Next Article in Journal
Enhancing Effect of Waste Engine Oil Bottom Incorporation on the Performance of CR+SBS Modified Bitumen: A Sustainable and Environmentally-Friendly Solution for Wastes
Next Article in Special Issue
Assessment of PV Module Temperature Models for Building-Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV)
Previous Article in Journal
Optimization of PEMFC Model Parameters Using Meta-Heuristics
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Smart Glass Coatings for Innovative BIPV Solutions

Sustainability 2021, 13(22), 12775; https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212775
by Roman Trattnig 1,*, Gianluca Cattaneo 2, Yuliya Voronko 3, Gabriele C. Eder 3, Dieter Moor 4, Florian Jamschek 5 and Thomas Buchsteiner 6
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Sustainability 2021, 13(22), 12775; https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212775
Submission received: 9 September 2021 / Revised: 9 November 2021 / Accepted: 12 November 2021 / Published: 18 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Integration of Solar PV in Buildings)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper compared three different glass coating technologies that are applied to BIPV modules which show three different colors for each technology. Durability and accelerated aging tests were systematically conducted and show promising results. The purpose of fabricating such BIPVs is to meeting the aesthetic standards of architects and reduce glares from building envelope. I guess those BIPVs mentioned in this paper are used for building façadea and roof. However, the authors use transparent double glass modules as reference, which doesn't make sense to me. The authors should explain why they use such modules instead of standard opaque modules. I also notice there are some similar commercial available products (e.g., http://www.jiashengguangdian.com/en/product/index.html). The authors should compare their technologies with existing technologies in Introduction. The language in this paper is good, but the quality of figures need to be improved. 

 

Something can be done to improve the scientific values of this paper but not necessarily included in the revision:

 

  1. Based on the optical measurements of the front coating, the author can conduct optical and electrical simulations of PV performance and compare the simulated results with experimental results.
  2. The authors studied the BIPV performance only for one climate. Considering the front coating could affect the cell temperature, different climates could show different results. That could be easily done by the aforementioned simulation.

 

Other details need to be improved including:

 

  1. A detailed literature review should be conducted in Introduction.
  2. Figure resolution should be improved.
  3. Errors of figure citation should be addressed.
  4. BPIV was explained twice in Introduction.
  5. Figure 4 does not show the spectral reflectance of the reference glass. Since the coating could have an impact on the cell temperature, the authors should extend the wavelength range of spectral reflectance to near infrared.
  6. Table 1 should be presented in a concise form.
  7. In Table 2, the authors defined three levels of degradation, i.e., no, minor, and unacceptable. But the authors did not explain how they define such degradation levels. Also, the legend "test not done" is not used in the table.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Before a further review the manucscript should be throuroughly overworked. While the field of science is of high interest and the approach and work seem to be of high quality, the manuscript is not in several points.

The manuscript was at submission not checked any more for compleeteness. More than 10 references are missing/incorrect and all figures except the tables and picture (i.e. all results), i.e. 4, 5, 6, 7 ar not propperly readabel. The resolution is too small, neither symbols nore writing are redable at all in some of the figures.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I'm ok with this version. Please check the error in Line 255.

Author Response

Dear Sir or Madam (Reviewer #1),

we are very pleased that this version meets your acceptance. We have removed the malfunctioning (double)reference in line 255.

Thank you very much!

With best regards on behalf of all authors

Dr. Roman Trattnig

Reviewer 2 Report

The article was sufficiently improved. Now the work presents in a good manner the results of high importance for acceptace of BIPV products in the market as well as for architects use. The combinaed research for visual appearance, long time stability and galre investigation is essential. The demonstration in real application and the investigation of the performance losses make the picture round. 

Author Response

Dear Sir or Madam (Reviewer #1),

we are very pleased that this version meets your acceptance. In addition, we have removed the malfunctioning (double)reference in line 255.

Thank you very much!

With best regards on behalf of all authors

Dr. Roman Trattnig

Back to TopTop