See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/318771329

Energy-efficiency gain by combination of PV modules and Trombe wall in the

low-energy building design

Article  in  Energy and Buildings · July 2017

DOI: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.07.073

CITATIONS READS

28 3,719

4 authors, including:

Xiaoqin Sun Svetlana Stevovic

Changsha University of Science and Technology Innovation Center, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering in Belgrade, Kraljice Marije …
42 PUBLICATIONS   857 CITATIONS    60 PUBLICATIONS   415 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

TR35030 View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Xiaoqin Sun on 10 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Energy and Buildings 152 (2017) 568–576

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy and Buildings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enbuild

Energy-efficiency gain by combination of PV modules and Trombe

wall in the low-energy building design
Jovana Jovanovic a,b , Xiaoqin Sun b,∗ , Svetlana Stevovic a,c , Jian Chen b
a
Faculty of Civil Engineering and Management, University Union Nikola Tesla, Belgrade 11 000, Serbia
b
School of Energy and Power Engineering, Changsha University of Science and Technology, Changsha 410114, China
c
Faculty of Ecology and Environmental Protection, University Union Nikola Tesla, Belgrade 11 000, Serbia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Ubiquitous modernization of building energy and management systems brings tendencies for an effective
Received 26 January 2017 integration of renewables in buildings. This article shows how solar energy can be in charge of energy
Received in revised form 4 May 2017 savings within a building by integration of solar systems with Trombe wall. Numerical calculations of
Accepted 25 July 2017
Trombe wall thermal resistance and its performances in comparison with a common wall are considered.
Available online 29 July 2017
Additionally, energy-efficiency gaining by a combination of PV modules and Trombe wall, using simula-
tions by SAM (System Advisor Model) software is discussed. PV module parameters and their impact on
Keywords:
its electricity production are observed and analyzed. The PV module parameters, analyzed in the paper
Trombe wall
Solar energy
are: the tilt angle ␣ of PV modules, incident angle ␤ of direct sunrays on PV modules, normal beam
PV modules irradiation N and PV cells operating temperature. With bigger incident angle ␤ of direct sunlight on PV
Energy efficiency modules, the normal beam irradiation is smaller, which brings less electricity production. The impact of
PV module operating temperature can be neglected in comparison with the impact of tilt angle on PV
module electricity production. The optimal tilt angle of PV modules for generating maximum annual elec-
tricity is around latitude angle. It varies with normal beam irradiation to achieve the maximum monthly
electricity production.
© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction and implementation aspects of a Trombe wall. Hu et al. [5] con-

Building is a vast mechanism, which can be designated as
a model of energy consumption. Building stock worldwide uses
around 40% of global energy, 25% of global water and emits approx-
imately 30% of GHG emissions. Moreover, electricity consumption
in the commercial buildings worldwide has doubled between 1980
and 2000 and it is expected to increase another 50% by 2025 [1].
In China, around 30% of the national energy consumption can be
attributed to building stock and 6% of that is consumed by public
dwellings [2]. The overall building energy consumption in China
once was equivalent to 16 billion tons of standard coal, which rep-
resented 20.7% of the total energy consumption at that time [3].
Energy efficiency buildings become a topic of increasing inter-
ests. Up-to-date low-energy dwelling blocks often implement a
thermal storage and efficient thermal delivery mechanism, which
is known as a Trombe wall. This masonry wall is a high radiance
absorbing wall usually south-oriented [4]. Many experiments and
theoretical case studies have been carried out to explain the role
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: xiaoqinsun@csust.edu.cn (X. Sun).
ducted a numerical analysis on the cooling performance of the
Trombe wall with venetian blinds and validated it by experiment.
In the experiment, the influence of three parameters on the cooling
load of Trombe wall is examined (blind tilt angles from the horizon-
tal, air-gap width, different thicknesses of used layers’ materials).
The results showed that increased air-gap width and variations of
the blind tilt angles lead to a higher cooling load of Trombe wall
with venetian blinds. Khalifa and Abbas [6] numerically studied the
effect of storage wall material and its thickness on the room tem-
perature for passive solar heating. Agrawal and Tiwari proposed the
optimal thickness ranging from 30 to 40 cm, for a concrete Trombe
wall [7].
The use of the Trombe wall in combination with PV modules,
the so-called PV-Trombe wall, was the subject of series of scien-
tific researches and papers. Taffesse et al. [8] conducted a periodic
modeling of semitransparent, photovoltaic, thermal Trombe wall
for thermal heating of a testing room during winter season in New
Delhi. Based on a computation, they provided optimal thermal load
leveling value, optimal thickness of a wall and optimal decrement
factor for thermal heating of a testing room. Sun et al. [9] studied
the temperature scale of a building with southern-facing window
and PV-Trombe wall. They brought a conclusion that PV coverage

