Journal Home > Volume 8 , Issue 6
CSEE Journal of Power and Energy Systems 2022, 8(6): 1670-1683 https://doi.org/10.17775/CSEEJPES.2020.00900
Open Access | Issue | Published: 19 August 2020

Modeling and Analysis of PV Configurations to Extract Maximum Power Under Partial Shading Conditions

Show Author's Information Aditi Atul Desai,  Suresh Mikkili
Department of EEE, National Institute of Technology Goa, Goa 403401, India
Keywords:
partial shading conditions (PSCs), Alternate Total Cross Tied – Bridge Linked (A-TCT-BL) PV configuration, mismatching loss, PV configurations
Cite this article:
Desai AA, Mikkili S. Modeling and Analysis of PV Configurations to Extract Maximum Power Under Partial Shading Conditions. CSEE Journal of Power and Energy Systems, 2022, 8(6): 1670-1683. https://doi.org/10.17775/CSEEJPES.2020.00900
Download citation
EndNote(RIS)
BibTeX

305

Views

18

Downloads

Citations

13

Crossref

N/A

WoS

0

Scopus

0

CSCD

Abstract Full text About this article

Photovoltaics (PV) are widely used as renewable energy sources for standalone and grid connected PV systems. But these PV systems face major reduction in output power and efficiency due to Partial Shading Conditions (PSCs). This research paper focuses on the different choices of optimum PV Configuration under a given shading pattern to extract maximum power by mitigating mismatching loss. Various PV configurations, such as Series (S), Series Parallel (SP), Total Cross Tied (TCT), Bridge Linked (BL), Honey Comb (HC) and Alternate Total Cross Tied – Bridge Linked (A-TCT-BL) are modeled and analyzed under PSCs. Nine shading patterns, such as center, diagonal, corner, L-shaped, short and narrow, short and wide, long and narrow, long and wide and random, are considered to study the behavior of a 6 × 6 array form of a PV Configuration. Their performances are compared based on open circuit voltage, short circuit current, global maximum power point (GMPP), maximum voltage, maximum current, shading loss, fill factor, mismatching loss and efficiency. A novel Hybrid Configuration called A-TCT-BL PV Configuration is proposed to generate maximum power under PSCs and to minimize the number of cross ties and wiring complexities. This Configuration is an integration of TCT and BL PV Configuration and the simulation results prove the capability of this proposed PV Configuration to generate maximum power, fill factor, efficiency and minimum mismatching loss compared to S, SP, BL and HC PV Configurations under a majority of the PSCs investigated. A Canadian Solar CS5P-200M PV module is considered for simulation and is simulated using Matlab/Simulink software.


menu
Abstract
Full text
Outline
About this article

Modeling and Analysis of PV Configurations to Extract Maximum Power Under Partial Shading Conditions

Show Author's information Aditi Atul Desai, Suresh Mikkili
Department of EEE, National Institute of Technology Goa, Goa 403401, India

Abstract

Photovoltaics (PV) are widely used as renewable energy sources for standalone and grid connected PV systems. But these PV systems face major reduction in output power and efficiency due to Partial Shading Conditions (PSCs). This research paper focuses on the different choices of optimum PV Configuration under a given shading pattern to extract maximum power by mitigating mismatching loss. Various PV configurations, such as Series (S), Series Parallel (SP), Total Cross Tied (TCT), Bridge Linked (BL), Honey Comb (HC) and Alternate Total Cross Tied – Bridge Linked (A-TCT-BL) are modeled and analyzed under PSCs. Nine shading patterns, such as center, diagonal, corner, L-shaped, short and narrow, short and wide, long and narrow, long and wide and random, are considered to study the behavior of a 6 × 6 array form of a PV Configuration. Their performances are compared based on open circuit voltage, short circuit current, global maximum power point (GMPP), maximum voltage, maximum current, shading loss, fill factor, mismatching loss and efficiency. A novel Hybrid Configuration called A-TCT-BL PV Configuration is proposed to generate maximum power under PSCs and to minimize the number of cross ties and wiring complexities. This Configuration is an integration of TCT and BL PV Configuration and the simulation results prove the capability of this proposed PV Configuration to generate maximum power, fill factor, efficiency and minimum mismatching loss compared to S, SP, BL and HC PV Configurations under a majority of the PSCs investigated. A Canadian Solar CS5P-200M PV module is considered for simulation and is simulated using Matlab/Simulink software.

Keywords: partial shading conditions (PSCs), Alternate Total Cross Tied – Bridge Linked (A-TCT-BL) PV configuration, mismatching loss, PV configurations

References(26)

