% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Carigiet:891485,
author = {Carigiet, Fabian and Brabec, Christoph and Baumgartner,
Franz P.},
title = {{L}ong-term power degradation analysis of crystalline
silicon {PV} modules using indoor and outdoor measurement
techniques},
journal = {Renewable $\&$ sustainable energy reviews},
volume = {144},
issn = {1364-0321},
address = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
publisher = {Elsevier Science},
reportid = {FZJ-2021-01559},
pages = {111005 -},
year = {2021},
abstract = {Annual degradation rates of PV modules are important in the
yield prediction. For a high-quality PV module, these rates
are lower than the measurement uncertainty of a nominal
power measurement performed in todays most advanced
certified photovoltaic reference laboratory. Therefore, the
analysis requires a well thought out methodology that can
compare the data relative to each other or relative to an
unused module stored in the dark on an annual base. Over the
past 10 years, several multi c-Si and HIT modules have been
accurately monitored in a string and single module setup by
an outdoor performance measurement system. Additionally, all
modules have been dismantled and measured using an indoor
flasher measurement system once every year. With this unique
measurement setup, the annual degradation rates of multi
c-Si modules and HIT modules are quantified based on three
different analysis methodologies. The multi c-Si modules
showed an average annual degradation rate of $0.18\%$ ±
$0.06\%$ and $0.29\%$ ± $0.06\%$ measured by the outdoor
and indoor system, respectively. The indoor analysis of the
HIT modules yielded an average annual degradation of
$0.26\%$ ± $0.05\%.$ That corresponds to half of the
degradation observed by the outdoor analysis method. Further
evaluations of the performance ratio PR confirmed the
results gained by the indoor methodology. The comparison of
the standard PR with a temperature-corrected PR’STC for
both technologies showed that the benefit of the lower
temperature coefficient of the HIT technology is eliminated
by its worse low light behaviour.},
cin = {IEK-11},
ddc = {620},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-11-20140314},
pnm = {121 - Photovoltaik und Windenergie (POF4-121)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-121},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000649678100004},
doi = {10.1016/j.rser.2021.111005},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/891485},
}