Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

A review of efficient high productivity solar stills T

a,⁎ a a b c
T. Arunkumar , Kaiwalya Raj , D. Dsilva Winfred Rufuss , David Denkenberger , Guo Tingting ,
Li Xuanc, R. Velraja
a
Institute for Energy Studies, CEG, Anna University, Chennai 600025, Tamilnadu, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, USA
c
Yunnan Academy of Scientific and Technical Information, Kunming 650051, China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Fresh water is an indispensable resource, which is getting contaminated. The shortage of freshwater has been
Desalination identified as a crucial issue all around the world. Solar desalination is one of the options to produce fresh water
Solar stills from any type of contaminated water (brackish, contaminated and sea water) in a sustainable way. A solar still is
Fresh water a simple device used to purify the water using solar energy through evaporation and condensation processes. In
Productivity
general, the productivity of the conventional solar still (CSS) is about 2–5 l/m2/day. But this quantity is not
Efficiency
sufficient for an individual to lead an adequate life. Hence either more than 1 m2 is required per person or better
yet are modifications to improve the yield of the fresh water (likely more than 5 l/m2/day). In this work, an
attempt has been made to categorize the different solar still designs with productivity exclusively more than 5 l/
m2/day. Here, we identify as such efficient high productivity stills and discuss their novel modifications and heat
transfer mechanism to arrive at useful conclusions. This comprehensive review will be a reference guide for
future researchers who wish to concentrate only on efficient high productivity solar stills to improve the pro-
ductivity further.

1. Introduction
Water is the most crucial fluid on Earth; survival without water is
impossible [1,2]. Water is the main source of life on Earth, since it is
required for all the biological processes. Because of its abundant nature
and physicochemical characteristics, water has a stabilizing effect on
interplanetary and earthly processes [3]. Nowadays it has become more
difficult to get good quality water for a healthy life. Solar desalination
technology is one of the trusted methods to produce fresh water in a
sustainable way [4,5]. An efficient solar desalination system can bring a
sufficient amount of water to society which may in turn be a remedy for
water scarcity [6,7]. Effective modifications to the conventional solar
still play a vital role in producing more fresh water. This can be done
through an effective heat utilization mechanism from the heat source to
the basin water [8,9]. The source may be a direct (sun) or indirect
source (through evacuated tube collectors, flat plate collector and solar
pond etc.) based on their modifications [10,11].
In this way, Alaudeen et al. [12] has conducted experiments in
single slope solar still (SSSS) with the basin material as glass. The glass
basin was composed of two compartments namely upper compartment
(evaporative zone) and lower compartment (heating zone). Heat
storage materials like sand, paraffin wax, sponges, corrugated material,
zinc nitrate and ethylene glycol (EG) were placed between the two glass
compartments. The research inferred that the glass basin solar still with
corrugated sheets yielded a maximum productivity of about 2.64 kg/
m2, which was higher than other storage elements. Al-Garni [13] ex-
perimentally studied the SSSS with a solar water heating system and
external cooling for productivity augmentation. An external fan was
used to cool the top glass cover with air velocities of 7 m/s and 9 m/s.
This modification increases the water temperature up to a maximum of
78 °C (heater plus fan). The result concluded that the productivity of the
SSSS with a water heater gave a maximum productivity of about
8.471 l/m2 whereas SSSS without heater yielded only 2.42 l/m2. Ar-
junan et al. [14] conducted experiments in a SSSS with sponge cubes of
various thickness including 3 mm, 5 mm, 7 mm, 10 mm and 12 mm
inside the basin to improve the heat utilization during nocturnal hours.
It is inferred from the study that the productivity of the solar still in-
creases with decrease in sponge thickness. Arshad et al. [15] conducted
experiments in a SSSS with honeycomb structures in the basin to im-
prove the heat transfer mechanism from the source. This modification
increased the basin water temperature from 54 °C to a maximum of
59 °C thereby improving the yield to 2.6 l/m2/day. Ayoub et al. [16]

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: tarunkumarsolar@gmail.com (T. Arunkumar).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.11.013
Received 30 May 2018; Received in revised form 1 August 2018; Accepted 14 November 2018
1364-0321/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
T. Arunkumar et al.
used a rotating drum inside the basin to improve heat transfer rate. Two
identical solar stills were fabricated with and without a drum. The drum
inside the solar still increases the evaporative surface area of the water
and this improves the freshwater yield as compared to SSSS without
rotating drum.
Generally, the productivity of a solar still depends on the various
parameters such as water depth [17–22], insulation [23], water-glass
temperature difference [24–28], wind [29–31], ambient temperature
[32,33], and solar radiation [34–37]. The design of a solar still possess a
greater impact on all the aforementioned productivity influencing
parameters. In this work, the designs of various passive and active solar
stills whose productivity is more than 5 l/m2/day are comprehensively
reviewed and the novel mechanism behind the productivity augmen-
tation is discussed. The importance of this review is to enabling future
research. Based on the review results, researchers can easily focus on
the most efficient techniques. This should also facilitate commerciali-
zation of the technologies.
2. Efficient high productivity solar stills
2.1. Integrated single slope solar stills with basin heat transfer enhancement
techniques and brine modifications
2.1.1. Solar still with collector
Srithar et al. [38] experimentally investigated a parabolic dish
collector (PDC) assisted triple basin solar still (TBSS) with cover cooling
for fresh water enhancement (Fig. 1). In order to increase the heat
transfer rate inside the distiller, fins, river sand and charcoal absorbers
were used in the basin. The inner dimensions of the TBSS were
0.30 m × 0.36 m and height of 0.33 m. A solar photovoltaic (PV) panel
was used to operate the pumping system for cooling the top glass cover
with the air flow rate of 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40 m/s respectively. Four
different operations were carried out: (1) TBSS alone, (2) TBSS with top
cover cooling, (3) TBSS integrated with PDC, and (4) PDC-TBSS with
top cover cooling. The authors found that the combination of PDC-TBSS
with top cover cooling yielded the highest productivity of about
16.94 kg/m2/day.
Sampathkumar and Senthilkumar [39] used an evacuated tube
collector with a solar still. The authors have experimentally studied the
SSSS coupled with a solar water heater evacuated tube collector (ETC)
for fresh water augmentation as shown in Fig. 2. The operation was
performed in four different ways: (1) SSSS coupled with ETC for 24 h
operation, (2) SSSS coupled with ETC only in the morning period
(8–12 h), (3) SSSS with ETC for 12–17 h operation and (4) 60 °C water
Fig. 1. Photograph of the PDC-TBSS [38].
198
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
temperature maintained at ETC coupled with a SSSS. The authors
concluded that the maximum productivity of 5.6 kg/m2 was collected
for the SSSS coupled with ETC on the full day treatment (24 h).
2.1.2. Solar still assisted with parabolic concentrator
Gorjian et al. [40] performed experiments on a parabolic solar still
for sea water desalination as shown in Fig. 3. The aperture area of the
parabolic reflector was 2 m2 and focal length of 0.693 m. The result
concluded that the parabolic solar still gave a maximum yield of
5.12 kg/m2/day with 7 h of operation.
Arunkumar et al. [41] experimentally studied the compound para-
bolic concentrator- concentric tubular solar still (CPC-CTSS) integrated
with single slope solar still (SSSS) for fresh water augmentation. The
schematic view of the solar still was shown in Fig. 4. The areas of the
CPC and SSSS were 2 m2 and 0.25 m2 respectively. Five concentric
tubular arrangements were fabricated and placed on the line focus of
the CPC. The ambient water could pass through the inlet of the con-
centric tube. This preheated water was directly coupled with the SSSS.
The preheated water reduced the warm up time and enhanced the
evaporation inside the distiller. The overall experimental result re-
vealed that the yield of the CPC-CTSS-SSSS was 6.4 l/m2/day was ob-
tained from the still.
Arunkumar et al. [42] performed an experiment on a CPC-CTSS
integrated with a SSSS and pyramid solar still (PSS). The schematic
view of the TSS is shown in Fig. 5. The collector area of the CPC was
2 m2. The preheated water from the CPC-CTSS was directly coupled
with a SSSS and a PSS. The authors concluded that the productivity of
CPC-CTSS with SSSS and PSS was 6460 ml/day and 7770 ml/day re-
spectively from the solar still. Pearce and Denkenberger [43] simulated
a CPC integrated with basin type solar still. The result concluded that
when the reflector height is 2.5 times the width of the still, the output
per unit area per day roughly triples (16 l/m2/day). Also, they sug-
gested that the CPCs have a significant economic advantage in produ-
cing solar distilled water.
2.1.3. Solar still with air blower
Joy et al. [44] experimentally studied the SSSS with hot air blower
to enhance the system productivity. The result concluded that the SSSS
with air blower injection at the basin of the solar still yielded 5 l/m2/
day.
2.1.4. Solar still integrated with reflectors
Dev at al. [45] tested an inverted absorber solar still for sea water.
An inverted absorber solar still consists of a curved shaped reflector and
a conventional solar still (CSS). The area of the solar still was 1 m2. Sea
water samples in the still were tested with different depths. The pro-
ductivity of the inverted absorber solar still was 6.302 kg/m2/day based
on the still area.
Wahab and Al-Hatmi [46] experimentally studied the inverted solar
still coupled with a refrigeration cycle. The fabricated size of the solar
still was 400 mm × 200 mm. The solar still was placed at the focal point
of the reflector mirror to heat the basin water. The significant ad-
vantage of the refrigeration cycle in the solar still was to add heat to the
basin and remove it from the condensation surface. The result was that
the feed temperature of 35 °C gave a maximum productivity of 10 l/m2/
day.
Khalifa and Ibrahim [47] experimentally studied the simple basin
type solar still with internal and external reflectors. The basin area of
the solar still was designed as 1 m2. The internal and external reflector
mirrors of thickness 4 mm were used. The maximum productivities of
no reflector solar still, external reflector solar still and internal and
external reflector solar still were 6.08 l/m2/day, 6.26 l/m2/day and
6.70 l/m2/day respectively.
2.1.5. Solar still with nanoparticles mixed in brine
Omara et al. [34] experimentally examined a wick type solar still
T. Arunkumar et al.
Fig. 2. SSSS coupled with solar water heater evacuated tube collector [39].
Fig. 3. Pictorial view of the parabolic dish concentrator solar still [40].
with Al2O3 and Cu2O nanoparticles in the brine in the basin as shown in
Fig. 6. The fabricated area of each of the solar stills was 0.5 m2. Three
different water depths (1 cm, 2 cm and 3 cm) were maintained during
the experimentation. The productivity results reveal that the wick still
with reflectors, providing vacuum (exhaust fan) and using Al2O3 and
Cu2O nanoparticles improved the yield. The still with Al2O3 yielded
7.570 l/m2/day whereas the still with Cu2O nanoparticles yielded only
7.360 l/m2/day. Kabeel et al. [48] integrated an exhaust fan operated
using a motor powered by PV panels with the still along with Al2O3
nanoparticles in the brine and depicted in Fig. 7. The mechanism be-
hind the productivity enhancement is as follows: the fan increases
turbulence above the saline water and takes the evaporated water from
the saline water surface to the glass more quickly than conventional
stills. It is also observed that the fan sweeps the non-condensable gases
away from the solar still and hence increases the condensation rate. The
productivity reported for the solar still with and without operating the
199
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
fan was 8.390 l/m2/day and 7.920 l/m2/day.
2.1.6. Solar still with finned basin
Fins increase the area of the surface, which improves the heat
transfer from source to sink. El-Naggar et al. [49] experimentally and
theoretically investigated the SSSS with a finned basin for productivity
enhancement (See Fig. 8). The result was that the finned basin solar still
gave a maximum productivity of 5 kg/m2/day, which was higher than
the conventional solar still (4.2 kg/m2/day).
El-Sebaii and Shalaby [50] also analysed the productivity using a
“v”-corrugated SSSS as shown in Fig. 9(a-b). The basin area of the
corrugated solar still was 0.437 m2. When the number of “vees” in-
creases from 5 to 31, the heat transfer area doubled. The result was that
the maximum productivity of corrugated solar still was 8.679 kg/m2/
day. It is inferred that this productivity is higher than the productivity
inverted solar still with reflectors [46], combined effect still (with
T. Arunkumar et al.
Fig. 4. Schematic view of the CPC-CTSS with SSSS [41].
Fig. 5. Tubular solar still [42].
nanoparticles in the brine along with reflectors, vacuum and fan) [48],
and pyramid type solar still with compound parabolic concentrator-
concentric tubular solar still [42].
2.1.7. Solar still with PV in the basin
Manokar et al. [51,52] have experimentally studied the SSSS with
PV panel in the basin as shown in Fig. 10. The PV panel acted as an
absorbing material of the basin as well as generating power. The result
reveals that the SSSS with PV panel in the basin yielded maximum of
7.3 kg/m2/day.
200
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
2.1.8. Solar still integrated with heat pump
Halima et al. [53] theoretically analysed the SSSS integrated with a
heat pump in the basin as shown in Fig. 11. They found that the daily
productivity of 13.5 kg/m2/day was obtained from heat pump assisted
distillation.
2.1.9. Solar still coupled with solar chimney and condenser
Refalo et al. [54] experimentally studied the fibreglass-reinforced
plastic (FGRP) solar still with solar chimney and condensers as shown
in Fig. 12. The area of the solar still was 0.897 m2. The results were that
the solar chimney and condenser integrated solar still gave a yield of
5.1 l/m2/day and the conventional solar still was 4.7 l/m2/day. It is
inferred from this study that though this research uses chimney for
heating and condenser for cooling simultaneously, but the productivity
increase was not as large as other interventions.
Summarily, it is observed from these reviews that the triple basin
solar still assisted with collector yielded maximum productivity of
about 16.94 kg/m2/day followed by solar still integrated with heat
pump, inverted solar still with reflectors, finned basin solar still, com-
bined effect still (with nanoparticles in the brine along with reflectors
and fan) and pyramid type solar still with compound parabolic con-
centrator- concentric tubular solar still with 13.5, 10, 8.67, 8.3 and
7.7 kg/m2/day respectively. It is to be noted that the Wahab and Al-
Hatmi [46] and Arunkumar et al. [42] studies focused on increasing the
water temperature whereas the Srithar et al. [38] and Kabeel et al. [48]
studies focused simultaneously on increasing the water temperature
and decreasing the glass cover temperature. These latter studies were
most effective. Hence future research integrating collectors, con-
centrators and reflectors should be directed towards the techniques
which increase the water temperature and decrease the glass cover
temperature simultaneously.
2.2. Step type solar stills
2.2.1. Stepped solar still with air heaters and absorbing materials
Abdullah [55] performed experiments in a stepped type solar still
T. Arunkumar et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220

