Fast Two Stage MPPT Method Using Power Estimation

Technique for Partially Shaded Condition

A A Saferi*1, J Selvaraj*, N A Rahim*
* Power Energy Dedicated Advanced Centre (UMPEDAC), Level 4, Wisma R&D, University of Malaya, Jalan Pantai Baharu,
59990 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,, Distinct Adjunct Professor Renewable Energy Research Group, King Abdulaziz University,
Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia, 1 Corresponding author: asyrafahmadsaferi@um.edu.my.

PSC happens when the PV modules in a string do not receive

the same solar irradiance. Shading due to the chimney, trees,
nearby building and place with slow moving cloud are
common make PSC for solar system inevitable. PSC can affect
the power-voltage (P-V) characteristic of the PV system
drastically by creating multiple local peaks instead of one
global peak for uniform shading due to bypass diodes in
parallel with each module [2], [3]. The current-voltage (I-V)
characteristic will also exhibit multiple stairs configuration in
accordance with the numbers of local peaks. Conventional
maximum power point tracker (MPPT) schemes, e.g. perturb
and observe(P&O) and incremental conductance(IC), are not
effective for PSC condition since they are designed to reach
one single peak. Convergence to a local peak is very likely and
can cause significant efficiency drop of the whole system[4].
In [5], it has been reported that power losses may be as high as
70% based on real measurements. In another example, 41% of
installed PV systems in the German 1000 Roofs Programme
were affected by partial shading condition, causing 10%
energy loss[6]. Thus, many types of research on the partial
shading condition and new MPPT methods to mitigate the
power losses due to partial shading have been proposed.

Keywords: Global Maximum Power Point Tracker(GMPPT),

Partial Shading Condition(PSC), Photo-voltaic(PV), Boost
Converter.

Abstract
To reach required power and voltage level for grid-connected
photovoltaic (PV) power generation system (PGS), PV
modules are arranged in series and parallel. This configuration
is called a string connection. A by-pass diode is used to prevent
hotspot build-up in the PV module when the PV string is under
partial shading condition (PSC). This bypass-diode caused the
P-V curve of PV string to have multiple peaks, of which only
one is the maximum point. The I-V curve also will have
multiple stairs where at lower voltage operation, the PV string
will be able to source a bigger current to the PGS system. In
this paper, a two-stage method called Fast Peak Power
Estimate(FPPE-GMPPT) has been proposed. The method is
developed based on critical analysis of both I-V and P-V curve
under PSC for a PV string. In the first stage, the vicinity where
the global maximum power point (MPP) is determined by
estimating the power at peak power point (PPP). Then, any
perturbation based MPPT can be used for the second stage to
locate the exact MPP location. The method is fast, easy to
implement without any extra sensor or additional equipment
needed. Simulations in PLECS validate the performance of the
proposed method.

To address the multiple peak values due to PSC, numerous

researches have been proposed through hardware and software
methods. Liu et al [7] have summarised on the latest update on
the hardware method for PSC MPPT. The hardware-based
solutions, although are guaranteed to track the system Global
Maximum Power Point (GMPP) and typically very robust and
highly reliable due to the distributed control, they share similar
disadvantages such that the hardware costs are often high and
implementation of the controller is complex and requires high
processing speed micro-controller. In addition to that,
additional power circuitry also decreases the system overall
reliability and efficiency.

1 Introduction
Solar photovoltaic has been one of the fastest growing
renewable energy technologies. In the year 2014 alone, 40GW
of photovoltaic power system have been installed around the
world which brings global total installation to be at around
170GW at the end of 2014 [1].

