Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Guillermo Velasco*, Francesc Guinjoan**, Robert Piqu*, Alfonso Conesa* and J.J. Negroni**
Electronic Engineering Department Polytechnic University of Catalonia (UPC)
*
CEIB-EUETIB, C/. Compte dUrgell, 187 **ETSETB, C/. Jordi Girona, 31
Barcelona, SPAIN
Tel.: +34 / 93 413 72 89
Fax: +34 / 93 413 74 01
guillermo.velasco@upc.edu
guinjoan@eel.upc.edu
http://www.euetib.upc.edu
http://www.upc.edu
Acknowledgements
This work has been partially granted by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology and by the EU
(FEDER funds) through the research project DPI-2006-15627-C03-01, and was developed at the URT
EdePAE 1 installations, of the EUETIB.
Keywords
Renewable energy systems, Photovoltaic, Efficiency, Modeling.
Abstract
This work is devoted to establish preliminary criteria helping in the choice of a central inverter power
sizing in grid-connected PV systems in order to maximize the yearly energy injected to the grid. These
criteria come from an estimation of the injected energy by means of a set of Matlab-based simulations
involving a simulation-oriented model of the PV conversion chain, the environmental data of several PV
Spanish sites as well as the PV installation mounting type characteristics.
The simulation results show that the current practice of under-sizing the inverter maximum power with
respect to the PV generator nominal power may not be the best choice in terms of yearly produced energy
and also evidence the strong impact of the PV generator operating temperature in the choice of the optimal
inverter power sizing.
I. Introduction
Central inverter grid-connected PV systems are formed by a set of series-parallel electrically
interconnected PV modules, which are known as the PV generator and one central inverter ensuring the
proper transfer of the collected energy to the mains. The choice of the central inverter maximum power
(PINV) is related with the total installed peak power of the PV generator (PGF) given in Standard Test
Conditions (STC: 1000W/m2 at 25C and for a solar spectrum of AM1.5) and has to maximize the injected
energy to the mains. The ratio between these two powers is known as the Sizing Factor (SF) and is
defined as (1):
PINV = SF PGF
(1)
The SF value is normally chosen lower than one since the PV generator generally operates below the
irradiance level and above the temperature value given by the STC.
1
In previous papers [1 - 2] a simulation-based procedure using simple PV system models neglecting the
temperature influence on the energy production was presented to estimate the SF optimal value
maximizing the yearly injected energy.
This work follows the same simulation procedure, but includes the operating temperature effects in the PV
generator model. Accordingly, the main objective is to establish preliminary criteria on the optimal SF
value choice by estimating the yearly injected energy to the grid, taking into account the following
characteristics of the PV conversion chain elements involved in the power production process, namely:
1. Irradiance and temperature level evolution at the PV installation site
2. Characteristics of the PV generator (operating temperature, PV mounting type )
3. Inverter electrical characteristics (maximum power, efficiency curve )
The paper content is organized as follows:
Section II describes, in terms of power processing, a set of simplified models of all the elements involved
in the PV conversion chain.
Section III focuses on the numerical simulation procedure leading to the yearly injected energy estimation.
This simulation procedure is applied, in Section IV, to different PV sites assuming the same PV generator,
the same inverter and considering the SF as a parameter.
Finally, Section V presents a set of criteria on the SF choice from the simulation results obtained in
Section IV.
Fig. 1: Monthly irradiance [W/m2] and temperature [C] time evolution at the city of Zaragoza
(2)
1: PV generator efficiency at 25 C.
G: Incident irradiance on the PV generators plane.
: Thermal power coefficient of the PV generator material.
TM: PV generator operating temperature.
TR: Reference temperature (25 C).
SGF: PV generator surface.
A constant value for both PV generator efficiency and thermal power coefficient of the PV generator
material has been assumed, and fixed to the typical values of silicon mono-crystalline PV modules,
namely 1 = 0.12 and = 0.5 %/C. On the other hand, this work considers a static PV generator (i.e. with
no sun tracking capability) oriented to the South, with a surface of 10 m2. Taking into account the
previous assumptions, the nominal power of this PV generator will be of 1.2 kWp.
Finally, the PV generator operating temperature (TM) simulation model is defined in [5 - 6] and is given
by (3):
TM = TA + G ,
where:
(3)
As shown in [7] from an analysis considering several mounting types of grid-connected PV systems
located in different countries, the thermal coefficient value () exhibits a strong dependency with the PV
generator ventilation capability (natural ventilation by convection, or forced ventilation by wind or
airflows).
