Performance study of Monocrystalline and

Polycrystalline solar PV modules in tropical

environments

Yimy Edisson Garcı́a Vera1 , Oscar Daniel Dı́az Castillo2 , Luz Ángela Cruz
Pardo3 , and Luisa Fernanda Sanabria Pérez3
1
Universidad de San Buenaventura - Bogotá, Carrera 8h No. 172 - 20, Bogotá D.C.,
Colombia,
2
Unipanamericana Compensar Institución Universitaria, Av Calle 32 No. 17 - 30,
Bogotá D.C., Colombia,
3
Universidad de Cundinamarca, Diagonal 18 No. 20-29, Fusagasuga, Colombia

Abstract. Photovoltaic solar technology has emerged as a sustainable

and environmental friendly source of energy, capable of mitigate climate
change caused by the intensive use of fossil fuels, in order to keep up with
the current world’s demand for energy. Current research effort is focused
on the behavior of photovoltaic modules under real working conditions.
Different photovoltaic module technologies like monocrystalline and poly-
crystalline were tested under the same operating conditions: autonomous
systems with comparable energy conversion capabilities, same electric
load and similar data acquisition systems, operating under the same
weather conditions (on Fusagasugá, Colombia) in a synchronous fash-
ion over a three month period.
Variables like temperature, humidity, solar irradiance, power and I-V op-
eration point were taken to estimate the conversion efficiency for each
module related to those environment parameters. This paper presents
comparison results between monocrystalline and polycrystalline tech-
nologies regarding operating parameters and environmental conditions
(closely related to tropic environments), in order to determine the recom-
mended photovoltaic solar technology to implement in a certain energy
generation context.

1 Introduction

Nowadays up to 6.6 billions of the world’s total population have access to elec-
tricity, however, about 1 billion people do not have it or have limited access [1].
A large part of this energy is obtained from fossil fuels such as gas, coal and oil,
which are responsible for greenhouse gas emissions and global warming. Many
countries are concern about reducing their dependence on fossil fuels, so many of
them have opted for use of renewable energies, to ensure their energy supply and
also to contribute to the reduction of gas emissions responsible of the greenhouse
effect, which in turn contribute to climate change mitigation [2].
2 Authors Suppressed Due to Excessive Length

Photovoltaic (PV) solar energy has grown vertiginously recently, due to its
reduded cost and increased efficiency. Nowadays PV solar energy has become
a viable option for energy production, with added benefits from its low gas
emissions level and extended lifetime (about 20 to 25 years). Recently it was
included as a viable energy for energy supply in countries such as Colombia,
where due to its geographical position presents great potential for this type of
renewable energy [3].
Solar cells are devices that convert photons into DC electric power; they
are based on thin films based on silicon, generating voltages in small ranges
between 0.5 and 0.8 volts. Solar cells efficiency vary with manufacturing tech-
nology, polycrystalline and monocrystalline silicon are the most common type,
with efficiencies about 13 % and 17 % respectively. Solar modules are manu-
factured and tested based on standard tests conditions (STC): solar irradiance
of 1000 W/m2 , ambient temperature of 25 ◦ C, and an air mass of 1.5. However
these conditions are not met since real conditions depend on the geographical
location where they are installed and their efficiency can be affected by weather
and climate conditions [4].
This paper evaluates the energy performance of two PV module technolo-
gies widely used in solar energy installations in Colombia, also commercially
available in the Colombian market, such as monocrystalline and polycrystalline
silicon. Other technologies such as amorphous silicon, thin-film, CdTe, CIGS
or organic was not included in the study due to their lack of availability in
the Colombian market. The variables evaluated are temperature and humidity.
Tests were conducted for about 3 months, at different hours of the day at the
University of Cundinamarca in Fusagasugá headquarters.

