You are on page 1of 9

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 26, NO.

2, JUNE 2011

707

Power Loss Comparison of Single- and Two-Stage Grid-Connected Photovoltaic Systems


Tsai-Fu Wu, Senior Member, IEEE, Chih-Hao Chang, Li-Chiun Lin, and Chia-Ling Kuo
AbstractThis paper presents power loss comparison of singleand two-stage grid-connected photovoltaic (PV) systems based on the loss factors of double line-frequency voltage ripple (DLFVR), fast irradiance variation + DLFVR, fast dc load variation + DLFVR, limited operating voltage range + DLFVR, and overall loss factor combination. These loss factors will result in power deviation from the maximum power points. In this paper, both single-stage and two-stage grid-connected PV systems are considered. All of the effects on a two-stage system are insignicant due to an additional maximum power point tracker, but the tracker will reduce the system efciency typically about 2.5%. The power loss caused by these loss factors in a single-stage grid-connected PV system is also around 2.5%; that is, a single-stage system has the merits of saving components and reducing cost, and does not penalize overall system efciency under certain operating voltage ranges. Simulation results with the MATLAB software package and experimental results have conrmed the analysis. Index TermsLoss factor, power loss comparison, single-stage grid-connected photovoltaic (PV) system, two-stage grid-connected PV system.

Fig. 1.

Block diagram of a PV dc-distributed system.

I. INTRODUCTION

HOTOVOLTAIC (PV) grid-connected systems based on a two-stage conguration have been widely studied. Recently, PV dc-distributed systems, as shown in Fig. 1, with either a single-stage conguration [saving an maximum power point tracker (MPPT) stage] or a two-stage one have been being emerging [1]. They can draw maximum power from PV modules and inject the power into utility grid with unity power factor or they can rectify the ac source to replenish and regulate the dc bus. However, the loss factors, such as operational conditions, components, and grid voltage, will deviate effective PV output power. In a grid-connected PV system (GCPVS), PV power varies with operational conditions, such as irradiance, temperature, light incident angle, reduction of sunlight transmittance on glass of module, and shading [2][5], [12], [13]. These factors have been investigated in detail and the authors have presented diagnosis methods to estimate the reduction of PV power. Moreover, a special condition, snow coverage, has been also discussed [6], which was compared with other coverage situations such as

Manuscript received October 21, 2010; revised January 23, 2011; accepted February 28, 2011. Date of publication April 19, 2011; date of current version May 18, 2011. Paper no. TEC-00417-2010. The authors are with Elegant Power Application Research Center, National Chung Cheng University, Chia-Yi 62102, Taiwan (e-mail: ieetfwu@ccu. edu.tw; d97415004@ccu.edu.tw; stanley-summer@hotmail.com; d99415003@ ccu.edu.tw). Color versions of one or more of the gures in this paper are available online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TEC.2011.2123897

shading and dirt. Then, another loss factors, such as components, solar cell serial resistance, and capacity loss in PV batteries, have been reported [3], [7], [8], [19], which are related to the cells themselves. During system operation, there are loss factors such as double line-frequency voltage ripple (DLFVR) due to ac grid [9], [10], [14][17] and fast irradiance variation [11], causing deviation from the maximum power points (MPPs) and also resulting in power loss. However, these factors have not been taken into account in power loss comparison for both single-stage and two-stage GCPVS. This paper presents power loss comparison according to ve loss factors that might deviate the operating points from the MPPs. First, this paper conducts modeling of solar cells and numerical analysis including IV characteristics of PV modules to derive the effect of DLFVR on both single-stage and twostage GCPVS. Then, it performs power loss analysis due to fast irradiance variation. Moreover, a single-stage PV system will penalize its output power under certain operating voltage ranges, while it can save an MPPT stage. In a PV dc-distributed system, as shown in Fig. 1, its dc-bus voltage is regulated by the bidirectional inverter within 360400 V (38020 V), and dc appliance and equipment can be connected to the dc bus directly. Thus, this study chooses fast dc load variation and limited operating voltage range as two of the loss factors. Since the effect of DLFVR exists all the time, this paper presents the ve loss factors as DLFVR, fast irradiance variation + DLFVR, fast dc load variation + DLFVR, limited operating voltage range + DLFVR, and overall loss factor combination. II. MODELING OF PV ARRAYS This section models a PV array, consisting of 14 in series and 2 in parallel PV modules (APOS Series AP-220) for a

0885-8969/$26.00 2011 IEEE

708

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 26, NO. 2, JUNE 2011

TABLE I SPECIFICATIONS OF THE 220-W SOLAR MODULE (APOS SERIES AP-220)

Fig. 2.

