Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

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

Comparative analysis of two-step GA-based PV array reconfiguration

technique and other reconfiguration techniques
Aidha Muhammad Ajmal a, *, Vigna K. Ramachandaramurthy a, Amirreza Naderipour b,
Janaka B. Ekanayake c
a
Institute of Power Engineering, Department of Electrical Power Engineering, College of Engineering, Universiti Tenaga National, Jalan IKRAM-UNITEN, 43000 Kajang,
Selangor, Malaysia
b
Institute of High Voltage & High Current, School of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Skudai, Johor, Malaysia
c
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Peradeniya, Galaha Rd, 20400, Sri Lanka

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Photovoltaic (PV) plants can be exposed to partial shading, which reduces the energy production and causes
Photovoltaic multi-peaks to form in the Power-Voltage (P-V) curve. As a result, the row currents of the PV modules will not be
Array reconfiguration constant. Several techniques have been proposed to overcome partial shading, such as the static and dynamic
Genetic algorithm
reconfiguration techniques, with both aiming to reduce the difference in the row currents to improve energy
Optimization
production. Minimization of the row current via static techniques requires laborious work and extra wiring. On
the other hand, dynamic techniques require an extensive monitoring system to support different tasks. Therefore,
to improve the power generated from the PV array, this paper suggests a new reconfiguration technique for PV
panels using Genetic algorithm (GA) and two main reconfigurable steps based on a switching matrix. In this
technique, only the electrical connections of the PV panels are changed while its physical location remains
unchanged. To verify the effectiveness of the proposed reconfiguration technique, the system was simulated and
tested using MATLAB/SIMULINK software, with four shading patterns. The results were compared with other
reconfiguration techniques, namely TCT configuration, competence square (CS), SuDoKu, two-phase array
reconfiguration, Genetic algorithm (GA), Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), and Modified Harris Hawks
Optimization (MHHO). The performance of each shading case was also analyzed. Also, a comparative study on
performance analysis in real-time application was carried out for each shading pattern. The results prove the
superiority of the proposed technique over other techniques for overcoming partial shading.

damage the panels [2]. A bypass diode is linked across each PV panel to
overcome the hotspot issue. However, adding the bypass diode reduces
1. Introduction
the capacity of generated power and the overall efficiency of PV plants
[3]. Partial shading losses for long series and parallel strings were
Renewable energy plays an important role in the development of
studied in [4]. The outcomes of this study show that the long series of PV
global energy sources. Photovoltaic (PV) energy is one of the most
panels and parallel connections of strings through a single inverter to the
important sources of renewable energy due to its availability and envi­
electrical grid should be reduced to mitigate the shading losses. Various
ronmentally friendly properties. However, there are challenges to
PV array schemes have been suggested to boost the energy generated
obtaining this green energy, for example, PV panels receive non-uniform
under shading conditions [5] including series (S), parallel (P), Series-
radiation due to changing environmental conditions and have non-
Parallel (SP), Total-Cross-Tie (TCT), Bridge-Link (BL), and Honey-
linear characteristics. This phenomenon (non-uniform radiation) is
Comb (HC) schemes. Most studies prefer the TCT configuration
known as partial shading and is known to reduce the performance of a
because it can produce higher energy under shading conditions when
solar cell system [1]. Partial shading causes multi-peaks to generate on
compared to the SP, BL, and HC configurations [6]. Different PV array
the Power-Voltage (P-V) curve and Current-Voltage (I-V) curve. Addi­
configuration schemes with and without bypass diode were presented in
tionally, the less irradiated PV modules will act as a load, thus raising the
[7] to decrease the power loss under shading conditions. The results of
temperature inside the PV panel, leading to hotspots that can potentially

