1 / 10

Influence of Canting Mechanism and Facet Profile on Heliostat Field Performance

Influence of Canting Mechanism and Facet Profile on Heliostat Field Performance. Stellenbosch University. Energy Postgraduate Conference 2013. 2. ATS 150 Heliostat (4 th generation). Carpe Diem Solar: HelioCa 16. 3. Total Beam Dispersion Error. 4. Canting and Facet Curvature. z. x.

wallis
Download Presentation

Influence of Canting Mechanism and Facet Profile on Heliostat Field Performance

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Influence of Canting Mechanism and Facet Profile on Heliostat Field Performance Stellenbosch University Energy Postgraduate Conference 2013

  2. 2 ATS 150 Heliostat • (4th generation) Carpe Diem Solar: HelioCa 16

  3. 3 Total Beam Dispersion Error

  4. 4 Canting and Facet Curvature z x (x >> z)

  5. 5 Analytical and Numerical Analysis Geometric Optics Ray Tracing

  6. 6 1 Validation 0.9 Yearly Performance Model Validation Ray Tracer: SolTrace Validation Geometric Optics Validation Case: Off-axis Canting 0.8 <0.7% 0.7 AIPWI 0.6 Ray Tracer: Experimental Validation 0.5 q on-axis canting ( = 30) q on-axis canting ( = 90) 0.4 (Buck, 2009) (Noone, 2011) HFCAL 6% q on-axis canting ( = 30) (Buck,et al. 2009) q on-axis canting ( = 90) (Buck,et al. 2009) 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 R

  7. 7 Parameter Variation Incidence Angle Toroid Misalignment Angle AZ Tracking FHA Tracking

  8. 8 Profile Optical Performance 14 12 10 Flat Parabolic 8 Spherical Abr-Free 6 Aligned Toroid CDF Toroid COA 4 2 0 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 

  9. 9 Toroidal Profile

  10. 10 Conclusions • An analytical and numerical tools have been developed to analyse the optical behaviour of a profiled heliostat. • Both tools have been validated and show good correlation to experimental and commercial software packages. • An aligned toroid provides the best optical performance • During profile misalignment performance tends toward a spherical profile at 45 and performance degrades further up to 90 We gratefully acknowledge: National Research Fund Solar Thermal Energy Research Group Department of Science and Technology Stellenbosch University Hope Project

More Related