applied

sciences
Article
Wind Loads on a PV Array
Ping-Han Chung 1, * , Chin-Cheng Chou 2 , Ray-Yeng Yang 1 and Cheng-Yang Chung 2
1 Department of Hydraulic and Ocean Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 701, Taiwan;
ryyang@mail.ncku.edu.tw
2 Aerospace Science and Technology Research Center, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 711, Taiwan;
choucc@mail.ncku.edu.tw (C.-C.C.); scychung@mail.ncku.edu.tw (C.-Y.C.)
* Correspondence: E84046082@mail.ncku.edu.tw; Tel.: +886-975175133




Received: 10 May 2019; Accepted: 13 June 2019; Published: 17 June 2019


Featured Application: This study determines the wind loads for a photovoltaic (PV) array at
a high angle of tilt. The data is useful for the detailed structural design of an offshore PV array.

Abstract: This study experimentally determines the wind loads on a stand-alone solar array
(length-to-width ratio of 0.19; 1/10-scale commercial modules). The freestream velocity in a uniform
flow is 14.5 ± 0.1 m/s, and the turbulence intensity is 0.3%. The angle of tilt ranges from 10◦ to 80◦
and the wind is incident at angle of 0◦ –180◦ . Mean surface pressure measurements on the upper and
the lower surface of the inclined solar panels are used to calculate the lift coefficient. For the angle of
incidence of 0◦ –60◦ for the wind, the variation in the lift coefficient with the angle of tilt is U-shaped.
The formation of a strong windward corner vortex results in greater lift force on the right half of the
inclined plate for the angle of incidence of 30◦ –45◦ for the wind.

Keywords: PV; tilt angle; wind incidence angle; wind load

1. Introduction
The use of solar energy has increased, due to public concerns about climate change and
environmental pollution. The total respective capacity for solar photovoltaic (PV) systems was
303 GW and 402 GW in 2016 and 2017 [1]. A PV system consists of inclined panels, which are usually
mounted on the rooftops of residential or commercial buildings. Floating PV on reservoirs, ponds,
or lakes are another emergent solar energy system [2–5]. In nearshore areas, a PV system floats in the
ocean using a buoyancy system [6].
To harness solar energy, PV panels for roof-top or ground systems are installed at an optimal
tilt angle that allows the sunlight to fall perpendicular to the panels’ surface. Wind loads depend on
the tilt angle, the angle of incidence of the wind, and the spacing and sheltering of the arrays [7–11].
For an inclined panel with a length-to-width ratio, L/W, of 2 that faces a uniform flow, Chung et al. [12]
showed that there is a decrease in the sectional lift coefficient as the angle of tilt increases (α = 15◦ –25◦ ).
Corner vortices are also observed. For an inclined panel (L/W = 0.22) on flat roofs, an increase in
α (= 20◦ –45◦ ) produces greater suction [13]. Cao et al. [14] noted that wind-induced loads on an inclined
panel are due primarily to pressure equalization at large angles of tilt and turbulence at small angles
of tilt. The effect of the angle of incidence of wind, β, was investigated by Chou et al. [15]. There is
greater suction on the upper surface near the windward corner for β = 15◦ –60◦ . A study by Shademan
and Hangan [16] obtained similar results.
For a PV system, wind loads are significantly reduced by the presence of neighboring upwind
arrays (sheltering effect) [17,18]. Therefore, this study only determines wind loads for a stand-alone
PV array (nine panels, L/W = 0.19). In addition, the wind loads on the PV panels in a sea environment
are not the same as those for PV panels that are located on land. The motion of a pontoon results in the

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2466; doi:10.3390/app9122466 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2466 2 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 2 of 11

variation in α during
the variation in α during
a wavea wave
cycle. cycle. The safety
The safety of PV in
of PV panels panels in environments
environments thatlarge
that feature feature large
waves is
awaves is a issue
practical practical issue
for the for the
system systemTodesign.
design. ensureTo ensure
that that the
the system system properly,
functions functions the
properly, α
effect ofthe
effect
(up to of ◦ andtoβ 80°)
80α)(up and β is determined.
is determined.

2. Experimental Setup
The experiments were performed in a closed-loop wind tunnel at the Architecture and Building
Research Institute (Tainan,
(Tainan, Taiwan).
Taiwan). TheThe wind
wind tunnel
tunnel has
has aa working
working cross
cross section
section ofof 2.6
2.6m (height) ××
m(height)
4 m (width) ×× 36.5 36.5 mm(length)
(length)and andaacontraction
contractionratio
ratioofof4.71.
4.71.ToTodetermine
determinethe thecritical
criticalwind
wind loads,
loads, a
a1/10
1/10scale
scalestand-alone
stand-alonearray array(nine
(nineinclined
inclinedpanels, P1–P9; LL == 168
panels,P1P9; 168 mm
mm andand W == 900 mm) was
constructed, as shownshown in in Figure
Figure 1. 1. The origin
origin of
of the
the coordinates (x/L== 00 and y/W
coordinates (x/L y/W == 0) is located at the
upper left corner of the inclined plate. When the low surface faces
left corner of the inclined plate. When the low surface faces the flow, this the flow, this corresponds
corresponds to βtoofβ 0of
◦.

The lift lift

0°. The coefficient, CL ,CisL, negative
coefficient, is negative inin
the upward
the upward direction.
direction.The
Themodel
modelsitssits10
10mmmmabove
above the
the tunnel
floor and the blockage ratio is is up
up to
to 1.4%.
1.4%.

