Professional Documents
Culture Documents
10 1016@j Solener 2019 07 005
10 1016@j Solener 2019 07 005
10 1016@j Solener 2019 07 005
Solar Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/solener
a
2EMI Team, ENSAM, Moulay Ismail University, B.P 15290 El Mansour, Meknes 50500, Morocco
b
Ecole Supérieure de Technologie de Fès, U.S.M.B.A, Route d’Imouzzer, BP 2427, Fez, Morocco
c
School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
d
FS – EST Meknès, Université Moulay Ismail, Avenue Zitoune, BP 11201, Meknès, Morocco
Keywords: Various works investigated different photovoltaic (PV) cell equivalent-circuit models and several techniques
Modelling of photovoltaic module were proposed to extract their unknown parameters. The present paper analyzes the current/voltage (I-V)
PV cell equivalent-circuit model characteristics for Si-crystalline PV modules under non-standard conditions of irradiance and temperature, by
Single-diode using single-diode and double-diode models. The Chaibi and Ishaque methods are employed to determine the
Double-diode
parameters for each equivalent-circuit model. Then, the I-V curves provided by the manufacturers and the
Parameters extraction
calculated I-V characteristics are compared at different levels of irradiance and temperature. The comparison
suggests prioritizing one of the two equivalent-circuit models according to the prevailing meteorological inputs.
As such, a hybrid approach is proposed in order to select the most appropriate model depending on the relevant
climatic conditions. The presented approach accuracy is evaluated using real weather data of two PV plants
located in two different climatic zones (Mediterranean and Semi-Continental). Results show that the double-
diode model is more reliable for low-irradiance levels; however, the single-diode model performs well with low-
temperature fluctuations. An error reduction of 53.93% and 21.04% can be reached for the cloudy weather and
for the sunny days, respectively. Accordingly, this approach can be easily implemented as a computing tool to
achieve more accurate prediction in the PV systems simulations.
1. Introduction and temperature (Chaibi et al., 2018). The history of the PV cell
equivalent-circuit models knows continuous progress. The first in-
Grid-connected and standalone systems represent the two principal troduced formulation is the ideal single-diode model which is composed
categories of solar PV applications (Allouhi et al., 2016; Malvoni et al., of a diode in parallel with a current source (Ebrahimi et al., 2019).
2017, 2016). It is well established that the economic viability and social However, the use of this model does not reflect the real behavior of the
acceptance of both applications rely strongly on the overall perfor- PV cell (Siddiqui and Abido, 2013; Suthar et al., 2013; Villalva et al.,
mance of energy conversion of PV modules (Allouhi et al., 2019). In 2009). Thereby, for a more realistic PV cell design, the assessment of
fact, the presently commercialized PV technologies have low effi- losses should be taken into account by adding a block of resistances to
ciencies and their performances are affected due to the nonlinearity of the ideal model (Ishaque and Salam, 2011). To design contacts between
the PV cell and the external parameters variation (Abbassi et al., 2018). the silicon and electrodes surface, a resistance is added in series
For these reasons, accurate modeling of PV modules constitutes an (Jordehi, 2016); this model is named as the simplified single-diode
important topic that attracts a lot of researchers. This modeling task is model (SSDM) and the number of the unknown parameters is increased
divided into two parts; first, the choice of equivalent-circuit model, then to four by adding the series resistance Rs (Chtita et al., 2019). The
the parameters extraction of the chosen model (Chaibi and Salhi, 2019). mathematical solution requires four equations to find the unknown
The PV cell equivalent-circuit model is an electrical scheme which parameters. The derivative of power with respect to voltage
allows analyzing the electrical performance of the PV module. This ( P / V = 0) (Ding et al., 2012; Ulapane et al., 2011; Xiao et al., 2004)
model gives the corresponding current–voltage (I-V) and power-voltage and the relative expressions of the temperature coefficients Ki and/or
(P-V) characteristics for different external changes such as irradiance Kv (Chenni et al., 2007; Kou et al., 1998) are commonly used as the
⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: y.chaibi@edu.umi.ac.ma (Y. Chaibi).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.07.005
Received 11 January 2019; Received in revised form 24 May 2019; Accepted 1 July 2019
Available online 09 July 2019
0038-092X/ © 2019 International Solar Energy Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Chaibi, et al. Solar Energy 188 (2019) 1102–1110
fourth equation. The SSDM has been used widely to study the perfor- methods from the literature to extract the parameters. Thus, SDM and
