Comparison Between CSP Systems and Effect of Different Heat
Transfer Fluids on the Performance
RABAA K. AL-FARAJAT, MOHAMED R. GOMAA *, Mai Z. ALZGHOUL
Mechanical Engineering Department
Faculty of Engineering, Al-Hussein Bin Talal University
Maan, 71110 Maan
JORDAN
Abstract: - While fossil fuel sources have declined and energy demand has increased, in addition to the climate
change crisis, the world turned to using renewable energies to get its energy. Concentrated solar power (CSP) is
one of the main technologies used for this purpose. This study aims to compare the different concentrated solar
power technologies in terms of their efficiency, cost, concentration ratio, and receiver temperature. Results
showed that technologies were arranged according to temperatures from high to low as follows; the parabolic
dish reflector, central receiver collector, linear Fresnel reflector, and parabolic trough collector. According to
cost, the parabolic dish reflector has the highest price, while the linear Fresnel reflector has the lowest price. Also,
the parabolic dish reflector has the highest efficiency among the others, followed by the central receiver collector,
then the linear Fresnel reflector, and the parabolic trough collector respectively. Additionally; the study
represented that point-focus devices have a high percentage of concentration ratio than line-focus devices.
Finally, in order to exploit these sources throughout the day, it is recommended to use phase change materials to
store the excess thermal energy as a positive and effective approach to solving the energy problems.
Key-Words: - Solar energy; Concentrated Solar Power; Parabolic trough collector; Linear Fresnel reflector; solar
tower; central receiver; solar dish, Heat transfer fluid.
Received: May 19, 2022. Revised: October 22, 2022. Accepted: November 28, 2022. Published: December 31, 2022.
1 Introduction
Due to the problems of near depletion of
conventional energy sources and issues of climate
change, the world is currently moving towards using
clean energy to obtain energy sources. One of the
most widely used sources of this energy is the use of
solar energy; the use of which in recent years has
increased by 35%. One of the most critical
technologies used in this field is CSP technologies
[1,2]. It is an active solar system meaning that it
requires mechanical equipment such as fans and
pumps to convert solar energy into electricity or heat
[3-6]. CSPs techniques can provide high and medium
heat for many uses such as industrial processes,
electricity generation, solar heating, and cooling as
well as desalination of brine [7]. CSPs are
characterized by dealing with direct radiation from
the sun, as it uses solar energy tracking systems to
obtain the largest possible amount of solar radiation
to use in generating energy and supplying energy to
operate the tracking system. Despite its efficiency
and high productivity, it is expensive construction
and maintenance cost [8]. The world's installed
capacity of solar energy is expanding rapidly to
accommodate energy demand. Indeed, the installed
capacity increased for CSPs from 1266 MW in 2010
to 6479 MW in 2020 [9].
1.1 system components
Concentrated Solar Power systems usually contain
multiple ingredients like a receiver, electrical
generator, solar concentrators, and steam turbine.
Fig. 1 illustrates the most important parts of this
system [10].
Fig. 1. Components of CSP plant [10].
In a solar field, there is a mirror or concentrator used
to redirect direct normal irradiance to the absorber
named receiver, in addition to a heat transfer system,
also thermal energy storage system which improves
the efficiency and stores energy to make it possible
to use at night, but storage capabilities might not be
present in all CSPs plants [11-14].
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on HEAT and MASS TRANSFER
DOI: 10.37394/232012.2022.17.21
Rabaa K. Al-Farajat, Mohamed R. Gomaa,
Mai Z. Alzghoul
E-ISSN: 2224-3461
196
Volume 17, 2022
1.2 Working principle of CSP
In CSPs plants, direct solar energy is focused on solar
collectors in order to heat a working fluid that
generates hot steam in order to spin turbines to
generate electrical power. Fig. 2 describes the
process in parabolic trough [15]. Firstly, the direct
solar rays fall on the reflecting mirrors, which act as
a concentrator for solar rays. Then these mirrors
reflect the solar rays to the receiver, which can be a
tower or tube depending on the type of station. The
receiver receives the solar radiation coming from the
mirrors and then stores the energy of this radiation to
Form heat through a working fluid, which retains
heat for a later steam generation [16].
Fig. 2. Power generation in parabolic trough [15].
1.3 Thermal energy storage in CSP
Renewable energies such as; wind and solar suffer
from the issue of that are available for a limited
period of time. So, to solve this problem storage of
energy are a critical solution for these issues, storing
thermal energy is cheapest than storage of electrical
energy Fig. 3 Shows a parabolic trough station
integrated with thermal energy storage unit [17].
Fig .3. A parabolic trough station integrated with thermal
energy storage unit [17].