Fig. 6. Schematic view of CSS and v-corrugated wick with nanoparticles in brine [34].

Fig. 7. SSSS with nanoparticles in brine [48].

integrated with a solar air heater and aluminium filling as shown in

Fig. 13. The area of the stepped solar still was 0.5 m2. The preheated air
increased the water temperature and enhanced the system perfor-
mance. The result was that the productivity of the solar air heater en-
hanced stepped solar still was a maximum of 6.3 l/m2/day versus the
conventional solar still at 3.4 l/m2/day).

2.2.2. Stepped solar still with top cover cooling

El-Samadony and Kabeel [56] theoretically analysed the effect of
top cover water cooling film thickness, flow rate, and glass cover length
on a stepped solar still's productivity. They found that the cooling film
thickness 2.5 × 10−4 to 5.5 × 10−4 m, volumetric flow 4 × 10−5 m3/s
Fig. 8. SSSS with finned basin [49].
to 8.5 × 10−5 m3/s and top cover length of 2–2.8 m gave a maximum
productivity of 5.58 kg/m2/day.

201
T. Arunkumar et al.
Fig. 9. (a-b) Schematic view of SSSS with v-corrugated basin [50].
Fig. 10. Photograph of SSSS with PV panel in the basin [52].
2.2.3. Stepped solar still with combined effect of reflectors, absorbing
material and condensing cooling unit
Omara et al. [57] investigated the performance of internal reflectors
in a stepped solar still under Egyptian climatic conditions. The sche-
matic view of the solar still is shown in Fig. 14. The absorber area of the
stepped solar still was 1.16 m2. The result was that the stepped solar
still with internal reflecting mirrors gave a productivity of 6350 ml/m2/
day, higher than without internal mirrors (5840 ml/m2/day). Maiti
Fig. 11. SSSS with heat pump [53].
202
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
et al. [58] experimentally studied the stepped solar still with external
reflectors for fresh water production, shown in Fig. 15. This involved
five steps and the area of each step was 0.06 m2. The area of the basin
was 1 m2. The result was that the productivity of 5.07 l/m2/day was
obtained from the distiller. However the productivity was further im-
proved by integrating absorber material and condensing unit by Muftah
et al. [59]. The author performed experiments in a stepped solar still
with various modifications such as addition of internal and external
reflectors, absorber materials and an external condenser cooling unit.
The area of the absorber plate used in the stepped solar still was
1.16 m2. The result was that the modified stepped solar still gave a
maximum productivity of 8.9 kg/m2/day.
2.2.4. Stepped solar still with different absorber plates
Researchers have modified the absorber plate and analysed the
productivity. Hansen and Murugavel [60] experimentally studied a step
type solar still with three different absorber plates including (1) flat
absorber, (2) grooved absorber and (3) fin type absorber. The schematic
view of the solar still is shown in Fig. 16. The experimental result was
that the inclined solar still with fin type absorber gave the maximum
distillate output of 5210 ml/m2/day.
2.3. Solar still with solar pond
2.3.1. Single basin slope solar still with shallow solar pond
Ranjan and Kaushik [61] performed an exergy analysis in a solar
still coupled with a solar pond. The area of the solar still was designed
as 1 m2. The authors have found that the productivity of a SSSS in-
tegrated with solar pond was 16.76 l/m2/day theoretically. El-Sebaii
et al. [62] has analysed the thermal performance of a SSSS coupled with
a shallow solar pond (SSP) experimentally with the area of 1 m2. The
result was that the productivity of the SSP integrated SSSS was
5.014 kg/m2/day based on the SSSS area at 0.001 kg/s mass flow rate.
Research was done investigating the productivity by varying the flow
rate. El-Sebaii et al. [63] performed an experiment in a SSP integrated
with a SSSS as shown in Fig. 17. Six different flow rates (0.001, 0.002,
0.003, 0.004, 0.005, and 0.10 kg/s) were tested in the closed cycle
operation. The result was that the productivity of the SSP integrated
SSSS gave a maximum yield of 6.68 kg/m2/day with mass flow rate of
0.005 kg/s, which was higher than the SSSS alone (5.29 kg/m2/day).
T. Arunkumar et al.
Fig. 12. Schematic view of SSSS integrated with solar chimney and condensers [54].
Fig. 13. Schematic view of schematic view of stepped solar still with air heater [55].
2.3.2. Double basin solar still with solar pond
Gnanaraj et al. [64] experimentally investigated the conventional
solar still and modified double basin solar still for productivity en-
hancement. The schematic view of the experimented solar still is shown
in Fig. 18. The dimension of the lower and upper basin was
0.100 m × 0.140 m and 0.100 m × 0.100 m, respectively. The double
basin solar still with reflector coupled FPC and mini solar pond gave a
productivity of 6249 ml/m2/day. This maximum productivity is com-
parably low as compared to various other types of solar stills as dis-
cussed above such as triple basin solar still integrated to collector with
the productivity of about 16.94 kg/m2/day, inverted solar still with
reflectors with 7.7 kg/m2/day and solar still with the combined effect of
internal, external reflectors, absorbing materials and condensing
cooling unit yielding a maximum productivity of about 8.9 kg/m2/day.
2.4. Double slope solar still
Researchers have also varied the number of condensation surfaces
i.e. glass cover to achieve double slope, hut like structure as shown in
Fig. 19. The productivity was analysed in this structure by integrating
various techniques like FPC, absorber material, and condensing unit.
203
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
Double slope solar still coupled with FPC.
Mord et al. [65] has performed experiments in a double slope solar
still (DSSS) integrated with a FPC. The dimension of the DSSS and FPC
are 170 cm × 70 cm and 180 cm × 75 cm, respectively. A thermal
model was developed, and it calculated the internal and external heat
transfer coefficients. The productivity achieved a maximum 10.06 l/
m2/day using intermittent cooling (5 min on and 5 min off) for the
basin water depth of 1 cm.
2.4.1. Solar still with air heater
Riahi et al. [66] integrated an air heater with a DSSS powered by PV
as shown in Fig. 20. The heater in the basin was powered by 6 PV panels
connected with 4 batteries of capacity 150 Ah each. The dimension of
the solar sill was 1 m × 0.60 m × 0.60 m. They found that the solar still
with air heater yielded the productivity of about 5.7 kg/m2/day.
However, it would be very expensive.
2.4.2. Double slope solar still integrated with absorber materials
Pal et al. [67] experimentally studied the DSSS with black cotton
wick and jute wick for fresh water production. The area of the DSSS was
2 m2. The black cotton wick with 2 cm water depth gave a maximum
T. Arunkumar et al.
Fig. 14. Schematic view of stepped solar still with internal reflectors [57].
Fig. 15. Pictorial view of stepped solar still with reflectors [58].
productivity of 9012 ml/m2/day, which was higher than 2 cm water
depth with jute cloth wick (7040 ml/m2/day). Akash et al. [68] ex-
perimentally studied the single basin DSSS with black rubber mat in the
basin. The maximum productivity of 7 l/m2/day was achieved during
the experiment.
2.4.3. Double slope solar still with condenser unit
Zeroual et al. [69] experimentally studied the DSSS integrated with
a condenser unit (Fig. 21). The dimension of the basin water was
0.9 × 0.70 × 0.03 m. The productivity was 6.26 l/m2/day.
To summarize, the maximum productivity of about 10.6 l/m2/day
for a double slope solar still can be attained by integrating a FPC and
cooling the glass cover simultaneously. This synergistic behaviour of
the solar still (i.e. preheating the water and cooling the glass cover si-
multaneously) was also witnessed in Section 2.1.
2.5. Solar still with heat storage
Heat storage can be done through sensible heat or latent (phase
change material (PCM)) heat energy storage techniques [70–73]. When
a material releases heat without changing its phase then the material is
204
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
called a sensible heat energy storage material. In solar still applications,
researchers have used both these techniques for maintaining the water
temperature and distilled water production during nocturnal hours.
2.5.1. Solar still with latent heat energy storage
