new solar setup with acoustic diagnostic techniques for ... · in a concentrated solar power plant,...
TRANSCRIPT
New solar setup with acoustic diagnostic techniques for CSP materials
Test materials and geometries selection Proposed thermo-mechanical behaviour
SFERA II Project Solar Facilities for the European Research Area -Second Phase
Grant agreement number: 312643
Start date of project: 01/01/2014
Duration of project: 48 months
WP13 – Task 1.A Deliverable 13.1
Due date: 06/2015
Submitted 12/2015
File name: WP13 – Task 1.A Deliverable 13.1
Version 1
Partner responsible CNRS
Person responsible Emmanuel Guillot
Author(s): Yasmine Lalau, Emmanuel Guillot
Dissemination Level PU
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
2
List of content
1. Context and objectives ........................................................................................................................ 4
1.1. Context ..................................................................................................................................... 4
1.2. Objectives and method ............................................................................................................ 4
2. Description of the new setup ............................................................................................................... 5
2.1. Principle .................................................................................................................................... 5
2.2. Solar facility .............................................................................................................................. 6
2.3. Measurements and diagnostics ............................................................................................... 7
2.3.1. Acoustic emission techniques ............................................................................................... 7
2.3.2. Photo-‐mechanic techniques .................................................................................................. 8
3. Selected samples: materials properties .............................................................................................. 9
3.1. Material selection .................................................................................................................... 9
3.2. Properties at ambient temperature ....................................................................................... 10
3.3. Temperature dependant properties ...................................................................................... 11
4. Samples: sizing and geometric considerations ................................................................................. 13
4.1. Optimization for acoustic measurement ............................................................................... 13
4.1.1. Ex situ localization tests ...................................................................................................... 13
4.2. Optimization for photomechanical measurement ................................................................. 18
4.2.1. Model: physical conditions .................................................................................................. 19
4.2.2. Model validation ................................................................................................................. 20
5. Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................... 23
References ............................................................................................................................................ 24
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
3
Executive Summary The EU-funded research project SFERA2 – grant agreement 312643 – aims to boost
scientific collaboration among the leading European research institutions in solar
concentrating systems, offering European research and industry access to the best research
and test infrastructures and creating a virtual European laboratory.
This deliverable is part of the results of the task 1 of the workpackage 13 Determination of
physical properties of CSP materials under concentrated solar irradiation within the Joint
Research Activities.
This workpackage 13 aims to provide a better evaluation of the material behaviour for CSP
applications and other fields with similar thermal stress, such as high temperature steels or
SiC ceramics, thanks to better or new experimental tests bed and associated theoretical
models. These results will lead to help users developing higher performance materials for
higher process efficiency.
The task 1 of workpackage 13 is focused on two principal targets:
- Define and validate new methodologies for comparative evaluation of the ability of
key CSP components to sustain cyclic thermal gradient.
- Improve CSP test facilities by developing news instruments and methods for in-situ
thermo-mechanical investigation using acoustic methods.
The work presented here focus on the selection of the samples to validate these new
instruments and methods based on acoustic measurements. This selection is made by
studying the acoustic and thermo-mechanical properties of the test materials.
After a brief introduction, the materials properties experimentally measured are summarized.
Then, the solar setup and the new measurement methods to be developed are presented.
This presentation of the development direction is required to allow the reader understands
which variables are needed to be studied to determine the optimal sample size: this
optimisation process is the fourth and main part of this report, followed by this work
conclusion.
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
4
1. Context and objectives
1.1. Context In a concentrated solar power plant, the receiver transfers the solar energy collected and
concentrated by the mirrors field to the heat transfer fluid used in vapour electricity
generation or any other heat processes (Figure 1). Therefore, the materials used for such
receivers are subjected to very high thermal loads. As illustrated by Figure 2, their
temperature varies:
Temporally due to the DNI (Direct Normal Irradiation, W.m-2) evolution, which is cyclical in alternating day/night and brutal in the clouds passing or any other atmospheric event;
Spatially due to the non-homogenous distribution of the concentrated solar energy on the front irradiated face and to the coolest heat transfer fluid imposed by the rear face.
