An experiment to measure the efficiency of a photovoltaic module due to tilt angle, shading, and temperature

February 28, 2012

Priscilla Camanho, Peter Chiu, John Chung-Sang Lee, Kevin J Wong

Environmental Engineering, Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, 92093

Abstract Factors that affect the efficiency of a solar panel are tested in this experiment to understand how one should install solar modules for maximum efficiency. As the tilt angle was increased from 0 degrees, the efficiency of the solar panel rises until it hits 50 +/- 1 degrees at which the maximum efficiency is reached. This most efficient angle is dependent upon the geographic location of panel as well as the time of the day and is where the solar arrays are shining perpendicular to the solar panels. When testing the effect of shading on the solar panel, the results were inconclusive between whether horizontal shading or vertical shading was more efficient. The horizontal shading showed a linear relationship between efficiency and power output while the vertical shading showed less of a linear relationship. This conclusion is due to the fluctuation in irradiance during the time of experiment as well as the circuit properties which are not known. Lastly, the temperature showed a negative relationship with the efficiency of the solar panel. As the temperature increased, the efficiency would decrease. The current-temperature coefficient for test #1 and #2 were 0.00078 A/degC and 0.00066 A/degC, respectively which had an error of 19.7% and 6.001%, respectively. These showed that the measured data had results similar to the rated performances.

Contents Subject Page I. Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................3 II. Theory.................................................................................................................................................3-5 III. Experimental Procedure.......................................................................................................................5-7 IV. Results ...............................................................................................................................................8-15 V. Discussion .........................................................................................................................................15-19 VI. Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................19-20 VII. References.20

I. Introduction Increasing anthropogenic impact on the environment has led scientists and engineers to look for more sustainable solutions for energy. A potential option is in the solar energy field, where generators can produce electricity through solar energy. Photovoltaic cells are a type of generator that absorbs photons of light and release electrons that can form an electric current and be used as electricity. Investigating photovoltaic cells in a laboratory can help test the feasibility of using solar energy as a sustainable source of energy as well as optimize a PV cells efficiency and use. The objective of this experiment was to study aspects of PV performance conducive for the design and implementation of solar PV power plants. The first aspect of the PV panels studied was investigating the tilt angle of the panels and how it affected the power output of the panel. This was done for two panels with a more varied testing of angles for the second panel. The second part of the experiment tested the effect of shading on the PV panels electrical performance and efficiency. Finally, the effects of cooling the PV panel are investigated and the voltage and current-temperature coefficients are measured.

II. Theory In order to discuss the efficiency of a solar panel, we need to establish some definitions. Firstly, the power generated by a photovoltaic system is dependent on the current and the voltage which can be determined using Equation 1. Power = Current * Voltage or P = IV Figure 1 shows this relationship in which Isc is the short circuit current while VOC is the open circuit voltage. Solar panel efficiency can be determined by Equation 2 where Pmpp represents the maximum power, Irr represents the irradiance, and A represents the surface area of the panel. (1)

(2) The solar irradiance and the production of the electricity from a photovoltaic system are directly proportional. This means that as the solar irradiance increase, the solar panels power production increases as well. However, the global horizontal irradiation (GHI) is the irradiance that is actually being absorbed by the photovoltaic cells. The GHI is a factor of both angle and diffusivity of the solar irradiance and is expressed by Equation 3. GHI = cosine(SZA)*(T) + (diffused light) Figure 2 illustrates the SZA (solar zenith angle) in three dimensions. T is the atmospheric transmissivity and is provided in Equation 4. (3)

Figure 2. I-V Curve

Figure 1. Angle Illustration

(4) The efficiency of the solar panel is also depended on the tilt of the solar panel. During a sunny day, the solar panel becomes more efficient as the sun rises until the solar array is perpendicular to the solar panel and then the efficiency drops until the arrays do not reach the panel. As for the solar zenith angle, the efficiency also changes depending on the location of the solar panel. North of the equator, the panels should be tilted and pointing south so that an optimal angle is reached to reach the maximum efficiency of the solar panel. Shading on a solar panel affects the efficiency as well. Ideally, the percentage of area shaded should reflect the percentage of power output (i.e. 5% area shaded means 5% less power output). In reality, however, this may not be true and a small area shaded could lead to an even smaller power 4

output. This may be due to the inverter inefficiently adjusting for the optimal current and voltage with shaded cells, since shaded cells have a different I-V curve. It can also be affected by the orientation of the shading (whether is vertical or horizontal). Lastly, the temperature of a solar panel can also change the efficiency of the solar panel. The higher the temperature, the more it shifts the I-V and P-V curve toward the origin leading to lower efficiency. This is illustrated in Figure 3. Since there will be two different sets of data that will be gathered from this part of the experiment (temperature of the solar panel versus the efficiency), a corrected power will need to be used which is Equation 5. (5) The corrected current will follow Equation 6 which requires gamma from Equation 7. (6)
Figure 3. I-V and P-V curve as Temperature Changes

