Low angle solar performance
Has my one seen data on performance by specific panel or general PV type for different incidence angles of solar radiation? All I can find so far is generic info. Jim
Forum Discussion
Well in reading solar studies and standards, it seems that as the sun angle moves away from perpendicular, the dominant loss of efficiency in typical solar cells is reflection from the top glass surface rather than the technology used.
Head on, as in the standard testing method used to rate the watts of a panel, the reflection loss is only 4%. But as the sun gets lower in the sky this becomes a larger factor than loss of light intensity, due to the high angle of incidence of the light against the glass.
At 70 degrees you are already eliminating 30% of the light hitting the solar panel, due to reflection from the surface glass. This is before you compute the lower light levels actually hitting the photovoltaic cells (you can look that up on the power intensity tables, after you subtract out the glass reflection losses off the top).
At 80 degrees you are reflecting over half the light from the glass. Part of why you see the tail drop off so fast in flat mount panels at the beginning and end of the day.
At 85 degrees (where many studies ended) 73 percent of the light is lost before it even gets through the glass.
I'm still looking for an idea of what the Tefzel coating on the front of the UniSolars refractive index is, to compute similar numbers for that technology.
If I had a sheet of glass large enough, it would be interesting to see how much additional low angle current would drop from reflection losses by mounting a unisolar and standard solar panel under it. Not the same as native, but it would show the increased loss which might be instructive to know.
------------
Wikipedia article on watts per m^2 at various angles of sunlight
Solar intensity vs zenith angle and airmass coefficient AM
AM range due to pollution[11] formula (I.1) ASTM G-173[10]
degree W/m2 W/m2 W/m2
- 0 1367 1353 1347.9[15]
0° 1 840 .. 1130 = 990 ± 15% 1040
23° 1.09 800 .. 1110 = 960 ± 16% 1020
30° 1.15 780 .. 1100 = 940 ± 17% 1010
45° 1.41 710 .. 1060 = 880 ± 20% 950
48.2° 1.5 680 .. 1050 = 870 ± 21% 930 1000.4[17]
60° 2 560 .. 970 = 770 ± 27% 840
70° 2.9 430 .. 880 = 650 ± 34% 710
75° 3.8 330 .. 800 = 560 ± 41% 620
80° 5.6 200 .. 660 = 430 ± 53% 470
85° 10 85 .. 480 = 280 ± 70% 270
90° 38 20
This illustrates that significant power is available at only a few degrees above the horizon.
----
Jim
Head on, as in the standard testing method used to rate the watts of a panel, the reflection loss is only 4%. But as the sun gets lower in the sky this becomes a larger factor than loss of light intensity, due to the high angle of incidence of the light against the glass.
At 70 degrees you are already eliminating 30% of the light hitting the solar panel, due to reflection from the surface glass. This is before you compute the lower light levels actually hitting the photovoltaic cells (you can look that up on the power intensity tables, after you subtract out the glass reflection losses off the top).
At 80 degrees you are reflecting over half the light from the glass. Part of why you see the tail drop off so fast in flat mount panels at the beginning and end of the day.
At 85 degrees (where many studies ended) 73 percent of the light is lost before it even gets through the glass.
I'm still looking for an idea of what the Tefzel coating on the front of the UniSolars refractive index is, to compute similar numbers for that technology.
If I had a sheet of glass large enough, it would be interesting to see how much additional low angle current would drop from reflection losses by mounting a unisolar and standard solar panel under it. Not the same as native, but it would show the increased loss which might be instructive to know.
------------
Wikipedia article on watts per m^2 at various angles of sunlight
Solar intensity vs zenith angle and airmass coefficient AM
AM range due to pollution[11] formula (I.1) ASTM G-173[10]
degree W/m2 W/m2 W/m2
- 0 1367 1353 1347.9[15]
0° 1 840 .. 1130 = 990 ± 15% 1040
23° 1.09 800 .. 1110 = 960 ± 16% 1020
30° 1.15 780 .. 1100 = 940 ± 17% 1010
45° 1.41 710 .. 1060 = 880 ± 20% 950
48.2° 1.5 680 .. 1050 = 870 ± 21% 930 1000.4[17]
60° 2 560 .. 970 = 770 ± 27% 840
70° 2.9 430 .. 880 = 650 ± 34% 710
75° 3.8 330 .. 800 = 560 ± 41% 620
80° 5.6 200 .. 660 = 430 ± 53% 470
85° 10 85 .. 480 = 280 ± 70% 270
90° 38 20
This illustrates that significant power is available at only a few degrees above the horizon.
----
Jim