The combination of (CSPs) and energy
storage is seen by the energy sector as a positive and
effective approach to solving the energy problem
[18]. CSPs are considered a vital source of power
generation, as they can provide deployable
electricity in addition to the capability to store
thermal energy. the largest widely used technique in
thermal energy storage (TES) in commercial CSPs is
Molten salt TES, but the industry is searching for
cheaper and more efficient TES systems; and phase
change materials (PCM) are marked as low-cost,
high-energy TES systems [19]. Because PCMs offer
high-density energy storage, isothermal in nature,
and operation in a variety of temperature conditions
is available [17]. The use of the PCM has several
advantages including;
1-Improved exergy efficiency [19].
2- Faster charging and discharging rate [19].
3- Raised heat transfer rate at the time of charging
and discharging, specifically during phase
change [19].
PCM energy storage involves phase change
processes (like; evaporation, and crystallization, in
addition to melting,), in these processes, the
transition of the phases occurs when the temperature
of the material reaches the transition temperature,
then the material is transferred from one state to
another, for instance: from liquid to gas, from solid
to liquid, and from solid to gas, among them Solid to
liquid PCMs are the most used due to high density in
addition to low volume change during the phase
transition process [20].
2 Types of CSP
A concentrating solar collector consists of a tracking
reflector that tracks the sun and concentrates
radiation onto a line or point receiver. A thermal
fluid circulates in the receiver and its temperature can
rise to about 400 °C (for linear focus) or up to 800 °C
(for point focus) [21]. There are four different types
of CSPs techniques, which differ from each other in
economic and technical criteria, these types are
parabolic trough concentrator (PTC) [6], linear
Fresnel reflectors (LFR) [14, 21,22], central receiver
\ solar tower (ST), and Solar dish [23]. Now CSPs
technologies are in tremendous progress all over the
world, where the total installed of it at the end of 2015
was 4.8 GW, and it is predicted that by the end of
2030 it will reach 261 GW [24].
2.1 Parabolic trough collector (PTC)
The parabolic trough collector is one of the
advanced and mature technologies used to produce
steam in electrical power plants or to produce useful
process heat by absorbing direct solar radiation
through either mechanical or hydraulic tracking
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on HEAT and MASS TRANSFER
DOI: 10.37394/232012.2022.17.21
Rabaa K. Al-Farajat, Mohamed R. Gomaa,
Mai Z. Alzghoul
E-ISSN: 2224-3461
197
Volume 17, 2022
systems that are associated with sensors [6,25]. PTC
consists of [26];
a) Collector: polished aluminium, steel, or glass.
b) Receiver: made up of a glass covering and metal
pipe.
c) Reflector: reflector sheet or glass mirrors.
d) Tracking system.
Fig. 4 Clarify this component [26]. Many types of
working fluid can be used as heat carriers inside the
receiver, like; pressurized water, thermal oil, and
Nanofluids which can increase the efficiency of the
process; when using it the temperature of the PTC
receiver tube can reach 350–400 °C [27], the
installation cost of it about 4500–5800 $/kW [26].
Also, the efficiency is about 13-14 %, while the
concentration ratio ranges between 15 and 70, Fig. 5
Shows the actual parabolic trough field [28].
Fig. 4. Parabolic trough component [26].
Fig. 5 Parabolic trough field [28].
2.2 Linear Fresnel reflector (LFR)
Linear Fresnel reflector (LFR) is an evolving
technology that has improved over the years and has
the ability for cost-effective heat generation. But,
LFR undergoes high optical losses, resulting in lower
thermal efficiency which is estimated between 11%-
19 %. LFR consists of separate linear primary mirrors
placed near the ground at a height of about 3-5m
above the ground, this construction is a prosperous
future option due to its low cost and few mechanical
issues due to wind loads compared to PTC. On the
other hand, the optical efficiency of LFRs is limited
due to the space between the main mirrors in addition
to the shadowing and blocking effects of the main
mirrors [29]. It’s a linear focusing technique that
requires a single-axis tracking mechanism to
accurately track the position of the sun Fig. 6 shows
an LFR station. Also, it’s one of the most important
concentrating solar systems for producing usable heat
in the medium and high-temperature range (<
500°C). The concentration ratio ranges from 10 to 50
and the cost of it is very low. LFR receivers typically
have an evacuated tube collector coupled to a
secondary concentrator which is commonly a
compound parabolic concentrator (CPC).
Water/steam is frequently chosen to produce a high-
pressure Super heater saturated steam, which can be
used in Rankine cycle turbines or industrial
processes, thermal oil too Therminol VP-1, and
others are used for various thermal applications up to
400°C.
Fig. 6. LFR station [30].
