Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Energy Procedia 90 (2016) 227 – 237

5th International Conference on Advances in Energy Research, ICAER 2015, 15-17 December
2015, Mumbai, India

Modelling and Performance Analysis of U Type Evacuated Tube

Solar Collector Using Different Working Fluids
B. Kiran Naika, A.Varshneya, P.Muthukumara*, C. Somayajia
a
Deparment of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institue of Technology Guwahati, Guwahati-781039, India

Abstract

This paper presents the mathematical modelling of a U type evacuated tube solar collector required for heating a working fluid.
The developed mathematical model is used for predicting the outlet temperature and net heat gain by the working fluid. The
model predictions are compared with experimental data and a good agreement is observed between them. Aqueous lithium
chloride solution (LiCl-H2O), water and air are chosen as working fluids. The effects of working fluid flow rate and inlet
temperature, collector length, ambient temperature and solar intensity on the performance of the system are investigated. It has
been observed that collector length, working fluid flow rate and solar intensity have greater impact on performance of the
collector. The working fluid inlet temperature doesn’t have significant effect. Also, a detailed analysis on aforementioned
working fluids is carried out for U type copper tube and the results are presented in this paper.

©©2016
2016TheTheAuthors. Published
Authors. by Elsevier
Published Ltd. This
by Elsevier Ltd. is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of ICAER 2015.
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of ICAER 2015
Keywords: Thermal model; heat transfer coefficient; heat gain; U type evacuated tube solar collector; water; air; LiCl-H2O;

1. Introduction

In the recent times, due to global warming and projected fossil fuel depletion in reserves the utilization of
renewable energy got more attention. In this regard, solar energy is projected one of the most reliable alternative
energy sources due to its abandon availability and environment friendliness. In order to utilize solar energy in most
efficient way, several possible technologies have been explored over last three decades.

* Corresponding Author. Tel.: (+91) 361-2582673; Fax: (+91) 361-2690762.

E-mail address: pmkumar@iitg.ernet.in

1876-6102 © 2016 The Authors. 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/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of ICAER 2015
doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2016.11.189
228 B. Kiran Naik et al. / Energy Procedia 90 (2016) 227 – 237

Nomenclature

Ac area of the collector (m2)

D diameter (m)
cp specific heat at constant pressure (kJ/kg-K)
hc convective heat transfer coefficient (W/m2-K)
hr radiative heat transfer coefficient (W/m2-K)
km thermal conductivity of the material (W/m-K)
ṁ mass flow rate (kg/s)
Qtube net heat gain by the U tube (W)
Quseful net heat gain by the working fluid (W)
r radius (m)
Seff effective solar intensity (W/m2)
I solar intensity (W/m2)
T temperature (°C)
U overall heat loss coefficient (W/m2)
v∞ ambient air velocity (m/s)
η collector efficiency

Greek symbols

ϵ emissivity
α absorptivity
τ transmissivity
σ Stefan Boltzmann constant (W/m2-K4)
η collector efficiency

Subscripts

a air
amb ambient air
avg average
a-c between copper tube and air
c,is copper tube inner surface
c,os copper tube outer surface
cf,o copper fin outer surface .
cf,i copper fin inner surface
i inlet
i,1 inner surface of outer glass tube
i,2 inner surface of inner glass tube
o outlet
o-amb between outer tube and ambient
o,1 outer surface of outer glass tube
o,2 outer surface of inner glass tube
w,o working fluid outlet
w,i working fluid inlet
1-c between copper tube and inlet fluid
2-c between copper tube and outlet fluid
 B. Kiran Naik et al. / Energy Procedia 90 (2016) 227 – 237 229

Evacuated tube solar collector is a device which is generally used to deliver heat for several applications such as
water heating, air conditioning, etc. This collector can achieve higher temperature range of above 120 °C, [1] due to
their combining effects of highly selective surface coating and vacuum insulation. Although many methods are
available for heating of working fluid, evacuated tube solar collectors are more attractive due to their capability of
having high heat extraction. Also, they are cost effective, most reliable and have reasonably longer life time. The
schematic of U-tube type evacuated tube solar collector is shown in Fig. 1. It consists of outer glass tube, inner glass
tube, copper or aluminum fin and U shaped copper tube (Fig. 1, a). Initially the solar radiation incident on the outer
surface of the outer glass tube is transferred to the outer surface of the inner glass tube and then it is absorbed by the
fin material. Finally, the energy collected by the fin is transferred to the working fluid, flowing inside the U shaped
copper tube, by the convective mode of heat transfer (Fig.1, b).