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.07.073
0378-7788/© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 J. Jovanovic et al. / Energy and Buildings 152 (2017) 568–576
on the glazing reduced the solar heating ability of Trombe wall sig-
nificantly. A reduction of thermal efficiency of PV-Trombe wall by
27% was found with a window on south façade.
From the standpoint of better use of PV modules with better
energetic indicators, it is necessary to investigate the performance
of PV-Trombe wall. This article analyzes the PV module param-
eters and their impacts on electricity production. First PV module
parameter which is analyzed is the tilt angle. It is shown the depen-
dency among PV module electricity production and a certain span
of tilt angles. The electricity production for PV modules integrated
into a Trombe wall is simulated using System Advisor Model (SAM)
software. Second analyzed PV module parameter is normal beam
irradiation, irradiation which originates from the normal compo-
nent (N) of direct solar irradiation. Third considered PV module
parameter is the PV module operating temperature (impact of PV
cells’ temperature on produced electricity), which can be calcu-
lated by taking into account determined PV module temperature
coefficients.
2. Trombe wall
Trombe wall is a complex mechanism which is effective for
winter heating and summer ventilation. Typical Trombe wall is con-
stituted of (20–40 cm) thick masonry wall as a thermal wall, with
a black absorber as a heat-absorbing layer on the outside wall sur-
face. This wall is framed with a double or triple layer of glass, i.e.
with glazing units. According to literatures [4,10], glazing units are
placed 2–10 cm of a masonry wall. The Trombe wall’s design can
include a vast variety of materials such as cast-in-place concrete
projections, shotcrete and aerated concrete, polished stone. Selec-
tive surface materials can be plasters, dry walls, mortars, silicones
or any metal foils in different thicknesses for an exterior and inte-
rior layer of the wall surface. These layers are glued to the bare brick
or concrete blocks.
Among many types of possible Trombe wall design, a Trombe
wall with potential possibilities and its operational functions is
shown in Fig. 1. Distribution of solar heat gains is enabled by
the small openings, vents, located at the low and upper points of
the massive thermal wall. Regulation of the natural air movement
through the vents, preventing or allowing the air flow, is enabled by
louvers, flaps, mounted on vents. They can be adjusted, positioned,
manually depending on the season and requirements. The vents
are correctly sized if their area is approximately 2% of thermal wall
area. So, for a 100 m2 wall, for example, it needs 2 vents at the top
and 2 vents at the bottom, each of the 1/2 m2 (2 m2 in total) [11].
During winter (winter heating, Fig. 1a), air flows from indoor
through a bottom vent in masonry wall (flap 4 is open), mixes and
warms up with the warmer air in the air gap between a Trombe wall
and glazing. Then, the captured heat in the air gap flows upwards
due to the air convection and buoyancy effect and transfers back
in the room (flap 2 is open) [12–14]. Around 50% of a heat and
sunlight, which falls on a Trombe wall, is being accumulated by a
bare wall, while another 50% heats an indoor space. For summer
ventilation, the positions of flaps are shown on Fig. 1c. As auxil-
iary tool for the accomplishment of summer ventilation effects can
serve the overhang. The overhang needs to be designed properly,
enabling shading of south oriented glass during the summer period,
but allowing maximum exposure to the sun in the winter.
3. Trombe wall’s performances in comparison with a
three-layered wall
Thermal insulation of walls is a regulator of the thermal regime
which needs to be provided in constructional elements. It is crucial
because of all potential thermal losses that can occur: transmis-
569
sion losses, ventilation losses, losses made by air passing through
fugues and clutches of materials and thermal bridges. The walls
can be single-layered and multi-layered. It has been proved that
multi-layered walls are more practical, better and they much more
satisfy current construction regulations and standards [15]. For
this research, it has been taken an arbitrary three-layered wall
(as a type of multi-layered wall). Theoretically, through the three-
layered wall, the heat is conveyed from interior to exterior during
winter. With the integration of Trombe wall, because of a Trombe
channel existence, the multi-direction and circulation of air is
accomplished.
Steady heat transfer through the composite walls was assumed.
Under such (steady) conditions, thermal resistance concept was
used to determine the rate of steady heat transfer through men-
tioned composite walls (Trombe wall and three-layered wall) in
the article. Additionally, one more assumption was that the build-
ing materials constituting composite wall layers’ are homogenous,
(flat) and make a perfect thermal contact. In both cases, (in this
three-layered wall and Trombe wall) the overall heat transfer coef-
ficient U and thermal resistance R for all existing layers of materials
in walls can be calculated. Thermal resistance R is calculated using
Eq. (1):
R = 1/hi + d1 /1 + d2 /2 + ...dn /n + 1/he (1)
To calculate R, an arbitrary wall (three-layered wall), (n = 3) with
a total thickness of 30 cm is analyzed. The thicknesses di and cor-
responding thermal conductivity ␭i of material layers are shown in
Table 1.
Coefficient h corresponds to a combined heat transfer coef-
ficient, (in literature usually marked as hcomb ), which means it
includes both radiation and convection effects. In the equations,
hrad and hconv stand for radiation heat transfer coefficient and con-
vection heat transfer coefficient, respectively [16].
hcomb = hconv + hrad (2)
There are two combined heat transfer coefficients, an inner
