Power based Fault Detection Method for PV Arrays

Harrison Iles and Yousef Mahmoud

Electrical and Computer Engineering
Kennesaw State University
Marietta, GA
IECON 2021 - 47th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society | 978-1-6654-3554-3/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/IECON48115.2021.9589163

ymahmoud@kennesaw.edu

Abstract— Faults occurring in solar PV systems could method. Finally, in section VI, the proposed method is
subsequently lead to safety hazards and negatively impact evaluated under various conditions including partial shading,
reliability and system efficiency. While many fault detection incorporating the applicable criteria that follow.
methods exist for fault identification and protection of solar PV
systems, recent studies revealed several shortcomings under II. PV MODEL REVIEW
certain conditions such as partial shading, and low irradiance.
This paper investigates faults in PV systems and conducts A. PV Modeling
pattern analysis for changes in PV systems occurring during PV cells can be represented using the practical circuit
faults. Several quantities are considered such as changes in model consisting of a current source, a diode, and resistors
power, fault current, and voltage under both homogenous and both shunt and series as shown in Fig. 1 [22]. A PV module
partial shading conditions at a variety of fault resistances and can be modeled using this circuit since it consists of many PV
fault locations. The observed patterns are then exploited to cells and therefore one aggregated model can be adopted [23-
develop a simple approach for detecting faults in PV systems 25].
under homogeneous and partial shading conditions. The
proposed approach can also differentiate between the
occurrence of faults and partial shading. The effectiveness of the
method to detect faults has been verified under various
atmospheric and partial shading conditions through
MATLAB/Simulink simulations.

Keywords— fault detection, photovoltaic array, partial

shading, PV ground faults
I. INTRODUCTION
Photovoltaic (PV) systems have become more prevalent in
recent years with the global effort to develop new clean
sources of renewable energy [1-3]. Maximizing the power
output of PV systems and improving their reliability is crucial
to the success of this endeavor and the global widespread use
of solar PV systems [4, 5]. Maximum power point tracking
(MPPT) has been studied extensively to improve power
extraction in PV systems by finding the optimal point at which
power is maximized [6-9].
Similarly, partial shading has significant negative impact
on PV system efficiency and on the reliability of PV systems
[10-12]. The reliability of solar PV systems is mainly affected
by faults occurring in solar PV systems such as ground faults
[13]. They not only reduce the power production of solar PV
systems, but also raise significant safety and fire hazards [14,
15]. While many fault detection techniques are available in the
literature, recent industry reports reveal that many faults could
still go undetected in what is known as “blind-spot” regions
[16, 17]. Unfortunately, undetected faults could lead to power
losses, reliability risks and safety hazards [18-21]. To
overcome these challenges and avoid dangerous hazards,
better fault detection methods are being researched and
developed.
This paper is organized as follows: Section II reviews PV
modeling and simulation used in this paper. In Section III, the
PV system’s behavior under both homogenous and partially
shaded conditions is scrutinized and analyzed. Next, the effect
of fault and cable resistances are considered in the analysis in
Section IV. Section V examines the proposed fault detection
Fig. 1. The Practical Circuit Model of a PV Cell
The relationship between the terminal voltage V and the
output current I of a PV circuit model of a PV module is
represented in (1) where the variables and the constants
appearing in the equations are defined in Table I [15, 26, 27].
= − −1 − (1)
First, confirm that you have the correct template for your
paper size. This template has been tailored for output on the
A4 paper size. If you are using US letter-sized paper, please
close this file and download the Microsoft Word, Letter file.
B. Simulation of PV Arrays
The practical PV model was utilized in this study to
construct a PV array using MATLAB/Simulink. The
parameters of the PV module used are summarized in Table 1.
The modeled array consists of five parallel strings where each
string consists of ten series connected PV modules.
TABLE 1. The Parameters of a solar PV module
Parameters Description
I The operating current
Iph The Photon Current
I0 Short circuit current
V The operating voltage
K Boltzmann constant (1.38×10-23)
q Charge of an electron (1.6×10-19)
Rs Series resistance
Rsh Shunt resistance