In addition to that, molten salts can be further
utilized in power generation and also used for
storage goals. It is also emphasized that molten salt
application is found to be more thermally efficient
compared to hot oil operation and that molten salt
offers the possibility of operation at higher
temperatures up to 600°C [30]. Its advantages are
summed by: firstly, the support structure is simple
and has an acceptable price, A little bit of wind load
on the concentrator because of its planar structure,
also, the danger of heat transfer fluid (HTF) leakage
is reduced due to the fixed receiver, in addition to
that, automatic cleaning appliance can be
comfortably extended, finally, its production and
spare parts are readily available on the market [23].
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on HEAT and MASS TRANSFER
DOI: 10.37394/232012.2022.17.21
Rabaa K. Al-Farajat, Mohamed R. Gomaa,
Mai Z. Alzghoul
E-ISSN: 2224-3461
198
Volume 17, 2022
2.3 Parabolic dish reflector
The solar dish is a point-focus device, which uses a
parabolic concentrator that receives direct solar
radiation and focuses it into a cavity receiver. It has
the ability to generate a large amount of clean energy
with higher efficiency and quietness compared to
conventional engines, but the cost of maintenance
and installation will be higher. The system consists
of a parabolic concentrator connected to a power
conversion unit which consists of a Stirling engine,
an alternator, and a spiral cavity receiver. Incident
solar radiation is collected by a parabolic
concentrator and focused on a focal point on a
receiver that is stable, Fig .7 shows the system.
The temperature of the receiver will be very high
because it receives a large supply of concentrated
solar energy, this heat which is absorbed by the
receiver will work on heating the working fluids,
which can be hydrogen gas or helium gas. As the
temperature of these gases will reach 650 °C – 750
°C. Also, for a 25MW plant the cost of investment is
about 2000 $/kW and 8000 $/kW and the efficiency
maybe reach 35% when a concentration ratio equals
1300, and the temperature of the receiver 850 K [31].
Fig .7. Photo of parabolic dish collector [31[.
Due to its high thermal efficiency, it can be
generally used to supply prime movers such as the
Bryton cycle, Rankine cycle, organic Rankine cycle,
and micro gas turbines which require high operating
temperatures [32]. also, one of its properties is that it
doesn't require water for its cooling or operating
processes, making it more suitable for power plant
construction in where water-shortage areas [33]. The
Solar Dish Stirling System has several uses, the most
important of which is shown in Fig. 8 [34].
Fig. 8. Solar dish Stirling application [35].
2.4 Central receiver collector/Heliostat field
collector
In this system, mirrored collectors which are named
heliostats reflect incident solar radiation through a
two-axis tracking mechanism to the absorber surface
which is located at the top of the tower to concentrate
the sunlight at the focal point, then this heat can heat
the HTF by convection and radiation. This technique
helps in rising the temperature of HTF and increases
the efficiency in addition to reducing thermal losses
[36]. It’s distinguished by its ability to produce a
hundred megawatts or a thousand gigawatts
universally in 2050 in inexpensive ways [37].
Moreover, it doesn't need large spaces to create the
solar tower station. Also, the temperature of HTF can
reach 1000°C or above, Fig. 9 Illustrates the
Operation of a solar power plant with a central
receiver [38]. Its efficiency ranges from 17% - 21%,
and its concentration ratio = 1000 [39].
Fig. 9. Working principle of the solar tower [30].
Applicatio
ns of SDS
technology
Electric
Power
Generatio
noff-grid
elecrificat
ion
Hybridizat
ion and
storage
Cooking
Water
distillation
and
desalinatio
n
Water
pumping
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on HEAT and MASS TRANSFER
DOI: 10.37394/232012.2022.17.21
Rabaa K. Al-Farajat, Mohamed R. Gomaa,
Mai Z. Alzghoul
E-ISSN: 2224-3461
199
Volume 17, 2022
3 Results and discussion
3.1 Comparison between CSP systems
The presented work summarizes the main difference
between CSP systems in the next table and charts.
Table 1 explains the most important differences
between CSPs, including efficiency, cost, and
concentration ratio, in addition to the receiver
temperature for each type. In terms of efficiency, the
Parabolic dish reflector occupies the highest rank, as
it can reach up to 35 %, followed by the central
receiver collector with an efficiency of about 21%,
then the Linear Fresnel reflector and the Parabolic
trough collector with an efficiency of about 19% and
14% respectively. On the other hand, in the field of
price, the Linear Fresnel reflector is the most cost-
effective with a very low price, followed by the
parabolic trough collector, central receiver collector,
and Parabolic dish reflector respectively. the
concentration ratio is categorized in ascending order
as follows; firstly, the Linear Fresnel reflector with a
ratio of 50, secondly, the Parabolic trough collector
with a ratio of 70, thirdly, the central receiver
collector with a ratio of 1000, finally the Parabolic
dish reflector with the highest ratio of concentration
up to 1300. according to the Receiver temperature
for each concentrator, the Parabolic trough collector
Receiver temperature can reach 400 °C, the Linear
Fresnel reflector with a Receiver temperature of
about 500°C, then the central receiver collector
Receiver temperature can estimate at 1000°C, And
the highest Receiver temperature among each
concentrator is for a Parabolic dish reflector which
can be reached to 1500 °C.
