Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Laboratory for Building Science and Technology, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research (Empa),
berlandstrasse 129, 8600 Dbendorf, Switzerland
2
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (ETHZ), Wolfgang-Pauli-Strasse 15, 8093 Zrich, Switzerland
3
The University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK
ABSTRACT
Airow around building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) has a signicant impact on their hygrothermal behavior and
degradation. The potential of reducing the temperature of BIPV using an underneath cavity is experimentally and
numerically investigated in literature. Most of the models are oversimplied in terms of modeling the impact of 3D ow
over/underneath of PV modules, which can result in a non-uniform surface temperature and consequently a non-homogenous
thermal degradation. Moreover, the simultaneous presence of radiation and convection related to upstream wind, in addition to
the combined impact of back-ventilation and surface convection, is barely addressed in literature. However, these simplications can result in the unrealistic loading climate conditions. This paper aims to present a unique experimental setup to provide
more realistic climate conditions for investigating the ventilation potential of the underneath. The setup consists of a solar
simulator and a building prototype with installed PV, placed inside an atmospheric wind tunnel to control upstream wind velocity. Thermography is performed using an infrared camera to monitor the surface temperature of the BIPV. The potential
of an underneath cavity with various cavity heights and PV arrangement is further investigated in this paper. The outcome
would be eventually useful in the development of practical guidelines for BIPV installation. Copyright 2013 John Wiley
& Sons, Ltd.
KEYWORDS
solar energy; photovoltaic panel; wind tunnel; building; cavity
*Correspondence
Parham A. Mirzaei, The University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK.
E-mail: Parham.Mirzaei_Ahranjani@nottingham.ac.uk
Received 1 September 2012; Revised 28 March 2013; Accepted 28 March 2013
1. INTRODUCTION
The global energy demand from its current amount, 10 TW/
year, is projected to increase by 300% by 2050 [1]. With
the present drastic growth of urbanization [2], the energy demand is projected to severely increase in the near future.
Among major sectors of energy consumption in developed
countries, the building sector is responsible for consumption
of 2040% of the total nal energy [3]. To respond to this increasing energy demand and to deal with current issues regarding global warming, climate changes, and CO2
emissions, the widespread implementation of renewable and
clean types of energy in all energy consumption sectors including the building sector is required. In other words, it is
not feasible to pursue the goal of net-zero-energy buildings
Copyright 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
without the integration of the renewable energies in the building sector. Despite the extensive benets of the renewable energies, the current share of renewable energies in total primary
energy of the world is about 13.3% [4]. Among all sources of
renewable energies, solar energy is known as the most abundant, inexhaustible, and clean form of energy [5]. The
intercepted energy from the sun by earth is estimated at about
1.8 1011 MW [6]. This implies that the energy provided by
the sun is 10 000 times the energy demand of a planet.
Despite the aforementioned advantages and also the simplicity of using photovoltaics (PVs), solar energy is still the
most expensive choice. At the moment, only 0.05% of the
total primary energy is reported to be supplied by PV technologies [7]. However, considerable demand and growth in
using PV are projected. The development and installation
19
2. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
As discussed earlier, the main objective of this experiment
is to understand the potential of underneath cavity ventilation for cooling the PV modules. It is important to induce a
radiation ux on the PV module using convective cooling
by air that ushes the underneath cavity and ows above
the PVs surface. Figures 1 and 2 depict the unique setup
of the developed experiment, including building prototype,
radiation source (solar simulator), and monitoring devices
(i.e., infrared camera (IRC), thermocouples, and thermopiles). The whole setup is placed inside the ETH/Empa
wind tunnel; the test section of this tunnel is 1300 mm in
height and 1900 mm in width.
The building prototype consists of an insulated styrofoam structure. The roof is covered with PV modules.
