Published in IET Power Electronics

Received on 25th February 2013

Revised on 30th April 2013
Accepted on 6th August 2013
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel.2013.0143
ISSN 1755-4535
Impact of partial shading on the output power of PV
systems under partial shading conditions
Indu Rani Balasubramanian, Saravana Ilango Ganesan, Nagamani Chilakapati
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India
E-mail: gsilango@nitt.edu
Abstract: A major challenge in the photovoltaics (PV) systems is to make it energy efcient. Partial shading reduces the energy
yield of PV systems and introduces multiple peaks in the PV characteristics. The maximum power point trackers (MPPTs) work
in conjunction with the boost converter and track the global peak in the PV characteristics. The boost converter used for MPPT is
generally designed to operate with high efciency at the maximum power point (MPP) voltage of the array by assuming a single
peak power point on the PV characteristics. However, the efciency of the boost converter varies with the input voltage, and the
MPP of the load when the converter efciency is considered is different from the MPP of the PV array. Since the maximisation of
power in the load is ultimately desirable, this study focuses on the maximisation of power to the load. The power transferred to
load under different shading patterns is analysed and the results of the study are demonstrated through simulation and
experimental results.
1 Introduction
The increase in the global energy demand and the growing
concern over environmental issues has led to the
exploration of renewable energy sources such as solar and
wind. Although PV systems are being increasingly
employed in various applications, the high installation cost
and the low conversion efciency of PV modules are the
major obstacles in utilising PV source [1, 2]. Therefore
studies on PV generation systems are actively being
promoted in order to minimise these drawbacks.
To utilise the PV power effectively, maximum power point
trackers (MPPTs) are normally employed in conjunction with
the dcdc converters [3, 4]. The boost converters are widely
adopted [5] as MPPT to achieve greater output voltage and
reduce the number of panels in the series string. The
objective of the MPPT is to ensure that the system always
extracts the maximum power from the PV array. However,
because of the varying environmental conditions such as
solar insolation and temperature, the maximum power point
(MPP) in PV characteristic curve varies non-linearly with
these conditions, thus posing a challenge for the tracking
algorithm [68]. Various MPPT schemes such as perturb
and observe [9, 10], incremental conductance [11, 12],
short-circuit current [13] and open-circuit voltage [14] have
been addressed in order to operate the PV array at the MPP
point under varying atmospheric conditions. These schemes
are effective under uniform insolation conditions, where
only one peak occurs at the MPP voltage of the array [15].
Under partial shading conditions, the PV array exhibits
multiple peaks in the PV characteristics of which one is the
global peak (GP) and the rest are the local peaks (LPs)
[16, 17]. The presence of multiple peaks reduces the
efcacy of the existing MPPT techniques because of their
inability to distinguish between local and global maxima
[18]. It is estimated that power loss because of the MPPT
algorithm tracking an LP may be up to 70% [19]. Therefore
under partial shading conditions, in addition to mismatch
losses there are also power losses because of failure in
tracking the GP.
The issue of MPPT for PV arrays operating under
non-uniform insolation conditions [2026] has been
addressed in literature. The real maximum power point
tracking method [20] rst detects the variations in the PV
voltage and current to identify the occurrence of partial
shading. Then, the operating point is changed according to
a predetermined linear function and then the conventional
MPPT is applied to track the real MPP. A two-stage
method [21] proposed to track the GP moves the operating
point into the vicinity of the maximum power point in the
rst stage and then converges to the MPP in the second
stage. This method requires additional circuits for real-time
measurement of open-circuit voltage and short-circuit
current and the method may not track the MPP for
non-uniform insolation conditions. A new tracking
algorithm [22] has been proposed to track the GP under all
shading conditions by controlling the dcdc converter
connected to the PV array. This method does not require the
knowledge of electrical characteristics or the array
conguration. The improved MPPT method based on a
modied particle swarm optimisation algorithm [23] tracks
the GP under partial shading conditions and eliminates the
steady-state oscillations at MPP. Fibonacci sequence
technique [24, 25] employs line search algorithm with
Fibonacci sequence to nd the MPP under both uniform
and non-uniform insolation conditions. However, the
www.ietdl.org
IET Power Electron., 2014, Vol. 7, Iss. 3, pp. 657666
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel.2013.0143
657
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014
method does not guarantee GP tracking under all conditions.
Some critical observations [26] such as the peaks on the PV
curve occurring nearly at multiples of 80% of open-circuit
voltage (V
oc
) of the module and the minimum displacement
between successive peaks being nearly 80% of V
oc
of the
module are presented. The magnitude of GP and the voltage
at which it occurs depends on the shading pattern, array
conguration, insolation and temperature [26]. An algorithm
with a separate GP tracking subroutine is proposed to track
the GP under partially shaded conditions. All these attempts
[2126] focus only on extracting maximum power from the
array by tracking the GP in the PV characteristics.
