Energy 281 (2023) 128253

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Potential application of electrical performance enhancement methods in

PV/T module
Yashun Lu, Guiqiang Li *
Department of Thermal Science and Energy Engineering, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei City, 230026, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Handling editor: Soteris Kalogirou Hybrid photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T) modules have been proposed to generate more electricity and heat, which
can improve the solar energy conversion efficiency per unit area. However, the photovoltaic (PV) efficiency of
Keywords: PV/T modules decreases as the PV cell temperature increases, which significantly affects the solar energy con­
Solar energy version efficiency of PV/T modules. Here, four temperature profiles (uniform, single-Gaussian, double-Gaussian,
PV/T
multi-Gaussian) are proposed on the PV cell surface by adjusting the heat transfer arrangement for the PV cell
Different temperature profiles
cooling duct in the PV/T module. Compared with the uniform temperature profile, the multi-Gaussian tem­
Electrical performance
perature profile PV cell efficiency increased by 1.292%; the single-Gaussian temperature profile PV cell efficiency
decreased by 4.308%. The results show that for PV cells in the PV/T module, different temperature profiles lead
to great differences in electrical performance, and a nonuniform temperature profile can be set to improve their
electrical performance.

1. Introduction by 0.5% compared to 25 ◦ C [11]. At the peak of irradiation, the tem­

With the deterioration of the global environment and the frequent
occurrence of extreme weather conditions around the world, clean en­
ergy sources such as solar energy are receiving more attention and
research [1]. The utilization of solar energy mainly includes photovol­
taic (PV), solar thermal, and photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T) systems [2].
The low conversion efficiency of PV systems limits the widespread use of
solar energy [3]. Commonly, only approximately 20% of direct solar
radiation is converted to electric energy, while the rest is converted to
waste heat or stored as heat in PV panels [4]. The accumulation of
excessive heat in PV panels increases the temperature of the PV panels,
which in turn reduces the electric performance of the PV cells. There­
fore, the use of PV/T modules not only generates more electric energy
but can also be used to generate thermal energy, improving the overall
solar energy conversion efficiency [5,6]. The main components of the
PV/T module are PV cells and thermal collectors. The heat accumulation
in the PV/T module and heat loss from the collector can be remarkably
reduced by effective heat transfer [7].
The temperature has a notable effect on the electrical performance of
photovoltaic cells [8–10], and this effect has been studied extensively by
researchers. For every 1 ◦ C increase in the temperature of a mono­
crystalline silicon solar cell, the power output of PV panel will decrease
perature of PV cells can reach about 50 ◦ C–60 ◦ C [12]. Similarly, the
study of Heba [13] also shows that every 1 ◦ C increase in PV panel
temperature will lead to a 0.40%–0.65% decrease in PV cell efficiency.
Swapnil et al. [14] studied the operating temperature of silicon-based
solar cells/modules and its effect on the electrical performance of PV
devices. The results showed that the operating temperature plays a key
role in the PV conversion process. Both the electrical efficiency and
power output of the PV module depends linearly on the operating
temperature. Zhao et al. [15] investigated the effect of enhanced radi­
ation cooling on the practical application of solar cells based on PV
modules. The results showed a 1.75 K reduction in solar cell temperature
under an ideal case. Am et al. [16] investigated how a cooling mecha­
nism can improve the electrical performance of PV panels. The study
showed that reducing the temperature of PV panels is important to
maintain the electrical performance of PV panels.
The solar radiation incident on the PV panels also raises the tem­
perature of the PV cells significantly when it is converted into electricity,
and the higher temperature reduces the electrical performance of the PV
cell. Therefore, various passive and active cooling methods have been
investigated for application in PV panels to improve the electrical per­
formance of PV/T modules [17–19]. Two cooling methods for PV panels
were investigated by Hussien et al. [20]. The results showed that the PV