mance of the PV cell (Chenni et al., 2007; Ding et al., 2012; Ismail et al., DDM are adopted and the methods proposed by Chaibi et al. (2018) and
2013; Ulapane et al., 2011; Walker, 2001), showing modest results, by Ishaque et al. (2011) are employed to determine the SDM and DDM
which implied its improvement by adding another parameter noted as parameters, respectively. The investigation aim is to analyze PV cell
the shunt resistance. Consequently, the number of parameters increases equivalent-circuit models for different Si-crystalline technologies under
to five and the extraction process becomes complicated. This model is non-standard conditions, namely under variations of irradiation and
named as the detailed single-diode model (SDM) and is considered as temperature. Through this analysis, it is possible to prioritize the use of
the most used due to its better compromise between efficiency and one model instead of the others according to the actual prevailing
simplicity (Gao et al., 2018a). Additionally, this model represents the meteorological inputs; an approach that could enhance significantly the
main structure of the most PV systems modelling software such as accuracy. Therefore, the novelty of this work is to assess the effec-
PVsyst, SAM and HOMER (Blair et al., 2014; Suite and Co, 2016; Uni- tiveness of a hybrid approach, obtained by switching from the two
versidade De Genebra, 2012). equivalent-circuit configurations (the single and the double diode
In the literature, another version of the SDM was introduced, termed model) according to different levels of solar irradiance and tempera-
as the double-diode model (DDM) that presents the same structure as ture, in order to ensure high accuracy in the photovoltaic cell model-
the SDM but in which a second diode is added to the circuit model of ling. In addition, experimental validation of the proposed hybrid ap-
the PV cell. Thanks to its high performance, this model has been proach is carried out using real PV power generations of two PV plants
adopted lately by several authors (Alam et al., 2015; Attivissimo et al., located in different climate zones (Semi-Continental and Mediterranean
2013; Et-torabi et al., 2017; Gao et al., 2018b; Ishaque et al., 2011). The climate zone). The reason is to investigate the performances of the
DDM assumes seven unknown parameters {IL, Ios1, Ios2, Rs ,Rsh , 1, 2 }, outlined models under various climatic fluctuations for more re-
leading to more complicated extraction process since it needs a set of presentative results.
seven equations to be solved. To overcome the complexity of para- The current paper is organized as follows: First, in Section 2, the
meters’ determination process, various techniques can be employed. description of different PV cell equivalent-circuit models is given. The
Analytical and metaheuristics methods are the most common ap- PV cell parameters extraction methods are demonstrated in Section 3.
proaches to solve the “PV cell model parameter estimation problem” The performance indices, together with climate conditions of the PV
(Haouari-Merbah et al., 2005; Stutenbaeumer and Mesfin, 1999). The sites under examination are presented in Section 4. Results and dis-
curve fitting method of I-V curves is the earliest analytical method used cussions are presented in Section 5. Finally, the main conclusions are
to extract the parameters (Chan et al., 1986; Stutenbaeumer and drawn based on the current analysis in Section 6.
Mesfin, 1999). Hadj et al. and De blas et al. used the initial equations
given by the manufacturer and confirmed that the initial values of Rs0 2. PV cell models
and Rsh0 are respectively the slope of the open-circuit point Voc / I and
the slope of the short circuit point ISC / V (De Blas et al., 2002; Hadj In order to evaluate the electrical performance of the PV cell, di-
Arab et al., 2004). This approach resulted in a set of five equations verse equivalent-circuit models are simulated with the main objective is
whose accuracy depends totally on the choice of the initial conditions. to plot the corresponding I-V and P-V characteristics for different values
Researchers used different approximations to simplify the calculation. of irradiance and temperature. The output current of the simplified
Chaibi et al. employed experimental measurements to reduce the single-diode model is expressed by the following equation
number of parameters (Chaibi et al., 2018). The parameters are ex- (Rauschenbach, 1980):
tracted by using a measurement under a special condition with initial
equations from the manufacturer datasheet. Applying this method to
I = IL Ios {exp [A (V + IRs ) 1]} (1)
silicon PV cell technologies indicates higher performance for mono- where I and V are respectively the output current and voltage of the PV
crystalline and low relative errors for polycrystalline (Chaibi et al., panel, IL is the photo-generated current, Ios is the saturation current, Rs
2018). On the other hand, Villalva et al. estimated an arbitrary value of is the series resistance and A is the thermal voltage.