Figure 1: Flat solar receiver drawing
Figure 2: Thermal load: cyclic and abrupt DNI, solar flux distribution and heat transfer fluid circulation
Refractory ceramic (SiC) are promising candidates for these applications as they allow
higher operating temperature than the usual metals, but their brittleness requires a thorough
thermo-mechanical behaviour study to estimate their durability. However, thus far there is
no in-situ monitoring means specifically developed for these applications to assess the
potential of existing or new materials.
1.2. Objectives and method To address these issues, the SFERA II European project aims to develop new devices under
Fluide caloporteur
Champ solaire
Récepteur
Flux solaire concentré 4 days insolation, Odeillo
Cycling
Cloudy day insolation, Odeillo
Shock
Solar flux : Gaussiandistribution
Heat transfer fluid
Temporal variation of T (°C) Spatial variation of T (°C)
zt
Φi
Φrear
Φloss
Φfront
Tamb
Tfluidhrear
hfront
Heat transfer fluid
Concentratedsolar irradiation
DNI (W.m
-‐2)
DNI (W.m
-‐2)
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
5
concentrated solar radiation and define in-situ thermo-mechanical study methods of these
receivers materials, either already used or with promising potential (WP 13 - Task 1).
A new innovative setup in real solar test conditions will be developed in WP13-T1 in order
to determine the following receivers material behavior:
Damage localization and monitoring thanks to acoustic techniques; Strain field estimation thanks to photo-mechanical methods (potential development
in a second step).
In order to design this new experimental setup, initial exploratory studies need to be conducted: assessment of these characterisation technologies, definition of the application boundaries, choice of samples to experimentally validate the concepts and the potential.
Figure 3 shows the main functions to be fulfilled by this new setup to help determining the
receivers material’s thermo-mechanical behaviour.
Figure 3: Diagnostic setup diagram block
This setup is developed following the steps below:
1. Describe the test conditions; 2. Determine the nuisance parameters; 3. Design the samples as a function of material properties, including through a single
numerical model (Code_Aster); 4. Carry out ex situ feasibility tests; 5. Realize the first tests in situ; 6. Experimentally validate the numerical model; 7. Define testing methodologies taking account materials thermo-mechanical behaviour
indicators (using the numerical model).
2. Description of the new setup
2.1. Principle The new setup can be defined as follow:
• Use of controlled concentrated solar from a solar furnace as thermal source.
THERMAL
STRESS
Solar flux
THERMO-‐MECHANICAL BEHAVIOUR
Temperatures
Crack monitoring & localisation
Strain field
Functions of test bedCYLINDRICAL
SAMPLE
Symmetrical mechanical stress field
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
6
• Possibility to change the samples, including metallic and ceramics materials.
• Geometry of the sample is defined by the setup: we will not test functional
components from a receiver.
• Different measurement techniques to assess thermo-mechanical behaviour,
specifically acoustic based methods never used before in such conditions:
o Damage localization and monitoring thanks to acoustic techniques;
o Strain field estimation thanks to photo-mechanical methods (potential
development in a second step).
Several constraints have been especially identified:
• To achieve proper results, the characterization setup must be used in thermal and
mechanical controlled and known conditions, and the noising parameters affecting
acoustic and photomechanical measures must be minimized.
• As the setup objective is to localize thermal gradients and fatigue defects, the sample
must not be mechanically constrained. Therefore, it has been decided that the
waveguides used to transmit the acoustic waves will also hold the sample on a three
points plane support. The pressure will be guaranteed by springs, allowing thermal
expansion.
2.2. Solar facility The solar receiver irradiation conditions are reproduced on a few centimeters-sized samples
by a 2 m solar parabolic furnace. This parabolic furnace is part of the Grand Four Solaire
d’Odeillo, France (see Figure 4Erreur ! Source du renvoi introuvable.).
The solar irradiation is collected by a heliostat at the bottom of the building (Figure 4Erreur !
Source du renvoi introuvable.), then reflected to the upper floors through a trap door in the
ground, to finally be focused by a parabolic dish.
The concentrated solar irradiation can be regulated by shutters (Figure 5Erreur ! Source du
renvoi introuvable.).
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
7
Figure 4: Odeillo’s solar furnace. This setup will use the facility showed on the left of the schema.
