Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 58e69

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Effects of partial shading on energy and exergy efficiencies for

photovoltaic panels
Fatih Bayrak a, Gamze Ertürk b, Hakan F. Oztop b, *
a
Department of Mechanical Education, Technical Education Faculty, Firat University, Elazig, Turkey
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technology Faculty, Firat University, Elazig, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Photovoltaic (PV) technology becomes very popular with development of material science among the
Received 7 February 2017 indispensable of solar energy in recent years. In this paper is investigated the electrical performance and
Received in revised form thermodynamics analysis under the shading shapes and shading ratios of photovoltaics panels which
2 May 2017
have in 75 W power. The operating and electrical parameters of a photovoltaic panel are including cell
Accepted 12 June 2017
Available online 15 June 2017
temperature, overall heat loss coefficient, fill factor, etc. With this aim, an experimental set-up was
constructed and serial experiments were done for different parameters such as shading ratio and po-
Handling Editor: Yutao Wang sitions. Three different cases of shading effects as cell, horizontal and vertical shading at different per-
centage. The results showed that the values of fill factor are also determined for the systems and effect of
Keywords: fill factor on the efficiencies is also evaluated. The shading makes important effect on energy and exergy
Photovoltaic efficiencies of the system and the most important effect is formed in case of horizontal shading. The
Partial shading maximum power loss was occurred at the shading rate 100% as 69.92% in cellular, 66.93% in vertical,
Energy 99.98% in horizontal shading.
Exergy
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Maximum power point (MPP)

1. Introduction radiation of photovoltaic panel. Energy and exergy efficiencies are

Electricity production from solar energy becomes very popular
in recent years due to increasing of efficiency of solar energy
technologies and decreasing of investment cost. As well known that
PV panels convert the energy of solar radiation directly to electrical
energy. They do not have mechanical or moving parts. This is their
most important advantage. However, they are affected from many
environmental parameters such as partial or complete shading,
dust, dye or other factors.
The shading is the most effective parameters on effectiveness of
PV panels. In this context, Kawamura et al. (2003) worked as
experimental and simulation on a PV power generating system by
considering the change of current-voltage characteristics. Also they
investigated the correlation between the output lowering due to
shaded PV cells and the change of current-voltage characteristics.
These results indicated on the change of I-V curve is very little.
Sahin et al. (2007) analysed the current-voltage variation with
temperature, energy and exergy efficiencies variation with solar
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: fatih.bayrak@gmail.com (F. Bayrak), erturkgamze23@gmail.
com (G. Ertürk), hfoztop1@gmail.com (H.F. Oztop).
obtained ranging from 7% to 12%, 2% to 8%, respectively. The I-V
curve is seen to vary with panel temperature. Joshi et al. (2009)
worked the thermodynamic analysis of PV and PV/T (photovol-
taic/thermal) systems. They found that of maximum values exergy
efficiency are formed as 13.8% and 16%, respectively.
Picault et al. (2010) presented a study to forecast existing PV
array production in different ambiance situations including
mismatch losses. Their aim was to reduce these losses in PVs. They
propose new experimental work on alternative array configura-
tions to enhance maximum power output up to 4%. Agrawal and
Tiwari (2011) studied the energy and exergy analysis of micro
and single channel PV/T collector for different weather condition.
Additionally, the four types of weather conditions are described as
Type A (clear days), Type B (hazy days), Type C (hazy and cloudy
days) and Type D (cloudy days). They have been found that an
overall annual thermal and exergy gains have been increased by
70.92% and 60.19%, respectively. Rajoria et al. (2012) carried out a
work for different conditions of photovoltaic/thermal arrays. They
have concluded that configuration under case-II gives better result
in terms of overall thermal energy gain, which is 12.1% higher than
case-III. However, the overall exergy gain for case-III is 12.9% and it
is higher than that of case-II. Therefore, condition under case-III is a

