Site 2.39
Site ID
2.39
Health
COD
2017
Nominal Capacity
10 kWp
Average Specific Yield
1039 kWh/kWp
Total Estimated Loss
10.86%
Possible Gain
1% to 6%
CAPEX, OPEX
4.15 ₹/Wp, 0 ₹/Wp/a
Expenditure / Energy
15.4 ₹/kWh to 3.3 ₹/kWh
Abstract
Loosely hanging cables with low bending radius were found. Junction boxes on several modules are detached and left hanging. It is recommended to (i) optimize the cable layout, (ii) replace modules with detached junction boxes, (iii) retrofit the mounting structure, (iv) add module to module equipotential bonding, and (v) clean inverter fans more frequently, and (vi) install a weather station or at least an irradiation sensor on the module plane. The estimated production boost expected by the retrofitting actions lies between 1.3% and 6%.
Image gallery
Main Findings
Poor cable management: Loosely hanging cables with low bending radius. Missing string labelling at the module end. In addition, the cables and connectors are exposed to ambient.
Junction boxes on several modules are detached from one side and left hanging.
Structure purlins cut asymmetrically and through the galvanization, causing end to rust.
Irregular spacing between ballast blocks causes sagging of purlins.
Screws, nuts, and earthing strips used in the structure are rusted.
Inverter fans are soiled and noisy.
Module to module equipotential bonding missing.
A row of modules are significantly shaded by a parapet wall.
No weather station identified on site.
IR analysis reveals hot cells due to cementing and shading from the parapet wall.
Based on the IV curve measurements, the modules are not underperforming.
Impact on Performance
Heavy Soiling
Based on the IV curve measurements, the soiling loss is estimated to be 3%. Some modules are soiled from bird dropping, and cementing.
Estimated Loss
≈ 3%
Cell Cracks
The EL image reveals presence of cracks and isolated parts, which arises due to issues in transportation or handling. These cracks are not expected to impact performance in their given state.
Estimated Loss
≈ 2%
Near Shading
According to PVsyst simulation, the near shading losses account to 2.66%.
Estimated Loss
≈ 2.66%
Total Estimated Energy Loss
≈ 10.86%
Proposed Solutions
Strings, tables, and inverters should have a suitable labelling (UV-resistant).
The cable layout can be optimized; the minimum cable bending radius is 10x the cable diameter.
Cleaning shall be conducted more effectively due to presence of bird droppings despite the weekly cleaning frequency reported by the on-site team.
Inverter shall be cleaned frequently.
Modules with detached junction box
pose a safety risk and shall be replaced.
Modules significantly shaded by the parapet wall shall be moved away to reduce shading losses at the expense of inter-row spacing.
A weather station, or at least an irradiation sensor on the module plane shall be installed.
Earthing connections between modules shall be added.
Rusted component and structure shall be replaced if possible. Purlins causing gaps due to improper cutting shall ideally be replaced so that the modules rest on the structure properly, and the module misalignment is reduced. To prevent such problems, metal objects vulnerable to corrosion can be painted with zinc.