Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64 (2016) 382–393

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Performance enhancement of solar photovoltaic cells using effective

cooling methods: A review
S. Sargunanathan a,n, A. Elango b, S. Tharves Mohideen c
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Annamalai Polytechnic College, Chettinad, Tamilnadu 630 102, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, A C College of Engineering & Technology, Karaikudi, Tamilnadu 630 004, India
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Road Transport Technology, Erode, Tamilnadu 638 316, India

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The Photovoltaic (PV) cells are sensitive to temperature variations. When the ambient temperature and
Received 4 April 2016 the intensity of solar irradiance falling on the PV cells increases, the operating temperature of the PV cells
Accepted 16 June 2016 also increases linearly. This increase in operating temperature of the PV cells leads to reduction in open
circuit voltage, fill factor and power output for mono and polycrystalline PV cells which are used in most
Keywords: of the power applications. The net results lead to the loss of conversion efficiency and irreversible da-
Photovoltaic cells mage to the PV cells materials. Therefore, to overcome these effects and to maintain the operating
Passive cooling temperature of the PV cells within the manufacturer specified value, it is necessary to remove heat from
Active cooling the PV cells by proper cooling methods. This review presents an overview on passive cooling (heat pipe
Immersion cooling
based and by fins), active cooling (by spraying water), liquid immersion cooling and cooling by em-
Phase change material
ploying phase change material (PCM) to enhance the performance of the commercially available PV and
Effective cooling
concentrated photovoltaic (CPV) cells.
& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382
2. Experimental studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383
2.1. Heat pipe passive cooling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383
2.2. Other passive cooling techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 384
2.3. Active cooling by flow of water over the front surface of the modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385
2.4. Liquid immersion cooling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387
2.5. Active cooling by attaching air/water/fin cooling system on the backside of the module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389
3. Numerical studies on PV cell cooling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390
4. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392

