03816nam a22001577a 4500999001700000100008400017245011800101260003000219300001100249500312100260700004103381856003303422942001103455952009003466952010203556  c56104d56101  aJakhrani, Muhammad Moosaa14MPE05aSupervisor - Prof. Dr. Muhammad Usman Keerio  aDetermination of Optimal Orientation & Slope for Maximizing Power Output of PV Modules at Nawabshah   (ME Theses)  aNawabshah:bQUEST,c2016.  a96P, :  aABSTRACT

Variation of climatic conditions, defective design of components and imperfect
system mounting alter the power out of photovoltaic modules. This study was
conducted to examine the influence of system mounting at different slopes and
orientations on power output of photovoltaic (P V) modules at Nawabshah. For that,
two types of PV technologies namely monocrystalline and polycrystalline were
mounted over the roof top of the Energy and Environment Engineering department
building of QUEST Nawabshah. The meteorological data such as solar radiation,
ambient temperature, relative humidity and wind speed was recorded with an
installed weather station at QUEST Nawabshah during study period. The power
output of selected PV modules were examined consecutively for three months from
October to December 2015, starting from 08:00am to 04:00pm at an interval of hour.
The power output of PV modules were recorded by varying the orientations at five
directions such as east (E), south-east (SE), south (S), south-west (SW) and west (W)
and also the slopes at (Y, 26.25•, 30', 45' and 600, and at connected power load at
OW (no load), SW, LOW, 15W and 20W. The power output of both PV modules were
compared with each other in all three conditions, i.e. on every orientation and slopes
at connected load.
It is revealed that monocrystalline module (PV)I performed slightly better with 3%
to 6% more power output as compared to polycrystalline (PV)2 at all three conditions
(slope, orientation and load). The recorded average maximum power output of (P V),
and (PV)2 was 27 W (89.9%) and 26W (86.8%) respectively of the rated power
output of both modules when the system slope was placed at 30' and orientation at
South. When the system slope was fixed at 300, the (P V)1 gave average percentile



Xxi



Power 32.2%, 52.7%, 57.0% and 35.3% and (PV)2  provided average
Percentile 29.2%, 48.95% , 56%, 54.3% and 33.5% at the orientation of east,
South east. South, southwest and west respectively, similarly, when the orientation
was fixed at south, the ( I'V)1 gave average percentile power 43%, 55.57%. 59%, 56.5% and 54.3% and (PV)2 provided average percentile power 39.3%. 50.7%.56%, 54% and 51.13 at the slopes 1, 26.25, 30, 45 and 60 respectively at all load conditions. At all slopes and load conditions, and at the orientation of true south, the (PV)1 produced 25.8%, 6.3%, 2%, 23.7% and {PV)2 gave 26.8%, 7.1%, 1.7% and
22.5% more power output than that of east, south-east, south-west and west
direct tons respectively. Similarly, at all orientations and load conditions, and at the
slope of 30, the (PV)1 produced 16%, 3.4%, 2.5% and 4.7% and PV2 16.7%, 53%,
and S. 7% from (P Vh nu»re power than that of (Y, 26.26145 •and 60' slope
Respectively. It is concluded that both PV modules produced 3% to 6% more power at the slope
of .30• and orientation of true south with the connected load of IOW at Nawabshah.
In addition, monocrystalline (PV)I module produced 3% to 6% more power than that
of polycrystalline (PV)2 module at all slopes, orientations and load conditions during
study period.
xxii
  aDepartment Of Electrical Engineering  uhttps://tinyurl.com/2s4728kd  cTHESIS  00104070aRESEARCHbRESEARCHd2016-11-25l0pMP/13-127r2016-11-25 00:00:00yTHESIS  00104070aRESEARCHbRESEARCHd2018-10-02l0pMP/28-321r2018-10-02 00:00:00w2018-10-02yTHESIS