2.5.1.1. Solar still with PCM. Kabeel and Abdelgaied [74] and Kabeel
et al. [75] performed experiments in solar stills with PCM and with
PCM and hot air injection, respectively. In the latter, a double pass solar
air heater was used to heat the air and insulated pipes introduced the
air into the solar still (See Figs. 22 and 23). The dimension of the SSSS
was 0.6 m × 1.2 m. The PCM was paraffin wax. The absorber material
of the solar still was copper with the area of 0.615 m2. Hot air bubbles
enhanced the rate of heat transfer. The combination of SSSS with PCM
and with PCM and solar air heater yielded 7.54 and 9.36 l/m2/day,
respectively, as compared to a conventional solar still with 4.5 l/m2/
day.
Faegh and Shafii [76] have performed an experiment with heat
pipes-evacuated tube collector integrated external condenser filled with
PCM in a solar still (Fig. 24). The basin area was 0.40 m2. They found
that the combination of heat pipes-evacuated heat pipes and external
condenser with PCM gave a productivity of 6.555 kg/m2/day.
2.5.1.2. Tubular solar still with PCM. Arunkumar et al. [77]
experimentally analysed the compound parabolic concentrator (CPC)
assisted concentric circular tubular solar still (CCTSS). The
photographic view of the solar still is shown in Fig. 25. The CPC-
CCTSS with and without PCM gave a productivity of 5.779 l/m2/day
and 5.330 l/m2/day respectively.
2.5.1.3. Weir type solar still with PCM. A weir type cascade stepped
solar still was equipped with a Paraffin Wax-energy storage medium
and was analysed by Dashtban and Tabrizi [78]. The schematic view of
solar still is shown in Fig. 26. The total area of the absorber plates was
0.72 m2. The productivity of the stepped solar still with and without PW
energy storage medium was 6.7 kg/m2/day and 5.1 kg/m2/day,
respectively. The thermal efficiency with and without PCM was 64%
and 47%, respectively.
2.5.1.4. Solar still with nanoparticle enhanced phase change
materials. Rufuss et al. [79,80] experimentally and numerically
T. Arunkumar et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220

Fig. 16. Schematic view of stepped solar still with fin shaped absorber [60].

investigated nanoparticle enhanced paraffin PCM in solar stills. Two
identical solar stills were constructed with an area of 0.50 m2. The
concentration of nanoparticles was 0.3 wt percentage. The distillate
yield for the solar still with and without nanoparticle PCM (NPCM) was
5.28 l/m2/day and 3.92 l/m2/day, respectively [81].
2.5.2. Solar still with sensible heat storage materials
Researchers have used sensible heat storage materials (SHSMs) such
as fins, sponges, marbles, pebbles, iron scrap, wick, charcoal, corru-
gated absorber, black cotton cloth, jute wick, clay pots, mild steel pieces
and black gravel granite in solar still applications [82,83] and in-
vestigated the productivity behaviour.

Fig. 17. Schematic diagram of SSSS coupled with SSP [63].

205
T. Arunkumar et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220

Fig. 18. Schematic view of conventional and double basin solar still [64].

2.5.2.1. Solar still with fins. Fins were used as a SHSM to store heat;
however, the main purpose of fins is to increase the heat transfer area.
But when fixed as a separate material inside the basin, fins may act both
as sensible heat storage material and a medium to increase the heat
transfer rate. Srivastava and Agraval [84] studied the single basin solar
still equipped with porous fin absorbers as shown in Fig. 27. The
productivity of the single basin type solar still with porous fin absorber
yielded a productivity of 7.5 kg/m2/day as compared to a conventional
solar still with 6.5 kg/m2/day.
Rajaseenivasan et al. [85] experimentally integrated fins, jute cloth
Fig. 19. Pictorial view of DSSS [65].
and black gravel, and flat plate collector basin (FPCB) with the solar
still. The schematic view of the FPCB is shown in Fig. 28. The area of
the FPCB was 1 m2. The jute cloth and black gravel were additionally
used to increase the evaporation surface area of the FPCB. They

Fig. 20. Schematic view of DSSS with PV powered heater [66].

206
T. Arunkumar et al.
Fig. 21. Photograph of DSSS with condenser unit [69].
discovered that the combination of jute with black gravel absorber in
the FPCB yielded 5.82 kg/day/m2 whereas the conventional solar still
was 3.62 kg/day/m2.
2.5.2.2. Solar still with sponges. Ensafisoroor et al. [86] experimentally
tested the SSSS with steps in the basin as shown in Fig. 29. Additionally,
sponge cubes were added to the basin to enhance the evaporation heat
transfer in the solar still. They found that the productivity of stepped
solar still with sponge and CSS was 5.37 l/m2/day and 4.8 l/m2/day,
respectively.
2.5.2.3. Solar still with marbles, pebbles and iron scraps. Shanmugan
et al. [87] experimentally investigated the solar still with white
marbles, pebbles, black stones, calcium stones, and iron scraps
individually in the basin. The dimension of the fabricated solar still
was 1.3 m × 1.3 m × 0.3 m. They have found that the calcium stones in
the solar still basin gave a maximum yield of 5.78 kg/m2/day.
2.5.2.4. Solar still with wick. Haddad et al. [88] experimentally studied
the vertical rotating black wick in the SSSS as depicted in Fig. 30. The
basin area of the solar still was 0.36 m2. The black wick was laid on the
belt and it was rotated by a PV operated DC motor. The rotation (0.2
rev/min) ensures that the wick was always wet. The productivity of the
vertical rotating wick type solar still gave a maximum yield of 7.17 kg/
day/m2 in summer and 5.03 kg/day/m2 in winter.
Fig. 22. Conventional solar still and PCM integrated solar still [74] (PLC is programmable logic controller).
207
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
2.5.2.5. Solar still with different absorbing materials. Rajaseenivasan
et al. [89] experimentally studied both the single basin and double
basin solar still with different absorbing materials as shown in Fig. 31.
They used black cotton cloth, jute cloth, cotton pieces, clay pots and
mild steel pieces to increase the evaporative heat transfer in the basin.
The mild steel pieces in the double basin solar still gave a maximum
productivity of 5.68 l/m2/day.
2.5.2.6. Solar still with wire mesh and wick. Agboola and Egelioglu [90]
experimentally studied two identical inclined solar water desalination
system under Cyprus climatic conditions. The effect of wire mesh and
wick material on the absorber plate was investigated. The productivity
of wire mesh and wick on the absorber plate with spraying technique
yielded 3.03 kg/m2/day and 6.41 kg/m2/day, respectively.
2.5.3. Solar still with combined effect of both sensible and latent heat energy
storage materials
Rajaseenivasan et al. [91] studied a modified conventional solar still
shown in Fig. 32. Charcoal absorber and paraffin wax were used in the
basin of the solar still. Additionally, a PV powered stirrer was used to
create turbulence in the basin and to increase evaporation. They found
that the combination of CSS with stirrer and PCM gave a maximum
yield of 5.23 kg/m2/day.
2.6. Multi-effect solar stills
2.6.1. Multi-effect solar still with vacuum tube collectors
Xiong et al. [92] performed experiments using vacuum tube heat
pipe assisted multi-effect solar still as shown in Fig. 33. The vacuum
tube collectors absorb the incoming energy from the sun and heat the
basins of the multi-stage solar still. The generated water vapour con-
denses and releases the latent heat continuously to heat the water in
other stacked trays. The vacuum tube assisted multi-stage solar still
yielded 9.61 kg/m2/day.
Chen et al. [93] performed experiments in a multi-stage stacked-
tray solar still. The trays were stainless steel plate of thickness 0.75 mm
and the area of 0.40 m × 0.55 m. The latent heat released by the lower
basin was properly utilized by the other stacked trays in the distiller.
The overall productivity of this system was reported as 8.1 kg/m2/day.
Estahbanati et al. [94] studied a multi-effect solar still with four dif-
ferent stages. The horizontal evaporation area of the chamber was
0.47 m2. The trays and heat exchanger (HE) used in the solar still were
made with aluminium and copper respectively. The heat transfer oil
acted as a heat transfer fluid (HTF) in the heat exchanger to carry the
heat from heat exchanger to the lower basin of the solar still. The
T. Arunkumar et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220

