4.7 Article

Thermal, efficiency and power output evaluation of pyramid, hexagonal and conical forms as solar panel

Journal

CASE STUDIES IN THERMAL ENGINEERING
Volume 27, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.csite.2021.101232

Keywords

Solar panels; Power output; Cooling performance; Temperature distribution; Electric efficiency

Categories

Funding

  1. King Khalid University, Ministry of Education, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia [RGP.2/100/42]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The investigation evaluated the thermal and power output of novel-shaped solar panels, with the conical shape exhibiting better performance than pyramid and hexagonal shapes. The corners of pyramid and hexagonal-shaped panels had higher temperatures. The efficiency of the conical shaped panel was up to 8.4% higher than that of the pyramid-shaped panel.
Through the present investigation, the thermal and power output of novel-shaped solar panels are evaluated. For the cooling of the mentioned forms, forced air flow was utilized. Three novel shapes, of Pyramid, Hexagonal, and Conical which had the equal lateral surface were considered. For the simulation, an open source CFD software was utilized. The lateral surfaces were put under identical amount of heat flux. Air as the coolant fluid was injected with constant inlet temperature from the trapdoors at the bottom of different shaped structures. Three different values of heat flux and air injection rate were evaluated for each shape. The outcomes presented that the conical shaped solar panel exhibits better thermal performance than other geometries. Furthermore, conical form finds the least temperature that was about 10.5 degrees C less than that of the pyramid-shaped panel. Furthermore, it was revealed that the corners of pyramid and hexagonal-shaped solar panels have higher temperature. Also, it was found that the efficiency of conical shaped panel was up to 8.4% more than that of pyramid-shaped panel.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available