Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-020-10057-7

Numerical analysis on flow and performance characteristics

of a small‑scale solar updraft tower (SUT) with horizontal absorber
plate and collector glass
Ramakrishna Balijepalli1 · V. P. Chandramohan1 · K. Kirankumar1 · S. Suresh2

Received: 25 October 2019 / Accepted: 7 July 2020

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2020

Abstract
A numerical analysis has been performed to examine and assess the flow and performance characteristics of the solar updraft
tower (SUT) power plant. A realistic domain (geometry and mesh) of the flow model was generated and simulations were
run with the help of ANSYS FLUENT 16.0 CFD package. A turbulent, realizable (k–ε) and discrete ordinates radiation
techniques were taken into consideration to solve the governing equation. The maximum air velocity of 3.27 m s−1 was
noticed at 200 mm above the chimney base (CB). The mean velocity at CB was 1.8 m s−1. The highest air temperature of
the absorber plate was 323 K, and it was at the centre of the absorber plate. The average air temperature inside the setup was
306.7 K. The power generated from the plant, chimney efficiency and overall efficiency of the SUT setup were evaluated to
be 0.38 W, 0.018% and 0.005%, respectively. 24% velocity increase and 70% power output increase were noticed when solar
flux increased from 650 to 1150 W m−2. Exergy analysis was performed. The results were compared with existing studies
and were found to be in good agreement.

Keywords Solar updraft tower · Turbulent model · Numerical · Performance characteristics · Horizontal absorber plate and
glass
List of symbols k Turbulent kinetic energy ­(m2 s−2)
a Absorption ­(m−1) P Power output (W)
A Cross-sectional area ­(m2) Q Volumetric flow rate of air ­(m3 s−1)
C Coefficient ⃗r Position vector
C1, C2, C3 Constant for k–ε model r Radial coordinate
CP Specific heat of air (J kg−1 K−1) Ra Rayleigh number
CB Chimney base RTE Radiative transfer equation
CFD Computational fluid dynamics ⃗s Direction vector
D Diameter SUT Solar updraft tower
DO Discrete ordinates T Temperature (K)
FVM Finite volume method u, v, w Velocity components (m s−1)
g Acceleration due to gravity (m s−2) z Axial coordinate
H Height (or) collector inlet gap (m)
Greek symbols
I Solar intensity (W m−2)
α Thermal diffusivity ­(m2 s−1)
β Coefficient of thermal expansion ­(K−1)
* V. P. Chandramohan ε Rate of dissipation of turbulent energy
[email protected] ­(m2 s−3)
μt Turbulent viscosity ­(m2 s−1)
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National ΔT Temperature difference (K)
Institute of Technology Warangal, Warangal,
Telangana State 506 004, India Δp Relative total pressure (Pa)
2 υ Kinematic viscosity ­(m2 s−1)
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National
Institute of Technology Tiruchirappalli, Tiruchirappalli, ρ Density (kg m−3)
Tamilnadu 620 015, India μ Dynamic viscosity (Pa s)

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 R. Balijepalli et al.

ϕ Phase function ­(sr−1) A good number of studies contributed to SUT plants.

dΩ′ Solid angle (sr) The physical process of SUT was analysed by Zhou et al.
λ Wave length (m) [2]. A small-scale SUT power plant was designed and built
η Efficiency (%) in China. The temperature data inside the collector were
σs Scattering coefficient measured, and the temperature difference between inside
σ Stephen Boltzmann constant and outside the collector was determined. It was reported
δk Turbulent Prandtl number for ‘k’ that after sunrise and at early morning, the air temperature
δε Turbulent Prandtl number for ‘ε’ inversion occurred due to insufficient driving force. Simi-
larly, the temperature distribution and maximum velocity of
Subscripts
air were recorded and analysed with the help of a reduced
a Absorption
scale SUT by Kasaeian et al. [3]. They achieved a maximum
b Black body
temperature difference of 25 °C. The maximum air velocity
c Collector
in SUT chimney was 3 m/s. They concluded that reducing
ch Chimney
the inlet size of the collector increased the power and effi-
h Hot air
ciency of the system.
t Turbulent
The effect of the geometrical parameters of SUT power
0 Reference
plant on fluid flow was discussed with the help of numerical
and experimental methodologies by Kasaeian et al. [4]. The
authors developed a mathematical model that contains all the
Introduction fluid flow details. They reported that when the inlet height
increased from 6 to 12 cm, the air temperature decreased
A vast consumption of fossil fuels creates a reduction of from 323.6 to 319.6 K. The maximum velocity of 1.62 m s−1
energy sources across the world. Numbers of organizations and maximum air temperature of 323.6 K were achieved in
and institutions are hardly working for identifying the alter- the setup. Numerical analysis was performed to predict the
nate option of energy. A good number of dedicated research fluid flow behaviour and heat transfer characteristics of SUT
group works for hassle-free energy sources such as solar system by Gholamalizade and Chung [5]. The Manzanares
energy. There is a number of ways the energy can be har- SUT power plant coupled with a turbine was simulated. A
vested from solar energy. One of the techniques to gener- maximum airflow velocity of 9 m s−1, a maximum tempera-
ate electricity is the solar updraft tower (SUT). It has four ture difference of 17.2 K inside the setup and maximum
important components such as collector plates, absorber pressure drop of 81.5 Pa were achieved from the numerical
plates, a chimney and a turbine. The fabrication of SUT solution. The ideal power output of the system was 52.82 kW
plants can be done by using the local components and avail- and the actual was 36 kW. These simulation results are com-
able scrap materials. Therefore, researchers interested in this parable with the Manzanares power plant as they reported
setup and want to do more researches on this topic to study that the real plant’s power output was 35–40 kW.
further [1]. Ayadi et al. [6] examined the performance of SUT plant
SUT plant is a big setup, which demands a large area under different collector slope angles with the help of
to collect more solar energy. A large open or desert areas numerical and experimental analyses. The various process
are needed to install this SUT plant. A large chimney is parameters such as air velocity, temperature, pressure and
needed to encourage the airflow inside so that the turbine can solar radiation were measured and studied for different col-
rotate fast and more energy can be harvested. Solar energy lector roof slope angles such as − 1.5°, − 1.0°, 0° and 1°.
is collected by glass plates and the collected solar energy is They concluded that the optimum geometry of a SUT mainly
transmitted inside the plant. A portion of the energy is used depends on the maximum value of air velocity. The results
to heat the air inside the canopy of SUT setup while another showed that a negative collector slope angle could enhance
part is stored in the copper absorber plate. The heat ener- the air velocity.
gies released through convection from the absorber plate and A pilot sloped SUT power plant was built by Kalash et al.
transmitted from the collector plates are used to heat the air [7] to investigate the temperature distribution and velocity
inside the setup. The temperature of the air inside the setup fluctuations inside the collector. Experimental data were
increases, and hence, the density of air decreases. Fresh air taken for every 10 min for a total of 40 days in the win-
from the atmosphere enters inside the setup to balance the ter season. This study concluded that any variation of solar
density gradient. The airflow is generated inside the chimney radiation directly impacted the collector outlet temperature
because of the buoyancy effect. The kinetic energy of flow- and the absorber layer also released heat to surrounding
ing air is used to run a turbine. This mechanical energy can air immediately when the intensity of solar power reduced
be converted into electrical energy. in the evening session. It was noticed that a maximum