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.108
0959-6526/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 F. Bayrak et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 58e69
Nomenclature
A area of collector (m2)
Ex exergy (W)
FF fill factor (
)
hca heat transfer coefficient (W/m2K)
I current (A)
Im current at the maximum power point (A)
Is solar radiation (W/m2)
P power (W)
SR shading ratio (%)
T temperature (K)
V voltage (V)
Vm voltage at the maximum power point (V)
v wind velocity (m/s)
W uncertainty in the measurement (%)
DP power loss of PV panels
better selection in comparison to other cases in terms of high grade
energy. Agrawal and Tiwari (2012) made an analysis of energy,
exergy and exergoeconomic for PV/T air collector. The results
showed that the annual overall thermal energy and exergy gain are
1252.0 kWh and 289.5 kWh, respectively. The net annual electrical
energy savings by glazed hybrid PVT module air collector is
234.7 kWh.
Akyuz et al. (2012) compared the new and classic approaches of
exergy efficiency on a PV system. The variations of exergy efficiency
are examined for two different cases using experimental data ob-
tained from an installed PV system in Turkey by using the Matlab-
Simulink software. They showed that the highest exergy efficiency
can be found for lower wind velocity and environment tempera-
ture, as well as higher global solar radiation. So, they expected to be
beneficial for other researches on photovoltaic systems of this
approach. Dolara et al. (2013) investigated the effect of partial
shading on polycrystalline and monocrystalline photovoltaic
panels. They performed an experimental work consisting of
measuring the I-V and P-V curves of PV panels. They showed that I-
V and P-V values are decreased by the increasing shading ratio on
PV panels. Shaiek et al. (2013) studied the effect of a PV system
under the shading, solar radiation and temperature which simu-
lated by using Matlab software. Also, they compared genetic algo-
rithm approach with two conventional algorithms and this
approach has given same analysis as other methods. Deline et al.
(2013) presented a novel analytical approximation of the effect of
inter-row shading on large photovoltaic (PV) arrays. The maximum
error is found as 1% with measurement values. Tian et al. (2013)
analysed the effect of cell temperature, bypass diode and shading
on the performance of a photovoltaic array. Three conditions for a
PV array consisting of four modules were investigated. The results
show that has been decreased at the different ratios I-V and P-V
curves for the five configurations from without bypass diode to
bypass diode for each module.
Sudhakar and Srivastava (2014) investigated the thermal, elec-
trical and exergy output of a PV panel. They found that the energy
and exergy efficiencies various between 6%e9% and 8%e10% during
the day, respectively. In additionally, the exergy efficiency of PV
module increases initially with increase in solar radiation intensity
and then decreases after attaining maximum point.
Rodrigo et al. (2015) investigated the variation according to
shading ratio of I-V curve at concentrator PV panels. This study has
used two PV panels which both panels have been measured under
59
Subscripts
a ambient
c cell
d destroyed
elec electrical
in input
m module, maximum
oc open circuit
out output
s sun
sc short circuit
therm thermal
PV photovoltaic
Greek letters
hI energy efficiency (
)
hII exergy efficiency (
)
the different shading conditions and I-V data obtaining have been
compared. They found root men squared errors for the I-V curves
lower than %4. Bai et al. (2015) investigated effects of shading ratio
on PV system experimentally and making a simulation. It is found
that shading ratio affects the power production directly. Schill et al.
(2015) experimentally investigated the effect of soling (partial
shading) on current-voltage curve of PV panels. As a result, the
efficiency of PV panels has decreased 20% from the first measure-
ment in 5 months. Belhachat and Larbes (2015) studied the per-
formance of values photovoltaic array configurations under
different shading states. These configurations are defined as fol-
lows; (a) series, (b) parallel, (c) series-parallel, (d) total-cross-tied,
(e) bridge-linked and (f) honey-comb. They have obtained from
the total-cross-tied configuration the maximum power and the
lowest relative power losses which be used in an intelligent algo-
rithm for the tracking of the maximum power point in the case of
shading. Visa et al. (2016) tested the performance of 5 different
types of PV panels based on environmental effects. They got long
term data from the installed system and found that the poly-
crystalline silicon shows the best performing modules in the
temperate climate for snowy winters and rather warm summers.
However, the best output corresponds to CIGS among thin film
modules, while the steadiest efficiency corresponds to CdTe.
Vijayalekshmy et al. (2016) proposed a novel Zig-Zag scheme of
array for the total cross tied interconnection of PV modules for
decreasing partial shading losses. Their main aim was to increase
power generation of PV systems. Their results show that the new
scheme of rearrangement lessens the number of multiple local
maxima in power-voltage characteristics which further simplifies
the MPP tracking algorithm. Yadav et al. (2016) analysed by com-
parison for increasing performance of PV array configuration for
various shading condition. These configurations and shading con-
dition are named such as series-parallel (SP), total-cross-tied (TCT),
bridge-link (BL), honey-comb (HC) and vertical, horizontal, diago-
nal shading, respectively. They have used Simulink software which
is and MATLAB/Simulink. Bidabadi et al. (2010, 2014), Varol and
Oztop (2007) and Fanaee (2016) studied on radiation effect on
different systems.
The main aim of this work is to study the partial shading effect
on power output, energy and exergy efficiency of the system. As
shown from the above literature survey and based on authors'
knowledge, there is no work on second law analysis of thermody-
namics on shading effect of photovoltaic panels.
60 F. Bayrak et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 58e69

