Tier 1
Australian pilot data
In preparation
NATA-accredited testing, customer-approved Australian case studies, panel-manufacturer warranty confirmation, AICIS review record and Australian-format SDS/GHS. Required for strong public claims.
Methodology · How we read the dataFrom overseas reports,
From overseas reports,
to local proof.
SolarShield's evidence base is supplier-disclosed today. This page documents the controlled-trial data we have been given, the test methods that produced it, and the Australian pilot protocol we will run to convert that Tier 2 evidence into Tier 1 — site-specific, independently auditable Australian performance data.
On record
- Controlled trials disclosed
- 3
- Reference panels measured
- 7
- Longest monitoring window
- 90 days
A/B/C panel-paired trials with documented control groups
Across baseline, cleaned-only and coated groups
AU pilot targets 3 – 12 months under documented protocol
Tiers · Trials · Methods · Pilot · Limits
ExploreEvidence hierarchy · 01
Three tiers, one direction of travel.
SolarShield treats evidence as a tiered hierarchy. The same data can carry different weight depending on where it sits in the hierarchy and what it is being used to claim. Our current evidence base sits at Tier 2 — overseas, supplier-disclosed. Australian pilots build the Tier 1 layer on top.
Tier 2
Overseas supplier evidence
Currently available
Overseas third-party reports (SGS, DEKRA, TÜV), supplier technical documents, overseas commercial case studies, raw A/B trial data and controlled-trial datasets with cleaned-only control groups. Supports qualified statements only.
Tier 3
Marketing material
Internal positioning only
Supplier brochures, before/after photos and percentage claims without methodology. Used only to inform internal positioning; never quoted as public proof.
Where we are today
We have Tier 2 evidence published, qualified and on record. Tier 1 evidence is in preparation through the Australian pilot protocol below. We never quote Tier 3 material — supplier brochures and unattributed percentages — as public proof.
Controlled trials · 02
A/B/C disclosures, with the control group included.
These three trials are the subset of supplier evidence where the control group is documented — coated panels vs cleaned-only control vs (where available) uncoated baseline, all at the same site, same string, same orientation. Each is a single-supplier disclosure pending broader cross-validation.
How to read each chart
- Baseline — uncoated, no intervention
- Control — cleaned at T=0, no coating
- Test — cleaned at T=0 then coated
T-01
Industrial rooftop · 30-day A/B/C
Site
Tier-1 industrial precinct with persistent atmospheric particulate
Metric
String-level power output, daily-average, irradiance- and temperature-normalised
Setup
12 paired panels split across two adjacent strings on the same rooftop. Identical age, tilt, azimuth and inverter. Pre-trial clean across all panels; group A coated, group B cleaned-only, group C left ambient as uncoated baseline.
Uncoated · ambient
-4.8%
No intervention — pure soiling decay over 30 days
Cleaned-only · control
-3.2%
Initial clean only — re-soiling after 30 days
Cleaned + coated · test
+0.4%
Held within ±1% of post-clean baseline
Net coating effect
+3.6%
Test vs cleaned-only control — disaggregated net coating effect
Single-supplier disclosure. Supplier-commissioned monitoring; raw data shared on request under NDA.
T-02
Distributed commercial · 90-day A/B
Site
Light-industrial rooftop, distributed scale, mixed urban dust profile
Metric
Performance ratio (PR) drift vs post-clean baseline
Setup
Two adjacent strings, identical orientation, panel age and module type. String A coated, string B cleaned-only. Quarterly monitoring window with weekly visual inspection.
Cleaned-only · control
-5.2%
PR drift over 90 days of ambient exposure
Cleaned + coated · test
-0.8%
PR drift over the same window
Net coating effect
+4.4%
Test vs cleaned-only control — quarterly PR retention delta
Single-supplier disclosure. PR calculation per supplier's documented method; not yet replicated by an independent lab.
T-03
Coastal exposure · 60-day transmittance
Site
Coastal industrial site, combined salt-mist and atmospheric dust
Metric
Light-transmittance retention vs pre-exposure baseline
Setup
8 paired panels at coastal exposure. Spectral transmittance measured pre- and post-exposure across 380–1094 nm. Coated group used spray-application formulation; control left uncoated.
Uncoated · control
-3.5%
Transmittance loss after 60-day exposure
Spray-coated · test
-0.5%
Transmittance loss over the same exposure
Net coating effect
+3.0%
Test vs uncoated control — spectral transmittance retention delta
Single-supplier disclosure. Spray-formulation specific; results may not generalise across formulations.
Test methods · 03
The protocols behind the numbers.
Every datapoint above traces to a documented test method. Supplier-disclosed lab reports are on file; Australian standards-mapping is in preparation; independent Australian re-testing is part of the pilot brief, not a marketing claim.
M-01
Optical performance
Supplier-disclosed · lab report on file
- Spectral transmittance 380 – 1094 nm
- Anti-reflection delta vs uncoated baseline
- Visible-light transmittance ≥ 94% (supplier-stated)
Spectral curves shared by one supplier partner across the relevant PV-active wavelength range.
M-02
Durability & aging
Supplier-disclosed · lab report on file
- Salt-fog test, neutral conditions
- UV-A / UV-B accelerated aging
- Damp-heat 85 °C / 85% RH cycle
- Thermal cycling, supplier-defined ranges
Accelerated-aging protocols documented by supplier; independent-lab replication is one of the targets of the Australian pilot.
