MATEC Web of Conferences 240, 04004 (2018) https://doi.org/10.

1051/matecconf/201824004004
ICCHMT 2018

An analysis of temperature distribution in solar photovoltaic

module under various environmental conditions
Marek Jaszczur1,* Qusay Hassan1,4, Janusz Teneta2, Ewelina Majewska1, Marcin Zych3
1
AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Energy and Fuels, Poland
2
AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Automatics, Poland
3
AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Geology, Geophysics and Environmental Protection, Poland
4
University of Diyala, Department of Mechanical engineering, Diayal, Iraq

Abstract. The operating temperature of the photovoltaic module is an important issue because it is directly
linked with system efficiency. The objective of this work is to evaluate temperature distribution in the
photovoltaic module under different environmental conditions. The results shown that photovoltaic module
operating temperature depends not only on the ambient temperature or solar radiation dependent but also
depends on wind speed and wind direction. It is presented that the mounting conditions which are not taken
into consideration by most of the literature models also play a significant role in heat transfer. Depends on
mounting type an increase in module operating temperature in the range 10-15oC was observed which cause
further PV system efficiency decrease of about 3.8-6.5 %.

1 Introduction 7.5%) [3] and the cell operating temperature. With

increasing the photovoltaic temperature, the current
Due to the international regulations regarding global increase but the voltage decreases and final effective
warming and increasing CO2 emissions, the electrical electrical power decrease [4]. The module efficiency is
energy production has to take into account the usually defined at the Standard Test Conditions STC
environmental aspect. The care for the environment is (temperature 25 oC, solar radiation 1000W/m2, wind
required because the Earth pollutions significantly speed 1 m/s).
influence the quality and the length of life for all living There are several studies investigated the influence of
organisms. The additional problem is that fossil fuels are temperature and thermal effect on photovoltaic energy
non-renewable and one day will be depleted. On the other and efficiency. The review concentrating on model
hand, rapid growth in renewable energy systems has validation, i.e. on temperature from measured and
reached in 2016 the faster growing with global available models has been prepared by Santiago et al. [5].
investments than traditional systems [1]. One of the The study analysed twenty models for predicting module
widely used renewable energy systems which provide the operating temperature with different complexity. Perović
direct method of converting solar energy into electrical et al. [6] have presented a model for estimation PV
energy is the photovoltaic system. Despite the significant module temperature used energy balance equation.
progress that has been already made, the increase in Authors validated the model with experiments and
electrical efficiency and the reduction of the production compared with two other models using different
cost are to be still important goals. The performance of the methodology. The results illustrated good agreement with
photovoltaic system depends on a large number of factors the experiments measured data. Estimation for the heat
such as module specifications, mounting scheme, module transfer coefficient for photovoltaic module based on the
inclination, solar radiation, wind speed, ambient empirical or theoretical relationship has been prepared by
temperature, pollution or shadowing. The energy Kendoush [7]. The study was conducted using theoretical
conversion efficiency in the photovoltaic module has high analysis for the fluid flowing across the flat plate in order
depends on the module temperature. The weak cooling to determine mass and heat flow. Zondag et al. [8]
mounting, high ambient temperature and high solar analysed the thermal performance of hybrid collectors
irradiation have a negative influence on the module with a-Si photovoltaic cells. The results showed that the
energy conversion efficiency [2]. In the critical situation annual degradation in the electrical efficiency is 7.6% due
of inverter overheat the system will radically decrease the to temperature effect. By using experimental
generating power or even shut down the system. The measurements, Hassan et al. [9] analysed the temperature
photovoltaic cell efficiency designed under Standard Test effect on the performance of the photovoltaic system and
Conditions STC and varied depending on the cell type energy production. The results of the analysis confirmed
(polycrystalline silicon 16.0-17%, monocrystalline that the operating temperature of a module plays a vital
silicon up to 20% and thin film amorphous silicon about
*
Corresponding author: jaszczur@agh.edu.pl

© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
MATEC Web of Conferences 240, 04004 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201824004004
ICCHMT 2018

role in the conversion process and the electrical efficiency

and power output are significantly influenced. Ceylan et
al. [10], analysed an effect of ambient temperature on the
photovoltaic module temperature. Their results developed
linear and nonlinear models for predicting module
temperature effect on the output power and efficiency
drop. They concluded that the non-linear model is more
efficient than linear. Comprehensive analysis of PV
modules by in-situ experimental measurement performed
with 3-D numerical simulation in order to model heat (a)
transfer from PV module have been by Jaszczur et al. [11].
The results allow developing a new model for PV panel
evaluation which includes all vital environmental factors
(ambient temperature, incident solar, wind speed) as well  T4  T1
as geometrical conditions or mounting conditions (using
Ross coefficient). Hassan et al. [12] used energy balance
equations and NOCT to prepare the new model for
predicting PV module temperature. Their results showed  T7  T6  T3 T2
that by using this model the yearly energy losses due to
temperature, effects could be about 23% for 1kW PV
system. An accurate determination of the PV module
operating temperature is an important issue. Koehl et al. T8  T4
(b)
[13] validate two models for prediction module
temperature in different climatic regions and getting
accurate results for PV module temperature evaluation. Fig.1. An experimental set-up with the mounting system (a) and
In this research, an analysis of temperature distribution in thermocouples arrangement (b).
the photovoltaic module under various environmental
conditions was performed. The real system analysis was 3-D model of the photovoltaic module with the
base on locally measured weather conditions and verify mounting system has been created in order to analyse
using in-situ experimental measurement and CFD fluid flow and temperature distribution. As a numerical
computer modelling. solver Fluent v.18 was used. The geometry under
consideration and key heat transfer components are
shown in Fig. 2. The module size is 1.6540.9890.04m
2 Experimental and numerical set-up and glass thickness is 5mm. Instead of the multilayer
system, it is assumed the modules one layer with an
The experimental set-up consists of two BrukBet
averaged thermal properties. Computational domain size
BEP260W polycrystalline photovoltaic modules
(temperature coefficient of power -0.40 %/oC and 1.62 m2 was 4.22.82.2m, and has been filled with hex-dominant
mesh elements, while in order to solve for boundary layer
of surface area, white back sheet) grid-connected, and two
prismatic elements were adjusted. Additionally for the
BrukBet BEP260W like modules without PV cells (first
region with the high turbulence intensity finer mesh has
with white and second with a black back sheet) presented
been used. Based on the preliminary test analysis mesh
in Fig. 1(a). An analysed modules were adjusted at tilt
with about 500,000 elements has been found to give a
angle β=35o and azimuth γ=20o West and located at the
mesh-independent solution.
roof of C3 building, AGH University of Science and
Technology in the city centre of Kraków, Poland radiative heat
(50.066354N, 19.918191E). incident solar loss
irradiation
The acquisition system for temperature and solar reflected
radiation include 4 Advantech ADAM4018 DAQ solar radiation convective
modules that provide programmable input ranges on all heat losses
channels, computer unit with data acquisition software
and storage. As temperature sensors, eight T-type
thermocouples were used (four thermocouples per PV
modules) located in the recommended by standard point - 
PV module
see Fig.1(b). The signals from thermocouples were
acquired every second, and the average value was y 
z
recorded every 60 seconds. x Support
The ambient temperature, wind speed and solar irradiation
were obtained from the local weather station. The signals
from weather station sensors were acquired every second, Fig.2. The geometry and the key heat transfer components.
and the average value was recorded for analysis every 5
minutes. It assumed that that fluid is Newtonian with constant fluid
and solid properties presented in Table 1.

2
MATEC Web of Conferences 240, 04004 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201824004004
ICCHMT 2018

Table 1. Fluid and solid properties. = 2 ; = ;

Ω Ω

Material Specific Density Viscosity/ Thermal

name heat kg/m3 Emissivity conductivity = + ; Ω = Ω − 2ε ω ;
J/kgK kg/ms / - W/mK
Air 1006.43 1.225 1.7810-5 0.0242 Ω = Ω − 2ε ω ; A0 = 4.04; AS = √6cos ;
Panel 700 2700 0.92 197 = cos √6 ; = .
Soil 1600 1600 0.95 2 The heat transfer model includes solar model and
radiation heat transfer, model. For the radiative heat
The considerations for the mathematical model eq. (1)-(3) transfer Surface-to-Surface (S2S) radiation model is used:
are: steady state negligible viscosity dissipation and the , = + , , (8)
use of the Boussinesq approximation. The time-averaged , =∑ , , (9)
equations for continuity, momentum and energy can be
written as follows: where , and , are energy flux leaving the surface
and energy flux incident on the surface from
U i surroundings; Ak is an area of k-surface, Fjk is view factor
0, (1)
xi between k-surface and j-surface. Average air velocity and
turbulence intensity profiles for roughness length 0.03 m
U i 1 P  2U i 
Uj
x j

