Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “bifacial”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2

Comparing Outdoor to Indoor Performance for Bifacial Modules Affected by Polarization-Type Potential-Induced Degradation

Bifacial photovoltaic (PV) modules have the advantage of using light reflected off of the ground to contribute to power production. Predicting the energy gain is challenging and requires complex models to do so accurately. Often, module degradation over time is neglected in models for the sake of simplicity or is underestimated. Comparing outdoor and indoor current–voltage (I–V) performance for bifacial modules is more challenging than for monofacial modules, as there are additional variables to consider such as rear albedo non-uniformity, cell mismatch, and their effects on temperature. This challenge is compounded when heterogeneous degradation modes occur, such as polarization-type potential-induced degradation (PID-p). To examine the effects of PID-p on I–V predictions using an empirical data-driven approach, 16 bifacial PERC modules are installed outdoors on racks with different albedo conditions. A subset is exposed to high-voltage biases of −1500 V or +1500 V. Outdoor data are traced at irradiance ranges of 150–250 W/m 2 , 500–600 W/m 2 , and 900–1000 W/m 2 . These curves are corrected using control module temperature, wire resistivity, and module resistance measured indoors. We examine several methods to transform indoor I–V curves to accurately, and more simply than existing methods, approximate outdoor performance for bifacial modules without and with varying levels of PID-p degradation. This way, bifacial performance modeling can be more accessible and informed by fielded, degraded modules. Distributions of percent errors between indoor and outdoor performance parameters and Mean Absolute Percent Errors (MAPEs) are used to assess method quality. Results including low-irradiance data (150–250 W/m 2 ) are discussed but are filtered for quantifying method quality as these data introduce substantial errors. The method with the most optimal tradeoff between low MAPE and analysis simplicity involves measuring the front side of a module indoors at an irradiance equal to plane-of-array irradiance plus the product of module bifaciality and albedo irradiance. This method gives MAPE values of 1–6.5% for non-degraded and 1.6–5.9% for PID-p degraded module performance.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Measuring and Modeling Bifacial Technologies

Measuring and modeling bifacial technologies is of interest for new system design, capacity testing, and performance evaluation. The bifacial PV field at NREL has been gathering data for different bifacial technologies and sensors for the last 2.5 years, making it possible to compare bifacial performance with monofacial counterparts, as well as experimental demonstrations of best locations to place sensors to match modeled and perceived irradiance non-uniformity on the rear of the bifacial modules. This presentation summarizes performance, degradation, sensor position for module edge effects and the impact of row edge effects, and the roadmap for NREL bifacial modeling tools.

bifacial PV↗

Susceptibility to polarization type potential induced degradation in commercial bifacial p-PERC PV modules

Potential induced degradation (PID) is a reliability issue affecting photovoltaic (PV) modules, mainly when PV strings operate under high voltages in hot/humid conditions. Polarization-type PID (PID-p) has been known to decrease module performance quickly. PID-p can be reduced or recovered under the light in some cases, but this effect, as expected, would be less pronounced on the rear side of bifacial PV modules receiving lower irradiance. As bifacial PV modules are projected to dominate the PV market within the next 10 years, it is crucial to understand the PID-p issue in bifacial modules better. In this study, we performed indoor PID testing to induce PID-p on 14 commercial bifacial p-PERC modules with three different module constructions from three manufacturers. Here, four rounds (+ve and –ve polarities for front and rear sides) of PID testing are done at 25°C, 54% relative humidity (RH) for 168 h using the aluminum foil method. Each module side (front cell side and back cell side) is tested individually under both negative and positive voltage bias. The results show that the highest degradation of 32% in maximum power (Pmax) at standard test conditions (1000 W/m 2 ) and 51% at low irradiance (200 W/m 2 ) has been observed in some cases. Recovery under sunlight is also done, and outcomes show a near-complete recovery in Pmax. This study presents an extensive experimental methodology and a detailed analysis to systematically and simultaneously/sequentially evaluate multiple construction types of bifacial modules to the PID-p susceptibility and recovery.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Field-Array Benchmark of Commercial Bifacial PV Technologies with Publicly Available Data

We present results for a 75-kW field array deployed with rows of 5 different commercially available bifacial technologies. Four PERC (multi and mono) and 1 Silicon Heterojunction manufacturers are represented. Reference strings of equivalent monofacial PV modules are also installed in the 10-row field. High accuracy string-level DC monitoring and module-level measurements have been recorded for six months. Analysis indicates performance within expectation, with a cumulative model mean error within +/- 2% for both bifacial and monofacial models and cumulative bifacial energy gain between 6-9%. A custom-module to measure shading loss from the torque-tube was installed. One month data shows up to 6% irradiance non-uniformity. A fixed-tilt test-site with 3 years of bifacial data is also presented, with a bifacial gain of 3%.

