EFFECT OF AZIMUTH ANGLE ON THE PERFORMANCE OF A SMALL-SCALE ON-GRID PV SYSTEM

Abstract

Abstract: In this study, the effective solar irradiation on the PV surface, electricity generation, and performance ratios of a small-scale system were investigated for a 100 kW on-grid PV system in Konya, Turkey, by PVsyst software. Five different azimuth angles as -30°, -15°, 0°, 15°, and 30° were investigated for no-shading simulations with a fixed optimum tilt angle of 33°. As a result, the highest effective solar radiation comes to the system with an azimuth of 0° as 1966.4 kWh/m², which is 2.12%, 0.46%, 0.79%, and 2.66% greater than the other azimuth angles of -30°, -15°, 15° and 30°, respectively. On the other hand, it is seen that the highest energy production is obtained from the system with an azimuth angle of 0° with annual energy of 174.33 MWh. This value is 1.91%, 0.37%, 0.89%, and 2.8% greater than the other azimuth angles of -30°, -15°, 15°, and 30°, respectively. In addition, to evaluate the shading effect on the performance of the PV panels, two different panel spacings as, 4 m and 8 m, were also considered. It was seen that the electricity generation with an 8 m span system was 8.88% better than the 4m. Another finding is that the height of the panels is negligible according to electricity generation. Finally, the highest performance ratio is obtained from the azimuth angle of 0°, as 0.857.

Keywords

• azimuth angle
• performance ratio
• PV performance
• PVsyst
• solar energy.

Kaynakça

1. [1] Tudor C, Sova R., EU Net-Zero Policy Achievement Assessment in selected members through Automated Forecasting Algorithms. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information. 2022;11:232-261.
2. [2] Gross R, Leach M, Bauen A., Progress in renewable energy. Environment International. Pergamon. 2022;29:105-102.
3. [3] Kose F, Aksoy MH, Ozgoren M. Experimental investigation of solar/wind hybrid system for irrigation in Konya, Turkey. Thermal Science. 2019;23: 4129–4139.
4. [4] Bull SR. Renewable energy today and Tomorrow. Proceedings of the IEEE. 2001;89: 1216–1226.
5. [5] Bagher AM, Valid MMA, Mohsen M. Types of solar cells and application. American Journal of Optics and Photonics. 2015;3(5):94-113.
6. [6] Powell DM, Winkler MT, Choi HJ, Simmons CB, Needleman DB, Buonassisi T. Crystalline silicon photovoltaics: A cost analysis framework for determining technology pathways to reach baseload electricity costs. Energy & Environmental Science. 2012;5(3):5874-5883.
7. [7] Tyagi VV, Rahim NAA, Rahim NA, Selvaraj JAL., Progress in solar PV technology: Research and achievement. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2013;20:443–461.
8. [8] Nogueira CE, Bedin J, Niedzialkoski RK, De Souza SN, Das Neves JC., Performance of monocrystalline and polycrystalline solar panels in a water pumping system in Brazil. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2015;51:1610–1616.