(7)

III. Experimental Procedure The equipment used in this experiment was as follows: EKO Mp-170 Photovoltaic Module & Array Tester Unisolar and Kyocera PV Panels Power Supply Grounding cable PV Leads Rs-485 cable for sensor unit Thermocouple wires

Using the PV leads, the Unisolar and Kyocera PV panels were individually connected to the MP-170. This formed the basis of all measurements taken, along with implementing individual effects to the panel. The data was subsequently transferred to a computer via the MP-170 Control Program. Connecting the PV Panel and MP-170 Both the Unisolar and Kyocera PV panels were placed next to each other on a flat surface exposed to the sun. The black and red PV leads connected from one the PV panels to the MP-170. The thermocouple wires connected to the ports on the back of the sensor panel labeled Temp 1 and Temp 2. Temp 1 connected to the back of the PV panel and Temp 2 was placed in the shade to measure the air temperature. The sensor unit was then connected to the MP-170, which was now grounded. To ensure that the panel and the pyranometer were on the same plane to the sun, the shadow compass device on the sensor unit was aligned by placing the compass on the panel and then matching the shadow locations when it was placed back on the sensor unit. After grounding the MP-170, measurements were ready to be taken. Measurement parameters were adjusted and ready to be taken by the MP-170. PV Panel Performance and Tilt The PV panels were each measured at specific tilt angles, first 0o then 30o. The panel was tilted by utilizing wooden blocks and adjusting for the correct angle. After measuring both panels, more varied angles for the Kyocera panel were used. Angles of 0o,10o, 30o,40o,50o,60o were used. After completing each measurement, the data from the MP-170 was uploaded to a computer using the Control Program software. Effect of Shading on PV Panel Performance Next, the effects of shading different portions of the panel on power output and efficiency were investigated. After following the previous procedure for connecting the PV panel and MP-170,

measurements were ready to be made again. The 10 W Unisolar PV panel was placed on a flat surface; the general layout of the panel is shown in Figure 4. The cells on the panel were labeled according to standard matrix notation. The first measurement was taken with the panel un-shaded. Next, the panels were shaded both vertically and horizontally. It was shaded vertically by covering the first column of cells in increments of two cells. For example, referring to figure 1, the (1,1) cell was covered and measured, then the (1,1) through (3,1) cells were covered until the (11,1) cell was reached. Next, to shade the cells horizontally, the first row (cells (1,1) and (1,2)) were covered and measured. Rows 1 and 2 were measured next, and then Rows 1 through 3, adding a row between each measurement until the fifth row was reached. After collecting all our measurements, the data was uploaded to a computer. Effect of PV Cell Temperature on the Electrical Conversion Efficiency The last effect on the PV Panel was the cell temperature on the electrical efficiency. This effect was implemented by taking a bag of ice and cooling the panel, investigating the efficiency changes according to temperature. The 10W Unisolar PV was first placed out under the sun and the MP-170 turned on and connected. A bag of ice was placed on top of the panel, covering the entire surface for about 10 minutes. After removing the bag of ice and drying the panel surface, the measurements were taken with the MP170. Measurements were taken as frequently until the panel reached a steady state temperature, around 40oC. A note of importance was that there were some delays between each measurement to prevent overheating of the MP-170 device. After the panel reached steady state, the procedure was repeated and measurements were taken once again to collect 2 data sets.
Figure 4. General layout of Unisolar PV Panel

IV. Results Effect of Tilt Angle on PV Panel Performance The Unisolar and Kyocera solar panels were measured at a tilt angle of 0 and 30 degrees each. Figure 5 shows the I-V curve of each panel at each tilt angle.

0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0

I-V Curve for Each Panel at 0 and 30 degrees

unisolar 0 degrees Unisolar 30 degrees kyo 0 degrees kyo 30 degrees

I (Amps)

10 V (voltage) 15

20

25

Figure 5. I-V Curve for Unisolar and Kyocera brand PV panels at 0 and 30 degrees

The next set of measurements in the experiment dealt with measuring only the performance Kyocera solar panel while varying its tilt angle. In Figures 6 and 7 the short circuit current and the open circuit voltage data are plotted against the tilt angle to show a rather linear relationship.

