Desalination 457 (2019) 32–38

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Desalination
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/desal

Modified active solar distillation system employing directly absorbing T

Therminol 55–Al2O3 nano heat transfer fluid and Fresnel lens concentrator
⁎
M. Muraleedharana, H. Singhb, M. Udayakumara, S. Suresha,
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirappalli 620015, India
b
Brunel University London, Kingston Lane Uxbridge, Uxbridge UB8 3PH, UK

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper reports the design and construction of a modified active solar distillation system (MSDS) and com-
Solar still parison of its performance parameters with that of a conventional solar still (CSS). MSDS consists of a solar still,
Fresnel lens concentrator a Fresnel lens concentrator with an evacuated receiver tube and a serpentine loop type heat exchanger.
Nanofluid Al2O3–Therminol-55 nanofluid (nHTF) is used as the heat transfer fluid in the solar collector loop. Various
A heat exchanger
performance parameters of MSDS and CSS such as saline water temperature, hourly yield and total yield have
been compared under the ambient and solar conditions prevailing at Trichy. The experimental results indicate
the hourly yield of MSDS with 0.1% nHTF is 45–250.27% more than CSS, and the total yield of MSDS with 0.1%
nHTF is 12.190 L/m2 day compared to 3.48 L/m2 day for CSS. The daily efficiency of MSDS is found to vary with
volumetric concentration of nanofluid, and maximum efficiency of 53.55% is obtained for 0.1% nHTF. Estimated
cost for production of one litre-distilled water is approximately 1.54 INR for CSS and 1.41 INR for MSDS. MSDS
developed in this study is found to be a better alternative to the CSS still due to its high productivity and cost-
effectiveness.

1. Introduction thermal collectors, which suffers from a high radiative loss in the hot
receiver area [14]. For the efficient utilisation of the collected solar
In several developing countries, water is either economically scarce, energy, nanoparticles can be introduced either directly to the saline
i.e. finding a reliable source of water is time-consuming and expensive water [6,8,9] or the heat transfer fluid [4,13]. The studies conducted by
or physically scarce where just enough water is not available. Rashidi et al. [1,2] using nanofluid in the solar still indicated a marginal
Desalination of the sea and brackish water offers a solution to the increase in productivity. However, the conventional method of adding
scarcity potable water. However, desalination techniques employing nano-additives to the heat transfer fluid still needs a selectively ab-
fossil fuel reserves to supply their huge energy requirement are quite sorbing metallic surface, which adds to the cost of fresh water pro-
expensive, and fossil fuels have been linked to environmental de- duced. Also, the performance metallic coating degrades due to weath-
gradation. The utilisation of solar energy for powering desalination ering or prolonged exposure to enhanced temperatures. The coating can
plants could be a sustainable solution. Integration of Tubular solar still be irreversibly damaged in the case of leakage of the heat transfer fluid.
with compound parabolic type concentrator was reported to have This study focuses on improving the daily productivity of conven-
productivity higher by 3.7 L/day compared to that of a conventional tional solar still by a novel modified solar distillation system (MSDS)
solar still, Arunkumar et al. [7]. Integration of phase change material comprising of a linear Fresnel lens based optical concentrator, directly
and cylindrical parabolic concentrator [3,20], photovoltaic-thermal absorbing Al2O3-Therminol-55 nanofluid as a heat transfer fluid and a
collectors [10], parabolic trough concentrators [17], flat plate solar serpentine heat exchanger in the still basin. To the best of the knowl-
collectors [18] and the use of hot air injection and PCM [12,15] could edge of the authors, this is the first study reporting the use of such a
overcome the low productivity of conventional solar stills to some ex- solar concentrator in a solar still.
tent. Singh and Tiwari [5] and Singh et al. [10] used N identical PVT
collectors and a compound parabolic collector (CPC) to enhance the 2. Experimental setup
daily yield of conventional solar still. To the best of author's knowledge
all the previously reported studies employed surface absorbing solar A conventional solar still (CSS) and modified solar distillation

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: harjit.singh@brunel.ac.uk (H. Singh), muday@nitt.edu (M. Udayakumar), ssuresh@nitt.edu (S. Suresh).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2019.01.024
Received 8 August 2018; Received in revised form 21 January 2019; Accepted 27 January 2019
0011-9164/ Crown Copyright © 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
M. Muraleedharan et al. Desalination 457 (2019) 32–38

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of conventional solar still (CSS).

