2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.solener.2017.02.042
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative performance assessment of a non-ventilated and ventilated BIPV rooftop configurations in the Netherlands

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Peng et al [39] found experimentally that 60 mm is a suitable thickness of the air gap behind the PV module that enhances its efficiency and reduces the cooling load in summer and the heating load in winter. Besides, Ritzen et al [40] indicated a possible correlation between ventilation, operating temperatures, and performance and lifespan of modules, after a comparative BIPV field test conducted during three years of a roof-top application.…”
Section: The Pv Modules Temperaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Peng et al [39] found experimentally that 60 mm is a suitable thickness of the air gap behind the PV module that enhances its efficiency and reduces the cooling load in summer and the heating load in winter. Besides, Ritzen et al [40] indicated a possible correlation between ventilation, operating temperatures, and performance and lifespan of modules, after a comparative BIPV field test conducted during three years of a roof-top application.…”
Section: The Pv Modules Temperaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is noted that this hybrid system yields benefit for both energy systems. A comparative performance evaluation of nonventilated and ventilated BIPV panels was elaborated in Ritzen et al for the case of Netherlands. The study revealed that after 3 years, the difference between the PV panel outputs of the ventilated PV segments was about 6%, while in the case of nonventilated PV panels segments, the reduction was in the amount of 86% (analysis was conducted by applied electric luminescence [EL] images at standard testing conditions).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The system consisted of 416 monocrystalline panels with an efficiency of 13.3% and the generated annually 19,481.66kWh of electricity. In Europe, such studies have been reported in the literature like Mondol et al [88] and Ayompe et al [89] for Ireland (see Figure 18); Aste et al [90], Malvoni et al [91], Ghiani et al [92], Congedo [93], Micheli et al [94], and Mellit and Pavan [95] for Italy; Cucumo [96] for Calabria; Schoen [97], Ritzen et al [98], and Ritzen et al [99] for Netherland; Adaramola [100] for Norway; Dufo-lo [101] for Spain; and Milosavljević et al [102] for Serbia.…”
Section: European Regionmentioning
confidence: 83%