See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/310482011

Comparison of PV Array Configuration Efficiency under Partial Shading

Condition

Conference Paper · June 2016

DOI: 10.1109/PVSC.2016.7750368

CITATIONS READS
14 832

4 authors, including:

Mahmoud Amin Jelani Bailey

Manhattan College Manhattan College
87 PUBLICATIONS 910 CITATIONS 2 PUBLICATIONS 23 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Cesar Tapia
Manhattan College
2 PUBLICATIONS 23 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mahmoud Amin on 29 January 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Comparison of PV Array Configuration Efficiency under Partial
Shading Condition
Dr. Mahmoud Amin, Jelani Bailey, Cesar Tapia, Vineeth Thodimeladine

Manhattan College, Riverdale, New York, 10471, USA

Abstract — This paper presents a comparative review study to The main objective of this paper is to identify if different
determine whether the configuration of a Photovoltaic (PV) array configurations of the PV Arrays would result in lower losses
helps mitigate partial shading. A 4x4 array is proposed, simulated due to partial shading effects [4]. This is done by setting up
and tested with series (S), series-parallel (SP) and total cross tied
(TCT) configurations. The PV module was first built in different 2x2, 2x4 and 4x4 configurations in MATLAB [5].
simulation software and then arranged in their respective Partial shading is simulated by changing the insolation levels,
orientations to test. All PV modules were investigated with a to test how shading effects the maximum power point (MPP).
constant insolation level, which was calibrated to simulate Our results show that the TCT configuration provides better
shading. Finally, P-V and I-V characteristics were analyzed, performance as well as higher efficiency, with regard to partial
across configurations, to determine the most resilient. Test results
are discussed to compare the energy efficiency across shading. The other conventional configurations are out
configurations. performed due to the way voltages are split within the TCT
configuration.
Index Terms — mitigate losses, configuration, MPP, partial Our simulations are based on the theoretical proof proposed
shading, photovoltaic cells, PV array, PV module, resilience, by Wang [3] based on using Kirchhoff’s Laws and analyzing
series, series parallel, solar energy, total cross tied. them through circuit analyses. Wang’s paper however deals
with individual cells working within a module but does not
I. INTRODUCTION expand on this concept at a system level.

Solar energy is one of the most abundant renewable energy

sources, capable of producing electricity with the help of a PV II. PV ARRAY CONFIGURATIONS
cell. A PV cell converts light into energy by taking in the Fig. 2 shows a schematic diagram of the different PV array
energy from photons striking the cell, exciting electrons inside configurations. The corresponding SIMULINK models are
a silicon lattice structure such that the electrons move to holes, introduced in Fig. 3.
and discharge the energy across a resistor attached in series
with a PV Cell. The equivalent diagram in from [1] by Atlas
and Sharaf is shown in Fig. 1.
This energy source will exist for the lifetime of the sun and
(a)
is fairly reliable. With that in mind, PV cells experience power
loss due to partial shading which can be caused by any object
preventing sunlight from striking the PV cell [2]. This effect
changes the Maximum Power Point (MPP), by decreasing the
amount of incoming voltage. As a result the efficiency of the
PV cell reduces, which is disastrous to the Solar Energy
Industry [3].

(b) (c)

Fig. 2. Different PV array configurations schematic diagram: (a)

Series, (b) Series Parallel and (c) TCT.

A. Series (S)
The S array configuration is based on setting up all of the
PV modules in series to allow for a single current to flow
throughout the array. This configuration is shown in Fig. 3a.
Fig. 1. PV cell equivalent circuit. Characteristic of an S array, as one module is greatly affected
by shading; the losses are distributed to the rest of the modules 1000
Ipv

Insolation
Ppv

Vpv
Ipv

Insolation
Ppv

Vpv
Goto3

[C]

in the array. This characteristic will lead to high efficiency Insolation Module 1 Module 9

losses when partial shading is initiated.

Ipv Ppv Ipv Ppv

Insolation Vpv Insolation Vpv

Module 2 Module 10

B. Series Parallel (SP) Ipv

Insolation
Ppv

Vpv
Ipv

Insolation
Ppv

Vpv

Module 3 Module 11

The SP array configuration has the same amount of modules Ipv Ppv Ipv Ppv

as the S array configuration, except split into two series strings

Insolation Vpv Insolation Vpv
Goto2
Module 4 Module 12
[A] [B]

that are connected in parallel to each other. Similarly, the Goto Ipv

Insolation
Ppv

Vpv
Ipv

Insolation
Ppv

Vpv

shading effect on one of the modules of the SP string creates Ipv

Module 5

Ppv Ipv
Module 13

Ppv

losses that affect all the modules in that string. The main Insolation

Module 6
Vpv Insolation

Module 14
Vpv

advantage is that only one string of the SP array is negatively Ipv Ppv Ipv Ppv

impacted, while in series the entire array is compromised. In

Insolation Vpv Insolation Vpv

Module 7 Module 15

this configuration, as seen in Fig. 3b, the currents in each row Ipv

Insolation
Ppv

Vpv
Ipv

Insolation
Ppv

Vpv

may vary based on the insolation levels, but voltages are Module 8 Module 16

equivalent. As a result partial shading shifts the MPP. This

[A]
V Array
From3

MPP is compared to the other configurations at different

[B] Add P Array
PV7
From1
[C]
To Workspace1
I Array

insolation levels, to see which is better at mitigating losses From2

from partial shading. 4 4 4

(a)
4
[A1]

