiver whit α = 0.8 and ε = 0.9
which requires PTC length of 30.4 m and the best situation corresponds
to an evacuated receiver with α = 0.95 and ε = 0.1, in that case the
length must be of 13.8 m, this is a PTC length reduction of 120%. The
thermal efficiency follows an opposite behavior of the PTC length
(Fig. 8b), reaching a value of 0.33 in the worst situation and 0.72 in the
best one.
Fig. 9a shows the required PTC length as a function of the HTF
(Therminol® VP-1) outlet temperature (To ). It can be seen that the
higher the outlet HTF temperature, the higher PTC length, which can be
explained because increasing the receiver temperature is followed by
larger thermal losses and lower thermal efficiencies. Experimental re­
sults [22] confirm the decrease in efficiency with the increase in outlet
temperature. Fig. 9b shows the required PTC length as a function of HTF
output temperature and HTF type for vacuum condition in the receiver
annular section, all HTF are considered to be in liquid condition. The
HTF outlet temperature range for the thermo-solar salt (40% KNO3 +
60% NaNO3 [47]) in liquid condition (260 ◦ C-593 ◦ C) starts at 310 ◦ C,
differing from other HTF that start at 100 ◦ C. The thermo-solar salt
outlet temperature is limited by the Second Law of Thermodynamics,
where the thermal efficiency at 450 ◦ C is about 0.04, after that it is not
possible to obtain (positive) useful heat, because the thermal losses
become equal to the absorbed radiation. One can see that the required
PTC lengths when working with Therminol® VP-1 and Therminol® 59
[48] are very similar because their similar thermophysical properties.
The required PTC length working with water as HTF gets shorter length
and higher thermal efficiencies when compared to the other fluids. The
necessary PTC length for thermo-solar salt is closer to water than to the
other two fluids.
5. Conclusions
The proposed model was based on thermal balances using energy
conservation laws, heat transfer equations, along with operational data.
The algorithm implementation is adequate for PTC sizing since the
comparison with previous experimental works (commercial PTCs) and a
theoretical one (finite differences method), shows a maximum PTC
length deviation of 5.9% and 6.2% for the thermal efficiency. The al­
gorithm implementation has been detailed and is suitable for evacuated
and non-evacuated receiver’s PTC sizing. Parametric sensitivity analysis
showed that direct solar radiation greatly influences the PTC
8
Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 24 (2021) 100932
dimensioning, thus, comparing a solar PTC system where direct solar
radiation is 700 W/m2, it would be necessary 60% less PTC length in a
place with 1000 W/m2 or 150% more of PTC length in a place with 400
W/m2. Regarding the mass flow, considering the useful heat gain and
the HTF outlet temperature constants, the required PTC length for HTF
laminar flow conditions is high. It decreases in the transitional region,
becoming stable at turbulent flow regime, which indicates that the
beginning of this last condition is appropriate for the fluid circulation
system. As expected, the higher the useful heat gain, the higher the PTC
length in almost linear fashion. On the other hand, the higher PTC
width, the lower its length. This behavior is not linear, and the projected
collector area (L × W) decreases. If the focal length is increased, it can
lead to reflected radiation dispersion [6]. The radiation selective
receiver properties analysis indicates that if a receiver (evacuated) with
α = 0.95 and ε = 0.1 is used, it could reduce by 84% the PTC length
compared to α = 0.8 and ε = 0.9. This reduction is 120% if in the second
case the receiver is not evacuated. On the other hand, the HTF outlet
temperature analysis indicates that, keeping the same useful heat, the
higher outlet PTC temperature, the higher the PTC length due to larger
thermal losses caused by the receiver temperature increase. In addition,
the performance of four thermal fluids was compared: Therminol® 59,
Therminol® VP1, water and solar salt 40% KNO3 + 60% NaNO3,
showing that pressurized water has a superior performance than the two
synthetic oils, since it causes shorter PTC lengths up to HTF outlet
temperatures of 300 ◦ C. For temperatures above 400 ◦ C the required
length becomes high because of the large thermal losses. In all cases, the
use of an evacuated receiver reduces the required PTC length and in­
creases thermal efficiency. The length variations comparing evacuated
and non-evacuated receivers vary for each case, ranging from 9% to
160%.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] S.A. Kalogirou, A detailed thermal model of a parabolic trough collector receiver,
Energy. 48 (1) (2012) 298–306, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.06.023.
