INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH

A. Ghouari et al., Vol.6, No.1, 2016

Data Monitoring and Performance Analysis of a

1.6kWp Grid Connected PV System in Algeria

A. Ghouari*‡, Ch. Hamouda**‡, A. Chaghi***, M. Chahdi****

*Department of Industrial Engineering, Laboratory of Automation and Manufacturing, Hadj Lakhdar University of Batna, 05
avenue Chahid Boukhlouf 05000 Batna, Algeria
**Department of Industrial Engineering, Hadj Lakhdar University of Batna, Algeria, 05 avenue Chahid Boukhlouf 05000
Batna, Algeria
***Department of Electrical Engineering, University Hadj Lakhdar Batna, 05000 Batna, Algeria, 05 avenue Chahid Boukhlouf
05000 Batna
****Department of physics, University Hadj Lakhdar Batna, 05 avenue Chahid Boukhlouf 05000 Batna
([email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected])

‡ Corresponding Author; Adel Ghouari, 05 avenue Chahid Boukhlouf 05000 Batna, Algeria, Tel: +213 (0) 663913860,
[email protected]

Received: 08.11.2015 Accepted:22.12.2015

Abstract- The present study deals with the performance of a 1.6kWp grid connected PV system installed at Batna University,
in Algeria. The average solar energy received was 5.21 kWh/m².d, the grid connected PV system seems to be a good candidate
for generating electricity in this region. The system was monitored during one year of continuous operation and data analysis to
evaluate the performance of the grid connected PV system. The performance ratio of the system ranged between 51 and 61%.
Furthermore, the total produced energy by the PV array was 1931.7kWh and the supplied energy to the grid was 1705kWh. The
annual final yield was 1065.6kWh/kWp. Moreover, an analysis of the energy losses in the system was performed, this makes it
possible to determine the effect of the capture and system losses on the total energy balance of the system. All the electricity
generated by the system was fed into the internal electrical grid of the university.
Keywords Grid connected PV system; Photovoltaic performance; PV yields and losses analysis; PV system comparative results.

TWh [1,2] because of the demographic expansion and

1. Introduction
economic growth. It is interesting to notice that the number of
low voltage customer increased from 5.57 to 7.7million
Nowadays, it is well established that solar energy is the between 2008 and 2013 [3,4].
best option to meet the electricity demand in the near future.
Algeria is facing a real dilemma. A recent survey has shown The highest value of the power demand was reached in
that the internal energy demand is increasing steadily, 2013 (10463MW against 6995MW in 2008 [3,4]) when the
whereas, energy production is decreasing at a very critical weather conditions of a particular hot summer (temperature
rate. Thus, in 2008 the energy production was 175.13Mtoe, exceeded 48°C) which required the use of air conditioners at
which decreased to 148.7Mtoe in 2013 [1,2]. It is well known a large scale [5].
that the main source used to generate the electricity is natural
Photovoltaic systems seem to be a good alternative for
gas and according to the regulation commission for electricity
generating electricity in Algeria. The estimated potential of
and gas (CREG), the amount of the natural gas consumed by
solar radiation is about 2000 kWh/m²/y [6], however, the grid
the electricity generation systems was 13.895Gm3 in 2013 [3].
connected systems are not widely used. The most important
In addition, the same survey showed that from 2008 to site is located in southern region in Ghardaia, with a nominal
2013 the electricity consumption increased from 40.18 to 50.8 power capacity of 1MW. In this plant, four technologies are
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH
A. Ghouari et al., Vol.6, No.1, 2016
involved (monocrystalline, poly-crystalline, amorphous and Junction temperature °C 25 45 60
thin film) . The plant became operational in 2014, but no data
about its performances is available. Also, other PV systems of Nominal voltage V 12 12 12
400 MW capacity are planned in the near future [7]. Maximum power W 40 36.8 34.5
The main goal of the present study is to determine the Voltage at Pmax V 16 14.6 13.6
performances of a grid connected PV system in the Batna
region during one year of continuous operation. In the .this Current at Pmax A 2.5 2.52 2.53
study, we consider a PV system that incorporates modules Short circuit current A 2.73 2.76 2.78
which have been operating for the last ten years which makes
this study even more interesting since degradation effect due Open circuit voltage V 20 18.5 17.4
to aging is taken into account. NOTC (0.8kW/m², 20°C, °C 45 45 45
1m/s)
2. System description

