Integrations Studies
E. M. da S. Brito, A. F. Cupertino, L. P. Carlette, P. F. Ribeiro
D. O. Filho, H. A. Pereira Technische Universiteit Eindhoven
Gerncia de Especialistas em Sistemas Eltricos de Potncia Department of Electrical Engineering,
Universidade Federal de Viosa, Viosa, Brasil 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands
erick.brito@ufv.br, allan.cupertino@yahoo.com.br, pfribeiro@ieee.org
luan.carlette@ufv.br, delly@ufv.br, heverton.pereira@ufv.br
Photovoltaic panels have an intermediary behave between a
Abstract Photovoltaic systems are highly dependent on climatic current and a voltage source. Moreover, variations in the
conditions in which they are submitted. The incident solar incident solar irradiance and temperature have a great impact
irradiance and temperature are the main factors impacting on on the generated power as illustrated in Figure 1.
the power generated by a solar panel. This paper presents three
different models of a solar panel and compare, through The modeling of photovoltaic panels can be considered a
simulations, their accuracies and efficiencies, and also shows the multi physical modeling because it considers the temperature at
advantages and applications of each model. Simulations for each the panel, the radiation incident on it, and its electric power
model connected to the grid were also made through a controlled generation. In this domain, it becomes necessary to make the
inverter. This inverter keeps the voltage at the terminals of the study of each subset, considering their effects in cascade that
panel in a constant value equal to its maximum power point, influence on each other [3], [4].
provided by the manufacturer. In the end, it is possible to see
that two of the presented models have almost the same behavior
while the third one has some discrepancy.
I. INTRODUCTION
The technological progress has changed the lifestyle of the
modern human and the energy demand prompted motivates
new researches for renewable energy sources. Among
these are solar and wind power systems [1].
It has been happened a significant growth in the installed
power on solar photovoltaic systems. In 2011 the value was of
69.68 GWp, a growth of 76 % in relation to the previous year.
More than 95% of this power is generated by grid-connected
systems [2].
(a)
Although its strong growth, renewable sources does
not produce a significant amount of energy compared to
the world demand. This is due to lack of tax incentives,
making these sources less competitive in the market. Many
countries do not have specific legislation for photovoltaic
systems connected to the grid, for instance. Nevertheless,
expectations and forecasts for the future indicate another
reality.
Even though the sun represents an almost unlimited source
of clean energy, an obstacle to develop the photovoltaic (PV)
panels technology is low efficiency, compared to
hydroelectric and nuclear plants. The energy production is
further reduced on cloudy days or in shaded situations and it is
even worse in the night time when there is no generation. (b)
Figure 1. Effect of incident irradiance (a) and temperature (b) in I x V curves
of a solar panel.
The authors would like to thank to CNPQ, FAPEMIG and CAPES for
their assistance and financial support.
Some parameters used in the modeling are informed by B. Model 2 Mathematical Model
manufactures and they are in TABLE I. This model is based on equations of photovoltaic panels.
Through equations it was possible to simulate the solar panel.
TABLE I. MAIN PARAMETERS OF A SOLAR PANEL
+
The equation of the current in the solar panel is:
= 1#
!
Parameter Symbol
(4)
Maximum Power (W)
The variable is calculated by (5):
Maximum Power Voltage (V)
= % +
'(
Maximum power current (A)
Open circuit voltage (V) (5)
Where is the current in the nominal conditions,
Short circuit current (A)
Temperature coefficient of
(V/K)
calculated by equation (6); ' = ' ') (T is the solar panel
Temperature coefficient of
(A/K)
temperature and T+ is the nominal solar panel temperature);
e are the values of incident solar irradiance and the
reference irradiance (W/m), respectively. The variable
0 is
II. METHODOLOGY
+
the temperature coefficient of the short circuit current (A/K).