Figure 5: Heliostat vertical furnace: door view through
the shutters.
2.3. Measurements and diagnostics
2.3.1. Acoustic emission techniques
2.3.1.1. Principle
Acoustic emission is the generation of transient elastic waves due to the release of energy
from local micro-displacement internal to a material [1]. The wave frequency ranges from a
few tens of kHz to several MHz, typically 1 MHz. The emergence of micro-displacements is
induced by:
• Mechanical events: plastic strains, fractures, impact, delamination, interface sliding, friction, leaks, etc.
• Physical-Chemical events: corrosion, gassing and grain growth, etc.
Acoustic emission is also, by extension, the test method based on this phenomenon. It is a
passive and non-destructive method that tracks the real-time damage progression in a
component. This technique finds applications in laboratory to study the fracture behaviour or
material fatigue, and in industry to qualify and monitor structures.
A: volumic wave
B: surfacic wave
C: sensor
Figure 6: Creation, propagation and detection of acoustic emission wave [2]
The waves generated by events propagate in the structure and are detected by sensors: the
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
8
material movements are converted into electrical signalsErreur ! Source du renvoi
introuvable.. These signals are processed by specific instrumentation and methods.
On one hand, the acoustic emission signals study provides information on the
stressed material mechanical and physico-chemical behaviour.
On the other hand, it is possible, from the information received by a sensor mesh, to
locate the acoustic emission signal source.
2.3.1.2. Accuracy
The event location accuracy is affected by calculation uncertainties (mathematical
uncertainty, multiple solutions) and by measurement errors.
In an industrial environment (large structures, generally steel), the typical error is estimated
at 5% of the distance between the sensors, or about 4.3 mm for a sample of 100 mm in
diameter.
In order to verify this approximation for the samples studied (dimensions and materials), ex-
situ localization tests have been conducted by using experimental setups existing at CNRS-
SPCTS/UNILIM laboratory in Limoges, France (see section on samples below).
2.3.2. Photo-mechanic techniques
2.3.2.1. Principle
Optical methods estimates in situ and without contact surface strain field in plane (1 camera)
or in relief (multiple cameras). To consider out of plane displacements related to the sample
deformation, it is best to choose a stereo measurement with 2 cameras.
Figure 7: Principle of the displacement field measurement
by optical method [3]
Figure 8: Schematic diagram of a surface displacement measurement
by stereo tracking markers [5]
Comparison between 2 pictures: reference / deformed
Strain field assessment
In situ & without contact
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
9
2.3.2.2. Accuracy
In previous tests (AZTECH project, ANR MATETPRO 2012), it was observed that a strain
accuracy of ± 2.10-5 could be obtained. This was achieved by drastically minimizing the
influence parameters.
In addition, a calibration for several positions (Z change) has been performed to better
estimate the x and y deformations; and a "non deformable" reference has been used to
correct any deformations due to nuisance parameters (e.g. cameras support dilatation due to
room temperature variation).
3. Selected samples: materials properties
3.1. Material selection In order to validate this new setup, different materials typically used in existing or in next
generation solar plants have been considered. Inconel 625 and SiC ceramics have been
selected as representative of current and of next generation materials.
A recent study [4] summarize the reasons of this choice. The authors compared the
behaviour of several materials potentially suitable for concentrated solar power systems.
They described the behaviour by thermo-mechanical (resistance to fracture and creep
resistance) and oxidation indicators (spalling resistance), which they summarized in the
properties map below.
Figure 9: Resistance to spalling of oxide Figure 10: Resistance to fracture by
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
10
by thermal shock vs Creep Resistance thermal shock vs Creep Resistance
In the Figure 9, ceramics and Ni-alloys (including Inconel) appear to be suitable candidates,
and that’s confirmed in Figure 10, even if some ceramics have a very low fracture resistance.
SiC is on the top of ceramic category, but still weak on this point: that confirms the interest on
scrutinize its thermo-mechanical behaviour.
It must be noted that Mo Silicides seems to have an interesting potential, and they could be
investigated with the new setup, once validated with the two “classical” materials SiC and
Inconel.
3.2. Properties at ambient temperature The majority of properties were determined at SPCTS laboratory in Limoges, France. Some
of the characteristics are from the literature (data sheets); these are indicated in bold.