13
Numerical analysis on flow and performance characteristics of a small‑scale solar updraft…

temperature difference between the inside and outside of very precisely. They suggested that a collector canopy profile
the system was 19 °C which could produce an updraft air with partial slope would minimize various losses such as
velocity of 2.9 m s−1. collector heat loss, heat loss to the ground, heat loss through
The present authors developed a theoretical model of the chimney wall, pressure loss due to friction, power losses
SUT plant [8] and estimated the performance parameters and recirculation losses. The authors came to the conclusion
of SUT plant. The dimensions of this model were chim- that the segmented canopy profile gave better power output
ney diameter (Dch) = 0.6 m, chimney height (Hch) = 6 m and than the flat collector canopy profiles. A comprehensive
diameter of the collector (Dc) = 3.5 m. Pressure drop and mathematical model of SUT was developed by Petela [14]
heat loss calculations were made to estimate the flow param- to describe the methodology of energy and exergy analysis
eters. Different materials required for the SUT components applied to SUT plant. Using energy balance equations and
were discussed and analysed. The solar radiation falls on exergy analysis, the solar flux distributions inside the setup
collector cover, transmitted solar energy through the collec- was studied.
tor glass plate, heat flux absorbed by the absorber plate and The effect of various geometrical parameters such as Hch
rate of heat transfer from the absorber plate to its surround- and collector roof angle (β) on the performance of a small-
ing air were estimated theoretically. It was also discussed scale SUT model was studied numerically by Das and Chan-
the estimation of required thermal energy storage material dramohan [15]. From the results, it was concluded that air
by doing analytical calculations. Different types of wind velocity was increased along with the increase in β, but the
turbine aerofoils were discussed for efficient turbine blade air temperature was slightly reduced with the increase in β. It
design. The same authors developed another optimization was also reported that the air updraft velocity was enhanced
study [9] and picked the turbine blade design parameters by up to 31% when Hch was varied from 3 to 8 m.
for low velocity (2 m s−1) and a higher velocity (10 m s−1) The plant efficiency was improved by enhancing the heat
air conditions. transfer coefficient of absorber plate from the utilization of
An experimental investigation was carried out by Sud- corona wind flow [16] which is generated by electrostatic
hakar and Cheralathan [10] to examine the growth in the forces linked to corona discharge arising at the tips of some
thermal performance of a double pass solar air collector sharp conductors subjected to high voltage to the ground. It
(which was made with a novel V-groove absorber plate with was an electro-hydrodynamic phenomenon. The heat trans-
pin fins). The parameters (mass flow rate) which influenced fer rate and wind velocity have been increased by about
the efficiency of the collector were discussed. It is observed 14.5% and 72%, respectively, with the application of voltage
that for a flow rate of 0.035 kg s−1, the novel absorber plate 15 kV across the setup wire (act as an anode) and absorber
enhanced the thermal efficiency of the collector by 17.4%. plate (act as a cathode) of the experimental setup.
A 3D CFD model was developed by Kasaeian et al. [11] to The performance of the solar chimney system was
describe the fluid flow behaviour through the turbine blade assessed by Koonsrisuk and Chitsomboon [17] with the
of SUT plant. They predicted the effect of angular speed of change of fluid flow area. Different types of configurations
turbine blade, the number of blades and radius of the col- of collector and chimney such as slopped collector, divergent
lector and height of the chimney on various thermodynamic and convergent chimneys were investigated. Based on such
parameters such as exit wind velocity, wind mass flow rate studies, the authors concluded that the ratio of slopped col-
through the turbine, torque generation and power output. lector roof and divergent chimney must be 16:1 to get more
They concluded that airflow rate and electricity production power generation (400 times more than the conventional
were increased with the increase in chimney height (Hch) and SUT system). A simple analytical model was developed by
collector diameter (Dc). Koonsrisuk et al. [18] in order to outline the constructional
The effect of the thermal energy storage (TES) system on theory of the geometry of SUT. The ratio of height to radius,
SUT plant was investigated numerically by Yaswanthkumar air flow rate and optimum power output were determined
and Chandramohan [12]. Two plants were modelled; one under the constant area of the plant. Finally, they concluded
without TES system (case I) and the other with TES system that electricity production per unit area was directly propor-
(case II). The natural materials such as sand and gravel were tional to the length scale of the system.
considered as TES materials. It was reported that a maxi- The impact of chimney configuration on the perfor-
mum velocity of 6.8 m s−1 was noticed in case I than case mance of SUT was investigated numerically by Arzpeyma
II (4.6 m s−1) because a certain amount of heat energy was et al. [19] in order to reduce the reverse flow of wind.
stored in case II which affected the air velocity in the day. The numerical results showed that the selection of oblique
Some studies investigated the design of various collector angle was mainly dependent on wind velocity. Similarly,
canopy profiles to achieve better performance of the system. Nasraoui et al. [20] presented a numerical investigation of
Steady-state mathematical model was formulated by Cottam the optimization of chimney shape on the fluid flow behav-
et al. [13] to analyse the actual physical process of collector iour inside SUT model. The examination was carried out