XXX-X-XXXX-XXXX-X/XX/$XX.00 ©20XX IEEE

 Fig. 3. Partial shading scenarios diagram

were varied and their effects on the system voltage, system

Fig. 2 Fault Location Diagram
The array was simulated under various homogenous,
partial shading and fault conditions. The simulations included
various fault locations within the array as shown in Fig. 2.
Partial shading was also considered in this study using the
scenarios shown in Fig. 3. It includes fourteen partial shading
scenarios. The shading is represented by a low irradiance of
100 W/m2 while the unshaded PV modules have full
irradiance level of 1000 W/m2. Various numbers of shaded
modules per string were considered: one PV module, four PV
power and fault current before and after faults are recorded.
The irradiance variation effect on the behavior of PV
systems during faults is illustrated in Fig. 4. The change in
power following the occurrence of faults is shown in Fig. 4(a)
which represents the irradiance variation vs the change in
power of the panel before and after various faults. As noticed,
increases in irradiance positively affect the change in power at
all the possible fault locations. It is also noticed that the closer
the fault location to the top of the PV array, the higher change
in power is produced. For example, fault location 1 as seen in
Fig. 2 represents the nine panels faulted which significantly
decreases the total output power and the change in power of
the system.
The change in voltage due to faults at a range of
irradiances is shown in Fig. 4(b) which represents the
irradiance vs the difference in voltage before and after faults.
As it can be seen, the change in voltage of the PV array
remains almost steady with irradiance increase at various fault
locations. Moreover, as the number of faulted panels
increases, the change in voltage decreases by a step equal to
the MPP voltage of a PV module which is 30 V in this case.
The fault current drawn at the fault location is also
investigated and its variation with irradiance is depicted in
Fig. 4(c). As illustrated, fault currents grow with irradiance
increase almost exponentially.
Change in Power (Watts)

modules and complete 10 PV modules. This is also repeated 10000

Fault Location 1
to consider different number of PV stings: one PV string, two Fault Location 2
Fault Location 3
strings, until the complete five strings are simulated. Fault Location 4
5000 Fault Location 5
TABLE 2. Specifications of each PV Module under Study Fault Location 6
Fault Location 7
Parameters Values Fault Location 8
0 Fault Location 9
Maximum power 213.15 W 200 400 600 800 1000
Irradiance (W/M 2)
Short-circuit current 7.84 A
Open-circuit voltage 36.3 V (a)
Change in Voltage (V)

Current at maximum power point 7.35 A 300

Fault Location 1
Fault Location 2
Voltage at maximum power point 29 V 200 Fault Location 3
Fault Location 4
Fault Location 5
III. PV SYSTEM BEHAVIOR UNDER FAULTS 100 Fault
Fault
Location
Location
6
7
Fault Location 8
A. Homogenous Conditions 0
200 400 600 800 1000
Fault Location 9

The developed models described earlier are used in this Irradiance (W/M 2)
section to analyze the behavior of homogenous PV system
under faults. The irradiance, temperature and fault location (b)
 4
Fault Current (Amps)

Fault Location 1
Fault Location 2
3
Fault Location 3
Partial Shading

Change in Power (W)

Fault Location 4
2 Fault Location 5 8000
1
Fault Location 6 1 Panel Shaded
Fault Location 7
Fault Location 8 2 Panels Shaded
0 Fault Location 9
6000
0 500 1000 3 Panels Shaded
Irradiance (W/M 2) 4000 4 Panels Shaded
5 Panels Shaded
(c) 2000

Fig. 4 The effect of irradiance change in homogeneous PV systems on a) 2 4 6 8

power, b) voltage, and c) fault current Fault Location
The temperature effect on PV systems under variety of
fault locations is illustrated in Fig. 5. The change in power (a)
caused by fault occurrence at various temperatures is shown Partial Shading

Change in Power (W)

in Fig. 5(a). As indicated, the change in power caused by faults 4 Panels Shaded
decreases with temperature increase. This could be attributed 4000 8 Panels Shaded
to the negative effect of temperature on power production in 12 Panels Shaded
2000
16 Panels Shaded
PV systems. It also revealed that the larger number of faulted 0 20 Panels Shaded
panels, the larger the change in power after fault occurrence.
-2000
The effect of temperature on voltage change during faults -4000
is illustrated in Fig. 5. As shown, temperature has a negative 2 4 6 8
impact on voltage change and the voltage change decreases Fault Location
with a temperature increase. (b)
Change in Power (Watts)

10000 Partial Shading

Change in Power (W)

Fault Location 1 6000

Fault Location 2 10 Panels Shaded
Fault Location 3 20 Panels Shaded
Fault Location 4 4000 30 Panels Shaded
5000 Fault Location 5 40 Panels Shaded
Fault Location 6 50 Panels Shaded
2000
Fault Location 7
Fault Location 8
Fault Location 9
0 2 4 6 8
0 20 40 60
Fault Location
Temperature (C°)
(c)
(a)
Fig. 6 Partial shading fault location vs change in power
300
Change in Voltage (V)

Fault Location 1 The change in voltage relation with fault locations under
250 Fault Location 2
Fault Location 3
partial shading is illustrated in Fig. 7. As seen, the relation is
200 straightforward where the change in voltage always decreases
Fault Location 4
150 Fault Location 5 when the number of panels faulted decrease. This is because
100 Fault Location 6 shorting the PV modules produced by faults reduces the
Fault Location 7
50 Fault Location 8
number of active PV modules which result in voltage
Fault Location 9 reduction. Moreover, it can be observed that partial shading
0 20 40 60 has slight impact on voltage change.
Temperature (C°) Partial Shading
Change in Voltage (V)

(b) 1 Panel Shaded

150 2 Panels Shaded
3 Panels Shaded
Fig. 5 Homogenous temperature vs a) change in power, b) change in voltage 100 4 Panels Shaded
5 Panels Shaded
B. Partially Shaded Conditions 50

The various partial shading scenarios described in Fig. 3 0

are utilized in this subsection to study the effect of partial 2 4 6 8
shading on the behavior of PV systems under various fault Fault Location
(a)
locations. The effect of partial shading on power change Partial Shading
Change in Voltage (V)

during faults is illustrated in Fig. 6. Fig. 6(a) considers only 200

one shaded PV module per string including one string to all 10 Panels Shaded
five strings, while Fig. 6(b) and Fig. 6(c) similarly consider 20 Panels Shaded
four and ten shaded PV modules, respectively. As noticed, the 100 30 Panels Shaded
40 Panels Shaded
lower number of faulted panels, the less change in power 50 Panels Shaded
except for some cases shown in Fig. 6(b) where power
0
increases back with lesser faulted panels. This can be 2 4 6 8
attributed to the appearance of multiple MPP which could trap Fault Location
the MPPT operation in a local power peak. (b)
 Partial Shading (b)
Change in Voltage (V)

4 Panels Shaded
200 8 Panels Shaded 8-Ohm

Fault Current (Amps)

12 Panels Shaded Fault Location 1
16 Panels Shaded 15 Fault Location 2
100 20 Panels Shaded Fault Location 3
10 Fault Location 4
Fault Location 5
0 5 Fault Location 6
2 4 6 8
Fault Location 7
Fault Location 0 Fault Location 8
(c) 200 400 600 800 1000 Fault Location 9
Fig. 7 Partial shading fault location vs change in voltage
Irradiance (W/M 2) 0.5 Amps

IV. EFFECT OF FAULT RESISTANCE (c)

A. Lower fault resistance Fig. 8 Homogenous 8-ohm irradiance vs a) change in power, b) change in
Although faults ideally are connected to ground solidly, voltage, c) fault current
most faults found in reality are connected to grounds through
some resistance. The value of fault resistance affects the V. PROPOSED FAULT DETECTION METHOD
behavior of PV systems under faults and therefore it is crucial Some of the previous observations are utilized in this
to investigate its effect. This subsection considers lower value section to develop an algorithm for fault detection. A
of fault resistance, which is equal to 8 Ω; a typical value found flowchart of the algorithm is depicted in Fig. 11.
in practical systems [5].
33-Ohm
The effect of irradiance change on power, voltage, and
Change in Power
Fault Location 1
fault current at various fault locations under lower value of 2000 Fault Location 2
fault resistance is depicted in Fig. 8. Fig. 8(a) shows that the Fault Location 3
Fault Location 4
change in power increases with irradiance increase similar to 1000 Fault Location 5
solid ground faults. However, this relationship is not as linear Fault Location 6
as in the case of solid faults as seen in the figure. The reduction Fault Location 7
0 Fault Location 8
in power change can be attributed to the voltage developed 200 400 600 800 Fault Location 9
across fault resistance which avoid shorting out faulted PV Irradiance (W/M 2)
arrays.
(a)
B. Higher fault resistance
Change in Voltage (Volts

The analysis is repeated in this subsection to consider a 33-Ohm

200
higher value of fault resistance which is equal to 33 Ω to Fault Location 1
Fault Location 2
include additional fault resistance and cable resistance.
Fault Location 3
As seen in Fig. 9(a), the change in power is much less than 100 Fault Location 4
Fault Location 5
the previous cases. Similarly, the change in voltage declines Fault Location 6
rapidly when compared to 8-ohm resistance and no resistance Fault Location 7
cases as seen in Fig. 9(b). However, it was noted an increase 0 Fault Location 8
200 400 600 800 1000
in fault current with higher value of fault resistance as Fault Location 9
observed in Fig. 9(c). Irradiance (W/M 2)
(b)
8-Ohm
8000
Fault Location 1 33-Ohm
Power (Watts)

Fault Current (Amps)

6000 Fault Location 2 8

Fault Location 3 Fault Location 1
4000 Fault Location 4 6 Fault Location 2
Fault Location 5 Fault Location 3
2000 Fault Location 6 4 Fault Location 4
Fault Location 7 Fault Location 5
0 Fault Location 8 2 Fault Location 6
200 400 600 800 1000 Fault Location 9 Fault Location 7
0 Fault Location 8
Irradiance (W/M 2) 200 400 600 800 1000 Fault Location 9
(a) Irradiance (W/M 2) 0.5 Amps

(c)
8-Ohm
Change in Voltage

Fault Location 1 Fig. 9 Homogenous 33-ohm irradiance vs a) change in power, b) change in

200 Fault Location 2 voltage c) fault current
Fault Location 3
Fault Location 4 The method starts by initiating a variable Temp to zero and
100 Fault Location 5
Fault Location 6 measuring the output power of the system. Then the difference
Fault Location 7 between the previous powers − 3 and − 2 is
0 Fault Location 8 calculated and compared to threshold power !"# $%& . When
200 400 600 800 1000 Fault Location 9
the difference exceeds the threshold, the previous power
Irradiance(W/M 2) − 3 will be stored in the variable Temp. The fault will be
detected if the value of the variable Temp is less or equal than Algorithm Output vs Time
the current power P. 1

Algorithm Output
0.8
This allows the system to analyze past values and compare
them to determine if a drop in power has occurred. The 0.6
algorithm works by detecting a rapid change in power greater 0.4
than the threshold value which is equal to 80 W in the system
0.2
under study. This value was chosen to work for this model
based on the homogenous change in power data collected and 0
because the MPPT will never adjust the power more than 40W 0 20 40 60 80 100
and therefore guarantees for this model that a fault has Time (Seconds)
occurred. (a)

If the fault eventually is cleared, the power should at some Power vs Time
point go back to the value of the highest point before the fault 12000
occurrence. When this occurs the output value of 1 is then

Power (Watts)
reset back to 0 and therefore another notable mention is that 10000
when it resets the output value back to 0 it also resets the temp
8000
value back to 0. This ensures that over time as the panel
degrades that the maximum power it needs to reach in order
6000
to reset the value stays up to date with the current total system
output. 4000
0 20 40 60 80 100
VI. VERIFICATION OF PROPOSED METHOD Time (Seconds)
The PV system shown in Fig. 2 is used for the verification (b)
in this section under homogenous condition under an Fig. 11 Fault detection homogenous scenario
irradiance of 1000 W/m2 and temperature of 25° C.
First, a fault occurs at location 7 which covers three panels
in the system. The output power of the array after fault is
plotted in Fig. 11(a). As shown, the fault occurs at 30 s and is
detected by the developed algorithm as shown in Fig. 11(b).

