Kjna 29513 Enn
Kjna 29513 Enn
Kjna 29513 Enn
Dunlop, E. D.
Gracia Amillo, A.
Salis, E.
Sample, T.
Taylor, N.
2019
EUR 29513 EN
This publication is a Technical report by the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commission’s science
and knowledge service. It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the European policymaking
process. The scientific output expressed does not imply a policy position of the European Commission. Neither
the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use that
might be made of this publication.
Contact information
Name: Ewan Dunlop
Address: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Ispra (VA) Italy
Email: [email protected]
EU Science Hub
https://ec.europa.eu/jrc
JRC114099
EUR 29513 EN
The reuse policy of the European Commission is implemented by Commission Decision 2011/833/EU of 12
December 2011 on the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). Reuse is authorised,
provided the source of the document is acknowledged and its original meaning or message is not distorted. The
European Commission shall not be liable for any consequence stemming from the reuse. For any use or
reproduction of photos or other material that is not owned by the EU, permission must be sought directly from
the copyright holders.
How to cite this report: E.D Dunlop, A. Gracia Amillo, E. Salis, T. Sample, N. Taylor, Transitional method for PV
modules, inverters, components and systems, EUR 29513 EN, Publications Office of the European Union,
Luxembourg, 2019, ISBN 978-92-79-98284-2, doi:10.2760/496002, JRC114099
Contents
1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 5
2 Prerequisites ..................................................................................................... 8
2.1 PV Modules ................................................................................................. 8
2.1.1 Summary comparison of EN IEC 61730 with EN 61215 ........................... 10
2.2 Inverters .................................................................................................. 10
2.3 Systems ................................................................................................... 12
2.4 Other system components .......................................................................... 12
3 Degradation and Failure Rates ........................................................................... 14
3.1 Definition of degradation rate ...................................................................... 14
3.2 Failure rate ............................................................................................... 14
3.3 PV modules ............................................................................................... 14
3.3.1 Prescribed values ............................................................................... 14
3.3.2 Validated Measurement Values ............................................................ 15
3.4 Inverters .................................................................................................. 15
3.4.1 Prescribed values ............................................................................... 15
3.5 PV systems ............................................................................................... 15
3.5.1 Prescribed values ............................................................................... 15
3.5.2 Validated Measurement values ............................................................ 15
4 Operational Service Lifetime ............................................................................. 17
4.1 Definition of lifetime ................................................................................... 17
4.2 Lifetime values .......................................................................................... 17
5 Transitional method – Calculation of Inverter Performance Functional Parameter for AC
power output from a reference PV system .............................................................. 18
5.1 Introduction .............................................................................................. 18
5.1.1 Definition .......................................................................................... 18
5.1.2 PV inverter types ............................................................................... 18
5.1.3 Functional unit .................................................................................. 18
5.2 Input data for PV inverter performance model ............................................... 18
5.2.1 DC energy yield ................................................................................. 19
5.2.2 PV inverter efficiency.......................................................................... 20
5.3 Inverter functional parameter estimation ...................................................... 20
5.4 General considerations ............................................................................... 20
5.4.1 Size of the inverter and PV module array .............................................. 20
5.4.2 DC power output ............................................................................... 21
5.4.3 Efficiency dependency on working conditions: input voltage, power output
and temperature ......................................................................................... 21
5.5 Example of the proposed methodology. Results ............................................. 22
i
6 Transitional methods – Determination of the Energy Yield of PV systems ................ 23
6.1 Introduction. ............................................................................................. 23
6.1.1 Definition .......................................................................................... 23
6.1.2 PV systems types ............................................................................... 23
6.1.3 Functional unit .................................................................................. 23
6.2 PV systems performance model ................................................................... 24
6.2.1 PV module ........................................................................................ 24
6.2.2 Power Conditioning Equipment. Inverter ............................................... 25
6.2.3 PV system losses ............................................................................... 25
6.2.4 AC energy yield ................................................................................. 25
6.3 PV systems functional parameter estimation ................................................. 26
6.4 General considerations ............................................................................... 26
6.4.1 Installation and Location Specific Energy Yield ....................................... 26
6.4.2 Building integrated PV systems ............................................................ 27
6.4.3 PV systems with battery storage .......................................................... 27
6.5 Datasets for Europe ................................................................................... 27
6.6 General overview of the PV System Lifetime AC Energy Yield estimation ........... 27
6.6.1 Step 1. PV array DC annual energy output ............................................ 28
6.6.2 Step 2. Inverter performance .............................................................. 28
6.6.3 Step 3. PV system losses .................................................................... 29
6.6.4 Step 4. PV array AC annual energy output ............................................ 29
6.6.5 Step 5. PV array AC lifetime energy output ........................................... 29
6.7 Demonstration of PV System Energy Yield Determination and Labelling ............ 30
7 Transitional Method for Dismantlability of PV Modules .......................................... 32
8 Transitional Methods for Disassemblability of PV Systems ..................................... 33
9 Transitional Methods for Remanufacturing of PV Systems ..................................... 34
References ......................................................................................................... 35
Annexes ............................................................................................................. 36
Annex A. Design and Safety Qualifications of PV modules: EN 61215 and
EN IEC 61730 at comparison ............................................................................. 36
A.1 Design qualification (EN 61215) and accelerated tests .................................... 36
A.1.1 The series EN 61215 on PV modules design qualification and type approval36
A.1.2 Additional standards with accelerated tests for design and safety
qualification purposes................................................................................... 39
A.2 The series EN IEC 61730 on PV modules safety ............................................. 44
A.2.1 Scope and exclusions ......................................................................... 44
A.2.2 EN IEC 61730-1 ................................................................................. 45
A.2.3 EN IEC 61730-2 ................................................................................. 45
A.3 Comparison of EN IEC 61730 tests with EN 61215 ones .................................. 50
ii
Annex B. PV inverter modelling ......................................................................... 53
B.1. PV inverter efficiency ................................................................................. 53
B.1.1. IEC 61683 ......................................................................................... 53
B.1.2. EN 50530 .......................................................................................... 54
B.2. Considered estimation methodologies .......................................................... 55
B.2.1. European efficiency (Method 1) ............................................................ 55
B.2.2. Climate Zone (Methods 2, 3 and 4) ...................................................... 55
B.3. Results .................................................................................................... 58
B.3.1. Input data ......................................................................................... 58
B.3.2. Estimated AC energy output ................................................................ 59
B.3.3. Temperature derating effect ................................................................ 62
B.3.4. PV array- Inverter sizing ratio effect ..................................................... 63
B.3.5. Selected methodology......................................................................... 64
Annex C. PV inverter review .............................................................................. 67
C.1. PV inverter datasheet ................................................................................ 67
C.2. Input data for the transitional methods ........................................................ 69
Annex D. PV system losses ............................................................................... 71
D.1. Losses in the PV array ............................................................................... 71
D.2. Losses in the inverter ................................................................................ 72
D.3. Losses in the PV system ............................................................................ 73
D.4. Example of PV system losses calculation ...................................................... 74
D.5. Performance ratio: various effects .............................................................. 76
Annex E. CSER dependence on orientation and inclination .................................... 79
Annex F. European reference climatic profiles for PV ............................................ 83
iii
Foreword
This document contains proposal for the establishment of transitional methods (related to
calculation and testing aspects) in order to facilitate the potential introduction of
requirements in the framework of the Ecodesign Directive, Energy Labelling Regulation,
Ecolabel and Green Public Procurement.
4
1 Introduction
Following the inclusion of the photovoltaic product group in the EcoDesign Working Plan
2016-19, a preparatory study has been launched on solar photovoltaic panels and
inverters, in order to assess the feasibility of proposing EcoDesign and/or Energy
Labelling requirements for this product group. This will also investigate in more detail the
potential for environmental improvement, including aspects relevant to the circular
economy, and provide the elements needed for the identification of policy options in the
subsequent impact assessment.
The EU Ecolabel (set up under Regulation EC 66/2010) aims at reducing the negative
impact of products and services on the environment, health, climate and natural
resources. The Regulation stipulates in Annex I a standard procedure for the
development and revision of EU Ecolabel criteria, taking into account the environmental
improvement potential along the life cycle of products.
The JRC undertook a detailed study of the situation regarding standardisation for these
product groups. The conclusions of this study were presented in a report
The situation for standards is varied and complex. There are over 100 relevant standards
covering aspects of used materials, production, PV modules measurement and safety,
power conditioning equipment, PV systems and their components and the design,
construction and commissioning cycle. However, not all aspects are covered to the same
degree, and where certain aspects essential to the implementation of the above
measures are not covered the Commission may choose to specify transitional methods,
that are implemented as regulations until suitable standards are adopted.
In the following the situation is summarised for the key areas identified in the standards
report. The main chapters of this report then detail the corresponding proposals for
transitional methods. The annexes provide information on the additional analyses
conducted to support the proposed methods.
PV modules
This group is well covered by existing standards for quality of individual components,
production, design qualification and type approval as well as power and energy yield. An
overall summary can be found in the JRC report “Standards for the assessment of the
environmental performance of photovoltaic modules, power conversion equipment and
photovoltaic systems” (Publication EUR 29247 EN). An extensive collection of operational
data and correlation with laboratory testing results give confidence in building an
appropriate definition of degradation effects, although an intermediate method may be
required for quantifying them. The operational service life (OSL) definition is still not fully
clarified; however, following the future IEC TS 62994, the IEC/TR 62635 and the
guidelines in the ISO 15686 series an agreed method will be achievable. The issues of
recyclability, reparability and durability should be covered by the Mandate M/543 pre-
norms. PV-specific standards deriving from the horizontal ones will be necessary,
although we do not foresee particular problems here.
5
Power Conditioning Equipment
For the PCE's the standards regarding materials and design are covered. Dedicated
standards have been developed for PV inverter performance such as EN 50530, which
describes the procedure for determining the “European Efficiency” that is provided in the
inverter's datasheet. This parameter could be used in the transitional method for
calculating a functional parameter in terms of AC power output for a nominal PV array.
Regarding the definition of OSL the situation is similar to that for PV modules and again a
transitional method may be required, also taking into account field data.
PV Systems
The situation for PV system reflects a combination of that for PV modules and power
conditioning components, as well as factors arising from the system location and design.
