4.7 Article

Enhancement of pyramid solar distiller performance using reflectors, cooling cycle, and dangled cords of wicks

Journal

DESALINATION
Volume 506, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.desal.2021.115019

Keywords

Wick solar still; Reflector; Solar distillation; Jute wick; Cords; Condenser

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The introduction of a new working mechanism for the wick in the pyramid solar distiller optimizes its performance, resulting in higher productivity and efficiency compared to conventional solar stills. Improved results were achieved by utilizing mirrors and a fan with 35 wick cords, leading to a 53% efficiency and a 195% increase in productivity. The theoretical deviations from experimental results for CPSS and CWPSS were 6% and 11% respectively.
A new working mechanism of the wick in the pyramid solar distiller was proposed. The cords wick pyramid solar still (CWPSS) had a parallel upper basin liner with a number of cracks above the original basin liner by 3.0 cm. This liner was covered by jute wick with wick cords dangled from the liner cracks to withdraw the basin water and keep the wick surface wet all the time by the capillary action. The suggested system optimizes the working mechanism of wick in the solar distiller because the wick cords withdraw an amount of water equals to the evaporated quantity without excessing or removing hot water. The different numbers of wick cords of 9, 16, 25, and 35 cords were tested. In addition, external and internal mirrors were used to enlarge the thermal energy input to the solar still. Moreover, the effect of vapor withdrawal from the CWPSS to be condensed in internal and external cooling cycle was studied. The results revealed that the maximum performance of CWPSS was obtained when using the mirrors and fan at 35 wick cords, where the efficiency was 53% and the productivity rise reached 195% over the conventional solar still. The theoretical results are deviated from the experimental results of CPSS and CWPSS by 6% and 11%, respectively.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available