Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293
www.elsevier.com/locate/solener

Performance analysis of a micro gas turbine and solar dish

integrated system under dierent solar-only and hybrid
operating conditions
Simone Semprini a, David Sanchez a,, Andrea De Pascale b
a

University of Seville, Camino de los descubrimientos s/n, 41092 Seville, Spain

b
Universita` di Bologna DIN, viale Risorgimento 2, 40136 Bologna, Italy
Received 23 February 2016; accepted 3 March 2016
Available online 24 March 2016
Communicated by: Associate Editor Klaus Brun

Abstract
A hybrid energy system comprising a parabolic dish solar energy concentrator (Solar Dish) and a micro gas turbine is investigated in
the study. A thermodynamic model of the system is presented, able to simulate both on-design and o-design performance of the system
and accounting for the main technical aspects of the concentrator, receiver and gas turbine engine. Then, simulations are performed for
various system sizes and operating strategies, with and without supplementary ring and for a reference location (Seville, Spain), yielding
solar-to-electric power conversion eciencies between 16.78% and 18.35% (rated conditions), depending on size. Annual performances
result in a capacity factor of about 29% (2540 full operating hours) in solar only operation and annual average eciency at 95% of the
nominal value.
The main results indicate that moderate supplementary ring is interesting for it increases the average eciency of the system and the
annual yield, whilst still keeping the carbon footprint within reasonable values. Nevertheless, as heavy fossil fuel ring is adopted, the
system becomes less competitive against conventional, standard distributed generation power systems either for natural gas or diesel fuel.
Whilst these trends were somehow to be expected, the interest of this paper is to provide the reader with a fundamental analysis from
which a technical and economic analysis can be performed, aimed at identifying the most leveraged solar share (i.e., fuel utilisation).
2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: CSP technology; Solar dish; Micro gas turbine; Dish-mGT integration

1. Introduction
Solar power generators are basically divided in two categories depending on whether or not the production of
electricity relies on a power cycle (such as Stirling, Rankine
or Brayton cycles): photovoltaic (PV) and concentrated
solar power (CSP/STE) systems. Amongst the latter, mul Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 954 486 488.

E-mail addresses: semprini.simone@gmail.com (S. Semprini), ds@us.es

(D. Sanchez), andrea.depascale@unibo.it (A. De Pascale).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2016.03.012
0038-092X/ 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

tiple solutions can be implemented to collect and concentrate solar energy. In increasing concentrating capacity,
the following are mature technologies for this purpose:
linear collectors employing parabolic trough or Fresnel
technologies, heliostats for large central receiver systems
and parabolic (dish) collectors (Pavlovic et al., 2012). These
technologies can also be combined with other energy
sources like non-solar renewable energies and/or fossil fuel
systems, yielding the so-called hybrid systems which enable
the simultaneous exploitation of green resources in conventional high performing energy systems such as gas

280

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

Nomenclature
a
m_
gis
c
j
lf
/
q
r
s
H
e
.
nrcp
A
Cf
F CO2
F fuel
Ib
k cv
Q
qin

absorptivity
mass ow rate
isentropic eciency
ratio of specic heats
pressure drop coecient
weight carbon content of fuel
non-dimensional parameter of mass ow rate,
shaft speed and pressure ratio in turbomachinery
density
StefanBoltzman constant
transmissivity
angle between receiver surface and horizon
emissivity
reectivity
recuperator eectiveness
area
capacity factor
specic carbon dioxide emissions
fuel share
heat ux on surface
convective heat transfer coecient
heat power
specic radiative energy input

turbines (GT) and others (e.g. gas and steam combined

cycle power plants) (Franchini et al., 2013).
Gas turbines operated partly or entirely on solar energy
have already been investigated in the past by several
authors, both for their thermodynamic potential
(Barigozzi et al., 2012) and for the technical challenges
posed by the necessary modications to enable the addition
of solar power (Fisher et al., 2014). Moreover, there are
practical implementations which have demonstrated the
technology at a representative power level,
5 MWe, as it
is the case of the EU-funded project SOLUGAS. In this
project, a Solar Mercury 50 engine is located atop a tower
where it is supplied with concentrated energy from a eld
of 69 heliostats. This solar heat input rises the temperature
of combustion air up to some 800 C, which is further
increased to 1150 C by merely burning natural gas in a
standard gas turbine combustor (Quero et al., 2014). The
experience so far conrms the feasibility of the system
and its capacity to operate under variable insolation.
At a smaller scale, very small (micro) gas turbines have
already been explored as an alternative to Stirling engines
integrated into dish-type parabolic collectors, either using
turbocharger technology (Six and Elkins, 1981; Gallup
and Kesseli, 1994; Kesseli and Wells, 1989) or with dedicated engines (Dickey, 2011). This is so because despite
the apparent advantages of Stirling engines over gas turbines for dish applications, the truth is that dish-Stirling
technologies have not been fully deployed to the market
yet (Stine and Harrigan, 1985; Mancini et al., 2003) and,

Qw
rc
re
T amb
CapEx
CSP
DNI
E
h
LHV
LMTD
mGT
N
O&M
OpEx
P
p
rcv
s
STE
T
UA
W

incident power
compressor pressure ratio
expander pressure ratio
ambient temperature
Capital Expenditures
concentrated solar power
direct normal irradiance
annual energy
enthalpy
low heating value
logarithmic mean temperature dierence
micro gas turbine
shaft speed
operation and maintenance
operational expenditures
power
pressure
receiver
entropy
solar thermal electricity
temperature
global heat transfer coecient
specic work

accordingly, gas turbines are still envisaged as an eective

and cost competitive alternative to volumetric engines
(Various, 2013). Nevertheless, whilst it is widely acknowledged that collector and tracking system are mature technologies, the scientic and industrial communities agree
that the micro gas turbine and, most importantly, the solar
receiver are not. The work by DLR (Germany) in the latter
eld during the nineteen nineties (Bauer et al., 1994; Buck
et al., 1996; Heller et al., 1994) put forward a number of
issues that still pose major engineering challenges; this is
conrmed by more recent reports on the topic, for instance
(Wang et al., 2015; Hischier et al., 2012).
Based on this vision, the number of research activities
aimed at developing the technology has increased in recent
years, putting emphasis on the development of one particular aspect of the system: optimisation of a large dish,
tubular receiver and expander for compressed air applications (LLC, 2011), optimisation of a tubular receiver for
dish-turbocharger integration (Le Roux et al., 2012), simulation of the performance of an heliostat eld, volumetric
receiver and micro gas turbine (Aichmayer et al., 2013),
optimisation of a small parabolic concentrator (Lanchi
et al., 2015), modelling and testing of a pressurised receiver
(Hischier et al., 2012), simulation of impinging refrigeration to volumetric receiver (Wang et al., 2015), design of
a micro gas turbine for solar dish applications (Ragnolo
et al., 2015).
Most of the earlier work focuses on the optimisation
and evaluation of single components of such systems,

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

whilst the assessment of integrated models generally makes

use of oversimplied formulations of the performance of
one or more components. This work, instead, introduces
an integrated model with the objective to optimise and assess
the performance of the entire system from a global perspective. The optimisation of the system as a whole is a key
aspect to assess its expected performance and to provide a
valuable insight for further feasibility analysis. The project
is divided in three sections, the rst one of which briey
describes the model used to size the components; given that
other references are available where similar models can be
found, only the most relevant innovations will be discussed.
The second section then presents the model for o-design
performance in more detail as this is a critical aspect of
the assessment. The last section provides the reader with a
discussion on the expected performance of the system when
dierent operating strategies are considered, either with fuel
backup or by merely using solar energy. In addition, before
the concluding section, an attempt to verify/validate the performance of the results, a comparison against experimental
results provided in literature for a similar prototype is presented. It is noted that the main innovations with respect
to similar works available in literature are highlighted
throughout the text. This is deemed necessary in order to
assess the added value of this publication.