1. Introduction demands in most of the countries are met out by fossil fuels such
as coal, oil and gas but their availability is limited. Conversion of
The standard of living of people in any country mainly depends energy stored in the fossil fuels into useful form produces harmful
on the industrial growth of that country, which in turn depends on pollutants and they leads to global warming, which is one of the
the energy availability and energy consumption. There is a well- major threats for the entire world.
established relationship that countries having higher per capita One of the best alternative to the fossil fuels is the harnessing
annual energy consumption have higher literacy rates than the the solar energy into electrical energy. The power from the sun
countries having lower per capita energy consumption. The energy intercepted by the earth is about 1.8
1011 MW, which is many
thousands times greater than the power consumption from all
n
Corresponding author. sources. Solar energy will not produce pollutants like fossil fuels
E-mail address: sar_nathan@yahoo.co.in (S. Sargunanathan). during conversion into electricity and it is possible to protect the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.06.024
1364-0321/& 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 S. Sargunanathan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64 (2016) 382–393
world from the global warming and also possible to preserve the
fossil fuels for our future generation. The technology of converting
solar energy into electrical energy was invented by Charles Feritts
and is referred to as photovoltaic (PV) cell. When the solar irra-
diance is made to fall on the PV cells, the photons are absorbed by
the PV cell materials and the photons having the energy above the
band gap of PV cell materials will constitute the flow of electric
current from the PV cell to external load. In general the wave
length of solar irradiance from 400 nm to 1200 nm are strongly
absorbed by the PV cells and converted into the electric power.
The conversion efficiency of the commercially available module
ranges from 12% to 18% and the laboratory cells have a record
efficiency of 24.7%. The remaining solar irradiance falling on the
PV cells are converted in to heat, which in turn increases the op-
erating temperature of the solar modules. The increase in oper-
ating temperature of the PV cells results in decrease of open circuit
voltage (Voc), fill factor and power output of about 2–2.3 mV/°C,
0.1–0.2%/°C and 0.4–0.5%/°C respectively, with increase in short
circuit current (Isc) of 0.06–0.1%/°C for mono and polycrystalline PV
cells, which results in the loss of conversion efficiency and irre-
versible damage to the PV cells materials [1]. Radziemska [2] in-
vestigated the influence of temperature and wavelength on elec-
trical parameters of crystalline silicon solar cell module. The single
crystalline solar cell is exposed to the halogen lamp irradiation of
intensity 618–756 W/m2. Figs. 1 and 2 showed that the maximum
output voltage and power decreased with increase in operating
temperature of the cell. The performance of the module was
measured at module temperature of 25 °C and 60 °C. The results
obtained indicated that the temperature co-efficient of the module
was  0.66%/K. The fill factor and conversion efficiency was de-
creased by 0.2%/K and 0.08%/K respectively. Chander et al. [3] in-
vestigated the effect of cell temperature on the photovoltaic
parameters of mono-crystalline silicon cell and reported that the
open circuit voltage, maximum power, fill factor and efficiency
were decreased with cell temperature. Zaoui et al. [4] studied
experimentally and numerically, the effect of irradiance and tem-
perature on the performance of PV modules and reported the si-
milar results.
Therefore to overcome the effects of cell temperature and to
maintain the operating temperature of the PV cells within the
manufacturer specified value, it is necessary to remove heat from
the PV cells by proper cooling methods. Passive cooling and active
cooling techniques are used to remove heat in order to enhance
the performance of PV cells.
Fig. 1. Output power versus voltage of a single-crystalline silicon solar cell at
various temperatures: 28 °C, 40 °C, 60 °C, 80 °C [2].
383
Fig. 2. Temperature dependence of the maximum output power Pm(T) [2].
2. Experimental studies
2.1. Heat pipe passive cooling
Heat pipe is a device which is used to transport heat by two
phase flow of working fluid from one place to other. The heat pipe
consists of evaporator section, adiabatic section and condenser
section. Heat absorption takes place in evaporator section; heat re-
jection at the condenser section and the adiabatic section is fully
insulated. With vacuum pump the evacuation is made at the heat
pipe to facilitate the filling of working fluid and the evaporator
section of the heat pipe is attached to the back side of the PV cells to
absorb the heat from them. Due to this, vaporization occurs so that
the liquid inside the heat pipe vaporizes, hence the vapor carrying
the latent heat of vaporization, flows towards the condenser section
and gives up its latent heat to the surroundings by natural convec-
tion. Heat pipes are manufactured using envelop material, working
fluid and wick material which must be compatible. For the tem-
perature range of  20 °C to 100 °C, the two potential heat pipe wick
and wall materials are copper and aluminum. The choice of working
fluid for different heat pipe materials is given in Table 1.
Akbarzadeh and Wadowski [7] introduced a passive cooling
method based on thermosyphon, which can effectively cool the
solar cells under concentrated light. The proposed system for
cooling of the solar cells contains two heat exchangers piped to-
gether, initially evacuated and filled with refrigerant R-11. As the
convection heat transfer co-efficient is low, the external heat
transfer area of the condenser is extended by fins. Polycrystalline
solar cells having dimensions of 25 mm by 20 mm were installed
on both sides of the evaporating surface of the cooling system. The
test results showed that the maximum temperature of the cells
without cooling was 84 °C and with cooling was 46 °C. The max-
imum power output was 10.6 W and 20.6 W without and with
cooling respectively. Cheknane et al. [8] experimentally in-
vestigated the role of passive cooling on silicon based concentrator
solar cell performance. They designed gravity dependent copper
heat pipe using water or acetone as working fluid. They measured
open circuit voltage (Voc), short circuit current (Isc), fill factor (FF)
and series resistance. The results showed that the Voc is smaller
without concentration and increased more rapidly with intensity
and its value is more for acetone than water. They also reported
that the FF decreased with increasing intensity for both liquids and
the efficiency increased with increase in intensity.
Anderson et al. [9] successfully demonstrated the feasibility of a
heat pipe passive cooling solution to CPV cell. Copper/water heat
pipe with aluminum fins can be used to remove the heat from the
CPV cell passively by natural convection. Copper and aluminum
heat pipe with various working fluids were examined and copper
384 S. Sargunanathan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64 (2016) 382–393
Table 1
Choice of working fluid for heat pipes [11].
Heat pipe working fluid Acetone Ammonia
Operating temperature (°C)  48 to 125  75 to 125
Heat pipe shell materials Aluminum, Stainless Aluminum, Stainless
steel steel
Fig. 3. Solar panel cooling by air with heat pipe and by water with heat pipe. [10].
heat pipe with water as working fluid was selected for their work.
They found the optimum size of the fin and spacing for rejecting
heat by natural convection using a series of CFD analysis. A pro-
totype heat pipe heat sink was designed, fabricated, tested and the
test result showed that with an input heat flux of 40 W/cm2, the
heat pipe rejected the heat to the environment by natural con-
vection, with the temperature difference of 40 °C. Tang et al. [10]
used a novel micro heat pipe array for cooling the solar panel.
They investigated both air and water cooling under natural con-
vection condition. They concluded the following from the test
results. For Air cooling when the daily radiation value of 26.3 MJ,
the maximum temperature reduction was 4.7 °C and average
temperature reduction was 1.5 °C. The maximum increase in
conversion efficiency was 2.6% and the average increase in con-
version efficiency was 0.4%. The average increase in power output
was 6.3% as compared to without cooling. For water cooling when
the daily radiation value of 21.9 MJ, the maximum temperature
reduction was 8 °C and average temperature reduction was 2.7 °C,
the maximum increase in conversion efficiency (Fig. 3) was 3% and
the average increase in conversion efficiency was 0.5%, the average
increase in power output was 9%, as compared to air cooling.
Benuel Sathish Raj et al. [11] investigated the performance of
CPV module with heat pipe cooling. A pulsating heat pipe filled
with acetone was attached on the back side of the solar panel in
order to provide cooling and improve the output. The pipes ex-
tended beyond the PV panel to dissipate the heat to surrounding.
Experiments were conducted on the setup to determine the vol-
tage generated by the PV panel without concentrator and cooler,
with concentrator and without cooler and panel with concentrator
and cooler. They found from the results that the PV panel without
concentrator and cooler has the maximum output voltage of
21.03 V and maximum operating temperature of 31.48 °C. The PV
panel with concentrator and without cooler has the maximum
output voltage of 23.03 V and maximum operating temperature of
34.26 °C. The PV panel with concentrator and with cooler has the
maximum output voltage of 22.23 V and maximum operating
temperature of 30.32 °C. The previous works reported on heat pipe
passive cooling of PV/CPV cells are given in Table 2.
2.2. Other passive cooling techniques
Cuce et al. [12] experimentally investigated the effect of passive
cooling on performance parameters of polycrystalline solar cells
Ethane Methanol Water R-11 and R-22
 150 to 25  75 to 120 1 to 325 20 to 100
Aluminum Copper, Stainless Copper, Monel, Nickel, Copper
steel Titanium
under indoor conditions. Current-voltage and power-voltage
characteristics of photovoltaic cells with/without fins for 200 W/
m2 is shown in Fig. 4. The experiments were carried out for dif-
ferent ambient temperatures and various illumination intensities
up to one sun under solar simulator. The experimental setup
consists of a solar simulator, a control room and measurement
devices. The experiments were carried out in the illumination
intensity range from 200 W/m2 to 800 W/m2. Temperature of the
control room was adjusted to 25 °C. Two identical polycrystalline
silicon PV cells were analyzed. One of the PV cell was equipped
with aluminum heat sink for passive cooling. Thermal grease was
used in between the heat sink and the back surface of the PV cell.
The results showed that increase in power output due to passive
cooling were 8 mW, 27 mW, 46 mW and 65 mW for 200 W/m2,
400 W/m2, 600 W/m2 and 800 W/m2 respectively. They found
from the results, the passive cooling increased the energy effi-
ciency by 9%, power conversion efficiency by 13% and exergy ef-
ficiency by 20%. The level of cooling achieved for the intensity
levels of 400 W/m2, 600 W/m2 and 800 W/m2 was 20.09%, 31.1%
and 25.2% respectively.
Wu et al. [13] proposed a passive cooling method for domestic
house application that utilized rainwater as cooling media and gas
expansion device to distribute the rain water. The proposed
method reduced the operating temperature of the cells up to 19 °C
and average electrical yield was increased by 8.3%. The cooling
maintains the efficiency of cells above 14.5% each hour in a design
day (Fig. 5), particularly between 12 pm and 2 pm during which
the PV panel has very low efficiency of 13.3% without cooling.
Chen et al. [14] investigated the performance of polycrystalline
PV panel with passive fin cooling under natural ventilation. They
carried out the comparative experimental study of the PV panels
with and without fin cooling to investigate the effect of PV panel
inclination, solar radiation, ambient temperature and wind velo-
city on the electrical efficiency and power output. Aluminum alloy
sheet of 0.8 mm thick was made into ‘U’ shape and ‘L’ shape units,
acting as cooling fins of the PV panel and those units were pasted
evenly on the back of the PV panel with good thermal conductive
glue. They proposed the four testing modes A, B, C and D to in-
vestigate the effect of PV panel inclination, ambient temperature,
wind velocity and solar radiation, on the electrical efficiency and
power output. The mode ‘A’ results showed that the electrical ef-
ficiency and power output decreased firstly and increased with
increase in PV panel inclination. The average increase in efficiency
and power output with fin cooling was 1.3% and 3.1% respectively.
The mode ‘B’ results showed that the electrical efficiency and
power output decreased with increase in ambient temperature.
The average increase in efficiency and power output of fin cooling
was 0.3% and 1.85% respectively. The mode ‘C’ results showed that
higher wind velocity led to improved fin cooling and better elec-
trical performance. The average increase in efficiency and power
output of fin cooling was 1.8% and 11.8%. The mode ‘D’ results
showed that the electrical efficiency decreased and the power
output increased with increase in solar radiation. The average in-
crease in efficiency and power output of fin cooling was 0.7% and
2.4%.
 S. Sargunanathan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64 (2016) 382–393 385

2.3. Active cooling by flow of water over the front surface of the

Temperature reduction was 4.7 °C. Output power and efficiency were 8.4% &
modules

Temperature reduction was 38 °C and output power increased was 10 W

Reflection of the sun irradiance typically reduces the electrical
yield of PV modules by 8 – 15%. This loss was reduced by using
Temperature difference between cell and ambient air was 30 °C

Temperature difference between cell and ambient air was 40 °C

anti-reflection coating but they are not durable. Structured sur-
faces were also used to reduce the reflection losses but they are
expensive, accumulate dust and difficult to clean. Krauter [15]
investigated the electrical yield of photovoltaic panels by spraying
the water over the front surface. When water is sprayed over the
PV panel, its refractive index is 1.3, and is in between refractive
Voc and efficiency increases with intensity

index of glass (1.5) and air (1.0), which reduces the reflection loss

Maintain operating temperature as 30 °C

by 2–3.6% and keeps the panel clean and dust free. Due to the
Requires 1 m/s or higher wind speed

water flow and additional cooling by evaporation, the cells oper-

Δŋmax ¼3% higher than air cooling

2.6% higher than without cooling

Temperature reduction was 4 °C

ating temperature was reduced up to 22 °C in comparison to panel
without cooling. The increased electrical yield over the whole day
was about 10.3% (Fig. 6).
Abdolzadeh and Ameri [16] investigated the performance of
ΔPmax ¼13.9% and

photovoltaic cells which is used to drive the water pump by

spraying water over the front surface of the PV panels. The ex-
perimental setup has two polycrystalline PV modules (45
2 W)
ΔT ¼ 8 °C
Results

with 13.5% efficiency and one positive displacement type water

pump. The PV cells are fixed at 10° facing south and the power
produced from the array was used to drive the DC motor of the
Solar panel its total radiation area was

water pump. To spray water over PV cells, a tube with small holes
placed on the top of the PV module is used. Temperature sensors
were installed on the back of the two modules where the actual
temperature is about 1.5 °C below the temperature on front of the
modules. Irradiance and pump flow rate were measured by pyr-
anometer and flow meter respectively. Data were recorded for
every 15 min and the results showed that the operating tem-
Line concentrator