Some of the techniques focus on increasing the output
power of the PV systems under partial shading conditions.
In the distributed MPPT technique [27], a dcdc power
converter is connected to each PV module of the PV array
in order to increase the total available power of the PV
array. However, this arrangement increases the cost of
implementation of the PV system. In the reconguration
techniques [28, 29], the connections of the modules are
dynamically changed according to a switching matrix so as
to maximise the current of the single string in the event of
shading. Although the power loss is reduced to an extent
under several partially shaded conditions, the technique
involves high cost and greater complexity. Further these
methods only attempt to improve the PV output power and
do not address the issues in maximising the PV power at
the load.
The boost converter acts as an interface and transfers the
PV power to the load. In many applications, the converter is
designed to operate at a xed operating point or within a
range of operating points [30] and supplies the load
depending on the load characteristics. However, in case of
PV systems, the operating point is continuously changing as
the PV output is uctuating in nature. As the efciency of
the boost converter varies with the input voltage, the
operating point of the PV array plays a vital role in
determining the power delivered to the load.
This paper addresses the impact of partial shading
combined with the non-linear behaviour of the boost
converter on the output power of PV systems. Based on
the study of PV characteristics under partial shading
conditions, an analysis has been carried out in Section 2 to
show that the GP of output power curve is displaced from
GP of PV curve. Comparative results are tabulated to
highlight the signicance of tracking the output power
curve. The power transferred to load under different
shading patterns is demonstrated through experimental
results in Section 3.
2 System description
The schematic of the PV system consisting of a PV array and a
boost converter is shown in Fig. 1a. The boost converter is
used to match the PV system with the load and transfer the
PV power to the load.
2.1 PV characteristics under partially shaded
conditions
A PV cell is modelled as a current source shunted with a diode
and represented by the equivalent circuit [31] shown in Fig. 1b.
The characteristics of the module are obtained by connecting a
number of cells in series. The equation relating the output
current and the voltage of a PV module can be written as
I
m
= I
ph
I
s
exp
V
pv
+R
s
I
m
A

1

V
pv
+R
s
I
m
R
sh

(1)
where I
m
is the current generated by the module, I
ph
is the
photoelectric current generated at a particular insolation G, I
s
is the saturation current, V
pv
is the PV voltage and
A = n
s
kT
pv
/q, where k is the Boltzmanns constant, q is
the electric charge, n
s
is the number of cells in series, R
s
is
the series resistance and R
sh
is the shunt resistance. The
specications of a typical PV module at standard test
conditions (STCs) of 1000 W/m
2
, 25C and air mass (AM)
1.5 are shown in Table 1.
From (1), it is evident that the output current of a PV module
is a function of I
ph
which depends on the solar insolation G.
The non-linear output characteristic of the PV module results
in a unique MPP on its PV characteristics. Generally, the
panels are connected in series and parallel to meet the load
power requirement. When the PV panels are mounted on the
roof of the building, non-uniform insolation among the
panels in the array is inevitable because of partial shading.
Partial shading reduces the energy yield of PV systems and
introduces multiple peaks on its PV characteristics.
To study the inuence of shading pattern on the PV
characteristics, two different array congurations (Figs. 2a
and b) subjected to different levels of shading are considered.
Array conguration I: the PV array (Fig. 2a) consists of
two different groups of modules in series. In each group,
three panels are connected in parallel. The insolation on
each group is given below:
Case 1: group 1 receives 700 W/m
2
and group 2 receives
350 W/m
2
.
Fig. 1 System description
a Schematic of photovoltaic system
b Equivalent circuit of a PV cell
www.ietdl.org
658
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014
IET Power Electron., 2014, Vol. 7, Iss. 3, pp. 657666
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel.2013.0143
Case 2: group 1 receives 700 W/m
2
and group 2 receives
220 W/m
2
.
Array conguration II: The PV array (Fig. 2b) consists of
four modules in series and the insolation on each module is
given below:
Case 3: 1000, 850, 550 and 450 W/m
2
.
Case 4: 1000, 850, 400 and 260 W/m
2
.