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ligq@ustc.edu.cn (G. Li).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.128253
Received 20 November 2022; Received in revised form 18 June 2023; Accepted 23 June 2023
Available online 4 July 2023
0360-5442/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Lu and G. Li
systems equipped with distributed cooling fans achieved an efficiency
improvement of 2.1% along with energy saving of 7.9%; while the PV
systems equipped with a concentrated cooling blower achieved an ef­
ficiency improvement of 1.34% and saved 4.2% of energy. Teo et al.
[21] built a hybrid PV/T system for an experimental study of cooling
methods. The experimental results showed that without active cooling,
the PV cell efficiency was only 8%–9%, the PV cell efficiency reached
12%–14% with active cooling. Mahmood and Aljubury [22] designed an
innovative hybrid photovoltaic evaporative cooling system to improve
PV panel efficiency by cooling the PV panels and simultaneously
providing cool humid supplied air. It was found that the PV panel effi­
ciency could be increased by a maximum of 11.2% compared to a PV
panel without cooling. Bahaidarah et al. [23] installed solar thermal
collectors (cooling panels) underneath the PV panels to capture the
waste heat from the panels to generate hot water and increase elec­
tricity. It was found that the temperature of the PV panels decreased by
about 20% and the electrical efficiency increased by 9%. Zhao et al. [24]
proposed, designed and fabricated a silica micrograting photonic cooler
for radiation cooling of PV cells. The outdoor experiments showed that
the proposed cooler can passively reduce the PV cell temperature by
3.6 ◦ C under irradiance of approximately 830 W/m2 to 990 W/m2.
In recent years, many studies on the cooling of PV systems have been
published [25,26]. However, most of them focus on the cooling of the
whole PV panel, thus forming a uniform or nonuniform temperature
profile on the surface of the PV panel. These cooling methods are pro­
posed to improve the electric efficiency of the whole PV panel, without
considering the impact on the electrical performance of each individual
PV cell in the PV panel. In practical production applications, several
ducts are usually installed on the backside of the PV panels for cooling
(creating a non-uniform temperature profile on the backside of the PV
panels), considering the cost for cooling. To explore the influence of the
non-uniform temperature profile on the electrical performance of indi­
vidual PV cell in the PV panel, and then design the cooling structure of
the PV panel, which is beneficial to improve the electrical performance
of the PV panel. PV/T modules can be designed to generate higher heat
and electrical energy, and improve the conversion efficiency of solar
energy. The study of the thermal and electrical performance of indi­
vidual PV cells in a PV panel can maximize the conversion and utiliza­
tion of solar energy by the whole PV/T module.
This work proposes four different cooling ducts distributed on the
back of the PV cell to reduce the PV cell temperature while performing
waste heat utilization. Based on solid heat transfer simulations, the PV
cell surface’s four temperature profiles (uniform, single-Gaussian, dou­
ble-Gaussian, multi-Gaussian) are obtained when these four cooling
ducts are distributed. Then, a numerical model of the PV cell is devel­
oped and the reliability of the proposed model is verified by experi­
ments. The electrical performance of the PV cell with four temperature
Fig. 1. (a) The physical picture of the PV cell; (b) The PV cell model.
2
Energy 281 (2023) 128253
profiles is calculated based on the validated numerical model. Further­
more, the electrical performance of the PV cell with four temperature
profiles has been compared and analyzed, and the optimal temperature
profile (cooling duct distribution) has been determined. The power
output can be improved by adjusting the distribution of cooling ducts on
the back of PV cells used in many large-scale PV/T power generation.
2. Description and experimental setup
2.1. Description of the PV cell
Fig. 1 shows the crystalline silicon solar cell used in the study in this
paper. Fig. 1(a) is the physical diagram of the PV cell, and Fig. 1(b) is the
model diagram of the PV cell used in the simulation. The size of the PV
cell is 78 × 78 mm2, and there are 52 parallel fingers along the x-axis
direction and 3 busbars along the y-axis direction for deriving the in­
ternal current of the PV cell. The electrical efficiency of the PV cell is
12.65% under the standard testing condition.
2.2. Experimental setup
Fig. 2 shows a schematic diagram of four PV cell cooling structures
consisting of different numbers of copper ducts, cooled fluids and PV
cells. Fig. 2(a) shows a copper duct attached to the entire PV cell back for
cooling; Fig. 2(b) shows two copper ducts attached to the back of the PV
cell for cooling, and the total area of the copper ducts is half of the area
of the entire PV cell; Fig. 2(c) shows three copper ducts attached to the
back of the PV cell for cooling, and the total area of the copper ducts is
half of the area of the entire PV cell; Fig. 2(d) shows five copper ducts
attached to the back of the PV cell for cooling, and the total area of the
copper ducts is half of the area of the entire PV cell. Approximately 80%
of the direct solar irradiation is converted to heat and stored in PV cells.
The heat energy is transferred along the copper ducts, and then the
output heat energy is collected and utilized through the convection heat
transfer of the liquid in the ducts.
A set of experiments was performed on the above PV cell using a
Newport Corporation solar simulator (Oriel Sol3A Model 90943A) as
shown in Fig. 3. The solar simulator consists of a computer, reference
cell meter, source meter, Keithley Instruments, Xenon lamp and filter. It
can provide an AM1.5 solar spectrum in the illumination region. The
difference in uniform irradiation is less than 2% in the illumination area
of 100 × 100 mm2. A 4-wire connection is used between the PV cell
under test and the source meter. The I–V characteristic curves of the PV
cells to be tested are manipulated and recorded using LabVIEW 2009
SP1 GUI software. The solar simulator usually needs to be preheated for
30 min after opening to make the internal energy flux output of the
system stable. The solar simulator was recalibrated using standard PV
Y. Lu and G. Li Energy 281 (2023) 128253

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of PV cells with different numbers of copper ducts: (a) single cooling ducts; (b) two cooling ducts; (c) three cooling ducts; (d) five
cooling ducts.

Fig. 3. Experimental setup for indoor measurements using the solar simulator.

cells before testing. After calibration (calibration was performed using √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
the reference cell meter provided), the Voc (open circuit voltage in volts), δWTotal = (δW1 )2 + (δW2 )2 + ⋅⋅⋅ + (δWm )2 (2)
Isc (short circuit current in amps), Imax (current at which the maximum
power is achieved), Vmax (voltage at which the maximum power is Using the above calculation formula according to the data provided
achieved), Pmax (the maximum power point, in mW, as calculated by by the experimental instrument manufacturer, the uncertainty values of
Imax × Vmax), Rsh (shunt resistance in ohms), Rs (series resistance in all instruments in this experiment are shown in Table 1.
ohms), efficiency and fill factor parameters of the PV cells can be
measured by the solar simulator. 3. Modeling and simulation