“Figure 1” shows the PV generator installed on the roof

top (20m) of the laboratory building at Batna University. The
nominal power installed capacity of the PV array (PG0) at the
standard test conditions (1kW/m², 25°C and AM1.5) is
1.6kWp. The PV array consists of 40 mono crystalline
modules (PHOTOWATT PW400 type) of 40Wp “Table 1” [8]
which form 8 strings of five modules each one. The modules
are connected in serial and the 8 strings are connected in
parallel. Also, the PV generator is connected to the monitoring
system via four cables (H07RN-F CENELEC HD22 4G6
type) with up to 30m of length. The inverter used in this
system is the NEG1600 which is characterized by an input DC
power of 1.6kW and an operational voltage ranging between
54 to 95V and a maximum input DC voltage of 110V [9]. Fig. 2. Architecture of the smart home system installed at
Batna University
Also, a power meter analyzer LMG 310 was used in order
to analyze both the DC and AC electrical parameters of the PV
3. Methodology
array (e.g. energy, power, current, voltage, frequency, etc.).
The electrical parameters of loads are measured using a power
3.1. Monitoring and Data acquisition
meter LMG450. All the measured parameters are sent to the
PC via the GPIB ports as shown in “Figure 2” [10,11]. Also,
the ambient temperature (Ta) and global radiations (Gi) were In order to collect and save the electrical and the weather
measured using a thermocouple (KTY type) and a parameters, a program was developed for this purpose under
pyranometer (KIPP&ZONEN CM11 type) respectively. The the integrated development environment Visual Basic
daily solar energy received was recorded using a solar program 5. All the system parameters were stored in the
integrator. The PV module temperature (Tm) was measured Access database by the software.
with KTY thermocouple. These sensors were connected to a The system parameters were processed and were shared
data acquisition unit (Data Taker DT50) which was linked to online via a software interface and data acquisition was done
the PC via a serial port [12]. Information about climatic every 30 seconds. Also, a website was developed under php
parameters (Humidity, global radiation on horizontal and programming language in order to show online all the system
ambient temperature) were obtained from the weather forecast parameters, the website was accessible via this address
station. http:/smart.univ-batna.dz/joomla/.

3.2. Data analysis

According to the IEC 61724 standard, IEA PVPS task 2

and the several research works on grid connected PV systems
[13—17], the indicators used to evaluate the grid connected
PV systems performances are the performance ratio, final
yield, reference yield, array yield, capture losses and system
losses. Moreover the analysis of the system, PV generator and
the inverter efficiency are essential to evaluate the behavior of
Fig. 1. The view of the PV generator. each system component. These indicators were calculated
Table 1. Technical data of the PV modules at 1 kW/m² and using the following relations:
AM 1.5

35
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH
A. Ghouari et al., Vol.6, No.1, 2016

HG where:
Yr  (1)
Gi, STC NOCT: is the Nominal Operating Cell Temperature
(45°C)
Where:
The miscellaneous capture losses LCM summarized the
The reference yield Yr is the ratio between the total in- different types of losses caused by the PV array operation,
plane solar radiation HG and the reference irradiance 1kW/m², during the reference period τ, it contains the losses of wiring,
it indicates the number of peak sun-hours during period τ (d: string diodes, low irradiance, partial shadowing and mismatch
day, m: month or y: year), the measuring unit is kWh/kWp/τ other factors. The measuring unit is kWh/kWp/τ or h/τ. It is
or h/τ. given as follows:

EDC LCM  YT  Ya (8)

