0
Technical Briefs

Effects of Natural and Manual Cleaning on Photovoltaic Output

[+] Author and Article Information
Matthew K. Smith

Department of Chemistry and Department
of Mechanical and Materials Engineering,
Portland State University,
Portland, OR 97207-0751

Carl C. Wamser

e-mail: wamserc@pdx.edu

Keith E. James

Department of Chemistry,
Portland State University,
Portland, OR 97207-0751

David J. Sailor

Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering,
Portland State University,
Portland, OR 97207-0751

Todd N. Rosenstiel

Department of Biology,
Portland State University,
Portland, OR 97207-0751

Contributed by the Solar Energy Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF SOLAR ENERGY ENGINEERING. Manuscript received August 7, 2012; final manuscript received February 15, 2013; published online June 11, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Santiago Silvestre.

J. Sol. Energy Eng 135(3), 034505 (Jun 11, 2013) (4 pages) Paper No: SOL-12-1193; doi: 10.1115/1.4023927 History: Received August 07, 2012; Revised February 15, 2013

Photovoltaic arrays are known to suffer power efficiency losses over time due to accumulation of natural dirt and dust. The importance of cleaning in order to maintain efficiencies and the significance of natural cleaning by rainfall have not been widely studied in different climates. Monocrystalline silicon photovoltaic panels located in Portland, Oregon, were evaluated for the effects of natural soiling on power output and correlated with efficiencies after manual cleaning or natural rainfall. The masses of particulates on each panel were measured when cleaning the panels, and the effects of the manual cleaning and natural cleaning by rainfall were compared. In order to distinguish possible causes for the losses in efficiency, thermal effects of soiling were also studied. During a 17-day rain-free period in July and Aug. 2011, natural particulate deposition was measured at 0.85 g/m2, which led to a power output about 4% lower than a nominally identical clean panel. A single natural rainfall event was sufficient to clean the panel to a level that restored power output to within 1% of the manually cleaned panel. Natural particulate deposition at that level did not detectably affect panel temperature, suggesting that the power losses were due to optical scattering effects rather than temperature effects. Artificially managed temperature adjustments did significantly affect power output, consistent with the expected temperature effects for monocrystalline silicon. Given the effectiveness of natural rainfall in cleaning the panels, appropriate protocols for maintaining optimum efficiencies can be determined for different climate situations.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Razykov, T. M., Ferekides, C. S., Morel, D., Stefanakos, E., Ullal, H. S., and Upadhyaya, H. M., 2011, “Solar Photovoltaic Electricity: Current Status and Future Prospects,” Solar Energy, 85, pp. 1580–1608. [CrossRef]
Kaldellis, J. K., Fragos, P., and Kapsali, M., 2011, “Systematic Experimental Study of the Pollution Deposition Impact on the Energy Yield of Photovoltaic Installations,” Renewable Energy, 36, pp. 2717–2724. [CrossRef]
Kaldellis, J. K., and Kokala, A., 2010, “Quantifying the Decrease of the Photovoltaic Panels' Energy Yield Due to Phenomena of Natural Air Pollution Disposal,” Energy, 35, pp. 4862–4869. [CrossRef]
Massi Pavan, A., Mellit, A., and De Pieri, D., 2011, “The Effect of Soiling on Energy Production for Large-Scale Photovoltaic Plants,” Solar Energy, 85, pp. 1128–1136. [CrossRef]
Vivar, M., Herrero, R., Antón, I., Martínez-Moreno, F., Moretón, R., Sala, G., Blakers, A. W., and Smeltink, J., 2010, “Effect of Soiling in CPV Systems,” Solar Energy, 84, pp. 1327–1335. [CrossRef]
Al-Hasan, A., and Ghoneim, A. A., 2005, “A New Correlation Between Photovoltaic Panel's Efficiency and Amount of Sand Dust Accumulated on Their Surface,” Int. J. Sustainable Energy, 24, pp. 187–197. [CrossRef]
Hammond, R., Srinivasan, D., Harris, A., Whitfield, K., and Wohlgemuth, J., 1997, “Effects of Soiling on PV Module and Radiometer Performance,” Conference Record of the 26th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, Anaheim, CA, September 29–October 3, pp. 1121–1124. [CrossRef]
NOAA Satellite and Information Service, 2013, National Climatic Data Center, accessed March 18, 2013, http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/
Kimber, A., Mitchell, L., Nogradi, S., and Wenger, H., 2007, “The Effect of Soiling on Large Grid-Connected Photovoltaic Systems in California and the Southwest Region of the United States,” Conference Record of the 2006 IEEE 4th World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion, Waikoloa, HI, May 7–12, pp. 2391–2396. [CrossRef]
Vignola, F. E., Krumsick, J., Mavromatakis, F., and Walwyn, R., 2009, “Measuring Degradation of Photovoltaic Module Performance in the Field,” Proceedings of the 38th ASES National Solar Conference (SOLAR 2009), Buffalo, NY, May 11–16, American Solar Energy Society, Boulder, CO, pp. 2611–2633.
Kappos, L., Ntouros, I., and Palivos, I., 1996, “Pollution Effect on PV System Efficiency,” Proceedings of the 5th National Conference on Soft Energy Forms, Athens, Greece, November 6–8.
King, D. L., Kratochvil, J. A., and Boyson, W. E., 1997, “Temperature Coefficients for PV Modules and Arrays: Measurement Methods, Difficulties, and Results,” Conference Record of the 26th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, Anaheim, CA, September 29–October 3, pp. 1183–1186.
Kottek, M., Grieser, J., Beck, C., Rudolf, B., and Rubel, F., 2006, “World Map of the Köppen-Geiger Climate Classification Updated,” Meteorol. Z., 15, pp. 259–263. [CrossRef]
Portland State University Photovoltaic Test Facility, 2013, accessed March 18, 2013, http://solar.pdx.edu/home/

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Difference in panel surface temperature ( °C) between panels 5B and 6B before (8/11) and after (8/12) panel 5B was cleaned

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

The effect of panel temperature on power output

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic representation of the experimental modules, where x represents the location of temperature sensors on the backs of the panels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Percentage difference in daily total power output between panel 5B and 6B before cleaning (prior to 8/12), after cleaning 5B only (between 8/12 and 8/22), and after a rain event (8/23 and beyond)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In