Line concentrator

perature of the module with spray water reduced up to 23 °C. The

maximum operating temperature of the modules was 35 °C and
0.2049 m2
Up to 700 sun Single cell

Water or Acetone Up to 500 sun Single cell

Single cell

58 °C with and without spray water respectively. The mean power

Type

output of the panel with cooling increased to 66.9 W instead of

55.4 W without cooling. The mean flow rate of the pumping sys-
tem was increased from 479 l/h to 644 l/h. The mean volume of
Irradiation

water used for spraying over the cells was about only 50 l/h. The
400 sun
20 sun
24 sun

PV cells achieved 12.5% mean conversion efficiency during the test

1 sun

1 sun

1 sun

2 sun

day. Water sprayed also improved the optical performance by 1.8%.

Odeh and Behnia [17] experimentally investigated the perfor-
Acetone or water

Refrigerant R-11

mance of PV module using water cooling. The experimental setup

Working fluid

used multi-crystalline PV module of 60 W maximum power out-

put. The module was connected to a variable resistance to find I-V
Benzene

Acetone
Water

Water

Water

characteristics curve of the module. The cooling system consists of

Air

a water trickling tube (2.5 cm diameter and 65 cm length) fixed on

the upper edge of the PV module, water conduit at the lower edge
Copper heat pipe, soldered cop-

Copper heat pipe with copper

Copper heat pipe with alumi-

Copper heat pipe with alumi-

of the module and by pass to deliver cooling water from the

Aluminum heat pipe and in-

submersible pump. The trickling tube has 32 holes of 5 mm dia-

meter distributed evenly and the cooling water flow rate of 4 l/min
Aluminum heat pipe
Heat pipe materials

was maintained. The results indicated that heat loss by convection

Works on heat pipe passive cooling of PV/CPV cells.

due to water flow over the module upper surface cause the tem-
perature reduction from 58 °C to 32 °C (the temperature reduction
tegral fins

num fins

num fins

up to 26 °C) and the module output increased in the range of 4–

per fins

Akbarzadeh and Wadowski [7] Copper

10% (Fig. 7).

fins

Kordzadeh [18] investigated the effects of nominal power of ar-

ray and system head on the operation of photovoltaic water
Benuel Sathish Raj et al. [11]

pumping set with array surface covered by a film of water. Two si-
milar crystalline type arrays having nominal power of 90 W and
135 W used and tested in three different heads of 10 m, 12.5 m and
Anderson et al. [9]

Hughes et al. [37]

Feldman et al. [6]

16 m. The results showed that the continuous film of water on the

Chekane et al. [8]
Beach et al. [5]
Work done by

Tang et al. [10]

surface of PV array has two important effects on the operation of the

system. First it reduced the reflection loss and then improved the
optical properties of the array surface. The short circuit current Isc of
Table 2

the panel which is temperature dependent, increased due to thin

water film. Second it reduced the cell temperature by absorbing the
386 S. Sargunanathan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64 (2016) 382–393

Fig. 4. Current-voltage and power-voltage characteristics of photovoltaic cells with/without fins for 200 W/m2. [12].

Fig. 5. Comparison of the efficiencies and power output between with cooling and without cooling to the PV panel [13].