The laboratory methods used were the following:
• The density was measured with a pycnometer,
• The elastic properties were measured by ultrasonic methods,
• The rupture properties were measured by 4-point bendings,
• The conductivity was measured by LFA.
Table 1: Properties at ambient temperature
Properties Unit SiC α Inconel 625
Bulk density kg.m-3 3.135 8.44
Propagation velocity
Longitudinal (vL) Transversal (vT)
m.s-1 12 050 7 620
5 940 3 015
Poisson Coefficient - 0.17 (0.16) 0.33 (0.312)
Shear modulus (G) GPa 182 (180) 77
Young modulus (E) GPa 425 (420) 204 (204.8)
Breaking stress (σR)
(Flexion 4 points) MPa 160 827-1034
Yield strenght MPa 414-655
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
11
Conductivity (λ) W.m-1.K-1 180 9,8
Specific heat (Cp) J.kg-1.K-1 680 410
Emissivity (ε) - 0,85 0,75
Absorptivity (α) - 0,85 0,75
It should be noted that the emissivity of Inconel is given in an oxidized state, and its absorptivity is assumed equivalent.
Figure 11: Spectral hemispherical emissivity for some materials [5]
The Figure 11 shows that the emissivity varies with the surface condition of Inconel, and it is
not constant over the range of measurements considered.
3.3. Temperature dependant properties These properties were measured by ultrasonic methods, by a dilatometer and by LFA at
Limoges, France.
Table 2: Properties of materials studied in function of temperature
Ppts SiC α Inconel 625
vL
m.s-2
Under air: -2% à -4% Under argon: -1% à -2%
Under air: -27% Under argon: -25%
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
12
E
GPa
αTH
10-6
λ
W.m-1.K-1
Cp
J.kg-1.K-1
For this project the tests will be performed at different temperatures, or Table 2 reveals that
the propagation velocity is dependent on the temperature: If this dependence is not taken
into account, this will induce an additional localization error.
10000
10500
11000
11500
12000
0 500 1000 1500v
(m.s
-1)
T (°C)
v
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
0 500 1000 1500
v (m
.s-1)
T (°C)
Mesure du module d'Young en fonction de la température
v
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 500 1000 1500
E (G
Pa)
T (°C)
Mesure du module d'Young en fonction de la température
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 500 1000 1500
E (G
Pa)
T (°C)
Mesure du module d'Young en fonction de la température
E CORR
0
2
4
6
0 1000 2000
Titr
e
T (T°C)
Série1
0
5
10
15
20
0 250 500 750 1000Ti
tre
T (T°C)
Série1
0
50
100
150
200
0 500 1000 1500
Titre
T (°C)
y = 0,015x + 9,299R² = 0,997
05
1015202530
0 250 500 750 1000
λ(W
.m−1
.K−1
)
T (°C)
0
500
1000
1500
0 500 1000
Titr
e
T (T°C)
Série1
0
200
400
600
800
0 250 500 750 1000
Titr
e
T (T°C)
Série1
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
13
Figure 12: Localization error induced by propagation velocity variation at 1000°C
Figure 12 shows that in the case of SiC, the error induced by the velocity variation is less
than 5%: this can be neglected. In contrast, in the case of Inconel, the induced error
becomes too large (up to 15 mm for a sample of 100 mm in diameter): the thermal
dependence of the velocity should be taken into account.
Two strategies can be adopted:
The velocity is adjusted with the temperature, based on the ex situ material characterization. Advantage: separated experiment keeps the new setup simpler. Disadvantage: the in situ experimental value can be a little different than the characterized value due to differences in samples and in their evolution.
The velocity can be measured during the test, using an additional module: sensors separated by a known distance emit signals, and the propagation velocity is deduced from the travel time. Disadvantage: as it emits sound in the samples, it cannot be done simultaneously with the emission method, thus the velocity evolution may not be well described when the temperature changes suddenly.
In both cases, due to software and calculation limitations, this speed adjustment cannot be
made during the test: a post processing routine will certainly be necessary to correct the
defect location estimations. The definite choice between both options will be made during the
commissioning of the solar setup.
