Comparison of Bifacial Solar Irradiance Model Predictions With Field Validation

Pelaez, Silvana Ayala; Deline, Chris; MacAlpine, Sara; Marion, Bill; Stein, Joshua S.; Kostuk, Raymond K.

doi:10.1109/jphotov.2018.2877000

Cited by 96 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The rear facing pyranometers on the HSAT are located 12 panels north of the southern array edge. Ray trace simulations made by [17] have shown that this distance into the 45-m-long array should be sufficient to remove edge-brightening effects and to be representative of the semi-infinite assumption that is common among 2-D VF models.…”

Section: Analysis Of Measured and Simulated Bifacial Energy Gain (Bg)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of Bifacial Photovoltaic Simulation Software against Monitoring Data from Large-Scale Single-Axis Trackers and Fixed Tilt Systems in Denmark

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The size and number of utility-scale bifacial photovoltaic (PV) installations has proliferated in recent years but concerns over modeling accuracy remain. The aim of this work is to provide the PV community with a validation study of eight tools used to simulate bifacial PV performance. We simulate real 26 kilowatt-peak (kWp) bifacial arrays within a 420-kWp site located in northern Europe (55.6° N, 12.1° E). The substructures investigated include horizontal single-axis trackers (HSATs) and fixed tilt racks that have dimensions analogous to those found in utility-scale PV installations. Each bifacial system has a monofacial reference system with similar front side power. We use on-site solar radiation (global, diffuse, and beam) and albedo measurements from spectrally flat class A sensors as inputs to the simulation tools, and compare the modeled values to field measurements of string level power, rear and front plane of array irradiance, and module temperature. Our results show that state-of-the-art bifacial performance models add ~0.5% uncertainty to the PV modeling chain. For the site investigated, 2-D view factor fixed tilt simulations are within ±1% of the measured monthly bifacial gain. However, simulations of single-axis tracker systems are less accurate, wherein 2-D view factor and 3-D ray tracing are within approximately 2% and 1% of the measured bifacial gain, respectively.

show abstract

Section: Analysis Of Measured and Simulated Bifacial Energy Gain (Bg)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of Bifacial Photovoltaic Simulation Software against Monitoring Data from Large-Scale Single-Axis Trackers and Fixed Tilt Systems in Denmark

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Illumination depends on the geographical location's conditions due to sun position, direct and diffuse radiation components, and climate. Installation conditions must consider row-to-row distance, clearance from the ground, tilt, and the albedo of the underlying surface [14]. Another effect regards the presence or not of tracking systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulink model of a bifacial PV module based on the manufacturer datasheet

Vergura¹

2024

RE&PQJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper proposes an update of a mathematical model of a Photo-Voltaic (PV) module, considering the possibility that also the rear face of the PV module produces energy. The proposed approach allows to write a new descriptive equation, whose terms are function of the information always available in the modern datasheet of the PV module's manufacturers. This implies that no pre-processing of the datasheet's parameters is needed to use the proposed model, whichever are the solar irradiance and the cell/module temperature. The model considers the total solar radiation (front and back side), such that the produced energy increases. Simulink environment is used to calculate the total solar radiation.

show abstract

“…Chiodetti also used single calibrated pyranometers to measure the backside irradiance on an extended stand of PV modules and compare it to that of modeled values found by 2D VF, and a deviation of 3% to 5% has been achieved during 1 week of measurement. The assessment of 2D VF and RT in comparison with measured backside irradiance during two consecutive days at the same time of day has been shown in Pelaez et al, and the rear irradiance was measured by four irradiance sensors mounted along the slope of the solar panel, where the 2D VF model has shown a better agreement to the measured data points than has RT for the mounting height of 0.15 m.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of ray tracing and view factor simulations of locally resolved rear irradiance with the experimental values

Berrian

Libal

2020

Progress in Photovoltaics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the prerequisites for a reliable energy yield prediction of bifacial photovoltaic (PV) systems is the capability of modeling the backside irradiance of those systems with high accuracy. Currently, the most important optical models used to quantify the reflected irradiance on the backside of a bifacial solar panel are view factor and ray tracing. The MoBiDiG simulation tool has been developed at ISC Konstanz uses the view factor (VF) concept to model the rear irradiance. In addition to the VF concept, ray tracing (RT) has been adopted to determine the backside irradiance of bifacial modules by using the open-source tool bifacial_radiance that has been developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). A customized monocrystalline silicon solar panel has been built in order to evaluate the accuracy of the existing optical models by locally resolved rear irradiance measurement. The performance of rear irradiance has been investigated along the rows of the customized PV module during sunny and cloudy days with typical back irradiance values of ≈50 and ≈ 150 W∕m 2 . The comparison of measured and modeled data has been carried out on hourly, daily, and monthly basis, and the results show lower deviations for solar cells located in the center of the PV module than on the edge. Moreover, the concept of decisive solar cells has been introduced and applied to both measured and modeled data, solar cells located in the center rows were found to act as the most decisive solar cells. Finally, considering the installation configuration studied here, ie, bifacial mounting with low clearance height (below 0.2 m), both hourly RT and VF approaches are able to model long-term cumulative irradiance received by decisive solar cells with a very high accuracy ranging from ±0.5% to ±2%.

show abstract

Comparison of Bifacial Solar Irradiance Model Predictions With Field Validation

Cited by 96 publications

References 7 publications

Validation of Bifacial Photovoltaic Simulation Software against Monitoring Data from Large-Scale Single-Axis Trackers and Fixed Tilt Systems in Denmark

Validation of Bifacial Photovoltaic Simulation Software against Monitoring Data from Large-Scale Single-Axis Trackers and Fixed Tilt Systems in Denmark

Simulink model of a bifacial PV module based on the manufacturer datasheet

A comparison of ray tracing and view factor simulations of locally resolved rear irradiance with the experimental values

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About