heat generated by the array during the day. The temperature re-
duction exceeds 25 °C at noon and operating temperature graph of
the panel with thin water film closes to the variable ambient tem-
perature. Thin film of water over the array with nominal power of
90 W and 135 W were improved the power graph peak from 52 W
to 78 W and 92 W to 98 W respectively. The average improvements
in efficiency were about 3.66% and 0.69% for array having nominal of
90 W and 135 W respectively. The experiment results showed that
the decreasing of array nominal power and increasing in system
head with thin film of water increase the power generated.
Hosseini et al. [19] investigated the combination of a photo-
voltaic system cooled by a thin film of water with an additional
system to use heat transferred to the cooling water. The experi-
mental setup was composed of two similar but separate solar PV
panels each with area of 0.44 m2. The maximum power output
was 60 W with the maximum output voltage and current of 23 V
and 2.61 A respectively. One of the panels was used in a combined
system with a film of water running over its top surface without
front glass and an additional fabricated system to use the heat Fig. 6. Comparison of photovoltaic conversion efficiencies of the PV-modules [15].
generated by the panel. The other panel is a conventional PV as a
reference panel and to produce a film of water over the PV panel, a panel passed through a finned tube used as heat exchanger to
tube with slit was installed on the top end of the PV panel. Water utilize the heat taken by the cooling water. Thermocouples were
pumped to the feeding tube leaves the slit and flows over the installed on the back surface of the panels to measure the panel
panel as a thin film. The water collected at the lower end of the operating temperature. The results showed that due to water flow
 S. Sargunanathan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64 (2016) 382–393
Fig. 7. The effect of water cooling on voltage-power characteristic curve of the PV
module. Radiation on PV module surface is equal 1000 W/m2 [17].
over the panel surface and additional cooling by water evapora-
tion, the panel operating temperature measured was much lower
in comparison to the conventional reference panel and a max-
imum temperature difference of 18.7 °C was observed. This tem-
perature reduction has a noticeable improvement in electrical ef-
ficiency and the relative difference was more than 33%.
Dorobantu et al. [20] proposed a system to increase the effi-
ciency of PV panels that makes a water film on the front surface of
panels. The experiment was conducted on monocrystalline panel
of 75 W, which was cooled by a continuous film of water that
pours on the working surface from the top of the panel. The
cooling device for single module consists of a cylindrical tube with
25 holes, each with 1.5 mm diameter. The diameter of the tube is
20 mm and its length is equal to that of the panel. The panel was
placed on the fixed frame with tilt angle of 35°. During the mea-
surement the average radiation level was 780 W/m2 and rate of
water flow was 33.3
10  6 m3/s. The results showed that the
front surface temperature was between 38.5 °C and 41.5 °C, the
rear surface temperature was in between 50 °C and 52 °C and the
power output was 73.11 W for without cooling panel. For the panel
with cooling, the front surface temperature was between 26 °C
and 27 °C, the rear surface temperature was between 31 °C and
32.5 °C and the power output was 76.74 W. The reduction in
temperature brings a gain of 1.5 V and drops of 0.2 A. The net
results lead to overall increase in power output of 3.5 W and the
percentage increase was 9.5%.
Moharram et al. [21] developed a heating rate and cooling rate
models to predict the commencement of cooling of solar module
by water cooling and the duration for which the water was
sprayed in order to enhance the performance of the PV module
and also to reduce the amount of cooling water and electrical
energy needed to provide cooling. The heating model determines
the maximum allowable temperature (MAT) at which the water to
be sprayed to cool the solar PV module. They found from the
mathematical model that the heating rate of the solar cells was
6 °C/h and the cooling rate of the solar cells was 2 °C/min for the
water flow of 29 l/min. The experimental setup used six mono-
crystalline module of power output 185 W each and 120 water
nozzles to spray water over the front surface of the module and
found that the cooling rate was 2.05 °C/min. They also observed
that without cooling the temperature was increased from 35 °C to
45 °C and the efficiency dropped from 12% to 10.5%. The proposed
cooling system reduced the operating temperature by 10 °C in
5 min and increased the solar module efficiency by 12.5%. The
selection of MAT was based on maintaining the efficiency of the
modules at an acceptable level with least amount of cooling water
387
and energy usage. They found that from net output energy vs MAT,
the optimum value of MAT to cool solar panels with least amount
of water and energy usage was 45 °C.
Aldihani et al. [22] reported that the dusty environmental
conditions reduced the power output by 16% and the water cooling
on the front surface of the module can be partially compensated
the power reduction. Balamuralikrishnan et al. [23] investigated
the performance improvement of solar PV panel by active cooling.
The proposed cooling system consists of LM35 temperature sensor
interfaced with PLC and placed over the panel. When the tem-
perature of the panel reaches the 35 °C, the PLC controller actuate
the water pump for 30 s, which will spray the water on the top
surface of the panel and provide cooling to the solar panel. The
temperature was sensed after water spray and the cycle was re-
peated in order to maintain the temperature of the panel within
the predetermined temperature. The results showed that the op-
erating temperature of the panel was reduced by 8 °C and the
efficiency was improved by 3%.
Irwan et al. [24] studied the performance of PV panel under
indoor test conditions. They proposed a water cooling method by
spraying water over the front surface of the panel. Four sets of
average solar radiation at the test surface of the solar simulator
were produced by the halogen lamps and were measured as 413,
620, 821 and 1016 W/m². A DC water pump is used to maintain the
water flow over the front surface of PV panel and to provide
cooling. The minimum temperature reduction of 5.03 °C for the
intensity of 413 W/m² and maximum temperature reduction of
23.17 °C for the intensity of 1016 W/m² was found from the results
with cooling. They also found that the cooling increased the
maximum power output by 9.76%, 14.87%, 18.19% and 22.81%
(Fig. 8) for the intensities 413, 620, 821 and 1016 W/m² respec-
tively. The various works on active cooling of PV modules by
spraying water over the front surface of the modules are shown in
Table 3.
2.4. Liquid immersion cooling
Abrahamyan et al. [25] investigated the performance of the
common silicon solar cell covered with thin film of antireflection
layer immersed in the dielectric liquids of glycerin, isopropyl al-
cohol, acetone, butanol and DI water. Silicon solar cells of the
Soviet production with a conventional configuration of a contact
grid were used during their research. The areas of the solar cells
were 2, 4 and 20 cm2. After the installation of cells the measure-
ments of the load current-voltage characteristics were carried out
at various densities of solar radiation for diffused day light and
direct solar radiation with the intensity 70–80 mW/cm2. They
Fig. 8. Maximum power output of PV panel with and without water cooling me-
chanism [24].
388 S. Sargunanathan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64 (2016) 382–393
Table 3
Works on active cooling of PV modules by spraying water over the front surface of the modules.
Workdone by Dimensions of water spray pipe Water used
Krauter [15] 4.4 l/min-m2
Abdolzadeh and Ameri [16] 0.25 in. diameter 50 l/h
Odeh and Behnia [17] Diameter 2.5 cm, length 65 cm, no. 4 l/min
of holes 32 of diameter 5mm.
Kordzadeh [18]
Hosseini et al. [19]
Dorobanţu and Popescu Diameter 20 mm, length equal to 33.3
10  6 m3/s. Mono crystalline panel of
[20] panel length, no. of holes 25 of
diameter 1.5 mm.
Moharram et al. [21] 120 water nozzles 29 l/min
Balamuralikrishnan et al.
[23]
Irwan et al. [24]
observed that there were greatest changes in the Isc and Voc of the
cell immersed in the glycerin than that of cell with direct exposure
to the solar radiation. The fill factor of I-V characteristics of solar
cell has little changes. The growth of the Isc and Voc took place
with further increase in the level of the liquid above the surface of
the cell up to 5–6 mm. Further increase of liquid level resulted in
some decrease in Isc. They also confirmed the fact that the de-
position of a noticeable thin film of glycerin on the surface of the
p–n junction of the cell increased the photo current by 1.5–1.8
times. The presence of dielectric thin film increased the solar cell
efficiency by 40–60%. They also mentioned the reasons for such an
increase, which include an increase in the barrier height of n–p
junction, a decrease in the velocity of the surface recombination
followed by an increase in the factor of the separation of charge
carriers generated by light as well as a decrease in a part of the
reflected radiation.
Wang et al. [26] achieved the better performance when the
bare silicon solar cells were immersed in liquids to enhance the
heat removing. They examined the efficiency of the solar cells
under simulated sun light. The iodine tungsten lamp was em-
ployed as the solar simulator with intensity of 999 W/m2. Eleven
single crystalline solar cells with an area of 2.5
10  5 m2 were
connected in series for the immersion of the bare solar cell test. Six
solar cells were connected in series and encapsulated by EVA,
which were used for the immersion solar module test. Polar
ethanol and glycerin, non-polar benzene and silicon oil and in-
organic distilled water and tap water were used as immersion li-
quids. The thickness of liquid cover film was adjusted to 3 mm,
6 mm and 9 mm to detect the changes in performance parameters.
The results showed that the Voc of the module was almost con-
stant, but there were certain changes in the Isc when the thickness
of immersion liquids was increased. The maximum increase in
power of solar cells immersed in silicon oil was up to 4.07%. The
solar cells immersed in silicon oil have the best performance. The
Type PV cell Results
M55 module Operating temperature reduced up to 22 °C
Optical performance improved by 1.5%
Electrical yield increased by 10.3%
Polycrystalline [45
2 W] Operating temperature reduced up to 23 °C
Optical performance improved by 1.8%
Electrical yield increased from 55.4 W to 66.9 W
Multicrystalline PV module Operating temperature reduced up to 26 °C
of 60 W Electrical yield increased in the range of 4–10%.
Crystalline array of 90 W Operating temperature reduction exceeds 26 °C
and 135 W Improved the power graph peak from 52 W to
78 W for 90 W array and 92 W to 98 W for 135 W
array
Efficiency improvement 3.66%
PV module of 60 W Temperature reduction up to 18.7 °C
Relative difference in electrical efficiency was
more than 33%
Temperature reduction on the front surface up to
75 W 13.5 °C
Temperature reduction on the rear surface up to
19.3 °C
Percentage increase in power output was 9.5%
Six monocrystalline module Temperature reduction up to 10 °C
of 185 W each. Efficiency increased by 12.5%
Maximum allowable temperature was 45 °C
Temperature reduction was 8 °C
Efficiency increased by 3%
Two units of 50 W mono- The minimum temperature reduction of 5.03 °C
crystalline PV panels. and maximum temperature reduction of 23.17 °C
The maximum power output increased by 9.76%,
14.87%, 18.19% and 22.81% for the intensities 413,
620, 821 and 1016 W/m² respectively
changes in the performance were more in solar cells than solar
module immersed in liquids.
Rosa-Clot et al. [27] investigated the behavior of single crys-
talline PV panel submerged in water. Three identical panels were
studied and compared. Panel 1 was placed in air exposed to solar
radiation. Panel 2, SP2 was submerged under 4 cm of water. Panel
3, SP2 was submerged under 40 cm of water. The temperature
range in panel 1 was in between 70 °C and 80 °C. The panel 2 has a
stable temperature of about 30 °C. They found that average in-
crease in efficiency of the SP2 at the 4 cm depth was about 11%,
whereas at 40 cm a reduction of 23% was reported.
Han et al. [28] proposed a direct liquid immersion cooling of
concentrator solar cells in order to maintain the low and uniform
temperature across the solar cells. Bare solar cells were made to
immerse in a circulating liquid. DI water, Isopropyl Alcohol (IPA),
Ethyl acetate (EA) and Dimethyl Silicon Oil (DMSO) were used as
potential immersion liquids. Optical transmittance of the liquids
was measured with help of spectrometer and they observed that
the four immersion liquids are quite transparent in the wave
length range between 400 nm and 1200 nm, over which the sili-
con solar cells absorbs strongly. The photocurrent density of solar
silicon cell when its front surface is encapsulated with 10mm of DI
water, IPA, EA and DMSO were 0.938, 0.975, 0.984 and 0.987 re-
spectively. These results showed that DI water immersion can
cause largest power loss. The electrical characteristics analysis was
carried out on the solar cell of 40mm width and 50mm length
having cell aperture area of 19.5 cm2 by using constant voltage I –
V flash tester. The test was carried out in both the absence of the
immersion liquid and also with 1.5mm liquid thickness on top.
Both the configuration was tested at 30 sun and 25 °C. They ob-
served that the Isc and Voc of the concentrator cells in the liquids
were larger than those in air but, the degree of change in Voc is
relatively less than that of Isc. The liquid immersion cooling re-
duced the loss due to reflection and increased the Isc by 7%. The
 S. Sargunanathan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64 (2016) 382–393 389