The cavity height can be adjusted as well as type: at
and stepped installation (Figure 1(c) and (d)). The roof
inclination is 45 . The building height from the oor to
the highest point of the roof is 582.8 mm, whereas the
height of the walls is 300 mm. The solar simulator includes
a 2 3 array of 250-W infrared lamps (Figure 2(b)). The
solar simulator is connected to an adjustable power system
to provide different heat ux values. The distance between
the solar simulator and the PV surface is 800 mm. As
shown in Figure 1(a), an IRC has been installed far away
from the prototype and close to the wall of the wind tunnel
to monitor the surface temperature of the PV modules. A
surface thermocouple has been attached on the PV surface
to calibrate the IRC pictures (Figure 2(c)). This technique
is further explained in the following sections.
As can be seen in Figure 2(c), the installed thermopile
measures the exact amount of incident radiation to the
PV surface. It is noteworthy to mention that the incident
radiation in a xed voltage supplied to the infrared lamps
signicantly varies because of the different convective
uxes using different upstream velocities. Therefore, the
implementation of a thermopile is crucial to control the
radiation intensity from the infrared lamps to the PV
surface. The uniformity of the radiation intensity on the
PV surface has been monitored by placing the thermopile
at various points.
Aluminum sheets and tape have been placed on the
building windward wall and the oor close to it to reect
the radiation and avoid a temperature increase of these
surfaces (Figure 2(a)). The upstream ow has not been
affected by any other surfaces except the building unit.
The performance of this technique has been ensured by
IRC observation as the temperature of the windward
wall and neighboring oor was almost equal to the
airow temperature.
As illustrated in Figure 1(c), eight thermocouples in two
arrays of four have been attached on the cavity surfaces of
the underneath buildings roof structure (T1T4) and of the
Prog. Photovolt: Res. Appl. 2015; 23:1929 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/pip
400
45
300
1900m
10 mm gap
30 mm gap
1300
(a)
(b)
600mm
400
mm
180mm
T1&T5
T2&T6
T3&T7
T4&T8
(c)
(d)
Figure 1. (a) Sketch of the experiment setup, (b) side views, (c) at photovoltaic (PV) one 590 390 mm PV module, and (d) stepped
PV three 590 130 mm PV modules.
(b)
Thermopile
Aluminum sheets
(a)
Thermocouple
(c)
Figure 2. (a) Building prototype, (b) infrared radiation source (solar simulator), and (c) surface thermopile and thermocouple.
Prog. Photovolt: Res. Appl. 2015; 23:1929 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/pip
21
q FAs es Tp4 Ts4
Emissivity
300.0
310.0
Max. Res.
Min. Res.
200.0
150.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
420
480
540
600
660
720
780
840
900
960
1020
1080
1140
1200
1260
1320
1380
Responsivity (V/W)
250.0
0.96
0.94
0.92
0.9
0.88
0.86
0.84
290.0
(1)
Time (s)
Figure 4. Responsivity calibration of thermopile constant.
320.0
330.0
340.0
350.0
360.0
Temperature (K)
Figure 3. Emissivity of photovoltaic modules in different temperatures.
22
Prog. Photovolt: Res. Appl. 2015; 23:1929 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/pip
ReH
9.0E+04
8.0E+04
7.0E+04
6.0E+04
5.0E+04
4.0E+04
3.0E+04
2.0E+04
1.0E+04
0.0E+00
0.00
Rb
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
Rb
Figure 5. Reynolds number (for the height of the prototype)
versus bulk-Richardson number in different radiation intensities
and upstream winds.
gLbTPVb Ta
Ua 2
(2)
(a)
(b)
2 m/s
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
1 m/s
(i)
(j)
(k)
(l)
(m)
(n)
0.5 m/s
(o)
(p)
(q)
(r)
Figure 6. Photovoltaic (PV) surface temperature, RI = 50 W/m . (a)(f) Ua = 2.0 m/s, (g)(l) Ua = 1.0 m/s, and (m)(r) Ua = 0.5 m/s. (a) Flat
PV without gap; (b) at PV gap = 10 mm; (c) at PV gap = 20 mm; (d) at PV gap = 30 mm; (e) stepped PV without gap; (f)
stepped PV gap = 10 mm; (g) at PV without gap; (h) at PV gap = 10 mm; (i) at PV gap = 20 mm; (j) at PV gap = 30 mm;
(k) stepped PV without gap; (l) stepped PV gap = 10 mm; (m) at PV without gap; (n) at PV gap = 10 mm; (o) at PV gap = 20
mm; (p) at PV gap = 30 mm; (q) stepped PV without gap; and (r) stepped PV gap = 10 mm.