space heat transfer coefficient ai (W/m2 K) and outer space heat
transfer coefficient ae (W/m2 K). Taken constant values for heat
transfer coefficients, ai and ae , are ai = 8 and ae = 23 [15].
About changeable nature of these parameters with time, heat
radiation, hrad , depends strongly on temperature, (temperature of
the surface and temperature of surrounding area), while hconv does
not depend so strongly, which can be seen from standard equations:
Qrad  
hrad =   = ε Ts2 + Tsurr
2
(Ts + Tsurr ) (3)
As Ts4 − Tsurr
4
Qconv
hconv = (4)
As (Ts − Tsurr )
In the case of the considered three-layered wall, thermal resis-
tance R will be:
R = 1/hi + d1 /1 + d2 /2 + d3 /3 + 1/he (5)
Finally, substituting coefficients into the calculation of R and
taking into account relation between overall heat transfer coeffi-
cient U and R, the obtained R is 0.349 m2 K/W and U is 2.865 W/m2 K.
In comparison with the three-layered wall, the Trombe wall in
this paper has identical inner structure except for a definite thick-
ness of 40 cm, because of added double glazing. Double glazing is set
up at the distance of 8 cm from a three-layered wall, with the over-
all thickness of 2 cm. Trombe wall has a conducive effect from the
point of energy efficiency, because stored heat during day irradi-
ates and heats the indoor space during night, which is convenient
during winter [17]. Integrated Trombe wall should have a lower
value of a heat coefficient U, because the glass unit of Trombe wall
counts for another material layer. In addition, there is also air-gap
570 J. Jovanovic et al. / Energy and Buildings 152 (2017) 568–576
Fig. 1. Trombe wall and its potential operational functions: a) Trombe wall, b) winter heating, c) summer ventilation.
Table 1
Thermo-physical properties of wall materials.
Material layers Thicknesses of layers (d, m)
inner layer of a mortar 0.02
wall of armored concrete 0.25
outer layer of a mortar 0.03
or air collector as a space between the glass and massive wall which
has its own density, specific heat and volumetric heat capacity. The
additional thermal resistance caused by the glass is 0.025 m2 K/W.
Therefore, the total thermal resistance R and overall heat coefficient
U for Trombe wall are 0.374 m2 K/W and 2.674 W/m2 K.
Taking into account the effects of conduction, the observed
direction of air flow and heat transfer from inner space to outer
space, these results show bigger value of thermal resistance R for
the Trombe wall, indicating that the Trombe wall retains much
more heat and at the same time releases much slower the absorbed
heat than a three-layered wall. Solar energy is being irradiated
towards Trombe wall in the form of short-length waves, which
Trombe wall absorbs easily. Trombe wall behaves as a heat con-
tainer and that means it stores heat in the pores of the material.
The heat comes into inner surface of Trombe wall by thermal con-
duction. Afterwards, the wall releases heat heavily in the form of
long-length waves.
4. PV module efficiency vs. tilt angle
The combination of Trombe wall and PV cells is shown in Fig. 2.
The PV cells (modules) installed in a Trombe wall, oriented to the
south, are in the vertical position (tilt angle related to the soil is
␣ = 90◦ ). The vertical position of PV modules corresponds to PV
modules attached on the inner surface of the glass in the Trombe
wall. Since the PV module dimensions are much larger than the
width of the air-gap between Trombe wall and glass (just 2–10 cm),
no tilt angle of the module to the soil can be adjusted, i.e., tilt angle
of PV modules must be 90◦ [18–21].
The level of sunlight irradiation on PV module depends not only
on weather data (ambient temperature), but also on the incident
angle ␤ of direct sunlight on the solar module. The incident angle
Thermal conductivity of layers (␭, W/mK)
0.85
2.04
0.87
can be varied by adjusting the tilt angle of the module. The pho-
tovoltaic effect depends on the normal component (N) of direct
irradiation, normal to the surface of the module (Fig. 3). This com-
ponent is named as direct normal beam irradiation and equals
N = D cos␤. Incident angle ␤ of direct sunlight on the solar module,
besides from the tilt angle ␣, also varies depending on the season:
in winter season this angle is smaller comparing with summer, due
to the sun position in the sky.
Software System Advisor Model (SAM), Version SAM 2016 3.14,
developed by the U.S. Department of Energy and National Renew-
able Energy Laboratory (NREL) is used [22]. SAM is a software that
simulates, calculates performance and financial metrics of renew-
able energy systems, in this case, the performance of photovoltaic
modules. It is possible to simulate the performance of photovoltaic,
concentrating solar power, solar water heating, the wind, geother-
mal, biomass, and conventional power systems. Simulations carried
out by SAM software, for two parallelly linked modules “SunPower
SPR-X21-335”, find the values of output electricity power for a cho-
sen span of tilt angles, taking into account all relevant weather and
other data (the real ambient temperature, wind, solar irradiation,
type of PV module, tilt angles, azimuth angles, operating temper-
atures of PV module, etc.) for the specified geographical positions.
For all variations of tilt angle ␣, the analyzing period of 25 years
(which is the anticipated lifetime of photovoltaic modules) is taken.
Also, the annual decline in production of electrical energy due to
the aging of the panel is taken as 0.5%.
The electricity production of PV modules with PV tilt angles is
shown in Fig. 4. In the monthly data file, the direct normal beam
component of solar irradiation is given as a value in kWh. The val-
ues of direct normal beam irradiances (component N in Fig. 3),
for two angles ␣ = 90◦ and ␣ = 30◦ , for used type and configura-
tion of modules, for the city of Podgorica, are also shown in this
 J. Jovanovic et al. / Energy and Buildings 152 (2017) 568–576 571

