Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems

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

A novel approach for optimal sizing of stand-alone solar PV systems with

power quality considerations
Aakash Hassan a, *, Octavian Bass a, Yasir M. Al-Abdeli a, Martin Masek b, Mohammad A.
S. Masoum c
a
Edith Cowan University, School of Engineering, Joondalup, WA 6027, Australia
b
Edith Cowan University, School of Science, Joondalup, WA 6027, Australia
c
Utah Valley University, Department of Engineering, Orem, UT 84058, USA

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

Keywords: Designing reliable and cost-effective solar PV systems with compliance to national and international power
Stand-alone solar PV systems quality standards is critical for their economical, efficient, and safe operation. The conventional approaches
Optimal sizing currently being used to optimally size the solar PV systems generally ignore power quality criteria during the
Genetic Algorithm
initial design phase. This paper fills this gap by presenting a novel Genetic Algorithm (GA) based strategy to
Power quality
design a stand-alone solar PV system featuring optimal system size with conformance to power quality standards.
MATLAB/Simulink environment was used to develop a detailed model of solar PV system, including a robust
control mechanism for maximum power point tracking, battery bi-directional control, and inverter output
control. An optimisation algorithm based on the single-objective GA was then designed to find the optimal PV
array size, battery capacity, and the values of harmonic filter components so that the total investment cost is
minimised and load demand as well as power quality criteria over the studied period are satisfied. The simulation
results, corroborated with insightful discussions demonstrate that ignoring power quality criteria by selecting
improper non-optimal system parameters can lead to inadmissible voltages and THD levels in the system. In
contrast, the proposed design strategy can successfully devise a solar PV system that is optimally sized and
complies with power quality standards.

created several technical challenges related to power quality [5–7].

1. Introduction
Rising global energy demand and growing concerns about environ­
mental impact of combustion-based power plants have increased the
uptake of renewable energy sources [1]. Solar energy has emerged as
one of the most promising resources owing to its sustainability and
omnipresence [2]. According to the International Renewable Energy
Agency (IRENA), the levelised cost of energy for solar PV has fallen by
almost 69 % between 2010 and 2016 [3]. Consequently, the last decade
has witnessed an upsurge in the adoption of solar PV technology into
both stand-alone and grid integrated systems. In Australia, 6.5 %
(14,807GWh) of the total electricity generated during 2020 came from
small-scale solar PV and around 3 % of the total generation was supplied
by large-scale PV systems [4]. This rapid transition in the electricity
generation sector has implications for the existing interconnected power
network, system design, and regulatory framework. Particularly, the
intermittent and distorted power output from solar PV systems has
Harmonic distortion is a common power quality issue associated with
solar PV systems and is mainly caused by power converters involving
high frequency switching devices, non-linear loads, and intermittent
solar irradiance [8]. Harmonics bear particular significance to a power
system’s stability and reliability as they can cause communication
interference, power losses, damage to the sensitive equipment due to
over-heating, and unusual tripping of protective relays and circuit
breakers [9]. The above-mentioned problems may be avoided by
adhering to a range of power quality standards [10].
Designing cost effective solar PV systems that also fulfil national and
international power quality standards constitutes a critical area of
research. A review of existing technical literature shows that most pre­
vious studies on the cost-effective design of solar PV systems did not
consider power quality requirements in the initial design criteria. Most
studies have focused either on the optimal sizing of solar PV system
components through artificial intelligence techniques [11–15] or on
energy management [16–20]; whilst power quality issues in solar PV

* Corresponding author at: Edith Cowan University, 270 Joondalup Drive, WA 6027, Australia.
E-mail address: aakashh@our.ecu.edu.au (A. Hassan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2022.108597
Received 25 February 2022; Received in revised form 19 June 2022; Accepted 30 August 2022
Available online 12 September 2022
0142-0615/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Hassan et al. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597

Nomenclature T ambient temperature (0C)

THDv total harmonic distortion in voltage waveform (%)
BatAh battery capacity (Ah) THDi total harmonic distortion in current waveform (%)
Bsoc battery state of charge (%) THDLOL loss of load due to THD constraint violation
Cbat cost of battery ($) VAC ac output voltage (V)
Cc cost of harmonic filter capacitor ($/F) VACLOL Loss of load due to VAC constraint violation
Cch cost of charge controller ($/W) VBat battery voltage (V)
Cf filter capacitance (F) VDC dc bus voltage (V)
Cinst system installation cost ($) VDC− ref dc bus reference voltage (V)
Cinv inverter cost ($/W) Voc open circuit voltage (V)
CL cost of harmonic filter inductor ($/H) Vmp voltage at maximum power point (V)
CPV cost of single PV panel ($) VPV PV output voltage (V)
d duty ratio Vrms root mean square voltage (V)
ELoad energy consumed by load (kWh)
EPV energy output from PV array (kWh) Abbreviations
G solar irradiance (W/m2) AC alternating current
IBat battery current (A) DC direct current
Imp current at maximum power point (A) ICC initial capital cost ($)
IPV PV output current (A) GA genetic algorithm
Lf filter inductance (H) LOL loss of load
Np number of parallel strings MPPT maximum power point tracking
Ns number of series connected PV modules PI proportional integral
PBat battery power (W) PQ power quality
PLoad load demand (W) PV photovoltaic
Pmp power at maximum power point (W) THD Total harmonic distortion (%)
PPV Output power from PV (W)

systems are investigated separately and solved through different design
methods such as, inverter topologies [21–24], PWM techniques [25–27],
sophisticated control loops [28–31], and harmonic filters [32–36]. This
paper introduces a novel methodology for designing a stand-alone solar
PV system which not only finds the optimal system size that meets the
varying load demand with minimum cost, but also fulfils the power
quality requirements. There are only few studies with limited investi­
gation in this area.
In this regard, Vinayagam et al. [37] investigated the impact of solar
PV integration on the power quality of a microgrid incorporating grid
source, diesel generators, and non-linear loads. It was observed that
intermittent solar PV output disturbs the power flow between grid and
diesel generator units as well as may also lead to voltage variations in
the system. Current and voltage THD levels were found to increase
directly with increasing PV penetration level and non-linear loads.
However, instead of applying a method to reduce the THD such as
harmonics filter, a harmonic management algorithm was proposed to
mitigate the exceeding THD levels during various scenarios. Moreover,
the impact of considering power quality on the costing and optimal
sizing of energy system was not considered. Jamal et al. [38] analysed
the role of fast frequency response battery storage system on the power
quality of a remote Australian PV-diesel system. It was found that the
system components optimised using HOMER can meet the dynamic load
demand and the employed fast frequency response batteries can help in
maintaining the system frequency within limits. Nonetheless, the har­
monics generated by the high frequency switching devices were not
considered. Additionally, the role of intermittent solar PV output on the
power quality was also not included in the analyses. In other studies, by
Christodoulou et al. [39,40], the operational characteristics of hardware
components affecting power quality, such as inverter output voltages,
filter inductance and capacitance, were analysed but without consider­
ation for their effects on the overall sizing and cost effectiveness of en­
ergy systems. The exception to these research works appears to be in
studies by Koutroulis et al. [41–43]. However, these studies focused on
the optimisation of grid-connected inverters only, selecting the optimal
values and types of inverter components (heat sink, inductance,
capacitance etc.) such that the levelised cost of energy for PV inverter is
minimised and did not consider solar PV capital or installation costs.
Additionally, no dynamic load with reliability criteria Loss of Load
Probability (LOLP) and control mechanism were considered. In another
recent study [44], Particle Swarm Optimisation (PSO) was used to
optimally size and locate distributed generation units including solar
PV, wind turbines, and fuel cells. Power quality constraints including
bus voltage limits and THD limits were applied as inequality constraints
with minimising total net present cost as an objective function. None­
theless, parameters optimisation of inverter sub-components which
control power quality were not considered and harmonics at each bus
were evaluated by employing harmonic power flow algorithm. More­
over, no actual weather data and electric load data were used.
In summary, earlier studies have either ignored the power quality
criteria during optimisation or considered it in a very limited opera­
tional scenario. This paper considers power quality indicators as con­
straints, and their role when using Genetic Algorithms to optimise stand-
alone solar PV systems. The research uses MATLAB/Simulink based
models of system components, such as PV array, batteries, electric load,
grid, and power conditioning unit (DC/DC converters, DC/AC inverter,
controller). Optimisation results are based on hourly resolved dynamic
electrical load and meteorological data spanning one week. However, to
ensure the validity of proposed approach, the system performance is also
analysed over the whole month in winter, during which lower avail­
ability of solar irradiance places significant demand on meeting load
reliability constraints. The paper also identifies the more dominant
power quality indicators affecting the GA optimisation outcomes. The
main contributions of this paper are:
• Inclusion of power quality indicators (load voltage magnitude and
THD) as constraints during the optimal sizing of solar PV systems for
minimum cost.
• Consideration of control mechanisms including, Maximum Power
Point Tracking (MPPT), battery charging/discharging, and inverter
control in the optimisation by using detailed (switching) components
models.