Alpha Versus Isc

0.7 Isc (A) 0.6 0.5 0.4 0 20 40 Tilt Angle (alpha) 60 -20 y = 0.0043x + 0.4789 R = 0.9531 Voc (V)

Alpha versus Voc

20.6 20.5 20.4 20.3 20.2 20.1 20 19.9 0 y = 0.0062x + 20.165 R = 0.5559

20 40 Tilt Angle (alpha)

60

80

Figure 6 Short Circuit Current relationship with Angle

Figure 7 Open Circuit Voltage relationship with Angle

With the angle changing, the global irradiance changes depending on the angle. Figures 8 and 9 shows the relationship between the maximum voltage and maximum power versus the irradiance.

Voltage (Vmpp) [V]

16.4 16.2 16 15.8 15.6 600

y = 0.0008x + 15.496 R = 0.2085

Power output(Pmpp) [W]

16.6

Voltage Max

11 10 9 8 7 6 600

Power Max
y = 0.0107x - 0.3165 R = 0.9716

700 800 900 Irradiance (GIPOA) [W/m^2]

1000

800 Irradiance (GIPOA) [W/m^2]

1000

Figure 8 Voltage Maximum relationship with Irradiance

Figure 9 Max Power Output relationship with Irradiance

The star at each plot represents the absolute maximum power output of the total data set. Effect of Shading on PV Panel Performance The current (I) in respect to voltage (V) was plotted with various degrees of shading as shown in Figure 10 for vertical shading and Figure 11 for horizontal shading.

Figure 10. I-V Curve for vertical shading measurements. Figure 11. I-V Curve for horizontal shading measurements.

Similarly, the panel power was plotted as a function of voltage for vertical and horizontal shading as shown in Figure 12 and Figure 13 respectively.

Figure 12. P-V Curve for vertical shading measurements.

Figure 13. P-V Curve for vertical shading measurements.

The ratio of the power at the maximum power point (Pmpp) of the shaded panel divided by the un-shaded Pmpp was plotted as a function of the ratio of shaded area to total panel area for both vertical and horizontal shading as shown in Figure 14 and Figure 15 respectively.

Vertical Shading
Pmpp shaded/Pmpp
1.5 1 R = 0.1373

Horizontal Shading
Pmpp shaded/Pmpp
0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 R = 0.7972

0.5 0 0

Shaded Area/Total Area

0.2

0.4

0.6

Shaded Area/Total Area

Figure 14. The ratio of the max power for shade to unshaded panels as a function of the ratio of the shaded to unshaded area for vertical shading measurements.

Figure 15. The ratio of the max power for shade to unshaded panels as a function of the ratio of the shaded to unshaded area for horizontal shading measurements.

The reduction in electrical conversion efficiency () was plotted as a function of the ratio of the shaded area to total panel area as shown in Figure 16 and Figure 17 for vertical and horizontal shading respectively.

Shaded/Unshaded Area

Shaded/Unshaded Area

0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0

Vertical Shading
R = 0.676

0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0

Horizontal Shading
R = 0.9951

[%]

10

[%]
Figure 17. The ratio of the shaded to unshaded area as a function of the panel efficiency for vertical shading measurements.

Figure 16. The ratio of the shaded to unshaded area as a function of the panel efficiency for vertical shading measurements.

Effect of Temperature on PV Panel Performance The relationship between electrical conversion efficiency and panel temperature for each test is shown in Figures 18 and 19.

Figure 18. Plot of efficiency as a function of temperature for test #1

Figure 19. Plot of the efficiency as a function of temperature for test #2.

The linear relationship between the power output at the maximum power points and the temperature of the solar panel for test#1 and test #2 is demonstrated in Figures 20 and 21 respectively.

Figure 20. Plot of power as a function of the temperature for test #1.

Figure 21. Plot of power and a function of temperature for test #2.

Plotting the voltage as a function of the panel temperature generated a voltage temperature coefficient which was the slope of the line. The voltage- temperature coefficient for test #1 was found to be 0.06019 V/degC and -0.06131 V/degC for test#2 as shown in Figures 22 and 23 respectively.

Figure 22. Plot of voltage as a function of temperature for test #1.