[2] L. Xu, F. Sun, L. Ma, X. Li, D. Lei, G. Yuan, H. Zhu, Q. Zhang, E. Xu, Z. Wang,
Analysis of optical and thermal factors’ effects on the transient performance of
parabolic trough solar collectors, Sol. Energy. 179 (2019) 195–209, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.solener.2018.12.070.
[3] Solar Payback, Solar heat for industry. https://www.solar-payback.com/wp-
content/uploads/2020/06/Solar-Heat-for-Industry-Solar-Payback-April-2017.pdf,
2017 (accessed 26 March 2021).
[4] IEA-SCH, Solar heat worldwide. https://www.iea-shc.org/Data/Sites/1/
publications/Solar-Heat-Worldwide-2020.pdf, 2020 (accessed 03 February 2021).
[5] IEA-SCH, Solar heat integrations in industrial processes. https://task49.iea-shc.
org/Data/Sites/1/publications/IEA-SHC-Technology-Position-Paper–Solar-Heat-
Integrations-Industrial-Processes–May2020.pdf, 2020 (accessed 26 March 2021).
[6] S.A. Kalogirou, Solar Energy Engineering: processes and systems, Elsevier, United
States of America, 2009.
[7] M. Ragheb, Solar thermal power and energy storage historical perspective,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2014.
[8] V.E. Dudley, G.J. Kolb, M. Sloan, D. Kearney, Test results: SEGS LS-2 solar
collector, Technical Report No. SAND94-1884, Sandia Natl. Labs., Albuquerque,
United States of America, 1994.
[9] S.A. Kalogirou, S. Lloyd, J. Ward, P. Eleftheriou, Design and performance
characteristics of a parabolic-trough solar-collector system, Appl. Energ. 47 (4)
(1994) 341–354, https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-2619(94)90041-8.
[10] D. Sauceda, N. Velázquez, O. García-Valladares, R. Beltrán, Numerical simulation
and design of a parabolic trough solar collector used as a direct generator in a
solar-GAX cooling cycle, J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 25 (6) (2011) 1399–1408, https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12206-011-0326-y.
[11] D.E. Woldemicha, H.K. Cheng, A.D. Woldeyohan, L.C. Ing, Design support system
for parabolic trough solar collector, J. Appl. Sci. 12 (23) (2012) 2474–2478,
https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2012.2474.2478.
[12] O. García-Valladares, N. Velázquez, Numerical simulation of parabolic trough solar
collector: improvement using counter flow concentric circular heat exchangers, Int.
J. Heat Mass Tran. 52 (3-4) (2009) 597–609, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijheatmasstransfer.2008.08.004.
F.I. Nascimento et al.
[13] Y. Marif, H. Benmoussa, H. Bouguettaia, M. Belhadj, M. Zerrouki, Numerical
simulation of solar parabolic trough collector performance in the Algeria Saharan
region, Energ. Convers. Manage. 85 (2014) 521–529, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2014.06.002.
[14] C. Tzivanidis, E. Bellos, D. Korres, K.A. Antonopoulos, G. Mitsopoulos, Thermal and
optical efficiency investigation of a parabolic trough collector, Case Stud. Therm.
Eng. 6 (2015) 226–237, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2015.10.005.
[15] E. Bellos, C. Tzivanidis, Analytical Expression of Parabolic Trough Solar Collector
Performance, Design. 2 (2018) 1–17, https://doi.org/10.3390/designs2010009.
