Desalination 347 (2014) 131–137

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Desalination
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/desal

An experimental investigation on a solar still with an integrated flat

plate collector
T. Rajaseenivasan a, P. Nelson Raja a, K. Srithar b,⁎
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Fatima Michael College of Engineering and Technology, Madurai, 625020 Tamil Nadu, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Madurai, 625015 Tamil Nadu, India

H I G H L I G H T S

• Flat plate collector basin and conventional stills were fabricated and tested.
• A horizontal flat plate collector (FPC) is integrated into the basin of the still.
• FPC arrangement considerably enhances the distillate of the still.
• The FPC basin still has about 60% higher distillate than the conventional still.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This work promotes the performance of the single basin solar still by means of preheating the saline water using
Received 2 January 2014 an integrated flat plate collector arrangement. A conventional single slope single basin still and a single slope flat
Received in revised form 20 May 2014 plate collector basin still (FPCB still) are fabricated with the same basin area of 1 m2. The FPCB still is fabricated
Accepted 21 May 2014
similar to a conventional still, with the integration of a horizontal flat plate collector arrangement to form six
Available online 17 June 2014
small compartments in the basin. The projected space between the consecutive basins acts as an extended
Keywords:
surface which increases the temperature of the basin as well as the flat plate collector where the saline water is
Solar still preheated before it enters the basin. Due to separate compartments (absorber plate) in the basin, the mass of
Flat plate collector water reduces and the evaporation rate increases for the same depth of water in the basin. Experiments are carried
Integrated still out by varying the water depth in the basin and using the wick and energy storing materials in basins of both stills.
Extended surface The FPCB still gives about 60% higher distillate than the conventional still for the same basin condition. Economic
Solar desalination analysis shows that the cost of distilled water for the FPCB still is lower than that for the conventional still.
© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
A single basin solar still is a simple device used for desalination
purposes. The productivity of a simple solar still is low. The performance
of the solar still depends on various factors, such as: solar intensity,
wind velocity, ambient temperature, water–glass temperature differ-
ence, free surface area of water, absorber plate area, temperature of
inlet water, transparent cover angle and depth of water [1]. Several
modifications were made in the solar still to improve its productivity.
Reducing the water depth in the basin enhances the daytime productiv-
ity and reduces the nocturnal productivity [2–6]. Placing of energy
storing materials [glass, black rubber, gravel, asphalt, quartzite rock,
red brick pieces, cement concrete pieces, washed stones and iron
scraps] in the basin improves the heat storing capacity and results in
higher productivity of the still [7–11]. The latent heat thermal energy
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 9842185302; fax: +91 4522483427.
E-mail address: ponsathya@hotmail.com (K. Srithar).
storage systems have many advantages over sensible heat storage sys-
tems including a large energy storage capacity per unit volume and al-
most constant temperature for charging and discharging [12]. In a
single slope single basin solar still, a thin layer of stearic acid was
used as a latent heat energy storage material in the basin [13]. The
evaporation rate of a still strongly depends on the surface area of
water exposed to the sun. The surface area exposure of the water can
be increased by providing sponge cubes in the basin [14,15].
In stills, evaporated water is condensed on the inside surface of the
glass cover that releases the latent heat energy to the surroundings.
It may be effectively used by providing an additional basin to the still, re-
ferred as a multi-effect still. Different methods to improve the perfor-
mance of the multi-effect solar still were reviewed by Rajaseenivasan
et al. [16]. Active methods significantly improve the temperature
of water in the basin by integrating the still with external heat sources.
A detailed review on the active solar distillation was made by
Sampathkumar et al. [17]. Performance of the solar still integrated with
a flat plate collector was studied using the tap and saline water [18].