2.1.1 Case 1: group 1 receives 700 W/m
2
and group 2
receives 350 W/m
2
: When the entire PV array shown in
Fig. 2a receives a uniform insolation of 700 W/m
2
, the PV
characteristics show a unique peak of 342 W at the MPP
voltage (36 V) of the array and is shown as dotted line in
Fig. 3a. To study about the mismatch losses occurring in a
PV system, the panels in the array are subjected to
non-uniform insolation. All the panels in group 1 receive an
insolation of 700 W/m
2
, whereas those in group 2 receive
350 W/m
2
. Two peaks (P
i1
, P
i2
) exist on the PV
characteristics of which P
i1
is the GP (177.9 W) at 37.6 V.
From Fig. 3a, it is observed that the GP occurs near the
MPP voltage of the array, whereas the LP P
i2
(155.6 W)
occurs at 16.73 V.
2.1.2 Case 2: group 1 receives 700 W/m
2
and group 2
receives 220 W/m
2
: To study the inuence of shading
pattern on the PV characteristics, the insolation difference
among the panels is increased. The insolation in group one
is maintained at 700 W/m
2
, whereas the insolation in group
2 is decreased from 350 to 220 W/m
2
. Now P
i2
is the GP
with 155.8 W at 16.84 V. The LP P
i1
(138.27 W) occurs at
37.8 V and the PV characteristics under this situation is
shown in Fig. 3b.
It can be observed that with the same array conguration,
as the insolation difference among the panels is increased,
the GP shifts from the MPP and occurs at a reduced voltage
because of the bypassing of modules in the array.
For further discussion, the PV characteristics of an array
consisting of four panels in series are considered.
2.1.3 Case 3: 1000, 850, 550 and 450 W/m
2
: When the
four panels in the array receive a uniform insolation of 1000
W/m
2
, a peak power of 316 W is produced from the PV array
(shown as dotted line in Fig. 3c). However, when the panels
are subjected to different insolation levels of 1000, 850, 550
and 450 W/m
2
, the non-uniform insolation among the panels
leads to four peaks on the PV characteristics P
i1
(157.69 W),
P
i2
(139.1 W), P
i3
(104.2 W) and P
i4
(66.67 W). The P
i1
is
the GP and it occurs at 76.75 V which is nearer to the MPP
voltage (72 V). It is observed that the magnitude of the
peaks decreases as the peaks move away from the MPP
voltage of the array.
2.1.4 Case 4: 1000, 850, 400 and 260 W/m
2
: With the
insolation remaining the same on two panels and reducing the
insolation on other two panels from 550 to 400 W/m
2
and 450
to 260 W/m
2
, the location of GP (P
i3
) shifts far away from
the MPP voltage and occurs at 36.41 V as shown in
Fig. 2d. The maximum power produced by the array is
135.73 W. The other LPs P
i1
(125.57 W), P
i2
(117.8 W)
and P
i4
(66.7 W) occur at 77.99, 57.63 and 15.53 V,
respectively. It is observed that the number of prominent
peaks increases with the decrease in the insolation level on
the shaded modules. Similar to case 2, as the difference in
insolation among the modules increases, the GP shifts from
the MPP voltage of the array.
3 Effect of PV characteristics on converter
efficiency
Generally, a boost converter matches the PV system with the
load and also acts as an MPPT. This MPPT is used to identify
the GP and extract the maximum power from the PV array.
Since PV output voltage is uctuating in nature, the
efciency of the boost converter which depends on the PV
output voltage is also affected. The dependence of converter
output power and efciency on the PV output voltage is
illustrated in this section. Firstly, from the volt-second
balance for the converter in ON and OFF modes, the
expression for the duty cycle is obtained. Further, the
output voltage and the expression for efciency are also
derived.
A PV system consisting of a PV array, a boost converter
and load is considered as shown in Fig. 1a. In the boost
converter, the IGBT switch is modelled by a voltage source
V
sw
and a resistance R
on
. The IGBT is switched ON and
OFF with an ON time of DT
s
and OFF time of (1 D)T
s
.
The diode is modelled by a voltage source V
D
in series with
a resistance R
D
to account for the diode conduction drop
and the inductor is represented by an inductive coil in series
with a resistance R
L.
The desired duty cycle at a given
operating point can be obtained based on the capacitor
current and inductor voltage at the operating condition.
D
2
I
pv
R +D I
pv
R
on
I
pv
R
D
2I
pv
R V
D
+V
sw

V
pv
I
pv
R
L
I
pv
R
D
I
pv
R V
D

= 0 (2)
Here only a positive root is considered valid as D{0,1}.