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: aida_khan_1@yahoo.com (A. Muhammad Ajmal).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113806
Received 22 August 2020; Received in revised form 22 August 2020; Accepted 27 December 2020
Available online 9 January 2021
0196-8904/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al.
Nomenclature
A Ideality factor
IPV PV module current (A)
Iirr Irradiation current (A)
ID Current through the diode (A)
I0 Saturated current
Ip Current across the parallel resistance (A)
IRn Row current of PV array
Iout Output current of PV array (A)
ISC Short circuit current (A)
VPV Output voltage of PV cell (V)
Vth Thermal voltage
Vout Output voltage of PV array (V)
Vmi PV module voltage at ith row
VOC Open circuit voltage (V)
Kb Boltzmann’s constant (1.38e− 23 J/K)
q Charge of electron (1.6e− 19 column)
this study show that the power losses due to shade are based on the
changes in the irradiation levels over the PV modules. In [8] different
configurations (S, SP, TCT, BL and HC) were studied and compared in
terms of maximum power and fill factor. The TCT configuration has
maximum power compared to other configurations under the same
conditions of partial shading. In addition, there is no extra cost for TCT-
connected of large scale PV array. However, TCT configuration cannot
provide an optimal solution for dispersing regular shading. Hence, re­
searchers have proposed other techniques for PV panel rearrangement to
enhance the generated power and mitigate the effects of partial shading.
The reconfiguration techniques are a) static or physical, b) dynamic or
electric array reconfiguration (EAR). Both techniques focus on
dispersing the shading on the PV array by maintaining equal row cur­
rents by exploiting all PV panels.
Static reconfiguration techniques disperse the shading by altering
the physical location of the shaded PV panels without changing the
electrical connection [9]. The SuDoKu puzzle technique [10] is the most
popular static reconfiguration technique, and it is effective at dispersing
the shading. The main disadvantage of this technique is that long wires
are needed to alter the position of the shaded panels, thus making it
more difficult to apply. Optimal SuDoKu [11] and improved SuDoKu
[12] have been proposed to solve the limitation of the SuDoKu puzzle
technique. In [13] Arrow-SuDoKu (AS) puzzle technique was suggested
to mitigate the shading effect over 6 × 6 TCT connected PV, to enhance
the generated power from the PV array. The AS technique generates
higher power compared with the SP, TCT, TCT-SP, BL, BL-TCT HC and
HC-TCT configurations under shading conditions. In [14] the authors
implemented a novel fixed reconfiguration technique based on
skyscraper technique to overcome the limitations in [13]. This tech­
nique requires fewer wires to reconfigure the shaded PV panels, unlike
the proposed technique in [13]. Thus, increase in produced power is
observed during shading conditions. Recently, several static techniques
have been proposed, such as Dominant Square (DS) and Competence
Square (CS) in [15] and [16] to rearrange a 9 × 9 TCT connected PV
array. The CS technique gave a higher efficiency over DS, SuDoKu, and
TCT schemes under shading conditions. In [17] the Magic square (MS)
technique was proposed for a TCT configuration to reduce shading los­
ses. The main outcomes confirm that the MS configuration is a more
suitable technique for reconfiguring the PV array to reduce shading
losses and improve the generated power during shading conditions.
Similarly in [18,19] authors presented the MS technique to reconfigure
4 × 4 and 6 × 6 TCT connected of PV array respectively. The results
show that the MS technique dispersed the shade effectively and produce
a higher power compared with the TCT configuration during shading
2
Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806
kSC-T The SC temperature coefficient
G0 Solar irradiation under STC (25 ◦ C and 1000 W/m2)
Gn PV module irradiation level in (W/m2)
Rs Series resistance
Rp Parallel resistance
T Temperature (◦ C)
T0 Temperature under STC (25 ◦ C and 1000 W/m2)
i Number of rows
j Number of columns
EI Equalization irradiation
Ns-TCT Number of the switches for TCT configuration
Pmismatch-loss Mismatch power loss
ΔPloss Power loss
P_MTP Power at maximum point tracking
P_GMP Power at global maximum point
FF Fill Factor
%PE Percentage power enhancement
conditions. However, this technique is not suitable for large-scale PV
arrays. A novel Magic-Square (MS) puzzle technique was presented in
[20] to rearrange the shaded PV panels, thus increasing the energy yield
from the PV array under shading conditions. The novel magic square
technique shows higher performance than TCT and SuDoKu configura­
tions under long and wide shading pattern. In [21] authors suggested an
odd-even technique to disperse the shading over PV array, thus
increasing the generated power from the PV array. The odd-even tech­
nique generates a higher power compared with the TCT configurations
under shading conditions. Similarly in [22] a novel odd-even reconfi­
guration technique was presented to reduce the effect of partial shading
over 6 × 4 TCT connected PV array. In this technique, the reconfigu­
ration process is done by placing the panels that hold odd digits together
and panels that hold even digits together. The results of the novel odd-
even technique show a higher efficiency than TCT, SP-TCT, BL-TCT and
BL-HC configurations under shading conditions. In [23] authors pro­
posed a static Shade-Dispersion-Positioning (SDP) technique to mitigate
the shading effects. Based on repositioning, the shaded PV panels
disperse the shade throughout the PV array. Two-phase array reconfi­
gurations were presented in [24] to reconfigure 9 × 9 and 18 × 18 TCT
connected PV arrays. Although the results of the two-phase techniques
show a higher efficiency than TCT, SuDoKu, and particle swarm opti­
mization (PSO) under shading conditions, the methods require complex
wiring between the PV panels, which leads to increased power loss and
system cost. A Non-Symmetrical (NS) PV array reconfiguration was
recommended by another study [25] using a 5 × 4 TCT-connected PV
array. The non-symmetrical PV array reconfiguration increased the PV
power generated and reduced shading losses compared to SP, TCT, BL,
HC, SP-TCT and BL-TCT configurations. The novel Zig-Zag reconfigu­
ration technique or a novel TCT (N-TCT) configuration is another
example of a static method. This technique is based on altering the
physical location of PV modules without changing in electrical
connection. The authors in [26] suggested the Zig-Zag reconfiguration
for a 4 × 3 TCT-connected of PV array. The outcomes of this technique
generates higher power than the TCT configuration.
Electric Array Reconfiguration (EAR) is a method to disperse the
shade over PV arrays, by rearranging the shaded PV panels electrically
without changing the physical location of the array. This technique uses
a fast switching matrix [27]. A Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC) and a
Neuro-Fuzzy Inference (NFI) method have been respectively suggested
to enhance the Maximum-Power-Point (MPP) of the P-V curve during
shading conditions in [28] and [29]. The Rough Set Theory was pro­
posed in [30] to reconfigure SP, TCT, BL, and HC connected PV array
dynamically. In [31] the authors discussed the Munkres optimization
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al.
Fig. 1. (a) Equivalent circuit of PV cell (b) PV cell, (c) PV module, (d) PV array.
algorithm, based on the irradiation equalization (IE) technique, which
rises the processing speed to find the optimum reconfiguration of a PV
array under non-uniform radiation conditions. A scanning technique
was established in [32] based on the Current-Variation-Index (CVI)
using the current row algorithm to find the best PV array rearrangement.
In [33] a greedy algorithm controller was implemented for dynamic
reconfiguration using a switching matrix to find the optimal reconfi­
guration of a PV array with less computational time and reduced number
of iterations. An auto reconfiguration technique to reconfigure 3 × 3 SP
and TCT connected PV array during shading conditions was imple­
mented in [34]. In this technique, the authors used Arduino based relay
circuit operation control scheme to rearrange the shaded PV panels
electrically. In [35] a new dynamic reconfiguration technique was pre­
sented to reconfigure 6 × 6 TCT connected PV array by using a switching
controller between the fixed part and adaptive part. A novel dynamic PV
array reconfiguration was implemented in [36] based on optimization
algorithm to reconfigure the shaded PV panels, to improve the output
power from the PV array. A Power Comparison Technique (PCT) was
proposed in [37] to reconfigure SP and TCT connected PV array under
shading conditions and enhances the power produced. Half-
reconfigurable and full-reconfigurable PV arrays were employed in
[38] to reduce the irradiance mismatch index (IMI) and develop an
optimal TCT reconfiguration for the PV array. Double-pole m-throw
switches were used to interchange the connections between the PV
panels. In the half-reconfigurable PV array, the first and third columns
are fixed, while the second and fourth columns are reconfigured; thus,
the shading is not fully dispersed over the PV array. A new real-time
reconfiguration technique was presented in [39] the controller of this
technique is based on an artificial neural network to find the optimal
reconfiguration for 3 × 4 PV array during shading conditions. In this
technique, the optimal reconfiguration of the PV array was achieved by
connecting the adaptive part of the PV panels with the greatest irradi­
ation to the fixed part. The experimental outcomes of this technique
dispersed the shade over the PV array by reconfiguring the shaded
modules of the PV array thus improved the generated power of the PV
array. In [40] the authors used the bubble sort and model-based algo­
rithm to control the switching matrix. In this technique, the switching
matrix is applied between the adaptive part of the PV modules and the
fixed part to find the optimal PV array reconfiguration that would
improve power generation for SP and TCT-connected PV array.
The EAR techniques face different problems, including the require­
ment for a comprehensive monitoring system that supports different
tasks, for example determining the shade position and alerting the sig­
nals received between the switching matrix and the PV panels. All these
lead to an increase in the system cost. Besides, EAR techniques require
numerous switching patterns to find the best solution for reconfiguring a
PV array.
Optimization algorithms have been suggested to overcome the issues
3
Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806
faced by EAR, such as the Genetic Algorithm (GA) [41] Particle Swarm
Optimizer (PSO) [42] and the Grasshopper Algorithm (GOA) [43]. These
methods have been shown to disperse the shading of a 9 × 9 TCT
configuration. These are simple algorithms and they reduce the time of
optimization the find the best solution of a PV array reconfiguration
during shading situations. In [44] the Harris-Hawks-Optimization
(HHO) and the Modified Harris Hawks Optimization (MHHO) algo­
rithm were applied to a 9 × 9 and 6 × 20 TCT configuration to mitigate
the shading effects over the PV array. The HHO and MHHO algorithms
were compared with TCT, CS, PSO, and GA, with the results showing the
MHHO algorithm generating more power under shading conditions.
Besides, the algorithm also yielded better PV array performance
compared to TCT, CS and PSO. The MHHO results of the generated
power were the same as that of GA. However, using the MHHO algo­
rithm, the optimal solution was obtained faster than the GA, and with
fewer iterations. In [45] A Grey Wolf Optimizer (GWO) was proposed to
reconfigure the series and SP connected PV array during shading con­
ditions. GWO requires fewer controlling parameters and generates
higher power compared with the PSO under shading conditions. A
Butterfly Optimization Algorithm (BOA) was implemented in [46] to
disperse the shade over PV array. The BOA is easy to implement and
needs fewer controlling parameters. The outcome of BOA shows a higher
performance than SP, TCT and GWO configurations under shading
condition. Gravitational Search Algorithm (GSA) was suggested in [47]
to find the optimal reconfiguration for 6 × 4 TCT connected of PV array
with the aim of decreasing the partial shading losses. This algorithm is
based on minimizing the mismatch index of irradiation levels. The GSA
method produced more power compared with the TCT configuration
under shading conditions.
From the different studies on static and dynamic PV array reconfi­
guration technique, it can be confirmed that the dynamic techniques are
more effective. Nevertheless, one of the main problems is the application
of these reconfiguration techniques in large PV farms. To effectively deal
with the various issues of reconfiguration, this paper suggests a new
dynamic reconfiguration technique using GA optimization. The new
dynamic reconfiguration technique is proposed to disperse the shading
on a (9 × 9) PV array. The proposed reconfiguration technique is carried
out in two reconfigurable steps based on equalization irradiation (EI). In
the first step, the panels are reconfigured by switching specific switches
in the panels. In the second step, GA is applied to optimize the output by
rearranging the columns in the PV array. The proposed reconfiguration
technique enhances the power output and reduces the multiple peak
points in the P-V curve as well as the number of switches compared to
other known techniques. Additionally, the proposed reconfiguration
technique overcomes the issue of scaling to larger applications.
To analyze the proposed reconfiguration technique, a comprehensive
study of the simulation results for 9 × 9 PV array was carried out. The
simulation results of the proposed technique were compared with the
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al.
Fig. 2. The various losses that occur due to non-uniform irradiation over the
PV array.
TCT configuration, the static reconfiguration methods (such as SuDoKu,
CS, and two-phase array reconfiguration) and dynamic reconfiguration
methods (such as PSO, GA and MHHO), under four different shading
cases, using MATLAB/SIMULINK software. Performance analysis was
done involving mismatch losses, Fill-Factor (FF), power loss, and Per­
centage Power Enhancement (%PE), for TCT configuration, SuDoKu, CS,
two-phase, PSO, GA, MHHO and the proposed technique. Besides,
different PV array sizes were also simulated and the results compared to
the TCT configuration results. All the results demonstrated the efficiency
and effectiveness of the proposed reconfiguration technique.
The remaining paper is introduced as follows: The PV system in a
TCT configuration is described in Section 2. Section 3 discusses the
proposed reconfiguration technique. The simulation results and perfor­
mance analysis are discussed in Section 4. The simulation study to
determine the scalable size of the PV array is presented in Section 5.
Sections 6 discusses the comparative study. The conclusions are pre­
sented in Section 7.
2. System description
To meet energy demand, some PV cells are connected to form a
module or panel. To generate a large amount of electricity, panels are
grouped together in series or parallel or in grouped together to create an
array, as shown in Fig. 1 (b), (c) and (d) respectively.
Fig. 1 (a) presents the equivalent circuit of the PV cell arranged in NP
parallel and NS series. The total output current of the PV cells IPV can be
determined by applying Kirchhoff’s Current Law (KCL) of the equivalent
circuit as in Eq. (1) [48].
IPV = Iirr − ID − Ip (1)
where Iirr, ID and Ip is the irradiation current, the current through the
diode and current across the parallel resistance respectively. Eqs. (2) and
(3) are described the current through the diode and the current across
the parallel resistance respectively.
(
exp(VPV + IPV Rs )
) the power generated caused by shading loss cannot be ignored. For each
ID = I0 − 1 (2)
AVth
(VPV + IPV Rs )
Ip = (3)
Rp
where VPV is the output voltage of the PV cell, A is the ideality factor, Vth
is thermal voltage and can be given as ((Kb × T)/q), Kb is the Boltz­
mann’s constant (1.38e− 23 J/K), T is the temperature in oC, q is the
4
Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806
Fig. 3. (9 × 9) TCT configuration.
charge of electron (1.6e− 19 Column), I0 is the saturation current and Rs
and Rp is the series and parallel resistance respectively.
By substituting ID and Ip, Eq. (1) is derived:
{ ( ) }
IPV = Iirr − I0 exp
q(VPV + Rs IPV )
− 1 −
(VPV + Rs IPV )
(4)
AKb T Rp
Partial shading negatively affects the PV array, lead to a decrease in
the generated energy. As current is proportional to radiation as given in
Eq. (5).
Gn
Iirr = [ISC + KSC− T (T − T0 ) ] (5)
G0
where Isc is the Short-Circuit (SC) current, KSC-T is the SC temperature
coefficient, Gn is the PV module irradiation level (W/m2) and G0 and T0
are the irradiation and temperature under STC (25 ◦ C and 1000 W/m2),
respectively [5].
During non-uniform irradiation levels, the PV panels receiving
different levels of radiation will experience varying row currents and
cause multi-peaks to appear on the P-V curve [1] such as Global
Maximum Power Point (GMPP) and Local Maximum Power Points
(LMPP) as shown in Fig. 2. This leads to mismatching in the character­
istics of the P-V curve, which decreases the amount of generated energy
and increases the power loss. The Maximum Power Point Tracking
(MPPT) under uniform irradiation is higher than the MPPT under non-
uniform irradiation levels as shown in Fig. 2. The variance between
shading case, the performance of various configurations was evaluated
and compared in terms of mismatch loss, Fill Factor (% FF) and power
loss (% ΔPloss) in Section 4.2.
The reconfiguration techniques for PV panels allow the dispersion of
shading on the PV array, in turn, helping obtain a uniform row current or