13
 R. Balijepalli et al.

on four different chimney shapes (two cylindrical chim-

neys with different diameters and two divergent chimneys
with different shapes). The results revealed that the diver-
gent shape chimney could generate better efficiency in the
system.
From the existing studies, it is observed that there were
few models of SUT plants which have been fabricated [2–5,
16]. Experiments were performed and temperatures of air,
absorber plate and solar glass plate were measured [2, 3].
Air velocity inside the setup was measured at different loca-
tions and results were analysed [6, 7]. Some studies have
reported that the numerical analysis [11, 17, 21] and other
studies presented the analytical discussion of various pro-
cess parameters of SUT [13, 14, 18]. Some studies discussed
the application of inclined solar collectors [10, 22] and the
application of parabolic trough solar collectors in gas refin-
ery units [23]. The design procedures and selection of mate-
rials of SUT plant were mentioned in a few studies [8, 24].
The studies mentioned all are with inclined absorber and
collector plates [2, 3, 7, 10]. Very limited studies [4, 18] ana-
lysed SUT with horizontal absorber and collector plates. The
flow and performance parameters of SUT with the horizontal
absorber and collector plate need to be estimated and ana-
lysed. Very few studies have analysed the effect of solar flux
on velocity, pressure and power output of SUT. This work
analyses a model of SUT plant with horizontal absorber and
collector plates. Fig. 1  a Practical domain generated and b mesh generated for model
The specific objectives of this study are; (1) to develop
a SUT plant model with horizontal collector and absorber
plates using ANSYS FLUENT 16.0, (2) to calculate and
assess the flow parameters such as velocity, pressure, tem-
perature and turbulent kinetic energy (3) to calculate the Grid independence test
power output, chimney and overall efficiencies of SUT plant
and (4) to examine the effect of solar flux on velocity, pres- Grid independence test was performed with four differ-
sure and power output of SUT plant. ent grid sizes (248,597, 428,702, 582,927 and 847,173,
respectively). The air velocity was estimated and plotted
(Fig. 2) inside the chimney at a height of 0.4 m from CB
along the length of Dch. The obtained velocity profiles are
Methodology in a similar trend with other profiles of different grid sizes.
An average error of 1.37% was noticed in the air velocity
Practical domain of flow model between the nodes of 248,597 and 428,702. The error in
between the nodes of 428,702 and 582,927 was 0.23%.
The dimensions of Dch = 0.6 m, Dc = 3.5 m and Hch = 6 m The error between the nodes of 582,927 and 847,173
were chosen for the SUT model based on the authors’ pre- was 0.01%. It is not much beneficial for the simulation
vious theoretical model [8]. The thickness of the absorber work from having an extremely fine meshing of geometry
plate was 1.5 mm. Thicknesses of chimney wall and col- because of the higher number of nodes prolong the com-
lector cover were chosen as 5 mm each. The 3D model of putational time and also utilize a lot of computer memory.
SUT plant was designed with both collector and absorber Therefore, 582,927 nodes were used to run the remaining
plates being in the horizontal position, as shown in Fig. 1a. simulations.
This model is generated using ANSYS FLUENT 16.0 design
modeller. These practical domains are divided into small
grid sizes with the help of ANSYS ICEM CFD tool. The
mesh generated is shown in Fig. 1b.

13
Numerical analysis on flow and performance characteristics of a small‑scale solar updraft…

3.5 viscosity of the air. Ra is estimated and it is 248,429,793.

3 Therefore, the problem is considered as turbulent flow. The
physical principles such as conservation of mass, momentum
Velocity/m s–1

2.5
248,597 nodes and energy [6] are applied to SUT model and the resulting
2
428,702 nodes governing equations are mentioned as follows;
1.5 582,927 nodes

