Comparative analysis of steady-state and dynamic models for grid-connected photovoltaic farm performance monitoring: A case study of Huawei SUN2000-60KTL-M0 inverter

  • Dias Prihatmoko orcid

    Doctoral Program of Engineering Science, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia; Department of Electrical Engineering, Universitas Islam Nahdlatul Ulama Jepara, Jepara 59424, Indonesia

  • Rustam Asnawi orcid

    Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia

  • Moh. Khairudin orcid

    Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia

  • Nor Azlan Othman orcid

    Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam 40450, Malaysia

Article ID: 4726
Keywords: photovoltaic monitoring; steady-state model; dynamic model; performance ratio; grid-connected PV

Abstract

This study evaluates the solar-to-electrical energy conversion performance of a 63.24 kWp grid-connected photovoltaic (PV) farm equipped with a Huawei SUN2000-60KTL-M0 (60 kW) inverter by comparing a steady-state diagnostic model against a dynamic observability assessment. A single-instant snapshot of 12 PV strings on 26 June 2026 identified three non-producing strings (PV6, PV7, PV8), reducing string availability to 75.0% and causing an instantaneous DC power shortfall of approximately 6.0 kW (23.6% of currently achievable capacity). Inverter DC-to-AC conversion efficiency was 98.72% and the observed daily-equivalent capacity factor was 15.48%, both computed directly from measured values. Performance Ratio is reported as not evaluable due to the absence of temporally overlapping plane-of-array irradiance data. The dynamic assessment evaluates day-to-day energy temporal variability and historical hourly weather variability from measured June 2026 and 2020–2025 records (mean absolute daily ramp 12.66%, daily energy CV 19.45%), while sub-minute electrical transient characteristics remain not evaluable owing to the lack of sub-minute electrical logging. A Model Observability Score (MOS) and Data Resolution Adequacy Index (DRAI) are computed from an a priori parameter registry. The steady-state model achieves an MOS of 87.5% (7 of 8 applicable parameters), while the dynamic model achieves 25.0% (4 of 16), with the gap concentrated in the electrical-transient domain and attributable to instrumentation limitations. A phased instrumentation roadmap is proposed. The findings provide a transparent, auditable template for determining appropriate monitoring depth in tropical grid-connected PV operations and maintenance practice.

Published
2026-08-25
How to Cite
Prihatmoko, D., Asnawi, R., Khairudin, M., & Othman, N. A. (2026). Comparative analysis of steady-state and dynamic models for grid-connected photovoltaic farm performance monitoring: A case study of Huawei SUN2000-60KTL-M0 inverter. Energy Storage and Conversion, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.59400/esc4726

References

[1]Madeti SR, Singh SN. Monitoring system for photovoltaic plants: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017; 67: 1180–1207. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.088

[2]Prihatmoko D, Asnawi R, Khairudin M. Optimizing the Utilization of 1.35 MW Grid-Connected Solar Power Plants to Reduce Carbon Emissions in the PLN Electricity System. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2025; 1543(1): 012032. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/1543/1/012032

[3]Huld T, Müller R, Gambardella A. A new solar radiation database for estimating PV performance in Europe and Africa. Solar Energy. 2012; 86(6): 1803–1815. doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2012.03.006

[4]IEC. IEC 61724-1:2021, Photovoltaic System Performance—Part 1: Monitoring, 2nd ed. International Electrotechnical Commission; 2021. Available online: https://webstore.iec.ch/en/publication/65561

[5]Reich NH, Mueller B, Armbruster A, et al. Performance ratio revisited: Is PR > 90% realistic? Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications. 2012; 20(6): 717–726. doi: 10.1002/pip.1219

[6]Li X, Wen H, Hu Y, et al. A Comparative Study on Photovoltaic MPPT Algorithms under EN50530 Dynamic Test Procedure. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics. 2021; 36(4): 4153–4168. doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2020.3024211

[7]Poudel B, Guruwacharya N, Subedi S, et al. Experimentation in Exploring Photovoltaic Inverter Dynamics under Different Irradiance Levels through a Data-Driven Approach. IEEE Access. 2024; 12: 164137–164150. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3488493