Fig. 2. Pictorial representation of the modified solar distillation system (MSDS).

system (MSDS) are fabricated and tested under the ambient and solar The MSDS, see Figs. 2–3 comprises of modified solar still (MSS) with
conditions of Trichy (Tamilnadu, India) during the summer of 2018; see a serpentine heat exchanger, and a single axis tracked linear Fresnel
Figs. 1–3. The CSS consists of a basin, a rectangular cross-section mild lens concentrator.
steel container (1.5 mm thick), whose inner surface (1 m2 area) is
painted black to act as the solar radiation absorber. For minimising the
heat loss, the outer box of solar still is designed specially to provide 2.1. Modified solar still (MSS)
sufficient thermal insulation. It consists of two layers of mild steel se-
parated by a wooden block. The total thickness of the outer box is about The modified solar still (MSS) has the similar geometrical specifi-
20 mm. Apart from this the basin is well insulated using a 50 mm thick cations and condensing surface tilt of 15° as the CSS, but the basin
glass wool insulation (thermal conductivity 0.035 W/mK). construction of MSS differs from the latter. Copper sheet is used to
A transparent glass cover (4 mm thick) acts as the condensation construct the basin to achieve a higher heat transfer rate between the
surface, located at the top of the outer box. The slope of the con- absorbing surface and saline water. Also, a serpentine shape heat ex-
densation surface is an important factor affecting the productivity of changer made of copper tube (diameter 10 mm) is placed in the basin.
solar still. Hashim et al. [16], and Tiwari and Tiwari [19] reported that The heat exchanger is mounted on Teflon blocks to prevent direct
the condensation surface should be inclined at the latitude angle of the contact with the basin surface. The water depth in the basin is main-
location to get maximum desalinated water yield. In this study, the tained at 25 mm using a floating valve system to ensure that the heat
glass cover is tilted at 15°, the latitude of Trichy. exchanger is always immersed in water.
The MSDS harnessed (i) direct energy from the sun and (ii) energy

33
M. Muraleedharan et al. Desalination 457 (2019) 32–38

Fig. 3. Experimental setup containing the MSDS.

Table 1 which are incorporated with a data logger and a laptop. Total solar
Specification of measuring devices. radiation intensity measurements are obtained using two pyranometers.
Sl. no. Device Accuracy Range The accuracy and range of the measuring instruments are depicted in
Table 1.
1 Thermocouple ± 1 °C −270 °C–500 °C The approach described by Barford [21] has been used to estimate
2 Pyranometer ± 1 W/m2 0–5000 W/m2 uncertainty in the hourly thermal efficiency. It is calculated as the root
3 Calibrated flask ± 1 mL 0–2000 mL
sum square of fixed error of the instrument and random error in the
measurement. Accordingly, the uncertainty of hourly thermal efficiency
supplied by the line-focusing Fresnel lens-based solar collector. A de- is obtained as 0.8%.
tailed description of the solar concentrator and the nanofluid is pre-
sented in the author's previous paper [11]. 4. Hourly efficiency of solar still

3. Error analysis The hourly efficiency of a solar is defined as the ratio of the actual
amount of heat consumed in producing distilled water in a specific time
Several parameters are taken into consideration to analyse the interval to the amount of solar energy incident on the still aperture
overall performance of the distillation system. The temperatures at during that time interval. Mathematically, it can be expressed by Eq.
unique points (Atmospheric temperature, the temperature of the glass, (1). The daily average efficiency of the system is the ratio of the sum of
temperature of saline water) is measured using K-type thermocouples hourly efficiency to working hours

Fig. 4. Irradiance during experiments.

34
M. Muraleedharan et al. Desalination 457 (2019) 32–38

Fig. 5. Temperature variation of saline water in CSS and MSDS basins.