Figure 23. Plot of voltage as a function of temperature for test #2.

The current-temperature coefficient for test#1 was found to be 0.00044 A/degC and 0.00028 A/degC for test #2 as shown in Figures 24 and 25.

Figure 24. Plot of current as a function of temperature for test #1.

Figure 25. Plot of current as a function of temperature for test #2.

The average of the GHI value for test #1 was calculated to be 746.955 W/m2 and for test #2 was 729.224 W/m2. The GHI was found to be 17.73099 W/m2. Using the data collected for both tests, a single plot was generated so the relationship between the current and the panel temperature for test #1 and test #2 could be analyzed in more detail. The slope of the lines was found to be 0.00044 A/degC for test #1 and 0.00028 A/degC for test #2.

Current vs Temperature
0.525 0.52 0.515 0.51 0.505 0.5 0.495 0.49 0.485 0.48 0.475 0 10 20 y = 0.00044x + 0.49628 R = 0.38633

Impp [A]

Test #2 Test #1 Linear (Test #2) y = 0.00028x + 0.47988 R = 0.15768 Linear (Test #1)

30

40

50

T[degree C]
Figure 26. Plot of the current as a function of the panel temperature for both test #1 and test #2.

The average values for the current at the maximum power was found to be for test #1 0.508498 A and for test #2 0.48822 A. The Impp was calculated as 0.0202773 A. The linearized Impp to GHI coefficient was calculated to be 0.001144 Am2/W and the corrected current at the max power Impp was calculated for measurements for both tests as shown on Table 1. Test #2 Corrected Impp (A) 0.472014445 0.479864766 0.496109253 0.483964353 0.487306353 0.487908793 0.499545722 0.498688722 0.488581336 Table 1. Calculated corrected current values for test #1 and test #2. Test #1 Corrected Impp (A) 0.492270718 0.496427576 0.514139576 0.511287385 0.509758797 0.508656603 0.519961287 0.515479925

The corrected current-temperature coefficient was found by plotting the corrected Impp as a function of the panel temperature. For test #1 the corrected current-temperature coefficient was found

13

to be 0.00078 A/degC and for test #2 was 0.00066A/degC. Figures 27 and 28 show the linear relationship between the corrected current value and the temperature of the solar panel.

Impp Corrected vs Temperature test #1

0.54 Impp [A] 0.52 0.5 0.48 0 20 40 T [degree C] Linear 60 (Series1) y = 0.00078x + 0.48659 R = 0.69369 Series1

Impp Corrected vs Temperature test #2

0.52 Impp [A] 0.5 y = 0.00066x + 0.46891 R = 0.54508

0.48 0.46 0 20 40 T [degree C] 60

Series1 Linear (Series1)

Figure 27. Plot of the Impp corrected as a function of the temperature of the panel for test #1.

Figure 28. Plot of the Impp corrected as a function of temperature of the panel for test #2.

The corrected maximum power and the corrected electrical conversion efficiency are shown in Table 2. Test #2 Corrected Pmpp (W) 8.861831 8.818149 8.654078 8.556868 8.480873 8.501194 8.459728 8.367298 8.328224 Table 2. Results of the calculated corrected Power and corrected efficiency. Test #1 Corrected Pmpp (W) 9.085822 9.097492 9.056703 8.949768 8.848502 8.816552 8.684912 8.654227 Test #1 Corrected (%) 7.90608 7.981143 7.945359 7.867681 7.785921 7.763612 7.637701 7.650733 Test #2 Corrected (%) 7.922027 7.914546 7.752508 7.672733 7.604589 7.659275 7.654142 7.570514 7.556953

The corrected electrical efficiency value was plotted as function of the temperature of the panel for both test 1 and 2 as shown in Figures 29 and 30 respectively.

14

Efficiency vs Temperature Test #1

efficiency [%] 8.2 efficiency [%] 8 7.8 7.6 0 20 40 T[degree C] 60 y = -0.01143x + 8.13687 R = 0.79209 Series1 Linear (Series1)

8 7.8 7.6 7.4 0

Efficiency vs temperature test #2

y = -0.01275x + 8.07520 R = 0.89641 Series1 20 40 T [degree C] 60 Linear (Series1)

Figure 29. Relationship between the corrected electrical converted efficiency and the panel temperature for test #1.

Figure 30. Relationship between the corrected electrical converted efficiency and the panel temperature for test #2.