Ya  (2)
PG 0
The LS is the energy losses due the inverter conversion
where: task DC to AC during the reference period τ, the measuring
unit is kWh/kWp/τ or h/τ, and it is given as below:
The array yield Ya is the net energy produced by the PV
generator EDC during period τ divided by its rated power P G0, Ls  Ya  Y f (9)
the measuring unit is kWh/kWp/τ or h/τ.
The performance ratio PR is the ratio between the final
EAC
Yf  (3) yield Yf and the reference yield during the reference period τ,
PG 0 it strongly depends on the energy losses in the system,
especially the losses due to PV array temperature higher than
where: 25°C and the inefficiencies or failures of the system
The final yield Yf is the net energy supplied to the component [18], this factor represents the ratio between the
electrical grid EAC during period τ divided by the PV generator useful energy and the energy which would be produced
rated power PG0, the measuring unit is kWh/kWp/τ or h/τ. without losses, the performance ratio is obtained using the
relation below:
LC  YT  Ya  LCT  LCM (4)
Yf
PR  (10)
where: Yr
The array capture losses LC is the energy losses due to the
PV array operation, in other hand it is the sum of the The system, PV generator and inverter efficiencies are
miscellaneous capture losses LCM and thermal capture losses calculated using the following equations:
LCT, during the reference period τ, the measuring unit is EAC
kWh/kWp/τ or h/τ. inv  (11)
EDC
LCT  Yr  YT (5)
E DC
where: G  (12)
H G  AG
LCT is the thermal capture losses caused by the cell
temperature higher than 25°C. where:
The YT is the temperature corrected reference yield during AG: is the PV generator area (m²)
the reference period τ, the measuring unit is kWh/kWp/τ or h/τ
which is given by the following relation:  s   inv  G (13)
YT  Yr  1  CT  TC  T0  (6)
4. Performance analysis
where:
4.1. Solar radiation potential
CT: is the temperature coefficient and CT = 0.44%/°C for
crystalline cells. It is well known that the PV system performance is
T0: is the cell temperature under standard test conditions strongly dependent on the weather conditions [19—21].
(25°C). “Figure 3” shows the monthly average solar radiation (HG).
As it is seen the daily average value was 5.21kWh/m²/d. The
TC: is the cell temperature and it is given as follow: total annual solar radiation on the surface plane of the modules


TC  Ta  Gi 
 NOCT - 20 (7)
was 1831.4kWh/m², which was found very close to other
regions like Greece, Egypt and Morocco[22—24] and higher

 800  than some other Mediterranean locations like Spain [25].

36
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH
A. Ghouari et al., Vol.6, No.1, 2016

Fig. 5. The view of the delamination.

Fig. 3. Monthly average daily solar radiation on the PV

modules plane (HG), ambient air temperature (Ta) for the
year of 2013 at Batna University.

4.2. The I-V and P-V curves Analysis

Fig. 6. The view of the superheated contact.
“Figure 4” shows The I-V and P-V curves during the day
of 20th, November, 2014. The solar irradiance (Gi) was about Consequently, a test was carried out to investigate the
900W/m² and the ambient temperature (T a) reached 25.4°C. degradation effect of the PV modules by comparing the I-V
The modules and cell temperatures, (Tm) and (TC), were curves of the old modules with that of the new ones. In this
43.22°C and 53°C respectively. The maximum power (P MAX) connection, five old modules (G1) of the investigated
generated by the PV generator was 857.3W. This test generator were considered and they were connected in series
indicated that the PV generator performance decreased by and five identical new ones (G2) which have never been used
about 26% in comparison with that found in 12th of, before, having the same configuration, were investigated. The
November 2011 [5]. This decrease is caused by the nominal power of each string is 200Wp. The results showed
delamination, superheated contact on several PV modules that the powers generated by G1 and G2 were 113.6 and
“Figure 5–6”. 123.9W respectively “Figure 7”, leading to a deviation of
about 8.31% “Table 2” [26,27].
Gi = 900 W/m²;Ta = 25.4, Tm = 43 & TC = 53°C; PMAX = 857.3 W
ISC = 16.43 & IMAX = 13.6A ; UOC = 89 & UMAX = 63V
18 1400 2
I-V P-V
16 1200
Power (W)

14 ISC 1,5
1000
Current (A)

12
10 800
Current (A)

IMAX 1
8 PMAX 600
6 I-V old modules
400 I-V New modules
4 0,5
2 200
UMAX UOC
0 0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 31 60 91
Voltage (V) Voltage (V)
Fig. 4. The I-V and PV curves of the PV array Fig. 7. The I-V curves of new and old PV modules at
(PG0=1.6KWp) at 900 W/m² of solar irradiance and the cell 800W/m² and cell temperature 27°C, 12/01/2014.
temperature is 53°C, 11/20/2014.
Table 2. Comparison between old PV modules (G1) used in
the present study and new PV modules (G2) of
PHOTOWATT PW400 type.
Degradatio
PMAX IMAX UMAX ISC UOC
n ratio