minimize the maximum row current. As a result, the power generated
will improve and the partial shading losses will be reduced. To confirm
the significance of the reconfiguration technique, a 9 × 9 PV array TCT
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al.
Fig. 4. (a) (9 × 9) TCT configuration of a PV array, (b) static reconfiguration of a PV array, (c) dynamic reconfiguration of a PV array.
configuration is studied and analyzed before and after reconfiguration.
For a better understanding of the reconfiguration technique, row cur­
rents are calculated and the results before and after reconfiguration
compared.
2.1. Modeling of TCT configuration
In the TCT configuration, the PV panels are linked in parallel by cross
ties to each row, and these panels are linked in series in each column
[49] as shown in Fig. 3. Fig. 3 shows a (9 × 9) TCT configuration for a PV
array. Each panel is denoted by PVmn, where m is the row number and n
is the column number. For example, PV32 indicates that the panel is
related to the 3rd row and the 2nd column. The current of each panel is
proportional to the radiation level that occurs on the surface of the PV
array. Thus, the current for each row, IRn, is calculated according to Eq.
(6).
9 ( )
∑ Gn
IRn = × IPV(ij)
i=1
G0
where IPV is the PV panel current at non-shading (Gn = G0), Gn is the PV
module irradiation in (W/m2), G0 is the irradiation under Standard Test
condition (STC), i is the number of rows, and j is the number of columns.
By applying Kirchhoff’s current law and Kirchhoff’s voltage law, the
output current and voltage of the PV array can be calculated as Eq. (7)
and Eq. (8), respectively.
∑
n
( )
Iout = Iir − I(i+1)r = 0, i = 1, 2 , ….., 8
r=1
∑ reconfiguration depends on a switching matrix, to switch between any
9
Vout = Vmi
i=1
where Vmi is the PV module voltage at the ith row.
The ability of TCT configuration to boost the generated energy under
the influence of shade, makes it a preferred application among re­
searchers over other configurations, such as the SP, BL, and HC con­
figurations. However, using TCT configuration to reconfigure the PV
array has many disadvantages, such as its inability to uniformly disperse
the shading through the array. Additionally, the TCT configuration re­
quires several sensors [50] to assess the voltage, current, and radiation
levels for each row, as presented in [43].
The number of switches in TCT is important to consider. Ns-TCT in­
dicates the number of switches used for the TCT configuration deter­
mined using Eq. (9) [51].
Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806
NS− = 2 × j(i × j − i) + i(i + 1) − 2 (9)
TCT
where i and j are the number of rows and columns, respectively. The
number of switches for the (9 × 9) PV array is 1384. To prevent too
many switches and other issues per the literature on TCT configuration,
a new reconfiguration technique for a (9 × 9) TCT PV array configura­
tion is proposed in this paper.
2.2. Reconfiguration of TCT scheme
It is necessary to reconfigure PV arrays to mitigate the shading effects
in the array by dispersing the shading over the array, thereby reducing
the difference in the row currents. Reconfiguration techniques are car­
ried out by rearranging the shaded PV panels physically or dynamically
to obtain a smoother P-V curve. The reconfiguration process reduces the
power losses that result from shading and improves the energy pro­
duction of the array. The efficiency of the reconfiguration methods is
(6)
measured by the number of peaks produced in the P-V curve. The
method of reconfiguration with a P-V curve with the fewest peaks is the
best.
The process of shading dispersion through the array, using dynamic
and physical reconfiguration technique is shown in Fig. 4, via a (9 × 9)
PV array in a TCT configuration under the influence of partial shading.
The PV panels are reconfigured to disperse the shading by applying
static and dynamic reconfiguration, as described in Fig. 4(b) and (c),
respectively. The results show that static reconfiguration requires much
(7) effort, as it requires the relocation of the PV panels using wires, which
increases power losses. Additionally, this method raises the complexity
of the system, thus decreases system efficiency. Meanwhile, dynamic
(8)
PV panel inside the column, until the optimal shading dispersion pattern
is found while still maintaining a nearly equal row current.
Despite the higher effectiveness of the dynamic reconfiguration
technique over static reconfiguration, it still has some difficulties when
many switches are used, as the time to find the final optimal configu­
ration will increase and increase the system cost. In this paper, a new
reconfiguration technique using a Genetic Algorithm (GA) was proposed
to overcome these difficulties. The proposed new reconfiguration tech­
nique for the PV array during the influence of shade aims to reduce the
number of switches and sensors, and thus enhance the energy produced
by the PV array. Shade dispersion via dynamic reconfiguration following
the GA technique can be effective for any shading condition. The pro­
posed technique was run over two main reconfigurable steps and is
explained in more detail in Section 3 below:
5
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al.
Fig. 5. Initialize (i × j) for the TCT configuration PV array.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 6. (a) 9 groups forming the TCT configuration of the PV array, (b) (3 × 3)
configuration in Group 1.
3. Proposed optimal reconfiguration technique
The PV array reconfiguration technique in real-time conditions is one
of the most important ways to reduce the shading problem. Therefore,
researchers have recently focused on improving these techniques even
further. However, most studies investigated small PV arrays. In this
paper, an easy and simple dynamic technique for reconfiguring a PV
array was proposed. This technique is applicable for different PV array
sizes, based on the reduction of the difference in the row current. To
6
Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806
understand the proposed reconfiguration technique, the authors adop­
ted a (9 × 9) PV array and compared it to different techniques under
various shading conditions. Note that most reconfiguration techniques
in the literature were performed on a (9 × 9) PV array.
To recognize the position of a PV panel in the array, the variables m
and n are used, where m denotes the number of rows and n denotes the
number of columns. For instance, PV34 is recognized as the PV module in
the 3rd row in the 4th column of the array. The detailed steps for
implementing the proposed GA-based reconfiguration technique of
shading dispersion through the PV array is explained as below:
Step 1: Initialize the TCT configuration size and set the initial
switching matrix.
The total size of the PV array was determined as (i × j), where i,
denotes the row number and j denotes the column number. After that,
the size of the divided group is determined as (k × l). For the proposed
reconfiguration technique, the size of the divided group was determined
as (3 × 3). The total number of divided groups (i × j) of the PV array is
(h), where (h) is determined as ((i ÷ 3) × (j ÷ 3)). For example, for a (9
× 9) PV array, the number of groups is 9, for a (6 × 24) array, the total
number of groups is 16 and so on, as shown in Fig. 5.
Step 2: In this step, the PV array is divided into h groups, for the (9 ×
9) TCT array the total number of groups is 9 groups is shown in Fig. 6(a).
Each group has 9 PV panels connected in a (3 × 3) TCT configuration
with irradiation sensors in each group, as shown in Fig. 6(b). During
shading conditions, only 6 panels (blue, pink, orange) will be recon­
figured using a specified switching matrix, as shown in Fig. 6(b), where
PVmn, is the PV panel in row m and column n. For example, Group 1 will
be rearranged as follows: the first panel PV11 is switched with PV21 in
the first column. Then, PV22 is switched with PV32 in the second column.
Finally, PV13 is switched with PV33 in the third column. The total
number of switches for the first stage (Ns_(first-stage)) can be identified by
Eq. (10).
Ns (first− stage) = (2nPV ) × h (10)
where, npv is the number of reconfigured PV arrays in each group and h
is the number of groups.
This technique of switching is applied to the rest of the groups under
the influence of shading. For instance, h is incremented by (h + 1) to
proceed to the next group. This technique ensures the minimum number
of switches are turned on. The switching in this step will automatically
take place when partial shading occurs.
Step 3: In this step, the GA is applied to find the optimal TCT
configuration that will yield the best performance for the PV array. This
result is attained by checking the irradiation level of each row and
comparing the new connection with the initial connection until the best
configuration is obtained.
In this step, the optimal solution is found by optimizing the columns
of the groups. For example, the first column in Group 1 is switched with
the first column in Groups 4 and 7, as shown in Fig. 7. Each column
consists of 3 panels connected in series, thus reducing the number of
switches. The total number of switches for the second stage (Ns_(second-
stage)) can be identified by Eq. (11).
Ns (second− stage) = ((2nh column ) × h) (11)
where, nh_column is the number of columns in each group and h is the
number of groups.
The number of switches Ns-TCT for the (9 × 9) TCT connected PV
array according to Eq. (9) is 1384 while the required number of switches
for the proposed technique is 162. Therefore, the number of switches
was reduced by 88.3% from that utilized in the case of TCT.
GA optimization is used to find the optimal PV array reconfiguration,
which boosts the shading dispersion of the PV array overall. The opti­
mization between columns using GA is based on the Equalization Irra­
diation (EI) principle. This principle ensures the maximum row currents
in each row are reduced, as the current is proportional to the radiation
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al.
Fig. 7. Colum switching design of the (9 × 9) PV array.
per Eq. (5). The optimization of the columns of the PV groups involves
rearranging these columns in the PV array. During optimization, each
time, the row current is calculated until the lowest value of EI is obtained
for each row. The optimal configuration is obtained with the lowest
value of EI. This step helps boost power output during various shading
conditions.
During no shading conditions, the PV arrays have the same radiation
levels and the same row currents. During shading conditions, the PV
panels receive different radiation levels, which lead to varied row cur­
rents in the PV array. If Gmn is the radiation level of the PV array at row
m and column n, then, the maximum radiation difference in each row
EIm is evaluated using Eq. (12) [52]:
EIm = max(Gmn ) − min(Gmn ), ∀m = 1, ....., k (12)
This paper proposed using GA to overcome the partial shading lim­
itations and enhance the power generated by the PV array. The new GA-
based technique optimizes the TCT configuration of the PV array based
on the EI of the row currents. Minimizing the maximum irradiation of
the rows decreases the mismatch losses and increases the power
generated by the PV array.
Therefore, the objective function to reconfigure the PV array mini­
mizes the difference in the irradiation in the rows, as per Eq. (13):
fitness(i) = min(max(EIm )), ∀m = 1, ...., i (13)
where fitness(i) = the fitness of the ith element in the present population
in which the EIm is defined by Eq. (12).
When applying the GA, the parameter selection is considered one of
the most important specified values, as it impacts the convergence rate
of the global optimum value. Therefore, limits are randomly set on these
parameters via trial and error. Note that all parameters are fixed, leading
to convergence around the optimal local point. Thus, certain values are
specified for some parameters to help the algorithm converge at the
7
Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806
global optimum point. In this paper, the population size and the number
of generations (iterations) were set to 50 and 100, respectively, whereas
the probability of mutation and crossover were chosen randomly. The
rate of convergence of the algorithm is based on the aptitude of the
fitness function to choose the best elements between a given population.
The flowchart of the proposed technique is shown in Fig. 8.
4. Case study and discussion
To evaluate the performance of the proposed reconfiguration tech­
nique and to test its suitability to seamlessly disperse the shading
through a PV array manner under irregular radiations, four various cases
of partial shading were studied and simulated for a (9 × 9) PV array. To
elucidate the effectiveness of the proposed reconfiguration technique,
the results achieved were compared with: (a) static techniques, such as
SuDoKu puzzle [10] CS [16] and two-phase array reconfiguration [24]
(b) dynamic techniques, such as GA [41] PSO [42] and MHHO [44].
Previous works used these techniques to solve the shade dispersion in a
(9 × 9) PV array. Moreover, the proposed technique is also compared to
the conventional TCT configuration.
A comprehensive analytical study is presented based on the simu­
lation results of the Global-Maximum-Power-Point (GMPP) and the
comparison of the P-V curves for all techniques using MATLAB/SIMU­
LINK software. Also, row currents were calculated for the four shading
cases. Additionally, a performance analysis was done, where mismatch
losses, Fill-Factor (FF), Power Losses (% ΔPloss), and percentage power
enhancement (% PE) were compared to evaluate the best reconfigura­
tion technique.
4.1. Simulation results and discussion
Case A: For case A, five shading levels (900 W/m2, 800 W/m2, 600
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al.
Fig. 8. Flowchart of the proposed reconfiguration technique (a) Step 1, (b) Step 2, (c) Step 3.
W/m2, 400 W/m2 and 200 W/m2) with a fixed temperature were inci­
dent on the (9 × 9) TCT configuration PV array. It can be supposed that
the shading is due to passing clouds. Fig. 9(a)–(f) describe the shading
pattern of the TCT configuration, SuDoKu, two-phase array, PSO,
MHHO, and the proposed reconfiguration technique, respectively.
To analyze the P-V curves, it is imperative to note the number of
multiple peaks of MPP. In this case, the fewer the points, the smoother
the P-V curve, and thus the higher the power generated.
Fig. 10 presents the simulated P-V curves for TCT, SuDoKu, two-
phase array, PSO, MHHO, and the proposed new reconfiguration for
Case A. From Fig. 10, the maximum generated power for the proposed
new reconfiguration technique was 14.24 kWpk, followed by the MHHO
technique at 14.22 kWpk. The SuDoKu and PSO techniques generated the
8
Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806
same power limits at 14.14 kWpk. Meanwhile, the power generated by
the two-phase array reconfiguration technique was 13.8 kWpk, and the
lowest power (11.14 kWpk) was generated by the array adopting the TCT
configuration. The P-V curves confirm that the proposed reconfiguration
technique generated higher power and a smoother curve when
compared to the P-V curves generated by the other techniques.
Furthermore, the increase in power using the proposed reconfiguration
technique was comparatively higher than that of the TCT, SuDoKu and
the two-phase techniques, by 28%, 0.7%, and 3.2%, respectively.
Meanwhile, the proposed technique generated more power than the PSO
and MHHO techniques by 0.7% and 0.15%, respectively.
The current of the PV module depends on the radiation level. In this
case, the PV modules receive different radiation levels (900 W/m2, 800
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al.
Fig. 9. (9 × 9) PV array under shading for Case A, (a) TCT configuration, (b) SuDoKu [10] (c) two-phase [24] (d) PSO [42] (e) MHHO [44] (f) proposed recon­
figuration technique.
Fig. 10. P-V curve for Case A.
W/m2, 600 W/m2, 400 W/m2, and 200 W/m2) so the maximum current
that can be provided is (0.9Im, 0.8Im, 0.6Im, 0.4Im and 0.2Im), respec­
tively. When, the load current goes beyond the sum of the specific panel
current, then, the particular row gets bypassed. For example, the panels
in rows 7, 8, and 9 of the TCT configuration shown in Fig. 9(a) gets
bypassed when the load current goes above the row current limit of
3.6Im.
To theoretically validate the results, the row current values were
calculated using Eq. (6) as follows:
9
Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806
The row current calculation for the TCT configuration in Fig. 9(a) is
as follows:
Gn 900
IR1 = IR2 = IR3 = IR4 = IR5 = (9( ) × Im ) = (9 × ) × Im ) = 8.1Im
G0 1000
IR6 = (9 × 0.8 × Im ) = 7.2Im
IR7 = IR8 = IR9 = (3 × 0.6 × Im ) + (3 × 0.4 × Im ) + (3 × 0.2 × Im ) = 3.6Im
The row current estimated for the proposed reconfiguration as in
Fig. 9(f) is as follows:
IR1 = IR2 = IR3 = IR4 = IR5 = IR6 = IR7 = IR8 = IR9 = (5 × 0.9 × Im )+
(0.6 × Im ) + (0.4 × Im ) + (0.8 × Im ) + (0.2 × Im ) = 6.5Im
Using the row currents, the power was calculated as described in
Table 1 for the TCT configuration, the two-phase array reconfiguration,
PSO, MHHO, and the proposed reconfiguration for Case A. From Table 1,
the maximum power coefficient value was 58.5 ImVm for the proposed
reconfiguration, while the maximum power coefficient value for the TCT
configuration was 43.3 ImVm. SuDoKu and two-phase methods were the
same value at 56.7 ImVm. PSO, and MHHO methods were 55.8 ImVm and
57.6 ImVm respectively. Note that the mathematical calculations validate
the simulation results for Case A.
According to Table 1, the proposed reconfiguration had zero by­
passes, so the simulated P-V curve is smoother than the other techniques.
Moreover, it can be seen that the panels with a minimum current will get
bypassed primarily to create power peaks in the P-V curves. Based on the
number of bypasses, in the TCT configuration row 7, 8, and 9 were
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al. Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806