Fig. 10 refers to the difference between the
efficiencies of each technique of CSPs, indeed, the
parabolic dish reflector has the highest efficiency
among the others, and it can reach 35%, also, it
indicates that the efficiency of the central receiver
collectors is around 21%, while the efficiency of the
Linear Fresnel reflector is 19%, finally, the Parabolic
trough collector has the lowest efficiency which
estimated approx. 14%.
Also, it’s clear from Fig. 11 which is titled Cost
differences for CSPs that the parabolic dish reflector
is the most expensive of the other CSPs type which
can be equal to 8000 $/kW. The central receiver
collector price is around 6500 $/kW. While the
Parabolic trough collector price is estimated at
approx. 4000 $/kW, finally the most economical
concentrator is the Linear Fresnel reflector with a
price of nearly 3000 $/kW. The concentration ratio
differences for CSPs that are shown in Fig. 12 clarify
that the point focuses concentrators (Parabolic dish
reflector and Central receiver collector) own the
highest concentration ratio as it can reach 1300 for
the parabolic dish reflector and 1000 for the Central
receiver collector. Compared with linear focus
concentrators (Parabolic trough and linear Fresnel
reflector) which are estimated to the parabolic trough
as 70 and the linear Fresnel reflector as 50.
Finally, Fig. 13 Illustrates the differences in
receiver temperature for all CSPs, the highest
temperature can be obtained from parabolic dish
reflectors as it can reach Up to 1500 °C, then the
central receiver collector with 1000°C, followed by
the Linear Fresnel reflector with 500 °C, and last is
the parabolic through with around 400 °C.
According to the previous comparisons, we can
access that the receiver of parabolic dish reflectors
has a higher temperature than the other CSPs, in
addition to the highest efficiency and concentration
ratio than the others. But, the cost of construction is
more expensive than the others. So, it's used to
supply prime movers such as the Bryton cycle,
Rankine cycle, organic Rankine cycle, and micro gas
turbines which require high operating temperatures.
On the other hand, the Linear Fresnel reflector is the
cheapest price among the CSPs. So, it's used for
producing usable heat in the medium and high-
temperature range.
Table 1: CSPs technologies analysis [26-39].
Fig. 10. Efficiencies difference for CSPs
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
parabolic
through
collector
linear fresenl
reflector Parabolic dish
reflector central
receiver
collector
Efficiency (%)
CSPs type
Parameter/concentrator
Linear
Fresnel
reflector
Parabolic
dish
reflector
Central
receiver
collector
Efficiency
15%-19 %
35%
17% -
21%
Price
Very low
Very high
High
Concentration ratio
10-50
1300
1000
Receiver temperature
<500°C
Up to 1500
°C
1000°C
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on HEAT and MASS TRANSFER
DOI: 10.37394/232012.2022.17.21
Rabaa K. Al-Farajat, Mohamed R. Gomaa,
Mai Z. Alzghoul
E-ISSN: 2224-3461
200
Volume 17, 2022
Fig. 11. Cost differences for CSPs.
Fig. 12. Concentration ratio differences for CSPs.
3.2. Heat transfer fluid (HTF)
Detailed accounting of exergy is represented in Fig.
14, the liquid Sodium has the best performance
within the selected HTFs, especially in the higher
range of temperature. In contrast to the molten salt,
liquid sodium is able to supply heat to the high-
temperature sCO2 Brayton cycle, that has the higher
efficiency of thermal-to-electrical and will cost less
than that of a steam Rankine cycle. The receiver
performance of the liquid sodium at lower
temperature range is only marginally better than the
molten salt due to the lower external wall
temperature, before considering the exergy losses in
the heat exchanger. Molten salt is still a competitive
as a working fluid in the receiver, and both with its
dual role as HTF and TES, and its low price, it is the
most used HTF in central tower CSP systems today
[40]. Water/steam can connect with the steam
turbine directly, that saves cost of equipment such as
the heat exchanger, but it has a difficult in integrating
with storage system [41-43].
Fig. 13. Receiver temperature differences for CSPs.
Exergy destruction in absorption was large
during the boiling process because of the low
external wall temperature, while exergy losses in
external radiation are low [44-47]. SCO2 seems that
it is not a promising HTF selection for the receiver.