2. On-design model of the dish-mGT integrated system

2.1. System concept and general features of the model
The hybrid dish-mGT system is made up of three subsystems, assembled as shown in Fig. 1.
 Concentrator. Reective parabolic dish which collects
solar energy and concentrates it onto the solar receiver.
The concentrator is supplied with a 2D sun-tracking

281

system that ensures as high a collection eciency as possible along the day.
 Receiver. The concentrated solar energy from the concentrator impinges on the receiver wherein the temperature of a heat transfer uid is raised. A volumetric air
receiver concept like those implemented successfully in
the DIAPR, REFOS and SOLGATE projects is consid vila Marn, 2011).
ered for the dish-mGT application (A
 Micro gas turbine. Small recuperated gas turbine
(Aichmayer et al., 2013) comprising one compressor
and one expander, a recuperator, a high speed alternator
and, potentially, an auxiliary combustor. In comparison
with Stirling engines, the mGT system provides potentially lower investment costs, higher availability and
lower O&M costs (Soares, 2007; Al-Attab and Zainal,
berg et al., 2004). In addition, it is possible to
2015; O
enable CHP capabilities by merely installing additional
equipment downstream of the turbine exhaust. The
alternator and power electronics are accounted for in
this subsystem.
It is interesting to note that micro gas turbines operate
at a temperature lower than 1000 C unless ceramic materials are used in the expander wheel given the limitations
in terms of materials and blade cooling capabilities
(Soares, 2007). Nevertheless, even if this is an apparent
shortcoming, it turns to be a positive feature in the context
of CSP applications wherein receiver temperatures are usually limited to less than 1000 C; above this temperature,
receiver eciency drops rapidly due to radiative losses
and osets any potential eciency rise of the power block
(Ho and Iverson, 2014).
Based on this observation, the utilisation of supplementary ring is not justied in terms of achieving higher turbine inlet temperatures for enhanced eciency but rather
for extended operation of the unit (low frequency oscillations of solar heat input) and to compensate for a lower

Fig. 1. Solar dish-mGT integrated system.

282

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

than rated solar energy supply (operation in hazy days or

with cloud passing events). The dierent operating strategies will be discussed in a later section.
A model of performance based on the cited layout
(Fig. 1) has been implemented in a numerical tool combining EES and Matlab environments. As deduced from
the ow diagram in Fig. 2, it provides on and o-design
performances both for single operating conditions (top
and centre levels) and yearly averaged boundary conditions
in a specic location (DNI and T amb ). Analyses are done for
four cases with outputs ranging from 7 to 30 kWe and, for
each one, various operating strategies are considered.
Fig. 3. Layout of the system for a solar-only application.

2.2. Micro gas turbine

The micro gas turbine model is based on simple heat and
mass balance equations with the hypothesis of ideal gas
behaviour for the working uid. For the solar only conguration in Fig. 3, these have the following structure:
 Continuity.
m_ 1 m_ 2 m_ 3 m_ 4 m_ 6 m_ d

 Compressor/expander.
rc;d p2 =p1 ; re;d p4 =p5
T 2;is =T 1 rc;d

cc 1=cc

; T 4 =T 5;is re;d

2
ce 1=ce

gis;c h2;is  h1 =h2  h1 ; gis;e h4  h5 =h4  h5;is

4
s2;is s1 ; s5;is s4

where rc;d and re;d are the compressor and expander

pressure ratio and gis;c and gis;e their respective eciencies. Subscript d indicates that these variables correspond to the design point (i.e. rated value). Ambient
conditions at compressor inlet are known whilst the

Fig. 2. Flow diagram of the numerical model.

peak inlet and outlet temperatures of the expander (T 4

and T 5 ) are constrained by the materials of the receiver
and recuperator respectively. Pressure ratio values are
optimised for eciency during the design process.
 Recuperator.
m_ 5 h5  h6 m_ 2 h3  h2

nrcp h3  h2 =h5  h2

p3 p2  jrcp;23 ; p6 p5  jrcp;56

where jrcp is the pressure drop coecient on both sides

of the recuperator and nrcp is the recuperator eectiveness from which the global heat transfer coecient of
the equipment UArcp can be calculated. Expanding Eq.
(6):
m_ 5 h5  h6 m_ 2 h3  h2 UArcp  LMTDrcp
LMTDrcp

T 5  T 3  T 6  T 2
lnT 5  T 3  T 6  T 2

9
10

2.3. Solar receiver

The receiver (Rcv in Fig. 1) is the most challenging component in terms of materials and manufacturing because it
has to withstand high, non-uniform heat uxes (110 MW/
m2) (Nepveu et al., 2009) which are further aggravated with
day-night thermal fatigue issues.
In a closed volumetric receiver, concentrated sunrays
ow across a quartz window (aperture plane) and strike
on a matrix of absorber material whose internal energy
increases. Nevertheless, in order to prevent the matrix from
overheating, this is put in direct contact with a heat transfer uid (air in this case) owing across it and absorbing
this surplus thermal energy. Overall, the matrix remains
at constant temperature whilst the air/coolant temperature
rises. The various heat transfer phenomena involved in the
receiver are shown in Fig. 4 schematically.
In this study, the volumetric pressurised receiver model
presented in (Aichmayer et al., 2013) is adopted though
some modications are introduced to correct certain oversimplications regarding heat transfer. In eect, the

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

Fig. 4. Heat transfer model of the receiver.

reference model by Aichmayer et al. assumes that both the

glass window and absorber material behave as black bodies. Nevertheless, whilst this is a reasonable assumption
for the absorber, it is quite far from reality in as far as
the glass window is concerned. In addition, convection
losses are not taken into account in the original formulation. Thus, the following modications are introduced with
respect to the model in (Aichmayer et al., 2013):
 The glass window behaves as a grey body.
 Convection losses from the glass window are calculated.
 The secondary concentrator present in Aichmayer
et al.s is removed.
 The supercial temperature of the absorber is conservatively assumed at a higher value to consider a more negative scenario in which the heat capacity of the absorber
is very high and its temperature prole is almost steady
in the ow direction.
 Conduction heat losses through the support metal structure are kept negligible.
Fig. 4 summarises the heat transfer phenomena involved
in the operation of the receiver. Black arrows denote radiative heat exchange in general, with thick solid lines for the
incoming solar radiation and thinner dotted lines for the
radiative heat exchange between the dierent components
of the receiver. White arrows indicate the ow of air.
The following equations stand for the conservation of
energy in a control volume comprising the glass window,
absorber material and volumetric enclosure (cavity):



