Professional Documents
Culture Documents
AbstractA polymer solar heat collector was combined with single-crystal silicon PV cells in a hybrid
energy-generating unit that simultaneously produced low temperature heat and electricity. The PV/ T unit was
tested experimentally to determine its thermal and photovoltaic performance, in addition to the interaction
mechanisms between the PV and thermal energy systems. Thermal efficiency measurements for different
collector configurations are compared, and PV performance and temperature readings are presented and
discussed. An analytical model for the PV/ T system simulated the temperature development and the
performance of both the thermal and photovoltaic units. 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. INTRODUCTION
Solar heat collectors can be combined with photovoltaic cells to form hybrid energy generating
units that simultaneously produce low temperature
heat and electricity. The radiant energy from the
sun is partly converted to electricity by photovoltaic cells in thermal contact with a solar heat
absorber, and excess heat generated in the photovoltaic cells serves as input for the thermal
system. During operation a heat carrier fluid
removes heat from absorber and cells. These solar
cells, cooled by the heat carrier, operate at a low
and stable temperature that gives increased solar
cell power output since photovoltaic conversion
efficiency is a linearly decreasing function of
temperature (Wysocki and Rappaport, 1960;
Saidov et al., 1995). The collected heat can be
utilized in, for example, domestic hot water
systems or as space heating.
The photovoltaic / thermal (PV/ T) collector also
offers economical advantages compared to a
combination of separate thermal and photovoltaic
panels. The transparent cover and supporting
frame are components the two panels have in
common, and in a combined system these are
64
3. EXPERIMENTAL METHOD
The combined PV/ T collector was tested experimentally in a series of field trials to determine
its thermal and photovoltaic performance, in
addition to the coupling between the two energy
systems. The experimental system consisted of
collector, storage tank (30 l), tubing and circulation pump. Measured parameters included irradiation I, storage tank temperature T i , ambient air
temperature T a , PV cell temperatures T 1 and T 2 ,
and absorber plate temperature T 3 (Fig. 1). Irradiation and temperature readings were logged at
intervals of 2 min 22 s during the experiments.
The data sets were smoothed (5 point averaging)
before calculations in order to reduce fluctuations,
and the efficiency analysis was based on clear sky
periods with reasonably constant irradiation. PV/ T
thermal efficiency, hT , was calculated from energy
balance analysis of the system, where the wellinsulated storage tank acts as a calorimeter. The
photovoltaic conversion efficiency, hPV , was determined from measured currentvoltage (IV )
characteristics at different temperatures, with irradiance and cell temperature recorded.
Three collector configurations were tested to
investigate how the thermal performance is affected by converting a solar heat collector to a
combined PV/ T system. The absorber plate has
two identical sides of which one was covered with
PV cells and hence constituted the combined
photovoltaic / thermal absorber (PV/ T). The other
side, the black absorber plate, was tested for
comparison to a pure thermal system (T). A
cover glass was later mounted on the PV/ T
absorber in a configuration referred to as the
glazed PV/ T absorber (PV/ Tg). The back-side of
the collector was insulated with 5-cm-thick mineral wool for all configurations. The PV cells were
not operated during thermal performance experiments. The relative effect of PV electrical output
on thermal efficiency was investigated by running
the PV/ T thermal system with the PV module in
an alternating on / off cycle.
