4.6 Article

Vacuum evaluation of parabolic trough receiver tubes in a 50 MW concentrated solar power plant

期刊

SOLAR ENERGY
卷 139, 期 -, 页码 36-46

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.solener.2016.09.017

关键词

Concentrated solar power; Parabolic trough; Receiver tubes; Thermal performance; Heat losses; Vacuum loss

资金

  1. Abengoa
  2. MINECO [IPT-2011-1425-920000]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The solar receiver tube is a key component in the parabolic trough solar thermal power system. The loss of vacuum or degradation of the receiver has a significant impact on the receiver's thermal performance and is the single largest cost factor in parabolic trough solar power plants. This paper, presents a procedure to evaluate the annulus gas and thermal performance of receivers in the solar field. It is based on the glass and absorber temperatures of receivers as well as on plasma generation in the annulus space. The procedure has been executed in a 50 MW commercial plant after five years of operation. 9% of receivers operating in the solar field showed vacuum loss to some degree. A sample of 70 receivers showing degradation were individually evaluated, of which: 34% of receivers showed progressive oxidation of the absorber coating, one receiver was measured to have argon in the annulus space at 10(-2) mbar pressure, and the remainder showed glass temperatures corresponding to those with air being the gas in the annulus. Temperatures measured in the receivers' glass envelope did not match those with hydrogen being the gas in the annulus. Hydrogen was not found either by plasma generation. Heat losses under operating conditions added up by the found vacuum losses have been estimated over the reference performance of a solar field keeping its initial vacuum. The full procedure, measurements, results and discussion are described in this paper, aiming to understand as fully as possible the cause of the loss of vacuum experienced by the receivers. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据