2. Experimental setup calculation of photovoltaic modules.

An experimental setup is tested in Technology Faculty of Fırat
University, Elazıg
of Turkey. The results obtained from experi-
mental measurements tested on polycrystalline panels with
different percentage of shading. A serial experiment has been
performed different days with clear sky condition for June, 2016.
The experimental studies were tested under the weather condi-
tions of the city of Elazıg, Turkey which is located at 36 and 42
North latitudes.
The experimental setup of the polycrystalline photovoltaic
system with equipment is shown in Fig. 1. Non-transparent mate-
rials are used as shading element on panels. These materials are
used by closing as 25, 50, 75 and 100 percentages of single-cell,
horizontal string and vertical string on the photovoltaic panel.
The detailed illustration is also given in Fig. 2. In this configuration,
effect of shading on three Case was considered at different per-
centages. Fig. 3 illustrates a picture of the experimental setup and at
the different shading ratio for three Cases. As seen from the
photograph that two panels are used which are same capacities
with 75 W in the experiments to make comparison.
The total solar radiation incident on the surface of the photo-
voltaic was measured with a Kipp & Zonen Pyranometer. The
ambient temperature and surface temperatures of PV panels were
measured by using the T-type thermocouples with a diameter of
0.25 mm. All measurements were carried out from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.
at June 2016 which were taken once every half an hour. Table 1
gives the electrical characteristics of the PV panel.
3.1. Energy analysis of photovoltaic system
The energy efficiency of photovoltaic systems is defined as the
ratio of the input energy of the system (solar radiation in the
photovoltaic surface) to the output energy. The first law or the
energy efficiency of photovoltaic systems is calculated as follows.
Vm Im
hI ¼ (1)
Is A
The power output is a product of the voltage and current from
the PV systems. This conversion effect is not constant even under
constant solar radiation. However, there is a maximum power point
and the voltage value Vm at this point is lower than the open circuit
voltage (Voc). The current Im is low but very close to the short circuit
current (Isc). The maximum power point is named with a term
called the fill factor as follows (Esen et al., 2016)
Vm Im
FF ¼ (2)
Voc Isc
When we substitute Eq. (2) into Eq. (1) another form of energy
efficiency equation can be obtained (Esen and Tuna, 2015).
Voc Isc FF
hI ¼ (3)
Is A

3. Thermodynamic analysis of the system 3.2. Exergy analysis

First law of thermodynamics is not enough to define the system Electrical exergy of the photovoltaic system aims to use present
efficiency. Thus, it is needed to define second law efficiency. The energy as useful energy. Exergy analysis contains a consideration of
brief theory is presented here to show the first and second laws energy quality or capability. The overall exergy balance of photo-
voltaic (PV) can be expressed as follows
X X
E_ in ¼ E_ out (4)

X X X X
E_ in ¼ E_ out þ E_ loss þ E_ irreversibility (5)

This corruption in the quality of energy is called exergy loss. The

exergy loss is also called irreversibility. Exergy efficiency of the PV
module is described as the proportion of total output exergy to total
input exergy [Petela, 2008; Hepbasli, 2008; Kilkis, 2012] as

Exoutput
hII;PV ¼ (6)
Exinput

Input exergy of a PV system includes only solar radiation in-

tensity exergy as below [Petela, 2008 and Hepbasli 2008]:
"     #
4 Ta 1 Ta 4
Exinput ¼ Is A 1
þ (7)
3 Ts 3 Ts

or
 
_ Ta
Ex input ¼ 1
Is A (8)
Ts

where Ts is the temperature of sun which is taken as 5777 K. The

exergy output of the photovoltaic systems can be expressed as
follows

_
_ out ¼ Ex _ _
Ex elec
Exther
Exd;elec (9)
Fig. 1. The schematic view of the experimental setup.
 F. Bayrak et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 58e69 61

Fig. 2. Shading of different percentages of Case I, Case II and Case III; (A1) SR ¼ 25%, (A2) SR ¼ 50%, (A3) SR ¼ 75% and (A4) SR ¼ 100%, (B1) SR ¼ 25% and (C1) SR ¼ 25%.

Fig. 3. The PV panels with non-transparent for shading scenario (a) single-cell-Case I (b) horizontal-Case II (c) vertical-Case III.