Fig. 2. PV-Trombe wall.

Fig. 3. a) summer and winter position of the Sun, b) normal (N) and vertical (V) components of a sun ray (D).

Fig. 4. Electricity production of PV modules with PV tilt angles.

572 J. Jovanovic et al. / Energy and Buildings 152 (2017) 568–576
figure. From presented curves, it is observed that average values of
direct normal beam irradiances are almost three times higher for
summer period at ␣ = 30◦ (511.7 kWh) than at ␣ = 90◦ (165.8 kWh).
Monthly PV production of electrical energy for the summer season
at ␣ = 30◦ (110.5 kWh) is more than twice higher than monthly PV
production at ␣ = 90◦ (47.8 kWh). This conclusion is in line with the
mentioned fact that higher value of a direct normal beam irradia-
tion N means a higher level of produced electricity by PV modules.
These direct normal beam irradiances curves for summer period
illustrate inefficiency of using PV modules vertically positioned
(␣ = 90◦ ) in PV-Trombe wall.
It is found that the use of vertically mounted PV modules in
PV-Trombe wall (tilt angle ␣ = 90◦ ) reduces efficiency, i.e., the pro-
duction of electricity by PV modules is smaller. Apart from reduced
electrical energy production, setting PV cells between glass and
masonry wall in any form (either as PV cells affixed back of the glass
surface or in a form of transparent PV modules) reduces the surface
of masonry wall exposed to sunlight, preventing real solar penetra-
tion through the masonry wall and thus diminishing the function
of masonry wall as heat storage. From the standpoint of better use
of PV modules, with better energetic indicators, it is more useful to
install them not within Trombe wall, but in the other place, outside
of the Trombe wall, providing optimal tilt angle.
4.1. Annual PV module electricity production vs. tilt angle
PV modules are usually oriented with fixed mountings, and
thus the performance of such PV modules highly depends on PV
modules orientations [23–29]. Locations for the positioning of pho-
tovoltaic modules are the cities of Podgorica (Montenegro) and
Changsha (China). Podgorica is located in the northern part of earth
hemisphere. Its average elevation is 33 m above sea level; Latitude
42.37◦ N; Longitude 19.25◦ E; Annual global irradiance average is
6.35 kWh/m2 /day; Average temperature 15.1 ◦ C. Changsha is also
located in northern part of earth hemisphere, with Elevation: 68 m;
Latitude: 28.23◦ N; Longitude: 112.87◦ E; Annual global irradiance
average: 6.35 kWh/m2 /day; and average temperature: 17.4 ◦ C.
Two photovoltaic modules “SunPower SPR-X21-335”, whose
cells are constructed from monocrystalline silicon, with the number
of cells 96 per module, are used. Modules are connected in paral-
lel, with total nominal power 670.5 kW, 335.205 Wdc per module,
nominal efficiency 20.55%. The total area of two modules is 3.3 m2 .
Two parallel connected inverters with the coefficient of efficiency
95% to convert DC power to AC (type ABB: Micro-0.3-1-OUTD-US-
208 208 V) are used [17]. Using SAM software, south oriented PV
modules and their electrical energy production vs. different tilt
angles ␣◦ , are considered. The range of variations of ␣ is from 0◦
(horizontal position of the PV module) to 90◦ (vertical position of
PV module).
The vertical position of PV modules corresponds to PV mod-
ules attached to the inner surface of the glass in the Trombe wall.
Simulations carried out for these parallelly linked inverters and
modules, automatically display values of output electricity power
for a chosen span of tilt angles.
Fig. 5 shows the electricity production of PV modules with tilt
angles for two cities, Podgorica and Changsha within a determined
lifespan of PV modules. It is observed that the biggest annual elec-
tricity production, for both cities happens when the tilt angle of PV
modules is equaled to latitude (␣ = Latitude◦ ). For Podgorica, opti-
mal tilt angle happens to be around ␣ = Latitude◦ = 42.37◦ and for
Changsha the optimal tilt angle is close to ␣ = Latitude◦ = 28.23◦ .
Additionally, it is shown that the same PV modules, for both cities,
generate the smallest portion of electricity at the tilt angle of
␣ = 90◦ , i. e., when PV cells are in vertical position, attached to the
inner glass surface of a Trombe wall.
Fig. 6 shows the electricity production (kWh) by PV cells for the
