Proceedings of the ASME 2016 International Mechanical Engineering Congress & Exposition

IMECE2016
November 11-17, 2016, Phoenix, Arizona, USA

IMECE2016-66769
ESTIMATION OF THE SURFACE TEMPERATURE OF A PHOTOVOLTAIC PANEL
THROUGH A RADIATION-NATURAL CONVECTION HEAT TRANSFER MODEL IN
MATLAB SIMULINK.
Mario A. Palacio Vega Orlando M. González López Arnold R. Martínez Guarín
Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana Universidad del Norte
Montería, Córdoba, Colombia Montería, Córdoba, Colombia Barranquilla, Atlántico, Colombia

Rafael D. Gómez Vásquez Antonio J. Bula Silvera Jorge M. Mendoza Fandiño

Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana Universidad del Norte Universidad de Córdoba
Montería, Córdoba, Colombia Barranquilla, Atlántico, Colombia Montería, Córdoba, Colombia

ABSTRACT.
This paper focuses on an approach to predict the temperature
of a Photovoltaic panel under varying irradiation conditions in
Cordoba, Colombia. The thermal model developed considers a
heat transfer analysis in order to estimate the performance of a
photovoltaic solar system due to local temperature variation. The
heat transfer model analyzes the photovoltaic cell as a system
exposed to radiation and natural convection by carrying out a
first law energy balance which takes into account the radiation
energy from the sun that hits the panel and the energy lost from
the photovoltaic cell through natural convection and radiation.
To determine the natural convection heat transfer coefficient, the
Grashof number was employed along with Nusselt and Rayleigh
number in a dimensionless form. The model has been
implemented in the Matlab-Simulink platform that allows to
establish a specific empirical correlation among the Nusselt
number and Rayleigh for PV statics panels operating under
natural convection condition. This experimental process consists
in an iterative adjust of the theoretical equations of natural
convection with experimental data gathered from a real PV
module operation. The variables measured were the surface
temperature, the environmental temperature and the solar
irradiation provided by a pyranometer. It is found a good
agreement between the radiation behavior and the predicted
temperature. The higher values of the irradiation and
environmental temperature coincides with predicted and
observed PV surface temperatures and the thermal performance
of the panel. The mean absolute error of the model was 3.09 K
and the root mean square deviation 3.47 K
Keywords: PV Module, Simulink, Model, Heat transfer,
Radiation, Convection.
INTRODUCTION.
Córdoba is located in the north coast of Colombia and is
characterized by its calm wind influence, high environmental
temperature (31°C average) and high humidity (78 %) which
does not correspond to the test conditions of photovoltaic cells
given by the manufacturers. Typically, to determine the operating
temperature, a mathematical correlations is required, that can be
either explicit or implicit, to establish 𝑇𝑃𝑉 [1].
An implicit procedure to estimate the operating temperature
requires to use a so-called nominal operating cell temperature
(NOCT) which in this case is defined as the temperature of PV
at the conditions of the nominal terrestrial environment (NTE):
ambient temperature 20 °C, average wind speed 1 m/s, irradiance
800 W/m2, zero electrical load, and free-standing mounting
frame oriented “normal to solar noon” [2]. Therefore, employing
the NOCT [3], [4] will create high discrepancy between the real
behavior of a photovoltaic panel and the manufacturer's
performance calculated at standard conditions. That is the reason
why it is important to determine the real operating temperature
of a PV module, as this affects the electrical parameters such as
current and voltage of the photovoltaic modules. For this
reasons, numerous studies have been conducted to evaluate the
operating temperature on the panel and the influence this will
have on its performance.
It has been reported several models to determine the
electrical parameters of the panels according to the operating
temperature. It is also found different correlations of the negative
effect of the high temperature on the solar cells efficiency [5].
Usually these correlations relate the cell temperature to
environmental variables such as environmental temperature,
local wind speed and the incident solar radiation on the
photovoltaic cell.