37
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH
A. Ghouari et al., Vol.6, No.1, 2016

G 113 1.4 77.3 1.7 92.6 in “Figure 9”. It is obvious that the PV system is affected by
1 W A V A V the site climatic conditions as well as the component
8.3% technology.
G 123 1.6 74.8 1.8 94.5 The month of October of the same year showed the lowest
2 W A V A V performance ratio, which makes this study interesting in a way
to get information about the losses occurring during this
month. These losses are related to thermal capture losses,
4.3. The Inverter, PV generator and system efficiencies miscellaneous capture losses and system losses.
Thus, the daily performance ratio in the month of October,
The inverter efficiency varied between 86.7% and 89.3%
ranged between 49.1% and 59%. Also, the daily average final
with an average value of 88.2%. Also, the PV array efficiency
yield (Yf,d) was 2.83kWh/kWp/d. Moreover the daily average
was found to be between 8.62% and 10.4% with an average
system losses (LS,d) were 0.34kWh/kWp/d, the system losses
value of 9.93%. The system efficiency varied between 7.69%
indicate that the inverter was in good state of operation. The
and 9.13% “Table 3”.
other hand, the daily average value of the capture losses (LC,d)
were found to be 2.26kWh/kWp/d.
4.4. The grid connected PV system normalized indicators
evaluation Yr = 1831.43 ,Ya = 1207.00 & Yf = 1065.58 kWh/kWp
Yr,m = 152 ,Ya,m = 101 & Yf,m = 88.7 kWh/kWp/m
Yr,d = 5.21,Ya,d = 3.44 & Yf,d = 3.03 kWh/kWp/d
“Figure 8” illustrates the variation of the average monthly
and daily values of the reference, array and final yields. The Reference yield Array yield Final yield
monitoring of the system parameters indicated that the
monthly average daily value of the reference yield (Y r,d) was 7
5.21kWh/kWp/d, the total reference yield (Yr) for the year Monthly average Yr, Ya and Yf 6
2013 was 1831.4kWh/kWp with an average of 5
152.6kWh/kWp each month. The monthly average daily
(kWh/kWp/m)

values of the array yield (Ya,d) ranged from 2.7233kWh/kWp 4

(December) and 4.33kWh/kWp (June) with an average value 3
of 3.44kWh/kWp/d. The annual array yield (Y a) generated in
this year was 1207kWh/kWp, giving a monthly value of 2
100.6kWh/kWp/m². The monthly average daily values of the 1
final yield (Yf,d) ranged from 2.433kWh/kWp (December) and 0
3.78kWh/kWp/d (June) “Table 3”. The annual final yield (Yf) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
was 1065.6kWh/kWp. Furthermore, it is worth noticing that
Month
the maximum of the produced energy by the installed PV
system was in June and the minimum occurred in December,
this indicates that the system is affected by the climatic Figure. 8. The I-V curves of new and old PV modules at
conditions. 800W/m² and cell temperature 27°C, 12/01/2014.
Final yield System losses
Other indicators are used in order to evaluate the Capture losses Performance ratio Yr,d = 5.21 kWh/kWp/d
performance of grid connected PV system (performance ratio, Ya,d = 4.33 kWh/kWp/d
Yields and losses (kWh/kWp*d)

capture losses and system losses). As shown in “Figure 9” the Yf,d = 3.03 kWh/kWp/d
8 PR = 57%
monthly average daily value of the capture losses (LC,d) varied
between 1.233kWh/kWp/d and 2.26kWh/kWp/d. The total of 7 58% 58%
58% 58% 51%
capture losses (LC) through the whole year was 6 59% 58%
610.77kWh/kWp. 5 59% 60% 59%
61% 58%
The main reasons of these losses are the high levels of 4
ambient temperatures during the summer period and the 3
ageing factor related to the PV modules, also, the connections 2
between strings of the PV generator and the wirings are 1
responsible for a part of these losses. The length of each wire 0
used to relate the PV generator to the connection box was up
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4
to 30m with a measured resistance of about 50.4 Ohms.
Month
The monthly average daily value of the system losses (LS,d Fig. 9. Monthly daily average values of the Performance
) ranged between 0,32kWh/kWp/d and 0.54kWh/kWp/d. The ratio, capture losses and system losses for 1.6kWp grid
annual system losses (LS) was 141.33kWh/kWp and the connected PV system at Batna region during the year 2013.
monthly average value was 11.77kWh/kWp/m. These losses
are due mainly to the system conversion (DC-AC).
Thus, the performance ratio (PR) of the system during this
period of the test ranged between 51% and 61% as indicated

