1993
DOI: 10.1016/0038-092x(93)90004-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimum aperture size and operating temperature of a solar cavity-receiver

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
65
0
3

Year Published

2003
2003
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 230 publications
(70 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
2
65
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…(1)) so having high solar absorptance becomes much more important to the receiver efficiency. Therefore, typically high optical concentration is used in combination with a black absorber or a blackbody cavity to efficiently operate at higher receiver temperatures (Prakash et al, 2009;Steinfeld and Schubnell, 1993). However, using high optical concentration ratios introduces complications such as large temperature gradients and complex heat exchangers required to handle a high heat flux.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(1)) so having high solar absorptance becomes much more important to the receiver efficiency. Therefore, typically high optical concentration is used in combination with a black absorber or a blackbody cavity to efficiently operate at higher receiver temperatures (Prakash et al, 2009;Steinfeld and Schubnell, 1993). However, using high optical concentration ratios introduces complications such as large temperature gradients and complex heat exchangers required to handle a high heat flux.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consequently, the equipment faces the trade-off between the maximum energy that can be absorbed by the cavity-receiver and the energy that is irradiated back through the aperture. Depending on the solar flux concentration, the subsequent optimum temperatures vary between 1100 and 1800 K [56]. More detailed thermodynamic evaluations of solar thermochemical processes have been reviewed elsewhere [10,54,57,58].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hence, it seems that the former effect is lower that the latter. Also note that we only consider the optical phenomena from sunlight so including other phenomena accounting for other energy loss mechanisms could yield in an effectively optimal aperture size, see [13]. Finally, we vary the cavity diameter.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%