Advertisement

Meccanica

, Volume 52, Issue 6, pp 1425–1439 | Cite as

Simulated hail impacts on flexible photovoltaic laminates: testing and modelling

  • Mauro Corrado
  • Andrea Infuso
  • Marco Paggi
Article

Abstract

The problem of simulated low-velocity hail impacts on flexible photovoltaic (PV) modules resting on a substrate with variable stiffness is investigated. For this type of PV module it is shown that the prescriptions of the IEC 61215 International Standard for quality control used for rigid (glass-covered) PV modules should be augmented by taking into account their real mounting condition and the stiffness of the substrate in the simulated hail impact tests. Moreover, electroluminescence inspection of the crack pattern should be made in addition to electric power output measurements. An implicit finite element simulation of the contact problem in dynamics is also proposed, with two different degrees of accuracy, to interpret the experimentally observed extension of cracking. Results pinpoint the important role of stress wave propagation and reflection in the case of soft substrates.

Keywords

Photovoltaic laminates Low-velocity impacts Experimental testing Dynamic contact problem 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007–2013)/ERC Grant Agreement No. 306622 (ERC Starting Grant “Multi-field and multi-scale Computational Approach to Design and Durability of PhotoVoltaic Modules”—CA2PVM).

References

  1. 1.
    Meyer EL, van Dyk EE (2004) Assessing the reliability and degradation of photovoltaic module performance parameters. IEEE Trans Reliab 53:83–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Paggi M, Kajari-Schröder S, Eitner U (2011) Thermomechanical deformations in photovoltaic laminates. J Strain Anal Eng Des 46:772–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Paggi M, Berardone I, Infuso A, Corrado M (2014) Fatigue degradation and electric recovery in silicon solar cells embedded in photovoltaic modules. Sci Rep 4:4506ADSGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Paggi M, Corrado M, Rodriguez MA (2013) A multi-physics and multi-scale numerical approach to microcracking and power-loss in photovoltaic modules. Compos Struct 95:630–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Paggi M, Berardone I, Corrado M (2016) A global/local approach for the prediction of the electric response of cracked solar cells in photovoltaic modules under the action of mechanical loads. Eng Fract Mech. doi: 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2016.01.018 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lenarda P, Paggi M (2016) A geometrical multi-scale numerical method for coupled hygro-thermo-mechanical problems in photovoltaic laminates. Comput Mech 57:947–963MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moore D, Wilson A, Ross R (1978) Simulated hail impact testing of photovoltaic solar panels. In: Proceedings of 24th annual technical meeting, Institute of Environmental Sciences, Ft. Worth, TX, 18–20 April 1978, pp 419–430Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sapora A, Paggi M (2014) A coupled cohesive zone model for transient analysis of thermoelastic interface debonding. Comput Mech 53:845–857MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Berardone I, Corrado M, Paggi M (2014) A generalized electric model for mono and polycrystalline silicon in the presence of cracks and random defects. Energy Procedia 55:22–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    International Standards IEC 61215:2006 (2006) Crystalline silicon terrestrial photovoltaic (PV) modules—design qualification and type approvalGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wriggers P, Van Vu T, Stein E (1990) Finite element formulation of large deformation impact–contact problems with friction. Comput Struct 37:319–331CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Laursen TA (2002) Computational contact and impact mechanics. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wriggers P (2006) Computational contact mechanics. Springer, BerlinCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yu C, Ortiz M, Rosakis AJ (2003) 3D modelling of impact failure in sandwich structures. Eur Struct Integr Soc 32:527–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zavarise G, Bacchetto A (2006) Nail shooting on a steel support. In: Prez-Aparicio JL (ed) Practical applications using computational contact mechanics. The TCN series on simulation based engineering and sciences, vol 2. Consorzio TCN, Trento, pp 143–196Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Richardson MOW, Wisheart MJ (1996) Review of low-velocity impact properties of composite materials. Compos A 27A:1123–1131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Xu LR, Rosakis AJ (2002) Impact failure characteristics in sandwich structures. Part I: basic failure mode selection. Int J Solids Struct 39:4215–4235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Xu LR, Rosakis AJ (2002) Impact failure characteristics in sandwich structures. Part II: effects of impact speed and interfacial strength. Int J Solids Struct 39:4237–4248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hazizan MA, Cantwell WJ (2002) The low velocity impact response of foam-based sandwich structures. Compos B 33:193–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ivañez I, Sanchez-Saez S (2013) Numerical modelling of the low-velocity impact response of composite sandwich beams with honeycomb core. Compos Struct 106:716–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim H, Kedward KT (2000) Modeling hail ice impacts and predicting impact damage initiation in composite structures. AIAA J 38:1278–1288ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kim H, Welch DA, Kedward KT (2003) Experimental investigation of high velocity ice impacts on woven carbon/epoxy composite panels. Compos A 34:25–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Anghileri M, Castelletti LML, Invernizzi F, Mascheroni M (2005) A survey of numerical models for hail impact analysis using explicit finite element codes. Int J Impact Eng 31:929–944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Olsson R, Juntikka R, Asp LE (2013) High velocity hail impact on composite laminates—modelling and testing. In: Abrate S, Castani B, Rajapakse YDS (eds) Dynamic failure of composite and sandwich structures. Springer, Berlin, pp 393–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nelva R, Morra L (2009) L’effetto della grandine su cupole e lucernari. Zenital, MonzaGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Johnson KL (1985) Contact mechanics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zienkiewicz OC, Taylor RL (2000) The finite element method, 5th edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, OxfordzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Paggi M, Sapora A (2015) An accurate thermoviscoelastic rheological model for Ethylene Vinyl Acetate based on fractional calculus. Int J Photoenergy 2015:252740Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ojo SO, Paggi M (2016) A thermo-visco-elastic shear-lag model for the prediction of residual stresses in photovoltaic modules after lamination. Compos Struct 136:481–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Abrate S (2001) Modeling of impacts on composite structures. Compos Struct 51:129–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Structural, Geotechnical and Building EngineeringPolitecnico di TorinoTurinItaly
  2. 2.Civil Engineering Institute, Materials Science and Engineering InstituteÉcole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL)LausanneSwitzerland
  3. 3.IMT School for Advanced Studies LuccaLuccaItaly

Personalised recommendations