Publications

This core capability project’s objective is to increase the value of photovoltaic (PV) performance models by improving their functionality, demonstrating, and quantifying their validity, and offering a wide range of stakeholder engagement opportunities. In FY22-24, we developed new and improved modeling algorithms and functions to represent PV performance more accurately in a variety of environments and conditions. The “Model parameter toolkit” was developed and includes functions to translate between different module temperature models, incidence angle modifier models, and single-diode models. A new modeling capability named “PV Atlas” was also developed leveraging Sandia’s High Performance Computing resources. This capability allows us to investigate several questions and provide climate-specific best practices and geographic data files; all these are hosted on an interactive website on Sandia’s GitHub and can be used for training, system optimization, or to provide best practices for uncertainty reduction. For model validation, we published high-quality PV performance, and weather data; these data are well documented, filtered, and processed for quality and include examples on how to run PV simulations. We also developed well documented, standardized methods for validating PV models and ran independent model validation and 2 blind modeling intercomparisons engaging with 49 organizations from 17 countries. We co-led and contributed to a growing, well documented and maintained suite of open-source functions for PV modeling (i.e., the pvlib-python) and we outreached to the PV modeling stakeholders via the PVPMC workshops and web resources. In addition, this project supported US representation and leadership for the International Energy Agency (IEA) PVPS Task 13; specifically, members of our team led and supported 3 subtasks on: 1) Best practices for the optimization of bifacial photovoltaic tracking, 2) Extreme weather events and their multiple impact on PV power plants: Risks, failure mechanisms and mitigation strategies, and 3) Best practice guidelines for the use of economic and technical Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). This project resulted in the publications of 14 peer reviewed journal papers, 37 conference presentations, 6 SAND reports, 5 public datasets and 6 new webpages on the PVPMC website. It supported the release of 13 pvlib-python versions where 28 enhancements were from this PV Performance Modeling project. We co-organized 5 PVPMC workshops in FY22-24 with the participation of 214 unique institutions and around 700 participants. The PVPMC website was redesigned, and its reliability was improved; it receives over 50,000 visitors/year from 202 unique countries.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

All freely available plane-of-array (POA) transposition models and photovoltaic (PV) temperature and performance models in pvlib-python and pvpltools-python were examined against multiyear field data from Albuquerque, New Mexico. The data include different PV systems composed of crystalline silicon modules that vary in cell type, module construction, and materials. These systems have been characterized via IEC 61853-1 and 61853-2 testing, and the input data for each model were sourced from these system-specific test results, rather than considering any generic input data (e.g., manufacturer's specification [spec] sheets or generic Panneau Solaire [PAN] files). Six POA transposition models, 7 temperature models, and 12 performance models are included in this comparative analysis. These freely available models were proven effective across many different types of technologies. The POA transposition models exhibited average normalized mean bias errors (NMBEs) within ±3%. Most PV temperature models underestimated temperature exhibiting mean and median residuals ranging from −6.5°C to 2.7°C; all temperature models saw a reduction in root mean square error when using transient assumptions over steady state. The performance models demonstrated similar behavior with a first and third interquartile NMBEs within ±4.2% and an overall average NMBE within ±2.3%. Although differences among models were observed at different times of the day/year, this study shows that the availability of system-specific input data is more important than model selection. For example, using spec sheet or generic PAN file data with a complex PV performance model does not guarantee a better accuracy than a simpler PV performance model that uses system-specific data.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

The Photovoltaic (PV) Performance Modeling Collaborative (PVPMC) organized a blind PV performance modeling intercomparison to allow PV modelers to blindly test their models and modeling ability against real system data. Measured weather and irradiance data were provided along with detailed descriptions of PV systems from two locations (Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA, and Roskilde, Denmark). Participants were asked to simulate the plane-of-array irradiance, module temperature, and DC power output from six systems and submit their results to Sandia for processing. The results showed overall median mean bias (i.e., the average error per participant) of 0.6% in annual irradiation and −3.3% in annual energy yield. While most PV performance modeling results seem to exhibit higher precision and accuracy as compared to an earlier blind PV modeling study in 2010, human errors, modeling skills, and derates were found to still cause significant errors in the estimates.

Abstract not provided.

Irradiance transposition models seem to perform well, except the Isotropic with -11.25 W/m² underestimation. Most temperature models could not capture behavior when ΔΤ between module and ambient is negative. Uncertainties due to derate factors: modelers overbudgeted resulting in significant power underestimation; maybe ~10% is appropriate for commercial systems but not lab-scale? Most software and models cluster together showing good reproducibility among participants. Modeler’s skills seem to be more important than the PV model itself (flat efficiency with irradiance, positive power temperature coefficients, etc.). Results and best practices will be communicated in a journal article.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.