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.05.029
0011-9164/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
132 T. Rajaseenivasan et al. / Desalination 347 (2014) 131–137
Performance of the double slope solar still with a flat plate collector under
natural circulation mode was investigated by Dwivedi and Tiwari [19]. A
double effect solar still with integrated flat plate collector and water
flow over the transparent cover was presented by Kumar and Tiwari [20].
Desalination system coupled with the parabolic collector with
heat exchanger was theoretically and experimentally studied by Abdel
Rehim and Lasheen [21]. An experimental analysis on a double slope
solar still with non-tracking cylindrical parabolic concentrator with
an electrical pump was presented [22]. The concentrator coupled still
resulted in higher production than the passive and flat plate collector
stills at various depth conditions.
Kumar and Tiwari [23] conducted an experimental study on a hybrid
Photovoltaic/Thermal (PV/T) active solar still. Life cycle cost analysis of a
single slope hybrid (PV/T) active solar still was presented by Kumar and
Tiwari [24]. A solar still integrated with a pulsating heat pipe collector
(PHP) was investigated by Sharif Abad et al. [25] with various filling
ratios in PHP, various water depths in the still and various inclination
angles of the flat plate collector. A double basin still integrated with a
vacuum tube collector was used to enhance the distillate of the still by
Panchal [26]. The productivity of this system was 56% higher than
that of the conventional double basin still. A study was conducted in a
single slope single basin still integrated with the solar water heater by
Sampathkumar and Senthilkumar [27].
The research works described above clearly show that the perfor-
mance of a still depends on mass of water in the basin, water tempera-
ture and exposure area. In active methods, a separate energy collector
is used to supply the preheated water to the still. It raises the overall
cost of the system as well as requires isolated space. The objective of
this work is to accommodate the flat plate collector system into the
single basin still, to enhance the distillate of the still by supplying the
preheated water. It evades the additional space of the collector and
reduces the collector system cost. In this work a horizontal flat plate
collector is integrated in the basin of a single slope single basin solar
still. This flat plate collector basin still (FPCB still) has the following
advantages compare with the conventional basin still. (i) The flat plate
collector arrangement provides preheated saline water supply to the
basin that increases the basin water temperature. (ii) The fin arrange-
ment increases the heat transfer rate from the basin to water. (iii) Due
to separate compartments in the basin, the mass of water reduces and
the evaporation rate increases for the same depth of water in the basin.
The experiments are conducted by varying the water depth in the
basin, using black gravels and wick materials in the basin of conventional
and FPCB stills.
2. Experimental setup and procedure
This work mainly consists of two systems namely conventional
single slope single basin and flat plate collector basin stills. Both stills
Fig. 1. Flat plate collector basin still — Sectional view.
consist of a wooden box made by plywood having four sides with di-
mensions of 1.1 × 1.1 m2 and thickness of 0.025 m. The outer sides of
the wooden box are covered by the sheet metal. The basins of both stills
are fabricated with a mild steel plate and effective basin area of 1 m2.
The basins are placed in the inner side of the plywood box. The space
available between the basin and plywood box is filled by the saw dust
as insulation material. Window glass with a thickness of 4 mm is used
as transparent covers for both stills and fixed at an inclination of 10°
to horizontal, which is latitude of Madurai. The net evaporation areas
of conventional and FPCB stills are 1 m2 and 0.65 m2 respectively. The
remaining area of 0.35 m2 in the FPCB still is used for flat plate
collector arrangement as shown in Fig. 1.
The FPCB still is fabricated similar to a conventional basin still and
following modifications are carried out in the basin. In the FPCB still,
the basin is divided into six small compartments with the size about
0.108 m × 1 m each. These compartments are used as basins for the
FPCB still. The gaps available between the compartments are fabricated
as a rectangular fin with the size of 0.07 m × 1 m each. These five rect-
angular fins are used as an absorber plate for the flat plate collector and
horizontally placed in the basin. Five mild steel pipes are used as risers
with a diameter of 12.7 mm and these are connected with the upper
and lower header (25.4 mm diameter) pipes (Fig. 2). This arrangement
is placed above the horizontal absorber plate (rectangular fins). The
basins of both stills, absorber plate and risers of the FPCB still are coated
in black to absorb more solar energy.
A water storage tank with a capacity of 50 l is used to supply the
saline water to conventional and FPCB stills and is controlled by three
valves (V1, V2 & V3) as shown in Fig. 2. V1 is used to control the flow be-
tween the saline water storage tank and conventional still. V2 controls
the flow between the storage tank and inlet riser of the flat plate collec-
tor. V3 controls the flow between the outlet of the flat plate collector
risers and basin of the FPCB still. Before starting the experiment, the re-
quired water is filled in the conventional still by opening V1. In the FPCB
still V2 and V3 are opened first; the water fills the risers of the collector
by V2 and then fills the basins of the still up to a required depth by V3.
After the required depth of water filled in the FPCB still the valves V2
and V3 are closed. Thus saline water is available in the risers and gets
heated by the solar radiation.
In stills, the saline water gets evaporated and condensed at the
inner surface of the glass cover as fresh water. As the water evapo-
rates, the level of the water is reduced in the stills. So, water level
is maintained in the conventional still by opening valve V1. In the
case of the FPCB still, V2 is opened initially, so that the preheated
saline water is supplied to the basins. Then V2 is closed and V 3 is
opened for water to fill the risers again for preheat. This is repeated
every 30 min.
Copper-constantan thermocouples integrated with a temperature
indicator and selector switch are used for temperature measurements.
 T. Rajaseenivasan et al. / Desalination 347 (2014) 131–137 133

