Selecting a proper design period for heliostat field layout optimization using Campo code

In this paper, different approaches are considered to calculate the cosine factor which is utilized in Campo code to expand the heliostat field layout and maximize its annual thermal output. Furthermore, three heliostat fields containing different number of mirrors are taken into consideration. Cosine factor is determined by considering instantaneous and time-average approaches. For instantaneous method, different design days and design hours are selected. For the time average method, daily time average, monthly time average, seasonally time average, and yearly time averaged cosine factor determinations are considered. Results indicate that instantaneous methods are more appropriate for small scale heliostat field optimization. Consequently, it is proposed to consider the design period as the second design variable to ensure the best outcome. For medium and large scale heliostat fields, selecting an appropriate design period is more important. Therefore, it is more reliable to select one of the recommended time average methods to optimize the field layout. Optimum annual weighted efficiency for heliostat fields (small, medium, and large) containing 350, 1460, and 3450 mirrors are 66.14%, 60.87%, and 54.04%, respectively.

[1]  Manuel Torrilhon,et al.  Heliostat field optimization: A new computationally efficient model and biomimetic layout , 2012 .

[2]  Gregory J. Kolb,et al.  Summary of the Solar Two Test and Evaluation Program , 2000 .

[3]  G. Sassi.  Some notes on shadow and blockage effects , 1983 .

[4]  Francisco J. Collado,et al.  A review of optimized design layouts for solar power tower plants with campo code , 2013 .

[5]  Francisco J. Collado,et al.  Campo: Generation of regular heliostat fields , 2012 .

[6]  W. Beckman,et al.  Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes: Duffie/Solar Engineering 4e , 2013 .

[7]  Mohamed Gadalla,et al.  Improvement in Spiral Heliostat Field Layout Thermo-Economic Performance by Field Zoning Implementation , 2016 .

[8]  Francisco J. Collado,et al.  Preliminary design of surrounding heliostat fields , 2009 .

[9]  Mohamed Gadalla,et al.  Thermo-economic and comparative analyses of two recently proposed optimization approaches for circular heliostat fields: Campo radial-staggered and biomimetic spiral , 2016 .

[10]  F. Dinter,et al.  Incidence angle effects on circular Gaussian flux density distributions for heliostat imaging , 2016 .

[11]  James Spelling,et al.  Hybrid Solar Gas-Turbine Power Plants : A Thermoeconomic Analysis , 2013 .

[12]  D. Yogi Goswami,et al.  A computationally efficient method for the design of the heliostat field for solar power tower plant , 2014 .

[13]  Tomas Cebecauer,et al.  Typical Meteorological Year Data: SolarGIS Approach☆ , 2015 .

[14]  Ruzhu Wang,et al.  Performance of two-stage rotary desiccant cooling system with different regeneration temperatures , 2015 .