1 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

 Some researchers have employed a simple empirical
equations to predict the solar radiation effect on the temperature
of a flat solar panel as a complement to model the performance
of a PV Module exposed to cloudless solar radiation. However,
the function used to determine the temperature is linear, i.e. it
did not contain the effects of heat transfer as buoyancy effect of
the natural convection and radiation absorptivity [6], [7].
An alternative procedure presented by [8], estimates the PV
Nominal Operating Specific Temperature or NOST by applying
specific restrictions on the mounting and measurements
conditions of the NOCT process. These restrictions include
orientation, special material, and environmental conditions. This
procedure is closer to the real operating condition however; its
implementation requires a complicated set up.
A semi-empirical explicit correlation was proposed by [3]
for modules of arbitrary mounting condition. The PV cell
temperature and the corresponding efficiency are attained by
introducing a dimensionless mounting parameter ω which
depends of four types of PV array (freestanding, flat-roof,
sloped-roof, and facade integrated). Moreover, this model
involves three available environmental variables (wind speed,
ambient temperature and solar irradiance). This correlation
should be used for wind speeds ≥ 1 m/s, because the model
ignores free-convection and radiation, the latter is important only
at wind speeds < 1 m/s. Although the results obtained with this
methodology have good agreement with the experimental
values, the proposed correlations ignore radiation and free-
convection.
Other authors [9], employed the heat transfer equations to
model the temperature of PV Cells integrated in ETFE cushion
roofs. This model takes into account radiation parameters, the
effects of natural convection and the thermal properties of the
materials of a photovoltaic cell. The modeling was validated
experimentally using a mock-up composed of PV and a three-
layer ETFE cushion structure. The experiments were carried out
under four typical weather conditions (winter sunny, winter
cloudy, summer sunny and summer cloudy). Regarding
temperature, the model presented good agreement, and validated
the feasibility of a theoretical model. For varying atmospheric
condition, [10] developed a thermal model for photovoltaic
panels by employing heat transfer relations to model the
behavior of the temperature on a flat PV Module. The
methodologies introduced can be useful to create empirical
correlations between Nusselt and Rayleigh for photovoltaic solar
panels exposed to local weather, i.e. Córdoba.
EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS.
The experiments were carried out in the campus of the
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, at Montería, Córdoba, from
10:00 to 14:00. The experimental setup was composed by a
Winbright YB125M72-200W PV solar panel positioned
horizontally and exposed to the typical conditions of the local
weather. The experimental thermal data was gathered through a
Psychrometer with Infrared Thermometer EXTECH HD500
employing the IR sensor to measure the surface temperature of
the PV, and the Psychrometer system to measure the
environmental conditions of temperature, moisture and dew
point. For the solar irradiance, the experimental data was
collected from the Solar Irradiation monitoring Station of the
Renewable Energy Laboratory of Córdoba. This Lab is also
located in campus and uses a global radiation pyranometer Li-
Cor PY 6 as the main radiation sensor.
The development of the experimental runs starts at 9:00 AM
when the PV panel is located and exposed to the solar irradiation
to ensure it reach the steady state at the first measure; at 10:00
AM the first measure is made by employing the IR thermometer
to measure the temperature in 5 random points of the PV panel,
simultaneously the environmental temperature, the relative
humidity and dew point are registered; the data acquisition is
repeated every 15 minutes until 2:00 PM; finally the thermal data
is related with the irradiation record given by the Solar
Irradiation Monitoring Station.
HEAT TRANSFER MODEL
The theoretical thermal model is based on an energy balance
method. The energy balance is expressed as the heat transfer
mechanisms involved in a PV panel exposed to solar radiation in
calm wind. The energy balance shown in Figure 1 is expressed
in equation (1) as:
𝑞̇ 𝑎𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑟𝑏𝑒𝑑 − 𝑞̇ 𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 − 𝑞̇ 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 𝑞̇ 𝑃𝑉 (1)
This energy balance is similar to the applied for solar
collectors, where, 𝑞̇ 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 is the emitted energy by
convection to the environment, 𝑞̇ 𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 represents the
radiation emitted for the surroundings, 𝑞̇ 𝑃𝑉 corresponds to the
internal energy change in PV module. [11] [12]
𝑞̇ 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝑞̇ 𝑎𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑟𝑏𝑒𝑑
PV
Module
𝑞̇ 𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝑞̇ 𝑃𝑉
Figure 1: Energy Balance representation.
Absorbed heat flux.
The variation of the PV module temperature is affected
principally by the fluctuations of the incident solar radiation. In
this regard, equation (2) determines the behavior of the solar
radiation heat flux absorbed by a PV panel (𝑞𝑎𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑟𝑏𝑒𝑑 )
2 Copyright © 2016 by ASME
considering the ratio of the direct solar irradiance to the total Convective heat flux.
solar irradiance (𝐼𝐶 ), and the PV absorptivity (𝛼). [13] [14] [15] The convective energy loss is caused by the temperature
difference between PV module and the surrounding air, it is
𝑞̇ 𝑎𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑟𝑏𝑒𝑑 = 𝛼 ∙ 𝐼𝐶 (2) commonly defined in the Newton’s cooling law as: [4] [13] [14]