Aspects on PV system design are the subject of new draft norms, including the full
construction cycle while the local situation can have a significant effect on the final
energy (and therefore on the material balance). On-site power measurement and
verification standards exist. However, there is no actual single standard for the
calculation of expected energy yield of a PV system. A transitional method would be
required here, based on existing monitoring standards or on the module energy-rating
standards but also integrating a model to include the effects of local environment
relevant to the specific geophysical position.
The degradation of PV modules, components and systems is still subject of debate and
scientific investigation. No European or International standard exists at present to define
the degradation of photovoltaic (PV) modules, inverters and PV systems and to give an
accepted standardised procedure to evaluate it. Therefore, a transitional method that
could be used to support the European legislation for PV product categories is needed
until the lack of standards is solved. The approaches that were considered for the
evaluation of the degradation of PV modules, inverters and PV systems include:
Prescribed values.
Experimental determination.
Estimation method similar to the one in ISO 15686 series for “Buildings and
construction assets”.
These are not all feasible at present due to the limited amount of validated measured
data for some of them. In particular, the latter is considered at present premature and
therefore not included in this document. Also, the available accelerated tests, which
address some specific failure modes and that could be the base for the second approach,
are not considered fully representing all the degradation paths that PV modules and
systems could meet when installed outdoors, because several factors influence the
degradation of these products.
For these reasons, the approach that is proposed as the default method among those
mentioned above is the use of prescribed values, based on long-term experimental data
collected on real PV modules and systems that have been mounted outdoors in the last
30-35 years. It has to be mentioned, though, that the majority of these systems have
6
been installed only recently in a wide range of climatic conditions. Therefore, additional
monitoring and data collection is needed to strengthen the values.
In addition we present methods for Inverter Efficiency loss effects and PV System Energy
yield calculation. Regarding the inverter' performance and its contribution to the final AC
energy yield of the PV system, various methodologies have been analysed taking into
consideration the available information commonly provided by the manufacturers and the
existing standards related the energy rating of PV modules and inverter efficiency. A
detailed description of the different methods evaluated is presented in Annex B of the
present document.
At present, there are no available standards for the estimation of the expected AC energy
yield from a PV system over its lifetime. In this document, a method is proposed taking
into consideration real working conditions affecting the PV array DC energy output based
on EN IEC standards, as well as the PV system degradation over its assumed service life.
Additional considerations are presented so as to model all types of PV systems, including
grid-connected, off-grid and BIPV systems.
7
2 Prerequisites
It is considered that component products and systems will have achieved pass or
conformity to all relevant design qualification, type approval and safety tests as a pre-
condition for entering the regulatory framework.
2.1 PV Modules
In case of PV Modules this would be successful completion of the harmonised standard
EN IEC 61730 to conform the Low Voltage Directive (LVD) (2014/35/EU). Details on the
harmonised standards series are included in Annex A.
Also required are:
— achievement of “pass” of the series of standards EN 61215 for design qualification
and type approval test of PV modules (Table 1); and
— PV module energy rating as specified in the series of standards EN 61853 (Table 1).
Table 1 Requirements to be satisfied as prerequisites for PV modules. The table includes also the
standards needed for application of the transitional methods proposed in the following sections.
8
Prerequisite Test Method Notes
Norm/
Standard/
Regulation
9
Prerequisite Test Method Notes
Norm/
Standard/
Regulation
2.2 Inverters
As a minimum prerequisite the relevant European safety standards and the design
qualification of BOS (EN 62093) should be applied. In addition, the performance of the
EN 50530 is required for the application of the transitional method for inverter energy
yield. These standards are listed in Table 2.
10
Table 2 Requirements to be satisfied as inverters prerequisites and standard needed for the
transitional methods application
11
2.3 Systems
For systems, the standards identified as prerequisites for PV modules and PCEs are also
applicable. Table 3 contains only the specific additional standards required.
Table 3 Pre-requisite requirements for PV systems and standard needed for the application of
transitional methods
12
Table 4 Requirements to be satisfied as other components prerequisites and standard needed for
the transitional methods application
13
3 Degradation and Failure Rates
For the definition and requirements given in this section some assumptions have to be
made, as degradation and even more failure rates can depend on the size and on the
configuration of the considered PV system. The size of the PV installations is classified (as
stated in Task 2 “Market data and trend” of the Preparatory Study for Solar Photovoltaic
Modules, Inverters and Systems) in terms of peak power as:
Residential: up to 10 kW of peak power;
Commercial: from 10 to 250 kW of peak power;
Industrial: above 250 kW of peak power;
Utility-scale: above 1 MW of peak power.
𝑃(𝑡) 1
𝜏𝑑𝑒𝑔 = ( − 1) ∙ (Eq. 1)
𝑃0 𝑡
where P is the value of the power output after an amount of years equal to t. The
degradation rate τdeg is therefore expressed in terms of %/year.
3.3 PV modules
14
3.3.2 Validated Measurement Values
When a PV module manufacturer wishes to claim a lower value for the degradation rate
compared to those given in 3.3.1, the lower claimed value shall be justified by means of
robust experimental data collected from the measurement of field deployed systems.
This data should cover at least 5 (five) consecutive years.
The experimental data shall cover all the climatic profiles that are considered in the
calculation of the annual energy yield of PV modules.
The data shall be collected from at least 2 (two) separate geographic locations in each
climatic zone.
It should contain open rack ground-mounted, roof-mounted and building added and or
building integrated systems (at least 2 of the four options must be included).
The assigned degradation rate shall be the average of all collected degradation rates
from above.
The collated report on the observed degradation rates shall be made available upon
request of the Authorities responsible for market surveillance for control and verification.
3.4 Inverters
3.5 PV systems
15
The assigned degradation rate shall be the average of all collected degradation rates
from above.
The collated report on the observed degradation rates shall be made available to the
National Authorities responsible for market surveillance for control and verification.
16
4 Operational Service Lifetime
17
5 Transitional method – Calculation of Inverter Performance
Functional Parameter for AC power output from a
reference PV system
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 Definition
The IEC TS 61836 "Solar photovoltaic energy systems – Terms, definitions and symbols"
defines the inverter as an ‘electric energy converter that changes direct electric current
to single-phase or poly-phase alternating currents’, being ‘one of a number of
components that is included in the term “power conditioner”’.
In line with this definition, the main function of PV inverters is the conversion of the DC
power received from the PV modules array into AC power suitable with the grid
requirements or the downstream consumer. In addition to this, the inverter is also
responsible of controlling the operating point of the PV array, adjusting it to its Maximum
Power Point (MPP tracking) so as to maximize the power output from the PV array.
18
5.2.1 DC energy yield
Following the EN 61853 series of standards “Photovoltaic (PV) module performance
testing and energy rating” it is possible to estimate the DC energy yield from a reference
1 kWp PV module array over a year (kWh/year). Additionally, following the inverter's
functional unit definition, Part 4 of the series of standards entitled "Standard reference
climatic profiles", contains six datasets that represent the most common climatic
conditions that PV systems may encounter worldwide. Out of these six, three are
considered representative of the European climate conditions: subtropical arid, temperate
continental and temperate coastal, which will be referred to in the present document as
Sub, Temp and Coast respectively. More information on the European reference climatic
datasets can be found in Annex F.
Therefore, following the EN 61853 series we could obtain the DC energy yield from a
reference 1 kWp PV array for the three European representative reference climates:
EYDC_Sub, EYDC_Temp and EYDC_Coast expressed in kWh/year per installed kWp.
The final output of the EN IEC 61853-3 standard is not the energy yield but the Climate
Specific Energy Rating parameter (CSER) calculated according to Equation 2.
The yearly in-plane irradiation depends on the climatic conditions, while the CSER value
will depend as well on the PV module under consideration. For the three European
reference climatic conditions, the Hp values are shown in Table 5.
If PV manufacturers included the CSER parameter in the PV module's datasheet, with the
yearly irradiation values of Table 5 and applying Equation 3, it would be possible to easily
estimate the yearly DC energy yield from a 1 kWp PV array. Otherwise, it would be
necessary to apply the methodology described in the EN IEC 61853-3 standard.
19
Table 5 Yearly in-plane irradiation (kWh/m2year) for the three proposed reference climatic
conditions.
From the yearly AC energy output (EYAC) obtained from 1 kWp PV array for the different
reference climates, the inverter functional parameter, FPinverter, can be calculated
according to Equation 7:
Considering the three reference climatic datasets selected for Europe from those included
in the EN IEC 61853-4, there will be three different values for the functional parameter
for every inverter, one per reference climate (FPinverter_Sub, FPinverter_Temp and FPinverter_Coast).
20
utility scale systems "the inverter AC capacity will tend to be significantly less than the
module DC power, with an indicative range for the ratio being 1.2 – 1.4".
In the analysis described in Annex B. PV inverter modelling, two different sizing values
have been applied to quantify the impact in the functional parameter estimation: 1.25
more suitable for utility scale systems and 1.1 better suited for small PV systems.
Although it would seem reasonable to define specific sizing ratios for the same categories
of PV systems as those used in the Task 2 report (residential, industrial and utility scale),
the results obtained show a limited impact of the sizing factor on the AC energy yield and
consequently on the inverter's functional parameter value obtained for the five inverters
considered in the Annex B analysis. For further information, please check Subsection
B3.4 in Annex B.
21
effect on the inverter behaviour (Please, see Annex B. PV inverter modelling, subsection
B3.3)
22
6 Transitional methods – Determination of the Energy Yield
of PV systems
6.1 Introduction.
6.1.1 Definition
As stated in the "Standards for the assessment of the environmental performance of
photovoltaic modules, power conditioning components and photovoltaic systems" report
a photovoltaic (PV) system could be defined as a power system designed to supply
usable electrical power by means of photovoltaic modules. It consists of an arrangement
of several components. The PV modules, which absorb and convert sunlight into
electricity, constitute the main one. Other components known collectively as Balance of
System (BOS) include switches, wiring, controls, meters and Power Conversion
Equipment (PCE). Out of PCEs, the inverter, which changes the electric current from
direct (DC) to alternate (AC), is the main element. Other components of the PV system
may include mounting structures, solar tracking system or energy storage systems, like
batteries.
We assume the PV system include all the elements up the AC output part of the inverter.
Therefore, the AC cables which link the inverter to the grid interface or the transformer,
if present, are not considered part of the PV system.
23
installation conditions as defined for a typical year (with reference to EN IEC 61853-4)
and for a service life of 30 years".
