Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “PV performance modeling”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

PV Performance Modeling - Data and Resources

The Photovoltaic (PV) Performance Modeling Collaborative (PVPMC) organized a blind PV performance modeling intercomparison to allow PV modelers to blindly test their models and modeling ability against real system data. Measured weather and irradiance data were provided along with detailed descriptions of PV systems from two locations (Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA and Roskilde, Denmark). Participants were asked to simulate the plane-of-array irradiance, module temperature, and DC power output from six systems and submit their results to Sandia for processing. This dataset includes seven MS-Excel sheets with instructions, notes and all necessary data (weather, irradiance, temperature, power) used for the data analysis of the blind modeling comparison. The hourly data represent six different systems from Albuquerque, NM and Roskilde, Denmark over a period of one year. These data are useful for PV performance model validation studies.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

PV Performance Modeling and Stakeholder Engagement (Final Technical Report)

This core capability project’s objective is to increase the value of photovoltaic (PV) performance models by improving their functionality, demonstrating, and quantifying their validity, and offering a wide range of stakeholder engagement opportunities. In FY22-24, we developed new and improved modeling algorithms and functions to represent PV performance more accurately in a variety of environments and conditions. The “Model parameter toolkit” was developed and includes functions to translate between different module temperature models, incidence angle modifier models, and single-diode models. A new modeling capability named “PV Atlas” was also developed leveraging Sandia’s High Performance Computing resources. This capability allows us to investigate several questions and provide climate-specific best practices and geographic data files; all these are hosted on an interactive website on Sandia’s GitHub and can be used for training, system optimization, or to provide best practices for uncertainty reduction. For model validation, we published high-quality PV performance, and weather data; these data are well documented, filtered, and processed for quality and include examples on how to run PV simulations. We also developed well documented, standardized methods for validating PV models and ran independent model validation and 2 blind modeling intercomparisons engaging with 49 organizations from 17 countries. We co-led and contributed to a growing, well documented and maintained suite of open-source functions for PV modeling (i.e., the pvlib-python) and we outreached to the PV modeling stakeholders via the PVPMC workshops and web resources. In addition, this project supported US representation and leadership for the International Energy Agency (IEA) PVPS Task 13; specifically, members of our team led and supported 3 subtasks on: 1) Best practices for the optimization of bifacial photovoltaic tracking, 2) Extreme weather events and their multiple impact on PV power plants: Risks, failure mechanisms and mitigation strategies, and 3) Best practice guidelines for the use of economic and technical Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). This project resulted in the publications of 14 peer reviewed journal papers, 37 conference presentations, 6 SAND reports, 5 public datasets and 6 new webpages on the PVPMC website. It supported the release of 13 pvlib-python versions where 28 enhancements were from this PV Performance Modeling project. We co-organized 5 PVPMC workshops in FY22-24 with the participation of 214 unique institutions and around 700 participants. The PVPMC website was redesigned, and its reliability was improved; it receives over 50,000 visitors/year from 202 unique countries.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

PV Performance Modeling and Stakeholder Engagement (Q3 FY2020 Project Report)

The objectives of this project are as follows: 1. Reduce uncertainty in PV performance models by developing and validating new and improved models and submodes. 2. Create and manage an open source repository of modeling functions and data. 3. Build and grow the PV Performance Modeling Collaborative; and, 4. Represent the US in the IEA PVPS Task 13 Working group.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

PV Performance Modeling and Stakeholder Engagement (Q1 FY2021 Project Report))

The objectives of this project are as follows: 1) Reduce uncertainty in PV performance models by developing and validating new and improved models and submodes. 2) Create and manage an open source repository of modeling functions and data. 3) Build and grow the PV Performance Modeling Collaborative 4) Represent the US in the IEA PVPS Task 13 Working group.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

The Numerical Computation of Clear-Sky Transmittance and Reflectance of Solar Radiation for the Modeling of PV System Performance

Modeling of photovoltaics (PV) system performance requires numerical computation of plane-of-array (POA) irradiances that are influenced by atmospheric absorption and scattering. Clear-sky transmittance and reflectance of diffuse irradiance are essential for the understanding of solar radiation related to multiple reflection between land surface and clouds. This study analytically solves the radiative transfer equation for clear-sky conditions and numerically computes the transmittance and reflectance of diffuse irradiance as functions of the optical thickness of the atmosphere. The computation will be implemented in all-sky radiative transfer models to improve their computational efficiency.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Blind photovoltaic modeling intercomparison: A multidimensional data analysis and lessons learned