Figure 1. Test
Test configuration for a stand-alone array.
array.

Meteorological data from nearshore buoys in Taiwan (Qigu, (Qigu, Longdong and Hsinchu) were
collected [19] to determine
determine the the test
test conditions.
conditions. The most most common
common values values of of ββ for
for Qigu
Qigu(23 ◦ 05”42” N)
(23°05”42”N)
were 210 ◦ ◦
–225 and ◦ ◦ ◦
210°225° and 315 –360 for
315°360° for the
the period
period of of2013–2017.
20132017.In InLongtong
Longtong(25 05”48” N) and Hsinchu
(25°05”48”N)
(24◦ 45”19” N), the respective values for β were 0◦ and 30◦ –45◦ . The variation in α for PV panels with
(24°45”19”N), the respective values for β 0° 30°45°. The α
respect
respect to wind was ±45
wind was ±45°.◦ . In this study,
In this study, the value of α α was between 10° 10◦ and 80°80◦ (in increments of 10°) 10◦ )
and the value
value ofof ββ ranged
rangedfrom from0° ◦
0 toto180° ◦
180 (in (inincrements
increments ofof ◦
15 Note
15°). ). Notethatthat
thetheangleangle between
between the the
PV
PV arrays
arrays andandthe the surface
surface of theof the
sea sea is fixed
is fixed for for an offshore-type
an offshore-type PV PV system.
system. ThisThisis notis not
the the
casecase for
for the
the
windwind tunnel
tunnel tests.
tests. However,
However, thethe experimental
experimental results
results of ofthis
thisstudy
studycan canbe beused
used for for preliminary
structural designs of an offshore
offshore PV PV array
array and and to to validate
validate thethe numerical
numerical simulation.
simulation.
For an inclined panel for which L/W L/W = = 2, Chung et al. [12] showed that there is a small increase
in wind loadload when
whentherethereisisananincrease
increase inin thethe intensity
intensity of the
of the freestream
freestream turbulence.
turbulence. Therefore,
Therefore, the
the experiments for this study used a uniform flow. The freestream
experiments for this study used a uniform flow. The freestream velocity was 14.5 ± 0.1 m/s, and thevelocity was 14.5 ± 0.1 m/s, and
the turbulence
turbulence intensity
intensity waswas 0.3%.0.3%. A Pitot-static
A Pitot-static tubetube was positioned
was positioned at theatsame
the same
height height
as theasfront
the front
edge
edge of the inclined panels to determine the static, p , and the dynamic
of the inclined panels to determine the static, p∞, and∞the dynamic pressure, q, for the incoming flow. pressure, q, for the incoming
flow. The Reynolds
The Reynolds number, number,
which is which
basedison based on theoflength
the length of the inclined
the inclined panels, was panels,
1.64 was
× 105.1.64
Note 105 .
× that
Note
there that there is Reynolds
is Reynolds number independence
number independence for an inclinedfor anpanel
inclined
[20].panel [20].
A total A total
of 434 of 434taps
pressure pressure
were
taps were drilled on the upper and lower surfaces of the model. Flexible
drilled on the upper and lower surfaces of the model. Flexible polyvinyl chloride tubes of 1.1 mm in polyvinyl chloride tubes
of 1.1 mmand
diameter in diameter
60 cm in andlength 60 were
cm inconnected
length were to connected
SCANIVALVE to SCANIVALVE
multichannelmultichannel
modules (Model modules
ZOC
(Model
33/64PxZOC 33/64Px
64-port; Model64-port;
RAD3200Modelpressure
RAD3200 pressure transducer,
transducer, ScanivalveScanivalve
Co., Liberty Co., Liberty
Lake, WA,Lake,
USA)WA,
to
USA)
measureto measure
the meanthe meanpressure.
surface surface pressure. The full-scale
The full-scale range of range of thewas
the sensors sensors
±2490 wasPa,±2490
and the Pa,accuracy
and the
accuracy
was ±0.15% wasof±0.15%
the fullofscale.
the full
Thescale.
samplingThe sampling
rate was rate250 was
Hz, and250 Hz,
each
R and each
record record
had had
32,768 32,768
data data
points.
points. The mean pressure coefficient, C
The mean pressure coefficient, Cp (= (pp − p∞)/q), and (= (p − p ∞ )/q), and C1 (= 1
CL (= L∫𝐴 ∆𝐶 A 𝑝 cos∆C cos
A (𝛼)𝑑𝐴)
p ( α ) dA ) were calculated.
were calculated. The
𝐴
The differential pressure coefficient, ∆Cp (= Cp,up − Cp,low ) was determined using the value of Cp for the
differential pressure coefficient, ΔCp (= Cp,up – Cp,low) was determined using the value of Cp for the upper
upper and lower surfaces.
and lower surfaces.