41 EE - Solar Energy Technologies Office (EE-4S)↗

Spectral Effects in Albedo and Rearside Irradiance Measurement for Bifacial Performance Estimation

We investigate the impact of spectral dependence of ground surface reflectivity on albedo and rearside irradiance measurements necessary for bifacial photovoltaic (PV) module performance estimation and monitoring. Because PV modules are spectrally selective, albedo and irradiance measurements performed with common irradiance sensors may require spectral mismatch corrections when used for performance prediction. We investigate via simulation the differences in spectrally responsive albedo measured with thermopile pyranometers and crystalline silicon PV reference cells in comparison to a typical crystalline-silicon bifacial PV module. Simulations are performed for nine different representative ground surface materials using simulated solar spectra together with spectral reflectivity data distributed with the SMARTS simulation software. For the materials considered, the results show that albedo spectral mismatch relative to the bifacial module is distributed over a range of ±9.2% for thermopile pyranometers versus only ±3.7% for a typical PV reference cell. We consider the impact of this spectrally-responsive albedo mismatch on bifacial PV module rearside irradiance measurements. Using synthesized rearside spectral irradiance distributions, we find that for the nine different ground surface materials the predicted rearside irradiance measurement deviates from the effective irradiance observed by the PV module by on the order of 16.5 W/m 2 for the pyranometer and 3.6 W/m 2 for the PV reference cell. We discuss the implications for bifacial albedo and irradiance measurement.

41 EE - Solar Energy Technologies Office (EE-4S)↗

Reliability Evaluation of Bifacial and Monofacial Glass/Glass Modules with EVA and non-EVA Encapsulants

The market share for bifacial modules is projected to be doubled from 30% to 60% in the next ten years. For the monofacial crystalline silicon glass/backsheet (G/B) modules, extensive reliability data has been available for over 40 years. However, practically little/no long-term field or accelerated reliability test data is available for the new generation glass/glass (G/G) bifacial modules and glass/transparent (G/T) bifacial modules. Therefore, the primary motivation of this project was to identify the reliability strengths and weaknesses of new generation G/G modules compared to G/B modules. In this 3-year project, the goal was to objectively recommend the best construction materials for the new generation G/G (bifacial) modules through a systematic experimental approach with appropriate tasks including: Evaluation of field retrieved old-generation G/G modules; Inspection of new-generation G/G modules installed in the plants; Evaluation of new-generation G/G, G/B and G/T modules using EAST (Extended Accelerated Stress Testing), CAST (Combined Accelerated Stress Testing) and FAST (Field Accelerated Stress Testing); and, dynamic literature search and review. Major accomplishments and outcomes of this project are: Accomplishments: Evaluated more than 60 field retrieved modules and constructed and characterized more than 135 mini-modules with three substrate types (G, B, and T), two encapsulant types (EVA and POE), and two cell types (monofacial and bifacial) as well as evaluated more than 30 commercial G/G and G/B modules; Subjected all the modules to multitude characterization tests and various indoor and outdoor accelerated stress tests including FAST (Field Accelerated Stress Testing), EAST (Extended Accelerated Stress Testing), and CAST (Combined Accelerated Stress Testing) to identify and correlate the failure modes in both field and lab tests. Outcomes: Based on the accelerated test results and handling/mounting experience obtained in this project, the recommended best construction for the glass/glass modules is: “Framed GG modules with cut-cells and POE encapsulant (UVpass front; UVpass back).” However, from a statistical and manufacturing point of view (along with stakeholders surveys), the following cautionary notes are added to the above-mentioned recommendation: (i) Cut cells could introduce a higher level of manufacturing issues, including a higher number of cell interconnects; (ii) POE encapsulant is more expensive than EVA and could present a delamination risk and lower throughput during manufacturing due to lower adhesion strength. Other encapsulants, such as coextruded EPE (EVA/POE/EVA), are also recommended to be investigated. The potential public benefit of the proposed project is to present the strengths and weaknesses of glass/glass modules, so an informed procurement decision can be made.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Understanding Bifacial Photovoltaic's Potential

The performance of bifacial PV systems depends greatly on the installed conditions. Previous simulations and results have shown very high bifacial gain improvement, but this may not be the case for all conditions, particularly for large-scale systems with self-shading, lower-cost PV modules (PERC) which might have lower bifaciality coefficient, and field deployments over natural ground cover. But not to worry! Financial models indicate that even with these lower performance conditions, and with bifacial gain of 4%-7%, bifacial modules can still provide improved LCOE.

bifacial↗

Assessing UV-Induced Degradation in Bifacial Modules of Different Cell Technologies

