Site 2.42

Site ID
Nominal Capacity
300 kWp
Average Specific Yield
1190 kWh/kWp
Total Estimated Loss
Possible Gain
6% to 12%
1.31 ₹/Wp, 0.12 ₹/Wp/a
Expenditure / Energy
2.5 ₹/kWh to 1.3 ₹/kWh


Cable management on site observed in poor condition. String with cut and burn marks found. It is recommended to (i) optimize the cable layout, (ii) replace modules with defects, (iii) increase cleaning cycles, (iv) relocate shading objects, (v) relocate installations on roof edge(vi) add module to module equipotential bonding, and (vii) 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 6.1% and 11.6%.

Image gallery

Main Findings

Poor cable management: String cables on the floor. String cable with cut and burn found. Missing labelling at string and module end.
Cable conduits broken.
Modules with burned cells, moisture ingress, backsheet burn and damaged frame found on site.
Modules with broken glass connected to the system.
Foreign objects placed on and under PV tables.
Improper roof access to some sections.
Modules installed beyond roof edge in high wind zones.
Multiple module orientations and tilts found on site.
Module to module equipotential bonding missing.
Modules severely shaded by water tanks, parapet walls, AC ducts, cables running over modules, causing permanent cell damage from hotspots.
No weather station found on site.
IR analysis reveals presence of hot cells due to shading by water tank. This may indicate irreversible cell damage.

Impact on Performance

Heavy Soiling
Based on the IV curve measurements, the soiling loss is estimated to be 7.1%. Modules with stuck cement remains, and animal droppings found.
Estimated Loss
≈ 7.1%
Cell Cracks
The EL image reveals presence of branched cracks and isolated parts indicating issues from transportation or handling. These defects generate hotspots, and pose both performance and safety threat.
Estimated Loss
≈ 5%
Based on the IV curve measurements, the estimated underperformance is 6.8% for the measured modules.
Estimated Loss
≈ 6.8%
Near Shading
According to PVsyst simulation, the near shading losses account to 4.36%.
Estimated Loss
≈ 4.36%
Self Shading
Estimated Loss
≈ 5.67%
Total Estimated Energy Loss
≈ 28.93%

Proposed Solutions

Strings, tables, and inverters should have a suitable labelling (UV-resistant).
Broken conduits shall be replaced to restore system safety.
The cleaning cycles shall be increased based on the results of a soiling study.
Modules with stuck cement remains, permanent damage like burned cells, backsheet burns, broken glass, and damaged frame shall be immediately replaced as they pose severe performance and safety threat.
Module to module earthing connections shall be added.
If possible, a better roof access and walkway shall be provided for safer and easier O&M activity.
Installations shall be moved away from the roof edge to prevent damage from higher wind loads. Variations in orientation shall be minimized.
Foreign objects placed on and under modules shall be removed.
A re-sorting shall be conducted to have lower performing modules in the same string, or at least the same MPPT.
A weather station, or at least an irradiation sensor on the module plane shall be installed.
Shading objects, or module tables shall be relocated wherever appropriate to prevent further performance loss and module damage.