Bitec: How To Simulate Bifacial Projects?

BiTEC Results 2 - Fall 2018 – Winter 2019
BiTEC: How to
simulate bifacial
projects?
Evaluations over a 6-month period at BiTEC confirm that the SF7 Bifacial
solar trackers in 2P obtain 2.2% more Bifacial Gain than 1P trackers.
Authors:
Javier Guerrero-Perez holds a Ph.D. in Renewable Energy. His professional activity spans over ten years in the solar industry
within multinational EPC operations. He has published several papers on modelling electrical behavior of both PV modules
and inverters, oriented to large scale simulation. Since 2015, when he was part of the team of La Silla PV plant (2015), current
research lines are focused on modelling the bifacial PV modules behavior while he is managing Soltec’s Bifacial Tracker
Evaluation Center in Livermore, California.
José Navarro Berbel holds a Master of Science degree in Sustainable Energy of the Technical University of Denmark. He has
worked as a Termotechnology Product Manager and right now he is a simulation specialist at bifacial solar plants in Soltec.
Evaluations carried out at BiTEC over a 6-month period confirm that SF7 Bifacial solar trackers with a two-in-
portrait configuration (2P) obtain 2.2% more Bifacial Gain than trackers with a one-in-portrait configuration
(1P)
BiTEC field data shows that individual bifacial modules mounted in SF7 Bifacial solar trackers provide 17%
more Bifacial Gain under high albedo conditions (60%) and 11% under medium albedo conditions (30%)
The specific performance and advantages of bifacial trackers can be simulated using software such as
PVsyst®, provided bifacial parameters from BiTEC are properly entered.
1. ABSTRACT
This whitepaper is the second part of a summary presenting the results obtained from November 2018 until March 2019 at
Soltec’s Bifacial Tracker Evaluation Center (BiTEC) in Livermore, CA, USA. BiTEC studied Bifacial Gain in photovoltaic modules
developed according to the two most common tracker market configurations nowadays: one-in-portrait (1P) and two-in-portrait
(2P). Results obtained during fall and winter months show that individual modules in two-in-portrait configuration trackers obtain
a Bifacial Gain of 16.8% under high albedo conditions (59.6%), which is 2.2% more than the same modules under a 1P configuration
trackers for identical conditions.
This document also presents model parameters adjusted according to BiTEC results, providing guidance in the use
of PVsyst® to estimate tracking system power generation performance. PVsyst® makes it possible to simulate field-
measured parameters by adjusting the values of Structure Shading Factor, Shed Transparent Fraction, Field Thermal Loss
Factors and Mismatch Loss Factor.
Besides, the document presents the main Bifacial Gain differences between the two main solar tracker types in the marketplace:
one-in-portrait (1P) and two-in-portrait (2P).
2. INTRODUCTION
As explained in the previous whitepaper, the high power generation of bifacial modules is revolutionizing the
world of solar energy. Bifacial technology is also transforming the design of fixed and tracking structures, and
even that of photovoltaic plants themselves.
To ensure power generation estimates allow us to compare and choose the best equipment for each project,
it is necessary to enter accurate parameters, preferably based on actual field data [1].
Tests at BiTEC provide information on the bifacial ratio for SF7 Bifacial trackers under various albedo conditions.
The table includes an example of data use to estimate maximum Bifacial Gain obtainable with different types
of modules installed on the SF7 Bifacial tracker, depending on module bifaciality.
Albedo Bifacial Ratio Module Bifaciality Bifacial Gain