2
A. Hassan et al.
Fig. 1. Conceptual design of studied solar PV system with control mechanism.
• Performing the transient simulations of developed solar PV system
model as a part of optimisation by employing actual dynamic solar
irradiance, temperature, and electric load data of one month.
• Comparing the optimisation results of the proposed methodology
with the conventional optimisation method that ignores power
quality criteria.
This manuscript is structured as follows: Section 2 presents the ar­
chitecture of renewable energy system, mathematical models and details
the optimisation approach. Section 3 discusses simulation results, with
conclusions summarised in Section 4.
2. Methodology
2.1. System architecture
Fig. 1 demonstrates the conceptual design of the studied solar PV
system. Solar PV arrays with batteries supply the electric load of a
typical household with annual load demand of 9,132.8kWh (25kWh/
day). To extract maximum power from solar PV under varying solar
irradiance (G) and temperature (T), a DC/DC boost converter is inte­
grated with the solar PV array. Batteries are employed to store the
surplus PV power and supply the load demand during intervals when
Fig. 2. Equivalent circuit of single diode PV model (a)- single solar cell (b)- PV module.
3
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597
solar PV production is not sufficient. Batteries are connected to the DC
link through a DC/DC buck-boost converter which can transfer energy in
both directions (charge and discharge). An inverter converts the DC
output from solar PV or batteries into AC power whilst the LC filter
mitigates harmonics from the inverter output to comply with the load
requirement and power quality standards. This is the most common
configuration used in residential solar PV systems [45,46]. The system
architecture presented in Fig. 1 is modelled using MATLAB/Simulink
(Fig. S1 of supplementary material). Further details of each component
model and control including the MPPT, DC link control, and control of
DC/AC inverter are presented in the following sections.
2.2. Solar PV
Solar PV is modelled by utilising the PV array block available in
Simulink/Simscape Electrical. This block implements the five-parameter
single diode model shown in Fig. 2 and simulates the PV array for a
selected number of series connected PV modules (Ns) and parallel strings
(Np) [47].
This model also allows selection of solar panels from a range of PV
modules available in the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)
System Advisory Model [48]. A commercially available PV module
(Manufacturer: LG Electronics, Model Name: MonoX, LG265S1C-B3)
A. Hassan et al.
having an area of 1.64 m2 and 195 W nominal power was selected for
this study [49]. The output current from a single module is found as
[50]:
V(t) + I(t)Rs
I(t) = IL (t) − Id (t) − (1)
Rsh
Eq. (1) shows that the photo current IL (t), generated by conversion of
sunlight into electricity is attenuated by some losses due to leakage
currents, internal cell resistance, and contact resistance. Such losses are
introduced in the model by adding a series resistance Rs , shunt resistance
Rsh , and a diode in parallel. The light generated photo current IL (t) de­
pends on the solar irradiance levels as well as cell temperature (Tcell ) and
can be calculated as:
( )
G(t) [ ]
IL (t) = IL,STC + Ki (Tcell (t) − TSTC ) (2)
GSTC
In Eq. (2), GSTC (1 kW/m2) and TSTC (25 ◦ C) represents the solar
irradiance and photocell reference temperature respectively at standard
test conditions, and Ki (A/0C) is the temperature coefficient. The diode
current Id can be calculated as follows:
[ ( ) ] Q − it
Vd
Id = Io exp − 1 (3)
VT
where Io stands for diode reverse saturation current, Vd is the diode
voltage and VT stands for thermal voltage which can be found as:
kT
VT = × nI × Ncell (4)
q
In Eq. (4), k stands for Boltzmann constant (1.308 × 10-23J/K), q is
the electron charge (1.6022 × 10-19C), nI represents diode ideality factor
(close to 1.0), and Ncell shows the number of solar cells connected in
series.
2.3. Maximum power point tracking (MPPT) control
Solar PV output depends directly upon the solar irradiance levels and
temperature which are intermittent in nature and thus make I-V char­
acteristics highly non-linear. However, at a particular operating point,
there exists a Maximum Power Point (MPP) where the solar PV outputs
maximum power. MPPT trackers are needed to harvest maximum power
from PV array under all conditions.
To date, several MPPT techniques have been developed which vary
in terms of their accuracy, complexity, and tracking speed. Perturb &
Observe (P&O) and Incremental Conductance (IC) are the most popular
and widely adopted techniques [51,52]. However, the P&O method may
fail to track the true MPP under rapidly varying environmental condi­
tions. Moreover, it also suffers from continuous oscillations in the
operating point around MPP [53]. On the other hand, IC method shows
better performance compared to P&O and is also free from operating
point oscillations, but requires an expensive controller to solve differ­
ential equations [54]. Keeping in mind these above facts, this study uses
a simple and cheap fractional open circuit voltage method for MPPT.
Fractional open circuit voltage (also known as constant voltage) is an
indirect MPPT technique which operates on the fact that the ratio of
maximum power point voltage (Vmp) to the open circuit voltage (VOC)
for a certain PV cell type remains almost constant under varying envi­
ronmental conditions [55].
Kv =
Vmp
(5)
VOC
If the values of Kv and VOC are known, the reference voltage can be
easily determined from Eq. (5), which can be realised through a feed­
back control unit. A DC/DC boost converter fulfils this function by
adjusting the output voltage of the solar PV array in accordance with the
measured reference voltage (Vmp) for maximum power transfer. The
4
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597
value of Kv normally ranges between 0.76 and 0.82 [56,57] and was
choosen to be 0.8 in this study after careful preliminary analyses. VOC
can be measured by periodically disconnecting the converter from the
PV array, making the output current zero, thus allowing the measure­
ment of VOC . However, this causes a disruption in the power supply and
power loss [58]. To avoid this issue, another approach of calculating VOC
is employed, which involves special measuring pilot PV cells of the same
type as the PV arrays. The whole schematic and the control strategy for
MPPT is illustrated in Fig. 1(a).
2.4. Battery modelling
The battery block available in Simscape Electrical/Specialized power
systems is utilised to model the batteries. This block implements a
generic dynamic battery model from a range of common battery types
[47]. The lead acid battery type is selected with the charging/dis­
charging model equations given below [59]:
Discharge(i* > 0) : f1 (it, i*, i, Exp)
( )
= E0 − K.
Q
.i* − K.
Q
.it + Laplace− 1 Exp(s)
.0 (6)
Q − it Sel(s)
Charge(i* < 0) : f1 (it, i*, i, Exp)
( )
Q Q Exp(s) 1
= E0 − K. .i* − K. .it + Laplace− 1
.
it + 0.1.Q Q − it Sel(s) s
(7)
In the above equations, it is the expected battery capacity (Ah), i*
stands for the low frequency current dynamics (A), i is the battery cur­
rent (A), Exp represents the battery exponential zone dynamics (V), E0 is
the constant voltage (V), Q denotes the maximum battery capacity (Ah),
K is the polarization constant (V/Ah), and Sel(s) represents the battery
mode (0 = discharge, 1 = charge). Further details of this battery model
can be found in [59].
2.5. Batteries bi-directional (charge/discharge) control
Batteries are essentially employed to store the surplus energy avail­
able from solar PV and to feed the load when the supply voltage fails or
drops. This can be achieved by connecting the batteries to the DC link
through a buck-boost converter that can transfer energy in both di­
rections as shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1(b) shows the battery discharge control mechanism during the
situation when solar PV output is not sufficient to feed the load. The
control of DC link voltage (VDC) is fulfilled through a PI controller by
comparing it with the reference voltage (VDC-ref = 400 V). The voltage
regulator output is compared with a unipolar triangular carrier wave­
form. If the regulator output is greater than the carrier, pulses are sent to
the transistor gate G3. The regulator starts operating when the input VDC
gets below U1 and stops when voltage level recovers to U2. When pulses
come to G3, the current starts flowing in the direction Ib2 and rises
rapidly through the inductor (L2). The current falls when pulses are
removed and flows through the capacitor C3 with the stepped up (boost
VBat t1
mode) mean voltage VDC = 1− d, where d = T0 is the duty ratio, t1 rep­
resents the pulse duration, and T0 is the repetition period.
In the charging mode shown in Fig. 1(c), pulses are sent to the G2 and
current flows in the direction Ib1. G2 operates when G3 is not active (RQ
= 0), and the battery state of charge (Bsoc) is less than S1. It is deacti­
vated when Bsoc > S2. When the pulses turn on transistor G2, inductor
(L2) current rises and when the pulse is removed, the current flows
through diode and the battery. The mean voltage appearing across the
capacitor C2 is stepped down (buck mode) VBat = dVDC and thus the
battery gets charged [60].
A. Hassan et al. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597