Table 1
Theoretical calculation of TCT, SuDoKu, two-phase, PSO, MHHO, and the proposed reconfiguration techniques for Case A.
TCT configuration SuDoKu Two-phase reconfiguration

IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I (A) V(V) P(MW)

IR7 3.6Im 9Vm 32.4ImVm IR1 6.3Im 6Vm 56.7ImVm IR4 6.3Im 9Vm 56.7ImVm
IR8 3.6Im – – IR3 6.3Im – – IR6 6.3Im – –
IR9 3.6Im – – IR4 6.3Im – – IR8 6.3Im – –
IR6 7.2Im 6Vm 43.3ImVm IR7 6.3Im – – IR1 6.6Im 6Vm 39.6ImVm
IR1 8.1Im 5Vm 40.5ImVm IR5 6.5Im 5Vm 32.5ImVm IR2 6.6Im – –
IR2 8.1Im – – IR9 6.5Im – – IR3 6.6Im – –
IR3 8.1Im – – IR6 6.7Im 3Vm 20.1ImVm IR5 6.6Im – –
IR4 8.1Im – – IR8 6.7Im – – IR7 6.6Im – –
IR5 8.1Im – – IR2 6.9Im Vm 6.9ImVm IR9 6.6Im – –

PSO reconfiguration MHHO reconfiguration Proposed reconfiguration

IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I (A) V(V) P(MW)

IR2 6.2Im 9Vm 55.8ImVm IR1 6.4Im 9Vm 57.6ImVm IR1 6.5Im 9Vm 58.5ImVm
IR4 6.3Im 8Vm 50.4ImVm IR2 6.4Im – – IR2 6.5Im – –
IR5 6.4Im 7Vm 44.8ImVm IR4 6.4Im – – IR3 6.5Im – –
IR7 6.4Im – – IR7 6.4Im – – IR4 6.5Im – –
IR8 6.4Im – – IR3 6.5Im 5Vm 32.5ImVm IR5 6.5Im – –
IR3 6.5Im 4Vm 26ImVm IR5 6.5Im – – IR6 6.5Im – –
IR1 6.7Im 3Vm 20.1ImVm IR9 6.5Im – – IR7 6.5Im – –
IR8 6.7Im – – IR6 6.6Im 2Vm 13.2ImVm IR8 6.5Im – –
IR6 6.9Im Vm 6.9ImVm IR8 6.8Im Vm 6.8ImVm IR9 6.5Im – –

Fig. 11. P-V curve for Case B.

bypassed, in SuDoKu row 1, 5, 6, and 2 were bypassed, in the two-phase,
row 4 and 1 were bypassed, in PSO row 2, 4, 5, 3, 1 and 6 were bypassed,
and in MHHO row 1, 3, 6 and 8 were bypassed.
Case B: For case B, five shading levels (900 W/m2, 800 W/m2, 700
W/m2, 400 W/m2 and 300 W/m2) with a constant temperature were
incident on the (9 × 9) TCT configuration PV array.
Fig. 11 presents the simulated P-V curves for TCT, SuDoKu, the two-
phase array reconfiguration, PSO, MHHO, and the proposed reconfigu­
ration technique for Case B.
From Fig. 11, the power output from the proposed technique was
15.7 kWpk which is a 7% increase compared to the TCT power (14.7
kWpk), a 1.3% increase compared to two-phase power (15.5 kWpk) a 2%
increase compared to Su Do Ku power (15.4 kWpk), a 4% increase
compared to the PSO power (15.1 kWpk), and a 1.6% increase compared
to the MHHO power (15.46 kWpk). From the P-V curves, it can be
verified that the proposed reconfiguration technique generated more
power than other techniques for this case.
Fig. 12(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f) show the shading profile of the TCT
configuration, SuDoKu, two-phase array reconfiguration, PSO, MHHO,
and the proposed reconfiguration techniques, respectively for Case B.
The row current values for the TCT, SuDoKu, two-phase array reconfi­
guration, PSO, MHHO and the proposed reconfiguration techniques are
highlighted in Table 2. From Table 2, the highest power coefficient value
for the proposed technique was 63 ImVm compared to TCT, Su Do Ku,
two-phase, PSO, and MHHO reconfigurations. Although the proposed
reconfiguration technique had more bypasses than the MHHO tech­
nique, it managed to overcome the MHHO technique by generating a
higher power because it minimized the differences in the row current.
Case C: In Case C, four shading levels (900 W/m2, 600 W/m2, 400
W/m2, and 200 W/m2) with a fixed temperature are incident on the (9
× 9) TCT-configuration PV array. Fig. 13 presents the simulated P-V
curves of the TCT configuration, CS, GA, MHHO, and the proposed
reconfiguration techniques for Case C.
From the P-V curve in Fig. 13, the maximum generated power was
14.14 kWpk for the proposed reconfiguration technique, followed by
MHHO and GA reconfiguration, with almost the same generated power
(14.06 kWpk and 14.05 kWpk, respectively). The generated power for the
CS reconfiguration is 13.71 kWpk while the lowest generated power

10
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al. Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806

Fig. 12. The (9 × 9) PV array under shading for Case B, (a) TCT configuration, (b) SuDoKu [10] (c) two-phase [24] (d) PSO [42] (e) MHHO [44] (f) proposed
reconfiguration.

Table 2
Theoretical calculation of TCT, SuDoKu, two-phase, PSO, MHHO, and the proposed reconfiguration techniques for Case B.
TCT configuration SuDoKu Two-phase reconfiguration

IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I (A) V(V) P(MW)

IR8 6.3Im 9Vm 56.7ImVm IR1 6.8Im 9Vm 61.2ImVm IR4 6.9Im 9Vm 62.1ImVm
IR9 6.3Im – – IR6 6.8Im – – IR6 6.9Im – –
IR6 6.6Im 7Vm 46.2ImVm IR7 6.8Im – – IR8 7Im 7Vm 49ImVm
IR7 6.6Im – – IR3 6.9Im 6Vm 41.4ImVm IR2 7.2Im 6Vm 43.2ImVm
IR3 7.6Im 5Vm 38ImVm IR4 6.9Im – – IR5 7.2Im – –
IR4 7.6Im – – IR5 7.3Im 4Vm 29.2ImVm IR7 7.2Im – –
IR5 7.6Im – – IR9 7.3Im – – IR9 7.2Im – –
IR1 7.8Im 2Vm 15.6ImVm IR2 7.7Im 2Vm 15.4ImVm IR1 7.3Im 2Vm 14.6ImVm
IR2 7.8Im – – IR8 7.7Im – – IR3 7.3Im – –

PSO reconfiguration MHHO reconfiguration Proposed reconfiguration

IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I (A) V(V) P(MW)

IR2 6.5Im 9Vm 58.5ImVm IR4 6.9Im 9Vm 62.1ImVm IR3 7Im 9Vm 63ImVm
IR9 6.5Im – – IR5 6.9Im – – IR4 7Im – –
IR8 6.7Im 7Vm 46.9ImVm IR9 6.9Im – – IR8 7Im – –
IR5 6.8Im 6Vm 46.9ImVm IR3 7.2Im 6Vm 43.2ImVm IR2 7.1Im 6Vm 42.6ImVm
IR1 7.2Im 5Vm 36ImVm IR7 7.2Im – – IR51 7.2Im 5Vm 36ImVm
IR7 7.4Im 4Vm 29.6ImVm IR8 7.2Im – – IR6 7.2Im – –
IR3 7.7Im 3Vm 23.1ImVm IR1 7.3Im 3Vm 13.2ImVm IR7 7.2Im – –
IR4 7.7Im – – IR2 7.3Im – – IR9 7.2Im – –
IR6 7.7Im – – IR6 7.3Im – – IR5 7.3Im Vm 7.3ImVm