Radiative heat flux. 𝑞̇ 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = ℎ(𝑇𝑃𝑉 − 𝑇𝛼 ) (11)

The energy loss due to radiation is caused by the temperature
difference between PV module and surroundings bodies. The
rate of energy radiation per unit of area is given by the Stefan-
Boltzmann law. [14] The radiation heat transfer is calculated as:
[9]
𝑞̇ 𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 𝑞̇ 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑡 + 𝑞̇ 𝐵𝑎𝑐𝑘 (3)
To calculate the natural convection effects, Grashof number
𝐺𝑟 is used. It depends on the geometry of the surface as well as
its orientation. It also depends on the variation of temperature on
the surface and the thermophysical properties of the fluid
involved as follows [14]:

Thus the heat fluxes from a PV module are: 𝑔𝛽(𝑇𝑃𝑉 − 𝑇𝛼 )𝐿3𝑐

𝐺𝑟 = (12)
𝜈2
4
𝑞̇ 𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑡 = 𝐹𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑡−𝑠𝑘𝑦 ∙ 𝜎 ∙ 𝜀𝑠𝑘𝑦 ∙ (𝑇𝑃𝑉 − 𝑇𝛼4 )
+ 𝐹𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑡−𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 ∙ 𝜎 ∙ 𝜀𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 (4) Where 𝑔 is the gravitational acceleration, 𝛽 is the coefficient
4
∙ (𝑇𝑃𝑉 − 𝑇𝛼4 ) of volume expansion, 𝐿𝑐 represents the characteristic length of
4
𝑞̇ 𝐵𝑎𝑐𝑘 = 𝐹𝐵𝑎𝑐𝑘−𝑠𝑘𝑦 ∙ 𝜎 ∙ 𝜀𝑠𝑘𝑦 ∙ (𝑇𝑃𝑉 − 𝑇𝛼4 ) the geometry and 𝜈 the kinematic viscosity of the fluid. The
+ 𝐹𝐵𝑎𝑐𝑘−𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 ∙ 𝜎 ∙ 𝜀𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 (5) Grashof number is employed to calculate the heat transfer
4 coefficient by empirical relations between the Nusselt 𝑁𝑢
∙ (𝑇𝑃𝑉 − 𝑇𝛼4 )
number and the Rayleigh number 𝑅𝑎. (see Table 1) Both
Where 𝜀 represents the panel`s emissivity, 𝜎 is the Stefan– parameters are related according to Eq. (13-14):
Boltzmann constant, 𝑇𝑠 and 𝑇𝛼 are respectively, the temperatures
of the panel and environment. ℎ𝐿𝑐
𝑁𝑢 = = 𝑀 ∙ 𝑅𝑎𝑛 (13)
𝑘
In the equations above the emissivity is considered as follow in
the equation (6) [9] 𝑅𝑎 = 𝐺𝑟 ∙ 𝑃𝑟 (14)

𝜀𝑠𝑘𝑦 ≈ 𝜀𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 = 0.727 + 0.006 ∙ 𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑤 (6) Where 𝑃𝑟 in the Prandtl number and the values of the
constants 𝑀 and 𝑛 depend on the geometry of the surface and the
flow regime. After mathematical manipulations of (12)(13)(14)
The 𝐹 terms in the heat radiation heat fluxes correspond to the and the heat transfer coefficient is equal to:
view factors [10] [9]. Those terms are calculated as:
𝑛
𝑘 𝑔𝛽 (𝑇𝑃𝑉 − 𝑇𝛼 )𝐿3𝑐
1 + cos(𝜃) ℎ=𝑀 [ 𝑃𝑟] (15)
𝐹𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑡−𝑠𝑘𝑦 = (7) 𝐿𝑐 𝜈2
2
1 − cos(𝜃) This investigation is focused in determining the adjust
∗ 𝐹𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑡−𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 = (8) values of the constants 𝑀 and 𝑛 to evaluate the convective heat
2
transfer coefficient in PV modules located in Córdoba,
1 + cos(𝜋 − 𝜃) Colombia.
𝐹𝐵𝑎𝑐𝑘−𝑠𝑘𝑦 = (9)
2
Table 1: Parameters for the thermal model. [10] [14] [9]
1 − cos(𝜋 − 𝜃) Parameter Value Unit
∗ 𝐹𝐵𝑎𝑐𝑘−𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 = (10) 𝛼 0.9 -
2
𝜎 5.669 × 10−8 𝑊/𝑚2
𝐿𝑐 1.585 𝑚
Where 𝜃 represents the tilt angle from the horizontal. This paper 𝜈 1.63 × 10−5 𝑚2 /𝑠
employs the PV module in horizontal position, for this reason 𝑃𝑟 0.72 -
𝜃 = 0 in the equation (7)(8)(9) and (10) 𝑘 0.026 𝑊/𝑚𝐾