38
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH
A. Ghouari et al., Vol.6, No.1, 2016

Table 3. The Annual and daily average values of the grid connected PV system parameters at BATNA region for the year 2013,
global solar insolation , ambient temperature , Energies (produced, supplied to the grid), yields (reference, array and final), losses
(capture and system), efficiencies (generator, inverter and system) and performance ratio.

Month Meteorological Energies (kWh/d) Yields and energy losses (kWh/kWp/d) PR Efficiencies
parameters %
Hi Ta EDC,d EAC,d Yr,d Ya,d Yf,d LC,d LS,d ηG ηinv ηS
kWh/m °C % % %
²/d
Jan 4.01 7.430 4.40 3.87 4.01 2.74 2.42 1.26 0.32 60 10.26 88.15 9.04
Feb 4.36 6.780 4.67 4.12 4.36 2.92 2.58 1.42 0.34 58 10.05 88.18 8.86
Mar 5.00 12.92 5.53 4.80 5.00 3.46 3.00 1.54 0.45 60 10.37 86.78 9.00
Apr 6.13 14.60 6.42 5.70 6.13 4.01 3.56 2.02 0.45 58 9.820 88.81 8.72
May 5.65 16.82 5.98 5.33 5.65 3.74 3.33 1.84 0.40 59 9.920 89.12 8.84
Jun 6.50 22.72 6.93 6.05 6.50 4.33 3.78 2.17 0.54 58 9.980 87.44 8.72
Jul 6.03 26.95 6.28 5.61 6.03 3.92 3.50 2.10 0.42 58 9.760 89.29 8.72
Aug 5.82 25.42 6.05 5.39 5.82 3.78 3.37 1.97 0.41 57 9.750 89.07 8.68
Sep 5.40 21.87 5.73 4.98 5.40 3.58 3.11 1.75 0.46 57 9.990 86.69 8.66
Oct 5.52 19.72 5.08 4.53 5.52 3.17 2.83 2.26 0.34 51 8.620 89.22 7.69
Nov 4.23 9.480 4.70 4.12 4.23 2.93 2.58 1.28 0.35 59 10.40 87.80 9.13
Dec 3.98 5.520 4.35 3.82 3.98 2.72 2.40 1.20 0.33 58 10.24 87.90 9.00
Annual daily
5.21 15.85 5.51 4.86 5.21 3.44 3.03 1.73 0.4 57 9.93 88.20 8.75
average value

As it is shown in “Figure 10”, the daily average value of performance ratio, thus the daily average cell temperature
the miscellaneous capture losses (LCM,d) ranged between variations during October 2013 in Batna region.
0.63kWh/kWp/d (30th, October) and 2.8kWh/kWp/d (14th,
October), and the daily average thermal losses varied between 5. Results analysis and discussion
-0.004kWh/kWp/d (30th, October) and 0.883kWh/kWp/d
(4th, October). In this section, a regional comparison of the grid
The LCT losses are proportional to the PV module connected photovoltaic systems performances is carried out.
temperature (Tm) which ranged between 23.48°C (7th, The comparison is done on the basis of various parameters.
The final yield (Yf) and the performance ratio PR and system
October) and 55.86°C (4th, October), during these two days,
efficiency are the most normalized factors that are needed to
the LCT were 0.015kWh/kWp/d to 2.045kWh/kWp/d
evaluate and compare PV systems17.
respectively. The miscellaneous capture losses, thermal
capture losses and system losses are estimated to be about The annual daily average final yield of the system under
34%, 8% and 6% respectively. Thus, during this month the study was 3.03kWh/kWp/d and the performance ratio was
final yield accounted for 52% of the total energy balance. found to be about 57% “Table 4”. Thus, the final yield of the
system installed in Batna region was found to be higher than
Final Yield
System Losses
that of the PV grid systems installed in Germany and
8 60 Netherlands (1.8kWh/kWp/d), Italy (2.0kWh/kWp/d) and
daily average Yf, LS, LCT, LCM