first year. In Fig. 6, 100% of production relates to the maximum
of electricity production. For Podgorica (Montenegro), the average
annual production of electrical energy at ␣ = 90◦ (vertical position of
PV modules, i.e. position of PV in Trombe wall) makes only 64.01%
of the maximum electricity production. In the case of Changsha
(China) annual energy production of PV in the Trombe wall (␣ = 90◦ )
makes only 54.21% of the maximum electricity production. The
explanation why production of electricity at ␣ = 90◦ is smaller in
Changsha than in Podgorica, lies in their different geographical
position. Angle ␣ = 90◦ is more distant from ␣ = Latitude ◦ = 28.23◦ in
Changsha than from ␣ = Latitude ◦ = 42.37◦ in Podgorica. The phys-
ical explanation is that at ␣ = 90◦ the normal component of direct
irradiation is smaller for ␣ = Latitude ◦ = 28.23◦ than for ␣ = Latitude
◦ = 42.37◦ . That implies smaller electricity production for Chang-
sha than for Podgorica, because the normal irradiation component
affects on photovoltaic effect. Another reason for a smaller elec-
tricity production in Changsha than in Podgorica, at the tilt angle
of 90◦ , is that Changsha has a less number of sunny days (sunny
intervals) than Podgorica.
4.2. Monthly PV module electricity production vs. tilt angle
Based on the aforementioned results, the electricity production
of PV modules is significantly affected by the tilt angle. Moreover,
electricity production is affected by the solar radiation intensity,
which changes with incident angle ␤ of direct sunrays on PV mod-
ule and with normal component N of solar radiation. Tables 2 and 3
show PV monthly electricity production for two cities (Podgorica
and Changsha). It can be concluded that optimal tilt angle of PV
modules changes with time. For each city, it is noticeable the shift
of decreasing and rising values of optimal tilt angles through the
time (different months). With each upcoming month, the optimal
tilt angle of PV modules depends and changes due to the PV mod-
ule parameters (solar radiation intensity, incident angle ␤ of direct
sunlight on PV modules, normal component N of sunrays, current
air-masses and windflaws, outdoor air temperature). From Table 2,
corresponding to a city of Podgorica, it is observed that from January
to July, the optimal tilt angle of PV modules decreases from 60◦ to
15◦ . On the contrary, from July to December, its optimal tilt angle
increases from 15◦ to 60◦ . The similar phenomena is noticed for a
city of Changsha as shown in Table 3. From January to May, its opti-
mal tilt angle decreases from 45◦ to 0◦ . And from July to December it
increases again from 0◦ to 45◦ . This phenomenon happens, because
of the mentioned fact that higher value of direct normal beam radia-
tion N influences on a higher level of electricity production. A higher
value of direct normal beam radiation N implies a smaller tilt angle
␣ and smaller incident angle ␤, (because N = D cos␤), but bigger
electricity production. Vice versa, lower value of N implies bigger
tilt angle ␣, bigger incident angle ␤, but less electricity production.
The biggest produced electricity for Podgorica, (121.94 kWh) is gen-
erated at the tilt angle ␣ = 15◦ in July, which confirms the fact that
smaller tilt angle brings bigger normal beam radiation N and more
electricity production. Moreover, from monthly electricity produc-
tion, for Podgorica and Changsha, for each month can be identified
optimal tilt angle of PV modules.
For this article it is the most important case for ␣ = 90◦ (PV-
Trombe wall). While observing this specific case, from Fig. 7
(vertical position of PV modules, ␣ = 90◦ ), it is obviously that
monthly production of electrical energy by PV modules in Podgor-
ica and Changsha are highest in October, November, and December
in one entire year, i.e. higher than in May, June, July, what could
be at first sight paradoxically. These facts are explicable by Fig. 3,
i.e., by the position of the Sun in the summer and the winter sea-
son and previous conclusions. In the summer season, direct normal
beam irradiation (N), perpendicular to the surface of the vertical
 J. Jovanovic et al. / Energy and Buildings 152 (2017) 568–576 573

Fig. 5. Annual average electricity production of the photovoltaic modules vs. lifetime for different tilt angles ␣.

Fig. 6. Annual electricity production vs. tilt angle ␣.

