Skip to main content
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
/content/aip/journal/jrse/7/6/10.1063/1.4935376
1.
1.International Energy Agency, “ Photovoltaic power system programme,” Annual Report No. IEA-PVPS 2013.
2.
2. M. A. Eltawil and Z. Zhao, “ Grid-connected photovoltaic power systems: Technical and potential problems—A review,” Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 14, 112129 (2010).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.07.015
3.
3. G. K. Singh, “ Solar power generation by PV (photovoltaic) technology: A review,” Energy 53, 113 (2013).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.02.057
4.
4. J. K. Kaldellis, M. Kapsali, and K. A. Kavadias, “ Temperature and wind speed impact on the efficiency of PV installations. Experience obtained from outdoor measurements in Greece,” Renewable Energy 66, 612624 (2014).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2013.12.041
5.
5. A. Fernández-Infantes, J. Contreras, and J. L. Bernal-Agustín, “ Design of grid connected PV systems considering electrical, economical and environmental aspects: A practical case,” Renewable Energy 31, 20422062 (2006).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2005.09.028
6.
6. J. Hernandez, G. Gordillo, and W. Vallejo, “ Predicting the behavior of a grid-connected photovoltaic system from measurements of solar radiation and ambient temperature,” Appl. Energy 104, 527537 (2013).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.10.022
7.
7. M. A. M. Ramli, A. Hiendro, and K. S. S. Twaha, “ Optimal sizing of grid-connected photovoltaic energy system in Saudi Arabia,” Renewable Energy 75, 489495 (2015).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.10.028
8.
8. J. D. Mondol, Y. G. Yohanis, and B. Norton, “ Optimising the economic viability of grid-connected photovoltaic systems,” Appl. Energy 86, 985999 (2009).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2008.10.001
9.
9. J. R. Perez-Gallardo, C. Azzaro-Pantel, S. Astier, S. Domenech, and A. Aguilar-Lasserre, “ Ecodesign of photovoltaic grid-connected systems,” Renewable Energy 64, 8297 (2014).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2013.10.027
10.
10. M. Díez-Mediavilla, M. I. Dieste-Velasco, M. C. Rodríguez-Amigo, T. García-Calderón, and C. Alonso-Tristán, “ Performance of grid-tied PV facilities: A case study based on real data,” Energy Convers. Manage. 76, 893898 (2013).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.08.035
11.
11. S. M. Pietruszko and M. Gradzki, “ Performance of a grid connected small PV system in Poland,” Appl. Energy 74, 177184 (2003).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0306-2619(02)00144-7
12.
12. V. Sharma and S. S. Chandel, “ Performance analysis of a 190 kWp grid interactive solar photovoltaic power plant in India,” Energy 55, 476485 (2013).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.03.075
13.
13. J. D. Mondol, Y. G. Yohanis, and B. Norton, “ Comparison of measured and predicted long term performance of grid a connected photovoltaic system,” Energy Convers. Manage. 48, 10651080 (2007).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2006.10.021
14.
14. B. Quesada, C. Sánchez, J. Cañada, R. Royo, and J. Payá, “ Experimental results and simulation with TRNSYS of a 7.2 kWp grid-connected photovoltaic system,” Appl. Energy 88, 17721783 (2011).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.12.011
15.
15.See http://www.cavalum.com/en for Cavalum company, accessed June 2014.
16.
16. S. A. Klein, et al., TRNSYS 17, A Transient System Simulation Program ( Solar Energy Laboratory, University of Winsconsin, Madison, USA, 2009).
17.
17.See http://www.meteotest.ch for Meteonorm v.7. Produced by Meteotest, Meteonorm Handbook, Parts I, II, and III. Bern, Switzerland, accessed June 2014.
18.
18.See http://www.pvsyst.com/en for PVsyst: Software for Photovoltaic Systems, accessed June 2014.
19.
19. R. Perez, R. Stewart, R. Seals, and T. Guertin, “ The development and verification of the perez diffuse radiation model,” Sandia Report No. SAND88-7030, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA 1988.
20.
20. N. Aste, C. D. Pero, F. Leonforte, and M. Manfren, “ A simplified model for the estimation of energy production of PV systems,” Energy 59, 503512 (2013).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.07.004
21.
21.IEC. IEC 61724, Photovoltaic System Performance Monitoring—Guidelines for Measurements, Data Exchange and Analysis ( IEC, Geneva, Switzerland, 1998).
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jrse/7/6/10.1063/1.4935376
Loading
/content/aip/journal/jrse/7/6/10.1063/1.4935376
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jrse/7/6/10.1063/1.4935376
2015-11-06
2016-09-27

Abstract

In this work, the performance of a photovoltaic (PV) installation is assessed. The plant consists of a grid-connected centralized system, where the supplied power is not associated with a particular electricity customer. Operational data from this PV plant, ground-mounted and located in the north of Portugal, are now available for a period of 3 years. The plant is equipped with PV modules (amorphous Si cells), with 60 Wp per module, and a total generating capacity of 124.2 kWp. In this installation, 24 inverters are used. To obtain an accurate prediction of the efficiency and power output, the characteristics of all plant components were introduced in the PVsyst software and TRNSYS software, together with meteorological data: either those collected at a local meteorological station or those provided by Meteonorm. The results obtained through the simulations and the measured output power values were compared. The results showed that both PVsyst and TRNSYS seem to be good tools to predict the annual electrical production of a PV plant, with an average relative difference in the results between both around 2%. In the simulations, parameters like orientation and inclination of the PV modules were analyzed and recommendations for improving the PV system production are given. The results showed that in the annual electrical production, the effect of panel tilt angle is more significant than the effect of panel orientation.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/aip/journal/jrse/7/6/1.4935376.html;jsessionid=_twKwYLkLKg06F56po7frg_w.x-aip-live-02?itemId=/content/aip/journal/jrse/7/6/10.1063/1.4935376&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah&containerItemId=content/aip/journal/jrse
true
true

Access Key

  • FFree Content
  • OAOpen Access Content
  • SSubscribed Content
  • TFree Trial Content
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
/content/realmedia?fmt=ahah&adPositionList=
&advertTargetUrl=//oascentral.aip.org/RealMedia/ads/&sitePageValue=jrse.aip.org/7/6/10.1063/1.4935376&pageURL=http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/jrse/7/6/10.1063/1.4935376'
Right1,Right2,Right3,