International Scientific Journal


An outdoor experimental study was carried out to investigate and compare the performance of three commercially available photovoltaic modules (monocrystalline, polycrystalline and single junction amorphous silicon) under the weather of Pakistan for the month of January. Power output efficiency, module efficiency, and performance ratio are calculated for each module and comparison is presented. Results have shown that mono-crystalline and poly-crystalline modules perform better at high irradiance and show poor performance in low irradiance conditions. Amorphous solar module has shown better light absorption characteristic and performs better in low irradiance i.e. in cloudy and diffuse sunshine conditions. Monocrystalline photovoltaic module is found to be more efficient, having module efficiency of 13.5% which is higher than the other two modules. Furthermore the power output of mono-crystalline and poly-crystalline modules has shown a higher decrement at higher module temperatures compared to the amorphous solar module. Because of better performance in low solar irradiance, amorphous solar module has shown monthly average performance ratio of 1.07 which is higher than other photovoltaic modules under study.
PAPER REVISED: 2013-09-04
PAPER ACCEPTED: 2013-08-23
CITATION EXPORT: view in browser or download as text file
THERMAL SCIENCE YEAR 2015, VOLUME 19, ISSUE Supplement 2, PAGES [S525 - S534]
  1. Fuentes, M., Nofuentes, G., Aguilera, J., Talavera, D.L. and Castro, M, Application and validation of algebraic methods to predict the behavior of crystalline silicon PV modules in Mediterranean climates, Solar Energy, 81 (2007), pp.1396-1408.
  2. Carr, A.J., and Pryor, T.L., A comparison of the performance of different PV module types in temperate climates, Solar Energy, 76 (2004), pp. 285-294.
  3. Amin, N., Lung, C.W., and Sopian K., A practical field study of various solar cells on their performance in Malaysia, Renewable Energy, 34 (2009), pp. 1939-1946.
  4. Midtgard, O.M., Saetre, T.O., Yordanov, G.A., Imenes, G. and Nge C.L., A qualitative examination of performance and energy yield of photovoltaic modules in southern Norway, Renewable Energy, 35 (2010), pp.1266-1274.
  5. Ahmed, K., Kitamura, A., Yamamoto, F., Okamoto, H., Takakura, H., and Hamakawa, Y., Outdoor performance of amorphous silicon and polycrystalline silicon PV modules, Solar Energy Materials and Solar cells, 46 (1997), pp. 209-218.
  6. Singh, P., Singh, S.N., Lal, M., and Husain, M., Temperature dependence of I - V characteristics and performance parameters of silicon solar cell, Solar Energy Materials & Solar Cells, 92 (2008), pp. 1611 -1616.
  7. Rodriguez, D. M., Horley, P. P., Hernandez, J. G., Vorobiev, Y. V. and Gorley P. N., Photovoltaic solar cells performance at elevated temperatures, Solar Energy, 78 (2005), pp. 243-250.
  8. Sadok M and Mehdaoui A, Outdoor testing of photovoltaic arrays in the Saharan region, Renewable Energy, 33 (2008), pp. 2516 - 2524.
  9. Meyer, EL., and van Dyk, EE., Assessing the reliability and degradation of photovoltaic module performance parameters, IEEE Trans Reliab, 53 (2004), pp.83-92.
  10. Mani, M., and Pillai, R., Impact of dust on solar photovoltaic (PV) performance: research status, challenges and recommendations, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14 (2010), pp. 3124-31.
  11. Jiang, H., Lu, L. and Sun K., Experimental investigation of the impact of airborne dust deposition on the performance of solar photovoltaic (PV) modules. Atmospheric Environment, 45 (2011), pp. 4299-4304.
  12. Goossens, V.D., and Kerschaever, E., Aeolian dust deposition on photovoltaic solar cells: The effects of wind velocity and airborne dust concentration on cell performance, Solar Energy, 4 (1999), pp. 277-289.
  13. Chaudhry, A.M., Raza, R., Hayat, S.A., Renewable energy technologies in Pakistan: prospects and challenges, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13 (2009), pp. 1657 -62.
  14. Ulfat, I., Javed, F., Abbasi, F.A., Kanwal, F., Usman, A., Jahangir, M. and Ahmed F., Estimation of solar energy potential for Islamabad, Pakistan, Energy Procedia, 18 (2012), pp. 1496-1500.
  15. Mirza, U.K., Maroto-Valerb, M.M. and Ahmad, N., Status and outlook of solar energy use in Pakistan, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 7 (2003), pp. 501-514.
  16. Radue, E.E and van Dyk, A comparison of degradation in three amorphous silicon PV module technologies, Solar Energy Materials & Solar Cells, 94 (2010), pp. 617-622.
  17. Akhter, P., Baig, A. and Mufti A., Clear sky solar insulation data for Islamabad, Int. J. Solar Energy, 10 (1991), pp. 155-159.
  18. Maluta, E., Outdoor testing of amorphous and crystalline silicon solar panels at Thohoyandou, Journal of Energy in Southern Africa, 22 (2011) 3, pp. 16-22.
  19. Munoz-Garcı, M.A., Marin, A., Alonso-Garcia, M.C. and Chenlo, F., Characterization of thin film PV modules under standard test conditions: Results of indoor and outdoor measurements and the effects of sunlight exposure, Solar Energy, 86 (2012), pp. 3049-3056.
  20. Markvart, T., Solar Electricity, University of Southampton UK, John Wiley and Sons Ltd. Baffin's lane, Chichester, 1994.
  21. Stone, J. L., Photovoltaic: Unlimited electrical energy from the Sun, Physics Today, September 1993.
  22. Sze, S.M., Physics of Semiconductor Devices, second ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York. pp. 79-807, 1981.
  23. Minemoto, T., Fukushige, S. and Takakura, H., Difference in the outdoor performance of bulk and thin-film silicon-based photovoltaic modules, Solar Energy Materials & Solar Cells, 93 (2009), pp. 1062-1065.

© 2019 Society of Thermal Engineers of Serbia. Published by the Vinča Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade, Serbia. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International licence