Abstract
A significant increase in reported glass breakages from the field was recognized during the past three years, where a disproportionately high number of modules were affected by glass breakage. Different substructures and module designs are affected, framed and unframed modules, tracked and fixed systems. What all inquiries have in common, however, is that modules with a double-glazed design with ≤ 2.5 mm glass thicknesses are affected and the problems were observed after just a few months in field operation. Various factors such as heavy weather events, faulty installation or errors in the structural design could be excluded as root causes and our experience points on additional, more fundamental problems that are associated in particular with the continuing trend towards larger modules > 3 m2 and thinner module glass ≤ 2mm. Furthermore, it seems that the residual compressive surface stress of the glass as one major parameter that determines the stability of glass panes has not been considered in this context in the PV module industry yet. In this work, we focus on the glass thickness in combination with the compressive surface stress. Besides qualitative methods, one possibility to investigate the surface stress quantitatively is a scattered light polariscope (SCALP), previously used in the glass industry. In particular, the aim is to validate the SCALP measurement method for the use on PV modules. Furthermore, a potential correlation between the surface compressive stress and the mechanical stability of various common module designs with 2 mm and 1.6 mm glass is investigated.
Funder
Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie
Reference13 articles.
1. ITRPV, "International Technology Roadmap for Photovoltaic (ITRPV): 2022 Results," 2023.
2. P. Sinha and A. Wade, "Assessment of Leaching Tests for Evaluating Potential Environ-mental Impacts of PV Module Field Breakage," IEEE J. Photovoltaics, vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 1710–1714, 2015, doi: 10.1109/JPHOTOV.2015.2479459.
3. A. Sinha et al., "Glass/glass photovoltaic module reliability and degradation: a review," J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., vol. 54, no. 41, p. 413002, 2021, doi: 10.1088/1361-6463/ac1462.
4. M. Köntges, S. Kurtz, C. Packard, U. Jahn, K. A. Berger, and K. Kato, Performance and reliability of photovoltaic systems: Subtask 3.2: Review of failures of photovoltaic mod-ules : IEA PVPS task 13 : external final report IEA-PVPS. Sankt Ursen: International En-ergy Agency Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://edocs.tib.eu/files/e01fb16/856979287.pdf
5. M. Aghaei et al., "Review of degradation and failure phenomena in photovoltaic mod-ules," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 159, p. 112160, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2022.112160.