In above equation, Ex _ _
Table 1 PV;elec shows electrical exergy ExPV
d;elec
and Ex_
Electrical Characteristics of the polycrystalline solar panel. PV
d;ther give exergy destruction due to inner and outer los-
ses, respectively. Electrical exergy of a PV system is given as
Maximum Power (STC) Pm. 75 W
Open-Circuit Voltage Voc 21,93 V
_
Ex elec ¼ Vm Im (10)
Optimum Operating Voltage Vm 18,11 V
Short-Circuit Current Isc 4,14 A
Operating Current Im 3,69 A Exergy loss of electric energy is presented as

Operating Temperature C
40 to 85  C
Tolerance of the rating power ±%3
_
Temp. Coefficients of Isc 0,0045%/C Ex d;ther ¼ Voc Isc
Vm Im (11)
Temp. Coefficient of Voc
0,32%/C
The thermal exergy of a photovoltaic system is consisted as the
heat loss from the PV system surface to the environment which can
62 F. Bayrak et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 58e69

be given as below " 2  2 #1=2

  vP vP
Ta _ WP ¼ W þ W (21)
_ vI I vV V
Ex ther ¼ 1
Q (12)
Tc
" 2  2  2  2 #1=2
where vh vh vh vh
Wh ¼ W þ W þ W þ W
vVm Vm vIm Im vIs Is vIs A
Q_ ¼ hca AðTc
Ta Þ (13)
(22)

hca ¼ 5:7 þ 3:8v (14) 2 2  2  2  2 31=2

vh
6 vVmII WVm þ vvIhmII WIm þ vvThIIa WTa þ vvThIIc WTc 7
where hca is heat transfer coefficient and v is the wind velocity. 6 7
The using Eqs. (9)e(13) the exergy output of a PV system can be WhII ¼ 6
6  2  2  2
7
7
4 vhII vhII vhII 5
calculated as below: þ vh Wh þ vTs WTs þ vIs WIs
 
(23)
_ out ¼ Vm Im
1
Ta hca AðTc
Ta Þ
Ex (15)
Tc The uncertainty analysis of system in determining were esti-
If Eqs. (8) and (15) are substituted in Eq. (6), it is arranged as mated by Eqs. (20)e(23). The uncertainty results of calculated and
below measured values are shown in Table 5.

 
Vm Im
1
TTac hca AðTc
Ta Þ 4. Results and discussion
hII;PV ¼   (16)
1
TTas Is A
In this experimental work, first and second law analyses of
thermodynamics are studied on effects of partial shading ratio on
photovoltaic panels. Three cases are studied based on chosen
shading ratio. In first case, namely Case I, shading on cell, Case II is
horizontally shading and Case III is vertically shading at different
3.3. Uncertainty analysis shading percentage.
In the Case I of this work, single-cell shading was applied on
It should be an indication that the quality of the numerical panel to test the efficiencies at different percentage of shading. In
values obtaining when reporting the result of the measurement. this context, single-cell shading was applied on a polycrystalline
The quality of a measurement may be characterized, easily under- module of 36 cells. The Shading Ratio (SR) is taken in the range of
stood and generally accepted that a process is very important. In 0  SR  100. This is clearly seen in Fig. 2(A1) to (A4) and photo of
order to determine the validity of the experimental findings should Fig. 3(a). Solar radiation measurement shows that the value
always make an error analysis.
An uncertainty analysis was performed using the method
described by Holman (1994). This calculation method of concerning
uncertainty analysis was also used in many studies. In experiments,
measured values (R) and effective parameters of n independent
parameters (x1, x2, ……… … xn) are defined. Error ratio for each
independent variable and calculated variables is obtained as W1,
W2, ………Wn and W is defined as the error ratio of R (Esen et al.,
2007; Esen, 2008).

" 2  2  2 #1=2
vR vR vR
WR ¼ W þ W þ…þ Wn (17)
vx1 1 vx2 2 vxn

Equation for current and power are

I ¼ V=R (18)

and

P ¼ IV (19)
From these measured data, current, power, energy and exergy
efficiencies were calculated. Eq. (17) can be applied to Eqs. (3), (16),
(18) and (19) as

" 2  2 #1=2
vI vI
WI ¼ W þ W (20)
vV V vR R

Fig. 4. The curves of photovoltaic panels under single-cell shading (a) I-V, (b) P-V.
 F. Bayrak et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 58e69 63

Table 2 Table 4
Loss ratio and fill factor values of single-cell shading. Loss ratio and fill factor values of vertical shading.