After analysing the available international standards, it was identified the lack of an
agreed methodology to estimate the performance of PV systems as prerequisite for the
estimation of their functional unit. Therefore, the aim of the present section is to propose
a method to model the performance of PV systems. Due to the wide range of possible
configurations, such as grid connected, off-grid systems or BIPV, the proposed
methodology is the concatenation of various models that account for the behaviour of the
main components of PV systems: PV modules, PCE (inverter) and cables. The
methodology accounts for different losses and degradation of the PV system so as to
model its performance over the defined service life of 30 years of the functional unit
definition.
6.2.1 PV module
The first step in the estimation of the PV system energy yield is the estimation of the PV
array DC energy yield (EYDC).
The EN 61853 series of standards "Photovoltaic (PV) module performance testing and
energy rating" defines a methodology to estimate the performance of PV modules
considering real working conditions defined by six datasets representative of the major
climatic conditions likely to be encountered by PV installations worldwide. The estimation
of the PV energy output takes into consideration various effects, like the irradiance being
reflected at the module's surface and therefore not used, the spectral content of the
irradiance which results in different PV technologies providing different output under the
same irradiance conditions, or the temperature reached by the module that can
significantly modify its performance. Taking these effects into consideration enables a
more realistic estimation of the energy output of the PV modules than by just considering
the power output declared by the manufacturer in the module's datasheet.
The modules are assumed to be installed in a free standing rack, facing the equator with
an inclination angle of 20. No local horizon effects or presence of obstacles are taken
into account in the methodology described in this Standard series.
The calculation is based on one year of hourly values as provided in the climatic datasets
included in Part 4 of the said standard ("Standard reference climatic profiles"). Therefore,
the output of the standard is the yearly DC energy output produced by 1 kWp of the PV
modules under consideration for the different reference climatic datasets in 8760 hourly
values or as their yearly sum. As stated in Section 5.2.1, if PV manufacturers provided
the EN IEC 61853-3 output parameter, the Climate Specific Energy Rating for the
different climatic datasets, the estimation of the yearly DC energy yield of 1 kWp system
could be easily obtained. Please refer to Section 5.2.1 for more information.
Regarding energy yield and rating for bifacial modules the present version of the IEC
61853 energy rating standard does not address this. An IEC technical specification on
bifacial module power measurement has been published by IEC (IEC TS 60904-1-2:2019
Photovoltaic devices - Part 1-2: Measurement of current-voltage characteristics of bifacial
photovoltaic (PV) devices) which can be used to establish peak power. A method for
accounting for bifaciality effects may be introduced at a later stage in this transitional
method, also taking into account a plausible level of albedo for the residential systems
under consideration based on literature results.
24
6.2.2 Power Conditioning Equipment. Inverter
The functional unit of PV systems requires the estimation of its AC energy output,
therefore a conversion from DC PV array output to AC is needed. To that aim, we need to
model the inverter's performance, for which the methodology described in Section 5.3
would be applied. Besides the yearly DC energy yield retrieved from the PV array (EYDC,
kWh/year per installed kWp), the other required input data is the European efficiency (EN
50530), EUR, provided at the inverter's datasheet.
Soiling 2 – 25 5 3.5 2
Shading 0 - 10 5 2.5 0
System EYAC (kWh/year per installed kWp) = EUR (1- 0.01 system_loss) EYDC (Eq. 8)
25
Where EUR is the European efficiency of the inverter, system_loss are the system losses
expressed in % and EYDC is the DC energy yield from the PV array, expressed in
kWh/year per installed kWp as resulted from the EN 61853 methodology.
𝑇𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 (Eq. 9)
𝑆𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝐸𝑌𝐴𝐶_𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 = 𝑆𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝐸𝑌𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙_0 ∙ 𝑇𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 ∙ (1 − 𝜏𝑑𝑒𝑔 ∙ )
2
Where Tlifetime would be the considered service life of the PV system (30 years) and deg
would be the PV system annual degradation rate, which depends mainly on the PV
modules degradation rate, as the other components are mainly subjected to failure, not
degradation. The degradation rate is assumed constant over the lifetime of the PV
system.
Once the energy yield of 1 kWp PV system is estimated over its lifetime, it is possible to
calculate the installed kWp that would be required to obtain 1 kWh of AC power as
defined in the functional parameter. This could be estimated according to Equation 10,
which considers an average energy yield over the lifetime (EYav) of the considered PV
System calculated as EYAC_lifetime / Tlifetime.
Considering the three reference climatic datasets selected for Europe, there will be three
different values for the functional parameter for every system, one per reference climate
(FPsystem_Sub, FPsystem_Temp and FPsystem _Coast).
26
In the case that site specific energy yield is required by the regulations a Geographical
defined European wide reference data set must be defined. This differs from the
reference climate data sets defined in EN IEC 61853-4 in that it must include also
geographic location data. Such a data set may be created for example from the PVGIS
online tool.
27
produced by a PV system over its lifetime. The methodology, as shown in Figure 1,
includes five steps described in the following subsections.
Fig 1. Complete methodology to estimate the lifetime AC energy yield from a PV system.
28
and their impact, the yearly calculation is proposed. However, if considered necessary,
the hourly calculation of the PV inverter performance could be applied.
29
applying a linear degradation factor which decreases the yearly AC energy output year by
year as depicted in Figure 1.
The sum of these "degraded" yearly AC energy output over the time period assumed as
lifetime of the PV system provides the estimation of the AC lifetime energy output (AC
MWh/kWp), as described by Equation 9.
Table 8 shows the AC energy yield calculated for a PV system for the year of installation
(Year 0) and over its lifetime as derived from the tool. The results are expressed in kWh,
kWh/kWp installed and. The lifetime AC energy yield of the PV system expressed in
30
kWh/kWpm2 installed is the variable proposed for the energy labelling classification of
the PV system. For the considered example, the obtained classification under the three
reference climates is shown in Figure 2.
Table 8. PV system’s AC energy yield estimation
Fig 2. Proposed assigned energy label for the considered PV system based on the lifetime AC
energy yield expressed in kWh/kWpm2 for the three reference climates.
31
7 Transitional Method for Dismantlability of PV Modules
32
8 Transitional Methods for Disassemblability of PV Systems
33
9 Transitional Methods for Remanufacturing of PV Systems
34
References
[1] Jordan Dirk C, Kurtz Sarah R, VanSant K and Newmiller J 2016 Compendium of
photovoltaic degradation rates Prog Photovoltaics Res Appl 24 978-89
[2] International Energy Agency. Köntges M, Kurtz Sarah R, Packard C, Jahn U,
Berger K A, Kato K, Friesen T, Liu H and Van Iseghem M 2014 Review on failures
of photovoltaic modules
[3] Jordan D and Kurtz Sarah R 2014 Reliability and Geographic Trends of 50,000
Photovoltaic Systems in the USA. In: 29th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy
Conference and Exhibition, (Amsterdam) pp 2208-15
35
Annexes
Annex A. Design and Safety Qualifications of PV modules:
EN 61215 and EN IEC 61730 at comparison
36
− Damp heat test, which considers the combination of effects due to temperature
and humidity. This test is addressed by the individual sub-parts EN 61215-1-X
with parameters specific for each PV technology;
− Humidity freeze test, which aims to causing and revealing possible failures of the
sealing materials and components of the PV modules;
− UV test, which can precondition the polymeric components of the PV module;
− Static mechanical load test, which simulates the effect of prolonged continuous
mechanical loads on the surface of the PV module, such as those caused by
constant wind or homogeneous snow accumulation;
− Hot spot test. It deals with safety issues due to local partial shading on thin-film
modules, which can cause the creation of very hot small areas in the PV material
and produce failure of the PV module;
− Hail test.
A total amount of at least 10 modules is required to run the tests included in the series of
standards EN 61215. Table A.1 gives the complete list of tests included in the series EN
61215. It also reports the Module Qualification Test (MQT) code associated to each of
them in order to give an immediate reference for the discussion that will be made later
on the series EN IEC 61730 (see section A.2).
37
Table A.1. Coding of tests included in the series EN 61215.
MQT 19 Stabilisation -
1
This is given as merely informative reference here. The original test procedure and/or requirements may be
different from those actually included in the EN IEC 61215 series. The latter must be referenced for the
tests coded in this table.
38
A.1.2 Additional standards with accelerated tests for design and safety
qualification purposes
In addition to those mentioned above, other accelerated tests are available as separate
standards, some of which are being considered to be included in the future within the
EN 61215 series. They are the following:
− EN 61701 Salt mist corrosion testing of photovoltaic (PV) modules, for salt spray
testing mainly of connectors, as long-term experience from the field has shown
that other PV modules components are not susceptible to this;
− EN 62716 Photovoltaic (PV) modules - Ammonia corrosion testing, mainly
conceived for testing PV modules resistance to ammonia gas in farms
installations;
− IEC TS 62782 Photovoltaic (PV) modules - Cyclic (dynamic) mechanical load
testing, which introduces load variations on the surface of the PV module as
compared to the above-mentioned static mechanical load;
− IEC TS 62804-1 Photovoltaic (PV) modules - Test methods for the detection of
potential-induced degradation - Part 1: Crystalline silicon, for testing c-Si PV
modules against potential-induced degradation (PID);
− IEC TS 62804-1-1 Photovoltaic (PV) modules - Test methods for the detection of
potential-induced degradation - Part 1-1: Crystalline silicon – Delamination
(draft), which is a specific part of the previous standard for checking delamination
due to PID;
− IEC TS 62804-2 Photovoltaic (PV) modules - Test methods for the detection of
potential-induced degradation - Part 2: Thin-film (draft);
− EN 62852 Connectors for DC-application in photovoltaic systems - Safety
requirements and tests;
− IEC TS 62916 Photovoltaic modules - Bypass diode electrostatic discharge
susceptibility testing, for testing the susceptibility of by-pass diodes to electrical
discharges, depending on their particular design;
− EN 62979 Photovoltaic modules - Bypass diode - Thermal runaway test,
specifically aimed to stress and verify the resistance of by-pass diodes, which are
a component of the PV module for its own and eventually the user safety, against
temperature stressor. This standard is quite recent and it is one of those which
need significant feedback from the field in terms of detailed information on
failures observed correlated to temperature conditions at which they occur;
− prEN 62938 Non-uniform snow load testing for photovoltaic (PV) modules (draft),
for non-uniform snow load test. It considers the non-uniformity of the load due to
different snow accumulation on an inclined plane, which is the usual condition at
which the majority of PV modules are installed. Its present foreseen date of
publication is October 2019;
− IEC TS 63126 Guidelines for qualifying PV modules, components and materials for
operation at higher temperatures (early draft), which aims to verify the
applicability of some of the previous tests in local climatic conditions characterised
by high temperatures, beyond the limits set by the previous standards. These
extreme conditions would include for example desert regions as well as BIPV
installation for which limited or no air circulation is possible on the back of the PV
module;
− IEC TS 63140 Photovoltaic (PV) modules – Partial shade endurance testing
(draft), for advanced testing of protection and performance measurement of thin-
film PV modules when exposed to partial-shading conditions;
Table A.2 lists all the standards that are either published or under development at
European or IEC level to deal with quality assurance and safety of PV modules, starting
from their design stage. The series EN IEC 61730, specific on safety qualification of PV
modules, is dealt with in more detail in the next section.