Fig. 3. Solar irradiance, temperature, and electric load profile used in this study.

2.6. DC/AC inverter modelling and control
A DC/AC inverter is needed to interface the AC loads and the solar PV
source. The universal bridge block available in the Simulink/Simscape
Electrical is utilised to model the inverter. Fig. 1(d) shows the topology
of the employed single-phase inverter with a voltage controller that
maintains the output load voltage at a reference value of 240Vrms. The
capability to store the excess energy produced by solar PV is limited by
the battery capacity. Therefore, the battery charging must stop after
getting fully charged and any excess energy available at this stage should
be properly controlled or dumped to avoid any inadmissible high load
voltages leading to equipment failure. To accomplish this, an additional
PI controller is utilised to uphold the output load voltage at the required
standard voltage level. At times when the load voltage exceeds 240Vrms
due to surplus input solar power and the batteries being at maximum
state of charge, the additional controller decreases the reference PV
output voltage relative to the optimal value and keeps the load voltage at
240Vrms.
Owing to the transistors (IGBTs/MOSFETs) switching on/off at very
high frequency, the inverter output voltage and current are distorted
with harmonics which are undesirable. Therefore, an LC filter is
employed to mitigate these harmonics and maintain the power quality

Fig. 4. Solar irradiance, ambient temperature, and electric load data of selected location during June 2017.

5
A. Hassan et al. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597

Table 1 √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
∑∞
Power quality standards used to evaluate the designed solar PV √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ V 2n
system. V 22 + V 23 + V 24 ⋯.V 2n
(8)
n=2
THDV = =
V 21 V1
Parameters Value

Voltage Limits: √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅

√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ ∑∞
Nominal voltage (single phase) 240 V I 2n
Lower limit 226 V I 22 + I 23 + I 24 ⋯.I 2n
(9)
n=2
THDi = =
Upper limit 254 V I 21 I1
Frequency Limits:
Nominal operating frequency 50 Hz
THDV and THDi represent the THD in votage and current waveforms
Lower limit 47.5 Hz
Upper limit 52 Hz respectively, while V1 and I1 are the fundamental voltage and current
Harmonics (THD) Limits: magnitudes respectively. According to the technical rules for the South
THDV <5 % West interconnected network in Western Australia [63], the renewable
THDi <5 % energy systems should maintain the voltage in the range of 240 ± 14 V
and the allowable frequency variation is 47.5–52 Hz. The list of all the
within permissible range. power quality standards used to evaluate the designed solar PV system
are presented in Table 1.
2.7. Meteorological and electric load data The reliability of the solar PV system is quantified to a single
parameter, Loss of Load Probability (LOLP) index. LOLP can be defined
To facilitate the simulations, electric load data of a typical house was as the sum of time steps over the studied period during which the system
obtained from a utility in Western Australia. Raw electric load data was fails to supply the load demand [64]. To account for the power quality
recorded every 15-minute interval, which was post processed to obtain criteria listed in Table 1, two modified LOL parameters including
the hourly resolved data and fill any missing time intervals. The solar VACLOL (loss of load due to voltage limits violation) and THDLOL (loss of
irradiance and temperature data, both used as an input for solar PV load due to THD limit violation) are introduced which are calculated as
model were resourced from the Bureau of Meteorology Australia [61] follows:
for a remote area in Western Australia (Geraldton, latitude: 28.7961◦ S, ∑N
0; 226V < VAC (t) < 254V
longitude: 114.7024◦ E). The original meteorological data received was VACLOL = (10)
1; otherwise
with 1-minute resolution and was also transformed into hourly averaged i=1

data. The dynamic load profile, solar irradiance, and temperature data
∑N
of one complete year are shown in Fig. 3. Since, performing transient THDLOL =
0; THD(t) < 5%
(11)
simulations is computationally much intensive, the data during the first i=1
1; otherwise
week of June was utilised for optimisation. This period of winter season
is particularly selected because solar irradiance is quite low whilst the where N represents the number of time steps (168 in this study) during
load demand is relatively higher during this period, which exerts sig­ which the solar PV system model is simulated, and the evaluation
nificant pressure on the PV system to meet the constraints. The validity criteria is checked.
of optimal solution found is further tested by performing the simulations
using one complete month’s data (June) shown in Fig. 4. 2.9. Genetic algorithm optimisation

2.8. Power quality criteria and reliability index Various optimisation techniques have been developed so far to solve
non-linear problems, such as the optimisation of renewable energy
Renewable energy systems need to abide by national and interna­ systems, which involve dynamic variables with non-linear relationship
tional power quality standards for safety of equipment, reliable opera­ like weather and electric load data. In particular, the Genetic Algorithm
tion, and integration with electric power system. Power quality is has proven its efficacy in finding the global optimum solution for such
generally measured in terms of Total Harmonic Distortion (THD%) and problems [65]. Genetic Algorithms are stochastic search algorithms
fluctuations in voltage and frequency levels from their set values [62]. which attempt to emulate processes from the theory of natural evolution
According to IEEE standard 519 [10], THD in the inverter’s ouput [66]. To apply GA, the first step is to formulate the solution as numerical
voltage and current waveform should be <5 %. THD is defined as the parameters, named “chromosomes”. The chromosome can be formed by
ratio of root mean square sum of harmonics component of a waveform to using a fixed length array of datatypes such as binary, integer, or real
its fundamental component and can be formulated as follows [62]: numbers. The GA then goes through an iterative set of steps, starting
with a population of solutions that is subject to evaluation by deter­
mining an objective measure for each individual (called the fitness
function). Based on the fitness, a selection scheme then chooses candi­
dates from the current population that are used to create a new popu­
lation. Solutions can move to the new population unchanged, or they
Table 2 can be transformed by genetic operators such as crossover and mutation.
Cost of stand-alone PV system components used in this study. Once the new population is filled (GA typically uses a fixed population
Parameter Value Reference size), the process of evaluation, selection, and production of the next
PV module (CPV) $310 [67] population is repeated, with each population being refered to as a
Installation cost (Cinst) 40 % of CPV [68] generation. The population is thus evolved through successive genera­
Battery (Cbat) $419 [69] tions until some stopping criteria is met, such as a solution with a desired
Inverter (Cinv ) 0.65($/W)
[70] fitness being reached, or the value of fitness not improving over a set
Charge controller (Cch ) 450($/kW) number of generations.
[71]
In this work, GA available in the MATLAB optimisation toolbox is
Inductor (CL ) $1/mH
[72] utilised to find the optimal system size based on the number of series
Capacitor (Cc ) 10($/µF) connected PV modules (Ns), number of PV modules in parallel (Np),
[72]
battery capacity (BatAh), and the values of output filter (Lf, Cf), such that