(%) (%) (p.u.) (6 Months, %)
Fall 19.2% 0.75 7.2
Seasonal Winter 17.2% 10% 0.80 7.7
6 months 18.4% 0.85 8.2
Fall 62.8% 0.75 15.8
White Winter 55.5% 21% 0.80 16.8
6 months 59.6% 0.85 17.9
Table 1. Estimated Bifacial Gain for modules with different bifaciality as a function of measured bifacial ratio during half year (period fall and winter) at SF7 Bifacial
Source: BiTEC
Bifacial module field test results obtained at BiTEC show that for seasonal albedo conditions of 18.4%, Bifacial
Gain amounts to 7.7%. Under high albedo (59.6%), the Bifacial Gain is 16.8%.
3. 1P SOLAR TRACKERS VS. 2P SOLAR TRACKERS
BiTEC is designed to study bifacial module performance under various conditions of albedo, unit height,
distance between rows and module temperatures, amongst others. Another key focus of research at BiTEC
is to determine the best tracker design for bifacial module installation.
©Soltec, all rights reserved. The total or partial exploitation, reproduction, distribution, public communication or alteration of this work is prohibited
2 without the written authorization of Soltec.
In today’s solar tracker market there are two trends when it comes to tracker configuration: one-in-portrait
(1P) and two-in-portrait (2P). This definition refers to module position. When modules are aligned in a vertical
row, the tracker is called “one-in-portrait” or 1P. When modules are aligned in two vertical rows, the tracker
is called “two-in-portrait” or 2P tracker. Figure 1 shows examples of modules in 1P and 2P configurations.
1P - Torque tube 2P - SF7 Bifacial - Gap
Figure 1. Example of rear shading on 1P and 2P. 1a) One-in-portrait. 1b) Two-in-portrait SF7 Bifacial
BiTEC continued assessing the Bifacial Gain of individual modules in 1P and 2P tracker configurations during the
winter season. In July 2018, bifacial modules Jolywood JW-D72N-355 were installed in a 2P configuration on a
SF7 Bifacial tracker (module height in horizontal position: 2.35 m) and a module of the same type was installed
on a 1P tracker (module height in horizontal position: 1.35 meters). The surface on which trackers were installed
had the same albedo (59.6%) and trackers had the same GCR (0.4).
Table 2 shows Bifacial Gain calculation results, estimated in relation to the standardized generation of monofacial
module Jinko JKM320PP-72 for the period from September 2018 to March 2019. Modules on the SF7 Bifacial
tracker in a 2P configuration under high albedo conditions (about 60%) during the referred six months obtained
2.2% more Bifacial Gain than the same modules in a 1P tracker configuration.
Module Albedo GCR 0.4 Bifacial Gain (%)

Configuration
Height (m) (%) Pitch (m) Fall Winter Overall �
2P (SF7 Bifacial) 2.35 59.6 10 19.2 14.3 16.8 2.2
1P 1.35 59.6 5 16.8 12.6 14.6
Table 2. Bifacial Gain calculation for modules on trackers in 1P and 2P configurations for 6 months. Source: BiTEC
Table 3 suggests a theoretical breakdown for this Bifacial Gain difference of 2.2%. As above-mentioned, 1.3% of
it comes from a lower average module operating temperature and 0.7% corresponds to the lack of torque tube
module shading. The remaining 0.2% results from other factors relating to the design of a structure optimized
for bifacial modules.
Parameters Calculated Bifacial Gain
Lower average module temperature (better cooling) +1.3%
No torque tube shading +0.7%
Higher module height and pitch, and other design details. +0.2%
Total +2.2%
Table 3. Bifacial Gain difference measured in SF7 Bifacial solar trackers compared to 1P tracker. Theoretical breakdown. Source: BiTEC
4. HOW TO SIMULATE BIFACIAL PROJECTS?