Maximum power point PV efficiencies were
found from IV-characteristics taken for both series
connection of all 30 cells, and for parallel connection of the two submodules. Characteristics
were taken when the PV/ T absorber had reached
stagnation temperature (no circulation of fluid, no
cooling), and also after the start of thermal
operation at low temperature, thus determining the
effect of cooling on the temperature-dependent
PV efficiency under the prevailing conditions. PV
cell temperatures were also logged during the
65
(1)
Q L 5 (UA) tank (T i 2 T a ) dt
(2)
66
(3)
Collector
FR (ta )
FR U L
19.09.97
15.10.97
16.10.97
20.10.97
27.10.97
29.10.97
03.11.97
T
PV/ T
T
PV/ T
PV/ T
PV/ Tg
PV/ Tg
0.87
0.77
0.84
0.79
0.72
0.70
0.72
18.2
16.2
14.7
17.4
11.0
8.1
8.5
0.99
0.95
0.95
0.97
0.97
0.95
0.88
plate (T) absorbs radiation most efficiently. Covering the absorber with photovoltaic cells (PV/ T)
reduces the energy absorptance of the collector,
and the heat loss coefficient is slightly lower
compared to the absorber only situation. The
effect of adding a glass cover plate (PV/ Tg) to
the collector, is to reduce the heat loss to the
surroundings, but the energy absorptance of the
system is also reduced by reflection from the glass
surface.
Scattering of the data points are mainly due to a
rather long sampling interval (2 min 22 s) for the
irradiation readings and also the higher order
temperature effects on the collector parameters.
Irregular irradiation on the 03.11.97 produced the
large scattering in the PV/ Tg data. The effect of
wind on heat loss is particularly important for
unglazed collectors, which may partly explain
observed differences in heat loss as wind speed
was not recorded during the experiments.
The thermal system was logged with the PV
cells both on and off, and the resulting thermal
efficiency is plotted in Fig. 5. (The smooth
transition between PV on or off is an artifact of
the data averaging procedure.) Extracting electrical power from the PV module reduces the
available solar energy and thus thermal efficiency
for the heat collector. The efficiency reduction is
|10% as seen from the graph. The electrical
power output was calculated from the measured
voltage over a power resistor of 6.8 V. The
average electrical power output from the PV
]
module was P 5 32.3 W. The experiment was
stopped during the second round of PV output
because of shading from clouds.
The IV characteristics plotted in Fig. 6 show
the effect of cooling on the photovoltaic output
67
Fig. 6. IV-characteristics for series (square symbol) and parallel (circle) combination of the submodules at cell temperatures
of 188C (dashed lines) and 528C (solid lines).
for both series and parallel connection of submodules. The average cell temperature was re]
]
duced from T c 5528C to T c 5188C, a temperature
difference of DT c 5348C, by operating the heat
collector with cold water (T water 10128C). The
average insolation was during this experiment
]
I 5 749 W/ m 2 , and the ambient air temperature
898C. Fig. 6 illustrates the most pronounced
temperature effect as a decrease in the open
circuit voltage, Voc , which is due to the diode
reverse saturation current which increases exponentially with temperature (Fahrenbruch and
Bube, 1983; Wysocki and Rappaport, 1960;
Saidov et al., 1995).
The photovoltaic efficiency, hPV , of the collector is calculated from the maximum power points
found visually from the IV curves:
ImpVmp
hPV 5 ]].
A cI
(4)
Table 2 lists Vmp , Imp and hPV for the series (S)
and parallel (P) arrangements with corresponding
]
average cell temperature T c (with and without
cooling). The results show a relative decrease in
hPV of 0.07% / K and 0.1% / K for the series and
parallel combinations, respectively. Note that PV
efficiency results are based on total cell area, not
the area of the collector.
Table 2. Maximum power point voltage Vmp , current Imp and
photovoltaic efficiency hPV for series (S) and parallel (P)
combination of cells. T c is average cell temperature
S/P
T c (8C)
Vmp (V)
Imp (A)
hPV (%)
S
P
S
P
18
18
52
52
14.69
6.93
11.19
5.28
2.16
4.62
2.39
4.59
13.3
13.4
10.9
9.9
68
(7)
]
The average measured PV cell temperature, T c
is in Fig. 7 plotted against time, together with
storage tank temperature T i for one of the experiments (03.11.97). Also plotted in the figure is
theoretical cell temperature T c , calculated as a
function of T i , the thermal efficiency of the
collector, hT , and irradiation I:
T c 5 T i 1 khT I
(5)
Ac
S 5 (ta ) eff I 5 (ta ) 2 hPV ] I.