=
A. Model 1 Equivalent Circuit
There is in literature a simplified model of PV used in some (6)
= %3 6 78 9(
2 45 :
3 ;
1
a constant continuous current source. The parameters of the (7)
model are calculated according to the electrical characteristics !
is the nominal short-circuit current,
is the nominal
of the photovoltaic panel. This model has some
open circuit voltage due to
. This equation also simplifies
=
way to express this dependency showing a linear variation in
(1)
the model canceling the errors around the open circuit voltage
Finally, @ is calculated by:
points and consequently in other points of the IxV curve.
=
A '
(2)
@ =
(8)
=
Where A is the Boltzmanns constant, ' is the temperature
(3)
' cde 1 1
^_`a
EJ = 0
I
P
EJ =
+
'
(10)
L,) =
exp W :< g 1
(13)
@
' 9h\L
,
OO QRS = ,
OO #
')
(14)
' 9hiL
,
OO QRS = ,
OO #
')
(15)
C. Model 3 Solar Cell Multi Physical Model estimated by an alternativeative method based on [6]. The
Y,
OO
resistances for each cell can be obtained by:
The multi-physics
physics modeling represents the influence of
,
OO = 2 ;
Y,
OO
various phenomena in which a real system is subjected. There
is in Matlab 7.10.0/Simulink, in Simscape library, a multi (16)
physical model of a solar cell. This model is defined by 16
Y,
OO
parameters including some temperature coefficients and the
,
OO = 2 ;
Y,
OO
reverse leakage current in both diodes, for example. This
model also contains two diodes which better represent the non
non- (17)
linear characteristic of the cell. Moreover, it is possible do
Where Y,
OO and Y,
OO
observe the change in the series and
nd parallel resistances with
temperature. The equation of the current in the solar panel is:
OO are the number of solar cells in
,5MM
= L 2 1;
;
series and in parallel of the panel,
panel respectively.
!
Comparing equations (7) ( and (13) it is possible to see the
,5MM
+
,
OO one more coefficient for temperature influence,
.
main difference between Model 2 and 3. In Model 2 there is
N 2 1;
(11)
,
OO
!
D. Connecting the Models to the Grid
,
OO and ,
OO are the series and parallel resistance of
Figure 4 shows a schematic of the grid connected
fixed value equal to the maximum power point (provided by TABLE II. KYOCERA SM-48KSM PARAMETERS FOR 1000 W/M
the manufacturer) and it injects the generated power in the AND 25 C.
grid with the power factor close to the unity.
48 l
Parameter Value
The controlled variables were written in direct and
quadrature axis. The control loops of the inverter are shown in 18.6
Figure 5, there is the reactive power loop that controls the 2.59 p
22.1
power factor and a loop for regulate the DC bus voltage. The
2.89 p
0.070 /
current control loops use proportional controllers and the
1.66 rp/
external loops use proportional-integral controllers [8]. The
controllers gains were adjusted by the poles allocation
*STC: AM1.5 spectrum
method.
A Synchronous Reference Frame PLL (SRF-PLL) circuit TABLE III. KYOCERA SM-48KSM PARAMETERS FOR 800 W/M
is used as synchronism technique to connect the system to the AND 47 C.
grid. This structure estimates the grid voltage angle for the
34 l
Parameter Value
control of the inverter. To reduce the harmonics generated by
17.1
IGBTs switching a LCL filter was used. The design of this
2.02 p
component is in [9].
20.5
2.26 p
0.070 /
1.66 rp/
*STC: AM1.5 spectrum
III. RESULTS
In order to validate the three mentioned models, it was
used the Kyocera panel, model SM-48KSM whose parameters
are shown in TABLE II. The curves for each model were
collected for different situations, varying the climate
parameters such as temperature and radiation in order to verify
the efficiency and accuracy of each one. Using the data shown
Figure 5. Control loops of the inverter. in TABLE II, TABLE III and the estimation method from [6],
the models were simulated for the nominal operating
conditions. The final values for the resistance for Model 2 are
shown in (18) and for Model 3 it is shown in (19). The
different values are justified because the reverse leakage
current of each model is calculated in a different way, as can
be seen in (7) and (12).
