Novel solar tower structure to lower plant cost and construction risk

,
J. H. Peterseim , S. White, and U. Hellwig

Citation: 1734, 070025 (2016); doi: 10.1063/1.4949172

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4949172
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/1734/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics

Novel Solar Tower Structure To Lower Plant Cost And

Construction Risk
J. H. Peterseim1, a), S. White2, and U. Hellwig3
1

PhD, Honorary Associate, Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney, Level 11, UTS
Building 10, 235 Jones Street, Ultimo NSW 2007, Australia.
2
Prof. Dr., Director, Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
3
Prof. Dr., Managing Director, ERK Eckrohrkessel GmbH, Berlin, Germany.
a)

Corresponding author: JuergenHeinzMartin.Peterseim@uts.edu.au

Abstract. In recent times the interest in solar tower power plants is increasing with various plants being built in the last
years and currently under construction, e.g. Ivanpah and Crescent Dunes in the US and Khi Solar One in South Africa.
The higher cycle efficiency leads to lower levelised cost of electricity. However, further cost reductions are required and
this paper compares a novel and patented solar tower structure with a conventional concrete tower. The novel solar tower
design is cable-stayed which has the benefit that the cables absorb a large part of the wind and buckling loads. A tower
that has to cope with fewer wind and buckling forces can have a significantly smaller diameter than a concrete tower,
which enables workshop manufacture, sea and road transport, and rapid on-site installation. The case study provided in
this paper finds that the tower area affected by wind can be reduced by up to 45%, installation time shortened by up to
66%, and tower cost by 20-40%. The novel design allows the construction and transport of the solar tower in few large
modules, which are pre-manufactured including piping, cables, platform, ladders etc. The few modules can be assembled
and installed rapidly not only lowering plant cost and construction time but also project risk.

INTRODUCTION
The concentrating solar power (CSP) industry is working intensively to improve its competitiveness and it has
made great efforts, ranging from component manufacturing optimisation and lower parasitic consumption to higher
cycle efficiencies. These have indeed led to significant cost reductions over the last years. In parallel to the mature
parabolic trough technology more tower plants are emerging in the CSP landscape due to increased cycle
efficiencies and associated cost reductions [1]. However, further improvements are required to strengthen economic
competitiveness and the solar tower structure itself is one interesting area. The tower of a CSP plant contributes to
ca. 5% of the plant cost [2] but it is not entirely clear from the literature if this percentage refers to the tower
structure only or includes all relevant piping or cabling. For the tower structure not only material costs have to be
considered but also the time requirements to install/erect the tower structure as this is a relevant risk management
aspect.
This paper presents a novel solar tower structure, a cable-stayed tower, which is significantly smaller in
diameter, lighter, and can therefore be manufactured in large pre-manufactured modules. The few large modules can
be assembled rapidly which shortens the overall installation time from ca. 3 months for a concrete tower to ca. 1
month for this novel design. This novel solar tower structure is patented by the University of Technology, Sydney
with the Australian patent number 2014904779.

CURRENT SOLAR TOWER DESIGNS

At the moment all solar tower projects used steel or predominantly steel reinforced concrete for the construction
of the towers. Figure 1 shows a few examples and despite some experimenting with steel and non-cylindrical

SolarPACES 2015
AIP Conf. Proc. 1734, 070025-1070025-8; doi: 10.1063/1.4949172
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1386-3/$30.00

070025-1

concrete towers, such as PS 10 & 20, it seems that cylindrical type steel reinforced concrete towers are dominating
the current choice for new solar tower projects, e.g. Gemasolar in Spain, Tonopah in the US, Khi Solar One in South
Africa, and Atacama One in Chile.
The current design is certainly a good choice as steel reinforced concrete is a comparatively low cost material,
available worldwide, easy to use, long-lasting, and many qualified suppliers know how to turn it into tall structures.
However, the disadvantage is that the tower structure has to be built on-site which leads to higher on-site labor costs,
higher installation risk, and extended installation times through sequential installation, e.g. working fluid pipes,
cables etc. have to be installed after completion of the civil structure.
Steel towers have the benefit that they can be partly pre-manufactured with components/modules arriving on-site
ready to be installed. Also steel structures are significantly lighter due to the higher strength of the material.
However, the reason concrete structures seem to be leading the market at the moment is the higher cost of the steel
material.
To lower the cost of the tower structure one has to investigate opportunities in manufacturing, transport, and
installation. It would be ideal to supply the tower structure fully assembled as a single module as this would lead to
higher manufacturing workshop quality, lower structure manufacturing cost, and rapid installation. Unfortunately,
most transport infrastructure, if not all, is not suited to transport >100 m long and heavy structures. However, the
tower supply in modules as large and pre-manufactured as possible is desirable. Other industries are doing this
already for decades, such as processing equipment for oil, gas, and chemical industries. Current solar tower plants
cannot benefit from large modules, such as a complete tower in 3 to 4 sections, as the cross section of the towers is
high to cope with weight, wind and buckling forces. This would lead to module widths and heights of more than 8 m
which is not suitable for heavy haulage road transport. The tower for the Ivanpah CSP plant was partly modularised
but it still consisted of 9 segments without all the required systems installed, such as piping and cabling.

