Modelling and analysis of PV configurations (alternate TCT-BL, total cross tied, series, series parallel, bridge linked and honey comb) to extract maximum power under partial shading conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Photovoltaics (PV) are widely used as renewable energy sources for standalone and grid connected PV system. But these PV systems face major reduction in output power and efficiency due to Partial Shading Conditions (PSCs). This research paper focuses on the choice of optimum PV Configuration under a given shading pattern to extract maximum power by mitigating mismatching loss. Various PV configurations such as Series(S), Series Parallel (SP), Total Cross Tied (TCT), Bridge Linked (BL), Honey Comb (HC) and Alternate Total Cross Tied — Bridge Linked (A-TCT-BL) are modelled and analyzed under PSCs. Nine shading patterns such as center, diagonal, corner, L-shaped, short and narrow, short and wide, long and narrow, long and wide and random are considered to study the behavior of 6×6 array form of PV Configuration. Their performances are compared based on open circuit voltage, short circuit current, global maximum power point (GMPP), maximum voltage, maximum current, shading loss, fill factor, mismatching loss and efficiency. A novel Hybrid Configuration called A-TCT-BL PV Configuration is proposed to generate maximum power under PSCs and to minimize the number of cross ties and wiring complexities. This Configuration is an integration of TCT and BL PV Configuration and the simulation results prove the capability of this proposed PV Configuration to generate maximum power, fill factor, efficiency and minimum mismatching loss compared to S, SP, BL and HC PV Configuration under most of the PSCs investigated. Canadian Solar CS5P-200M PV module is considered for simulation and is simulated in Matlab /Simulink software.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".