Power vs Time
1000
Power (Watts)

800

600

400
0 20 40 60 80 100
Time (Seconds)
(a)

Algorithm Output vs Time

1
Algorithm Output

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Fig. 10 Fault detection algorithm flowchart Time (Seconds)
(b)
Fig. 12 Fault detection homogenous scenario

An additional test at an irradiance of 100 W/m2 and

temperature of 50°C was conducted at Fig. 12. The fault
occurs at 30 seconds at fault location 8 and the algorithm
detects the fault as expected and displays 1 at 30 seconds.
 10
5 Power vs Time [7] A. Sen, S. Pradhan, and A. Kumar, "A Novel Curve Scanning Based
0.5
Maximum Power Point Tracking Algorithm Under Partial Shading
0 Conditions," in 2020 IEEE First International Conference on Smart
Technologies for Power, Energy and Control (STPEC), 2020, pp. 1-6.
Power (Watts)
-0.5
[8] Y. Mahmoud, "A Model-based MPPT with Improved Tracking
-1 Accuracy," in IECON 2018 - 44th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial
-1.5
Electronics Society, 2018, pp. 1609-1612.
[9] M. K. Al-Smadi, Y. Hu, and Y. Mahmoud, "LQR-based PID Voltage
-2
Controller for Photovoltaic Systems," in IECON 2018 - 44th Annual
-2.5 Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, 2018, pp. 1854-1859.
0 20 40 60 80 100
[10] V. Quaschning and R. Hanitsch, "Numerical simulation of current-
Time (Seconds) voltage characteristics of photovoltaic systems with shaded solar cells,"
(a) Solar Energy, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 513-520, 1996/06/01/ 1996.
[11] F. Salem and M. A. Awadallah, "Detection and assessment of partial
Algorithm Output vs Time shading in photovoltaic arrays," Journal of Electrical Systems and
1 Information Technology, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 23-32, 2016/05/01/ 2016.
[12] A. Ostadrahimi and Y. Mahmoud, "Novel Spline-MPPT Technique for
Algorithm Output