6
A. Hassan et al. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597

Table 3 ( )
Genetic algorithm parameters used in this study. Cinst + CPV Ns × Np + (Cbat × BatAh ) + Cch + Cinv + (CL × Lf ) + (Cc × Cf )

Operation Operator Used Description

(12)

Initial Random integer Population is initialised with randomly Subject to constraints:

population generated integers.
Elite count Elitism Top 5 % of fittest candidates moved to
VACLOL < 1 (13)
next generation unchanged.
Selection Binary tournament The best individual (lowest fitness THDLOL < 1 (14)
criteria selection value) is selected from two randomly
chosen individuals. 20% ≤ Bsoc ≤ 100% (15)
Crossover Laplace crossover Crossover scheme suited to integer-
based chromosomes. In Eq. (12) X = [Ns, Np, BatAh, Lf, Cf] and ICC is the initial capital cost.
Mutation Power mutation Handles integer-based chromosomes. The costs of the system hardware components used in Eq. (12) are
Fitness Minimise ICC with Infeasible solutions violating the
provided in Table 2.
evaluation constraint penalty constraints are penalised.
function To handle the contraints, a parameter free penalty function is used
which modifies the objective function as follows [73]:
⎧
the total investment cost (ICC) is minimised while simultaneously the ⎪
⎪
⎨ f (xi ), if xi is feasible;
power quality standards given in Table 1 are satisfied. The optimisation F(xi ) = ∑m ⃒ ⃒ (16)
⎪ ⃒∅j (xi ) ⃒, otherwise.
problem is formulated as: ⎩ fworst +
⎪ j=1
Objective function: minimise {ICC(X)}

Fig. 5. Optimisation workflow representing data inputs and outputs.

7
A. Hassan et al. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597

Fig. 6a. I-V and P-V characteristic curves of selected PV module at different solar irradiance levels with maximum power points [48].

Setting correct GA operators is crucial in terms of solution compu­
tational time and accuracy. After careful analyses, it was found that a
population size of 20, function tolerance, and constraints tolerance of 1e-
2
give satisfactory results. Table 3 lists the GA operators used in this
study.
The optimisation problem is solved by iteratively evolving the GA
population over a number of generations. During each iteration, the
hourly resolved irradiance, temperature, and electric load data are
loaded into the solar PV system model built in Simulink. The Simulink
model is simulated for 1 s and the power flows during each time interval

Fig. 6b. Simulation results for the adopted fractional open circuit MPPT technique at different irradiance values.

8
A. Hassan et al.
Fig. 7. DC bus voltage, battery, and inverter control testing under varying irradiance conditions. (1), (2), and (3) represent selected zones for zoomed view of
inverter output voltage, load voltage, and load current, respectively.
are transformed into the hourly energy flows. The simulation results
including the parameters such as battery state of charge, output voltage,
current, and THD are recorded to check the feasiblity of each individual
against the non-linear constraints (Eqs. 13–15). The objective function
(min. ICC) measures the fitness of each feasible individual. Fig. 5 shows
the workflow of whole optimisation process.
3. Results and discussions
The GA based approach is adopted to optimally size a stand-alone
solar PV system based on the optimum number of PV panels in series
and parallel, battery capacity (Ah), and output LC filter values. The
optimisation problem is formulated such that the initial capital cost is
minimised, and the constraints including power quality criteria (section
2.8) are satisfied. The system comprising solar PV arrays, DC/DC con­
verters, batteries, inverter, and LC filter is modelled using MATLAB/
Simulink and the evaluation criteria is checked by simulating under
varying solar irradiance, temperature, and electric load data of one
week. The simulation results including validation of control scheme,
initial capital costs, and optimal sizing considering power quality con­
straints are presented below.
3.1. Validation of control scheme
Fig. 6a shows the I-V and P-V curves of the selected PV module at
different irradiance levels. The corresponding voltages, currents, and
power values at maximum power points are shown by red circles. These
curves were extracted from the NREL system advisory model available in
MATLAB. The tracking performance of MPPT technique is illustrated in
9
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597
Fig. 6b. By comparing Fig. 6b with Fig. 6a, it can be witnessed that the
adopted MPPT technique can efficiently track the true MPP under
varying irradiance conditions. A little diversion from the reference
power locus occurs after every 1 s due to the sudden drop in the irra­
diance level. However, the controller manages to quickly restore the
reference MPP, which manifests the effectiveness of the developed
MPPT controller.
To test the robustness of the developed control mechanisms for DC
bus voltage regulation, battery charging/discharging, and inverter
output control, simulations are performed using a test case with the
following non-optimal system parameters: Ns = 4, Np = 3, PLoad = 2000
W, BatAh = 200Ah, initial Bsoc = 90 %, Lf = 10mH, and Cf = 4µF. System
dynamic behavior is analysed by simulating for 6 s under varying solar
irradiance after every 1 s and the results are presented in Fig. 7. The
results depict that during 0–2 s when solar irradiance is high (1000, 800
W/m2), batteries get charged (Bsoc rises and IBat is negative) as PV output
power (PPV) is greater than the load demand (PLoad), whilst during 2–5 s,
when PPV is less than the PLoad due to low solar irradiance, batteries are
discharged (Bsoc drops and IBat is positive) to compensate the load de­
mand deficit. It can also be noticed that the designed control scheme
maintains the DC bus voltage (VDC) and the load voltage (Vrms) around
400 V and 240 V respectively as required by the design criteria. How­
ever, due to the fact that this test case is based on non-optimal values of
the system components, the output voltage (VAC) and current (IAC)
waveforms are polluted with inadmissible harmonics as shown in Fig. 7
(2) and Fig. 7(3). The THD levels found by Fast Fourier Transform (FFT)
in the VAC at the end of each 1 s interval are displayed in Figs. 8a-8c. It
can be observed that the system frequency is maintained at nominal
value of 50 Hz, whilst the THD levels and VAC vary with varying
A. Hassan et al.
Fig. 8a. THD level in the output load voltage waveform for non-optimal case at the end of 1 s and 2 s.
Fig. 8b. THD level in the output load voltage waveform for non-optimal case at the end of 3 s and 4 s.
irradiance and electric load conditions. Additionally, the THD in the
selected VAC cycles during each interval are higher than the allowable
limit (5 %) and thus must be brought down by selecting correct har­
monic filter size to satisfy the power quality criteria. Since no inductive
or capacitive loads were considered, THD in the current waveform was
found equal to the load voltage waveform. Therefore, the THD level in
load voltage (THDv) is displayed only.
3.2. Case 1: Non-optimal without any constraints
To analyse the impact of system size and varying conditions on the
energy flow and power quality, simulations using the weekly irradiance,
temperature, and electric load data (Fig. 4) were performed with the
previously mentioned non-optimal PV array size (Ns × Np = 4 × 3),
battery capacity (200Ah), and LC filter values (Lf = 10mH, Cf = 4µF).
The results shown in Fig. 9 depict that the solar PV power is mainly
produced during the daytime (8:00am-5:00 pm) reaching its peak value
around midday. Thereby, batteries are charged or discharged depending
upon the available energy (EPV) and the load demand (ELoad). However,
due to the non-optimal PV array and battery size, it can be observed that
10
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597
the system fails to fulfil the load demand during most of the time of
week. Since the batteries are assumed to be fully charged (Bsoc = 100 %)
at the start of simulations, the system successfully manages to maintain
the VAC at the required level (240 V) for more than one day by dis­
charging the batteries. However, as the Bsoc gradually drops and be­
comes zero during 2nd day, VAC also falls to zero and the load is lost
(VACLOL = 1). Afterwards, the VAC gets restored during the daytime if
sufficient solar PV power is being produced, whilst it stays at zero during
the rest of the day. Due to very low irradiance during the 4th and 5th day
of the selected week, frequent tumbling in the VAC can be observed
which results in recurring loss of loads (VACLOL = 1). Regarding the
THDv, the criteria (below 5 %) is not met (THDvLOL = 1) throughout the
week except during two intervals, which is due to the incorrect non-
optimal LC filter size. Moreover, it can also be noticed that THDv
ranges between 5.3 and 9 % when VAC is close to its required level and
can reach around 60 % when VAC is trembling due to the poor irradiance
or very low battery state of charge. Some of the THDv values can be
found missing during some specific instances which is due to the loss of
system load voltage (VAC = 0). These results illustrate the importance of
optimal system parameters, which if not selected correctly, can give rise
A. Hassan et al. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597

Fig. 8c. THD level in the output load voltage waveform for non-optimal case at the end of 5 s and 6 s.