As for software MPPT methods under PSC, it can be

categorised into three general groups. The first group is called
the soft-computing(SC) method. This categorization refers to
the use of a computer to simulate the biochemical processes of
natural intelligence system[7]. Since PSC can be viewed as an
optimisation problem, SC techniques have been used with
great success [8][10]. The main advantage of SC based
methods is their adaptive ability to accurately track GMPP
through a change in shading patterns, P-V characteristics and
various configurations of the PV array. They also share the

Large percentage of new Photo-Voltaic(PV) system

installations are grid connected residential connection. For the
system to connect to the grid, due to economic and technical
reason, the power system will be required to operate at a certain
range of voltage. Hence, the solar modules are connected in
series or parallel to achieve the required voltage and power
level. The series and parallel configuration of the PV system
can lead to partial shading condition(PSC).

same major disadvantages that they are complex to implement,

need very high computational processing power and the initial
point need to be carefully selected by professionals.

method is that the probability of tracking the GMPP is also

affected by the parameter used. This method also requires more
tracking steps compared with other methods since it requires
using P&O to determine each PPP. Other similar methods are
also proposed in [17], [18]. Method proposed in [19] has a
good performance but requires measurement of voltage for
each module. This will increase the cost significantly
especially for a large PGS. Wang et al [17]proposed two
methods. The first method proposed sampling the P-V curve
and limits the search area based on the short circuit current of
the modules and the highest local power. This method has high
accuracy but slow tracking speed. The second method
proposed estimates the local power by measuring current
bypass diodes of the modules. This method has high tracking
speed, but the implementation cost is high due to the current
sensor required for each module. Kok et al [20] proposed a
method based on IC and sampling at the 80% distance of
_ . This limits the search area, but still requires a high
sampling numbers. Hence, it has a similar limitation as the
method proposed in [3]. Another method also proposed in [21]
employing a constant-power operation for the first stage
search. This method yields a fast tracking speed but it requires
a specifically designed DC/DC power converter that can accept
power command for constant-power control.

The second group is called segmental search method. Methods

in this group are based on mathematical theories where the
search for GMPP is achieved through gradually reducing the
search range. Three methods that fall under these categories are
load-line method[11], DIRECT method[12] and Fibonacci
method[13].The advantages of these methods are they are
based on the solid mathematical foundation and facilitate rapid
tracking. The disadvantages are under certain shading pattern,
the GMPP may not be able to be tracked and the other peak
power point(PPP) is tracked instead. These methods also
cannot be directly integrated into conventional PGS firmware.
The third group is a two-stage method. During PSC, the P-V
characteristic curve will exhibit multiple peak values
corresponding to shade pattern. This P-V characteristics curve
can then be divided into multiple single-peak P-V
characteristic curves and conventional MPPT methods e.g.
P&O and IC can be used to determine the maximum value for
each peak. Hence, the two-stage method proposed in the
previous literature involves using various proposed method in
the first stage to determine the interval for approximate GMPP
location and then using conventional MPPT methods to
determine the precise GMPP location. These methods may be
preferable compared to the other since they did not increase the
component of the system, except for a few exceptions. The
two-stage methods can be further divided into two categories.
The first category is where the technique employs the system
characteristic and the second category is technique using
search method, where both are being applied to the first stage.

In this paper, a two-stage MPPT algorithm is presented which

is based on an estimation of peak power for the voltage range
segment that is assumed to have the local peak power. The
reference voltage is then set to the estimated maximum voltage
( ), where perturbation based MPPT can be used to find the
exact MPP. The method is fast, easy to implement and shown
to be able to correctly determined the MPP.
The rest of the paper is organised as follows. The next section
describes the characteristics of PV string under different
conditions. In section III, the proposed FPPE-GMPPT method
is described in details. In section IV, the proposed method is
implemented via simulation and compared to conventional
GMPPT method and the conclusions are made in the last
section.

In [14][16] similar techniques of using a pre-set linear

function to move the operating point (OP) near the GMPP are
employed. The linear function usually is related to various
system parameters. This can include open circuit voltage and
short circuit current of the PGS, hence, they are categorised
under system characteristic curve method. These methods have
a fast tracking speed due to them requiring only one step to
move the OP near the GMPP. Nevertheless, to obtain the open
circuit voltage and short circuit current requires open or short
circuiting the system, which can cause power losses and safety
concern for implementation in real-world PGS. In [7], it is also
shown that error can happen for determination of the area of
GMPP under certain shading patterns, hence, the method
cannot always guarantee that the GMPP can be tracked.