4. Samples: sizing and geometric consideration
4.1. Optimization for acoustic measurement
4.1.1. Ex situ localization tests
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Erre
ur (
m)
Diamètre (m)
SiC Inc 625 Erreur 5%
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
14
The acoustic emission methods, the selected materials and the acquisition system for the
new setup have first been assessed in laboratory with different tests. The final assessment
aim is to conduct a 2D localization on cylindrical samples, thin enough to assimilate them to
a 2D structure for easier comparison with modelled theoretical behaviour.
4.1.1.1. Hsu-Nielsen test
This test is defined by the EN 1330-9 standard. It is used to simulate an acoustic event by
means of a broke pencil pit. The mine should have a hardness of 2H, a diameter of 0.5 mm
and a length of 3 mm. The amplitude of the detected signal must be greater than 80 dB.
Figure 13: Hsu-Nielsen test principle
The test is made on one hand to check the proper coupling of the sensors, and on other
hand to verify the proper localization of the acoustic source.
4.1.1.2. Sliding time slots definition
The acoustic bursts discretization is achieved by means of 3 time indicators specific to
studied material, shown in Figure 14:
Peak Definition Time (PDT): Set the highest amplitude peak arrival time, from the first threshold is exceeded;
Hit Definition Time (HDT): defines the total duration of the burst; Hit Lockout Time (HLT): sets the system blind time during which threshold violations
will not be considered (eliminates echoes).
Table 3. Temporal parameters
SiC Inc 625
PDT 30 300
HDT 150 600
HLT 300 1000
Figure 14: Sliding time slots (PDT, HDT, HLT) The experiment has been conducted several times for the different materials. The reported in
PDT HDT HLT
seuil
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
15
Table 3.
Results: Specific time indicators have been determined for Inconel and SiC
4.1.1.3. 1D localization
Linear localization tests have been performed to verify that the material does not exhibit
characteristics affecting the localization: too high attenuation, large heterogeneities, etc.
Figure 15: Sensors arrangement for linear location
As shown schematically in Figure 15, the tests are carried over distances of 90 mm between
sensors, which was the maximum possible with the available samples. This distance is
similar to expected distances on future samples: for a proposed 100 mm diameter sample,
the distance between 3 sensors at 120° is 87 mm.
Figure 16: Burst amplitude varying with position on SiC sample (Hsu-Nielsen Test)
Figure 17: Burst amplitude varying with position on Inc. sample (Hsu-Nielsen Test)
Figure 16 and Figure 17 shows that the SiC and Inconel do not induce significant attenuation
for studied dimensions.
The accuracy and repeatability of measurements are shown in Figure 18 and Figure 19. The
repeatability is quite good, with an average deviation about 1 mm. Accuracy is about 1.5 mm.
C1 C2
90 mm
00.511.522.533.54
405060708090
100110120
0 20 40 60 80
Ecart type (dB)
Amplitu
de (d
B)
Position (mm)
00.511.522.533.54
405060708090
100110120
0 20 40 60 80
Ecart type (dB)
Amplitu
de (d
B)
Position (mm)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 20 40 60 80
Ecart type Erreu
r (m
m)
Localisation (m
m)
Position (mm)
Moyenne Précision MOY Précision Ecart type MOY Ecart type
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
16
Figure 18: 1D localization of Hsu-Nielsen sources on SiC sample
Accuracy and standard deviation
Figure 19: 1D localization of Hsu-Nielsen sources on Inconel 625 sample
Accuracy and standard deviation
Results: Inconel 625 and SiC are homogeneous and do not attenuate the acoustic signal.
4.1.1.4. 2D localization
The planar locating tests were conducted using a 76 mm diameter and 5 mm thick cylindrical
steel sample, with propagation velocity similar to Inconel 625. The sensors are spread over
the cylinder side, and maintained by clamps.
For a 2D location, it takes at least three sensors. The corresponding optimal mesh is an
equilateral triangle. It is possible to obtain better accuracy by increasing the number of
sensors used. It is also expected to gain in accuracy with the use of new SFERA2
experimental setup, whose design will enhance the localisation accuracy by improving the
quality of the contacts.
3 sensors 4 sensors 6 sensors
Figure 20: 2D localization of Hsu-Nielsen sources on cylindrical steel sample (ø76 mm)
Figure 20 represents experimental events localization with respect to the theoretical points.