FIGURE 1. Structure of one Ivanpah tower in the US, the PS10 and Gemasolar towers in Spain, the Crescent Dunes tower in the
US, and the Khi Solar One tower in South Africa (from left to right).

NOVEL CABLE STAYED SOLAR TOWER DESIGN

All solar tower structures have to withstand the weight of the receiver, the tower structure itself as well as wind
and buckling forces. The height and diameter of solar towers creates a large area affected by wind, which
contributes significantly to the strength requirements of the tower structure. The proposed solar tower concept
(Australian patent number 2014904779 held by the University of Technology, Sydney) presents a different approach
as the wind and buckling forces are absorbed by various steel cables, see Figure 2, and therefore the tower has to
only withstand the receivers and its own weight. Depending on the tower height and receiver capacity 3-5 cables
are distributed along the tower columns of which 3-4 are needed.
Cable constructions have been used previously in bridges but there the cables transfer the forces of the bridge
deck onto the tower/towers while in this application the cables transfer the forces away from the tower to ground
mounted anchors. The lower strength requirements result in a smaller tower diameter, which enables workshop
manufacturing, sea and road transport, and rapid on-site assembly and installation of large modules, e.g. 3 modules

070025-2

for a 150 m tall tower. With such large and pre-manufactured modules the tower could be manufactured including
working fluid piping, cables, platforms etc. in a workshop with high quality control and parallel work flows.
The benefits of the invention are multiple:
including a compact tower that is transportable in few large pre-manufactured modules,
dood quality control due to workshop manufacturing and little on-site work,
rapid and low cost tower installation with minimal field work,
small tower exposure to wind loads,
smaller tower foundations due to lower tower weight, and
use of standard materials that are globally available, e.g. standardised tubes and beams.
Additionally, the use of lower labor cost is possible as towers for CSP projects in higher cost countries could be
manufactured in lower cost countries, e.g. tower module manufacturing in Indonesia for Australian projects or
Turkey/northern Africa for European projects.
Maintenance of the cables has to be considered carefully in the life-cycle cost analysis. However, cable stayed
bridges have lifetimes in excess of 40 years but require frequent maintenance due to the high humidity environment.
Cable maintenance in solar tower applications is significantly reduced as humidity is very low in desert
environments. Also space for grounding the cables is available when carefully considering the placement of plant
components, e.g. power block and condenser.

FIGURE 2. Concept of the cable-stayed solar tower with the following components: 1) first tower module, 2) second tower
module, 3) third tower module, 4) foundation, 5) receiver, 6-8) steel cables, and 9) tower internals, such as piping and cables.

070025-3

Modularisation Approach
The modularisation of large structures/components is, amongst others, common practice in the oil & gas industry
to lower component/plant cost, increase product quality, minimise risk, and shorten delivery times. Currently, the
construction industry is leading the way in design for manufacture and assembly (DfMA) as this concept takes a
holistic approach to project cost by not only considering manufacturing but also transport and assembly costs. In this
regard assembly risk has to be taken into account as the assembly of tall and heavy structures has an inherently
higher risk than the assembly of a small and light components. The recent crane accident at the construction site of a
CSP plant in South Africa sadly demonstrates this risk [3].
The novel cable-stayed tower concept presented in this paper follows the DfMA approach. It aims to minimise
manufacturing cost through workshop manufacturing of large pre-assembled tower modules. However, it also
considers assembly cost as labor in remote places is more expensive and costs associated with quality problems can
be significant. Obviously, transport costs have to be taken into account but the cable-stayed design leads to a small
tower diameter and the use of steel limits total weight, thus enabling road transport.
Figure 3 outlines the cable-stayed tower installation process consisting of: a) workshop manufacture, b)
transport, c) rapid on-site assembly, and d) rapid tower installation. These steps are explained in more detail in the
case study.

FIGURE 3. Process of cable stayed tower supply.