Dealing with a high working temperatures and
pressure in the tubes of receiver causes higher exergy
losses than that of anticipating saving resulting from
the direct connection to a sCO2 Brayton cycle. Air
seems that it is not a strong HTF due to its poor
thermophysical properties that cause extremely high
external wall temperatures. It has the largest exergy
destruction in internal convection and in pumping
work, across all the fluids. It has to operate at the
lower temperature with low flux to avoid high
external wall temperature, even though it has the
ability to work at a high temperature range (e.g.,
800–1000 ◦C). Air receivers, if it feasible, will
require to make use of channels with enhanced heat
transfer [48].
Fig. 14 Detailed exergy of the best-case configurations
found for each working fluid [41].
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
parabolic
through
collector
linear
fresenl
reflector
Parabolic
dish
reflector
central
receiver
collector
Price ($/kW)
CSPs type
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
parabolic
through
collector
Parabolic
dish
reflector
central
receiver
collector
linear
fresenl
reflector
Concentration ratio
CSPs type
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
parabolic
through
collector
linear
fresenl
reflector
Parabolic
dish
reflector
central
receiver
collector
Reciver tempreture (°C)
CSPs type
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on HEAT and MASS TRANSFER
DOI: 10.37394/232012.2022.17.21
Rabaa K. Al-Farajat, Mohamed R. Gomaa,
Mai Z. Alzghoul
E-ISSN: 2224-3461
201
Volume 17, 2022
The Overall results are shown in Table 2, which
summaries the optimal configurations of the flow for
each fluid and shows a comparison between receiver
efficiency and Tmax for the selected (HTFs), which
shows that the liquid sodium has the highest
performance, then molten salt followed it.
Table 2: Summary of the best-case receiver
configurations identified for each HTF [41].
Case
Molten
Salt
(290–
565 ºC)
Sodium
(310–
585 ºC)
Sodium
(540–
740 ºC)
sCO2
(500–
700
ºC)
Air
(279–
479
ºC)
Water
(270–
545
ºC)
CR
800
800
800
160
640
800
pi,rec (bar)
17.93
5.76
8.72
204.20
101.85
144
po,rec (bar)
1
1
1
200
100
119.60
do
(mm)/DN
10.3
10.3
10.3
13.7
48.3
10.3
ηI,rec (%)
89.65
90
83.81
41.79
85.03
91.40
ηII,rec (%)
55.45
56.72
60.92
29.52
49.43
51.73
ηII,PU(%)
47.73
49.24
63.52
91.20
78.45
89.03
4 Conclusion
The Different types of CSPs produce different
receiver temperatures and varying efficiencies, due
to differences in the way that they track the sun and
focus light. parabolic trough and linear Fresnel
reflectors focus the sun rays into a linear receiver, so
it's single-axis tracking, while Parabolic dish
reflectors and central receiver collectors are tracking
the sun by more than one axis, and then concentrate
the sun rays into a point receiver.
On the other side, the Parabolic dish reflector has
the highest receiver temperature which can reach Up
to 1500 °C and the highest efficiency value of about
35%, and the highest concentration ratio in a range
of 1300. Despite this, it's the most expensive
technique among CSPs it can reach 8000 $/kW.
while the central receiver collector can record the
temperature of 1000°C with an efficiency of 21%
and a concentration ratio of approx 1000 with a high
cost of investment, in contrast with the Linear
Fresnel reflector Which is the most economically
effective as it is the very low-cost investment, but
limited concentration ratio estimated by 50 and its
receiver temperature can reach 500 °C with
efficiency 19%. Finally, the parabolic trough
collector receiver temperature can reach 400 °C with
an efficiency of 14% and a concentration ratio of
about 70 with a low cost of investment.
Also, it recommended using phase change
materials to solve the problem of the availability of
thermal energy throughout the day, where it is low-
cost and its ability to thermal energy storage is high,
as it Improved the exergy efficiency of the process
and increases charging and discharging rate in
addition to Raised heat transfer rate, especially
during phase change.
References:
[1] A. Peinado Gonzalo, A. Pliego Marugán, F. P.
García Márquez, A review of the application
performances of concentrated solar power
systems. Applied Energy. 255 (2019),,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.11389
3
[2] Mohamed R. Gomaa, Talib K. Murtadha,
Ahmad Abu-jrai, Hegazy Rezk, Moath A.
Altarawneh, and Abdullah Marashli.
Experimental Investigation on Waste Heat
Recovery from a Cement Factory to Enhance
Thermoelectric Generation. Sustainability
2022, 14, 10146.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su141610146
[3] M. Shahabuddin et al., A critical review on the
development and challenges of concentrated
solar power technologies. Sustainable
Energy Technologies and
Assessments. 47 (2021),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.101434
[4] Abdullah Marashli, Enas Alfanatseh,
Mohammad Shalby, Mohamed R. Gomaa.