For measurement with 3 sensors, the localization is satisfying within the sensors mesh while
it strongly degrades outside. This has prompted us to increase the number of sensors, to
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 20 40 60 80
Ecart type Précision
(mm)
Localisation (m
m)
Position (mm)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 20 40 60 80
Ecart type Précision
(mm)
Localisation (m
m)
Position (mm)
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
17
expand the mesh surface. The accuracy seems to be improved, but is still lower outside the
mesh symmetry axes.
This analysis is confirmed by the values of the accuracy given in Table 10: for locating with 3
sensors, it is around 3.2 mm on the axes of symmetry (In) and 8.9 mm outside (Out); while
these values are respectively 2.4 mm and 4.6 mm for the 6 sensors configuration. However,
the standard deviation varies less, and is about 1 mm, the measurement repeatability is good
enough.
Table 4: Standard deviation and accuracy (In and Out symmetry axes))
3 sensors 4 sensors 6 sensors
In Out In Out In Out
Standard deviation (mm) 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.83 0.83
Steel spatial accuracy (mm) 3.2 8.9 2.3 6.3 2.4 4.6
From this spatial accuracy, it is possible to find the temporal accuracy (Equation 1), time
being the measured quantity. The temporal accuracy is largely influenced by the device (and
specific settings) and the sensor mesh type (number and arrangement of sensors), it is
considered to be equivalent for other homogeneous materials. It is then possible to estimate
the SiC and Inconel 625 spatial accuracy (Equation 2).
Relation between spatial and time
accuracies: 𝑃!"#$%&"''" =
𝑃!"#$%#&'𝑣!"#$%
Equation 1
Relation between sample and reference
steel accuracies: 𝑃é!! =
𝑃!"#$%𝑣!"#$%
×𝑣é!! Equation 2
The resulting values are presented in the Table 5.
Table 5: Measurement spatial and temporal accuracy (In and Out symmetry axes)
3 sensors 4 sensors 6 sensors
In Out In Out In Out
Temporal accuracy (µs) 0.5 1.5 0.4 1 0.4 0.8
Inconel spatial accuracy (mm) 3.2 8.2 2.3 6.3 2.3 4.6
SiC spatial accuracy (mm) 6.5 18 4.7 12.7 4.8 9.3
Defining this spatial precision will allow us to define the desired diameter for the samples in
order to limit the location error.
Results: Localization accuracy is clearly better when using more sensors. A compromise
between accuracy and solar facility clutter should be found with scrutinizing the acceptable
error induced by each sensor meshing.
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
18
4.1.2. Experimental error estimation
The localisation error as a function of SiC and Inconel 625 sample diameter is illustrated by
the Figure 21, Figure 22, and Figure 23, respectively for a localisation by 2, 4 and 6 sensors.
As pointed in the planar localisation accuracy evaluation, the use of 6 sensors significantly
improves the localization. In this most favourable case, the minimum diameters SiC samples
and Inconel 625 are respectively 90 mm and 50 mm for a localisation within the symmetry
axes, and respectively 160 mm and 80 mm outside.
Figure 21: 3 sensors localization – Localization error vs sample diameter
Figure 22: 4 sensors localization – Localization error vs sample diameter
Figure 23: 6 sensors localization – Localization error vs sample diameter
Results: The 6 sensors mesh should lead to 160 mm SiC samples and 80 mm Inconel
samples. In order to scrutinize the relevance of such dimensions, these values have to be
compared to the predicted sample behaviour.
4.2. Optimization for photomechanical measurement To limit the strain field estimation error at 10%, the measured deformation must be at least
2.10-4 (in optimal conditions). To determine which sample sizes are needed to obtain
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Erreur (%
)
Diamètre (m)
SiC IN INC 625 IN SiC OUT INC 625 OUT
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Erreur (%
)
Diamètre (m)
SiC IN INC 625 IN SiC OUT INC 625 OUT
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Erreur (%
)
Diamètre (m)
SiC IN INC 625 IN SiC OUT INC 625 OUT
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Erreur (%
)
Diamètre (m)
SiC IN INC 625 IN SiC OUT INC 625 OUT
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Erreur (%
)
Diamètre (m)
SiC IN INC 625 IN SiC OUT INC 625 OUT
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Erreur (%
)
Diamètre (m)
SiC IN INC 625 IN SiC OUT INC 625 OUT
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Erreur (%
)
Diamètre (m)
SiC IN INC 625 IN SiC OUT INC 625 OUT
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
19
sufficient deformation values, simulations are carried out for each material using Code_Aster.