I b  ag;vis r ag;th T 4amb ag;ir T 4s  2eg;th T 4g  k cv;o T g  T amb
k cv;i T g  T 3



G I b sg;vis r eg;th T 4g  T 4s kg;ir T 4s =h4  hm

11
12

283

hm  h3 U g T g  T 3 =G

13

Qg;o I b Arcv

14

where ag ; eg ; sg and .g are the optical properties of the

glass window in the visible range (vis), at the absorber temperature (subscript ir) and at the glass temperature (subscript th). I b is the heat ux of concentrated solar energy
incident on the glass window, G is the supercial mass ow
rate; Arcv is the aperture area of the glass window, k cv;i and
k cv;o are the inner and outer convective heat transfer coecients, r is the StefanBoltzman constant; T amb is the ambient temperature, T g is the glass temperature, T s is the
absorber temperature and Qg;o is the gross incident radiative heat ux that is collected by the dish and concentrated
onto the outer wall of the glass window. It is worth noting
that three dierent values are considered for the optical
properties in order to retain some sensitivity to the corresponding wavelength whilst still avoiding the utilisation
of a detailed distribution of ag ; eg ; sg and qg for the entire
spectrum. These values are reported in a later section.
With respect to the absorber temperature, it is assumed
that it can be conservatively approximated with the air
temperature at the outlet of the absorber. Friction losses
are also taken into account.
Ts T4

15

p4 jrcv p3

16

Finally, the external heat losses due to convection are

modelled with a heat transfer correlation valid for natural
convection ow on inclined planes: k cv;o f NuH, where
H is the angle between the receiver window surface and the
horizon. The correlation used for Nusselt number in this
case is provided by Welty and Wilson (2000).
Receiver eciency is dened as:
grcv m_ d h4  h3 =Qg;o

17

2.4. Model of the power conversion unit

The micro gas turbine and solar receiver are integrated
into a single system which converts concentrated solar
energy into electricity. In this process, losses are incurred
not only due to the energy conversion process itself (thermal eciency) but also due to friction and electrical losses.
The mechanical eciency (gm ) accounts for friction losses
as well as losses in the turboalternator, rectier and inverter. The following power balance equations are used:
P gross P exp  P com

18

P net P exp  P com gm

19

P exp m_ 4 h4  h5

20

P com m_ 1 h2  h1

21

gsyst P net =Qg;o gmGT  grcv

22

gmGT P net =Qin

23

284

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

2.5. Concentrator
The concentrator collects solar energy and concentrates
it onto the aperture plane of the receiver (the glass window
in this case). Its design must be approached jointly with the
receiver inasmuch as their respective eciencies show
opposing trends with respect to the aperture area of the latter (Arcv ). In eect, increasing the receiver area brings about
a higher collector eciency (lower spillage of solar energy)
but, at the same time, reduces receiver eciency (larger
heat losses). Concentrator eciency (gcon ) is dened as:
gcon Qg;o =DNI  Acon

24

where Acon is the aperture area of the collector (cross sectional area of the aperture plane). A detailed description
of the geometrical properties and geometrical errors for
paraboloids can be found in Stine and Harrigan (1985).
Paraboloids are three dimensional concentrators that
can ideally concentrate solar energy on a single point called
the focus (as opposed to linear collectors like parabolic
troughs which concentrate solar energy on a line). This is
not true though for real paraboloids which are aected
by certain irregularities in the reection process after which
solar energy is not concentrated on a point but on a surface
(spot). The main deviations from the ideal performance
are: (i) geometrical imperfections in the shape of the paraboloid which is closer to a spherical shape; (ii) lack of specularity and reectivity of the reecting surface, which
means that a fraction of the solar energy collected is
absorbed rather than reected and for that fraction that
is reected, it is so in a diused and not specular mode;
(iii) the so called sun shape error that brings about a lack
of parallelism of the sun rays; (iv) tracking errors (the axis
of the collector is not perfectly aligned with the sun).
The algorithm provided by Stine and Harrigan (1985)
takes into account the specications of the system (mainly
heat input and design DNI) and the geometrical properties
and optical errors of the paraboloid and yields the energy
collected onto a surface on its focus point. The algorithm
has been modied to consider the conditions of the receiver
(Qg;o ; Arcv ; grcv ) to determine the peak collection eciency
(gcol ) and the associated Acon ; Arcv . Collection eciency is
the product of concentrator eciency and receiver
eciency:
gcol gcon  grcv

25

Finally, the overall eciency of the system is:

govr P net =DNI  Acon gcon  grcv  gmGT

26

2.6. Design algorithm

The design process for the SD-mGT integrated system
starts o from the denition of the electric output to be
provided by the system. Then, through a cascaded process,
the three components are coupled and optimised:

1. Dene target P net and optimise thermodynamic cycle for

the micro turbine only.
2. Add receiver equations, obtaining a series of potential
pairs (Arcv ; grcv ) for each Qg;o .
3. For each receiver area (Arcv ), compute the size (Acon ) and
eciency (gcon ) of the concentrator.
4. Select the highest gcol and associated Acon and Arcv .

3. O-design model of the dish-mGT integrated system

3.1. Micro gas turbine
The model of the micro gas turbine for o-design performance is based on the utilisation of normalised performance maps and the assumption that the engine is
arranged in a single shaft layout (i.e. same shaft speed
for compressor and turbine). These maps are graphical representations of the performance of the machine for a given
set of operating conditions, which are themselves expressed
in terms of certain corrected variables (Dixon, 1998). This
approach is based on similarity and dimensional analyses
and is widely used in turbomachinery. The corrected variables used in a turbomachine are corrected mass ow rate
m_ cor (Eq. (27)), compressor/expander pressure ratio (Eq.
(2)), isentropic eciency (Eq. (4)) and corrected speed
N cor (Eq. (28)):
p
m_ T 0
m_ cor
27
p0
N
N cor p
T0

28

A performance map for the compressor is obtained from

a specic software available at the University of Seville,
based on the design guidelines exposed in (Aungier,
2000). This yields the mass ow rate, pressure ratio, specic
speed and eciency parameters /i which are related as
follows:
/g f /m_ cor ; /N cor ; /rc

29

The expander model is somewhat simpler and it considers two dierent operating regimes:
 Unchoked operation. Stodolas equation is used as presented in (Stodola, 1927).
 Choked operation. Constant corrected mass ow rate is
assumed regardless of shaft speed, based on the assumption that choking takes place in the stator vanes
(Kaikko, 1998).
From a numerical standpoint, it is assumed that the
expander is designed to operate at the critical mass ow
rate (i.e. mass ow rate corresponding to the transition
from unchoked to choked operation). This translates into
the following set of equations describing the performance
of the expander:

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

/m_ cor

8 r


2
<
r
re;on
1  e;off
1re;on

:
1

if /re < 1

285

30

if /re > 1

The eciency in o-design operation is assumed well

described in the entire operating regime by the following
correlation provided by (Wang et al., 2004):


