Journal of Physics: Conference

Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Glass/glass photovoltaic module reliability
Design of ground-mounted grid-connected and degradation: a review
Archana Sinha, Dana B Sulas-Kern,
photovoltaic system with bifacial modules using Michael Owen-Bellini et al.

- Feasibility and performance analysis of

PVsyst software bifacial module under extremely hot and
dry climate
Deepak Verma, Jainam Shah, Nisarg
To cite this article: NSS Mohamed et al 2022 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2312 012058 Patel et al.

- Development of high-efficiency bifacial

photovoltaic module and simulation
method for its power generation
Takahiro Nakamura, Syuji Fukumochi, Yu
View the article online for updates and enhancements. Maruyama et al.

This content was downloaded from IP address 122.171.85.221 on 19/03/2024 at 04:54

ICE4CT2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2312 (2022) 012058 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2312/1/012058

Design of ground-mounted grid-connected photovoltaic

system with bifacial modules using PVsyst software

NSS Mohamed1,2, SI Sulaiman2, SRA Rahim1

1
Faculty of Electrical Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, Perlis.
2
School of Electrical Engineering, College of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA,
40450 Shah Alam,Selangor Darul Ehsan
Email: norsyafiqah@unimap.edu.my

Abstract. Bifacial photovoltaic module has gained significant traction in recent years due to
its higher irradiation capture capabilities with cost-effective technology. This paper presents
the design, simulation, and techno-economic evaluation of a 45MW fixed-tilt ground-mounted
grid-connected photovoltaic system with bifacial photovoltaic modules. The site is located in
Sungai Petani, Kedah, Malaysia. The PVsyst 7.2 software was used to design the system by
selecting the rating of PV module, inverter and tilt angle of PV modules. In addition, shading
and loss calculation, as well as performance evaluation, were also conducted using the
software. The simulation of the optimal geometrical parameters had shown an optimal tilt angle
of 5º, the pitch of 5.5m and PV array installation height of 1.5m with an albedo value of 0.25.
Besides, the performance of system with bifacial and monofacial modules were compared in
terms of techno-economic performance indicators. The results showed that the bifacial PV
system produces higher energy output with a lower levelized cost of electricity when compared
to the system with monofacial PV modules.

1. Introduction
Electricity is vital for the socio-economic development of a nation. REN 21 Global Status Report 2021
reported that the global electricity generation 75 % comes from non-renewable energy while the
remaining 25 % is generated from Renewable Energy (RE) resources [1]. Solar power via photovoltaic
(PV) technology has become important for electricity generation due to lower production costs and
consistent support via various green financing schemes[2]. In Malaysia, the government has announced
to increase the target to achieve 31% of RE in the energy mix by 2025[3]. As a result, many large-scale
grid-connected photovoltaic (GCPV) systems with capacities ranging from 1MW to 50 MW were
installed to meet the target. Large-scale systems were constructed using bifacial PV modules in recent
years due to the higher energy yield and minimal technical change or investment. The ability to generate
15% to 20% additional power by capturing irradiance from the front and rear becomes an advantage of
the bifacial PV modules system compared to monofacial PV modules [4]. The usage of such modules
were also proven to reduce the Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) [5][6]. However, the location,
weather, system design and sizing system affect the electricity production and the cost of bifacial
installation. Several design parameters such as geometrical parameters (module tilt angle, pitch, PV
array height), ground albedo and mounting structure [7]–[9] are significant to be taken into
consideration when designing a bifacial PV system. Therefore, this study presents the simulation of a
ground-mounted large-scale GCPV system in Malaysia using bifacial PV modules.

2. Tools
The design simulation in this study was conducted using PVsyst software version 7.2. PVsyst is a sizing
tool and data analysis software with extensive meteorological data and the database of PV system

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
ICE4CT2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2312 (2022) 012058 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2312/1/012058

components. Such software has been widely used to perform the sizing and performance analysis of PV
systems[10]. In this study, PVsyst software was used to compare the techno-economic performance of
GCPV system with bifacial PV modules and the system with monofacial PV modules. Figure shows
the outline of different steps in achieving the optimum design and simulation in PVsyst. In 2017, the
PVsyst software version 6.6.0 was introduced a bifacial model for a fixed tilt of ground-mounted
systems with regular rows [11]. PVsyst software has considered that the behavior of the rear production
is similar to the front. The bifacial evaluation of PVsyst includes ground scattering to the front and rear
side of PV modules and direct and diffuse sky contributions on the rear side.