[16] M. Fan, H. Liang, S. You, H. Zhang, W. Zheng, J. Xia, Heat transfer analysis of a
new volumetric based receiver for parabolic trough solar collector, Energy. 142
(2018) 920–931, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.10.076.
[17] N. Rosado Hau M.A. Escalante Soberanis 3 6 2011 063108 10.1063/1.3663954.
[18] A. Wahab, A. Hassan, M.A. Qasim, H.M. Ali, H. Babar, M.U. Sajid, Solar energy
systems–Potential of nanofluids, J. Mol. Liq. 289 (2019) 111049, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.molliq.2019.111049.
[19] K. Karthick, S. Suresh, M. M. M.D. Hussain, H. M. Ali. C.S. S. Kumar, Evaluation of
solar thermal system configurations for thermoelectric generator applications: A
critical review, Sol. Energy. 188(2019), 111-142. Doi: 10.1016/j.
solener.2019.05.075.
[20] H.M. Ali, Recent advancements in PV cooling and efficiency enhancement
integrating phase change materials based systems – A comprehensive review, Sol.
Energy. 197 (2020) 163–198, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.11.075.
[21] J.A. Duffie, W.A. Beckman, Solar engineering of thermal processes, fourth ed, John
Wiley & Sons, New Jersey, 2013.
[22] G.W. Treadwell, Design considerations for parabolic-cylindrical solar collectors,
Technical Report No. SAND76-0082, Sandia Natl. Labs., Albuquerque, 1976.
[23] M. Günther, M. Joemann, S. Csambor, Parabolic trough technology, in: Advanced
CSP Teaching Materials, Chapter 5, DLR, 2011.
[24] A. Mokhtari, M. Yaghoubi, P. Kanan, A. Vadiee, R. Hessami, Thermal and optical
study of parabolic trough collectors of shiraz solar power plant, Proc. 3rd
International Conference on Thermal Engineering: Theory and Applications,
Amman, Jordan, 65-69, 2007.
[25] A. Valan-Arasu, T. Sornakumar, Theoretical analysis and experimental verification
of parabolic trough solar collector with hot water generation system, Therm. Sci.
11 (1) (2007) 119–126, https://doi.org/10.2298/TSCI0701119V.
[26] M.A. Gomes, G.P Guedes, Development of a parabolic trough solar concentrator for
fluid heating, (Desenvolvimento de um Concentrador Solar Cilíndrico Parabólico
para Aquecimento de Fluidos. In Portuguese), Proc. 3rd Brazilian Congress of Solar
Energy, Belem, Brazil, 2010.
[27] E. Venegas-Reyes, O.A. Jaramillo, R. Castrejón-García, J.O. Aguilar, F. Sosa-
Montemayor, Design, construction, and testing of a parabolic trough solar
concentrator for hot water and low enthalpy steam generation, J. Renew. Sustain.
Ener. 4 (2012) 1–19, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4751461.
[28] J. Macedo-Valencia, J. Ramírez-Ávila, R. Acosta, O.A. Jaramillo, J.O. Aguilar,
Design, construction and evaluation of parabolic trough collector as demonstrative
prototype, Energy Proced. 57 (2014) 989–998, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
egypro.2014.10.082.
[29] K.H. Bhujangrao, Design and development of prototype cylindrical parabolic solar
collector for water heating application, Int. J. Renew. Energy Dev. 5 (2016) 49–55.
https://doi.org/10.14710/ijred.5.1.49-55.
Thermal Science and Engineering Progress 24 (2021) 100932
[30] K.A.R. Ismail, M.A. Zanardi, F.A.M. Lino, Modeling and validation of a parabolic
solar collector with a heat pipe absorber, Adv. Energy Res. 4 (2016) 299–323. htt
ps://doi.org/10.12989/eri.2016.4.4.299.