51% 51% 50%

49% 50% Japan (2.7kWh/kWp/d). Israel has a significantly higher final
(kWh/kWp/d) and PR (%)

53% 50%51% 51%

53% 50% 52% 52%
Daily average TC (°C)

49% 51%
52%
52%
yield (3.5kWp/kWh/d) this may be attributed to the higher
6 49% 52% 50 received solar radiation (6.6kWh/m²/d) [28].
51% 51% 53%

52% 52% 56% In terms of performance ratio, the investigated system was
4 49% 59% 40
52% found to be in a good agreement with the results obtained and
reported in other countries. In fact, in the case of Germany, the
2 30 PR of 106 systems varied between 42% and 85%, with an
average value of 67%. In the same way, Austria reported an
0 20 average performance ratio related to 22 systems to be in the
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 order of 63% and 69% for 62 investigated systems in
Day Switzerland.
Fig. 10. The normalized daily final yield, system losses,
Furthermore, the overall efficiency of the system
thermal capture losses, miscellaneous capture losses and
investigated was found to be very close to the results of PV

39
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH
A. Ghouari et al., Vol.6, No.1, 2016
systems reported in literature, especially with those using
similar technology (MC-Si).

Table 4. The comparison of the performance of various grid connected PV systems thought the world and the results obtained
from the present work in Algeria (PS).
Location PV type Yields and losses kWh/kWp/d PR Efficiency % Ref
Yf,d Yr,d Ya,d LC,d LS,d % ηG ηinv ηs
18
MC-Si 2.4 2.8 2.6 0.2 0.2 81.5 14.9 89 12.6
Dublin, Ireland 29
MC-si 1.6-1.7 2.6-2.9 1.8-2 0.3-1.3 0.08-0.4 60-62 7.5-10 87 6–9
MC-Si 2.74 4.27 3.10 1.16 0.37 65 9.21 87 8.08
MC-Si 2.32 4.01 2.42 1.59 0.10 58 7.5 95 7.20 25
Jaén, Spain
MC-Si 2.74 4.20 3.35 0.85 0.61 65 9.96 80 8.04
PC-Si 1.60 3.26 1.83 1.43 0.24 49 5.71 87 4.96
30
Phitsanulok, Thailand - 3.84 5.21 4.32 0.90 0.47 73 - - -
31
Poland A-Si - - - - - 60-80 4-5 91-99 -
32
Bangi, Malaysia A-Si - - - - - 93-101 - - -
PC-Si 3.8-4.3 - - - 67-89 - 11.8 8-11
33
Selangor, Malaysia A-Si 1.9-3 4.2-5.5 - - - 88-102 - 9.8 6.1-6.9
MC-Si 1-3.8 - - - 72-85 - 6.5 9.9-11.7
MC-Si - - - - - 75.1 10.1 89 9.0
PC-Si - - - - - 63.3 9.2 86 7.9 34
Daejeon, Korea
MC-Si - - - - - 67.3 9.5 83 7.9
PC-Si - - - - - 71.8 9.5 87 8.3
Austria - - - - - - 42-79 - - -
Germany - - - - - 42-85 - - -
35
Italy - - - - - - 44-82 - - -
Netherlands - - - - 58-79 - - -
Switzerland - - - - - - 49-85 - - -
23
Cairo, Egypt - 4.35 5.6 - - - - 4.22 94.5 4.02
France - - - - - - 52-75 - - -
17
Belgium - - - - - - 52-93 - - -
Taiwan - - - - - - 30-90 - - -
22
Crete, Greece PC-Si 1.9-5.0 5.43 2-6.6 0.5-1.3 0.2-1.5 58-73 - - -
MC-Si 78
MC-Si 79
36
Jayapura, Indonesia
A-Si 91
MC-Si 54
38
Jodhpur, India 16-98
PS
Batna, Algeria MC-Si 3.03 5.21 3.44 1.73 0.4 57 9.9 88.2 8.75

of 2013. This investigation was carried out according to the

6. Conclusion
standard IEC 61724. This analysis showed that the annual
average PR of the system was 57%, which was relatively low
In this study we present the results of an investigated grid because of the high capture losses (LC). These losses
connected PV system. This system consists of PV modules accounted for 33% of the total PV system energy balance and
which have been used for the last 10 years and which are
the losses were related to the degradation factor of PV
located in remote area where regular tests for evaluation were
modules. Consequentely, the PV generator efficiency
not possible. To remedy this situation, a laboratory work was
obtained varied between 8.62% and 10.40%, knowing that the
undertaken and which consisted of an experimental set up that
PV generator efficiency at STC was 15%. Also, the final yield
allowed to conduct a series of regular tests. The system power of the system (Yf ) was 1065.6kWh/kWp with an average daily
capacity is 1.6kWp and was operating during the whole year