= 0.186200
s = 108.602693 P
3
(18)
= 0.090600
s = 92.939664 P
2.5
(19)
2
Current(A)
Analyzing Figure 6, Model 1 follows a solar panel 1.5
behavior, but not its accuracy. It presented a different shape of
the curve, more linear, compared to the other ones, showing a 1 Model 1
wide divergence from reality. Furthermore, it was observed Model 2
that for different values of irradiance the open circuit voltage in Model 3
0.5
Model 1 was constant. Despite being the less accurate, Model 1
has the fastest simulation and a small number of equations.
Model 3s simulation is slower than Model 2 and it has a 0
0 5 10 15 20 25
satisfactory performance when compared to the Model 1, since Voltage(V)
its waveform was more accurate and its open circuit voltage
decreased with a reduction of incident radiation. Besides, (a)
Model 3 presents the characteristics of each solar cell, what is
an advantage. 55
simulations were made to these new values and the results are 30
shown in Figure 7. 25
0 0.3 0 0 0
Model 1 0
0 5 10 15 20 25
18.6
Models Pm(%) Voc (%) Isc (%) Vmp (%) Imp (%)
1.5
Model 1
1
Model 2
Model 3
0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Voltage(V)
(a)
3.5
50 Model 1 3
Model 2
40 Model 3 2.5
Current(A)
2
Power(W)
30
1.5
20
1
Model 2
10 0.5 Model 3
0
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
0 5 10 15 20 25
Voltage(V) Voltage(V)
(b)
(b) Figure 8. I x V curves for 25 C (a) and for 75 C (b) of the Models 2 and 3,
with radiation of 1000 W/m.
Figure 7. Curves I x V (a) and P x V (b) of the three panels for a irradiance of
800 W/m and temperature 47 C
50
(a)
3
45
2.5 40 Model 2
Model 3
35
2
30
Current(A)
Power(W)
1.5 25
20
1
15
Model 2
0.5 Model 3 10
5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Voltage(V) Voltage(V)
(a) (b)
Figure 9. P x V curves for 25 C (a) and for 75 C (b) of the Models 2 and 3,
with irradiance of 1000 W/m.
As a comparison criterion, it was simulated panels
connected to the grid. A controlled inverter maintains the 50
Model 1
output voltage of the panels in a constant value. Figure 10(a) Model 2
and (b) shows the generated power and voltage in the panel. 40 Model 3
Figure 10(b) shows the smooth operation of the inverter to
Power(W)
keep the output voltage of the panel at a constant value. This 30
fact was evidenced for the three analyzed models. Note in
Figure 10(a) that in steady state the power in all the Models is 20
close to the maximum power provided by the manufacturer.
The only difference in Model 1 is the overshoot due to the 10
different dynamics behavior that comes from the linearization
of the model.
0
20 Model 1
Models Simulation time (s)
Model 2
Model 3 Model 1 19.0
10
Model 2 22.55
Model 3 1140.35
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
time(s)
IV. CONCLUSIONS
(a) The results show that the mathematical model (Model 2) is
more accurate if compared to the equivalent circuit model
20 (Model 1) and to the panel made by individual cells association
(Model 3). It allows obtaining the results closer to the reality.
Model 1 The advantages of high simplicity of the Model 1 and the
19.5 Model 2 study of individual cells in Model 3 should not be disregarded.
Besides electrical and thermal characteristics, the simulation
Voltage(V)
Model 3
time is a critical factor since Model 3 might become
impracticable using a lot of solar cells. There will be situations
19
where each of these models will be very important in the
development of works in PV studies and it is up to the
researcher to decide which one fits better.
Obtaining a model of PV panels with high accuracy is vital
18.5 for future works in the photovoltaic solar engineering area.
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
time(s)
These Models make it possible to develop works and
techniques to improve the performance and applicability of PV
systems in the context of global renewable energy production.
