SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
This white paper, published by Nextracker, presents findings from PVEL's DOE-funded outdoor bifacial field study to explain potential for bifacial gain in dual-axis tracker mounting configurations. Data from PVEL's study also informed Nextracker's modeling and system design recommendations.
Abstract Bifacial CdTe solar cells with greater power density than the monofacial baselines are demonstrated by using a CuGaO x rear interface buffer that passivates while reducing sheet resistance and contact resistance. Inserting CuGaO x between the CdTe and Au increases mean power density from 18.0 ± 0.5 to 19.8 ± 0.4 mW cm −2 for one sun front illumination. However, coupling CuGaO x with a transparent conductive oxide leads to an electrical barrier. Instead, CuGaO x is integrated with cracked film lithography (CFL)‐patterned metal grids. CFL grid wires are spaced narrowly enough (≈10 µm) to alleviate semiconductor resistance while retaining enough passivation and transmittance for a bifacial power gain: bifacial CuGaO x /CFL grids generate 19.1 ± 0.6 mW cm −2 for 1 sun front + 0.08 sun rear illumination and 20.0 ± 0.6 mW cm −2 at 1 sun front + 0.52 sun rear—the highest reported power density at field albedo conditions for a scaled polycrystalline absorber.
The performance of bifacial PV systems depends greatly on the installed conditions. Previous simulations and results have shown very high bifacial gain improvement, but this may not be the case for all conditions, particularly for large-scale systems with self-shading, lower-cost PV modules (PERC) which might have lower bifaciality coefficient, and field deployments over natural ground cover. But not to worry! Financial models indicate that even with these lower performance conditions, and with bifacial gain of 4%-7%, bifacial modules can still provide improved LCOE.
Not Available
This work presents one year results for a side-by-side comparison of 5 different bifacial technologies, deployed in a 75-kW single-axis tracked field at Golden, CO. Four PERC (multi and mono) and 1 Silicon Heterojunction manufacturers are represented. Reference strings of equivalent monofacial PV modules are also installed for a direct technology comparison and calculation of bifacial gain. Analysis indicates performance within expectation, with a cumulative model mean error within +/- 2% for both bifacial and monofacial models and cumulative bifacial energy gain between 6-9%. High accuracy string-level DC monitoring and module-level measurements are also presented, showing effects of snow and edge effects in the order of +/- 3% for non-uniform irradiance across the row. Data from a custom-module to measure shading loss from the torque-tube is installed, showing up to 6% irradiance non-uniformity for the month of January.
This paper presents the first systematic comparison between south-facing monofacial and bifacial photovoltaic (PV) modules, as well as between south-facing bifacial and vertical east-west facing bifacial PV modules in Alaska. The state’s solar industry, driven by the high price of energy and dropping equipment costs, is quickly growing. The challenges posed by extreme sun angles in Alaska’s northern regions also present opportunities for unique system designs. Annual bifacial gains of 21% were observed between side by side south-facing monofacial and bifacial modules. Vertical east-west bifacial modules had virtually the same annual production as south-facing latitude tilt bifacial modules, but with different energy production profiles.
This study compares three rear-side irradiance modeling methods for bifacial PV systems on single-axis trackers: (i) the 2D View Factor (VF) model in PVsyst(R), (ii) the open-source PVFactors VF model, and (iii) the Ray Tracing (RT) technique using bifacial_radiance. Simulations were benchmarked against field measurements from a pilot PV plant with rear-side sensors at the torque tube height. Results show that all models underestimated the non-uniformity of rear irradiance along the module length and overestimated the total rear irradiance incident on the module. However, since bifacial gain represents only a fraction of the system's total energy, the resulting energy yield differences among methods remained within +- 2 % of measured values, which is typical for such simulations. While the overall energy impact is limited, this study characterizes the specific limitations of each modeling approach, supporting further improvements in bifacial PV performance assessment methods.
The bifacial single-axis tracking field at NREL has been collecting now data for 3 years, for different bifacial PV technologies. Through this presentation, we will see the overall bifacial gains from the various PERCs and SHJ in the field, which are compared to their monofacial counterpart technologies, as well as degradations and investigation into some of the rows performance losses. We will present results on best sensor locations, as well as preliminary results on albedo material placement optimization and agrivoltaics also explored on this site.
This work presents improvements to the widely used NREL PVWatts photovoltaic system energy model to improve modeling accuracy for typical fixed and one axis system designs. The aim is to calculate losses in the PV system assuming typical modern system design practices, while maintaining simplicity by keeping the required set of input parameters small. These improvements allow users to more credibly and quickly evaluate competing system designs in early stage feasibility. Common submodels for module cover, spectral, snow, tracker, transformer, plant controller, and self-shading losses, in addition to a bifacial gain option, are incorporated into the PVWatts model, and are shown to improve PVWatts' system performance prediction capabilities without major impact to ease of use. We anticipate including these improvements in a future release of NREL's open source PVWatts code, and some of the features may become available in the System Advisor Model (SAM) desktop software as well as the popular PVWatts web application.
This is the final technical report for the Cypress Creek Renewables project focused on bifacial plant performance. The project consisted of building a heavily instrumented Bifacial test sites with several cell technologies; instrumenting >1 MW scale commercial sites with both monofacial and bifacial arrays in order to understand real-world differences; and to engage with the performance modeling and financial stakeholder community to improve accuracy and increase investor confidence. The data from the test and commercial sites has been used to validate and improve the accuracy of both physics-based and reduced order modeling software. The heavily instrumented nature has been used to understand how light contributions from the sky and reflected from the ground impact different portions of the module and array while the data from the commercial sites has directly impacted how independent engineers model production from bifacial systems. The latter point has led to an increase in over 2% compared to earlier predictions. Even this modest increase has had significant downward pressure on project LCOE. As the data and results are both public, this refined modeling and empirical evidence for a higher bifacial gain than modeled, the benefits to the broader US solar community are assured.