2 Characteristics of P-V String

For two-stage searching methods, the first stage is used to

search the general operating point where the GMPP is located
and for the second stage, conventional MPPT method is used
to search for the precise location of the GMPP. Patel et al [3]
proposed a first stage method where the interval between 0.6 0.7 value of _ is used for searching area. This
method is easy to implement, and can be integrated into the
traditional PGS firmware. However, a study done in [7] shows
that there exist some shading patterns that cause the method
not able to detect the GMPP. Another disadvantage of the

Figure 1 Single diode model of PV cell

Many different models for PV cell have been proposed in the
literature [22][24]. Each of the models proposed is of varying
complexity and accuracy compared to the real PV cell
characteristic. In this paper, the single-diode model has been
chosen and the circuit diagram representation of the model is
as shown in Fig. 1. Relation between voltage (V) and current

(I) for a PV module for the model can be represented by the

equation:
= [exp (

(+ )

) 1] (

different as shown in Fig. 3. Fig. 4a and Fig. 5 shows the output

curves of the PV string. While the string current, , is smaller
than the SC-current of module-3, 3 , all modules will provide
power and the string voltage, will be equal to the sum of
voltage for all modules. Once the exceed the value of 3 ,
the diode 3 will conducts and module 2 will be bypassed.
During this, the will be contributed by module 1 and
module 2. The same analysis can also be applied when the
value exceeds 2 . Diode 3 and 2 will conduct and will
only be contributed by module-1.

(1)

where is the equivalent photocurrent of the module, is

the reverse saturation current of the equivalent diode, is the
thermal voltage of the module and is the ideality factor,
and are the equivalent series and shunt resistances.
2.1 PV String under Uniform Irradiance

Due to the value of affecting the power generation of the

string, this causes the I-V and P-V curves of the PV string
under partial shading exhibited multiple stairs for I-V curve,
and multiple peaks for P-V curve.

From the single diode model, the output characteristics of the

PV module for UI can be observed through the I-V and P-V
curves. These can be seen in Fig. 2. From the P-V curve, it can
be observed that only one PPP exhibited (the MPP). The
current and voltage at MPP for the module can be
approximated as [25]:
_ 0.9 _
_ 0.8 _

(2)
(3)

where _ and _ are the MPP current and

voltage respectively, while _ is the short circuit
current value and _ is the open circuit voltage.
To the left of the MPP, the PV module output approximately
constant current (the current source region). While on the right
side of the MPP, the module output a constant voltage (the
voltage source region).

Figure 3 Example of irradiance pattern for PV string under

PSC
2.3 Critical Observation for PV String Output under
Partial Shading Condition
The amount of peak and stairs in the I-V and P-V curves
depends on the different level of irradiance on the PV string.

Figure 2 I-V and P-V curve under UI

The modules can be connected in a string configuration, where
multiple modules are arranged in series. Under UI, the string
will have the same characteristics, hence, at MPP:
_ 0.9 _
(4)
(5)
_ 0.8 _

(a) Three irradiance level

where _ and _ are the MPP current and voltage

for the string. While _ is the short circuit current for the
string and _ is the open circuit voltage for the string.
2.2 PV String Under Partial Shading Condition
A string with three modules is considered for analysis. The
amount of irradiance for each module is considered to be

required segment as designated by MPPT system designer. The

power at each interval will be evaluated and the point with the
highest power will be used as the initial reference point for
local MPPT e.g. P&O or Incremental Conductance method to
find the precise location of MPP. More segment will increase
the probability for the highest power reference point to be in
the MPP interval, but lead to longer scanning time hence more
power loss for the system. Developed based on the analysis in
Section II, Fast Peak Power Estimation (FPPE)-GMPPT
method only requires approximate short-current measurement,
, at each stairs in I-V. From the values obtained, the PPP
for that interval is estimated. The interval/section with highest
PPP value is assumed to be the point where MPP is located,
and the estimated will be the initial reference for local
MPPT. Fig. 6 shows the flowchart for proposed FPPE-GMPPT
method. The method will be discussed in more details in the
following paragraph.

