Comparison of the Efficiency of Polycrystalline and Thin-Film Photovoltaic Outdoors



Abstract Views
470

Downloads
372

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Jan 11, 2022
Published Mar 11, 2022
10.24018/ejenergy.2022.2.2.43

Abstract viewed = 470 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

In this paper, a comparison was made between two types of PV modules widely used in the market: polycrystalline and thin-film (both of them are silicon-based manufacturing) to identify the variables and parameters affecting the efficiency of solar cells. The efficiency of polycrystalline is higher than thin-film, although the open circuit voltage is more affected by solar radiation. The comparison was made in Gödöllő in Hungary, characterized by a moderate climate temperature and humidity on a partly cloudy day to study the effect of clouds and the change in the amount of solar radiation on solar cells. The flexible feature of thin-film cells can be used in many applications, especially those related to covering surfaces, as it is considered thin-layer and does not require an expensive metal structure to install. All these variables were calculated and discussed. The difference between the efficiency of polycrystalline and thin-film modules was a small percentage ranging between (-0.2% to 0.5%). This difference comes from the manufacturing technology method and the manufacturing quality itself.

Keywords: Solar cell, polycrystalline, PV module, PV technology, thin-film

References

  1. Machi M, Al-Neama M, Buzás J, Farkas I. Energy-based performance analysis of a double pass solar air collector integrated to triangular shaped fins. International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering. 2021.
     Google Scholar
  2. Ahmad S, Tahar RM. Selection of renewable energy sources for sustainable development of electricity generation system using analytic hierarchy process: A case of Malaysia. Renewable Energy. 2014; 63: 458–66.
     Google Scholar
  3. Fuentes M, Vivar M, de la Casa J, Aguilera J. An experimental comparison between commercial hybrid PV-T and simple PV systems intended for BIPV. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2018: 110–120.
     Google Scholar
  4. Udayakumar MD, Anushree G, Sathyaraj J, Manjunathan A. The impact of advanced technological developments on solar PV value chain. Materials Today: Proceedings. 2021: 2053–8.
     Google Scholar
  5. Sredenšek K, Štumberger B, Hadžiselimović M, Mavsar P, Seme S. Physical, Geographical, Technical, and Economic Potential for the Optimal Configuration of Photovoltaic Systems Using a Digital Surface Model and Optimization Method. Energy. 2021.
     Google Scholar
  6. Kesler S, Kivrak S, Dincer F, Rustemli S, Karaaslan M, Unal E, et al. The analysis of PV power potential and system installation in Manavgat, Turkey - A case study in winter season. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2014: 671–80.
     Google Scholar
  7. Mohammad Bagher A, Vahid MA, Mohsen. Types of Solar Cells and Application. American Journal of Optics and Photonics. 2015; 3(5): 94.
     Google Scholar
  8. Cañete C, Carretero J, Sidrach-de-Cardona M. Energy performance of different photovoltaic module technologies under outdoor conditions. Energy. 2014: 295–302.
     Google Scholar
  9. Soulatiantork P. Performance comparison of a two PV module experimental setup using a modified MPPT algorithm under real outdoor conditions. Solar Energy. 2018; 169: 401–410.
     Google Scholar
  10. Khanam S, Meraj M, Azhar M, Karimi MN, Ahmad T, Arif MR, et al. Comparative performance analysis of photovoltaic modules of different materials for four different climatic zone of India. Urban Climate. 2021; 39: 100957.
     Google Scholar
  11. Cuce E, Bali T, Sekucoglu SA. Effects of passive cooling on performance of silicon photovoltaic cells. International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies. 2011: 299–308.
     Google Scholar
  12. Heinrich M, Kuhn TE, Dimroth F, Würfel U, Goldschmidt JC, Powalla M, et al. A Comparison of Different Solar Cell Technologies for Integrated photovoltaics. the 37th European PV Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition; 2020: 7–11.
     Google Scholar
  13. Alshibil MA, Víg P, Farkas I. Performance Evaluation of a Hybrid Solar Collector in Two Different Climates. European Journal of Energy Research. 2021; 1(2): 17–20.
     Google Scholar
  14. Lázár I, Szegedi S, Tóth T, Csákberényi-Nagy G. An estimation model based on solar geometry parameters for solar power production. Energy Reports. 2020; 6: 1636–40.
     Google Scholar
  15. Karki IB. Effect of Temperature on the I-V Characteristics of a Polycrystalline Solar Cell Indra. Journal of Nepal Physical Society. 2015; 3(1): 35–40.
     Google Scholar
  16. Ibrahim H, Anani N. Variations of PV module parameters with irradiance and temperature. Energy Procedia. 2017: 276–285.
     Google Scholar
  17. Kumar NM, Chopra SS, Malvoni M, Elavarasan RM, Das N. Solar Cell Technology Selection for a PV Leaf Based on Energy and Sustainability Indicators—A Case of a Multilayered Solar Photovoltaic Tree. Energies. 2020; 13(23): 6439.
     Google Scholar
  18. Lee TD, Ebong AU. A review of thin film solar cell technologies and challenges. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017; 70: 1286–97.
     Google Scholar
  19. Yang J, Banerjee A, Guha S. Triple-junction amorphous silicon alloy solar cell with 14.6% initial and 13.0% stable conversion efficiencies. Applied Physics Letters. 1997; 70(22): 2975–7.
     Google Scholar
  20. Yamamoto K, Nakajima A, Yoshimi M, Sawada T, Fukuda S, Suezaki T, et al. A high efficiency thin film silicon solar cell and module. Solar Energy. 2004; 77(6): 939–49.
     Google Scholar
  21. Sai H, Matsui T, Koida T, Matsubara K, Kondo M, Sugiyama S, et al. Triple-junction thin-film silicon solar cell fabricated on periodically textured substrate with a stabilized efficiency of 13.6%. Applied Physics Letters. 2015; 106(21): 30–4.
     Google Scholar
  22. Duffie JA, Beckman. Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes, 4th ed. J Sol Energy Eng. 2013; 116(1): 67.
     Google Scholar