(a) (b)

(c)
1
hr,(o,2−i,1) Po,1
rc , o s ro , 2 ro ,1
1 l n( ) l n( ) 1 l n( )
rc , is 1 ri , 2 ri ,1 Tamb
hc,1−c P c,is U a − c Pcf
hr,(o,2−i,1) P o,2
2π K m 2π K g 2π K g
Tamb
Tw ,i Tc ,is Tcf ,o Ti ,2 To ,2 T i ,1 To ,1 1
hc , amb P o ,1

Fig. 1. Schematic of U type evacuated tube solar collector (a) Cross section (b) Illustration (c) Thermal network diagram.

The heat transfer process occurring in an evacuated tube solar collector has been studied way back from 1970s.
The first mathematical model for the heat transfer analysis and the performance predictions of the aforementioned
collector was studied by Eberlein [2] in 1976 using air as working fluid. In this study, it was found the overall heat
loss coefficient was very less in the collector due to the sealing of outer and inner glass together and by maintaining
evacuated annular space between the tubes. Using the formulated model, investigated the performance of the
collector by means of air and liquid as working fluid under identical conditions. Zhiqiang et al. [3] and Morrision et
al. [4, 5] modeled the natural circulation flow of the collector experimentally and numerically using water as
working fluid and concluded that for efficient heat transfer, buoyancy effects and mass flow rates inside the tube
played a significant role. Hazami et al. [6] and Nkwetta et al. [7] studied the thermal performance of water in glass
evacuated tube solar collector with different inner glass surface coating. Depending upon the temperature of the
working fluid, they classified heat transfer characteristics of the surface coating as low (<100°C), medium (100-300
°C) or high temperature (>300 °C). Neeraj and Avdhesh [8] experimentally investigated and compared the ordinary
230 B. Kiran Naik et al. / Energy Procedia 90 (2016) 227 – 237

type, copper coil type and the circular fin type headers for an evacuated tube solar collector coupled with latent heat
storage device, where air was considered as a working fluid. Form the experimental studies, they have observed that
the outlet temperature in an evacuated tube solar air collector using circular fin and copper coil gave better
performance when compared with the ordinary solar evacuated tube collector. Shah and Furbo [9] investigated the
theoretical flow of an all-glass evacuated tube collector and mentioned that collector tube with shorter length
achieved the highest efficiency. Kim et al. [10] compared the numerically investigated model with the Eberlein’s
model and suggested that one-dimensional numerical model could be used in designing the all-glass solar collector
tube very efficiently for different geometrical parameters. Liang et al. [11] validated the theoretical and experimental
investigations of U tube evacuated tube collector with filled type and concluded that this collector has a better
thermal performance with normal U-tube evacuated type solar collector. Badar et al. [12] evaluated the overall heat
transfer coefficient of evacuated tube both theoretically and experimentally. They found out that the theoretical
model has good agreement with the experimental model for air inside the glass cover. Gao et al. [13] proposed a new
mathematical model for predicting the thermal performance of U-type evacuated tube solar collector by taking into
account the temperature distribution along the tube radius and axis, and validated the model with experimental data
obtained using aluminum as a fin. They investigated the dependence of thermal efficiency on ambient conditions and
tube design parameters. Arturo et al. [14] numerically studied the low temperature water in glass evacuated tube
solar collector using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and predicted the outlet temperature with the Boussinesq
approximation model (BA) and variation of the properties with the temperature (VPT) model. They concluded that
the BA model has closer values for both thermal efficiency and outlet temperature when compared with the VPT
model.

Most of these studies on collector performance were focused on the enhancement of the design for various
components. Many researchers evaluated the overall performance of solar collectors experimentally [2-5, 8, 11, 16-
18]. Most of the theoretical models developed were based on numerical simulations [6-7, 9-10, 12-15]. Compared to
numerical investigation, analytical solution have advantages in analyzing the parameters which affect the heat
transfer performance. In the present study, a mathematical model is developed for predicting the outlet temperature
and net heat gain by the working fluid. The developed model reduces the complexity of the solution and doesn’t
require tedious numerical procedure. Furthermore, this model can be used for different working fluids by altering the
specific heat of the working fluids and the heat transfer coefficient from the U-tube surface wall to the working
fluids.