2 Background

Performance of PV cells largely depends on the climatic conditions to which they

are subjected, mainly due that they are tested under laboratory environments
(using STC). However these conditions differ from the real ones at the installation
site, which causes performance deficiencies due to variations in environmental
conditions such as irradiation, temperature and humidity [5]. Therefore knowl-
edge and understanding of the performance of the PV module in the operating
conditions of the installation site is of great importance for the correct selection
of the solar module technology.
Different studies have been carried out to determine how atmospheric con-
ditions affect PV modules. Perko et al. [6] presented a comparative analysis
between solar modules, and concluded that thin film is the most efficient tech-
nology compared to monocrystalline and polycrystalline. Amin et al. [7] included
a comparison of more than 3 solar cell technologies and study the operation of
PV systems under different climatic conditions with polycrystalline, monocrys-
talline, amorphous silicon and CIS(Copper, Indium, Selenium) modules; this
analysis conducted in Malaysia concludes that for this latitude the CIS cells had
better performance. Other research presented by Bashir et al. [8] compared three
 Title Suppressed Due to Excessive Length 3

technologies: monocrystalline, polycrystalline and amorphous silicon, concluding

that the first two show better efficiency with high irradiance, while the amor-
phous silicon cells have a higher performance ratio with low irradiance due to
its better sunlight absorption capacity.
Temperature is an important parameter in the performance of a PV cell,
as shown by several investigations [9–11]. Higher temperatures produces a de-
crease in the open circuit voltage, which causes lower performance on the solar
cells. Sansui et al. [12] studied the effect of the ambient temperature on the per-
formance of PV modules in tropical regions, concluded that a proportionality
relation exists between the ambient temperature and the power output of a PV
module. Other important factors that affect the operation of PV modules such
as ambient temperature and dust accumulation are analyzed in [13, 14]; in these
works the importance of maintenance in desert areas is highlighted. Dust and
particules accumulation can affect the performance of solar modules. The wind
is another factor considered in research as presented by Mattei et al. [15]; which
present some temperature models with energy balances taking into account the
ambient temperature, irradiation and wind speed.
Many studies focused on the behavior of solar modules are done taking into
account parameters such as irradiation, temperature and humidity. Mustapha et
al. [16], compared polycrystalline and monocrystalline technologies, the results
indicated a direct relationship between the current generated by the modules
and the irradiation and an independence of the temperature. However there is
a decrease in the voltage due to an increase in temperature. Other studies such
as the one carried out by Taşçıoğlu et al. [17] show a better performance of
monocrystalline polycrystalline modules for a latitude like of Turkey.
The work carried out by Kalu et al. [18] is a project that used the Pvsyst
simulation software, and performed a comparative analysis of different photo-
voltaic technologies. Polycrystalline, monocrystalline and thin film types were
chosen for the the modeling and simulation tests, with meteorological data used
from the NASA database; the results show that for the geographical location of
installation the best technology benefits was the polycrystalline.
There are other works carried out in Colombia where most common technolo-
gies found in the market are compared. The thesis proposed by Barbosa Janett
[19] did a comparative study between monocrystalline and polycrystalline tech-
nologies. However no conclusive results on which of the two technologies had
better energy performance, except for the similar behavior for open circuit con-
ditions. On the other hand, the thesis done by Martinez Raúl [20] an efficiency
study of PV modules was done in Bogotá, taking into account climatic variations
such as temperature, humidity and irradiance; which found a better performance
of monocrystalline modules. However, it is found that its performance is below
that specified by the manufacturer.
The previous works related to the performance of solar modules of com-
mercial technologies such as polycrystalline and monocrystalline have served as
reference for this study and enhance the importance of knowing the operation
of PV modules in outdoor conditions. However, many of the previous investiga-
4 Authors Suppressed Due to Excessive Length

tions only compare how solar modules work under open circuit and short circuit
conditions that are common laboratory tests. It is necessary to analyze the per-
formance of solar cells in real conditions, that is, under climatic conditions of
the site or installation site and under load variations that can affect the output
voltage.

3 Materials and methods

3.1 Experimental design
Two solar modules of similar characteristics have been prepared, whose specifi-
cations can be seen in table 1.

Table 1. Comparison of the PV modules used

Characteristics Polycrystalline Monocrystalline

Peak power (W) 20 20
Maximum power current (A) 1.111 1.16
Maximum power voltage (V) 18 17.2
Open circuit voltage (V) 22.50 21.50
Short circuit current (A) 1.202 1.25
Dimensions (mm) 440 × 350 × 25 510 × 290 × 25

