Shading and masking affect the performance of photovoltaic systems—a review

J. Appelbaum; J. Appelbaum

doi:10.3934/energy.2019.1.77

AIMS Energy

2019, Volume 7, Issue 1: 77-87. doi: 10.3934/energy.2019.1.77

Previous Article Next Article

Review Special Issues

Shading and masking affect the performance of photovoltaic systems—a review

J. Appelbaum ^,

School of Electrical Engineering, Tel Aviv University, Israel

Received: 24 December 2018 Accepted: 28 January 2019 Published: 31 January 2019

Photovoltaic collectors in the second and in the subsequent rows in a multiple row deployment of PV fields are subject to two effects: Shading and masking both of which reduce the incident solar radiation, and hence reduce the electric energy generated by the PV field. Shading affects the direct beam incident radiation and masking (expressed by the sky view factor) affects the diffuse incident radiation on the PV modules. Both effects depend on field and collector geometric parameters. The result of these effects is uneven distribution of the incident solar radiation on the PV modules, manifested by formation of steps across the I-V characteristic. However, these two effects differ in their nature-shading depends on the movement of the sum and is time dependent whereas masking is position dependent and attains constant values, dependent on geometrical parameters only. Not much attention was paid in the past to the masking phenomenon and its effect on the power loss of PV systems. A series of recent works show that masking in PV fields is an emerging topic of technical significance. Masking may be more detrimental than shading, especially at locations with high percentage of diffuse radiation.

Keywords:

Citation: J. Appelbaum. Shading and masking affect the performance of photovoltaic systems—a review[J]. AIMS Energy, 2019, 7(1): 77-87. doi: 10.3934/energy.2019.1.77

Related Papers:

[1]	Yuting Ding, Gaoyang Liu, Yong An . Stability and bifurcation analysis of a tumor-immune system with two delays and diffusion. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(2): 1154-1173. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022053
[2]	Shunyi Li . Hopf bifurcation, stability switches and chaos in a prey-predator system with three stage structure and two time delays. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(6): 6934-6961. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019348
[3]	Jianjun Paul Tian . The replicability of oncolytic virus: Defining conditions in tumor virotherapy. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2011, 8(3): 841-860. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2011.8.841
[4]	Qingfeng Tang, Guohong Zhang . Stability and Hopf bifurcations in a competitive tumour-immune system with intrinsic recruitment delay and chemotherapy. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(3): 1941-1965. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021101
[5]	LanJiang Luo, Haihong Liu, Fang Yan . Dynamic behavior of P53-Mdm2-Wip1 gene regulatory network under the influence of time delay and noise. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(2): 2321-2347. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023109
[6]	Suqi Ma . Low viral persistence of an immunological model. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2012, 9(4): 809-817. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2012.9.809
[7]	Hongying Shu, Wanxiao Xu, Zenghui Hao . Global dynamics of an immunosuppressive infection model with stage structure. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(3): 2082-2102. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020111
[8]	Hsiu-Chuan Wei . Mathematical modeling of tumor growth: the MCF-7 breast cancer cell line. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(6): 6512-6535. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019325
[9]	Juenu Yang, Fang Yan, Haihong Liu . Dynamic behavior of the p53-Mdm2 core module under the action of drug Nutlin and dual delays. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(4): 3448-3468. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021173
[10]	Yilong Li, Shigui Ruan, Dongmei Xiao . The Within-Host dynamics of malaria infection with immune response. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2011, 8(4): 999-1018. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2011.8.999