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 20 40 60 80
Time (Seconds)
(b)
Fig. 13 Fault detection homogenous scenario
Finally, a test shown in Fig. 13 at an irradiance of 500
W/m2 and a temperature of 0°C was used to verify the
proposed algorithm. The fault occurs at fault location 1
covering 9 panels. The algorithm detects the fault as expected
and displays 1 at the 30 second’s mark.
VII. CONCLUSION
The objective of this paper is to conduct comprehensive
analysis for the operation of solar PV systems under faults at
homogenous and partial shading conditions. Moreover, the
homogenous change in power data obtained was used to
develop an algorithm for detecting faults in solar PV systems.
All data collected and presented may be relevant for the future
development of fault detection methods. Future work will be
needed to extend the proposed method to operate under partial
shading conditions.
REFERENCES
[1] Z. Alqaisi and Y. Mahmoud, "Comprehensive Study of Partially Shaded
PV Modules With Overlapping Diodes," IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 172665-
172675, 2019.
[2] A. Ostadrahimi and Y. Mahmoud, "Curve Computation MPPT Method
Based on Simple Modeling of the Photovoltaic Modules," in 2020
International Conference on Smart Grids and Energy Systems (SGES), 2020,
pp. 819-825.
[3] Y. Mahmoud, "A Simple Approach to Parameterize Gompertz
Photovoltaic Model," in 2020 International Conference on Smart Grids and
Energy Systems (SGES), 2020, pp. 757-760.
[4] M. K. Al-Smadi and Y. Mahmoud, "Analysis of Photovoltaic Systems
Power Losses in Partial Shading Conditions," in IECON 2018 - 44th Annual
Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, 2018, pp. 1699-1704.
[5] M. K. Al-Smadi and Y. Mahmoud, "Photovoltaic module cascaded
converters for distributed maximum power point tracking: a review," IET
Renewable Power Generation, vol. 14, no. 14, pp. 2551-2562
[6] M. A.-. Emam, M. I. Marei, and W. El-khattam, "A Maximum Power
Point Tracking Technique for PV Under Partial Shading Condition," in 2018
8th IEEE India International Conference on Power Electronics (IICPE),
2018, pp. 1-6.
Photovoltaic Systems under Uniform Irradiance and Partial Shading
Conditions," IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, pp. 1-1, 2020.
[13] I. U. Khalil et al., "Comparative Analysis of Photovoltaic Faults and
Performance Evaluation of its Detection Techniques," IEEE Access, vol. 8,
pp. 26676-26700, 2020.
[14] M. K. Al-Smadi and Y. Mahmoud, "Image-Based Differential Power
Processing for Photovoltaic Microinverter," IEEE Transactions on Energy
100
Conversion, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 619-628, 2021.
[15] Z. Alqaisi and Y. Mahmoud, "A Study of Partially-Shaded PV Modules
with Overlapping Diodes," in 2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and
Exposition (ECCE), 2019, pp. 3388-3393.
[16] B. Brooks, "The Ground-Fault Protection BLIND SPOT: A Safety
Concern for Larger Photovoltaic Systems in the United States," Solar
America Board for Codes and StandardsJanuary 2012, Available:
[17] Y. Zhao, B. Lehman, J. d. Palma, J. Mosesian, and R. Lyons,
"Challenges of overcurrent protection devices in photovoltaic arrays brought
by maximum power point tracker," in 2011 37th IEEE Photovoltaic
Specialists Conference, 2011, pp. 002472-002477.
[18] R. Hariharan, M. Chakkarapani, G. S. Ilango, and C. Nagamani, "A
Method to Detect Photovoltaic Array Faults and Partial Shading in PV
Systems," IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 1278-1285, 2016.
[19] S. Sarikh, M. Raoufi, A. Bennouna, A. Benlarabi, and B. Ikken, "Fault
diagnosis in a photovoltaic system through I-V characteristics analysis," in
2018 9th International Renewable Energy Congress (IREC), 2018, pp. 1-6.
[20] Y. Zhao, B. Lehman, J. DePalma, J. Mosesian, and R. Lyons, "Fault
evolution in photovoltaic array during night-to-day transition," in 2010 IEEE
12th Workshop on Control and Modeling for Power Electronics (COMPEL),
2010, pp. 1-6.
[21] Y. Zhao, B. Lehman, J. d. Palma, J. Mosesian, and R. Lyons, "Fault
analysis in solar PV arrays under: Low irradiance conditions and reverse
connections," in 2011 37th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, 2011,
pp. 002000-002005.
[22] S. Laamami, M. Benhamed, and L. Sbita, "Analysis of shading effects
on a photovoltaic array," in 2017 International Conference on Green Energy
Conversion Systems (GECS), 2017, pp. 1-5.
[23] S. S. Kumar and A. I. Selvakumar, "Detection of the faults in the
photovoltaic array under normal and partial shading conditions," in 2017
Innovations in Power and Advanced Computing Technologies (i-PACT),
2017, pp. 1-5.
[24] Y. Mahmoud and W. Xiao, "Evaluation of Shunt Model for Simulating
Photovoltaic Modules," IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics, vol. 8, no. 6, pp.
1818-1823, 2018.
[25] Y. Mahmoud and A. Ulhaq, "Computational time quantification of the
single diode PV models," in 2017 8th International Renewable Energy
Congress (IREC), 2017, pp. 1-5.
[26] M. K. Al-Smadi and Y. Mahmoud, "Comparative Analysis of Partial
Shading Power Losses in Photovoltaic Topologies," in 2019 International
Conference on Clean Electrical Power (ICCEP), 2019, pp. 699-704.
[27] Y. Mahmoud and Z. Alqaisi, "Rule Based Model for Power Peaks of
Overlapped PV Arrays," IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 12,
no. 2, pp. 1426-1438, 2021.