The high-power generation of bifacial modules has revolutionized the world of solar energy. However, the lack
of state-of-the-art Bifacial Gain field data makes it difficult to accurately estimate the potential Bifacial Gain
of future projects [2]. Knowing the exact power generation of a bifacial module versus a monofacial module,
or determining Bifacial Gain depending on plant location or soil type, are key aspects to be considered. To
assess this data, simulation software needs to be used.
Most photovoltaic simulation software estimates consider the effect of solar radiation reflected onto
the ground. However, they don’t model radiation and reflection behavior with the level of detail needed
for accurate Bifacial Gain estimation, especially in the case of solar tracking systems. The most popular
commercial photovoltaic simulation software, PVsyst®, provides long-term simulations, estimating module
plane radiation and considering atmospheric effects. This includes module properties (e.g. degradation) and
accurately simulates electrical aspects such as inverter clipping and MPPT. This simulation software is a very
useful design tool. Software modeling reduces computational costs by reducing the number of simulations
to obtain results within a reasonable timeline. In the case of solar trackers, these programs tend to simulate
only one tracking angle per hour. Detailed photovoltaic plant modeling at a scale level to compare existing
tracker technologies by accurately simulating effects such as reflections on the surrounding area, terrain
with variable slope, or special tracking algorithms, would really take days. To estimate the generation
capabilities of a specific technology, if conveniently managed, PVsyst® can consider these and other effects
by employing numerical parameters previously calculated outside the program.
Some software are specifically designed for bifacial modules. NREL Bifacial Radiance [3], for instance, uses
a Raytracing Model [4] applied to lighting design in buildings. This simulation tool provides a physically
realistic image representation and a lighting map that are useful to obtain a detailed profile of the rear
irradiance of a solar panel. Then, it is possible to simulate and analyze the specificities of bifacial modules
and their performance in tracking systems. Despite model accuracy, Bifacial Radiance is intended exclusively
for irradiance performance simulation and, although it can be used to determine a site’s bifacial ratio, it does
not provide a complete photovoltaic plant power generation performance model. Thus, it does not offer a
conclusive generated power value.
Another program used to simulate bifacial module generation is System Advisor Model (SAM), which does
estimate Bifacial Gain based on three parameters:
-- Transmission fraction, which specifies the percentage of the panel area that allows sunlight to pass through.
-- Bifaciality fraction, which refers to relative front side efficiency compared to rear side efficiency.
-- Ground clearance height, which is the distance between the ground and the lowest part of the
photovoltaic module.
4.1 PVsyst® bifacial parameter simulation at BiTEC
Versions 6.7 and above of PVsyst® feature a bifacial tracker simulation algorithm that includes electrical
modelling for long-term simulations. This program uses a simplified model assuming that photovoltaic
modules are an air-suspended continuous plane. It also uses manually-adjusted parameters to adjust rear
irradiation effects, namely: Structure Shading Factor, Shed Transparent Fraction, Field Thermal Loss Factors
and Mismatch Loss Factor. Variables directly impacting Bifacial Gain and how they can be simulated on
PVsyst® are presented below.
4.1.1 Albedo
As explained in the first whitepaper released in March 2019, the most determining factor of Bifacial Gain is
ground albedo, a property that changes depending on color and surface characteristics. Grounds of light
color and soft texture have higher albedo and favor increased power generation in bifacial-module sites.
Pictures in Figure 2 show how albedo changes throughout the year (seasonal albedo) at BiTEC. Field data
reveal that seasonal albedo remained stable around 19% until the rainy season, that in California started by
late November 2018. From then on, grass growth caused a reduction of the albedo to 17%, until grass was
eventually cut in March 2019.
Figure 2. Grass growth at seasonal albedo areas from September (left) to March (right). Source: BiTEC
It was noticed that during the humid season, rain puddles caused surface reflection with an atypical effect
on bifacial modules [Figure 3]. Despite the interest of such reflection, it is important to mention that short-
lived albedo increases do not translate into significant power generation gains. In fact, albedo decreases
during subsequent days due to the dark color of wet ground reflects less sunlight.
Figure 3. Example of reflection effects produced by puddles on January 2019. Source: BiTEC
Field data of Table 4 confirms that surface changes directly impact albedo values and, in turn, the Bifacial Gain.
Albedo (%) Bifacial Gain (%)