40
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH
A. Ghouari et al., Vol.6, No.1, 2016
value of 3.038kWh/kWp/d. It accounted for 59% of the total [15] H. Haeberlin, Ch. Beutler. “Normalized
PV system energy balance. Representation of Energy and Power for Analysis of
Performance and One-line Error Detection in PV-
The results of the survey of previous work undertaken
Systems”, 13th EU PV Conference on Photovoltaic Solar
elsewhere and reported in literature show that a good
Energy Conversion, Nice, France,1995.
agreement is found in terms of energy yields and system
components efficiency. [16] G. Blaesser, D. Munro, “Guideline for the
Assessment of Photovoltaic Plants Document B. Analysis
The future works will be focused on the energy
and Presentation of Monitoring Data. Report EURO
management in smart home concept and the economic
16339”, Joint Research Center, European
evaluation.
Comission,1993.
References [17] Photovoltaic power systems programme, “Analytical
Monitoring of Grid-connected Photovoltaic Systems Good
[1] Document, Ministry of energy, “National energy balance Practices for Monitoring and Performance Analysis”, IEA-
for the year 2008”, edition 2010, available from : PVPS T13-03, 2014.
http://www.mem-algeria.org.
[18] L. M. Ayompe, A. Duffy, S.J. McCormack, M.
[2] Document, Ministry of energy, “National energy balance Conlon, “Measured performance of a 1.72 kW rooftop grid
for the year 2013”, edition 2014, available from : connected photovoltaic system in Ireland”, Energy
http://www.mem-algeria.org. Conversion and Management, Vol. 52, pp.16-825, 2011.
[3] Document, The regulation commission for electricity and [19] P. Bhattacharya, S. Dey, B. Mustaphi, “Some
gas, “Activity rapport 2008”, 2009, available from analytical studies on the performance of grid connected
http://www.creg.gov.dz. solar photovoltaic system with different parameters”,
Procedia Mater Sci Vol. 6, pp.1942–50, 2014,.
[4] Document, The regulation commission for electricity and
gas, “Activity rapport 2013”, available from [20] S. Ghazi, K. Ip, “The effect of weather conditions on
http://www.creg.gov.dz. the efficiency of PV panels in the southeast of UK”,
Renewable Energy, vol. 69, pp. 50-59, 2014.
[5] A. Ghouari, Ch. Hamouda and A. Chaghi, “Performance
Analysis of Grid connected PV system in the perspective [21] P. M. Congedo, M. Malvoni, M. Mele, M.G. De
of use in a smart house in Algeria”, International Giorgi, “Performance measurements of monocrystalline
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Conference, silicon PV modules in South-eastern Italy”, Energy
Ouarzazate, Morocco, 7-9 March 2013. Conversion and Management, vol. 68, pp.1-10, 2013.
[6] Energy potential in Algeria, available from: [22] M. Drif, P. J. Pérez, J. Aguilera, et al, “Univer
http://www.mem-algeria.org/fr/enr/pot.html. Project. A grid connected photovoltaic system of 200 kWp
at Jaén University. Overview and performance analysis”,
[7] SKTM, Company of Electricity and renewable Energy, Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells. vol. 91, pp. 670-
http://www.sktm.dz. 683, 2007.
[8] Photovoltaic solar module. PW-P400 40W-12V datasheet, [23] E. Kymakis, S. Kalykakis, T. M. Papazoglou,
PHOTOWATT. “Performance analysis of a grid connected photovoltaic
[9] NEG inverter 1600 user manual. park on the island of Crete”, Energy Conversion and
Management, vol. 50, pp.433-438, 2009.
[10] Precision power meter LMG310 User Manual. ZES
ZIMMER Electronic Systems, 1995. [24] A. S. Elhodeiby, H. M. B. Metwally, M. A. Farahat,
“Performance analysis of 3.6 kW rooftop grid connected