/N cor
2 /N cor
/ge 1  0:3  1  /N cor
2
31
/m_ cor
/m_ cor
In as fas as the recuperator is concerned, the following
approach is adopted based on the assumption that the
compressor and turbine ow rates are the same and that
the Nusselt numbers on both sides of the heat exchanger
are well described by the DittusBoelter correlation. Whilst
the former assumption is very accurate for a solar only and
even a hybrid application (due to the very low fuel to air
ratio of the latter), the latter is supported by the type of
heat exchangers typically used in these applications
(Shah, 2005; Dorman et al., 2012). Thus, assuming that
ow conditions are similar and turbulent in both sides of
the heat exchanger, the global heat transfer coecient
and pressure drops are calculated by the following equation making use of DittusBoelters correlation for Nusselt
number and Pethukovs equation to estimate Fanning factor (Pethukov, 1970):
 0:8
UArcp
m_

32
m_ d
UArcp;d
 1:71 

q23;d
Dp23
m_

33
m_ d
Dp23;d
q23
where q23 is the average density across the recuperator.
3.2. Solar receiver
The behaviour of the solar receiver in o-design conditions can be modelled with the same formulation used for
the recuperator on the assumption that heat transfer is controlled by convection in the cavity (convection between
porous matrix and compressor delivery air). This means
that the same Eq. (32) is applicable if UArcv is substituted
for UArcp . The same applies to pressure losses and Eq. (33).
3.3. Concentrator
The performance of the dish in o-design operation does
not change with respect to the model presented in Section 2.5 inasmuch as the same geometrical equations apply
in any position of the collector (Stine and Harrigan, 1985;
Stine and Diver, 1994). Even if errors due to the tracking
system must be usually acknowledged, it is herein assumed
that the relative sun-concentrator position is constant
and optical errors can thus be considered constant
throughout the year; i.e. they are given a certain value during the design phase and this remains constant in o-design
operation.

Fig. 5. Layout of the system for a hybrid application.

3.4. Hybrid operation: utilisation of fossil fuels

Hybrid operation with solar energy and fossil fuel supply simultaneously is enabled by a combustor installed in
series with the solar receiver, Fig. 5. In this case, mass
and energy balance equations for the combustor are incorporated into the model, introducing an additional pressure
drop term as well (via an equation similar to Eq. (33)).
_ h5  h4
Qfuel mfuel

34

m_ fuel Qfuel =LHV  gcc

35

The strategy used to operate the auxiliary combustor is

presented in Section 4.1.
3.5. Parasitic losses
Parasitic losses refer to the power consumption that is
required to drive the auxiliary equipment, in particular
the tracking system. A tracking system corrects the position of the dish every two seconds approximately, hence
its consumption is not rigorously constant. Nevertheless,
it is usual to adopt a constant value which can be regarded
as a conservative approach when determining the performance of the system. This constant value of parasitic losses
is provided in Table 1 for dierent system outputs.
4. Control strategies and input data
4.1. Control strategies
The operating conditions of the system when running in
solar only mode are determined by DNI and ambient conditions (i.e., T amb ). For each pair of operating conditions,1
there is one single stable operating point of the system
which comes determined by shaft speed. The procedure
to evaluate the optimum shaft speed is as follows.
1

Note that pressure and relative humidity also play a role though this is
not quoted here for the relative variations of these two parameters
negligible when compared to ambient temperature.

286

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

Table 1
Parasitic losses for dierent system outputs.
System

]1

]2

]3

]4

Output [kWe]
Losses [We]

7
50

15
100

23
150

30
200

 Shaft speed is reduced to decrease mass ow rate and

ensure that turbine inlet temperature T 4 remains at the
rated value.
 Nevertheless, due to the decreasing pressure ratio for
reduced mass ow rates, there is an increase in turbine
exhaust temperature T 5 at part load. Thus, there is a
load for which turbine inlet temperature must also be
reduced along with shaft speed in order to ensure that
the recuperator is not overheated.
 When the maximum operating temperature of the recuperator is achieved, shaft speed and turbine inlet temperature T 4 are further reduced with load in such a way that
turbine exhaust temperature T 5 remains constant at its
maximum value.
 For all the aforelisted strategies, mass ow rate is kept
above 40% the rated value in order to ensure ow stability of the compressor.
For hybrid operation, the following operating strategies
are considered:
 Strategy 1: Fuel is supplied to ensure that the system
output is kept at the rated value during sun hours,
regardless of the actual DNI. Then, at a given cut-o
DNI during sunset, the system is shut down.
 Strategy 2: Fuel is supplied to ensure that overall eciency
is always above a certain minimum value. Then, at a given
cut-o DNI during sunset, the system is shut down.
 Strategy 3: Based on the electricity demand curve of
most countries, the system is assumed to work at full
capacity from 7 am to 11 pm during working days
(Aichmayer et al., 2013).

obtained from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (Solar prospector, 2015). The task of setting the
design DNI is not easy though and a pre-analysis is typically required. To assist on this matter, Fig. 6 shows the
duration curve for Seville. Based on this information,
Mancini et al. (2003) suggest that the dierence between
design and peak DNI should be not larger than 1015%
for a dish-Stirling. In fact, many system optimised for
Seville operate at a nominal DNI of 800 W/m2
(Reinalter et al., 2003). Owing to the easier implementation of peaking capacity (overload), a more conservative
design DNI of 780 W/m2 is selected.
 Micro gas turbine. The expected thermal eciency of a
mGT in the output range considered is between 23%
and 26%. This is in line with the values reported by Capstone, for instance 25% for the C30 model (30 kWe) running on liquid fuel whilst the version for natural gas is
claimed to achieve 26% (Various, 2006).
Compressor and expander. The rated isentropic eciencies of compressor and expander are reported in
Table 2, showing sensitivity to the size of the system.
Additionally, a peak turbine inlet temperature of
900 C is considered on the assumption that exotic
materials are not used (Aichmayer et al., 2013;
Wright et al., 2005).
Recuperator. Rated eectiveness and pressure drop
are set to 85% and 2% (on each side) and for the maximum operator temperature a value of 780 C is taken
from (Aichmayer et al., 2013; McDonald, 2003).

For all these cases, either in solar-only or hybrid operation, it is assumed that the system is able to run in overload
conditions yielding 110% the rated output (if this is possible at all for the given ambient temperature). This is
achieved by spinning faster and operating at higher pressure ratio and mass ow rate, thus ensuring that the rated
turbine inlet temperature (and hence receiver temperature)
is not exceeded.
Fig. 6. DNI duration curve for the reference location (Seville).