Bifacial technology enables solar cells to offer higher power output and lower levelized cost of energy compared to their monofacial counterparts. Here, we examined the adverse effects of ultraviolet-induced degradation (UVID) on a variety of high-efficiency silicon wafer-based bifacial cell technologies, including silicon heterojunction (SHJ), interdigitated back contact (IBC), passivated emitter rear contact (PERC), and passivated emitter rear totally-diffused (PERT). Both the front and rear sides of bifacial cells without any encapsulation were exposed to an artificially accelerated UV exposure test. After 2000 h of UV irradiation, the bifacial cells exhibited greater power loss with backside exposure indicating potential sensitivity of the rear passivation to UV. The highest power degradation is observed in SHJ cells, followed by p-PERC and n-PERT cell technologies. The degradation in SHJ cells is attributed to the reduction in V oc and FF, while the degradation in p-PERC and n-PERT cells is correlated with a significant drop in I sc . This suggests that each cell type/make degrades via different degradation pathways.

bifacial cells↗

Understanding Bifacial PV Modeling: Raytracing and View Factor Models

As part of the PV Magazine Webinar 'View-factor vs. ray tracing - which bifacial modelling techniques should you use?,' the second part lead by NREL will explore the different rear-irradiance calculation software, which fall into two categories: view-factor and ray-tracing models. View factor models assume isotropic scattering of reflected rays, allowing for calculation of irradiance by integration. Due-diligence software such as PVSyst or SAM use the view-factor model. Ray-tracing models simulate multipath reflection and absorption of individual rays entering a scene. Raytracing software such as bifacial_radiance, which is the only available open-source toolkit, offers the possibility of reproducing complex scenes, including shading or finite-system edge effects. This can be useful to evaluate specific system geometries, shading and obstructions, areas of different albedo and electrical mismatch, all topics of interest to the prediction of bifacial performance. Model agreement for view factors and bifacial_radiance software is improving and has been shown to be between 2% (absolute) when compared with measured results.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Highly Efficient Bifacial Single Junction Perovskite Solar Cells

We report on efficient, single-junction bifacial perovskite solar cells (PSCs) that simultaneously exhibit high front-side-illumination power conversion efficiency (PCE) (over 22 %) and high bifaciality (over 91%), which represents a significant advancement for single junction bifacial PSC development. The bifacial PSCs exhibit substantial performance boost under concurrent front and rear illumination conditions. The stabilized power output goes up to 25.3 mW/cm 2 under albedos of 0.2, which is comparable to the state-of-the-art monofacial single-junction PSCs. Our work demonstrates the value and potential of bifacial single junction PSCs as an attractive direction for future scientific study and commercialization.

commercialization↗

Capturing the full benefits of bifacial modules to approach an LCOE of 3c/kWh through a regional optimization of the electrical architecture (Final Technical Report)

This is the final technical report for the Cypress Creek Renewables project focused on bifacial plant performance. The project consisted of building a heavily instrumented Bifacial test sites with several cell technologies; instrumenting >1 MW scale commercial sites with both monofacial and bifacial arrays in order to understand real-world differences; and to engage with the performance modeling and financial stakeholder community to improve accuracy and increase investor confidence. The data from the test and commercial sites has been used to validate and improve the accuracy of both physics-based and reduced order modeling software. The heavily instrumented nature has been used to understand how light contributions from the sky and reflected from the ground impact different portions of the module and array while the data from the commercial sites has directly impacted how independent engineers model production from bifacial systems. The latter point has led to an increase in over 2% compared to earlier predictions. Even this modest increase has had significant downward pressure on project LCOE. As the data and results are both public, this refined modeling and empirical evidence for a higher bifacial gain than modeled, the benefits to the broader US solar community are assured.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Ultimate Bifacial Showdown: 75kW Field Results

This work presents one year results for a side-by-side comparison of 5 different bifacial technologies, deployed in a 75-kW single-axis tracked field at Golden, CO. Four PERC (multi and mono) and 1 Silicon Heterojunction manufacturers are represented. Reference strings of equivalent monofacial PV modules are also installed for a direct technology comparison and calculation of bifacial gain. Analysis indicates performance within expectation, with a cumulative model mean error within +/- 2% for both bifacial and monofacial models and cumulative bifacial energy gain between 6-9%. High accuracy string-level DC monitoring and module-level measurements are also presented, showing effects of snow and edge effects in the order of +/- 3% for non-uniform irradiance across the row. Data from a custom-module to measure shading loss from the torque-tube is installed, showing up to 6% irradiance non-uniformity for the month of January.

bifacial field validation↗

Estimating and parameterizing mismatch power loss in bifacial photovoltaic systems