PV modules, is smaller than in the winter period (because angle ␤
is bigger in the summer than in the winter period). Therefore, for
Podgorica electricity production is the smallest in June (39.4 kWh),
smaller than in January (48.7 kWh). Also, for Changsha electric-
ity production is the smallest in June (34.5 kWh), smaller than in
January (41.7 kWh).
Fig. 8 presents real data of Direct normal beam irradiation (N) for
Podgorica, which are available in the SAM software databases. From
Fig. 8, it is obvious that in summer period there are increased val-
ues of N for ␣ = 0◦ –42.37◦ , and decreased values of N for ␣ = 60◦ –90◦
(for the above mentioned reason). Comparing the diagrams in Figs.
7 a and 8, it can be seen that the forms of the curves are very simi-
lar. This fact proves that PV production of electrical energy depends
mostly on the values of the N component. At the same time, it con-
firms the conclusion that the impact of operating temperature on
the PV production of electrical energy is negligible.
574 J. Jovanovic et al. / Energy and Buildings 152 (2017) 568–576

Fig. 7. Electricity production of the photovoltaic modules vs. months for different tilt angles ␣◦ .

Fig. 8. Direct normal beam irradiation (N) vs. months in Podgorica (kWh).
 J. Jovanovic et al. / Energy and Buildings 152 (2017) 568–576 575

Table 2
Monthly electricity production (kWh) for PV with various tilt angles in Podgorica.

Month ␣ = 0◦ ␣ = 15◦ ␣ = 30◦ ␣ = 42.37◦ ␣ = 60◦ ␣ = 75◦ ␣ = 90◦

Jan 26.58 37.66 46.13 50.88 53.91 52.95 48.78

Feb 39.82 51.93 60.58 64.89 66.37 63.26 56.28
Mar 59.65 70.49 76.95 78.86 76.12 68.86 57.35
Apr 76.76 83.91 86.15 84.31 76.08 64.26 48.71
May 101.48 106.14 104.59 98.86 84.19 66.40 45.55
Jun 110.57 112.71 108.26 100.02 81.85 61.57 39.47
Jul 118.10 121.94 118.53 110.57 91.79 70.15 45.68
Aug 105.52 114.48 116.39 112.70 99.49 81.47 58.35
Sep 76.68 89.49 96.56 97.99 93.11 82.65 66.68
Oct 49.79 63.58 73.15 77.61 78.40 73.88 64.76
Nov 29.71 42.56 52.39 57.88 61.35 60.14 55.17
Dec 23.48 36.38 46.59 52.60 57.08 57.00 53.35

Table 3
Monthly electricity production (kWh) for PV with various tilt angles in Changsha.

Month ␣ = 0◦ ␣ = 15◦ ␣ = 28.23◦ ␣ = 45◦ ␣ = 60◦ ␣ = 75◦ ␣ = 90◦

Jan 47.92 53.39 55.97 56.25 53.76 48.84 41.72

Feb 51.88 55.42 56.41 54.93 51.13 45.23 37.52
Mar 70.15 72.48 71.88 67.79 61.21 52.20 41.22
Apr 82.68 83.35 80.87 73.93 64.43 52.31 38.55
May 102.09 101.15 96.55 86.14 72.92 56.98 40.45
Jun 96.38 94.38 89.03 77.99 64.57 49.04 34.54
Jul 118.57 116.75 110.39 96.51 79.16 58.77 39.42
Aug 104.28 105.26 101.83 92.04 78.42 60.92 41.52
Sep 87.75 91.81 91.58 86.36 77.19 64.09 47.70
Oct 75.30 83.14 86.40 85.78 80.80 71.76 58.85
Nov 61.62 71.39 76.64 78.78 76.45 70.22 60.23
Dec 54.59 65.15 71.24 74.63 73.59 68.80 60.38

Fig. 9. PV cell operating temperature vs. months.