the ideality factor and used an iterative method of the series and the The detailed single-diode model (Fig. 1) adds the shunt resistance
shunt resistances until the datasheet peak power (Pmax , e ) coincides with Rsh and the output current of the PV cell is given by (Rauschenbach,
the mathematical peak power(Pmax , m) . At this condition (Pmax , m =Pmax , e ) , 1980):
the corresponding resistances are displayed and the other parameters
V + Rs I
are calculated using explicit equations (Villalva et al., 2009). In the case I = IL Ios {exp [A (V + IRs ) 1]}
of seven parameters determination, Ishaque et al. assumed that the sa- Rsh (2)
turation currents were equal and gave an arbitrary value to both ide- For the double-diode model, shown in Fig. 2, both the circulated
ality factors, hence the number of unknown parameters has been re- currents in the diodes are expressed separately; hence the output cur-
duced. It was reported that this technique presents a good performance rent is given by the following equation (Ishaque et al., 2011):
at low irradiance changes (Ishaque et al., 2011).
V + Rs I
PV cell model parameter estimation can be seen as an optimization I = IL Ios1 {exp [A1 (V + IR s ) 1]} Ios2 {exp [A2 (V + IR s ) 1]}
Rsh (3)
problem that can be solved using metaheuristic algorithms (Saha et al., q
2018). These algorithms include genetic algorithm (GA) (Jervase et al., with Ai =
i kTNcell
2001), particle swarm optimization (PSO) (Mughal et al., 2017), arti-
ficial bee colony (ABC) (Oliva et al., 2014; Chaibi et al., 2019), and
shuffled complex evolution (SCE) etc (Gao et al., 2018b). The literature
review shows that different PV cell equivalent-circuit configurations
can be adopted to analyze the electrical performance in accordance
with the model complexity. The various ways to figure out the unknown
parameters, whatever the model is chosen, differ from a technique to
another; whether it is an iterative, analytical, graphical, numerical
method or metaheuristic approaches, implying the complexity of the
parameters determination.
The objective of this paper is to investigate the performance of the
most popular PV cell equivalent-circuit models, using two accurate Fig. 1. Single-diode equivalent circuit.
1103
Y. Chaibi, et al. Solar Energy 188 (2019) 1102–1110
Voc Rs Isc
Isc Rsh
Ior =
exp (AVoc ) exp (AIsc Rs ) (7)
1104
Y. Chaibi, et al. Solar Energy 188 (2019) 1102–1110
1105
Y. Chaibi, et al. Solar Energy 188 (2019) 1102–1110
300 35
Mediterranean Mediterranean
Semi-Continental Semi-Continental
30
250
25
200
Temperature [°C]
GHI [kWh/m2 ]
20
150
15
100
10
50
5
0 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Fig. 4. The monthly average values of the horizontal plane irradiance and the ambient temperature for the Mediterranean and the semi-continental climate zone.