Figure 1.The project design steps in PVsyst Software

For simplicity, this software assumes that the rows of PV modules have the same orientation, are spaced
equally, and neglects the edge effects. While designing the bifacial PV system, several parameters need
to be defined optimally to ensure the system can produce the extra energy yield, such as tilt angle,
module height, pitch, and albedo, as shown in Figure 2. These parameters were considered in the
sofware during the design process. Two bifacial models were developed to estimate the bifacial PV
performance using unlimited sheds 2D-model for fixed-tilt system and unlimited trackers 2D-model for
single-axis tracking. The first approach in PVsyst software is to calculate the irradiance reaching the
ground before modeling the fraction of light effectively reaching the back of the PV module using the
view factor. In addition, the irradiance captured on the front side of the bifacial PV module is determined
in similar to the one used for the monofacial PV module [12].

Figure 2. Two-dimensional parameters for a bifacial PV system.

3. System design
This study presents the simulation analysis to determine the optimum configuration of a ground-
mounted large-scale GCPV system with a bifacial module in Malaysia. Later, the comparative study
was conducted to compare the techno-economic performance of bifacial and monofacial PV systems at
the same characteristics as location, installed capacity, and orientation of PV array using PVsyst
software.

3.1. Site Assessment

In this study, the prospective site is located in Sungai Petani, Kedah, north of Malaysia. Using the
Google mapping tools, it was found that the selected location encompasses approximately
508,402.85m2 of the overall development area. The development area includes allocating substation
building, utility building, guardhouse, and an onsite detention pond.

3.2. Meteorological Data

As an equatorial location, Malaysia naturally has abundant sunshine but a cloudy sky. Figure 3 shows
the distribution of solar irradiation in Malaysia. The meteorological data used for this study are selected
from the data file Meteornome 8.0 available in PVsyst software. The Metronome datasets are generated

2
ICE4CT2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2312 (2022) 012058 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2312/1/012058

from ground weather stations and extended with data from five geostationary satellites to fill gaps in
areas where no weather stations are available[13]. The data is based on longer datasets, preferably
covering 19-29 years to obtain homogenous term averages. The average yearly Global Horizontal
Irradiance,GHI of PV site installation is 1808.91 kWh/m2.

Figure 3. Annual average daily global solar irradiation for Malaysia [14]
3.3. Selection of PV module and Inverter
Nowadays, numerous modules are available in different manufacturers' sizes, power, types, efficiency,
and price. It became a challenging step to select the optimum module for each project. The PV module
chosen must comply with IEC standards for module design, quality, and warranty in the first stage.
Most monofacial PV panel manufacturers offer a 10-20 years product warranty, while for bifacial PV
modules, the companies offer more extended warranties, 25-30 year warranties due to the lower failure
and have lasted longer compared to monofacial PV [15][16]. Another factor to be considered is to ensure
the selected PV modules are available in the country. The bifacial and monofacial PV modules using
half-cut cell technology from Jinko solar manufacture have been chosen for this study. Both PV
modules have the same power output, 325Wp on the front side. The modules have to be oriented in
portrait configuration to reduce the effect of electrical losses of the system[17]. When selecting the
inverter, several aspects need to be considered, such as the size of the system, type of inverter, cost, the
flexibility of the system, and able to maximize reliability and quality throughout the operational life
cycle. Improper sizing of inverters can result in load mismatches that reduce the performance of the PV
system. The central inverter has been chosen for the large-scale GCPV system in this study. The detailed
parameter of PV and inverter used in this study are listed in Table 1.
Table 1. System Components Description

PV Parameter Bifacial Monofacial

Brand/Model JKM325M-60H-BDVP JKM325M-60/72H-V
Pmp_stc (W) 325 325
Vmp (V) 33.9 33.6
Imp_stc (A) 9.59 9.68
Voc_stc (V) 40.70 41.10
Isc_stc (A) 10.08 10.20
∂PMP (%/C) -0.35 -0.35
∂IMP (%/C) 0.048 0.048
Module Area (m2) 1.718 1.680
No of cells 120 60
Inverter
Brand/Model Sunny Central 3000-EV
Pac (kW) 2400
MPP min (V) 927
MPP max (V) 1500
ɳinv (%) 98.8

3
ICE4CT2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2312 (2022) 012058 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2312/1/012058