M-03
Surface chemistry
Supplier-disclosed · lab report on file
- Water contact-angle measurement (super-hydrophilic / hydrophobic mode)
- Pencil-hardness scratch test (≥ 4H supplier-stated)
- Acid resistance (sulphuric / nitric)
- Alkali resistance (sodium hydroxide)
Documented per supplier internal QC standard; cross-mapping to AS/NZS and IEC equivalents is in progress.
M-04
Soiling & field performance
Supplier-disclosed · field data
- Soiling deposit mass per unit area
- Power-output decay rate vs cleaned baseline
- Cleaning-interval extension (supplier-reported)
Field measurements from the controlled trials above and the broader case-study portfolio. Site-specific.
M-05
Australian standards mapping
AU mapping · in preparation
- AS/NZS 5033 — PV array installation context
- IEC 61724-1 — PV performance monitoring conventions
- AICIS chemical-introduction review pathway
- Australian SDS / GHS-compliant data sheet preparation
SolarShield is responsible for translating supplier test data into Australian-compliance artefacts before commercial rollout.
Australian pilot protocol · 04
How Tier 2 becomes Tier 1, locally.
This is the four-step protocol SolarShield will follow at every Australian pilot site. It is designed to produce data that is site-specific, paired-sample, statistically defensible and independently auditable. Pilot partners receive the data alongside the report.
Reference frameworks
- · IEC 61724-1 normalisation conventions
- · Paired-sample statistical analysis
- · Independent data-logger sign-off where possible
P-0101
Baseline establishment
Pre-coating performance baseline taken from paired reference panels. ≥ 2 weeks of clear-sky operation recorded under same string, same inverter, same orientation. Site-specific soiling profile documented via local PM₁₀ / PM₂.₅ data plus visual inspection.
Deliverables
- Baseline IV-curve set
- Irradiance & temperature reference dataset
- Site soiling profile
P-0202
Twin-panel A/B installation
Test group coated; control group cleaned-only. Both groups share string layout, panel age, orientation, tilt and inverter to minimise confounding variables. Installation conditions, batch number and application method recorded.
Deliverables
- Installation record
- Coating batch & application-mode documentation
- Photographic record per panel
P-0303
Monitored exposure
String-level power output recorded daily under independent data logger where available. Irradiance and temperature normalisation per IEC 61724-1 conventions. Visual inspection monthly. Minimum 3-month, target 6–12-month, monitoring window.
Deliverables
- Daily string-level power data
- Monthly inspection log
- Normalised performance-ratio time series
P-0404
Statistical reporting
Paired-sample analysis with 95% confidence intervals. Net coating effect reported as both absolute PR delta and relative reduction in soiling-induced loss. Cumulative energy delta and any change in cleaning interval reported separately.
Deliverables
- Pilot report (paired-sample statistics)
- Independent data-review record
- Customer-approved AU case study
Limitations & caveats · 05
What this data does not prove.
Honesty about the data is part of the methodology. The trial set above is a valuable controlled subset, but it is still Tier 2 evidence with documented constraints. We name them up front so pilot conversations start from the same baseline of facts.
Trial-specific limitations
L-01
Single-supplier disclosure
The controlled-trial datasets above were disclosed by one supplier partner per trial. They have not yet been cross-validated across multiple suppliers or replicated by an independent laboratory.
L-02
Sample size
Each trial uses 8–12 paired panels. This is sufficient to detect coating-vs-control differences at the trial site, but not to generalise across panel technologies, climates or soiling profiles without further data.
L-03
Baseline drift
Long-monitoring windows must account for baseline drift in the control group itself (panel-level degradation, seasonal irradiance shifts). The trials above either use short-enough windows to keep drift negligible or document a counter-baseline.
L-04
Climate transferability
Pollution profile, irradiance regime, ambient temperature and rainfall pattern differ materially between the trial sites and Australian commercial rooftops or utility-scale farms. Direct numeric transfer is not appropriate.
Portfolio-level caveats (from /evidence)
Net coating effect vs cleaning + coating
Across the broader case-study portfolio, reported figures generally combine surface cleaning with coating application. Controlled A/B/C trial data with cleaned-only control groups has been disclosed by one supplier partner for select formulations — published separately under our trial methodology disclosure. For the remaining case set, the independent net coating effect has not been disaggregated in supplier material.
Irradiance / weather normalisation
Whether energy data was normalised for irradiance, ambient temperature, rainfall and seasonality is not consistently stated across the supplier case summary. Where controlled-trial datasets exist, normalisation is documented for the corresponding inverter pairs only.
Monitoring period
The duration of post-application monitoring used to derive each percentage varies. Supplier-disclosed windows range from 14 days (controlled trials) to ≈12 months (selected commercial customer studies). SolarShield Australian pilots target a minimum 3-month, preferably 6–12-month, monitoring window.
Independent verification
Reported gains have not been confirmed by an independent third party across the full dataset. NATA-accredited testing and customer-approved Australian case studies sit above supplier case lists in our evidence hierarchy.
Transferability to Australia
Pollution profile, climate, panel technology, tilt, cleaning baseline and access constraints differ materially between Chinese industrial sites and Australian commercial rooftops or utility-scale farms. Local pilot data is required before any Australian performance claim is made.
Legal framing
Product performance may vary depending on site conditions, panel type, weather exposure, pollution source, cleaning frequency and application method. Any performance figures from overseas supplier case studies are indicative only and do not guarantee Australian site outcomes. Commercial application is subject to product-specific compliance review, site assessment and pilot validation.
Next step · 07
Help us turn
Tier 2 into Tier 1.
We are actively seeking Australian commercial rooftop and utility-scale PV partners to host pilot deployments under the protocol above. Pilot sites get the coating application, the monitoring instrumentation and the data — and become co-authors of the first Australian-site evidence base for this technology.