2. Mathematical modelling for evacuated tube solar collector

The following assumptions are made to simplify the analysis

• The process of heat transfer is steady.

• Solar intensity at the collector surface is constant throughout the collector.
• Specific heat of working fluids remains constant with respect to the temperature encountered in the system.
• Axial mode of heat transfer is negligible.
• Convective heat transfer between the inner surface of inner glass tube and the air gap is negligible.
• Hear loss of heat between copper tube and inner glass tube is negligible.

The energy balance for the outer and inner surface of the outer glass tube can be written as

2π k g l (Ti ,1 - To ,1 )
U o − amb (To ,1 - Tamb ) + =0 (1)
ro ,1
ln( )
ri ,1
 B. Kiran Naik et al. / Energy Procedia 90 (2016) 227 – 237 231

2π k g l (Ti ,1 - To ,1 )
hr ,( o ,2−i ,1) (To ,2 - Ti ,1 ) + =0 (2)
r
ln( o ,1 )
ri ,1

Energy balance for the inner glass tube is obtained as

2π k g l (To ,2 - Ti ,2 )
hr ,( o ,2−i ,1) (To ,2 - Ti ,1 ) = + hc , amb (Ti ,2 − Ta ) (3)
ro ,2
ln( )
ri ,2

Energy balance for the copper fin can be written as

Seff = U a − c (Tcf ,o − Ta ) + Qtube (4)

where Seff = ατI

Heat transfer across the copper tube can be written as

K m (Tc ,is − Tc ,os )

Qtube × rcf ,i = (5)
r
ln( c ,os )
rc ,is

Energy balance for the working fluid is obtained as

Quseful = mc p (Tw,o − Tw,i ) = hc ,1−c Ac (Tc ,is − Tavg ) (6)

Tw,i + Tw,o
where Tavg =
2

2.1 Heat transfer coefficients

The overall heat transfer coefficient between the outer surface of the outer glass tube and the ambient air is
formulated as [2]

U o − a = hc , amb + hr ,o − amb (7)

Where

hc , amb = 5.7 + 3.8V∞ [2] (8)

2
hr ,o−amb =∈o σ (Tamb + To2,1 ) (9)

Radiative heat transfer coefficient between the outer surface of inner glass tube and the inner surface of outer glass
tube can be written as
232 B. Kiran Naik et al. / Energy Procedia 90 (2016) 227 – 237

σ (To2,2 + Ti ,12 )(To ,2 + Ti ,1 )

hr ,( o ,2 −i ,1) = (10)
Di ,1 (1− ∈2 ) 1 (1− ∈1 )
× + +
Do ,2 ∈2 F12 ∈1

The overall heat transfer coefficient between the copper tube and the inlet working fluid is formulated as

1
U1−c = U 2−c = (11)
Dc ,os Dc ,os D
+ × ln( c ,os )
Dc ,is × hc 2 K m Dc ,is

2.2 Collector Efficiency

The thermal performance of an evacuated tube solar collector is calculated using the collector efficiency (η). It is
defined as the ratio of the net heat gain capacity of the working fluid to the product of solar radiation incident on the
collector and area of the collector (Ac).

mc p (Tw,o − Tw,i ) (12)

η=
Seff Ac
This can also be calculated using following equation [19]

2 (13)
⎛ T − Tamb
η = ηo − a1 ⎜⎜ avg
⎞ (Tavg − Tamb )
⎟⎟ − a2
⎝ Seff ⎠ Seff

where ηo is attained from the manufacture’s data sheet or official test reports, a1 and a2 are the thermal loss
parameters

3. Validation of analytical model

Table 1. Evacuated tube collector dimensions and surface properties [8, 13].

