Coatings for CSP Lifetime
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The feasibility and performance of tower-technology-based concentrated solar power (CSP) is highly dependent on the efficiency of the energy transformation from sun to heat at the receiver. The higher the solar absorptivity of the receiver coating, the higher the efficiency of the plant as a whole. BrightSource Energy (BSE) has developed a series of High-Performance Coating (HPC) systems in order to achieve high absorptivity over the plant lifetime (25-35 years). This requires stable coatings that are easily applicable on the large receiver surface and will maintain their optical properties under intense solar flux and thousands of heating and cooling cycles in desert conditions. Different coating formulations are required according to the differing plant conditions: receiver materials, operating conditions (temperatures, daily cycles, etc.), and environmental conditions. BSE also developed a coating for the next generation of CSP receivers, such as those being under DOE’s CSP Gen3 program, which will be operated with high temperature heat transfer fluids at temperatures of up to 800°C, which is significantly hotter than the operating temperature of current systems. Once the coating is formulated, the next challenge is evaluating its lifetime properties. BSE has found several independent failure modes that impact HPC absorptivity degradation: • Decrease in HPC optical properties due to oxidation in the receiver tubes surface below the HPC; • HPC film deterioration due to cycling of temperatures and humidity due to daily operation startup and shutdown as well as changing ambient conditions; • Mechanical degradation due to erosion by sand and wind. Existing test methods examine various aspects independently, but do not provide a combined accelerated lifetime result. Creating such a combined test suite, with a way to interpret the results to predict the coating’s projected lifetime, was the ultimate goal of this project. The project was divided into three major workstreams: lab testing (individual failure mode tests and combined failure mode tests); developing a theoretical model for aging; and validation of the test apparatus via on-sun testing in near real-world conditions at CIEMAT-PSA. Developing a test apparatus that accurately controlled the temperature while also introducing the desired solar flux proved more challenging than expected. While in the end we did succeed in creating a test apparatus that can control temperature, solar flux, and humidity, the results did not appear to accelerate the lifetime of the samples as desired. We suspect that to properly accelerate the samples we must also subject the samples to increased amounts of oxygen. Similarly, while we successfully created a combined model that is publicly available, we were unable to validate it sufficiently to feel comfortable recommending it as a general guideline.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".