Fig. 23. SSSS integrated with solar air collector [75].

Fig. 24. Schematic view of SSSS coupled with evacuated tubular collector with PCM [76].

208
T. Arunkumar et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220

Fig. 25. CPC-CCTSS with PCM [77].

vapour condenses and releases the latent heat to the tray above. The
solar still yielded a maximum of 23.8 kg of fresh water when operated a
full day.
Shatat and Mahkamov [95] performed experiments in a multi-stage
solar still with an integrated evacuated solar collector. The schematic
view of the multi-stage system is shown in Fig. 34. The length and
width of the multi-stage rectangular still were 1200 mm and 400 mm
respectively. The multistage solar still produced 10 kg of fresh water
daily.
Panchal et al. [96] experimentally studied the SSSS integrated with
evacuated tubular collectors. A 14-concentric tubular array with a
length of 1.5 m and inner and outer diameters of 47 mm and 58 mm,
respectively was designed and fabricated. The productivity of 5 kg/day/
m2 was obtained from the system. The same author [97] investigated
another experiment with double effect solar distillation system with Fig. 27. SSSS with porous fin absorber [84].
evacuated tubular collectors as shown in Fig. 35. The lower basin of the
solar still was integrated with evacuated tubular solar collectors. The
shown in Fig. 36. The productivity of the hybrid multi-effect solar still
double effect solar distillation system with evacuated collectors had
was 18.02 kg/m2/day.
fresh water yield of 20 l/day.

2.6.2. Multi-effect solar still with wicks 2.6.3. Multi-effect solar still coupled with heat pump
Park et al. [98] experimentally analysed the multi-effect diffusion Ahmed et al. [99] studied a multi-effect evacuated solar still. A solar
hybrid solar still operated by solar thermal energy and waste heat as collector was integrated with the lower basin of the multi-stage unit and

Fig. 26. Schematic view of stepped solar still with PCM [78].

209
T. Arunkumar et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220

Fig. 28. Schematic view of FPCB [85].

Fig. 29. Stepped shaped basin with sponge absorber [86].

210
T. Arunkumar et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220

Fig. 30. Photographs of rotating wick solar still [88].

Fig. 31. Different absorbing materials, (1) black cotton cloth, (2) jute wick, (3) waste cotton pieces, (4)-(5) clay pots and (6) mild steel pieces [89].

a solar operated vacuum was used to evacuate the non-condensable
gases from all the stages to increase the evaporation inside the trays.
The productivity of this multi-effect solar still with heat pump was
14.2 kg/m2/day at 0.5 bars of vacuum pressure.
2.6.4. Multi-effect solar still integrated with Fresnel lens
Younas et al. [100] conducted experiments in a multi-stage solar
still integrated with a Fresnel lens as shown in Fig. 37. The result
concluded that the productivity of the multi-stage still coupled with
Fresnel lens was 5 kg/m2/day based on lens area.
coupled with a solar collector. The photograph of solar still is shown in
Fig. 38. A heat exchanger coil was used to integrate the solar still and
the solar collector. The productivity of the multi-stage solar still with
collector gave a maximum yield of 5 l/m2/day.
Reddy et al. [102] analysed the performance of a multi-stage solar
desalination system with a FPC. The components of the multi-stage unit
included an evaporative condenser unit and FPCs. The area of the FPC
was 1 m2. The cumulative yield of the multi-stage solar desalination
system was 28.04 kg/m2/day.

2.6.5. gh Multi-stage solar still integrated with FPC

Abed et al. [101] experimentally tested a multi-stage solar still

211
T. Arunkumar et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220

Fig. 32. SSSS with PV powered stirrer [91].

Fig. 33. Photograph of multi-effect solar still with vacuum tubes [92].

Fig. 35. Solar still integrated with evacuated tubular collectors [97].

Fig. 34. Multi-stage solar still with evacuated solar collector [95].

212
T. Arunkumar et al.
Fig. 36. Multi-effect diffusion hybrid solar still [98].
2.7. Solar still with humidification and dehumidification (HDH) techniques
2.7.1. Conventional solar still coupled with HDH system
Ghazy and Fath [103] investigated a solar still with a HDH system.
The area of solar still was 1 m2. This solar still gave a maximum yield of
about 6.5 l/m2/day as compared to the conventional solar still with
4.2 l/m2/day.
2.7.2. Multi effect solar still coupled with HDH system
Fath et al. [104] theoretically studied the multiple effect solar still
integrated with a HDH system as shown in Fig. 39. The components of
humidifier and dehumidifier were used to enhance the natural water
circulation inside the distiller to ease condensation. The maximum
productivity was 9.85 kg/m2/day at 0.2 kg/s air flow rate.
Fig. 37. Multi-stage solar still with Fresnel lens [100].
213
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
Fig. 38. Multi-stage solar still coupled with solar collector [101].
2.8. Stills with unconventional shapes and designs
These types of solar stills possess various distinct configurations by
changing the whole structure of the conventional solar stills to un-
conventional shapes like hemispherical, tubular, cascade, pyramid and
inclined [27,71]. However, these types of stills work with the same
principle as CSS.
2.8.1. Hemispherical solar still
Ismail [105] experimentally studied the hemispherical solar still
(Fig. 40). The area of the aluminium absorber plate was 0.50 m2. This
type of still yields maximum productivity of 5.71 l/m2/day at 12 mm
water depth. The daily efficiency of this still was 33%.
2.8.2. Tubular solar still
Ahsan et al. [106] experimentally studied the tubular solar still
(TSS). The length, diameter and thickness of the outer tube was 0.52 m,
0.13 m and 0.15 mm respectively. The productivity of TSS was 5 kg/
m2/day and it is construed that there was little improvement due to this
tubular shape as opposed to the other unconventionally shaped solar
T. Arunkumar et al.
Fig. 39. Schematic view of solar still with HDH [104].
Fig. 40. Photographs of transparent hemispherical solar still [105].
stills.
2.8.3. Cascaded solar still
This type of solar still possess two significant qualities i.e. it has
inclined structure with stepped basin and it has a single condensate
channel to get the distillate yield. Ziabari et al. [107] experimentally
studied the cascaded solar still. The basin area of the still was 1.16 m2.
They supplied water continuously prevent dry spots in the basin. A
mathematical model was also developed and validated with the ex-
perimental results. The average productivity for the modified cascaded
solar still was 6.7 l/m2/day.
2.8.4. Inclined solar still
Sadineni et al. [108] experimentally and theoretically analysed a
weir type inclined solar still with single and double glazing arrange-
ment. The dimensions of the absorber plate were 1.7 m × 0.57 m. The
productivity of the inclined solar still with single and double glazing
was 5.5 l/m2/day and 2.2 l/m2/day respectively.
214
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
2.8.5. Inclined still coupled with pyramid still
Kumar et al. [109] theoretically analysed a pyramid solar still
coupled to an inclined solar still with baffles. The inclined structure
with baffles increases the heat transfer area of the solar still, thereby
improving productivity. Eight different basin water masses of 20, 30,
40, 50, 60, 70, 80 and 100 kg were analysed. The maximum pro-
ductivity of 7.05 l/m2 was achieved with the water mass of 20 kg. The
review results of efficient solar still designs including cost per litre data
are shown in Table 1.
3. Conclusion
A review of efficient high productivity solar still designs and their
mechanisms is reported here. The modifications in the solar still in-
cluded multiple basins, step sized basins, weir type solar stills, inclined
type solar stills, tubular shaped solar still, pyramid type solar stills and
hemispherical type solar stills. Various active and passive heat sources
like flat plate collector, concentrators, evacuated tube collectors, water
heaters, internal & external reflectors were used for enhancing heat
transfer in the basin. Heat storage materials included pebbles, PCM,
NPCM and steel pieces. Various materials like clay pot, jute cloth,
cotton cloths, and wicks are used to increase the yield. The major
findings from the efficient solar still designs are follows,
• Multi-stage solar desalination technique increased the freshwater
productivity. Latent heat of the vapour generated from the first stage
heated the water in upper trays. The maximum productivity of
multi-effect solar still integrated with FPC was 28 kg/m2/day, multi-
effect active solar still yielded 23.8 kg/m2/day, productivity of
double effect solar still with ETC was 20 kg/m2/day, hybrid multi-
effect desalination system integrated with SSSS gave 18.02 kg/m2/
day productivity and multi-stage solar still with point focus Fresnel
lens yielded 10.9 kg/m2/day.
• SSSS integrated with solar pond yielded a maximum of 16.76 kg/
m2/day. The extracted heat from the solar pond was directly linked
with solar still enhanced the water temperature to augment the fresh
water productivity.
• Intense radiation from the concentrator increased the temperature
of the lower basin. The fresh water productivity achieved for the
triple basin solar still integrated with parabolic dish concentrator
was 16.94 kg/m2/day.
• The productivity of SSSS integrated with heat pump was 13.5 kg/
m2/day. The heat pump played an important role to augment the
basin water temperature for higher productivity.
• Use of Phase change material in solar still yielded fresh water pro-
duction at night time also. The productivity of solar still integrated
with PCM, hot PCM with hot air injection and tubular solar still with
PCM was 7.54, 9.36 and 7.77 kg/m2/day respectively.
• The fresh water productivity of double slope solar still with cover
cooling, and multi-wick, black rubber mat was 7.8, 9.0 and 6.2 kg/
m2/day respectively. Cooling glass cover increases the condensation
rate in the solar still. Capillary action and evaporation area were
enhanced by providing wick in the solar still. The rubber mats in-
creased the basin water temperature which augmented the pro-
ductivity.
4. Future research directions
1. Optimize the weight percentage of various nanoparticles to im-
pregnate in phase change material.
2. Investigate eutectic phase change materials and their thermo-phy-
sical properties for various solar thermal applications.
3. In integration of solar stills, research should be carried out without
affecting the naturally available solar radiation to the basin.
4. Properties hierarchy should be analysed based on expert opinion
using various analysis (using fuzz, VIKOR, etc.) and should be
 Table 1
Solar still designs and productivity.
Sl. no. Author & Country Solar still design Area/dimension Productivity Cost Per Litre Mechanism
(CPL) in $
T. Arunkumar et al.