4.2. Input data

The input data that is necessary to run the model is provided below:
 Location. The location of reference is Seville, Spain,
given its remarkably high solar resource. Hourly data
for DNI and ambient temperature for this location are

Table 2
Isentropic eciencies of compressor and expander.
System

]1

]2

]3

]4

Output [kWe]
gis;c
gis;e

7
0.76
0.74

15
0.76
0.75

23
0.76
0.76

30
0.77
0.76

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

Also, as far as heat transfer is concerned, the component is designed for similar convective heat transfer
coecient on both sides, which is here considered
10 W/m2K based on usual industrial practice for a
standard gasgas heat exchanger (Traverso and
Massardo, 2005). This yields a global heat transfer
coecient U rcp of 5 W/m2.
Mechanical considerations. The compressor/expander coupling is assumed able to spin at up to
115% the rated speed in a hot day, even if this can
be occasionally increased to 125% the nominal value
if necessary. This latter value cannot be exceeded
though if the mechanical integrity of the engine is
to be ensured. Regardless of the rotating speed,
mechanical eciency is set to 96%.
System optimisation. The variable used to optimise
the system is pressure ratio, whose value is selected
to achieve highest eciency for the ambient conditions of the location (25 C and 1 atm for Seville).
vila Marn, 2011), the
 Solar receiver. According to (A
aforecited turbine inlet temperature (900 C) is well
within the capabilities of state-of-the-art solar receivers
(950 C), thus compatibility is ensured. Other relevant
input data for this component are listed below:
Elevation angle for design conditions Hdes is 60 as
this is the position where most of the electricity is produced. Pressure drops and k cv;i;d are set to 2% and
150 W/m2 as well (Aichmayer et al., 2013).
Materials set temperature constraints on the receiver
design and operation. Hence, for the window, various
temperature limits are reported in literature. For
instance, Roger claims that the limit for uncoated
glass is 850 C (Roger et al., 2009) and, according
vila Marn (2011), metallic based absorber can
to A
withstand air temperatures up to 1000 C whereas siliconised silicon carbide (SiSiC) ceramic absorbers
and silicon carbide (SiC) absorbers can reach temperatures of 1200 C and 1500 C respectively. Based on
this, a safe value of 800 C for continuous operation
is chosen here.
The optical properties of the receiver materials are
considered variable with temperature and radiation
wavelength. Values are taken from (Roger et al.,
2009) where wavelength weighted values are reported
for the optical properties of a 5-mm thick fused silica
glass at dierent temperatures, Table 3. Also, the

Table 3
Optical properties of receiver materials (Roger et al., 2009).

a
s
.

Solar visible

Thermal (1373 K)
infrared

Thermal (600 K)
thermal

0.01
0.851
0.136

0.326
0.549
0.125

0.8

287

absorptivity and emissivity (third column) are used

to calculate ambient radiation and radiation emitted
by the glass (Tanaka et al., 2000).
 Concentrator. Further to the considerations reported in
previous sections, a reectivity of 94% is selected from
the information in (Stine and Harrigan, 1985).
 Operation. Neither for solar-only nor hybrid operations
does the model take into account thermal and mechanical inertias. Nevertheless, the absorber takes time to be
heated up and also the lube oil temperature has to be
increased to a minimum value for start-up. The energy
absorbed during start-up is represented by the cut-in
DNI which relates to the cumulative solar energy
absorbed during warm-up (i.e.; energy absorbed from
DNI 0 to DNI DNI cutin ). Cut-in DNI is estimated
at 200 W/m2 for Stirling engines, which is assumed a
conservative value for micro gas turbines given the lower
thermo-mechanical inertia of the latter. Based on this
and to avoid thermal shock in the turbine, air ow rate
is kept constant at 40% the rated value between
DNI = 200 W/m2 and DNI = 250 W/m2 and it is left
to increase above this DNI value.For hybrid operation,
both liquid and gas fuels are considered with low heating values of 43.4 MJ/kg (diesel) and 50 MJ/kg (natural
gas) respectively. Combustor eciency and pressure loss
are set to 97% and 2%.

5. Comparison against literature data

The validation of a dish-mGT system operating in odesign conditions is not easy as the experimental results
in the public domain are scarce (if available at all). Therefore, a particular validation/verication of each individualised component in the system is usually carried out,
rather than a full system validation. On the other hand,
the mGT and concentrator can be considered standard
equipment and their corresponding governing equations
are well known. Therefore, for a preliminary assessment
where the hardware is not determined yet, there is not
really a need to validate the results obtained for these
two components. The interested reader can check the
results reported in (Le Roux et al., 2012; Wang et al.,
2015; Gallup and Kesseli, 1994; Lanchi et al., 2015;
Ragnolo et al., 2015; LLC, 2011).
The receiver, instead, is not standardised. The performance models, simulations results and experimental data
are developed according to strong design assumptions or
testing conditions of specic prototypes (small/large size,
pressurised/atmospheric, tubular/volumetric, open/closed,
dierent materials, etc.), thus being very dicult to compare the results from dierent analyses. Nevertheless, in
an attempt to validate the receiver model used in this work,
a comparison against the results provided in a recent experimental research is presented below (Pozivil et al., 2015).

288

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

Pozivil et al. report experimental data for a 50 kWth

directly-irradiated open volumetric receiver design with
an internal receiver matrix and pressurised operation
(Pozivil et al., 2015). The main conceptual dierence
between this design and the one presented in this article
is the adoption of a glass window aimed at minimising convective losses; for the remaining features, both designs are
fairly similar. Two plots in reference (Pozivil et al., 2015)
are particularly interesting: one showing a t curve for
receiver outlet temperature over mass ow rate and the
other one showing receiver eciency versus specic radiative energy input (qin ) dened as incident power (Qw ) normalised by mass ow rate.
These plots are presented in Figs. 7 and 8. The original
data are plotted together with the results obtained from the
model in this paper for operating conditions that have been
replicated as accurately as possible, for instance assuming
the same air inlet temperature of 25 C. It is noted that
the available experimental data apply to a stand-alone
receiver and not to an integrated dish-mGT system.
Fig. 7 demonstrates the parallel temperature drop for
increasing mass ow rate of the experimental data in
(Pozivil et al., 2015) and the results provided by the model.
It is worth noting though that, even if there is similarity
between the simulated and experimental results, the existence of a glass-window modies the operating conditions
of the receiver. The window attenuates the re-irradiation
and convection losses, thus explaining why the temperature
of Pozivils prototype (T p ) falls between the two receiver
temperatures of this model (T 4 and T g ). Actually, the
model predicts a window temperature below T p and an outlet value higher than this. This is the reason why a directlyirradiated (open) receiver exhibits worse performance at
high temperatures whilst performing better at low heat
input and high mass ow. In other words, it is observed
that the shape of the eciency curve is similar in both cases

Fig. 8. Comparison of receiver eciency for variable specic radiative

energy input (Pozivil et al., 2015).

but it has dierent curvature and therefore absolute values.

Two zones are distinguished:
 at low values of qin , radiation losses are not dominant
because the receiver temperature is low and the main
loss for a closed receiver is the reection of solar rays
(about 13%), which does not aect a directly-irradiated
open receiver.
 as qin increases, the receiver temperatures rise and the
closed receiver performs better because of the lower reradiation losses due to a lower temperature at the interface with the environment (T g ).
From the plots in Figs. 7 and 8, it is deduced that the
model performs as expected from the available experimental data, even if there is not a direct correspondence due to
the inherently dierent designs. The authors are aware that
this cannot be considered a full validation (actually the
comparison was not intended to be so); nevertheless, it still
comes to conrm that the results provided by the model are
realistic and, as such, this can be employed for preliminary
assessment of the technology.
6. Results
6.1. Performance indicators
This section introduces the various gures of merit that
will be used to assess the performance of the system under
various operating strategies and conditions. The most relevant index is the annually averaged overall eciency:
govr

Fig. 7. Comparison of receiver temperature for variable mass ow and

irradiance (Pozivil et al., 2015).