3. Results and Discussion

 Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2466 3 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 3 of 11

3.1. 3. Results andPressure

Longitudinal Discussion
Distributions
3.1. Longitudinal
Examples Pressure
of the Distributions
pressure distribution in the longitudinal direction, Cpl, (α = 20°80°) for β = 0° at
y/W = 0.5 are shown
Examples of the inpressure
Figure 2. Negativeinvalues
distribution for Cpl (ordirection,
the longitudinal suction)Cwere observed
pl , (α = on βthe
20◦ –80◦ ) for = 0upper
◦

surface for=all
at y/W 0.5test
arecases.
shownFor α = 20°2.and
in Figure 40°, thevalues
Negative valueforof CCplpl (or
decreased
suction)along the longitudinal
were observed direction.
on the upper
all test cases. For α = 20 ◦ and 40◦ , the value of C decreased along the longitudinal direction.
The location with the lowest Cpl value moved upstream for
surface for pl α = 60° and 80°. The variation in Cpl ranged
fromThe location
4.6% withto
(α = 20°) lowest(αCpl
the10.9% value For
= 60°). moved for α =with
upstreampanel
an inclined 60◦ and ◦
L/W80= .2,The
Chou variation
et al. in Cplshowed
[21] ranged that
from 4.6% (α = 20 ◦ ) to 10.9% (α = 60 ◦ ). For an inclined panel with L/W = 2,
there is a significant change in the value of Cpl for α ≤ 30°. This is due to the formation of intense side- Chou et al. [21] showed
edgethat there isOn
vortices. a significant
the lowerchange surface,in the
thevalue
valueofofCplαfor
hadα≤ a 30
◦ . This is due to the formation of intense
significant effect on the Cpl distribution. For
side-edge vortices. On the lower surface, the value of α had a significant effect on the Cpl distribution.
α = 20° and 40°, the value of C pl decreased initially, and then the distributions flattened. The values of
For α = 20◦ and 40◦ , the value of Cpl decreased initially, and then the distributions flattened. The values
Cpl for α = 60° and◦80° were greater for the first half of the inclined array. This demonstrates that the
of Cpl for α = 60 and 80◦ were greater for the first half of the inclined array. This demonstrates that the
localized load
localized was
load wasmost
mostsignificant nearthe
significant near the front
front edgeedge for greater
for greater valuesvalues
of α. The of value
α. The of value
Cpl for of
L/WCpl for
L/W== 0.19
0.19(an(anarray)
array) was was less
less thanthan
thatthat
for L/Wfor L/W
= 2 (a=panel).
2 (a panel).

-0.2 (a) upper surface  = 0o, y/W= 0.5

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8
Cp,l

-1.0 
o
20
o
-1.2 40
o
60
-1.4 o
80

(b) lower surface

0.8

0.6
Cp,l

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

x/L
FigureFigure
2. Mean longitudinal
2. Mean longitudinalpressure distributions
pressure distributions for =y/W
for y/W = 0.5
0.5 and β =and
0◦ . β = 0°.

forforβ β==30°at y/W == 0.5

◦
TheTheCpl C pl distributions
distributions 30 aty/W 0.5 are
are shown
shownininFigure
Figure3. On the the
3. On upper surface,
upper the the
surface,
distributions were flat for α = 40 ◦ , 60◦ , and 80◦ but not for α = 20◦ . The value of C decreased
distributions were flat for α = 40°, 60°, and 80° but not for α = 20°. The value of pl Cpl decreased
significantly for the second half of the inclined array. On the
significantly for the second ◦half of the inclined array. On the lower surface, lower surface, the C pl distributions
the Cpl distributions were were
similar to those for β = 0 . The values for Cpl were lower for β = 30◦ . For β = 45◦ , Kopp et al. [22]
similar to those for β = 0°. The values for Cpl were lower for β = 30°. For β = 45°, Kopp et al. [22] observed
observed the peak system torque at angles for approaching wind that are close to the angle of the
the peak system torque at angles for approaching wind that are close to the angle of the diagonal axes
diagonal axes of an inclined panel. Figure 4 shows that the variation in Cpl on the upper surface
of anwas
inclined panel. Figure
more significant 4 shows
at lower valuesthatofthe variation
α. The lowestin Cpl on
value of the upper
Cpl was surfaceatwas
observed x/L =more
0.5–0.7significant
for
at lower values of α. The lowest value of C pl was observed at x/L = 0.50.7 for α = 20°, 40°, and 60°.
α = 20 , 40 , and 60 . This corresponds to the formation of the windward corner vortex. An increase
◦ ◦ ◦
Thisincorresponds
the value of βto the formation
resulted in a decrease of the windward
in the value of Cplcorner
on the vortex. An increase
lower surface. in the
For β = 135 value5 of β
◦ , Figure

resulted
showsinthat
a decrease
the flow in the valuealong
decelerated of Cpltheonlongitudinal
the lower surface.
directionFor β =upper
on the 135°, surface.
Figure 5An shows that the
increase
α produced along
flowindecelerated a morethe longitudinal
positive value fordirection
Cpl on theon the upper
upper surfacesurface.
and a moreAn negative
increasevalue
in α produced
for Cpl a
more positive value for Cpl on the upper surface and a more negative value for Cpl on the lower surface.
The sectional lift coefficient increased as α increased; hence, there is a greater downward force.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2466 4 of 11

on the lower surface. The sectional lift coefficient increased as α increased; hence, there is a greater
downward force.

-0.2 (a) upper surface  = 30oo, y/W= 0.5

-0.2 (a) upper surface  = 30 , y/W= 0.5
-0.4
-0.4
-0.6
-0.6
-0.8

Cp,l
-0.8
Cp,l -1.0 
-1.0 o
20
o
-1.2 20o
40
-1.2 40
o
o
-1.4 60
o
-1.4 60
80
o
o
80

(b) lower surface

(b) lower surface
0.8
0.8

0.6
0.6
Cp,l
Cp,l

0.4
0.4

0.2
0.2

0.0
0.00.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
x/L
x/L
Figure 3. Mean longitudinal pressure distributions for y/W = 0.5 and β =◦ 30°.
Figure
Figure 3. 3. Meanlongitudinal
Mean longitudinal pressure
pressure distributions
distributionsforfor = 0.5
y/Wy/W β = 30
andand
= 0.5 β = .30°.