[31] A.S. Tijani, M.J.J. Jamarei, Numerical investigation of thermal losses from air filled
annulus of a parabolic trough solar collector, J. Mech. Eng. 13 (2016) (2016) 1–16.
[32] A. Bharti, B. Paul, Design of solar parabolic trough collector, Proc. International
Conference on Advances in Mechanical, Industrial, Automation and Management
Systems – AMIAMS 2017, Allahabad, India, 2017.
[33] S. Pavlovic, E. Bellos, V. Stefanovic, C. Tzivanidis, Optimum geometry of parabolic
trough collectors with optical and thermal criteria, Int. Rev. Appl. Sci. Eng. 8 (1)
(2017) 45–50, https://doi.org/10.1556/1848.2017.8.1.7.
[34] W. Qu, R. Wang, H. Hong, J. Sun, H. Jin, Prototype testing of a 300kwth solar
parabolic-trough collector using rotatable axis tracking, Energy Proced. 105 (2017)
780–786, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.389.
[35] M. Abbood, R. Radhi, A. Shaheed, Design, construction, and testing of a parabolic
trough solar concentrator system for hot water and moderate temperature steam
generation, Kufa J. Eng. 9 (1) (2018) 42–59.
[36] B. Lamrani, A. Khouya, B. Zeghmati, A. Draoui, mathematical modeling and
numerical simulation of a parabolic trough collector: a case study in thermal
engineering, Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 8 (2018) 47–54, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tsep.2018.07.015.
[37] H.M. Güven, R.B. Bannerot, determination of error tolerances for the optical design
of parabolic troughs for developing countries, Sol. Energy. 36 (6) (1986) 535–550,
https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-092X(86)90018-6.
[38] V. Gnielinski, On heat transfer in tubes, Int. J. Heat Mass Tran. 63 (2013) 134–140,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2013.04.015.
[39] G.D. Raithby, K.G.T. Hollands, A general method of obtaining approximate
solutions to laminar and turbulent free convection problems, Advances in Heat
Transfer, 3rd Edition, Academic Press, New York, United States, 1975.
[40] G. Jorgensen, T. Williams, T. Wendelin, Advanced reflector materials for solar
concentrators,” Technical Report No. NREL/TP-471-7018, National Renewable
Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado, United States, 1994.
[41] V.E. Dudley, L.R. Evans, C.W. Matthews, Test results: industrial solar technology
parabolic trough solar collector, Technical Report No. SAND94-1117, Sandia Natl.
Labs., Albuquerque, United States, 1995.
[42] A. Sagade, S. Aher, N.N. Shinde, Performance evaluation of low-cost for parabolic
trough reflector with mild steel receiver, Int. J. Energy Environ. Eng. 4 (2013)
5–13, https://doi.org/10.1186/2251-6832-4-5.
[43] Sandia National Laboratories. https://www.sandia.gov/ (Accessed 02 April 2021).
[44] Dow, Syltherm 800 – Heat Transfer Fluid, https://www.dow.com/content/dam/
dcc/ documents/en-us/app-tech-guide/176/176-01435-01-syltherm-800-heat-
transfer-fluid.pdf?iframe=true, 2020 (accessed 02 October 2020).
[45] Solutia, Therminol ® VP-1. http://twt.mpei.ac.ru/TTHB/HEDH/HTF-VP1.PDF,
2019 (accessed 24 September 2019).
[46] K.e. Xu, M. Du, L. Hao, J. Mi, Q. Yu, S. Li, A review of high-temperature selective
absorbing coatings for solar thermal applications, J. Materiomics. 6 (1) (2020)
167–182, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmat.2019.12.012.
[47] SQM International N.V., Thermo-solar Salts. https://www.sqm.com/wp-content/
uploads/2018/05/Solar-salts-Book-eng.pdf, 2019 (accessed 05 July 2019).
[48] Solutia, Therminol ® 59. http://twt.mpei.ac.ru/TTHB/HEDH/HTF-59.PDF, 2019
(accessed 29 September 2019).