The theoretical efficiency of each PV module is calculated by equation 1,

Where Pmax is the maximum output power, G is the standard irradiance value
(1000 W/m2 ) and A is the module area in m2 . Using equation 1, calculated
module efficiency for each technology is 13.52 % for monocrystalline and 12.98
% for polycrystalline.
Pmax
η= × 100% (1)
G×A
By comparing the modules areas, a bigger efficiency of the monocrystalline
module is observed for practically the same irradiation capture area (0.148 vs
0.154 m2 ). Figure 1 shows a view of the installation site. For an optimal capture,
the coordinates was taken into account (4 ◦ 20’ 14.1” N, 74 ◦ 22’ 17.8” W), south
orientation was used, choosing a 15◦ inclination angle as recommended by the
UPME.
Two low power autonomous PV systems were used for this work, one for each
PV technology. Each system has its charge regulator, battery, and variable DC
loads. For the dimensioning and autonomy, the IDEAM radiation database was
taken into account [21], the system was designed with the worst radiation month
method, which for the case of Fusagasugá is November and December since for
both months there is a lower average radiation [22].
Figure 2 shows a schematic view showing both the photovoltaic modules
and the charge regulators, the storage system that are 12V / 12Ah Netion type
 Title Suppressed Due to Excessive Length 5

Fig. 1. Panoramic view of the system

batteries, this is a dry maintenance-free deep cycle battery with high performance
and electrical resistance against excessive discharges. The charge controllers are
of PWM type with a current range of 10 A at 12 V. The test loads used are LED
variable DC switching lamps, each with power variation between 6 W up to 20
W for each module.

Fig. 2. Schematic view of the system

The system was designed with the following criteria: assuming one day auton-
omy, 25% of oversize design, irradiance of 4.6 kW/m2 , and choosing the month
of worst radiation. The radiation table for the site is obtained from the SWERA
tool [23]. Equation 2 calculates the system power output, where Fs is the over-
size design factor, Consumption is the energy demanded by the load and the
Irradiance is the one calculated based on the geographic location.

Fs × Consumption
P = (2)
Irradiance
From the equation 2 and taking into account that the system power output
must be 20 W, clearing the consumption gives 73.6 Wh per day. The 25 %
safety factor of compensates for the batteries and other components losses. The
minimum battery capacity is set with equation 3, where Consumption is the
calculated energy from equation 2, Days refers to the system time autonomy
(one day), P D refers to the battery discharge depth and V is the generator
6 Authors Suppressed Due to Excessive Length

voltage. Using equation 3, calculated minimum battery capacity is 7.7Ah, so a

commercial value of 10Ah has been selected.
Consumption × Days
Cbat = (3)
PD × V

3.2 Data acquisition system (DAQ)

Fig. 3. View of the working system

To measure the temperature and humidity variables for each modules, as well
as the voltages and currents (thus estimating power) supplied to the load, a data
acquisition system (DAQ) was implemented [24], as shown in the Figure 3.
This DAQ is based on an Arduino Mega 2560 R3 card, with four voltage
sensor modules, four ACS712 current sensors and 2 temperature and humid-
ity sensors based on the DHT11 module. These sensors measure currents and
voltages in both the module and the load, with temperature and humidity data
taken from both PV modules.
Additionally, a DS3231 real time clock (RTC) was used to improve time
measurements, as well as a micro SD module for data storage. Irradiance and
ambient temperature were taken manually. Data were acquired during March,
April and May of 2018, with an 8 hours on average with sunny and cloudy
climatic conditions. Table 2 summarizes the instruments used.

4 Results and discussion

Both systems were analyzed taking into account environmental data, like tem-
perature and humidity. This environmental data was provided by IDEAM [25].
Average temperature in Fusagasugá was obtained with values between 15.2 ◦ C
and 21.8 ◦ C. Air temperature remained at an average of 18.11 ◦ C. Relative hu-
midity data can be seen in Figure 4, having an average of 77 %, with two days
of low humidity on March 15 and April 19 with a value of 19.98 % and 18.48 %
respectively, and the highest humidity on April 14 with 97.80 %.
Temperature variaton of each module compared with ambient temperature
differ greatly due to the heat generated by the photovoltaic process as explained
 Title Suppressed Due to Excessive Length 7

Table 2. Overview of the measurement modules of the data acquisition system (DAQ)

Module Specifications View

Controller Arduino Mega 2560 R3

Model DHT11
Temperature and
Temperature range: 0 - 50 ◦ C
humidity sensor
humidity range: 20 - 50 %)

Voltage range: 0 - 25 V
Voltage sensor
resolution: 4.9 mV

Model ACS712
Current sensor
Current range: 0 - 20 A

Solar Power Model SM206

Meter range: 1 - 3999 W/m2

in [8], as shown in the Figure 5. Most of the radiation that reach a solar cell
is not converted to electricity but heat, thereby increasing the module’s own
temperature [24].
Some studies show the inverse relationship between the relative humidity and
the efficiency of the photovoltaic modules [26], the increase of humidity levels
decreases the current and the output voltage of the modules and consequently
the power output, due that the water vapor particles produce absorption, reflec-
tion (diffuse and non-diffuse), refraction and collision of solar radiation, which
result in the reduction of solar irradiance [27]. Figure 6 shows how power output
decreases when the humidity levels increase.