Equivalent circuit of a solar cell.

single-stage GCPVS or 7 in series and 4 in parallel for a twostage GCPVS. The power loss analysis based on the loss factors will be then presented in the next section. An equivalent circuit of a solar cell is shown in Fig. 2, in which the current source Isc is the light-induced current, Rj is the nonlinear resistance in the PN junction, Dj is the PN junction diode, Rsh and Rs stand for internal equivalent parallel and series resistance, respectively, Ro is the output load, and ipv and vpv are the output current and voltage of the solar cell, respectively [18]. For simplifying the analysis, Rsh , Rs , and Rj are ignored. Therefore, the output current ipv of the solar cell can be expressed as ipv = np Isc np Isat e((q /T A )(v p v /n s )) 1 (1)

where np is the number of solar cells in parallel, ns is the number of solar cells in series, q is the electric charge (1.61019 C), is the Boltzmann constant (1.381023 J/K ), T is the temperature of solar cells (in degrees Kelvin), and A is the diode ideal factor (A = 15). Additionally, Isat stands for the reverse saturation current and can be expressed as Isat = Ir r T Tr
3

exp

qEgap A

1 1 Tr T

(2)

Fig. 3. PV module IV characteristics of (a) simulated module and (b) real one (APOS Series AP-220).

The saturation current Isat is a function of temperature T. In (2), Tr is the reference temperature of the solar cell, Irr is the reverse saturation current at Tr , and Egap is the band gap of the solar cell (in electronvolts). Moreover, the light-induced current Isc changes with irradiance and temperature, which can be expressed as Si (3) Isc = [Isso + Ki (T Tr )] 1000 where the current Isso is the short-circuit current at reference temperature Tr and a specic irradiance (1000 W/m2 ), Ki is the temperature coefcient of a short-circuit current, and Si is the irradiance (W/m2 ). Table I lists the parameters of the APOS Series AP-220 PV module [20], which are used in (1)(3). By tuning the ideal diode factor A = 1.8 and energy band gap Egap = 1.4 eV, a PV module can be then simulated and compared with a real module, as shown in Fig. 3. It can be observed that the simulated results are relatively close to the real ones, which can ensure accuracy of the following analysis. III. ANALYSIS OF POWER LOSS This section presents power loss analysis of both single-stage and two-stage GCPVS, which includes the effects of DLFVR, fast irradiance variation + DLFVR, fast dc load variation +

DLFVR, limited operating voltage range + DLFVR, and overall loss factor combination. The analysis is based on the simulated PV array model shown in Figs. 2 and 3. A. DLFVR 1) Single-Stage GCPVS: The circuit conguration of a single-stage GCPVS is shown in Fig. 4. When the system reaches the maximum power point Pm pp under a specic irradiance, its PV voltage vpv and current ipv become constant and equal to Vm pp and Im pp , respectively. However, the effect of DLFVR on the deviation of PV voltage away from Vm pp will cause power loss, which can be expressed as
AS Ploss = n k =1

ploss (k) n

(4)

where ploss (k) = Pm pp vpv (k) ipv (k) n= Tl . Ts

Here, Tl is the line period and Ts is the switching period of the full-bridge inverter. Expressions for vpv and ipv are derived

WU et al.: POWER LOSS COMPARISON OF SINGLE- AND TWO-STAGE GRID-CONNECTED PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEMS

709

Fig. 4.

Circuit conguration of a single-stage GCPVS.

rst, and then the power loss can be determined. Voltage vpv can be expressed as vpv (k) = vpv (k 1) + vpv (k) where vpv (k) = Ts [ipv (k 1) iinv (k 1)] Cpv (5)

Fig. 5.

