Article 1

Mathematical Modelling of a Static Concentrating 2

Photovoltaic: Simulation and Experimental Validation 3

Firdaus Muhammad-Sukki 1,2, *, Haroon Farooq 3, Siti Hawa Abu-Bakar 4, Jorge Alfredo Ardila-Rey 5, 4
Nazmi Sellami 6, Ciaran Kilpatrick 6, Mohd Nabil Muhtazaruddin 2,*, Nurul Aini Bani 2 and Muhammad Zulkipli 7 5

1 School of Engineering & the Built Environment, Edinburgh Napier University, Merchiston Campus, 10 6
Colinton Road, Edinburgh EH10 5DT, Scotland, UK; 7
2 Razak Faculty of Technology and Informatics, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Jalan Sultan Yahya Petra, 8
Kuala Lumpur 54100, Malaysia; nurulaini.kl@utm.my (N.A.B) 9
3 Electrical Engineering RCET, University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan; 10
haroon.farooq@uet.edu.pk 11
4 Renewable Energy Research Laboratory; Electrical Engineering Section, British Malaysian Institute, 12
Universiti Kuala Lumpur, Jalan Sungai Pusu, Selangor 53100, Malaysia; hawa012@gmail.com 13
5 Department of Electrical Engineering, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, Santiago de Chile 14
8940000, Chile; jorge.ardila@usm.cl 15
6 School of Engineering, Robert Gordon University, The Sir Ian Wood Building, Riverside East, Garthdee 16
Road, AB10 7GJ Aberdeen, UK; n.sellami@rgu.ac.uk (N.S.); c.kilpatrick1@rgu.ac.uk (C.K.); 17
7 Faculty of Engineering Technology, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Pagoh Higher Education Hub, 18
KM1, Jalan Panchor, Pagoh, Muar 84600 Johor, Malaysia; muhammad@uthm.edu.my 19
* Correspondence: f.muhammadsukki@napier.ac.uk (F.M-.S.); mohdnabil.kl@utm.my (M.N.M). 20

Featured Application: Building integrated photovoltaic systems. 21

Citation: Lastname, F.; Lastname, F.;
Lastname, F. Title. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11,
x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx
Abstract: For the past twenty years, there has been increasing interest and investment in solar 22
photovoltaic (PV) technology. One particular area of interest is the development of concentrating 23
PV (CPV), especially for use in building integration. Many CPV designs have been developed and 24
investigated. This paper aims at predicting the current-voltage (I-V) and power-voltage (P-V) 25
characteristics of a static concentrator known as the rotationally asymmetrical dielectric totally 26
internally reflecting concentrator (RADTIRC). A MATLAB code was developed to simulate the I-V 27
and P-V characteristics of the RADTIRC-PV structure. The results from the simulations were 28
validated via experiments. It was found that the simulation model is able to predict the I-V and P- 29
V characteristics of the RADTIRC with good accuracy when compared with the experiment. 30

Keywords: solar photovoltaic; concentrating photovoltaic; simulation; experiment. 31

Received: date
32
Accepted: date
Published: date

1. Introduction 33
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays
neutral with regard to jurisdictional Over the previous few decades, there has been increasing interest and investment in 34
claims in published maps and solar photovoltaic (PV) technology, primarily based on the increasing efficiency of solar 35
institutional affiliations. cells and the increased economic viability of generating electricity using this method. The 36
solar PV system's operating principle is based on the photovoltaic effect of photons of 37
light interacting with electrons within a solar cell, primarily composed of doped silicon to 38
create a p-n junction. This interaction causes the electrons within the junction to be 39
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
released creating an electron hole which is filled by a free electron within the p-n junction, 40
Submitted for possible open access
given a continuous source of light these individual interactions compound resulting in a 41
publication under the terms and
flow of electrons and subsequently, generate a current. Typically, a commercial silicon 42
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license
solar cell produces around 0.5 – 0.6 V with a current between 28 and 35 mA/cm2 [1]. 43

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses
Therefore, to allow solar energy to be used for practical applications, solar cells are group 44
/by/4.0/). together into solar panels. , which typically do not exceed a maximum of thirty-six solar 45