Fig. 2. Top view of conventional and FPCB stills.

The temperatures are measured at following locations: basin plate, 4. Uncertainty analysis
water at basin, vapour, and inner and outer glass. Solar radiation is mea-
sured by using the calibrated solarimeter. A calibrated glass jar of 1- The uncertainty analysis for the measuring instruments such as
litre capacity is used to measure the hourly yield. Vane type digital thermocouples, solarimeter, anemometer, measuring jar and daily
anemometer is used to measure the wind velocity. efficiency is calculated from Eqs. (2) and (3) as given by Rahbar
The observations are recorded from 9 AM to 6 PM. The solar intensi- and Esfahani [28] and experimental errors are calculated as given
ty, wind velocity, ambient temperature, yield and temperatures at vari- by Velmurugan et al. [29].
ous parts of the stills are recorded in an hourly basis. The experiments
are carried out in both conventional and FPCB stills to compare the a
u ¼ pffiffiffi ð2Þ
performance of the proposed system. In the first set of experiments, 3
performance of the systems is studied with various depths of water in
the basin (1, 2, 3, 4 cm). In the second set of experiments, wick and " #1 =
energy storing materials are used in the basin to improve the heat uðmÞ2 uðIs Þ2 2
uðηÞ ¼ η þ ð3Þ
storing and evaporation rate of the still. All the experiments are m2 Is 2
performed in the actual solar condition, during the period of March–
July 2013. The experimentations are carried out at the Mechanical
The daily uncertainty for efficiency is varied from 0.03 to 0.04% and
Engineering Department, Fatima Michael College of Engineering and
0.05 to 0.06% for conventional and FPCB stills respectively. Table 1
Technology, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India.
shows the range, accuracy and uncertainty of various instruments
used in the experimentation work.
3. Efficiency of solar still
The hourly productivity m = f(H). Total uncertainty for the hourly
condensate production was given by Omara and Eltawil [30]
The daily efficiency, η, is obtained by the summation of the hourly
condensate production m, multiplied by the latent heat hfg; hence the
" 2 #0:5
result is divided by the daily average solar radiation Is over the whole ∂m
area A of the device: um ¼ u ð4Þ
∂H H
X
m  hfg
η¼ X : ð1Þ where m is the hourly productivity of the still, H is the depth of water in
A Is
the measuring jar and um be the results of the uncertainty.

Table 1
Accuracy and experimental uncertainty for various measuring instruments.