Sl. Parameters Unit Evacuated tube Evacuated tube

No. collector- (a) [8] collector- (b) [13]
1 Outer glass tube diameter m 0.047 0.058
2 Outer glass tube thickness m 0.0012 0.002
3 Outer glass tube transmittance - τ= 0.8 τ= 0.8
4 Thermal conductivity of glass W/mK 1.2 0.74
5 Inner glass tube outer diameter m 0.037 0.047
6 Inner glass tube thickness m 0.0012 0.002
7 Selective surface properties of inner tube - α= 0.92 α= 0.92
8 Inner glass tube inner surface, emissivity (ε) - 0.8 0.8
9 Air gap m 0.001 0.001
10 Air thermal conductivity W/mK 0.03 0.03
11 Type of fin - Copper Aluminium
12 Fin thickness m 0.0006 0.00025
13 Thermal Conductivity of fin W/mK 307 202
14 U copper tube outer diameter m 0.008 0.01
15 U copper tube inner diameter m 0.0074 0.0095
16 Collector tube length m 1.5 1.8
17 Working fluid - Air Water
18 Specific heat at constant pressure (Cp) kJ/kg-K 1.005 4.2
19 Heat transfer coefficient between U tube wall and working W/m2K 250 700
fluid hc(1-c)
 B. Kiran Naik et al. / Energy Procedia 90 (2016) 227 – 237 233

In order to use the developed analytical model for predicting the performance of the evacuated tube solar collector
with confidence, validation is needed. A comparison was made between the predicted values, calculated using an
analytical model by means of dimensions and surface properties specified in Table 1 and the experimental values
available in the literature. Reliable sets of experimental data using water and air as the working fluid reported by
Gao et al. [13] and Neeraj et al. [8] respectively were considered for the validation purpose. A comparison of typical
experimental results (ten cases [8, 13]), with the results obtained from the developed model, is given in Table 2.
Since Gao et al. [13] and Neeraj et al. [8] provided no information about the ambient air velocity used in their
experimental facility, it is assumed as 2.5 m/s. The outer glass surface temperature (To-1) is adjusted using an
increment ratio (temperature/intensity) of 0.002 (K-m2/W), for obtaining slighter increment of To-1 when compared
with the ambient temperature (Ta). According to the results given in Table 2, there is a very good agreement between
the experimental data [8, 13] and the theoretically predicted data of outlet temperature and net heat absorbed by the
working fluid. In all the cases, the analytical model yields the outlet temperature and net heat gain slightly less or
greater than the predicted values. The maximum and mean difference of the working fluid outlet temperature are
0.8 °C and 0.58 °C, whereas for net heat gain the maximum and mean deviation are - 9.18 % and – 2.01 %.

Table 2. Comparison of experimental results with the present model.

Working fluid – Air [8] for evacuated tube collector, a

Inlet parameters Outlet parameters
Case Tamb Tw,i ṁ Seff V Tw,o Quseful
∞
(°C) (°C) (kg/s) (W/m2) (m/s) (°C) (W)
Experimental Present Difference Experimental Present % error
(1) 32 32 0.035 495 2.5 39.8 39.35 0.45 273.0 257.27 5.76
(2) 34.5 34.5 0.035 662 2.5 44.5 43.85 0.65 350.0 327.26 6.49
(3) 35.5 35.5 0.035 748 2.5 46.4 45.77 0.63 381.5 359.41 5.79
(4) 36 36 0.035 836 2.5 48.0 47.20 0.8 420.0 392.14 6.63
(5) 33.5 33.5 0.018 469 2.5 39.4 39.89 -0.49 106.2 115.08 -8.36
(6) 34 34 0.018 621 2.5 42.3 42.95 -0.65 149.4 161.11 -7.84
(7) 35 35 0.018 758 2.5 44.3 44.94 -0.64 167.4 179.00 -6.93
(8) 36.5 36.5 0.018 813 2.5 46.4 46.94 -0.54 178.2 187.92 -5.45
Working fluid – Water [13] for evacuated tube collector, b
Inlet parameters Outlet parameters
Tamb Tw,i ṁ Seff V Tw,o Quseful
∞
(°C) (°C) (kg/s) (W/m2) (m/s) (°C) (W)
Experimental Present Difference Experimental Present % error
(9) 23.7 22.9 0.027 926 2.5 29 29.56 -0.56 688.45 751.65 -9.18
(10) 23.9 56.6 0.030 860 2.5 61 61.31 -0.31 496.58 531.57 -7.05

Fig. 2 show the experimental results for net heat gain with the analytical model. The heat gained by the working
fluid increases with increase in solar intensity. At higher solar intensity, there will be a higher heat transfer from the
outer glass to the U type copper or aluminum tube and subsequently, higher potential for convective heat transfer
between the lower surface of the U tube and the working fluid. Based on this preliminary comparison, it is believed
that the mathematical model described herein provided good prediction and added confidence to use this model for
quick estimate of the performance parameters. Further, the effects of the ambient temperature and mass flow rate on
the net heat absorbed by the working fluid, the influence of evacuated tube length on the outlet temperature of the
working fluid and the impact of working fluids (Air, H2O and LiCl-H2O) on the performance of the evacuated tube
collector by varying inlet temperature and solar intensity are investigated using the present model. The parameters
that have been kept constant are listed in Table 3.

