1996
DOI: 10.1016/s0038-092x(96)00137-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A simple model for PV module reflection losses under field conditions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
23
0
2

Year Published

2004
2004
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 69 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
2
23
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, an approach based on flat surfaces and Fresnel equations including the daily incidence angle variation and diffuse radiation [25] yielded about 3% yearly reflection losses (for front glass without AR coating) for tilt angle corresponding the latitude, in good agreement with measurements. A similar method for numerical treatment of optical module losses was described in more detail in Ref.…”
Section: Simulation Approaches and Studiessupporting
confidence: 57%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For instance, an approach based on flat surfaces and Fresnel equations including the daily incidence angle variation and diffuse radiation [25] yielded about 3% yearly reflection losses (for front glass without AR coating) for tilt angle corresponding the latitude, in good agreement with measurements. A similar method for numerical treatment of optical module losses was described in more detail in Ref.…”
Section: Simulation Approaches and Studiessupporting
confidence: 57%
“…It can, though, become a very time-consuming task when, for example, a ray tracing approach has to be solved as a function of incidence angle and wavelength for realistic illumination conditions and correct averaging over the whole typical year. Nonetheless, such studies have been conducted successfully [25], showing for instance that without AR coating, c-Si modules in fixed orientation exhibit more than 3% additional reflection loss averaged over the day as compared to standard test conditions (STCs). Correspondingly, a module with structured glass surface was shown to reduce these losses most effectively [8].…”
Section: Effects Of Incidence Angle Variation and Diffuse Lightmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This model is described in depth elsewhere 2,3 and has been applied to the analysis of different PV modules and satisfactorily validated with experimental data. It presents no discontinuities and good fitting results for all angles of incidence, in contrast to the ASHRAE incidence modifier, 4 a model initially proposed by Souka and Safat 5 and adopted by ASHRAE 6 (American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning) and considered by some authors 7,8 and simulation tools, such as PVSYST. 9 Also it gives better fitting results than the polynomial model used by NREL 10 and developed by King et al 11,12 In addition, the proposed model can easily include the effect of dust on the module's surface in the angular losses calculation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These losses were determined using the air-glass model developed by Sjerps-Koomen et al (1997). The airglass model resulted from studies that showed that the airglass interface dominates the transmittance of radiation, relative to normal incidence, and that considering only the air-glass interface provides essentially the same results when compared to using more complex models that consider transmittance and reflectance of other PV module materials and interfaces (glass, EVA, and cell anti-reflective coatings).…”
Section: Aoi Lossesmentioning
confidence: 99%