V. Discussion Effect of Tilt Angle on PV Panel Performance The rated performance of the Uni-solar solar panel was rated at 1kW/m2. With this setting, the short circuit current and the open circuit voltage were 0.78A and 23.8V respectively which is not the same as the measured data at 0 degrees (a difference of about 34% and 9%) and is close to the data at 30 degrees (a difference of about 1% and 7%). For the Kyocera solar panel, the rated performances were rated at 1kW/m2 as well. The short circuit current and the open circuit voltage were 0.62A and 21.7V respectively which was not the same as the measured data at 0 degrees (a difference of about 24% and 10%) and is again, close to the data at 30 degrees (a difference of about 38% and 1%). The difference would be due to the fact that the irradiance measured was less than 1kW/m2 which means that the solar panels were not able to produce the full amount of power. Temperature might have had an effect as well. If it was higher than 25 Celsius, then the efficiency might have dropped and if the temperature was lower than 25 Celsius, the efficiency might have raised. The relationship between the tilt angle and the short circuit current shows that these two variables have a linear relationship or are directly proportional to each other. As for the relationship between the tilt angle and the open circuit voltage, the relationship seems to be a polynomial based on

the data. However, in theory, the irradiance and voltage relationship is one where there is a steep increase in voltage as the irradiance rises while the change in voltage becomes smaller as the irradiance gets larger until it reaches a maximum voltage. And since the irradiance is a direct relationship with the tilt angle, the voltage and tilt angle relationship should be the same as the voltage and irradiance relationship. This shows that there is error amongst our data. The error bars in Figures 6 and 7 are due to the tilt angle where each measured tilt angle has a range of approximately +/- 5 degrees. During the experiment, these tilt angles were calculated using the Pythagorean relationship of 90 degree triangles. It may not be as accurate as using a protractor. If the angle changes, the irradiance changes as well. With this said, Figures 29 and 30 show the relationship between maximum voltage and irradiance and maximum power and irradiance, respectively. The data shows the same relationship described earlier when the variables were compared to tilt angle. Basically, as the irradiance increases, the voltage increases (while decreasing in the change in voltage) until it reaches a maximum irradiance that can be absorbed. The power is the same except that the increase in power is steady. According to this data set, at 50 degree (+/- 5 degree) tilt angle of the panel, the maximum power output occurs for the Kyocera panel. The significance of this angle is that this is the angle at which the sunlight should be perpendicular to the solar panel, hence, creating the maximum efficiency. This angle of maximum power production is dependent upon the location on earth and the time of the day. If we changed location on earth and the time of the day, it could change both the zenith angle and the azimuth angle. The location of the maximum power point on the I-V curve is almost at the middle of the I-V curve line. The max current approximately 7% away from the short circuit current and the max voltage is approximately 25% away from the open circuit voltage. Effect of Shading on PV Panel Performance In vertical shading, it follows a pattern in which the voltage remains relatively constant while the current drops. In the case of horizontal shading, the current drops when the shading starts then remains

16

rather constant as the voltage drops. As evidenced in Figures 10 and 11, the results were somewhat inconsistent. For example as seen in Figure 10, in the case of 1 Cell Shaded and 3 Cells shaded, the curve appears to be dented in where the Pmpp is in the baseline case of no shading. As evidenced in Figure 12 and Figure 13, when plotting ratio of Pmpp of the shaded to the unshaded panel as a function of the ratio of total shaded area, the data from the horizontal shading had a better linear regression fit. This is most likely due to the inconsistent irradiance during testing. Since it was a scattered cloudy day and the wind was moving the clouds in and out of the sun, it caused the irradiance to vary in between tests. When analyzing the irradiance between subsequent tests as shown in Figure 31, it can clearly be seen that the irradiance spiked when taking the baseline measurement

Irradiance vs Number of Cells Shaded

Solar Irradiance (Er)[W/m^2] 1000 500 0 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 # Cells Shaded While Testing

Figure 31. Plot of measured irradiance from the pyranometer when different measurements were taken.

with no shading, and taking the measurements when shading 7 and 11 cells vertically. Though the horizontal shading better linear fit, it is likely due to the irradiance spikes present when taking the vertical shading measurements. When omitting the vertically shaded measurements for 7 and 11 cells, the linear regression would have a much better fit with an R2 value of 0.672. When fitting a linear regression to the plot of the ratio of the shaded to un-shaded area as a function of the panel efficiency, the horizontal panel shading has a better fit. This can once again can be explained by the fact that the irradiance spiked. Since the horizontal fit is near-perfect and when omitting the outlying irradiance measurements, the vertical regression still has a value of R2 = 0.7665, it is an unlikely reason and the horizontal shading is presumed to fit the linear regression. 17

