Comparison of trend extraction methods for calculating performance loss rates of different photovoltaic technologies

被引:0
|
作者
Phinikarides, Alexander [1 ]
Makrides, George [1 ]
Kindyni, Nitsa [1 ]
Georghiou, George E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Cyprus, Dept Elect & Comp Engn, FOSS Res Ctr Sustainable Energy, Photovolta Technol Lab, CY-1678 Nicosia, Cyprus
关键词
degradation; photovoltaic systems; performance; statistical methods; LOCALLY WEIGHTED REGRESSION; TEMPERATURE; BEHAVIOR;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
In this work, the performance loss rates of eleven grid-connected photovoltaic (PV) systems of different technologies were evaluated by applying linear regression (LR) and trend extraction methods to Performance Ratio, Rp, time series. In particular, model-based methods such as Classical Seasonal Decomposition (CSD), Holt-Winters (11W) exponential smoothing and Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA), as well as non-parametric filtering methods such as LOcally wEighted Scatterplot Smoothing (LOESS) were used to extract the trend from monthly Rp time series of the first five years of operation of each PV system. The results showed that applying LR on the time series produced the lowest performance loss rates for most systems, but with significant autocorrelations in the residuals, signifying statistical inaccuracy. The application of CSD and 11W significantly reduced the residual autocorrelations as the seasonal component was extracted from the time series, resulting in comparable results for eight out of eleven PV systems, with a mean absolute percentage error (1VIAPE) of 6.22 % between the performance loss rates calculated from each method. Finally, the optimal use of multiplicative ARIMA resulted in Gaussian white noise (GWN) residuals and the most accurate statistical model of the Rp time series. ARIMA produced higher performance loss rates than LR for all technologies, except the amorphous Silicon (a-Si) system. The LOESS non-parametric method produced directly comparable results to multiplicative ARIMA, with a MAPE of -2.04 % between the performance loss rates calculated from each method, whereas LR, CSD and 11W showed higher deviation from ARIMA, with MAPE of 25.14 %, -13.71 % and -6.39 %, respectively.
引用
收藏
页码:3211 / 3215
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT METHODS FOR CALCULATING BAROCLINIC OCEAN CURRENTS
    SARKISYAN, AS
    IVANOV, VF
    IZVESTIYA AKADEMII NAUK SSSR FIZIKA ATMOSFERY I OKEANA, 1972, 8 (04): : 403 - +
  • [22] Comparison of different calculating methods for path loss in ray-tracmig method at 2GHz
    Li, YH
    Du, ZW
    Gong, K
    2004 4th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MICROWAVE AND MILLIMETER WAVE TECHNOLOGY PROCEEDINGS, 2004, : 182 - 184
  • [23] Comparison of Performance of Different Feature Extraction Methods in Detection of P300
    Amini, Zahra
    Abootalebi, Vahid
    Sadeghi, Mohammad T.
    BIOCYBERNETICS AND BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 2013, 33 (01) : 3 - 20
  • [24] Comparative Performance Evaluation of Different Technologies of Photovoltaic Modules in Algeria
    Balaska, Amira
    Tahri, Ali
    Stambouli, Amine Boudghene
    Tahri, Fatima
    Oozeki, Takashi
    2016 7TH INTERNATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY CONGRESS (IREC), 2016,
  • [25] Performance evaluation of different photovoltaic technologies in the region of Ifrane, Morocco
    Ameur, Arechkik
    Sekkat, Abderrahime
    Loudiyi, Khalid
    Aggour, Mohammed
    ENERGY FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, 2019, 52 : 96 - 103
  • [26] Experimental characterization of the performance of different photovoltaic technologies on water bodies
    Kumar, Manish
    Kumar, Arun
    PROGRESS IN PHOTOVOLTAICS, 2020, 28 (01): : 25 - 48
  • [27] A comparison of three balance methods for calculating ventilation rates in livestock buildings
    Pedersen, S
    Takai, H
    Johnsen, JO
    Metz, JHM
    Koerkamp, PWGG
    Uenk, GH
    Phillips, VR
    Holden, MR
    Sneath, RW
    Short, JL
    White, RP
    Hartung, J
    Seedorf, J
    Schroder, M
    Linkert, KH
    Wathes, CM
    JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING RESEARCH, 1998, 70 (01): : 25 - 37
  • [28] A Study and Comparison of Calculating Gruneisen Parameter Using Different Methods
    Zhang, Ting
    Wu, Mengqiang
    He, Ming
    Xiong, Jie
    Chen, Song
    ADVANCES IN SUPERALLOYS, PTS 1 AND 2, 2011, 146-147 : 1102 - 1107
  • [29] Comparison of different methods of Ritz vectors extraction
    Mendrok, K
    Uhl, T
    DAMAGE ASSESSMENT OF STRUCTURES VI, 2005, 293-294 : 143 - 150
  • [30] COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT EXTRACTION METHODS OF ALTERNARIA ALLERGENS
    PARIS, S
    FITTING, C
    RAMIREZ, E
    LATGE, JP
    DAVID, B
    JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY, 1990, 85 (05) : 941 - 948