Type of ground Area
Fall Winter 6 Months Fall Winter 6 Months
White 62.8 55.5 59.6 19.2 14.3 16.8
Gravel 32 25.5 30.4 11.9 9.3 11.1
Seasonal 19.2 17.2 18.4 7.9 6.5 7.7
Table 4. Bifacial Gain for SF7 Bifacial tracker for each albedo measured for 6 months. Source: BiTEC
As seen in Figure 4, Bifacial Gain performance over the months tends to have a linear trend in terms of
albedo values.
Figure 4. Bifacial relation to albedo
BiTEC also measured the power generation of a SF7 Bifacial tracker with a 2P configuration mounting
a Jolywood JW-D72N-355 panels, 10-meter pitch between trackers, and three different albedos (white,
seasonal, and gravel). Following the same procedure established for the previous whitepaper [4], Bifacial
Gain was assessed in relation to a monofacial module Jinko JKM320PP-72 under the same conditions.
The graph on Figure 5 represents Bifacial Gain evolution for the three albedo scenarios at BiTEC (left axis),
as well as irradiation on the front side of the module (right axis). A detailed analysis of the winter period
shows that Bifacial Gain tends to decrease with the lower irradiation values of the winter months.
Figure 5. Bifacial Gain of Jolywood modules on SF7 Bifacial for GCR 0.4. Evolution with year and dependence with irradiance. Source: BiTEC
This performance is commensurate with decreased albedo measurement values, especially in the case of
seasonal albedo and tall grass. Operating experience seems to support the hypothesis that albedo, and in turn
the radiation reflected by the rear side of modules, decreases in humid environments and with higher solar angles
during winter months (under the latitude conditions of BiTEC).
Although Bifacial Gain values during winter months are lower, Bifacial Gain sensitivity over the period is not
relevant due to significant month-on-month irradiation differences between summer and winter recorded in this
latitude (Livermore, California).
It is important to mention that estimating Bifacial Gain for a long-term analysis requires the use of representative
albedo values throughout the observed period. This document uses an annual effective average albedo,
calculated as a weighted average dependent on horizontal irradiation of the daily albedo. In other words, albedo
values during periods with higher radiation will weigh more in the final estimated value.
Bifacial Gain results for various average effective albedo combinations between September 2018 and March 2019
are included in Table 5.
Types of Ground Albedo (%) Pitch (m) Bifacial Gain (%)
Scenario A: White 59.6 10 16.8
Scenario B: Gravel 30.4 10 11.1
Scenario C: Seasonal 18.4 10 7.7
Interpolation 38 10 12.8
Table 5. Estimated Bifacial Gain of Jolywood modules on a SF7 Bifacial solar tracker with a 10-meter pitch between trackers measured between September 2018 and
March 2019 for different types of ground. Source: BiTEC
When simulating annual generation for a bifacial photovoltaic project on PVsyst®, it is important to consider that
albedo is one of the most sensitive variables and that only one fixed albedo value per month can be used in the
program, so it is needed to establish the same albedo value for the hole month. In this case, the average effective
albedo value provides more realistic results. In case of limited data availability, we could use the average effective
annual albedo value with similar results
Figure 6. Albedo PVsyst® location.
4.1.2 Structure Shading Factor and Shed Transparent Factor