11
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al.
Fig. 13. The P-V curve for Case C.
(10.44 kWpk) was obtained by the TCT configuration. The P-V curves
show that the proposed reconfiguration technique generated more
power than the TCT configuration, and the CS, GA, and MHHO recon­
figurations. Furthermore, it is observed that the P-V curve for the pro­
posed reconfiguration was smoother, with a minimum number of multi-
peaks, compared to the P-V curves generated by the TCT configuration,
or the CS, GA and MHHO reconfigurations. Hence, the proposed
reconfiguration technique generated the most power in Case C.
Fig. 14(a), (b), (c), (d), and (e) show the shading pattern for the TCT
configuration, the CS, GA, MHHO, and the proposed reconfiguration
Fig. 14. The (9 × 9) PV array under shading for Case C: (a) TCT configuration, (b) CS [16] (c) GA [41] (d) MHHO [44] (e) proposed reconfiguration.
12
Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806
techniques, respectively. To theoretically verify the values, the row
currents were calculated. For the row currents, the power was calculated
and listed in Table 3 for the TCT configuration, CS, GA, MHHO, and the
proposed reconfiguration techniques.
From Table 3, the maximum power coefficient of the proposed
technique, GA, and MHHO was the same, at 56.7 ImVm. However, the
proposed reconfiguration technique was still superior to GA and MHHO
because it had fewer bypasses, so its simulated P-V curve was smoother
than that of GA and MHHO. Moreover, it can be seen that the panels
with a minimum current will get bypassed primarily to create power
peaks in the P-V curves. Based on the number of bypasses, in TCT, rows
7, 6, and 1 were bypassed, in CS the rows 6, 8, 4, 1, 3, and 2 were
bypassed, in GA, the rows 2, 3, 7, and 1 were bypassed, in MHHO rows 2,
6, 4, and 1 were bypassed and in proposed reconfiguration, rows 1 and 4
were bypassed. Note that the maximum power generated by the pro­
posed reconfiguration was close to that of the GA and MHHO tech­
niques. However, the proposed technique and the MHHO technique [44]
used less than 100 iterations to achieve the maximum generated power.
Meanwhile, the GA used 800 iterations to produce the same power limit
based on the results in [41]. On the other hand, the proposed reconfi­
guration had fewer bypasses, which, shows its superiority over GA and
MHHO.
Case D: In case D, five shading levels (900 W/m2, 600 W/m2, 500 W/
m , 400 W/m2, and 200 W/m2) with a fixed temperature are incident on
2
the (9 × 9) PV array TCT configuration. Fig. 15 presents the simulated P-
V curves for the TCT configuration, CS, GA, MHHO, and the proposed
reconfiguration techniques for Case D.
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al. Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806

Table 3
Theoretical calculation of TCT, CA, GA, MHHO, and the proposed reconfiguration techniques for Case C.
TCT configuration CS GA reconfiguration

IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I (A) V(V) P(MW)

IR7 3.6Im 9Vm 32.4ImVm IR6 5.9Im 9Vm 53.1ImVm IR2 6.3Im 9Vm 56.7ImVm
IR8 3.6Im – – IR5 6.1Im 8Vm 48.8ImVm IR5 6.3Im – –
IR9 3.6Im – – IR8 6.1Im – – IR6 6.3Im – –
IR6 6.6Im 6Vm 39.6ImVm IR4 6.3Im 6Vm 37.8ImVm IR8 6.3Im – –
IR1 8.1Im 5Vm 40.5ImVm IR7 6.3Im – – IR3 6.4Im 5Vm 34ImVm
IR2 8.1Im – – IR1 6.6Im 4Vm 26.4ImVm IR7 6.5Im 4Vm 26ImVm
IR3 8.1Im – – IR3 6.8Im 3Vm 20.4ImVm IR1 6.6Im 3Vm 19.8ImVm
IR4 8.1Im – – IR9 6.8Im – – IR4 6.6Im – –
IR5 8.1Im – – IR2 7Im Vm 7ImVm IR9 6.6Im – –

MHHO reconfiguration Proposed reconfiguration

IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW)

IR2 6.3Im 9Vm 56.7ImVm IR1 6.3Im 9Vm 56.7ImVm

IR3 6.3Im – – IR2 6.3Im – –
IR5 6.3Im – – IR3 6.3Im – –
IR9 6.3Im – – IR5 6.3Im – –
IR6 6.4Im 5Vm 32ImVm IR7 6.3Im – –
IR4 6.5Im 4Vm 26ImVm IR4 6.6Im 4Vm 26.4ImVm
IR1 6.6Im 3Vm 19.8ImVm IR6 6.6Im – –
IR7 6.6Im – – IR8 6.6Im – –

Although the maximum power generated by the proposed reconfi­

guration is close to that of the GA and MHHO techniques, the proposed
technique and the MHHO technique used less than 100 iterations to
generate maximum power. Meanwhile, the GA used 800 iterations to
produce the same power based on the results in [41]. On the other hand,
the proposed reconfiguration technique had fewer bypasses, so it is still
superior to GA and MHHO. In view of the number of bypasses, in TCT,
rows 7 and 1 were bypassed, in CS rows 2, 4, 7, 6, 8 and 9 were bypassed,
in GA rows 2, 4, 6, and 1 were bypassed, in MHHO rows 2, 5, and 7 were
bypassed, and in the proposed reconfiguration zero rows were bypassed.

4.2. Performance analysis

To evaluate the overall performance improvement of the PV array,

Fig. 15. P-V curve for Case D.
From the P-V curve in Fig. 15, the maximum generated power was
12.26 kWpk for the proposed reconfiguration technique, followed by
MHHO and GA reconfiguration at almost the same value (12.24 kWpk
and 12.22 kWpk, respectively). The generated power for the CS recon­
figuration was 12.18 kWpk and the lowest generated power was 9.541
kWpk obtained by the TCT configuration. The P-V curves show that the
proposed reconfiguration technique generated more power than the TCT
configuration, CS, GA and MHHO reconfigurations. Furthermore, the P-
V curve for the proposed reconfiguration was smoother with one peak
point compared to the P-V curves generated by the TCT configuration,
CS, GA, and MHHO reconfigurations. Hence, the proposed reconfigu­
after applying the proposed new reconfiguration technique in this paper,
the quantitative comparisons of the proposed technique were made and
then compared to the results of the TCT configuration, SuDoKu, two-
phase, PSO and MHHO techniques for Case A and B. For Case C and
D, the outcomes of the proposed reconfiguration technique were
compared with that of the TCT configuration, CS, GA, and MHHO. The
analysis was done based on the mismatching losses, % FF, % ΔPloss and
% PE. The analysis involved the (9 × 9) PV array for the four shaded
cases in Section 4.1.
Mismatching losses: Mismatching losses were evaluated by iden­
tifying the variance between the power at Maximum Point Tracking
under full radiation conditions (P_MPT) and the power at Global
Maximum Point (P_GMP) during irregular radiation conditions, as in Eq.
(14):
Pmismatch− =P − P (14)
loss MPT GMP

ration technique is proven to generate the most power in Case D.
Fig. 16(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) show the shading pattern for the TCT
configuration, CS, GA, MHHO and the proposed reconfiguration tech­
niques, respectively. The figures show the capability of the proposed
reconfiguration in providing the best shading dispersion through the PV
array, offering regular PV curves by reducing the row currents. To
theoretically verify the values, the row currents were calculated. For the
row currents, the power was calculated and listed in Table 4 for the TCT
configuration, CS, GA, MHHO, and the proposed reconfiguration tech­
niques. From Table 4, the maximum power coefficient of the proposed
technique was 50.4 ImVm, MHHO was 49.5ImVm, GA and CS gave the
same power coefficient at 48.6 ImVm and the lowest power coefficient
was given by the TCT configuration at 39.6 ImVm.
Fill-Factor (% FF): FF in PV array is defined as a measure of efficient
energy conversion. Further, the shade occurrence in PV causes the
variation in fill factor. The FF is another factor used to study the power
losses during the influence of shade for different PV plant configura­
tions. FF is determined as the ratio of power at Global Maximum Point
(P_GMP) during shading conditions to the produce of the Short-Circuit
current (Isc) and the Open-Circuit voltage (Voc), as shown by Eq. (15):
P GMP
%FF = × 100 (15)
VOC × ISC
Power Loss (%ΔPloss): Power loss in PV array is natural effect of
shade occurrence. % ΔPloss is determined as the ratio of the difference
between the power at Maximum Point Tracking (P_MPT) of the PV array

13
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al. Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806

Fig. 16. The (9 × 9) PV array under shading for Case D, (a) TCT configuration, (b) CS [16] (c) GA [41] (d) MHHO [44] (e) proposed reconfiguration.

Table 4
Theoretical calculation of TCT, CA, GA, MHHO, and the proposed reconfiguration techniques for Case D.
TCT configuration CS reconfiguration GA reconfiguration

IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I (A) V(V) P(MW)

IR7 3.6Im 9Vm 32.4ImVm IR2 5.4Im 9Vm 48.6ImVm IR2 5.4Im 9Vm 48.6ImVm
IR8 3.6Im – – IR3 5.4Im – – IR4 5.5Im 8Vm 44ImVm
IR9 3.6Im – – IR4 5.5Im 7Vm 38.5ImVm IR6 5.6Im 7Vm 39.2ImVm
IR1 6.6Im 6Vm 39.6ImVm IR5 5.5Im – – IR7 5.6Im – –
IR2 6.6Im – – IR7 5.6Im 5Vm 28ImVm IR8 5.6Im – –
IR3 6.6Im – – IR6 5.7Im 4Vm 24.8ImVm IR9 5.6Im – –
IR4 6.6Im – – IR1 5.7Im – – IR1 5.7Im 3Vm 17.1ImVm
IR5 6.6Im – – IR8 5.9Im 2Vm 11.8ImVm IR3 5.7Im – –
IR6 6.6Im – – IR9 6.6Im Vm 6.6ImVm IR5 5.7Im – –

MHHO reconfiguration Proposed reconfiguration

IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW) IRi I(A) V(V) P(MW)

IR2 5.5Im 9Vm 49.5ImVm IR1 5.6Im 9Vm 50.4ImVm

IR3 5.5Im – – IR2 5.6Im – –
IR5 5.6Im 5Vm 39.2ImVm IR3 5.6Im – –
IR9 5.6Im – – IR4 5.6Im – –
IR6 5.6Im – – IR5 5.6Im – –
IR4 5.6Im – – IR6 5.6Im – –
IR1 5.6Im – – IR7 5.6Im – –
IR7 5.7Im 2Vm 11.4ImVm IR8 5.6Im – –
IR8 5.7Im – – IR9 5.6Im – –