C. Total Cross Tied (TCT)

From4

[A2]

1000 1000 1000 1000 From5 [A]

[A1] [A2] [A3] [A4]
[A3]

The TCT array configuration is meant to connect PV Goto4 Goto5 Goto6 Goto7 Goto8

Insolation

Insolation

Insolation

Insolation
From6

Ipv

Ipv

Ipv

Ipv
[A4]

modules in parallel with respect to the row they are in, and the From7

Ppv

Vpv

Ppv

Vpv

Ppv

Vpv

Ppv

Vpv
rows in series with the other rows. This is to say that each
node is connected to all the modules in a row and are then [B]

From1
V_Array

P_Array

connected in series with other rows. The equivalent diagram is

PV8

Insolation

Insolation

Insolation

Insolation
Ipv

Ipv

Ipv

Ipv
Product To Workspace1
[A] I_Array

shown in Fig. 3c. To elaborate how the I-V characteristics

Ppv

Vpv

Ppv

Vpv

Ppv

Vpv

Ppv

Vpv
From3

work for a TCT arrangement, we examined the 2x2 TCT array

for the V-I equations. V_Array
[B]
Insolation

Insolation

Insolation

Insolation
Ipv

Ipv

Ipv

Ipv
4
Goto2

Z1
Ppv

Vpv

Ppv

Vpv

Ppv

Vpv

Ppv

Vpv
I 1  I in ( ) (1)
Z1  Z 3

Similarly, we can see that the other currents divide based on

Insolation

Insolation

Insolation

Insolation
Ipv

Ipv

Ipv

Ipv
the impedances of the element the voltage flows across as I2
Ppv

Vpv

Ppv

Vpv

Ppv

Vpv

Ppv

Vpv

(b)
Z2
I 2  ( I 1  I 3 )( ) (2)
Z2  Z4
P_Array
Goto5

Eqs. (1, 2) show us that whatever losses occur within I3 and I1

[B]
I4

I3

I2

I1
Ppv Ipv Ppv Ipv Ppv Ipv Ppv Ipv

4
affect the following currents irrespective of the input current.
1000

1000

1000

1000
Vpv Insolation Vpv Insolation Vpv Insolation Vpv Insolation

The voltages in the TCT configuration average out based on

I8

I7

I6

I5
Ppv Ipv Ppv Ipv Ppv Ipv Ppv Ipv

4
1000

1000

1000

1000
the mismatch caused by the different currents from the two PV Vpv Insolation Vpv Insolation Vpv Insolation Vpv Insolation

modules. The Vn of the TCT configuration should be the

I12

I11

I10

Ppv Ipv Ppv Ipv Ppv Ipv Ppv Ipv I9

4
4

4
I_Array

1000

1000

1000

1000
Vpv Insolation Vpv Insolation Vpv Insolation Vpv Insolation

difference between V1, V3, and ground. Similarly, Vn1 is the

I16

I15

I14

I13

difference between V2, V4, and ground. The advantage of the Ppv Ipv Ppv Ipv Ppv Ipv Ppv Ipv
Goto4

4
[A]

1000

1000

1000

1000

Vpv Insolation Vpv Insolation Vpv Insolation Vpv Insolation

TCT configuration is that shading occurring at a module does

From3

From1
[A]

[B]

not greatly compromise a string or row of modules. This array

configuration will be proven experimentally to operate the best
V_Array

P_Array
I_Array

under shading conditions.

To Workspace1

PV9

(c)
Fig. 3. Different PV array configurations SIMULINK model: (a)
Series, (b) Series Parallel and (c) TCT.
 III. TEST RESULTS B. Series Parallel (SP) Shading
In order to simulate shading on our three different Fig. 6 shows a significant drop in power when shading is
configurations, we applied partial shading to the first module initialized, but not as large a drop as that in the S array
in each configuration. We varied shading from 50-70% and configuration. The cascading effect of shading is localized to
compared those I-V and P-V curves with those unaffected by only one string of the 4x4 array, thereby resulting in better
shading. efficiency than the purely S array. Notice from Table I that a
single module shaded at 50% reduced the power output by
A. Series (S) Shading about 35%, leading to an efficiency of 65%. Unlike with the S
As can be seen in Fig. 4, when shading is initialized a array configuration spoken of earlier, as the shading is
drastic drop in power is noticeable. The cascading effect of increased the efficiency losses stabilize. There is a limit to the
power loss due to shading reduces efficiency greatly. From effects of shading on one module with respect to the array.
Table I, it is noticed that a single module in the S array shaded
at 50% reduced the power output by over 50%, leading to an Power vs Voltage (Series Parallel)
efficiency of 47%. Upon further shading the efficiency 4,000 0% Shade
50% Shade
plummets to 28%. 3,500 60% Shade
70% Shade
3,000

Power (W)
2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Voltage (V)

Fig. 6. P-V curve of a 4x4 SP array during partial shading.