Table 2 where the base case represents the extracted value from manufacturer
Extracted parameters using Chaibi et al. method for the single-diode model. curves and the calculated one corresponds to the computed values using
Rsh [Ω] Rs [Ω] Io [μA] γ
the SDM and the DDM. The results are displayed in Fig. 8. Based on this
categorization, Fig. 8(a) gives the relative errors of the PV panel output
Mono-Si 6500 0.1124 4.8244 1.7409 power for each class of irradiance and temperature. As noticed in
Poly-Si 7000 0.1880 1.1174 1.5079 Fig. 8(a), the SDM is more reliable to model the PV panel for low-
temperature ranges. However, the double-diode model shows good
results in medium and high-temperature ranges. Furthermore, it can be
Table 3
seen that the double-diode model performs well with low and medium
Extracted parameters using Ishaque et al. method for the double-diode model.
irradiances whereas the single-diode model is more convenient with
Rsh [Ω] Rs [Ω] γ1 γ2 Io1 = Io2 [A] high irradiance variations. Besides, the open-circuit voltage relative
errors associated with the equivalent-circuit models of both PV panel
Mono-Si 144.24 0.34 1 1.2 4.7039 0.10−10
Poly-Si 166.58 0.47 1 1.2 2.2324 0.10−10 technologies are presented for different levels of temperature and ir-
radiance (see Fig. 8(b)). As can be observed, the single-diode model
seems to be very appropriate to model the Mono-Si modules because of
models and the electrical parameters of the PV panel {Isc, Voc, Pm} ex- its lower error compared to the double-diode model. On the opposite
tracted from manufacturer datasheet for different weather conditions, side, the double-diode model presents a key solution to model the Poly-
three intervals (Low, Medium and High) of irradiance and temperature Si PV panel especially for medium and high levels of temperature.
were identified for classification. For the irradiance, the low values Moreover, the SDM presents good results for low irradiance, while the
class is below 400 W/m2, the medium one is between 400 W/m2 and DDM is more suitable for medium and high ranges of irradiance. For the
800 W/m2 and the high values class is above 800 W/m2. For the tem- short-circuit current, the chosen equivalent-circuit models are com-
perature changes, the low variations are below 25 °C, the medium one is pared under the same variation of climate conditions and this is per-
between 25 °C and 40 °C and the last class is for temperatures above formed for both PV panel technologies. As can be seen in Fig. 8(c), the
40 °C. relative errors demonstrate that the single-diode model is more ap-
As a first step, the manufacturer I-V curves are used to calculate the propriate to model the PV panel under the variation of irradiance. Also,
corresponding power for each variation of the climatic variable. Based this model is more suitable for temperature variation except for the
on the climate variations, the relative error is computed using Eq. (11), Poly-Si technology in high temperature changes. Briefly, these curves
3 800 W/m
2 1.5
2.5
RMSE [%]
Current [A]
2
600 W/m
2 1
2
1.5 400 W/m
1 0.5
2
200 W/m
0.5
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 200 400 600 800 1000
Voltage [V] Irradiance [W/m 2]
Fig. 5. Comparison between the I-V characteristics using Chaibi et al., Ishaque et al. methods and manufacturer data related to the Mono-Si SM55 PV panel for
different irradiances, T = 25 °C.
1106
Y. Chaibi, et al. Solar Energy 188 (2019) 1102–1110
2.5 60 °C 1.5
RMSE [%]
Current [A]
50 °C
2 40 °C
30 °C 1
1.5 20 °C
1
0.5
0.5
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 20 30 40 50 60
Voltage [V] Temperature [°C]
Fig. 6. Comparison of the I-V characteristics using Chaibi et al., Ishaque et al. methods and manufacturer data related to the Mono-Si SM55 PV panel for different
temperatures, G = 1000 W/m2.
show that the low-irradiance levels engender high errors in the PV of DC power based on the actual atmospheric condition of the two
output power with a value of 8.40%. The lowest error closed to 0.10%. climate zones (Mediterranean and the Semi-continental climate). These
is presented at the short circuit currents. powers are utilized to calculate the normalized absolute mean errors
Such analysis enables the clustering of the performance for both (see Eq. (13)) between experimental and calculated DC power using the
single-diode and double-diode model in different range of irradiance hybrid approach for each one of the PV plants. These errors are dis-
and temperature according to the flowchart in Fig. 3. So, the classifi- played in Fig. 10. Fig. 10(a) shows the NMAE between the hybrid ap-
cation tabulated in Table 4 proposes guidelines in selecting the model proach and the individual SDM and DDM. It is significantly high be-
to be used in the simulation process with respect to the actual climate cause of the fluctuated cloudy weather of the Mediterranean climate.
