Publications

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

A strategy to optimize the thermal efficiency of falling particle receivers (FPRs) in concentrating solar power applications is described in this paper. FPRs are a critical component of a falling particle system, and receiver designs with high thermal efficiencies (~90%) for particle outlet temperatures > 700°C have been targeted for next generation systems. Advective losses are one of the most significant loss mechanisms for FPRs. Hence, this optimization aims to find receiver geometries that passively minimize these losses. The optimization strategy consists of a series of simulations varying different geometric parameters on a conceptual receiver design for the Generation 3 Particle Pilot Plant (G3P3) project using simplified CFD models to model the flow. A linear polynomial surrogate model was fit to the resulting data set, and a global optimization routine was then executed on the surrogate to reveal an optimized receiver geometry that minimized advective losses. This optimized receiver geometry was then evaluated with more rigorous CFD models, revealing a thermal efficiency of 86.9% for an average particle temperature increase of 193.6°C and advective losses less than 3.5% of the total incident thermal power in quiescent conditions.

Two active airflow control methods are investigated to mitigate advective and particle losses from the open aperture of a falling particle receiver. Advective losses can be reduced via active airflow methods. However, in the case of once-through suction, energy lost as enthalpy of hot air due to active airflow needs to be minimized so that thermal efficiency can be maximized. In the case of forced air injection, a properly configured aerowindow can reduce advective losses substantially for calm conditions. Although some improvement is offered in windy conditions, an aerowindow in the presence of winds does not show an ability to mitigate advective losses to values achievable by an aerowindow in the absence of wind. The two active airflow methods considered in this paper both show potential for efficiency improvement, but the improvement many not be justified given the added complexity and cost of implementing an active airflow system. While active airflow methods are tractable for a 1 MWth cavity receiver with a 1 m square aperture, the scalability of these active airflow methods is questionable when considering commercial scale receivers with 10–20 m square apertures or larger.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.