Sl. no. Instrument Accuracy Range Standard uncertainty % error

1 Thermometer ±1 °C 0–100 °C 0.6 °C 0.25%

2 Thermocouple ±0.1 °C 0–100 °C 0.06 °C 0.50%
3 Kipp–Zonen solarimeter ±1 W/m2 0–2500 W/m2 0.6 W/m2 2.50%
4 Anemometer ±0.1 m/s 0–15 m/s 0.06 m/s 1.00%
5 Measuring jar ±1 ml 0–1000 ml 0.6 ml 1.00%
134 T. Rajaseenivasan et al. / Desalination 347 (2014) 131–137

Fig. 3. Hourly variation of different parameters.

5. Results and discussion
Each experiment is conducted for three times to investigate the
performance of the still at different days. The deviation in operational
conditions (solar intensity and ambient temperature) within 10% is
chosen for comparison and discussion purposes.
Fig. 3 compares the performance of conventional and FPCB stills at
1 cm depth with various environmental and still parameters. It can be
noticed that the distillate output and hourly efficiency of the FPCB still
is always higher than those of the conventional still for the same
environmental condition. It is due to the occupation of considerable
area by the arrangement of the flat plate collector (FPC) in the basin
(Fig. 1). This causes reduced mass of water in the FPCB still compared
to the conventional basin still for the same depth of water in the
basin. Due to the separate compartments and fin arrangement, heat
transfer rate increases from the basin to water and leads to higher
evaporation rate. Conventional stills need more time to get warm up
than FPCB stills due to higher mass of water available in the single
compartment. It reduces the speed of evaporation process in the
conventional still and lowers the production rate. Further enhancement
is achieved in the FPCB still by the preheated water supply.
The variation of solar intensity, ambient temperature and
production rate for conventional and FPCB stills with different
depths of water is shown in Fig. 4. It is noted that higher production
rate is obtained for the lower depth due to reduced mass of water in
both stills. Maximum distillate yields of 0.58 kg/m2 and 0.42 kg/m2
are obtained for 1 cm depth at 2.00 PM for FPCB and conventional
basin stills respectively.
Comparison of cumulative production rate for FPCB and convention-
al basin stills with different materials in the basin is shown in Fig. 5.
The water depth of 1 cm is used for all modifications in both stills. It
shows that provision of jute cloth has higher production rate at
morning time and black gravel in afternoon hours. Black gravel is a
sensible heat storing material. It absorbs the radiation and stores
the heat within it at sunshine hours. At nighttime, this stored heat
is released and it leads to increases in water temperature and pro-
duction rate in both stills. The production rate is higher for both stills
with jute cloth and black gravel in the basin. It is due to the higher
heat carrying capacity of black gravel and exposure area of wick
materials in the basin.
Fig. 6 shows the variation of glass and water temperature of conven-
tional and FPCB stills. Water temperature of the FPCB still is always
higher than that of the conventional still due to the preheated water
supply and fin arrangement. Glass temperature of the FPCB still is little
higher than that of the conventional still, due to the higher condensa-
tion rate of vapour in the glass cover.

Fig. 4. Hourly variation of distillate for different depths of water in conventional and FPCB stills.
 T. Rajaseenivasan et al. / Desalination 347 (2014) 131–137 135

Fig. 5. Variation of cumulative productivity with different materials in basin and FPCB still.

