Impact of Non-Uniform Soiling on PV System Performance and Soiling Measurement

Kagan, S. N.; Giosa, Eric; Flottemesch, Robert; Andrews, Rob W.; Rand, James A.; Reed, Meredith; Gostein, Michael; Stueve, Bill

doi:10.1109/pvsc.2018.8547728

Cited by 11 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The data were obtained at a different time than for the CdTe and Si modules (Figures 8 and 9). Additionally, both of these modules had remnants of antireflection coatings left (the modules in Figures 8 and 9 did not), and this could have contributed to some non-uniformities in the soiling deposition due to the ARCs and surface temperatures [62][63][64][65]. As noted, these modules are of an older generation.…”

Section: Amorphous Silicon:hydrogen and Copper (Indium Gallium) Sulfi...mentioning

confidence: 94%

Soiling Spectral and Module Temperature Effects: Comparisons of Competing Operating Parameters for Four Commercial PV Module Technologies

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The choice of a particular PV technology for best performance is sometimes based upon a single factor or single operating condition. However, many parameters have functionalities that oppose each under actual operating conditions. In this paper, the comparisons of different PV module technologies under moderate environmental conditions (Tropical Climate Zone, Belo Horizonte, Brazil) are explored based upon the two competing parameters of soiling-layer spectral effects and panel operating temperature. Specifically, low-bandgap PV technologies (e.g., Si or Cu(In,Ga)(SSe)2) are reported to have performances less affected by the absorption of incoming sunlight than higher-bandgap absorbers (e.g., a-Si:H or CdTe). However, the opposite is true for operating temperatures, with higher bandgaps having advantages under higher-temperature operating conditions. We present a simple comparative soiling-temperature model with experimental collaborative data to address the following question: What is the controlling parameter of the combination of soiling spectral effects and temperature on lower- and higher-bandgap module technologies? Temperature coefficients are measured for groups of modules for the four technologies having bandgaps ranging from 1.1 to 1.7 eV. Additional optical absorption for the soiling layers in the range of 300 nm to ~600 nm is confirmed by transmission measurements. The data from our soiling monitoring stations indicate that these potential spectral effects are based on consistent differences in soiling ratios and soiling rates. Some differences between the model predications and experimental observations are discussed. This paper reports temperature and soiling regions of “best-of-class” performances for these four commercial PV technologies in this climate region based upon the two competing parameters.

show abstract

Section: Amorphous Silicon:hydrogen and Copper (Indium Gallium) Sulfi...mentioning

confidence: 94%

Soiling Spectral and Module Temperature Effects: Comparisons of Competing Operating Parameters for Four Commercial PV Module Technologies

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Practically, the dust deposition usually distributed unevenly across the surface of a single PV module or in a large-scale PV array. The nonuniform dust deposition on the solar panels results in more significant power generation losses due to dust-induced shading effects on the PV modules 9,28 . The in-field observations in 29 show that the dusty areas will result in a higher temperature which consequently reduces the power generation efficiency.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimal cleaning strategy of large-scale solar PVarrays considering non-uniform dust deposition

Simiyu¹

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dust deposition on top of solar panels blocks the solar insolation, causes erosion of the solar panel surface material, andalso deviates the maximum power point of the solar panels’ power output, which results in reductions of the panels’ poweroutputs and accelerations on the panels’ aging process. In practice, periodically cleaning efforts on the solar panels have to beconducted for dust removal, which intensifies the operational cost of many solar photovoltaic power plants. This study proposesan optimal cleaning plan for the PV plants that are prone to the dust deposition. In order to obtain the optimal cleaning plan,we first investigate the dust deposition process and develop a model to describe how PV power generation varies with thenon-uniform dust deposition patterns. Then we formulate a constrained optimization model to identify the most cost-effectivesolar panel cleaning strategy. In the optimisation, the additional revenue due to cleaning the solar panels is formulated as theobjective function. The decision variables are the number of PV strings to be cleaned at each cleaning interval. A case study ispresented to show how effective the proposed optimal solar panel cleaning strategy is.

show abstract

“…For radiometers such as pyranometers that are used to measure global horizontal irradiance (GHI) or global tilted irradiance (GTI), several studies investigated the signal reduction 2,3 and have shown that soiling can cause relevant uncertainty contributions 4 5 and to avoid false alarms related to other issues that might cause underperformance 6 . Underperformance can be detected by comparing measured to modeled PV production derived using pyranometer or reference cell measurements.…”

Section: Introduction Aim and Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 The knowledge of the current soiling losses of a PV installation can be used to optimize the cleaning schedule 5 and to avoid false alarms related to other issues that might cause underperformance. 6 Underperformance can be detected by comparing measured to modeled PV production derived using pyranometer or reference cell measurements. Soiled pyranometers or reference cells lead to too low modeled PV production so that PV soiling or other errors might not be detected.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%