Further information on the acceleration factors that have to be used for quantitative
analysis of the degradation process might be derived by means of extensive testing
39
applying measurement procedures like those required by the series of standards
EN 627882 (included as well in Table A.2), which deals with accelerated weathering
testing procedures on a wide variety of materials and components for PV modules. In this
sense, an increased availability of feedback from the field in terms of information on
(known or new) failure modes and the environmental conditions at which they occur
would also be extremely valuable.
Furthermore, there is a new work item approved at IEC TC 82 WG 2 to prepare a new
technical specification on extended testing, IEC TS 63209 “Extended-stress testing of
photovoltaic modules for risk analysis” , which would include longer or more intense test
for a specific stressor in order to further improve PV module qualification beyond the
basic requirements. This could be used by manufacturers as well as by PV installation
designers to check whether the PV products meet specific more aggressive or prolonged
stressing conditions.
Today, in addition to qualification testing (EN 61215 for measurements and EN IEC
61730 for safety) most PV companies require a robust quality management system that
controls many aspects of the manufacturing process (incoming materials, processes,
etc.) as well as testing beyond EN 61215. As the PV industry matures, the methods used
for quality control (QC) are evolving to utilize new knowledge and to be more consistent,
enabling lower QC costs, as with IEC TS 62941 (see Table A.2).
The series EN 62788 could also be used in the framework of quality controls
recommended by the IEC TS 62941 in order to improve confidence in PV module design
qualification and testing at production sites. Indeed, the series EN 62788 gives guidelines
on many measurement procedures that, for example, could be implemented at the
manufacturer factory: (i) as quality check of the incoming material/component or of the
PV module production process itself and (ii) as feedback from the production to the
design and engineering stage within the overall quality system of the manufacturer.
Additionally, the standards series EN 60068 “Environmental testing” contains
environmental testing procedures for electrical, electro-mechanical and electronic
equipment and devices. Some of these testing may be applicable to PCEs for testing
degradation due to corrosion, or failure due shock, vibration, or deposition of dust and
sand. The same testing conditions could be applicable to PV modules.
We expect an evolution in the standardisation process to move from pass-fail
qualification testing to more sophisticated analyses that provide more quantitative
assessment of risk specific to a particular location or type of location, and, thus, enable
more quantitative assessment of the value of high-quality components, both in terms of
degradation rates and failure rates. One proposed approach to completing a quantitative
assessment assigns a Cost Priority Number (CPN) that reflects the cost of repair or loss
of revenue associated with a problem [A.1]. Assignment of a CPN or other rating
methodologies [A.2] relies on being able to link knowledge about the components and
system with the anticipated outcomes. Another possible approach would be the use of
RBDs as dealt with by EN 61078. The industry and the PV community in general has not
yet agreed upon the best approaches for gathering and using the information needed for
quantifying overall risk.
2
“Measurement procedures for materials used in photovoltaic modules”
40
Table A.2. Quality standards for PV modules and their components, including some safety aspects.
41
Standard Specific Test Method Notes
42
Standard Specific Test Method Notes
prEN 62938 Non-uniform snow load testing for photovoltaic (PV) Final stage
(draft) modules
43
A.2 The series EN IEC 61730 on PV modules safety
44
(g) Applications where the environmental temperature (as measured and documented
by meteorological services for the specific location) falls outside the range
(-40 ; 40) °C;
(h) Application in locations with explosive or corrosive atmosphere;
(i) Concentrating PV modules (CPV);
(j) PV modules with applied electronics (e.g. with micro-inverters).
45
In practice, PV modules that are installed in buildings also fall under the construction
regulations. As building products, PV modules have to comply with safety requirements
specific to the construction sector, which is not standardised at European level and
therefore is subject of national building codes. The same applies for fundamental fire
safety requirements, which are not internationally harmonised. Therefore, until a
standardisation is made within the European Union on these aspects, national and (if
applicable) local legislation will have to be considered for the test requirements specific
to fire test and PV modules as building products. Only in those Member States where no
national or local fire code is available, if any, Annex B of the EN IEC 61730-2 can be used
as reference for fire test requirements.
46
Table A.4. Safety tests for PV modules included in the series EN 61730, with either comparison to
quality tests required by EN 61215 or reference to external standards, where applicable.
3
This is given as merely informative reference here, unless equivalence is explicitly specified in the table by the
term EQV. The original test procedure and/or requirements may be different from those actually included in
the EN IEC 61730 series. The latter must be referenced for the tests coded in this table.
4
Refer to Error! Reference source not found.
5
Equivalence in test procedure
47
Test Test Name Based on3 Notes
code
MST 25 Bypass diode thermal MQT 184,5 Both MQT 18.1 and
test MQT 18.2 apply
MST 32 Module breakage test ANSI Z97.1 It does not cover risk of
electric shock, only of
physical injury due to
broken parts.
Additional tests due to
applicable building
codes may have to be
considered.
MST 35 Peel test ISO 5893; ISO 813 Not applicable to rigid-
rigid bonded PV
modules, e.g.
glass/glass (in this case
see MST 36).
Test not required if
conditions set in Table
3 and Table 4 of EN IEC
61730-1 are met.
48
Test Test Name Based on3 Notes
code
49
A.3 Comparison of EN IEC 61730 tests with EN 61215 ones
Contrary to the general quality assurance approach of the EN 61215 series, the
EN IEC 61730 deals with the safety of the PV modules strictly connecting it to the final
application for which they will be installed. Indeed, some of the safety tests requirements
are of general application, in order to ensure the basic safety of the products from the
manufacturing over the installation to the final use. Some other requirements and tests
are applicable only to PV modules belonging to specific class for protection against
electric shock or to specific characteristics of the PV modules themselves.
As already previously mentioned, 13 out of 32 tests required by the EN IEC 61730 are in
fact equivalent to tests included in the EN 61215 series of standards. They are once more
listed below for the reader’s convenience:
1. MST 02 ≡ MQT 06.1 (Performance at STC)
2. MST 03 ≡ MQT 02 (Maximum power determination)
3. MST 07 ≡ MQT 18.2 (Bypass diode functionality test)
4. MST 16 ≡ MQT 03 (Insulation test)
5. MST 17 ≡ MQT 15 (Wet leakage current test)
6. MST 22 ≡ MQT 09 (Hot-spot endurance test)
7. MST 25 ≡ MQT 18 (Bypass diode thermal test)
8. MST 34 ≡ MQT 16 (Static mechanical load test)
9. MST 42 ≡ MQT 14 (Robustness of terminations test)
10. MST 51 ≡ MQT 11 (Thermal cycling test)
11. MST 52 ≡ MQT 12 (Humidity freeze test)
12. MST 53 ≡ MQT 13 (Damp heat test)
13. MST 54 ≡ MQT 10 (UV test)
The MST 01 (visual inspection test), although based on the MQT 01 and performed in the
same way, has some additional criteria for the final evaluation of the result, either
connected to safety of the tested PV module or to additional final assessment criteria as
per other tests of the same series EN IEC 61730. Therefore, we believe that equivalence
of MST 01 and MQT 01 cannot be stated entirely.
For MST 53 Damp Heat, one additional test duration (200 h) is included in one part of the
overall MST sequence; no need for MQT 15.
For MST 54 UV test, one additional test dose (4 times the MQT one) is included in one
part of the overall MST sequence; no need for MQT 15.
Care must be taken in assuming the exact equivalence of these tests in terms of safety
qualification (EN IEC 61730) as compared to design qualification and type approval
(EN 61215). Complying with individual tests for design qualification (MQT tests) may lead
to an erroneous assumption that compliance with (part of) EN IEC 61730 is also obtained
(MST tests). Although the equivalence between the MST and the MQT tests listed above
can be drawn in terms of test execution and observable result, their inclusion in the
overall test sequence for either safety (EN IEC 61730-2) or design qualification (EN
61215-1) is strictly specific to the type of qualification and therefore to the specific series
of standards considered. The flow sequence of tests to be followed for safety qualification
(Figure 1 in EN IEC 61730-2) is significantly different from the one to be followed for PV
modules design qualification and type approval (Figure 1 in EN 61215-1).
From this point of view, equivalence may not be drawn in general and PV modules must
undergo both tests sequences as per EN IEC 61730-2 and EN 61215-1 in order to be
50
assessed in terms of their safety besides their performance and some degree of
resistance to environmental conditions.
Annex A - References
[A.1] Moser D, Del Buono M, Jahn U, Herz M, Richter M and De Brabandere K 2017
Identification of technical risks in the photovoltaic value chain and quantification
of the economic impact Prog Photovoltaics Res Appl 25 592-604
[A.2] Shrestha S M, Mallineni J K, Yedidi K R, Knisely B, Tatapudi S, Kuitche J and
TamizhMani G 2015 Determination of Dominant Failure Modes Using FMECA on
the Field Deployed c-Si Modules Under Hot-Dry Desert Climate IEEE J.
Photovoltaics 5 174-82
51
Annex B. PV inverter modelling
In order to define a methodology for the estimation of the inverter's performance inside a
PV system and its contribution to the final AC energy yield, we considered different
options. Besides, the estimated AC energy yield is necessary for the estimation of the
inverter's functional unit as described in Section 5.3.
The different methodologies analysed are based on two sets of standards. Firstly, most of
the estimation procedures considered are in line with the one described in the recently
completed series of standards EN 61853, which defines a method for the estimation of
the hourly DC energy yield of a standardised 1 kWp PV module over a year.