50MWE SOLAR TOWER CASE STUDY

This section compares the cable-stayed tower design to a current steel reinforced concrete tower structure. The
case study is based on a 50MWe solar tower with 6h molten salt thermal energy storage (TES) and a circular
heliostat field. The Rankine cycle design, the corresponding solar field, and tower height was calculated with the
Thermoflex software, version 23.0. The software is widely used in the CSP industry and considered suitable for this
analysis.
The location of the case study does not really matter but the analysis is based on the state of Western Australia,
Australia, due to the facts that the DNI resource is high and Australia is a promising country for CSP plants.
Figure 4 shows the two different 135 m tall tower designs (150 m height including receiver) but does not show
the locations of steam turbine, condenser, TES etc. However, the placement of these components was considered in
the analysis and is possible without technical disadvantages, such as longer pipes leading to higher convective
losses.

070025-4

The cable-stayed tower consists of three modules, nine steel cables and receiver. The modules arrive on-site fully
assembled with all the components necessary to later on operate the tower, e.g. piping, cables and platforms.

FIGURE 4. Comparison of a concrete (left) and cable-stayed (right) solar tower structure for a 50MWe plant with 6h TES.

Table 1 summarises the results of the tower comparison. It is obvious that the cable-stayed solar tower diameter
is significantly smaller than for the concrete tower as the cables absorb the wind and buckling forces, taking these
loads away from the tower structure. The cable-stayed tower diameter is with 6 m significantly smaller than the 12
m at the bottom and 10 m at the top of a concrete tower. Having a smaller diameter significantly reduces the wind
loads the tower has to cope with as the wind affected area decreases from 1,490 m2 in the concrete tower version to
810 m2 in the cable-stayed version. This in turn lowers the wind forces the tower has to be designed for.
Another important aspect is the overall weight of the tower structures. The concrete tower weight is ca. 5,000 t
while the cable-stayed steel tower has a weight of only 600t. The weight difference can be partly attributed to the
higher strength of steel but also to the smaller tower diameter. A conventional steel tower would have a similar
diameter to the concrete tower to ensure stability, e.g. wind loads.
The distance from the tower to the first heliostats is 95 m and the nine cables required can be anchored to the
ground within this distance. Depending on the final design it is possible to use more cables to anchor the tower.
The assembly and installation time decreases from 3 months to 1 month as the work required to assemble the
cable-stayed tower modules on-site and lift the completed tower in its final position is very short. Assuming that a
concrete tower contributes to 5% of a CSP plant investment [2] it is estimated that the cable-stayed tower design can
lower tower cost by 20-40% or overall CSP plant cost by 1-2%. This may not sound much but is relevant
considering that the cost for large capacity solar tower projects can exceed US$1b. A cost reduction range is given
as the actual cost reduction depends on the project specifics, such as labor cost structure in the country, remoteness
of the site, transport infrastructure, etc. The cost reduction given does not only refer to the tower structure but
includes cost reductions from pre-manufactured modules, rapid installation, quality improvements, and overall
delivery time.
TABLE 1. Solar tower comparison for a 50MWe solar tower plant with 6h thermal energy storage
Criteria

Tower height without receiver

Tower diameter (bottom/top)
Tower weight
Tower area affected by wind, m2
Installation time

Concrete tower

Cable stayed tower

135 m
12m/10 m
5,000 t
1,490 m2
3 months

135 m
6m
600 t
810 m2
1 month

070025-5

Fabrication
From a cost, quality, and time perspective it is beneficial to manufacture components in a workshop rather than
on-site as the environment is controlled. The costs are lower as qualified personnel is easily available, lower cost
than personnel in remote locations, and material can be transported to the workshop easily as the right infrastructure
is in place. The quality is higher as all components are easily accessible to manufacturing and quality control
personnel and because the whole process takes place in a controlled environment undisturbed of weather impacts.
Many large components and modules are manufactured in suitable workshops and Figure 5 shows two examples.
Manufacturing modules of a cable-stayed solar tower would be close to the manufacturing process of wind towers
with the difference that not only cabling, platforms and ladders need to be installed in the workshop but also molten
salt piping and auxiliary piping. Figure 5 outlines how a 135 m tall cable-stayed solar tower could be manufactured
in three large modules plus the receiver.
The columns and beams of a cable-stayed solar tower do not have to bear as much load as conventional tower
structures and can be selected from standard steel tubes and beams. This not only lowers material cost but also
delivery time as standard material is easier available than tailor-made components. An additional benefit to lower
cost and improve quality is that the tower modules are in a horizontal position, which makes them easily accessible
to various working teams simultaneously, e.g. welders and electricians. The different teams are able to work in
parallel which shortens the manufacturing time.

FIGURE 5. Manufacturing of large steel structures for the oil and gas industry (left), wind towers (center), and proposed solar
tower modules

Transport
Transporting large and heavy structures/modules is not an easy task but one that is carried out by many
companies worldwide in a daily basis. Figure 6 shows two examples of oversized transports. A conventional steel or
concrete tower could not be transported economically in large modules as the diameter of 10-12 m is too large for
road transport. However, the dimensions of the three cable-stayed tower modules are with 6m width, 50 m length,
and a module weight of ca. 200 t suitable for special road transport. Figure 6 shows the transport principle of three
tower modules plus the receiver. A detailed analysis of the road infrastructure from the point of manufacturing or
port to the installation site is required to ensure the modules can be transported.