4. Results and discussions

Fig. 3 illustrates the net heat absorbed by the water at different ambient temperatures and solar intensities
incident on the collector. To investigate this effect, the ambient temperature is varied from 34 to 40 °C that can be
obtained during high solar intensities. The net heat absorption increases linearly as function of ambient temperature.
234 B. Kiran Naik et al. / Energy Procedia 90 (2016) 227 – 237

The higher the solar intensity yields the greater rate of heat absorption by a working fluid. This is due to the fact that,
when the ambient temperature decreases, the heat transfer rate from the outer surface of the glass tube to the
working fluid decreases. This implies that, with decrease in solar intensity, there is a significant decrease in radiative
heat transfer between the outer glass and the inner glass tube and hence there is a decrease in net heat energy
absorbed by the working fluid. The ambient temperature causes significant variation in the net heat absorption
capacity at higher solar intensity and the effect is relatively insignificant at lower solar intensity. For a given Tamb of
37 °C, increasing the solar intensity from 800 to 1100 W/m2, increases the net heat absorption by 29 %.

(a) (b)

(c)

Fig. 2. Comparison of present model with the experimental data of Neeraj et al. [8] and Gao et al. [13]: Influence of solar intensity on net
heat gain for U-type evacuated tube solar collector, a) copper material (flow rate 0.035 kg/s); b) copper material (flow rate 0.018 kg/s);
c) Aluminium material.

Table 3. Operating parameters for parametric investigation

Sl. No. Operating parameters Unit Operating values

1 Ambient air temperature °C 34
2 Ambient air velocity m/s 2.5
3 Working fluid inlet temperature °C 32
4 Mass flow rate of working fluid kg/s 0.018
5 Solar intensity W/m2 834
6 Efficiency of the evacuated tube % 0.7
7 Dimensions of evacuated tube collector (Table 1) - Evacuated tube Collector- (a)
8 Working fluids - Air, H2O, LiCl-H2O
9 Licl-H2O properties [20] - Cp= 1.280 kJ/kgK
hc,(1-c)= 400 W/m2
LiCl concentration 34 % of H2O
 B. Kiran Naik et al. / Energy Procedia 90 (2016) 227 – 237 235

475 Tamb - 34 °C
Tamb - 37 °C

425 Tamb - 40 °C

375

Quseful, W
325

275

225

175
750 800 850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150

Solar intensity, W/m2

Fig. 3. Influence of ambient temperature on net heat absorbed by the working fluid (water).

The influence of mass flow rate on the water outlet temperature is illustrated in Fig. 4. For the given operating
conditions, as the mass flow rate increases, the outlet temperature decreases. This indicates that at low flow rate
there is a longer period of contact between the working fluid and U tube wall and hence there is decrease in the
outlet temperature. From Fig. 4, it is observed that, for a given inlet temperature of 32 °C, the percentage change in
the outlet temperature for mass flow rate between 0.01 kg/s and 0.015 kg/s is greater than that of 0.015 and 0.02 kg/s.
Therefore, it is recommended to operate the working fluid at lower flow rate as much as possible for maximum heat
gain from the U tube wall surface.

46 400

ṁ - 0.01 kg/s L-1m

44 350
ṁ - 0.015 kg/s L - 1.5 m

42 ṁ - 0.02 kg/s L-2m

300
Outlet Temperature, °C

40
250
Quseful, W

38
200
36
150
34

100
32

50
30 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46
30 32 34 36 38 40 42
Inlet temperature, °C
Inlet Temperature, °C



Fig. 4. Influence of working fluid (water) mass flow rate on outlet Fig. 5. Influence of collector length on net heat absorption of the working
temperature. fluid (water).