3 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

PV Module heat flux.
The PV Module heat flux represents the energy rate stored
or lost by the system due to its thermal interaction with the
surroundings. The temperature TPV represents the amount of
thermal energy stored in the components of the module. Hence,
equation (16) is employed to consider the thermal properties of
the materials which compose the PV panel. [9] [10] [15]

𝑑𝑇𝑃𝑉
𝑞̇ 𝑃𝑉 = ∑ 𝐶𝑖 ∙ 𝜌𝑖 ∙ 𝑥𝑖 (16)
𝑑𝑡

In this equation the PV module heat flux is equal to the

product of the specific heat capacity, the density and thickness of Figure 3: Matlab/Simulink structure.
each material that composes the PV panel. The components
considered and its thermal properties are shown in Table 2 The calculation process was carried out as follows: First, the
input variables are introduced using the Simulink block
Table 2: Parameters for determining the heat capacity Repeated Sequence Interpolated which allows to insert time-
[9] [10] dependent parameters. Subsequently, the input variables, the 𝑇𝑃𝑉
Layer 𝑪𝒊 [𝑱/𝒌𝒈 𝑲] 𝝆𝒊 [𝒌𝒈/𝒎𝟑 ] 𝒙𝒊 [𝒎] and the experimental temperature are analyzed and compared
EVA 2090 960 500E-6 before being exported to the Matlab workspace, where they will
PV 677 2330 225E-6 be used to determine the correlation coefficients 𝑀 and 𝑛.
Rear substrate 460 7850 2E-3
Once the variables are in the workspace, the Parameter
MATLAB/SIMULINK MODELATION. Estimation tool of Simulink is used to determine 𝑀 and 𝑛
The equations of the thermal model depends on the PV coefficients through an iterative process aiming to minimize the
temperature. Due to this, MATLAB/Simulink software was used sum squared error between the experimental temperature and PV
to solve the energy balance in equation (1). temperature 𝑇𝑃𝑉 determined by the thermal model.

Figure 2: Thermal model subsystem Matlab/Simulink.

