You are on page 1of 5

Solar Energy Vol. 35, No. I, pp. 15-19, 1985 {~)38-092X/85 $3.00 + .

00
Printed in the U.S.A. ~: 1985 Pergamon Press Ltd.

WIND-RELATED HEAT LOSSES OF A FLAT-PLATE


COLLECTOR

J. L. A. FRANCEYand J. PAPAIOANNOU
Physics Department, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, 3168, Australia

(Received 2 August 1983: revision received 3 December 1984; accepted 21 January 1985)

Abstract--The heat loss from a flat-plate solar collector is measured over a range of inlet temperatures.
tilt angles and wind velocities while operating in a wind tunnel. The measurements are compared wilh
recent empirical relations for calculating top losses. While there is good agreement for zero or low
wind velocities, the calculations appear to underestimate the top loss when wind velocities exceed
about I ms-~.

INTRODUCTION of collector the mean plate temperature as given by


The performance of a flat-plate collector is very de- the expression
pendent on the energy tosses from the top surface.
The calculation of these losses is not easy, and Hot- T~n + T,,,,,
Tp - 2 (l)
tel and Woertz[1] put forward an empirical expres-
sion for calculating U,, the top-loss coefficient. This
expression was later modified by Klein[2] and later does not agree with measured values, although this
still by Agarwal and Larson[3], whose calculations is a good approximation for all-metal collectors.
agree well with the free convection data of Hollands Here the mean plate temperature was taken as the
e t a/.[4] and Randall e t a/.[5]. There is, however, a average value of six temperature sensors distrib-
lack of experimental data for forced convection, uted over the plate surface. Tests were conducted
and this has motivated the present work. in a windowless laboratory so that there was no
insolation and a range of tilt angles and inlet tem-
peratures was covered. The collector and the tilting
EXPERIMENTAL ARRANGEMENT
rig are shown on Fig. 1.
For forced convection tests the collector was
The collector used in this work is rather uncon- mounted in a wind tunnel having a cross section of
ventional in that the back plate and water tubes 4 m x 3 m and a wind speed range 1 to .5 ms
were formed in one piece by extrusion of EPDM Again a range of tilt angles and inlet temperatures
elastomer. This construction gave a nonselective was covered. Tests were conducted mainly with the
black collecting surface with an emissivity ~p of wind head on to the collector although some results
about 0.94. The collector area was 1.85 m 2, and it were obtained with the collector at 54 to the wind
was mounted in a metal box with back and edge direction.
insulation of rockwool and had a single cover of 3- The wind-tunnel turbulence level was less than
mm acrylic sheet. The collector contained 64 riser 1% and the blockage factor ranged up to 0.. 125 de-
tubes with the normal inlet manifold at the bottom pending on collector tilt angle. Wind speeds quoted
and outlet at the top. External water connections below are free wind speeds measured by an ane-
were made by specially designed couplings con- mometer upstream of the collector. The wind com-
taining temperature sensors and two orifice plates ponent parallel to the collector surface was also
arranged to ensure full flooding of the sensors with measured at five points l0 cm above the surface,
thoroughly mixed water. All temperatures were and this is discussed further below.
measured by thermocouples which were calibrated
against standard thermometers and accurate to
within 0.1C. Measured temperature differences
RESULTS
used in eqn (2) below were never less than 10C.
For free convection tests, hot water was fed into From the measured quantities the heat loss was
the outlet and when conditions were steady, as de- calculated using
termined by stability of all temperatures to 0.1C
for 5 rain, a test was conducted over a 10 min period Uz. = rhCp(Ti - Too0 (2)
during which readings were taken every 10 s. The A(Tv - 7",,)
measured quantities included water flow rate, inlet
and outlet temperatures, ambient temperature, Here UL is the overall heat loss (Wm z C ~), fiz
plate and cover surface temperatures. For this type the mass flow rate (kg s - ~), CR the specific heat of
15
16 J. L. A. FRANCEYand J. PAPAIOANNOU

Fig. I. The collector on the tilting rig. The rig is constructed from 2.5-cm square section steel tube.
Inset: The plate temperature measuring thermocouples. These are attached by a light coating of epoxy
resin and covered by sticky tape.

