3.8 Proceedings Paper

BACKFLIP: Identification of Materials and Changes Upon Aging of Emerging Fluoropolymer-Free and Industry-Benchmark PV Backsheets

出版社

IEEE
DOI: 10.1109/PVSC43889.2021.9518781

关键词

backsheet; DSC; WAXS; FTIR; DuraMAT; polyolefin; weathering

资金

  1. Durable Modules Consortium (DuraMAT), an Energy Materials Network Consortium by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, Solar Energy Technologies Office (EERE, SETO) [32509]
  2. U.S. DOE [DE-AC36-08GO28308]
  3. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences [DE-AC02-76SF00515]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compares traditional PET-based backsheets with novel, co-extruded, and recyclable PO-based backsheets after undergoing accelerated aging tests. Results suggest that the PO materials may have advantages in resisting environmental degradation.
Extending lifetimes of photovoltaic (PV) modules and decreasing manufacturing and decommissioning costs are motivating research of novel PV module backsheet materials. Backsheet integrity is critical to the safety and performance of a PV module, however, the polymeric materials are often vulnerable to environmental degradation. The long-term durability of emerging polyolefin (PO) materials is being examined to inform regarding the possible replacement of laminated backsheets containing polyethylene terephthalate (PET) cores and fluoropolymer protective inner/outer layers. This study compares traditional PET-based backsheets with novel, co-extruded, and recyclable PO-based backsheets after being subjected to hygrometric and UV photolytic accelerated weathering. A large set of characterization methods will compare physical, chemical, structural, mechanical, and insulating properties of these backsheets and the resulting mini-module (MiMo) PV performances. The study of chemical composition, glass- and phase-transition temperatures, degree of crystallinity, and crystalline structure are described here.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据