Secondly, the considered methodologies use the efficiency values measured on the
inverter under consideration according to IEC 61683 and EN 50530.
Grid-connected ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Stand-alone ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
These measurements are to be performed at three input voltages: minimum rated input
voltage, the inverter's nominal voltage or the average of its rated input range and at
90% of the inverter's maximum input voltage.
Measurements are to be performed at an ambient temperature of 25 C 2 C.
The results shall be presented in tabulated or in graphical form. Most manufacturers
provide the efficiency measured at one of those voltage levels in graphical form. The
complete measurements in tabulated form are not normally available.
This standard also describes a weighted average energy efficiency whose weighting
coefficients depend on the type of inverter. For utility-interactive inverters, the weighting
coefficients are derived from the regional irradiance duration (Figure B1a), while for
stand-alone ones, the coefficients are defined according to the load duration curve
(Figure B1b).
53
Figure B1a. Example of irradiance duration Figure B1b. Example of load duration curve
curve
B.1.2. EN 50530
The EN 50530 "Overall efficiency of grid connected photovoltaic inverters" describes the
procedure for measuring the accuracy of both static and dynamic MPP tracking. The static
efficiency describes the accuracy of the inverter to regulate on the maximum power point
on a given static characteristic curve of a PV generator. While the dynamic efficiency
accounts for the performance of the inverter under variable irradiation intensity
conditions which require the transition to different operation points.
The overall efficiency of the inverter ( t) is calculated from the conversion efficiency
obtained from the IEC 61683 ( conv) and the static MPPT efficiency ( MPPT stat), as shown
in Equation B1, where PDC is the actual DC power of the inverter under test, which
depends on the MPP power provided by the PV generator.
The static MPPT efficiency is measured at different levels of DC rated power, similarly to
IEC 61683. New measuring conditions are added regarding the IEC standard as indicated
in Table B2. Differently from the IEC 61683, the scope of the EN 50530 standard only
covers grid-connected inverters.
Table B2. Rated power conditions under which measure the inverter static efficiency.
Grid-connected ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
For the static MPPT efficiency, measurements are to be performed at AC nominal grid
voltage, and shall be repeated three times at three different levels of DC voltage
(maximum MPP voltage, rated DC input voltage and minimum MPP voltage).
The dynamic MPPT efficiency, which is reported separately, is determined applying a test
sequence of fluctuating irradiance intensities as defined in the Annex B of the EN 50530
standard.
All measurements have to be made at the same reference ambient condition as that
applied in the IEC 61683.
The results are to be documented in the measuring report.
54
The EN 50530 standard also defines two weighted efficiencies: the Euroefficiency or
European efficiency (Equation B2) whose weighting coefficients account for a full year of
power distribution of a middle-Europe climate, and the CEC efficiency (California Energy
Commission) defined for locations with higher radiation profiles and whose weighting
factors consider, for example, less likely that the inverter would work at its maximum
efficiency ( 100%) as shown in Equation B3.
Manufacturers provide the European efficiency at the inverter's datasheet, along with the
maximum efficiency.
55
calculating the corresponding DC energy output (kWh) from a reference 1 kWp PV is
presented in EN IEC 61853-3.
In opposition to the first methodology that uses the inverter's European efficiency value
for the calculations at all climatic zones, the other proposed methodologies apply
different efficiency values depending on the working conditions of the inverter under the
various climatic conditions. The efficiency values are obtained from linear interpolation on
the efficiency values measured following IEC 61683 and EN 50530 standards at different
rated power (5%, 10%, 20%, 25%, etc.) and are used to calculate the energy output
accordingly for the three climate reference datasets.
The yearly DC energy output (kWh/year) obtained with the models described in the EN
IEC 61853-3 and used in Method 1, is in fact the sum of the 8760 hourly values in a year
of DC energy output (kWh) estimated for every reference climatic dataset. Considering
these hourly values, it is possible to define for every hour the working conditions of the
inverter regarding its rated power and with these calculate the corresponding efficiency
for every hour.
Depending on how the climate specific inverter efficiencies are treated, we have
considered three new methods.
B.2.2.1. Method 2: hourly efficiency
Using as input the hourly values of DC energy output (EYDC,h) and inverter efficiency ( h),
their product would provide an estimate the AC energy output for every hour. Their sum
will be a more realistic estimate of the yearly AC energy output (Equation B5) compared
to using the single European efficiency value.
Where h would be the inverter's efficiency for hour h obtained by interpolation of the
efficiency values derived from IEC 61683 and EN 50530 standards, which range between
6 and 8 values. The working conditions of the inverter at every hour, required to perform
the interpolation, is defined by the ratio of the DC power received from the PV array and
the inverter's nominal power.
In opposition to the European efficiency value which is always provided in the inverter's
datasheet, these efficiency values measured at different rated power working conditions
(IEC 61683 and EN 50530) are not always available in the inverter's datasheet. And
when they are, they are normally provided in graphical format as an efficiency curve
which makes it more difficult to estimate the hourly efficiency values. If the rated
efficiency values are provided in tabulated form (following Table B1 and B2 structure) or
defined from the efficiency curve, we propose a simple linear interpolation to calculate
the h values.
In case the DC power delivered from the PV array is higher than the recommended
maximum power for the inverter, we assume the inverter continues working at its
maximum power during that period (clipping).
B.2.2.2. Method 3: weighted efficiency based on in-plane irradiance
The weighted annual conversion inverter efficiency, internationally adopted as
Euroefficiency or European efficiency in the EN 50530 standard was originally defined by
Hotopp in the 1990s [B1, B2]. It was defined based on averaged hourly irradiance data
measured for a single reference year at the location of Trier in Germany. The weighting
factors shown in Equation B2 (0.03, 0.06, 0.13, etc.) were obtained by analysing the
distribution of irradiance levels over the considered year, normalized to the STC
irradiance (1000 Wm-2). The authors found that, for example, the number of hours
during the period of a year that the received irradiance is 50% of the STC one
represented 20% of the time.
56
Considering the in-plane irradiance hourly values provided in the reference climatic
datasets of EN IEC 61853-4, it would be possible to define new weighting factors for the
three reference climatic datasets following Hotopp's procedure based on irradiance values
(f_I5, f_I10, f_I20, etc.) and with those obtain an average weighted inverter efficiency
adjusted to the reference irradiance yearly profiles, following Equation B6.
Following Hotopp methodology, the weighted factors (f_I5, f_I10, f_I20, etc.) are calculated
from the number of hours when the received irradiance is between the following ranges:
f_I5 is defined counting the hours the in-plane irradiance divided by the STC irradiance is
between the interval (0% to 7.5%) over a year. Similarly,
f_I10 considers the range [7.5% to 15%)
f_I20 considers the range [15% to 25%)
f_I30 considers the range [25% to 40%)
f_I50 considers the range [40% to 75%)
f_I100 considers the range 75%
The estimation of the yearly AC energy output is then obtained by multiplying the DC
energy output derived from the EN 61853 methodology (kWh/year per kWp installed) by
the climate specific aggregate efficiency of the inverter under consideration for a
particular reference climate ( Irrad_climate) as shown in Equation B7:
EYAC_climate (kWh/year per kWp) = Irrad_climate EYDC_climate (kWh/year per kWp) (Eq.B7)
Where Irrad_climate would be the inverter's weighted efficiency obtained considering the
hourly in-plane irradiance values of the reference climatic conditions under consideration,
and EYDC_climate would be the DC energy output from a reference 1 kWp PV array under
the same climatic conditions. This latter value is common with Method 1, but instead of
using the European efficiency, this third Method applies an efficiency adjusted to the
irradiance profiles of every climatic condition ( Irrad_climate).
B.2.2.3. Method 4: weighted efficiency based on rated power
In Method 3 the weighting factors (f_I5, f_I10, f_I20 etc.) are calculated based on the
irradiance profile at the different reference climatic profiles, while the efficiency values (
5%, 10%, 20%, etc.) are measured according to IEC 61683 and EN 50530 standards
submitting the inverter to different rated power. Since not all the received irradiance is
effectively transformed to DC energy by the PV module array, Method 4 proposed here
would define the weighting factors considering the number of hours the inverter works at
different working conditions (received DC power), which are better related to the
conditions in which the inverter's efficiency are measured.
From the hourly irradiance values of the reference climatic datasets, the DC energy
output from a reference PV module array can be estimated. With these it is possible to
define the inverter's working conditions and knowing the frequency distribution of these
working conditions over a year, it is possible to define the percentage of hours within a
year that the inverter works at different power levels. From these a single aggregate
efficiency parameter, similar to the European efficiency, can be calculated. The new
weighted average efficiencies for each of the three climate reference zones are calculated
as shown in Equation B8.
57
In order to apply this fourth methodology, we could maintain the rated power levels used
in the European efficiency calculation, as shown in Equation B2 (5%, 10%. 20%, 30%,
50% and 100%) or define different ones like those used in the CEC efficiency. In addition
to this, the method on how to quantify the hours during which the inverter works at
these discrete levels has to be defined. In this regard, we propose using the levels and
ranges considered in the European efficiency definition, which are also applied in Method
3 described above. Therefore, it is necessary to quantify the hours assigned to each level
(5%, 10%. 20%, 30%, 50% and 100%) considering the same intervals as defined in
Method 3 but linked to the rated power received by the inverter from the PV array. For
example, the weighting factor f_RP5 would be the number of hours during the year, for a
particular reference climatic region, that the DC power provided to the inverter by the PV
array is between 0% and 7.5% of its rated power.
Similarly to Equation B7, the estimation of the yearly AC energy output is then obtained
by multiplying the DC energy output derived from the EN 61853 series methodology
(kWh/year per installed kWp) by the climate specific aggregate efficiency obtained
considering the rated power provided to the inverter under consideration (Equation B9).
EYAC_climate (kWh/year kWp) = Rated Power_climate EYDC_climate (kWh/year kWp) (Eq. B9)
Where Rated Power_ climate would be the inverter's weighted efficiency for the reference
climatic conditions under consideration defined using the rated power to which the
inverter is submitted every hour.
B.3. Results
In order to optimize the PV array-Inverter pair, for every inverter, due to their different
nominal power, a different size of PV array needs to be applied so as to maintain the
sizing ratio between the two elements. We have used two different size ratios, 1.25 for
central inverters and 1.1 to micro and string inverters, in order to consider two different
PV systems sizes, utility scale and residential respectively. The installed PV array peak
power in every case is defined in Table B3.