3.4. Module Orientation and Bifacial Parameters.

The field type of a ground-mounted PV system can be chosen either in a fixed tilted plane or unlimited
sheds in PVsyst software. In this study, the fixed tilted plane has been selected while performing the
simulation. The module rows are constructed in the near sheading scene. A fixed tilt plane is used
unlimited sheds are defined on near shadings optional parameters to specify module layout. As the
output, the energy production will be optimized for yearly irradiation yield. When choosing the
geometric parameters such as the tilt angle, pitch, and PV array height, the area utilization and the
maximum energy production must be considered to ensure the optimum design. The PVsyst software
is not only able to be designed to simulate a single case of PV installation system but allows to perform
the optimization and parametric studies by running several simulations in an automated way. Figure 4
shows the result optimization of geometric parameters for bifacial PV system by using optimization
tool in PVsyst. The dark red zone indicates the highest energy can be injected into the PV system's grid
utility due to the maximum value of geometrical parameters. However, the optimum value needs to be
selected in this study. Therefore, parametric studies were conducted to define the optimum geometrical
parameter of the bifacial PV system. From the parametric studies, the optimum point has been selected
with a tilt angle is 5º, the pitch is 5.5m, and the PV installation height is 1.5m. An albedo value of 0.25
was chosen for the ground scattering corresponding to the green grass surface based on the data
available in PVsyst. The comparative study will use similar optimum parameters from the bifacial PV
system to the monofacial PV system.

Pitch 5.5m
Tilt 5º
Height 1.5m

Figure 4.The optimization of the geometric parameter using PVsyst Software.

3.5. System Design
Based on 235,579.25 m2 of the land area available for PV installation, the PVsyst estimated the desired
load nominal power for the design is 45MW. PVsyst will propose a number of PV modules in series,
the number of the string, and the number of inverters to approach the desired capacity.Table 2 lists the
summary of the array design of the bifacial and monofacial PV system in the same location.

Table 2. The array design of bifacial and monofacial PV system

Parameters Bifacial PV System Monofacial PV System
System size 45 MW 45 MW
No of PV module in series 34 34
No of string 4072 4072
No of Modules 138448 138448
No.of Inverter 14 14
Pnom ratio 1.1 1.1
Tilt, º 5 5
Pitch,m 5.5 5.5
Height,m 1.5 1.5

4
ICE4CT2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2312 (2022) 012058 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2312/1/012058

3.6. Shading Analysis

Shading on the PV module is one factor that will reduce the PV module's power output and cause
heating in a solar cell[18]. Therefore, the shading scenario of the prospective site needs to evaluate. In
PVsyst, two types of shadings effect can be analyzed. Far shading and near shading are considered in
this analysis. The far shading describes by the horizon line, as shown in Figure 5a. The far shading is
considered when objects are sufficiently far, which causes the shading on the field. For the near objects,
3D drawings of visible shades on the PV field need to perform in the Near Shading analysis as shown
in Figure 5b. This analysis is based on the ratio of shaded area for the entire sensitive site of the field.
During the simulation, the hourly shading calculations will be computed and applied differently on the
beam, diffuse and albedo components. Due to the optimum pitch selected, no mutual shading occurs
from 9 am to 6 pm during the lowest sun position on 21st December based on the solar paths at the
specified site.

(b)
(a)

Figure 5. (a) The sun path at Sungai Petani, Kedah for Far Shading analysis (b)The 3D drawing for
the Near shading analysis

3.7. Bifacial Gain

Analyzing the energy output is one of the methods for assessing the reliability of large-scale GCPV
systems. The bifacial gain (BG) is the best parameter to quantify the additional energy yield of bifacial
system compare to the monofacial system with identical installation configurations by using this
formula [7]:
𝑆𝑌𝑏𝑃𝑉 − 𝑆𝑌𝑚𝑃𝑉 (1)
𝐵𝐺(%) = ( ) × 100
𝑆𝑌𝑚𝑃𝑉

Where BG is a bifacial gain of the system (%), SYbPV is the specific energy yield of bifacial PV module
or system (kWh/kWp), SYmPV is the specific energy yield of monofacial PV module or system
(kWh/kWp).Typically, the specific energy yield is analyzed in kWh/kWp. For the bifacial PV module,
the kWp value usually represents the STC of the front side measurement. In order to make a significant
comparison possible, the monofacial PV module must be selected with a similar type and similar
nominal power as the front of the bifacial module[19].
3.8. Economic Evaluation
After performing the system simulation, the economic evaluation was conducted based on the defined
parameters and simulation results. The Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) is widely used as a metric
to assess the economic feasibility of the PV system. Ideally, the best method to compare bifacially
versus monofacial PV systems is based on LCOE values[20]. The formula used in PVsyst software for
the LCOE calculation is:

5
ICE4CT2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2312 (2022) 012058 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2312/1/012058

𝐼𝑡 + 𝑀𝑡
∑𝑛𝑡=1
(1 + 𝑟)𝑡
𝐿𝐶𝑂𝐸 = (2)
𝐸𝑡
∑𝑛𝑡=1
(1 + 𝑟)𝑡
Where It is investment and expenditures for the year (RM/kWp), Mt is operational and maintenance
expenditures for the year (RM/kWp), Et is Electricity production for the year (kWh), r is the discount
rate that could be earned in alternative investment, n is a lifetime of the system. The economic
parameters used in the analysis are shown Table 3.
Table 3. Financial data considered in the economic analysis

Value
Parameters
Bifacial Monofacial
Installation cost (RM/kW) 3150 2826
Maintenance cost (RM/kW/year) 26000 26000
Feed-in tariff (RM/kWh) 0.3096 0.3096
Interest rate (%) 12 12
Inflation rate(%) 10 10
System expected lifetime (years) 30 20

4. Result and Analysis

A comparative study evaluated bifacial and monofacial PV systems' techno-economic performance in
similar configurations and locations. The 45MW of ground-mounted GCPV system was simulated
considering the fixed-tilt mounting structure for the bifacial and monofacial PV system. After
performing a simulation run, PVsyst will generate the final report consisting of a detail of the system.
PVsyst provides a detailed analysis of optical, array and system losses with each simulation. For the
bifacial simulation, there are additional result variable effects of the irradiance on the rear side, such as
the irradiance on the ground, the scattering losses, the view factor losses, direct and diffuse sky
irradiance, rear side shadings and bifacial mismatch. The detail variable in a loss diagram for the
bifacial and monofacial PV system is shown Figure 6a and Figure 6b, respectively. Figure 6a shows an
additional branch for the bifacial PV system due to the contribution that leads to the additional
irradiance on the rear side as a highlight in the red box.

(a) (b)

Figure 6. Yearly loss diagram for a simulation with a)bifacial PV system b)monofacial PV system

6
ICE4CT2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2312 (2022) 012058 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2312/1/012058

The irradiance on the ground and the scattering losses are normalized to the ground surface, while the
view factor is normalized to the PV module surface. In comparison to the same system configuration,
Table 4 shows the technical performance of bifacial and monofacial from the simulation using PVsyst
software. The result shows, by using the similar configuration of PV system, there is an extra gain of
bifacial PV system almost 5% compared to the monofacial system. This percentage is considered low
by comparison to another bifacial system[8]. The bifacial gain of less than 10% is due to the lower value
of albedo even though the system has optimized geometric parameters to maximize annual energy
production. The limited bifacial gain was also affected due to the self-shading. Based on a study in [4],
there have been suggested to increase the value of bifacial gain by increasing the ground albedo
coefficient, elevating the module height to reduce the self-shading, or applying both simultaneously.
For monofacial modules, the albedo has no significant effect on the PV system performance. The
economic evaluation has been performed by installing a bifacial PV system that will reduce energy cost.
In contrast, the LCOE of bifacial PV system is RM 0.084 ($0.0194) per kWh compared to a monofacial
system with RM 0.098 ($0.024).
Table 4. The technical performance of bifacial and monofacial PV system

Parameters Bifacial PV System Monofacial PV System

System Production (MWh/yr) 68190 65236
Specific Production (kWh/kWp/yr) 1515 1450
Normalize Production (kWh/kWp/day) 4.15 3.97
Array Losses (kWh/kWp/day) 0.60 0.79
System Losses(kWh/kWp/day) 0.23 0.22
LCOE(RM/kWp) 0.084 0.098
Performance Ratio (%) 83.35 79.73
Bifacial Gain +4.48%