Table 1 PV specifications at STC 1000 W/m
2
, 25C and AM 1.5
PV power 80 W
open-circuit voltage 22 V
short-circuit current 4.7 A
MPP voltage 18 V
MPP current 4.4 A
Fig. 2 Two different array congurations subjected to different
levels of shading
a Array conguration I
b Array conguration II
www.ietdl.org
IET Power Electron., 2014, Vol. 7, Iss. 3, pp. 657666
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel.2013.0143
659
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014
Once D is determined, the output voltage is calculated as
V
o
=
V
pv
(1 D)V
D
DV
sw
(1 D) (1 + R
L
+DR
on
+(1 D)R
D

/ (1 D)
2
R

(3)
The efciency of the converter is given by
h =
1 (1 D)V
D
+DV
sw

/V
pv

(1 + R
L
+DR
on
+(1 D)R
D

/(1 D)
2
R
(4)
It can be noted from (3) and (4) that the output voltage and the
efciency of the boost converter are functions of PV voltage
and duty cycle. Fig. 4a shows the variation of output voltage
of the converter with respect to duty cycle and Fig. 4b shows
the variation in converters efciency with respect to duty
cycle for different values of R
L
/R ratio.
Fig. 3 PV characteristics for
a Case 1
b Case 2
c Case 3
d Case 4
Fig. 4 Variation of output voltage of the converter with respect to duty cycle and the variation in converters efciency with respect to duty
cycle for different values of R
L
/R ratio
a Output voltage against duty cycle for different R
L
/R ratio
b Variation of efciency with respect to duty cycle for different R
L
/R ratio
www.ietdl.org
660
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014
IET Power Electron., 2014, Vol. 7, Iss. 3, pp. 657666
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel.2013.0143
3.1 Power transfer to the load under partially
shaded conditions
The boost converter performs the function of MPPT and
generally it is designed to operate with high efciency at
the MPP voltage of the PV array by considering a single
peak power point in the PV characteristics (shown as
dotted line in Fig. 3a). As discussed in Section 2.1, partial
shading shifts the operating point from the MPP voltage.
That is, the input voltage of the boost converter varies
because of shading. When the GP occurs at a reduced
voltage (case 2 and case 4) because of partial shading, the
input voltage for the boost converter is reduced. Under
these cases, the converter has to operate at a higher duty
cycle to extract the maximum power from the array. As the
efciency is typically high at low duty cycles (Fig. 4b) and
Fig. 5 PV and output power characteristics with array conguration I
a Case 1
b Efciency curve for case 1
c Case 2
d Efciency curve for case 2
www.ietdl.org
IET Power Electron., 2014, Vol. 7, Iss. 3, pp. 657666
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel.2013.0143
661
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014
decreases at high duty cycles [20], the power delivered to the
load under partial shading conditions needs to be investigated.
The power to the load (converter output power) is
calculated as
P
o
= hV
pv
I
pv
(5)
The efciency of the converter is a function of PV operating
point which is dened by V
mpp
and I
mpp
which in turn are
functions of solar irradiance, temperature and the shading
pattern. The power delivered to the load is determined for
the four shading patterns reported in Section 2.1.
A boost converter with the following specications is
taken up for study. L = 10 mH, R
L
= 0.4 , V
D
= 1.8 V,
R
D
= 0.24 , V
sw
= 1 V and R
ON
= 0.2 . It is ensured that
efciency of the converter is 95% at the MPP voltage of
the array. For the PV characteristics shown in Fig. 3, the
duty cycle is calculated by solving (2) for various operating
points and the power delivered to the load in each case is
determined.
3.1.1 Case 1: group 1 receives 700 W/m
2
and group 2
receives 350 W/m
2
: The PV characteristics for this case
shown in Fig. 3a have two peaks P
i1
and P
i2.
This output of
PV array is fed as input to the boost converter and the power
delivered to the load at each operating point is calculated
using (5). Fig. 5a shows the input and the corresponding
output power characteristics. It is observed that two peaks
P
o1
(170.2 W) and P
o2
(112 W) exist on the output power
curve at 37.64 and 17.5 V, respectively. The efciency of
the converter at each operating point is calculated using (4)
and is plotted in Fig. 5b. The efciencies corresponding to
the peaks P
i1
and P
i2
are 95.8% (point A) and 72% (point
B), respectively. This shows the dependence of efciency
of the converter on the output voltage (V
pv)
of the PV array
(i.e. input voltage of the converter).
An important observation from Fig. 5a is that the peak P
i1
of PV curve (converter input power curve) occurs at V
p2
,
whereas peak P
o1
of converter output power curve occurs at
V
p1
. Similarly, P
i2
occurs at V
p4
, whereas P
o2
occurs at V
p3
.
This difference in voltage between the peaks indicates that
the peak point in converter output curve is displaced from
the peak of converter input power curve. In other words,
the MPP of load is different from the MPP of the array.
The above observation is veried analytically as given below.