Fig. 9. Weekly energy flows and PQ indices with non-optimal system parameters.

Table 4
Optimisation results for studied cases.
Case studies Optimised parameters Fitness function min. ICC ($) Loss of load (LOL) over 1 week

Ns Np BatAh (Ah) Lf (mH) Cf (µF) VAC-LOL THDv-LOL

Case 1: non-optimal 4 3 200 10 4 13,510 94 166

Case 2: VAC constraint 8 5 531 32 12 39,233 0 78
Case 3: VAC & THDv constraints 7 6 537 51 54 40,886 0 0
Case 4: USA 6 7 885 16 109 53,551 0 0

11
A. Hassan et al. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597

Fig. 10. Energy flows and PQ indicators over one week with the optimal system parameters for VAC constraint only.

to poor power quality and frequent loss of loads leading to system fail­
ure. Further analyses on the GA based optimisation with power quality
constraints are presented below.
3.3. Case 2: Optimisation with load voltage (VAC) constraint
To reveal the influence of each PQ constraint, the system is first
optimised for VAC constraint only and then by considering both VAC and
THD constraints. The optimal system parameters found for VAC
constraint are Ns = 8, Np = 5, BatAh = 531Ah, Lf = 32mH, and Cf = 12µF
as given in Table 4. The system behavior over the whole week with these
parameters is shown in Fig. 10. It is interesting to note that unlike case 1,
the optimal solar PV size and battery capacity found by GA successfully
meet the load demand throughout the studied period by keeping the VAC
close to the standard voltage of 240 V. Therefore, there is no loss of load
over the whole week due to the violation of VAC from allowable limits
(VACLOL = 0). It can also be observed that due to very low solar irradi­
ance during the 4th and 5th day of the week, a continuous drop in Bsoc

Fig. 11. Energy flows and PQ indicators over the selected week with the optimal parameters found by considering both VAC and THDv constraints.

12
A. Hassan et al.
Fig. 12. Energy flows and PQ indicators over the whole month of June using optimal parameters found by considering both VAC and THDv constraints.
occurs, but it never goes below 20 % as required in the design criteria
(Eq.15). Furthermore, as THDv constraint was not included in this case
along with VAC, there are 78 intervals when THDv exceeded the upper
limit of 5 % and caused the loss of load due to THD violation (THDLOL =
1). The reason is the non-optimal LC filter size which causes THDv
overstepping under varying load and irradiance conditions. These re­
sults demonstrate the importance of considering THDv constraint during
the optimal sizing of solar PV systems to prevent inadmissible THD
distortions. The ensuing results therefore present the effects of consid­
ering both VAC and THDv constraints.
3.4. Case 3: Optimisation with both VAC and THDv constraints
As discussed previously, maintaining the VAC and THDv within
allowable limits under varying operating conditions is critical for the
efficient and reliable operation of solar PV systems. In this context, both
VAC and THDv are considered during optimisation. The optimum system
parameters found in this case are Ns = 7, Np = 6, BatAh = 537Ah, Lf =
51mH, and Cf = 54µF as listed in Table 4. It can be noticed that the
number of PV panels and battery size are almost the same as case 2, but
LC filter size which mainly controls the THD level in the voltage and
current waveforms is higher in this case. The simulation results shown in
Fig. 11 reveal that the optimal solution fulfills both VAC and THDv
criteria over the whole week. As required by the design criteria, VAC is
maintained very close to the reference voltage (240Vrms) throughout the
week under varying irradiance, temperature, and electric load condi­
tions and thus result in zero loss of load due to VAC constraint violation
Table 5
Current harmonics limits for systems rated 120 V-169 kV [76].
Type Harmonic Order (h) Limits (%) TDD (%)
Odd 35 ≤ h ≤ 50 <0.3 <5
23 ≤ h < 35 <0.6
17 ≤ h < 23 <1.5
11 ≤ h < 17 <2
3 ≤ h < 11 <4
Even 25 % of odd harmonics stated above.
13
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597
(VACLOL = 0). Similarly, optimal LC filter also keeps the THD level within
the allowable limits (<5%) under all varying conditions and thus no loss
of load occurs (THDvLOL = 0) due to THD overstepping. These results
show the efficacy of the proposed approach for optimal sizing of solar PV
systems with consideration of power quality constraints. The impact of
fluctuating input conditions on solar PV output, battery power flows,
output load voltage, and current waveforms during the Day-1 of selected
week are displayed in the supplementary material Fig. S2.
To further test the validity of the optimal solution, simulations were
performed using the whole month data of June (Fig. 4) and the results
are displayed in Fig. 12. It can be witnessed that the optimal parameters
found by GA can successfully meet the load demand during the whole
month and there is no loss of load due to VAC limits violation. However,
there are three instances at t = 300 (THD = 5.3 %), t = 638 (THD = 5.8
%), and t = 661 (THD = 7.8 %) when THD marginally exceeds the upper
limit (5 %). This happens when the electric load demand is extremely
low (239 W) or is very high (4500 W), which causes irregular current
flows through the LC filter and thus leads to higher THD during these
instances. Nonetheless, according to [74], THD levels below 8 % for
individual systems are considered safe for operation. It was found
through several tests that the higher THD at low electric load conditions
can be reduced by employing larger Lf, but this may cause significant
drop in the output voltage (from 240 V to 210 V) and inadmissible THD
during high electric load demands as shown in Fig. S3 of supplementary
material. Likewise, as shown in Fig. S4 of supplementary material, the
elevated THD at high electric load demand can be mitigated by using a
higher Cf, but this results in very high output load voltages (around 350
V) and unacceptable THD at low electric load conditions. So, it is very
challenging to find an LC filter that can control the harmonics at all
electric load conditions. Therefore, the active power filters or hybrid
harmonic filters [75] are recommended to deal with more sophisticated
loads.
3.5. Case 4: Optimisation considering individual current harmonics limits
THD is the most popular index to quantify the level of harmonics in
the voltage or current waveforms. In the previous results, a universal
A. Hassan et al.
Fig. 13a. Voltages, currents, and corresponding THDi at the end of 1, 2, 3, and 4 h intervals.
Fig. 13b. Voltages, currents, and corresponding THD at the end of 5,6,7, and 8 h intervals.
power quality criteria of THD < 5 % [10] in the output voltage and
current was used. However, for integrating solar PV systems with the
grid, IEEE std. 519–2014 [76] also imposes some limitations (Table 5)
on the individual current harmonics at the point of common coupling
(PCC). Figs. 13a-13f show the current, voltage waveforms (10 cycles)
and their corresponding THDi values at the end of each 1-hour interval
during the Day-1 of selected week. It can be observed that the optimal
solution found by GA for THD < 5 % also satisfies most of the individual
current harmonics limits mentioned in Table 5. The harmonics greater
than the harmonic order (h > 17) are almost zero, whilst the harmonics
in the range of 11 ≤ h < 17 and 17 ≤ h < 23 never exceed the upper
limits of 2 % and 1.5 % respectively. Only the harmonics in the range of
2 ≤ h ≤ 11 are significant, among which the odd harmonic (h = 3) and
the even harmonic (h = 2) are found to marginally exceed their upper
limits of 4 % and 1 % during 0–1 h and 2–3 h intervals respectively.
These results show the efficacy of the proposed approach and
14
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597
demonstrate that the THD < 5 % index along with the voltage and fre­
quency constraints used in this study can also effectively meet most of
the individual current harmonic limits. Although, a stand-alone solar PV
system (without grid integration) was considered as a test case in this
study, however, to be more precise in fulfilling the power quality stan­
dards and demonstrate the applicability of the proposed approach,
optimisation using the data for Day-1 was performed by incorporating
the current harmonics limits given in Table 5. In this case, the optimal
solution is found at Lf = 61mH and Cf = 47µF, while the solar PV size and
battery capacity remain almost the same (Ns = 7, Np = 6, BatAh =
538Ah). The results shown in Figs. 14a-14f exhibit that the optimal
solution found by GA can successfully meet all the imposed individual
current harmonic limits listed in Table 5. The harmonics greater than h
> 15 are almost zero and never exceed their upper limits. Similarly, the
most dominant low order odd harmonics (3 ≤ h < 11) and the even
harmonics (2 ≤ h < 10) also comply with their upper bounds of 4 % and
A. Hassan et al.
Fig. 13c. Voltages, currents, and corresponding THD at the end of 9,10,11, and 12 h intervals.
Fig. 13d. Voltages, currents, and corresponding THD at the end of 13,14,15, and 16 h intervals.
1 % respectively during all 24-hours intervals. The maximum THD
observed in this case is only 1.72 % during 9–10 h. These results
demonstrate that in addition to THD, voltage, and frequency standard,
the proposed approach can easily be adapted to fulfill the individual
current harmonic limits at PCC.
3.6. Case 5: Optimisation considering USA power system parameters
In the previous results, the parameters of an Australian power system
(voltage = 240 V, frequency = 50 Hz) were used as a test case to opti­
mally size a solar PV system with compliance to international power
quality standards. However, in some countries such as USA, a nominal
voltage of 120 V and frequency of 60 Hz is used. To demonstrate the
effectiveness of the proposed approach, optimisation considering the
power system’s parameters of USA was also performed. Following
changes were made in the solar PV system model to make it work for
USA case:
15
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597
• Electric load: nominal voltage = 120Vrms, nominal frequency = 60
Hz.
• Inverter control: sinusoidal reference signal frequency = 60 Hz, Vac-
ref = 120Vrms (Fig. 1 (d)).
• DC bus: VDC-ref = 300 V (Fig. 1 (b)).
• Voltage limits in Table 1: upper limit = 134 V, lower limit = 106 V,
whilst the THD limits were kept the same (<5 %).
The optimum system parameters found by GA in this case are Ns = 6,
Np = 7, BatAh = 885Ah, Lf = 16mH, and Cf = 109µF as given in Table 4. It
can be observed that the PV array size is almost the same (6 × 7 = 42) as
in case 3, but the capacity of battery has increased from 537Ah to
885Ah. This can be attributed to the lower voltage level (120 V) in this
case, which demands a higher ampere-hour capacity to meet the same
load demand. The simulation results shown in Fig. 15 reveal that the
optimal solution found by GA can also successfully fulfill the load de­
mand and the power quality criteria over the whole week for USA case.
A. Hassan et al.
Fig. 13e. Voltages, currents, and corresponding THD at the end of 17,18,19, and 20 h intervals.
Fig. 13f. Voltages, currents, and corresponding THD at the end of 21,22,23, and 24 h intervals.
The output load voltage is maintained at required 120Vrms and THD is
also kept below 5 %. The dynamic response of the system depicting the
solar PV output, battery power flows, dc bus voltage, load voltage, and
load currents during the Day-1 of the selected week are shown in Fig. S5
of the supplementary materials.
3.7. Comparison with the previous study
To test and demonstrate the robustness of proposed approach, results
of this study are compared with our previous work [77] which involves
optimal sizing of stand-alone and grid-supplemented solar PV systems
without power quality constraints. The system components models,
optimisation method, and economic parameters described in [77] are
used to find the optimal PV and battery sizes for the same weather and
electric load data, and the results are shown in Fig. 16. The optimal
battery capacity found by GA is almost same in both cases
16
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597
(approximately 108kWh). However, the number of PV panels has
increased from 36 to 42 due to the inclusion of PQ constraints proposed
in this paper. This 16 % increase in PV array size is mainly due to the
detailed and more accurate dynamic PV system components models (PV
array, MPPT, batteries, dc/dc converter, inverter, and load) employed in
this paper. Whilst, in the previous study, generalized models with no
consideration of system transients were used to calculate the overall
energy flows. Additionally, owing to the higher PV panels size and in­
clusion of LC filter cost, the minimum ICC has slightly increased from
$38,936 to $40,886. Whilst in the case of USA, ICC jumps to $53,551
owing to the higher battery capacity needed to fulfill the load demand. It
can be inferred from these results that although the conventional
methodology currently being used by most researchers and adopted in
[77] to find solar and battery size is simpler, but it does not provide
insights into system transients during operation and neither accounts for
any power quality criteria, which may lead to system failure due to
A. Hassan et al. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597