14
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al. Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806

Table 5 Table 7
Performance parameter for Case A and Case B. Percentage power enhancement in Case A and Case B.
Case A % PE

Configuration P_GMP (kW) Pmismatch-loss (kW) % FF % ΔPLoss Configuration Case A Case B

TCT 11.14 6.68 49.6 37.48 TCT- proposed 28 7

Two-phase 13.80 4.02 72 22.55 Two-phase- proposed 3.2 1.3
SuDoKu 14.14 3.68 73.7 20.65 SuDoKu- proposed 0.7 2
PSO 14.14 3.68 73.7 20.65 PSO- proposed 0.7 4
MHHO 14.22 3.6 75.4 20.20 MHHO- proposed 0.15 1.6
Proposed 14.24 3.58 75.8 20.08

Case B
Configuration P_GMP (kW) Pmismatch-loss (kW) % FF % ΔPLoss Table 8
TCT 14.70 3.12 67.5 17.50 Percentage power enhancement in Case C and Case D.
Two-phase 15.50 2.32 76.1 13.01
% PE
SuDoKu 15.40 2.42 71.7 13.58
PSO 15.10 2.72 70.3 15.26 Configuration Case C Case D
MHHO 15.46 2.36 75.6 13.24
TCT- proposed 35.44 28.5
Proposed 15.70 2.12 77.5 11.89
CS- proposed 3.14 0.66
GA- proposed 0.64 0.33
MHHO- proposed 0.57 0.16
Table 6
Performance parameter for Case C and Case D.
Table 6 presents the values of P_GMP, Pmismatch-loss, % FF, and % ΔPloss
Case C for the TCT configuration, CS, GA, MHHO, and the proposed reconfi­
Configuration P_GMP (kW) Pmismatch-loss (kW) % FF % ΔPLoss guration techniques for Case C and Case D. Per Table 6, the following
TCT 10.44 7.38 46.5 41.41 conclusion can be made:
CS 13.71 4.11 70.5 23.06
GA 14.05 3.77 76.6 21.15 a) The proposed reconfiguration technique had lower mismatch losses
MHHO 14.06 3.76 76.6 21.09 for Case C and Case D at 3.68 kW and 5.54 kW, respectively,
Proposed 14.14 3.68 77.3 20.65
compared to that of the TCT configuration, CS, GA, and MHHO
Case D techniques. Hence, the proposed reconfiguration technique per­
Configuration P_GMPP (kW) Pmismatch-loss (kW) % FF % ΔPLoss
formed better than the TCT configuration, CS, GA, and MHHO
TCT 9.541 8.3 52.4 46.5 techniques.
CS 12.18 5.64 74.7 46.30 b) The fill factor of the proposed reconfiguration technique for Case C
GA 12.22 5.6 77.5 31.42
MHHO 12.24 5.58 77.8 31.31
and Case D was estimated as 77.3% and 79.4%, respectively. Per
Proposed 12.26 5.54 79.4 31.20 Table 6, the proposed reconfiguration technique had a higher FF
value compared to the TCT configuration, CS, GA, and MHHO
techniques. These results emphasize the superiority of the proposed
in non-shaded condition and the power at Global Maximum Point reconfiguration technique over the TCT configuration, CS, GA, and
(P_GMP) of the PV array during irregular radiation, as determined by Eq. MHHO techniques.
(16): c) A lower %ΔPLoss was obtained for the proposed reconfiguration
P − P technique compared to the other techniques. The %ΔPLoss was
(16)
MPT GMP
%ΔPloss =
P MPT
× 100 20.65% and 31.20%, respectively, for the proposed reconfiguration
when compared to the TCT configuration, CS, GA, and MHHO
Table 5 presents the values of P_GMP, Pmismatch-loss, % FF, and % ΔPloss techniques.
for the TCT configuration., SuDoKu, the two-phase array reconfigura­
tion, PSO, MHHO, and the proposed reconfiguration techniques for Case In conclusion, as presented in Tables 5 and 6, the proposed recon­
A and B. Per Table 5, the following conclusions can be made: figuration technique had the lowest mismatch losses under all shading
cases; therefore proving the reliability of the proposed reconfiguration
a) The proposed reconfiguration technique had fewer mismatch losses technique over previous techniques. These results also emphasize the
for Case A and Case B at 3.58 kW and 2.12 kW, respectively, than the superiority of the proposed reconfiguration technique over the TCT
TCT, SuDoKu, two-phase, PSO, and MHHO techniques. Hence, the configuration, SuDoKu, two-phase, PSO, CS, GA and MHHO techniques
proposed reconfiguration technique performed better than the TCT under different shading conditions.
configuration, SuDoKu, two-phase, PSO, and MHHO techniques. Percentage Power Enhancement (%PE): Percentage power
b) The fill factor of the proposed reconfiguration technique for Case A enhancement (% PE) is defined as the ratio between the difference in the
and Case B was estimated as 75.8% and 77.5%, respectively. Per Power at Global Maximum Point before reconfiguration P_GMP(before) and
Table 5, the proposed reconfiguration technique had a higher FF Power at Global Maximum Point after reconfiguration to P_GMP(after), as
value than that of the TCT configuration, SuDoKu, the two-phase, depicted by Eq. (17). Also, %PE is defined as the amount of power
PSO, and MHHO techniques. These results emphasize the superior­ improvement after applying the reconfiguration technique.
ity of the proposed reconfiguration technique over the TCT config­
uration, SuDoKu, the two-phase, PSO, and MHHO techniques. %PE =
P GMP(before) − P GPP(after)
× 100 (17)
c) Lower values of % ΔPLoss obtained by the proposed reconfiguration P GMP(before)

technique. The % ΔPLoss was 20.08% and 11.89%, for Case A and
Case B, respectively, for the proposed reconfiguration when
compared to the TCT configuration, SuDoKu, two-phase, PSO, and
MHHO techniques.
Table 7 shows the % PE for Case A and Case B. In Case A, the pro­
posed reconfiguration technique enhanced the generated power by 28%,
3.2%, 0.7%, and 0.15% compared to the TCT configuration, SuDoKu,
two-phase, PSO, and MHHO techniques, respectively. In Case B, the %
PE of the proposed reconfiguration had increased generated power by

15
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al. Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806

(a)

Fig. 17. (a) (9 × 9) PV array under shading patterns for 8 h; (b) Actual irradiation levels.

7%, 1.3%, 2%, 4% and 1.6% compared to the TCT configuration,
SuDoKu, two-phase, PSO, and MHHO techniques, respectively. In
conclusion, the proposed reconfiguration technique enhanced the power
generated from PV array more than the conventional TCT connection,
SuDoKu, two-phase, PSO, and MHHO techniques.
Table 8 shows the % PE for Case C and Case D. In Case C, the pro­
posed reconfiguration enhanced the power by 35.44%, 3.14%, 0.64%,
and 0.57% over the TCT configuration, CS, GA, and MHHO techniques,
respectively. In Case D, the % PE of the proposed reconfiguration was
increased by 28.5%, 0.66%, 0.33%, and 0.16% compared to the TCT
configuration, CS, GA and MHHO techniques, respectively. In conclu­
sion, the proposed reconfiguration technique enhanced the generated
power by the PV array when compared to the conventional TCT
connection, CS, GA, and MHHO techniques.

Fig. 18. P-V curves in real-time under 8 shading patterns; (a) TCT configuration; (b) proposed new reconfiguration technique.

16
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al. Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806

Table 9
Maximum generated energy per hour and total income generated calculations.
Time Maximum generated energy per hour (kWh)

TCT SuDoKu MHHO Proposed

10:00 AM 10.46 10.77 10.45 11.15

11:00 AM 11.84 12.59 13.00 13.01
12:00 PM 11.85 13.55 13.69 13.81
01:00 PM 15.28 18.04 18.10 18.16
02:00 PM 15.16 17.65 17.47 17.80
03:00 PM 8.63 9.79 9.79 9.82
04:00 PM 5.83 6.51 6.54 6.70
05:00 PM 3.01 3.36 3.40 3.51
Total energy produced per day 82.06 92.26 92.44 93.96
(kWh) Fig. 19. Power generation of the (6 × 6), (12 × 12), (18 × 9), (18 × 18), (12 ×
Total energy produced per 29951.9 33674.9 33740.6 34295.4
24) and (30 × 48) PV arrays.
year (kWh)(1 year = 365
day)
Total income generated per 2995.19 3367.49 3374.06 3429.54 technique will further enhance the amount of annual revenue when
year in $0.10 per kWh expanding the PV array to include a large-scale PV plant.

