IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v16y2023i16p5945-d1215542.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Irradiation Analysis of Tensile Membrane Structures for Building-Integrated Photovoltaics

Author

Listed:
  • Janusz Marchwiński

    (Faculty of Architecture, University of Ecology and Management in Warsaw, 00-792 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Vuk Milošević

    (Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, University of Niš, 18000 Niš, Serbia)

  • Anna Stefańska

    (Institute of Civil Engineering, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, 02-787 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Elena Lucchi

    (Department of Architecture, Built Environment and Construction Engineering (DABC), Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milan, Italy)

Abstract

A dynamic development in building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPVs) has been observed in recent years. One of the manifestations of this trend is the integration of photovoltaic cells with tensile membrane structures, including canopies. Such solutions bring mutual benefits—the roofs provide a potentially large area for the application of photovoltaic cells while contributing to the improvement of the energy efficiency of the building. However, what is lacking is thorough research on the most favourable photovoltaic cell exposure within these roofs. This paper investigates the optimal position of photovoltaic cells in terms of energy gains related to exposure to solar radiation. Hypar geometries were simulated as the most characteristic of tensile membrane roofs and, simultaneously, the least obvious in the research context. Simulations were performed for 54 roof samples with the following geometric variables: roof height (1.0, 3.0 m) and membrane prestress (1:3, 1:1, 3:1). The research was conducted for three roof orientations defined by azimuth angles of 0, 22.5, and 45 degrees and three geographic locations, Oslo, Vienna, and Lisbon, representing Northern, Central, and Southern Europe, respectively. The Sofistik and Rhino + Ladybug software were used to create models and simulations. The study results show significant differences in the roof irradiation and, consequently, the optimal location of BIPVs depending on the above variables. Generally, it is the curvature that is the most important variable-less curved roofs are more irradiated and thus more suitable for BIPVs. Prestress and the azimuth angle are of lesser significance, but defining the optimal use of a BIPV depends on the adopted scenario regarding the percentage of membrane coverage with PVs—other recommendations concern the strategy of total or partial roof coverage with PV cells. The difference between optimally and incorrectly designed roofs may amount to a 50% electricity gain from PV cells.

Suggested Citation

  • Janusz Marchwiński & Vuk Milošević & Anna Stefańska & Elena Lucchi, 2023. "Irradiation Analysis of Tensile Membrane Structures for Building-Integrated Photovoltaics," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-26, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:16:p:5945-:d:1215542
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/16/5945/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/16/5945/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Li, Qingxiang & Zanelli, Alessandra, 2021. "A review on fabrication and applications of textile envelope integrated flexible photovoltaic systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    2. Chang, Ruidong & Cao, Yuan & Lu, Yujie & Shabunko, Veronika, 2019. "Should BIPV technologies be empowered by innovation policy mix to facilitate energy transitions? - Revealing stakeholders' different perspectives using Q methodology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 307-318.
    3. Baltas, A.E. & Dervos, A.N., 2012. "Special framework for the spatial planning & the sustainable development of renewable energy sources," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 358-363.
    4. Cohen, Jed J. & Reichl, Johannes & Schmidthaler, Michael, 2014. "Re-focussing research efforts on the public acceptance of energy infrastructure: A critical review," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 4-9.
    5. Lucchi, Elena & Dall'Orto, Isabella & Peluchetti, Alessia & Toledo, Linda & Pelle, Martina & Polo López, Cristina & Guazzi, Giulia, 2022. "Photovoltaic technologies in historic buildings and protected areas: Comprehensive legislative framework in Italy and Switzerland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    6. Müller, Matthias Otto & Stämpfli, Adrian & Dold, Ursula & Hammer, Thomas, 2011. "Energy autarky: A conceptual framework for sustainable regional development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 5800-5810, October.
    7. Yuan, Xueliang & Zuo, Jian & Ma, Chunyuan, 2011. "Social acceptance of solar energy technologies in China--End users' perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1031-1036, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Matteo Clementi & Valentina Dessì & Giulio Maria Podestà & Szu-Cheng Chien & Barbara Ang Ting Wei & Elena Lucchi, 2024. "GIS-Based Digital Twin Model for Solar Radiation Mapping to Support Sustainable Urban Agriculture Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-24, August.

