Site 2.61

Site ID
Nominal Capacity
120 kWp
Average Specific Yield
1216 kWh/kWp
Total Estimated Loss
Possible Gain
5% to 13%
1.94 ₹/Wp, 0 ₹/Wp/a
Expenditure / Energy
1.4 ₹/kWh to 0.6 ₹/kWh


Cable connectors severely soiled and deformed. Damaged modules were found on site. Several modules are shaded. It is recommended to (i) investigate isolation issues in the system, (ii) replace damaged modules, (iii) retrofit the mounting structure, (iv) re-sort different power class and lower performing modules, (v) re-string shaded modules, and (vi) install a weather station or at least an irradiation sensor on the module plane to quantify and monitor the performance ratio. The estimated production boost expected by the retrofitting actions is expected to be around 5.4% to 12.5%.

Image gallery

Main Findings

Cable management: Connectors deformed and soiled.
One of the inverters found to have faulty fan and isolation issues.
Modules with paint remains stuck on module, solder flux over cell, and damaged frame observed on site.
Module-to-module bonding missing.
Module tables installed in roof edges without parapet walls in high wind zones.
Modules of different power class and manufacture year found in the same string.
Purlin and module sagging observed due to uneven ballast block placement. The vertical posts are not parallel to each other.
Nuts and bolts used in the structure are rusted.
Modules are shaded due to varying table configurations, trees, safety railings, and shed roofs.
IR analysis indicates hot cells from cementing which may cause permanent cell damage.

Impact on Performance

Heavy Soiling
The system performance was affected by soiling loss of 2.4%, estimated from IV curve measurements. Some modules were severely soiled from cementing.
Estimated Loss
≈ 2.4%
Cell Cracks
The EL image reveals presence of cracks, isolated cell parts and dark cells. These defects are expected to impact performance and generate hotspots.
Estimated Loss
≈ 6%
Based on the IV curve measurements, the estimated underperformance is 6.1% for the measured modules.
Estimated Loss
≈ 6.1%
Near Shading
According to PVsyst simulation, the near shading losses account to 2.11%.
Estimated Loss
≈ 2.11%
Self Shading
Estimated Loss
≈ 2.74%
Total Estimated Energy Loss
≈ 19.35%

Proposed Solutions

Deformed and degraded connectors shall be replaced.
Faulty components in the inverters shall be replaced. A root-cause-analysis shall be conducted to investigate and rectify isolation problem.
Modules with stuck paint remains, solder flux remains, isolated cell parts, and damaged frame shall be replaced as they pose performance and safety threat.
Module tables installed in roof edges shall either be relocated to reduce wind loads.
A re-sorting shall be conducted to have the modules with same power class and lower performing modules in the same string at least same MPPT, dedicated for each case.
A re-stringing shall be conducted to have shaded modules in the same string or at least same MPPT.
A weather station, or at least an irradiation sensor on the module plane shall be installed.
Rusted components should be replaced if possible. To prevent such problems, metal objects vulnerable to corrosion can be painted with zinc. Ballast blocks shall be replaced to reduce purlin sagging and vertical posts shall be realigned and fixed.