Shading negatively impacts photovoltaic performance of both monofacial and bifacial modules. Shading causes
a partial generation output loss, hence reducing photovoltaic project production and profitability.
In the case of solar trackers, the torque tube or axis is an element potentially shading rear side modules, thus
causing a power generation loss. However, PVsyst® (photovoltaic plant power generation simulation software)
does not model tracking system specificities. As above mentioned, PVsyst® considers that photovoltaic modules
are placed on an air-suspended continuous plane (Figure 7, upper pic) and does not simulate this direct output
loss. In any case, this loss could be simulated through the so-called Structure Shading Factor, which allows for
manual value modification to enhance simulation accuracy and realism.
In the case of SF7 Bifacial trackers, the Structure Shading Factor was calculated using the software Bifacial
Radiance 0.3.0 by NREL [3], comparing rear irradiance output for the complete model (Figure 7, lower pic) and
simplified model (Figure 7, upper pic). With this software it is possible to estimate rear radiation performance for
various models and with different levels of detail. Figure 7 shows a SF7 Bifacial 2P tracker model made by NREL
for Soltec, as well as the standard model of 1P tracker. These simulations were carried out over a one-year period
considering the climate parameters of BiTEC (Livermore, California) with a 28% albedo and a 0.33 GCR.
Figure 7. Evaluation of Structure Shading Factor as a detailed model comparison for a full year. 7-upper) Simplified model. 7-lower) Complete model. The percentages of
lost irradiation in the rear side are aligned to front side irradiation for a full year. Data Source: NREL
These simulations resulted in a shading factor value of -1.7% for Soltec’s SF7 Bifacial trackers. This “negative
shading” translates into increased radiation and, in turn, a higher production in the torque tube area. However,
since a negative Structure Shading Factor cannot be entered in PVsyst®, the best option is to set it up at 0% and
increase the Shed Transparent Fraction, as will be discussed later.
In the case of solar trackers with a one-in-portrait configuration (1P), the torque tube shading factor is 5.6%
according to NREL’s Bifacial Radiance software results. That represents a 0.7% power loss.
Figure 8. Structure Shading Factor PVsyst® location
The Shed Transparent Fraction in PVsyst® represents the amount

of light that passes through a row of modules and reaches the
ground. Such parameter does consider the space between cells
(if they are transparent) and the space between modules (if it is
transparent). The space between modules in SF7 Bifacial trackers
enables radiation to reach the central part of the tracker. Thus, to
optimize software simulation, it is necessary to aggregate a Shed
Transparent Fraction value of 3.75%. Additionally, this parameter
should be multiplied by 1.017 in order to consider the radiation
gain above-mentioned.
4.1.3 Simulation of thermodynamic effects: Thermal Loss
Factors (Uc & Uv)
Photovoltaic cell power generation decreases as operating
temperature increases. In the case of bifacial modules, which have
a higher operating current and tend to work at higher temperature,
designing systems that reduce operating temperatures could
lead to increased power generation.
Field data from BiTEC shows that 2P module temperatures tend
Figure 9: Shed Transparent Fraction PVsyst® location
to be lower than those of 1P trackers, as seen in Figure 10. SF7 Bifacial

tracker design allows for airflow through the tracker and considers
the installation of modules higher above the ground, hence favoring
overall cooling. Lower performance temperatures lead to increased
power generation.
Figure 10. Infrared imaging shows that upper 2P (right) tracker modules perform better at lower temperatures than 1P tracker modules (left). Source: BiTEC
PVsyst® can consider the structure’s cooling capacity by including two thermal heat transfer coefficients:
constant factor (Uc) and convective factor (Uv) [5]. Although these values can be manually modified, only a
constant tracker angle value can be entered in the software. It is inaccurate, because such values really vary
with the solar tracker tilt throughout the day.
BiTEC field data reveal that upper module temperatures in 2P trackers are lower than in standard 1P-configuration
trackers. Higher pitch and taller module installation, alongside a design enabling increased airflow through the
tracker, result in better photovoltaic system air-cooling respect of 1P trackers.
Based on infrared imaging taken at BiTEC, various simulations were made adjusting parameters until simulated
thermal losses reached the value of field-measured temperatures.
By default, Uc and Uv values on PVsyst® for a fixed structure with free airflow are Uc= 29 W / m2K and Uv= 0 W
/ m2K /m/s. However, based on result evaluation at BiTEC, Soltec recommends the following SF7 Bifacial tracker
values: Uc= 31 W/m2 K and Uv= 1.6 W/m2 K /m/s. With such values, it is possible to simulate power losses caused
by temperature as measured in BiTEC modules.
Figure 11. Thermal factors PVsyst® location
4.1.4 Module height and Mismatching Loss Factor