Table 2 in 1 h (J/m2)
Hourly temperatures of base fluid and nHTF measured on experimental days.
L w = 103 [2501.9 − 2.4076Tw + 1.192217 × 10−3Tw2 − 1.5863 × 10−5Tw3
Time nHTF temperature (°C)
(2)
Base fluid 0.025% 0.05% 0.075% 0.1% 0.2%
In the case of the MSDS, in addition to direct solar energy, thermal
8:00 35.2 36.2 36.4 37.2 37.8 35.4 energy received from the solar concentrator is also used for evaporation
9:00 49.5 50.8 55.6 60.2 65.7 54.6 of the saline water. Its hourly (ηh(MSDS)) and daily (ηD(MSDS)) efficiency
10:00 64.2 67.8 71.3 76.4 86.4 68.4
can be obtained by Eqs. (3) and (5)
11:00 77.6 81.7 84.5 86.8 92.6 82.3
12:00 93.7 99.4 104.5 108.7 115.7 98.7
mh × L w
13:00 102.6 107.6 110.6 116.7 126.6 105.4 ηh (MSDS ) = × 100
14:00 99.7 102.4 104.7 113.5 120.5 101.5 [A × (I (t ) × 3600)] + qex (3)
15:00 91.4 95.4 99.8 106.3 112 94.4
16:00 83.4 85.4 93.1 97.5 102 87.7
17:00 76.4 79.4 85.4 87.7 94.5 81.6
qex = mc (Tin − Tout ) × 3600 (4)
18:00 67.2 68.4 72.8 74.6 79.6 66.4
∑ ηh (MSDS )
ηD (MSDS ) =
mh × L w n (5)
η= × 100
A × [I (t ) × 3600] (1) where qex is the energy supplied by the nHTF circulated in serpentine
heat exchanger to saline water (J/h), m is the flow rate of nHTF (kg/s),
where η is the hourly efficiency of CSS, mh is the water distilled in 1 h
c is the specific heat of nHTF (J/kg·K), Tin, Tout are respectively the
(kg), Lw is the latent heat of saline water (J/kg) calculated as per Eq.
average inlet and outlet temperatures (°C) of nHTF in the modified solar
(2), A is the basin area (m2), I(t) is the average solar irradiation received
still in 1 h.

Fig. 6. Hourly discharge of CSS and MSDS.

35
M. Muraleedharan et al. Desalination 457 (2019) 32–38

Fig. 7. The total accumulated yield of MSDS and CSS.

Fig. 8. Hourly yield during a 24-hour cycle.

Table 3 FAC = P × CRF (7)

Comparison of nocturnal and total yield at a different water depth. where P is the capital cost
Sl no Water depth (mm) Nocturnal yield (mL/m2) Total yield mL/m2 Capital recovery factor (CRF) can be found through

1 25 910 13,100 i × (1 + i)n

CRF =
2 30 1300 12,650 (1 + i)n − 1 (8)
3 35 1680 12,080
4 40 1390 9560 The period during which the system operates (n) and annual interest
(i) of capital cost are assumed to be five years and 7% respectively.
From the table, AOMC is obtained as 40% of FAC, and system salvage
5. Cost evaluation value (s) is obtained as 20% of capital cost.
ASV = S × SFF (9)
Cost of producing 1 L of desalinated water is estimated in this sec-
tion. It is determined under the assumption that both CSS and MSDS are The sinking fund factor is (SFF) can be stated as
functional for 300 days in a year under the climatic conditions of i
SFF =
Tamilnadu, India. The total cost for producing 1 L of desalinated water (1 + i)n − 1 (10)
per year (TAC/L) is the ratio of total annual cost (TAC) to total quantity
(Q) of distilled water produced. Therefore the total cost for producing 1 L of desalinated water can
According to Faithetal 2003 TAC involves the cost of so many fac- be estimated by Eq. (11).
tors such as annual operating and maintenance cost (AOMC), fixed TAC TAC
=
annual cost (FAC), and annual salvage value (ASV). Eq. (6) gives it. L Q (11)

TAC = AOMC + FAC − ASV (6) where Q is the total quantity of desalinated water collected in a year in
litters.

36
M. Muraleedharan et al. Desalination 457 (2019) 32–38

Fig. 9. Daily average efficiencies at different nanofluid concentrations of MSDS.