Abstract

References

[1]	Barra O, Conti M, Santamata E, et al. (1977) Shadows' effect in a large scale solar power plant. Sol Energy 19: 759–762. doi: 10.1016/0038-092X(77)90042-1
[2]	Appelbaum J, Bany J (1979) Shadow effect of adjacent solar collectors in large scale systems. Sol Energy 23: 497–508. doi: 10.1016/0038-092X(79)90073-2
[3]	Jones Jr RE, Burkhart JF (1981) Shading effect of collector row tilt toward the equator. Sol Energy 26: 563–565. doi: 10.1016/0038-092X(81)90171-7
[4]	Budin R, Budin L (1982) A mathematical model for shading calculations. Sol Energy 29: 339–349. doi: 10.1016/0038-092X(82)90249-3
[5]	Bany J, Appelbaum J (1987) The effect of shading on the design of a field of solar collectors. Sol Cells 20: 201–228. doi: 10.1016/0379-6787(87)90029-9
[6]	Groumpos PP, Kouzam KY (1987) A Generic approach to the shadow effect in large solar power systems. Sol Cells 22: 29–46. doi: 10.1016/0379-6787(87)90068-8
[7]	Elsayed MM (1991) Monthly-averaged daily shading factor for a collector field. Sol Energy 47: 287–297. doi: 10.1016/0038-092X(91)90120-L
[8]	Elsayed M, AI-Turki AM (1991) Calculation of shading factor for a collector field. Sol Energy 47: 413–424. doi: 10.1016/0038-092X(91)90109-A
[9]	Passias D, Kallback B (1984) Shading effects in rows of solar cell. Sol Cells 11: 281–291. doi: 10.1016/0379-6787(84)90017-6
[10]	Thakkar N, Cormode D, Lonij VPA, et al. (2010) A simple non-linear model for the effect of partial shade on PV systems, 2010 35th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference.
[11]	Quaschning V, Hanitsch R (1998) Increased energy yield of 50% at flat roof and field installations with optimized module structures, 2nd World Conference and Exhibition on Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conversion, Vienna, Austria, 1993–1996.
[12]	Appelbaum J, Aronescu (2018) The effect of sky diffuse radiation on photovoltaic fields. Renew Sust Energ 10.
[13]	Mirhosseini M, Saboonchi A (2011) Monte carlo method for calculating local factor for the practical case in material processing. Int Commun Heat Mass 38: 1142–1147. doi: 10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2011.05.003
[14]	Vujicic MR, Lavery NP, Brown SGR (2006) View factor calculation using the Monte Carlo method and numerical sensitivity. Commun Numer Meth Eng 22: 197–203.
[15]	Walker T, Xue SC, Barton GW (2010) Numerical determination of radiative view factors using ray tracing. J Heat Transfer 132: 6.
[16]	Bopche SB, Sridharan A (2009) Determination of view factors by contour integral technique. Ann Nucl Energy 36: 1681–1688. doi: 10.1016/j.anucene.2009.09.007
[17]	Walton GN (2002) Calculation of obstructed view factors by adaptive integration, NISTIR, 6925.
[18]	Martinez I, Radiative View Factors, 1995–2015.
[19]	Available from: http://www1.accsnet.ne.jp/~aml00731/c/thermal/View%20factor%20definition.pdf.
[20]	Maor T, Appelbaum J (2012) View factors of photovoltaic collector systems. J Sol Energy 86: 1701–1708.
[21]	Appelbaum J, Aronescu A (2016) View factors of photovoltaic collectors on roof tops. J Renew Sust Energ 8: 1–12.
[22]	Hottel HC, Sarofin AF (1967), Radiative transfer, McGraw-Hill series in mechanical engineering. New York, 31–39.
[23]	Duffie JA, Beckman WA (1991) Solar engineering of thermal processes, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
[24]	Peled A, Appelbaum J (2016) Minimizing the current mismatch from different locations of solar cells within a PV module by proposing new interconnections. Sol Energy 135: 840–847. doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2016.06.016
[25]	Peled A, Appelbaum J (2017) Enhancing the power output of PV modules by considering the view factor to sky effect and rearranging the interconnections of solar cells. Prog Photovoltaic 25: 810–818. doi: 10.1002/pip.2896
[26]	Peled A, Appelbaum J (2018) The view-factor effect shaping of I-V chatacteristics. Prog Photovoltaic 26: 273–280. doi: 10.1002/pip.2979
[27]	Appelbaum J (2016) Current mismatch in PV panels resulting from different locations of cells in the panel. Sol Energy 126: 264–275. doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2016.01.013
[28]	Aronescu A, Appelbaum J (2017) Design optimization of photovoltaic solar fields-insight and methodology. Renew Sust Energ Rev 76: 882–893. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.079

This article has been cited by:

1.	Gamze ACAVUT, İlknur YEŞİLÇINAR, Meltem UĞURLU, Kazım Emre KARAŞAHİN, Awareness of pregnant women about glucose tolerance test and the effect of media on test preferences, 2021, 8, 2148-7472, 283, 10.52880/sagakaderg.878436
2.	Elif Yıldız, Fatma Ketenci Gencer, Burcu Timur, Bergen Laleli Koc, Hakan Timur, Is maternal serum endocan level a novel marker in gestational diabetes mellitus?, 2023, 49, 1341-8076, 2310, 10.1111/jog.15733
3.	Nazan Vanlı Tonyalı, Burak Arslan, Serap Topkara Sucu, Kemal Sarsmaz, Müjde Can İbanoğlu, Gökçen Örgül, Gizem Aktemur, Aykan Yücel, Dilek Şahin, Does Second Trimester Maternal Serum Zonulin Level Predict Gestational Diabetes Mellitus?, 2024, 13, 2077-0383, 394, 10.3390/jcm13020394

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2019 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)