9. [9] Karaağac MO, Oğul H, Bulut F. Evaluation of Monocrystalline and Polycrystalline Photovoltaic Panels in Sinop Province Conditions. Turkish Journal of Nature and Science. 2021;10:176-181.
10. [10] Green MA., Silicon Photovoltaic Modules: A brief history of the first 50 years. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications. 2005;13:447–455.
11. [11] IRENA, Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2018 [Internet], International Renewable Energy Agency, Abu Dhabi, 2019 [cited 2022 September 20]. Available from: https://www.irena.org/publications/2019/May/Renewable-power-generation-costs-in-2018
12. [12] Jäger-Waldau A. Snapshot of photovoltaics − February 2018. EPJ Photovoltaics. 2018;9:6–11.
13. [13] Benda V, Černá L. PV cells and modules – state of the art, limits and Trends. 2020;6(12): e0566.
14. [14] Kaya MN, Aksoy MH, Köse F. Renewable Energy in Turkey: Potential, Current Status and Future Aspects. Annals of Faculty Engineering Hunedoara – International Journal of Engineering Tome. 2017;15:65–69.
15. [15] Babayigit O, Aksoy MH, Ozgoren M, Solmaz O. Investigation of absorption cooling application powered by solar energy in the South Coast region of Turkey. EPJ Web of Conferences. 2013;45:01100.
16. [16] Yilmaz Cakmak B. Solar energy potential of Konya and Architectural Design Criterias for solar energy efficiency. 2015 International Conference on Renewable Energy Research and Applications (ICRERA). 2015. p. 1463-1469.
17. [17] Sözen A, Arcaklioğlu E, Özalp M, Kanit EG. Solar-energy potential in Turkey. Applied Energy. 2005;80:367–381.
18. [18] Kougias I, Taylor N, Kakoulaki G, Jäger-Waldau A., The role of photovoltaics for the European Green Deal and the recovery plan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2021;44:111017.
19. [19] Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources [cited 2022 September 20]. Available from: https://enerji.gov.tr/eigm-yenilenebilir-enerji-kaynaklar-gunes.
20. [20] Çeçen M, Yavuz C, Tırmıkçı CA, Sarıkaya S, Yanıkoğlu E., Analysis and evaluation of distributed photovoltaic generation in electrical energy production and related regulations of Turkey. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy. 2022;24:1321–1336.
21. [21] Doğan S, Yağmur S. Aksoy MH, Köse F. Solmaz O. Solar Energy Potential in Turkey and Manufacturability Research for Equipments of Photovoltaic Panel in Konya Province, III. International Congress on Environmental Research and Technology (Icerat), 2017. p 35.
22. [22] Karaveli AB, Soytas U, Akinoglu BG., The role of legislations and incentives in the growth of a PV market in a developing country. 2017 International Renewable and Sustainable Energy Conference (IRSEC). 2017.
23. [23] Enerji Atlası [internet]. Karapınar YEKA-1 GES [cited 2022 September 20]. Available from: https://www.enerjiatlasi.com/gunes/karapinar-yeka-11.html
24. [24] Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources [cited 2022 September 20]. Available from:https://gepa.enerji.gov.tr/MyCalculator/pages/42.aspx
25. [25] Ahmed W, Sheikh JA, Ahmad S, Farjana SH, Mahmud MAP. Impact of PV system orientation angle accuracy on greenhouse gases mitigation. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering. 2021;23:100815.
26. [26] Yiğit A, Atmaca İ. Güneş Enerjisi Mühendislik Uygulamaları. 2nd ed. Bursa: Dora; 2018.
27. [27] Barbón A, Bayón-Cueli C, Bayón L, Rodríguez-Suanzes C. Analysis of the tilt and azimuth angles of photovoltaic systems in non-ideal positions for Urban Applications. Applied Energy. 2022;35:117802.
28. [28] Sun L, Lu L, Yang H. Optimum design of shading-type building-integrated photovoltaic claddings with different surface azimuth angles. Applied Energy. 2012;90:233–240.
29. [29] Yadav S, Hachem-Vermette C, Panda SK, Tiwari GN, Mohapatra SS. Determination of optimum tilt and azimuth angle of BiSPVT system along with its performance due to shadow of adjacent buildings. Solar Energy. 2021;215:206–219.
30. [30] Ramaprabha R, Mathur BL. Impact of Partial Shading on Solar PV Module Containing Series Connected Cells, 2019.
31. [31] Mamun MA, Hasanuzzaman M, Selvaraj J. Experimental investigation of the effect of partial shading on photovoltaic performance. IET Renewable Power Generation. 2017;11:912–921.
32. [32] Dolara A, Lazaroiu GC, Leva S, Manzolini G. Experimental investigation of partial shading scenarios on PV (photovoltaic) modules. Energy. 2013;55:466–475.
33. [33] Sharma, D. K., Verma, V., Singh, A. P., Review and Analysis of Solar Photovoltaic Softwares. International Journal of Engineering and Technology. 2017;4(2):725–731.
34. [34] Etci A, Bilhan A., PVSyst ile Konya i̇linde sabit ve çift Eksenli Güneş Takip Sisteminin modellenmesi. European Journal of Science and Technology. 2022;32:142–147.
35. [35] Akcan E, Kuncan M, Minaz M. R., PVsyst Yazılımı i̇le 30 kw şebekeye Bağlı Fotovoltaik sistemin modellenmesi ve Simülasyonu. European Journal of Science and Technology. 2020;18:248–261.
36. [36] Karki P, Adhikary B, Sherpa K., Comparative study of grid-tied photovoltaic (PV) system in Kathmandu and Berlin using PVsyst. 2012 IEEE Third International Conference on Sustainable Energy Technologies (ICSET). 2012.
37. [37] Belmahdi B, Bouardi AE., Solar potential assessment using PVSYST software in the Northern Zone of Morocco. Procedia Manufacturing. 2020;46:738–745.
38. [38] Aksoy MH, Çalik MK. Çift Yüzlü Fotovoltaik Panellerin Farklı Zemin Koşullarında Performansının i̇ncelenmesi. Konya Journal of Engineering Sciences. 2022;10(3):704–718.
39. [39] Soualmia A, Chenni R. Modeling and simulation of 15MW grid-connected photovoltaic system using PVsyst software. 2016 International Renewable and Sustainable Energy Conference (IRSEC). 2016.
40. [40] Boduch A, Mik K, Castro R, Zawadzki P., Technical and Economic Assessment of a 1 MWP floating photovoltaic system in Polish conditions. Renewable Energy. 2022;196:983–994.
41. [41] Bansal N, Jaiswal SP, Singh G., Long Term Performance Assessment and loss analysis of 9 MW grid tied PV plant in India. Materials Today: Proceedings. 2022;60:1056–1067.
42. [42] Sharma S, Kurian CP, Paragond LS., Solar PV system design using PVsyst: A case study of an Academic Institute. 2018 International Conference on Control, Power, Communication and Computing Technologies (ICCPCCT). Kannur, India: IEEE; 2018. p. 123–128.
43. [43] Yadav P, Kumar N, Chandel SS., Simulation and performance analysis of a 1kWp photovoltaic system using PVsyst. 2015 International Conference on Computation of Power, Energy, Information and Communication (ICCPEIC). Melmaruvathur, India: IEEE; 2015. p. 358–363.
44. [44] Öztürk D, Dener A. Power Generation Variation Analysis Of Solar Panels Coated With TiO2. Turkish Journal of Nature and Science. 2022;11:108-115.
45. [45] Boppana S, Passow K, Sorensen J, King BH, Robinson C. Impact of Uncertainty in IAM Measurement on Energy Predictions. 2018 IEEE 7th World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion (WCPEC). Waikoloa, HI, USA: IEEE; 2018. p. 2276–2281.
46. [46] PVsyst Help [cited 2022 September 20]. Available from: https://www.pvsyst.com/help/iam_loss.htm
47. [47] PVsyst Help [cited 2022 September 20]. Available from: https://www.pvsyst.com/help/performance_ratio.htm