Fig. 14a. Voltages, currents, and corresponding THDi at the end of 1, 2, 3, and 4 h intervals.

Fig. 14b. Voltages, currents, and corresponding THD at the end of 5,6,7, and 8 h intervals.

improper selection of system parameters as demonstrated in section 3.2. 4. Conclusions

Whilst the proposed approach has the advantage of designing a more
realistic, cost effective, and reliable solar PV system with the consider­
ation of power quality standards as well as system dynamics under
actual varying conditions.
Cost-effectiveness, reliablity, and compliance with the international
power quality standards are some of the major challenges in the
advancement of solar PV systems. This paper presents a new approach
for the optimal sizing of stand-alone solar PV systems while considering
voltage and THD constraints according to power quality standards. A

17
A. Hassan et al. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597

Fig. 14c. Voltages, currents, and corresponding THD at the end of 9,10,11, and 12 h intervals.

Fig. 14d. Voltages, currents, and corresponding THD at the end of 13,14,15, and 16 h intervals.

detailed model comprising of PV arrays, MPPT controller, batteries,
buck/boost converter, DC/AC inverter, and LC filter is developed using
MATLAB/Simulink. To analyse the actual operation of the system under
varying conditions, highly dynamic solar irradiance, temperature, and
electric load data of one week are utilised to facilitate the simulations.
Optimum number of PV panels required in series (Ns) and parallel (Np),
optimal size of battery (BatAh), as well as optimal values of LC filter (Lf,
Cf) are found using a Genetic Algorithm, such that the Initial Capital Cost
(ICC) for establishing PV system is minimised and the power quality
criteria is also satisfied. The main findings of this study are as follows:
• Selection of optimal system parameters including Ns, Np, BatAh, Lf,
and Cf during the initial design stage is critical for the cost efficient,
reliable, and uninterrupted operation of solar PV systems, since

18
A. Hassan et al. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597

Fig. 14e. Voltages, currents, and corresponding THD at the end of 17,18,19, and 20 h intervals.

Fig. 14f. Voltages, currents, and corresponding THD at the end of 21,22,23, and 24 h intervals.

improper system components values may lead to loss of loads and
system failure. In particular, inaccurate values of Ns, Np, and BatAh
may disrupt the sytem voltages, while improper LC filter size might
induce unacceptable levels of harmonics (THD) in the output voltage
and current waveforms.
• Both VAC as well as THD constraint should be considered during
optimisation. Ignoring any constraint may result in its undesirable
levels under varying conditions and lead to loss of load. Moreover, it
was found that VAC and THD levels are strongly influenced by the
varying solar irradiance, battery state of charge, and electric load
conditions. Therefore, analysing the system performance under
varying input conditions over long enough period is essential to
ensure the safe, reliable, and un-interrupted PV system operation.

19
A. Hassan et al. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597

Fig. 15. Energy flows and PQ indicators over the selected week with the optimal parameters found by considering USA power system.

Fig. 16. Comparison of optimisation results of current study (optimal sizing with PQ consideration) with the previous study (optimal sizing without PQ
consideration).

• The comparison of optimisation results of present study with our
previous work (without power quality consideration [77]) indicates
that optimal battery capacity over the selected period is the same in
both cases (108kWh). Whilst the optimal number of PV panels is
found to be higher in the present approach (from 36 to 42) which is
due to the more detailed and accurate PV system components models
used in this study. Owing to higher PV array size and inclusion of LC
filter, the Initial Capital Cost (ICC) has slighlty increased from
$38,936 to $40,886. However, the methodology developed in this
paper has the advantage of being able to design a more robust solar
PV system with adherence to power quality standards under varying
conditions.
The analyses presented in this paper verify the effectiveness of the
developed design approach for optimal sizing of stand-alone solar PV
systems with compliance to international power quality standards and
thus will facilitate the designers and researchers in this field to develop
more cost effective and reliable solar PV systems. Further research is
warranted into applying the developed methodology to grid-connected
and hybrid solar PV systems topologies with different harmonic filters
configurations.