4 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

 This process was conducted for each measurement, seen that the temperature predicted by the model and the
obtaining slightly different coefficients every day (See results). experimental temperature show the same trend.
The final values of 𝑀 and 𝑛 are obtained as the average of the
values obtained in the measurement days. Cloudy and partially cloudy days are good example to
validate that the heat capacity parameters of equation (16), and
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION. the results show a correct approach. Despite the solar irradiance
fluctuation throughout the day, the temperature values predicted
Correlation results. by the model are maintained consistent with the experimental
Through Simulink model was possible to determine the values. This phenomenon is clearly observed in 2016-04-16,
constants 𝑀 and 𝑛 of equations (13)(15). The results of the 2016-06-09 and 2016-06-10.
iterative processes of the Parameter Estimation tool are shown in
the following table: In addition, the sunny days show a special condition. In
these days the predicted temperature tends to reach values
Table 3: Correlation constants results. slightly higher than the experimental temperature, however, the
Parameter 𝑴 𝒏 difference barely reaches values of 4 K. This issue is specially
Mean Value 0.650 0.305 observed when the irradiation has high and stable magnitudes as
Standard deviation 0.059 0.010 displayed in 2016-04-15 and 2016-04-18. This result is distinct
Error rate 9.13% 3.52% from the findings of [9] These authors concluded that their
proposed thermal model can predict the temperature better under
The model developed is presented in Figure 3, which allows sunny conditions. This disparity can be explained by the fact that
to calculate the PV temperature in different environmental the PV module modelled by [9] was isolated from the
conditions. The inputs variables are the Solar Irradiation 𝐼𝐶 , the environmental humidity.
dew point 𝑇𝑑𝑒𝑤 and the environmental temperature 𝑇𝛼 .
Furthermore, the model permits to analyze the heat fluxes and To determine the factors that affect the accuracy of the
the behavior of the convective heat transfer coefficient. model, an analysis of variance has been performed to test
whether there is significant effect of radiation, relative humidity
Therefore, the Nusselt-Rayleigh empirical relation is given or time on the difference between the predicted and experimental
as: temperature (∆𝑇). The Results of the analysis of variance is
reported in Table 4.
𝑁𝑢 = 0.65 𝑅𝑎0.305 for SI units
Table 4: ANOVA Results.
The error for Table 3 can be explained by the fact that the Sum of Mean F- P-
correlation constants only have effect on the convection heat Source Df
squares Square Ratio Value
transfer. In this regard, it is possible that a convective correlation
is insufficient to characterize the local conditions. Radiation Main Effects
Coefficients such as emissivity and absorptivity proposed by [9] Time 137,465 15 9,16432 1,66 0,0772
should be reviewed or adjusted in order to increase the model RH 343,058 14 24,5041 4,43 0,0000
accuracy.
Irradiation 73,8077 17 4,34163 0,78 0,7052
Model validation Residuals 448,248 81 5,53393
TOTAL
1273,39 127
The model validation for different weather conditions is (Corrected)
reported in Figure 4. The plots present the behavior of the
experimental temperature, the predicted temperature and the Since the P values of Irradiation and Time are above 0.05
environmental temperature with the solar irradiation to verify the there is no effect of these variables in the model accuracy. By
model response to external parameters. There is a good contrast, the RH obtained a P value below 0.05, thus the results
agreement between the radiation behavior and the thermal show that there is a significant effect of relative humidity on ∆𝑇
performance of the panel. The higher values of the irradiation Hence, to further analyze this effect Figure 6 was constructed to
and environmental temperature agrees with predicted and show whether there is a trend of ∆𝑇 with regard to the relative
observed PV temperatures. humidity. This graph shows that higher values of relative
humidity generate greater values of ∆𝑇 in the model. This effect
The graphs show good performance of the model according may be caused by the variation of the air composition which
to the incident radiation. Higher values of radiation coincide with affect its thermal properties and the radiation heat transfer.
higher values of temperature and vice versa. Although, it can be

5 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

 2016-04-15 2016-04-16
345 1200 340 1200
340 335
1000 1000
335 330

Irradiation [W/m2]

Irradiation [W/m2]
Temperature [K]

Temperature [K]
330 800 800
325
325
600 320 600
320
315
315 400 400
310 310
200 200
305 305
300 0 300 0
10,0 11,0 12,0 13,0 14,0 10,0 11,0 12,0 13,0 14,0
Time [H] Time [H]

2016-04-18 2016-06-09
340 1200 345 1200

335 340
1000 1000
335
Irradiation [W/m2]

Irradiation [W/m2]
Temperature [K]

330 Temperature [K]

800 330 800
325 325
600 600
320 320
400 315 400
315
310
310 200 200
305
305 0 300 0
10,0 11,0 12,0 13,0 14,0 10,0 11,0 12,0 13,0 14,0
Time [H] Time [H]

2016-06-10 2016-06-27
340 1200 340 1200
335 335
1000 1000
330 330
Irradiation [W/m2]

Irradiation [W/m2]
Temperature [K]

Temperature [K]

800 800
325 325
320 600 320 600
315 315
400 400
310 310
200 200
305 305
300 0 300 0
10,0 11,0 12,0 13,0 14,0 10,0 11,0 12,0 13,0 14,0
Time [H] Time [H]

Figure 4: Model validation.

6 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

 Observed vs Predicted ∆𝑇 vs RH
345 10
340 9
Predicted Temperature [K]

335 8
330 7
325 6

∆𝑇 [K]
320 5
4
315
3
310
2
305
1
300 0
300 310 320 330 340 350 50 60 70 80 90 100
Observed Temperature [K] Relative Humidity [%]

Figure 5: Observed vs Predicted. Figure 6: Tendency of ∆𝑇 with the Relative Humidity.