Single-cell shading - (case I) Vertical shading - (case III)

SR (shading ratio) FF (%) DP (W) DP/P (%) SR (shading ratio) FF (%) DP (W) DP/P (%)
0.00 52.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 51,97 0.00 0.00
0.25 45.97 3.58 9.06 0.25 43,62 6,90 16,99
0.50 25.67 25.06 65.88 0.50 36,09 7,65 18,85
0.75 23.47 26.43 66.38 0.75 17,80 25,12 61,88
1.00 22.80 27.33 69.22 1.00 16,68 25,44 66,93

Table 3 22.80%. As well-known from the literature (Sarioglu, 2012) that DP

Loss ratio and fill factor values of horizontal shading. shows the difference between maximum power of with and
Horizontal shading - (case II) without shading. Thus, this value increases for each value of
SR (shading ratio) FF (%) DP (W) DP/P (%) shading ratio. The power loss is calculated as 27.33 W for cell and
loss of module reach to 69.22%.
0.00 51.97 0.00 0.00
The Case II, PV panels exposure to horizontal partial shading at
0.25 48.84 14.02 34.53
0.50 26.23 29.67 75.97 different shading ratio. Different shading ratio is applied to system
0.75 11.30 37.74 92.96 as seen from Fig. 3(b). The Current-Voltage measurements are
1.00 0.34 40.60 99.98 taken from the module and I-V and P-V characteristics are obtained
as shown in Fig. 5. As seen from the figure, short circuit current is
decreased with increasing of shading ratio. The main reason of
power loss is to decreasing of current value. Table 4 presents the FF,
DP and DP/P (%) values which are calculated from the values of
Fig. 5. Fill factor (FF) is decreased from 51.97% to 0.34%. The
maximum power of the module is obtained almost zero.
The Case III, PV panels are exposure to vertical partial shading at
different shading ratio. In similar way with Case II, vertical shading
was applied to system and current-voltage and power-voltage
characteristics are obtained in Fig. 6. From these results, power
losses and fill factor values are calculated and presented in Table 5.
Based on this table, fill factor is changed from 51.97% to 16.68%.
As a result, when the I-V and P-V curves of the photovoltaic

Fig. 5. The curves of photovoltaic panels under horizontal shading (a) I-V, (b) P-V.

changes between 960 W/m2 and 972 W/m2. The maximum tem-
perature of the module is measured as 53.31  C while outside
temperature value is 32.4  C.
Fig. 4(a) and (b) show current-voltage and power-voltage vari-
ation for different shading ratio, respectively. In this figure, Isc,Voc,
Im, Vm, and Pm values are calculated from current-voltage charac-
teristics. As seen from the figure, Voc voltage is little decreased with
increasing of shading-ratio. Maximum power is decreased with
increasing of shading ratio. This changing depends on Pm, Im and Vm
values. Table 3 shows FF, DP and DP/P (%) values which are calcu-
lated by using parameters of Fig. 4. As seen from Table 2 fill factor
(FF) is increased with increasing of shading ratio. The value of FF is
calculated for without shading as 52.68% while its value reach to Fig. 6. The curves of photovoltaic panels under vertical shading (a) I-V, (b) P-V.
64 F. Bayrak et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 58e69

Table 5 Vm values. Bypass diodes are completely disabled because the

Uncertainty analysis values connected with the measured values. panels under the horizontal shading are greatly affected by the
Description Unit Total uncertainty (%) electrical parameters. Bypass diodes are activated under partial
Temperatures 
C ±0.776
shading may occur in the cellular array, and allows other directories
Velocity m/s ±0.03 to run in normal conditions. When shading includes all arrays, the
Solar irradiance W/m2 ±0.02 diodes have no meaning and the output power is seriously affected.
Current A ±0.85 Fig. 5 is examined; the first observed current values are reduced to
Power W ±1.52
about 1 A each shading rate. The compared to other types of
Energy efficiency e ±1.29
Exergy efficiency e ±17,54 shading with horizontal shading, further deactivation of the diodes
has resulted in greater power loss.
Attention should be to the shapes and percentage of shadows so
that maximum power can be obtained from the photovoltaic
panels are examined, small decrease of the open-circuit voltage
panels. In addition, each shadow affects the performance of pho-
(Voc) occurs due to the increase of the shading ratio. In addition,
tovoltaics negatively by creating hotspot occurrences.
there has been a critical decrease in maximum power point (Pm)
Fig. 7 shows the variation of energy and exergy efficiencies of
with increasing SR. These reductions are due to reductions in Im and

Fig. 7. Variation of energy and exergy efficiencies of the photovoltaic panels under the shading ratio 25% (a) single-cell (b) vertical (c) horizontal.
 F. Bayrak et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 58e69 65

Fig. 8. Variation of energy and exergy efficiencies of the photovoltaic panels under the shading ratio 50% (a) single-cell (b) vertical (c) horizontal.