Enet
Esolar Efuel

36

where Enet is the annual yield (kWe), Esolar is the annual

solar energy input and Efuel is the total fuel heat input in
a year. These two parameters are dened as follows:

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

Esolar Acon 

8760
X

289

37

DNIt

t0

Efuel

8760
1 X
Q t
gcc t0 fuel

38

The capacity factor is then dened as:

Cf

Enet
8760  P nom

39

where P nom is the rated output of the unit. Other interesting

performance indicators are the fuel share and the specic
carbon dioxide (CO2 ) emissions.
F fuel

F CO2

Efuel
Efuel Esolar  gcon
Efuel
Efuel Acon  gcon 

P8760
t0

DNIt

44 m_ f

12 lf Enet

40

Fig. 9. Concentrator, receiver and collector eciency versus receiver

diameter (Heat supply at receiver window is 120 kWth).

41

where lf is the weight carbon content of the fuel, taken as

0.75 for natural gas and 0.86 for diesel fuel.
6.2. System optimisation in design conditions
System optimisation is made in two steps. First, the
optimum pressure ratio yielding highest heat-to-electricity
eciency of the micro gas turbine engine is found. Then,
based on the required heat input for given output and pressure ratio, the aperture areas of concentrator and receiver
are sized so that collector eciency is highest, as shown
in Fig. 9. Based on this methodology, design specications
are obtained for the four system outputs considered,
Table 4. It is worth noting that the maximum temperature
constraints are satised in all four cases.

Table 4
Design specications for the reference location (25 C).
System
2

DNI [W/m ]
Pressure ratio []
P net [kWe]
Qin [kWt]
m_ d [g/s]
govr [%]
gsyst [%]
gmGT [%]
grcv [%]
gcon [%]
Drcv [cm]
Dcon [cm]
Acon [m2]
Arcv [m2]

]1

]2

]3

]4

780
3.84
30.28
119.25
337.9
18.35
20.20
25.40
79.51
90.83
38.79
16.42
211.8
396.8

780
3.75
23.55
95.25
276.2
17.84
19.63
24.73
79.37
90.87
34.80
14.70
169.4
320.1

780
3.70
14.80
61.60
180.8
17.31
19.04
24.03
79.26
90.92
28.10
11.81
109.6
209.8

780
3.65
6.90
29.61
88.1
16.78
18.47
23.32
79.23
90.86
19.41
8.20
52.80
102.2

6.3. O-design performance

O-design simulation provides a performance matrix
whereby the production of electricity can be obtained for
each pair of DNI and T amb ,given a relative position of
sun and system (i.e. annual time and location of the plant).
For the sake of accuracy, the matrix is evenly spaced in
steps of 5 W/m2 for DNI and 10 C for temperature in
the entire operative range (5 C to 45 C). The inuence
of ambient temperature and DNI on system output and
eciency is shown in Figs. 10 and 11, where the noteworthy eect of temperature at high power settings is easily
observed (i.e., the green2 line falls in the rightward direction much faster than the blue and red ones).
The combined eect of ambient temperature and DNI
on the o-design performance of the system is complex
though as it entrains various thermodynamic phenomena
2
For interpretation of colour in Figs. 10 and 11, the reader is referred to
the web version of this article.

Fig. 10. System output in o-design operating conditions.

290

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

Fig. 11. System eciency in o-design operating conditions.

that oppose to one another. For constant shaft speed

(hence volumetric ow ratio), an increase in ambient temperature brings about a reduction of the mass ow rate
and, accordingly, pressure ratio (given that the expander
nozzles are typically choked in these systems). The former
eect (higher inlet temperature) tends to increase compression work but the latter (lower pressure ratio) is dominant
and hence the global eect is a reduction of compression
work (see Eq. (42)). Regarding expansion work, there is a
reduction caused by the lower pressure ratio of the engine
which, overall, brings about a lower shaft work of the cycle
that adds to the mass ow rate reduction to yield a substantial drop in system output.
Wc

cp T amb c1=c
rc
 1
gc

42

The foregoing discussion is valid for constant shaft speed

units. For variable speed engines the behaviour is dierent
though: when mass ow rate decreases as a consequence of
a reduction in density, the control system of the unit
increases shaft speed in an attempt to rise the volumetric ow
so as to keep mass ow rate constant. As a consequence,
mass ow ratio, pressure ratio and compression work
increase whilst expansion work remains constant, thus bringing about lower output and eciency as easily observed in
Figs. 10 and 11. Such control strategy is only limited by
mechanical integrity issues at high speed, as also deduced
from Fig. 10 where the 45 C line drops at high DNI even
for the rated insolation. This indicates that shaft speed is
at the peak value and no further accelerations are allowed.
A nal comment is still necessary with respect to the
abrupt change in slope at low DNI in Fig. 11, which comes
about due to the limitation on minimum mass ow rate of
the compressor (40%) in order to ensure stable operation.

Fig. 12. Net power over DNI (T amb 25  C).

gies presented in Section 4.1. The following observations

are made:
 For DNI > DNI rated , the system is always run in solar
only modality and the curves overlap regardless of the
operating strategy.
 The discontinuity for DNI < DNI rated is easily identied
by a sudden drop in output and eciency. This comes
about because of the induced pressure losses of the
combustor.
 The curves for strategies 1 (fuel is supplied to ensure that
the system output is kept at the rated value during sun
hours) and 3 (the system is assumed to work at full
capacity from 7 am to 11 pm during working days) overlap since the only dierence between them is the operating schedule;i.e., there are no dierences as far as the
system is concerned.

6.4. Hybrid performance

Figs. 12 and 13 compare the performance of the system
in solar only and hybrid conditions using the control strate-

Fig. 13. Overall eciency over DNI (T amb 25  C).

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

 Even if plotted for higher DNI, strategy 2 does only

dier from the solar only mode for DNI lower than
500 W/m2.
Tables 58 compare the annual yield of electricity for
the solar only and hybrid operating modes, reporting values for all four system sizes.
There are several interesting observations that can be
made regarding the information in the tables and gures

Table 5
Annual performance in solar only mode.
System

]1

]2

]3

]4

Enet [MWh]
C f [%]

govr [%]

77.33
29.16
17.47

59.99
29.05
16.93

37.66
29.05
16.44

17.56
29.05
15.92

Table 6
Annual performance in hybrid mode. Strategy 1.
System

]1

]2

]3

]4

Enet [MWh]
C f [%]
govr;S1 [%]
Efuel [MWh]
F fuel [%]
mCH4 [kg]
mDiesel [kg]
F CO2 ;CH4 [g/kWh]
F CO2 ;Diesel [g/kWh]

115.4
43.50
19.04
163.40
28.90
11,765
13,553
280.4
323.1

90.52
43.87
18.68
130.63
28.88
9,405
10,835
285.7
329.2

56.52
43.59
18.03
84.48
28.86
6,083
7,007
295.9
341.0

26.30
43.50
17.43
40.60
28.83
2,923
3,368
305.6
352.1

Table 7
Annual performance in hybrid mode. Strategy 2.
System

]1

]2

]3

]4

Enet [MWh]
C f [%]
govr;S2 [%]
Efuel [MWh]
F fuel [%]
mCH4 [kg]
mDiesel [kg]
F CO2 ;CH4 [g/kWh]
F CO2 ;Diesel [g/kWh]