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 16

cells. Depending on the application, solar panels can be grouped and arranged into solar 46
arrays, providing a larger surface area, generating significantly more electricity. 47
As the most expensive component within a PV system is the solar cell itself [2,3], 48
numerous methods are developed to optimise the energy produced from a single solar 49
cell. This includes tracking systems which change the direction that the solar arrays face, 50
to track the sun as it rises and falls over the course of a day and more advanced tracking 51
systems are capable of multiple axis of movement to track seasonal changes in the suns 52
location [4]. These systems significantly improve the amount of energy acquired over time 53
from the solar panels, but due to their moving components, this also comes with the 54
drawback of increased maintenance and a greater initial investment cost. 55
Another method of improving the efficiency of a solar panel’s efficiency is to increase 56
the apparent surface area of the cell using a lens or series of lenses to focus the solar energy 57
from a large surface area onto the a relatively small exit surface area of the smallwhere a 58
solar cell is attached;, if setup correctly this allows a solar panel to be constructed using a 59
fraction of the number of solar cells it would typically require for a traditional solar panel 60
of an equivalent surface area [5]. Additionally, depending on the shape of the lenses the 61
panel may absorb a high percentage of solar energy when it is not directly orientated 62
towards the source of light, further increasing the efficiency of the system compared to 63
a traditional solar panel. To further increase solar cells' efficiency and economic viability, 64
the two optimisation techniques can be combined into an integrated system capable of 65
focusing the light source onto a solar cell and orientating the panel towards the source of 66
light. Recently, there are increasing interest of integrating the CPV technology into a 67
building [6–9]. A report published in 2021 by the Market Data Forecast indicated that the 68
global concentrating PV (CPV) is now exceeding $790 million and will continue to achived 69
a compound annual growth rate of 14.5% until 2026 [10]. A joint report in 2017 by the 70
Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems (ISE) and the National Renewable Energy 71
Laboratory (NREL) projected that the levelised cost of electricity of both the CPV and 72
traditional PV system will achieve a competitive value of minimum €0.05/kWh by 2030 73
[11]. 74
As the PV systems have developed there has been an increasing demand to model 75
their performance and predict the amount of energy that shall be generated under a set of 76
given conditions. As a result of this, equivalent circuits of PV cells have been developed 77
as well as other mathematical models to attempt to predict the performance characteristics 78
and potential output power of a PV cell. Note that these models differ between each other; 79
each one of the model requires different parameters. To ensure the effectiveness of these 80
model, often they are verified via experiments. 81
Ma et al. [12] described the design of an approximate single-diode model which does 82
not utilise the standard iterative calculated method and instead uses a function 83
approximation method to reduce the computational requirements needed to model the 84
characteristics of a PV cell. Upon implementing the model within MATLAB, they 85
compared the results with other pre-established models and experimental data, 86
determining that the model operated with a lower error value as the irradiance increased, 87
ranging from a 6.34% relative error at 200 W/m2 for the first module tested, to a 0.38% 88
relative error at 1000 W/m2 for the second module tested. In addition to this, as this 89
modelling technique does not use the iterative calculation method, it was on average 30% 90
faster to simulate the modules' characteristics. 91
Li et al. [13] described in detail the design and testing of a MATLAB simulation for 92
extracting the model's parameters using the open and closed circuit currents as well as the 93
maximum power, through an iterative calculation until convergence. Having 94
implemented the model, they then compared the performance of the simulations against 95
the predicted characteristics from the PV cells datasheet and six sets of experimental 96
results using different PV modules, resulting in an average error of 5.53%. 97
Mahmoud et al. [14] thoroughly presented the design and testing of a new method 98
for calculating PV cell parameters using the data provided within the manufacturer's 99
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 16

datasheet and the single-diode equivalent circuit. When tested against experimental 100
results, it had a snormalised root mean square deviation of less than 4.91%, and for most 101
tests, the error was around 1%, therefore, making this aan excellent mathematical 102
simulation model. 103
Mehta et al. [15] designed and implemented a single-diode model using MATLAB to 104
attempts to tackles the noise in the measurements and results in a highly accurate model 105
where the maximum errors recorded were between 2.5938 × 10−5 and is 1.6299 × 10−3 A and 106
the minimum is 2.5938 × 10−5 A when compared with experimental results. 107
Bader et al. [16] conducted a review into existing PV cell models using MATLAB, 108
identifying two models as good with one possessing an error smaller than 3%. Their paper 109
also had a large focus in parameter scaling, which was identified as a factor that is rarely 110
considered and when taken into account, it causes the observed modelling errors to 111
drastically increase, sighting this as an area for improvement. 112
Helmers el at. [17] carried out the modelling of a PV cell using an energy balance 113
model with thermal losses to model a PV cell's efficiency as part of a larger water heating 114
system. They found the efficiency of the simulated concentrator and determines that the 115
system can operate with an efficiency of 75%, but due to the focus being on the overall 116
system, this paper does not provide sufficient data for analysis of the PV cell model. 117
This paper aims at predicting the current-voltage (I-V) and power-voltage (P-V) 118
characteristics of a static concentrator known as the rotationally asymmetrical dielectric 119
totally internally reflecting concentrator (RADTIRC). The structure of the paper is 120
structured as follow: Section 1 is provides an the introduction with a brief literature on 121
different models developed by other researchers, Section 2 givesoffers an overview of 122
solar photovoltaic modelling, and about the RADTIRC, Section 3 describes the steps to 123
model the concentrator’s characteristics, Section 4 demonstrates the simulation rresults 124
from the bespoke model and compared them ison with the experimental result, and finally 125
Section 5 is the conclusion. 126

2. Overview of Solar Photovoltaic Modelling 127

A solar PV cell can be modelled transformed into an equivalent electrical circuit to 128
predict its current and voltage output. An iIdeally,l equivalent circuit for a PV cell’s 129
equivalent circuit is represented by a diode connected in parallel with a photocurrent, Iph, 130
(i.e. a light generated current source) light generated current source (or also known as 131
photocurrent), Iph, as illustrated in Figure 1. 132

133
Figure 1. An equivalent circuit of an ideal PV cell. Adapted from [18]. 134

The expression for the output current, I, is given by the followinggoverned by 135
Equation (1) [18]: 136
137

𝐼 = 𝐼𝑝ℎ − 𝐼𝑑 (1)

or 138

𝑞𝑉
𝐼 = 𝐼𝑝ℎ − 𝐼0 [𝑒𝑥𝑝 ( ) − 1] (2)
𝑛𝑑 𝑘𝑇
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 16