the photovoltaic panels under the shading ratio 25% and different
cases. Fig. 7(a) shows no clouding during the day except during
evening hours. The solar radiation varies from a minimum of
430,62 W/m2 to a maximum of 955,87 W/m2. Also, energy and
exergy efficiencies of non-shading PV panel varies from a minimum
of 5,54% and 5,21% to a maximum of 8,06% and 8,03% at between
9:00 to 16:00, respectively. The highest energy and exergy effi-
ciencies were found at 7,28% and 7,13% for shading PV panel. At
12:30 h the ambient temperature is 34.98  C, the surface temper-
ature of the non-shading panel is 46.92  C and the surface tem-
perature of the shading panel is 47.46  C. Fig. 7(b) indicates
comparison between the efficiencies of the non-shading and ver-
tical shading PV panels. The changes in ambient temperature and
wind speed along with the changing solar radiation during the day
have created the fluctuation of exergy efficiencies. As a result of the
highest energy and exergy efficiencies 7,9% and 7,38% for non-
shading, 6,55% and 5,74% for vertical shading. Fig. 7(c) shows the
variation of efficiency values at horizontal shading and non-
shading photovoltaic panels. This type of shading results in the
lowest power generation since all bypass diodes in the panel are
disabled. According to the experimental results, the highest energy
and exergy efficiencies were found for non-shading and horizontal
shading systems of 8,10%e7,83% and 5,3%e4,86%, respectively.
The energy and exergy efficiencies of the photovoltaic panels for
single-cell, vertical and horizontal shading is presented in Fig. 8(a)
to (c) at shading ratio 50%. The compared with Figs. 7(a) and 8(a), a
66 F. Bayrak et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 58e69

Fig. 9. Variation of energy and exergy efficiencies of the photovoltaic panels under the shading ratio 75% (a) single-cell (b) vertical (c) horizontal.

significant decrease in efficiencies values is observed with
increasing shading ratio. The highest ambient temperature on the
day of the experiment is 34.95  C, the panel surface temperature is
47.61  C for a non-shading panel, the panel surface temperature is
50.91  C for Case I (single cell). The highest solar radiation of the
non-shading panel has valued energy and exergy efficiencies of
8.17% and 8.04%. The energy and exergy efficiencies of the Case I at
the highest radiation values are 2.73% and 2.39%. Figs. 7(b) and 8(b)
showed a similar slope and there was no excess loss in the system
with increasing SR. The ambient temperature is between 30 and
34  C throughout the day. The average temperature of the non-
shading panel is 44.42  C and the average temperature of the
Case I is 45.61  C. The compared to Figs. 7(c) and 8(c), the power
generation of the system decreases at a critical level as the SR in-
creases. Decreasing the current and voltage values of the system
has adversely affected the efficiency of the PV module. The
maximum efficiency values of the Case III are 1.96% and 1.47%.
Fig. 9 shows the variation of energy and exergy efficiencies of
the photovoltaic panels under the shading ratio 75% and different
cases. As the SR has increased the output powers have decreased in
all cases, so the efficiency values have decreased considerably. The
most critical decline has been the horizontal shading. In Fig. 9(a)
and (b), the highest energy and exergy efficiency values of shaded
panels are 3.61%e3.04% and 3.97%e3.90%, respectively.
Fig. 10 shows the variation of energy and exergy efficiencies of
the photovoltaic panels under the shading ratio 100% and different
 F. Bayrak et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 58e69 67

Fig. 10. Variation of energy and exergy efficiencies of the photovoltaic panels under the shading ratio per cent (a) single-cell (b) vertical (c) horizontal.

