Photovoltaic Module Temperature Profile for Malaysia
H. Zainuddin, M.S. Sallo and S. Shaari
Faculty of Applied Sciences
Universiti Teknologi MARA
40450 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia
zainuddinhedzlin@gmail.com
Abstract Many attentions have been driven to evaluate
the behaviour of PV module temperature for higher latitude
regions, but very few were conducted for lower latitude
regions. Thus, this study investigates the temperature profile
of cell-to-cell within a single module and analyse the
temperature difference between open circuit and on load
operating conditions. This study has been conducted at
Green Energy Research Centre, Universiti Teknologi
MARA Shah Alam, Malaysia. The data was collected and
separated in two sections which are daytime data and night
time data. The daytime data of cell-to-cell temperature
difference within a module shows the centre cell to be
warmer than the corner cells with RMS different of 0.77 oC.
For nighttime data, the RMS different was found to be only
0.34 oC. On the other hand, in changing the modules
operating conditions from open circuit to on load conditions
has resulted in lowering the module temperature
significantly.
KeywordsPV modules; module temperature; open
circuit; on load;
I. INTRODUCTION
Based on Koppen-Geiger world climate map, Malaysia is a
country classified as Af; as equatorial rainforest and fully
humid climate region [1]. In Malaysia, high solar irradiance
and high ambient temperature are constantly received
throughout the year except slightly lower values at the end
of the year due to rainy season. A study conducted in an
urban area in Klang Valley reported the monthly median of
solar irradiance and ambient temperature (Tamb) during
daytime are 377 Wm-2 and 31.3 oC respectively [2].
Presently, solar PV systems is getting much
attention in Malaysia due to the cost competitiveness of the
system and the implementation of FIT scheme in Malaysia
embarked in 2011[3]. Due to this stimulating development,
many studies have been conducted in Malaysia aiming to
optimize the energy output of a PV system in Malaysia [4-8]
Fundamentally, the energy output of a PV system
will reduce when module temperature (TPV) is greater than
25 oC. This is explained by referring to the temperature
coefficient based on Standard Test Condition (STC); for
crystalline PV module the power ratings typically have
temperature coefficients within -0.5% oC-1. Thus, an
increment of 2 oC in TPV from STC temperature represents
reduction in power output of 1 %. Consequently, an
uncertainty of 2 oC in TPV represents an error of 1 % in
978-1-4799-8598-2/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE
A.M. Omar and S.I. Sulaiman
Faculty of Electrical Engineering
Universiti Teknologi MARA
40450 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia
power output [9]. This uncertainty is best explained by the
profile of the cell-to-cell temperature difference within a
module [9].
Moreover, temperature difference is also
significant between modes of operation of the PV module
namely open circuit (OC) and on load (OL) conditions. A
study conducted in Ljubljana, Slovenia has highlighted the
issue of dissimilar gradient of trend line between TPV at OC
and OL conditions [10].
Due to the importance of TPV that directly affects
the energy output of PV system, the profile of the cell-to-
cell temperature difference and TPV trend line of different
modes of operation will be developed for Malaysia.
II. METHODOLOGY
This study has been conducted at Green Energy Research
Centre (GERC), Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Shah
Alam, Malaysia (Lat. 3.1 N, Long. 101.5 E). The chosen
PV system is a free-standing (FS) grid-connected PV
(GCPV) system. There are seven mono-crystalline PV
modules connected in series with a capacity of 1.12 kWp.
The PV modules are tilted at 7.5 degrees and oriented
-12 degrees of azimuth angle.
Figure 1 shows the equipment setup and the dimension of
GCPV System at UiTM, Shah Alam (Side View). The
sensors used in this study comprise of solar irradiance
sensor, Tamb sensor, wind speed sensor, relative humidity
and TPV sensors. All this sensors are connected to two
universal data loggers. Data from both data loggers was
synchronized and logged for every five minutes which is in
accordance with the requirement of IEC61724 [11]. In this
study, the experiments are conducted in two phases, which
are phase 1 and phase 2.
469
Figure 1 Equipment setup and the dimension of free-
standing grid-connected PV System at Universiti Teknologi
MARA (UiTM), Shah Alam (Side View).

Figure 3 The location of the eight thermocouples placed at

Phase 1: Cell-to-Cell Temperature Differences
For Phase 1, eight thermocouples (TC) were attached on the
rear surface of the first module. The locations of the
thermocouples are as depicted in Figure 2. This phase was
conducted at OC condition.
Figure 2 The locations of the eight thermocouples attached
on rear surface of a PV module.
the back surface of a single PV module for different module
operating conditions.
III. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Figure 4 shows the sample of graphical plot for ambient
temperature (Tamb), average module temperature (TPV_avg),
and solar irradiance during day time from 15th to 21st
November 2014 against time in terms of measurement
number (A.U.). From this figure, it is observed that day 1
(0 to 145 measurement number), day 5 (581 to 725
measurement number), day 6 (726 to 870 measurement
number) and day 7 (871 to 1015 measurement number) are
typical bright days at site. On the other hand, day 2 (146 to
290 measurement number), day 3 (291 to 435 measurement
number) and day 4 (436 to 580 measurement number) are
considered cloudy and rainy days at site.