139
where Iph is the photocurrent, Id is the diode current, I0 is the reverse saturation current, q 140
is the electron charge (1.602 x 10-19 C), k is the Boltzman constant (1.38 x 10-23 J/K), T is the 141
temperature of the p-n junction (in Kelvin), V is the voltage across the PV cell, and nd is 142
the diode ideality factor (ranges between 1 and 2). 143
However, in reality, additional parameters must be taken into 144
considerationconsidered, including the resistivity of the material, the ohmic losses and the 145
effect of shunt resistance’s effect ion the cell. These parameters can be modelled as the 146
the shunt resistance, Rsh and series resistance, Rs, and the shunt resistance, Rsh. The 147
equivalent circuit of the PV cell can be represented by a single-diode model, as illustrated 148
in Figure 2, where Iph is the photocurrent, Id is the diode current, and Ish is the shunt 149
resistance current. In order to make the analysis easier, the -1 term in the exponential 150
𝑞𝑉
expression is typically omitted from the equation because 𝑒𝑥𝑝 ( ) ≫ 1. 151
𝑛𝑑 𝑘𝑇

152
Figure 2. Single-diode equivalent circuit. Adapted from [18,19]. 153

The expression for the output current for the single-diode model’s output current is 154
given by the following Equation (3) [18,19]: 155
156

𝐼 = 𝐼𝑝ℎ − 𝐼𝑑 − 𝐼𝑠ℎ (3)

157
The Ish can be expressed rewritten in terms of V, I, Rs and Rsh, which is shown as 158
follows: 159
160

𝑉 + 𝐼𝑅𝑠
𝐼𝑠ℎ = (4)
𝑅𝑠ℎ
161
Substituting Equation (3) into Equation (4), the output current, I, can be rewritten 162
expressed as: 163
164

𝑞(𝑉 + 𝐼𝑅𝑠 ) 𝑉 + 𝐼𝑅𝑠

𝐼 = 𝐼𝑝ℎ − 𝐼0 [𝑒𝑥𝑝 ( )] − (5)
𝑛𝑑 𝑘𝑇 𝑅𝑠ℎ
165
Several researchers enhanced the single-diode model by including an additional 166
diode into the circuit [20–23]. The new model representation is denoted called the two- 167
diode model (see Figure 3). This extra diode corresponds to the recombination effects of 168
the charge carriers [18,19]. Despite providing a more accurate precise representation of 169
the PV cell’s outputs, the two-diode model requires much longer computational time 170
compared with the previous single-diode model [18]. 171
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 16

172
Figure 3. Two-diode equivalent circuit. Adapted from [19]. 173

The expression for the output current for the two-diode model’s output current is 174
given by the following Equation (6) [19]: 175
176

𝐼 = 𝐼𝑝ℎ − 𝐼𝑑1 − 𝐼𝑑2 − 𝐼𝑠ℎ (6)

177
where Id1 and Id2 are the diode currents for diode 1 and diode 2 respectively. Equation (6) 178
can then be writtentranscribed as [24]: 179
180

𝑞(𝑉 + 𝐼𝑅𝑠 ) 𝑞(𝑉 + 𝐼𝑅𝑠 ) 𝑉 + 𝐼𝑅𝑠

𝐼 = 𝐼𝑝ℎ − 𝐼01 [𝑒𝑥𝑝 ( )] − 𝐼02 [𝑒𝑥𝑝 ( )] − (7)
𝑛𝑑1 𝑘𝑇 𝑛𝑑2 𝑘𝑇 𝑅𝑠ℎ
181
where I01 and is the reverse saturation current for diode 1, I02 is the reverse saturation 182
current for diode 1 and diode 2 respectively2, while nd1 and is the diode ideality factor for 183
diode 1 and nd2 correspond tois the diode ideality factor for diode 1 and diode 22. 184

2.1 RADTIRC 185

The RADTIRC (see Figure 4) was invented by Ramirez-Iniguez et al. [25] with the aim toto 186
improve the electrical outputyield which could minimise the reduce the usageamount of 187
costly of expensive PV material; hence, and ultimately minimisingreducing the cost of PV 188
system [26]. The procedure to create the RADTIRC has been described thoroughly by 189
Ramirez-Iniguez et al. [25]. Subsequently, Muhammad-Sukki et al. [26] wrote a MATLAB 190
code was written by Muhammad-Sukki et al. [26] to helpassist the svisualisationse and 191
investigateexamine the geometrical properties of the RADTIRC’s geometrical properties 192
design. For the past few years, several analyses have been carried out to evaluate the 193
concentrator’s performance. This includes evaluating its geometrical concentration gain 194
and its optical concentration gain [26], identifying the most cost-effective fabrication 195
technique to mass-produce the concentrator [27], integration in a double-glazed window 196
[28] and calculating its annual energy output [29]. Based on these investigationsstudies, it 197
was concluded found that it is more desirable to utilise a smaller shorter RADTIRC that 198
have with a wider larger half-acceptance angle and a smaller lower geometrical 199
concentration gain is more desirable than the ones with a smaller half-acceptance angle 200
and a higher geometrical concentration gain because: (i) it sutilises requires less material 201
hence minimises the cost of material, which reduces the material cost; (ii) it 202
capturescollects the sunlight sun energy for longerextended durations period during the 203
daytime; and (iii) the design concentrator exhibitsproduces a more uniform flux 204
distribution of flux, i.e. the amount of which generates less ‘hot spots’ diminisehed on the 205
PV cell, which translates to leads to a lower temperature, and ultimatelyeventually 206
enablesallows the RADTRIC-PV structure to operatefunction at its optimum efficiency 207
level. 208
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 16

