Near Shading of

Available online at www.sciencedirect.
com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Energy
Available
Available Procedia
online
online 00 (2017) 000–000
atatwww.sciencedirect.com
www.sciencedirect.com
Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Energy
EnergyProcedia
Procedia124 (2017) 000–000
00 (2017) 532–539
7th International Conference on Silicon Photovoltaics, SiliconPV 2017

7th International Conference on Silicon Photovoltaics, SiliconPV 2017
Near-field partial shading on rear side of bifacial modules
Near-field partial shading on rear side of bifacial modules
The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and Cooling
Koen M. de Groot and Bas B. Van Aken*
Koen M. de Groot and Bas B. Van Aken*
Assessing the feasibility of using the heat demand-outdoor
ECN – Solar Energy, Westerduinweg 3,1755 LE Petten, the Netherlands
ECN – Solar Energy, Westerduinweg 3,1755 LE Petten, the Netherlands
temperature function for a long-term district heat demand forecast
Abstract
Abstract I. Andrića,b,c*, A. Pinaa, P. Ferrãoa, J. Fournierb., B. Lacarrièrec, O. Le Correc
It is well-known that near-field shading reduces the power output of a PV system drastically, especially when inhomogeneous
a
It
shading IN+creates
Center afor
is well-known Innovation,
that
large near-field
current Technology
shading and
mismatch Policythe
reduces
between Research
power- output
Institutosolar
series-connected ofSuperior
a PV Técnico,
cells.system Av. Rovisco
drastically,
Typically, the front Pais 1, 1049-001
especially
side whenLisbon,
irradiance Portugal
inhomogeneous
is very uniform
b
shading creates a large current Veolia Recherche
mismatch & Innovation,
between 291 Avenuesolar
series-connected Dreyfous
cells. Daniel, 78520the
Typically, Limay,
front France
side irradiance is very uniform
and near-field c
shading is avoided. In contrast, for bifacial panels, the rear side contribution is effected much more, both by the
and near-fieldDépartement
inhomogeneity shading
of the rear
Systèmes Énergétiques
is avoided.
irradianceIn contrast, et
forEnvironnement
bifacial panels,
and by (unavoidable)
- IMTtheAtlantique,
near-field rear side4contribution
objects,
rue Alfred Kastler,
including the
44300 Nantes,more,
is effected
mountingmuch
France
system. In boththis by the
paper,
inhomogeneity
outdoor and indoor of the rear irradiance
irradiance and by (unavoidable)
and IV measurements near-field
are combined objects, modelling
with LT-spice including to theshow
mounting system.
the limited In of
effect this paper,
rear side
outdoor
shading and indoor
on the irradiance We
performance. and will
IV measurements
show that the are combined
actual rear side with LT-spicefor
irradiance modelling
an actual, to show
tilted, the limited effectsystem,
equator-facing of rear with
side
shading
cell-size on the performance.
resolution, varies We will
between 47 show
and 83that
W/m the2. actual
Varyingrear side irradiance
distance and for an
position of actual, tilted,
near-field equator-facing
objects, the drop insystem,
current with
is in
Abstract 2
cell-size
good resolution,agreement
quantitative varies between
with the47 and 83 W/m
measured . Varyingindistance
reductions rear side andirradiance.
position ofIncreasing
near-fieldthe objects, the drop
reflectance ofinthe
current is in
near-field
good quantitative
object strongly agreement
reduces with the
the effective measured
shading, reductionsloss
the measured in in
rear
rearside irradiance. Increasing
irradiance the
dropreflectance of the near-field
District heating networks are commonly addressed in the literature as one of andthe the
mostcurrent
effective in the IV curve.
solutions for decreasing the