FIGURE 6. Transport of large structure for an oil platform (left), an expansion vessel (middle), and proposal for cable-stayed
tower modules (right).

070025-6

Considering that logistic costs for sea and road transport are comparatively low it could make sense to
manufacture the tower modules for projects in high labor cost countries in lower labor cost countries. Australia is
one interesting example as the labor costs, in particular at remote sites, are with >AU$100/h high. Building the
tower modules in a shipyard or another workshop for large civil structures in Indonesia could yield labor cost
reductions of up to 80% without compromising product quality as various good workshops exist there serving the
marine and oil & gas industry.

On-site Assembly
The on-site assembly work of plant components is inherently costly, such as higher labor cost, and risky, such as
uncontrolled environment, and should therefore be minimized. The recent crane accident at a CSP plant construction
site in South Africa tragically demonstrates the risk factor [3].
Having three pre-manufactured modules would shorten assembly times significantly. The three modules could be
assembled rapidly by placing them along a horizontal axis and connecting the civil structures, piping, and cabling,
see Figure 7. This could be done with few welds and simultaneously as the tower modules are in a horizontal
position close to the ground. Due to the easy access no large cranes are required but man lifts would suffice to reach
the top of the 6 m tall tower modules/completed structure.
The rapid on-site assembly method would enhance product quality. The connection of few points at a remote site
is significantly better for the product quality than installing all pipes and cables on-site in an uncontrolled
environment.

FIGURE 7. Rapid assembly of the three pre-manufactured tower modules.

Installation
Installing tall structures requires heavy machinery and a lot of expertise to make sure everything goes according
to plan and without any safety issues. Concrete towers are slip-formed and completed with all the necessary piping,
cabling, platforms etc. afterwards. The receiver is installed at the end in modules using tall heavy lift cranes.
The installation/erection of the cable-stayed tower would be similar to the refinery column and wind tower
examples provided in Figure 8. The assembled tower structure would be lifted from the horizontal into the final
vertical position using two cranes. Once the tower structure is in place the cables are tightened and anchored to fix
the tower in its final position. Figure 8 outlines the process. It has to be checked if the cables itself could be used to
support the lifting process of the tower. Depending on the capacity of the solar tower plant it might be possible to
also assemble the receiver in the horizontal position and lift it in place with the tower structure. This would save
further cost as the receiver installation at great heights is costly and risky. However, the thermal capacity of the

070025-7

receiver is the limiting factor as large receives are heavy components which can quickly exceed the lifting
capabilities of tall cranes.
The cranes to erect the tower structure are only required for a short period as lifting process itself does not take
long. Afterwards smaller and lower cost cranes can lift the remaining components in place, e.g. steam turbine,
molten salt steam generators, pumps, tanks etc. The assembly and installation of the complete tower, including
piping, cables, platforms etc., could be completed in 4 weeks. A concrete type tower would require 3 months or
more.

FIGURE 8. Installation of a refinery column (left), wind towers (middle), and proposal for the cable-stayed tower (right).

CONCLUSION
The proposed cable-stayed solar tower design aims to lower the cost, risk, and construction time for solar towers
through modularization and pre-manufacturing. The cable stayed tower design enables workshop manufacturing, sea
and road transport, as well as rapid assembly and installation of few pre-manufactured modules by lowering tower
module weight and diameter. Modularisation is widely used in other industries and the CSP industry should make
use of this approach to improve its economic competitiveness too.
The cable-stayed solar tower has the benefits that the tower diameter decreases significantly, which lowers the
wind forces the tower has to withstand. The case study provided in this paper outlines that the tower area affected
by wind can be reduced by up to 45%, installation time shortened by up to 66% and tower cost decreased by 2040%. The novel design allows the construction and transport of the solar tower in few large modules, which are premanufactured including piping, cables, platform, ladders etc. The few modules can be assembled and installed
rapidly not only lowering plant cost and construction time but also project risk.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors want to thank the University of Technology, Sydney for their ongoing support with the patenting
process of the cable-stayed solar tower.

REFERENCES
[1] SBC Energy Institute, Concentrating Solar Power, Gravenhage, Netherlands, 2013.
[2] R. Pitz-Paal, J. Dersch, and B. Milow, European Concentrated Solar Thermal Road-Mapping, Deutsches
Zentrum fr Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V., 2005.
[3] J. Deign, Khi Solar One deaths prompt questions over CSP safety, in CSP Today, 2014.

070025-8