Comparison of Bifacial Solar Irradiance Model Predictions With Field Validation
Abstract
Models predicting rear irradiance for bifacial systems are critical to establish accurate estimates of energy yield. In this paper, we compare five published bifacial irradiance models, varying clearance, row spacing, tilt, and albedo to measure the sensitivity to these parameters. Bifacial energy gains (BG E) as high as 20% are predicted for some configurations. Model agreement is generally good for low ground clearance (clearance heights lower than 0.75 times the collector width), but at higher clearances, finite system size and edge effects become a significant factor in simulations, stretching assumptions of infinite system extent made in some models. In addition, rear irradiance uniformity is improved at high ground clearance, as expected. A test-bed construction and results are described for comparison between modeled and measured data in Golden, CO, USA. Finally, the investigations indicate that model agreement for BG E calculation is better than 2% (absolute) when compared with measured results, depending on the system configuration.
- Authors:
- Univ. of Arizona, Tucson, AZ (United States)
- National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, CO (United States)
- Sandia National Lab. (SNL-NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States)
- Publication Date:
- Research Org.:
- National Renewable Energy Lab. (NREL), Golden, CO (United States)
- Sponsoring Org.:
- USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Solar Energy Technologies Office (EE-4S)
- OSTI Identifier:
- 1485567
- Report Number(s):
- NREL/JA-5K00-72510
Journal ID: ISSN 2156-3381
- Grant/Contract Number:
- AC36-08GO28308
- Resource Type:
- Accepted Manuscript
- Journal Name:
- IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics
- Additional Journal Information:
- Journal Volume: 9; Journal Issue: 1; Journal ID: ISSN 2156-3381
- Publisher:
- IEEE
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
- Subject:
- 14 SOLAR ENERGY; 36 MATERIALS SCIENCE; bifacial solar panels; irradiance modeling; photovoltaic system modeling
Citation Formats
Pelaez, Silvana Ayala, Deline, Christopher A., MacAlpine, Sara M., Marion, William F., Stein, Joshua S., and Kostak, Raymond K. Comparison of Bifacial Solar Irradiance Model Predictions With Field Validation. United States: N. p., 2018.
Web. doi:10.1109/JPHOTOV.2018.2877000.
Pelaez, Silvana Ayala, Deline, Christopher A., MacAlpine, Sara M., Marion, William F., Stein, Joshua S., & Kostak, Raymond K. Comparison of Bifacial Solar Irradiance Model Predictions With Field Validation. United States. doi:10.1109/JPHOTOV.2018.2877000.
Pelaez, Silvana Ayala, Deline, Christopher A., MacAlpine, Sara M., Marion, William F., Stein, Joshua S., and Kostak, Raymond K. Wed .
"Comparison of Bifacial Solar Irradiance Model Predictions With Field Validation". United States. doi:10.1109/JPHOTOV.2018.2877000. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1485567.
@article{osti_1485567,
title = {Comparison of Bifacial Solar Irradiance Model Predictions With Field Validation},
author = {Pelaez, Silvana Ayala and Deline, Christopher A. and MacAlpine, Sara M. and Marion, William F. and Stein, Joshua S. and Kostak, Raymond K.},
abstractNote = {Models predicting rear irradiance for bifacial systems are critical to establish accurate estimates of energy yield. In this paper, we compare five published bifacial irradiance models, varying clearance, row spacing, tilt, and albedo to measure the sensitivity to these parameters. Bifacial energy gains (BG E) as high as 20% are predicted for some configurations. Model agreement is generally good for low ground clearance (clearance heights lower than 0.75 times the collector width), but at higher clearances, finite system size and edge effects become a significant factor in simulations, stretching assumptions of infinite system extent made in some models. In addition, rear irradiance uniformity is improved at high ground clearance, as expected. A test-bed construction and results are described for comparison between modeled and measured data in Golden, CO, USA. Finally, the investigations indicate that model agreement for BG E calculation is better than 2% (absolute) when compared with measured results, depending on the system configuration.},
doi = {10.1109/JPHOTOV.2018.2877000},
journal = {IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics},
number = 1,
volume = 9,
place = {United States},
year = {2018},
month = {11}
}