Conceptual current waveforms of isd , iin , and iL .

vpv (0) = Vm pp and current iinv stands for the inverter input average current. PV voltage vpv will vary with input capacitance Cpv , the difference between current ipv and iinv , and switching period Ts . Additionally, current ipv will change with vpv . From (1), we can obtain a numerical expression for ipv : ipv (k) = np Isc np Isat e((q /(T A ))(v p v (k ))/(n s )) 1 where ipv (0) = Im pp . In general, an inverter system is operated by a current control at a xed frequency 1/Ts . Even though the system reaches the MPP, its inductor current iL still has a current ripple; that is, the uperbound current command isd can be set to is for an inverter-inductor current iL to track, as shown in Fig. 5, where is a real number larger than unity. Moreover, the circuit shown in Fig. 4 is operated as a buck converter to shape the inductor current to be sinusoidal and in phase with the ac grid voltage. Thus, the inverter input average current iinv can be approximated by a multiplication of the output current is and the duty ratio d in every switching cycle Ts , which can be expressed as iinv (k) is (k)d(k) = = where isd is isd (k) isd (k) + isd = iL (k) = iL (k 1) + iL (k) and iL (k) = Ts Lac [(vpv (k) |vs (k)|) d(k) |vs (k)| (1 d(k))] . (isd (k) + iL (k)) d(k) 2 (7) d(k)Ts = (6) From the aforementioned equations, we can determine the turn-on time interval as follows: Lac [isd (k) iL (k)] vpv (k) |vs (k)| (8)

Fig. 6. Circuit conguration of a two-stage GCPVS with a boost converter functioning as an MPPT.

where Lac is the inverter inductor and vs is the ac-grid voltage. AS From (1) to (8), the total power loss Ploss deviating from the MPP during one line period (1/60 Hz) can be estimated. 2) Two-Stage GCPVS: Circuit conguration, with a boost converter functioning as an MPPT, of a two-stage GCPVS is shown in Fig. 6. With the boost converter, the operating voltage vpv of the PV modules can be lower than the dc-link voltage vlink . For comparing both single-stage and two-stage systems, inverter parameters are kept identical. The expression of the PV current ipv is the same as (6), and the variation of the PV voltage vpv is the same as (4) except the inverter input current iinv , which is replaced with the inductor current iLb . Determination of the boost inductor current iLb is illustrated in Fig. 7. Before the next perturbation of maximum power point tracking, it is necessary to regulate the average value of iLb equaling the MPP current Im pp . Therefore, we can adopt an average method to determine iLb where the average value of iLb equals Im pp during turn-on interval db Ts . It can be expressed as iL b (k) = iL b (k 1) + iL b (k 1) vpv (k 1) vlink (k 1) [1 db (k 1)]Ts Lb (9)

710

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 26, NO. 2, JUNE 2011

Fig. 7.

Illustration of inductor current iL b varying with time.

Fig. 8. load.

Block diagrams of (a) single-stage and (b) two-stage GCPVS with dc

where iL b (k 1) = 2 (Im pp iL b (k 1)) = From (9), we can have db (k) = where iL b (0) = Im pp iL b (0) 2 2 (Im pp iL b (k)) Lb vpv (k) Ts (10) vpv (k 1) db (k 1) Ts . Lb

C. Fast DC Load Variation + DLFVR Fig. 8 shows block diagrams of a single-stage and a twostage GCPVS with dc load. When the dc load starts to absorb power, the capacitor current ic will drop and the PV voltage vpv will drop correspondingly. The PV voltage vpv then will deviate from the MPP and result in power loss. By setting the required power Pdc for dc load and rising time Trise from no load to the full load, the expression for dc load power pdc load is shown as follows: pdc where pdc and pdc
load (0) load load (k)

= pdc

load (k

1) + pdc

load

(12)

Vm pp iL b (0) = db (0) Ts Lb and Vm pp . db (0) = 1 vlink (0) Additionally, similar to (5), variation of the dc-link voltage vlink can be analogously related to the input diode current id and PV current ipv . Power loss analysis according to the loss factor of DLFVR can be attained from (6), (7), (9), and (10). B. Fast Irradiance Variation + DLFVR The output power of a PV array is strongly dependent on irradiance and temperature, where irradiance would change rapidly in a cloudy day. A cloud passing over PV modules will cause operating point deviating from the MPP and resulting in power loss. The power loss analysis based on fast irradiance variation and DLFVR will include the relationship between PV array output current and irradiance. Then, by setting the change of irradiance Si over one line period (1/60 Hz) and combining (1)(3) with the analysis of DLFVR, as well as the effect of fast B irradiance variation on PV voltage vpv , the power loss Ploss can be determined as
B Ploss = n k =1

Pdc Trise Ts = 0.