[11] M. A. Hamouda et al, “Study and implanting of an photovoltaic system in Egypt”, International conference
intelligent electrical power supply system of urban on energy systems and technologies,. Cairo, Egypt, 2011.
housing with feeding into the grid”, Review of renewable
energy, vol. 14, pp. 187-202, Jun 2011, available from: [25] A. Barhdadi, A. S. Zakey, “Performance assessment
http://www.cder.dz/download/Art14-2_1.pdf of the first grid-connected photovoltaic micro power in
Africa: the PVGIS approach”, Moroccan Journal of
[12] Datataker DT50 User’s Manual. Connected Matter, vol. 12, pp. 14-19, 2010.
[13] IEC, Photovoltaic system performance monitoring – [26] U. Jahn et al, “International energy agency TASK II
guidelines for measurement, data exchange and analysis. database on photovoltaic power systems: statistical and
in: IEC 61724, International Electrotechnical Committee: analytical evaluation of PV operational data”, 2nd World
Geneva, 1998. Switzerland. conference on photovoltaic solar energy conversion,
[14] H. Haeberlin, Ph. Schaerf, “long-term Behaviour of Vienna, Austria, 1998.
Grid-Connected PV systems over more than 15 Years, [27] U. Jahn, W. Nasse, “Operational performance of
25th European Photovoltaic Solar Conference / 5th World grid-connected PV systems on buildings in Germany”,
Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion”, Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications, vol.
Valencia, Spain, 2010. 12, pp.441-448, 2004.
41
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH
A. Ghouari et al., Vol.6, No.1, 2016
[28] J. D. Mondol, Y. Yohanis, M. Smyth, B. Norton,
“Long term performance analysis of a grid connected
photovoltaic system in Northern Ireland”, Energy
Conversion and Management, vol.47, pp.2925-2947,
2006.
[29] A. Chimtavee, N. Ketjoy, “PV generator
performance evaluation and load analysis of the PV
microgrid system in Thailand”, In: Procedia Engineering,
vol.32, pp.384-391, 2012.
[30] S. M. Pietruszko, M. Gradzki, “Performance of a grid
connected small PV system in Poland”, Applied Energy,
vol. 74, pp. 177-184, 2003.
[31] R. A. Rahman, S.I. Sulaiman, A.M. Omar, S. Shaari,
Z.M. Zain, “Performance analysis of a grid-connected PV
system at malaysian energy centre”, 4th International
Power Engineering and Optimization Conference,
Malaysia,2010.
[32] M. Z. Hussin et al, “Performance of grid-Connected
photovoltaic system in equatorial rainforest fully humid
climate of Malaysia”, International Journal of Applied
Power Engineering, pp.105–142013.
[33] J.H. So, Y.S Jung, G.J. Yu, J.Y. Choi, J.H. Choi,
“Performance results and analysis of 3kW grid-connected
PV systems”, Renewable Energy, vol.32, pp.1858-
1872,2007.
[34] U. Jahn, W. Nasse, T. Nordmann, L. Clavadetscher,
D. Mayer, “Achievements of task 2 of IEA PV power
systems performance: final results on PV system
performance”, 19th EUPVSECParis, France, 2004.
[35] A. J. Veldhuis, A.H.M.E. Reinders, “Performance of
34 kWp Grid-Connected PV System in Indonesia –
Acomparison of Tropical and European PV system”, 40th
IEEE Photovoltaic Specialist Conference, Denver,
Colorado, 2014.
[36] D. C. Jordan, B. Sekulic, B. Marion, S.R. Kurtz,
“Performance and aging of a 20-year-old silicon PV
system”, IEEE J. Photovoltaics, vo.5, pp.744-751, 2015.
[37] J. Wohlgemuth, S.R. Kurtz, “Photovoltaic module
qualification plus testing”, 40th IEEE Photovoltaic
Specialist Conference, Denver, Colorado, 2014.
[38] S. Singh, R. Kumar, V. Vijay, “Performance analysis
of 58 kW grid-connected roof-top PV systems”, 6th IEEE
Power India International Conference, Delhi, India, 2014.

42