The converter output power can be written as
P
o
= P
pv
P
LS
(6)
where P
LS
corresponds to losses.
Differentiating (6) w.r.t to V
pv
dP
o
dV
pv
=
dP
pv
dV
pv

dP
LS
dV
pv
(7)
At maximum power point of PV, dP
pv
/dV
pv
= 0
Therefore
dP
o
dV
pv
= 0
dP
LS
dV
pv
=0 (8)
The above equation clearly states that at MPP voltage of PV
array, the derivative of the output power with respect to PV
voltage is not equal to zero. Therefore it is evident that
maximum power point of P
o
is displaced from maximum
power point of P
pv
. Hence tracking of GP in converter input
power curve does not guarantee delivering of maximum
power to the load. When GP of converter input power curve
is tracked, the power delivered to the load is 170.2 W,
whereas when GP of converter output power curve is
tracked, the power delivered to the load is 170.5 W. The gain
incurred in this case is negligible as the GP of both PV and
output power curves occur near the MPP voltage of the array.
3.1.2 Case 2: group 1 receives 700 W/m
2
and group 2
receives 220 W/m
2
: The signicance of considering the
PV characteristics shown in Fig. 3b is to study the effect
of the shift in the operating point from the MPP voltage of
the array. Similar to the PV characteristics, two peaks P
o1
(133.68 W) and P
o2
(112.2 W) exists on the output power
characteristics at 37.88 and 17.78 V, respectively. However,
a major difference that can be noted from Fig. 5c is that the
GP (P
i2
) of PV curve occurs at 17.01 V, whereas the GP
(P
o1
) of output power curve occurs at 37.88 V. Since the
efciency of the converter at this operating voltage (point
B) is only 72%, the power delivered to the load is 112.2 W.
When the GP (P
o1
) of output power curve is tracked, the
power delivered to the load is 133.74 W. Fig. 5c shows the
gain (P) incurred by tracking the output curve. Table 2
provides the comparative study of the power delivered to
the load in the conventional method of tracking PV curve
and proposed method. As seen from Table 2 for case 2, the
power delivered to the load is increased by 16.09% by
tracking the output power curve.
3.1.3 Case 3: 1000, 850, 550 and 450 W/m
2
: The
performance of the system is studied for array conguration
II shown in Fig. 2b. Similar to the PV characteristics shown
in Fig. 2c, the output power characteristics (Fig. 6a) has
four peaks P
o1
(147.4 W), P
o2
(126.7 W), P
o3
(90.19 W)
and P
o4
(43.4 W). The output power characteristics has four
Table 2 Comparative study of power delivered to the load
Case PV power, W Output power, W Power delivered to load, W Gain, W
P
i1
P
i2
P
i3
P
i4
P
o1
P
o2
P
o3
P
o4
Conventional
method
Proposed
method
1 (Fig. 3a) 177.9 155.6 170.2 112 170.2 170.5 0.3 (0.18%)
2 (Fig. 3b) 138.27 155.8 133.68 112.2 112.2 133.71 21.51
(16.1%)
3 (Fig. 3c) 157.69 139.1 104.2 66.67 147.4 126.7 90.19 43.4 147.4 147.43 0.03 (0.02%)
4 (Fig. 3d) 125.57 117.8 135.7 66.7 117.9 108.2 112.8 41.78 112.6 117.9 5.3 (4.49%)
www.ietdl.org
662
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014
IET Power Electron., 2014, Vol. 7, Iss. 3, pp. 657666
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel.2013.0143
peaks P
o1
(147.4 W), P
o2
(126.7 W), P
o3
(90.19 W) and P
o4
(43.4 W) as shown in Fig. 6a. The efciency of the
converter (Fig. 6b when it is operated at points A, B, C and
D are 93.6, 90.6, 84.5 and 63%, respectively. The GP (P
i1
)
in PV curve occurs at 76.4 V, whereas the GP (P
o1
) of
output power curve occurs at 76.6 V. Table 2 shows that
when P
i1
is tracked the power delivered to the load is
147.4 W, whereas it is 147.43 W in proposed method.
Fig. 6 Converter input and output PV characteristics
a Case 3
b Efciency curve for case 3
c Case 4
d Efciency curve for case 4
Fig. 7 Conguration of the PV system considered for study
www.ietdl.org
IET Power Electron., 2014, Vol. 7, Iss. 3, pp. 657666
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel.2013.0143
663
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014
It can be observed that the gain is negligible when the GP of
both PV and output power curve occurs near the MPP
voltage of the array.