 xi
 2
x j

x j
uiu j , (2)   are employed as an inlet boundary conditions. At the
domain exit, a uniform zero gauge pressure boundary
condition is used. At the side walls pressure outlet
boundary condition were applied. The bottom wall has
T  2T 
Uj
x j
 2 
x j x j
u j ,   (3) been treated as a rough wall with no-slip boundary
condition. At the inlet of the domain the air temperature
Ta equal to the values obtained from measurements have
where xi , x j are the Cartesian coordinates of the system, been applied. Solar radiation is applied to the thermal
radiation model as an incident solar radiation in the range
U , P, T are the mean velocity, dynamic pressure and 100-1000W/m2 depend on the case.
temperature; are fluid viscosity and thermal
diffusivity. Turbulent a semi-empirical 2-equation eddy 3 Results and discussion
viscosity realizable k-ε model was used. This model is
based on the Boussinesq hypothesis, and Reynolds The incident global and diffuse solar radiation at
stresses are expressed regarding mean velocity gradients horizontal surface =0o and tilted at =35o (azimuth
and that the turbulent eddy viscosity is related to the γ=20o) and wind speed and ambient temperature are
turbulent kinetic energy and the dissipation rate of shown in Fig. 3 for selected sunny day 07.06.2018.
turbulent kinetic energy as follows:
1100
Incident global solar at β=35
 U i U j  1000
Incident global solar at β=0
(a)
  2 T  Sij , (4)
Incedend Irradiance, W/m2

  ui u j   ij  T   900 Incident diffuse solar at β=0

 x xi  800
 j
700
k2
T    C ; ui       T  T . (5) 600
  PrT  xi 500
400
300
Turbulence model Realizable k-ε posses an improved 200
formulation for the turbulent viscosity. The equation for 100
the turbulent kinetic energy and the dissipation rate are as 0
30 5
follows: Ambient Temp.
(b) 4.5
Wind speed
25
4
  
Ui  k   x  eff xk   Pk   ,
Ambient Temp., oC

3.5
Wind speed, m/s

xi (6) 20
i  k i  3
15 2.5
    eff   C2   2
xi

Ui       C 1 S   
xi    xi  k   
, (7)
10
2
1.5
1
5
where k and are turbulence kinetic energy and 0.5
dissipation rate, Pk is the turbulent kinetic energy 0 0
production  eff    T and  eff   eff /  are 0:00 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12:00 14:24 16:48 19:12 21:36 0:00
Time
turbulent effective viscosity. The model constants are: Fig. 3. The solar irradiation (a), wind speed and ambient
temperature (b).
η k
C1 =max 0.43, ; η=S ; Ce1=1.44; σk =1.0; σε = 1.2
η+5 ε

3
MATEC Web of Conferences 240, 04004 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201824004004
ICCHMT 2018

One may infer from results that the incident solar X-axis direction (Vw = -3.1 m/s) while in Figure 5(b) air
radiation, at =35o has lower magnitude and the signal is flow has the same magnitude but the flow is from the
a delay in the morning hours due to pyranometer azimuth module left side. In Figure 5(d) module tilt angle is  =
and inclination. 0°, and the space under the module is closed which
Figure 4(a) shows the temperature of polycrystalline significantly reduces heat transfer from the bottom
panels with tilted angle =35o for selected sunny day surface.
07.06.2018. The maximum temperatures recorded during

2.0
Vw
the day is 50.9oC. It can be seen that at different points of m/s
(a) (b)
5.0
the panel (T1-T4) temperature during high solar

Y, m
irradiation may vary significantly as a result of different

1.0
heat transfer from various part of the photovoltaic module
(top, side or corners). In Figure 4(b)-(c) temperature from β=15o
β=15o

2.0 0.0
the modules with black and white back sheet (and without
silicon cells) are presented for  = 35o. Much higher (c) (d)
temperature raising up to equal to 57.5oC is observed for
a panel with a black back sheet while for the panel with a

Y, m
1.0
white back sheet the maximum temperature 34.4oC was
recorded during the day. 0.0
β=35o β=0o

0.0
0.0 2.1 4.2 0.0 2.1 4.2
55
X, m X, m
T_1 (a)
50 T_2
45 T_3 Fig.5. Velocity field around module for different tilt angle:
T_4
40 15o (a), 15o (b),35o (c),0o (d) and air flow direction
Temperature, oC

T_Ave
35
30 The temperature field for the same conditions as
25
presented in Figures 5 are presented in Figures 6. One can
20
see from this figures that temperature distribution for
15
similar weather parameters differs significantly. The
10
5
highest temperature has been obtained for module with tilt
60 angle  = 0° when the cooling conditions are the worst
55 T_1 (b) cooling while the lowest temperature of the PV module is
50 T_2
T_3 seen for the tilt angle equal to 15o when the of air flow is
45
T_4 from the module (left) side - see Fig. 6(b).
Temperature, oC