From (12), we can obtain the dc load current idc


load (k)

pdc load (k) . vlink (k)

(13)

Analysis of power loss due to fast dc load variation can be accomplished from (12) and (13), and based on the derivation of DLFVR. D. Limited Operating Voltage Range + DLFVR If a single-stage GCPVS is applied to a dc microgrid power distribution system, its operating voltage range of PV arrays is limited within 360400 V. In general, an MPP voltage changes with irradiance and temperature. Therefore, Pm pp is expressed as Pm pp (Si ,T), and it is identical to (4). E. Overall Loss Factor Combination Since all loss factors are not independent except the effect of DLFVR, the power loss cannot be summarized from each individual one. Therefore, combing all loss factors together to analyze the total power loss is necessary. With (1)(8), the overall power loss due to these loss factors can be then calculated. IV. ANALYSIS AND SIMULATION PROCEDURE This section summarizes the procedure of the power loss analysis and its simulation. By following the procedure, one can conduct power loss analysis of a given PV array and a GCPV system according to the aforementioned loss factors. The

ploss (k) n

(11)

where ploss (k) = Pm pp (Si (k)) vpv (k) ipv (k) and Si (k) = Si (k 1) + Si /Ts .

WU et al.: POWER LOSS COMPARISON OF SINGLE- AND TWO-STAGE GRID-CONNECTED PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEMS

711

TABLE II OPERATING CONDITIONS OF THE TWO PV SYSTEMS

Fig. 9. Ripple waveforms of (a) PV array voltage v pv and (b) PV array output power ppv in a single-stage GCPVS when capacitor Cpv is xed at 8470 F.

proposed modeling procedure can include both high-frequency and low-frequency voltage ripple and power loss. Moreover, the power loss analysis can be conducted with loss factors one by one. The procedure is described as follows. 1) Program array characteristic equations (1)(3) into MATLAB and set parameters of a selected PV module, such as open-circuit voltage Vo c , short-circuit current Isc , and others from (1) to (3) except the ideal factor A and energy band gap Egap . 2) Tune A (A = 15) and Egap (Egap 1.1 eV) so that the simulated module model can t the actual parameters, Vm pp , Im pp , and temperature coefcient Kv of the voltage. 3) Set operating conditions, such as Cpv , Clink , irradiance, and temperature, and program the derivation of power loss caused by DLFVR, (1)(10), into MATLAB. 4) Based on step 3), set a fast irradiance change rate Si and program the derivation of power loss caused by fast irradiance variation, (11). 5) Based on step 3), set dc load conditions, such as dc load power Pdc and the rising time Trise , and program the derivation of power loss caused by fast dc load variation, (12) and (13). 6) Base on step 2), set ten irradiance levels from 100 to 1000 W/m2 and six temperature levels from 25 to 70 C to estimate the power loss caused by over limited operating voltage range, 360400 V. 7) Finally, summarize the power loss due to the aforementioned loss factors for both single-stage and two-stage grid-connected PV systems.

Fig. 10.

Illustration of a power ripple due to the effect of DLFVR.

Fig. 11. Plots of PV capacitor Cpv versus (a) PV voltage-ripple percentage and (b) power-loss percentage in a single-stage GCPVS.