5. Conclusion
Conventionally, the large-scale GCPV systems in Malaysia use monofacial PV modules. Therefore, a
comparative study was conducted to evaluate the techno-economic performance of the ground-mounted
system. Based on the analysis and simulation result using PVsyst 7.2 software, the optimal design of a
ground-mounted GCPV system by utilizing a land area of 235,579.25 m2 in Malaysia using bifacial PV
modules was obtained. The optimum geometric parameters have been selected with a tilt angle is 5º,
the pitch of 5.5m, and the PV installation height of 1.5m by using optimization tools in PVsyst software.
The bifacial gain is defined by comparing the energy yield of bifacial and monofacial PV systems to
visualize the benefit of a bifacial system. With the low albedo value of 0.25, the rear side of bifacial PV
modules can generate an additional 4.48% energy production compare to the monofacial PV system.
Finally, from the economic perspective, the bifacial has a strong potential to reduce the LCOE
significantly of PV generated electricity. It motivated the academic research group and industries to
exploit the bifacial PV module potential fully.

Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank the Faculty of Electrical Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia
Perlis (UniMAP) for providing the facilities and financial support under FTKE Research Activities
Fund.

References
[1] “Renewable 2021 Global Status Report (GSR)” Paris, France, 2021.
[2] D. Henner and REN21, “Renewables 2020 Global Status Report,” 2020.
[3] “Report on Peninsular Generation Development Plan 2020” Energy Comm. Malaysia, p. 18,
2021.

7
ICE4CT2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2312 (2022) 012058 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2312/1/012058

[4] X. Sun, M. R. Khan, C. Deline, and M. A. Alam, “Optimization and performance of bifacial
solar modules: A global perspective,” Appl. Energy, vol. 212, pp. 1601–1610, 2018.
[5] N. Ishikawa and S. Nishiyama, “World First Large Scale 1 . 25MW Bifacial PV Power Plant
on Snowy Area in Japan,” pp. 1–23, 2016.
[6] T. S. Liang, D. Poh, and M. Pravettoni, “Challenges in the pre-normative characterization of
bifacial photovoltaic modules,” Energy Procedia, vol. 150, pp. 66–73, 2018.
[7] S. R. Stein, Joshua S., Christian Reise, J.Bonilla Castro, G.Friesen, G.Maugeri, E.Urrejola,
IEA PVPS Task 13 Performance, Operation and Reliability of Photovoltaic Systems – Bifacial
PV Modules and Systems . International Energy Agency (IEA), 2021.
[8] R. Kopecek and J. Libal, “Bifacial Photovoltaics 2021: Status, Opportunities and Challenges,”
Energies, vol. 14, no. 8, p. 2076, 2021.
[9] H. Nussbaumer, M. Klenk, M. Morf, and N. Keller, “Energy yield prediction of a bifacial PV
system with a miniaturized test array,” Sol. Energy, vol. 179, pp. 316–325, 2019.
[10] W. Gu, T. Ma, S. Ahmed, Y. Zhang, and J. Peng, “A comprehensive review and outlook of
bifacial photovoltaic (bPV) technology,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 223, no. May, p.
113283, 2020.
[11] A. Mermoud and B. Wittmer, “PVsysts new framework to simulate bifacial systems,”
Germany, 2016.
[12] B. Wittmer and A. Mermoud, “Yield Simulations for Horizontal Axis Trackers with Bifacial
PV Modules in PVsyst Bifacial model Parametric studies,” 2018.
[13] “Meteornom Software.” https://meteonorm.com/en/meteonorm-features (accessed Sep. 13,
2021).
[14] W. B. Group, “Global Solar ATLAS (Sungai Petani,Kedah, Malaysia),” 2021.
[15] W. Porter, “Bifacial Modules: There are two sides to every solar panel,” p. 5, 2019.
[16] Jinko Solar, “Solar Jinko Limited Warranty,” 2020.
[17] M. Obeng, S. Gyamfi, N. S. Derkyi, A. T. Kabo-bah, and F. Peprah, “Technical and economic
feasibility of a 50 MW grid-connected solar PV at UENR Nsoatre Campus,” J. Clean. Prod.,
vol. 247, 2020.
[18] E. D. Chepp and A. Krenzinger, “A methodology for prediction and assessment of shading on
PV systems,” Sol. Energy, vol. 216, pp. 537–550, 2021.
[19] R. Libal, Joris; Kopecek, Bifacial Photovoltaics Technology,Application and Economics.
2019.
[20] C. D. Rodríguez-Gallegos, M. Bieri, O. Gandhi, J. P. Singh, T. Reindl, and S. K. Panda,
“Monofacial vs bifacial Si-based PV modules: Which one is more cost-effective?,” Sol.
Energy, vol. 176, pp. 412–438, 2018.