3.1.4 Case 4: 1000, 850, 400and 260 W/m
2
: From the
PV characteristics shown in Fig. 2d, it is clear that the
number of prominent peak increases with the decrease in
the insolation level on the shaded panels. The power at the
load side has four peaks P
o1
(117.9 W), P
o2
(108.2 W),
P
o3
(112.8 W) and P
o4
(41.78 W). It is observed from
Fig. 6c that P
o1
is the GP and occurs at 78.18 V, whereas
GP (P
i3
) of PV occurs at 34.7 V. Hence, when input PV
Fig. 8 Experimental waveforms
a V
pv
, I
pv,
V
o
and I
o
curves by varying the duty cycle case 1
b The corresponding PV power and power at the load side case 1
c V
pv
, I
pv,
V
o
and I
o
curves by varying the duty cycle case 2
d The corresponding PV power and power at the load side case 2
e V
pv
, I
pv,
V
o
and I
o
curves by varying the duty cycle case 3
f The corresponding PV power and power at the load side case 3. Scale: X-axis-time 2 s/div, Y-axis V
pv
= 10 V/div, I
pv
= 2 A/div, V
o
= 20 V/div and
I
o
= 10 V/div
www.ietdl.org
664
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014
IET Power Electron., 2014, Vol. 7, Iss. 3, pp. 657666
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel.2013.0143
curve P
i3
is tracked, the converter efciency is 84.5% (point
C) in efciency curve (Fig. 6d) and only 112.6 W of power is
delivered to the load. However, if the output power curve P
o1
is tracked, the power transferred to the load is 117.9 W.
Table 2 shows that the power delivered to the load is
increased by 4.49% when output power curve is tracked.
Therefore irrespective of the shading pattern, array
conguration and converter efciency, the maximum
power is delivered to the load, when the output power
curve is tracked. It is noted from Table 2 that when the
location of GP of PV and output power curve are close
to each other (cases 1 and 3), the gain is not
appreciable. However, as the array size increases, the
gain increases. When the locations of GP of PV and
output power curve are different as in cases 2 and 4, the
maximum power is delivered to the load by tracking the
output power curve.
4 Results and discussion
A PV system consisting of a PV array, a boost converter and
the load is considered for study with a view to validate the
analytical results through experiments in the laboratory.
Two solar PV modules are connected in series and a boost
converter is used as the MPPT which interfaces the PV
array with the resistive load. Although only two modules
are connected in series, it can be considered as two groups
of modules in series. The specications of the modules are
shown in Table 1 and the parameters of the boost converter
are described in Section 2.2. The load resistance is kept
constant at 200 . The converter input and output voltages
and currents are sensed using Hall effect voltage
transducers LV25 P and current transducers LA55P,
respectively. The control algorithm is implemented in
ALTERA Cyclone II FPGA board and the conguration of
the system set up is shown in Fig. 7. Three different cases
are taken up for study and in each case the input PV power
and the power transferred to the load are examined.
4.1 Case 1
In the PV array, one module receives an insolation of 540
W/m
2
, whereas the other module is articially shaded with
a transparent sheet such that it receives 310 W/m
2
of
insolation. The duty cycle is varied in steps and the
variation in converter input voltage V
pv
, input current I
pv,
converter output voltage V
o
and the output current I
o
are
observed (Fig. 8a). The corresponding power curves are
plotted in Fig. 8b. It is observed that two peaks exist in the
PV curve with P
i1
as GP (32 W) and P
i2
as LP (25.6 W).
Similarly, two peaks P
o1
(27.2 W) and P
o2
(16.4 W) exist
in the load side power curve P
o
. When the PV is operated
at a point corresponding to P
i1
, the power transferred to the
load is 27 W. However, when P
o1
is tracked, the power
delivered to the load is 27.2 W, which is 0.73% higher than
the power transferred to the load by tracking the GP in the
converter input power characteristics as shown in Table 3.
In this case, the gain (0.2 W) is negligible.
4.2 Case 2
In this case, the difference in insolation between the modules
is increased such that one module receives 560 W/m
2
,
whereas the other receives 180 W/m
2
. Fig. 8c shows the
experimental waveforms of the V
pv
, I
pv,
V
o
and I
o
when the
duty cycle is varied in steps and the corresponding power
curves are plotted in Fig. 8d. It is observed from Fig. 8d
that the GP (P
i2
) shifts from the MPP value and occurs at a
reduced voltage. When this GP on input power
characteristics is tracked, the power delivered to the load is
only 15.7 W. This is because of the inability of the
converter to operate at the same efciency at all the
operating points.
4.3 Case 3
The signicance of tracking the output power curve is
revealed through case 3. One of the modules in the string is
shaded to receive 220 W/m
2
, whereas the other receives
480 W/m
2
. Fig. 8e shows the experimental waveforms of
the V
pv
, I
pv,
V
o
and I
o
obtained by varying the duty cycle
and the corresponding power curves are shown in Fig. 8f.