A. Simulated Results 1) DLFVR: For the operating conditions shown in Table II, we can obtain the waveforms of PV array voltage vpv , dc-link voltage vlink , and PV array output power ppv with MATLAB. The range of capacitor Cpv has six levels from 1470 F to 20470 F in a single-stage GCPVS. The waveforms of vpv and ppv can be simulated, as shown in Fig. 9, in which the system is operated with Cpv = 8470 F. It can be observed that the magnitude of ppv is not constant, and its swing is much larger when vpv is located on the right-hand side of the MPP, which results from a steeper slope in the PV curve, as shown in Fig. 10. Then, by calculating the voltage ripple of vpv and the power loss, the plots of Cpv versus voltage-ripple percentage and power-loss percentage are illustrated in Fig. 11. The power loss due to double line-frequency in a single-stage PV system is about 3.5 W or 0.06% under Cpv = 8470 F. For a two-stage GCPVS, the dc-link capacitor Clink is xed to 8470 F, and the range of Cpv varies from 47 to 470 F. Fig. 12 shows the ripple waveform of dc-link voltage vlink , PV array voltage vpv , and its output power ppv with Cpv = 470 F. The voltage ripple of vpv and the power ripple are almost zero mainly due to switching-frequency; hence, the ripple effect can

V. SIMULATED AND MEASURED RESULTS This section shows simulated and measured results based on the power loss analysis, and the plots of power loss versus different operating conditions, such as irradiance, dc-link capacitance, and PV-side capacitance. In addition, the effects of the loss factors on both single-stage and two-stage GCPVS are discussed. Table II shows the operating conditions for the two systems.

712

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 26, NO. 2, JUNE 2011

Fig. 12. Ripple waveforms of (a) voltages v lin k and v pv and (b) PV array output power ppv in a two-stage GCPVS when a PV capacitor Clin k is xed at 8470 F and Cpv is 470 F.

Fig. 14. Ripple waveforms of (a) PV array voltage and (b) PV array output power under fast dc load variation in a single-stage GCPVS.

Fig. 13. The ripple waveforms of (a) PV array voltage and (b) PV array power in a single-stage GCPVS when fast irradiance variation is 100 W/m2 /16.6 ms.

Fig. 15. Ripple waveforms of (a) voltages v lin k and v pv and (b) PV array output power under fast dc load variation in a two-stage GCPVS.

be ignored. Therefore, we can select PV capacitor Cpv = 470 F, which is sufcient enough to lter out the effect of DLFVR. 2) Fast Irradiance Variation + DLFVR: First, we consider that the speed of cloud is 30 m/s passing over PV arrays, and its corresponding irradiance variation Si /t being about 100 W/m2 /16.6 ms and the PV array temperature being unchanged over one line cycle (1/60 Hz). According to the power loss analysis of fast irradiance variation, the ripple waveforms of PV voltage vpv and PV output power ppv can be simulated as shown in Fig. 13. For a large PV capacitor Cpv , the change of vpv is only 3.8 V, and the power loss is 3.67 W or 0.07%. Because the change of Vm pp during 100 W/m2 is only 2 V, the operating voltage does not deviate from the MPP signicantly. Therefore, the effect of fast irradiance variation on a single-stage GCPVS is not signicant. 3) Fast DC Load Variation + DLFVR: For common dc home appliances, some like air conditioners consume high power above 500 W per set and others like lamps and computers just consume low power, below 300 W. In the following, we assume that a set of dc load includes two air conditioners (the maximum power is 2000 W), ten lamps (about 400 W), two computers (about 500 W), and the rising times of their power are 3 min, 1 ms, and 0.5 ms, respectively. That is, the fastest power variation is 1 kW/ms. Moreover, the operating conditions, Cpv = 8470 F for a single-stage GCPVS, and Clink = 8470 F and Cpv = 470 F for a two-stage GCPVS, are selected. The simulated results can be obtained from (12) and (13) with parameters Pdc = 1000 W and Trise = 1 ms, as shown in Figs. 14 and 15, respectively. The power loss caused by a deviation from the MPP under fast dc load variation is 7.77 W on average or 0.13% in a single-stage GCPVS and 0.12 W or 0.002% in a two-stage GCPVS.

Fig. 16. Plots of irradiance versus the MPP voltage under the limited operating voltage range of 360400 V with 14 PV modules in series.