[8]IEEE/IEC 60255-118-1:2018. Measuring Relays and Protection Equipment—Part 118-1: Synchrophasor for Power Systems—Measurements. IEEE/IEC; 2018. Available online: https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/60255-118-1/5724/

[9]Villalva MG, Gazoli JR, Filho ER. Comprehensive Approach to Modeling and Simulation of Photovoltaic Arrays. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics. 2009; 24(5): 1198–1208. doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2009.2013862

[10]Phinikarides A, Kindyni N, Makrides G, et al. Review of photovoltaic degradation rate methodologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2014; 40: 143–152. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.155

[11]Jordan DC, Kurtz SR. Photovoltaic Degradation Rates—An Analytical Review. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications. 2013; 21(1): 12–29. doi: 10.1002/pip.1182

[12]Guerriero P, Piegari L, Rizzo R, et al. Mismatch Based Diagnosis of PV Fields Relying on Monitored String Currents. International Journal of Photoenergy. 2017; 2017: 2834685. doi: 10.1155/2017/2834685

[13]Dhimish M, Holmes V. Fault detection algorithm for grid-connected photovoltaic plants. Solar Energy. 2016; 137: 236–245. doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2016.08.021

[14]Madeti SR, Singh SN. A comprehensive study on different types of faults and detection techniques for solar photovoltaic system. Solar Energy. 2017; 158: 161–185. doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2017.08.069

[15]Ahmed J, Salam Z. A Modified P&O Maximum Power Point Tracking Method with Reduced Steady State Oscillation and Improved Tracking Efficiency. IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. 2016; 7(4): 1506–1515. doi: 10.1109/TSTE.2016.2568043

[16]Belkaid A, Colak I, Isik O. Photovoltaic maximum power point tracking under fast varying of solar radiation. Applied Energy. 2016; 179: 523–530. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.07.034

[17]Lappalainen K, Valkealahti S. Recognition and modelling of irradiance transitions caused by moving clouds. Solar Energy. 2015; 112: 55–67. doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2014.11.018

[18]Skomedal ÅF, Øgaard MB, Haug H, et al. Robust and Fast Detection of Small Power Losses in Large-Scale PV Systems. IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics. 2021; 11(3): 819–828. doi: 10.1109/JPHOTOV.2021.3060732

[19]Meng B, Loonen RCGM, Hensen JLM. Leveraging dynamic power benchmarks and CUSUM charts for enhanced fault detection in distributed PV systems. Energy Conversion and Management. 2024; 314: 118692. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2024.118692

[20]Dhimish M, Tyrrell AM. Photovoltaic bypass diode fault detection using artificial neural networks. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement. 2023; 72: 1–10.

[21]Zhao Y, de Palma JF, Mosesian J, et al. Line–line fault analysis and protection challenges in solar photovoltaic arrays. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics. 2013; 60(9): 3784–3795. doi: 10.1109/TIE.2012.2205355

[22]Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. SUN2000-60KTL-M0 Smart String Inverter—Technical Specifications. Available online: https://solar.huawei.com/-/media/Solar/attachment/pdf/au/datasheet/SUN2000-60KTL-M0.pdf (accessed on 13 July 2026).

[23]Mellit A, Kalogirou S. Assessment of machine learning and ensemble methods for fault diagnosis of photovoltaic systems. Renewable Energy. 2022; 184: 1074–1090. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.11.125

[24]Lappalainen K, Valkealahti S. Output power variation of different PV array configurations during irradiance transitions caused by moving clouds. Applied Energy. 2017; 190: 902–910. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.01.013

[25]Agüera-Pérez A, Espinosa-Gavira MJ, Palomares-Salas JC, et al. Meteorological contexts in the analysis of cloud-induced photovoltaic transients: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2024; 202: 114689. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2024.114689

[26]Mazumdar BM, Saquib M, Das AK. An empirical model for ramp analysis of utility-scale solar PV power. Solar Energy. 2014; 107: 44–49. doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2014.05.027