support@samet.co.in
AE 178, 11th Main Rd, A E Block, Block AE, Anna Nagar, Chennai- 600040
EPC Partner : Solar Quest

Solar Panel Performance Analysis: Monocrystalline vs. Polycrystalline Panels

Home Blogs

This case study examines the performance of monocrystalline and polycrystalline solar panels installed on a south-facing RCC roof over a 30-month period (January 2021 - August 2023). It analyzes energy production and efficiency, comparing both panel types under identical conditions.

Site Conditions

  • Solar panels are installed on an RCC roof with a due south-facing orientation
  • The panels are mounted on a single-row aluminum structure

Monocrystalline Panels

Key Details

  • Total Panels: 360
  • Panel Capacity: - 370 Wp.
  • DC Capacity: 133.2 kWp
  • Inverter Capacity: 110 kVA

Polycrystalline Panels

Key Details

  • Total Panels: 399
  • Panel Capacity: - 330 Wp.
  • DC Capacity: 131.67 kWp
  • Inverter Capacity: 110 kVA

Performance Comparison

Month kWh/kWp (Mono crystalline) kWh/kWp (Poly crystalline) % Difference in Performance
44197 100.1 101.09 -0.0099
44228 101.73 101.47 0.0026
44256 102.72 101.84 0.0088
44287 101.82 101.92 -0.001
44317 101.23 101.28 -0.0005
44348 100.17 99.53 0.0064
44378 100.42 99.8 0.0062
44409 101.13 99.81 0.0133
44440 99.68 99.51 0.0017
44470 99.18 99.47 -0.0029
44501 99.18 99.46 -0.0028
44531 98.77 99.4 -0.0063
44562 98.49 99.34 -0.0085
44593 98.87 99.4 -0.0053
44621 98.96 99.31 -0.0035
44652 98.99 99.32 -0.0033
44682 98.68 99.2 -0.0052
44713 98.41 99.01 -0.006
44743 97.94 98.65 -0.0072
44774 98.27 98.7 -0.0044
44805 97.92 98.4 -0.0048
44835 97.63 98.37 -0.0074
44866 97.46 98.33 -0.0089
44896 97.23 98.17 -0.0095
44927 97.33 98.18 -0.0088
44958 97.95 98.51 -0.0057
44986 98.77 98.85 -0.0008
45017 98.83 98.98 -0.0015
45047 98.5 99.02 -0.0053
45078 98.46 98.87 -0.0042
45108 97.42 99.27 -0.0186
45139 99.23 98.62 0.0061

Key Findings

  • Overall Performance: Monocrystalline panels outperformed polycrystalline panels by an average of 0.66% in kWh/kWp production.
  • Seasonal Variations: The performance gap was widest during summer months (June-August), while winter months (December-February) showed the smallest difference
  • Efficiency: Mono crystalline panels maintained slightly higher efficiency throughout the study period.

Potential Explanations

The higher performance of monocrystalline panels can be attributed to several factors:

  • South-Facing Panels: In the northern hemisphere, panels should ideally face south to capture the maximum amount of sunlight throughout the day.
  • Higher silicon purity:Monocrystalline panels are constructed from a single silicon crystal, leading to higher efficiency and better light absorption.
  • Improved cell structure: Monocrystalline panels often have finer and more consistent cell structures, further enhancing efficiency.
  • Temperature coefficient: Monocrystalline panels typically have a lower temperature coefficient, meaning their efficiency degrades less in hot weather compared to polycrystalline panels.

Conclusion

This case study indicates that monocrystalline panels offer slightly higher performance and efficiency, especially during summer months.