1
847,173 nodes Continuity equation:
0.5 1 𝜕 𝜕
(r𝜌u) + (𝜌w) = 0 (2)
0 r 𝜕r 𝜕z
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Along the length of chimney diameter/m where ρ is air density, r and z are coordinates; u and w are
the air velocity in radial and axial directions, respectively.
Fig. 2  Grid independence test of SUT model (air velocity/m s−1 at The corresponding momentum equations are as follows:
0.4 m height from CB)
r-component:
1 𝜕 𝜕
Assumptions r 𝜕r
(r𝜌uu) + (𝜌uw)
𝜕z
( )
𝜕p 1 𝜕 ( 𝜕u ) 𝜕 𝜕u
( )
u
The following assumptions were made while solving the =−
𝜕r
+
r 𝜕r
𝜇r
𝜕r
+
𝜕z
𝜇
𝜕z
− 2𝜇 2
r (3)
numerical problem.
Z-component:
• There is no heat loss between the inner walls of glass ( )
1 𝜕 𝜕 𝜕p 1 𝜕 ( 𝜕w ) 𝜕 𝜕w
plates because the glasses have maximum transmissivity. r 𝜕r
(r𝜌uw) + (𝜌ww) = − +
𝜕z 𝜕z r 𝜕r
𝜇r
𝜕r
+
𝜕z
𝜇
𝜕z
− (𝜌g)
Similarly, no heat loss between the chimney and open air (4)
as the chimney material is a polycarbonate plate, so that
where μ is dynamic viscosity of air and p is the pressure.
it acts as an insulator [8, 13].
Energy equation:
• The ambient temperature at the inlet and outlet of SUT
is assumed as 300 K. [
1 𝜕 𝜕
]
1 𝜕
(
k 𝜕T
)
𝜕
(
k 𝜕T
)
• Steady state and turbulent airflow were considered inside (r𝜌Tu) + (𝜌wT) = r +
r 𝜕r 𝜕z r 𝜕r Cp 𝜕r 𝜕z Cp 𝜕z
the SUT [4, 25]. (5)
• Airflow is considered as incompressible, as the air veloc-
ity range inside the chimney is 2–20 m s−1 (Mach number where k is thermal conductivity of air (0.0265 W m−1 K−1)
of 0.006–0.06) [13]. and thermal expansion coefficient (β) is 0.00326 K−1.
• The intensity of solar heat flux (or) global solar radia- Turbulent kinetic energy equation (k) [6]:
tion is assumed as uniform (850 W m−2) for the SUT 1 𝜕 𝜕
model [8]. Therefore, solar heat flux absorbed by the (r𝜌ku) + (𝜌kw)
r 𝜕r 𝜕z
plate remained the same in a whole day and the periodic 1 𝜕
[ (
𝜇t 𝜕k
) ]
changes in temperature are neglected. = r 𝜇+
r 𝜕r 𝛿 𝜕r
)k ]
𝜇 𝜕k
[(
𝜕
+ 𝜇+ t + 𝜌Gk + Gb − 𝜌𝜀
𝜕z 𝛿k 𝜕z (6)
Governing equations
Turbulent energy dissipation equation (ε):
The flow inside the chimney is caused by the buoyancy effect
which is expressed in terms of Rayleigh number (Ra). If 1 𝜕 𝜕
(r𝜌𝜀u) + (𝜌𝜀w)
Ra is greater than 1­ 08, the fluid flow is to be considered as r 𝜕r 𝜕z
turbulent. 𝜇t 𝜕𝜀 𝜇t 𝜕𝜀
[ ( ) ] [( ) ]
1 𝜕 𝜕
= r 𝜇+ + 𝜇+
r 𝜕r 𝛿𝜀 𝜕r 𝜕z 𝛿𝜀 𝜕z
g𝛽ΔTH 3
Ra = (1) [ ( )(
𝜀
] C 𝜌𝜀2
𝜌Gk + C3 Gb − 2
)
𝛼v + C1
k k (7)
where g is the acceleration due to gravity, β is coefficient of
where δk and δε are turbulent Prandtl numbers for k and
thermal expansion, ΔT is temperature difference between
ε, respectively. C1, C2, C3 are constants of k–ε turbulence
surface and hot air, H is characteristic length (or) collec-
model.
tor inlet gap, α is thermal diffusivity and υ is the kinematic

13
 R. Balijepalli et al.

The DO radiation model is used to discretize the radiative in strongly curved domains [6]. Therefore, it was chosen for
transfer equation (RTE) with a directional vector ⃗s placed in a pressure interpolation scheme.
the global Cartesian coordinate system [26]. Momentum, energy, turbulent kinetic energy, turbulence
( ( )) ( ) ( ) dissipation energy and radiation heat transfer equations were
∇ ⋅ I𝜆 ⃗r, ⃗s ⃗s + Ca + 𝜎s I𝜆 ⃗r, ⃗s discretized with the help of second-order upwind scheme.
𝜎s 4𝜋 (
The Realizable k–ε model with wall treatment as standard
4𝜋 ∫0
= Ca ⋅ n2 Ib𝜆 + I𝜆 ⃗r, ⃗s� � ⃗s ⋅ ⃗s� d𝛺�
) ( )
(8) wall functions and buoyancy effect was considered for turbu-
lence predictions. The discrete ordinates (DO) method was
where I is the solar intensity at a position of ⃗r in the direc- used to solve RTE equation as it allows RTE equation for
tion of ⃗s , λ is the wavelength, Ca is absorption coefficient, semi-transparent wall materials such as glass. The conver-
σs is the scattering coefficient, Ib is black body intensity, ϕ is gence criterion for continuity, momentum and other velocity
phase function and dΩ′ is the discrete solid angle. terms was given as ­10−4, and the energy and radiation terms
were given as ­10−6.
Boundary conditions

The following boundary conditions were applied at different Estimation of power output of SUT and efficiency
sections of SUT.
Relative total pressure (Δp) of air means the total
• The pressure of ambient air is 0 Pa (gauge) and ambient (static + dynamic) pressure difference between inside and
temperature is 300 K at inlet and outlet of the setup. outside of SUT system.
• Mixed boundary condition (convection as well as radia- The volume of the air which passes through the chimney
tion) is applied to anti-refluxing collector roof glass. This pipe per unit time is called the rate of airflow (or) volumetric
collector roof is considered as a semi-transparent wall. flow rate of air. It is estimated by using,
• No-slip boundary condition is adopted for all the wall
Q = Av (9)
surfaces of main elements of SUT such as collector
cover, chimney and glass roof joint, chimney wall and where A is cross-sectional area of chimney, v is the air veloc-
ground absorber plate surface. ity at CB.
• The adiabatic wall boundary condition is selected for the Theoretical electric power (P) generated by SUT [8] is
wall of the chimney. estimated by,
• The heat flux is considered from the absorber plate to its
surrounding airflow.
P = QΔp (10)
• A constant input of solar beam and diffuse radiations are The chimney efficiency [8] is estimated using,
taken into consideration as 750 W m−2 and 100 W m−2,
respectively, for the flow model as mentioned in Abhay gHch
𝜂ch = (11)
et al. [27]. Cp Th

Numerical solution and methods where g is acceleration due to gravity, Cp is specific heat of
air and Th is temperature of hot air.
A finite volume method (FVM) was applied to discretize The overall efficiency (ηo) of SUT plant can be deter-
the governing equations. A steady-state, absolute velocity mined from,
formulations and pressure-based solver was selected for sim- P
ulation. SIMPLE algorithm was chosen for pressure veloc- 𝜂o = (12)
GI 𝜋R2c
ity coupling. Gravitational acceleration was considered for
a more precise and appropriate response of results as the where P is power output, GI is incident solar radiation, Rc is
nature of the problem was natural convection. radius of the collector.
In the spatial discretization scheme, the least square
cell-based method was applied to gradients. Gradients are
required for building values of a scalar at control volume Exergy analysis
faces and also for estimating secondary diffusion terms and
velocity gradients. PRESTO algorithm was recommended The collector exergy efficiency (ηc.exe) is defined as the ratio
for flows with high swirl numbers, natural convection with of amount of heat exergy output from the collector to the
high Rayleigh numbers, high speed rotating flows and flows heat exergy input to the collector [28].

13
Numerical analysis on flow and performance characteristics of a small‑scale solar updraft…

Qexe.out middle of the setup. The velocity contour for the flow model
𝜂c.exe = (13) is evaluated and presented in Fig. 3. The velocity profile
Qexe.in
almost looks like a symmetrical profile because the setup is
The heat exergy output from the collector has been expressed also symmetry. The air velocity is maximum (3.27 m s−1)
by, near to chimney base (CB) because of the nozzle effect as
{ ( )} the distance between the surface of the absorber plate and
Th.a
CB is 0.1 m. The average air velocity inside the SUT model
( )
Qexe.out = mair Cp,air Th.a − Tamb − Tamb ln
Tamb is calculated using area weighted average method and was
(14) 1.8 m s−1. Air velocity near the boundary of the chimney
The heat exergy input to the collector has been expressed by, was observed as a minimum when compared to the centre
[ { ( )} { ( )4 }] of the chimney because of no-slip boundary condition. A
4 Tamb 1 Tamb similar type of horizontal collector and absorber plate setup
Qexe.in = Is As.c 1 − +
3 Tsky 3 Tsky was developed by Ayadi et al. [6] and Kasaeian et al. [4]
(15) and found the velocity distribution. Ayadi et al. [6] reported
where ‘Tsky’ is the sky temperature [29]. that the air velocity was in the range of 0–2.13 m s−1. The
reported maximum air velocity in Kasaeian et al. [4] study
( )3
Tsky = 0.0552 Tamb 2 . (16) was 1.62 m s−1. The setup made by Ghalamchi et al. [27]
produced a maximum air velocity of 1.7 m s−1 at CB.
Similarly, the temperature distribution inside the model
was estimated and shown in Fig. 4. From the collector inlet,
Results and discussions the temperature increases gradually towards CB, because
of absorber plate heats the air. It was noticed that the air
Results of SUT model (both collector glass temperature was always maximum (323.5 K) near central
and absorber plate are horizontal) regions of chimney and minimum at boundary regions. The
average temperature of the air is 306.7 K inside the model.
The results of SUT model are presented in this section. All A significant temperature drop occurs in air temperature near
the contour plots were drawn in the XY plane and at the the exit of the chimney (305 K) because the chimney outlet
is open to ambient air, so that heat transfer takes place from

Y
Y

Z X
X
Y Velocity
Temperature
3.3
3.0 323.0
321.9
2.8 320.8
2.6 319.7
2.3 318.6
2.1 317.5
316.4
1.9
315.3
1.6 314.2
1.4 313.1
1.2 311.9
0.9 310.8
309.7
0.7
308.6
0.5 307.5
0.2 306.4
0.0 305.3
304.2
303.1
302.0

Fig. 4  Temperature contours/K of model

Fig. 3  Air velocity/m s−1 contours of model

13
 R. Balijepalli et al.

inside the chimney to the outside air. The air temperature Y

inside the setup of Nasraoui et al. [26] was in the range of

308–326.7 K with the maximum air temperature of 326.7 K.
X
Air temperature inside the setup of Ayadi et al. [6] was in the
range of 305–331 K. The maximum air temperature inside 0.50
0.46
the setup was 322 K [6], which is almost equivalent to the 0.43
0.39
temperature in the present study. Ghalamchi et al. [30] also 0.36
reported the maximum air temperature of 323.8 K. 0.32
0.29
The static pressure and TKE contour of the flow model 0.25
0.21
are shown in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively. Maximum static 0.18
pressure (0.025 Pa) occurs at the collector inlet (Fig. 5). Air 0.14
0.11
pressure decreases when it moves from collector inlet to CB 0.07
0.04
and reaches to the lowest value of − 7.1 Pa where the mag- 0.00

nitude of air velocity is maximum (as mentioned in Fig. 3).

It is because of static pressure is only the function of density
and altitude of air particle. It causes lower air densities near
CB region due to higher air temperatures. Similar nature of
air static pressure contours was observed inside the setup of
Ayadi et al. [6] with a minimum value of 3.8 Pa. Air static
pressure inside the setup of Nasraoui et al. [26] was in the
range of 0.09 to − 6.51 Pa. The minimum air static pressure
inside the setup is − 6.51 Pa, which is almost equivalent to Fig. 6  Turbulent kinetic energy/m2 s−2 inside SUT model
the present study’s model.
Figure 6 shows TKE in the SUT model. TKE is a meas-
ure of the strength of turbulence generation in airflow. It Z

is observed that a minimum of TKE (0.00015 m 2 s−2) is

at the inlet of collector and a maximum (0.48 m2 s−2) is at X

CB with an average of 0.067 m2 s−2. The contours of air Temperature

363.0
360.1
357.1
354.2
351.2
348.3
345.3
342.4
Y 339.4
336.5
333.5
330.6
X 327.6
324.7
Pressure 321.7
318.8
0.0
315.8
– 0.5
312.9
– 1.0 309.9
– 1.5 307.0
– 2.0
– 2.5
– 3.0
– 3.5
– 4.0 Fig. 7  Temperature/K of absorber plate of SUT model
– 4.6
– 5.1
– 5.6
– 6.1 turbulent kinetic energy inside the setup of Ayadi et al. [6]
– 6.6
– 7.1
were noticed in the range of 0.00012–0.4 m2 s−2.
The temperature distribution of the absorber plate is
determined and is mentioned in Fig. 7. Maximum tempera-
ture (363 K) of absorber plate is noticed at a location from
300 to 800 mm away from the outer periphery because of
continuous absorption of the radiant energy absorbed by a
copper plate which is transmitted from the collector plate. A
minimum temperature of absorber plate (305 K) is observed
at the outer periphery because of fresh air enters inside the
Fig. 5  Static pressure/N m−2 distribution inside SUT model

13
Numerical analysis on flow and performance characteristics of a small‑scale solar updraft…

Table 1  Flow parameters and Parameters Model

thermodynamic characteristics
of SUT Min Max Av.
−1
Air velocity/m s 0 3.27 1.8
Temperature of air inside the setup/K 300 323 306.7
Static pressure of air/Pa − 7.1 0.025 − 2.03
Turbulent kinetic energy/m2 s−2 0.00015 0.48 0.067
Temperature of absorber plate/K 307 363 350.1
Average mass flow rate at collector inlet/kg s−1 0.58
Average volumetric flow rate at collector inlet/m3 s−1 0.47

Table 2  Estimated output parameters of flow model of SUT The relative pressure difference at CB at different solar
fluxes was estimated and is shown in Fig. 8. The pressure
Parameters Value
difference increased from 0.28 to 0.9 N m−2 when the solar
Air velocity near turbine/m s−1
3.15 flux increased from 650 to 1150 W m−2. The increase in
Volumetric flow rate of air inside chimney/m3 ­s−1 0.89 buoyancy effect inside the canopy creates an increase in
Relative total pressure at chimney base/Pa 0.43 pressure drop. This increase in pressure drop brings a good
Power output/W 0.38 amount of fresh air inside, improving the performance
Chimney efficiency/% 0.0181 of the system, shown in Fig. 8. The power output, in this
Overall SUT efficiency/% 0.005 case, was estimated using Eq. (10) and shown in Fig. 8. It
is observed that there is a 70% increase in power output
Case: Maximum
when the solar flux increased from 650 to 1150 W m−2. The
maximum power output was observed at the solar flux of
system. The mean temperature of the plate is 350.1 K. 1150 W m−2. On a particular day, if the solar flux varied
Fadaei et al. [29] were achieved a similar type of absorber from 650 to 1150 W m−2, then the average power output
temperature (maximum of 343 K) by using concrete cement from the system is 0.47 W.
as absorbing material. All the exergy parameters such as exergy output and input
The minimum, maximum and average flow properties of from the collector and exergy efficiency of collector were
SUT model (both horizontal collector and absorber plates) estimated using Eqs. (13–16) and are presented in Table 3.
were estimated and mentioned in Table 1. The performance
characteristics of SUT flow model were estimated using Results validation
Eqs. (8–11) and presented in Table 2. The power genera-
tion, chimney efficiency and overall efficiency of the SUT The numerical results along with the estimated parameters
setup are to be 0.38 W, 0.018% and 0.005%, respectively. were compared with similar studies of small scale proto-
The results were compared with existing studies and found types and mentioned in Fig. 9 and Table 4. The temperature
good agreement.
2.5
Influence of solar radiation on air velocity
2.25
and power output of SUT model 2
1.75
Average air velocity at CB/m s–1
Depending on the solar radiation in a particular region, the 1.5
Relative total air pressure at CB/N m–2
flow and performance parameters of SUT change. A trial 1.25
Power output, W
was made in this study to identify the effect of solar radia- 1
tion. The impact of solar radiation on velocity, pressure and 0.75
power output of SUT plant is shown in Fig. 8. The average 0.5

air velocity increased when solar radiation increased from 0.25

650 to 1150 W m−2. The temperature difference between 0

650 750 850 950 1050 1150
inside and outside of setup increases when the solar heat flux Solar radiation/W m–2
increases, so that air mass flow rate, volume flow rate and
velocity increases at CB because of buoyancy effect. 24% Fig. 8  Average air velocity/m s−1, relative pressure difference/N m−2
of air velocity increase takes place when the solar radiation at chimney base and power output/W of SUT model under different
increased from 650 to 1150 W m−2. solar irradiances

13
 R. Balijepalli et al.

Table 3  Exergy analysis of solar updraft tower energy of the setup are similar to those obtained in existing
Parameters Values studies. Ayadi et al. [6] and Nasraoui et al. [26] used wood
and black rubber, respectively, as absorber material. In the
Heat exergy output from the collector, Qexe.out 0.08 W present model, the copper plate with black paint was used
Heat exergy input to the collector, Qexe.in 24.9 W as an absorber. This is the reason the maximum velocity
Solar collector exergy efficiency, ηc.exe 0.32% achieved near CB was low for Ayadi et al. [6] (2.13 m s−1)
and Nasraoui et al. [26] (2.41 m s−1). The present study’s
maximum velocity was 3.27 m s−1.
324 The nature of present numerical results was also com-
322
Ayadi et al. [6] pared with the simulation results of Kasaeian et al. [4] and
Present model experimental results of Ghalamchi et al. [30] and found
320
a good agreement on air temperature. The maximum
Temperature/K

318
absorber plate temperature of Ghalamchi et al. [30] study
316 was 353.8 K, whereas, the present study has 363 K. The
314 absorber plate material in the present study was copper,
312 whereas in the experimental study Ghalamchi et al. [30], it
was aluminium.
310