87.37
32.94
18.08
41.44
9.34
2,983
3,437
93.72
107.97

68.45
33.17
17.65
33.93
9.54
2,443
2,814
98.14
113.06

42.91
33.09
17.09
22.07
9.58
1,589
1,831
101.84
117.33

20.00
33.07
16.54
10.62
9.57
764
880.8
105.11
121.09

Table 8
Annual performance in hybrid mode. Strategy 3.
System

]1

]2

]3

]4

Enet [MWh]
C f [%]
govr;S3 [%]
Efuel [MWh]
F fuel [%]
mCH4 [kg]
mDiesel [kg]
F CO2 ;CH4 [g/kWh]
F CO2 ;Diesel [g/kWh]

166.2
62.68
20.70
365.55
47.62
26,320
30,321
429.30
494.57

130.18
63.09
20.27
292.32
47.61
21,047
24,246
438.28
504.92

81.41
62.79
19.60
189.07
47.59
13,613
15,682
453.26
522.17

37.94
62.74
18.98
90.87
47.55
6,542
7,538
467.54
538.63

291

in this section. For strategy 1, a 50% increase in yield

(annual production of electricity) with respect to the reference solar-only case is observed which also brings about a
higher average eciency (govr;S1 ) owing to a higher average
load setting. For the same reason, the capacity factor is
increased by 50%, from less than 30% to over 43%. On
the negative side, the carbon footprint increases to
300 g/kWh with natural gas and 340 g/kWh with diesel
fuel. Overall, the solar share is quiet high (>70%) so the
system can still be regarded as a mainly solar distributed
power generator boosted with supplementary ring for
unfavourable operating conditions.
Strategy 2 is closer to the solar-only case than strategy 1,
as credited by the main performance specications lying
somewhere between these two. A modest increase in yield
due to supplementary ring brings about a very interesting
combination of almost 15% higher yield and still very low
emissions. In this latter regard, the emission factor is just
30% of the value expected for a small diesel or natural
gas power generator according to international standards:
75 tonsCO2 =MJ (ca. 270 gCO2 =MW h) (Dean et al., 2010;
Herold, 2010).
Strategy 3 makes the most intensive use of fuel in order
to more than double the annual yield, thus reducing the
solar share to less than 50%. Average eciencies rise as a
consequence of the higher load setting but this does not
suce to avoid a very large carbon footprint of the system,
which is actually 50% higher than a state-of-the-art diesel
or natural gas reciprocating engine. The overall picture is
discouraging in terms of using the hybrid dish-mGT generator in applications with such a low solar share, where
other more ecient devices could be used instead.
7. Conclusions
This paper has presented a thermodynamic assessment
on the potential interest of a dish-mGT solar power generator with fossil fuel backup, showing the fundamental
equations to integrate the components and optimise the
design point of the system. A performance model has been
introduced rst, followed by a discussion about the performance of the system using dierent operating strategies,
using either solar energy only or also fossil fuel for supplementary ring. The model has been constructed based on
the most recent publications in the topic and compared
against these to assess the results provided by the receiver
sub-model.
Globally, the assessment on the interest of hybrid operation indicates that whilst it makes thermodynamic and
environmental sense to use the dish-mGT system with
moderate supplementary ring, this should be limited to
sun hours. Extended operation on fossil fuel only (before
sunrise and after sunset) is not advised as it increases the
operational cost with respect to other alternative distributed power generators (i.e. reciprocating engines) and
brings about a dramatic increase in carbon footprint.

292

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

Nevertheless, it cannot be concluded from here that

solar-only operation is most interesting as it reduces the
annual yield substantially and hence increases the levelised
cost of electricity (LEC [/MWh]). The system running on
solar energy without supplementary ring is environmentally friendly but extraordinarily CapEx (Capital Expenditures) intensive whilst increasing fuel usage increases OpEx
(Operating Expenditures) and yield at somewhat constant
CapEx, in a worthwhile proportion in the sense that it
reduces CapEx. This trend with respect to additional fuel
burning is nevertheless oset by carbon footprint which
becomes increasingly large as the solar share is reduced.
The discussion in this paragraph sets the need for an
economic analysis accounting for investment (CapEx)
and operating (OpEx) costs. This is the natural next step
to this analysis and will be presented in a follow up publication, based on the thermodynamic model and results
contained in this article.
References
Aichmayer, L., Spelling, J., Laumert, B., Fransson, T., 2013. Micro gasturbine design for small-scale hybrid solar power plant. J. Eng. Gas
Turbines Power 135 (11), 113001113011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/
1.4025077.
Al-Attab, K., Zainal, Z., 2015. Externally red gas turbine technology: a
review. Appl. Energy 138, 474487. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2014.10.049.
Aungier, R., 2000. Centrifugal Compressors: A Strategy for Aerodynamic
Design and Analysis. ASME Press, New York.
vila Marn, A., 2011. Volumetric receivers in solar thermal power plants
A
with central receiver system technology: a review. Sol. Energy 85 (5),
891910. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2011.02.002.
Barigozzi, G., Bonetti, G., Franchini, G., Perdichizzi, A., Ravelli, S., 2012.
Thermal performance prediction of a solar hybrid gas turbine. Sol.
Energy
86
(7),
21162127.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.solener.2012.04.014.
Bauer, H., Abele, M., Biehler, T., Buck, R., Heller, P., 1994. Design and
test of volumetric receivers for dish/Brayton systems and solar
methane reforming. In: ASME-IGTI (Ed.), 7th Symposium on Solar
Thermal Concentrating Technologies, pp. 818825.
Buck, R., Heller, P., Koch, H., 1996. Receiver development for a dishBrayton system. In: ASME (Ed.), Solar Engineering, San Antonio,
TX, pp. 9196.
Dean, J., Van Geet, O., Rockenbaugh, C., 2010. Onsite Distributed
Generation Systems for Laboratories. Technical Paper. National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).
Dickey, B., 2011. Test results from a concentrated solar microturbine
Brayton cycle integration gt2011-45918. In: ASME-IGTI (Ed.), ASME
2011 Turbo Expo: Turbine Technical Conference and Exposition, pp.
20131036.
Dixon, S., 1998. Fluid Mechanics, Thermodynamics of Turbomachinery,
fourth ed. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Dorman, K., Quintero, S., Tran, L., Ricklick, M., Kapat, J., 2012.
Microturbine recuperation: turbulators and their eect on power
density and thermal eciency GT2012-69879. In: ASME-IGTI (Ed.),
ASME 2012 Turbo Expo: Turbine Technical Conference and Exposition, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2012, pp. 911920. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1115/GT2012-69879.
Fisher, U., Surgarmen, C., Sinai, J., 2014. Gas turbine solarization
-modications for solar/fuel hybrid operation. J. Sol. Energy Eng. 126,
872878. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.1763602.
Franchini, G., Perdichizzi, A., Ravelli, S., Barigozzi, G., 2013. A
comparative study between parabolic trough and solar tower tech-