-0.2 (a) upper surface  = 45o, y/W= 0.5

-0.2 (a) upper surface  = 45o, y/W= 0.5
-0.4
-0.4
-0.6
-0.6
-0.8
Cp,l

-0.8
Cp,l

-1.0
-1.0
-1.2
-1.2
-1.4
-1.4

(b) lower surface 

0.8
(b) lower surface 
20
o
o
0.8 20o
40
o
40
60
o
o
0.6 60
80
o
0.6 80
o
Cp,l
Cp,l

0.4
0.4

0.2
0.2

0.0
0.00.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
x/L
x/L
Figure
Figure Meanlongitudinal
4. 4.Mean longitudinal pressure
pressuredistributions
distributionsforfor = 0.50.5
y/Wy/W= β = β45= .45°.
andand ◦
Figure 4. Mean longitudinal pressure distributions for y/W= 0.5 and β = 45°.
 Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2466 5 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 2 of 11

1.0
(a) upper surface 
o
0.8 20
o
40
0.6 60
o

o
80
0.4

Cp,l
0.2

0.0

-0.2

-0.2 (b) lower surface  = 135o, y/W= 0.5

-0.4

-0.6
Cp,l

-0.8

-1.0

-1.2

-1.4

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

x/L

Mean longitudinal
Figure5.5.Mean
Figure longitudinal pressure
pressuredistributions for for
distributions = 0.5 and
y/Wy/W= β = 135
0.5 and β =◦135°.
.

3.2. Spanwise Pressure Distributions

3.2. Spanwise Pressure Distributions
For x/L = 0.5, the spanwise pressure, Cps , distributions for β = 0◦ are shown in Figure 6. On the
For x/L
upper and =lower
0.5, surfaces,
the spanwise pressure,
there was an invertedCps, U-shape
distributionsfor α =for
20◦ ,β40=◦ ,0°
andare
60shown
◦ , whichin Figure 6. to
corresponds On the
upper and lower
side-edge surfaces,
vortices. therewith
This agrees wasthe an results
inverted for U-shape
an inclined forpanel
α = 20°, 40°, and
for which L/W60°, which
= 2 [21]. corresponds
Therefore,
to side-edge vortices. This agrees with the results for an inclined panel
the side panels (P1 and P9) experienced greater suction on the upper surface and less lift force on the for which L/W = 2 [21].
Therefore, the side
lower surface. α = 80 (P1
Forpanels ◦ , theand P9) experienced
distributions were quitegreater
flat. The suction
difference on in
thetheupper surface
pressure between andthe
less lift
upper (highly separated flow with lower
force on the lower surface. For α = 80°, the distributionsvalue in C ps ) and lower surfaces (near stagnation region
were quite flat. The difference in the pressure with
greaterthe
between value in Cps )(highly
upper was greater than thatflow
separated for α with
= 20◦ , lower
40◦ , andvalue
60◦ . in Cps) and lower surfaces (near
stagnation β = 30 ,with
For region ◦ the Cgreater
ps distributions
value in areCshown in Figure 7. For the left half (P1–P4), the value of Cps
ps) was greater than that for α = 20°, 40°, and 60°.
on the upper surface decreased slightly toward the right side and increased as the value of α increased.
For β = 30°, the Cps distributions are shown in Figure 7. For the left half (P1–P4), the value of Cps
For the right half, the opposite was true. Expansion and compression were observed for α = 20◦ ,
on the upper surface decreased slightly toward the right side and increased as the value of α increased.
due to the formation of a strong windward corner vortex and a greater lift force on P6–P8. On the
Forlower
the right half, the opposite was true. Expansion and compression were observed for α = 20°, due
surface, the value of Cps increased from the left to the right sides as the value of α increased.
to the
Theformation
location of of theamaximum
strong windward
Cps movedcorner vortex
to the right and
side whena greater lift force on P6P8. On the lower
α increased.
surface,Fortheβ value of Cps 8increased
= 45◦ , Figure shows thatfrom the Cthe left to the right sides as the value of α◦ increased. The
ps distributions were similar to those for β = 30 . However,
location of the maximum C moved to
there was a greater pressure gradient on the upper
ps the right side when For
surface. α increased.
α = 20◦ , a larger windward corner
For βwas
vortex = 45°, Figure
formed, and8the
shows thatofthe
location the C ps distributions
lowest value of Cps weremovedsimilar For β =for
to those
to the left. 135β◦ ,=wind
30°. blew
However,
over
there wasthealower surface
greater of the inclined
pressure gradient panels.
on the Cps distributions
Theupper surface. For on the
α =lower
20°, asurface
largershowed
windward similarcorner
patterns to those on the upper surface for β = 45 ◦ , as shown in Figure 9. This shows the downward
vortex was formed, and the location of the lowest value of Cps moved to the left. For β = 135°, wind
blewforce
overincreased
the lower from the leftoftothe
surface the inclined
right edges. panels. The Cps distributions on the lower surface showed
similar patterns to those on the upper surface for β = 45°, as shown in Figure 9. This shows the
downward force increased from the left to the right edges.
 Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2466 6 of 11
Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2019,
2019, 9,
9, xx 33 of
of 11
11