Due to these results, when designing a PV system, it would be best to design for horizontal shading since the efficiency followed a linear pattern vs. the ratio of shaded area. The horizontal shading test follows the pattern exemplified by a circuit system wired in series, where the voltage adds up and the current stays the same. Effect of Temperature on PV Panel Performance Plotting the data collected from both tests (Figures 18 and 19) performed during the experiment, it was observed that the electrical conversion efficiency decreases linearly with the increase of the panel temperature. This may be because at higher temperatures, the materials in the module perform less efficiently. The electrical conversion is inversely proportional to the temperature of the panel, therefore the higher the temperature of the solar panel, the smaller the efficiency. As expected, the global horizontal irradiance (GHI) is directly proportional to the electrical conversion efficiency, the efficiency decreases as the global horizontal irradiance values decreases. The voltage- temperature coefficient for test #1 is about 15.3% smaller than the rated value (-0.051 V/degC) and test #2 is about 16.8% smaller than the rated value. The experimental values from test#1 and test #2 have a difference of 8.9% which shows that both tests were performed successfully, but the measurements were taken at different times. The experimental voltage-coefficient is smaller than the rated value, probably due to the temperature of the panel and solar angle. The currenttemperature coefficients for test #1 is about 29.1% smaller than the rated value (0.000626A/degC) and for test #2 is about 55% smaller than the rated value. The significant difference between the coefficient values from both tests #1 and #2 could be related to the amount of solar irradiation when the measurements were taken. Solar irradiation decreases as the day continues. On the other hand, when using the calculated GHI averages to calculate the Impp corrected, the current-temperature coefficients for both tests #1 and #2 differed by 19.7% and 6.001% respectively. The percentage difference between the experimental current-coefficient and the rated value decreased

18

by 32% for test#1 and 89.1% for test #2, which shows that linearizing Impp GHI coefficient gives a value a lot closer to the actual value. For both tests, the graph shows the dependency of the voltage with irradiance, the graphs clearly show that the voltage values decreases linearly with smaller values of the GHI. On the other hand, the current is linearly increased with the lower values of GHI. This trend can be observed on the IV curve where it shows that the voltage decreases with less irradiation whereas the current drastically increases with higher irradiation. The difference between the calculated averages of GHI for both tests was 2.34% which is relatively small. This small difference of the GHI values is probably due to the difference of the time that the measurements were taken at different temperatures of the solar panel. The Impp between tests 1 and 2 was 3.97%. This difference between the currents values of test 1 and 2 was also probably due to the different times that the data was collected. Plotting the calculated corrected electrical conversion efficiency as a function of temperature, it was observed the slope for test#1 was smaller by 28.56% and slope for test #2 was smaller by 29.17% than the non-corrected electrical efficiency conversion as function of the panel temperature. These values show that the corrected efficiency value decreases slower by roughly 30% for both tests. This significant difference between both graphs is due to the Impp averaged current values calculated from both measurements that were used to calculate the corrected power and the efficiency.

VI. Conclusion The photovoltaic modules performance is affected by the tilt angle, shading, and temperature. When the direct solar radiation is perpendicular to the photovoltaic module, the performance is at its maximum efficiency. With this said, the panel should be pointed toward south if standing north of the equator. Also, depending on the time of the day, the position of the sun in the sky will change the zenith

19

and azimuth angles which mean that the solar module should follow this change throughout the day to maximize the efficiency. The direction of shading on a panel affects both its efficiency and the power collected by the panel. Since the irradiance varied while conducting the experiment, the data is shown to be inconclusive. However, it is very likely that horizontal shading has greater efficiency based on the results. Therefore, when installing solar panels, one should consider installing the system in a way to minimize shading in vertical direction. The performance of the solar panel is maximized at a lower temperature compared to a higher temperature. The range of temperature tested was from approximately 7o Celsius and 40o Celsius. The measured data compared to the rated performance had errors that were less than 20%. To apply this, one should not over-heat the solar panels in any way. Based on this experiment, a south-facing solar panel in a cool environment with minimal vertical shading (or any shading overall) would be optimal.

VII. References Nottrott, Anders., "PV Panel Performance and Tilt", University of California at San Diego. Santa Monica, CA, Feb. 2012

20