The previous analysis in this section provides evidence of the supe­
riority of the proposed reconfiguration technique under various shading
conditions. In particular, the method generated the most amount of
power and produced the smoothest P-V curves and the fewest multiple
peaks of all the other methods.
4.3. Performance analysis in real-time application
Based on the simulation results of various shading patterns, the
proposed reconfiguration technique shows its ability to disperse shading
more significantly with a lower number of power peaks in the P-V curve
compared to other reconfiguration techniques mentioned in this paper.
In this section, confirming the efficiency and performance of the pro­
posed reconfiguration technique in real-time conditions is done by
calculating the total energy produced and total income generated during
the peak hours of the day for 8 h, which are then compared with the TCT,
SuDoKu and MHHO configuration. The evaluation is carried out for the
(9 × 9) PV plant with a capacity of 20.73 kWpk, which is subjected to 8
different shading patterns during the peak hours spanning from 10 am to
5 pm and changing pattern values every one hour as shown in Fig. 17
(a). Here, the radiation levels of the shaded panels are considered to
50% of non-shaded panels. Meanwhile, the real radiation levels per hour
as provided by Nilai, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia are shown in Fig. 17 (b).
Accordingly, the simulated P-V curves per hour are plotted in Fig. 18
(a) and (b) for the TCT configuration and proposed new reconfiguration,
respectively, based on the shading cases throughout 8 h implemented as
shown in Fig. 17 (a). In addition, the PV panels are reconfigured via
SuDoKu and MHHO techniques for each shading pattern and comparing
the results with the proposed technique. The simulation results revealed
the values of maximum energy produced every hour for the TCT,
SuDoKu, MHHO configurations and the proposed reconfiguration tech­
nique. Moreover, the amount of energy saved and the income generated
by the array per day and a year, respectively, are calculated by taking
the tariff as $0.10 (US dollar) per kWh based on the electricity price in
Malaysia (see Table 9). The values included in the table allowed the
understanding that the proposed new reconfiguration technique
contributed towards generating a maximum energy amount of 34295.4
kWpk per year. Meanwhile, the total income generated per year using the
same technique was $3429.54, whereas $2995.19, $3367.49 and
$3374.06 was obtained for the TCT, SuDoKu and MHHO configurations
respectively. Based on the energy calculations, the proposed technique
could result in energy saving by 13%, 2% and 1.6% annually compared
to that produced by TCT, SuDoKu and MHHO configurations respec­
tively. Therefore, the newly-proposed reconfiguration technique is
rightfully endorsed due to its ability to provide an optimal configuration
of the PV array under any partial shading conditions. Moreover, it is
evident from the calculations that the proposed reconfiguration
5. Scalability of the PV array
To prove the advantage of the proposed reconfiguration technique
and its applicability to varying PV plant size, (6 × 6), (12 × 12), (18 ×
9), (18 × 18), (12 × 24) and (30 × 48) PV arrays were simulated. The
simulated results were compared with the TCT configuration during
shading conditions. In the case of shade occurrence for the 6 × 6 array,
the maximum generated power was 7311 W using the proposed recon­
figuration technique and 6832 W using the TCT configuration. For the
12 × 12 array, the maximum generated power was 29 kW using the
proposed reconfiguration technique and 27 kW power using the TCT
configuration. For the 18 × 9, 18 × 18, 12 × 24 and 30 × 48 arrays, the
maximum generated power was 28 kW, 57 kW, 58 kW, and 292 kW,
respectively, using the proposed reconfiguration technique, as shown in
the bar chart in Fig. 19.
The results of the simulation demonstrate the superiority of the
proposed technique under shading conditions. Plus, this technique can
also be applied to different PV array sizes. In general, all simulated re­
sults proved the effectiveness of the proposed technique, and its ability
to overcome the shading problems and generate more power than the
TCT configuration. Hence, the new reconfiguration technique is sug­
gested as one of the best options to the classical TCT configuration, and
other dynamic and static reconfiguration techniques.
6. Quantitative summary of the simulation study
After discussing and analyzing the different shadow states and their
effect on the PV array using different reconfiguration techniques, the
following inferences were reached:
1) The proposed reconfiguration technique for the PV array in this
paper is easy and simple, as reconfiguration takes place between a
group of panels, which make it more applicable for large-scale PV
plants. This result is in contrast to previous reconfiguration tech­
niques in the literature, which applied only for small-scale PV array.
2) Reconfiguring between groups of PV panels reduces the number of
switches and sensors used. Additionally, the method does not require
wires for the reconfiguration process, unlike physical reconfigura­
tion techniques. Thus, the proposed reconfiguration technique has
proven superior to previous static and dynamic reconfiguration
techniques.
3) From the simulated P-V curves under various shading patterns for
different reconfiguration techniques, the proposed reconfiguration
technique improved the generated power and PV array performance
compared to other static and dynamic reconfiguration techniques.
4) In Section 4.1, the results of the analysis demonstrate the superiority
of the proposed reconfiguration technique over different static and

17
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al. Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806

Table 10
The Qualitative comparison of the proposed reconfiguration technique and other static and EAR techniques in the literature.
Reconfiguration Technique Complexity Number of Parameter Array size configuration Ref./
type switches requirement year

Static SuDoKu High – Current, 9×9 TCT [10]/

irradiation (2015)
Optimal SuDuKu High – Irradiation 9×9 TCT [11]/
(2015)
Improved SuDoKu High – Irradiation 9×9 TCT [12]/
(2019)
AS High – Current, 6×6 TCT [13]/
irradiation (2019)
Novel fix Moderate Irradiation 6×6 TCT [14]/
reconfiguration (2020)
DS High – Irradiation 5×5 TCT [15]/
(2018)
CS High – Irradiation 9 × 9,5 × 5 TCT [16]/
(2018)
Novel MS Moderate – Current, 9×9 TCT [20]/
irradiation (2019)
Odd-even Moderate – Voltage, current 6×5 TCT [21]/
(2019)
Novel odd-even Moderate – Voltage, current 6×4 TCT, SP-TCT BL- [22]/
TCT,BL-HC (2020)
SDP Moderate – Irradiation 5 × 5, 3 × 3 TCT [23]/
(2018)
Two-phase Moderate – Irradiation 9 × 9,18 × 18 TCT [24]/
(2018)
NS High – Current 5×4 SP, TCT, BL, HC, SP- [25]/
TCT,BL-TCT (2016)
Zig-Zag High – Irradiation 4×3 TCT [26]/
(2016)
Dynamic FLC High NS Voltage, current, 3×3 S, P, SP, TCT [28]/
irradiation (2016)
NFI High NS Voltage, current, 3×4 TCT [29]/
irradiation (2010)
Rough set theory High NS Current 2×3 SP [30]/
(2011)
Munkres High NS Irradiation 3 × 3,4 × 4 TCT [31]/
(2015)
Scanning Moderate 2 m.m Current 3×3 TCT [32]/
(2014)
Greedy algorithm Moderate NS Current, 9×9 TCT [33]/
irradiation (2017)
Auto reconfiguration High Two switches - Voltage, current 3×3 SP, TCT [34]/
manual change (2019)
New dynamic High NS Current, 6×6 TCT [35]/
reconfiguration irradiation (2019)
Novel PV array High NS Current, 3×4 SP, TCT, BL [36]/
reconfiguration irradiation (2020)
PCT Moderate NS Current, 4 × 4, 3 × 3 SP, TCT [37]/
irradiation (2018)
Half and full High Double-pole m- Irradiation 6×4 TCT [38]/
reconfigurable throws (2012)
A new real-time Moderate NS Irradiation 3×4 TCT [39]/
(2014)
Bubble sort Moderate NS Voltage, current 10 × 10 SP, TCT [40]/
(2008)
Optimization GA Low NS Voltage, current 9×9 TCT [41]/
(2015)
PSO Moderate 2(1 pole-‘m’ Voltage, current 9×9 TCT [42]/
through) (2018)
GOA Moderate NS Voltage, current 9×9 TCT [44]/
(2018)
MHHO Moderate 2.m.n Voltage, current 9 × 9, 6 × 20 TCT [44]/
(2020)
GWO Moderate NS Irradiation 2×2 S, SP [45]/
(2017)
BOA Moderate NS Current, 6×6 SP-TCT [46]/
irradiation (2020)
GSA Moderate NS Current, 6×4 TCT [47]/
irradiation (2016)
Proposed Two-step GA-based Low ((2nPV) × h) +(2 Irradiation 9 × 9,6 × 216 × 6, 12 × 12, 9 × TCT
reconfiguration (nh_column) × h) 9, 18 × 9, 18 × 18, 12 × 24, 30
× 48