40 T_Ave
35
TC ,oC (a) TC ,oC (b)
30
50.0 30.0
25
20
15
10
5
0:00 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12:00 14:24 16:48 19:12 21:36 0:00
35
T_1 (c)
30 T_2 8.0 8.0
T_3 TC ,oC TC ,oC
Temperature,oC

25
T_Ave
50.0 (c) 50.0 (d)
20

15

10

5
0:00 2:24 4:48 7:12 9:36 12:00 14:24 16:48 19:12 21:36 0:00 8.0
Time 8.0

Fig. 4. Module temperature: with Si-cells (a), black back sheet Fig. 6. Temperature at the module surface for different tilt angle:
(b), white back sheet (c) and for  = 35o. 15o (a),15o (b),35o (c),0o (d) and air flow direction.

In order to evaluate temperature distribution at module The essential parameters which have considerable
surface, Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis influence on the module operating temperature are the
was performed for the panels with titled angles  = 0 , 15o solar irradiation, ambient temperature Ta and wind speed
and 35o and environmental conditions, solar radiation GT Vw The impact of above parameters on the mean module
= 470 W/m2, wind speed Vw = 3.1 m/s and ambient operating temperature are shown in Figures 7 together
temperature Ta=8 oC. In Figure 5(a)-4(d) the flow field with experimental measurement. It can be seen that for
around the module is shown. Except the configuration low airspeed the module temperature becomes very high
presented in Figure 5(b) wind direction is opposite to the which effect PV module performance.

4
MATEC Web of Conferences 240, 04004 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201824004004
ICCHMT 2018

100 Using numerical and experimental data correlation for

(a) 15°, 470 W/m2
90
15°, 1000 w/m2 module temperature Tc can be created which takes into
account all important phenomena parameters: solar
Module temperature,Tc, °C

80 30°, 470 W/m2

30°, 1000 W/m2 irradiation, ambient temperature, wind speed and the
70
EXP 15°
60 mounting conditions. The proposed correlation uses four
50 parameters responsible for all crucial phenomena. In the
40
literature, several relationships have been advised
30
however most of them use two or three parameters only.
20
In the present work modification of the following
relationship will be used [14]:
10
0 1 2 3 4 5

80
Wind speed Vw, m/s = + . (10)
100 W/m2
(b) 350 W/m2
70 470 W/m2 In this very popular and straightforward linear
Module temperature Tc, °C

700 W/m2
60 1000 W/m2 expression, no wind effect is taken into account, but the
EXP 470 W/m2
50 EXP 700 W/m2 mounting condition does. eq. (10) depends on the one k,
40
which is known as the Ross coefficient [15]. In the
literature models which take into account wind speed are
30
proposed however without mounting configuration
20
consideration [16]:
10

0 = 0.943 + 0.028 − 1.528 + 4.3. (11)

0 1 2 3 4 5
Wind speed Vw , m/s
In this work the extended formula of eq.(10) but taking
46 15°
(c) 15°
into account air velocity is proposed in the as follows:
30°
Module temperature Tc, °C

41 ( . )
.
30° = + + . (12)
EXP 15°
36
Proposed correlation takes into account ambient
31
temperature, solar irradiation, wind speed as well as a
26 mounting configuration including PV modules
arrangement. The model correlation eq.(12) accuracies
21
have been validated using: root mean squire error
16 (RMSE), the mean bias error (MBE) and the coefficient
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 of determination (R2):
Ambient temperature Ta , °C
70
(d) Flow under normal condition
60 Flow restricted by cover = ∑ , − , , (13)
Module temperature Tc, °C

Panel with insulation layer

50 Panel located on the ground
= ∑ , − , , (14)
40

∑ ,
30 = , (15)
∑ ,
20

where N indicates a number of measurements, while Tcal,i

10
0 1 2 3 4 5 and Texp,i are obtained from the model equation or
Wind speed Vw , m/s measured respectively. Table 2 shows the proposed
Fig. 7. The average module temperature Tc vs.: wind speed Vw model’s accuracy indicators. As can be seen, all indicators
(a-b), ambient temperature Ta, (c) mounting configuration (d). show very good accuracy of the proposed model.