Modelling single-effect of Lithium Bromide-
Water (LiBr–H2O) driven by an evacuated
solar tube collector in Ma’an city (Jordan) case
study. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 37,
(2022), 102239.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2022.102239
[5] Mohamed R. Gomaa, Mohsen Ahmed, Hegazy
Rezk. Temperature distribution modelling of
PV and cooling water PV/T collectors through
thin and thick cooling cross-fined channel box.
Energy Reports 8 (2022), 1144-1153.
[6] Mohamed R. Gomaa, Ramadan J. Mustafa,
Mujahed Al-Dhaifallah, Hegazy Rezk. A Low-
Grade Heat Organic Rankine Cycle Driven by
Hybrid Solar Collectors and a Waste Heat
Recovery System. Energy Reports 6 (2020)
3425–3445.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2020.12.011
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on HEAT and MASS TRANSFER
DOI: 10.37394/232012.2022.17.21
Rabaa K. Al-Farajat, Mohamed R. Gomaa,
Mai Z. Alzghoul
E-ISSN: 2224-3461
202
Volume 17, 2022
[7] D. R. Rajendran et al., Review on influencing
parameters in the performance of concentrated
solar power collector based on materials, heat
transfer fluids and design. Journal of Thermal
Analysis and Calorimetry. 140 (2020), pp. 33–
51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-019-08759-
8
[8] S. K. Verma, N. K. Gupta, D. Rakshit, A
comprehensive analysis on advances in
application of solar collectors considering
design, process and working fluid parameters
for solar to thermal conversion. Solar
Energy. 208 (2020), pp. 1114–1150.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.08.042
[9] Maka, A. O. M., and Alabid, J. M. (2022). Solar
energy technology and its roles in sustainable
development. Clean. Energy 6 (3), 476–483.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ce/zkac023
[10] M. T. Islam, N. Huda, A. B. Abdullah, R.
Saidur, A comprehensive review of state-of-
the-art concentrating solar power (CSP)
technologies: Current status and research
trends. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews. 91 (2018), pp. 987–1018.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.04.097
[11] M. Walczak, F. Pineda, Á. G. Fernández, C.
Mata-Torres, R. A. Escobar, Materials
corrosion for thermal energy storage systems in
concentrated solar power plants. Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 86 (2018),
pp. 22–44.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.01.010
[12] Mohamed R. Gomaa, Waleed Hammad,
Mujahed Al-Dhaifallah, Hegazy Rezk.
Performance enhancement of grid-tied PV
system through proposed design cooling
techniques: An experimental study and
comparative analysis. Solar Energy 2020, 211,
1110–1127.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.10.062.
[13] Mohamed R. Gomaa, Ghayda’ A. Matarneh,
Mohammad Shalby, Hani A. AL-Rawashdeh.
A State-¬of-¬the-¬art Review on a
Thermochemical Conversion of Carbonaceous
Materials: Production of Synthesis Gas by Co-
gasification Process- Part I. Current Alternative
Energy 2020, 4, 1.
https://doi.org/10.2174/2405463104999200904
115100.
[14] Mohamed R. Gomaa, Mujahed Al-Dhaifallah,
Ali Alahmer, Hegazy Rezk. Design, Modeling
and Experimental Investigation of Active Water
Cooling Concentrating Photovoltaic System.
Sustainability 2020, 12(13), 5392.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135392.
[15] P. Jenkins, G. Ramamoorthy, Design,
Thermodynamic Performance Comparison and
Cost Analysis of Photovoltaic (PV),
Concentrated Solar Power (CSP), Wind
Turbine, Natural Gas Combined Cycle
(NGCC), and Integrated Solar Combined Cycle
(ISCC) Power Plants. Energy and Power
Engineering. 12, 288–313 (2020).
https://doi.org/10.4236/epe.2020.126018
[16] M. Liu et al., Review on concentrating solar
power plants and new developments in high
temperature thermal energy storage
technologies. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews. 53 (2016), pp. 1411–1432.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.026.
[17] Mofijur, M., Mahlia, T. M. I., Silitonga, A. S.,
Ong, H. C., Silakhori, M., Hasan, M. H., …
Ashrafur Rahman, S. M. (2019, August 17).
Phase change materials (PCM) for solar energy
usages and storage: An overview. Energies.
MDPI AG.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en12163167.
[18] Mao, Q., Chen, H., Zhao, Y., & Wu, H. (2018).