object strongly reduces the effective shading, the measured loss in rear irradiance and the current drop in the IV curve.
greenhouse gas emissions from the building sector. These systems require high investments which are returned through the heat
©sales.
2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
© 2017 Due to the changed
The Authors. Published climate conditions
by Elsevier Ltd. and building renovation policies, heat demand in the future could decrease,
©
Peer2017 The Authors.
review Published by Elsevier Ltd. of SiliconPV 2017 under responsibility of PSE AG.
Peer review by
prolonging thethe
by the scientific
investment conference
scientificreturn committee
period.committee
conference of SiliconPV 2017 under responsibility of PSE AG.
Peer review by the scientific conference committee of SiliconPV 2017 under responsibility of PSE AG.
The main scope of this paper is to assess the feasibility of using the heat demand – outdoor temperature function for heat demand
Keywords:
forecast. Bifacial photovoltaics;
The district energy yield;
of Alvalade, locatedreliability;
in Lisbon shading;
(Portugal), was used as a case study. The district is consisted of 665
Keywords: Bifacial photovoltaics; energy yield; reliability; shading;
buildings that vary in both construction period and typology. Three weather scenarios (low, medium, high) and three district
renovation scenarios were developed (shallow, intermediate, deep). To estimate the error, obtained heat demand values were
1.compared
Introductionwith results from a dynamic heat demand model, previously developed and validated by the authors.
1.The
Introduction
results showed that when only weather change is considered, the margin of error could be acceptable for some applications
Bifacial
(the error inPV panels
annual convert
demand to electricity
was lower than 20%both theweather
for all irradiance
scenarioson the front, dominated
considered). However, after by direct light,renovation
introducing and the
Bifacialon
irradiance
scenarios, PVthe
the panels
error rear,
value convert
typically
increased to electricity
diffuse
up to 59.5% both
light originating the irradiance
(depending from
on the the on the
sky
weather andfront,
and scattered
renovationdominated
light from
scenarios bycombination
direct
the light,
surroundings and andthe
considered).
irradiance
underground on
The value of [1]. the
slope rear,
The typically
coefficient
front side diffuse
increased
irradiance light
on averageoriginating
is typically within from the sky
the range of 3.8%
homogeneous, and
whenupscattered light
to 8% per decade,
transmission from the surroundings
that corresponds
losses (dust, snow, etc.)toareandthe
underground
absent. [1].number
decreaseInincontrast,
the The thefront
of
rear side
side irradiance
heating isistypically
hours of 22-139h
irradiance oftenduring
morehomogeneous,
the heating season
inhomogeneous. when(depending
transmission
For example, on thelosses
the (dust, snow,
combination
contribution of by etc.)
weather
ground-are
and
absent.
renovation
reflection In is
contrast,
effectedthe
scenarios byrear
considered).side On
the self-shadeirradiance
the and ishand,
otheralso often morefactor
thefunction
view inhomogeneous.
intercept
anglesincreased Forforexample,
are different for thethe
7.8-12.7% topcontribution
per decade by
(depending
and bottom ground-
part onthe
of the
coupled scenarios).
reflection is effectedThe by values suggestedand
the self-shade couldalsobethe used
viewto modify the function
factor angles parameters
are different for for
the the
top scenarios
and bottom considered,
part of theand
improve the accuracy of heat demand estimations.
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