w a t e r (kJ k g - ' C - '), T~, the inlet t e m p e r a t u r e (C),


To~, t h e o u t l e t t e m p e r a t u r e (C), A the c o l l e c t o r a r e a
(mZ), Tp t h e m e a n plate t e m p e r a t u r e (C), 7",, the
a m b i e n t t e m p e r a t u r e (C). T h e b a c k a n d edge losses
t
w e r e s u b t r a c t e d f r o m (2) to give the top loss U,,
T h e b a c k loss w a s c a l c u l a t e d a c c o r d i n g to Tabor[6] TILT ANGLE (degrees)
to b e 0.93 W m - 2 K -~, while t h e edge loss w a s cal-
Fig. 3. Free convection top loss as a function of collector
c u l a t e d a c c o r d i n g to Duffle a n d B e c k m a n [ 7 ] to be tilt. (AT = 28C). Measured ;
0.2 W m - 2 K - I . Predicted e --
F i g u r e 2 s h o w s the t o p loss as a f u n c t i o n o f
p l a t e - a m b i e n t t e m p e r a t u r e for a tilt angle S of 30
a n d z e r o w i n d v e l o c i t y . O n the s a m e g r a p h is s h o w n
t h e p r e d i c t e d t o p loss u n d e r the s a m e c o n d i t i o n s

l E ...... -s-( .... -o

? s

3
I I
2 I l , j
2
8 16 ~ 32 Wind
Plate-Ambient T e m p e r a t u r e ('12)
Fig. 4. Forced convection top loss as a function of wind
Fig, 2. Free convection top loss as a function of plate- speed (AT = 28C). Measured at 10 o tilt x ;
ambient temperature. Measured x ; Measured at 55 tilt A A ; Predicted at 10 tilt
Predicted . . . . . . . O O ; Predicted at 55 t i l t - - ~
Wind-related heat losses of a flat-plate collector 17

using the expression due to Agarwal and Larson[3] It can be seen that the agreement is quite good
over the range of temperatures tested. For a fixed
(T v - 1",) of 28C, Fig. 3 shows the variation of Ut
N 1
with tilt angle S, and it can be seen that the expres-
Ut

'- t g l
%o..
1' sion (3) predicts this small variation well. For Figs.
2 and 3 hw in equation (3) was taken as 2.8
~ ( T . + T.)(T~ + T~) W m - 2K- t.
For the forced convection tests in the wind tun-
2N+ f- 1]
[% + 0.05N(I - %,)]- i + - N nel some of the data obtained are presented in Table
Ee 1 below and in Fig. 4. It can be seen that for wind
(3) speeds above 1 ms-~ the top loss as predicted by
Agarwal and Larson[3] is low by as much as 40%.
where The predicted top loss decreases with wind speed
while measurements indicate the opposite. In cal-
f = (1 - 0.04 hw + 0.005h.?)(l + 0.091N), culating the top loss from equation (3) the expres-
C = 250 [1 - 0.0044 (S - 90)], sion of Sparrow et al.[8] was used to find h,, the
h . = convective heat transfer coefficient due to convective heat loss due to wind. By comparison
wind (Win - 2 C- i ), the expression for h,,, due to Watmuffet al.[9] would
N = number of cover plates, % = cover have produced even worse results, as is shown in
emissivity, Fig. 5.
cr = Stefan-Boltzmannconstant = 5.6 10 -8 All the foregoing results refer to the wind inci-
Wm-2K- 4 dent at 90 to the collector, that is, head on. Some

Table 1. Measured and predicted [A-L] top loss as functions of wind speed and tilt

Wind Speed Collector Tilt Plate-Amblent Top-Loss (Wm 2C ~)

(ms-1) (De~rees) Temperature(C) A-L Measured


1 30 12 4.44 4.50

1 30 25 4.88 5.00

1 55 12 4.34 3.88

1 55 25 4.75 4.66

2 lO 12 4.47 5.50

2 lO 25 4.95 6.30

2 30 12 4.38 5.52

2 30 25 4.86 6.32

2 55 12 4.28 4.59

2 55 25 4.71 5.45

3 lO 12 4.25 5.93

3 lO 25 4.74 6.83

3 55 12 4.04 5.27

3 55 25 4.47 5.87

4 30 12 3.84 6.72

4 30 25 4.31 7.43

5 30 12 3.50 6.50

5 30 25 3.94 7.55

5 55 12 3.38 5.77

5 55 25 3.77 6.30
18 J. L. A. FRANCEYand J. PAPAIOANNOU

Table 2. A comparison between the top loss (U,) at 4) = 0 and + = 54

S V AT Ut(=0 ) Ut(=540 )

(Degrees) (ms -I) (*C) (Wm 2C i) (Wm 2C i)