2
24
Prog. Photovolt: Res. Appl. 2015; 23:1929 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/pip
(a)
(b)
2 m/s
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
1 m/s
(i)
(j)
(k)
(l)
(m)
(n)
0.5 m/s
(o)
(p)
(q)
(r)
Figure 7. Photovoltaic (PV) surface temperature, RI = 100 W/m2. (a)(f) Ua = 2.0 m/s, (g)(l) Ua = 1.0 m/s, and (m)(r) Ua = 0.5 m/s. (a)
Flat PV without gap; (b) at PV gap = 10 mm; (c) at PV gap = 20 mm; (d) at PV gap = 30 mm; (e) stepped PV without gap;
(f) stepped PV gap = 10 mm; (g) at PV without gap; (h) at PV gap = 10 mm; (i) at PV gap = 20 mm; (j) at PV gap = 30 mm;
(k) stepped PV without gap; (l) stepped PV gap = 10 mm; (m) at PV without gap; (n) at PV gap = 10 mm; (o) at PV gap = 20
mm; (p) at PV gap = 30 mm; (q) stepped PV without gap; and (r) stepped PV gap = 10 mm.
Prog. Photovolt: Res. Appl. 2015; 23:1929 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/pip
25
(a)
(b)
2 m/s
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
1 m/s
(i)
(j)
(k)
(l)
(m)
(n)
0.5 m/s
(o)
(p)
(q)
(r)
Figure 8. Photovoltaic (PV) surface temperature, RI = 200 W/m2. (a)(f) Ua = 2.0 m/s, (g)(l) Ua = 1.0 m/s, and (m)(f) Ua = 0.5 m/s. (a)
Flat PV without gap; (b) at PV gap = 10 mm; (c) at PV gap = 20 mm; (d) at PV gap = 30 mm; (e) stepped PV without gap;
(f) stepped PV gap = 10 mm; (g) at PV without gap; (h) at PV gap = 10 mm; (i) at PV gap = 20 mm; (j) at PV gap = 30 mm;
(k) stepped PV without gap; (l) stepped PV gap = 10 mm; (m) at PV without gap; (n) at PV gap = 10 mm; (o) at PV gap = 20
mm; (p) at PV gap = 30 mm; (q) stepped PV without gap, and (r) stepped PV gap = 10 mm.
26
Prog. Photovolt: Res. Appl. 2015; 23:1929 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/pip
Table I. The mean surface temperature of the PV module under various upstream velocities and radiation intensities.
Case
Flat PV
Without gap
Highest temperature
Largest
Step ped PV
Gap = 10 mm
Gap = 20 mm
Gap = 30 mm
Without gap
Gap = 10 mm
T (C)
Lowest temperature
PV, photovoltaic.
Table II. The maximum surface temperature of the PV module under various upstream velocities and radiation intensities.
Case
Flat PV
Without gap
Highest temperature
Largest
Stepped PV
Gap = 10 mm
Gap = 20 mm
Gap = 30 mm
Without gap
T (C)
Gap = 10 mm
Lowest temperature
PV, photovoltaic.
(b)
(a)
(c)
Figure 9. Cavity surface temperature (left: photovoltaic (PV) side and right: roof side), RI = 200 W/m2. (a) Ua = 0.5 m/s, (b) Ua = 1.0 m/s,
and (c) Ua = 2.0 m/s.
28
Prog. Photovolt: Res. Appl. 2015; 23:1929 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/pip
4. CONCLUSION
An experimental setup is developed to provide more realistic
climate conditions for a BIPV prototype. The setup includes
a solar simulator that is positioned in an atmospheric wind
tunnel to provide a range of various radiation intensities over
the BIPV. The approaching upstream wind is controlled in
the wind tunnel. The temperatures within the underneath
cavity and at the front side of the PV module are monitored
with thermocouples and IRC, respectively. To emit the
desired radiation intensity, a control is developed using a
thermopile on the PV surface.