Fig. 4. Average humidity measured in Fusagasugá

8 Authors Suppressed Due to Excessive Length

Fig. 5. Temperature comparison for each module (on average day)

Fig. 6. Humidity and power output for each PV module

Figure 7 shows a simulation result done in Pvsyst, in order to compare the

irradiance levels and power output with the real measurements done in the ex-
periment site.
Figure 8 shows power output compared with irradiance along an average day,
which shows that monocrystalline technology has better performance, mainly in
noon hours, with peaks at 11:30 am, where the monocrystalline module outputs
14 W compared with 12 W delvered by polycrystalline module.

Fig. 7. Simulation using Pvsyst

 Title Suppressed Due to Excessive Length 9

Fig. 8. Irradiance vs power output

To verify power output of both modules, a test with a 7 W load was done,
where the monocrystalline module performs better than polycrystalline. The
results are shown in figure 9.

Fig. 9. Power output with load

5 Conclusions

This paper show a comparative study of the the performance of two photo-
voltaic modules (monocrystalline and polycrystalline), under climatic conditions
of Fusagasugá, supported by two autonomous photovoltaic systems with sim-
ilar load characteristics. Both modules were almost always above the ambient
temperature due to the heat produced during the photovoltaic process. How-
ever, temperature dropped in the afternoon hours in the same way as the power
output. This did not show significant losses due to temperature.
It was shown that relative humidity has an influence on the performance
of the photovoltaic modules, due to reflective and refractive factors that affect
irradiance levels which results in a decrease in power output. The results show
an inverse correlation between relative humidity and current supplied by each
PV module.
Both technologies shown similar characteristics regarding irradiance and tem-
perature variations; it is more notorious by increasing the load connected to the
10 Authors Suppressed Due to Excessive Length

two systems. Although the difference between the two systems can not only be
verified in the event of load variations (it could have been done under short
circuit and open circuit test conditions done in laboratory conditions), the ex-
perimental setup includes load variation measurements to take account of real
working conditions.
Regarding load variations the monocrystalline module had better perfor-
mance under load variations, with a difference close to 2 W compared to the
polycrystalline module. This difference is more noticeable when the load was 14
W. It is inferred that the small differences in both technologies had its effects
increased under high power loads.
This results can help predict the output characteristics of the autonomous
photovoltaic system, under environmental variations, which will allow improving
designs in technical, operational and financial terms. However, it is recommended
to perform extender tests for longer periods of time in similar latitudes of ge-
ographic areas of interest, with more detailed measurements, particularly mea-
suring variations of solar irradiance that allow more conclusive results regarding
this parameter.

References

1. IEA, “Energy Access Outlook 2017,” tech. rep., 2017. cites: ieaEnergyAccessOut-
look2017.
2. IEA, “IEA sees great potential for solar, providing up to a quarter of world elec-
tricity by 2050 | EMIS,” May 2010.
3. UPME, “Integración de las energı́as renovables no convencionales en Colombia,”
2015.
4. M. Fuentes, G. Nofuentes, J. Aguilera, D. L. Talavera, and M. Castro, “Application
and validation of algebraic methods to predict the behaviour of crystalline silicon
PV modules in Mediterranean climates,” Solar Energy, vol. 81, no. 11, pp. 1396–
1408, 2007.
5. P. D. Villar, Energı́a solar fotovoltaica. Roble, 2010.
6. J. Perko, M. Žnidarec, and D. Topić, “Comparative Analysis of Electricity Produc-
tion from Different Technologies of PV Modules,” in 10th International Conference
on Sustainable Energy and Environmental Protection, 2017.
7. N. Amin, C. W. Lung, and K. Sopian, “A practical field study of various solar cells
on their performance in Malaysia,” Renewable Energy, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 1939–1946,
2009.
8. M. A. Bashir, H. M. Ali, S. Khalil, M. Ali, and A. M. Siddiqui, “Comparison
of performance measurements of photovoltaic modules during winter months in
Taxila, Pakistan,” International Journal of Photoenergy, vol. 2014, 2014.
9. P. Singh, S. N. Singh, M. Lal, and M. Husain, “Temperature dependence of I–V
characteristics and performance parameters of silicon solar cell,” Solar Energy Ma-
terials and Solar Cells, vol. 92, no. 12, pp. 1611–1616, 2008.
10. S. Rehman and I. El-Amin, “Performance evaluation of an off-grid photovoltaic
system in Saudi Arabia,” Energy, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 451–458, 2012.
11. C. Wen, C. Fu, J. Tang, D. Liu, S. Hu, and Z. Xing, “The influence of envi-
ronment temperatures on single crystalline and polycrystalline silicon solar cell
 Title Suppressed Due to Excessive Length 11