2.3. Uncertainty analysis 3.1. Thermal modeling

The reliability of the experimental results depends on the accuracy of The purpose of using cooling ducts is to increase the heat rejection
the instruments used in the experiment. Since the measurement of magnitude and lower the temperature of the PV panel, i.e., to increase
experimental data cannot be accurate, uncertainty analysis is required to the power output of the PV panel. The general heat exchange in the
quantify the accuracy of experimental data. Uncertainty analysis is cooling process of PV panels is as follows: only a small portion of the
carried out for all experimental instruments involved in data measure­ incoming solar irradiance SG is converted into useful electric power
ment in this paper. The method proposed according to Baloch [27] is output, the largest part of the incoming solar irradiance SG is wasted on
used to calculate various experimental measurement errors. The equa­ increasing the thermal energy of the PV panel, and a small part of the
tion for calculating uncertainty is as follows: incoming solar irradiance SG is wasted on convective heat transfer and
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ radiation heat transfer with the surrounding environment. Among them,
( )2 ( )2 ( )2
∂W ∂W ∂W the thermal energy increased by the PV panel removes part of the heat
δW = δv1 + δv2 + ⋅⋅⋅ + δvm (1)
∂v1 ∂v2 ∂vm energy QU through the cooling ducts.

where δW is the uncertainty in the result, δvm is a given function of the Table 1
independent variables, m is the number of elements in a sample, and the Uncertainty values of equipment.
partial derivative of W concerning v is the sensitivity coefficient of the Equipment Uncertainty value (δW)
result W to the measurement vm.
Uniform irradiation difference 2%
The total uncertainty in this experiment was calculated by incorpo­ Ambient temperature 0.1 ◦ C
rating the uncertainties of each instrument and using the sum of the Current 0.05%
squares of all uncertainty components. Voltage 0.02%
Total uncertainty 0.10198

3
Y. Lu and G. Li
To visualize and analyze the PV cell thermal model for backside
cooling of crystalline silicon solar cells, the equivalent thermal network
is established as shown in Fig. 4. Five assumptions should be considered
[6].
1. Energy transfer in PV cells is one-dimensional and steady.
2. Assume that there is no heat losses between the surface and the back
of the crystalline silicon solar cell, and that the temperature is the
same.
3. Convective heat dissipation can be neglected, and the physical
properties of the copper duct material are constant.
4. The total heat of the fluid entering the duct inlet is constant.
5. For a single PV cell, the temperature gradient difference △t between
the inlet and outlet of the fluid can be ignored.
Based on the above assumptions, the energy equation of the PV cell is
presented as:
kd
SG = hc− a (Tc − Ta ) + hr,c− s (Tc − Ts ) + (Tc − Td )
Ld
where SG is the irradiation intensity, hc-a is the convective heat transfer
coefficient of the PV cell to the air, hr,c-s is the radiation heat transfer
coefficient of the PV cell to the sky, kd is the thermal conductivity of the
copper duct material, Ld is the thickness of the copper duct, Tc is the
temperature of the PV cell, Ta is the temperature of the air, Ts is the
temperature of the sky, and Td is the surface temperature of the copper
duct on the fluid side.
The radiant heat absorbed by the PV cell is taken away by the fluid
through the copper duct, and the energy equation can be expressed as:
( )
kd
(Tc − Td ) = hd− f Td − T f
Ld
where hd-f is the convective heat transfer coefficient of the copper duct to
the fluid, Td is the copper duct surface temperature on the fluid side, and
T f is the average temperature of the fluid in the copper duct.
The fluid energy equation in the copper duct can be expressed as:
( ) dTf
hd− Td − T f = ṁCp dx
f
dx
where ṁ is the mass flow rate of the fluid, Cp is the specific heat capacity
of the fluid, and Tf is the temperature of the fluid.
Fig. 4. Thermal network for the PV cell cooling model.
Energy 281 (2023) 128253
3.2. Temperature profile
Based on the four cooling duct models constructed in Fig. 2, the
three-dimensional plots of four temperature profiles shown in Fig. 5 is
obtained through solid heat transfer simulation. Fig. 5(a) shows the
uniform temperature profile formed when the entire PV cell back is
cooled. It can be seen that the temperature is 320.50 K. Fig. 5(b) shows
the approximate single-Gaussian temperature profile formed when two
copper ducts are attached to the back of the PV cell for cooling. In this
single-Gaussian temperature profile, the highest peak temperature is
332.94 K, the lowest temperature is 308.06 K, and the average tem­
perature is 320.50 K. Fig. 5(c) shows the approximate double-Gaussian
temperature profile formed when three copper ducts are attached to the
back of the PV cell for cooling. In this double-Gaussian temperature
profile, the highest peak temperature is 332.52 K, the lowest tempera­
ture is 308.09 K, and the average temperature is 320.50 K. Fig. 5(d)
shows the approximate multi-Gaussian temperature profile formed
when five copper ducts were attached to the back of the PV cell for
(3) cooling. In this multi-Gaussian temperature profile, the highest peak
temperature is 325.39 K, the lowest temperature is 315.61 K, and the
average temperature is 320.50 K.
3.3. Electrical modeling
The working principle of PV cells is based on the photoelectric effect,
as shown in Fig. 6: electron-hole pairs are generated under solar radia­
tion, electrons and holes move in opposite directions due to the presence
of a built-in electric field (P–N junction field), resulting in a higher po­
tential difference across the semiconductor. If the two ends of a semi­
conductor are connected, an electric current is generated and the
(4) magnitude of the short-circuit current is determined by the ratio of
electron-hole pairs produced by solar radiation. If the two ends of the
semiconductor are disconnected, the charge accumulates in both re­
gions, creating a potential across the junction capacitor. This potential is
the forward voltage of the diode. The thickness of the transition region is
reduced to establish the diode forward current. Equilibrium is reached
when the diode forward current is equal to the photon-generated drift
current. The voltage at both ends is the open-circuit voltage of the PV
(5)
cell under irradiation.
The PV cells convert optical energy into electric energy according to
the photovoltaic effect of the P–N junction, and their basic structure is a
diode. However, the existence of series resistance and shunt resistance
should be considered in practical applications. Then, the equivalent
4
Y. Lu and G. Li Energy 281 (2023) 128253

Fig. 5. Three-dimensional plot of the temperature profile of PV cells: (a) uniform temperature profile; (b) single-Gaussian temperature profile; (c) double-Gaussian
temperature profile; (d) multi-Gaussian temperature profile.

