IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v17y2024i6p1288-d1353016.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

CPV System Optical Performance Evaluation by Means of Direct Experimental Measurement Procedure

Author

Listed:
  • Carlo Renno

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Salerno, Via Giovanni Paolo II, 132, 84084 Fisciano, Italy)

  • Fabio Petito

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Salerno, Via Giovanni Paolo II, 132, 84084 Fisciano, Italy)

Abstract

The optics is the component that most affects the concentrating photovoltaic (CPV) system performance, depending above all on the concentration factor and optical efficiency. Hence, a basic aspect is the concentrated solar flux measure on the receiving area, the evaluation of which is principally realized by indirect measurement methods. First, a literature review on indirect and direct methods used for the evaluation of concentrated solar flux and optical parameters is presented in this paper. The experimental measurement procedure, which is able to evaluate the optical parameters and concentrated solar flux in CPV systems, is also presented. The main steps of this procedure are represented by experimental system setup, sensor selection for concentrated solar flux estimation, identification of all the factors affecting optical performances, and development of an experimental campaign and output analysis. In particular, the optical characterization results of a CPV system are obtained by means of in-depth experimental analysis using Triple-Junction (TJ) solar cells with areas of 5.5 × 5.5 mm 2 and 10 × 10 mm 2 . Three different setups have been analyzed related to primary and secondary optics composition. The main aim of this paper is the determination of a direct measuring technique, rarely adopted in literature in comparison to the established techniques, that is able to evaluate experimentally the optical parameter values and that can be standardized for other CPV systems. In particular, equations that link the optical concentration factor (C) and efficiency (η opt ) with focal distance (h) represent the fundamental results. They can be used for similar point-focus configurations presenting the same TJ cell size and ranges of C, η opt and h. Finally, the experimental results of the direct method are compared with those of an indirect method adopting the same CPV system and operational conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlo Renno & Fabio Petito, 2024. "CPV System Optical Performance Evaluation by Means of Direct Experimental Measurement Procedure," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-20, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:6:p:1288-:d:1353016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/6/1288/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/6/1288/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2014. "Photovoltaic power stations in Germany and the United States: A comparative study by data envelopment analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 271-288.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2015. "Environmental assessment on coal-fired power plants in U.S. north-east region by DEA non-radial measurement," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 125-139.
    2. Awan, Ahmed Bilal & Zubair, Muhammad & Chandra Mouli, Kotturu V.V., 2020. "Design, optimization and performance comparison of solar tower and photovoltaic power plants," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    3. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2017. "Measurement of returns to scale on large photovoltaic power stations in the United States and Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 306-320.
    4. Wang, Derek & Li, Shanling & Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki, 2014. "DEA environmental assessment on U.S. Industrial sectors: Investment for improvement in operational and environmental performance to attain corporate sustainability," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 254-267.
    5. Mezősi, András & Szabó, László & Szabó, Sándor, 2018. "Cost-efficiency benchmarking of European renewable electricity support schemes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 217-226.
    6. Wang, Zhaohua & Li, Yi & Wang, Ke & Huang, Zhimin, 2017. "Environment-adjusted operational performance evaluation of solar photovoltaic power plants: A three stage efficiency analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1153-1162.
    7. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan, 2015. "China's regional sustainability and diversified resource allocation: DEA environmental assessment on economic development and air pollution," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 239-256.
    8. Zhou, Haibo & Yang, Yi & Chen, Yao & Zhu, Joe, 2018. "Data envelopment analysis application in sustainability: The origins, development and future directions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 1-16.
    9. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan, 2016. "Returns to damage under undesirable congestion and damages to return under desirable congestion measured by DEA environmental assessment with multiplier restriction: Economic and energy planning for s," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 288-309.
    10. Jian Chai & Wenyue Fan & Jing Han, 2019. "Does the Energy Efficiency of Power Companies Affect Their Industry Status? A DEA Analysis of Listed Companies in Thermal Power Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    11. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan, 2016. "Marginal Rate of Transformation and Rate of Substitution measured by DEA environmental assessment: Comparison among European and North American nations," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 270-287.
    12. Dadi Wang, 2017. "Benchmarking the Performance of Solar Installers and Rooftop Photovoltaic Installations in California," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-17, August.
    13. Li, Nan & Liu, Cengceng & Zha, Donglan, 2016. "Performance evaluation of Chinese photovoltaic companies with the input-oriented dynamic SBM model," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 489-497.
    14. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2015. "DEA environmental assessment in time horizon: Radial approach for Malmquist index measurement on petroleum companies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 329-345.
    15. Chen, Peipei & Wu, Yi & Zou, Lele, 2019. "Distributive PV trading market in China: A design of multi-agent-based model and its forecast analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 423-436.
    16. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2016. "Undesirable congestion under natural disposability and desirable congestion under managerial disposability in U.S. electric power industry measured by DEA environmental assessment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 173-188.
    17. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2015. "Japanese fuel mix strategy after disaster of Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant: Lessons from international comparison among industrial nations measured by DEA environmental assessment in time hori," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(PA), pages 87-103.
    18. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Wang, Derek, 2014. "Sustainability development for supply chain management in U.S. petroleum industry by DEA environmental assessment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 360-374.
    19. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan & Li, Aijun & Wang, Daoping, 2017. "Methodological comparison among radial, non-radial and intermediate approaches for DEA environmental assessment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 439-453.
    20. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan & Goto, Mika, 2017. "A literature study for DEA applied to energy and environment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 104-124.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:6:p:1288-:d:1353016. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.