(b) Two irradiance level

Figure 4 P-V Curve for different irradiance pattern
For a string with number of modules and each module having
different irradiance, the peaks on the P-V curve will occur
approximately in multiples of 80% of _ . For this
condition, the minimum displacement between successive
peaks is nearly 80% of _ [3]. Fig. 4a shows an
example of a string with 3 modules and 3 different irradiance
levels. Although, this condition is not applicable for all
irradiance pattern. For a string that has less different irradiance
level compared to the number of modules, , the amount of
PPP exist in the P-V curve depend on the amount of different
irradiance condition e.g. for a 3 modules string, with only 2
irradiance level, only two peak power point exist for this
condition (Fig.4b). Nevertheless, the minimum difference
between the PPP will still be more than 80% of _ [26].

(a) Main Program

Figure 5 I-V under PSC

I-V Curves of string with n irradiance condition, will exhibit
n number of stairs. Fig.5 shows an example for a string with 3
modules. The values of current the peak power occurs, ,
where represent the PPP number, can be approximated to
[17]:
0.9
(6)
where is the value of the short circuit current for the stair
leading to the number PPP.

3 Proposed FPPE-GMPPT Method

For conventional GMPPT Method, the MPP is determined by
scanning the whole range of _ from zero or small value
of i.e. . to . The voltage value for scanning
interval will usually be divided evenly according to the

(b) FPPE-GMPPT Subroutine

Figure 6 Proposed FPPE-GMPPT Algorithm

The string is assumed initially to be in UI state hence initial

is set to 80% of _ as shown in block 1 in the Main
Program part of Fig 6. Then the local MPPT (LMPPT)
subroutine (P&O, IC etc.) is executed continuously to find the
exact MPP. To determine whether the MPP has been reached,
the sign for change in power in two subsequent perturbations
are checked [3]. If the MPP has been reached (block 3), the
program will check the change in power between each
perturbation, (block 4). If the is bigger than the
threshold value, it is assumed that either large change in
irradiance or partial shading has occurred and the program calls
the FPPE-GMPPT subroutine (block 5). This subroutine can
also be called at an interval of time which can be set in the timer
interrupt (block 6).

Fig. 7a (3 different irradiance level) shows the operating point

at each step. At each point, the () for each stair.
The PPP estimate also give the algorithm the correct region
where the MPP is located.
Fig. 7b (2 different irradiance level) with operating point at
each step. As discussed in section 2, for this irradiance pattern,
values are not multiple of 0.8. Although, the
approximation is still applicable for all point. Nevertheless,
due to linear relation between the power and voltage along the
region estimated, the method still able to give the correct
decision on region where the MPP is located.

Variable act as a counter and initialize to 1 (block 7). is

set to the current source region for each stair in I-V curves.
30% of _ value has been chosen as to make sure that
the is located in the current source region. Hence,
=
(. _ ) + (_ ( )) ()
Then, the value of current () is measured and this value is
approximately equal to _ . With the value of obtained,
the estimated is calculated using the following equation:
(a) Three irradiance level

_ = _ _
(. _ ) (. _ )

()

where _ the is the short circuit current current ,

_ is the open circuit voltage of the module, _ and
_ are the current and voltage at local PPP.
This sequences (block 812) is repeated until reaches ,
where is the number of module in series for the PV string. At
block 11, if the _ is bigger than the global power
estimate, the new Global Peak Power Estimate will be replaced
by the new _ together with the estimate. If
it is not, the previous value will be maintained.
Once has reached , the is set to and the program
will return to main program and conventional MPPT will be
executed to search for the exact MPP.

(b) Two irradiance level

Figure 7 Operating Point and Estimated Power

To provide further understanding of the method, a PV-string

with three modules has been chosen as an example to illustrate
the process. Two irradiance patterns have been chosen to show
the method operation under different operating curves. The
first pattern will have different levels of irradiance for each
module, giving a P-V curve with three PPP and three stairs for
I-V curve. While another pattern will have two different levels
of irradiances only, translating to two PPPs and two stairs.

4 Simulation Results
()
0.01

(F)
100

(F)
22

Switching Frequency (kHz)

20

Table 1: Boost Converter Parameters.

voltage. This stage is where the GMPPT method is

implemented. In the second stage, the inverter controls the
output voltage of the dc/dc converter and ac voltage is
generated to connect the solar system to the grid. Availability
of DC-link capacitor between the first stage and second stage
caused little coupling between the two system hence they can
be analysed separately [27], thus only the DC/DC boost stage
will be discussed here.

Figure 8 Overview of two-stage grid connected PV system

The voltage regulation of boost stage is done through closedloop control where digital PI controller is used. The reference
voltage of the controller ( ) is given by the GMPPT
module. The parameter of the component used in the boost
stage is listed in Table 1. The number of global search zone
set for the conventional GMPPT is set to 10. While for the
LMPPT stage, the improved P&O method proposed in [28] is
used, where the dynamic performance is improved compared
to conventional P&O. Research by Femia et al [29] details how
the P&O parameter can be optimized. This improved P&O is
also used in the proposed FPPE method implementation. The
threshold power for PSC detection for both method is set to
10%. The sampling frequency for both methods is set at 10Hz.

(a) V,P vs T

(a) V, P vs T

(b) P vs V
Figure 9 Results of conventional GMPPT for specified
irradiance pattern
In this section, the performance of the proposed FPPE-GMPPT
method is evaluated via simulation. The proposed method is
compared with conventional GMPPT method and both are
implemented in PLECS. PV module used in the simulation is
KC200GT with 54 cells in a module. Three modules are
arranged in a series to make a string. As for the power
conversion system, Two Stage Grid Connected PV system is
used (Fig.8). For the first stage, a dc/dc boost converter is used
to absorb the power from the PV array by controlling its

(b) P vs V
Figure 10 Results of proposed FPPE-GMPPT for specified
irradiance pattern

The first test is done to determine whether both methods can

find the Global MPP. Initially, the PV string is under UI of
/ . Then, at the time 3.27s, PSC is applied to the
module where the irradiance value for module / ,
/ and / , respectively. Fig.9a and 10a
shows the Panel Power and Voltage from and after the PSC for
both methods. The conventional method requires 30
perturbations to reach the MPP value, while the proposed
method only requires 9 perturbations. Beside proposed method
requiring less perturbations during the GMPP stage, the
proposed method also requires less perturbations for the P&O
algorithm to reach MPP due to the proposed method is set
in the vicinity nearer to the true MPP voltage. From the P-V
graphs in the Fig. 9b and 10b they also show that the
conventional method did not manage to arrive at the real MPP,
while the proposed method manages to successfully detect the
real MPP.

algorithm. This is put to test by using irradiance pattern of

/ , / and / . Result in Fig. 12
shows that even when the difference in irradiance is small
between module 2 and module 3, which caused the for each
module (value used to determine the estimated power) have
small difference, the proposed method still able to determine
the section where the correct GMPP is located and arrived at
the real GMPP.

4 Conclusion
The P-V curve and I-V for a PV string get more complex
under PSC. The P-V curve exhibits multiple peaks and
multiple stairs for I-V curves. Conventional MPPT usually
will be unable to find the global MPP. In this paper, based on
analysis of P-V and I-V curves under PSC, several useful
observation has been made and used to propose FPPEGMPPT method where the peak power for each section is
estimated based on the short circuit current of the section.
Several simulation test results have also been presented to
demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed FPPE-GMPPT
algorithm.