4.3. Analysis of the impact of PV modules operating temperature Table 4

Technical specifications of SunPower SPR-X21-335.
on its efficiency and electricity production
Value
A PV module exposed to sunlight generates heat as well as elec- Nominal efficiency 20.5521%
tricity. The smaller part of solar energy, irradiated on the surface of Maximum power 335.205 Wdc (2 modules: 670.41Wdc)
a PV cell, converts into electricity and its value is defined by a factor Temperature coefficient −0.31 W/◦ C or −1.039 W/◦ C
␩ (electrical efficiency) of a PV module, representing how much a Nominal temperature 25 ◦ C
Total irradiance 1000 W
module can produce electricity for a given incident solar energy.
A typical value is ␩ = (10–15) % for a commercial PV module. High
efficiency ␩ > 20% is achieved by high-quality PV modules.
[33] are used in this paper. Data for PV module “SunPower SPR-
The rest of the sunlight power, irradiated on the surface of
X21-335” is given in Table 4. The monthly operating temperature
a PV module, is mostly converted into thermal energy, what
of PV modules, hourly during 2016, taking into account influence
leads to higher PV module operating temperatures. Consequently,
of all relevant real data (weather data including winds, ambient
increasing of PV module temperatures leads to a drop in electrical
temperatures, irradiations, type of PV cells, etc.) is presented in
efficiency, i.e., drop of generated electricity [30,31]. Both the elec-
Fig. 9.
trical efficiency and the power output of a photovoltaic (PV) module
Influence of PV module operating temperature can be deter-
depend linearly on the operating temperature [32].
mined by PV module temperature coefficient. It relates to the
For this analysis it is necessary to have the operating tempera-
maximum power of module or panel. It defines how much power of
ture of PV modules studied. SunPower monocrystalline silicon cells
the module or panel will decrease when the temperature rises by
576 J. Jovanovic et al. / Energy and Buildings 152 (2017) 568–576
1 ◦ C above 25 ◦ C. For this considered module temperature coeffi-
cient is −0.31%/◦ C or −1.039 W/◦ C. For every degree above 25 ◦ C,
the maximum power of PV module “SunPower SPR-X21-335”
decreases by −1.039 W/◦ C. In this case, because of two modules,
decrease of power will be doubled, i.e. 2.078 W/◦ C. PV module tem-
perature in Podgorica (Fig. 8) varies in the range from 17 ◦ C to 38 ◦ C.
If the PV module temperature rises from 25 ◦ C to 38 ◦ C the power
drop will be 27.01 W what makes 4% of the total power, 670.41 W.
In turn, if there is a drop in PV module temperature from 25 ◦ C to
17 ◦ C the increase of the total PV module power will be 16.6 W.
When PV module temperatures are higher of 25 ◦ C, the efficiency
decreases; but with a temperature lower than 25 ◦ C the efficiency
increases above nominal. Similar results are obtained for Changsha,
with a smaller drop of power affected by a smaller range of vary-
ing temperatures during the year. During a year, in most climates,
the efficiency will be balanced out over the long run. Especially
in cases of Podgorica and Changsha, where during half a year PV
module temperatures are below 25 ◦ C.
Moreover, it is observed that the PV module temperature
increases approximately 4 ◦ C when the tilt angle increases from
30◦ to 90◦ . That is, the electricity efficiency is sacrificed by 1.24%
because of decreasing tilt angle to obtain a higher electricity pro-
duction. However, this efficiency reduction is negligible compared
with the electricity production reduction of 36% with a tilt angle of
90◦ . Therefore, the influence of operating temperature on the elec-
trical efficiency and the power output of photovoltaic modules, in
considered cases can be neglected comparing with the impact of the
incident angle of sunlight on the PV module, i.e., with the impact
of PV tilt angle.
5. Conclusion
This article focuses on analyzing the performance of PV-Trombe
wall. Several PV module parameters and their impacts on its elec-
tricity generation are studied. Detailed analysis with examples has
shown that the application of vertically positioned PV modules,
attached to the inner glass surface of Trombe wall (PV-Trombe
wall), is not justified in terms of the produced electrical energy
efficiency of PV modules. From the standpoint of electricity pro-
duction, it is more useful to install PV modules not within Trombe
wall, but in the other place, outside of the Trombe wall, providing
optimal tilt angle. The following conclusions are obtained.
• The optimal tilt angle related to the biggest electricity production
happens to be around latitude angle with respect to the soil for
one entire year. It changes with time when focusing on monthly
electricity production.
• The higher value of normal beam irradiance (N) brings higher
electricity production value. N is related to the incident angle ␤
of sun rays, which varies with PV module tilt angle.
• The impact of PV module operating temperature can be neglected
in comparison with the impact of tilt angle on PV module elec-
tricity production.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Natural and Sci-
ence Funding (51308051), the Education Department of Hunan
(15B014), the Science and Technology Department of Hunan
(2016JJ3006), Hunan Association for Science and Technology
(2017TJ-Q05), Hunan Province 2011 Collaborative Innovation Cen-