Current vs Voltage (Series Parallel)

40 0% Shade
50% Shade
Fig. 4. P-V curve of a 4x4 S array during partial shading. 35 60% Shade
70% Shade
30
Current (A)

25

20

15

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Voltage (V)

Fig. 7. I-V curve of a 4x4 SP array during partial shading.

C. Total Cross Tied (TCT) Shading
Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 clearly show how resistant to shading one
module of the TCT array configuration proves to be. A slight
reduction in power is noticeable with shading initialized. The
cascading effects of power loss that greatly affected S and SP
Fig. 5. I-V curve of a 4x4 S array during partial shading. array configurations previously do not occur with the TCT
array configuration. From Table I, the efficiency with respect
to shading of the TCT array is seen as far superior when
compared to S and SP array configurations. This is due to the
nature of how it is configured. No single module is directly
connected in series with other modules, therefore eliminating
the cascading losses experienced in previous configurations.
 TABLE I
MPP CURRENT, VOLTAGE AND POWER OUTPUTS WITH VARYING LEVELS OF SHADING (S, SP, TCT)
Series 4x4 Series Parallel 4x4 Total Cross Tied 4x4
Section No Module Module Module No Module Module Module No Module Module Module
Shading Shaded Shaded Shaded Shading Shaded Shaded Shaded Shading Shaded Shaded Shaded
50% 60% 70% 50% 60% 70% 50% 60% 70%

Power (W) 4083.4 1911.6 1529.3 1147 4083.4 2662.3 2586.3 2510.2 4083.5 3680 3623.6 3562.2
Voltage (V) 498.58 466.71 467.71 466.99 124.65 92.85 93.05 92.91 124.76 123.38 125.09 126.74
Current (A) 8.19 4.10 3.27 2.46 32.76 28.67 27.79 27.02 32.73 29.826 28.97 28.11
Efficiency (%) 100 47 36 28 100 65 63 62 100 90 88 87

Power vs Voltage (Total Cross Tied) Based on Table I, we can see that the power in TCT
0% Shade
4000
50% Shade configuration is magnitudes higher than S or SP. Specifically,
60% Shade
3500
70% Shade we can see that for 70% shaded, S configuration loses 72% of
3000 its power, SP configuration loses 38% of its power, and TCT
Power (W)

2500 configuration loses 13% of its power. From this comparison, it

2000
is clear that TCT is the best configuration to mitigate partial
1500
shading. Likewise, the P-V and I-V characteristics also support
1000
this data as we can see that the current rapidly drops in the S
500
and SP configurations at 50% shaded, whereas the TCT
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 configuration losses are much smaller. The benefit of this
Voltage (V)
paper is to provide simulation of a theoretical proof such that
any implementations of this architecture is held true. This
Fig. 8. P-V curve of a 4x4 TCT array during partial shading.
experiment could be improved by including the Bridge-Linked
configuration, another popular configuration and testing these
theories with hardware.

Current vs Voltage (Total Cross Tied)

40 0% Shade REFERENCES
50% Shade
35
60% Shade
70% Shade
[1] H. Altas and A. M. Sharaf "A photovoltaic array simulation
30
model for matlab–simulink GUI environment", Proc. Int. Conf.
Current (A)

25 Clean Elect. Power (ICCEP), pp.341 -345 2007

20 [2] Yanzhi Wang; Xue Lin; Younghyun Kim; Naehyuck Chang;
15
Pedram, M., "Architecture and Control Algorithms for
Combating Partial Shading in Photovoltaic
10
Systems," Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and
5 Systems, IEEE Transactions on , vol.33, no.6, pp.917,930, June
0 2014
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170
Voltage (V) [3] Y.J. Wang, P.C. Hsu “An investigation on partial shading of PV
modules with different connection con of PV cells” Energy, 36
(2011), pp. 3069–3078
Fig. 9. I-V curve of a 4x4 TCT array during partial shading. [4] R. Ramaprabha and B. L. Mathur, “A Comprehensive Review
and Analysis of Solar Photovoltaic Array Configurations under
Partial Shaded Conditions,” International Journal of
The entire first row of modules of the TCT would have to be Photoenergy, vol. 2012, Article ID 120214, 16 pages, 2012
affected by partial shading in order for efficiency losses to [5] Patel, H.; Agarwal, V., "MATLAB-Based Modeling to Study
become noticeable. the Effects of Partial Shading on PV Array
Characteristics," Energy Conversion, IEEE Transactions on ,
vol.23, no.1, pp.302,310, March 2008
[6] A.Bidram, A. Davoudi, R. S. Balog, " Control and circuit
techniques to mitigate partial shading effects in photovoltaic
IV. CONCLUSION
arrays—an overview", IEEE J. Photovoltaics , vol. 2(4), pp.
532-546, October 2012.
After finding the MPPs for S, SP, and TCT arrays, we can
clearly see that TCT is the most resistant to partial shading.

View publication stats