1. Omara et al. [34], Egypt SSSS with Al2O3 and Cu2O nanofluids 1 m2 Al2O3: 7.6 l/m2/day – Thermal conductivity of the base fluid (water) increased due
Cu2O: 7.4 ml/m2/day to the nanoparticles in the basin.
2. Srithar et al. [38], India PDC-TBSS 0.3 m × 0.36 m × 0.33 m 16.94 kg/m2/day 0.084 • Accumulation of more radiation through concentrator
increased the lower basin temperature.
• Higher ΔT between water and glass because of cover
cooling technique (40 ml/s of water).
3. Sampathkumar and SSSS-solar water heater – 5.6 kg/m2/day – Evacuated solar water heater increased the basin
Senthilkumar [39], India. temperature.
2 2
4. Gorjian et al. [40], Iran Parabolic solar still Aperture area: 2 m ; focal length: 5.12 kg/7 h/m 0.1103 The parabolic dish reflects the incoming solar radiation to the
0.693 m and receiver area 0.031 m2 basin.
2
5. Arunkumar et al. [41], India CPC-TSS-SSSS CPC: 2 m2 6.46 l/m /day 0.019 Preheated water from CPC-CTSS linked with SSSS.
SSSS: 0.25 m2
6. Arunkumar et al. [42], India CPC-TSS-SSSS-PSS CPC: 2 m2 7.77 l/m2/day 0.016 Preheated water from CPC-CTSS linked with SSSS and PSS.
SSSS: 0.25 m2
PSS: 1 m2
7. Joy et al. [44], India SSSS with air blower 1 m2 5 kg/m2/day – Basin water heat enhancement.
8. Dev et al. [45], Oman Inverted absorber solar still 1 m2 6.302 kg/m2/day 0.0378 The reflector profile directs the incoming solar radiation to
the absorber, which is the bottom of the basin.
9. Wahab and Al-Hatmi [46], Inverted solar still integrated with refrigeration 0.4 m × 0.2 m 10 l/m2/day – • Waste heat from the refrigeration cycle heats solar still.
Oman cycle. Reflectors increase the basin water temperature.
2 2
10. Kabeel et al. [48], Egypt SSSS with Al2O3 nanofluids with an external 0.5 m 8.390 l/m /day 0.0220
•
Thermal conductivity of the base fluid (water) increased due
condenser fan unit to the nanoparticles in the basin.
2 2
11. El-Naggar et al. [49], Egypt SSSS with fins 1m 5 l/m /day – • Heat transfer enhancement through fins
Extended absorber area
2 2
•

215
12. El-Sebaii and Shalaby [50], Single basin v-corrugated type solar still 1m 8.679 l/m /day – • The “vees” in v-corrugated absorber
Egypt • Productivity depends on number of “vees” in the basin
(≈31 optimal)
13. Shalaby et al. [51], Egypt SSSS with rotating wick 0.36 m2 In summer: 7.17 kg/ – Evaporative heat transfer enhancement by the wick.
m2/day
In winter: 5.03 kg/
m2/day
14. Manokar et al. [52], India Inclined solar still with PV panel 1.81 m × 0.92 m 7.3 kg/m2/day – • Longer flow of feed water in the basin absorber.
• Efficient inclination angle towards sun.
15. Halima et al. [53], Tunisia SSSS with heat pump 1 m2 13.5 kg/m2/day – Basin water heating enhancement.
16. Refalo et al. [54], Malta SSSS with solar chimney and condensers 1 m2 5.1 l/m2/day – • Double glazing increased the temperature inside the
(Europe) distiller.
• The solar chimney helps to enhance the convective heat
transfer inside the distiller.
• Water-cooled condenser improved the condensation inside
the system.
17. Abdullah [55], Egypt Stepped solar still with air heater 0.50 m2 6.300 l/m2/day – Hot air injected through the basin causes larger temperature
difference between water and glass.
18. El-Samadony and Kabeel Stepped solar still with cover cooling 1 m2 5.58 kg/m2/day – Cooling water increases evaporative heat transfer between
[56], Egypt water and glass.
2 2
19. Omara et al. [57], Egypt Stepped solar still with internal mirrors 1.16 m 6.350 l/m /day 0.0197 Mirrors would increase the temperature of the system.
20. Maiti et al. [58], India Stepped solar still with reflectors and 1.01 m2 7.27 l/m2/day – • Reflectors used to increase the system operating
condensers temperature.
• Condensers increase distillate water production.
21. Muftah et al. [59], Malaysia Stepped solar still with internal mirror 1 m2 8.9 kg/m2/day – Improve the absorption and condensation process by
incorporating internal & external reflectors, fins and
condensers.
22. Hansen and Murugavel [60], SSSS with flat, grooved and fin shaped absorber 1.3 m2 5.2 l/m2/day – Absorbers increased the heat transfer area in the solar still.
India
(continued on next page)
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
 Table 1 (continued)

Sl. no. Author & Country Solar still design Area/dimension Productivity Cost Per Litre Mechanism
(CPL) in $

23. Ranjan and Kaushik [61], SSSS integrated with solar pond 1 m2 16.76 l/m2/day Extracted heat from SSP introduced into single basin solar
T. Arunkumar et al.

–
India still.
24. El-Sebaii et al. [62], Egypt SSSS-SSP 1 m2 5.014 kg/m2/day 0.052 Extracted heat from SSP introduced into single basin solar
still.
25. El-Sebaii et al. [63], Egypt SSSS-SSP 1 m2 6.68 kg/m2/day – Extracted heat from SSP integrated with single basin solar
still.
2
26. Gnanaraj et al. [64], India Double basin solar still with reflectors 0.14 m × 1 m 6.249 l/m /day 0.026 Reflectors, FPC, solar pond and absorbing materials acted as
integrated with FPC and solar pond additional heat sources.
2
27. Mord et al. [65], Egypt Double slope solar still with cover cooling 0.17 m × 0.7 m 7.81 l/m /day – Cooling glass cover increases the condensation rate in the
solar still.
28. Riahi et al. [66], Perak Conventional solar still with PV powered heater 0.405 m2 5.7 kg/m2/day – Basin water heat enhancement.
29. Pal et al. [67], India Double slope multi-wick solar still 2 m2 9.0 l/m2/day 0.028 Capillary action and evaporation area enhanced by the wick.
30. Akash et al. [68], Jordan Double slope solar still with black rubber mat 3 m2 7 l/m2/day – The rubber mats acted as a solar absorber and increased the
basin temperature.
31. Zeroul et al. [69], Algeria Double slope solar still with cooled condenser 0.9 m × 0.7 m 6.26 l/m2/day – Glass cooling increases the temperature difference between
glass and water and improves the productivity.
32. Kabeel and Abdelgaied [74], SSSS with PCM 0.72 m2 7.54 l/m2/day 0.0240 PCM represents heat source after sunset.
Egypt
33. Kabeel et al. [75], Egypt SSSS with PCM and hot air injection 0.6 m × 1.24 m 9.36 l/m2/day – • Hot bubbles due to hot air injection increase the interface
area.
• PCM represents heat source after sunset.
34. Faegh and Shafii [76], Iran SSSS with evacuated tube collectors with SSSS: 0.2 m × 0.2 m; 6.55 kg/m2/day 0.01527 • Evacuated tube collectors increased the basin water
condenser and PCM Tube length: 180 cm temperature.
Tube inner dia.: 4.7 cm • PCM extended the productivity of the distiller.
Tube outer dia.: 5.8 cm