A novel heat transfer model of a phase change
material using in solar power plant. Applied
Thermal Engineering, 129, 557–563.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.
10.038
[19] Prieto, C., & Cabeza, L. F. (2019). Thermal
energy storage (TES) with phase change
materials (PCM) in solar power plants (CSP).
Concept and plant performance. Applied
Energy, 254.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.11364
6
[20] Liu, D., Xin-Feng, L., Bo, L., Si-quan, Z., &
Yan, X. (2018, December 1). Progress in
thermochemical energy storage for
concentrated solar power: A
review. International Journal of Energy
Research. John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1002/er.4183
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on HEAT and MASS TRANSFER
DOI: 10.37394/232012.2022.17.21
Rabaa K. Al-Farajat, Mohamed R. Gomaa,
Mai Z. Alzghoul
E-ISSN: 2224-3461
203
Volume 17, 2022
[21] Mohamed R. Gomaa, Ramadan J. Mustafa,
Hegazy Rezk. An Experimental
Implementation and Testing of a Concentrated
Hybrid Photovoltaic/Thermal System with
Monocrystalline Solar Cells Using Linear
Fresnel Reflected Mirrors. International Journal
of Energy Research 2019; 43: 8660–8673.
https://doi.org/10.1002/er.4862
[22] Mohamed R. Gomaa, Ramadan J. Mustafa,
Hegazy Rezk, Mujahed Al-Dhaifallah, A. Al-
Salaymeh. Sizing Methodology of a Multi-
Mirror Solar Concentrated Hybrid PV/thermal
System. Energies 11(12), 2018, 3276.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en11123276.
[23] Tsekouras, P., Tzivanidis, C., & Antonopoulos,
K. (2018). Optical and thermal investigation of
a linear Fresnel collector with trapezoidal cavity
receiver. Applied Thermal Engineering, 135,
379–388.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.
02.082
[24] O. Ogunmodimu, E. C. Okoroigwe,
Concentrating solar power technologies for
solar thermal grid electricity in Nigeria: A
review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews. 90 (2018), pp. 104–119.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.029
[25] R. Mena, R. Escobar, Lorca, M. Negrete-
Pincetic, D. Olivares, The impact of
concentrated solar power in electric power
systems: A Chilean case study. Applied
Energy. 235, 258–283 (2019)..
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.10.088
[26] G. K. Manikandan, S. Iniyan, R. Goic,
Enhancing the optical and thermal efficiency of
a parabolic trough collector–Areview. Applied
Energy. 235 (2019), pp. 1524–1540.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.11.048
[27] P. V. Gharat et al., Chronological development
of innovations in reflector systems of parabolic
trough solar collector (PTC) - A
review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews. 145 (2021),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111002.
[28] A. J. Abdulhamed, N. M. Adam, M. Z. A. Ab-
Kadir, A. A. Hairuddin, Review of solar
parabolic-trough collector geometrical and
thermal analyses, performance, and
applications. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews. 91 (2018), pp. 822–831.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.04.085
[29] E. Bellos, C. Tzivanidis, Alternative designs of
parabolic trough solar collectors. Progress in
Energy and Combustion Science. 71 (2019), pp.
81–117.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2018.11.001
[30] Bellos, E., Tzivanidis, C., & Moghimi, M. A.
(2019). Reducing the optical end losses of a
linear Fresnel reflector using novel
techniques. Solar Energy, 186, 247–256.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.05.020
[31] Bellos, E. Progress in the design and the
applications of linear Fresnel reflectors – A
critical review. Thermal Science and
Engineering Progress. Elsevier Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2019.01.014
[32] Zayed, M. E., Zhao, J., Elsheikh, A. H., Li, W.,
Sadek, S., & Aboelmaaref, M. M. (2021,
February 10). A comprehensive review on
Dish/Stirling concentrated solar power systems:
Design, optical and geometrical analyses,
thermal performance assessment, and
applications. Journal of Cleaner Production.
Elsevier Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124664
[33] Kasaeian, A., Kouravand, A., Vaziri Rad, M. A.,
Maniee, S., & Pourfayaz, F. (2021). Cavity
receivers in solar dish collectors: A geometric
overview. Renewable Energy, 169, 53–79.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.12.106
[34] Abdelhady, S. (2021). Performance and cost
evaluation of solar dish power plant: sensitivity
analysis of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE)
and net present value (NPV). Renewable
Energy, 168, 332–342.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.12.074
[35] Malik, M. Z., Shaikh, P. H., Zhang, S., Lashari,
A. A., Leghari, Z. H., Baloch, M. H., …
Caiming, C. (2022, November 1). A review on
design parameters and specifications of
parabolic solar dish Stirling systems and their
applications. Energy Reports. Elsevier Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.03.031
[36] Avila-Marin, A. L., Fernandez-Reche, J., &
Martinez-Tarifa, A. (2019, September 1).