One of the important parameters is related to the Table 2. The models accuracies statistical indicators.
module mounting conditions. Typically module top Model MBE RMS R2
surface is well cooled. However, the bottom module
Proposed model eq. (12) 0.72 2.71 0.93
surface heat transfer can differ depending on mounting
configuration significant. For the conditions which allow
for air flow from two sides the module temperature
become the lowest. When the flow below module is 4 Conclusions
restricted the temperature, an increase about 2-4oC is
The operating temperature of the PV module panel is
observed. On the other hand when the module is mounted
an important issue because it is directly linked with
horizontally, or the module bottom surface is insulated
photovoltaic system efficiency. In the present work, the
(wall integrated configuration) poor heat transfer causes
temperature distribution in the PV module is analysed
additional module temperature increase about 10.0oC.
using computer modelling and experimental

5
MATEC Web of Conferences 240, 04004 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201824004004
ICCHMT 2018

measurement. Presented results show large temperature 10. I. Ceylan, O. Erkaymaz, E. Gedik, A. E. Gürel, Case
variations, and measured temperature for the white back Studies in Thermal Engineering, 3, 11 (2017)
sheet panel was more than 20oC lower than for other 11. M. Jaszczur, J. Teneta, K. Styszko, Q. Hassan, P.
configurations which translate into at least an 8% decrease Burzyńska, E. Marcinek, N. Łopian, Environmental
in module performance. Science and Pollution Research, 1-16. (2018)
The analysis shows that module operating temperature
12. Q. Hassan, M. Jaszczur, E. Przenzak, J. Abdulateef,
depends not only on ambient temperature and solar
Contemporary Problems of Power Engineering and
irradiation what is taken into account by most of the
Environmental Protection, 33 (2016)
models but also depends on wind speed and wind
direction. It has shown that the mounting conditions also 13. M. Koehl, M. Heck, S. Wiesmeier, J. Wirth, Solar
play a significant role and may cause an additional Energy Materials and Solar Cells, 95, 1638 (2011)
module temperature increase of about 10oC which to turn 14. X. Ju, A. Vossier, Z. Wang, A. Dollet, G. Flamant,
into further module efficiency decrease about (3.8-6.5) % Solar Energy, 93, 80 (2013)
for mono and polycrystalline modules (assuming (- 15. J. Zhou, Q. Yi, Y. Wang, Z. Ye, Solar Energy, 111,
0.38 - 0.42) %/oC). 97 (2015)
The results enable the development of a model for the
photovoltaic module operating temperature. The 16. R. Chenni, M. Makhlouf, T. Kerbache, A. Bouzid, A.,
proposed model is very much sought after by the system Energy, 32, 1724 (2007)
designers, computer software and system malfunction
detection tools and takes into account all basic phenomena
parameters such as solar irradiation, ambient temperature,
wind speed and the mounting conditions.

Acknowledgement
The photovoltaic installation was funded by the National
Fund for Environmental Protection and Water
Management, Grant 139/2015/Wn06/OA-is-ku/D. This
work was partially financed by AGH UST Rector Grant
35/2018 and AGH University Grant No.11.11.210.312.
The authors would like to thank MESCO Sp. z o.o.
company to provide ANSYS software used in this
computer simulation.

References
1. H. E. Adib, F. Murdock, A. Appavou, B. Brown, A.
Epp, A. Leidreiter, C. Lins et al. Renewables 2016
Global Status Report. Global Status Report (2016)
2. R. Anis, M. Abdul-Sadek Nour, Energy Conversion
and Management, 36, 1107 (1995)
3. S.A. Kalogirou, R. Agathokleous, G., Energy, 51,
439 (2013)
4. C.W.A. Baltus, J.A. Eikelboom, R.J.C. van Zolingen,
R. J. C., 14th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy
Conference, Barcelona, 30.06-4.07 (1997)
5. I. Santiago, D. Trillo-Montero, I. M. Moreno-Garcia,
V. Pallarés-López, J. J. Luna-Rodríguez, Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 90, 70 (2018)
6. B. Perović, D. Klimenta, M. Jevtić, M. Milovanović,
Zbornik Međunarodne konferencije o obnovljivim
izvorima električne energije–MKOIEE, 5, 89 (2017)
7. A. A. Kendoush, International Journal of Thermal
Sciences, 48, 188 (2009)
8. H. A. Zondag, D. W. De Vries, W. G. J. van Helden,
R. J. C. van Zolingen, A. A. Van Steenhoven, Solar
energy ,74, 253 (2003)
9. Q. Hassan, M. Jaszczur, E. Przenzak, E3S Web of
Conferences, EDP Sciences, 01028 (2017)