Comparison of Energy Obtained from Solar Panels in Partial Shading Condition Using Various MPPT Techniques
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51747/energy.v15i2.15211Keywords:
partial shading, photovoltaic, energy comparison, MPPT, PNO, GMPPD, 4 Section MethodAbstract
Partial shading conditions (PSC) create multiple peaks on the power–voltage (P–V) curve of photovoltaic (PV) systems, making it difficult for conventional Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT) algorithms to accurately identify the global maximum power point (GMPP). This study compares the performance of three MPPT techniques—Perturb and Observe (PNO), Global Maximum Power Point Detection (GMPPD), and the Four-Section (4S) method—by analyzing the electrical energy obtained during sudden changes in irradiance and shading. Experiments were conducted on two series-connected polycrystalline modules equipped with bypass diodes under three shading scenarios, with measurement data processed using an Arduino-based system. The novelty of this work lies in its experimental, energy-based comparison of PNO, GMPPD, and the recently developed 4S method under sequential irradiance transitions, providing a practical performance assessment that goes beyond instantaneous tracking evaluation commonly reported in previous studies. The results show that the 4S method significantly outperforms both PNO and GMPPD by providing faster tracking, lower computational demand, and superior accuracy under dynamic shading conditions. The total energy obtained using the 4S, GMPPD, and PNO methods was 4203.08 Wh, 3551.69 Wh, and 3091.60 Wh, respectively. These findings demonstrate that the 4S method offers the most efficient and reliable MPPT performance for PV systems operating under rapidly fluctuating environmental conditions.
References
[1] S. Titri, C. Larbes, K. Y. Toumi, and K. Benatchba, “A new MPPT controller based on the Ant colony optimization algorithm for Photovoltaic systems under partial shading conditions,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 58, pp. 465–479, 2017.
[2] A. K. Pandey et al., “Novel approaches and recent developments on potential applications of phase change materials in solar energy,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 82, pp. 281–323, 2018.
[3] E. Kabir, P. Kumar, S. Kumar, A. A. Adelodun, and K.-H. Kim, “Solar energy: Potential and future prospects,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 82, pp. 894–900, 2018.
[4] N. Kannan and D. Vakeesan, “Solar energy for future world:-A review,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 62, pp. 1092–1105, 2016.
[5] B. V. Mathiesen, H. Lund, and K. Karlsson, “100% Renewable energy systems, climate mitigation and economic growth,” Appl. Energy, vol. 88, no. 2, pp. 488–501, 2011.
[6] M. J. Afroni, D. Sutanto, and D. Stirling, “SAX-based decomposition of non-stationary power quality waveforms,” in Proceedings of International Conference on Harmonics and Quality of Power, ICHQP, 2012. doi: 10.1109/ICHQP.2012.6381218.
[7] A. Ingle, D. I. Sangotra, R. B. Chadge, and P. Thorat, “Module configurations in photovoltaic system: A review,” Mater. Today Proc., vol. 4, no. 14, pp. 12625–12629, 2017.
[8] K. Hazarika and P. K. Choudhury, “Automatic monitoring of solar photovoltaic (SPV) module,” Mater. Today Proc., vol. 4, no. 14, pp. 12606–12609, 2017.
[9] S. R. Pendem and S. Mikkili, “Modeling, simulation and performance analysis of solar PV array configurations (Series, Series–Parallel and Honey-Comb) to extract maximum power under Partial Shading Conditions,” Energy Reports, vol. 4, pp. 274–287, 2018.
[10] J. J. Nedumgatt, K. B. Jayakrishnan, S. Umashankar, D. Vijayakumar, and D. P. Kothari, “Perturb and observe MPPT algorithm for solar PV systems-modeling and simulation,” in 2011 Annual IEEE India Conference, IEEE, 2011, pp. 1–6.
[11] F. Raziya, M. Afnaz, S. Jesudason, I. Ranaweera, and H. Walpita, “MPPT technique based on perturb and observe method for pv systems under partial shading conditions,” in 2019 Moratuwa Engineering Research Conference (MERCon), IEEE, 2019, pp. 474–479.
[12] M. J. Afroni, E. S. Wirateruna, and O. Melfazen, “An Experimental Study of Partial Shading Effects on the PV Characteristic Curve,” in 2022 11th Electrical Power, Electronics, Communications, Controls and Informatics Seminar (EECCIS), IEEE, 2022, pp. 22–27.
[13] M. J. Afroni and E. S. Wirateruna, “4 Section method for MPPT optimization in Solar Panel Experiments under PSC v221023,” in 2023 International Conference on Smart-Green Technology in Electrical and Information Systems (ICSGTEIS), IEEE, 2023, pp. 172–177.
[14] M. Al-Rizky, M. J. Afroni, and B. M. Basuki, “Perbandingan Perolehan Energi Listrik Tenaga Surya Antara Beberapa Algoritma Maximum Power Point Tracker (MPPT) Pada Kondisi Berbayang Sebagian,” Sci. ELECTRO, vol. 17, no. 1, 2024.
[15] D. C. Bani, M. Pu, and H. Suryoatmojo, “¬ MPPT Pada Sistem PV Menggunakan Algoritma Firefly dan Modified PNO dengan Konverter Hybrid Cuk terkoneksi ke Grid Satu Phasa di Bawah Kondisi Partial Shaded,” J. Tek. ITS, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. B128–B134, 2016.
[16] A. Mohapatra, B. Nayak, P. Das, and K. B. Mohanty, “A review on MPPT techniques of PV system under partial shading condition,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 80, pp. 854–867, 2017.
[17] F. Belhachat and C. Larbes, “A review of global maximum power point tracking techniques of photovoltaic system under partial shading conditions,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 92, pp. 513–553, 2018.
[18] M. Ben Aicha, N. Hacene, and A. Teta, “Comparative study of PNO and PSO-based MPPT algorithms for PV systems under partial shading conditions”.
[19] N. H. Alombah et al., “Multiple-to-single maximum power point tracking for empowering conventional MPPT algorithms under partial shading conditions,” Sci. Rep., vol. 15, no. 1, p. 14540, 2025.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 ENERGY: JURNAL ILMIAH ILMU-ILMU TEKNIK
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
