1

Two types of prevalent medium-to-large-scale concentrated solar thermal fields use:

  1. Parabolic trough or
  2. Parabolic dish

Since 1986, hundreds of sites around the world have built arrays of Scheffler parabolic dishes, mostly in India.

Since 1998, numerous sites around the world have built arrays of Euro Troughs.

Photo of a rooftop covered with an array of Scheffler parabolic dishes Photo of a field covered with an array of
Array of parabolic dishes (Scheffler) Array of parabolic linear Euro Troughs

What are the design trade-offs between these two types (Scheffler & Euro Trough) of solar thermal concentrators?

Michael Altfield
  • 225
  • 1
  • 10
  • just a guess - the trough, with its uniform cross section, seems like it might be more cost effective to fabricate the parts, and more straightforward for system design, since you just run the pipe thru the focal point in the cross-section and that's it – Pete W Feb 01 '24 at 00:52
  • I noticed that I haven't found any trough-style arrays on rooftops. I wonder if one is better for roofs? And maybe if one suffers more than the other if tightly-packed together in a confined space? – Michael Altfield Feb 01 '24 at 01:38
  • @PeteW I imagine that the linear design in the trough-style affects how tightly the components can be packed for shipping and facilitates rapid construction at-scale. – Michael Altfield Feb 01 '24 at 01:42
  • If you are considering rooftops, consider rain and snow (maybe stronger winds too)... – Abel Feb 01 '24 at 01:43
  • @Abel why would there be a difference in rain/snow on a rooftop vs on the ground? wind differences makes sense. – Michael Altfield Feb 01 '24 at 01:44
  • Take a look at your pics. Which one more readily drains? The difference is in the load for your walls and structures that support the collectors due to added weight of snow or water. Over the course of a structure it can be significant. If you need gaps anyway, might as well collect into a point instead of line for higher temp at the point. – Abel Feb 01 '24 at 02:09
  • The Euro Troughs would be easier to make, install & operate. – Fred Feb 01 '24 at 07:50
  • So what are you considering? costs? maintenance? efficiency? – Solar Mike Feb 01 '24 at 11:40
  • Up-front build costs, long-term cost per kW, transportation weight & volume, assembly time, availability of components in unindustrialized countries, tolerance to high wind/rain/hail/snow, efficiency in low-light conditions, kW/sq m, maintenance time required (eg how frequent & difficult to clean), longevity of components, long-term maintenance costs, global efficacy changes in different latitudes, etc. The answer to this question shouldn't be specific to my needs -- but rather it should list the most important trade-offs in general for anyone considering building a CSP system. – Michael Altfield Feb 01 '24 at 17:35
  • sun tracking might be much simpler to deal with for the focal line compared to the focal point –  Feb 04 '24 at 14:15
  • interesting. I was thinking the opposite would be true -- since you can rotate a dish across multiple axes but with a trough I'd expect you could only rotate across one axis. – Michael Altfield Feb 05 '24 at 11:21
  • 1
    linear requires one actuator, while dish requires two –  Feb 17 '24 at 19:18

0 Answers0