Fig. 7 compares the overall performance of both stills for all basin
conditions. The average solar radiation and ambient temperature are
provided in Fig. 7. It shows that efficiency and productivity of both stills
increase with materials in the basin. The conventional basin and FPCB
stills achieve the maximum efficiency of 37% and 60% and maximum
distillate of 3.62 kg/day and 5.82 kg/day.
Fig. 8 compares the day–night productivity of both stills with different
modifications in the basin. It shows a considerable improvement in the
daytime production rate for the FPCB still. Daytime productivity of the
still is higher with jute cloth and hot water supply in the basin. Black grav-
el significantly increases the nighttime production rate in both stills. The
maximum productivity of both stills is obtained with the combination
of jute cloth and black gravel in the basin. Maximum distillate yields ob-
tained at daytime for conventional and FPCB stills with jute cloth and
black gravel in the basin are 3.02 and 4.90 kg/m2 respectively.
The percentage of increase in distillate for conventional and FPCB
stills with different basin conditions is compared in Table 2. The distil-
late yield is enhanced about 60%, when the FPCB still is used instead of
the conventional basin still at the same basin condition.
6. Economic analysis
Economic analysis is used to estimate the unit cost of the distillated
water by stills. The unit cost of the distilled water can be calculated by
using Eq. (2). Here the average year around productivity of the solar
still is taken about 60% of its daily original productivity, due to the
year around variation in climatic condition. The solving methodology
and other parameters used for the economic analysis are provided in
Appendix A [31,32].
TAC
Cdw ¼ ð2Þ
M
Table 3 shows the economic analysis of conventional and FPCB stills
with different modifications in the basin. It shows that the cost of
distilled water per kg is lower for the FPCB still. The initial cost for the
FPCB still is 15% higher than that for the conventional still and the
distillate output of the FPCB still is enhanced up to 60% higher than
that of the conventional still.
7. Conclusion
A flat plate collector basin still and conventional basin still are
fabricated and tested under local climatic condition with different
modifications in the basin. Jute cloth and black gravels are used in the
basin to improve the evaporation rate and heat capacity of the still.
Result indicates that the FPCB still has higher evaporation rate than
the conventional basin still. The effect of extended surface and
preheated water supply increases the distillate of the FPCB still about
60% than that of the conventional still for the same basin condition.
Stills with jute cloth enhance the productivity in sunshine hours
and the black gravel has a significant effect at afternoon hours. The
maximum productivity values obtained for conventional and FPCB
stills are 3.62 and 5.82 kg/m2·day respectively. Economic analysis
shows that the costs of distilled water for the conventional and
FPCB stills with wick and energy storing materials in the basin are
0.0362 and 0.0276 $/kg/m2 respectively.

Nomenclature
AMC annual maintenance cost, $
ASV annual salvage value, $
A area, m2
a accuracy of instrument
Cdw unit cost of distilled water, $/kg/m2
CRF capital recovery factor
FAC annualized capital cost, $
FPCB flat plate collector basin
H depth of water in measuring jar, m
Fig. 6. Hourly variation of water and glass temperature in conventional and FPCB stills. hfg enthalpy of evaporation at Tw, J/kg
136 T. Rajaseenivasan et al. / Desalination 347 (2014) 131–137

Fig. 7. Comparison of different parameters in conventional and FPCB stills for different basin conditions.

Fig. 8. Variation in distillate production rate with various modifications in basin and FPCB still.

Is solar intensity, W/m2 um uncertainty result

i interest rate, % η daily efficiency
M annual productivity, kg/m2
m hourly productivity, kg/m2 Appendix A
n number of life years of the system
P capital cost, $ FAC ¼ P  ðCRFÞ
Prod daily productivity, kg/day
SFF sinking fund factor The capital costs (P) of the conventional and concentrator stills are
S salvage value, $ $167 and $192 respectively.
TAC total annualized cost, $
Tw temperature of water, °C ið1 þ iÞn
CRF ¼
u uncertainty ð1 þ iÞn −1

Table 2
Comparison of distillate yield in conventional and FPCB stills.

S. no. Basin condition Conventional basin still FPCB still

Productivity (kg/day) % increase Productivity (kg/day) % increase

1 Still without materials (1 cm) 2.69 (ref) – 4.35 61.71

2 Jute cloth 3.04 13.01 4.81 78.88
3 Black gravel 3.38 25.65 5.34 98.51
4 Jute cloth + black gravel 3.62 34.57 5.82 116.36
 T. Rajaseenivasan et al. / Desalination 347 (2014) 131–137 137

Table 3
Economic analysis of stills with different modifications in basin.