condition to achieve the lowest error. Furthermore, a decreasing of the error up to 53.93% for irradiance
variations and 49.52% for temperature variations can be achieved by
the proposed approach. Fig. 10(b) shows that the NMAE related to the
5.2. Implementations of the hybrid approach and validation Semi-Continental PV plant, seems to be lower compared to Mediterra-
nean PV plant, due to the sunny behavior of Meknes city. Moreover, in
A comparison of predicted DC outputs and actual experimental data Continental climatic conditions the proposed approach can reduce the
on an hourly basis is carried out. In order to investigate the impact of error by 21.04% and 14.66% due to irradiance and temperature var-
the climatic condition on the performance of both SDM and DDM, the iations, respectively.
experimental titled irradiance and modules temperature of two PV
plants are utilized to compute the corresponding SDM and DDM
powers. Thereafter, the obtained output data series is used to calculate 6. Conclusion
the error between the real generated powers (base case) and the com-
puted ones (SDM and DDM power) using the error formula given in Eq. The paper evaluates the accuracy of the single-diode and the
(11). These errors are presented in Fig. 9. As can be observed in this double-diode models as the most popular PV cell equivalent-circuit
figure, the mean error results support the findings of the previous models under changes of solar irradiance and temperature. Two com-
subsection about the relationship between climate conditions and ac- mercialized silicon PV module technologies, Monocrystalline SM55 and
curacy of single and double diode model which was summarized in Polycrystalline MSX60, are considered to investigate the performance
Table 4. of two equivalent-circuit models with respect to the manufacturer data.
The previously classification introduced in Table 4 is used to build a The comparison demonstrates that the single-diode model seems to be
hybrid approach which selects the most suitable model for computing more suitable for high fluctuations of irradiance. In turn, the double-
3 T = 0°C
Current [A]
RMSE [%]
T = 25°C
1
T = 50°C
2 T = 75°C
0.5
1
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 25 50 75
Voltage [V] Temperature [°C]
Fig. 7. Comparison of the I-V characteristics using Chaibi et al., Ishaque et al. methods and manufacturer data related to the Poly-Si MSX60 PV panel for different
temperatures, G = 1000 W/m2.
1107
Y. Chaibi, et al. Solar Energy 188 (2019) 1102–1110
Output PV power
9
Low Temperature
Medium Temperature
8
High Temperature
Low Irradiance
7
Medium Irradiance
High Irradiance
6
E rel [%]
5
0
Mono-Si (SDM) Mono-Si (DDM) Poly-Si (SDM) Poly-Si (DDM)
Technology (ECM)
(a)
Open-circuit voltage Short-circuit current
9 9
Low Temperature Low Temperature
Medium Temperature Medium Temperature
8 8
High Temperature High Temperature
Low Irradiance Low Irradiance
7 7
Medium Irradiance Medium Irradiance
High Irradiance High Irradiance
6 6
E rel [%]
5
E rel [%]
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
Mono-Si (SDM) Mono-Si (DDM) Poly-Si (SDM) Poly-Si (DDM) Mono-Si (SDM) Mono-Si (DDM) Poly-Si (SDM) Poly-Si (DDM)
7
Table 4 Low Temperature
Performance classification of the equivalent-circuit models for different levels Medium Temperature
of irradiance and temperature. 6 Low Irradiance
Medium Irradiance
Irradiance Temperature High Irradiance
5
Low Medium High Low Medium High
4
[%]
2
diode model is more reliable to predict the electrical parameters under
the medium and low irradiance variations. Furthermore, the SDM 1
performs well with low fluctuations of temperature and the DDM is
more appropriate for medium and high variations. The results prove 0
that the performance of the Photovoltaic Cell Equivalent-Circuit Models SDM (MC) DDM (MC) SDM (SCC) DDM (SCC)
is influenced by solar irradiance and temperature. This suggests a new ECM (Climate zone)
approach to enhance the accuracy of PV output prediction. The paper
Fig. 9. Normalized mean error of the SDM and the DDM under different classes
presents a more appropriate approach able to switch between the SDM
of solar irradiance and temperature in Mediterranean climate (MC) and Semi-
and DDM according to the instantaneous variation of solar irradiance Continental Climate (SCC) conditions.
and temperature. The performance of the hybrid approach was assessed
considering real data of two PV systems implemented in two sites of
different climatic zones. An error analysis was performed between the The proposed approach can diminish the computing errors by up to
proposed hybrid approach and the conventional SDM and DDM models. 53.93% in the case of the cloudy weather conditions and up to 21.04%
for sunny climatic conditions.