216
35. Arunkumar and Kabeel [77], TSS with PCM 2 m2 7.77 l/m2/day 0.033 • Reflected radiation by the CPC
India PCM represents heat source after sunset.
2 2
36. Dashtban and Tabrizi [78], Cascade solar still with PCM 1.17 m 6.7/kg/m /day 0.05
•
PCM represents heat source after sunset and maintains the
Iran temperature.
2 2
37. Rufuss et al. [79–81], India SSSS with mixture of CuO and PW 0.50 m 5.28 kg/m 0.026 Thermal conductivity of the base fluid (water) increased due
to the nanoparticles and energy storage materials in the basin.
38. Srivastava and Agarval [84], SSSS with porous fin absorber 0.50 m2 7.5 kg/m2/day – Basin water heat enhancement by fins.
India
39. Rajaseenivasan et al. [85], Flat plate collector basin solar still 0.65 m2 5.82 kg/m2/day 0.0405 • Preheated water enters into the basin.
India • Heat transfer rate increased by the fins.
• Evaporation increases in the separate compartments due to
lower water mass.
40. Ensafisoroor et al. [86], North SSSS with steps and sponges 1 m2 5.37 l/m2/day – Sponges reduce the glass temperature and increase the
Cyprus temperature difference.
41. Shanmugan et al. [87], India SSSS with calcium stone, black stone, white 1.3 m × 1.3 m 5.78 kg/m2/day – Basin water heating enhancement through different absorbing
marbles, pebbles and iron scraps materials.
2
42. Rajaseenivasan et al. [89], Double basin solar still with black cotton cloth, 0.9 m × 0.7 m × 0.08 m 5.68 l/m /day 0.0265 • Additives absorb more sunlight
India jute cloth, cotton pieces, clay pots and mild steel • The evaporative surface area increased in the solar still due
pieces to the absorbing materials.
43. Agboola and Egelioglu [90], Inclined solar still 1 m2 6.41 kg/m2/day – • Longer flow of feed water in the basin absorber
Turkey • Efficient inclination angle towards sun
44. Rajaseenivasan et al. [91], • SSSS with PV-stirrer and absorber 0.8 m × 0.8 m 5.23 kg/m2/day – • Stirrer action enhanced the forced convective heat
India (charcoal) and energy storage material transfer between water and glass.
(paraffin wax) • The basin height range from 0.45 m to 0.15 m shows the
maximum productivity.
(continued on next page)
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
 Table 1 (continued)

Sl. no. Author & Country Solar still design Area/dimension Productivity Cost Per Litre Mechanism
(CPL) in $

45. Xiong et al. [92], China Multi-effect solar still 1.7 m2 9.61 kg/m2/day tubes increased the basin temperature.
T. Arunkumar et al.

– • Vacuum
• Water vapour released latent heat, which consequently
heated the water in upper trays.
• The “vees” in the corrugated shape increased the heat
transfer area.
46. Chen et al. [93], China Multi-stage stacked tray solar still – 8.1 kg/m2/day – • Solar energy heat collector increased the basin
temperature.
• Water vapour released latent heat, which consequently
heated the water in upper trays.
• The “vees” in the corrugated shape increased the heat
transfer area.
47. Estahbanati et al. [94], Iran Multi-effect active solar still 0.47 m2 23.8 kg/m2/day 0.0281 • Water vapour released latent heat, which consequently
heated the water in upper trays.
2 2
48. Shatat and Mahkamov [95], Multi-stage solar still 1.7 m 11 kg/m /day – • Evacuated solar collector increased the basin
UK temperature.
• Water vapour released latent heat, which consequently
heated the water in upper trays.
49. Panchal et al. [96], India SSSS with evacuated tubes 1 m2 5 kg/m2/day 0.86 Basin water heat transport enhancement
50. Panchal [97], India Double effect solar still with evacuated glass 1 m2 20 l/m2/day/ 0.26 Water vapour released latent heat, which consequently
tubes heated the water in upper trays.
51. Park et al. [98], Korea Hybrid MED-SSSS 0.77 m2 18.02 kg/m2/day – Water vapour released latent heat, which consequently
heated the water in upper trays.
2 2
52. Ahmed et al. [99], Malaysia Multi-stage evacuated solar still 1m 14.2 kg/m /day 0.0903 Water vapour released latent heat, which consequently
heated the water in upper trays.
53. Younas et al. [100], UAE Multi-stage solar still with point focus Fresnel 2.2 m2 10.9 kg/m2/day 0.02 Water vapour released latent heat, which consequently