Nonuniform irradiance on the rear side of bifacial photovoltaic (PV) systems can cause additional mismatch loss, which may not be appropriately captured in PV energy production estimates and software. We evaluated several scenarios including horizontal single-axis tracking (HSAT) over natural ground-cover and rooftop-mounted systems over high albedo reflective roofs. We found mismatch losses of up to 1.5% annual loss for very close-mounted (0.15 m) rooftop systems, but losses for HSAT systems and high-ground-clearance rooftop systems were lower (<0.5%). A simplified empirical relationship was found that links the spatial variation of irradiance (specifically, the mean absolute difference of irradiance) to the resulting mismatch loss factor, with an R 2 better than .99. Furthermore, this approximate relationship was experimentally validated on mismatched PV modules, and it provides a basis for rapidly estimating bifacial mismatch loss factors for use in hourly PV performance simulations such as PVSyst or SAM. Additional parameters investigated include (a) climate dependence and module orientation, which were not found to have a strong impact on bifacial mismatch losses and (b) PV module fill factor and bifaciality ratio, which did have a strong linear impact on mismatch losses.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Bifacial CdTe Solar Cells with Copper Chromium Oxide Back-Buffer Layer

Bifacial solar cells have the potential to maintain energy output higher than monofacial devices under unfavorable weather conditions. A transparent back-buffer layer which can passivate the interface and improve the minority carrier lifetime is critical in CdTe-based bifacial devices. Herein, solution-processed Cu x Cr y O z as a promising back-buffer for CdTe/CdS solar cells is demonstrated. The carrier lifetimes measured at the front and back of the device are 31.2 and 3.1 ns, respectively, which correspond to an increase of ≈38% and 138%, respectively, compared to the reference device. This dramatic improvement in lifetime results in a 100% increase in short-circuit current measured with backside illumination. The best bifacial device has efficiencies 7.6% and 12.5%, respectively, from back and front illumination, yielding a bifaciality factor of 0.60.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Understanding and Advancing Bifacial Thin Film Solar Cells under Dual Illumination

There is a great deal of interest in increasing the energy yield from thin film solar cells by implementing bifacial operation. However, deleterious band bending and high interface recombination at the back transparent electrode can cause problems. Herein, it is investigated how bifacial thin film devices perform when illuminated through the front, back, and simultaneously through both interfaces using numerical modeling. It is shown that the downward band bending near the back interface is reduced during illumination when the carrier concentration is low. This effect is not found when the doping is relatively high, but the minority carrier distribution is still modified. Under either condition, the power generated under bifacial illumination exceeds the sum of the power generated when the illumination is solely from the back or the front. It is also shown that the back-illuminated device performance is independent of the angle at which the light enters the back of the device, which provides accommodation for scattered light. Finally, the power enhancement is calculated for bifacial devices relative to front-illuminated devices, and is shown that any significant loss in frontside power generation is difficult to overcome with back illumination under real-world albedo conditions.

CdTe↗

Comparative Analysis of Rear Irradiance Modeling Methods for Bifacial PV Systems on Single-Axis Trackers Under Varying Albedo Conditions

This study compares three rear-side irradiance modeling methods for bifacial PV systems on single-axis trackers: (i) the 2D View Factor (VF) model in PVsyst(R), (ii) the open-source PVFactors VF model, and (iii) the Ray Tracing (RT) technique using bifacial_radiance. Simulations were benchmarked against field measurements from a pilot PV plant with rear-side sensors at the torque tube height. Results show that all models underestimated the non-uniformity of rear irradiance along the module length and overestimated the total rear irradiance incident on the module. However, since bifacial gain represents only a fraction of the system's total energy, the resulting energy yield differences among methods remained within +- 2 % of measured values, which is typical for such simulations. While the overall energy impact is limited, this study characterizes the specific limitations of each modeling approach, supporting further improvements in bifacial PV performance assessment methods.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Measuring Irradiance for Bifacial PV Systems

The advent of bifacial PV systems drives new requirements for irradiance measurement at PV projects for monitoring and assessment purposes. While there are several approaches, there is still no uniform guidance for what irradiance parameters to measure and for the optimal selection and placement of irradiance sensors at bifacial arrays. Standards are emerging to address these topics but are not yet available. In this paper we review approaches to bifacial irradiance monitoring which are being discussed in the research literature and pursued in early systems, to provide a preliminary guide and framework for developers planning bifacial projects.

bifacial↗

Measuring Irradiance for Bifacial PV Systems: Preprint

The advent of bifacial PV systems drives new requirements for irradiance measurement at PV projects for monitoring and assessment purposes. While there are several approaches, there is still no uniform guidance for what irradiance parameters to measure and for the optimal selection and placement of irradiance sensors at bifacial arrays. Standards are emerging to address these topics but are not yet available. In this paper we review approaches to bifacial irradiance monitoring which are being discussed in the research literature and pursued in early systems, to provide a preliminary guide and framework for developers planning bifacial projects.

41 EE - Solar Energy Technologies Office (EE-4S)↗