Fig. 6. Separation of holes and electrons in PV cells.

circuit of the PV cell can be obtained as shown in Fig. 7. The series ( V+IRs ) V + IR
resistance comes from the bulk resistance of the material, contact (6)
s
I = Iph − I0 e nVth − 1 −
Rsh
resistance, and recombination of carriers at the interface. The shunt
resistance is generated by the leakage current at the P–N junction. where I is the PV cell output current; V is the electrical potential; Iph is
Therefore, the I–V expression of PV cells considering series resistance the photocurrent; I0 is the reverse saturation diode current; n is the diode
and shunt resistance can be expressed as [28,29]: ideality factor; Rs is the series resistance; Rsh is the shunt resistance; and
Vth is the thermal voltage, which is defined as:

5
Y. Lu and G. Li Energy 281 (2023) 128253

Rsh Gref
= (15)
Rsh,ref G

The variation in n with temperature and irradiance is small, so n can

be considered to not vary with irradiance and temperature in the nu­
merical calculation.
Based on the above expression, Eq. (6) can be re-expressed as:
[( )]
Fig. 7. Equivalent circuit of the PV cell model. Eg,ref Eg
Iph,ref T 3 1
k T − T ( V+IRs ) V + IR
(16)
ref s
I= G − I0,ref 3 e e nVth − 1 −
Gref Tref Rsh
kT
Vth = (7)
q To visualize the surface current density distribution of the PV cells,
− 23
the continuity equation is solved in the simulation, as shown in Eq. (17).
where k is the Boltzmann constant, 1.38 × 10 J/K; q is the electron The continuity equation can be solved by applying the finite element
charge constant, 1.6 × 10− 19 C; and T is the PV cell temperature. method. In the finite element method, the whole domain is modeled, and
The dependence of Iph, I0, Rs, Rsh, and n in Eq. (6) on irradiance and all the domains are discretized into several small subregions; the alge­
temperature. is as follows: braic equation describing the solution of the physical problem (direct
Iph is approximately linear with the irradiance. The relationship of current flow in the conducting medium) is developed using the finite
irradiance, PV cell temperature, and short-circuit current temperature element method. The partial differential equation can be expressed as
coefficient on Iph can be expressed as [30]: [38]:
G [ ( )]
Iph = Iph,ref + αIsc T − Tref (8) − ∇ ⋅ (σ∇V − J e ) = Q (17)
Gref
where σ is the sheet conductivity of the material, Ω− 1 m− 1 ; V is the
where Gref is the irradiance under standard test conditions (STC); Iph,ref is electrical potential, V; Je is the internal current density, A/m2; and Q is
the photocurrent under STC; Tref is the PV cell temperature under STC; the current source, A/m2.
and αIsc is the short-circuit current temperature coefficient. Since the The conductivity of the emitter is calculated from the experimentally
value of αIsc is very small, the effect of temperature can be ignored in the acquired Rsheet (sheet resistance) as [39]:
numerical simulation calculation, so Eq. (8) can be simplified as [31]:
1
G σ= (18)
Iph = Iph,ref (9) Rsheet ⋅de
Gref
where de is the depth of the emitter, m.
I0 varies with temperature, and the equation of I0 is:
The conductivity of the grid line (fingers and busbars) is calculated
( )3 [ ( ⃒ ⃒ )]
I0 T q Eg ⃒⃒ Eg ⃒⃒ from the experimentally acquired Rl (resistance per unit length) as [39]:
= exp − (10)
I0,ref Tref k T ⃒Tref T ⃒T 1
σ= (19)
Rl ⋅wg ⋅dg
where Eg is the energy bandwidth of the material; and Eg is temperature
dependent. where wg is the grid line width, m; dg is the depth, m.
Eg ( ) The diode voltage in Eq. (16) is defined as Vj = V + IRs, and the
= 1 − 0.0002677 T − Tref (11) current density generated in the emitter region during irradiance can be
Eg,Tref
described as:
For crystalline silicon solar cell, the typical value of Eg,Tref at Tref = 298 K ( qVj )
(20)
− Eg

is 1.12eV [32]. Qe = C1 G + C2 T 3 e kT enkT − 1 + C3 Vj

Rs is a function of temperature and increases with the rise of PV cell
Similarly, the current density generated in the finger and busbar
temperature. Rs is inversely proportional to the logarithm of the irra­
regions can be described as:
diance. Therefore, the relationship between irradiance and PV cell
( qVj )
temperature on Rs can be expressed as [33,34]: − Eg
Qf ,b = C2 T 3 e kT enkT − 1 + C3 Vj (21)
( )
Rs T G
= 1 − β ln (12)
Rs,ref Tref Gref where C1 is the photocurrent density per unit of incident power; C2 is the
reverse saturation current density at temperature; C3 is the inverse of PV
where the value of β is approximately 0.217. cell shunt resistance, and Rosell et al. [40] describe these three pa­
Rsh is approximately inversely proportional to Isc [35]: rameters in detail.
Rsh Isc,ref
= (13) 3.4. Boundary conditions
Rsh,ref Isc