nologies in solar rankine cycle and integrated solar combined cycle

plants. Sol. Energy 98 (C), 302314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.solener.2013.09.033.
Gallup, D., Kesseli, J., 1994. A solarized Brayton engine based on turbocharger technology and DLR receiver. In: AIAA (Ed.), International
Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC), pp. 16.
Heller, P., Buck, R., Biehler, T., 1994. Development of a volumetric
receiver for a dish-Brayton system. In: ASME (Ed.), Joint Solar
Engineering Conference, pp. 561566.
Herold, A., 2010. Comparison of CO2 Emission Factors for Fuels Used in
Greenhouse Gas Inventories and Consequences for Monitoring and
Reporting under the EC Emissions Trading Scheme. Technical
Paper. European Topic Centre on Air and Climate Change (ETC/
ACC).
Hischier, I., Leumann, P., Steinfeld, A., 2012. Experimental and numerical
analyses of a pressurized air receiver for solar-driven gas turbines. J.
Sol. Energy Eng. 134 (2), 021003021008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/
1.4005446.
Ho, C., Iverson, B.D., 2014. Review of high-temperature central receiver
designs for concentrating solar power. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
29, 835846. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.099.
Kaikko, J., 1998. Performance Prediction of Gas Turbines by Solving a
System of Non-linear Equation. Msc Thesis. University of Technology, Lappeenranta.
Kesseli, J., Wells, A., 1989. Cost competitive 30 kWe gas turbine/generator demonstration for cogeneration or solar-electric applications. In:
IEEE (Ed.), 24th International Energy Conversion Engineering
Conference, pp. 19031908.
Lanchi, M., Montecchi, M., Crescenzi, T., Mele, D., Miliozzi, A., Russo,
V., Mazzei, D., Misceo, M., Falchetta, M., Mancini, R., 2015.
Investigation into the coupling of micro gas turbines with CSP
technology: OMSoP project. Energy Procedia 69, 13171326. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.03.146.
Le Roux, W.G., Bello-Ochende, T., Meyer, J.P., 2012. Thermodynamic
optimisation of the integrated design of a small-scale solar thermal
Brayton cycle. Int. J. Energy Res. 36 (11), 10881104.
LLC, B.E., 2011. Brayton Power Conversion System.
Mancini, T., Heller, P., Butler, B., Osborn, B., Schiel, W., Buck, R., 2003.
Dish-stirling systems: an overview of development and status. J. Sol.
Energy Eng. 125 (2), 135151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.1562634.
McDonald, C., 2003. Recuperator considerations for future higher
eciency microturbines. Appl. Therm. Eng. 23 (12), 14631487.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1359-4311(03)00083-8.
Nepveu, F., Ferriere, A., Bataille, F., 2009. Thermal model of a
dish/stirling systems. Sol. Energy 83 (1), 8189. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.solener.2008.07.008.
berg, R., Olsson, F., Palsson, M., Demonstration Stirling Engine Based
O
Micro-CHP with Ultra-low Emissions.
Pavlovic, T.M., Radonjic, I., Milosavljevic, D., Pantic, L., 2012. A review
of concentrating solar power plants in the world and their potential use
in Serbia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (6), 38913902. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.03.042.
Pethukov, B., 1970. Heat transfer and friction in turbulent pipe ow with
variable physical properties. Adv. Heat Transf. 6, 503564.
Pozivil, P., Ettlin, F., Stucker, N., Steinfeld, A., 2015. Modular design and
experimental testing of a 50 kWth pressurized-air solar receiver for gas
turbines. J. Sol. Energy Eng. 137 (3), 031002031007. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1115/1.4028918.
Quero, M., Korzynietz, R., Ebert, M., Jimenez, A., del Ro, A., Brioso, J.,
2014. Solugas: operation experience of the rst solar hybrid gas turbine
system at MW scale. Energy Procedia 49, 18201830. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.egypro.2014.03.193.
Ragnolo, G., Aichmayer, L., Wang, W., Strand, T., Laumert, B., 2015.
Technoeconomic design of a micro-gas turbine for a solar dish system.
Energy Procedia 69, 11331142.
Reinalter, W., Chryssos, V., Keck, T., 2003. CESI EuroDish Reference
Manual Version 1.0. Progress Report. European Commission.
Almera-Stuttgart, oMSoP Project (FP7 Grant n. 308952).

S. Semprini et al. / Solar Energy 132 (2016) 279293

Roger, M., Rickers, C., Uhlig, R., Neumann, F., Polenzky, C., 2009.
Infrared-reective coating on fused silica for a solar high-temperature
receiver. J. Sol. Energy Eng. 131 (2), 021004021007. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1115/1.3097270.
Shah, R., 2005. Compact heat exchangers for microturbines. In: Shah, R.,
Ishizuka, I., Rudy, T., Wadekar, V., (Eds.), 5th International
Conference on Enhanced, Compact and Ultra-Compact Heat
Exchangers: Science, Engineering and Technology, Hoboken, NJ,
2005, pp. 247257.
Six, L., Elkins, R., 1981. Solar Brayton engine/alternator set. In: Parabolic
Dish Solar Thermal Power Annual Program Review, pp. 2336.
Soares, C., 2007. Microturbines. Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington.
Solar Prospector, 2015. <http://maps.nrel.gov/node/10>.
Stine, W., Diver, R., 1994. A Compendium of Solar/Dish Stirling
Technology. Technical Report. SANDIA National Labs, Alburquerque, NM, sAND93-7026 UC-236.
Stine, W., Harrigan, R., 1985. Solar Energy Fundamentals and Design.
Wiley-Interscience.
Stodola, A., 1927. Steam and Gas Turbines. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Tanaka, H., Sawai, S., Morimoto, K., Hisano, K., 2000. Evaluation of
hemispherical total emissivity for thermal radiation calorimetry. Int. J.
Thermophys. 121 (4), 927940. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1006670409740.

293

Traverso, A., Massardo, A., 2005. Optimal design of compact recuperators for microturbine application. Appl. Therm. Eng. 25 (1415),
20542071. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2005.01.015.
Various, 2006. Capstone Model C30 Performance. Technical Reference.
Capstone Turbine Inc., Chatsworth, CA.
Various, 2013. Report on State-of-the-art of Dish-engine Applications.
Progress Report. European Commission, oMSoP Project (FP7 Grant
n. 308952).
Wang, W., Cai, R., Zhang, N., 2004. General characteristics of single shaft
microturbine set at variable speed operation and its optimization.
Appl. Therm. Eng. 24 (13), 18511863. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2003.12.012.
Wang, W., Ragnolo, G., Aichmayer, L., Strand, T., Laumert, B., 2015.
Integrated design of a hybrid gas turbine-receiver unit for a solar dish
system. Energy Procedia 69, 583592. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.egypro.2015.03.067.
Welty, W., Wilson, R., 2000. Fundamentals of Momentum, Heat and
Mass transfer, fth ed. Wiley.
Wright, S., Fuller, R., Lipinski, R., Nichols, K., Brown, N., 2005.
Operational results of a closed Brayton cycle test-loop. In: El-Genk M.
(Ed.), Space Technology and Applications Technology Forum
STAIF2005, Hoboken, NJ, pp. 699746.