* Corresponding
Peer-review author.
under Tel.: +31-88-515-4905
responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and
* Corresponding
E-mail address:author.
Cooling. Tel.: +31-88-515-4905
vanaken@ecn.nl
E-mail address: vanaken@ecn.nl
1876-6102
Keywords:©Heat
2017demand;
The Authors. Published
Forecast; Climatebychange
Elsevier Ltd.
1876-6102
Peer review©by2017 The Authors.
the scientific Published
conference by Elsevier
committee Ltd.
of SiliconPV 2017 under responsibility of PSE AG.
1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and Cooling.
1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
10.1016/j.egypro.2017.09.254
Koen M. de Groot et al. / Energy Procedia 124 (2017) 532–539 533
K.M de Groot and B.B. Van Aken / Energy Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000
panels [2]. Furthermore, to prevent shading of direct light, PV installations are designed to have all structural and
functional parts at the rear side. These items, like cables and racks, will influence the irradiance on the rear.
2. Experimental details
The rear side irradiance per cell was measured using solar cells, laminated between two transparent foils,
including an absorbing layer behind the solar cell, exactly blocking the rear of the solar cell. This set-up made these
measurement cells monofacial, but allowed the light incident on the inter-cell area of the bifacial module of interest
to be transmitted.
Indoor IV-curves were recorded with 1000 W/m2 front side irradiance by a steady-state solar simulator. Diffuse
rear irradiance was created by placing scattering white panels at 1 m distance behind the module. A black, white or
aluminium-coloured object of 10 cm wide and 25 cm high was placed at a variable distance between the module and
the scattering panels and positioned to shade two cells or four cells from the same string. The rear side irradiance per
cell was measured under the same conditions. Fig. 0 shows a sketch of the measurement set-up.
Fig. 0. Sketch of the measurement set-up. The distance between the steady-state solar simulator and the module ensures 1000 W/m2 irradiance.
The shade object can be placed between 1 and 30 cm behind the rear of the bifacial module. The white foam is placed about 1 metre behind the
module.
The effect of inhomogeneous irradiance was simulated with LT-spice by serial connection of sixty equivalent
circuit, using the one diode model. It was assumed that the light-generated current scaled linearly with the total
irradiance on the cell. The simulated module was divided in three strings with bypass diodes.
3. Results
3.1. Outdoor irradiance measurements with near-field shade
Fig. 1 shows the distribution of the measured rear irradiance per cell for an equator-facing bifacial module on a
rooftop rack. The cell with the lowest rear irradiance, 47 W/m2 has only 55% of the highest irradiance, 83 W/m2.
However, due to the additional, homogeneous front irradiance of 845 W/m2 the total irradiance on the module is
only reduced by 2.2% compared to a homogeneous front + rear irradiance of 845 + 83 W/m2. Note that the
inhomogeneity is partly due to inhomogeneities in the albedo light and partly due to objects near the rear side, in
particular the lower irradiance at the fourth and fifth row of cells, counted from the top.
534 Koen M. de Groot et al. / Energy Procedia 124 (2017) 532–539
Fig. 1. Measured rear side irradiance per cell for a 6x12 cell module.
Using the measured homogeneous front irradiance and inhomogeneous rear irradiance of Fig. 1, IV-curves are
simulated using one-diode approximation with variable current source in LT-spice [3]. The resulting IV-curves are
shown in Fig. 2. The homogeneous case corresponds to a total irradiance of 928 W/m2 for each solar cell; the
inhomogeneous case applies for each cell the measured irradiance with average of 909 W/m2; and the reference
case corresponds to the homogeneous irradiance, viz. 903 W/m2, where the Isc and Voc are identical to the
inhomogeneous case.
Fig. 2. Simulated IV-curves for three cases of rear side irradiance as explained in the text. The open circles indicate the maximum power point for
each curve.
To highlight the differences between these three cases, in Fig. 3 only the part of the simulated IV-curve with I >
7.2 A is shown. Although the inhomogeneous case shows a clear deviation from a regular IV-curve, this is only the
case at currents > 99% of Isc. In the region of the maximum power point, the reference and inhomogeneous case are
virtually identical. This means that no cell is put under reverse bias and there is no risk of degradation or failure due
to hot spots [4].
Fig. 3. Detail of the IV curve of Fig.2. Only the part with I > 7.2 A is plotted to highlight the differences between the three cases.
Due to the inhomogeneous irradiance a power loss relative to the homogeneous case of 2.2% is simulated. But
the average irradiance of the inhomogeneous case is 909 W/m2. This is also 2.0% lower than for the homogeneous
case. The power loss is thus purely due to a lower irradiance and not due to inhomogeneous-irradiance induced
current mismatch. As it is not possible to measure IV-curves and the rear irradiance per cell under the exact same
outdoor conditions, the effect is replicated in the lab with a constant light source.
3.2. Indoor IV-measurements with near-field shade
Fig. 4 shows the change of IV-curves by varying the distance of a black shading object behind the module. With
decreasing distance between the rear of the module and the object, losses in the IV-curves appear, typical for
modules with only one string partially shaded. The drop in the average current between 17 and 22 V with and
without shading is calculated as measure of the rear side shading.
10.6
10.4
no shade
10.2
Current [A] 20 cm
10 15 cm
9.8 10 cm
9.6 8 cm
5 cm
9.4
2 cm
9.2 0 cm
9
0 5 10 15 20 25
Voltage [V]
Fig. 4. Measured IV-curves varying the 10 cm wide shading object’s distance. Only the part with I > 9 A is plotted to highlight the details.