308

306
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75
Conclusions
Collector radius from centre to it's outer periphery/m
A CFD investigation was performed for the computation of
flow and heat transfer characteristics of SUT plant with hori-
Fig. 9  Air temperature/K inside collector (10 mm above absorber
plate surface) zontal absorber and collector plates. The practical domain
was created and simulations were run using ANSYS FLU-
ENT 16.0 CFD. The flow and performance parameters were
profile of air (10 mm above absorber plate surface) inside studied. A turbulent, realizable (k–ε) model and discrete
SUT model shows a similar trend of Ayadi et al. [6] model ordinates (DO) radiation model were utilized to work out
which is shown in Fig. 9. The maximum temperature of air the mathematical equations governing the flow model.
obtained in the numerical simulation was 323.05 K, whereas The following conclusions were drawn. For the SUT
the experimental setup of Ramakrishna et al. [31] yielded an model, the air velocity, temperature, pressure and turbulent
almost similar value (319 K). kinetic energy (TKE) distributions were almost symmetric
Table 4 provides a data comparison of present and exist- in nature as the domain developed was symmetrical. The
ing studies. There is a similarity of values between the pre- maximum air velocity was obtained at chimney base (CB)
sent numerical results with other studies. The maximum and it was 3.27 m s−1 with an average of 1.8 m s−1. The
temperature inside the setup is 323 K, which is almost simi- maximum air temperature of 323 K was noticed just above
lar to the studies of Ayadi et al. [6] and Nasraoui et al. [26]. the absorber plate and the average was 306.7 K. TKE was
Similarly, the static pressure range and turbulent kinetic higher (0.574 m2 s−2) for the chimney at a height of 0.3 m

Table 4  Comparison of simulated and estimated parameters of SUT model with existing literature
Parameters Ayadi et al. [6] Nasraoui et al. [25] Ghalamchi Kasaeian Present model
et al. [30] et al. [4]

Dch/m 0.16 0.154 0.2 0.3 0.6

Hch/m 3 2.95 3 3 6
Dc/m 2.75 3.7 3 3 3.5
Maximum temperature/K 322 326.7 323.8 323.6 323
Static pressure range/Pa − 3.5 to 0.0 − 6.51 to 0.09 − 7.1 to 0.025
Maximum velocity/m s−1 2.13 2.41 1.7 1.62 3.27
Turbulent kinetic energy range/m2 s−2 0.00012–0.4 0–0.8 – – 0.00015–0.48
Maximum temperature of absorber plate/K – – 353.8 – 363
Power/W – 0.05 – – 0.38

13
Numerical analysis on flow and performance characteristics of a small‑scale solar updraft…

from CB and the average of TKE was 0.074 m2 s−2. The Energy Convers Manag. 2014;83:28–34. https:​ //doi.org/10.1016/j.
maximum absorber plate temperature was 363 K (noticed at encon​man.2014.03.042.
5. Gholamalizade E, Chung JD. Analysis of fluid flow and heat
a location from 500 to 1150 mm away from the outer periph- transfer on a solar updraft tower power plant coupled with a
ery). The average absorber plate temperature was 350.1 K. wind turbine using computational fluid dynamics. Appl Therm
The maximum static pressure of the air was 0.024 Pa and Eng. 2017;126:548–58. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.applt ​herma​
the average was − 2.03 Pa. leng.2017.07.192.
6. Ayadi A, Driss Z, Abdullah B, Abid MS. Experimental and
The average volumetric flow rate of air inside the chim- numerical study of the impact of the collector roof inclination on
ney was 0.89 m3 s−1. Relative total pressure at the chimney the performance of a solar chimney power plant. Energy Build.
base was 0.43 Pa. The power output of the plant was 0.38 W. 2017;139:263–76. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbui​ld.2017.01.047.
The chimney efficiency was 0.018% and overall efficiency 7. Kalash S, Naimeh W, Ajib S. Experimental investigation of
the solar collector temperature field of a sloped solar updraft
was 0.005%. The effect of solar radiation on various process power plant prototype. Sol Energy. 2013;98:70–7. https​://doi.
parameters such as air velocity, relative total pressure at CB org/10.1016/j.solen​er.2013.05.025.
and power output of SUT model was estimated and analysed. 8. Ramakrishna B, Chandramohan VP, Kirankumar K. Perfor-
The average air velocity increased from 1.71 to 2.25 m s−1 mance parameter evaluation, materials selection, solar radia-
tion with energy losses, energy storage and turbine design pro-
and the relative total air pressure at CB increased from cedure for a pilot scale solar updraft tower. Energy Convers
0.28 to 0.9 N m−2 when the solar radiation increased from Manag. 2017;150:451–62. https ​ : //doi.org/10.1016/j.encon​
650 to 1150 W m−2. Subsequently, the power output (P) of man.2017.08.043.
the SUT model increased to 0.8 W from 0.24 W. Exergy 9. Ramakrishna B, Chandramohan VP, Kirankumar K. Optimized
design and performance parameters for wind turbine blades of a
analysis of solar collector was carried out. The exergy effi- solar updraft tower (SUT) plant using theories of Schmitz and aer-
ciency of the solar collector was 0.32%. The present results odynamics Forces. Sustain Energy Technol Assess. 2018;30:192–
were compared with published data, and they were in good 200. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2018.10.001.
accordance. 10. Sudhakar P, Cheralathan M. Thermal performance enhance-
ment of solar air collector using a novel V-groove absorber plate
This numerical work can be further enhanced by finding with pin fins for drying agricultural products: an experimental
the effect of air inlet gap on flow and performance param- study. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2019;140:2397–408. https​://doi.
eters. The effect of thermal energy storage can be investi- org/10.1007/s1097​3-019-08952​-9.
gated which enables the system to function even after the 11. Kasaeian A, Mahmoudi AR, Astaraei FR, Hejab A. 3D simulation
of solar chimney power plant considering turbine blades. Energy
sunset time. The effect of Dch and Hch can be investigated Convers Manag. 2017;147:55–65. https:​ //doi.org/10.1016/j.encon​
further keeping in mind the power output and efficiency of man.2017.05.029.
the system. 12. Yaswanthkumar A, Chandramohan VP. Numerical analysis of
flow parameters on solar updraft tower (SUT) with and without
Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge the financial support thermal energy storage (TES) system. J Therm Anal Calorim.
provided by (1) Science & Engineering Research Board (SERB), 2018;136(1):331–43. https:​ //doi.org/10.1007/s10973​ -018-7756-z.
Department of Science and Technology (DST), New Delhi—110 13. Cottam PJ, Duffor P, Lindstrand P, Fromme P. Effect of canopy
070, India, Grant No. File No. EEQ/2016/000111 and (2) Centre of profile on solar thermal chimney performance. Sol Energy.
Excellence (CoE) under TEQIP—II, National Institute of Technology 2016;129:286–96. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.solen​er.2016.01.052.
Warangal, Warangal, India, Ref. No: TEQIP-II/NITW/CoE/2016. The 14. Petela R. Thermodynamic study of a simplified model of the solar
authors also acknowledge the support received by way of proof reading chimney power plant. Sol Energy. 2008;83(1):94–107. https:​ //doi.
from Dr. M.R. Vishwanathan, Assistant Professor and Head, Humani- org/10.1016/j.solen​er.2008.07.001.
ties and Social Sciences Department, NIT Warangal, India. 15. Das P, Chandramohan VP. Effect of chimney height and collector
roof angle on flow parameters of solar updraft tower (SUT) plant.
J Therm Anal Calorim. 2018;136:133–45. https:​ //doi.org/10.1007/
s1097​3-018-7749-y.
References 16. Nasirivatan S, Kasaeian A, Ghalamchi M, Ghalamchi M. Per-
formance optimization of solar chimney power plant using
electric/corona wind. J Electrost. 2015;78:22–30. https​://doi.
1. Najmi M, Nazari A, Mansouri H, Zahedi G. Feasibility study org/10.1016/j.elsta​t.2015.09.007.
on optimization of a typical solar chimney power plant. Heat 17. Koonsrisuk A, Chitsomboon T. Effects of flow area changes on the
Mass Transf. 2012;48:475–85. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s0023​ potential of solar chimney power plants. Energy. 2013;51:400–6.
1-011-0894-5. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.energ​y.2012.12.051.
2. Zhou X, Yang J, Xiao B, Hou G. Experimental study of tem- 18. Koonsrisuk A, Lorente S, Bejan A. Constructal solar chimney
perature field in a solar chimney power setup. Appl Therm configuration. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2010;53(1–3):327–33. https​
Eng. 2007;27:2044–50. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.applt ​herma​ ://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhea​tmass​trans​fer.2009.09.026.
leng.2006.12.007. 19. Arzpeyma M, Mekhilef S, Newaz KMS, Horan B, Seyedmahmou-
3. Kasaeian AB, Heidari E, Nasirivatan SH. Experimental investiga- dian M, Akram N, Stojcevski A. Solar chimney power plant and
tion of climatic effects on the efficiency of a solar chimney pilot its correlation with ambient wind effect. J Therm Anal Calorim.
power plant. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2011;15:5202–6. https​ 2019. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s1097​3-019-09065​-z.
://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.04.019. 20. Nasraoui H, Driss Z, Kchaou H. Effect of the chimney design on
4. Kasaeian A, Ghalamchi M, Ghalamchi M. Simulation and opti- the thermal characteristics in solar chimney power plant. J Therm
mization of geometric parameters of a solar chimney in Tehran.