According to this work, the typical values of the thermal coefficient are fixed to = 0.025 for PV systems
on flat surface (flat roof) with good ventilation, and = 0.050 for PV systems integrated in buildings
(habitually on faade or sloped roof) where the PV generator ventilation is worse. The simulations of this
work will use these typical values.
Fig. 2 shows the daily operating temperature for a PV generator located at Zaragoza, during the month of
August and for the PV generator mounting types previously mentioned.
Fig. 2: PV generator operating temperature for = 0.025 (flat roof) and = 0.050 (building integrated)
Inverter model
The available power at the inverter output (PAC) will depend on both the input power (PDC) and the
inverter efficiency (2). This work has considered the model given by [8], which is applicable for input
power ranges lower than the maximum inverter power (PINV). This model is given by the equation (4):
2 =
p
,
p + k0 + k1 p + k 2 p 2
(4)
2: Inverter efficiency.
p: PDC / PINV ratio.
k0: Losses coefficient at not load.
k1, k2: Linear and quadratic current losses coefficients.
where:
For input power ranges greater than the inverter maximum power, this work assumes the inverter
operating mode suggested in [9 - 10], i.e., the input power (PDC) is limited to its maximum value without
output power interruptions until overload conditions are no longer present.
In this case, the new inverter efficiency function can be properly modelled by the following hyperbolic
dependence (5):
2 =
2 ( p =1)
p
(5)
Fig. 3 shows the inverter efficiency curve for the set of parameters k0 = 0.014, k1 = 0.001 and k2 = 0.081,
which closely match the efficiency curve of a commercial grid-connected inverter with low frequency
isolation transformer (SB1100 inverter from SMA).
Finally, the energy efficiency of the PV system defined by (6) can be evaluated.
E =
PAC
PDC
(6)
As regards the PV generator operating temperature effect on the optimal SF value, the resulting
simulations have considered two installation mounting types, the first one mounted on a flat surface with
good ventilation (i.e. = 0.025), and the other one integrated in buildings with a worse ventilation
capability (i.e. = 0.050).
Fig. 7 and Fig. 8 show the SF optimal values maps obtained from the regression analysis for both values
of the thermal coefficient ().
Table I summarizes the most significant results obtained with respect to the SF optimal value, the
irradiance levels and the average temperature for the 47 studied cities.
Vitoria
La Corua
Santander
Oviedo
Optimal SF value
Flat surface
Integrated
1,03
0,93
1,03
0,93
1,02
0,92
1,02
0,93
1,01
0,92
0,99
0,90
0,98
0,89
0,76
0,71
0,75
0,70
0,74
0,69
0,73
0,68
Irradiance
average [W/m2]
Temperature
average [C]
396,8
390,2
396,7
405,6
382,9
390,9
355,9
269,4
262,1
263,1
255,4
18,2
16,6
20,1
19,9
17,3
17,4
14,2
13,0
15,7
15,6
14,4
Energy production
In order to compare the yearly produced energy of different sites assuming that their corresponding PV
installations exhibit the optimal SF, the energy value of each site is normalized with respect to the
maximum value of the obtained energies and is referred as EAC (%). Fig. 9 and Fig. 10 show the EAC
values map for the previous values of the thermal coefficient ().
Table II summarizes the most significant results with respect to the annual energy production EAC for the
47 cities.
In order to enhance the comparative, two different normalized values of produced energy are computed
for building integrated installations, namely: the first column corresponds to a normalization with respect
to the maximum energy value of this mounting type, whereas the second one considers the maximum
energy value of the flat surface installations mounting type.
By this way given a PV site, the loss of produced energy depending on the installation mounting type can
be evaluated.
Location
Cdiz
Huelva
Zaragoza
Almera
Lrida
Granada
Jan
Lugo
Santander
La Corua
Oviedo
Energy [%]
Building Integrated (BI)
E AC ( FS )
E AC ( BI )
E AC ( BI )
E AC ( FS ) max
E AC ( BI ) max
E AC ( FS ) max
100,0
99,4
99,1
98,5
96,9
96,7
95,7
71,5
69,7
69,6
67,9
100,0
99,1
99,0
98,5
96,9
96,9
95,8
73,2
71,6
71,4
70,0
92,2
91,3
91,2
90,8
89,3
89,3
88,3
67,5
66,0
65,8
64,5
Finally, the grid injected energy, in terms of the SF, has been computed for different PV sites and for the
two installation mounting types, as plotted in Fig.11 for the city of Barcelona.