-0.4
-0.4
(a) upper
upper surface
surface 

(a) 20o
o
20 o
40o
40 o
60
60
o
-0.5
-0.5 80
o
o
80

p,s
CCp,s
-0.6
-0.6

 == 00o,, x/L=
(b) lower
(b) lower surface
surface o
x/L= 0.5
0.5
0.8
0.8

0.6
0.6

0.4
p,s

0.4
CCp,s

0.2
0.2

0.0
0.0

-0.2
-0.2

0.0
0.0 0.2
0.2 0.4
0.4 0.6
0.6 0.8
0.8 1.0
1.0
y/W
y/W

Figure 6.6.Mean
Figure6.
Figure Mean spanwise
Meanspanwise pressuredistributions
spanwise pressure
pressure distributions
distributions for
forfor x/L == and
= 0.5
x/L x/L 0.5 and
0.5 and β◦ .== 0°.
β = 0β 0°.

0.0
0.0
(a) upper surface  = 30oo, x/L= 0.5
upper surface
(a)  = 30 , x/L= 0.5

-0.5
-0.5
p,s
CCp,s

-1.0
-1.0

 o
20o
20 o
-1.5 40o
40
-1.5 o
60
60
o
o
80
80
o

-2.0
-2.0
(b) lower
(b) lower surface
surface
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
p,s
CCp,s

0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
-0.2
-0.2
0.0
0.0 0.2
0.2 0.4
0.4 0.6
0.6 0.8
0.8 1.0
1.0
y/W
y/W

Figure 7.7.Mean
Figure7.
Figure Mean spanwise
Meanspanwise pressuredistributions
spanwise pressure
pressure distributions
distributions for = 0.5
x/L
x/L x/L
forfor == 0.5 β = 30
0.5 and
and and ◦ 30°.
ββ ==. 30°.
 Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2466 7 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 4 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 4 of 11

0.0
0.0
(a) upper surface
(a) upper surface

-0.5
-0.5

p,sp,s
-1.0

CC
-1.0

o
20o
20 o
-1.5 40o
-1.5 40 o
60o
60 o
80o
80
-2.0
-2.0
(b) lower surface  = 45o, x/L= 0.5
1.0 (b) lower surface  = 45o, x/L= 0.5
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
p,sp,s
CC

0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
-0.2
-0.2
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
y/W
y/W
Figure 8. Mean spanwise pressure distributions for x/L = 0.5 and β =◦ 45°.
Figure 8.8.Mean
Figure Meanspanwise
spanwise pressure distributions
pressure distributions forfor = 0.5
x/Lx/L = 0.5 β = 45
andand β = .45°.

(a) upper surface  =

(a) upper surface o
= 135o , x/L= 0.5
1.0 135 , x/L= 0.5
1.0 o
o
20
20 o
40o
40 o
60o
60 o
0.5
p,sp,s

80o
0.5 80
CC

0.0
0.0

(b) lower surface

(b) lower surface

-0.5
-0.5
p,sp,s

-1.0
CC

-1.0

-1.5
-1.5

-2.0
-2.00.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
y/W
y/W
Figure 9.9.Mean
Figure Meanspanwise
spanwise pressure distributions
pressure distributions forfor = 0.5
x/Lx/L = 0.5 β = 135
andand β =◦135°.
.
Figure 9. Mean spanwise pressure distributions for x/L = 0.5 and β = 135°.

3.3. The
3.3. The Lift
Lift Coefficient
Coefficient
CLL was
C was calculated
calculated byby integrating
integrating ΔC ΔCpp (differential
(differential pressure
pressure between
between upper
upper and
and lower
lower surface).
surface). The
The
variation in
variation in CCLL with
with αα and
and ββ is
is shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 10.
10. The
The value
value of
of C
CLL was
was negative for ββ  75°.
negative for 75°. The
The lowest
lowest
value for
value for CCLL was
was observed
observed forfor αα == 30°
30° and
and ββ == 45°.
45°. This
This is
is similar
similar to
to the
the results
results of
of Chou
Chou et et al.
al. [21]
[21] for
for
an inclined panel, for which L/W = 2. The value of C L was relatively small for β = 90°, and it was
an inclined panel, for which L/W = 2. The value of CL was relatively small for β = 90°, and it was
 Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 5 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 5 of 11
Figure 11. For an inclined panel, for which L/W = 2, the value of CL for β  75° decreased linearly with
Figure 11.
α (Sci.
Appl. 30°), For
2019, 9,an
following
2466inclined panel, for
an increase forwhich
α = 50°. L/WAt =high
2, thevalues for β  75°Cdecreased
valueofofαC(=L 60°80°), linearly with
L remained approximately 8 of 11
α (constant
30°), following an increase for α = 50°. At high values of α (= 60°80°),
for α = 30° and 40° [21]. For β of 0°, 30°, 45°, and 60°, for which L/W = 0.19, the variation of C L remained approximately