The measurement is repeated under various upstream
velocities, radiation intensities, and cavity sizes and arrangements. The main results can be summarized as follows:
Higher ventilation can be achieved using stepped PV
arrangements with an open cavity behind the modules
compared with a at arrangement.
3D ows (e.g., lateral eddies) contribute in a nonuniform surface temperature distribution over the PV
modules.
Inuence of the cavity height is signicantly greater
for higher upstream velocities.
Future research will be performed to visualize the ow
underneath and above the cavity using a particle image
velocimetry technique. The results will be used to validate
a 3D computational uid dynamics model for simulating
the annual variation of temperatures of the PV modules.
These data can be later used for the development of tools
for the prediction of PV degradation probability in various
climates or for dening accelerated aging test conditions
for enhancing the durability of the PV modules.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to express their gratitude to the
Swiss-Electric Research (SER), the Competence Center
Energy and Mobility (CCEM), the Swiss Federal Ofce
for Energy (SFOE), and the Services Industriels Genevois
(SIG) for nancing the Archinsolar project. Also, the nancial support by Marie Curie COFUND project, Swiss Federal
Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research (Empa), and
ETH University is gratefully acknowledged.
Prog. Photovolt: Res. Appl. 2015; 23:1929 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/pip
REFERENCES
1. Razykov TM, Ferekides CS, Morel D, Stefanakos E,
Ullal HS, Upadhyaya HM. Solar photovoltaic electricity: current status and future prospects. Solar Energy
2011; 85(8): 15801608.
2. Mirzaei PA, Haghighat F. Approaches to study urban
heat island abilities and limitations. Building and
Environment 2010; 45(10): 21922201. DOI:
10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.04.001
3. Prez-Lombard L, Ortiz J, Pout C. A review on buildings energy consumption information. Energy and
Buildings 2008; 40(3): 394398.
4. Hasan MA, Sumathy K. Photovoltaic thermal module
concepts and their performance analysis: a review.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2010;
14(7): 18451859.
5. Petter Jelle B, Breivik C, Drolsum Rkenes H. Building integrated photovoltaic products: a state-of-the-art
review and future research opportunities. Solar Energy
Materials and Solar Cells 2012; 100(0): 6996.
6. Parida B, Iniyan S, Goic R. A review of solar photovoltaic technologies. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 2011; 15(3): 16251636.
7. Solangi KH, Islam MR, Saidur R, Rahim NA,
Fayaz H. A review on global solar energy policy.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2011;
15(4): 21492163.
8. Chow TT. A review on photovoltaic/thermal
hybrid solar technology. Applied Energy 2010; 87(2):
365379.
9. Kumar R, Rosen MA. A critical review of photovoltaicthermal solar collectors for air heating. Applied
Energy 2011; 88(11): 36033614.
10. Scherba A, Sailor DJ, Rosenstiel TN, Wamser CC.
Modeling impacts of roof reectivity, integrated
photovoltaic panels and green roof systems on sensible
heat ux into the urban environment. Building and
Environment 2011; 46(12): 25422551.
11. Gan G. Effect of air gap on the performance of
building-integrated photovoltaics. Energy 2009; 34(7):
913921.
12. Corbin CD, Zhai ZJ. Experimental and numerical
investigation on thermal and electrical performance
of a building integrated photovoltaicthermal collector
system. Energy and Buildings 2010; 42(1): 7682.
13. Yoo S-H, Manz H. Available remodeling simulation
for a BIPV as a shading device. Solar Energy
Materials and Solar Cells 2011; 95(1): 394397.
14. Mei L, Ineld DG, Gottschalg R, Loveday DL, Davies
D, Berry M. Equilibrium thermal characteristics of a
building integrated photovoltaic tiled roof. Solar
Energy 2009; 83(10): 18931901.
29