13
 R. Balijepalli et al.

Anal Calorim. 2019;140:2721–32. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s1097​ 27. Abhay L, Chandramohan VP, Raju VRK. Design, development
3-019-09037​-3. and performance of indirect type solar dryer for banana drying.
21. Yaswanthkumar A, Chandramohan VP. Influence of thermal Energy Proc. 2017;109:409–16. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypr​
energy storage system on flow and performance parameters of o.2017.03.041.
solar updraft tower power plant: a three dimensional numeri- 28. Neeraj M, Krishan K, Manoj K. Thermal analysis of solar updraft
cal analysis. J Clean Prod. 2019;207(10):136–52. https​://doi. tower by using different absorbers with convergent chimney. Envi-
org/10.1016/j.jclep​ro.2018.09.248. ron Dev Sustain. 2018;21:1251–69. https:​ //doi.org/10.1007/s1066​
22. Kesavan S, Arjunan TV, Vijayan S. Thermodynamic analysis 8-018-0087-1.
of a triple pass solar dryer for drying potato slices. J Therm 29. Fadaei N, Kasaeian A, Akbarzadeh A, Hashemabadi SH. Experi-
Anal Calorim. 2018;136:159–71. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s1097​ mental investigation of solar chimney with phase change material
3-018-7747-0. (PCM). Renew Energy. 2018;123:26–35. https:​ //doi.org/10.1016/j.
23. Shahdost BM, Jokar MA, Astaraei FR, Ahmadi MH. Modeling renen​e.2018.01.122.
and economic analysis of a parabolic trough solar collector 30. Ghalamchi M, Kasaeian A, Ghalamchi M, Mirahosseeini AH.
used in order to preheat the process fluid of furnaces in a refin- An experimental study on the thermal performance of a solar
ery (case study: Parsian Gas Refinery). J Therm Anal Calorim. chimney with different dimensional parameters. Renew Energy.
2019;137:2081–97. https:​ //doi.org/10.1007/s10973​ -019-08135-​ 6. 2016;91:477–83. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.renen​e.2016.01.091.
24. Ramakrishna B, Chandramohan VP, Kiran KK. A complete design 31. Ramakrishna B, Chandramohan VP, Kirankumar K. Development
data and performance parameter evaluation of a pilot scale solar of a small scale plant for a solar chimney power plant (SCPP):
updraft tower. Heat Transf Eng. 2019;41(6–7):562–75. https:​ //doi. a detailed fabrication procedure, experiments and performance
org/10.1080/01457​632.2018.15468​11. parameters evaluation. Renew Energy. 2020;148:247–60. https​://
25. Ming T, deRitcher RK, Meng F, Pan Y, Liu W. Chimney shape doi.org/10.1016/j.renen​e.2019.12.001.
numerical study for solar chimney power generating systems. Int J
Energy Res. 2011;37(4):310–22. https​://doi.org/10.1002/er.1910. Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
26. Nasraoui H, Driss Z, Ayadi A, Bouabidi A, Kchaou H. Numeri- jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
cal and experimental study of the impact of conical chimney
angle on the thermodynamic characteristics of a solar chimney
power plant. J Proc Mech Eng. 2019;233(5):1185–99. https​://doi.
org/10.1177/09544​08919​85916​0.

13