4) Limited Operating Voltage Range + DLFVR: As mentioned in Section II, the operating voltage Vm pp deviating out of the limited range, 360400 V, will cause power loss. In the following, the power loss versus irradiance and temperature under the limited voltage range is investigated and illustrated. Note that infrequently occurring operating conditions are removed from the plots, since some temperature levels could not happen under certain irradiance, such as 2530 C under Si = 6001000 W/m2 , 50 C under Si = 100400 W/m2 , and 60 C under Si = 100500 W/m2 . With simulation, plots of irradiance versus MPP voltage and plots of irradiance versus power loss are illustrated in Figs. 16 and 17, respectively. The power loss due to the limited operating voltage range is about 04%, and the maximum power loss under 600 W/m2 and 60 C is 3.84%. It is important to ensure that the MPP voltage range of a PV array can t the limited operating voltage range, which can prevent deviation from the MPPs and reduce the power loss. According to the PV characteristics of the aforementioned

WU et al.: POWER LOSS COMPARISON OF SINGLE- AND TWO-STAGE GRID-CONNECTED PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEMS

713

Fig. 17. Plots of irradiance versus power loss under the limited operating voltage range of 360400 V with 14 PV modules in series.

Fig. 20. Plots of irradiance versus power loss under the limited operating voltage range of 360400 V with 13 PV modules in series.

Fig. 21. Ripple waveforms of (a) PV array voltage and (b) PV array output power under overall loss factor combination in a single-stage GCPVS. Fig. 18. Conceptual PV curve for illustrating a limited operating voltage range under typical operational conditions.

Fig. 19. Plots of irradiance versus power loss under the limited operating voltage range of 360400 V with 15 PV modules in series.

arrays, the maximum value of the MPP voltages appears at Si = 600 W/m2 and T = 25 C, and the minimum one appears at Si = 600 W/m2 and T = 60 C, as shown in Fig. 18. The number of PV modules in series and in parallel should be chosen to ensure a proper voltage range, which is located within 20 V or 5% variation from the maximum to the minimum value. As a result, the MPP voltage range under typical operational conditions, T = 3050 C and Si = 4001000 W/m2 , can almost t the limited range. For elaborating on this setting, we add or reduce one PV module from the original PV array. The added simulation results for 15 and 13 PV modules in series are shown in Figs. 19 and 20, respectively. It is clear that larger power loss occurs at higher irradiance for 15 PV modules in series, and the same case happens at lower irradiance for 13 in series; that is, more or less connected PV modules will cause major MPP range out of the operating voltage range, 360400 V, signicantly. Therefore, it is important to set the series number of a PV array to ensure that the MPP range can t the limited operating voltage range. 5) Overall Loss Factor Combination: Since all of the loss factors are not independent, combing them together to calculate overall power loss is necessary. Moreover, this analysis

just focuses on a single-stage PV system, because the effects due to fast irradiance variation + DLFVR and fast dc load variation + DLFVR are very insignicant in a two-stage PV system and the effect due to limited operating voltage range + DLFVR does not exist in the two-stage case. Fig. 21 shows the PV array output voltage and power under overall loss factor combination and with the operational parameters of Si = 600 W/m2 , T = 60 C, Pm pp = 3028 W, Vm pp = 336 V, Si = 100 W/m2 /16.6 ms, Pdc = 1000 W, Trise = 1 ms, and the operating voltage xed to 360 V for a single-stage GCPVS. The PV array voltage has double line-frequency ripple and drops due to the effect of fast irradiance and fast dc load variations. The average power loss over one line period is 77.57 W or 2.34%. B. Efciency Comparison In a two-stage GCPVS, the loss factor, limited operating voltage range, does not result in power loss, since a PV array is not directly connected to a grid-connected inverter. Moreover, an additional boost converter with the MPPT function can update its tracking command immediately so that the effect of fast irradiance variation can be ignored. As a result, the power losses due to these two factors are set to 0%. From the aforementioned analysis, the loss factor of the limited operating voltage range will deviate the output power from the MPP most signicantly in a single-stage GCPVS. This study considers a typical boost converter loss of about 2.5%. Then, according to the aforementioned simulation, the power loss due to the loss factors under the discussed operating conditions is shown in Table III. It can be seen that the total loss in a single-stage GCPVS is slightly smaller than that in a two-stage GCPVS. If the operating voltage range of a single-stage system is properly limited, its overall efciency will be higher than that of a two-stage system.