The relationship of irradiance, PV cell temperature, and short-circuit Some of the boundary conditions used in the PV cell simulations in
current temperature coefficient on Isc is described as [36]: this study can be expressed as [39,41,42]:
G [ ( )] Current conservation equation (the current conservation equations
Isc = Isc,ref 1 + αIsc T − Tref (14) are applied to the entire PV cell):
Gref
− ∇⋅J = Qj (22)
Since the value αIsc is very small, the effect of temperature can be ignored
in the numerical simulation calculation, so Eq. (13) can be simplified as J = σE + Je (23)
[37]:
E = − ∇V (24)

6
Y. Lu and G. Li Energy 281 (2023) 128253

Electric insulation equation (the outside boundary of finger and

emitter regions are considered to be electrically insulated):
nb ⋅ Jb = 0 (25)
Interface condition equation (suitable for internal boundaries to
ensure continuity of current at the interface between different media):
nb ⋅ (J1 − J2 ) = 0 (26)
Busbar electrical potential equation (the ends of the busbar can be
seen as connected to the external load and therefore equal to the electric
potential of the PV cell operating voltage Vcell):
V = Vcell (27)

where J is the current density vector at the PV cell; Je is the current

density vector at the electrical field; nb is the unit normal to the
boundary; Jb is the current density vector at the external boundary; and
J1 and J2 are the current density vectors at the boundary of the adjacent
media.
Fig. 8. Experimental and modeled curves for PV cells.
3.5. Model validation

To validate the model, experimental data for the studied PV cells

were obtained using a Newport Corporation solar simulator (Oriel Sol3A
Model 90943A). By setting the solar simulator device, a continuous ray
source with an illumination intensity of 1000 W/m2 can be generated.
The detailed parameters of the PV cell simulation model are summarized
in Table 2. The I–V curve composed of the PV cell experiment and
simulation data is shown in Fig. 8. The experimental data of the PV cell
are in good agreement with the simulation results. Therefore, the
simulation results of the model can be considered reliable. The PV cell
simulation model established and used in this study has been verified.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Comparison of the I–V characteristic curves

Fig. 9 shows the I–V curves of the PV cell with an irradiance 1000 W/
m2 and four different temperature profiles. All temperature profiles have
an average temperature of 320.5 K. Significant differences in electrical
performance were observed when the PV cells were subjected to
different temperature profiles, and different shapes of I–V curves Fig. 9. The I–V curves of different temperature profile models.
appeared. The multi-Gaussian temperature profile has the best electrical
performance compared to the uniform temperature profile, the single-
Table 3
Gaussian temperature profile has the worst electrical performance,
Electrical performance of PV cells with different temperature profiles.
and the double-Gaussian temperature profile has almost the same elec­
trical performance as the uniform temperature profile. Uniform Single-Gaussian Double-Gaussian Multi-Gaussian

The short circuit current (Isc) is mainly affected by the irradiance, Isc (A) 1.401219 1.401217 1.401218 1.401219
and since the irradiance in the study is all 1000 W/m2, the difference Voc (V) 0.5473 0.5269 0.5472 0.5529
Pmax (mW) 573.9714 549.2199 573.7090 581.3769
between the Isc of the four different temperature curves is very small.
FF (%) 74.8443 74.3897 74.6873 75.0421
The open circuit voltage (Voc) is mainly affected by temperature, and the η (%) 10.445 9.995 10.441 10.580
different temperature profiles lead to the difference in Voc.

4.2. Power output and conversion efficiency The variation in Voc with the temperature profile corresponds to the
variation in the maximum power (Pmax) provided by the PV cell.
The detailed electrical properties of PV cells with different temper­ Compared to the uniform temperature profile, the multi-Gaussian tem­
ature profiles obtained from the above I–V curves are shown in Table 3. perature profile leads to a 1.53% increase in the maximum power (Pmax)
of the PV cells, the single-Gaussian temperature profile leads to a 3.31%
decrease in the Pmax of the PV cells, and the Pmax of PV cells with a
Table 2
Input parameters used in all simulations for PV cells.
double-Gaussian temperature profile is almost the same (difference of
0.046%). The results of different temperature profiles show that the
PV cell geometry and resistivities Diode equation parameters
cooler regions are close to the busbar and that the recombination effect
PV cell length 78 mm C1 0.255123 A m2/W losses and Joule effect losses of the current generated in these regions
PV cell width 78 mm C2 12006.72 A/K3 are lower than at the average temperature. Better performance is ach­
Busbar width 1.8 mm C3 0.007918 A/V
Finger width 0.035 mm Ideality factor (n) 1.4183
ieved in the region around the busbar because the temperature in the
Finger resistivity 0.3 Ω/cm Eg 1.124eV busbar region is lower than the average temperature, which greatly