    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. Lucchi, Elena, 2022. "Integration between photovoltaic systems and cultural heritage: A socio-technical comparison of international policies, design criteria, applications, and innovation developments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    2. Antoine Boche & Clément Foucher & Luiz Fernando Lavado Villa, 2022. "Understanding Microgrid Sustainability: A Systemic and Comprehensive Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-29, April.
    3. Azarova, Valeriya & Cohen, Jed & Friedl, Christina & Reichl, Johannes, 2019. "Designing local renewable energy communities to increase social acceptance: Evidence from a choice experiment in Austria, Germany, Italy, and Switzerland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1176-1183.
    4. Scognamiglio, Alessandra, 2016. "‘Photovoltaic landscapes’: Design and assessment. A critical review for a new transdisciplinary design vision," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 629-661.
    5. Wang, Yutao & Sun, Mingxing & Song, Baimin, 2017. "Public perceptions of and willingness to pay for sponge city initiatives in China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 11-20.
    6. Hogan, Jessica L. & Warren, Charles R. & Simpson, Michael & McCauley, Darren, 2022. "What makes local energy projects acceptable? Probing the connection between ownership structures and community acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    7. Ioannidis, Romanos & Koutsoyiannis, Demetris, 2020. "A review of land use, visibility and public perception of renewable energy in the context of landscape impact," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    8. Klein, Sharon J.W. & Coffey, Stephanie, 2016. "Building a sustainable energy future, one community at a time," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 867-880.
    9. Backhaus, Klaus & Gausling, Philipp & Hildebrand, Luise, 2015. "Comparing the incomparable: Lessons to be learned from models evaluating the feasibility of Desertec," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 905-913.
    10. Skroufouta, S. & Baltas, E., 2021. "Investigation of hybrid renewable energy system (HRES) for covering energy and water needs on the Island of Karpathos in Aegean Sea," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 141-150.
    11. Ming, Zeng & Song, Xue & Mingjuan, Ma & Xiaoli, Zhu, 2013. "New energy bases and sustainable development in China: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 169-185.
    12. Che, Xiao-Jing & Zhou, P. & Chai, Kah-Hin, 2022. "Regional policy effect on photovoltaic (PV) technology innovation: Findings from 260 cities in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    13. Du, Hua & Han, Qi & de Vries, Bauke & Sun, Jun, 2024. "Community solar PV adoption in residential apartment buildings: A case study on influencing factors and incentive measures in Wuhan," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 354(PA).
    14. József Kádár & Martina Pilloni & Tareq Abu Hamed, 2023. "A Survey of Renewable Energy, Climate Change, and Policy Awareness in Israel: The Long Path for Citizen Participation in the National Renewable Energy Transition," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-16, February.
    15. Tongyu Meng & Jamie Newth & Christine Woods, 2022. "Ethical Sensemaking in Impact Investing: Reasons and Motives in the Chinese Renewable Energy Sector," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(4), pages 1091-1117, September.
    16. Schweizer, Pia-Johanna & Bovet, Jana, 2016. "The potential of public participation to facilitate infrastructure decision-making: Lessons from the German and European legal planning system for electricity grid expansion," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 64-73.
    17. Siu-Kit Lau & Vesna Kosorić & Monika Bieri & André.M. Nobre, 2021. "Identification of Factors Influencing Development of Photovoltaic (PV) Implementation in Singapore," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-30, March.
    18. Karytsas, Spyridon & Theodoropoulou, Helen, 2014. "Socioeconomic and demographic factors that influence publics' awareness on the different forms of renewable energy sources," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 480-485.
    19. Silva Herran, Diego & Dai, Hancheng & Fujimori, Shinichiro & Masui, Toshihiko, 2016. "Global assessment of onshore wind power resources considering the distance to urban areas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 75-86.
    20. Elena Helerea & Marius D. Calin & Cristian Musuroi, 2023. "Water Energy Nexus and Energy Transition—A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-31, February.

    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:16:y:2023:i:16:p:5945-:d:1215542. 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.