714

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 26, NO. 2, JUNE 2011

TABLE III POWER LOSS OF THE TWO PV SYSTEMS (SIMULATED)

TABLE IV INVERTER OUTPUT POWER MEASUREMENT FROM THE TWO 6-kW PV SYSTEMS

Fig. 22. systems.

Photograph of the prototype of single-stage and two-stage PV

C. Measured Results In reality, it is difcult to measure the power loss due to each single loss factor at a time. In this study, we verify the feasibility of the systems with overall output power measurement. Fig. 22 shows a photograph of the prototype of the single-stage and twostage systems. When the single-stage system is operated, the boost stage is removed from the hardware set-up. Table IV shows the measured output power of the two systems under the effect of all possible loss factors together. It can be observed that the single-stage system can yield higher output power. Moreover, the right two columns show the% deviations of Pout,1 and Pout,2 between the simulated and measured results. It can be observed that the deviation is less than 3%. VI. CONCLUSION This paper has presented numerical analysis with MATLAB to simulate the power loss caused by deviation from the MPPs which are due to the loss factors of DLFVR, fast irradiance variation + DLFVR, fast dc load variation + DLFVR, limited

operating voltage range + DLFVR, and overall combination for both single-stage and two-stage GCPVS. Analysis and simulation procedure of the power loss has been described, which provides engineers a guideline for building a model of PV array and performing the power loss analysis. According to the loss analysis, the total power loss in a single-stage GCPVS is close to a two-stage GCPVS, while the single-stage one can save a stage of a boost converter. That is, from a viewpoint of efciency, cost, and system size, a single-stage GCPVS is feasible in dc-distribution and grid-connected applications if the operating voltage range is properly selected. It has been also veried with the measured inverter output power from the two systems.

REFERENCES
[1] T.-F. Wu, C.-H. Chang, Y.-D. Chang, and K.-Y. Lee, Power loss analysis of grid-connection photovoltaic systems, in Proc. Power Electronics and Drive Systems (PEDS) Conf., 2009, pp. 326331. [2] T. A. Huld, M. Suri, R. P. Kenny, and E. D. Dunlop, Estimating PV performance over large geographical regions, in Proc. 31st IEEE. Photovoltaic. Spec. Conf., 2005, pp. 16791682. [3] N. Okada, S. Yamanaka, H. Kawamura, and H. Ohno, Diagnostic method of performance of a PV module with estimated power output in considering four loss factors, in Proc. 31st IEEE Photovoltaic. Spec. Conf., 2005, pp. 16431646. [4] R. Suzuki, H. Kawamura, S. Yamanaka, H. Ohno, and K. Naito, Loss factors affecting power generation efciency of a PV module, in Proc. 29th IEEE. Photovoltaic. Spec. Conf., 2002, pp. 15571560. [5] N. Okada, S. Yamanaka, H. Kawamura, and H. Ohno, Energy loss of photovoltaic system caused by irradiance and incident angle, in Proc. 3rd IEEE Photovoltaic Energy Convers. World. Conf., 2003, pp. 2062 2065. [6] Y. Ueda, K. Kurokawa, T. Itou, K. Kitamura, Y. Miyamoto, M. Yokota, and H. Sugihara, Performance ratio and yield analysis of grid connected clustered PV systems in Japan, in Proc. 4th IEEE Photovoltaic Energy Convers. World. Conf., 2006, pp. 22962299.

WU et al.: POWER LOSS COMPARISON OF SINGLE- AND TWO-STAGE GRID-CONNECTED PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEMS

715

[7] W.-M. Wu, X.-L. Wang, P. Geng, and T.-H. Tang, Efciency analysis for three phase grid-tied inverter, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Technol. Int. Conf. (ICIT), 2008, pp. 15. [8] T. Oozeki, K. Otani, and K. Kurokawa, An evaluation method for PV system to identify system losses by means of utilizing monitoring data, in Proc. 4th IEEE Photovoltaic Energy Convers. World Conf., 2006, pp. 23192322. [9] N. A. Ninad and L. A. C. Lopes, Operation of single-phase grid-connected inverters with large DC bus voltage ripple, in Proc. IEEE Energy Power and Control (EPC), 2007, pp. 172176. [10] G. Ertasgin, D. M. Whaley, N. Ertugrul, and W. L. Soong, Analysis and design of energy storage for current-source 1-ph grid-connected PV inverters, in Proc. 23rd Annu. IEEE Appl. Power Electron. Conf. (APEC), 2008, pp. 12291234. [11] D. D. Nguyen and B. Lehman, Modeling and simulation of solar PV arrays under changing illumination conditions, in Proc. IEEE Comput. Power Electronics (COMPEL06) Workshops, 2006, pp. 295299. [12] H. Patel and V. Agarwal, MATLAB-based modeling to study the effects of partial shading on PV array characteristics, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 302310, Mar. 2008. [13] X. Weidong, N. Ozog, and W. G. Dunford, Topology Study of photovoltaic interface for maximum power point tracking, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 16961704, Jun. 2007. [14] D. Casadei, G. Grandi, and C. Rossi, Single-phase single-stage photovoltaic generation system based on a ripple correlation control maximum power point tracking, IEEE Energy Convers., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 562568, Jun. 2006. [15] A. Kotsopoulos, J. L. Duarte, and M. A. M. Hendrix, Predictive DC control of single-phase PV inverters with small DC link capacitance, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron., Jun. 911, 2003, vol. 2, pp. 793797. [16] N. D. Benavides and P. L. Chapman, Modeling the effect of voltage ripple on the power output of photovoltaic modules, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 26382643, Jul. 2008. [17] S. B. Kjaer, J. K. Pedersen, and F. Blaabjerg, A review of single-phase grid-connected inverters for photovoltaic modules, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 12921306, Sep./Oct. 2005. [18] S. Liu and R. A. Dougal, Dynamic multiphysics model for solar array, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 285294, Jun. 2002. [19] T. Hund, Capacity loss in PV batteries and recovery procedures, Photovoltaic System Applications Department, Sandia National Labs website (1998). [Online]. Available: http://www.sandia.gov/pv/docs/PDF/caploss. pdf [20] (2004). [Online]. Available: http://www.solarhub.com/pv-modules/1876AP220-APOS-Energy.

Chih-Hao Chang is working toward the Ph.D. degree in Elegant Power Application Research Center, National Chung Cheng University, Chia-Yi, Taiwan. His research interests include three-phase gridconnected inverter, three-phase power factor correction, and dc microgrid.

Li-Chiun Lin was born in Taiwan in 1986. He is a Masters student in Elegant Power Application Research Center, National Chung Cheng University, Chia-Yi, Taiwan. His research interests include grid-connected inverter, power factor correction, DSP-based control and dc-microgrid distribution system.

Chia-Ling Kuo was born in Taiwan in 1985. She received the B.S. degrees in 2008 and the M.S. degree in 2010 in electrical engineering from National Chung Cheng University, Chia-Yi, Taiwan, where she is currently working toward the Ph.D. degree in the same department. Her research interests include design and implementation of bidirectional inverters for dcdistribution applications.

Tsai-Fu Wu (S88M91SM98) received the B.S. degree in electronic engineering from National Chiao-Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, in 1983, the M.S. degree in electrical and computer engineering from Ohio University, Athens, Greece, in 1988, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering and computer science from the University of Illinois, Chicago, in 1992. From 1985 to 1986, he was a System Engineer at SAMPO, Inc., Taiwan, where he was involved in developing and designing graphic terminals. From 1988 to 1992, he was a teaching and research assistant in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (EECS), University of Illinois. Since 1993, he has been with the Department of Electrical Engineering, National Chung Cheng University, Chia-Yi, Taiwan, where he is currently a Chair Professor and Director of the Elegant Power Application Research Center. His research interests include developing and modeling of power converters, design of electronic dimming ballasts for uorescent lamps and metal halide lamps, design and development of smart green energy dc-distribution systems with grid connection. Dr. Wu received three Best Paper Awards from Taipei Power Electronics Association in 20032005. In 2006, he was awarded as an outstanding researcher by the National Science Council, Taiwan.

You might also like