A User's Manual for DELSOL3 - prod.sandia.gov - Sandia National ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

At the time of the comparisons MIRVAL and HELIOS used different descriptions of the heliostat errors. MIRVAL used a 1.65 mrad error in each component of the surface normal (corresponding to the DELSOL variables SIGSX and SIGSY). HELIOS used a 3.3 mrad (=2x1.65 mrad) error in each component of the reflected vector (SIGTX and SIGTY). These two error descriptions are not exactly equivalent whenever the cosine < 1. For the 10 AM case the DELSOL calculation was done twice: once with the MIRVAL error description and once with the HELIOS error description. The final complication in the comparisons is a difference in defining the effect of the individual loss terms. The cosine, spillage, total power and flux definitions are identical. However, there is a small difference between DELSOL and the other two codes in defining the shadowing/blocking and between DELSOL and HELIOS (but not MIRVAL) in defining attenuation. Comparisons of shadowing/blocking and attenuation are therefore not as meaningful as comparing the other quanti- ties. The comparison of the power production is given in Table VII-2. The comparison of the flux distribution along a horizontal line through the aperture ten- ter is shown in Figures VIEl(a) (10 AM) and VII-l(b) (4 PM). The agreement is good. There are small differences (approximately 1% or less) in some of the predictions. These differences are not practically significant since the uncertainties in the input (e.g., heliostat errors) generally produce larger effects. The differences result from slightly different assumptions in the models, numerical errors, etc. For example, the DELSOL flux is symmetrical about the receiver center while the MIRVAL and HELIOS results show a slight asymmetry. The approximately 1% difference in the flux profiles results from the fact that in order to speed up the calculation DELSOL assumes that the mirror panels are canted symmetrically. In actuality, for canting at a fixed time (off-axis cant), the cant of the heliostat panels is slightly asymmetric because the sun angle is slightly different on each cant panel. MIRVAL and HELIOS include this small effect and therefore produce the small asymmetry in the image. The asymmetry would not arise for on-axis canting schemes. While the predictions are very close, the running times are very different. Users will probably find that DELSOL is 10-100 times faster than either MIRVAL or HELIOS. 162
TABLE VII-2 COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE PREDICTIONS FOR A SMALL SYSTEM Code Error Type Cosine Shadow + Block Atmospheric Attenuation S p i 1 lage Power on Receiver (MWth) Peak Flux (M W th/m2) Avg. Flux Around Peak (MWth/m2) 10 AM MIRVAL HELIOS DELSOL DELSOL MIRVAL HELIOS MIRVAL HELIIOS 0.949 0.949 0.949 0.949 0.92s 0.924 0.920 0.920 0.973 0.974 0.973 0.973 0.921 0.922 0.921 0.917 4 PM HELIOS DELSOL HELIOS HELIOS 0.873 0.873 0.651 0.658 0.974 0.973 0.902 0.888 4.79f0.2 4.76f0.1 4.76 4.74 I 2.99 3.02 - 1.83 - 1.82 0.923 0.922 1.68 1.63 1.66 1.62 I - - I 'MIRVAL errors are 1.65 mrad in each surface component. HELIOS errors are 3.30 mrad in each component of reflected ray. 2MIRVAL and HELIOS give an area loss, DELSOL gives an average area loss weighted by the cosine. 163
Page 1 and 2:
- SANDIA REPORT SAND86-8018 Unlimit
Page 3:
SAND 86-8018 Unlimited Release Prin
Page 6 and 7:
' The computer code which this repo
Page 9 and 10:
I. Introduction CONTENTS A. Differe
Page 11 and 12:
1. More Accurate Images from Canted
Page 13:
VII. Comparison of DELSOL, MIRVAL,
Page 16 and 17:
111-1 Insolation Models 111-2 Atmos
Page 19 and 20:
A USER’S MANUAL FOR DELSOLS: A CO
Page 21 and 22:
owing, blocking, atmospheric attenu
Page 23:
The fourth major enhancement in DEL
Page 26 and 27:
W- 26 S ? Jr RECEIVER NORMAL COORDI
Page 28 and 29:
ZONE FlEL 180" Figure 11-3. Surroun
Page 30 and 31:
30 ZONE 60 Figure 11-4. Method of Z
Page 32 and 33:
Figure 11-5. North-only Field (INOR
Page 34 and 35:
34 N' Figure 11-6. Code Defined Fie
Page 36 and 37:
36 Figure 11-7. Schematic Diagram o
Page 38 and 39:
-SLEW (1)- Figure 11-8. Example of
Page 40 and 41:
Figure 11-9. Radial Stagger Arrange
Page 42 and 43:
Note that when IDENS=l or 2 the azi
Page 44 and 45:
J1.D. Heliostats Either rectangular
Page 46 and 47:
Given that heliostats will be mass
Page 48 and 49:
(A) FLAT REFLECTED RAY FROM (B) FOC
Page 50 and 51:
IROUND = 0 WM = 9.91 (m) HM = 9.93
Page 52 and 53:
That is, the aperture is always loc
Page 54 and 55:
controlled by the IAUTOP parameter
Page 56 and 57:
only be used with rectangular cavit
Page 58 and 59:
grid of points on the DELSOL assume
Page 60 and 61:
W E Figure 11-17. Flux Points on a
Page 62 and 63:
flux point grid defined during syst
Page 64 and 65:
To see whether this problem is occu
Page 66 and 67:
Cal cul ati onal Day 1 2 3 4 5 Tabl
Page 68 and 69:
1II.B-I. Position 01 the Sun-The su
Page 70 and 71:
where SO is given by Equation (1II.