Acknowledgements

(a) V, P vs T

The authors thank the technical and financial assistance of the

University of Malaya, UM Power Energy Dedicated Advanced
Centre (UMPEDAC), and Fundamental Research Grant
Scheme FP065-2014A.

(b) P vs T

Figure 11 Result for Proposed FPPE-GMPPT for two level

irradiance test

References

Test simulation is also done for irradiance pattern that only

produce two PPP instead of the maximum three. Similar to
previous test, at time 3.27s, PSC is applied to the module with
irradiance values is set to / , / and
/ respectively. Fig. 11 shows the result in various
format. The proposed method still managed to successfully
detect the real GMPP.

[1]
[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]
(a) V, P vs T

(b) P vs T

Figure 12 Result for Proposed FPPE-GMPPT small

difference in irradiance level

[6]

Another concern regarding the method is when the difference

in irradiance between two modules are small due to the usage
of estimation for values used for decision making in the

I. PVPS, Trends 2015 - IN PHOTOVOLTAIC

APPLICATIONS, 2015.
A. Mki, S. Valkealahti, and J. Leppaho, Operation
of series-connected silicon-based photovoltaic
modules under partial shading conditions, Prog.
Photovoltaics Res. Appl., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 298309,
2012.
H. Patel and V. Agarwal, Maximum Power Point
Tracking Scheme for PV Systems Operating Under
Partially Shaded Conditions, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 16891698, 2008.
E. Roman, R. Alonso, P. Ibanez, S.
Elorduizapatarietxe, and D. Goitia, Intelligent PV
Module for Grid-Connected PV Systems, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 10661073,
2006.
G. Petrone, G. Spagnuolo, R. Teodorescu, M.
Veerachary, and M. Vitelli, Reliability Issues in
Photovoltaic Power Processing Systems, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 25692580,
2008.
M. Drif, P. J. P??rez, J. Aguilera, and J. D. Aguilar,
A new estimation method of irradiance on a partially
shaded PV generator in grid-connected photovoltaic
systems, Renew. Energy, vol. 33, no. 9, pp. 2048
2056, 2008.

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

Y.-H. Liu, J.-H. Chen, and J.-W. Huang, A review of

maximum power point tracking techniques for use in
partially shaded conditions, Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev., vol. 41, pp. 436453, 2015.
Syafaruddin, E. Karatepe, and T. Hiyama,
Performance enhancement of photovoltaic array
through string and central based MPPT system under
non-uniform irradiance conditions, Energy Convers.
Manag., vol. 62, pp. 131140, 2012.
M. Miyatake, M. Veerachary, F. Toriumi, N. Fujii,
and H. Ko, Maximum Power Point Tracking of
Multiple Photovoltaic Arrays: A PSO Approach,
IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 47, no. 1,
pp. 367380, 2011.
K. Sundareswaran, P. Sankar, P. S. R. Nayak, S. P.
Simon, and S. Palani, Enhanced Energy Output
From a PV System Under Partial Shaded Conditions
Through Artificial Bee Colony, Sustain. Energy,
IEEE Trans., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 198209, 2015.
Y.-H. H. Ji, D.-Y. Y. Jung, J.-H. H. J.-G. G. Kim, J.H. H. J.-G. G. Kim, T.-W. W. Lee, C.-Y. Y. Won, J.
Young-Hyok, J. Doo-Yong, K. Jun-Gu, K. JaeHyung, L. Tae-Won, and W. Chung-Yuen, A Real
Maximum Power Point Tracking Method for
Mismatching Compensation in PV Array Under
Partially Shaded Conditions, Power Electron. IEEE
Trans., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 10011009, 2011.
T. L. Nguyen and K.-S. Low, A Global Maximum
Power Point Tracking Scheme Employing DIRECT
Search Algorithm for Photovoltaic Systems, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 57, no. 10, pp. 34563467,
2010.
N. A. Ahmed and M. Miyatake, A novel maximum
power point tracking for photovoltaic applications
under partially shaded insolation conditions, Electr.
Power Syst. Res., vol. 78, no. 5, pp. 777784, 2008.
S. Bifaretti, V. Iacovone, L. Cina, and E. Buffone,
Global MPPT method for partially shaded
photovoltaic modules, in 2012 IEEE Energy
Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), 2012,
pp. 47684775.
G. Carannante, C. Fraddanno, M. Pagano, and L.
Piegari, Experimental performance of MPPT
algorithm for photovoltaic sources subject to
inhomogeneous insolation, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 56, no. 11, pp. 43744380, 2009.
K. Kobayashi, I. Takano, and Y. Sawada, A study of
a two stage maximum power point tracking control of
a photovoltaic system under partially shaded
insolation conditions, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells,
vol. 90, no. 1819, pp. 29752988, 2006.
Y. Wang, Y. Li, and X. Ruan, High-Accuracy and
Fast-Speed MPPT Methods for PV String Under
Partially Shaded Conditions, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 235245, Jan. 2016.
A. Kouchaki, H. Iman-Eini, and B. Asaei, A new
maximum power point tracking strategy for PV arrays
under uniform and non-uniform insolation
conditions, Sol. Energy, vol. 91, pp. 221232, 2013.