Figure 5 shows that the model presents good agreement
between the experimental data and the predicted temperature. In
fact, The Mean absolute error of the model was 3.09 K and the
Root mean square deviation 3.47 K. Observe that the model
increases its accuracy when the temperature reaches extreme
values (315 K and 340 K) where the adjust is better than middle
values.
CONCLUSIONS.
This research aims to adjust a theoretical experimental
modeling of the temperature of a solar PV module exposed to
varying environmental conditions through a heat transfer model.
The research was focused on determining correlation
coefficients between Nusselt and Rayleigh through the
regression of experimental data collected from a photovoltaic
solar panel in operation.
The model developed in Matlab/Simulink and adjusted to
the experimental data with the Parameter Estimation tool, is
capable to determinate the PV Module temperature with a Mean
absolute error of 3.09 K, which validates the feasibility of the
theoretical model. Nevertheless, some limitations were found.
There is an accuracy loss at values of relative humidity higher
than 85%. The second issue is the inaccuracy at invariable and
high radiation values as presented in sunny days. Both
limitations can be solved by developing new correlation of the
emissivity and absorptivity values with the relative humidity. It
is clear that a pure convective correlation is insufficient to
characterize the phenomenon at local conditions of Córdoba.
Further works will deal with improving the accuracy of the
model, developing correlations for the radiation heat transfer
with the humidity and carrying out experiments at tilted installed
PV Modules. Moreover, other investigations could study the
effect of the electrical energy conversion on the thermal model
and its influence on PV efficiency and temperature.
ACKNOWLEDGES.
This work was supported by the Renewable Energy
Laboratory of Córdoba and the Faculty of Mechanical
Engineering of the Pontifical Bolivarian University Montería .
Eifren Fernandez, Alvaro Calderín and Yolber González took
part in carrying out the experiments in and did some preliminary
analysis. The authors acknowledge with thanks all these help and
other unmentioned ones.
REFERENCES.
[1] E. Skoplaki and J. Palyvos, "Operating
temperature of photovoltaic modules: A survey of
pertinent correlations," Renewable Energy, vol. 34,
no. 1, pp. 23-29, 2009.
[2] ASTM, "Method for determining the nominal
operating cell temperature (NOCT) of an array or
module. E1036M, Annex A.1," 1999.
[3] E. Skoplaki, A. Boudouvis and J. Palyvos, "A
simple correlation for the operating temperature of
photovoltaic modules of arbitrary mounting," Solar
Energy Materials and Solar Cells, vol. 92, pp. 1393-
1402, 2008.
[4] M. a. N. G. Mattei, C. Cristofari, M. Muselli and
P. Poggi, "Calculation of the polycrystalline PV
module temperature using a simple method of energy
balance," Renewable energy, pp. 553-6567, 2006.
[5] M. U. a. A. A. a. K. L. a. D. S. Siddiqui, "Three-
dimensional thermal modeling of a photovoltaic
module under varying conditions," Solar energy, vol.
86, no. 9, pp. 2620-2631, 2012.
[6] R. P. Vengatesh and S. E. Rajan, "Investigation
of cloudless solar radiation with PV module
employing Matlab--Simulink," Solar Energy, vol.
85, pp. 1727-1734, 2011.

7 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

[7] D. Dusabe, J. Munda and A. Jimoh, "Modelling [11] D. Y. Goswami, F. Kreith and J. F. Kreider,
of cloudless solar radiation for PV module Principles of solar engineering, Philadelphia: Taylor
performance analysis," Journal of Electrical & Francis, 2000.
Engineering, vol. 60, pp. 192-197, 2009. [12] G. M. Masters, Renweable and efficiet electric
[8] M. C. C. B. S. D. G. F. G. G. V. M. A. N. G. O. power systems, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons,
A. S. A. Pellegrino, "Outdoor Measurements for an 2004.
Effective PV Modules Temperature [13] T. L. Bergman, A. S. Lavine, F. P. Incropera and
Characterization," EU PVSEC Proceedings, D. P. Dewitt, Fundameentals of heat and mass
September 2009. transfer, Jefferson City: John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
[9] B. Zhao, W. Chen, J. Hu, Z. Qiu, Y. Qu and B. [14] Y. A. Cengel, Heat transfer, New York:
Ge, "A thermal model for amorphous silicon McGraw-Hill Science, 2006.
photovoltaic integrated in ETFE cushion roofs,"
[15] Y. Du, C. J. Fell, B. Duck, D. Chen, K. Liffman,
Energy Conversion and Management, pp. 440-448,
Y. Zhang, M. Gu and Y. Zhu, "Evaluation of
2015.
photovoltaic panel temperature in realistic
[10] S. Armstrong and W. G. Hurley, "A thermal scenarios," Energy Conversion and Management,
model for photovoltaic panels under varying no. 108, pp. 60-67, 2016.
atmospheric conditions," Applied Thermal
Engineering, no. 30, pp. 1488-1495, 2010.

8 Copyright © 2016 by ASME