Solar collectors(metal and fabrication content)

Has anybody built there own solar panels? I googled around and found some info but wanted to hear from RCMs. I also posted to alt.solar.thermal and
alt.energy.homepower and got no replies. I have a bunch of sheet copper and thought I could braze or solder it to 3/8 tubing and paint it black, place in an insulated box .....The goal is to supply my domestic hot water or at least reduce the amount of fuel oil we use. As always I'd like to do most of this myself but if building panels doesn't make sense (efficiency wise) then I'd look to fabricate and install whatever else I could. (more time then money)Also if anyone has experience with heat exchangers that too would be helpful.
Thanks in advance
Andrew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I played around with some things about 20 years ago, just piddling during a winter, and found that painting a common red brick black in color raised it's temperature 9 degrees when compared to a red brick placed next to it on wood blocks in the direct sun. In Mother Earth News at the time, the statement was made that a dark green color was actually the most heat absorbent color to use. That's about as deep as I got into it.
RJ
--
"You're just jealous because the voices are talking to me, instead of you."


"AndrewV" < snipped-for-privacy@evolutionironworksNOSPAM.com> wrote in message
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I think it was that dark green was almost as good as glossy black and a lot more attractive. At least that is how I remember it.
Dan

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Backlash wrote:

If we place on wood blocks directly in the sun two equal size samples of bare steel and bare aluminum it is found that aluminum gets way hotter. Although the bare aluminum reflects more heat than the bare steel, the absorbed heat is very poorly radiated back out so it gets bloody hot. The steel reflects less heat but radiates back out that absorbed heat far more efficiently with the result that the temperature rise is much lower. If our two samples are painted with the same paint all over they each get the same temperature. The color of the paint determines how much heat is reflected back. The type of paint determines how much heat is radiated out: Color determines reflection/heat input. Material determines radiation or heat output. Practical applications: 1) If you use in house or shop hot water radiators it is best to paint them a light (white) color as this will minimize absorption of heat from out of the room. For the highest heat output (radiation) to the room you select a paint or clear surface finish over the paint that has the best radiation property. 2) If you got one of those aluminum campers and you paint the aluminum with a clear varnish you retain the good reflection of the aluminum color and cash in on the much better heat radiation of the surface film of the lacquer. HTH
--
SATOR AREPO TENET OPERA ROTAS
Have 5 nice days! John
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

during a

it on

I have a hard time believing this; it takes more energy to raise the temperature of a block of steel than an equal size block of aluminum. The heat capacity of steel is about half that of aluminum per gram but its density is about triple so it would take half again as much energy input to the steel block to raise its temperature the same amount.

No, the vast amount of heat transfer from a radiator running at a reasonable temperature will be via convection not radiation. Color will have very little to do with efficiency. The insulating properties of the finish will have a lot more to do with the heat transfer than the color.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This is indeed more complicated, but the difference in heat capacity may be less important in practical terms.
Considering tubing for pipes in solar collectors, one would expect the strength/weight ratio of the two metals to reverse the effect - aluminium tubes would be thicker, equalising (or more) the total latent heat.
What would be nice to know is the rate of heat transfer across the inside tube wall, into whatever the working fluid is - especially if it is a large effect.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

be
I would think the issue would be moving the heat in to your working medium: the water. If that is so the ideal choice would be the material with the greatest thermal conductivity for the required thickness to meet your mechanical goals: all most certainly copper. The only reason I can think of that might invalidate that idea is if you for some reason are wanting to use your tubing as thermal mass. Perhaps in a small collector system that's going to rapidly draw warm water off in large volumes compared to the systems capacity.

large
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
http://tinyurl.com/2ol7m Happy hunting. Regards. Ken.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Keeney wrote:

You would need thick wall tubing but that would reduce the overall conductivity.
If you compare the heat capacity of (say) a foot of copper tube to the heat capacity of the water in it for typical copper tubing (~1/16" wall), you find that the thermal mass of the water is 1.67 times the thermal mass of the copper for 3/8" ID tube and 2.34 times for 1/2" ID tube and gets even larger as the nominal size increase.
Also of note: Some years ago I read a paper on non fan cooled heat sinks for semiconductor devices. It was found that black anodized aluminum was considerably more effective than painted or bare.
The thermal conductivity of copper is ~1.7 times that of aluminum. This may not be terribly significant especially in a fairly thin wall tube.
I would think that the most important characteristics would be the emmisivity of blackened (oxidized?) copper compared to black anodized aluminum and the comparative ease of joining copper compared to alluminum.
Ted
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ted Edwards wrote:

A stupid question. Would you benefit from making the internal surface of the copper pipe black?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

In absolute terms, yes. In practical terms, no. The effect would be way too small to be economical and that is assuming all else is equal, which it never is.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Stewart wrote:

Haven't had your coffee yet? Nobody said anything about the inside surface. The topic is a _solar_ collector. Ya know? Abbsorbing the sun's rays.
Ted
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ted Edwards wrote:

Yabbut........then the 'collector' has to transfer the energy to the working fluid. It is still 'solar' energy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ken Davey wrote:

Irrelevent. Heat is transfered by radiation, convection and conduction. Whether it's solar, fire or nuclear is irrelevent. Only the nature of the transfer matters. Inside the tube, radiation will be neglegable, convection (the fluid is moving) small and conduction the major factor. You don't want to put any poor conductors in the way.
Ted
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Obviously he is concerned with transferring the collected heat into the water. Go drink some coffee.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Keeney wrote:

Energy vs temerature. Larger heat capacity will slow the approach to equilibrium but, in and of itself, will not effect the final equilibrium temperature.
Further, water has one of the highest specific heats of any known material. The heat capacity of the water in the system will far outway that of the metal.
Ted
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 15:11:08 -0500, "AndrewV"

Finding black body info. is hard , I think it's because solar people want the edge from proprietary info. Something turns copper or was it aluminum black , maybe sulfuric acid? Don't know if it will hurt the pipe , but its best to stain it somehow. Maybe anodize it flat black. I tried engine paint once and it didn't last long , but then I was focusing about 25 suns on it and what ever water boils @ 300 psi. That was one scary experiment. Try looking for redrock web site from alt.thermal it has tons of info. in it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:51:46 GMT, Sunworshiper

I can't say the process (because I don't know), but we work with a product that uses IR. Preventing reflections, which are bad, is important in the equipment we make. Not reflecting is of course another way of saying it absorbs IR.
One of the many aluminum formulas available from the anodizing shop we use is much superior to others at absorbing IR.
-- WS mostly in m.s - http://members.1stconnect.com/anozira
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thanks, good tip on that web site lots of usefull stuff.
Andrew
wrote:

some
and
place
at
of
then
be
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

some
and
place
at
of
then
be
For hot water you really should look into batch heaters; basically the bottle out of a water heater in a solar collection box. Trying to heat the water on demand requires gobs of collector and they are going to reach inconvenient temps when the water isn't flowing. It's unfortunate but true, that most people use hot water when the sun is inconvenitly placed in the sky: early morning and evening as they are gone to work during the best times. Unless some one is at home during the day to do laundry etc or your life style can be modified of such this is a serious issue. Another reason to look into batch heaters as they can store some of the energy.

Way back when I was looking hard at solar heating the number one absorber was a coating of "black chrome", not that I ever really figured out what that is. It was available in peal&stick though that was nearly as effective as a direct coating. About any flat black high temp paint was cost effective: we're talking stove, barbecue and header paint. The secret, as with all coatings, is to keep it thin.
Oh yea, three layers of glazing was what I came up with as the max useful number of glazing layers. Pass three layers you block more energy from getting in than you keep in with the extra insulation.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.