(b)
Figure 10. Power (a) and Voltage (b) in the panel connected to the grid.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT Luan Peterle Carlette was born in Cachoeiro de
Itapemirim, Brazil. He is student of Electrical
Engineering at Federal University of Viosa, Viosa,
The authors would like to thank to CNPQ, FAPEMIG and Brazil. He works with Power Systems, especially
CAPES for their assistance and financial support. with photovoltaic energy and control applied to
converters.
REFERENCES
[1] GUIMARES, A. P. C. et al. Manual para Engenharia de Sistemas Delly Oliveira Filho received his BSc in Electrical
Fotovoltaicos. Edio Especial. ed. Rio de Janeiro: PRODEEM, v. I, Engineering at the Federal University of Minas
2004. Gerais in 1979 and his MSc in Thermal Engineering
[2] EPIA. Global Market Outlook for Photovoltaics until 2016. 1. ed. [S.l.]: at the same university in 1983. In 1995 received his
EPIA, v. I, 2012. PhD in Electrical Engineering at the McGill
[3] MENNER, R. J. C. M. Multi-Physical Modeling and Experimental University in Montreal, Canada. He has been working
Verification of Respiratory System. University of Technology. [S.l.], p. as an Associate Professor of the Energy Area of the
13. 2009. (Graduation Symposium). Agricultural Engineering Department of Federal
University of Viosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil, since
[4] MICHAEL POKORNY, Z. R. Multi-Physical Model of Gunn Diode. 1988.
[S.l.]. (IEEE Paper).
Paulo F. Ribeiro received B.S. degree in electrical
[5] MINEIRO, S. E. et al. Photovoltaic system for supply public illumination
engineering from the Federal Univesity of
in electrical energy demand peak. The Applied Power Electronics
Pernambumco, Brazil, in 1975, and the Ph.D. degree
Conference and Exposition, California, v. 3, p. 1501-1506, 2004.
in electrical engineering from the University of
[6] VILLALVA, M. G.; GAZOLI, J. R.; FILHO, E. R. Comprehensive Manchester, Manchester, U.K., in 1985. Presently, he
Approach to Modeling and Simulation of Photovoltaic Arrays. IEEE is a Professor at Calvin College, Grand Rapids,
Transactions on Power Electronics, v. 24, n. 1, p. 1198-1208, Maio 2009. Michigan. In 2010 he was a visiting professor at the
[7] VILLALVA, M. G.; GAZOLI, J. R.; FILHO, E. R. Modeling and circuit- Eindhoven University of technology, The
based simulation of photovoltaic arrays. Brazilian Journal of Power Netherlands. Dr. Rbeiro is active in the IEEE,.
Electronics, v. 14, n. 1, p. 35-45, 2009. International Council on Large Electric Systems (CIGRE), and International
Electrotechnical Comission (IEC) technical working groups
[8] SUUL, J. A. et al. Turning of control loops for grid connected voltage
Heverton Augusto Pereira was born in So Miguel
source converters. PECon, Johor Baharu, Malaysia, p. 797-802,
do Anta, Brazil, in 1984. He received the B.S. degree
December 2008.
in electrical engineering from the Federal University
[9] LISERRE, M.; BLAABJERG, L.; HANSEN, S. Design and control of an of Viosa (UFV),Viosa, Brazil, in 2007, the M.S.
LCL-filter based three-phase active rectifier. IEEE Transactions on degree in electrical engineering from the
Industry Applications, v. 41, n. 5, p. 1281-1291, September 2001. Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP),
Campinas, Brazil, in 2009, and currently is Ph.D.
student from the Federal University of Minas Gerais
BIOGRAPHIES (UFMG), Belo Horizonte,
Brazil. He is currently an Assistant Professor with the Department of Electric
Erick Matheus da Silva Brito was Born in Feira de Engineering, Federal University of Viosa, Brazil. His research interests are
Santana, Brazil. He is student of Electrical wind power, solar energy and power quality.
Engineering at Federal University of Viosa, Viosa,
Brazil. He works with Power Systems, especially
with photovoltaic energy.