4.2.1. Model: physical conditions
4.2.1.1. Mechanical conditions
One of the new setup functions is to maintain the sample without mechanical stress, thus the
modelling should also let the sample free to expand.
This means for the model to set three degrees of
freedom, which is done by defining isostatic points on
the sample rear face (Figure 24): a point at the centre
is fixed in x and y, while three points at 120° on the
circumference (corresponding to the sample support
points) are fixed in z. One of them is also fixed in x.
Figure 24: Mechanical boundary conditions
With these conditions, only the thermal gradients due to radiation cause stresses in the
sample.
4.2.1.2. Thermal conditions
Boundary conditions
The thermal boundary conditions are illustrated in Figure 25, and described by Equation 3 to
Equation 6: the sample (thickness e and diameter D), irradiated locally homogeneously
through a kaleidoscope, is subjected to convection and radiation on all its outer sides, and to
an inner conduction.
Figure 25: Samples boundary conditions
𝑆 = 𝜋×𝐷!
4 Equation 3
Conduction
𝜑!"#$ = ℎ!"#$×𝑆× 𝑇é!! − 𝑇!"# Equation 4
Convection
𝜑!"#$ =𝜆𝑆𝑒× 𝑇é!! − 𝑇!"# Equation 5
Rayonnement
𝜑!"# = 𝜀×𝑆×𝜎×𝑇é!!! Equation 6
z, x
y, x
zz
D
Φemis
Tamb = 20°C
Φ conv
Concentrated solar flux
E = 500 kW.m-‐2
Kaleidoscope
e
SAMPLE
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
20
Convection is approximated to an average convective coefficient ℎ!"#$ = 10 𝑊.𝑚!.𝐾!!, and
ambient temperature is fixed at 𝑇!"# = 20°𝐶.
Radiation
The measure feasibility must be studied for tests resulting in most difficult measurement
conditions, inflicting minimum constraints in the samples. The chart below shows a summary
of incident concentrated solar flux in the kaleidoscope in the solar furnace for different
positions of the shutters, for a standardized DNI = 1000 W/m2.
Figure 26: Normalized irradiation on solar furnace focus varying with shutter opening
In nominal conditions, the tower plant receivers collect between 300 and 600 kW.m-2 [1] [2].
The objective is to study the material aging mechanisms by amplifying the applied stress,
hence the incident solar radiation shall be at least equal to the nominal flux conditions.
Results: The thermal conditions should be applied to modelled samples in order to observe
the resulting strain field. A "low" value of the incident flux is chosen to optimize the sample
size in unfavourable and realistic strain measurement condition: 500 kW.m-2, about half of
the applicable radiation with the solar installation to be used with the new setup.
4.2.2. Model validation On Figure 27, the results obtained with the SiC behaviour modelling were compared to the
sample temperature measured by a pyrometer at the focus of the solar furnace under simple
conditions.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Ecla
irem
ent
norm
alis
é (k
W.m
-2)
Ouverture des obturateurs
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
21
Figure 27: SiC sample temperature varying with irradiation – Experimental and theoretical value
There is a similar trend, but rather different values as the model overestimates the
temperature: it reveals that the model follows the correct physical behaviour, but should be
refined to better match the reality. Furthermore, the test parameters and measuring means
should also be controlled in the best possible way: the values difference may be partly due to
an erroneous estimate of the solar radiation or to a perfectible pyrometer measurement.
4.2.3. Parametric study results
Using the software Code_Aster, SiC and Inconel 625 strain were calculated for a 500 kW.m-2
solar irradiation for different sample dimensions (thickness and diameter). The nominal
dimensions were arbitrary set to a diameter D = 100 mm and a thickness e = 5 mm.
The Figure 28 to Figure 31 represent the maximum temperature (at the irradiated surface
centre), the minimum temperature (in the periphery), and the corresponding minimum and
maximum strain.