Table 4 greater than that of CSS. It is clearly due to the additional thermal
Cost analysis. energy supplied by the solar concentrator. Temperatures of nHTF
Sl no Particulars CSS MSDS
measured at different concentrations are detailed in Table 2.
As indicated in Fig. 5 and Table 2 the temperature of nHTF and
1 Capital cost (P) in INR 5000 20,000 saline water increases with increasing concentration of nanoparticle up
2 Operational period (n) in years 5 5 to 0.1% after that it decreases. The reason for the decrease is detailed in
3 Interst per year (i) 7% 7%
4 AOMC in INR 487.8 1951.2
the author's previous paper [11]. A maximum saline water temperature
5 FAC in INR 1219.5 4878 of 99.4 °C is reported for 0.1% nHTF, which is 8 °C more than the
6 ASV in INR 86.9 347.6 temperature for MSDS with base fluid as heat transfer fluid.
7 TAC in INR 1620.4 6481.6 The hourly freshwater discharge for both CSS and MSDS is shown in
8 Annual desalinated water production (Q) in litters 1050 4140
Fig. 6. The total yield for the MSDS and CSS are shown in Fig. 7. The
9 The cost for one little-distilled water production in INR 1.54 1.41
figure indicates that throughout the observation period the accumu-
lated freshwater productivity is higher for MSDS than CSS. The final
6. Experimental accumulated freshwater productivity for CSS, MSDS + base fluid and
MSDS + 0.1%nHTF are respectively 3480 mL/m2, 7404 mL/m2 and
The experimental set up shown in Fig. 3 is constructed to study the 12,190 mL/m2. An overall increase in accumulated freshwater pro-
performance of MSDS in producing distilled water under realistic out- ductivity of about 250.27% can be seen for MSDS+0.1% nHTF com-
door conditions at Tiruchirapalli (India). Water productivity perfor- pared to CSS.
mances of the CSS and MSDS are measured. Sixteen K-type thermo- The hourly yield, total discharge and nocturnal yield in the 24-hour
couples are employed to measure hourly temperatures of nano heat cycle for MSDS with 0.1% concentration are depicted in Fig. 8 and
transfer fluid (nHTF), saline water, inner glass surface, and ambient Table 3. The result shows that as the saline water depth is increased
temperature. The flow rate of nHTF is maintained at 0.5 L/min while above an optimum value of 25 mm, the hourly yield during day time
saline water depth is kept constant at 25 mm for both base fluid and decreases steadily, while the nocturnal yield increases up to a water
nHTF. Two pyranometers are used; one located in the shade to measure depth of 35 mm and then decreases. This is because as the water depth
diffuse radiation and the other directly attached to the concentrator increases the saline water stores more thermal energy. The colder at-
plane to measure global radiation. Working fluid, pure Therminol 55 or mosphere in the night results in the release of stored energy and this, in
nHTF, is recycled to the reservoir after the heat transfer to saline water. turn, produces nocturnal yield. As far as total yield in the 24-hour cycle
is concerned a brine depth of 25 mm is 9% more yielding than a brine
depth of 35 mm. Hence it can be concluded that a brine depth of 25 mm
7. Results and discussions is optimum for maximum yield.
Daily average efficiencies of MSDS calculated at different con-
The study was conducted at an outdoor test facility at NIT Trichy centrations of nHTF based on Eq. (5) are shown in Fig. 9. The estimated
during the summer of 2018. The following sections take into con- daily average efficiency for MSDS is found to vary with the volumetric
sideration only the best results obtained from several experiments concentration of nanofluid, and maximum efficiency of 53.55% is ob-
conducted during this period. The solar irradiation intensity has a vital tained for 0.1% nHTF.
role in the distillation process. Fig. 4 shows the daily averages of solar The cost evaluation of both CSS and MSDS is given in Table 4. It
irradiation intensity chosen for the comparison of the performance indicates that the estimated cost for production of one little-distilled
parameters of the system. It is clear from the figure that the comparison water is approximately 1.54 INR for CSS and 1.41 INR for MSDS. That
of various concentrations has been made for solar intensity exposures in is, an expenditure of producing 1 L distilled water in MSDS is less than
the range of 764 W/m2 to 770 W/m2, which indicates more or less the that of CSS. Therefore MSDS is economical.
same atmospheric conditions. The experimental results signify that the integration of a Fresnel
The hourly saline water temperatures of CSS and MSDS at different lens solar concentrator with Therminol-55+ 0.1% Al2O3 nHTF and a
concentrations of Al2O3 in the nHTF (0, 0.025, 0.05, 0.075, 0.1 and serpentine shaped heat exchanger to CSS has resulted in a significant
0.2%) are shown in Fig. 5. Although the trend is similar, quantitatively improvement in daily fresh water productivity without compromising
the temperature of saline water in MSDS is on an average of 1–18 °C on the instantaneous efficiency of the system and cost of distilled water