As it is observed from Fig. 8f, this shading pattern leads to
two peaks in the PV characteristics with the P
i2
as GP (24
W) and P
i1
as LP (22.8 W). When GP in the PV
characteristics is tracked, the power delivered to the load is
15.2 W with an efciency of 63.2%. Interestingly, it is
observed (from Table 3) that tracking the LP with the
available power of 22.8 W, the power delivered to the load
is 18.8 W which is 19.15% higher than the power
transferred to the load by tracking the GP in the PV
characteristics. It is evident that the efciency of the
converter and the shading pattern determines the power
delivered to the load. Therefore it is concluded that under
all the cases the power delivered to the load is maximum
when GP in the output power curve is tracked.
5 Conclusions
This paper addresses the impact of partial shading on the
power delivered to the load. The power transferred to the
load under different shading patterns is analysed and it is
observed that the MPP of the load when the converter
efciency is considered is different from the MPP of the PV
array. Therefore tracking of converter input power curve
does not guarantee maximum power transfer to the load
under partial shading conditions. Hence, the study proposes
to track the converter output power for maximum power
transferred to the load under partial shading conditions.
Simulation and experimental results are presented to
Table 3 Comparison of proposed and conventional method
Case G
1,
W/m
2
G
2
, W/m
2
Converter input
power
Power delivered to load, W Gain, W
P
i1
, W P
i2
, W Conventional method Proposed method
1 (Fig. 8b) 540 310 32 25.6 27 (P
i1
is tracked) 27.2 (P
o1
is tracked) 0.2 (0.73%)
2 (Fig. 8d) 560 180 17.5 25 15.7 (P
i2
is tracked) 16 (P
o2
is tracked) 0.3 (1.87%)
3 (Fig. 8f ) 220 480 22.8 24 15.2 (P
i2
is tracked) 18.8 (P
o1
is tracked) 3.6 (19.15%)
www.ietdl.org
IET Power Electron., 2014, Vol. 7, Iss. 3, pp. 657666
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel.2013.0143
665
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014
demonstrate that maximum power is transferred to the load by
tracking the GP in the output power curve.
6 Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank the National Mission on
Power Electronics Technology (NaMPET)-Phase II, an
initiative of Department of Information Technology,
Government of India for their nancial support towards this
work.
7 References
1 Bidram, A., Davoudi, A., Balog, S.: Control and circuit techniques to
mitigate partial shading effects in Photovoltaic arrays, IEEE
J. Photovolt., 2012, 2, (4), pp. 532546
2 Mutoh, N., Ohno, M., Takayoshi, I.: A method for MPPT control while
searching for parameters corresponding to weather conditions for PV
generation systems, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2008, 53, (4),
pp. 10551065
3 Masoum, A.S., Mousavi Badejani, S.M., Fuchs, E.F.:
Microprocessor-controlled new class of optimal battery chargers for
photovoltaic applications, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 2004, 19,
(3), pp. 599606
4 Gules, R., De Pellegrin Pacheco, J., Hey, H.L.: A maximum power
point tracking system with parallel connection for PV stand-alone
applications, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2008, 55, (7), pp. 26742683
5 Walker, G.R., Sernia, C.: Cascaded DCDC converter connection of
photovoltaic modules, IEEE Trans. Power. Electron., 2004, 19, (4),
pp. 11301139
6 Esram, T., Chapman, L.: Comparison of photovoltaic array maximum
power point tracking techniques, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers, 2007,
22, (2), pp. 439449
7 Sera, D., Teodorescu, R., Hantschel, J., Knoll, M.: Optimized
maximum power point tracker for fast changing environmental
conditions, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2008, 55, (7), pp. 26292637
8 Gomes, M.A., Galotto Jr., L., Sampaio, L., Melo, A., Canesin, C.A.:
Evaluation of the main MPPT techniques for photovoltaic
applications, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron, 2013, 60, (3), pp. 11561167
9 Petrone, G., Spagnuolo, G., Vitelli, M.: A multivariable perturb and
observe maximum power point tracking technique applied to a single
stage photovoltaic inverter, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2011, 58, (1),
pp. 7684
10 Femia, N., Petrone, G., Spagnuolo, G., Vitelli, M.: A technique for
improving P&O MPPT performance of double-stage grid-connected
photovoltaic systems, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2011, 58, (11),
pp. 7684
11 Safari, A., Mekhilef, S.: Simulation and hardware implementation of
incremental conductance MPPT with direct control method using cuk