18
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al.
Fig. 20. Quantitative comparison of the proposed reconfiguration technique and the static, EAR, and optimization techniques.
dynamic reconfiguration techniques under various shading patterns.
The proposed technique generated the most power, the smoothest P-
V curve, achieved the fastest convergence, and required the shortest
time to reach optimal configuration. Additionally, the proposed
reconfiguration technique overcame the drawback of the TCT
configuration, namely, by dispersing the shading over the PV array.
6.1. Comparative study
Numerous works have been done in the field of array reconfiguration
to improve the power produced by a PV array during irregular radiation.
In particular, the EAR technique has been used more than other tech­
niques because it is easier and more applicable compared to other
techniques. However, the EAR technique has several disadvantages.
That is, it needs many switches and sensors, so it increases the system
cost and complexity [19]. Also, the EAR system needs continuous
maintenance, which incurs other additional costs on the system. To
overcome the issues of EAR, optimization algorithms have been pro­
posed, such as GA, PSO, and MHHO. An optimization algorithm is easier
to use than EAR because the former performs one-time switching, unlike
the latter. However, the algorithm needs high computing capacity with a
large memory. In this paper, a fully controllable switching matrix was
designed for (9 × 9) and varying size PV arrays. In cases of partial
shading, the switching matrix is controlled by minimizing the maximum
row currents or equalizing the row currents, to disperse the shading onto
the PV array. The proposed reconfiguration technique was designed
with fewer switches compared to the various dynamic reconfiguration
19
Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806
techniques, such as EAR. Table 10 shows the comparisons between
different static techniques, the EAR technique, and the proposed
reconfiguration technique in terms of the type of controller, the number
of switches, the required sensors, and the array size. According to
Table 10, the following conclusions were made: the proposed new
reconfiguration technique is (i) robust and reliable (ii) less complex, and
(iii) simpler in structure and easier to code and compile.
Fig. 20 shows a wheel chart of the qualitative comparison between
the static technique, the EAR technique, the optimization technique, and
the proposed technique. The parameters were (A) complexity, (B)
number of switches, (C) sensors requirement, (D) number of bypasses,
and (E) array size.
The plotted wheel chart is described as follows: the reconfiguration
technique, which has a minimum area in the chart has the best perfor­
mance and vice versa. The parameter levels initiate from the origin and
move outside. The origin position indicates the lower values (best) and
increases while moving outside.
7. Conclusion
This paper presented a simple and cost-effective new reconfiguration
technique for a PV array. To solve the reconfiguration problem affecting
the PV array, the proposed technique involved two main steps: i)
dispersing the shade by switching between PV panels and ii) optimizing
the group columns to find the optimal connection for the TCT configu­
ration under various shading conditions. The new reconfiguration
technique helps limit the number of switches and sensors in reconfig­
urable systems and at the same time provides a solution for larger-scale
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al.
PV plants. The proposed reconfiguration technique was simulated over a
two-step analysis, for a (9 × 9) TCT configuration PV array under four
shaded cases. From the simulated results, the proposed reconfiguration
generated more power for Case A and Case B, compared to the TCT
configuration, two-phase, SuDoKu, PSO and MHHO reconfiguration
techniques. Meanwhile, in Case C and Case D, the proposed reconfigu­
ration produced more power than the TCT configuration, CS, GA, and
MHHO reconfiguration techniques. The performance analysis of the
proposed reconfiguration technique and various configurations were
also done. Moreover, the proposed technique was estimated and
approved during eight shade pattern over a day from 10 AM to 5 PM for
(9 × 9) PV array. Generally, the reconfigurations of the PV arrays via the
proposed technique reduces power loss mismatches and solves the
multi-peaks problem in the P-V curves. Additionally, the proposed
technique could be used to reconfigure different sizes of PV arrays,
further demonstrating superiority over the static and dynamic reconfi­
guration techniques, which have thus far failed to reconfigure large-
scale PV plants.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Aidha Muhammad Ajmal: Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing -
original draft. Vigna K. Ramachandaramurthy: Resources, Writing -
review & editing, Supervision. Amirreza Naderipour: Writing - review
& editing. Janaka B. Ekanayake: Writing - review & editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] Ajmal AM, Babu TS, Ramachandaramurthy VK, Yousri D, Ekanayake JB. Static and
dynamic reconfiguration approaches for mitigation of partial shading influence in
photovoltaic arrays. Sustain Energy Technol Assess 2020;40:100738. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.seta.2020.100738.
[2] Chaibi Y, Malvoni M, Chouder A, Boussetta M, Salhi M. Simple and efficient
approach to detect and diagnose electrical faults and partial shading in
photovoltaic systems. Energy Convers Manage 2019;196:330–43. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2019.05.086.
[3] Baka M, Manganiello P, Soudris D, Catthoor F. A cost-benefit analysis for
reconfigurable PV modules under shading. Sol Energy 2019;178:69–78. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2018.11.063.
[4] Maki A, Valkealahti S. Power losses in long string and parallelconnected short
strings of series-connected silicon-based photovoltaic modules due to partial
shading conditions. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2012;27(1):173–83.
[5] Bingöl O, Özkaya B. Analysis and comparison of different PV array configurations
under partial shading conditions. Sol. Energy 2018;160:336–43. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.solener.2017.12.004.
[6] Ajmal AM, Thanikanti SB, Ramachandaramurthy VK, Ekanayake J, Tariq M. In:
December. Effect of Partial Shading and Performance Analysis on Various Array
Configurations of Photovoltaic System. IEEE; 2019. p. 1–6.
[7] Almaktar M, Rahman HA, Hassan MY. Effect of losses resistances, module
temperature variation, and partial shading on PV output power. In: Proceedings of
IEEE International Conference on Power & Energy; 2012. p. 360–5.
[8] Gautamand NK, Kaushika ND. Reliability evaluation of solar photovoltaic arrays.
Sol. Energy 2002;72(2):129–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-092X(01)00085-
8.
[9] Malathy S, Ramaprabha R. Reconfiguration strategies to extract maximum power
from photovoltaic array under partially shaded conditions. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2018;81:2922–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.100.
[10] Vijayalekshmy S, Bindu G, Iyer S. Analysis of various photovoltaic array
configurations under shade dispersion by Su Do Ku arrangement during passing
cloud conditions. Indian J Sci Technol 2015;8.
[11] Potnuru SR, Pattabiraman D, Ganesan SI, Chilakapati N. Positioning of PV panels
for reduction in line losses and mismatch losses in PV array. Renewable Energy
2015;78:264–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.12.055.
[12] Krishna GS, Moger T. Improved SuDoKu reconfiguration technique for total-cross-
tied PV array to enhance maximum power under partial shading conditions.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019;109:333–48.
[13] Tatabhatla VM, Ram AA, Kanumuri T. Performance enhancement by shade
dispersion of Solar Photo-Voltaic array under continuous dynamic partial shading
conditions. J. Cleaner Prod. 2019;213:462–79.
20
Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806
[14] Meerimatha G, Loveswara Rao B. Novel reconfiguration approach to reduce line
losses of the photovoltaic array under various shading conditions. Energy 2020;
196:117120.
[15] Dhanalakshmi B, Rajasekar N. Dominance square based array reconfiguration
scheme for power loss reduction in solar photovoltaic (PV) systems. Energy
Convers. Manage. 2018;156:84–102.
[16] Dhanalakshmi B, Rajasekar N. A novel competence square based PV array
reconfiguration technique for solar PV maximum power extraction. Energy
Convers Manage 2018;174:897–912.
[17] Yadav AS, Pachauri RK, Chauhan YK, Choudhury S, Singh R. Performance
enhancement of partially shaded PV array using novel shade dispersion effect on
magic-square puzzle configuration. Sol. Energy 2017;144:780–97.
[18] N. Rakesh and T. V. Madhavaram, “Performance enhancement of partially shaded
solar PV array using novel shade dispersion technique,” Front. Energy, vol. 10, no.
2, pp. 227–239, 2016.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-016-0405-y.
[19] Samikannu SM, Namani R, Subramaniam SK. Power enhancement of partially
shaded PV arrays through shade dispersion using magic square configuration.
J. Renew. Sustain Energy 2016.
[20] Iysaouy El, Lahcen ML, Oumnad A. A novel magic square view topology of a PV
system under partial shading condition. Energy Proc 2019:1182–90. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.egypro.2018.11.284.
[21] Nasiruddin, Ibraheem, Shahida Khatoon, Mohd Faisal Jalil, and R. C. Bansal. Shade
diffusion of partial shaded PV array by using odd-even structure. Solar Energy 181
(2019): 519-529.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.01.076.
[22] Yadav, Karan, Bhavnesh Kumar, and D. Swaroop. Mitigation of Mismatch Power
Losses of PV Array under Partial Shading Condition using novel Odd Even
Configuration. Energy Reports 6 (2020): 427-437.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
egyr.2020.01.012.
[23] Satpathy PR, Sharma R. Power loss reduction in partially shaded PV arrays by a
static SDP technique. Energy 2018:569–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2018.05.131.
[24] Pillai DS, Rajasekar N, Prasanth Ram J, Chinnaiyan VK. Design and testing of two
phase array reconfiguration procedure for maximizing power in solar PV systems
under partial shade conditions (PSC). Energy Convers Manage 2018:92–110.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.10.020.
[25] Yadav AS, Pachauri RK, Chauhan YK. Comprehensive investigation of PV arrays
with puzzle shade dispersion for improved performance. Sol. Energy 2016;129:
256–85.
[26] Vijayalekshmy S, Bindu GR, Iyer SR. A novel Zig-Zag scheme for power
enhancement of partially shaded solar arrays. Sol. Energy 2016;135:92–102.
[27] Matam M, Barry VR. Improved performance of dynamic photovoltaic array under
repeating shade conditions. Energy Convers. Manage. 2018;168:639–50.
[28] Karakose M, Baygin M, Murat K, Baygin N, Akin E. Fuzzy based reconfiguration
method using intelligent partial shadow detection in PV arrays. Int J Comput Intell
Syst 2016;9:202–12.
[29] Chaouachi Aymen, Rashad MKamel, Nagasaka Ken. Microgrid efficiency
enhancement based on neuro-fuzzy MPPT control for photovoltaic generator. In
Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC), 2010 35th IEEE, 2010, pp. 002889–
002894. IEEE.
[30] dos Santos P, Vicente EM, Ribeiro ER. Reconfiguration methodology of shaded
photovoltaic panels to maximize the produced energy. In: XI Brazilian power
electronics conference. IEEE; 2011. p. 700–6.
[31] Sanseverino, Eleonora Riva, Thanh Ngo Ngoc, Marzia Cardinale, Vincenzo Li Vigni,
Domenico Musso, Pietro Romano, and Fabio Viola. “Dynamic programming and
Munkres algorithm for optimal photovoltaic arrays reconfiguration.” Solar
Energy 122 (2015): 347-358.
[32] Parlak KŞ. PV array reconfiguration method under partial shading conditions. Int.
J. Electric. Power Energy System. 2014;63:713–21.
[33] Mahmoud Y, El-Saadany E. Fast reconfiguration algorithm for improving the
efficiency of PV systems. In: Renewable Energy Congress (IREC), 2017 8th
International. IEEE; 2017. p. 1–5.
[34] Pachauri R, Singh R, Gehlot A, Samakaria R, Choudhury S. Experimental analysis
to extract maximum power from PV array reconfiguration under partial shading
conditions. Eng Sci Technol Int J 2019;22(1):109–30.
[35] Mostafaee G, Ghandehari R. Power enhancement of photovoltaic arrays under
partial shading conditions by a new dynamic reconfiguration method. Journal of
Energy Management and Technology 2020;4(1):46–51.
[36] Alkahtani M, Zuyu Wu, Kuka CS, Alahammad MS, Ni K. A novel PV array
reconfiguration algorithm approach to optimising power generation across non-
uniformly aged PV arrays by merely repositioning. J—Multidiscip Sci J 2020;3(1):
32–53.
[37] Akrami M, Pourhossein K. A novel reconfiguration procedure to extract maximum
power from partially-shaded photovoltaic arrays. Sol. Energy 2018;173:110–9.
[38] El-Dein MS, Kazerani M, Salama M. Optimal photovoltaic array reconfiguration to
reduce partial shading losses. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy 2012;4:145–53.
[39] M. Karakose, M. Baygin, and K. S. Parlak, “A new real-time reconfiguration
approach based on neural network in partial shading for PV arrays,” 2014.
[40] Nguyen D, Lehman B. An adaptive solar photovoltaic array using model-based
reconfiguration algorithm. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2008.
[41] Deshkar SN, Dhale SB, Mukherjee JS, Babu TS, Rajasekar N. Solar PV array
reconfiguration under partial shading conditions for maximum power extraction
using genetic algorithm. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;43:102–10.
[42] Babu TS, Ram JP, Dragičević T, Miyatake M, Blaabjerg F, Rajasekar N. Particle
swarm optimization based solar PV array reconfiguration of the maximum power
extraction under partial shading conditions. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy 2018;9(1):
74–85.
A. Muhammad Ajmal et al.
[43] Fathy A. Recent meta-heuristic grasshopper optimization algorithm for optimal
reconfiguration of partially shaded PV array. Sol Energy 2018;171:638–51.
[44] Yousri D, Allam D, Eteiba MB. Optimal photovoltaic array reconfiguration for
alleviating the partial shading influence based on a modified harris hawks
optimizer. Energy Convers. Manage. 2020;206:112470.
[45] Cherukuri SK, Rayapudi SR. Enhanced grey wolf optimizer based MPPT algorithm
of PV system under partial shaded condition. Int J Renew Energy Develop 2017;6
(3):203.
[46] Fathy A. Butterfly optimization algorithm based methodology for enhancing the
shaded photovoltaic array extracted power via reconfiguration process. Energy
Convers. Manage. 2020;220:113115.
[47] H. M. Hasanien, A. Al-Durra, S. M. Muyeen, “Gravitational search algorithm-based
photovoltaic array reconfiguration for partial shading losses reduction”, 5th IET
International Conference on Renewable Power Generation (RPG), London, UK, 21-
23 Sept. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2016.0577.
[48] Gao X, Cui Y, Hu J, Xu G, Yu Y. Lambert W-function based exact representation for
double diode model of solar cells: comparison on fitness and parameter extraction.
21
Energy Conversion and Management 230 (2021) 113806
Energy Convers. Manage. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2016.09.005.
[49] Patel, Hiren, and Vivek Agarwal. MATLAB-based modeling to study the effects of
partial shading on PV array characteristics. IEEE transactions on energy
conversion, Mar.20018, 23, (1), pp. 302-310.
[50] La Manna D, Vigni VL, Sanseverino ER, Di Dio V, Romano P. Reconfigurable
electrical interconnection strategies for photovoltaic arrays: a review. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2014;33:412–26.
[51] Velasco-Quesada G, Guinjoan-Gispert F, Piqué-López R, Román-Lumbreras M,
Conesa-Roca A. Electrical PV array reconfiguration strategy for energy extraction
improvement in grid-connected PV systems. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2009;56:
4319–31.
[52] Romano P, Candela R, Cardinale M, Vigni VL, Musso D, Sanseverino ER.
Optimization of photovoltaic energy production through an efficient switching
matrix. J. Sustain Develop Energy Water Environ Syst 2013;1(3):227–36.