7
Y. Lu and G. Li
compensates for the losses in the emitter region where the temperature
is higher than the average temperature.
These results indicate that, depending on the temperature profile
used, the multi-Gaussian temperature profile has a significant influence
on the efficiency of the PV cell (relative increase of 1.292% compared to
the uniform temperature profile PV cell efficiency). Compared with the
uniform temperature profile, the multi-Gaussian temperature profile
improves the electrical performance of PV cells. This improvement is
also reflected in the fill factor (FF) of the multi-Gaussian temperature
profile increasing by 0.52% compared with the uniform temperature
profile. Different distributions of cooling ducts lead to different tem­
perature profiles of PV cells, and thus the electrical performance of PV
cells is different. It can be seen that the different distribution of cooling
ducts does not increase the economic cost, but is a way to slightly
improve the electrical performance of PV cells.
4.3. Comparison of the current density distribution
The three-dimensional plots of the current density distribution of the
PV cell emitter region with different temperature profiles under the
maximum power point condition are shown in Fig. 10. The intensity of
irradiation directly affects the current density generated in the emitter
region of PV cells. The resistivity of the finger and busbar is several
orders of magnitude smaller than that of the emitter (semiconductor
material). Therefore, the internal current generated in the emitter region
of the PV cell is exported to the outside through the surrounding finger
and busbar.
Fig. 10(a) shows the current density distribution of the uniform
temperature profile, and the current density in the emitter region is
uniformly distributed along the x-axis direction. The maximum current
density in the emitter region of the PV cell is 0.2470 A/m2. Fig. 10(b)
Fig. 10. Three-dimensional plot of the current density distribution of the PV cell emitter region with different temperature profiles: (a) uniform temperature profile;
(b) single-Gaussian temperature profile; (c) double-Gaussian temperature profile; (d) multi-Gaussian temperature profile.
8
Energy 281 (2023) 128253
shows the current density distribution of the single-Gaussian tempera­
ture profile, the emitter region’s current density along the x-axis direc­
tion is higher in the region near the busbar on both sides, and the current
density is lower in the region near x = 0 mm (the highest temperature
region of the PV cell). The maximum current density in the emitter re­
gion of the PV cell is 0.2527 A/m2. Fig. 10(c) shows the current density
distribution of the double-Gaussian temperature profile, the emitter
region’s current density along the x-axis direction is higher in the region
near the busbar on both sides, and the current density is lower in the
region near x = − 10mm and x = 10 mm (the two regions with highest
temperature). The maximum current density in the emitter region of the
PV cell is 0.2527 A/m2. Fig. 10(d) shows the current density distribution
of the multi-Gaussian temperature profile, the current density in the
emitter region is relatively evenly distributed along the x-axis direction.
Among them, the current density is relatively high in the regions near
the busbars, x = − 10mm and x = 10 mm. The maximum current density
in the emitter region of the PV cell is 0.2500 A/m2.
4.4. Comparison of the surface voltage distribution
The surface voltage distribution and internal current flow of the PV
cell with different temperature profiles under the maximum power point
condition are shown in Fig. 11. The red arrow indicates the direction of
current flow inside the PV cell, and the different colors represent the
junction voltage on the surface of the PV cell. The existence of semi­
conductor material resistance leads to low junction voltage at the po­
sition of the emitter near the finger and high junction voltage at the
position far from the finger. The internal current generated by PV cells
flows from the high junction voltage position of the emitter to the low
junction voltage position and then flows to the external load through
fingers and busbars.
Y. Lu and G. Li
Fig. 11. The surface voltage distribution and internal current flow of the PV cell with different temperature profiles: (a) uniform temperature profile; (b) single-
Gaussian temperature profile; (c) double-Gaussian temperature profile; (d) multi-Gaussian temperature profile.
Fig. 11(a) shows the surface voltage distribution of the uniform
temperature profile, where the junction voltage at each position on the
PV cell surface has been marked. The maximum junction voltage on the
PV cell surface is 0.5892 V. Fig. 11(b) shows the surface voltage distri­
bution with a single-Gaussian temperature profile. Compared with the
surface voltage distribution of the uniform temperature profile, the
junction voltage at each position on the PV cell surface decreases on
average by more than 0.0080 V. The maximum junction voltage on the
PV cell surface is 0.5852 V. Fig. 11(c) shows the surface voltage distri­
bution with double-Gaussian temperature profile. Compared with the
surface voltage distribution of the uniform temperature profile, the
difference in junction voltage at each position on the PV cell surface is
less than 0.0004 V. The maximum junction voltage on the PV cell surface
is 0.5896 V. Fig. 11(d) shows the surface voltage distribution with multi-
Gaussian temperature profile. Compared with the surface voltage dis­
tribution of the uniform temperature profile, the junction voltage at
each position on the PV cell surface increases on average by about
0.0010 V. The maximum junction voltage on the PV cell surface is