20
A. Hassan et al.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Aakash Hassan: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Vali­
dation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data curation. Octavian Bass:
Supervision, Methodology, Validation, Resources, Writing – review &
editing, Project administration. Yasir M. Al-Abdeli: Supervision, Vali­
dation, Resources, Writing – review & editing. Martin Masek: Meth­
odology, Visualization, Writing – review & editing. Mohammad A.S.
Masoum: Supervision, Methodology, Writing – review & editing, Proj­
ect administration.
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.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by Edith Cowan University, Australia
and Higher Education Commission, Pakistan joint scholarship. The au­
thors also appreciate the Western Power, a Western Australian State
Government corporation, in providing access to the electric load data for
the study undertaken.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2022.108597.
References
[1] IEA. World Energy Outlook 2019, International Energy Agency 2019; 2019.
https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2019 (accessed October 20,
2019).
[2] IEA. Renewables 2020, IEA, Paris 2020; 2020. https://www.iea.org/reports/
renewables-2020 (accessed May 12, 2021).
[3] IRENA. Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2018, International Renewable
Energy Agency, Abu Dhabi 2018; 2019. https://www.irena.org/Statistics/View-
Data-by-Topic/Costs/Global-Trends (accessed February 4, 2020).
[4] Clean Energy Council | Renewable Energy Australia 2021. https://www.
cleanenergycouncil.org.au/consumers/buying-solar/government-program
(accessed May 12, 2021).
[5] Karimi M, Mokhlis H, Naidu K, Uddin S, Bakar AHA. Photovoltaic penetration
issues and impacts in distribution network - a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2016;53:594–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.08.042.
[6] Lupangu C, Bansal RC. A review of technical issues on the development of solar
photovoltaic systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;73:950–65. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.003.
[7] Mohammadi P, Mehraeen S. Challenges of PV integration in low-voltage secondary
networks. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 2017;32:525–35. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TPWRD.2016.2556692.
[8] Jadeja K. Major technical issues with increased PV penetration on the existing
electrical grid. Murdoch University; 2012.
[9] Singh B, Chandra A, Al-Haddad K. Power Quality : Problems and Mitigation
Techniques. New York, UNITED KINGDOM: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated;
2015.
[10] Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers I. IEEE std 519-1992. IEEE
Recommended Practices and Requirements for Harmonic Control in Electric Power
Systems. New York; 1992. https://doi.org/10.1109/PAPCON.2006.1673767.
[11] Syed IM. Near-optimal standalone hybrid PV/WE system sizing method. Sol Energy
2017;157:727–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2017.08.085.
[12] Eltamaly AM, Mohamed MA. Optimal sizing and designing of hybrid renewable
energy systems in smart grid applications. vol. 2. Elsevier Inc.; 2018. https://doi.
org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813185-5.00011-5.
[13] Ghorbani N, Kasaeian A, Toopshekan A, Bahrami L, Maghami A. Optimizing a
hybrid wind-PV-battery system using GA-PSO and MOPSO for reducing cost and
increasing reliability. Energy 2018;154:581–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
ENERGY.2017.12.057.
[14] El-Bidairi KS, Duc Nguyen H, Jayasinghe SDG, Mahmoud TS, Penesis I. A hybrid
energy management and battery size optimization for standalone microgrids: a
21
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597
case study for Flinders Island, Australia. Energy Convers Manage 2018;175:
192–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.08.076.
[15] Al-falahi MDAA, Jayasinghe SDGG, Enshaei H. A review on recent size
optimization methodologies for standalone solar and wind hybrid renewable
energy system. Energy Convers Manage 2017;143:252–74. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2017.04.019.
[16] Chaudhary P, Rizwan M. Energy management supporting high penetration of solar
photovoltaic generation for smart grid using solar forecasts and pumped hydro
storage system. Renew Energy 2018;118:928–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
RENENE.2017.10.113.
[17] Pascual J, Barricarte J, Sanchis P, Marroyo L. Energy management strategy for a
renewable-based residential microgrid with generation and demand forecasting.
Appl Energy 2015;158:12–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.08.040.
[18] Chauhan A, Saini RP. Techno-economic optimization based approach for energy
management of a stand-alone integrated renewable energy system for remote areas
of India. Energy 2016;94:138–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.10.136.
[19] Tawfik TM, Badr MA, El-Kady EY, Abdellatif OE. Optimization and energy
management of hybrid standalone energy system: a case study. Renew Energy
Focus 2018;25:48–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ref.2018.03.004.
[20] Moradi H, Esfahanian M, Abtahi A, Zilouchian A. Optimization and energy
management of a standalone hybrid microgrid in the presence of battery storage
system. Energy 2018;147:226–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.01.016.
[21] Zeng Z, Yang H, Zhao R, Cheng C. Topologies and control strategies of multi-
functional grid-connected inverters for power quality enhancement: a
comprehensive review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;24:223–70. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.03.033.
[22] Manoj Kumar MV, Mishra MK, Kumar C. A grid-connected dual voltage source
inverter with power quality improvement features. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy
2015;6:482–90. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSTE.2014.2386534.
[23] Kamel RM. New inverter control for balancing standalone micro-grid phase
voltages: a review on MG power quality improvement. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2016;63:520–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.074.
[24] Prakash Mahela O, Gafoor SA. Topological aspects of power quality improvement
techniques: a comprehensive overview. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;58:
1129–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.251.
[25] Moeed Amjad A, Salam Z. A review of soft computing methods for harmonics
elimination PWM for inverters in renewable energy conversion systems. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2014;33:141–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.080.
[26] Deniz E, Aydogmus O, Aydogmus Z. Implementation of ANN-based selective
harmonic elimination PWM using hybrid genetic algorithm-based optimization.
Meas J Int Meas Confed 2016;85:32–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
measurement.2016.02.012.
[27] Dahidah MSA, Konstantinou G, Agelidis VG. A review of multilevel selective
harmonic elimination PWM: formulations, solving algorithms, implementation and
applications. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2015;30:4091–106. https://doi.org/
10.1109/TPEL.2014.2355226.
[28] Al-Saedi W, Lachowicz SW, Habibi D, Bass O. Voltage and frequency regulation
based DG unit in an autonomous microgrid operation using particle swarm
optimization. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2013;53:742–51. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijepes.2013.06.002.
[29] Liang X, Andalib-Bin-Karim C. Harmonics and mitigation techniques through
advanced control in grid-connected renewable energy sources: a review. IEEE
Trans Ind Appl 2018;54:3100–11. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2018.2823680.
[30] Adhikari S, Li F. Coordinated V-f and P-Q control of solar photovoltaic generators
with MPPT and battery storage in microgrids. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2014;5:
1270–81. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2014.2301157.
[31] Yi Z, Dong W, Etemadi AH. A unified control and power management scheme for
PV-Battery-based hybrid microgrids for both grid-connected and islanded modes.
IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2018;9:5975–85. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TSG.2017.2700332.
[32] Elkholy MM, El-Hameed MA, El-Fergany AA. Harmonic analysis of hybrid
renewable microgrids comprising optimal design of passive filters and
uncertainties. Electr Power Syst Res 2018;163:491–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.epsr.2018.07.023.
[33] Wu Z, Aldeen M, Saha S. A novel optimisation method for the design of LCL filters
for three-phase grid-tied inverters. IEEE PES Innov Smart Grid Technol Conf Eur
2016:214–20. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISGT-Asia.2016.7796388.