A
(8)
where
1 2 FR
k 5 ]]
FR U L
(6)
A PV/ T system analytical model was developed based on the equations for the fin-tube
collector configuration outlined in Duffie and
Beckman (1991) and Hottel and Whillier (1958),
but modified to include the effects of integrated
solar cells and also a different absorber plate
design (Bergene and Lvvik, 1995).
The square, wall-to-wall, fluid channels of the
absorber plate used in this study ensures (ideally)
that the fluid flow covers the entire back side of
the absorber surface. This gives in terms of the
(9)
(10)
(11)
vg2 2
vg1 2vg2
T i (t) 5 ]t 1 ] 2 ]]
t
u
u
u2
vg0 vg1 2vg2 w
1 ]2]
1 ]]
1]
u
u
u2
u3
S
F S
DG
where
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
69
(16)
(17)
(18)
(19)
70
Fig. 9. Calculated inlet fluid temperature and thermal efficiency with PV power output (solid lines) and without PV power output
(dashed lines). The higher thermal efficiency without PV output gives a faster increasing storage tank temperature. PV/ Tg system,
03.11.97.
modeled with a transmittanceabsorptance product of 0.9. The simulations so far reflect a system
with continuous accumulation and increasing
temperature in the heat store. If however the
PV/ T collectors are implemented in a system with
draw-off of thermal energy, the PV cell temperature would be kept at a lower and more stable
level. By assuming a constant system (storage)
temperature of 308C, the same simulation as
above gives a total PV energy of 349.1 W h for
the PV/ T system and 307.1 W h for the PV/ Tg
system.
7. DISCUSSION
71
72
8. CONCLUSION
NOMENCLATURE
A
Ac
b0
Cp
F
F9
FR
g0,1,2
h
I
Imp
K
Kta (u )
k
m
collector area (m )
total PV cell area (m 2 )
incidence angle modifier coefficient
heat capacity of fluid (J kg 21 K 21 )
fin efficiency
collector efficiency factor
collector heat removal factor
irradiation curve fitting constants
heat transfer coefficient between absorber and
fluid (W m 22 K 21 )
22
irradiation (W m )
current at maximum power point (A)
pump power (W)
incidence angle modifier
system thermal property (K m 2 W 21 )
total mass of fluid in system (kg)
]
P
QL
QP
QS
QT
QU
S
T 1,2
T3
Ta
Tc
]
Tc
Ti
T i,0
T PV
T PV,NOCT
T ref
Ts
t
UL
UPV
(UA) tank
Vmp
Voc
a
hPV
hT
href
u
m
(ta )
(ta ) eff
(ta ) PV
REFERENCES
Bergene T. and Lvvik O. M. (1995) Model calculations on a
flat-plate solar heat collector with integrated solar cells.
Solar Energy 55, 453462.
Solar Collectors, Energy Storage, and Materials, (1990). Solar
Heat Technologies, Vol. 5, de Winter F. (Ed.), MIT Press,
Cambridge.
Duffie J. A. and Beckman W. A. (1991). In 2nd edn, Solar
Engineering of Thermal Processes, Wiley Interscience, New
York.
Fahrenbruch A. L. and Bube R. H. (1983). Fundamentals of
Solar Cells, Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conversion, Academic Press, New York.
Florschuetz L. W. (1979) Extension of the HottelWhillier
model to the analysis of combined photovoltaic / thermal flat
plate collectors. Solar Energy 22, 361366.
Fujisawa T. and Tani T. (1997) Annual exergy evaluation on
photovoltaic-thermal hybrid collector. Solar Energy Mater.
Solar Cells 47, 135.
Garg H. P., Agarwal R. K. and Joshi J. C. (1994) Experimental
study on a hybrid photovoltaicthermal solar water heater
and its performance predictions. Energy Convers. Manage.
35(7), 621633.
73