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

C. Kai, T. Shulin, C. Yuhua, B. Libing, K. Chen, S.

Tian, Y. Cheng, and L. Bai, An Improved MPPT
Controller for Photovoltaic System Under Partial
Shading Condition, Sustain. Energy, IEEE Trans.,
vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 978985, 2014.
T. Kok Soon, S. Mekhilef, K. S. Tey, and S.
Mekhilef, Modified Incremental Conductance
Algorithm for Photovoltaic System Under Partial
Shading Conditions and Load Variation, Ind.
Electron. IEEE Trans., vol. 61, no. 10, pp. 5384
5392, 2014.
E. Koutroulis and F. Blaabjerg, A New Technique
for Tracking the Global Maximum Power Point of PV
Arrays Operating Under Partial-Shading Conditions,
IEEE J. Photovoltaics, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 184190,
2012.
E. Karatepe, M. Boztepe, and M. olak,
Development of a suitable model for characterizing
photovoltaic arrays with shaded solar cells, Sol.
Energy, vol. 81, no. 8, pp. 977992, 2007.
M. G. Villalva, J. R. Gazoli, and E. R. Filho,
Comprehensive Approach to Modeling and
Simulation of Photovoltaic Arrays, IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 11981208, May
2009.
Z. Salam, K. Ishaque, and H. Taheri, An improved
two-diode photovoltaic (PV) model for PV system,
in 2010 Joint International Conference on Power
Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems & 2010
Power India, 2010, pp. 15.
J. Ahmed, S. Member, and Z. Salam, An Improved
Method to Predict the Position of Maximum Power
Point During Partial Shading for PV Arrays, vol. 11,
no. 6, pp. 13781387, 2015.
M. A. Ghasemi, H. Mohammadian Forushani, and M.
Parniani, Partial shading detection and smooth
maximum power point tracking of PV arrays under
PSC, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 31, no. 9,
pp. 62816292, 2016.
H. Haitao Xiang, Y. Yangguang Yan, and H. Haijiang
Jiang, A two-stage PV grid-connected inverter with
optimized anti-islanding protection method, in 2009
International Conference on Sustainable Power
Generation and Supply, 2009, pp. 14.
T. Yao and R. Ayyanar, Maximum-voltage-unitguided MPPT algorithm for improved performance
under partial shading, 2013 IEEE Energy Convers.
Congr. Expo. ECCE 2013, pp. 24282434, 2013.
N. Femia, G. Petrone, G. Spagnuolo, and M. Vitelli,
Optimization of perturb and observe maximum
power point tracking method, IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 963973, 2005.