constant
CL with forαα was = 30° and 40°The
U-shaped. [21].lowest
For β of value0°, 30°,
of CL45°,for and
β = 0°60°,
and for30°which L/W = 0.19,
was observed at the variation
 = 20°. For β of = 45°
C3.3.
L with Theα Lift
was Coefficient
U-shaped. The lowest value of C L for β = 0° and 30° was observed at  = 20°. For β = 45°
and 60°, it respectively corresponded to  = 30° and 40°. For high values of α (= 60°80°),  had a less
andsignificant
60°,
CL itwas respectively
calculated
effect on the corresponded
byamplitude
integrating to
of∆CCL=. 30° and 40°.for
(differential For
anhigh
pressure values
between of αupper
at(=lower
60°80°),
and  had
lower a (
less30°)
ofsurface).
p Therefore, inclined array values
significant effect on the amplitude of C L. Therefore, for an inclined array at lower values of  ( 30°)◦
The andvariation
β ( 45°),inthere CL withwereαlower and βvaluesis shown in CLin Figurewas
, which 10.critical
The value to the CL was
ofsafe design negative for β ≤ 75 .
of the system.
and β (
The lowest 45°),
Figurevaluethere were
for Cthe lower values in C L, which was
α= ◦ critical
and βFor to
= 45 the
◦ safe
 . 30°, design of the system.
12 shows L was effectobserved
of β on C for
L for 30 0°80°.
α of Thistheis similar
value oftoCLthe results as
decreased of α
Figure L for α of 0°80°. For   30°, the value of CL decreased as α
Chou et al.12
increased (shows
[21] for an
20°). theinclined
For effect ofpanel,
= 75°105°, β on theCfor whichofL/W
value α had= 2.a less value of CLeffect.
The significant was relatively
This agrees small
withfor the
increased
β results
= 90◦ , and ( Chou
of 20°).
it was For  =[21].
etpositive
al. 75°105°,
Theβ value
for the ◦value
≥ 105 of, which
CL forof represents
α
 had
 120° a less significant
a downward
decreased effect.
as force. Thiscritical
The
(= 40°80°) agrees withand
wind
increased, thethe
loads
resultstheofinclined
onopposite Chouwaset al. for
panels [21].  The
occurred valuefor of CL for
lower   120°
values of β;decreased
hence, theaseffect  (= of40°80°)
α on Cincreased, and the
true =10°30°. L is only shown for
opposite
β = 0 –60 was true for  =10°30°. L/W =For  =value L with  is
L for β ≤ 75
◦ ◦ in Figure of Cvariation ◦
The wind load11. onFor each an inclined
inclined panel,panel was for which
of interest. 2, the 30°, the in Cdecreased
The
linearly wind
with αload
(≤30 on
◦ ), each
followinginclined an panel
increase wasfor of
α =interest.
50 ◦ . At For
shown in Figure 13. For P1 (the left-most panel), the value of CL increased linearly as  increased.
high  = 30°,
values the
of α variation
(= 60 ◦ –80in◦ ), CCL with  is
remained The
L
shown in Figure
variation
approximately 13.
in CLconstant ForP1
with for (the
for P2 left-most
α and
= 30P3◦ andwas panel),
◦ [21].
40similar theto value
Forthat of0◦CP1.
β offor increased
, L30 ◦ , 45◦ , and
However, linearly
60◦ , for
there was aincreased.
as which sudden =The
L/W increase
0.19,
variation
the in CL with
 = 60°75°.
at variation CLwith
of For for P2
P5P9, and
α was P3 wasofsimilar
U-shaped.
the value Thetolowest
CL decreased that initially,
for P1. However,
value CL for βthere
offollowing ◦was
anda30
= 0increase.
an sudden
◦ was increase
The lowestobserved value
atatfor
= 60°75°.
α =C20 ◦ For P5P9,
. For βdecreased
L, which = 45 andfrom
◦ the value
◦
60 ,P5 of C L decreased initially, following an
to P9, was observed
it respectively corresponded for  =to30°45°.
α = 30 For
◦ increase.
and 40  90°,
◦ The
. For lowest
thehighvariationvalue
valuesinofCL
for CL,60
α for
(= which
◦ –80◦ ),
P1P9 decreased
wasβ had from
lessa significant.
less P5 toThis
significant P9,effect
was observed
on the amplitude
demonstrates that the
for = 30°45°. For  on
CL . Therefore,
ofwind loads  90°, thethe
for an variation
inclined
inclined in C
array
array L
at
were
for P1P9 was less
values of αat(≤30
unsymmetrical
lower significant.
lower ◦ This
 (β60°).
) and demonstrates
◦ that the wind loads on
(≤45 ), there were lower values in CL , which was critical to the safe the inclined array were
unsymmetrical
design of the system. at lower  ( 60°).

-1.4
-1.4 -1.2
0.8 -1.0
-1.2
0.8 0.6 -1.0 -0.8
-0.8 -0.6
0.6 0.4
-0.6 -0.4
0.4 0.2 -0.4 -0.2
0.2 0.0 -0.2 0.0
0.0 0.2
0.0 -0.2 0.4
CL

0.2
-0.2 -0.4 0.4 0.6
CL

0.6 0.8
-0.4 -0.6
0.8
-0.6 -0.8 180
160
-0.8 -1.0 180
140
160
120
-1.0 -1.2 140
100
-1.2 -1.4 120
80 
100
-1.4 70
60 80 60 
70 50 60 40
60 40
50 30 40 20
40  20 0
30 1020
 20
10
0

Figure
Figure 10.10.Lift
Liftcoefficient.
coefficient.
Figure 10. Lift coefficient.
1.0
1.0