Modelling strategies for porous structures as
solar receivers in central receiver systems: A
review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews. Elsevier Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.03.059
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on HEAT and MASS TRANSFER
DOI: 10.37394/232012.2022.17.21
Rabaa K. Al-Farajat, Mohamed R. Gomaa,
Mai Z. Alzghoul
E-ISSN: 2224-3461
204
Volume 17, 2022
[37] Mahmoud, M. S., Khudheyer, A. F., & Abdul
Ghafoor, Q. J. (2020). A Novel design of the
solar central receiver to improve the
performance of the central solar power tower
plant. In IOP Conference Series: Materials
Science and Engineering (Vol. 928). IOP
Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-
899X/928/2/022003
[38] Praveen, R. P. (2020). Performance analysis and
optimization of central receiver solar thermal
power plants for utility scale power
generation. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(1).
https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12010127
[39] Crespo, L., & Ramos, F. (2020). Making central
receiver plants modular, more efficient and
scalable. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol.
2303). American Institute of Physics Inc.
https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0028916.
[40] Craig S. Turchia, Judith Vidalb, Matthew Bauer.
Molten salt power towers operating at 600–650
°C: Salt selection and cost benefits. Solar
Energy (2018) 164:38-46.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2018.01.063
[41] Meige Zheng, Jos´e Zapata, Charles-Alexis
Asselineau, Joe Coventry, John Pye. Analysis of
tubular receivers for concentrating solar tower
systems with a range of working fluids, in
exergy-optimised flow-path configurations.
Solar Energy, 211, (2020), 999-1016.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.09.037.
[42] Monther Alsboul, Mohd Sabri Mohd Ghazali,
Mohamed R. Gomaa and Aliashim Albani.
Experimental and theoretical investigations of
temperature and solid volume fraction-
dependent thermal conductivity of Erbium
oxide/Ethylene Glycol (Er2O3/EG) nanofluid
for thermal energy applications. Chemical
Engineering & Technology 2022. 45(12), 2139-
2149. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.202200159.
[43] Monther Alsboul, Mohd Sabri Mohd Ghazali,
Mohamed R. Gomaa and Aliashim Albani.
Experimental and Theoretical Investigation of
the Thermophysical Properties of Cobalt Oxide
(Co3O4) in DistilledWater (DW), Ethylene
Glycol (EG), and DW–EG Mixture Nanofluids.
Nanomaterials 2022, 12, 2779.
https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12162779.
[44] Farah M. Falahat, Mohamed R. Gomaa. A
Review Study on Solar Tower Using Different
Heat Transfer Fluid. Technology Audit and
Production Reserves 2022, 5 (1 (67)), 00–00.
doi: http://doi.org/10.15587/2706-
5448.2022.267560
[45] Eric C. Okonkwo1, Chinedu F. Okwose,
Muhammad Abid, and Tahir A. H. Ratlamwala.
Second-Law Analysis and Exergoeconomics
Optimization of a Solar Tower–Driven
Combined-Cycle Power Plant Using
Supercritical CO2. Journal of Energy
Engineering 2018, 144 (03).
[46] Maiyada A. Alamr, Mohamed R. Gomaa.
Comparison between the Evacuated and Flat
Plate Collectors. International Journal for
Innovative Engineering Research 2022, 1 (3):
PP. 01-09.
[47] Suhib a. Abu taha, Mohamed R. Gomaa, Sohaib
Al-Ma’asfeh. Hydro Pump Storage System
Driven by PV System for Peak Demand.
WSEAS Transactions on Systems 2022, 21: 49-
54. http://doi.org/10.37394/23202.2022.21.5.
[48] Sara el Hassani, Hanane Ait Lahoussine Ouali,
Benyounes Raillani and Mohammed Amine
Moussaou. Thermal Performance of Solar
Tower Using Air as Heat Transfer Fluid under
MENA Region Climate. (2020) 5th
International Conference on Renewable
Energies for Developing Countries (REDEC).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/REDEC49234.2020.9
163893
Contribution of Individual Authors to the
Creation of a Scientific Article (Ghostwriting
Policy)
Author Contributions: The authors are equal in all
work.
Sources of Funding for Research Presented in a
Scientific Article or Scientific Article Itself
No funding
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
(Attribution 4.0 International, CC BY 4.0)
This article is published under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en
_US
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on HEAT and MASS TRANSFER
DOI: 10.37394/232012.2022.17.21
Rabaa K. Al-Farajat, Mohamed R. Gomaa,
Mai Z. Alzghoul
E-ISSN: 2224-3461
205
Volume 17, 2022