Fig. 5 shows the results obtained for the net heat absorbed by the working fluid for different collector length and
outlet temperatures. For a given collector length, as the inlet temperature increases the amount of heat absorption
decreases. It happens because lower the inlet temperature implies the higher rate of heat transfer and with increase in
inlet temperature, the heat transfer rate decreases drastically due to constant solar intensity, thermal conductivity of
the material (copper) and working fluid flow rate. From Fig. 5, it is also observed that for a given inlet temperature
of 32 °C, with increase in collector length there is a significant increase in net heat absorption capacity but as the
inlet temperature increases from 32 to 44 °C, there is insignificant effect on the net heat absorption capacity. This is
due to the fact that the decrement of the heat interactions from the working fluid to the U tube surface and the
collector efficiency (function of change in working fluid temperature) apparently with increase in inlet temperature.
Hence, there is a constant heat transfer gain beyond a particular working fluid inlet temperature irrespective of
236 B. Kiran Naik et al. / Energy Procedia 90 (2016) 227 – 237

collector length. Therefore, it is advisable that the length of the collector should be synchronized depending upon the
operating conditions.
Fig. 6 shows the variation of the inlet temperature with the outlet temperature for various working fluids. The
outlet temperature increases with the increase in inlet temperature. In this study, three different working fluids
namely, air, H2O and LiCl-H2O which are entering into a U- copper tube are analyzed. The results indicate that a
higher heat transfer coefficient results in a higher outlet temperature. The difference in outlet temperatures between
the air and the water was about 10 °C for 40 °C inlet temperature and this difference was about 7.5 °C for water and
LiCl-H2O. In contrast, the corresponding outlet temperature differences between the air and the LiCl-H2O is 3.2 °C
(write in temperature) for 40 °C outlet temperature. However, some factors like chemical reaction between the
working fluid and the U copper tube, evaporation loss with increase in temperature of working fluids are neglected
during the analysis.

55 600

Air H2O
H2O 500 LiCl-H2O
50
LiCl-H2O Air

400
Outlet Temperature, °C

45 Quseful, W

300

40
200

35
100

30 0
30 32 34 36 38 40 42 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

Inlet Temperature, °C Solar intensity, W/m2

Fig. 6. Variation of inlet temperature with outlet temperature for Fig. 7. Variation of solar intensity with net heat absorption
different working fluids phenomenon for different working fluids.

The variation of solar intensity with net heat absorption for different working fluids is illustrated in Fig. 7. For a
given operating conditions, to investigate the effect of solar intensity with the net heat absorption, solar intensity is
varied from 700 to 1500 W/m2 (Table 3). For a particular solar intensity, the net heat absorption for H2O is higher
when compared to air and LiCl-H2O. This happens because of the difference in heat transfer coefficient and specific
heats of the working fluid. The difference in net heat absorption between the H2O and the air was about 67 % for
700 W/m2 solar intensity and 74 % for 1100 W/m2, and this difference increases with increase in solar intensity. The
results also show that the net heat absorption difference between Air and LiCl-H2O was 46 % for 700 W/m2 and
increased to 50 % for the 1100 W/m2 solar intensity; in contrast, the corresponding net heat absorption differences
between the LiCl-H2O and H2O were 40 and 48 % for 700 and 1100 W/m2 solar intensities respectively. This
indicates that the thermal conductance of the U-tube material (copper) with the working fluid have a greater impact
on the net heat energy gain. Moreover, it is observed from Fig.7 that the solar intensity causes the insignificant
variation in net heat absorbed by a working fluid at lower specific heat and the effect is significant at higher specific
heat.

5. Conclusions
An analytical solution of heat transfer process taking place in an evacuated tube solar collector was developed
under some reasonable assumptions based on the proposed mathematical model. The performance predicted with the
analytical solution showed very good agreement with experimental data available in the literature [8, 13]. It is found
 B. Kiran Naik et al. / Energy Procedia 90 (2016) 227 – 237 237

that the lower mass flow rate and the optimized collector length increase the outlet temperature of working fluid.
The effect of changing the ambient temperature on the net heat energy gain is more prominent at high solar intensity
compared to low intensity. Results of the study showed that the water has highest amount of heat energy absorption
capacity when compared with air and LiCl-H2O solution. Also, it is observed that the higher specific heats and the
higher heat transfer coefficients between the U-tube wall and working fluid increase the heat energy absorption
capacity significantly. For the detailed analysis of heat transfer processes across an evacuated tube solar collector,
this model provides more accurate prediction. In addition, using this mathematical model one can quickly analyze
the performance characteristics of different working fluids with the known operating parameters.