converter, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2011, 58, (4), pp. 11541161
12 Mei, Q., Shan, M., Liuand, L., Guerrero, J.M.: A novel variable step
size incremental resistance MPPT method for PV systems, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., 2011, 58, (4), pp. 24272434
13 Noguchi, T., Togashi, S., Nakamoto, R.: Short-current pulse-based
maximum-power-point tracking method for multiple
photovoltaic-and-converter module system, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., 2002, 49, (1), pp. 217223
14 Masoum, M.A.S., Dehbonei, H., Fuchs, E.F.: Theoretical and
experimental analyses of photovoltaic systems with voltage and
current-based maximum power-point tracking, IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers., 2002, 17, (4), pp. 514522
15 Patel, H., Agarwal, V.: MATLAB based modeling to study the effects
of partial shading on PV array characteristics, IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers., 2008, 23, (1), pp. 302310
16

Maki, A., Valkealahti, S.: Power losses in long string and parallel
connected short strings of series-connected silicon-based photovoltaic
modules due to partial shading conditions, IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers., 2012, 27, (1), pp. 173183
17 Wang, Y.-J., Hsu, P.-C.: Analytical modelling of partial shading and
different orientation of photovoltaic modules, IET Renew. Power
Gener., 2010, 4, (3), pp. 272282
18 Syafaruddin, R., Karatepe, E., Hiyama, T.: Articial neural
network-polar coordinated fuzzy controller based maximum power
point tracking control under partially shaded conditions, IET Renew.
Power Gener., 2009, 3, (2), pp. 239253
19 Young-Hyok, J., Doo-Yong, J., Chung-Yuen, W., Byoung-Kuk, L.,
Jin-Wook, K.: A real maximum power point tracking method for
mismatching compensation in PV array under partially shaded
conditions, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., 2011, 26, (4), pp. 10011009
20 Petrone, G., Spagnuolo, G., Teodorescu, R., Veerachary, M., Vitelli, M.:
Reliability issues in photovoltaic power processing systems, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., 2008, 55, (7), pp. 25692580
21 Kobayashi, K., Takano, I., Sawada, Y.: A study on a two stage
maximum power point tracking control of a photovoltaic system under
partially shaded isolation conditions. Proc. IEEE Power Engineering
Society General Meeting, 2003, pp. 26122617
22 Koutroulis, E., Blaabjerg, F.: A new technique for tracking the global
maximum power point of PV arrays operating under partial-shading
conditions, IEEE J. Photovolt., 2012, 2, (2), pp. 184190
23 Ishaque, K., Salam, Z., Amjad, M., Mekhilef, S.: An improved particle
swarm optimization (PSO)based MPPT for PV with reduced
steady-state oscillation, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., 2012, 27, (8),
pp. 36273638
24 Miyatake, M., Inada, T., Hiratsuka, I., Zhao, H., Otsuka, H., Nakano,
M.: Control characteristics of a Fibonacci-search-based maximum
power point tracker when a photovoltaic array is partially shaded.
Proc. IEEE IPEMC, 2004, vol. 2, pp. 816821
25 Ramaprabha, R., Mathur, B., Ravi, A., Aventhika, S.: Modied
Fibonacci search based MPPT scheme for SPVA under partial shaded
conditions. Proc. Third Int. Conf. Emerging Trends Engineering
Technology, 2010, pp. 379384
26 Patel, H., Agarwal, V.: Maximum power point tracking scheme for pv
systems operating under partially shaded conditions, IEEE Trans Ind.
Electron., 2008, 55, (4), pp. 16891698
27 Femia, N., Gianpaolo, L., Giovanni, P., Spagnuolo, G., Vitelli, M.:
Distributed maximum power point tracking of photovoltaic arrays:
novel approach and system analysis, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
2008, 55, (7), pp. 26102621
28 Nguyen, D., Lehman, B.: An adaptive solar photovoltaic array using
model-based reconguration algorithm, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
2008, 55, (7), pp. 26442654
29 Velasco, G., Gispert, F., Pique-lopez, L., Roca: Electrical PV array
reconguration strategy for energy extraction improvement in grid
connected systems, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2009, 56, (11),
pp. 431931
30 Erickson, W., Maksimovic, D: Fundamentals of Power Electronics
(Springer International Edition, 2000, 2nd edn.)
31 Kuo, Y.-C., Liang, T.-J., Chen, J.-F.: Novel maximum-power-point
tracking controller for photovoltaic energy conversion system, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., 2001, 48, (3), pp. 594601
www.ietdl.org
666
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2014
IET Power Electron., 2014, Vol. 7, Iss. 3, pp. 657666
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel.2013.0143