0.5  0
o

o
0.5 0 30o
o
30 45o
o
0.0 45 60o
0.0 o
CL

60
CL

-0.5
-0.5

-1.0
-1.0

-1.5
-1.5 0 20 40 60 80
0 20 40 60 80
, deg
, deg
Figure 11. Lift coefficient. β: 0◦ , 30◦ , 45◦ , 60◦ .
Figure 11. Lift coefficient. β: 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°.
Figure 11. Lift coefficient. β: 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°.
Figure 12 shows the effect of β on CL for α of 0◦ –80◦ . For β ≤ 30◦ , the value of CL decreased as α
increased (≥ 20◦ ). For β = 75◦ –105◦ , the value of α had a less significant effect. This agrees with the
results of Chou et al. [21]. The value of CL for β ≥ 120◦ decreased as α (= 40◦ –80◦ ) increased, and the
opposite was true for α =10◦ –30◦ .
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2466 9 of 11
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 6 of 11

1.0

o
10
o
0.5 20
o
30
o
40
0.0 o
50

CL
o
60
o
-0.5 70
o
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x 80 6 of 11
-1.0
1.0

o
-1.5 10
o
0.5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 20
o
30
, deg 40
o
0.0 o
50
Lift coefficient. 0◦ –80◦ .
coefficient. αα:: 0°80°.
CL

Figure 12. Lift

Figure 60
o

o
-0.5 70
panel was of interest. For α = in CL with β is
◦ o
The wind load on each inclined 1.0 30 , the
80 variation

shown in Figure 13. For P1 (the-1.0 P1 panel), the value of C increased linearly as β increased.
left-most L
P2
The variation in CL with β for P2 0.5
and P3P3 was similar to that for P1. However, there was a sudden
increase at β = 60◦ –75◦ . For P5–P9, P4 of C decreased initially, following an increase. The lowest
-1.5the value L
0.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
value for CL , which decreased from P5 to P9, was observed for β = 30◦ –45◦ . For β ≥ 90◦ , the variation
CL

in CL for P1–P9 was less significant. , degthat the wind loads on the inclined array were
This demonstrates
-0.5
unsymmetrical at lower β (≤60 ). ◦
Figure 12. Lift coefficient. α : 0°80°.
-1.0
1.0
P1
0.5 P5 P2
0.5 P6 P3
P7 P4
0.0 P8
0.0
P9
CL
CL

-0.5 -0.5

-1.0 -1.0

-1.5

-2.0 P5
0.5
0 20 P6 60
40 80 100 120 140 160 180
P7
0.0
P8 , deg
P9
13. Lift coefficient for P1P9 for  = 30°.
Figure-0.5
CL

4. Conclusions -1.0

Wind loading on inclined solar -1.5 panels is a key factor in the proper functioning of the system

during its lifetime. This study determined -2.0

the effect of the angle of tilt and the angle of the incidence
of the wind on the mean surface pressure, as40well
0 20 60 as80 the lift 140
100 120 coefficient
160 180 for an inclined array (L/W =
0.19). There was a significant localized load near the, front deg edge at greater angles of tilt but less than
for L/W = 2. For β of 0°60°, the variation in CL with the angle of tilt was U-shaped. The formation of
Figure
Figure 13. 13.
LiftLift coefficient
coefficient for for P1P9
P1–P9 α =30=◦30°.
for for .
a strong windward corner vortex induced a greater lift force on the right half of the inclined plate for
β4.=Conclusions
30°45°. Unsymmetrical wind loads on the inclined array at lower angles of incidence for the wind
4. Conclusions
( 60°) in the spanwise direction induced a greater bending moment. Wind loads on an inclined array
Wind
at lower Wind loading
angles loadingonand
of tilt inclined
on anglessolar
inclined panels
ofsolar panels
incidence isfor
aiskey
a key
the factor
wind in in
factor
are the proper
the
a cause for functioning
proper functioning
concern of design
in the thethe
of system
system
of a
during its lifetime. This study determined the effect of the angle of tilt and the angle
during its lifetime. This study determined the effect of the angle of tilt and the angle of the incidence
system. of the incidence of
theofwind on theon
the wind mean surfacesurface
the mean pressure, as wellasaswell
pressure, the lift coefficient
as the for an inclined
lift coefficient array (L/W
for an inclined = 0.19).
array (L/W =
Author
There Contributions:
was a significant conceptualization/methodology/data
localized load near the front edgecuration,
at C.-C.C.,
greater P.-H.C.
angles of andbut
tilt C.-Y.C.;
less writing
than for
0.19). There was a significant localized load near the front
(original draft preparation), P.-H.C.; writing (review and editing), R.-Y.Y.
edge at greater angles of tilt but less than
for L/W = 2. For β of 0°60°, the variation in CL with the angle of tilt was U-shaped. The formation of
Funding: This
a strong research was
windward funded
corner by Industrial
vortex induced Technology
a greater lift Research
force on Institute.
the right half of the inclined plate for
β = 30°45°. Unsymmetrical wind loads on the inclined array at lower angles of incidence for the wind
( 60°) in the spanwise direction induced a greater bending moment. Wind loads on an inclined array
at lower angles of tilt and angles of incidence for the wind are a cause for concern in the design of a
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2466 10 of 11

