Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Performance Comparison Between Bifacial PERC and TOPCon on a South‐Facing Vertical Structure
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Performance Comparison Between Bifacial PERC and TOPCon on a South‐Facing Vertical Structure
Do you wish to request the book?
Performance Comparison Between Bifacial PERC and TOPCon on a South‐Facing Vertical Structure
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Performance Comparison Between Bifacial PERC and TOPCon on a South‐Facing Vertical Structure
2025
Overview
The aim of this study is to quantitatively compare the field performance of two bifacial photovoltaic (PV) technologies—Passivated Emitter and Rear Contact (PERC) and Tunnel Oxide Passivated Contact (TOPCon)—under real‐world rooftop conditions in winter in South Korea. PV module efficiency obtained under standard test conditions, such values can diverge significantly from actual field performance, directly impacting energy yield and the levelized cost of energy. This study employed a 20‐day rooftop field test on a south‐facing building to evaluate and compare the energy yield and electrical characteristics of PERC and TOPCon modules. TOPCon achieved an 8.16% higher energy yield than PERC, owing to its higher bifaciality coefficient (83.3% vs. 78.8%), better temperature coefficient of voltage, and lower rear‐side shading. TOPCon thus achieved 1.51% higher normalized open‐circuit voltage (Voc) and 7.40% higher normalized short‐circuit current (Isc). This study, the first to decompose the normalized Voc and Isc contributions under field conditions, confirms that device‐level innovations in cell architecture can substantially improve real‐world energy generation. These findings underscore the importance of optimizing module design based on field conditions rather than relying solely on laboratory benchmarks. We fabricated modules using Tunnel Oxide Passivated Contact and Passivated Emitter and Rear Contact solar cells, installed them outdoors, and compared their energy yields. This paper examines the factors contributing to the differences in energy yield, considering everything from the manufacturing processes of each solar cell to their electrical parameters (Voc, Isc, QE) and outdoor environmental conditions.
Publisher
John Wiley & Sons, Inc,Wiley
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.