12-2

Evaluation of Performance of MPPT Equipment in Photovoltaic System

Ryo Ito*, Yasuyuki Matsuzaki*, Tatsuo Tani**, Toshiaki Yachi*
Tokyo University of Science*, Tokyo University of Science, SUWA** 1-3, Kagurazaka, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 162-8601, Japan* 5000-1, Toyohira, Chino-shi, Nagana-ken, 391-0292, Japan**

J4302606@,ed.ka~u.tus.ac.i~
Abstract: I n recent years, environmental problems have become serious issue environmental problems, and using low emission energy is the focus of worldwide attention. The use of small-scale photovoltaic (PV) systems for flashing light and emergency power is spreading widely and these are installed in places with confined space and they generate low output power. We propose, for the first time, that these small-scale PV systems should have maximum power point tracking (MPPT) to make the most of their performance. A PV cell has an I-V curve (current-voltage characteristic curve), and has an optimal operating point to output the maximum power. This point is influenced by the surroundings such as the PV module temperature and solar radiation. Therefore, MPPT equipment can track the maximum power point. However, it may not converge on the maximum power point due to the rapid change in solar radiation, and there is the mismatch loss. Moreover, PV systems have other losses such as operating loss within the MPPT equipment and PV module temperature increase loss I". I n this paper, we evaluated the validity of introducing MPPT into a PV system and compared the characteristics on a fine day and those on a cloudy day to evaluate these losses ['I. Then we totaled up the measurements for the half-year from the beginning of September to the end of February.
1. System Diagram

2. Specifications for Experimental Equipment 2.I MPPT Equipmenf The MPPT equipment (PT208HV) specifications are in Table 1.

Manufachuer hput "OltaEC

Output voltage

TSUSHIMA eleceic
15-250 V

12-120 v

Maximum output current

Power consumption
Maximum inout mwer Basic circuit

. .

500 w

DC/DC converter P W M switching

2.2 PV Module
The PV module (NE-H12S) specifications are in Table 2. Two modules (2 serial - 1 parallel) are connected to the MPPT equipment in the experiment system. Their maximum output is 24.2W (12.1WX 2 modules), and we assumed the system would be used as a small capacity power supply.
Table 2 Specifications of photovoltaic module Manufachlrer

There is a diagram of the experimental system in Fig. 1. The MPPT equipment controls the power generated by the PV modules and supplies this to the load. We measured the PV module temperature, irradiance and the input and output power of the MPPT equipment when the PV system was operating. Moreover, the same modules as the PV modules used for this system were connected to the I-V curve tracer, and we measured the true maximum power in the surroundings with the PV system operating.

SHARP

(hradiance I kW/m', AM 1.5, Cell m p . 2 5 ' c )

Fig. I System diagram

The relation of the I-V curve for two PV modules and the load line is in Fig.2. As the resistance of the load is 45 n, the maximum power point in the I-V curve and load line may cross when irradiance is 1 kWlm2. The MPPT equipment follow-up controls for change of solar radiation so that the load line and maximum power point cross. It may not converge on the maximum power point due to rapid change in solar radiation, and it may produce mismatch loss.

IEICEnEEE MTELEC'O3, Oct. 19-23,2003

256

Authorized licensed use limited to: Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University. Downloaded on October 21, 2009 at 01:37 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

4.2 MPPT Mismatch Loss

Mismatch loss is generated by deviations between the output power at an operating point where MPPT equipment follow-up controls and the maximum power P of the PV. , , This loss is equivalent to the difference between the input power Pmiof MPPT equipment and the maximum power P,, measured with the I-V curve tracer. However, since the PV module connected to the I-V curve tracer is generated in the no-load state, its module temperature is different fiom the module temperature of the PV connected to the MPPT equipment. Output power is corrected by Eq.1 considering the difference in module temperature, and mismatch loss is defined on the basis of output power at a module temperature of 25C. MPPT mismatch loss P,, is in Eq.3. Pm,=Ym-& * * '(3) P . : output power after temperature compensation

Irr=lkW/m'