L/W = 2. For β of 0◦ –60◦ , the variation in CL with the angle of tilt was U-shaped. The formation of
a strong windward corner vortex induced a greater lift force on the right half of the inclined plate
for β = 30◦ –45◦ . Unsymmetrical wind loads on the inclined array at lower angles of incidence for the
wind (≤60◦ ) in the spanwise direction induced a greater bending moment. Wind loads on an inclined
array at lower angles of tilt and angles of incidence for the wind are a cause for concern in the design
of a system.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization/methodology/data curation, C.-C.C., P.-H.C. and C.-Y.C.; writing

(original draft preparation), P.-H.C.; writing (review and editing), R.-Y.Y.
Funding: This research was funded by Industrial Technology Research Institute.
Acknowledgments: The technical support of the staff of the Aerospace Science and Technology Research Center,
National Cheng Kung University, is greatly appreciated.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature
CL lift coefficient
Cp pressure coefficient in the longitudinal direction, (p–p∞ )/q
Cp,low pressure coefficient on the lower surface
Cps pressure coefficient in the spanwise direction
Cp,up pressure coefficient on the upper surface
L length of tilted panel
p∞, freestream static pressure
q dynamic pressure
W width of tilted panel
x coordinate in the longitudinal direction
y coordinate in the spanwise direction
α angle of tilt
β wind incidence angle
∆Cp differential pressure, Cp,up − Cp,low

References
1. REN21. Renewables 2018, Global Status Report; Ren21 Secretariat: Paris, France, 2018.
2. Trapani, K.; Santafe, M.R. A review of floating photovoltaics installations: 2007–2013. Prog. Photovolt. 2015,
23, 524–532. [CrossRef]
3. Sahu, A.; Yadav, N.; Sudhakar, K. Floating photovoltaic power plant: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2016, 66, 815–824. [CrossRef]
4. Castellano, N.N.; Parra, J.A.G.; Valls-Guirado, J.; Manzano-Agugliaro, F. Optimal displacement of photovoltaic
array’s rows using a novel shading model. Appl. Energy 2015, 144, 1–9. [CrossRef]
5. Kim, S.M.; Oh, M.; Park, H.D. Analysis and Prioritization of the Floating Photovoltaic System Potential for
Reservoirs in Korea. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 365. [CrossRef]
6. Trapani, K.; Millar, D.L.; Smith, H.C.M. Novel offshore application of photovoltaics in comparison to
conventional marine renewable energy technologies. Renew. Energy 2013, 50, 879–888. [CrossRef]
7. Chung, K.-M.; Chang, K.-C.; Chou, C.-C. Wind loads on residential and large-scale solar collector models.
J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 2011, 99, 59–64. [CrossRef]
8. Jubayer, C.M.; Hangan, H. Numerical simulation of wind effects on a stand-alone ground mounted
photovoltaic (PV) system. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 2014, 134, 56–64. [CrossRef]
9. Aly, A.M. On the evaluation of wind loads on solar panels: The scale issue. Sol. Energy 2016, 135, 423–434.
[CrossRef]
10. Naeiji, A.; Raji, F.; Zisis, I. Wind loads on residential scale rooftop photovoltaic panels. J. Wind Eng.
Ind. Aerodyn. 2017, 168, 228–246. [CrossRef]
11. Guo, M.; Zang, H.; Gao, S.; Chen, T.; Xiao, J.; Cheng, L.; Wei, Z.; Sun, G. Optimal tilt angle and orientation on
photovoltaic modules using HS algorithm in different climates in China. Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 1028. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2466 11 of 11

12. Chung, K.-M.; Chou, C.-C.; Chang, K.-C.; Chen, Y.-J. Effect of a vertical guide plate on the wind loading of
an inclined flat plate. Wind Struct. Int. J. 2013, 17, 537–552. [CrossRef]
13. Stathopoulos, T.; Zisis, I.; Xypnitou, E. Local and overall wind pressure and force coefficients for solar panels.
J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 2014, 125, 195–206. [CrossRef]
14. Cao, J.; Yoshida, A.; Saha, P.K.; Tamura, Y. Wind loading characteristics of solar arrays mounted on flat roofs.
J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 2013, 123, 214–225. [CrossRef]
15. Chou, C.-C.; Chung, K.-M.; Chang, K.-C. Wind Loads of Solar Water Heaters: Wind Incidence Effect.
J. Aerodyn. 2014, 2014, 1–10. [CrossRef]
16. Shademan, M.; Hangan, H. Wind Loading on Solar Panels at Different Inclination Angles. In Proceedings of
the 11th Americas Conference on Wind Engineering, San Juan, PR, USA, 22–26 June 2009.
17. Radu, A.; Axinte, E. Wind forces on structures supporting solar collectors. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 1989,
32, 93–100. [CrossRef]
18. Warsido, W.P.; Bitsuamlak, G.T.; Barata, J.; Chowdhury, A.G. Influence of spacing parameters on the wind
loading of solar array. J. Fluids Struct. 2014, 48, 295–315. [CrossRef]
19. Central Weather Bureau (CWB), Ministry of Transportation and Communication. Available online:
https://www.cwb.gov.tw/V7/climate/marine_stat/wave.htm (accessed on 22 May 2018).
20. Chung, K.; Chang, K.-C.; Liu, Y. Reduction of wind uplift of a solar collector model. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn.
2008, 96, 1294–1306. [CrossRef]
21. Chou, C.C.; Chung, P.H.; Yang, R.Y. Wind loads on a solar panel at high tilt angles. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1594.
[CrossRef]
22. Kopp, G.A.; Surry, D.; Chen, K. Wind loads on a solar array. Wind Struct. 2002, 5, 393–406. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).