Module height may affect rear side module irradiation, meaning that modules further away from the ground
receive more diffuse radiation than those closer to the ground [6]. Besides, modules sitting higher above the
ground receive more reflected radiation and tend to operate at lower temperature.
Module elevation: 2 m | α = 0.5 Module elevation: 1 m | α = 0.5
Figure 12. Irradiance at the module rear side (W/m2) on an exemplary summer day in Cairo. No homogeneity irradiation in the rear module plane at low clearance. Source:
RWTH Aachen University - ISC [6]
Rear side module irradiation is not homogeneously distributed, meaning some module areas may receive more
radiation depending on tracker tilting. Such module irradiation variation may lead to a power loss than can
be accounted for in PVsyst® as a percentage generation loss known as mismatching loss. In other words, a
generated power loss caused by generation misalignment inside the actual module. This value is not fixed and
depends on height of the module in each angle. Thus, such radiation would also be distributed differently in 1P
and 2P trackers.
In a bifacial system, in which rear side module radiation depends on reflections from various elements, radiation
absorbed by different module parts is most likely heterogeneous. PVsyst® does not consider this non-
homogeneous radiation, simulating it as constant radiation mismatching in the module rear side. In fact, the
default program value is 10%, which according to Figure 12, could be a valid value for a lower structure.
To learn more about rear radiation distribution, Soltec installed numerous pyranometers cross-sectionally to the
module in 1P tracker and in a 2P SF7 Bifacial tracker by Soltec. A comparison of the field-data in both trackers
and the simulations from Bifacial Radiance of NREL revealed a rear side an average Mismatch Loss Factor of 3.1%
in the SF7 Bifacial tracker, while the preset value in PVsyst® is 10%. In other words, increased height of the SF7
Bifacial Tracker reduces mismatch losses. Hence, PV designers should use a Mismatch loss factor in PVsyst® of
3.1% for SF7 Bifacial solar tracker.
4.1.5 Summary of parameters adjustments in
PVsyst® for the SF7 Bifacial tracker
Table 6 presents a summary of the adjustments that
PV designers should consider when simulating in
PVsyst® with Soltec’s SF7 Bifacial tracker. The table
also shows the values for a 1P-configuration tracker, as
Figure 13. Mismatch Loss Factor PVsyst® location measured at BiTEC.
Parameters Standard 1P trackers SF7 Bifacial
Angle - -60º +60º
Height 1.35 meters 2.35 meters
Structure Shading Factor 5.6% 0%
Shed Transparent Fraction 0% (MT + 3.75) x 1.017
Thermal Loss factor Thermal factor (Uc) 29 W/m2 k 31 W/m2 k
Thermal Loss Factor (Uv) 0 W/m2 k/m/s 1.6 W/m2 k/m/s
Mismatch Loss Factor 10 % 3.1 %
Table 6. SF7 parameter PVsyst® adjustment *MT=Module Transparency
5. CONCLUSIONS
Field data from BiTEC obtained between September 2018 and March 2019 show a Bifacial Gain of 17% for
individual bifacial tracker modules with an albedo of about 60%. Under seasonal albedo conditions, in which
ground albedo changes throughout the year and is lower in the winter due to taller grass, Bifacial Gain was 7.9%
in the fall and 6.5% in the winter. Lower irradiation values in winter months minimize negative impacts on annual
Bifacial Gain, which is eventually quantified at 7.7%.
Data gathered for six months (fall and winter) confirms that Bifacial Gain for SF7 Bifacial tracker modules is
higher than in a solar tracker with 1P configuration. This difference is mainly caused by the lack of shading in the
rear side of the module, by the higher position of the solar panels, and by a lower operating temperature.
The specific performance and advantages of bifacial modules can be simulated using available software, such as
PVsyst®, provided bifacial parameters are properly entered. In this paper, BiTEC results were used to adjust the
set of parameters enabling a Bifacial Gain simulation that is more accurate and commensurate with field data. To
do that, it is necessary to adjust the values for Structure Shading factor, Shed Transparent fraction, Field Thermal
Loss factors and Mismatch Loss factor.
Most of the solar projects from 2020 will install bifacial modules. Thus, structures specifically designed to optimize
bifacial generation are key for solar stakeholders. Replacing monofacial modules with bifacial modules brings new
challenges and the need for an enhanced design system that maximizes power generation. Upcoming challenges
are the update of tracking algorithms with the aim to optimize bifacial technology performance.
6. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES
[1] Ayala Pelaez et al. 2019. The subtle art of bifacial performance modeling, 12th PV Performance Modeling Workshop,
Albuquerque, NM. On-line link:
https://pvpmc.sandia.gov/download/7213/
[2] Pelaez, S.A., C. Deline, P. Greenberg, J. Stein, and R.K. Kostuk. 2018. “Model and Validation of Single-Axis Tracker
with Bifacial Photovoltaics: Preprint.” Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/CP-5K00-72039. On-
line link:
https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy19osti/72039.pdf
[3] NREL, Bifacial_Radiance 0.2.3 , bifacial irradiance simulation software. Online reference:
https://github.com/NREL/bifacial_radiance
[4] Stein et al. 2019. Bifacial Photovoltaic Performance Optimization Using Ray Tracing and High Performance
Computing, Keynote presentation at Photonics North, Quebec City, Canada. On-line link:
https://pvpmc.sandia.gov/download/7213/
[5] Faiman, D. (2008). “Assessing the outdoor operating temperature of photovoltaic modules.” Progress in
Photovoltaics 16(4): 307-315.
[6] U. Yusufoglu T. Lee, T. Pletzer, H.Kurz, A. Halm, L.J. Koduvelikulathu C. Comparotto, R. Kopecek. “Modeling and
simulation of annual energy yields of bifacial modules at different climate zones” 2014 Bifacial PV Workshop, Chambery,
May 27, 2014. On-line link:
https://www.slideshare.net/sandiaecis/3-yusufoglu-ok