cases. The cases where the shading rate is the highest are
compared. The operation of a cell array on the panel is inhibited
since full cell shading occurs in the cellular shadowing. Since all
cells in the horizontal shadowed cell array are fully shadowed,
minimum power is generated.
5. Exergy effect and sustainability on energy systems
The use of exergy is described as a measure for identifying and
explaining the benefits of sustainable energy and Technologies.
Exergy can be used to assess and improve energy systems, and can
help better understand the benefits of utilizing green energy by
providing more useful and meaningful information than energy
provides. Exergy clearly identifies efficiency improvements and
reductions in thermodynamic losses attributable to more sustain-
able technologies. Exergy can also identify better than energy the
environmental benefits and economics of energy technologies.
Measures to increase energy efficiency can reduce environmental
impact by reducing energy losses. The relationship between the
emissions and sustainable index with increasing of exergy effi-
ciency are given in Fig. 11 (Rosen et al. 2008).
The main purpose of the exergy analysis is to evaluate and
quantify the causes of thermodynamic errors in thermal and
chemical processes as quantities. The benefits of the exergy analysis
for thermal systems are as follows;
68 F. Bayrak et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 58e69
Fig. 11. The relation between the emissions and sustainable index with increasing of
exergy efficiency (Rosen et al., 2008).
 Thermodynamic analysis is a method of evaluating thermody-
namic losses taking into account not only the first law but also
the second law.
 Allows the design and operation of any energy conversion
system.
 It facilitates the analysis of the second law of thermodynamics
and allows interpretation of losses in the system.
 Consideration must be given to exergy for the design of an
efficient solar energy system.
 Exergy for solar energy systems is mainly due to the intensity of
solar radiation.
 The parameters such as current, temperature and time are very
influential on the exergy efficiency of photovoltaic panel.
6. Conclusions
In summary the PV cells are considered a major candidate for
obtaining energy from the sun, due to the fact that it can convert
sunlight directly to electricity with good conversion efficiency. In
this study, effects of partial shading on photovoltaic panels are
analysed by using first and second law of thermodynamics. Also,
the performed experimental tests provide an investigated of
shading effects on the electrical parameters of PV modules.
Different shading ratio and shading positions are applied on a cell
of PV with 75 W. The bypass diodes at the photovoltaic panels are
very important. These diodes allow dividing in several sections
each panel, limiting the productions decrease caused by the
shading cases. The main findings can be drawn from the obtained
results as.
 The power values are decreased with increasing of SR, especially
in the value Im.
 The maximum current loss was achieved by reducing the hori-
zontal shading and 100% SR from 3.31 A to 0.14.
 The most important effect of shading on PV panels can be seen
in case of horizontal shading according to other cases.
 The highest temperature of the ambient and the PV surface are
affected in a negative way both the output power and the effi-
ciencies of the systems.
 Both energy and exergy efficiencies decreases when solar radi-
ation value becomes maximum due to increasing of SR and
temperature. Thus, hot spot situation is occurred as a result of
shading.
 The FF plays an important role in order to know the behaviour of
the exergy efficiency the photovoltaic systems. Also, fill factor
decreases with increasing of SR.
 The maximum energy and exergy efficiencies are obtained 7.28%
and 7,13%, 6,55% and 5,74%, 5.30% and 4,86% for Case I, Case II,
Case III for SR 25%, respectively.
 The highest values of energy and exergy efficiencies for non-
shading panel are found to be 8,19% and 8,05%, respectively.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support pro-
vided by the Firat University Scientific Research Unit (FUBAP) under
the project no. TEKF.16.23.
References
Agrawal, S., Tiwari, G.N., 2011. Energy and exergy analysis of hybrid micro-channel
photovoltaic thermal module. Sol. Energy 85, 356e370.
Agrawal, S., Tiwari, G.N., 2012. Exergoeconomic analysis of glazed hybrid photo-
voltaic thermal module air collector. Sol. Energy 86, 2826e2838.
Akyuz, E., Coskun, C., Oktay, Z., Dincer, I., 2012. A novel approach for estimation of
photovoltaic exergy efficiency. Energy 440, 1059e1066.
Bai, J., Cao, Y., Hao, Y., Zhang, Z., Liu, S., Cao, F., 2015. Characteristic output of PV
systems under partial shading or mismatch conditions. Sol. Energy 112, 41e54.
Belhachat, F., Larbes, C., 2015. Modeling, analysis and comparison of solar photo-
voltaic array configurations under partial shading conditions. Sol. Energy 120,