I0 I 20 6.2 6.35

2 19 6.59 7.91

3 21 7.1 8.1

4 18 7.2 9.1

5 18 7.5 11.2

30 1 21 6.3 6.0

2 18 6.6 7.9

3 20 6.9 7.5

4 18 7.2 8.4

5 17 7.4 7.8

55 I 19 6.1 6.0

2 18 6.5 6.9

3 18 6.8 7.2

4 17 7.1 7.8

5 17 7.2 7.2

tests were c o n d u c t e d with the collector rotated by p e r f o r m a n c e of flat plate collectors, and perhaps
54 from head on, and these results are shown in more fundamental changes to the expression (3) are
Table 2. It can be seen that there is a significant needed. In particular, no account is taken in (3) of
increase in the top loss particularly at low elevation the wind incident angle, and the m e a s u r e m e n t s in-
angles. dicate that this factor is important. In practice, col-
lectors are often set to face north (or south) at geo-
graphic locations where winds have large e a s t - w e s t
DISCUSSION
c o m p o n e n t s , and this aspect of wind-related heat
It seems that the expression (3) does not account losses needs much further investigation.
for wind-related heat losses from collectors. The As mentioned a b o v e , the wind speed o v e r the
first term in (3) appears to be dominant at least in surface of the collector was measured during the
this work. and it is possible to alter (3) so as to give tests. Wind speeds near the bottom were found to
good a g r e e m e n t with the m e a s u r e m e n t s by altering be lower than the free wind speed, while wind
the e x p o n e n t 0.33 in this first term. The present speeds near the top were higher than the free wind
w o r k shows that the e x p o n e n t needs to be a func- speed. The finite thickness of the collector presents
tion of both wind speed and of collector tilt angle. a blunt leading edge to the wind and presumably
Empirically determined values for the e x p o n e n t e produces turbulent flow o v e r the surface. This tur-
are bulence is thought to lead to an increase in the heat
loss at the surface. The turbulent flow region on the
f o r S = I0 , e -- 0.09 + 0.32V - 0.03V-'. collector appears to be larger at small tilt angles,
S = 30 , e = -I.0 + 1.96V - 0.83V-', leading to a d e c r e a s e in the heat loss coefficient as
S = 55 , e ---- - 0 . 0 2 + 0.20V - 0.03V -~. the collector is raised more toward the vertical.
Again further investigation is needed.
E v e n with this allowance for the variation of e, It has been pointed out (by a referee) that the
eqn (3) is not a satisfactory way of predicting the expression f in equation (3) is incorrect and that
Wind-related heat losses of a flat-plate collector 19

the correct version is given in an erratum by Agar-


7- Wind speed 2 m s -1
wal and Larson[10] and should read

4 6
f = (I + 0.04 h,, + 0.0005 h,,-')(l + 0,09IN).
P
? 5
This change does not alter any of the conclusions
4 of this w o r k and in fact leads to smaller values of
the top loss coefficients predicted by eqn (3). F o r
5 e x a m p l e at a wind speed of 5 m s - ' the " c o r r e c t e d "
I I I I predicted heat loss coefficient is 20% less than that
8 16 2/, 32
Plate-Ambient Temperature (C) reported here.

Acknowledgement--We are very grateful to Professor W.


Melbourne and staff of the Department of Mechanical En-
gineering, Monash University for facilities and assistance
given for wind tunnel tests.
Wind speed- 3ms -1
7 REFERENCES

I 1. H. C. Hottel and B. B. Woertz, The performance of


6
flat-plate solar heat collectors. Trans A S M E 64, 91
(1942).
5 2. S. A. Klein, Calculation of flat-plate collector loss
coefficients. Solar Energy 17, 79 (1975).
3. V. K. Agarwal and D. C. Larson, Calculation of the
top loss coefficient of a flat-plate collector. Solar En-
ergy 27, 69 (1981).
I I I J 4. K. G. T. Hollands, T. E. Unny, G. D. Raithby and
8 16 24 32 L. Konicek, Free convective heat transfer across in-
Plate-Ambient Temperature (C) clined air layers. A S M E J. Heat Transfer 98, 189
(1976).
5. K. R. Randall, J. W. Mitchell and M. M. EI-Wakil,
Mutual convection characteristics of fiat-plate collec-
7 tors, in Heat Transfer in Solar Energy System (Edited
Wind speed- 5ms"1 by J. R. Howell and T. Min), pp. 9-16. ASME, New
L
York (1977).
00 6 6. H. Tabor, Radiation, convection, and conduction
e4
coefficients in solar collectors. Bull. Res. Coun. Is-
5 rael, 6c, 155 (1958).
~E
7. J. A. Duffle and W. A. Beckman, Solar Engineering
of Thermal Processes. Wiley-lnterscience, New York
(1980).
3 8. E. M. Sparrow, J. W. Ramsey and E. A. Mass, Effect
I I I I of finite width on heat transfer and fluid flow about
8 16 24 32 an inclined rectangular plate. ASME, J. Heat Transfer
99, 507 (1977).
Plate- Ambient Temperature (C) 9. J. H. Watmuff, W. W. S. Charters and D. Proctor,
Solar and wind induced external coefficients, solar
Fig. 5. Forced convection top loss as a fuaction of plate- collectors, comples. Int. Revue d'Hellio-technique 2,
ambient temperature at collector tilt 1 0 ~ d various wind 56 (1977).
speeds. Measured ; Predicted using Sparrow[8] - - - 10. V. K. Agarwal and D. C. Larson, Erratum. Solar En-
- - @ - - ; Predicted using Watmuff[9] - - - - x - - - - - x - - - . ergy 30, 86 (1983).

You might also like