58
Table B3. AC nominal power (W) and European efficiency of the five considered inverters, and the
installed PV array peak power applied to every inverter derived from the applied size ratio.
As a result, for every inverter there is a different PV system, denoted Syst, with a
different installed PV array, based on the size ratio applied between both components.
The PV system containing the inverter 1 is denoted Syst 1, the system including the
inverter 2 is Syst 2, etc.
In order to compare the performance of the inverters in the different systems, the results
are normalised to the installed PV peak power, so as to reference all energy yield
estimation to 1 kWp of installed peak power, as required by the inverter's functional unit
definition. Results are shown in Table B5.
59
Table B5. Yearly DC energy output from the PV array at the five different PV systems, and AC
energy output estimated by the four methodologies normalized to 1 kWp PV array (kWh/year per
installed kWp). Subtropical arid reference climate.
Method 1. EYAC_Sub
1933.69 1844.41 1899.20 1992.53 1996.59
(kWh/yearkWp)
Method 2. EYAC_Sub
1938.43 1844.22 1907.41 1989.37 2004.85
(kWh/yearkWp)
Method 3. EYAC_Sub
1935.60 1833.64 1893.91 1988.96 1998.16
(kWh/yearkWp)
Method 4. EYAC_Sub
1934.45 1829.06 1889.51 1988.33 1997.89
(kWh/yearkWp)
Considering the results from Method 1 as reference values, Table B6 shows the
difference, in percentage, between the AC energy yield estimated by Method 1 and the
other 3.
Table B6. Difference (%) in the AC energy output from Methods 2 to 4 with regard to Method 1
estimates. Subtropical arid reference climate.
Method 1. EYAC_Sub
1933.69 1844.41 1899.20 1992.53 1996.59
(kWh/yearkWp)
The difference in all cases is below 1%. For both the microinverter (Syst 1) and the
central inverter (Syst 5) Method 1 provides lower values than the other three methods,
with differences below 0.1% for Methods 3 and 4 compared to Method 1. Differences are
higher for the string inverters, for which Method 1 tends to provide higher values than
the other methods.
Differences between Method 1 results and the other three methods tend to increase in
the other two reference climatic datasets, as shown in Tables B7 and B8 that contain
respectively the differences obtained in the Temperate continental and Temperate coastal
climates. Especially for two of the string inverters Method 1 results in AC energy yields
about 2% higher than Methods 3 and 4 which apply a new weighted average efficiency
defined according to the frequency distribution of in-plane irradiance and working
conditions over the year of the reference climatic datasets.
60
Table B7. Difference (%) in the AC energy output from Methods 2 to 4 with regard to Method 1
estimates. Temperate continental reference climate.
Method 1. EYAC_Temp
1123.56 1071.69 1103.52 1157.75 1160.11
(kWh/yearkWp)
Table B8. Difference (%) in the AC energy output from Methods 2 to 4 with regard to Method 1
estimates. Temperate coastal reference climate.
Method 1. EYAC_Coast
854.36 814.92 839.12 880.36 882.15
(kWh/yearkWp)
Methods 3 and 4 calculate a new average weighted efficiency for every reference climate
which compare to the European efficiency of the five inverters as shown in Table B9.
Table B9. New average weighted efficiency values obtained by Methods 3 and 4, for the five
considered inverters at the three climatic regions.
The new average weighted efficiencies ( Irradand Rated Power) for the Subtropical arid
reference dataset are similar to the Euroefficiency values, especially when the new
weighting factors are defined according to the irradiance distribution ( Irrad). For the
other two reference climates, the new efficiencies are lower than the Euroefficiency,
61
meaning that the working conditions of the inverters under those climatic conditions
would make them work more frequently at lower efficiency ranges than those assumed
by the Euroefficiency (Eq. B2).
Where is the inverter's efficiency, der is the derating effect calculated from the
information provided by the manufacturers, and T is the difference between the hourly
ambient temperature value and the derating temperature threshold value.
Table B10 shows, for the five inverters used as example, the minimum temperature
threshold declared by the manufacturers above which derating occurs, and the number of
hours within the year when the ambient temperature is above that threshold for the
three reference climates. According to the manufacturer, the inverter 5, central inverter,
would have two derating factors, one applicable from 25C to 40 C, and a second one
above 40 C. No information on temperature derating is provided for the microinverter
(Inverter 1).
Table B10. Temperature threshold above which derating occurs and number of hours within the
reference year when the ambient temperature is above that threshold for the three reference
climatic datasets and the five considered inverters.
1 No info - - -
2 38 96 0 0
3 33 701 0 0
4 44 0 0 0
5 25 2914 91 0
62
For this temperature derating analysis, we have only considered two methods, based on
Methods 1 and 2 described above. The new methods are denoted T1 and T2. In Method
T1, for every hour whose ambient temperature is above the derating temperature, the
Euroefficiency value is reduced according to the corresponding derating factor. Similarly,
Method T2 applies the same derating factor to the hourly efficiency values estimated
interpolating the efficiency curve values, according to the DC energy output delivered by
the PV array. These hourly efficiency values were used in Method 2. Therefore, the
used in Equation B10 is the Euroefficiency in Method T1 and the hourly efficiency value
obtained from interpolation of the efficiency curve values in Method T2.
The ambient temperate at the Temperate coastal reference climate never exceeds the
derating threshold temperatures so, according to the model considered, the inverters'
performance would not be affected by temperature derating. Regarding the Temperate
continental climate only inverter 5 would be affected by derating. The difference, in
percentage, between the estimated AC power output from Methods T1 and T2 and the
corresponding calculations without considering derating (Method 1 and 2, respectively) is
0.041% decrease in power prediction when derating is quantified. Table B11 shows the
temperature derating effect in the AC energy output estimation for the Subtropical arid
reference climate. The values shown are the difference, in percentage, between the
energy outputs from Methods T1 and T2, in comparison to Methods 1 and 2, respectively.
Table B11. Variation, in percentage, in the estimated AC energy output when temperature
derating is considered in Methods 1 (Euroefficiency) and 2 (hourly interpolated efficiency values)
under the Subtropical arid reference climatic conditions.
2 -0.0219 -0.0220
3 -0.3826 -0.3830
4 0 0
5 -1.7947 -1.7950
Except from the fifth inverter whose declared performance decreases above 25 C, the
temperature derating effect according to the methodology and assumptions applied here
does not significantly reduce the AC energy output for the other inverters analysed. No
results are shown for Inverter 1 (microinverter) since no information on temperature
derating was available.
63
Table B12. Difference (%) between the AC energy output from 1 kWp PV array estimated with
Method 2 considering a sizing ratio of 1.1 for small inverters and 1.25 for central inverters,
compared to applying the inverse sizing ratios, for the five different inverters at the three European
reference climates.
Since the AC energy yield is used in the transitional parameter calculation, the sizing
ratio will also have a limited impact on its value.
64
Annex B - References
[B.1] R. Hotopp; „Private Photovoltaik-Stromerzeugungsanlagen im Netzparallelbetrieb“,
2. Auflage, RWE Energie AG, Essen, 1991.
[B.2] Auf den Spuren von „Euro-Eta“, Photon, Juni 2004, S. 62 – 65
65
Annex C. PV inverter review
As stated in the Task 1 report "Product scope" of the "Preparatory study for solar
photovoltaic modules, inverters and systems" after the stakeholders' consultation, it was
concluded that all inverters should be included in the scope of this preparatory study.
Therefore, the transitional method for the evaluation of the functional parameter should
also cover all types of inverters, from microinverters, to string and central inverters.
The objective of this Annex is to present the results of a review study performed on the
relevant information to the transitional method for inverters that are available at the
inverters' datasheet and other information provided by the manufacturers. In most
cases, the information required is only available on the Manual of the inverter or other
additional documentation and not on the datasheet. Besides, the information provided is
not common to all manufacturers and it also depends on the type of inverter (micro,
string or central).
The various methodologies considered for the estimation of the inverter's functional
parameter and the AC power output depend on the available information (Annex B PV
inverter modelling). Depending on the information provided by a particular manufacturer
or type of inverter, some of the considered methods cannot be applied. However, it
would be convenient that the methodology proposed in the transitional method could be
applicable to all inverters. Therefore, it should be based on information provided by all
manufacturers for all types of inverters. Otherwise, it would be necessary to request
manufacturers to provide more detailed and homogeneous information than the one
currently available.
Nine different manufacturers have been reviewed, including those that represent more
than half of the market share of solar inverters. Most brands produce string and central
inverters, while microinverters are only available from four of the nine considered
manufacturers. A total of almost 140 datasheets have been analysed considering the
different manufacturers and the various produced types of inverters available.
67
temperature above which derating occurs. Nevertheless, according to the AC output
power values provided at other temperatures, some power decrease already occurs at
lower temperatures. For example, for big central inverters it is common to find the AC
power output described in the datasheet as follows: AC power at 25 C 1100 kVA, at 40
C 1000 kVA and at 50 C 900 kVA, which already indicates some extent of derating with
temperature. In the same datasheet the operation temperature range is defined to be
between -25 C to 62 C. Smaller central inverters tend to have the AC output power
declared at two different temperatures, 35 C and 45 C, for example, and the derating is
specifically described to occur only above 45 C. On the contrary, string inverters have a
single AC power value declared in the datasheet, which is also the case of the
microinverters analysed. Besides, none of the four microinverters manufacturers provides
any information about the temperature derating of these devices.
When declared, the derating is referred to the ambient temperature, but it has not been
possible to find in any documentation provided by the reviewed manufacturers or in any
available standard, a model or mathematical expression that relates ambient and inverter
temperature. On the contrary, the EN IEC 61853-3 "Photovoltaic (PV) module
performance testing and energy rating – Energy rating of PV modules", describes a
model to estimate the temperature reached by a free standing PV module using the
ambient temperature, wind speed and in-plane irradiance as main inputs. However, an
equivalent model to estimate the temperature of the inverter and its components has not
been found. Besides, this working temperature will depend, to a great extent, on the
installation and operating conditions that, as declared in the IEC 62894 standard, could
vary between unprotected in the open, protected in the open, air-conditioned in interiors
and without air-condition in interiors. Even though the datasheet contains information
about the cooling method used (ranging from convection, natural flow and natural
cooling for small inverters, to fan, forced ventilation, or other active systems used in
bigger inverters), nothing is mentioned about the targeted temperature for the inverter
operating conditions or about the temperature range that these cooling systems
maintain. According to the information provided in the datasheets, the presence of an
active cooling system does not prevent temperature derating above a certain
temperature. But no information is provided about the working patterns of the active
cooling system.
