Artificial ground reflector size and position effects on energy yield and economics of single‐axis‐tracked bifacial photovoltaics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Artificial ground reflectors improve bifacial energy yield by increasing both front and rear‐incident irradiance. Studies have demonstrated an increase in energy yield due to the addition of artificial reflectors; however, they have not addressed the effect of varying reflector dimensions and placement on system performance and the impact of these parameters on the reflectors' financial viability. We studied the effect of high albedo (70% reflective) artificial reflectors on single‐axis‐tracked bifacial photovoltaic systems through ray‐trace modeling and field measurements. In the field, we tested a range of reflector configurations by varying reflector size and placement and demonstrated that reflectors increased daily energy yield up to 6.2% relative to natural albedo for PERC modules. To confirm the accuracy of our model, we compared modeled and measured power and found a root mean square error (RMSE) of 5.4% on an hourly basis. We modeled a typical meteorological year in Golden, Colorado, to demonstrate the effects of artificial reflectors under a wide range of operating conditions. Seventy percent reflective material can increase total incident irradiance by 1.9%–8.6% and total energy yield by 0.9%–4.5% annually after clipping is considered with a DC–AC ratio of 1.2. Clipping has a significant effect on reflector impact and must be included when assessing reflector viability because it reduces reflector energy gain. We calculated a maximum viable cost for these improvements of up to $2.50–4.60/m2, including both material and installation, in Golden. We expanded our analysis to cover a latitude range of 32–48°N and demonstrated that higher‐latitude installations with lower energy yield and higher diffuse irradiance content can support higher reflector costs. In both modeling and field tests, and for all locations, the ideal placement of the reflectors was found to be directly underneath the module due to the optimized rear irradiance increase.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".