increase in efficiency of solar cell immersed in IPA is larger than
that with other liquids. The efficiency was increased from 18.7% to
21.7%. The thermal performance analysis was carried out by CFD
analysis. The results showed that DI water was the best option
with respect to lowest operating cell temperature.
Nikhil et al. [29] investigated the performance of amorphous
silicon solar cell cooled by silicone oil for different thickness up to
6 mm.The system consists of solar module of 7 W rated power
output surrounded by glass sheets on four sides so that module
surface can retain liquid on it. The experiments were conducted
for 0 mm, 2 mm, 3 mm, 4 mm and 6 mm thickness of silicon oil
over the module. The efficiency and power output of the module
without oil over it were 2.98% and 2.775 W respectively. The ef-
ficiency and power output at optimum thickness of 2 mm were
about 3.5% and 3.397 W respectively. They found that the power
output increased up to 2 mm thickness of oil and decreased above
2 mm thickness of oil over its surface. The percentage variation in
output for 2 mm, 3 mm, 4 mm and 6 mm thickness of silicone oil
were 23.29%, 20.05%, 10.803% and 13.032% respectively and the
variation of module efficiency throughout the day is shown in
Fig. 9. The various works on liquid immersion cooling of PV
modules is given in Table 4.
Fig. 9. Variation of module efficiency throughout the day [29].
2.5. Active cooling by attaching air/water/fin cooling system on the
backside of the module
Teo et al. [30] developed a hybrid PV/T solar system to in-
vestigate the electrical efficiency of the PV module with and
without active cooling. They investigated the effects of tempera-
ture on the efficiency and power output of the module. Four 55 W
polycrystalline solar modules were used in the experiment. An
array of air ducts that allowed air to pass through was attached
underneath of the PV modules. Fins were fitted in the duct to
increase the heat transfer rate from the PV panel to moving air.
They observed that the electrical efficiency was a linear function of
module temperature and decreased with increase in PV module
temperature. Without active cooling increase in temperature was
higher at 1.6 °C for every 100 W/m2 increment of solar radiation
and attained maximum value of 68 °C. The efficiency dropped to
8.6%. However with active cooling the increment was about 1.4 °C
for every 100 W/m2 increment of the solar irradiation. The oper-
ating temperature of the module could be maintained at 38 °C and
the electrical efficiency could also be kept at 12.5%.
Tarabsheh et al. [31] investigated the performance of photo-
voltaic modules with respect to temperature and proposed pipes
layouts as shown in Fig. 10. The module was cooled by a fluid
flowing through pipes underneath the PV module backside to
improve the conversion efficiency of the module. The temperature
of the cooling fluid at the outlet of the PV module is higher than
that of inlet due to heat exchange between the backside of the
module and pipes. Therefore, the temperature of the pipe in-
creased gradually from the inlet towards the outlet resulting into a
non-uniformly cooled PV module. In other words, each PV cell in
the module has a different operation temperature leading to dif-
ferent I–V characteristics of each cell. In their work, each PV panel
composed of N-series connected solar cells was evaluated using
MATLABTM software, from which the I–V characteristics of each ‘n’
cell (1 r nZN) were calculated for different operating tempera-
ture Tn and it is provided in Eq. (1).

Table 4
Works on liquid immersion cooling of PV modules.

Work done by Type of PV cell Intensity of solar Immersion liquid Height of liquid above Results
irradiation the cell/module