S. no Still type Modification in basin P TAC M Cdw

($) ($) (kg/m2) ($/kg/m2)

1 Basin still Still without materials (1 cm) 166.7 30.6 633 0.0483
2 Jute cloth 166.7 30.6 712 0.0429
3 Black gravel 166.7 30.6 750 0.0407
4 Jute cloth + black gravel 166.7 30.6 845 0.0362
5 FPCB still Still without materials (1 cm) 191.7 35.1 950 0.037
6 Jute cloth 191.7 35.1 1090 0.0322
7 Black gravel 191.7 35.1 1160 0.0303
8 Jute cloth + black gravel 191.7 35.1 1275 0.0276

The interest per year (i) and the number of life years of the system
(n) are assumed as 12% and 10 years respectively.
AMC ¼ 0:1FAC
The maintenance cost is associated with cleaning the glass covers
and water collection trough and washing the basin to avoid the
scale deposition. For the above process, costly equipments are not
required and only waste cloths and water are sufficient. However it
may require coating of black paint in the basin to maintain the higher
radiation absorption. Therefore 10% of the capital cost is taken as the
maintenance cost.
ASV ¼ S  SFF
S ¼ 0:2  P
Here the salvage value of the system is taken as 20% of capital cost
(P) of the system
i distillation with water flow, Energy Convers. Manag. 40 (1999) 703–715.
SFF ¼
ð1 þ iÞn −1
TAC ¼ FAC þ AMC–ASV:
References
[1] V. Velmurugan, K. Srithar, Performance analysis of solar stills based on various
factors affecting the productivity — a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15
(2011) 1294–1304.
[2] Rajesh Tripathi, G.N. Tiwari, Effect of water depth on internal heat and mass transfer
for active solar distillation, Desalination 173 (9) (2005) 187–200.
[3] Abdul Jabbar N. Khalifa, Ahmad M. Hamood, On the verification of the effect of water
depth on the performance of basin type solar stills, Sol. Energy 83 (2009)
1312–1321.
[4] K. Kalidasa Murugavel, Kn.K.S.K. Chockalingam, K. Srithar, An experimental study on
single basin double slope simulation solar still with thin layer of water in the basin,
Desalination 220 (2008) 687–693.
[5] T. Rajaseenivasan, K. Kalidasa Murugavel, Theoretical and experimental investiga-
tion on double basin double slope solar still, Desalination 319 (2013) 25–32.
[6] K. Kalidasa Murugavel, Kn.K.S.K. Chockalingam, K. Srithar, Progress in improving the
effectiveness of the single basin passive solar still, Desalination 220 (2008) 677–686.
[7] A.S. Nafey, M. Abdelkader, A. Abdelmotalip, A.A. Mabrouk, Solar still productivity
enhancement, Energy Convers. Manag. 42 (2001) 1401–1408.
[8] S. Zeinab Abdel-Rehima, Ashraf Lasheen, Improving the performance of solar
desalination systems, Renew. Energy 30 (2005) 1955–1971.
[9] O.O. Badran, Experimental study of the enhancement parameters on a single slope
solar still productivity, Desalination 209 (2007) 136–143.
[10] K. Kalidasa Murugavel, S. Sivakumar, J. Riaz Ahamed, Kn.K.S.K. Chockalingam, K.
Srithar, Single basin double slope solar still with minimum basin depth and energy
storing materials, Appl. Energy 87 (2010) 514–523.
[11] T. Rajaseenivasan, T. Elango, K. Kalidasa Murugavel, Comparative study of double
basin and single basin solar stills, Desalination 309 (2013) 27–31.
[12] A.I. Fernandez, M. Martınez, M. Segarra, I. Martorell, L.F. Cabeza, Selection of
materials with potential in sensible thermal energy storage, Sol. Energy Mater.
Sol. Cells 94 (2010) 1723–1729.