0.5909 V.
According to the above comparison of the surface junction voltage
distribution of different temperature profiles, it can be seen that the
junction voltage at the end of the busbar is all 0.4551 V, and the
maximum power of the multi-Gaussian temperature profile is the
largest, while the maximum power of the single-Gaussian temperature
profile is the smallest. The resistivity of the semiconductor material
(emitter) decreases with increasing temperature, but the resistivity of
the metal conductor (busbar) increases with increasing temperature.
Therefore, the total current losses generated in the busbar and emitter
regions for the uniform temperature profile of the PV cell are not the
smallest. Different temperature profiles in the busbar and emitter
9
Energy 281 (2023) 128253
regions are more helpful to reduce the total current losses. According to
the distribution of grid lines and emitter regions of PV cells, a reasonable
optimization of the cooling structure is helpful to reduce the internal
current losses and improve the electrical performance of PV cells.
5. Conclusions
Different cooling ducts on the back of PV cells form different tem­
perature distributions on the surface of PV cells, and different temper­
ature profiles (uniform, single-Gaussian, double-Gaussian, multi-
Gaussian) are obtained through solid heat transfer simulation. The nu­
merical model of irradiance and temperature of PV cells is established,
and the reliability of the model is verified by comparing experimental
data and simulation results. The electrical performance of the PV cell
with four temperature profiles was analyzed under the conditions of an
average temperature 320.5 K and illumination intensity 1000 W/m2.
The results show that the maximum power of PV cells increases by
1.290% under the multi-Gaussian temperature profile compared with
the uniform temperature profile. The recombination effect losses and
Joule effect losses in the current generated near the busbar were
significantly decreased compared to those in the emitter region at the
same cooling temperature. Therefore, the nonuniform temperature
profile pattern of lower than average temperature around the busbar and
higher than average temperature in the emitter region is better than the
uniform temperature profile pattern. The recombination effect losses
and Joule effect losses in the current generated by the whole PV cell are
relatively small.
The results also show that the PV cell efficiency decreases under the
single-Gaussian temperature profile. Compared with the PV cell effi­
ciency under a uniform temperature profile, the PV cell efficiency
Y. Lu and G. Li
decreased by 4.308%. Considering this type of heat distribution caused
by commonly used cooling ducts on the market today, there is a sig­
nificant loss of efficiency in the overall system.
For working PV cells, the cooling ducts can be adjusted to maximize
PV cell efficiency. This method of adjusting the cooling duct distribution
and thus obtaining optimal PV cell heat dissipation does not add an
additional cost. The improvement in electrical power output for indi­
vidual PV cells is relatively small, but if applied to large-scale PV power
generation, it will generate significant additional profits. This provides a
research route for further improving the electrical power output of
large-scale PV/T power generation. And in the future work, the exten­
sion of the improved method for single PV cell to PV/T modules or
systems will be considered.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (Nos.52276216), the International Partnership Program of
Chinese Academy of Sciences (123GJHZ2022055MI) and the Anhui
Provincial Natural Science Foundation (2108085UD03).
References
[1] Tebaldi C, Ranasinghe R, Vousdoukas M, Rasmussen DJ, Westhoff BV, Kirezci E,
Kopp RE, Sriver R, Mentaschi L. Extreme sea levels at different global warming
levels. Nat Clim Change 2021;11:746–51.
[2] Gorjian S, Ebadi H, Calise F, Shukla A, Ingrao C. A review on recent advancements
in performance enhancement techniques for low-temperature solar collectors.
Energy Convers Manag 2020;222:113246.
[3] Shukla A, Kant K, Sharma A, Biwole PH. Cooling methodologies of photovoltaic
module for enhancing electrical efficiency: a review. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells
2017;160:275–86.
[4] El-Samie MMA, Ju X, Zhang Z, Adam SA, Pan X, Xu C. Three-dimensional
numerical investigation of a hybrid low concentrated photovoltaic/thermal system.
Energy 2020;190:116436.
[5] Yu Q, Hu M, Li J, Wang Y, Pei G. Development of a 2D temperature-irradiance
coupling model for performance characterizations of the flat-plate photovoltaic/
thermal (PV/T) collector. Renew Energy 2020:404–19.
[6] Bahaidarah HM, Tanweer B, Gandhidasan P, Ibrahim N, Rehman S. Experimental
and numerical study on non-concentrating and symmetric unglazed compound
parabolic photovoltaic concentration systems. Appl Energy 2014;136:527–36.
[7] Senthil R, Elavarasan RM, Pugazhendhi R, Premkumar M, Vengadesan E,
Navakrishnan S, Islam MR, Natarajan SK. A holistic review on the integration of
heat pipes in solar thermal and photovoltaic systems. Sol Energy 2021;227:
577–605.
[8] Golive YR, Kottantharayil A, Shiradkar N. Improving the accuracy of temperature
coefficient measurement of a PV module by accounting for the transient
temperature difference between cell and backsheet. Sol Energy 2022;237:203–12.
[9] Armstrong S, Hurley WG. A thermal model for photovoltaic panels under varying
atmospheric conditions. Appl Therm Eng 2010;30:1488–95.
[10] Sánchez Barroso JC, Barth N, Correia JPM, Ahzi S, Khaleel MA. A computational
analysis of coupled thermal and electrical behavior of PV panels. Sol Energy Mater
Sol Cells 2016;148:73–86.