The observed strain is only due to the static temperature gradient in the sample: it is
therefore lower than during cycling conditions.
Inconel 625
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 250 500 750 1000
Tem
pera
ture
(°C
)
Eclairement (kW.m-2)
T Exp T ASTER
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
22
Figure 28: Inconel Temperature and Strain varying with thickness (D = 100 mm)
Figure 29: Inconel Temperature and Strain varying with diameter (e = 5 mm)
SiC
Figure 30: SiC Temperature and Strain varying with thickness (D = 100 mm)
Figure 31: SiC Temperature and Strain varying with diameter (e = 5 mm)
For sample diameters less than 150 mm, SiC and Inconel strain is greater than the
measurement limit (shown by a red dotted line). The measure is feasible, but the margin is
not comfortable enough (a factor of 10 or less): special attention should be paid to the
limitation of nuisance parameters. The temperature level reached corresponds to the desired
temperature range.
Results: Inconel 625 strain measurement is feasible between 50 and 150 mm diameter, and
the side temperature decrease quickly with diameter: small diameters should be preferred.
SiC strain measurement will be more difficult to realize under 150 mm (side strain only
reaches minimum value), but high temperatures (>500°C) are difficult to reach: a
compromise between 100 mm and 150 mm should be chosen.
0.0E+00
2.0E-03
4.0E-03
6.0E-03
8.0E-03
1.0E-02
1.2E-02
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012
Def
orm
atio
n ε X
X
Tem
pera
ture
(°C
)
Thickness (m)
EP T max EP T min EP Def max EP Def min
DEF MIN FOR ERROR < 10%0.0E+00
2.0E-03
4.0E-03
6.0E-03
8.0E-03
1.0E-02
1.2E-02
1.4E-02
1.6E-02
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Def
orm
atio
n ε X
X
Tem
pera
ture
(°C
)
Diameter (m)
DIAM T max DIAM T min DIAM Def max DIAM Def min
DEF MIN FOR ERROR < 10%
0
0,0002
0,0004
0,0006
0,0008
0,001
0,0012
0,0014
0,0016
0,0018
0,002
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 0,002 0,004 0,006 0,008 0,01 0,012
Stra
in ε
XX
Tem
pera
ture
(°C
)
Thickness (m)
DEF MIN FOR ERROR < 10%
0
0,0002
0,0004
0,0006
0,0008
0,001
0,0012
0,0014
0,0016
0,0018
0,002
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 0,05 0,1 0,15 0,2 0,25
Stra
in ε
XX
Tem
pera
ture
(°C
)
Diameter (m)
DEF MIN FOR ERROR < 10%
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
23
5. Conclusions
This preliminary work has studied the measurement feasibility and the suitable sample size.
Sizing Inconel 625 material was not problematic; the measures should be done on samples
between 50 and 100 mm diameter and 5 mm thick for the best measurement performance.
Measurements on SiC will be more problematic: its high acoustic propagation velocity leads
to high error in localization and its feeble strain field leads to difficulties in photo-mechanic
method. Diameter samples should range between 100 mm and 150 mm.
In both case, a 5 mm thickness is suitable.
This work enabled to design the solar device, which will be used to confirm these first
estimations before command the sample with definitive size.
Figure 32: Acoustic emission measurement solar setup
FP7-INFRA-312643
WP13-T1.A — Deliverable D13.1
24
References
[1] ISO 12716, “Essais non destructifs -‐ Contrôle par émission acoustique -‐ Vocabulaire.” 2001.
[2] J. Roget, “Émission acoustique,” Techniques de l’Ingénieur, vol. r3200, 1990.
[3] Laboratoire mécanique multi-‐échelles -‐ Polytechnique Montréal, “Modélisation micrométrique,” 2015. .
[4] D. G. Morris, a. López-‐Delgado, I. Padilla, and M. a. Muñoz-‐Morris, “Selection of high temperature materials for concentrated solar power systems: Property maps and experiments,” Sol. Energy, vol. 112, pp. 246–258, Feb. 2015.
[5] J. Dory, F. Evin, and M. Piro, “Chauffage par rayonnement infrarouge.” Techniques de l’Ingénieur, 1999.