Phase 2: Temperature at different module operating

conditions

Phase 2 is continuation of Phase 1. The attachment of the 8

thermocouples is as in Phase 1. However, two operating
conditions are set up for this phase. The first condition was
conducted at OC condition; meanwhile the second condition
was conducted at OL as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 4 Sample of graphical plot for ambient temperature

(Tamb), average module temperature (TPV_avg), and solar
irradiance during day time from 15th to 21st November 2014.

470
Phase 1: Cell-to-Cell Temperature Differences Table 2 Average differences and RMS differences between
Phase 1 recorded the average cell temperatures of eight the center cell and corner cells temperature for eight
thermocouples for whole day, daytime and nighttime during thermocouples for daytime and nighttime data from 15th to
OC condition. In this study, the daytime period refers to 21st November 2014.
7am-7pm, meanwhile nighttime period refers to 7pm-7am. <TC4 TCX> ( RMS Temperature
Thus, the amount of data collected for the seven days period Cell
Difference (
of investigation is approximately 2000. Number
Day Night Day Night
TC1 +0.38 +0.18 0.71 0.23
Table 1 tabulates the cell-to-cell temperatures TC2 +0.12 +0.32 0.86 0.34
during the seven days period of 15th to 21st November 2014 TC3 +0.54 +0.17 1.03 0.22
for whole day, daytime and nighttime. Based on Table 1, it TC5 +0.02 +0.02 0.78 0.17
is found that the centre cell (TC4) experienced the hottest TC6 +0.04 +0.22 0.66 0.24
temperature as compared to the other corner cells regardless TC7 +0.22 +0.50 0.55 0.54
it is daytime or night time. The average hottest temperatures TC8 +0.46 +0.64 0.77 0.67
for the whole day, daytime and night time are 28.79 oC, Average +0.26 +0.29 0.77 0.34
34.72 oC and 22.23 oC respectively. It is also found that the
difference of average daytime temperature as compared to
average night time temperature is approximately 12.5 oC.

Table 1 Cell temperatures for eight positions of

thermocouples on a module from 15th to 21st November
2014 for whole day, daytime and nighttime data.
Average temperature of eight TCs (oC)
Cell Number
Whole day Day Night
TC1 28.75 34.56 22.98
TC2 28.81 34.82 22.84
TC3 28.67 34.40 22.99
TC4 29.02 34.94 23.16
TC5 29.00 34.92 23.14
TC6 28.90 34.90 22.94
TC7 28.66 34.72 22.66
TC8 28.47 34.48 22.52
Average 28.79 34.72 22.23 Figure 5 (a) Position of the 1st module in the PV string
(b) Side view of describing possible heat transfer
mechanism and (c) Top view of describing possible heat
Table 2 shows the average differences and Root Mean transfer mechanism.
Square (RMS) differences between the centre cell and
corner cells temperature of the eight thermocouples for Phase 2: Temperature at different module operating
daytime and night time data from 15th to 21st November conditions
2014. The locations of corner cell are designated by X In this phase, the TPV difference between open circuit
(X=1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8) as depicted in methodology condition and on load condition is analyzed. In this study,
section. The average temperature differences between the the same PV module of FS mounting configuration is used
centre cell and corner cells for day time and night time are for both conditions. Since, the experiment for OC condition
+ 0.26 oC and + 0.29 oC respectively. Consequently, the was not conducted concurrently with the experiment for OL
RMS difference between center cell and corner cells for day condition, the value of over temperature is determined to
time and nighttime are 0.77 oC and 0.34 oC respectively. All normalize the TPV values. The value of over-temperature is
the temperature differences between center and corner cell the difference between TPV and Tamb.
are positive. This indicated a systematic behavior between Figure 6 shows the over-temperature (TPV_avg Tamb)
the center cells and corner cell temperature. It is also as a function of solar irradiance. It is observed that the trend
observed that the highest RMS different is 1.03, which lines have significant difference. The trend line for OC
means the temperature TC3 is the coldest among all. condition (solid line) is higher as compared to OL condition
Perhaps, this is due to the fact that the PV cell is more (dashed line). This result is agreeable with a similar study
subjected to cooling effect or heat transfer mechanism by conducted in Ljubljana (Slovenia) [10]. Consequently, TPV at
the ambient temperature due to its location as depicted in OC condition has a higher gradient of 0.0261 as compared
Figure 5. to 0.0225 for OL condition. This behaviour is as expressed
by:

471
 = 0.0261x - 2.3679 (1)
= 0.0225x - 2.329 (2)
Where;
y1 over-temperature difference between TPV and Tamb
at OC condition (oC)
y2 over-temperature difference between TPV and Tamb
at OL condition (oC)
x solar irradiance (W/m2)
Table 3 tabulates the measured over-temperature
(TPV_avg Tamb) and the difference between these over
temperatures ( for OC and OL conditions respectively. It
is observed that as the irradiance increases, the over-
temperature values also increases. The difference of this
over temperatures for different operating conditions
increases in the range of 1.1 oC to 2.8 oC for irradiance level
of 300 W/m2 to 800 W/m2 respectively. On the other hand,
referring to another similar study located at higher latitude
region (46.1 oN, 14.5 oE), the difference of the over
temperature ranges from 2.1 oC to 4.6 oC for the same
irradiance range [10]. These results consistently prove that
the effect of changing the modules operating condition
from OC to OL resulted in lowering the TPV.
IV. CONCLUSION
This study has examined the profile of cell-to-cell
temperature difference within a module and TPV difference
for different modes of PV system operations. The centre cell
is found to be hotter than then the corner cells with RMS
difference of 0.77 oC during daytime. Therefore, in any
attempt to predict TPV, the cell-to-cell temperature
difference of approximately 0.77 oC is expected. From the
analysis of different modes of PV module operation
conditions, changing the module operating conditions from
OC to OL resulted in lowering the over-temperature
(TPV_avg Tamb) up to 2.8 oC for irradiance of 800W/m2.
Thus, changing PV system operations has significant effect
on TPV and has to be taken into account especially in
designing large scale PV system.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank Ministry of Higher
Education Malaysia and Universiti Teknologi MARA for
providing financial support under the research grant of
FRGS/1/2014/TK06/UITM/02/2.
REFERENCES

[1] F. Rubel and M. Kottek, "Observed and projected

climate shifts 19012100 depicted by world maps of
the Koppen-Geiger climate classification,"
Meteorologische Zeitschrift, vol. 19, pp. 135-141,
2010.
[2] H. Zainuddin, "Module Temperature Modelling for
Free-Standing Photovoltaic System in Equatorial
Climate," Ph.D, Physics, Universiti Teknologi
MARA, Shah Alam, Malaysia, 2014.
[3] SEDA. (2012, 04.01.2013). Feed-in Tariff (FiT)
Rates. Available: http://seda.gov.my
[4] H. Abdul Rahman, et al., "Assessment of PV cell
performance under actual Malaysia operating
condition," in Power Engineering Conference
AUPEC 2009, 2009, pp. 1-5.
Figure 6 Measured values of over-temperature [5] N. Z. Zakaria, et al., "Critical factors affecting
(TPV_avg Tamb) versus solar irradiance for FS mounting retrofitted roof-mounted photovoltaic arrays:
configuration. Malaysian case study," in Clean Energy and
Technology (CEAT), 2013 IEEE Conference on,
Table 3 Measured values of over-temperature 2013, pp. 384-388.
(TPV_avg Tamb) for OC an OL and the module temperature [6] A. M. Omar, et al., "Energy Yield Calculation of
difference between OL and OC condition (. the Grid Connected Photovoltaic Power System,"
Solar Irradiance TPV_avg Tamb () in International Conference on Renewable Energy
Sources (RES '14), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2014.
(W/m2) OC OL
[7] M. Z. Hussin, et al., "Design impact of 6.08 kWp
300 5.1 4.4 1.1 grid-connected photovoltaic system at Malaysia
400 8.1 6.8 1.3 Green Technology Corporation " International
500 10.7 8.9 1.8 Journal of Electrical and Electronic Systems
600 13.3 11.2 2.1 Research, vol. 5, 2012.
700 15.9 13.4 2.5 [8] H. Zainuddin, et al., "Power prediction for grid-
800 18.5 15.7 2.8 connected photovoltaic system in Malaysia," in

472
 Sustainable Energy & Environment (ISESEE),
2011 3rd International Symposium & Exhibition,
2011, pp. 110-113.
[9] D. Faiman, "Assessing the outdoor operating
temperature of photovoltaic modules," Progress in
photovoltaics: Research and applications, vol. 16,
pp. 307-315, 2008.
[10] J. Kurnik, et al., "Outdoor testing of PV module
temperature and performance under different
mounting and operational conditions," Solar
Energy Materials and Solar Cells, vol. 95, pp. 373-
376, 2011.
[11] IEC, "INTERNATIONAL STANDARD IEC
61724 Photovoltaic system performance
monitoring-guidelines for measurement, data
exchange and analysis," First Edition 1998-04 ed.
Geneva, Switzerland, 1998.

473