This lack of information, combined with the heterogeneous information provided about
the derating of the AC power output dependent on temperature, makes it difficult to get
an estimate of the temperature reached by the inverter under working conditions. In
addition to this, not all manufacturers provide the same information and with the same
detail. For example, only four of the nine reviewed manufacturers provide graphical
information about the temperature derating and this information is not even provided to
all models of inverters. Even though big inverters have a declared decreased AC power
output with temperature (AC power output defined at two or three temperature levels),
only 20% of the reviewed inverters explicitly declare the threshold above which derating
occurs. And as previously mentioned, this contradicts somehow the decreased AC output
power declared in the same datasheet at increasing temperature values. While three
manufacturers do not provide any type of information related to derating, four provide
graphical representation of the derating effect, but not for all models of inverters.
According to these graphs, a linear derating does not always occur, even though is the
most common behaviour observed in the reviewed information. Therefore, if modelled,
the temperature derating could be assumed linear, with a slope defined from the AC
power output and temperature values provided in the datasheets or additional
documentation.
In opposition to the temperature derating, the efficiency of the inverter is always
declared in the datasheet. Either the Euroefficiency or the CEC efficiency, depending on
the targeted market, is provided. These are calculated according to the standard EN
50530 "Overall efficiency of grid connected photovoltaic inverters". Besides these
weighted efficiencies, the datasheets tend to include, in graphical form, the efficiency at
different input and output voltages as stipulated in the IEC 62894 standard. If not
68
provided in the datasheet, these values, commonly denoted efficiency curve, are
normally available at the additional information provided by the manufacturers like the
Manual or other technical information sheets. Two out of the nine manufacturers do not
provide any graphical information of the efficiency values at different working conditions.
And of the other seven manufacturers, only one provides this kind of information for all
types of inverters. Most manufacturers only provide the efficiency curve for some
devices, not for all models. The efficiency values in tabulated form are even scarcer,
being available for only some devices from two manufacturers. Besides, in these cases,
this information is not normally provided in the datasheet but in additional information
like the Manual of the inverter. In fact, only one of the reviewed manufacturers includes
the tabulated values in the datasheet.
69
Annex D. PV system losses
There are several losses that affect the performance of a PV system reducing the AC
energy output finally delivered by the system. These losses can be classified in two
different types. They can be directly linked to the different components, like wiring losses
or the inverter's DC to AC conversion efficiency, or they can derive from the installation
and maintenance of the PV system, being therefore independent of the PV system
components. Poor maintenance or an incorrect installation (non-optimal orientation or
presence of shades, for example) can significantly reduce the performance of a PV
system regardless of the quality and efficiency of its components. That is why the
proposed method to account for the PV system's losses is based on the PV system
configuration, more than on its components, whose intrinsic performance is already
considered in the corresponding model used within the complete methodology applied to
estimate the AC energy output of the PV system. As explained in Subsection 6.6, the
final AC energy output from the PV system is estimated in various steps that represent
the performance of its main components: the PV array (DC energy output) and the
inverter (AC energy output). These two elements are modelled in the first two steps, in
which the losses due to their intrinsic characteristics are already considered. In a
subsequent step, the PV system losses are considered and included in the AC energy
yield estimation from the complete PV system.
The three different PV systems configurations that will be considered to define the range
of the various losses are:
Default installation
Optimised design and yield forecasting
Optimised monitoring and maintenance
We assume that they are all subjected to the same losses but the value of these losses
depends on the PV system configuration. We consider that the Default installation will be
affected by the typical losses reported in the scientific bibliography, while the Optimised
monitoring and maintenance PV system will be affected by the lowest values of every PV
system losses. So, unless declared differently by the PV installer, we propose a range of
values for every type of PV system loss to be used in the simulations. The lowest value
would be applied to the Optimised monitoring and maintenance system, the typical value
will be used for the Default installation, while for the Optimised design and yield
forecasting configuration the average of the two aforementioned values will be
applicable.
By the combination of the various losses, it is possible to estimate system_loss, a single
variable which is used in the proposed methodology to estimate the AC annual energy
yield from the PV system (Equation 8). An example on how to define system_loss, is shown
in the present Annex. A tool to perform this calculation could be developed if needed.
To easily quantify the impact of the various losses in the PV system's performance, in
this Annex we will use the Performance Ratio (PR), which is the ratio of the energy yield
delivered by the PV system and the energy yield from the same system if losses were not
considered. Therefore, a value of PR equal to 1 would correspond to an ideal PV system
without losses.
71
consideration and quantifies three types of losses derived from the intrinsic
characteristics of the PV module. These are:
Angle of incidence. Part of the received irradiance is reflected on the surface of
the module. Different coatings or surface texture could minimize this kind of loss,
which also depends on the installation conditions and the solar coordinates. These
two factors are predefined in the reference climatic datasets of Part 4 of the same
standard (EN IEC 61853-4 "Part 4 "Standard reference climatic profiles") which
contains the solar coordinates for a specific location in every reference climate.
Spectral effects. Due to the photovoltaic active material of the PV modules, not all
wavelengths of the incoming irradiance are actively used to produce electricity.
The methodology used to estimate the DC energy output accounts for this spectral
effect.
PV module behaviour at conditions different from the Standard Test Conditions
used to measure the declared Pmax provided in the datasheet. The conversion
efficiency of the modules depends on the module temperature and also on the
received irradiance. These two effects are also accounted for in the methodology
used to estimate the DC energy output.
Besides these three effects that directly depend on the PV module characteristics, there
are other losses affecting the DC energy output from the PV array, which depends on the
installation conditions, like for example:
Soiling whose impact could be minimized by a good maintenance.
Presence of shades which are very much site dependent.
Mismatch within the array. The PV array should be composed of modules of
similar electrical characteristics since modules of lower quality could decrease the
performance of the complete array.
Diodes and connectors which are part of the PV array.
These losses, not directly linked to the PV module will be considered within the PV
system losses so as to estimate the system_loss used to calculate the final annual AC
energy yield.
72
D.3. Losses in the PV system
As described in previous subsections, within the PV system losses we include some linked
to the PV array and to the inverter. In addition to this, we should account for other losses
like those from the wiring system. For this study, the PV system is considered to include
every element of the photovoltaic installation up to the AC output side of the inverter.
Any other element after this point, like transformers for the grid connection are not
considered part of the PV system. Therefore, with this definition, there should not be AC
wiring losses, only DC wiring losses. However, if microinverters (module integrated
inverters) are used, the output of the PV array will be in AC. So in this case, AC cables
losses should be included as well.
If the PV system had an energy storage system, we should model the performance and
efficiency of the battery system. Following the proposal to perform the simulations of the
PV system performance on yearly basis, it is not possible to model accurately the flow of
energy between the different components (PV array, battery, inverter, load or grid)
neither the state of charge of the battery, for which hourly or even shorter time period
simulations would be required. In addition to this, information about the loads connected
to the PV system would be needed as well. As a result, the battery system will be
included in the estimation of the annual AC energy yield of the PV system as a new
derating factor within the PV system losses.
Even though it is out of the scope of this study, if the PV system under analysis were
mounted on a solar tracking system, the losses due to this component should also be
included. If specific PV systems were to be validated with the proposed methodology, like
building integrated systems, for example, it would be necessary to account for new types
of losses, like that from the sun tracking system or others specific to the system under
consideration. However, following the reference PV system considered in the present
study composed of a free standing PV array, inverter and cables, the proposed list of PV
system losses would be the following:
Soiling or dust
Shading
PV array mismatch
Diodes and connectors
Inverter temperature derating
Wiring DC or AC
We consider no losses due to grid availability or long repair times.
After reviewing various scientific publications [D.1-D.5], we propose the values shown in
Table D1 for the different losses. We assume that the PV systems classified as Default
installation will be subjected to the typical values, while the Optimised monitoring and
maintenance system are simulated considering the lowest values of the different losses.
For the third PV system configuration, Optimised design and yield forecasting the value of
the PV system losses will be the average of the typical and lowest value, which is also
indicated in Table D1.
73
Table D1. PV system losses: typical value, and range with the minimum and maximum values.
Soiling 2 – 25 5 2 3.5
Shading 0 - 10 5 0 2.5
The degradation of the different components can also represent a reduction over time of
the AC energy output. In the proposed methodology, the degradation is not considered
among the PV system losses, but it is accounted for in a subsequent step when the AC
energy yield is estimated over the complete lifetime of the PV system (See Subsections
6.3 and 6.6).
The estimation of the DC energy output, following the EN 61853 methodology, accounts
for the angle of incidence losses (AOI) and those derived from the behaviour of the
modules under low irradiance levels and high temperatures (Irrad & Temp). The spectral
effects () can, like in this example, represent a gain, not a loss due to the spectral
response of the considered PV module and the spectral content of the irradiance at the
sites representative of the three reference climates.
74
From an ideal performance ratio of 1, the losses linked to the PV module and inverter
already represent a reduction that varies, for this example, from 9% in the Temperate
coastal climate to 14% in the Subtropical arid location where modules are more affected
by the temperatures reached by the modules.
Assuming no other losses but those in Table D1, the PV system losses ( system_loss) for the
three system configurations are shown in Table D3.
Table D3. PV system losses for the three different system configurations.
From the losses reported in Table D1, the system_loss shown in Table D3 are calculated
according to Equation D1.
Since microinverters are not used in this example only DC wiring losses are considered.
To be used in Equation D1, the different losses need to be expressed in decimal format. A
5% losses due to soiling would be quantified in Eq. D1 as 0.05.
Once the system_loss is calculated, it is possible to estimate the AC annual energy yield of
the PV system according to Equation 8 shown in Subsection 6.2.4. Subsequently, as
described in Subsection 6.3 the AC energy yield delivered by the PV system over its
lifetime can be estimated (Eq. 9), when degradation is considered.
Following with the example, Table D4 shows, for the considered PV system and three
possible PV system configurations, the final performance ratio for the three reference
climates.
Table D4. Final Performance Ratio for the PV system used in the example, for the three different
PV system configurations, and for the three reference climates.