0.0

10

20

30

40

50

Voltage[V] Fig2 I-V a w e and load line

3. SV Method to Evaluate PV System

The SV method is used to evaluate the operational characteristics of PV systems and is used to find the cause of decreased output by classifying PV system loss factors. And we improve efficiency by correcting PV system design. The SV method defines five loss factors[']. @ Loss under influence of shadow @ Loss due to sunlight incident angle @ Temperature increase loss @ MPPT mismatch loss 0 Inverter loss In this research, we installed the PV modules in a place where partial buildings shadows did not influence them. Moreover, inverter loss is considered the power consumption in MPPT equipment since an inverter is not used in the PV system. Therefore, we evaluated the PV system based on temperature increase, MPPT mismatch, and MPPT operating losses.
4. Method of Calculating Losses 4. I Temperature Increase Loss

4.3 MPPT Operating Loss

MPPT equipment consumes a part of the output power generated by the PV to operate itself. This loss Po, (MPPT operating loss) is equivalent to the difference between the input power Pmiof the MPPT equipment, and its output power P,,. Po, is in Eq.4. &=Pmi-P,, * * .(4)
5. Experiment Results 5. I Characteristics of MPPT in a Day

Figure 3 shows the effect of introducing MPPT into the PV system on a fine day (2/21/03) and a cloudy day (2/23/03). It reveals that it is effective since MPPT output power increases to nearly maximum power.
-Maximum power -MPPT
W i t h o u t M P P T o u t.m t
' '
' ' '

output power
D . OIYC~

30

The output of a PV changes depending on the PV module temperature. The maximum output of multicystal Si PV reduces 0.41% for every 1C rise in module temperature. If the reference module temperature is 2S"C, the output value of the PV module can he approximated by the following equation. P(T)=P,,{l-a(Tc-25)} * ' * (1) Tc : cell temperahlre['C] P ~ :J output power at a tempnature of Z S T [ l w a : Temperamre compensation coefficient (=0.0041) Temperature increase loss P,,is defined as the difference between maximum powers P,, measured with the I-V curve tracer and output power P2s at a temperature of 25 "c calculated with P , ,and Eq. 1. P,, is in Eq.2. ,, 4 = p z 5 -pm * (2)

25

1/23'

'

'

'

'

2ot
15

E -

10 5 0

E 30

e 25
20
15

10

5 0 6

9 10 I I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Time Fig.3 MPPT performance in PV system

257

Authorized licensed use limited to: Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University. Downloaded on October 21, 2009 at 01:37 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Table 4 lists each loss energy on January 25 and January 22. It reveals that MPPT operating loss energy represents a large proportion of the losses.

loss'
2l2l Maximum energy [Wh] MPPT output energy [MI Without MPPT output energy [Whl I79 158 (88%) 133 (74%) U23 39 29 (79%) I2 (32%)

loss.
17.05 148.44 89.82

0.69

13.67

Figure 5 shows the conversion efficiency of the MPPT equipment that was measured using a direct-current power supply. It reveals that the reason why the ratio of the MPPT operating loss is high in this PV system. As the PV modules generate no more than 24.2 W, the input power to the MPPT equipment is limited, and it operates inefficiently.

04

20

IllPYt powcrlw]

40

60

So

Id0

Fig.5 Conversion efficiency of MPPT equipment

Time

Mismatch 10%.

-MPPT operating lola

Figure 6 shows daily power loss ratios compared to the maximum power of PV modules. The ratio of mismatch loss on January 22 is higher than that on January 25 since the PV system was influenced by rapid changes in solar radiation. The MPPT operation loss accounts for a high ratio on both days. Consequently, MPPT loss accounts for 11.3% on January 25 and 14.7%on January 22. Dlemwratum increase loss [%I
OMismatch 1 s 0 [%I OMPPT operatini 1068

[%I

1 om
90%

80%
70%
60%
50% 40% 30% 20%

10%

ox
Time Fig.4 Transition in pow= loss due to rapid change s i n solar radiation
1/25 1/22

Fig.6 Daily power loss ratios

258

Authorized licensed use limited to: Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University. Downloaded on October 21, 2009 at 01:37 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

5.2 Analysis o Measurementsfor Longer Periods f

Figure 7 shows monthly power loss ratios calculated from measurements. The PV system operates efficiently during months that have many fine days. However, in months such as September that have many rainy days, the utilizing power is small.