Fig. 11: PV system annual energy production at Barcelona versus SF value for the two types of
installations under consideration
This plot shows on one hand the values of the optimal SF, and the energy production difference depending
on the installation mounting type. In particular a reduction of a 5% is observed in the case of building
integrated PV installations, this being attributable to the greater value of the PV generator operating
temperature of this type of installations due to the worse ventilation with respect to the flat surface
mounting ones.
V. Conclusions
This work has presented a set of simulations based on simple simulation-oriented models of all the
elements of the generation and conversion chain involved in PV grid-connected systems, namely:
irradiance and temperature evolution, PV generator and inverter models. These simulations are oriented to
calculate the optimum SF value, defined as the ratio between the maximum inverter power and the
nominal power of the PV generator, which maximizes the yearly energy production.
The obtained results, carried out for 47 Spanish PV sites, evidence the existence of a SF optimal value,
maximizing the installation yearly energy production and show that this value can be greater than one for
PV installations located at low latitude sites. Accordingly, for these latitudes the results suggest to
oversize the inverter maximum power with respect to the PV generator nominal power, in spite of the
under-sizing current practice.
On the other hand, a geographical distribution of the SF optimal values and the yearly produced energy
has also been obtained and lead to the following conclusions:
The SF optimal value has exhibits a stronger dependency with the irradiance than the temperature.
Therefore, PV sites with higher average irradiance levels present higher optimal SF values.
For PV sites with similar levels of irradiance, the greater SF optimal values correspond to those
sites with lower average temperature levels.
The SF optimal value is strongly dependent with the PV generator operating temperature. The
lower the PV generator operating temperature (i.e. the better PV generator ventilation), the larger
the SF optimal value is.
Finally, with respect to the yearly injected energy to the grid in the different PV sites:
PV sites with a greater SF optimal value are also the PV sites with a greater yearly energy
production.
The yearly injected energy to the grid is greater when the PV generator operating temperature is
lower.
References
[1] G. Velasco, F. Guinjoan and R. Piqu: Consideraciones sobre la Relacin entre las Potencias del Generador
Fotovoltaico y del Inversor en Sistemas Fotovoltaicos Conectados a Red, XIII SAAEI. Gijn, September 2006. (In
Spanish)
[2] G. Velasco, F. Guinjoan, R. Piqu and J.J. Negroni: Sizing Factor Considerations for Grid-Connected PV
Systems Based on a Central Inverter Configuration, 32nd IECON. Paris, November 2006.
[3] N.J.C.M. van der Borg and A.R. Burgers: Inverter Under-sizing in PV Systems, 3th WCPEC pp. 2066-2069.
Osaka, May 2003.
[4] David L. King, Jay A. Kratochvil and William E. Boyson: Temperature Coefficients for PV Modules and Arrays:
Measurement Methods, Difficulties and Results, 26th PVSEC pp. 1183-1186. California, September-October 1997.
[5] T. Nordmann and L. Clavadetscher: Understanding Temperature Effects on PV Systems Performance, 3th
WCPEC pp. 2243-2246. Osaka, May 2003.
[6] H.G. Beyer and O. Prignitz: Modeling the PV-Output, PVSAT 2 Workshop on Satellite-Based Performance
Check of Photovoltaic Systems. Barcelona, June 2005.
[7] T. Nordmann and L. Clavadetscher: Understanding Temperature Effects on PV System Performance, 3th WCPEC
pp. 2243-2246. Osaka, May 2003.
[8] E. Lorenzo: Retratos de la Conexin Fotovoltaica a la Red V. De la AIE a los Inversores, ERA SOLAR Vol
126 pp. 52-59, 2005. (In Spanish)
[9] L. Keller and P. Affolter: Optimizing the panel area of a photovoltaic system in relation to the static inverter
Practical results, Solar Energy Vol 55 no 1 pp 1-7, 1995.
[10] B. Burger and R. Rther: Inverter sizing of grid-connected photovoltaic systems in the light of local solar
resource distribution characteristics and temperature, Solar Energy Vol 80 no 1 pp 32-45, 2006.