Page 72 and 73:
c 0 w V c LL .r a 0 0 0 0 0 s /s 0
Page 74 and 75:
1II.C. Field Performance Calculatio
Page 76 and 77:
1II.F. Flux Density and SDillane Th
Page 78 and 79:
III. G-1. Atmospheric Attenuation:
Page 80 and 81:
eceiver) or with aperture area (cav
Page 82 and 83:
In other words, PLOST,R is the same
Page 84 and 85:
Following the approach in the previ
Page 86 and 87:
86 - - - LLLLLL www CLee o m 4 I i
Page 88 and 89:
This approximate method of calculat
Page 90 and 91:
RECEIVER STARTUP WEATHER SUN PARASI
Page 92 and 93:
111.1. Relationship Between Perform
Page 95 and 96:
IV. System Optimization Calculation
Page 97 and 98:
power and annual energy. Section 11
Page 99 and 100:
, . IV.A-7. Calculation of Annual E
Page 101 and 102:
. production. When each design powe
Page 103 and 104:
large enough fraction of total capi
Page 105 and 106:
_____ Table IV-2. Design Parameters
Page 107 and 108:
DELSOL will examine NUMHTW (520) eq
Page 109 and 110:
The final step of cavity receiver o
Page 111 and 112: . furthermore, that the assumed tur
Page 113 and 114: point in the NMXFLX(1) array (I=l,
Page 115 and 116: , flux level. DELSOL determines the
Page 117 and 118: optimum for any power level is 13.
Page 119 and 120: I V. System Costs and Economics Whi
Page 121 and 122: for meteorological equipment. The d
Page 123 and 124: 0 co I I I 0 co J 0 c\! c, 0 3 Ln 0
Page 125 and 126: w/2 x RWCAV W/2 x RWCAV IN (180. -
Page 127 and 128: S M ~ , = ~ solar F multiple for re
Page 129 and 130: nSTOR is determined from an assumed
Page 131 and 132: CTK,REF (CSTREF) = $9.70 x loG VTK,
Page 133 and 134: XHE,A = scaling exponent. ni is cal
Page 135 and 136: . CCFIXED = 2.OE6 +'0.14 x DCC + 0.
Page 137 and 138: (V.B - 6) The discount rate rDIS is
Page 139 and 140: VI. Program Flow DELSOL can be used
Page 141 and 142: .I c to reach a certain design powe
Page 143 and 144: an optimum storage size based on en
Page 145 and 146: I Read i n N + K t x ] ITAPE=O or 1
Page 147 and 148: Read in System Definition from File
Page 149 and 150: . TABLE VI-2 OUTPIJT FROM OPTIMIZAT
Page 151 and 152: ) Power level specific for detailed
Page 153 and 154: V1.B. DescriDtion of Subroutines in
Page 155 and 156: C cy c: C C
Page 157 and 158: L C c C c C c: C c C C c C C C c: c
Page 159: C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
Page 164 and 165: 164 n m W * ? 0 F F 0 ( z W /M W) X
Page 166 and 167: 166 Phase 1; CDRL Item 2, Pilot Pla
Page 168 and 169: 168 43. Vittitoe, C. N. et al., “
Page 170 and 171: since the values have been already
Page 172 and 173: Title Card $BASIC$ $FIELD$ $HSTAT$
Page 174 and 175: IPROB NYEAR HRDEL UDAY UTIME NUAZ N
Page 176 and 177: TDESP PLAT ALT INSOL SOLCON IWEATH
Page 178 and 179: REFTIM REFSOL ASTART IATM ATMl ATM2
Page 180 and 181: IHPR NLAND XTOWER YTOWER (I= 1 ,NLA
Page 182 and 183: 182 1 1-40 2 1-10 11-20 3 1-10 11-2
Page 184 and 185: SIGTX SIGTY ICANT NCANTX NCANTY HCA
Page 186 and 187: THT TOWL TOWD IREC W H RRECL IAUTOP
Page 188 and 189: For cavities or flat plates, the fo
Page 190 and 191: NXFLX FAZMIN FAZMAX 190 AZMF (North
Page 192 and 193: NMXFLXY) identifies the exact point
Page 194 and 195: REFPRL FSP FEP EFFSTR PF SMULT IP H
Page 196 and 197: IHOPT NUMTHT THTST THTEND NUMREC WS
Page 198 and 199: SMULT IPLFL(1) (I=l ,NUMOPT) IPROPT
Page 200 and 201: CH CL CWR CWDR CWDA ITHT CTOWl CTOW
Page 202 and 203: ICHE CHEREF PHEREF XHEP APHREF PPHR
Page 204 and 205: CKNREF PKNREF XKN 204 Sodium-to-sal
Page 206 and 207: TC TR FDEBT RDEBT ROE IDEP NDEP NYO
Page 208 and 209: The next set of cards is read at th
Page 210 and 211: value of insolation from the specif
Page 212 and 213:
For optimizing cavity depth, the IO
Page 214 and 215:
For the final detailed performance
Page 216 and 217:
from that specified during the opti
Page 218 and 219:
Sample Problem 4 - User Defined Fie
Page 221 and 222:
GLOSSARY Absorber: The portion of t
Page 223 and 224:
Heat Exchanger: A component in whic
Page 225 and 226:
Receiver System Efficiency: The rat
Page 227 and 228:
Variable AEVMAX AEVREF AFDC ALP(I)
Page 229 and 230:
Variable H H20 HCANT HM HPANL HRDEL
Page 231 and 232:
Variable PARL7,PARLI) PARL9,PARLlO
Page 233 and 234:
Variable W WEATH WEND WM WPANL WST
Page 235 and 236:
Analysis Review and Critique 6503 8
Page 237 and 238:
Martin Marietta Aerospace P.O. Box
Page 239:
Stone and Webster Engineering Corpo
show all

A User's Manual for DELSOL3 - prod.sandia.gov - Sandia National ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?