Abrahamyan et al. [25] Anti-reflection coated solar
cell
Wang et al. [26] Bare silicon PV cell [simu-
lated sunlight]
Rosa-Clot et al. [27] Single crystalline PV panel
Han et al. [28] Bare PV cells
Nikhil et al. [29] Amorphous PV module of
7 W rated power
70–80 mW/cm2 Glycerin 5–6 mm Isc and Voc increased up to 5–6 mm
Anti-reflection coating increased
Photo current by 1.5–1.8 times
999 W/m2 Silicon oil 3 mm, 6 mm and Voc was almost constant
9 mm Isc increased with depth
Output power increased by 4.07%
Water 4 cm Temperature reduction up to 40 °C
Stable operating temperature of 30 °C
The efficiency increased by 11%
40 cm Stable operating temperature
The efficiency decreased by 23%
Simulated sun light DI water IPA, EA and 10 mm DI water caused largest power loss
DMSO [0.938]
DMSO caused less power loss [0.987]
Simulated sun light of DI water 1.5 mm Isc and Voc are higher than in air
30 sun IPA, EA and DMSO Isc increased by 7%
The increase in efficiency is higher in
IPA
DI water has the lowest operating
temperature
Solar irradiation Silicon oil 0 mm, 2 mm, 3 mm, Optimum thickness was 2 mm
4 mm and 6 mm The efficiency increased by 17.5% at
2 mm thickness
Power output increased by 22.4% at
2 mm thickness
Above 2 mm thickness the perfor-
mance decreased
390 S. Sargunanathan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64 (2016) 382–393
Fig. 10. Different design suggested by Anas Al Tarabsheh et al. [31].
Fig. 11. Comparison of maximum power output of the module during the day with
and without cooling. [32].
Tn = Ta + ( Tb – Ta){ ( n − 1) / ( N − 1)}
Ta ¼cooling fluid inlet temperature, Tb ¼cooling fluid outlet
temperature, and N ¼number of cells.
Design ‘A’ used one continuous pipe. Design ‘B’ splits the
cooling medium flow into 9 channels with each channel used for
cooling of 4 cells in series. Design ‘C’ splits the cooling medium
into 4 channels used for cooling of 9 cells in series. The efficiency
of module without cooling was 14%. The efficiency of modules
with cooling for design A, B and C were 15%, 16.4% and 16.25%
respectively.
Bahaidarah et al. [32] investigated the performance of hybrid
PV water cooled system numerically and experimentally. The nu-
merical model was developed by using EES [Engineering Equation
Solver] software. The experimental setup composed of a mono-
crystalline PV module of 230 W rated power combined with solar
thermal collector. The cooling system attached on the rear side of
the module has the inlet and outlet port for water flow. The
cooling water was stored in an insulated tank connected to the PV/
T system through PVC pipes. With active cooling technique, the
maximum operating temperature of the module reduced from
45 °C to 34 °C. An overall reduction in operating temperature of
about 20% and an increase of 9% in the electrical efficiency was
observed due to the cooling. The electrical output with cooling at
an irradiance of 900 W/m2 was (Fig. 11) about 211 W, whereas the
PV system without cooling was 190 W.
Kolhe et al. [33] evaluated the concentrated single crystalline
silicon PV module with water cooling system for temperature,
power output and efficiency. The effect of cooling water flow rate
on the performance also evaluated. The water cooling system was
attached to the back of the PV module. A fixed PV module without
solar concentration and cooling was used for comparing the per-
formance of it with CPV module with cooling and the concentra-
tion ratio was 8.5. They observed that the maximum temperature
difference between CPV module and fixed PV module was lower
than 5 °C due to the water cooling of CPV module. The power
output of the CPV with cooling was 71.13 W instead of 16.55 W of
fixed PV module. At noon, the efficiency of CPV with cooling was
7.81% and for the fixed PV was 10.68%. The efficiency of CPV de-
creased after noon and the increase in cooling water flow rate
increases the electrical efficiency.
Chong and Tan [34] proposed an automotive radiator cooling
system for the heat rejection of dense-array concentrator PV sys-
tem. Theoretical modeling on integration of automotive radiator
into the cooling system with a specially designed cooling block has
been carried out. The proposed system has been constructed and
tested at solar concentration ratio of 377 sun. During on-site
measurement, it has been observed that the conversion efficiency
(1) of CPV module was improved from 22.39% to 26.85%, when CPV
cell operating temperature was reduced from 59.4 °C to 37.1 °C.
Tonui and Tripanagnostopoulos [35] investigated the perfor-
mance of two low cost heat extraction improvements in the
channel of PV/T air system to achieve higher thermal output and
PV cooling so as to keep electrical efficiency at acceptable level
during energy conversion. For the improved system the channels
were modified as shown in Fig. 12 by suspending a thin aluminum
sheet in the middle (TMS) or attaching rectangular fins at the
opposite back wall of the air channel (FIN). The experimental
model used polycrystalline silicon PV module of length 1 m,
aperture area 0.4 m2 and rated power 46 W. The channel walls, the
metal sheet and the fins surfaces were painted black to increase
their absorptivity and emissivity. The air circulation in the channel
was accomplished with help of air pump. Their test results showed
that the FIN system has the much lower operating temperature
than other two systems by up to 10 °C and the additional power
required by the modified systems (TMS and FIN) were about 1%
more than that of the reference (REF) system. But the increase in
electrical efficiency due to the cooling was about 1% for TMS
system and 6% for the FIN systems compared to the reference
system. Thus, the net electrical gain for the FIN system is about 5%.
The parametric results also confirmed that the FIN system was
more superior to the other two configurations for collector length
up to 3 m.
3. Numerical studies on PV cell cooling
Gray et al. [36] carried out numerical analysis on the Amonix
high concentration photovoltaic system [HCPV], to study the passive
cooling aspect of this particular type of system. A model of the HCPV
passive cooling system was made using Gambit and numerical re-
sults were computed using Fluent software. The simulation was
 S. Sargunanathan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64 (2016) 382–393
Fig. 12. Different cross-sectional view of PVT/AIR collector models suggested by Tonui et al. [35].
carried out for different elevation angle in order to predict the
temperature distribution and velocity profile. The temperature
distribution and air velocity vector information gives the visual
description of how the air is moving in the system. Hughes et al.
[37] used computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to model the heat
transfer from a standard PV panel in order to determine the rate of
heat dissipation occurred in the PV panel. They proposed a finned
copper heat pipe attached with aluminum fins to improve the heat
dissipation and efficiency of the PV panel. CFD analysis was carried
out by using ANSYS version 12.1. They successfully demonstrated
that the proposed system has the cooling solution for the PV panels.
They developed the mathematical model for temperature distribu-
tion and were reasonable agreement with the CFD predicted values.
The CFD results were validated by the results of developed scaled
prototype. They also determined the optimum temperature cooled
under the UAE environmental conditions by CFD analysis.
Natarajan et al. [38] numerically studied the solar cell tem-
perature for concentrating PV system with the concentration ratio
of 10. They developed the two dimensional thermal model and
predicted the temperature for concentrator PV system with and
without passive cooling arrangements. They also studied the effect
of ambient temperature and solar radiation intensity on the solar
cell temperature for the system with and without cooling fins.
They found from the results that the fins attached at the base of
the back of the plate effectively reduced the solar cell operating
temperature than the cell without fins and the thermal con-
ductivity of back plate played a key role in reducing the solar cell
temperature. They also observed that the increase in the height of
fins from 2.5 to 5 mm, the cell temperature was decreased by
4.3 °C and the temperature was reduced by 10 °C for the fin height
of 5–20 mm (Fig. 13). Based on the simulation results they pro-
posed two separate solar cell temperature correlation for the
system with and without fins to predict the cell temperature.
Micheli et al. [39] identified the most convenient micro fins
geometry for CPV passive cooling. The micro-fin array was used to
cool single CPV cell exposed to 500 sun, reproduced in COSMOL
Multiphysics 5.0.They found from the results that micro-fins can
improve the thermal performance and lower the weight of a sys-
tem. They found that the proposed fin array able to enhance the
mass specific power up to 50% compared to an unfinned surface.
Wu et al. [40] proposed and described by selecting a wick heat
pipe to absorb isothermally the excessive heat from solar PV cells
in order to solve the non-uniform cooling of solar PV cells and
control the operating temperature of solar PV cells conveniently.
The results showed that the overall thermal, electrical and exergy