Compared to an ideal PV system with no losses (PR equal to 1), the PV system used in
this example, results in PR which goes from 0.731 in the warmest climate and least
maintained PV system configuration, to 0.865 for the best monitored PV system
configuration and coldest climate, where the PV modules used in this example perform
best.
75
According to Task 4 "Technical analysis including end-of-life" of the "Preparatory study
for solar photovoltaic modules, inverters, and systems", the three PV system
configurations could be represented by PR of 0.75, 0.80 and 0.85 respectively. According
to this, if the PV system evaluated in the example had been classified as Default
installation due to the operation and maintenance actions performed on it, it would not
reach the PR of 0.75 for that configuration in a subtropical arid location. The PV installer
in that case, should try to reduce the PV system losses or improve the quality of the
components, in order to increase the final PR. In a temperate coastal location whose
climatic conditions are more favourable to the PV array performance, even a default
installation would reach the threshold of 0.75 of the PR. Under this kind of climatic
conditions, an optimal maintained PV system could reach a PR of 0.865, like shown in the
example.
The final PR values obtained in the present example are in line with reported
performance ratio of real monitored PV systems [D.4, D.6]. For example, [D.4] collected
performance data of almost 100 PV systems installed in Germany between 1994 and
2010. The PR of new systems is clearly higher than those measured on the PV systems
installed in the 1990s. While the PR of those is normally between 0.6 and 0.8, the PR of
the PV systems installed in 2010 tends to vary between 0.7 and 0.9.
Further research work could be aimed to propose a ‘normalisation’ of the Final
Performance Ratio (of a certain PV system) against the reference climatic area (e.g.
considering irradiance and temperature aspects). This would make the Final Performance
Ratio independent from the specific reference climatic area, allowing comparability.
76
Fig D1. Relative difference between the c-Si PV array performance ratio when modules are inclined
20 or 40.
Table D5 shows the performance ratio of a c-Si array for the reference sites used for the
three European reference climates when modules are assumed inclined 20 or installed
with the optimal inclination angle for each site.
Table D5. Performance ratio for a c-Si PV array installed with an inclination angle of 20 or with
the optimal angle for each location.
As shown in Table D5, considering the optimal inclination angle does not improve
significantly the performance ratio of the PV module. The maximum gain is observed in
the Temperate coastal location with a 0.76% increment.
The wind can increase the performance of the PV modules as their temperature is
reduced. Figure D2 shows the relative difference in the PR of a c-Si module with or
without considering the wind effects. This could serve as example of the losses in the PR
that could be expected in building integrated PV system where the wind effect cannot be
considered.
Fig D2. Relative difference between the c-Si performance ratio with and without considering the
wind effect.
77
The reduction of the PV module temperature by the wind can result in PR increment of up
to 6% in the extreme cases as shown in Fig D2.
Annex D - References
[D.1] B. Marion et al. Performance parameters for grid-connected PV systems. 31st IEEE
Photovoltaic Specialists Conference. 2005. Doi: 10.1109/PVSC.2005.1488451.
[D.2] A. Bianchini et al. Performance analysis and economic assessment of different
photovoltaic technologies based on experimental measurements. Renewable Energy
(2016) 85, 1-11.
[D.3] S. Ekici and M. Ali Kopru. Investigation of PV system cable losses. International
Journal of Renewable Energy Research (2017) 7(2), 807-815.
[D.4] N.H. Reich et al. Performance ratio revisited: is PR>90% realistic? Progress in
Photovoltaics: research and applications (2012) 20, 717-726.
[D.5] A. Woyte et al. Analytical monitoring of grid-connected photovoltaic systems. Good
practices for monitoring and performance analysis. IEA PVPS Task 13, Substask 2. Report
IEA-PVPS T13-03:2014. ISBN 978-3-906042-18-3.
[D.6] U. Jahn and N. Wolfgang. Operational performance of grid-connected PV systems
on buildings in Germany. Progress in Photovoltaics: research and applications (2004) 12,
441-448.
[D.7] T Huld and A.M Gracia Amillo. Estimating PV module performance over large
geographical regions: the role of irradiance, air temperature, wind speed and solar
spectrum. Energies (2015) 8, 5159-5181.
78
Annex E. CSER dependence on orientation and inclination
The methodology proposed for the estimation the energy yield derived from a PV system
assumes the PV modules installed facing the equator with an inclination angle of 20,
according to the configuration applied in the EN 61853 series. However, as indicated in
subsection 6.4.1 "Installation and Location Specific Energy Yield", PV systems may be
installed according to other configurations. In order to consider these in the energy yield
estimation, additional models or correction factors should be included.
The first step in the estimation of PV system's lifetime AC energy yield (See Section 6) is
the evaluation of the DC annual energy output. This is done following the EN IEC 61853-
3 methodology, which assumes the installation previously mentioned of inclination and
orientation (azimuth) of the PV modules, using the reference climatic datasets of hourly
values. However, if PV manufacturers included in the datasheet of the PV modules the
CSER (Climate Specific Energy Rating) value, the yearly DC energy output could be easily
obtained applying Equation 3.
However, the CSER are derived considering the modules inclined 20 and facing the
equator, while it may be that the analysed PV system is installed following other
configuration. Therefore, the CSER calculated with the EN 61853 methodology may not
be directly applicable to that PV system. The aim of the present Annex is to quantify the
effect of considering different installation settings (inclination and orientation) in the
CSER values.
To do so, the CSER has been calculated for 1 kWp PV array of crystalline silicon modules
located at the three European reference climatic regions considering different inclination
and orientation angles, besides the EN 61853 installation configuration. The inclination
angle has been evaluated from 0 (horizontal plane) to 90 (vertical plane) in steps of 5.
Regarding the orientation angle or azimuth of the PV array, which is assumed due to the
equator by the EN 61853, in this Annex it has been evaluated from north (-180) to east
(-90), south (0), west (90) and back to north (180), at 30 steps. As a result, a total
of 247 installation configurations have been analysed.
The CSER for each setting (inclination and orientation combination) has been normalized
to the CSER value for the EN 61853 installation condition (inclination of 20 and
orientation of 0), in order to evaluate the effect of the inclination and orientation on the
CSER. These normalized CSER values could be used to "correct" the declared CSER value
obtained following the EN 61853 methodology, in order to consider other configurations
of the PV system when evaluating the DC annual energy yield.
The obtained normalized CSER values are shown in the figures E1 to E3, showing the
results for the Subtropical arid, Temperate continental and Temperate coastal reference
climatic regions, respectively.
For deviations up to 90 from the equator (-90 east and 90 west), the effect on the
CSER with regard to the EN 61853 results is in general below the -2%, regardless of the
inclination angle. Depending on the reference climate, which affect the ratio of direct and
diffuse irradiance, the CSER for vertical surfaces oriented towards north can be up to
18% lower than the value obtained for the EN 61853 configuration.
79
Figure E1. CSER normalized to the EN 61853 configuration for the Subtropical arid European
climatic profile.
Figure E2. CSER normalized to the EN 61853 configuration for the Temperate continental
European climatic profile.
80
Figure E3. CSER normalized to the EN 61853 configuration for the Temperate coastal European
climatic profile.
81
Annex F. European reference climatic profiles for PV
The EN IEC 61853-4 "Photovoltaic (PV) module performance testing and energy rating –
Part 4: Standard reference climatic profiles" tabulates the standards reference climatic
profiles used for calculating energy rating. Six climatic profiles are used to define the
climatic conditions that PV systems will most likely by subjected to when installed
worldwide. Out of these six, three are considered representative of the European climatic
conditions:
- Subtropical arid
- Temperate continental
- Temperate coastal
The climatic datasets included in Part 4 contain hourly values over one full year, listed as
days one through 365, of the following parameters:
Year
Month
Day
Hour (local solar time)
Ambient temperature (Tamb, C)
Wind speed at module height (v, m/s)
Sun elevation ()
Sun incidence angle (to the normal of module) ()
Global horizontal irradiance (Gh, W/m2)
Direct horizontal irradiance (Bh, W/m2)
Global in-plane irradiance (G, W/m2)
Direct in-plane irradiance (B, W/m2)
Spectrally resolved global in-plane irradiance (W/m2) integrated for a set of discrete
bands (G(),W/m2)
Modules are assumed to be installed in a fixed open-rack, facing the equator with an
inclination angle of 20.
Figure F1 shows the geographical distribution of the EN IEC 61853-4 reference climatic
profiles assumed representative of the European weather conditions. Figure F2 shows the
distribution of the three reference climates in the 1348 NUTS 3 European regions as
defined in the current NUTS 2016 classification. According to the average available solar
resource of the region, this is assigned one of the three European weather conditions.
This may result in regions that in Figure 1 are under two or more climatic conditions,
when represented by its average irradiation value, are represented only by one of those
initial reference climates. As a result, the transition between reference climates in Figure
2 is not progressive as in Figure 1, as it depends on the NUTS 2 regions distribution.
Being based on an accepted existing classification, Figure F2 is certainly better fit (than
Figure F1) for potential use for regulatory purposes. In order to ‘smoothen’ the transition
from one reference climate to another, it could be necessary to modify Figure F2 by
introducing a ‘granularity’ at the municipality level, at least in specific areas.
83
Figure F1. Geographical distribution of the EN IEC 61853-4 climatic profiles representative of the
PV European climatic conditions.
84
Figure F2. Geographical distribution of the EN IEC 61853-4 climatic profiles representative of the
PV European climatic conditions in the 1348 NUTS 3 European regions.
85
GETTING IN TOUCH WITH THE EU
In person
All over the European Union there are hundreds of Europe Direct information centres. You can find the
address of the centre nearest you at: https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en
On the phone or by email
Europe Direct is a service that answers your questions about the European Union. You can contact this
service:
- by freephone: 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (certain operators may charge for these calls),
- at the following standard number: +32 22999696, or
- by electronic mail via: https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en
FINDING INFORMATION ABOUT THE EU
Online
Information about the European Union in all the official languages of the EU is available on the Europa
website at: https://europa.eu/european-union/index_en
EU publications
You can download or order free and priced EU publications from EU Bookshop at:
https://publications.europa.eu/en/publications. Multiple copies of free publications may be obtained by
contacting Europe Direct or your local information centre (see https://europa.eu/european-
union/contact_en).
KJ-NA-29513-EN-N
doi: 10.2760/496002
ISBN 978-92-79-98284-2