209
Figure 4. (a) A small concentrating solar PV window concentrating PV (CPV) window 210
incorporatingintegrating the rotationally asymmetrical dielectric totally internally reflecting 211
concentrators (RADTIRCs); and (b) the rays impinging the entrance aperture of the RADTIRC at 212
an angle of 40˚ half-acceptance angle of the RADTIRC. 213

This paper aims at predicting the current-voltage (I-V) and power-voltage (P-V) 214
characteristics of the RADTIRC-PV structure, which has never been explored before. The 215
previous work could only obtain acquire these I-V and P-V characteristics via experiments 216
which require time and cost to fabricate, integrate and test the RADTIRC-PV. A 217
mathematical modelling will enable these characterisations to be computed in a short time 218
with minimum cost – which is more desirable to the stakeholders. 219

3. Mathematical modelling of the RADTIRC 220

A MATLAB code was developed to predictenvisage the electrical power output 221
generatedproduced from the RADTIRC-PV structure. The code utilises two diodes 222
equivalent circuit model (see Figure 3 and Equation (7)), and the parametric values for the 223
solar PV cell are presented indicated in Table 1. First, the saturation dark current for both 224
diodes is determined using Equations (8) and (9) [24]. 225

Table 1. Parametric values of the solar cell 226

Component Value
Solar radiation intensity, Gref 1000 W m2, AM 1.5
Square solar cell area, A 1 cm2
Short circuit current, Isc 0.0355 A
Open-circuit voltage, Voc 0.574 V
Ideality factor, n 1.109
Charge of an electron, q 1.6 x 10-19 C
Boltzman constant, K 1.38 x 10-23 m2 kg s-2 K-1
Series resistance, Rs 0.047994 Ω
Shunt resistance, Rsh 2148.53 Ω
Saturation current , Is 2.69187 x 10-11 A
Short circuit current temperature coefficient 0.00014 A/˚C
Open circuit voltage temperature coefficient -0.0022 V/˚C
227
228
229

1 𝑞𝑉𝑜𝑐
𝐼𝑜1 = 𝐼𝑠𝑐 [𝑒𝑥𝑝 ( ) − 1] (8)
2 𝑛𝑑1 𝑘𝑇
230
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 16

1 𝑞𝑉𝑜𝑐
𝐼𝑜2 = 𝐼𝑠𝑐 [𝑒𝑥𝑝 ( ) − 1] (9)
2 𝑛𝑑2 𝑘𝑇
231
The short circuit current and the open-circuit voltage and the short circuit current 232
can be obtained by substituting zero value in Equation (7) for the voltage and the current 233
and the voltage, respectivelyin turn. The values of the short circuit current, and the open- 234
circuit voltage, the series resistance and the shunt resistance were determined from the 235
experiment. The experimental setup and indoor and outdoor characterisations have been 236
described in detail by Abu-Bakar et al. in [20]. 237

Table 1. Parametric values of the solar cell 238

Component Value
Solar radiation intensity, Gref 1000 W m2, AM 1.5
Square solar cell area, A 1 cm2
Short circuit current, Isc 0.0355 A
Open circuit voltage, Voc 0.574 V
Ideality factor, n 1.109
Charge of an electron, q 1.6 x 10-19 C
Boltzman constant, K 1.38 x 10-23 m2 kg s-2 K-1
Series resistance, Rs 0.047994 Ω
Shunt resistance, Rsh 2148.53 Ω
Saturation current , Is 2.69187 x 10-11 A
Short circuit current temperature coefficient 0.00014 A/˚C
Open circuit voltage temperature coefficient -0.0022 V/˚C
239
The MATLAB code also incorporated a temperature dependence in the model. The 240
relationship between the temperature, the open-circuit voltage and the photo current can 241
be described according to Equations (10)-(12) [24]. 242
243

𝐼𝑝ℎ (𝑇) = 𝐼𝑝ℎ (𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑓 )(1 + α(𝑇 − 𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑓 )) (10)

244

𝐼𝑝ℎ (𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑓 ) = 𝐼𝑠𝑐 × (𝐺/𝐺𝑟𝑒𝑓 ) (11)

245
246

𝑉𝑜𝑐 (𝑇) = 𝑉𝑜𝑐 (𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑓 )(1 + β(𝑇 − 𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑓 )) (12)

247
where Tref is 25 ˚C, α is the current temperature coefficient, and β is the current and voltage 248
temperature coefficient respectively, G is the irradiations at the given temperature T and 249
Gref is the irradiance at a reference temperature. The ration G/Gref leads to the concentration 250
ratio (CR). The relationship between the CR value that is greater than 1 and the open- 251
circuit voltage at 1 sun (non-concentrated) is presented in Equation (13) [24]. 252
253

𝑘𝑇
𝑉𝑜𝑐,𝐶𝑜𝑛 = 𝑉𝑜𝑐,1 𝑆𝑢𝑛 + ln(𝐶𝑅) (13)
𝑞
254
By evaluating Equations (8) – (12) and substituting back into Equation (7) and using 255
Newton Raphson iteration method, the corresponding I value is obtained for voltages 256
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 16

ranging from 0 to Voc. The corresponding value of power, P is calculated by multiplying 257
the corresponding values of I and V. The I-V and P-V curves are then plotted at the end 258
of the programme. The flowchart of the MATLAB code is presented in Figure 5. 259
260

261

Figure 5. The flowchart of the MATLAB code. 262

4. Results and Discussions 263

Figure 65 shows depicted the simulated current-voltage (I-V) and power-voltage (P-V) 264
characteristics of the RADTIRC-PV structure and the bare PV cell at normal incidence. 265
The RADTIRC has a geometrical concentration gain of 4.91, a total height of 3 cm and a 266
square exit aperture area of 1 cm2. It isThe concentrator is designed to achieve a half- 267
acceptance angle of ±40˚ along its x-axis. The simulations were carried outperformed 268
under standard test conditions (STCs) defined by the IEC 62670-1. From the simulations, 269
the bare PV cell generated 0.035.5 mA of short circuit current, 0.598060 mV of open-circuit 270
voltage and 0.01697.11 mW of maximum power output of. The inclusion of RADTIRC in 271
the structure increases the short circuit voltage to 0.158.541460 mA, the open-circuit 272
voltage to 0.06395 mV and the maximum output power to 0.07582.637 mW. The simulated 273
opto–electronic gain, (calculated by i.e. the ratiodividing the of short circuit current 274
generated from the concentrator to by the one generated produced from a bare PV cell, is 275
calculated to be 4.1747. 276
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 16

277

Figure 65. Simulated current-voltage (I-V) and power-voltage ( and P-V) characteristics of the 278
RADTIRC-PV structure and the bare PV cell at normal incidence. 279

The performances of the RADTIRC-PV structure and the bare PV cell were evaluated 280
investigated under STCs at different angles of incident anglesce between -50˚ and 50˚. For 281
In each simulation, the short circuit current (Isc), the open-circuit voltage (Voc), the 282
maximum power (Pmax) and the opto-electronic gain were determined and recorded. The 283
I-V and P-V characteristics generated from the simulations were compared with values 284
obtained from the experiment. 285
The indoor experiments to characterise the RADTIRC-PV structure have been 286
discussed presented in detail by Abu-BakarMuhammad-Sukki et al. in [30]. The indoor 287
experiments utilised a Class A solar simulator produced by Abet Technologies from the 288
Sun 2000 model, a Keithley 2400 source meter, which are connected to a computer that 289
has been installed with a National Instrument software. The experiments were conducted 290
under STCs to mimic the simulation conditions, and the setup is depicted in following 291
Figure 7. The absolute error for the each reading is calculated using the formula presented 292
in Equation (14) [31]. 293
294

295

Figure 7. Indoor experimental setup to evaluate the I-V and P-V characteristics of the RADTIRC- 296
PV structure and the bare PV cell. 297

298
299
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 16

𝐴𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑒 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 %=𝑆𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒−𝐸𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑆𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑

𝑆𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛_𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒−𝐸𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙_𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 (14)
𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒×100%𝐴𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑒 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 (𝐴𝐸) = | |
𝑆𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 _𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒

300
Figure 86 shows the comparison of the short circuit currents obtained from 301
simulations and experiments for the RADTIRC-PV structure and a bare PV cell at STCs at 302
a different angle of incident anglesce. For the RADTIRC-PV structure, the short circuit 303
current experienced a drop from a maximum value of 0.158.54146 mA at the normal 304
incidence to 146 124 mA at the incident angles of ±15˚ angle of incidence. The value of 305
short circuit current’s value reduced to less than half of the maximum peak value when 306
the angle of incidenct anglee is beyond ±30˚. The value of the short circuit current 307
generated produced from the RADTIRC-PV structure is less than the one generated from 308
the bare PV cell outside the design half-acceptance angle of ±40˚. This adheres to theory 309
where outside the half-acceptance angle, the sun rays will not be directed to the exit 310
aperture, rather they escape through the side profile of the concentrator [32]. It can be 311
concluded that within the ‘design’ half-acceptance angles, the RADTIRC-PV structure 312
produces generates much higher short circuit current thant the bare PV cell within the 313
‘design’ half-acceptance angles. 314
A similar trend is demonstrated by the bare PV cell, where the value of the simulated 315
short circuit current gradually dropped from the maximum value of 0.035.5 mA at normal 316
incidence to lower values when the the angle of incident anglece was increased from 0˚ to 317
±50˚. 318
The simulation values of the short circuit current agreed well with the experiment 319
values for both the RADTIRC-PV structure and the bare PV cell, with the maximum 320
highest error of 2.123.97% recorded at the angle of incident anglece of ±150˚. As for the 321
bare PV cell, the maximum error of 4.03% recorded at the angle of incidence of ±50˚ when 322
the simulation was compared with the experiment. 323

324
Figure 86. Comparison of the short circuit currents obtained from simulations and experiments for 325
the RADTIRC-PV structure and a bare PV cell at STCs. 326

Figures 97 and 108 show the comparison of the open circuit voltages obtained from 327
simulations and experiments for the RADTIRC-PV structure and a bare PV cell at STCs at 328
a different angle of incidence, respectivelycorrespondingly. For the RADTIRC-PV 329
structure, tThe simulated open circuit voltage for the RADTIRC-PV structure experienced 330
a gradual drop from a maximum value of 65 m0.639 V at the normal incidence to 0.57554 331
m V at ±560˚ angle of incidence. The simulation values of the open-circuit voltage agreed 332
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 16

well with the experiment values for the RADTIRC-PV structure, with the maximum error 333
of 7.035.39% recorded at the angle of incidence of ±510˚ and ±20˚. 334

335
Figure 97. Comparison of the open-circuit voltages obtained from simulations and experiments for 336
the RADTIRC-PV structure at STCs. 337

Meanwhile, For the bare PV cell, tthe simulated open circuit voltage for the bare PV 338
cell experienced a gradual drop from a maximum value of 60 0.598 mV at the normal 339
incidence to 0.585 mV at ±560˚ angle of incidence. The maximum error of 3.789.50% 340
recorded at the angle of incidence of ±210˚ when the simulation was compared with the 341
experiment. 342

343
Figure 108. Comparison of the open-circuit voltage obtained from simulations and experiments 344
for the bare PV cells at STCs. 345

In terms ofLooking at the maximum power generation, Figures 119 shows the 346
comparison of the values obtained from simulations and experiments for the RADTIRC- 347
PV structure and a bare PV cell at STCs at a different angle of incident anglesnce. For the 348
RADTIRC-PV structure, the simulations indicated that the peak value of 0.075682.37 m W 349
was achieved at normal incidence. This value reduced to 75.630.0626 mW at ±15˚ angle of 350
incidence. The maximum power value continued to drop reduced to less than half of the 351
maximum peak value when the angle of incident angle ce is beyond ±30˚. The value of the 352
maximum power value generated produced from the RADTIRC-PV structure is less than 353
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 16

the one generated produced from the bare PV cell outside the design half-acceptance angle 354
of ±40˚. 355

356

357
Figure 119. Comparison of the maximum powers obtained from simulations and experiments for 358
the RADTIRC-PV structure and a bare PV cell at STCs. 359

360
A similar trend is demonstrated by the bare PV cell, where the value of the simulated 361
maximum power gradually dropped from the peak value of 0.016917.11 m W at normal 362
incidence to lower values when the angle of incidencethe incident angle was increased 363
raised from 0˚ to ±50˚. 364
The maximum power simulation values showed a good agreement with the 365
experiment values for the RADTIRC-PV structure, with the maximum highest error of 366
16.7912.03% recorded at the angle of incident angle ce of ±50˚. As for the bare PV cell, the 367
maximum error of 15.8861% was recorded at the angle of incidence of ±150˚ when the 368
simulation was compared with the experiment. 369
Figure 120 shows the comparisonassessment of the opto-electronic gains obtained 370
from simulations and experiments for the RADTIRC-PV structure and a bare PV cell at 371
STCs. The simulated opto-electronic gain experienced a drop from a maximum value of 372
4.417 at the normal incidence to 4.263.60 at ±15˚ angle of incidence. The opto-electronic 373
gain value reduced to less than half of the maximum value when the angle of incidenct 374
anglee is beyond ±30˚. The value of the opto-electronic gain value is less than one outside 375
beyond the design half-acceptance angle of ±40˚. In this case, the simulations matched the 376
experimental value perfectly.The maximum error of 0.06% was recorded at the angle of 377
incidence of ±50˚ when the simulation was compared with the experiment. 378
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 16

379
Figure 120. Comparison of the opto-electronic gains obtained from simulations and experiments 380
for the RADTIRC-PV structure and a bare PV cell at STCs. 381

The deviation difference between the simulation and experimental values can be 382
attributed contributed to by several reasons, and these include (i) errors during the 383
manufacturing processes which made the physical dimensions of the RADTIRC to differ 384
deviate from the dimensions of the CAD design dimensions, irregular surfaces of the 385
entrance aperture’s irregular surfaces and over-polishing on the side profile of the 386
RADTIRC’s side profile; (ii) errors that occurred during the assembly processes where the 387
effective area of the PV cell was reduced due to soldering of the tabbing wire on the solar 388
PV cells, misalignment between the exit aperture of the RADTIRC and the solar cells, as 389
well as losses due to the index matching gel at the lower part of the RADTIRC profile due 390
to the index matching gel; and (iii) errors attributed to associated with the sun rays of the 391
sun such as reflection on the front surface of the concentrator and scattering which reduces 392
the total rays reaching arriving at the PV cell attached to exit aperture of the RADTIRC. 393

5. Conclusions 394
There has been an increasing demand to be able to model the performance and 395
predict the amount of energy that could be generated from any solar PV cell. As a result 396
of this, equivalent circuits of PV cells have been developed as well as other mathematical 397
models to attempt to predict the performance characteristics and potential output power 398
of a PV cell by many researchers. This paper discussed a MATLAB code's performance, 399
which was developed to simulate the I-V and P-V characteristics of the RADTIRC-PV 400
structure. 401
The performances of the RADTIRC-PV structure and the bare PV cell were evaluated 402
simulated under STCs at different angles of incident angles ranging from ce between -50˚ 403
toand 50˚. and the results were compared with the ones obtained from indoor 404
experiments. For each simulation, the short circuit current (Isc), the open-circuit voltage 405
(Voc), the maximum power (Pmax) and the opto-electronic gain were determined and 406
recorded and were compared with values obtained from the experiment. The simulation 407
values of the short circuit current agreed well with the experiment values for the 408
RADTIRC-PV structure, with the maximum error of 3.972.12% recorded obtained at the 409
angle of incident anglece of ±150˚. For the open-circuit voltage, the maximum highest error 410
of 7.035.89% recorded achieved at the angle of incident anglece of ±1500˚ and ±20˚. The 411
maximum power's simulation values achieved the maximum highest error of 16.7912.03% 412
recordedlogged at the angle of incident anglece of ±50˚ when compared with the 413
experimental value. As for the opto-electronic gain, no error were recorded the maximum 414
error of 0.06% was recorded at the angle of incidence of ±50˚ when the simulation was 415
compared with the experiment. It can be concluded that the simulation model is able to 416
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 16

predict the I-V and P-V characteristics of the RADTIRC-PV structure with good accuracy 417
when compared with the experiment. It is expected the development of this code will 418
enable the stakeholders to compute the I-V and P-V characteristics of the RADTIRC in a 419
short period and in a cost effective way, i.e. without the need to fabricate and carry out 420
experimental work. 421
422
The deviation can be attributed to several reasons, and these include [20]: (i) errors 423
during the manufacturing processes which made the physical dimensions of the 424
RADTIRC to differ from the CAD design dimensions, irregular surfaces of the entrance 425
aperture and over-polishing on the side profile of the RADTIRC; (ii) errors during the 426
assembly processes where the effective area of the PV cell was reduced due to soldering 427
of the tabbing wire on the solar cells, misalignment between the exit aperture of the 428
RADTIRC and the solar cells, as well as losses due to the index matching gel at the lower 429
part of the RADTIRC profile; and (iii) errors associated with the sun rays such as reflection 430
on the front surface of the concentrator and scattering which reduces the total rays 431
reaching the PV cell attached to exit aperture of the RADTIRC. 432
433
Author Contributions: Conceptualisation, F.M.-S.; Data curation, F.M.-S.; Formal analysis, F.M.-S., 434
S.H.A.-B. and C.K.; Funding acquisition, F.M.-S., S.H.A.-B., J.A.A.-R., M.N.M. and N.A.B.; 435
Investigation, F.M.-S., S.H.A.-B. and C.K.; Methodology, F.M.-S.; Project administration, F.M.-S.; 436
Resources, F.M.-S.; Software, F.M.-S. and N.S.; Supervision, F.M.-S.; Validation, F.M.-S., S.H.A.-B. 437
and N.S.; Visualization, F.M.-S. and S.H.A.-B.; Writing – original draft, F.M.-S., S.H.A.-B., N.S., and 438
C.K.; Writing – review & editing, F.M.-S., H.F., S.H.A.-B., J.A.A.-R., N.S., C.K., M.N.M., N.A.B. and 439
M.Z. and All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. 440

Funding: The authors would like to thank Edinburgh Napier University under the Research 441
Excellence Grant (REG) and the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia under the Visiting Researcher 442
(Publication) scheme (Q.J090000.21A4.00D20). The Article Processing Charges (APC) is funded by 443
Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo (ANID) through the projects Fondecyt regular 444
1200055 and Fondef ID19I10165 and by the Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María (UTFSM) 445
through the project PI_m_19_01. 446

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the 447
design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the 448
manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results. 449

References 450

1. Qazi, S. Mobile Photovoltaic Systems for Disaster Relief and Remote Areas. In Standalone Photovoltaic (PV) Systems for Disaster 451

Relief and Remote Areas; Elsevier: Massachusetts, USA, 2017; pp. 83–112. 452

2. IEA PVPS Trends in Photovoltaic Applications 2020; Paris, France, 2020; 453

3. Munir, A.B.; Muhammad-Sukki, F.; Bani, N.A. Renewables: Solar energy needs focus. Nature 2016, 529, 466. 454

4. Martinez-Plaza, D.; Abdallah, A.; Figgis, B.W.; Mirza, T. Performance Improvement Techniques for Photovoltaic Systems in 455

Qatar: Results of First year of Outdoor Exposure. Energy Procedia 2015, 77, 386–396. 456

5. Alamoudi, A.; Saaduddin, S.M.; Munir, A.B.; Muhammad-Sukki, F.; Abu-Bakar, S.H.; Mohd Yasin, S.H.; Karim, R.; Bani, 457

N.A.; Mas’ud, A.A.; Ardila-Rey, J.A.; et al. Using static concentrator technology to achieve global energy goal. Sustainability 458

2019, 11, 3056:1–22. 459

6. Li, G.; Xuan, Q.; Akram, M.W.; Golizadeh Akhlaghi, Y.; Liu, H.; Shittu, S. Building integrated solar concentrating systems: A 460

review. Appl. Energy 2020, 260, 114288. 461

7. Marín-Sáez, J.; Chemisana, D.; Atencia, J.; Collados, M.V. Outdoor performance evaluation of a holographic solar 462

concentrator optimized for building integration. Appl. Energy 2019, 250, 1073–1084. 463

8. Day, J.; Senthilarasu, S.; Mallick, T.K. Enhanced efficiency for building integrated concentrator photovoltaic modules based 464

on rare earth doped optics. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2019, 199, 83–90. 465
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 16

9. Xuan, Q.; Li, G.; Lu, Y.; Zhao, X.; Su, Y.; Ji, J.; Pei, G. A general optimization strategy for the annual performance enhancement 466

of a solar concentrating system incorporated in the south-facing wall of a building. Indoor Built Environ. 2020, 29, 1386–1398. 467

10. Market Data Forecast Concentrator Photovoltaic (CPV) Market Segmentation By Product (Reflector and Refractor), By Application 468

(Utility and Commercial), By Concentration Level (High and Low) and Region - Industry Forecast of 2021 to 2026; Telangana, 2021; 469

11. Wiesenfarth, M.; Philipps, S.P.; Bett, A.W.; Horowitz, K.; Kurtz, S. Current Status of Concentrator Photovoltaic (CPV) Technology; 470

Virginia, USA, 2017; 471

12. Ma, J.; Man, K.L.; Ting, T.O.; Zhang, N.; Guan, S.U.; Wong, P.W.H. Approximate single-diode photovoltaic model for efficient 472

I-V characteristics estimation. Sci. World J. 2013, 2013. 473

13. Li, W.; Paul, M.C.; Baig, H.; Siviter, J.; Montecucco, A.; Mallick, T.K.; Knox, A.R. A three-point-based electrical model and its 474

application in a photovoltaic thermal hybrid roof-top system with crossed compound parabolic concentrator. Renew. Energy 475

2019, 130, 400–415. 476

14. Mahmoud, Y.A.; Xiao, W.; Zeineldin, H.H. A parameterization approach for enhancing PV model accuracy. IEEE Trans. Ind. 477

Electron. 2013, 60, 5708–5716. 478

15. Mehta, H.K.; Warke, H.; Kukadiya, K.; Panchal, A.K. Accurate Expressions for Single-Diode-Model Solar Cell 479

Parameterization. IEEE J. Photovoltaics 2019, 9, 803–810. 480

16. Bader, S.; Ma, X.; Oelmann, B. One-diode photovoltaic model parameters at indoor illumination levels – A comparison. Sol. 481

Energy 2019, 180, 707–716. 482

17. Helmers, H.; Bett, A.W.; Parisi, J.; Agert, C. Modeling of concentrating photovoltaic and thermal systems. Prog. Photovoltaics 483

Res. Appl. 2014, 22, 427–439. 484

18. Ishaque, K.; Salam, Z. An improved modeling method to determine the model parameters of photovoltaic (PV) modules 485

using differential evolution (DE). Sol. Energy 2011, 85, 2349–2359. 486

19. Bonkoungou, D.; Koalaga, Z.; Njomo, D. Modelling and simulation of photovoltaic module considering single-diode 487

equivalent circuit model in MATLAB. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Adv. Eng. 2013, 3, 493–502. 488

20. Ishaque, K.; Salam, Z.; Taheri, H. Simple, fast and accurate two-diode model for photovoltaic modules. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. 489

Cells 2011, 95, 586–594. 490

21. Nishioka, K.; Sakitani, N.; Uraoka, Y.; Fuyuki, T. Analysis of multicrystalline silicon solar cells by modified 3-diode 491

equivalent circuit model taking leakage current through periphery into consideration. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2007, 91, 492

1222–1227. 493

22. Kassis, A.; Saad, M. Analysis of multi-crystalline silicon solar cells at low illumination levels using a modified two-diode 494

model. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2010, 94, 2108–2112. 495

23. Gow, J.A.; Manning, C.D. Development of a photovoltaic array model for use in power-electronics simulation studies. IEE 496

Proc. - Electr. Power Appl. 1999, 146, 193. 497

24. Mammo, E.D.; Sellami, N.; Mallick, T.K. Performance analysis of a reflective 3D crossed compound parabolic concentrating 498

photovoltaic system for building façade integration. Prog. Photovoltaics Res. Appl. 2013, 21, 1095–1103. 499
25. Ramirez-iniguez, R.; Muhammad-Sukki, F.; McMeekin, S.G.; Stewart, B.G. Optical element (Patent No. US9,910,253,B2) 2018, 500

1–26. 501

26. Muhammad-Sukki, F.; Abu-Bakar, S.H.; Ramirez-Iniguez, R.; McMeekin, S.G.; Stewart, B.G.; Sarmah, N.; Mallick, T.K.; Munir, 502

A.B.; Mohd Yasin, S.H.; Abdul Rahim, R. Mirror symmetrical dielectric totally internally reflecting concentrator for building 503

integrated photovoltaic systems. Appl. Energy 2014, 113, 32–40. 504

27. Abu-Bakar, S.H.; Muhammad-Sukki, F.; Freier, D.; Ramirez-Iniguez, R.; Mallick, T.K.; Munir, A.B.; Mohd Yasin, S.H.; 505

Abubakar Mas’ud, A.; Md Yunus, N. Optimisation of the performance of a novel rotationally asymmetrical optical 506

concentrator design for building integrated photovoltaic system. Energy 2015, 90, 1033–1045. 507
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 16

28. Abu-Bakar, S.H.; Muhammad-Sukki, F.; Freier, D.; Ramirez-Iniguez, R.; Mallick, T.K.; Munir, A.B.; Mohd Yasin, S.H.; 508

Abubakar Mas’ud, A.; Bani, N.A. Performance analysis of a solar window incorporating a novel rotationally asymmetrical 509

concentrator. Energy 2016, 99, 181–192. 510

29. Freier, D.; Muhammad-Sukki, F.; Abu-Bakar, S.; Ramirez-Iniguez, R.; Munir, A.B.; Mohd Yasin, S.H.; Bani, N.A.; Abubakar 511

Mas’ud, A.; Ardila-Rey, J.A.; Karim, M.E. Annual prediction output of an RADTIRC-PV module. Energies 2018, 11, 544:1–20. 512

30. Muhammad-Sukki, F.; Abu-Bakar, S.H.; Ramirez-Iniguez, R.; McMeekin, S.G.; Stewart, B.G.; Munir, A.B.; Mohd Yasin, S.H.; 513

Abdul Rahim, R. Performance analysis of a mirror symmetrical dielectric totally internally reflecting concentrator for 514

building integrated photovoltaic systems. Appl. Energy 2013, 111, 288–299. 515

31. Mayer, M.J.; Gróf, G. Extensive comparison of physical models for photovoltaic power forecasting. Appl. Energy 2020, 283, 516

116239. 517

32. Welford, W.T.; Winston, R. High Collection Nonimaging Optics; Academic Press: California, USA, 1989; ISBN 9780127428857. 518
519