References

[1] Harding GL, Zhiqiang Y, Mackey DW. Heat extraction efficiency of a concentric glass tubular
evacuated collector. Int. J. Solar Energy. 1985; 35 p.71–9.
[2] Eberlein MB. Analysis and Performance Predictions of Evacuated Tubular Solar Collectors using Air as
the Working Fluid. University of Wisconsin. 1976;
[3] Zhiqiang Y, Harding G, Window B. Water-in-glass manifolds for heat extraction from evacuated solar
collector tubes. Int. J. Solar Energy. 1984; 32 p.223–30.
[4] Morrison G, Budihardjo I, Behnia M. Water-in-glass evacuated tube solar water heaters. Int.J. Solar
Energy. 2004; 76 p.135–40.
[5] Morrison G, Budihardjo I, Behnia M. Measurement and simulation of flow rate in a water-in-glass
evacuated tube solar water heater. Int.J. Solar Energy. 2005; 78 p.257–67.
[6] Hazami M, Naili N, Attar I, Farhat A. Solar water heating systems feasibility for domestic requests in
Tunisia: thermal potential and economic analysis. Int. J. Energy Convers Manage. 2013; 76 p.599–608.
[7] Nkwetta DN, Smyth M, Zacharopoulos A, Hyde T. Experimental performance evaluation and
comparative analyses of heat pipe and direct flow augmented solar collector. Int. J. Appl Therm Eng.
2013; 60 p.225–33.
[8] Mehla N, Yadav A. Experimental analysis of thermal performance of evacuated tube solar air collector
with phase change material for sunshine and off-sunshine hours. Int. J. Amb. Energy. 2015; 2162-8246.
[9] Shah LJ, Furbo S. Theoretical flow investigations of an all glass evacuated tubular collector. Int. J. Solar
Energy. 2007; 81 p.822–28.
[10] Kim JT, Ahn HT, Han H, Kim HT, Chun W. The performance simulation of all-glass vacuum tubes with
coaxial fluid conduit. Int. J. Commun. Heat Mass Transfer. 2007; 34 p.587–97.
[11] Liang R. Theoretical and experimental investigation of the filled-type evacuated tube solar collector
with U tube. Int. J. Sol. Energy. 2011; 85 1735–44.
[12] Badar AW, Buchholz R, Ziegler F. Experimental and theoretical evaluation of the overall heat loss
coefficient of vacuum tubes of a solar collector. Int. J. Solar Energy. 2011; 85 pp.1447–56.
[13] Gao Y, Fan R, Zhang XY, Wang MX, Gao YK, Yu Y. Thermal performance and parameter analysis of a
U-pipe evacuated solar tube collector. Int. J. Solar energy. 2014; 104 p.714-27.
[14] Ayala JA, Rodriguez GM, Nunez MP, Ramirez ARM, Munoz AG. Numerical study of a low
temperature water-in-glass evacuated tube solar collector. Int. J. Energy Convers Manage. 2015; 94 p.
472–81.
[15] Duffie JA, Beckman W. Solar engineering of thermal processes. 3rd ed. J. Wiley & Sons.
[16] Grass C, Schoelkop W, Staudacher L, Hacker Z. Comparison of the optics of non-tracking and novel
types of tracking solar thermal collectors for process heat applications up to 300 1C. Solar Energy.
2005; 76 p.207–15.
[17] Ghoneim AA, Fisch N, Ammar ASA, Hahne E. Investigation of evacuated tube collectors. Int. J. Solar
Energy. 1994; 16 p.15–25.
[18] Lin Q, Furbo S, Solar heating systems with evacuated tubular solar collector. EuroSun. 1998; 98 p.1-7.
[19] Rodríguez-Hidalgo MC, Rodríguez-Aumente PA, Lecuona A, Legrand M, Ventas R. Domestic hot water
consumption vs. solar thermal energy storage: the optimum size of the storage tank. Int. J. Appl. Energy.
2012; 97 p. 897-906.
[20] Chaudhari SK, Patil KR. Thermodynamic properties of Aqueous solutions of Lithium Chloride. Int. J.
Phy. & Chem. Liq. 2002; 40 p. 317–25.