[1]
O. Bingöl and B. Özkaya, “Analysis and comparison of different PV array configurations under partial shading conditions,” Solar Energy, vol. 160, pp. 336–343, Jan. 2018.
DOI Google Scholar
[2]
W. Jaideaw, A. Suksri, and T. Wongwuttanasatian, “Simulation of photovoltaic module configuration for different shaded patterns,” IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 113, pp. 012204, Feb. 2018.
DOI Google Scholar
[3]
F. Belhachat and C. Larbes, “Modeling, analysis and comparison of solar photovoltaic array configurations under partial shading conditions,” Solar Energy, vol. 120, pp. 399–418, Oct. 2015.
DOI Google Scholar
[4]
M. Z. Ramli and Z. Salam, “Analysis and experimental validation of partial shading mitigation in photovoltaic system using integrated dc–dc converter with maximum power point tracker,” IET Renewable Power Generation, vol. 13, no. 13, pp. 2356–2366, Jul. 2019.
DOI Google Scholar
[5]
S. Bana and R. P. Saini, “Experimental investigation on power output of different photovoltaic array configurations under uniform and partial shading scenarios,” Energy, vol. 127, pp. 438–453, May 2017.
DOI Google Scholar
[6]
S. Mohammadnejad, A. Khalafi, and S. M. Ahmadi, “Mathematical analysis of total- cross-Tied photovoltaic array under partial shading condition and its comparison with other configurations,” Solar Energy, vol. 133, pp. 501–511, Aug. 2016.
DOI Google Scholar
[7]
H. Patel and V. Agarwal, “MATLAB-based modeling to study the effects of partial shading on PV array characteristics,” IEEE transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 302–310, Mar. 2008.
DOI Google Scholar
[8]
N. D. Kaushika and N. K. Gautam, “Energy yield simulations of interconnected solar PV arrays,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 127–134, Mar. 2003.
DOI Google Scholar
[9]
R. Ramaprabha and B. L. Mathur, “A comprehensive review and analysis of solar photovoltaic array configurations under partial shaded conditions,” International Journal of Photoenergy, vol. 2012, pp. 120214, Mar. 2012.
DOI Google Scholar
[10]
Y. J. Wang and P. C. Hsu, “Analytical modelling of partial shading and different orientation of photovoltaic modules,” IET Renewable Power Generation, vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 272–282, May 2010.
DOI Google Scholar
[11]
Y. J. Wang and P. C. Hsu, “An investigation on partial shading of PV modules with different connection configurations of PV cells,” Energy, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 3069–3078, May 2011.
DOI Google Scholar
[12]
M. Dhimish, V. Holmes, B. Mehrdadi, M. Dales, B. Chong, and L. Zhang, “Seven indicators variations for multiple PV array configurations under partial shading and faulty PV conditions,” Renewable Energy, vol. 113, pp. 438–460, Dec. 2017.
DOI Google Scholar
[13]
P. R. Satpathy, S. Jena, and R. Sharma, “Power enhancement from partially shaded modules of solar PV arrays through various interconnections among modules,” Energy, vol. 144, pp. 839–850, Feb. 2018.
DOI Google Scholar
[14]
V. Jha and U. S. Triar, “A detailed comparative analysis of different photovoltaic array configurations under partial shading conditions,” International transactions on Electrical Energy Systems, vol. 29, No. 6, pp. e12020, Jun. 2019.
DOI Google Scholar
[15]
J. D. Bastidas-Rodríguez, L. A. Trejos-Grisales, D. González-Montoya, C. A. Ramos-Paja, G. Petrone, and G. Spagnuolo, “General modeling procedure for photovoltaic arrays,” Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 155, pp. 67–79, Feb. 2018.
DOI Google Scholar
[16]
M. Z. Shams El-Dein, M. Kazerani, and M. M. A. Salama, “Optimal photovoltaic array reconfiguration to reduce partial shading losses,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 145–153, Jan. 2013.
DOI Google Scholar
[17]
G. Sai Krishna and T. Moger, “Reconfiguration strategies for reducing partial shading effects in photovoltaic arrays: State of the art,” Solar Energy, vol. 182, pp. 429–452, Apr. 2019.
DOI Google Scholar
[18]
V. M. Ram Tatabhatla, A. Agarwal, and T. Kanumuri, “Performance enhancement by shade dispersion of Solar Photo-Voltaic array under continuous dynamic partial shading conditions,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 213, pp. 462–479, Mar. 2019.
DOI Google Scholar
[19]
G. Walker, “Evaluating MPPT converter topologies using a MATLAB PV model,” Journal of Electrical & Electronics Engineering, vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 49–55, Jan. 2001.
Google Scholar
[20]
W. De Soto, S. A. Klein, and W. A. Beckman, “Improvement and validation of a model for photovoltaic array performance,” Solar Energy, vol. 80, no. 1, pp. 78–88, Jan. 2006.
DOI Google Scholar
[21]
S. Shongwe and M. Hanif, “Comparative Analysis of Different Single-Diode PV Modeling Methods,” IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics, vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 938–946, May 2015.
DOI Google Scholar
[22]
S. Motahhir, A. El Ghzizal, S. Sebti, and A. Derouich, “Modeling of photovoltaic system with modified incremental conductance algorithm for fast changes of irradiance,” International Journal of Photoenergy, vol. 2018, pp. 3286479, Mar. 2018.
DOI Google Scholar
[23]
S. R. Pendem and S. Mikkili, “Modelling and performance assessment of PV array topologies under partial shading conditions to mitigate the mismatching power losses,” Solar Energy, vol. 160, pp. 303–321, Jan. 2018.
DOI Google Scholar
[24]
S. Malathy and R. Ramaprabha, “Comprehensive analysis on the role of array size and configuration on energy yield of photovoltaic systems under shaded conditions,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 49, pp. 672–679, Sep. 2015.
DOI Google Scholar
[25]
A. S. Yadav, R. K. Pachauri, Y. K. Chauhan, S. Choudhury, and R. Singh, “Performance enhancement of partially shaded PV array using novel shade dispersion effect on magic-square puzzle configuration,” Solar Energy, vol. 144, pp. 780–797, Mar. 2017.
DOI Google Scholar
[26]
R. Ahmad, A. F. Murtaza, H. A. Sher, U. T. Shami, and S. Olalekan, “An analytical approach to study partial shading effects on PV array supported by literature,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 74, pp. 721–732, Jul. 2017.
DOI Google Scholar
Publication history
Copyright
Rights and permissions

Publication history

Received: 21 March 2020
Revised: 04 May 2020
Accepted: 24 June 2020
Published: 19 August 2020
Issue date: November 2022

Copyright

© 2020 CSEE

Rights and permissions

Return