[34] Kazemi-Robati E, Sepasian MS. Passive harmonic filter planning considering daily
load variations and distribution system reconfiguration. Electr Power Syst Res
2019;166:125–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2018.09.019.
[35] Poongothai C, Vasudevan K. Design of LCL filter for grid-interfaced PV system
based on cost minimization. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 2019;55:584–92. https://doi.org/
10.1109/TIA.2018.2865723.
[36] Azab M. Multi-objective design approach of passive filters for single-phase
distributed energy grid integration systems using particle swarm optimization.
Energy Rep 2020;6:157–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2019.12.015.
[37] Vinayagam A, Aziz A, Swarna KSV, Khoo S, Stojcevski A. Power Quality Impacts in
a Typical Microgrid. Int. Conf. Sustain. Energy Environ. Eng. (SEEE 2015), Atlantis
Press; 2015, p. 77–82. https://doi.org/10.2991/seee-15.2015.20.
[38] Jamal T, Sha GM, Carter C, Urmee T. A comprehensive techno-economic and
power quality analysis of a remote PV-diesel system in Australia. Renew Energy
Environ Sustain 2017;24. https://doi.org/10.1051/rees/2017033.
[39] Christodoulou CA, Papanikolaou NP, Gonos IF. Design of three-phase autonomous
pv residential systems with improved power quality. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy
2014;5:1027–35. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSTE.2014.2324757.
A. Hassan et al.
[40] Voglitsis D, Papanikolaou NP, Christodoulou CA, Baros DK, Gonos IF. Sensitivity
analysis for the power quality indices of standalone PV systems. IEEE Access 2017;
5:25913–22. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2771527.
[41] Koutroulis E, Blaabjerg F. Design optimization of transformerless grid-connected
PV Inverters including reliability. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2013;28:325–35.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1431927614002451.
[42] Saridakis S, Koutroulis E. Optimal Design of Modern Transformerless PV Inverter
Topologies 2013;28:394–404.
[43] Koutroulis E, Blaabjerg F. Methodology for the optimal design of transformerless
grid-connected PV inverters. IET Power Electron 2012;5:1491–9. https://doi.org/
10.1049/iet-pel.2012.0105.
[44] HassanzadehFard H, Jalilian A. Optimal sizing and location of renewable energy
based DG units in distribution systems considering load growth. Int J Electr Power
Energy Syst 2018;101:356–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2018.03.038.
[45] Upadhyay S, Sharma MP. A review on configurations, control and sizing
methodologies of hybrid energy systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;38:
47–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.05.057.
[46] Chauhan A, Saini RP. A review on integrated renewable energy system based
power generation for stand-alone applications: configurations, storage options,
sizing methodologies and control. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;38:99–120.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.05.079.
[47] MathWorks. Simscape TM Electrical TM User ’ s Guide (Specialized Power Systems)
2020:479–86.
[48] Blair N, Diorio N, Freeman J, Gilman P, Janzou S, Neises TW, et al. System Advisor
Model (SAM). General Description 2018.
[49] LG Electronics. Spec Sheet Mono X LG265S1C-B3. Available from: 17.06. 2014.
http://www.lgsolar.de/downloads/products/MonoX-B3/DS-B3-60-C-G-F-EN-
20140414.pdf.
[50] Gow JA, Manning CD. Development of a photovoltaic array model for use in
power-electronics simulation studies. IEE Proc Electr Power Appl 1999;146:
193–200. https://doi.org/10.1049/ip-epa:19990116.
[51] Karami N, Moubayed N, Outbib R. General review and classification of different
MPPT techniques. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;68:1–18. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.132.
[52] Salas V, Olias E, Barrado A, Lazaro A. Review of the maximum power point
tracking algorithms for stand-alone photovoltaic systems. Sol Energy Mater Sol
Cells 2006;90:1555–78.
[53] Ishaque K, Salam Z, Amjad M, Mekhilef S. An improved particle swarm
optimization (PSO)-based MPPT for PV with reduced steady-state oscillation. IEEE
Trans Power Electron 2012;27:3627–38. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TPEL.2012.2185713.
[54] De Brito MAG, Galotto L, Sampaio LP, De Azevedo MG, Canesin CA. Evaluation of
the main MPPT techniques for photovoltaic applications. IEEE Trans Ind Electron
2013;60:1156–67. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2012.2198036.
[55] Femia N. Power electronics and control techniques for maximum energy harvesting
in photovoltaic systems, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2013, p. 35–42.
[56] Masoum MAS, Dehbonei H, Fuchs EF. Theoretical and experimental analyses of
photovoltaic systems with voltage- and current-based maximum power-point
tracking. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2002;17:514–22. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TEC.2002.805205.
[57] Enslin JHR, Wolf MS, Snyman DB, Swiegers W. Integrated Photovoltaic Maximum
Power Point Tracking Converter. vol. 44. 1997.
[58] Ahmad J. A fractional open circuit voltage based maximum power point tracker for
photovoltaic arrays. ICSTE 2010 - 2010 2nd Int. Conf. Softw. Technol. Eng. Proc.,
vol. 1, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSTE.2010.5608868.
22
International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems 144 (2023) 108597
[59] Tremblay O, Dessaint L-A. Experimental Validation of a Battery Dynamic Model for
EV Applications. n.d.
[60] Viktor Perelmuter. Renewable energy systems with simulink and simpower, Boca
Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis group; 2017, p. 240–326.
[61] BOM, Meteorology B of. Western Australian Weather and Warnings 2019. http://
www.bom.gov.au/wa/forecasts/perth.shtml (accessed August 28, 2019).
[62] Fuchs E, Masoum MAS. Power quality in power systems and electrical machines.
Academic press; 2011.
[63] Economic Regulation Authority Western Australia. Technical Rules for South West
Interconnected Network 2017:6–75. https://www.erawa.com.au/electricity/
electricity-access/western-power-network/technical-rules (accessed March 12,
2021).
[64] Brka A, Al-Abdeli YM, Kothapalli G. Predictive power management strategies for
stand-alone hydrogen systems: Operational impact. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2016;
41:6685–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.03.085.
[65] Sinha S, Chandel SS. Review of recent trends in optimization techniques for solar
photovoltaic-wind based hybrid energy systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;
50:755–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.05.040.
[66] Holland JH. Genetic algorithms. Sci Am 1992;267:66–73.
[67] Brka A, Al-Abdeli YM, Kothapalli G. The interplay between renewables
penetration, costing and emissions in the sizing of stand-alone hydrogen systems.
Int J Hydrogen Energy 2015;40:125–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2014.10.132.
[68] Mohamed MA, Eltamaly AM, Alolah AI. Swarm intelligence-based optimization of
grid-dependent hybrid renewable energy systems. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2015;77:515–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.04.048.
[69] Das BK, Al-Abdeli YM. Optimisation of stand-alone hybrid CHP systems meeting
electric and heating loads. Energy Convers Manag 2017;153:391–408. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.09.078.
[70] Burger B, Rüther R. Inverter sizing of grid-connected photovoltaic systems in the
light of local solar resource distribution characteristics and temperature. Sol
Energy 2006;80:32–45.
[71] Ismail MSS, Moghavvemi M, Mahlia TMIMI. Design of an optimized photovoltaic
and microturbine hybrid power system for a remote small community: Case study
of Palestine. Energy Convers Manage 2013;75:271–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
ENCONMAN.2013.06.019.
[72] DigiKey Electronics Australia | Electronic Components Distributor n.d. https://
www.digikey.com.au/ (accessed May 14, 2021).
[73] Deb K. An efficient constraint handling method for genetic algorithms. Comput
Methods Appl Mech Eng 2000;186:311–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7825
(99)00389-8.
[74] IEEE. Recommended Practices and Requirements for Harmonic Control in
Electrical Power Systems; 1992.
[75] Minal M. Harmonics in Photovoltaic Inverters & Mitigation Techniques PV Inverter
System Configuration : Sterl Wilson; 2020:8.
[76] IEEE Power and Energy Society. IEEE Recommended Practice and Requirements
for Harmonic Control in Electric Power Systems IEEE Power and Energy Society
2014;2014.
[77] Hassan A, Al-Abdeli YM, Masek M, Bass O. Optimal sizing and energy scheduling of
grid-supplemented solar PV systems with battery storage: Sensitivity of reliability
and financial constraints. Energy 2022;238:121780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2021.121780.