37
M. Muraleedharan et al. Desalination 457 (2019) 32–38

production. [6] L. Sahota, G.N. Tiwari, Analytical characteristic equation of nanofluid loaded active
double slope solar still coupled with helically coiled heat exchanger, Energy
Convers. Manag. 135 (2017) 308–326.
8. Conclusion [7] T. Arunkumar, R. Velraj, D.C. Denkenberger, R. Sathyamurthy, K.V. Kumar,
A. Ahsan, Productivity enhancements of compound parabolic concentrator tubular
Performance parameters such as total freshwater productivity, solar stills, Renew. Energy 88 (2016) 391–400.
[8] L. Sahota, G.N. Tiwari, Effect of Al 2 O 3 nanoparticles on the performance of
temperatures of saline water and efficiencies have been experimentally passive double slope solar still, Sol. Energy 130 (2016) 260–272.
measured for CSS and MSDS with a range of nHTF variants under the [9] L. Sahota, G.N. Tiwari, Effect of nanofluids on the performance of passive double
same ambient conditions of Trichy (India). The MSDS with 0.1% vo- slope solar still: a comparative study using characteristic curve, Desalination 388
(2016) 9–21.
lumetric concentration of Al2O3 in nHTF is found to be a better alter- [10] D.B. Singh, J.K. Yadav, V.K. Dwivedi, S. Kumar, G.N. Tiwari, I.M. Al-Helal,
native to the conventional solar stills due to its high productivity (by Experimental studies of active solar still integrated with two hybrid PVT collectors,
250.27%) and cost-effectiveness. Solar concentrator based solar dis- Sol. Energy 130 (2016) 207–223.
[11] M. Muraleedharan, H. Singh, S. Suresh, M. Udayakumar, Directly absorbing
tillation system investigated in this study has significant potential.
Therminol-Al 2 O 3 nano heat transfer fluid for linear solar concentrating collectors,
Sol. Energy 137 (2016) 134–142.
Acknowledgement [12] A.E. Kabeel, M. Abdelgaied, M. Mahgoub, The performance of a modified solar still
using hot air injection and PCM, Desalination 379 (2016) 102–107.
[13] Z.M. Omara, A.E. Kabeel, F.A. Essa, Effect of using nanofluids and providing va-
The authors would like to acknowledge the funding acquired from cuum on the yield of corrugated wick solar still, Energy Convers. Manag. 103
UKIERI-DST (IND/CONT/E/14-15/381, DST/INT/UK/P-105/2014) (2015) 965–972.
and similar support from Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd. [14] A. Toppin-Hector, H. Singh, Development of a nano-heat transfer fluid cooled direct
absorbing receiver for concentrating solar collectors, Int. J. Low Carbon Technol. 11
(2) (2013) 199–204.
References [15] F.F. Tabrizi, M. Dashtban, H. Moghaddam, Experimental investigation of a weir-
type cascade solar still with the built-in latent heat thermal energy storage system,
Desalination 260 (1) (2010) 248–253.
[1] S. Rashidi, S. Akar, M. Bovand, R. Ellahi, Volume of fluid model to simulate the
[16] A.Y. Hashim, J.M. Al-Asadi, W.T. Alramdhan, An attempt to solar still productivity
nanofluid flow and entropy generation in a single slope solar still, Renew. Energy
optimization; solar still shape, glass cover inclination and inner surface area of a
115 (2018) 400–410.
single basin solar still, optimization, Basrah J. Sci. 28 (2010) 39–48.
[2] S. Rashidi, M. Bovand, N. Rahbar, J.A. Esfahani, Steps optimization and pro-
[17] Z.S. Abdel-Rehim, A. Lasheen, Experimental and theoretical study of a solar desa-
ductivity enhancement in a nanofluid cascade solar still, Renew. Energy 118 (2018)
lination system located in Cairo, Egypt, Desalination 217 (1–3) (2007) 52–64.
536–545.
[18] A.A. Badran, I.A. Al-Hallaq, I.A.E. Salman, M.Z. Odat, A solar still augmented with a
[3] A.E. Kabeel, M. Abdelgaied, Observational study of modified solar still coupled with
flat-plate collector, Desalination 172 (3) (2005) 227–234.
oil serpentine loop from cylindrical parabolic concentrator and phase changing
[19] A.K. Tiwari, G.N. Tiwari, Effect of the condensing cover's slope on internal heat and
material under basin, Sol. Energy 144 (2017) 71–78.
mass transfer in distillation: an indoor simulation, Desalination 180 (1–3) (2005)
[4] O. Mahian, A. Kianifar, S.Z. Heris, D. Wen, A.Z. Sahin, S. Wongwises, Nanofluids
73–88.
effects on the evaporation rate in a solar still equipped with a heat exchanger, Nano
[20] K. Voropoulos, E. Mathioulakis, V. Belessiotis, Experimental investigation of a solar
Energy 36 (2017) 134–155.
still coupled with solar collectors, Desalination 138 (1) (2001) 103–110.
[5] D.B. Singh, G.N. Tiwari, Performance analysis of basin type solar stills integrated
[21] N.C. Barford, Experimental Measurements: Precision Error and Truth, John Wiley &
with N identical photovoltaic thermal (PVT) compound parabolic concentrator
Sons, New York, 1990.
(CPC) collectors: a comparative study, Sol. Energy 142 (2017) 144–158.

38