This conference presentation provides an overview of interim test results and findings from PVEL's DOE-funded bifacial study, including monthly comparisons of bifacial and monofacial yield by manufacturer and cell type and an analysis of bifacial gain versus irradiance.
As part of the PV Magazine Webinar 'View-factor vs. ray tracing - which bifacial modelling techniques should you use?,' the second part lead by NREL will explore the different rear-irradiance calculation software, which fall into two categories: view-factor and ray-tracing models. View factor models assume isotropic scattering of reflected rays, allowing for calculation of irradiance by integration. Due-diligence software such as PVSyst or SAM use the view-factor model. Ray-tracing models simulate multipath reflection and absorption of individual rays entering a scene. Raytracing software such as bifacial_radiance, which is the only available open-source toolkit, offers the possibility of reproducing complex scenes, including shading or finite-system edge effects. This can be useful to evaluate specific system geometries, shading and obstructions, areas of different albedo and electrical mismatch, all topics of interest to the prediction of bifacial performance. Model agreement for view factors and bifacial_radiance software is improving and has been shown to be between 2% (absolute) when compared with measured results.
This presentation for a Nextracker-sponsored virtual symposium and webinar series leveraged PVEL's DOE-funded outdoor bifacial field study to explain potential for bifacial gain in dual-axis tracker mounting configurations. Data from PVEL's study also informed the modeling findings presented by Nextracker.
This webinar presentation summarizes initial results from PVEL's DOE-funded outdoor bifacial field study at PVUSA and well as data from PVEL's indoor bifacial reliability testing. Highlights from PVEL's DOE-funded research include daily and monthly bifacial gains by manufacturer over different albedos and by time of day.
We present results for a 75-kW field array deployed with rows of 5 different commercially available bifacial technologies. Four PERC (multi and mono) and 1 Silicon Heterojunction manufacturers are represented. Reference strings of equivalent monofacial PV modules are also installed in the 10-row field. High accuracy string-level DC monitoring and module-level measurements have been recorded for six months. Analysis indicates performance within expectation, with a cumulative model mean error within +/- 2% for both bifacial and monofacial models and cumulative bifacial energy gain between 6-9%. A custom-module to measure shading loss from the torque-tube was installed. One month data shows up to 6% irradiance non-uniformity. A fixed-tilt test-site with 3 years of bifacial data is also presented, with a bifacial gain of 3%.
The cost delta between monofacial and bifacial photovoltaic (PV) modules was decreasing in 2018 when this study was initially proposed, making bifacial modules an attractive offering. However, there were limited field studies available that could be considered utility-scale representative, and PV module manufacturers were stating large ranges for the expected energy yield improvements of bifacial technology. This generated uncertainties regarding bifacial performance gains and the actual LCOE (levelized cost of energy). There was also relatively low confidence in the industry’s energy modeling tools’ ability to accurately predict bifacial energy yield, meaning that early adopters of bifacial modules were not able to fully account for the increased energy yield in their energy and financial models. The intent of this project was to provide the solar industry with greater certainty on the energy yield gains of bifacial modules and provide higher confidence in the ability for different energy modeling software to model bifacial PV site performance. Achieving this would allow for bifacial technology to become bankable (i.e. accepted by Independent Engineers, site financiers and other PV site stakeholders), offering a step change in PV site performance that had not been seen since the widespread adoption of the single-axis tracker. Over the course of this study other economic factors including a significant tariff exemption for bifacial modules resulted in accelerated adoption of bifacial technology throughout the US utility scale solar segment. The number of early adopters increased rapidly, and with many investors accepting this module choice the question of bifacial bankability was seemingly answered faster than expected. However, PVEL’s study has still achieved significant accomplishments in demonstrating the accuracy of bifacial modeling across three different software platforms. The results of this study have shown that the mean biased error (MBE) between the field data and the predicted values from all three software platforms were aligned with a maximum MBE of 1.3% and a minimum MBE of -1.8%.
This project has four main technical objectives. Develop and improve bifacial performance models by adding the capability to evaluate electrical behavior and performance of bifacial modules and arrays under realistic field conditions including irradiance variability caused by racking, module frame, and position in the array. Instrument and monitor performance of fielded bifacial systems to validate performance models and to measure, analyze and publish on bifacial energy gain. These should include both research and commercial bifacial systems and cover a variety of deployment applications. Evaluate optimal bifacial system designs using simulations leveraging high performance computing, and also using full sized and miniaturized experimental field deployments. Establish and contribute to international test standards for bifacial system performance, testing, and safety, and work with the community to establish installation and siting best practices.
This project has four main technical objectives: 1) Develop and improve bifacial performance models by adding the capability to evaluate electrical behavior and performance of bifacial modules and arrays under realistic field conditions including irradiance variability caused by racking, module frame, and position in the array. 2) Instrument and monitor performance of fielded bifacial systems to validate performance models and to measure, analyze and publish on bifacial energy gain. These should include both research and commercial bifacial systems and cover a variety of deployment applications. 3) Evaluate optimal bifacial system designs using simulations leveraging high-performance computing, and also using full sized and miniaturized experimental field deployments. 4) Establish and contribute to international test standards for bifacial system performance, testing, and safety, and work with the community to establish installation and siting best practices.