Measwementdates

I
U)

Output energy

irradiation is calculated

every other day

Charaeteristies(Figlo)

120

IO0

Ll=L
I
9

OTempsraturs increase loss OMismatch loss O M P P T operating loss [U] mUtiIiing power [%I

[%I

[%I

Irradiation dates of MET-WZ em substituted in

A n n u l 0"tP"t enem
F i g 9 Flow chart for simulation

' 1

IO

II

12

Fig.7 Monthly power Ims ratios

Figure 8 shows ratio of the total energy &om September to February in Fig.7. This shows that the ratio of mismatch loss is 2.6% and that of MPPT operating loss is 14.4% compared to maximum power energy.
OTampsrature incrense IDSS[%I OMismatch loss [%I OMPPT operating loss [%I BUtiliring power [%I

Fig.10 Relation between irradiation aod energy levels

The rate of each loss to the maximum power of the PV cell is calculated by annual simulation and can be seen in Fig.ll.Without MPPT, the ratio of losses in the whole PV system is about 40%, and mismatch loss accounts for 30%. With MF'PT, mismatch loss is reduced and the ratio of mismatch loss in the whole PV system is decreased. This indicates that the simulation accuracy is high because each calculated ratio matches the measured results.
OTempsratum increase loss OMismatch IDSS [%I OMPPT operating loss 1x1 BUtilizing power [%I

[%I
3.3

100%
90%
Total

80%
70%
60%

Fig.8 Ratio oftotll energy from September to February

5.3 Annual Simulation

The flow chart for annual simulation is in Fig.9. Each output energy to irradiation is calculated every other day based on the measured data from September 21 to October 28. Figure IO bas the characteristics of the measured data. The approximate equation of each output energy to irradiation is calculated f o Fig.10. The irradiation date for MET-PVZ rm has been substituted in the approximate equation and the annual output energy has been calculated every other day'41.

5 a
40% 30%
20%

I ox
OX
WManMPPT

WAh MPPT

Wrth MPPT (See-Feb)

Simulation

Measurement

Fig.1 I Annual powm loss ratios

259

Authorized licensed use limited to: Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University. Downloaded on October 21, 2009 at 01:37 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

6.

Summary

We evaluation of performance of MFPT equipment in photovoltaic system and understand the following. 1. 2.

3.
4.

5.

6.

7.

MPPT has greater on the PV system with a little solar irradiation than with much excess. MPPT output power changes to a value that is nearly maximum power on a fme day. However, mismatch loss is great when solar radiation changes rapidly on a cloudy day. When the PV supplies MPPT equipment with an input power of less than 5 W, it cannot be controlled accurately. As the PV modules generate no more than 24.2 W, the input power to the MFPT equipment is limited, and it operates inefficiently. The ratio of MPPT loss compared to the maximum power of PV modules accounts for 11.3% on a fine day (1/25/03) and 14.7% on a cloudy day (1/22/03). The ratio of mismatch loss is 2.6% and that of MPPT operating loss is 14.4% compared to maximum power energy for the half-year fiom the beginning of September to the end of February. By Annual simulation, without MPPT the ratio of losses in the whole PV system is about 40% and with MFPT the ratio of that is about 24%.
ReferellCCS

[I1 PI
131

R. Ito, et al., Evaluation of MPPT loss in the photovoltaic power sysm,. Proceeding of ISES/JWEA loin1 Conference 2002, pp.399402,2002. R. 110, et al., Evaluation o f MPFT equipment in the photovoltaic power system,. 2003 National Convention Record I.E.E. Japan,
00.197-198.2003.

.. l~lto:ilwuw.~vsvslem.ocfi-k.olanii

141 Y.

M a s e , et al., Evaluation of MTPT loss a year in a photovoltaic power system, 2003 National Convention Record I.E.E.

260

Authorized licensed use limited to: Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University. Downloaded on October 21, 2009 at 01:37 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.