ter of Clean Energy and Smart Grid and the Science and Technology
Department of Changsha (kq1602016).
View publication stats
References
[1] N.Y. Jadhav, Green and Smart Buildings, Springer, Singapore, 2016.
[2] F. Yan-ping, W. Yong, L. Chang-bin, Energy-efficiency supervision systems for
energy management in large public buildings: necessary choice for China,
Energy Policy 37 (2009) 2060–2065.
[3] W.G. Cai, Y. Wu, Y. Zhong, H. Ren, China building energy consumption:
situation, challenges and corresponding measures, Energy Policy 37 (2009)
2054–2059.
[4] P. Torcellini, S. Pless, Trombe Walls in Low-Energy Buildings: Practical
Experiences, World Renewable Energy VIII, Denver, Colorado, 2004.
[5] Z. Hu, W. He, X. Hong, J. Ji, Z. Shen, Numerical analysis on the cooling
performance of a ventilated Trombe wall combined with venetian blinds in an
office building, Energy Build. 126 (2016) 14–27.
[6] A.J.N. Khalifa, E.F. Abbas, A comparative performance study of some thermal
storage materials used for solar space heating, Energy Build. 41 (2009)
407–415.
[7] B. Agrawal, G.N. Tiwari, Building Integrated Photovoltaic Thermal Systems for
Sustainable Developments, Royal Society of Chemistry, 2011.
[8] F. Taffesse, A. Verma, S. Singh, G.N. Tiwari, Periodic modeling of
semi-transparent photovoltaic thermal-trombe wall (SPVT-TW), Sol. Energy
135 (2016) 265–273.
[9] W. Sun, J. Ji, C. Luo, W. He, Performance of PV-Trombe wall in winter
correlated with south façade design, Appl. Energy 88 (2011) 224–231.
[10] G. Gan, A parametric study of Trombe walls for passive cooling of buildings,
Energy Build. 27 (1998) 37–43.
[11] How Vent Thermal Trombe Walls, 2017, http://www.solar365.com/green-
homes/heating-ac/how-vent-thermal-trombe-walls (Accessed 3 May 2017).
[12] T.G. Özbalta, S. Kartal, Heat gain through Trombe wall using solar energy in a
cold region of Turkey, Sci. Res. Essays 5 (2010) 2768–2778.
[13] H. Boyer, F. Miranville, D. Bigot, S. Guichard, I. Ingar, A.P. Jean, et al., Heat
Transfer in Buildings, 2011.
[14] M. Dowson, D. Harrison, Z. Dehouche, Trombe walls with nanoporous aerogel
insulation applied to UK housing refurbishments, Int. J. Smart Nano Mater. 5
(2015) 283–303.
[15] B. Milic, Building Construction Elements, Part II, University of Montenegro,
1999.
[16] Y.A. Cengel, A.J. Ghajar, Heat and Mass Transfer: Fundamentals &
Applications, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill Compaies, Inc., New York, 2011.
[17] A. Briga Sá, J. Boaventura-Cunha, J.-C. Lanzinha, A. Paiva, An experimental
analysis of the Trombe wall temperature fluctuations for high range climate
conditions: influence of ventilation openings and shading devices, Energy
Build. 138 (2017) 546–558.
[18] O. Saadatian, K. Sopian, C.H. Lim, N. Asim, M.Y. Sulaiman, Trombe walls: a
review of opportunities and challenges in research and development, Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (2012) 6340–6351.
[19] B.K. Koyunbaba, Z. Yilmaz, K. Ulgen, An approach for energy modeling of a
building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) Trombe wall system, Energy Build. 67
(2013) 680–688.
[20] B. Jiang, J. Ji, H. Yi, The influence of PV coverage ratio on thermal and electrical
performance of photovoltaic-Trombe wall, Renew. Energy 33 (2008)
2491–2498.
[21] N. Dimassi, L. Dehmani, Thermal efficiency of a solar wall in Tunisia, ISRN
Renew. Energy 2012 (2012) 1–8.
[22] Nate Blair, A.P. Dobas, Janine Freeman, Ty Neises, M. Wagner, System Advisor
Model, SAM 2014.1.14: General Description, National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, Denver West Parkway Golden, CO 80401, 2014.
[23] S. Soulayman, M. Hammoud, Optimum tilt angle of solar collectors for
building applications in mid-latitude zone, Energy Convers. Manage. 124
(2016) 20–28.
[24] M. Benghanem, Optimization of tilt angle for solar panel: case study for
Madinah, Saudi Arabia, Appl. Energy 88 (2011) 1427–1433.
[25] M. Hartner, A. Ortner, A. Hiesl, R. Haas, East to west—the optimal tilt angle
and orientation of photovoltaic panels from an electricity system perspective,
Appl. Energy 160 (2015) 94–107.
[26] W.G. Le Roux, Optimum tilt and azimuth angles for fixed solar collectors in
South Africa using measured data, Renew. Energy 96 (2016) 603–612.
[27] K. Bakirci, General models for optimum tilt angles of solar panels: Turkey case
study, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16 (2012) 6149–6159.
[28] T.O. Kaddoura, M.A.M. Ramli, Y.A. Al-Turki, On the estimation of the optimum
tilt angle of PV panel in Saudi Arabia, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 65 (2016)
626–634.
[29] B. Jamil, A.T. Siddiqui, N. Akhtar, Estimation of solar radiation and optimum
tilt angles for south-facing surfaces in Humid Subtropical Climatic Region of
India, Engi. Sci. Technol. Int. J. 19 (2016) 1826–1835.
[30] R.N. Hall, Silicon photovoltaic cells, Solid-State Electron. 24 (1981) 595–616.
[31] R. Couderc, M. Amara, M. Lemiti, In-depth analysis of heat generation in
silicon solar cells, IEEE J. Photovolt. 6 (2016) 1123–1131.
[32] S. Dubey, J.N. Sarvaiya, B. Seshadri, Temperature dependent photovoltaic (PV)
efficiency and its effect on PV production in the world—a review, Energy
Procedia 33 (2013) 311–321.
[33] SunPower, SunPower TM X-Series Data Sheet, 2013, https://us.sunpower.
com/solar-panels-technology/x-series-solar-panels/ (Accessed 3 May 2017).