1108
Y. Chaibi, et al. Solar Energy 188 (2019) 1102–1110
40 40
NMAE [%]
NMAE [%]
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
Low Medium High Low Medium
Irradiance Level Temperature Level
(a)
Semi-Continental Climate Semi-Continental Climate
60 60
SDM SDM
DDM DDM
50 50
40 40
NMAE [%]
NMAE [%]
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
Low Medium High Low Medium
Irradiance Level Temperature Level
(b)
Fig. 10. Relative error between the hybrid approach and the SDM and DDM of Mediterranean (a) and Semi-continental climate conditions (b) PV plant for different
level of solar irradiance and temperature. Base case: Hybrid approach.
Acknowledgment Blair, N., Dobos, A.P., Freeman, J., Neises, T., Wagner, M., Ferguson, T., Gilman, P.,
Janzou, S., 2014. System advisor model, sam 2014.1. 14: General description. NREL
Rep. No. TP-6A20-61019, Natl. Renew. Energy Lab. Golden, CO 13. https://doi.org/
Authors would like to thank S. GHYATI for her help and support to 10.2172/1126294.
improve this work. The contribution of the School of Electrical and BP MSX60, 2002. bp solar msx60 Solar PV module datasheet [WWW Document].
Computer Engineering, National Technical University of Athens was Chaibi, Y., Salhi, M., 2019. Sliding mode controllers for standalone PV systems: Modeling
and approach of control. Int. J. Photoenergy 2019. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/
funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation 5092078.
programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No Chaibi, Y., Malvoni, M., Chouder, A., Boussetta, M., Salhi, M., 2019. Simple and efficient
799835. approach to detect and diagnose electrical faults and partial shading in photovoltaic
systems. Energy Convers. Manag. 196, 330–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2019.05.086.
References Chaibi, Y., Salhi, M., El-jouni, A., Essadki, A., 2018. A new method to extract the
equivalent circuit parameters of a photovoltaic panel. Sol. Energy 163. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.solener.2018.02.017.
Abbassi, R., Abbassi, A., Jemli, M., Chebbi, S., 2018. Identification of unknown para-
Chan, D.S.H., Phillips, J.R., Phang, J.C.H., 1986. A comparative study of extraction
meters of solar cell models: A comprehensive overview of available approaches.
methods for solar cell model parameters. Solid. State. Electron. 29, 329–337. https://
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 90, 453–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2018.03.
doi.org/10.1016/0038-1101(86)90212-1.
011.
Chenni, R., Makhlouf, M., Kerbache, T., Bouzid, A., 2007. A detailed modeling method for
Alam, D.F., Yousri, D.A., Eteiba, M.B., 2015. Flower pollination Algorithm based solar PV
photovoltaic cells. Energy 32, 1724–1730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2006.
parameter estimation. Energy Convers. Manag. 101, 410–422. https://doi.org/10.
12.006.
1016/j.enconman.2015.05.074.
Chtita, S., Chaibi, Y., Derouich, A., Belkadid, J., 2019. Modeling and Simulation of a
Allouhi, A., Saadani, R., Buker, M.S., Kousksou, T., Jamil, A., Rahmoune, M., 2019.
Photovoltaic Panel Based on a Triple Junction Cells for a Nanosatellite. Int. Symp.
Energetic, economic and environmental (3E) analyses and LCOE estimation of three
Adv. Electr. Commun. Technol. ISAECT 2018 - Proc. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/
technologies of PV grid-connected systems under different climates. Sol. Energy 178,
ISAECT.2018.8618840.
25–36.