[11] Benghanem M, Al-Mashraqi A, Daffallah K. Performance of solar cells using
thermoelectric module in hot sites. Renew Energy 2016;89:51–9.
[12] Senthil R, Elavarasan RM, Pugazhendhi R, Premkumar M, Vengadesan E,
Navakrishnan S, Islam MR, Natarajan SK. A holistic review on the integration of
heat pipes in solar thermal and photovoltaic systems. Sol Energy 2021;227:
577–605.
[13] Heba AM. Experimental investigation of temperature effect on PV monocrystalline
module. IJRER 2018;8:365–73.
10
Energy 281 (2023) 128253
[14] Swapnil D, Jatin NS, Bharath S. Temperature dependent photovoltaic (PV)
efficiency and its effect on PV production in the world – a review. Energy Proc
2013;33:311–21.
[15] Zhao B, Hu M, Ao X, Pei G. Performance analysis of enhanced radiative cooling of
solar cells based on a commercial silicon photovoltaic module. Sol Energy 2018;
176:248–55.
[16] Amelia AR, Irwan YM, Irwanto M, Leow WZ, Gomesh N, Safwati I, Anuar MAM.
Cooling on photovoltaic panel using forced air convection induced by DC fan. Int J
Electr Comput Eng 2016;6(2):526.
[17] Li G, Xuan Q, Pei G, Su Y, Lu Y, Ji J. Life-cycle assessment of a low-concentration
PV module for building south wall integration in China. Appl Energy 2018;215:
174–85.
[18] Li G, Chen X, Jin Y. Analysis of the primary constraint conditions of an efficient
photovoltaic-thermoelectric hybrid system. Energies 2017;10(1):20.
[19] Li G, Li J, Yang R, Chen X. Performance analysis of a hybrid hydrogen production
system in the integrations of PV/T power generation electrolytic water and
photothermal cooperative reaction. Appl Energy 2022;323:119625.
[20] Hussien A, Eltayesh A, El-Batsh HM. Experimental and numerical investigation for
PV cooling by forced convection. Alex Eng J 2023;64:427–40.
[21] Teo HG, Lee PS, Hawlader MNA. An active cooling system for photovoltaic
modules. Appl Energy 2012;90:309–15.
[22] Mahmood DMN, Aljubury IMA. Experimental investigation of a hybrid
photovoltaic evaporative cooling (PV/EC) system performance under arid
conditions. Results in Engineering 2022;15:100618.
[23] Bahaidarah H, Abdul S, Gandhidasan P, Rehman S. Performance evaluation of a PV
(photovoltaic) module by back surface water cooling for hot climatic conditions.
Energy 2013;59:445–53.
[24] Zhao B, Lu K, Hu M, Liu J, Wu L, Xu C, Xuan Q, Pei G. Radiative cooling of solar
cells with micrograting photonic cooler. Renew Energy 2022;191:662–8.
[25] maleki A, Haghighi A, Assad MEH, Mahariq I, Nazari MA. A review on the
approaches employed for cooling PV cells. Sol Energy 2020;209:170–85.
[26] Rahimi M, Asadi M, Karami N, Karimi E. A comparative study on using single and
multi header microchannels in a hybrid PV cell cooling. Energy Convers Manag
2015;101:1–8.
[27] Baloch AAB, Bahaidarah HMS, Gandhidasan P, Al-Sulaiman FA. Experimental and
numerical performance analysis of a converging channel heat exchanger for PV
cooling. Energy Convers Manag 2015;103:14–27.
[28] Lu Y, Li G, Akhlaghi YG, Xuan Q, Pei G, Ji J, Zhao X. Effect of gid and optimization
on improving the electrical performance of compound parabolic concentrator
photovoltaic cells. Sol Energy 2020;196:607–15.
[29] Tianjun L, Bihong L, Zhimin Y. Performance characteristics of a low concentrated
photovoltaic-thermoelectric hybrid power generation device. Int J Thermal Sci
2014;77:158–64.
[30] Yousef MS, Rahman AKA, Ookawara S. Performance investigation of
low–Concentration photovoltaic systems under hot and arid conditions:
experimental and numerical results. Energy Convers Manag 2017;128:82–94.
[31] Li G, Pei G, Ji J, Su Y. Outdoor overall performance of a novel air-gap-lens-walled
compound parabolic concentrator (ALCPC) incorporated with photovoltaic/
thermal system. Appl Energy 2015;144:214–23.
[32] Soto WD, Klein SA, Beckman WA. Improvement and validation of a model for
photovoltaic arry performance. Sol Energy 2006;80(1):78–88.
[33] Laudani A, Fulginei FR, Salvini A. High performing extraction procedure for the
one-diode model of a photovoltaic panel from experimental I-V curves by using
reduced forms. Sol Energy 2014;103:316–26.
[34] Zhang C, Zhang Y, Su J, Gu T, Yang M. Modeling and prediction of PV module
performance under different operating conditions based on power-law I-V model.
IEE J Photovoltaics 2020;10(6):1816–27.
[35] Ma T, Gu W, Shen L, Li M. An improved and comprehensive mathematical model
for solar photovoltaic modules under real operating conditions. Sol Energy 2019;
184:292–304.
[36] Aly SP, Ahzi S, Barth N. An adaptive modeling technique for parameters extraction
of photovoltaic devices under varying sunlight and temperature conditions. Appl
Energy 2019;236:728–42.
[37] Zhang Y, Hao P, Lu H, Ma J, Yang M. Modeling and estimating performance for PV
module under varying operating conditions independent of reference condition.
Appl Energy 2022;310:118527.
[38] Li G, Xuan Q, Lu Y, Pei G, Su Y, Ji J. Numerical and lab experiment study of a novel
concentrating PV with uniform flux distribution. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells 2018;
179:1–9.
[39] Domenech-Garret JL. Cell behavior under different nonuniform temperature and
radiation combined profiles using a two dimensional finite element model. Sol
Energy 2011;85:256–64.
[40] Rosell JI, Ibanez M. Modeling power output in photovoltaic modules for outdoor
operating conditions. Energy Convers Manag 2006;47:2424–30.
[41] Li G, Lu Y, Zhao X. The Gaussian nonuniform temperature field on PV cells – a
unique solution for enhancing the performance of the PV/T module. Energy 2022;
250:123621.
[42] Mellor A, Domenech-Garret JL, Chemisana D, Rosell JI. A two-dimensional finite
element model of front surface current flow in cells under nonuniform
concentrated illumination. Sol Energy 2009;83:1459–65.