217
lens
• heated the water in upper trays.
• Additional basin water heat enhancement by Fresnel lens.
54. Abed et al. [101], Iraq Multi-stage solar still with solar collector 0.45 m2 5 l/m2/day – • Water vapour released the latent heat consequently
heated the water in upper trays.
• Additional basin water heat enhancement by solar energy
collector.
55. Reddy et al. [102], India Multi-stage solar desalination system with FPC 1 m2 28.04 kg/m2/day – • Water vapour released latent heat, which consequently
heated the water in upper trays.
• Additional basin water heat enhancement by FPC.
56. Ghazy and Fath [103], Egypt SSSS integrated with HDH system 1 m2 6.5 l/m2/day – • Humidification and dehumidification.
57. Fath et al. [104], UAE SSSS integrated with HDH system 5.4 m2 9.85 kg/m2/day – • Humidification and dehumidification.
58. Ismail [105], Canada Hemispherical solar still 0.50 m2 5.7 l/m2/day 0.18 The interaction of ambient air with the curved surface of
hemispherical cover play a significant role over the
productivity.
59. Ahsan et al. [106], Malaysia TSS L= 0.52 m, d= 0.13 m and thickness 5 kg/m2/day 0.1050 The unconventional design has improved the productivity as
0.15 mm compared to the conventional still
2
60. Sadineni et al. [108], USA Weir type solar still 1.7 m × 0.57 m 5.5 l/m /day – • Continuous water flow in the basin to avoid dry spots.
61. Kumar et al. [109], India Pyramid solar still integrated with inclined solar 1 m2 7.05 kg/m2/day – Enhanced solar collection.
still
62. Khalifa and Ibrahim [110], SSSS with internal and external reflectors 1 m2 6.70 l/m2/day – Internal and external reflectors increased the basin water
Iraq temperature.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
T. Arunkumar et al.
implemented during the selection of storage material.
5. A better condenser material should be invented to overcome the
drawback of glass's fragility, such as a hydrophilic polymer.
Acknowledgments
This study received a grant from the University Grant Commission
(UGC), Government of India. Ref. No. F.4-2/2006 (BSR)/PH/14-15/
0124 dated on 01 July 2015. We thank all the researchers and their
contributions which were cited in this article.
References
[1] Samuel DGH, Nagarajan PK, Sathyamurthy R, El-agouz SA, Kannan E. Improving
the yield of fresh water in conventional solar still using low cost energy storage
material. Energy Convers Manag 2016;112:125–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2015.12.074.
[2] IRENA. Renewable energy in the water, energy and food nexus. Int Renew Energy
Agency 2015:1–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2012.10.057.
[3] Dessu SB, Melesse AM, Bhat MG, McClain ME. Assessment of water resources
availability and demand in the Mara River Basin. Catena 2014;115:104–14.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2013.11.017.
[4] Kalogirou SA. Seawater desalination using renewable energy sources. Prog Energy
Combust Sci 2005;31:242–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2005.03.001.
[5] Ghaffour N, Bundschuh J, Mahmoudi H, Goosen MFA. Renewable energy-driven
desalination technologies: a comprehensive review on challenges and potential
applications of integrated systems. Desalination 2015;356:94–114. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.10.024.
[6] Kucera J. Introduction to desalination. Desalin water from water. 2014. p. 1–37.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118904855.ch1.
[7] Gude VG, Nirmalakhandan N, Deng S. Renewable and sustainable approaches for
desalination. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:2641–54. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.rser.2010.06.008.
[8] Gude VG, Nirmalakhandan N, Deng S, Maganti A. Feasibility study of a new two-
stage low temperature desalination process. Energy Convers Manag
2012;56:192–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2011.11.026.
[9] Ghaffour N, Lattemann S, Missimer T, Ng KC, Sinha S, Amy G. Renewable energy-
driven innovative energy-efficient desalination technologies. Appl Energy
2014;136:1155–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.03.033.
[10] Muthu Manokar A, Prince Winston D, Kabeel AE, El-Agouz SA, Sathyamurthy R,
Arunkumar T, et al. Integrated PV/T solar still - a mini-review. Desalination 2017.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2017.04.022.
[11] Appadurai M, Velmurugan V. Performance analysis of fin type solar still integrated
with fin type mini solar pond. Sustain Energy Technol Assess 2015;9:30–6. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2014.11.001.
[12] Alaudeen A, Vasanth K, Srithar K. Experimental and theoretical analysis of solar
still with glass basin. Desalin Water Treat 2014:1489–98. https://doi.org/10.
1080/19443994.2014.888679.
[13] Al-Garni AZ. Productivity enhancement of single slope solar still using immersion-
type water heater and external cooling fan during summer. Desalin Water Treat
2014;52:6295–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2013.822151.
[14] Arjunan TV, Aybar HŞ NN. Effect of sponge liner on the internal heat transfer
coefficients in a simple solar still. Desalin Water Treat Water Treat
2011;29:271–84. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2011.1638.
[15] Arshad Kutty, Balasundaram Janarthanan SS. Performance of honeycomb double
exposure solar still. Desalin Water Treat 2011;26:260–5. https://doi.org/10.5004/
dwt.2011.1826.
[16] Ayoub GM, Al-Hindi M, Malaeb L. A solar still desalination system with enhanced
productivity. Desalin Water Treat 2015;53:3179–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/
19443994.2014.933040.
[17] Tiwari AK, Tiwari GN. Effect of water depths on heat and mass transfer in a passive
solar still: in summer climatic condition. Desalination 2006;195:78–94. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2005.11.014.
[18] Tripathi R, Tiwari GN. Thermal modeling of passive and active solar stills for
different depths of water by using the concept of solar fraction. Sol Energy
2006;80:956–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2005.08.002.
[19] Tiwari AK, Tiwari GN. Thermal modeling based on solar fraction and experimental
study of the annual and seasonal performance of a single slope passive solar still:
the effect of water depths. Desalination 2007;207:184–204. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.desal.2006.07.011.
[20] Rajamanickam MR, Ragupathy A. Influence of water depth on internal heat and
mass transfer in a double slope solar still. Energy Procedia 2012;14:1701–8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2011.12.1155.
[21] Suneja S, Tiwari GN. Effect of water depth on the performance of an inverted
absorber double basin solar still. Energy Convers Manag 1999;40:1885–97.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-8904(99)00047-3.
[22] Murugavel KK, Sivakumar S, Ahamed JR, Chockalingam KKSK, Srithar K. Single
basin double slope solar still with minimum basin depth and energy storing ma-
terials. Appl Energy 2010;87:514–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.
07.023.
[23] Arunkumar T, Kabeel AE, Raj K, Denkenberger D, Sathyamurthy R, Ragupathy P,
et al. Productivity enhancement of solar still by using porous absorber with
218
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
bubble-wrap insulation. J Clean Prod 2018;195:1149–61. https://doi.org/10.
1016/J.JCLEPRO.2018.05.199.
[24] Kabeel AE, El-Agouz SA. Review of researches and developments on solar stills.
Desalination 2011;276:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.03.042.
[25] Mahdi N Al. Performance prediction of a multi-basin solar still. Energy
1992;17:87–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/0360-5442(92)90035-X.
[26] Sodha MS, Nayak JK, Tiwari GN, Kumar A. Double basin solar still. Energy Convers
Manag 1980;20:23–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0196-8904(80)90025-4.
[27] Kaushal A Varun. Solar stills: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2010;14:446–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.05.011.
[28] Somwanshi A, Tiwari AK. Performance enhancement of a single basin solar still
with flow of water from an air cooler on the cover. Desalination 2014;352:92–102.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.08.011.
[29] El-Sebaii AA. Effect of wind speed on some designs of solar stills. Energy Convers
Manag 2000;41:523–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-8904(99)00119-3.
[30] Zurigat YH, Abu-Arabi MK. Modelling and performance analysis of a regenerative
solar desalination unit. Appl Therm Eng 2004;24:1061–72. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.applthermaleng.2003.11.010.
[31] Khalifa AJN. On the effect of cover tilt angle of the simple solar still on its pro-
ductivity in different seasons and latitudes. Energy Convers Manag
2011;52:431–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2010.07.018.
[32] Jubran BA. Effect of climatic, design and operational parameters on the yield of a
simple solar still. Energy Convers Manag 2002;43:1639–50.
[33] Rahbar N, Esfahani JA. Experimental study of a novel portable solar still by uti-
lizing the heatpipe and thermoelectric module. Desalination 2012;284:55–61.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.08.036.
[34] Omara ZM, Kabeel AE, Essa FA. Effect of using nanofluids and providing vacuum
on the yield of corrugated wick solar still. Energy Convers Manag
2015;103:965–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2015.07.035.
[35] Trieb F, Müller-Steinhagen H, Kern J, Scharfe J, Kabariti M, Al Taher A.
Technologies for large scale seawater desalination using concentrated solar ra-
diation. Desalination 2009;235:33–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2007.04.
098.
[36] Qiblawey HM, Banat F. Solar thermal desalination technologies. Desalination
2008;220:633–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2007.01.059.
[37] García-Rodríguez L. Seawater desalination driven by renewable energies: a review.
Desalination 2002;143:103–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-9164(02)
00232-1.
[38] Srithar K, Rajaseenivasan T, Karthik N, Periyannan M, Gowtham M. Stand alone
triple basin solar desalination system with cover cooling and parabolic dish con-
centrator. Renew Energy 2016;90:157–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.
2015.12.063.
[39] Sampathkumar K, Senthilkumar P. Utilization of solar water heater in a single
basin solar still-an experimental study. Desalination 2012;297:8–19. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.desal.2012.04.012.
[40] Gorjian S, Ghobadian B, Tavakkoli Hashjin T, Banakar A. Experimental perfor-
mance evaluation of a stand-alone point-focus parabolic solar still. Desalination
2014;352:1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.08.005.
[41] Arunkumar T, Velraj R, Denkenberger D, Sathyamurthy R, Vinothkumar K,
Porkumaran K, et al. Effect of heat removal on tubular solar desalting system.
Desalination 2016;379:24–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2015.10.007.
[42] Arunkumar T, Velraj R, Denkenberger DC, Sathyamurthy R, Kumar KV, Ahsan A.
Productivity enhancements of compound parabolic concentrator tubular solar
stills. Renew Energy 2016;88:391–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2015.
11.051.
[43] Pearce JM, Denkenberger DC. Numerical simulation of the direct application of
compound parabolic concentrators to a single effect basin solar still. In: Proceeding
of Solar Cookers and Food Processing International Conference 2006. Granada,
Spain; 2006, p. 118.
[44] Joy Nivin, Alphonsa Antony AA. Experimental study on improving the perfor-
mance of solar still using air blower. Int J Ambient Energy 2017:1–4. https://doi.
org/10.1080/01430750.2017.1324817.
[45] Dev R, Abdul-Wahab SA, Tiwari GN. Performance study of the inverted absorber
solar still with water depth and total dissolved solid. Appl Energy 2011;88:252–64.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.08.001.
[46] Abdul-Wahab SA, Al-Hatmi YY. Study of the performance of the inverted solar still
integrated with a refrigeration cycle. Procedia Eng 2012;33:424–34. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.proeng.2012.01.1222.
[47] Khalifa AJNIH. Experimental study on the effect of internal and external reflectors
on the performance of basin type solar stills at various seasons. Desalin Water
Treat 2011;27:313–8. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2011.2088.
[48] Kabeel AE, Omara ZM, Essa FA. Enhancement of modified solar still integrated
with external condenser using nanofluids: an experimental approach. Energy
Convers Manag 2014;78:493–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.11.
013.
[49] El-Naggar M, El-Sebaii AA, Ramadan MRI, Aboul-Enein S. Experimental and the-
oretical performance of finned-single effect solar still. Desalin Water Treat
2016;57:17151–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2015.1085451.
[50] El-Sebaii AA, Shalaby SM. Parametric study and heat transfer mechanisms of single
basin v-corrugated solar still. Desalin Water Treat 2015;55:285–96. https://doi.
org/10.1080/19443994.2014.913998.
[51] Shalaby SM, El-Bialy E, El-Sebaii AA. Performance evaluation of a continuous flow
inclined solar still desalination system. Desalination 2016;49:1–9. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2015.05.069.
[52] Manokar AM, Winston DP, Kabeel AE, Sathyamurthy R. Sustainable fresh water
and power production by integrating PV panel in inclined solar still. J Clean Prod
T. Arunkumar et al.
2018;172:2711–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.140.
[53] Ben Halima H, Frikha N, Ben Slama R. Numerical investigation of a simple solar