Bitec: How To Simulate Bifacial Projects?

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bitec: How To Simulate Bifacial Projects?

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BiTEC Results 2 - Fall 2018 – Winter 2019

BiTEC Results 2 - Fall 2018 – Winter 2019

Albedo Bifacial Ratio Module Bifaciality Bifacial Gain

1P - Torque tube 2P - SF7 Bifacial - Gap

Module Albedo GCR 0.4 Bifacial Gain (%)

Parameters Calculated Bifacial Gain

Lower average module temperature (better cooling) +1.3%

No torque tube shading +0.7%

4. HOW TO SIMULATE BIFACIAL PROJECTS?

Albedo (%) Bifacial Gain (%)

Figure 4. Bifacial relation to albedo

Types of Ground Albedo (%) Pitch (m) Bifacial Gain (%)

Scenario A: White 59.6 10 16.8

Scenario B: Gravel 30.4 10 11.1

Scenario C: Seasonal 18.4 10 7.7

Figure 6. Albedo PVsyst® location.

4.1.2 Structure Shading Factor and Shed Transparent Factor

Figure 8. Structure Shading Factor PVsyst® location

The Shed Transparent Fraction in PVsyst® represents the amount

to be lower than those of 1P trackers, as seen in Figure 10. SF7 Bifacial

Figure 11. Thermal factors PVsyst® location

4.1.4 Module height and Mismatching Loss Factor

Module elevation: 2 m | α = 0.5 Module elevation: 1 m | α = 0.5

Parameters Standard 1P trackers SF7 Bifacial

Angle - -60º +60º

Height 1.35 meters 2.35 meters

Structure Shading Factor 5.6% 0%

Shed Transparent Fraction 0% (MT + 3.75) x 1.017

Thermal Loss factor Thermal factor (Uc) 29 W/m2 k 31 W/m2 k

Thermal Loss Factor (Uv) 0 W/m2 k/m/s 1.6 W/m2 k/m/s

Mismatch Loss Factor 10 % 3.1 %

Table 6. SF7 parameter PVsyst® adjustment *MT=Module Transparency

You might also like