The Photovoltaic (PV) Performance Modeling Collaborative (PVPMC) organized a blind PV performance modeling intercomparison to allow PV modelers to blindly test their models and modeling ability against real system data. Measured weather and irradiance data were provided along with detailed descriptions of PV systems from two locations (Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA, and Roskilde, Denmark). Participants were asked to simulate the plane-of-array irradiance, module temperature, and DC power output from six systems and submit their results to Sandia for processing. The results showed overall median mean bias (i.e., the average error per participant) of 0.6% in annual irradiation and –3.3% in annual energy yield. While most PV performance modeling results seem to exhibit higher precision and accuracy as compared to an earlier blind PV modeling study in 2010, human errors, modeling skills, and derates were found to still cause significant errors in the estimates.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Photovoltaic System Health-State Architecture for Data-Driven Failure Detection

The timely detection of photovoltaic (PV) system failures is important for maintaining optimal performance and lifetime reliability. A main challenge remains the lack of a unified health-state architecture for the uninterrupted monitoring and predictive performance of PV systems. To this end, existing failure detection models are strongly dependent on the availability and quality of site-specific historic data. The scope of this work is to address these fundamental challenges by presenting a health-state architecture for advanced PV system monitoring. The proposed architecture comprises of a machine learning model for PV performance modeling and accurate failure diagnosis. The predictive model is optimally trained on low amounts of on-site data using minimal features and coupled to functional routines for data quality verification, whereas the classifier is trained under an enhanced supervised learning regime. The results demonstrated high accuracies for the implemented predictive model, exhibiting normalized root mean square errors lower than 3.40% even when trained with low data shares. The classification results provided evidence that fault conditions can be detected with a sensitivity of 83.91% for synthetic power-loss events (power reduction of 5%) and of 97.99% for field-emulated failures in the test-bench PV system. Finally, this work provides insights on how to construct an accurate PV system with predictive and classification models for the timely detection of faults and uninterrupted monitoring of PV systems, regardless of historic data availability and quality. Such guidelines and insights on the development of accurate health-state architectures for PV plants can have positive implications in operation and maintenance and monitoring strategies, thus improving the system’s performance.

photovoltaics↗
NASA NTRS1984

Summary of photovoltaic system performance models

A detailed overview of photovoltaics (PV) performance modeling capabilities developed for analyzing PV system and component design and policy issues is provided. A set of 10 performance models are selected which span a representative range of capabilities from generalized first order calculations to highly specialized electrical network simulations. A set of performance modeling topics and characteristics is defined and used to examine some of the major issues associated with photovoltaic performance modeling. Each of the models is described in the context of these topics and characteristics to assess its purpose, approach, and level of detail. The issues are discussed in terms of the range of model capabilities available and summarized in tabular form for quick reference. The models are grouped into categories to illustrate their purposes and perspectives.

Smith, J. H.↗
DOE OSTI2026

Education for PV Modeling Professionals: Survey of Educators

We report a survey of instructors at universities offering courses that address PV performance modeling. We confirm our earlier finding that most courses lack the level of detail sought by the professional community. We recommend that the PV Performance Modeling Collaborative (PVPMC), or a university, sponsor a committee to produce a curriculum outline for PV system performance modeling, and that the PVPMC solicit industry for well-documented examples of PV system designs and accompany

Hansen, Clifford [Sandia National Laboratories (SN↗
DOE OSTI2024

Side-by-Side Comparison of Subhourly Clipping Models

Over the past several years there have been numerous attempts at quantifying the inherent power clipping of inverters due to sub-hourly irradiance variability that is not captured in hourly PV performance models. Different models have been proposed to correct for these clipping losses in PV performance estimates, including matrix lookup models, distribution modeling of the PV power performance within a given hour, and machine learning methods. To date, there have been few comprehensive quantitative comparisons of these inverter clipping correction modeling approaches to evaluate the effectiveness of these approaches in predicting the actual behavior of PV system inverter clipping. In this study, we perform such a comparison, evaluating the Allen and Walker correction loss modeling approaches recently implemented in the System Advisor Model (SAM) against clipping losses modeled with 1-minute climate data. These comparisons were performed across a variety of climate locations and inverter loading ratios to thoroughly analyze the effectiveness of these modeling approaches relative to each other. Results from this analysis reveal that both clipping correction approaches improve annual energy accuracy to within 2% of 1-minute modeled energy yield. The two models predict annual clipping loss more accurately than simple hourly power limit clipping, with the Allen method typically being slightly more accurate at typical ILR values and the Walker method often being slightly more accurate at high ILR values The models can improve accuracy over the status quo clipping approach up to 3 percentage points in systems with ILR of 2.0, showing the importance of this modeling factor in energy yield estimates.

ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY,MATHEMATICS A↗
DOE OSTI2024

Side-by-Side Comparison of Subhourly Clipping Models: Preprint

Over the past several years there have been numerous attempts at quantifying the inherent power clipping of inverters due to inter-hourly irradiance variability that is not captured in hourly PV performance models. Different models have been proposed to correct for these clipping losses in PV performance estimates, including matrix lookup models, distribution modeling of the PV power performance within a given hour, and machine learning methods. To date, there have been few comprehensive quantitative comparisons of these inverter clipping correction modeling approaches to evaluate the effectiveness of said approaches in predicting the actual behavior of PV system inverter clipping. In this study, we perform such a comparison, evaluating two different clipping correction loss modeling approaches recently implemented in the System Advisor Model (SAM) against clipping losses modeled with 1-minute climate data. These comparisons will be performed across a variety of climate locations and inverter loading ratios to thoroughly analyze the effectiveness of these modeling approaches relative to each other. Results from this analysis reveal that both clipping correction approaches improve annual energy accuracy to within 2% of 1-minute modeled energy yield. The models can improve accuracy up to 3% in systems with ILR of 2.0, showing the importance of this modeling factor in energy yield estimates.

clipping↗
DOE OSTI2024

Side-by-Side Comparison of Subhourly Clipping Models

Over the past several years there have been numerous attempts at quantifying the inherent power clipping of inverters due to subhourly irradiance variability that is not captured in hourly PV performance models. Different models have been proposed to correct for these clipping losses in PV performance estimates, including matrix lookup models, distribution modeling of the PV power performance within a given hour, and machine learning methods. To date, there have been few comprehensive quantitative comparisons of these inverter clipping correction modeling approaches to evaluate the effectiveness of these approaches in predicting the actual behavior of PV system inverter clipping. In this study, we perform such a comparison, evaluating the Allen and Walker correction loss modeling approaches recently implemented in the System Advisor Model (SAM) against clipping losses modeled with 1-minute climate data. These comparisons were performed across a variety of climate locations and inverter loading ratios to thoroughly analyze the effectiveness of these modeling approaches relative to each other. Results from this analysis reveal that both clipping correction approaches improve annual energy accuracy to within 2% of 1-minute modeled energy yield. The two models predict annual clipping loss more accurately than simple hourly power limit clipping, with the Allen method typically being slightly more accurate at typical ILR values and the Walker method often being slightly more accurate at high ILR values The models can improve accuracy over the status quo clipping approach up to 3 percentage points in systems with ILR of 2.0, showing the importance of this modeling factor in energy yield estimates.

accuracy↗
DOE OSTI2024

pvplr-python: Python package implementation of PVplr for Performance Loss Rate (PLR) analysis

Due to software fragmentation, PV system modeling teams can be limited to language specific packages, preventing cross-sectional analysis of different modeling techniques and workflows. To this end, PVplr, a popular PV performance modeling R software package, has been ported to the Python programming language. To verify and test the robustness of the port, NSRDB data has been used to simulated PV installations at native resolution (~2 million Sites), with a variety of degradation rates, degradation patterns, and modules. Performance Ratios were calculated using the ported functions from pvplr-python and compared against Rdtools YoY values. Due to the complicated nature of degradation, a new metric has been proposed to quantify the performance loss of a system. The cumulative production loss, is the total amount of energy lost due to the degrading performance of the system. Cumulative production loss alleviates the problems with fitting linear functions to non-linear degradation. Cumulative Production loss was shown to better estimate the total lost revenue for non-linear degradation patterns. $XbX + UTC$ was found to most accurately predict the total lost revenue in simulated systems.

Kumar, Suraj↗
DOE OSTI2023

The 2021 Blind PVPMC Modeling Intercomparison

This document provides the instructions for participating in the 2021 blind photovoltaic (PV) modeling intercomparison organized by the PV Performance Modeling Collaborative (PVPMC). It describes the system configurations, metadata, and other information necessary for the modeling exercise. The practical details of the validation datasets are also described. The datasets were published online in open access in April 2023, after completing the analysis of the results.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