De Blas, M.A., Torres, J.L., Prieto, E., García, A., 2002. Selecting a suitable model for
Allouhi, A., Saadani, R., Kousksou, T., Saidur, R., Jamil, A., Rahmoune, M., 2016. Grid-
characterizing photovoltaic devices. Renew. Energy 25, 371–380. https://doi.org/10.
connected PV systems installed on institutional buildings: Technology comparison,
1016/S0960-1481(01)00056-8.
energy analysis and economic performance. Energy Build. 130. https://doi.org/10.
Ding, K., Bian, X., Liu, H., Peng, T., 2012. A MATLAB-simulink-based PV module model
1016/j.enbuild.2016.08.054.
and its application under conditions of nonuniform irradiance. IEEE Trans. Energy
Attivissimo, F., Adamo, F., Carullo, A., Lanzolla, A.M.L., Spertino, F., Vallan, A., 2013. On
Convers. 27, 864–872. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEC.2012.2216529.
the performance of the double-diode model in estimating the maximum power point
Ebrahimi, S.M., Salahshour, E., Malekzadeh, M., FranciscoGordillo, 2019. Parameters
for different photovoltaic technologies. Meas. J. Int. Meas. Confed. 46, 3549–3559.
identification of PV solar cells and modules using flexible particle swarm optimiza-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2013.06.032.
tion algorithm. Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.04.218.
1109
Y. Chaibi, et al. Solar Energy 188 (2019) 1102–1110
Et-torabi, K., Nassar-eddine, I., Obbadi, A., Errami, Y., Rmaily, R., Sahnoun, S., El fajri, A., Mediterranean climate. Energy Convers. Manag. 145, 169–181. https://doi.org/10.
Agunaou, M., 2017. Parameters estimation of the single and double diode photo- 1016/j.enconman.2017.04.075.
voltaic models using a Gauss–Seidel algorithm and analytical method: A comparative Motahhir, S., Ghzizal, A. El, Sebti, S., Derouich, A., 2018. Modeling of Photovoltaic
study. Energy Convers. Manag. 148, 1041–1054. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. System with modified Incremental Conductance Algorithm for fast changes of irra-
enconman.2017.06.064. diance. Int. J. Photoenergy 2018, 13. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3286479.
Gao, X., Cui, Y., Hu, J., Tahir, N., Xu, G., 2018a. Performance comparison of exponential, Mughal, M.A., Ma, Q., Xiao, C., 2017. Photovoltaic cell parameter estimation using hybrid
Lambert W function and special trans function based single diode solar cell models. particle swarm optimization and simulated annealing. Energies 10, 1–14. https://doi.
Energy Convers. Manag. 171, 1822–1842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman. org/10.3390/en10081213.
2018.06.106. Oliva, D., Cuevas, E., Pajares, G., 2014. Parameter identification of solar cells using ar-
Gao, X., Cui, Y., Hu, J., Xu, G., Wang, Z., Qu, J., Wang, H., 2018b. Parameter extraction of tificial bee colony optimization. Energy 72, 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
solar cell models using improved shuffled complex evolution algorithm. Energy energy.2014.05.011.
Convers. Manag. 157, 460–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.12.033. PVGIS [WWW Document], n.d.
Hadj Arab, A., Chenlo, F., Benghanem, M., 2004. Loss-of-load probability of photovoltaic Rauschenbach, H. s., 1980. Solar Cell Array Design Handbook.
water pumping systems. Sol. Energy 76, 713–723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener. Saha, C., Agbu, N., Jinks, R., 2018. Review article of the Solar PV Parameters Estimation
2004.01.006. using Evolutionary Algorithms 2, 66–78. https://doi.org/10.15406/mojsp.2018.02.
Haouari-Merbah, M., Belhamel, M., Tobías, I., Ruiz, J.M., 2005. Extraction and analysis of 00026.
solar cell parameters from the illuminated current-voltage curve. Sol. Energy Mater. Shell SM55, 2002. Shell SM55 Solar PV module datasheet [WWW Document].
Sol. Cells 87, 225–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solmat.2004.07.019. Siddiqui, M.U., Abido, M., 2013. Parameter estimation for five- and seven-parameter
Ishaque, K., Salam, Z., 2011. An improved modeling method to determine the model photovoltaic electrical models using evolutionary algorithms. Appl. Soft Comput. J.
parameters of photovoltaic (PV) modules using differential evolution (DE). Sol. 13, 4608–4621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2013.07.005.