The drop in current is plotted against the distance between the shading object and the rear of the module in Fig. 5.
A continuous decrease of the drop in current is observed. At a distance larger than 20 cm, the drop in current
becomes negligible. Note that the Impp of the unshaded module with the additional diffuse rear irradiance is
~10.0 A. A drop in current smaller than 0.6 A will therefore hardly effect the Pmax of the rear shaded module.
Centring the 10-cm wide shade object between two cells, instead of at the centre of a single cell, roughly halves the
drop in current (see Fig. 4) and also halves the reduction in rear irradiance (see Fig. 5) relative to a reference cell far
from the shading object.
1
shaded cell
Low Grear ‐‐> high Grear
0.8 half‐shaded cell
Drop in current [A]
measured Grear
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 5 10 15 20
distance [cm]
Fig. 5. The drop in current versus the shade distance. Triangles indicate the measured irradiance, with numbers in reverse direction.
The irradiance on the rear side as function of the distance has been measured using the same laminates as
discussed above, see Fig. 6. At a distance of 0 cm, less than a third of the diffuse light reaches the shaded cell. With
increasing distance, the irradiance on that cell increases. At the same time, the cell next to the shaded cell starts to
receive less light. As the thickness of the shading object is only a few cm, placing the object next to a cell hardly
blocks any diffuse light. However, from the viewpoint of the neighbouring cell, the object becomes ‘more visible’
with increasing distance, thus blocking an increasingly larger part of the diffuse light on the neighbouring cell.
160
Rear irradiance [W/m2]
140
120
100
80
reference
60
neighbour
40 half‐shaded cell
20 shaded cell
0
0 5 10 15 20
distance [cm]
Fig. 6. Measured rear irradiance as function of the shade distance for three neighbouring cells.
Fig. 7 shows the effect of the colour of the object placed behind the module. The IV curves for this graph were
taken with the shade object placed 2 cm behind the module. Clearly, the black object gives a larger reduction of the
module current at 20 V. Obviously, these objects reduce the irradiance due to blocking of the diffuse irradiance in
the same way. The difference is how transmitted light interacts with the shading object. For white and Al objects, a
significant part of the light transmitted through the solar cells is scattered back to the solar cells. in this way, the
reduction of the rear incident light is partially compensated and thus a smaller drop of the module current is
observed.
10.8
10.6
10.4
10.2
Current [A]
10
9.8
White
9.6
9.4 Aluminium
9.2 Black
9
0 10 20 30
Voltage V]
Fig. 7. Measured IV curves for three colours of the shaded object at 2 cm from the module.
The results presented here represent a rear irradiance of about 10% (outdoor) or 17% (indoor) of the front
irradiance. For even higher fractions of rear irradiance, of the order of 30%, due to high albedo locations or
conditions, the effect of the shading becomes stronger. Correspondingly, the measures to prevent current mismatch
and hot spots should be stronger. That means more distance between shading objects and the rear of the module,
smaller dimensions of these objects or higher reflection by these objects.
On the other hand, conditions when the rear irradiance is dominant, e.g. during the early/late hours of the summer
months at high latitude or when the front is fully covered by snow or dust, do occur. But under those conditions the
(total) rear irradiance is low anyway, not more than 0.2 or 0.3 suns. Although this could still lead to current
mismatch for poorly designed modules or systems, the effect on the already low power output is small. The low
system current, at these low total irradiances, will not allow hot spots to form as the dissipated power scales with the
square of the current.
4. Conclusions
To conclude, the measured, large variation in rear irradiance per cell due to real outdoor conditions does not lead
to increased risk of hot spots as the current mismatch is too low to cause solar cells to get under reverse bias.
Furthermore, the power loss is as small, -2%, as the small reduction in irradiance at about 10% rear irradiance.
By replicating these effects indoors at about 17% rear irradiance, it is shown that with decreasing distance the
observed drop in current due to indirect light shading increases. For thin objects close to the module, no current drop
is observed for cells not directly behind the object, but a small reduction is observed when the object is 10-20 cm
from the module. The drop in current is in good quantitative agreement with the measured reductions in rear side
irradiance. Finally, we have shown that increasing the reflectance of the near-field object, strongly reduces the drop
in current.
Acknowledgements
This work was funded by the Dutch TKI-toeslag project BING. http://www.tki-urbanenergy.nl/.
References
[1] Duffie JA and Beckman WA. Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1991.
[2] Yusufoglu UA, Lee TH,. Pletzer TM, Halm A, Koduvelikulathu LJ, Comparotto C, Kopecek R and Kurz H. Simulation of Energy Production
by Bifacial Modules with Revision of Ground Reflection. En Proc 2014; 55:389-95.
[3] LTspice software package: http://www.linear.com/designtools/software/#LTspice.
[4] Jansen MJ, Okel LAG, Van der schilden RA, Romijn IG, Geerligs BJ and Van Aken, BB. Improved heat dissipation for hot spots in MWT
laminates. Proc. 22nd Int. PV Sci. Eng. Conf. Hangzhou, China; 2012.

Near Shading of

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Near Shading of

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Available online at www.sciencedirect.

7th International Conference on Silicon Photovoltaics, SiliconPV 2017

© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

3.1. Outdoor irradiance measurements with near-field shade

3.2. Indoor IV-measurements with near-field shade

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen