DETERMINATION OF OPTIMUM TILT ANGLE AND ACCURATE

INSOLATION OF BIPV PANEL INFLUENCED BY ADVERSE

EFFECT OF SHADOW.

Presented By
SOMIL YADAV
Under the guidance of
DR. S.K PANDA

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

INDIAN INSTITUE OF TECHONOLOGY (ISM) DHANBAD
Introduction:

BIPV stands for building integrated photovoltaic systems.

Building Integrated Photovoltaic Systems harness Solar energy

(BIPV )

.
PV MODULES
Energy generation.
COVENTIONAL STRUCTURAL ELEMETS replaced by
Weather protection.
Noise insulation.

Fig.1. Types of integration of photovoltaic

systems in building.

2
 Continue…

 Performance of BIPV generators is the maximize by installing BIPV

panel at optimum Tilt Angle.

 For correct determination of optimum tilt angle, it is important to estimate

the accurate total solar insolation.

Fig.2. An optimally tilted BIPV panel.

Total solar radiation

Diffused Ground reflected

Beam radiation
radiation radiation

Circumsolar diffused Isotropic diffused Horizontal brightening

radiation radiation diffused radiation

Fig.3. Component of total radiation on a tilted

Isotropic Sky Model
surface.
 Solar radiation computation model (https://solarpanelsandsolarsystem.files.wordpress.com)

Anisotropic Sky Model

 HDKR (Hay, Davies, Renidle & Klucher) anisotropic sky model is one of the most accurate model for
estimation of solar insolation on tilted surfaces. 3
 Literature Review:

 Pour et al. (2011)

• Computed the optimum tilt angle of panel by following the isotropic
Liu and Jordan model.
• It was found out that the fixed optimum tilt angle is approximately
latitude of the location.

 Klein et al. (1976) • For a further accurate determination of the optimum tilt angle non-
isotropic models were used by considering the azimuth angle of PV
panels.

 Roux et al. (2016) • Measured data from nine measuring stations were used to evaluated
optimum tilt and azimuth angle of solar collector for South-Africa.
• 10 % more solar insolation than that of horizontally fixed solar
collector

4
 Jeyaprabha et al. • Artificial intelligence technique (AIT) were employed to calculated the
(2015) optimum tilt angle of PV panels for remote locations of India.
• It was noted that the insolation values increased by 23.56% and
29.64% in the third and fourth season for optimally tilted BIPV hybrid
system.

 Siraki et al. (2012) • Proposed a modified anisotropic sky model considering effect of
adjacent obstacle and weather conditions to evaluate optimum tilt
angle for five different latitudes.

“one rule of thumb can be established that the optimum tilt angle of PV panel is equal to
latitude facing south in northern hemisphere with azimuth angle being zero and vice-
versa.”

5
 Research Gap:

 Studies discussed in open literature are not suitable for determining the optimum
azimuth and tilt angle of the BIPV system for urban application due to their simplified
assumption (there is no barrier between the sun and BIPV system).

 There is no research work on effect of height and radial distance of the surrounding
building for calculating accurate insolation corresponding to optimum tilt angle of
BIPV panel.

Objective:

Determination of optimum tilt angle and accurate insolation of BIPV

panel influenced by adverse effect of shadow.

6
 Scopes:
Evaluation of optimum tilt angle and accurate insolation of BIPV panel influenced by
adverse effect of shadow by employing present HDKR/S model.

Mathematical modelling:

HDKR (Hay and Davies Model, Klucher and Reindl) Model.

The total insolation over tilted surface is given as.
I I I I (1)
beamT diffuseT reflT
The beam insolation is defined as.
I  R  I  I  (2)
beamT b  g diffuse 
The circumsolar, isotropic and horizontal components of diffused insolation are given as.
I  I I 
g diffuse  (3)
I  AIR I   beam  R I  R I
csT b diffuse  I  b diffuse  I  b diffuse
 ex   ex 
 I  I I I 
beam ex g diffuse 
I   1  AI  F I 
 1  F I   F I (4)
isoT sky diffuse  I  sky diffuse  I  sky diffuse
 ex   ex 
I    1  cos  
I  beam  1  AI  F sin3  I reflT
 I  g   Ig (5)
hzT I sky  
2 diffuse  2 
g

The ground reflectance component of total insolation is expressed as. (6)

 1  cos  
where, Fsky   
 2  7
 HDKR model is an accurate anisotropic sky model for evaluation of solar insolation of open
rooftop solar application. However, this model does not estimate the solar insolation correctly for
urban areas because it does not consider the adverse influence of shadow caused by the
neighbourhood buildings.

Problem considered.

Adverse Effects
of Buildings.

Sky View
Shading Effect
Blocking Effect

Fig.2. PV panel surrounded by building of height ‘H’ at radial distance of ‘R’.

8
 SHADING EFFECT
This effect come into action during the time duration when sun is trapped behind an
obstruction. This effect is considered by shading coefficient (Ksc).

Ksc = (T/60) (7) 90

Jun 12:00 Jul
80
11:00 May 13:00
Sep
where, T (minute) is time during 70
Apr
which sun is trapped behind an 10:00 14:00

Altitude angle (degrees)

60 Aug
obstacle. Mar
50 9:00 15:00

40
8:00 16:00
30 Building envelope
7:00 Oct 17:00
20 Feb
Nov
10 6:00 Jan 18:00
Dec
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
Azimuth angle (degrees)

Fig.3. PV panel under shade Fig.3.1. Sun path diagram for latitude angle (Φ=23.8144) in conjunction with
of an obstruction.
(source:https://solarpanelsandsolarsys surrounding building (H=9m and R=12m).
tem.files.wordpress.com) 9
 Sky view blocking
The view to some portion of sky is blocked due to existence of the obstacles around the
panel. This effect is taken into account by sky view factor.

Sky view factor is determined using expression

given below.

1 n
Fsky ,mod  1  2  Ar
 s 1

where,

Ar = Net area of sky trapped by panel and building

Astp = Area of sky trapped by panel itself.
Acom = Common area of sky trapped by both bldg. and panel.
Fig.5.Sky trapped diagram for 40 degree tilt of panel and
Ap   tan (  tan  cos  p )d  p
1
surrounded by building of height 9m and radial distance of
12m from panel.

10
 HDKR/S (Hay, Davies, Klucher, Reindl / shadow) model equations.

The beam insolation over tilted surface is given as.

I
beamT 
 1 K
sc  Rb  I g  Idiffuse  (8)

The circumsolar diffused insolation over tilted surface is defined as below.

 I g  I diffuse 
I
csT 
 1 K 
sc  I
 R I
 b diffuse
 ex  (9)
The isotropic diffused insolation over tilted surface is given as below.
 I ex  I g  I diffuse 
I   1  AI  F I  F I (10)
isoT sky,mod diffuse  I  skym diffuse
 ex 
The horizontal brightening diffused insolation over tilted surface is expressed as below.

 1  AI  Fsky ,mod sin3   I diffuse
I beam
I hzT  (11)
Ig 2

11
 Methodology:

• Computation of shading coefficient and sky view factor for

1. building under consideration.

• Calculation of total insolation for each value of tilt angle from

2. 0 to 90 degree.

• Determination of optimum tilt angle.

3.

12
 Results and Discussions:

0.60 HDKR model

0.55 Present HDKR/S model

Insolation(kWh/m /hr) 0.50

2

0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20

Months

Fig.8. Insolation for HDKR model and present modified HDKR model for IIT(ISM) Dhanbad
(R=12m & H=9m).

Insolation value of HDKR model is more than that of modified model as present HDKR/S anisotropic
sky model does not include the effect of surrounding obstacles which causes shade on panel and block
certain portion of sky.
13
 0.40
Fig.17a. Variation of average hourly
0.35
insolation for different heights of building.
0.30
Insolation(kWh/m /hr)
2

0.25
Difference of average hourly insolation in a
0.20
year for two different heights of building is
0.15 R=8m more for lower value of radial distance.
R=12m
0.10 R=16m
R=20m
0.05
3 6 9 12 15
Height of building(H)

0.38
0.36
0.34
0.32
0.30
Insolation(kWh/m /hr)
0.28
Fig.17b. Variation of average hourly
2

0.26
0.24
insolation for different radial distance 0.22
0.20
between panel and building. 0.18 H=3m
0.16 H=6m
0.14 H=9m
0.12 H=12m
0.10
H=15m
0.08
The variation is maximum for higher storey building 8 12 16 20
due to more influence of shadow. Radial distance of building(R)
14
 28
R=20m
26 Fig.10. Variation of fixed optimum tilt
Optimum fixed tilt Angle(degrees)

R=16m
24 angle with varying height of building.
22

20
R=12m The large variation of optimum tilt
18 angle for building with close proximity is
16 because of higher influence of shading and
14
sky view blocking effect.
R=8m
12
3 6 9 12 15
Height of building (m)

28

26

Optimum fixed tilt angle (degrees)

24
Fig.1. Variation of fixed optimum tilt angle
with varying radial distance between panel 22

and building. 20

18
H=3m
16 H=6m
H=9m
14 H=12m
H=15m
Variation is maximum for higher storey building due 12
8 12 16 20
to more influence of shadow.
Radial distance from building(m)
15
 2.0

70
1.6

Percentage loss of insolation

Insolation (MJ/m /hr)

60
2

1.2 50

40
0.8
30

0.4 20

10
0.0
10 20 30 40 50 60 0
10 20 30 40 50 60
Altitude of building(Degree)
Altitude of building( Degree)

Fig.9a.Variation of average hourly insolation Fig.9b.Percentage loss of insolation due to

in a year with altitude of building. shading and sky view blocking effect.

16
 Conclusions:

 For a given storey height of a building around the BIPV panel, the
optimum fixed tilt angle increases with increase in radial distance.

 For a given radial distance of the building, optimum fixed tilt angle
decreases with increase in height. Similar behaviour is also observed for
insolation.

 With increase of altitude angle of building, percentage loss of insolation

due to shading and sky view blocking effect increases.

17
 References:
1. Pour HS, Beheshti HK, Rahnama M. The gain of the energy under the optimum angles of
solar panels during a Year in Isfahan, Iran. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization,
and Environmental Effects 2011 Apr 29; 33(13):1281-90.
2. Mutlu A, Turkeri AN. Proposed model for design of photovoltaic mountedsteep roof
systems and case study: Istanbul, Turkey. Sustainability in energyand buildings. SIST
2011;7:289-98.
3. Sun L, Lu L, Yang H. Optimum design of shading-type building-integrated photovoltaic
claddings with different surface azimuth angles. Applied Energy 2012; 90(1): 233-40.
4. Agrawal B, Tiwari GN. Optimizing the energy and exergy of building integrated
photovoltaic thermal (BIPVT) systems under cold climatic conditions. Applied Energy
2010; 87(2): 417-426.
5. Prasad DK, Snow M. Examples of successful architectural integration of PV:Australia.
Progress in Photovoltaic Research Application 2004;12:477-83.

18
6. Hestnes AG. Building integration of solar energy systems. Solar Energy
1999;67:181-7.
7. Duffie JA, Beckman WA. Solar engineering of thermal processes. New York
etc.: Wiley; 1980.
8. Yang H, Lu L. The optimum tilt angles and orientations of PV claddings for
building-integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) applications. Journalof Solar Energy
Engineering2007;129:253-5.
9. Tripathy M, Yadav S, Sadhu PK, Panda SK. Determination of optimum tilt angle
and accurate insolation of BIPV panel influenced by adverse effect of
shadow. Renewable Energy 2016; 104: 211-223.
10. Mutlu A, Turkeri AN. Proposed model for design of photovoltaic mountedsteep
roof systems and case study: Istanbul, Turkey. Sustainability in energyand
buildings. SIST 2011;7:289-98.

19
THANKING YOU

20