efficiencies of heat pipe PV/T hybrid system could reach up to
63.65%, 8.45% and 10.26% respectively. The varying range of op-
erating temperature for solar cell on the solar PV panel is less than
2.5 °C. The parametric analysis showed that decrease in inlet water
temperature and increase in water mass flow rate, packing factor
of solar cell and heat loss coefficient would increase the electrical
efficiency of the hybrid system.
Elmir et al. [41] studied the cooling of a solar cell under forced
convection in the presence of nanofluid by numerical simulation.
They used the model of Brinkman and Wasp for the physical
parameters of Al2O3-Water nanofluid. The finite elements method
was used to solve the system of differential equations that was
based on the Galerkin method. They evaluated the possibilities for
391
Fig. 13. Variation of solar cell temperature with height of the fins [38].
improvement of the transfer of heat by the use of nanofluids, as
well as the influence of the volume fraction of nanofluid. They
found from the simulation, the structure of the flow was not af-
fected by the addition of nanoparticles to a basic fluid, but the
increase in the thermal conductivity of the mixture increases the
rate of heat transfer. The presence of nanoparticles in the fluid
increases the rate of transfer of heat in comparison with the basic
fluid thus improving cooling of the solar cells which leads to have
a better performance of the solar panel. Kerzmann and Schaefer
[42] studied the system simulation to model a medium 2D solar
concentration energy system with an active cooling. The simula-
tion was coded in Engineering Equation Solver (EES) and was used
to simulate the linear concentrating photovoltaic system (LCPV)
under Phoenix, AZ, solar and climatic conditions for a full year.
They used the output data from this simulation to evaluate the
LCPV system from an economic and environmental perspective
and they claimed that over one year a 6.2 kW LCPV system would
save a residential user $1623 in electricity and water heating, as
well as displace 10.35 t of CO2.
Gardas and Tendolkar [43] designed and developed a system
for cooling the solar cell in order to increase its electrical efficiency
and also to extract the heat energy. A hybrid solar system which
generates both electricity and heat energy consists of PV cells at-
tached to an absorber plate with fins attached at the other side of
the absorber surface. Simulation model for single pass, single duct
solar collector with fins was prepared and performance curves
obtained. Performance with seven different gases was analyzed for
maximum heat transfer, minimum mass flow rate and minimum
number of fins. They found that hydrogen was the most suitable
option with the present. For hydrogen, the system requires a mass
flow rate of 0.00275 kg/s, which was the least amongst all. Theo-
retical number of fins required in this case was found to be 3.46.
Popovici et al. [44] numerically studied the efficiency improve-
ment of the PV cell in the same condition of solar radiation and
proposed an air cooled heat sink to improve their performance.
The cooling efficiency was studied for different configurations of
heat sink by using ANSYS Fluent software. The simulation results
392 S. Sargunanathan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64 (2016) 382–393
Fig. 14. Average and maximum relative increase in efficiency for different transi-
tion temperatures. [49].
showed that the minimum temperature reduction was 10 °C and
the maximum power produced increased by 4%.
Siddiqui and Arif [45] developed a multiphysics model for es-
timating the three dimensional thermal, structural and electrical
performance of a PV module under given meteorological condi-
tions. ANSYS CFX CFD software was used for the thermal modeling,
the structural modeling had been done in ANSYS Mechanical FEA
code and the electrical modeling had been developed in MATLAB
environment. The developed model was used to simulate the
electrical, thermal and structural performance of a PV module
with and without cooling for four different days representing
different environmental conditions at Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. From
the simulation they concluded that the effectiveness of cooling in
improving the electrical conversion efficiency was strongly de-
pendent on irradiance than ambient temperature. The cooled pa-
nel showed lower cell temperatures than the module without
cooling. Reddy et al. [46] carried out numerical analysis of a heat
sink based on micro-channels for efficient cooling of a commercial
high concentration (500
) photovoltaic (HCPV) cell. The micro
channels were found to better at cooling the module and pressure
drop was found to be low in straight flow channels. A combinatory
model of an array of micro-channels enclosed in a wide parallel
flow channel design was developed. The optimized geometry of
the micro-channel heat sink was found by using commercial CFD
software ANSYS 13.
Biwole et al. [47] investigated the use of phase-change mate-
rials (PCM) to maintain the temperature of the panels close to the
ambient. They developed CFD modeling of heat and mass transfers
in a system composed of an impure phase change material si-
tuated in the back of a solar panel (SP). The results showed that
adding a PCM on the back of a solar panel can maintain the panel's
operating temperature under 40 °C for around two hours under a
constant solar radiation of 1000 W/m². When the panel tempera-
ture rises, the excess heat must be absorbed until the PCM has
completely melted. When the panel temperature decreases, the
solidification of the PCM should provide additional heat for the
operating liquid in solar thermal panel, provide heat to the
building or act as an insulation material. The SP/PCM solution is
expected to be very useful for roof or facade integrated panels
where space for ventilation is limited. Browne et al. [48] proposed
a PV/T phase change material (PCM) system to provide cooling by
absorbing the heat in PCM and were taken away by the water
flows through a pipe network within the PCM. They found that
heat gain by the water in PV/T-PCM system was approximately
6 °C higher than that of a PV/T system. Machniewicz et al. [49]
carried out dynamic simulations of thermal and electrical perfor-
mance of PV/PCM panels using ESP-r software in order to de-
termine the transition temperature of PCM layer that allows
avoiding rapid temperature fluctuations on the PV back surface.
They concluded from the results that additional PCM layer on the
back side of PV panel can effectively increase the efficiency of
electricity production with PCM transition temperature about
20 °C (Fig. 14).
Drabiniok and Neyer [50] demonstrated a novel cooling system
for PV cells using the bionic method of evaporation cooling using a
porous compound polymer foil. The foil was laminated directly on
silicon substrates providing good thermal contact with the water
cooled down by evaporation. Once the cooling process is started,
the system was solar driven without a request of additional energy
support. Beyond this the cooling mechanism is self-regulating
depending only on temperature and air velocity. A temperature
reduction up to 11.7 °C was proved with perspective to further
significant enhancement.
4. Summary
This paper presents an overview of the experimental and nu-
merical studies on performance enhancement of solar photo-
voltaic cells by using effective cooling methods. The experimental
and numerical analysis showed that the passive and active cooling
techniques can reduce the rate of increase of solar cell operating
temperature with time, irradiation intensity and ambient tem-
perature and also maintain the temperature of the solar cell within
the manufacturer specified value.
1. Heat pipe based passive cooling can be used up to 700 sun for
single cell configuration and reduction in operating tempera-
ture of about 30–40 °C was possible. However use of that con-
cept in terms of economic viability for the large power gen-
eration modules may need further research.
2. Passive cooling with attaching the fins on back side of the
module may effectively reduce the operating temperature; im-
prove the power output and efficiency. But their performance
mainly depends on the heat transfer area and wind velocity.
Therefore further research is needed to find the dimensions of
the fin and number of fins required for commercial modules.
3. Active cooling by spraying the water over the front surface of
the module will yield very good performance. This method can
reduce the operating temperature up to 26 °C and reduce the
reflection losses by 2–4%. It improves the solar cell performance
to near value of rated performance parameters. But, water and
additional power needed for pumping must be taken to con-
sideration while designing the system.
4. The liquid immersion cooling reduces the reflection losses, in-
creases the power output and can maintain the stable operating
temperature, but there is no clear information on effect of depth
of immersion on the performance.
5. Additional PCM layer on the back side of PV panel can effec-
tively increase the efficiency of electricity production by pro-
viding cooling. The transition temperature of the PCM layer
temperature should be as low as possible for maximum per-