performance,” Science China Physics, Mechanics and Astronomy, vol. 55, no. 2,
pp. 235–241, 2012.
12. Y. K. Sanusi, G. R. Fajinmi, and E. B. Babatunde, “Effects of ambient temperature
on the performance of a photovoltaic solar system in a tropical area,” The Pacific
Journal of Science and Technology, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 176–180, 2011.
13. M. Mani and R. Pillai, “Impact of dust on solar photovoltaic (PV) performance:
Research status, challenges and recommendations,” Renewable and Sustainable En-
ergy Reviews, vol. 14, pp. 3124–3131, Dec. 2010.
14. H. Jiang, L. Lu, and K. Sun, “Experimental investigation of the impact of air-
borne dust deposition on the performance of solar photovoltaic (PV) modules,”
Atmospheric Environment, vol. 45, pp. 4299–4304, Aug. 2011.
15. M. Mattei, G. Notton, C. Cristofari, M. Muselli, and P. Poggi, “Calculation of the
polycrystalline PV module temperature using a simple method of energy balance,”
Renewable Energy, vol. 31, pp. 553–567, Apr. 2006.
16. I. Mustapha, M. K. Dikwa, B. U. Musa, and M. Abbagana, “Performance evaluation
of polycrystalline solar photovoltaic module in weather conditions of Maiduguri,
Nigeria,” Arid Zone Journal of Engineering, Technology and Environment, vol. 9,
pp. 69–81, Aug. 2013.
17. A. Taşçıoğlu, O. Taşkın, and A. Vardar, “A Power Case Study for Monocrystalline
and Polycrystalline Solar Panels in Bursa City, Turkey,” International Journal of
Photoenergy, 2016.
18. C. Kalu, I. A. Ezenugu, and A. M. Umoren, “Comparative Study of Performance
of Three Different Photovoltaic Technologies,” Mathematical and Software Engi-
neering, vol. 2, pp. 19–29, May 2016.
19. J. Barbosa Urbano, Estudio comparativo entre variables fotovoltaicas de dos sis-
temas de paneles solares (monocristalino y policristalino) en Bogotá. PhD thesis,
Universidad Sergio Arboleda, May 2013.
20. R. Martı́nez Bernal, Estimación de la eficiencia de un sistema de energı́a eléc-
trica basado en paneles solares considerando variables ambientales en la ciudad de
Bogotá. PhD thesis, Universidad Santo Tomás, 2017.
21. IDEAM, “Atlas Interactivo - Radiación IDEAM,” 2018.
22. NASA, “NASA POWER | Prediction Of Worldwide Energy Resources,” 2018.
23. OpenEI, “Solar and Wind Energy Resource Assessment (SWERA) | Open Energy
Information,” 2018.
24. B. Soumia, M. K. Nallapaneni, and T. Ali, “Data acquisition system: On the so-
lar photovoltaic module and weather parameters monitoring,” Procedia Computer
Science, vol. 132, pp. 873–879, Jan. 2018.
25. IDEAM, “Atlas Interactivo - Climatológico - IDEAM,” 2018.
26. H. A. Kazem, M. T. Chaichan, I. M. Al-shezawi, H. S. Al-saidi, H. S. Al-rubkhi,
K. Al-sinani, and A. H. A. Al-waeli, Effect of Humidity on the PV Performance in
Oman. 2012.
27. Joseph Amajama and Daniel Effiong Oku, “Effect of Relative humidity on Photo-
voltaic panels’ Output and Solar Illuminance/Intensity,” Journal of Scientific and
Engineering Research (IJSEAS), vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 126–130, 2016.