399e418.
Bidabadi, M., Montazerinejad, S., Fanaee, S.A., 2010. An analytical study of radiation
effect on the ignition of magnesium particles using perturbation theory. Lat.
Am. Appl. Res. 40, 351e357.
Bidabadi, M., Montazerinejad, S., Fanaee, S.A., 2014. The influence of radiation on
the flame propagation through micro organic dust particles with non-unity
Lewis number. J. Energy Inst. 87, 354e356.
Deline, C., Dobos, A., Janzou, S., Meydbray, J., Donovan, M., 2013. A simplified model
of uniform shading in large photovoltaic arrays. Sol. Energy 96, 274e282.
Dolara, A., Lazaroiu, G.C., Leva, S., Manzolini, G., 2013. Experimental investigation of
partial shading scenarios on PV (photovoltaic) modules. Energy 55, 466e475.
Esen, H., 2008. Experimental energy and exergy analysis of a double-flow solar air
heater having different obstacles on absorber plates. Build. Environ. 43,
1046e1054.
Esen, H., Tuna, O., 2015. Investigation of photovoltaic assisted misting system
application for arbor refreshment. Int. J. Photoenergy, 748219. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1155/2015/748219.
Esen, H., Inalli, M., Esen, M., Pihtili, K., 2007. Energy and exergy analysis of a ground-
coupled heat pump system with two horizontal ground heat exchangers. Build.
Environ. 42, 3606e3615.
Esen, H., Kapicioglu, A., Ozsolak, O., 2016. Design and implementation of automatic
wheat mower based on smart sensor fed by a photovoltaic. Int. J. Photoenergy,
5410759. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/5410759.
Fanaee, S.A., 2016. The analytical modeling of finite-length homogonous micro-
combustor for a hydrogen-oxygen mixture with wall temperature effects.
J. Mech. 32, 631e642.
Hepbasli, A., 2008. A key review on exergetic analysis and assessment of renewable
energy resources for a sustainable future. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 12,
593e661.
Holman, J.P., 1994. Experimental Methods for Engineers, sixth ed. McGraw-Hill,
Singapore.
Joshi, A.S., Dincer, I., Reddy, B.V., 2009. Thermodynamic assessment of photovoltaic
systems. Sol. Energy 83, 1139e1149.
Kawamura, H., Naka, K., Yonekura, N., Yamanaka, S., Kawamura, H., Ohno, H.,
Naito, K., 2003. Simulation of I2V characteristics of a PV module with shaded PV
cells. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cell. 75, 613e621.
Kilkis, B., 2012. Exergy metrication of radiant panel heating and cooling with heat
pumps. Energy Convers. Manag. 63, 218e224.
Petela, R., 2008. An approach to the exergy analysis of photosynthesis. Sol. Energy
82, 311e328.
Picault, D., Raison, B., Bacha, S., de la Casa, J., Aguilera, J., 2010. Forecasting photo-
voltaic array power production subject to mismatch losses. Sol. Energy 84,
1301e1309.
Rajoria, C.S., Agrawal, S., Tiwari, G.N., 2012. Overall thermal energy and exergy
analysis of hybrid photovoltaic thermal array. Sol. Energy 86, 1531e1538.
Rodrigo, P., Gutie rrez, S., Velazquez, R., Fern andez, E.F., Almonacid, F., Pe rez-
Higueras, P.J., 2015. A methodology for the electrical characterization of shaded
high concentrator photovoltaic modules. Energy 89, 768e777.
Rosen, M.A., Dincer, I., Kanoglu, M., 2008. Role of exergy in increasing efficiency and
sustainability and reducing environmental impact. Energy Pol. 36128e36137.
Sahin, A.D., Dincer, I., Rosen, M.A., 2007. Thermodynamic analysis of solar photo-
voltaic cell systems. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Energy 91, 153e159.
Sarioglu, G., 2012. Partial Shading on Solar Cells (MsC thesis). Department of
Physics, Mugla University, Turkey (In Turkish).
Schill, C., Brachmann, S., Koehl, M., 2015. Impact of soiling on IV-curves and effi-
ciency of PV-modules. Sol. Energy 112, 259e262.
Shaiek, Y., Smida, M.B., Sakly, A., Mimouni, M.F., 2013. Comparison between
 F. Bayrak et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 58e69
conventional methods and GA approach for maximum power point tracking of
shaded solar PV generators. Sol. Energy 90, 107e122.
Sudhakar, K., Srivastava, T., 2014. Energy and exergy analysis of 36 W solar
photovoltaic module. Int. J. Ambient Energy 35, 51e57.
Tian, H., Mancilla-David, F., Ellis, K., Muljadi, E., Jenkins, P., 2013. Determination of
the optimal configuration for a photovoltaic array depending on the shading
condition. Sol. Energy 95, 1e12.
Varol, Y., Oztop, H.F., 2007. Buoyancy induced heat transfer and fluid flow inside a
tilted wavy solar collector. Build. Environ. 42, 2062e2071.
69
Vijayalekshmy, S., Bindu, G.R., Rama Iyer, S., 2016. A novel Zig-Zag scheme for power
enhancement of partially shaded solar arrays. Sol. Energy 135, 92e102.
Visa, I., Burduhos, B., Neagoe, M., Moldovan, M., Duta, A., 2016. Comparative analysis
of the infield response of five types of photovoltaic modules. Renew. Energy 95,
178e190.
Yadav, A.N., Pachauri, R.K., Chauhan, Y.K., 2016. Comprehensive investigation of PV
arrays with puzzle shade dispersion for improved performance. Sol. Energy 129,
256e285.