formance improvement.
6. Bionic method of evaporation cooling using a porous compound
polymer foil is also used for effective cooling and they need
further research to enhance the effect.
References
[1] Solanki Chetan Sing. Solar photovoltaics fundamentals, technologies and ap-
plications. 2nd ed. Delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited; 2013.
[2] Radziemska E. The effect of temperature on the power drops in crystalline
silicon solar cells. Renew Energy 2003;28:1–12.
[3] Chander Subhash, Purohit A, Sharma Anshu, Arvind, Nehra SP, Dhaka MS. A
study on photovoltaic parameters of mono-crystalline silicon solar cell with
cell temperature. Energy Rep 2015;1:104–9.
[4] Zaoui F, Titaouine A, Becherif M, Emziane M, Aboubou A. A combined ex-
perimental and simulation study on the effects of irradiance and temperature
on photovoltaic modules. Energy Procedia 2015;75:373–80.
[5] Beach RT, White RM. Heat pipe for passive cooling of concentrator solar cells.
 S. Sargunanathan et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 64 (2016) 382–393
In: Proceedings of the 15th IEEE photovoltaic specialists conference, Kissim-
mee, FL; May 12–15, 1981. p. 75–80.
[6] Feldman KT, Kenney DD, Edenburn MW. A passive heat pipe cooled photo-
voltaic receiver. In: Proceedings of the 15th IEEE photovoltaic specialists
conference, Kissimmee, FL; May 12–15, 1981. p. 165–72.
[7] Akbarzadeh A, Wadowski T. Heat pipe – based cooling systems for photo-
voltaic cells under concentrated solar radiation. Appl Therm Eng 1996;16
(1):81–7.
[8] Cheknane A, Benyoucef B, Chaker A. Performance of concentrator solar cells
with passive cooling. Semicond Sci Technol 2006;21:144–7.
[9] Anderson WG, Dussinger PM, Sarraf DB, Tamanna S. Heat pipe cooling of
concentrating photovoltaic cells. In: Proceedings of the 33rd IEEE photovoltaic
specialist conference (PVSC’08); 2008.
[10] Tang Xiao, Quan Zhenhua, Zhao Yaohua. Experimental investigation of solar
panel cooling by a novel micro heat pipe array. Energy Power Eng 2010;2:171–4.
[11] Benuel Sathish Raj A, Praveen Kumar S, Manikandan G, Jerry Titus P. An ex-
perimental study on the performance of concentrated photovoltaic system
with cooling system for domestic applications. Int J Eng Adv Technol 2014;3
(6):2249–8958.
[12] Cuce Erdem, Bali Tulin, Sekucoglu Suphi Anil. Effects of passive cooling on
performance of silicon photovoltaic cells. Int J Low-Carbon Technol
2011;6:299–308.
[13] Wu Shenyi, Xiong Chenguang. Passive cooling technology for photovoltaic
panels for domestic houses. Int J Low-Carbon Technol 2014;0:1–9.
[14] Chen Hongbing, Chen Xilin, Li Sizhuo, Ding Hanwan. Comparative study on the
performance improvement of photovoltaic panel with passive cooling under
natural ventilation. Int J Smart Grid Clean Energy 2014;3(4):374–9.
[15] Krauter Stefan. Increased electrical yield via water flow over the front of
photovoltaic panels. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells 2004;82:131–7.
[16] Abdolzadeh M, Ameri M. Improving the effectiveness of a photovoltaic water
pumping system by spraying water over the front of photovoltaic panels.
Renew Energy 2009;34:91–6.
[17] Odeh Saad, Behnia Masud. Improving photovoltaic module efficiency using
water cooling. Heat Transf Eng 2009;30:499–505.
[18] Kordzadeh Azadeh. The effects of nominal power of array and system head on
the operation of photovoltaic water pumping set with array surface covered
by a film of water. Renew Energy 2010;35:1098–102.
[19] Hosseini R, Hosseini N, Khorasanizadeh. An experimental study of combining
photovoltaic system with a heating system. World Renewable Energy Con-
gress. Linkoping, Sweden: Photovoltaic Technology; 8–13 May, 2011.
[20] Drobanţu Loredana, Popescu Mihai Octavian. Increasing the efficiency of
photovoltaic panels through cooling water film. UPB Sci Bull, Ser C 2013
(4):2286–3540.
[21] Moharram KA, Abd-Elhady MS, Kandil HA, El-Sherif H. Enhancing the per-
formance of photovoltaic panels by water cooling. Ain Shams Eng J
2013;4:869–77.
[22] Aldihani A, Aldossary A, Mahmoud S, Al-Dadah RK. The effect of cooling on the
performance of photovoltaic cells under dusty environmental conditions.
Energy Procedia 2014;61:2383–6.
[23] Balamuralikrishnan B, Deepika B, Nagajothi K, Shubaa Shree S, Subasini PT.
Efficiency enhancement of photovoltaic cell. Int J Adv Res Electr, Electron In-
strum Eng 2014;3:2278–8875.
[24] Irwan YM, Leow WZ, Irwanto M, Fareq M, Amelia AR, Gomesh N, et al. Indoor
test performance of PV panel through water cooling method. Energy Procedia
2015;79:604–11.
[25] Abrahamyan YuA, Serago VI, Aroutiounian VM, Anisimova ID, Stafeev VI,
Karamian GG, et al. The efficiency of solar cells immersed in liquid dielectrics.
Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells 2002;73:367–75.
[26] Wang Yiping, Fang Zhenlei, Zhu Li, Huang Qunwu, Zhang Yan, Zhang Zhiying.
The performance of silicon solar cells operated in liquids. Appl Energy
2009;86:1037–42.
[27] Rosa-Clot M, Rosa-Clot P, Tina GM, Scandura PF. Submerged photovoltaic solar
panel SP2. Renew Energy 2010;35:1862–5.
[28] Han Xinyue, Wang Yiping, Zhu Li. Electrical and thermal performance of sili-
con concentrator solar cells immersed in dielectric liquids. Appl Energy
393
2011;88:4481–9.
[29] Nikhil PG, Premalatha M. Performance enhancement of solar module by
cooling. An experimental investigation. Int J Energy Environ 2012;3(1):73–82.
[30] Teo HG, Lee PS, Hawlader MNA. An active cooling system for photovoltaic
modules. Appl Energy 2012;90:309–15.
[31] Tarabsheh Anas Al, Voutetakisb Spyrοs, Papadopoulos Athanasios Ι, Seferlis
Panos, Etier Issa, Saraereh Omar. Investigation of temperature effects in effi-
ciency improvement of non-uniformly cooled photovoltaic cells. Chem Eng
Trans 2013;35:1387–92.
[32] Bahaidarah H, Subhan Abdul, Gandhidasan P, Rehman S. Performance eva-
luation of a PV [photovoltaic] module by back surface water cooling for hot
climatic conditions. Energy 2013;59:445–53.
[33] Mohan Kolhe, Du Bin, Eric Hu. Water cooled concentrated photovoltaic sys-
tem. Int J Smart Grid Clean Energy 2013;2(2) [May].
[34] Chong Kok-Keong, Tan Woei-Chong. Study of automotive radiator cooling
system for dense-array concentration photovoltaic system. Sol Energy
2012;86:2632–43.
[35] Tonui JK, Tripanagnostopoulos Y. Air-cooled PV/T solar collectors with low cost
performance improvements. Sol Energy 2007;8:498–511.
[36] Allison Gray, Boehm Robert, Kenneth Las Vegas, Stone W. Modeling a passive
cooling system for photovoltaic cells under concentration. In: Proceedings of
HT2007, 2007; ASME-JSME thermal engineering summer heat transfer con-
ference. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; July 8–12, 2007.
[37] Hughes Ben Richard, Cherisa Ng Ping Sze, Beg Osman. Computational study of
improving the efficiency of photovoltaic panels in the UAE. . World Academy
of Science, Engineering and Technology; 2011. p. 278–87.
[38] Natarajan Sendhil Kumar, Mallick Tapas Kumar, Katz Matty, Weingaertner
Simon. Numerical investigations of solar cell temperature for photovoltaic
concentrator system with and without passive cooling arrangements. Int J
Therm Sci 2011;50:2514–21.
[39] Micheli Leonardo, Reddy KS, Mallick TK. Plate micro-fins in natural convec-
tion. An opportunity for passive concentrating photovoltaic cooling. Energy
Procedia 2015;82:301–8.
[40] Wu Shuang-Ying, Zhang Qiao-Ling, Xiao Lan, Guo Feng-Hua. A heat pipe
photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T) hybrid system and its performance evaluation.
Energy Build 2011;43:3558–67.
[41] Elmir M, Mehdaoui R, Mojtabi A. Numerical simulation of cooling a solar cell
by forced convection in the presence of a nanofluid. Energy Procedia
2012;18:594–603.
[42] Kerzmann Tony, Schaefer Laura. System simulation of a linear concentrating
photovoltaic system with an active cooling system. Renew Energy
2012;41:254–61.
[43] Gardas Bhaskar B, Tendolkar MV. Design of cooling system for photovoltaic
panel for increasing its electrical efficiency. Int J Mech Ind Eng 2012;2
(3):2231–6477 [ISSN no. 2231-6477].
[44] Popovici Catalin George, Hudișteanu Sebastian Valeriu, Mateescu Theodor
Dorin, Cherecheș Nelu-Cristian. Efficiency improvement of photovoltaic panels
by using air cooled heat sinks. Energy Procedia 2016;85:425–32.
[45 Siddiqui MU, Arif AFM. Electrical, thermal and structural performance of a
cooled PV module. Transient analysis using a multiphysics model. Appl Energy
2013;112:300–12.
[46] Reddy KS, Lokeswaran S, Agarwal Pulkit, Mallick Tapas K. Numerical in-
vestigation of micro-channel based active module cooling for solar CPV sys-
tem. Energy Procedia 2014;54:400–16.
[47] Biwole Pascal, Eclache Pierre, Kuznik Frederic. Improving the performance of
solar panels by the use of phase-change materials. World Renew Energy
Congress 2011 [Linkoping, Sweden].
[48] Browne Maria C, Lawlor Keith, Kelly Adam, Norton Brian, Cormack Sarah JM.
Indoor characterisation of a photovoltaic/thermal phase change material
system. Energy Procedia 2015;70:163–71.
[49] Machniewicz Anna, Knera Dominika, Heim Dariusz. Effect of transition tem-
perature on efficiency of PV/PCM panels. Energy Procedia 2015;78:1684–9.
[50] Drabiniok Evelyn, Neyer Andreas. Bionic microporous evaporation foil for
photovoltaic cell cooling. Microelectron Eng 2014;119:65–9.