Energy 85, 2349–2359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2011.06.025. Stutenbaeumer, U., Mesfin, B., 1999. Equivalent model of monocrystalline, polycrystal-
Ishaque, K., Salam, Z., Taheri, H., 2011. Simple, fast and accurate two-diode model for line and amorphous silicon solar cells. Renew. Energy 18, 501–512. https://doi.org/
photovoltaic modules. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 95, 586–594. https://doi.org/10. 10.1016/S0960-1481(98)00813-1.
1016/j.solmat.2010.09.023. Sudhakar Babu, T., Prasanth Ram, J., Sangeetha, K., Laudani, A., Rajasekar, N., 2016.
Ismail, M.S., Moghavvemi, M., Mahlia, T.M.I., 2013. Characterization of PV panel and Parameter extraction of two diode solar PV model using Fireworks algorithm. Sol.
global optimization of its model parameters using genetic algorithm. Energy Convers. Energy 140, 265–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2016.10.044.
Manag. 73, 10–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.03.033. Suite, S., Co, B., 2016. Homer User Manual.
Jervase, J.A., Bourdoucen, H., Al-Lawati, A., 2001. Solar cell parameter extraction using Suthar, M., Singh, G.K., Saini, R.P., 2013. Comparison of mathematical models of photo-
genetic algorithms. Meas. Sci. Technol. 12, 1922–1925. https://doi.org/10.1088/ voltaic (PV) module and effect of various parameters on its performance. 2013 Int.
0957-0233/12/11/322. Conf. Energy Effic. Technol. Sustain. 1354–1359. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEETS.
Jordehi, A.R., 2016. Parameter estimation of solar photovoltaic (PV) cells: A review. 2013.6533584.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 61, 354–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.03. Ulapane, N.N.B., Dhanapala, C.H., Wickramasinghe, S.M., Abeyratne, S.G., Rathnayake,
049. N., Binduhewa, P.J., 2011. Extraction of parameters for simulating photovoltaic pa-
Kou, Q., Klein, S.A., Beckman, W.A., 1998. A method for estimating the long-term per- nels. 2011 6th Int. Conf. Ind. Inf. Syst. ICIIS 2011 - Conf. Proc. 539–544. https://doi.
formance of direct-coupled PV pumping systems. Sol. Energy 64, 33–40. https://doi. org/10.1109/ICIINFS.2011.6038128.
org/10.1016/S0038-092X(98)00049-8. Universidade De Genebra, 2012. User’s Guide, PVsyst Contextual Help.
Lineykin, S., Averbukh, M., Kuperman, A., 2014. An improved approach to extract the Villalva, M.G., Gazoli, J.R., Filho, E.R., 2009. Comprehensive approach to modeling and
single-diode equivalent circuit parameters of a photovoltaic cell/panel. Renew. simulation of photovoltaic arrays. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 24, 1198–1208.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 30, 282–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.10.015. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2009.2013862.
Malvoni, M., Fiore, M.C., Maggiotto, G., Mancarella, L., Quarta, R., Radice, V., Congedo, Walker, G., 2001. Evaluating Mppt converter topologies using a matlab Pv model. J.
P.M., De Giorgi, M.G., 2016. Improvements in the predictions for the photovoltaic Electr. Electron. Eng. 21, 49–56. https://doi.org/10.7237/.
system performance of the Mediterranean regions. Energy Convers. Manag. 128, Xiao, W., Dunford, W.G., Capel, A., 2004. A novel modeling method for photovoltaic cells.
191–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.09.069. PESC Rec. - IEEE Annu. Power Electron. Spec. Conf. 3, 1950–1956. https://doi.org/
Malvoni, M., Leggieri, A., Maggiotto, G., Congedo, P.M., De Giorgi, M.G., 2017. Long term 10.1109/PESC.2004.1355416.
performance, losses and efficiency analysis of a 960 kWPphotovoltaic system in the
1110