still coupled to a compression heat pump. Desalination 2014;337:60–6. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.01.010.
[54] Refalo P, Ghirlando R, Abela S. The use of a solar chimney and condensers to
enhance the productivity of a solar still. Desalin Water Treat 2016;57:23024–37.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2015.1106096.
[55] Abdullah AS. Improving the performance of stepped solar still. Desalination
2013;319:60–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2013.04.003.
[56] El-Samadony YAF, Kabeel AE. Theoretical estimation of the optimum glass cover
water film cooling parameters combinations of a stepped solar still. Energy
2014;68:744–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.01.080.
[57] Omara ZM, Kabeel AEYM. Enhancing the stepped solar still performance using
internal reflectors. Desalination 2013;314:67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.
2013.01.007.
[58] Maiti S, Bhatt C, Patel P, Ghosh PK. Practical and sustainable household seawater
desalination using an improved solar still. Desalin Water Treat 2016;57:3358–71.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2014.986534.
[59] Muftah AF, Sopian K, Alghoul MA. Performance of basin type stepped solar still
enhanced with superior design concepts. Desalination 2017. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.desal.2017.07.017.
[60] Samuel Hansen R, Kalidasa Murugavel K. Enhancement of integrated solar still
using different new absorber configurations: an experimental approach.
Desalination 2017;422:59–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2017.08.015.
[61] Ranjan KR, Kaushik SC. Exergy analysis of the active solar distillation systems
integrated with solar ponds. Clean Technol Environ Policy 2014;16:791–805.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-013-0669-4.
[62] El-Sebaii AA, Ramadan MRI, Aboul-Enein S, Salem N. Thermal performance of a
single-basin solar still integrated with a shallow solar pond. Energy Convers Manag
2008;49:2839–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2008.03.002.
[63] El-Sebaii AA, Aboul-Enein S, Ramadan MRI, Khallaf AM. Thermal performance of
an active single basin solar still (ASBS) coupled to shallow solar pond (SSP).
Desalination 2011;280:183–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.07.004.
[64] Joe Patrick Gnanaraj S, Ramachandran S, Christopher David Santosh. Enhancing
the design to optimize the performance of double basin solar still. Desalination
2017;411:112–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2017.02.011.
[65] Morad MM, El-Maghawry H AM, Wasfy KI. Improving the double slope solar still
performance by using flat-plate solar collector and cooling glass cover.
Desalination 2015;373:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2015.06.017.
[66] Riahi A, Wan Yusof K, Mahinder Singh BS, Isa MH, Olisa E, Zahari NAM.
Sustainable potable water production using a solar still with photovoltaic modules-
AC heater. Desalin Water Treat 2015;3994:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/
19443994.2015.1070285.
[67] Pal P, Yadav P, Dev R, Singh D. Performance analysis of modified basin type
double slope multi–wick solar still. Desalination 2017;422:68–82. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.desal.2017.08.009.
[68] Akash BA, Mohsen MS, Nayfeh W. Experimental study of the basin type solar still
under local climate conditions. Energy Convers Manag 2000;41:883–90. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S0196-8904(99)00158-2.
[69] Zeroual M, Bouguettaia H, Bechki D, Boughali S, Bouchekima B, Mahcene H.
Experimental investigation on a double-slope solar still with partially cooled
condenser in the region of Ouargla (Algeria). Energy Procedia 2011;6:736–42.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2011.05.083.
[70] Farid MM, Khudhair AM, Razack SAK, Al-Hallaj S. A review on phase change
energy storage: materials and applications. Energy Convers Manag
2004;45:1597–615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2003.09.015.
[71] Dsilva Winfred Rufuss D, Iniyan S, Suganthi L, Davies PA. Solar stills: a compre-
hensive review of designs, performance and material advances. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2016;63:464–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.068.
[72] Gude VG. Energy storage for desalination processes powered by renewable energy
and waste heat sources. Appl Energy 2015;137:877–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.apenergy.2014.06.061.
[73] Parameshwaran R, Kalaiselvam S, Harikrishnan S, Elayaperumal A. Sustainable
thermal energy storage technologies for buildings: a review. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2012;16:2394–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.01.058.
[74] Kabeel AE, Abdelgaied M. Improving the performance of solar still by using PCM
as a thermal storage medium under Egyptian conditions. Desalination
2016;383:22–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2016.01.006.
[75] Kabeel AE, Abdelgaied M, Mahgoub M. The performance of a modified solar still
using hot air injection and PCM. Desalination 2016;379:102–7. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.desal.2015.11.007.
[76] Faegh M, Shafii MB. Experimental investigation of a solar still equipped with an
external heat storage system using phase change materials and heat pipes.
Desalination 2017;409:128–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2017.01.023.
[77] Arunkumar T, Kabeel AE. Effect of phase change material on concentric circular
tubular solar still-Integration meets enhancement. Desalination 2017;414:46–50.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2017.03.035.
[78] Dashtban M, Tabrizi FF. Thermal analysis of a weir-type cascade solar still in-
tegrated with PCM storage. Desalination 2011;279:415–22. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.desal.2011.06.044.
[79] Dsilva Winfred Rufuss D, Iniyan S, Suganthi L, PA D. Nanoparticles enhanced
phase change material (NPCM) as heat storage in solar still application for pro-
ductivity enhancement. Energy Procedia 2017;141:45–9. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.egypro.2017.11.009.
[80] Dsilva Winfred Rufuss D, Raj Kumar V, Suganthi L, Iniyan S, Davies PA. Techno-
economic analysis of solar stills using integrated fuzzy analytical hierarchy process
219
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
and data envelopment analysis. Sol Energy 2018;159:820–33. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.solener.2017.11.050.
[81] Dsilva Winfred Rufuss D, Suganthi L, Iniyan S, Davies PA. Effects of nanoparticle-
enhanced phase change material (NPCM) on solar still productivity. J Clean Prod
2018;192:9–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.201.
[82] Manikandan V, Shanmugasundaram K, Shanmugan S, Janarthanan B,
Chandrasekaran J. Wick type solar stills: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2013;20:322–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.11.046.
[83] Abdallah S, Abu-Khader MM, Badran O. Effect of various absorbing materials on
the thermal performance of solar stills. Desalination 2009;242:128–37. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2008.03.036.
[84] Srivastava PK, Agrawal SK. Winter and summer performance of single sloped basin
type solar still integrated with extended porous fins. Desalination 2013;319:73–8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2013.03.030.
[85] Rajaseenivasan T, Nelson Raja P, Srithar K. An experimental investigation on a
solar still with an integrated flat plate collector. Desalination 2014;347:131–7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.05.029.
[86] Ensafisoroor H, Khamooshi M, Egelioglu F, Parham K. An experimental com-
parative study on different configurations of basin solar still. Desalin Water Treat
2016;57:1901–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2014.979238.
[87] Shanmugan S, Janarthanan B, Chandrasekaran J. Performance of single-slope
single-basin solar still with sensible heat storage materials. Desalin Water Treat
2012;41:195–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2012.664714.
[88] Haddad Z, Chaker A, Rahmani A. Improving the basin type solar still performances
using a vertical rotating wick. Desalination 2017;418:71–8. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.desal.2017.05.030.
[89] Rajaseenivasan T, Elango T, Kalidasa Murugavel K. Comparative study of double
basin and single basin solar stills. Desalination 2013;309:27–31. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.desal.2012.09.014.
[90] Agboola P, Egelioglu F. Empirical investigation of two designs of incline solar
water desalination system. Pol J Chem Technol 2012;14:35–40. https://doi.org/
10.2478/v10026-012-0056-7.
[91] Rajaseenivasan T, Prakash R, Vijayakumar K, Srithar K. Mathematical and ex-
perimental investigation on the influence of basin height variation and stirring of
water by solar PV panels in solar still. Desalination 2017;415:67–75. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.desal.2017.04.010.
[92] Xiong J, Xie G, Zheng H. Experimental and numerical study on a new multi-effect
solar still with enhanced condensation surface. Energy Convers Manag
2013;73:176–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.04.024.
[93] Chen Z, Peng J, Chen G, Hou L, Yu T, Yao Y, et al. Analysis of heat and mass
transferring mechanism of multi-stage stacked-tray solar seawater desalination
still and experimental research on its performance. Sol Energy 2017;142:278–87.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2016.12.028.
[94] Karimi Estahbanati MR, Feilizadeh M, Jafarpur K, Feilizadeh M, Rahimpour MR.
Experimental investigation of a multi-effect active solar still: the effect of the
number of stages. Appl Energy 2015;137:46–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2014.09.082.
[95] Shatat MIM, Mahkamov K. Determination of rational design parameters of a multi-
stage solar water desalination still using transient mathematical modelling. Renew
Energy 2010;35:52–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.06.022.
[96] Panchal H, Sathyamurthy R, Pandey AK, Kumar M, Arunkumar T, Patel DK.
Annual performance analysis of a single-basin passive solar still coupled with
evacuated tubes: comprehensive study in climate conditions of Mahesana, Gujarat.
Int J Ambient Energy 2017:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/01430750.2017.
1378720.
[97] Panchal HN. Enhancement of distillate output of double basin solar still with va-
cuum tubes. J King Saud Univ - Eng Sci 2015;27:170–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jksues.2013.06.007.
[98] Park C-D, Lim B-J, Chung K-Y, Lee S-S, Kim Y-M. Experimental evaluation of hy-
brid solar still using waste heat. Desalination 2016;379:1–9. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.desal.2015.10.004.
[99] Ahmed MI, Hrairi M, Ismail AF. On the characteristics of multistage evacuated
solar distillation. Renew Energy 2009;34:1471–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
renene.2008.10.029.
[100] Younas O, Banat F, Islam D. Seasonal behavior and techno economical analysis of
a multi-stage solar still coupled with a point-focus Fresnel lens. Desalin Water
Treat 2016;57:4796–809. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2014.1001443.
[101] Abed FM, Kassim MS, Rahi MR. Performance improvement of a passive solar still
in a water desalination. Int J Environ Sci Technol 2017;14:1277–84. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s13762-016-1231-9.
[102] Reddy KS, Kumar KR, O’Donovan TS, Mallick TK. Performance analysis of an
evacuated multi-stage solar water desalination system. Desalination
2012;288:80–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.12.016.
[103] Ghazy A, Fath HES. Solar desalination system of combined solar still and humi-
dification-dehumidification unit. Heat Mass Transf Stoff 2016;52:2497–506.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-016-1761-1.
[104] Fath H, Jayswal N, Qadir A. Novel multiple effect direct solar distillation system of
integrated solar still and HDH system. Desalin Water Treat 2013;51:1319–26.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2012.722775.
[105] Ismail BI. Design and performance of a transportable hemispherical solar still.
Renew Energy 2009;34:145–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2008.03.013.
[106] Ahsan A, Imteaz M, Rahman A, Yusuf B, Fukuhara T. Design, fabrication and
performance analysis of an improved solar still. Desalination 2012;292:105–12.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2012.02.013.
[107] Ziabari FB, Sharak AZ, Moghadam H, Tabrizi FF. Theoretical and experimental
study of cascade solar stills. Sol Energy 2013;90:205–11. https://doi.org/10.
T. Arunkumar et al.
1016/j.solener.2012.12.019.
[108] Sadineni SB, Hurt R, Halford CK, Boehm RF. Theory and experimental investiga-
tion of a weir-type inclined solar still. Energy 2008;33:71–80. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.energy.2007.08.003.
[109] Naveen Kumar P, Harris Samuel DG, Nagarajan PK, Sathyamurthy R. Theoretical
analysis of a triangular pyramid solar still integrated to an inclined solar still with
220
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101 (2019) 197–220
baffles. Int J Ambient Energy 2017;38:694–700. https://doi.org/10.1080/
01430750.2016.1181569.
[110] Khalifa AJN, Ibrahim HA. Effect of inclination of the external reflector on the
performance of a basin type solar still at various seasons. Energy Sustain Dev
2009;13:244–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2009.09.001.