[13] A.A. El-Sebaii, A.A. Al-Ghamdi, F.S. Al-Hazmi, Adel S. Faidah, Thermal performance of
a single basin solar still with PCM as a storage medium, Appl. Energy 86 (2009)
1187–1195.
[14] A.K. Bassam Abu-Hijileh, Himzeh M. Rababah, Experimental study of a solar still
with sponge cubes in basin, Energy Convers. Manag. 44 (2003) 1411–1418.
[15] V. Velmurugan, C.K. Deenadayalan, H. Vinod, K. Srithar, Desalination of effluent
using fin type solar still, Energy 33 (2008) 1719–1727.
[16] T. Rajaseenivasan, K. Kalidasa Murugavel, T. Elango, R. Samuel Hansen, A review of
different methods to enhance the productivity of the multi-effect solar still,
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 17 (2013) 248–259.
[17] K. Sampathkumar, T.V. Arjunan, P. Pitchandi, P. Senthilkumar, Active solar
distillation — a detailed review, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 14 (2010) 1503–1526.
[18] Ali A. Badran, Ahmad A. Al-Hallaq, A. Imad Eyal Salman, Mohammad Z. Odat, A solar
still augmented with a flat plate collector, Desalination 172 (2005) 227–234.
[19] V.K. Dwivedi, G.N. Tiwari, Experimental validation of thermal model of double
slope active solar still under natural circulation mode, Desalination 250 (1)
(2010) 49–55.
[20] Sanjeev Kumar, G.N. Tiwari, Optimization of daily yield for an active double effect
[21] Zeinab S. Abdel Rehim, Ashraf Lasheen, Experimental and theoretical study of a solar
desalination system located in Cairo, Egypt, Desalination 217 (2007) 52–64.
[22] Sanjay Kumar, S. Sinha, Transient model and comparative study of concentrator
coupled regenerative solar still in forced circulation mode, Energy Convers.
Manag. 37 (5) (1996) 629–636.
[23] Shiv Kumar, Arvind Tiwari, An experimental study of hybrid photovoltaic thermal
(PV/T) active solar still, Int. J. Energy Res. 32 (2008) 847–858.
[24] Shiv Kumar, G.N. Tiwari, Life cycle cost analysis of single slope hybrid (PV/T) active
solar still, Appl. Energy 86 (2009) 1995–2004.
[25] H. Kargar Sharif Abad, M. Ghiasi, S. Jahangiri Mamouri, M.B. Shafii, A novel
integrated solar desalination system with a pulsating heat pipe, Desalination
311 (2013) 206–210.
[26] H.N. Panchal, Enhancement of distillate output of double basin solar still with
vacuum tubes, J. King Saud Univ. Eng. Sci. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jksues.
2013.06.007.
[27] K. Sampathkumar, P. Senthilkumar, Utilization of solar water heater in a single basin
solar still—an experimental study, Desalination 297 (2012) 8–19.
[28] N. Rahbar, J.A. Esfahani, Experimental study of a novel portable solar still by utilizing
the heatpipe and thermoelectric module, Desalination 284 (2012) 55–61.
[29] V. Velmurugan, K.J.N. Kumar, T.N. Haq, K. Srithar, Performance analysis in stepped
solar still for effluent desalination, Energy 34 (2009) 1179–1186.
[30] Z.M. Omara, Mohamed A. Eltawil, Hybrid of solar dish concentrator, new boiler
and simple solar collector for brackish water desalination, Desalination 326
(2013) 62–68.
[31] A.E. Kabeel, A.M. Hamed, S.A. El-Agouz, Cost analysis of different solar still
configurations, Energy 35 (2010) 2901–2908.
[32] J.A. Esfahani, N. Rahbar, M. Lavvaf, Utilization of thermoelectric cooling in a portable
active solar still — an experimental study on winter days, Desalination 269 (2011)
198–205.