Comparative Study of MPPT Techniques for Solar

Photovoltaic System
Shraiya Pant R. P. Saini
Department of Hydro and Renewable Energy Department of Hydro and Renewable Energy
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
Roorkee, India Roorkee, India
[email protected] [email protected]

Abstract— Solar photovoltaics (PV) has proven itself to be the The various MPPT techniques differ from each other in
most dependable source for harvesting solar energy. The output several aspects such as: effectiveness, complexity, number of
of solar PV system relies upon solar radiation and temperature sensors required, ease of hardware implementation, speed of
which vary throughout the day. This causes variations in the convergence, etc. [3].
maximum power point (MPP) on the solar PV output The most widely used MPPT method is P&O, on
characteristics curve. Therefore, various Maximum Power account of its ease of implementation, simplicity and
Point Tracking (MPPT) techniques are used to track the MPP reliability. But this method has two major disadvantages:
and extract maximum power out of the PV systems. This paper
acquaints a simulation based comprehensive study for
First, on reaching near the MPP there are unending
comparison of three widely adopted MPPT algorithms: Perturb oscillations in output power causing a reduction in energy
and Observe (P&O), Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) and yield. Second, this method is unable to cope up with the fast-
Cuckoo Search (CS) using MATLAB Simulink. These MPPT changing irradiance which causes the operating point to shift
algorithms are implemented to regulate the duty cycle of a DC- away from MPP locus causing energy loss [4]. To overcome
DC Boost converter. The performance of the three algorithms is these problems some soft computing based MPPT methods
compared on the basis of their tracking speed, accuracy and are becoming popular. Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)
tracking efficiency. The CS MPPT algorithm showed the best and Cuckoo Search (CS) are two effective and simple meta-
tracking efficiency among the three under partial shading and heuristic algorithms used for tracking MPP. These MPPT
fast changing conditions of irradiance.
Keywords- Maximum Power Point Tracking, Photovoltaic,
techniques can extract the global maximum power point
Particle Swarm Optimization, Cuckoo Search, Perturb and (GMPP) under partial shading condition (PSC). These
Observe methods do not require the identification of shading pattern
for GMPP location [5].
I. INTRODUCTION
Electricity generation using solar photovoltaic (PV) Rezk et al. [5] studied PSO and CS to compare the
technology has become the most viable option in the recent results with the conventional algorithm of incremental
times. With exhaustion of fossil fuel reserves and rising resistance-based MPP tracker. Performances of the three
concerns about the environmental impact of the use of fossil methods for tracking MPP were compared under partial
fuels in recent times, has led to increase in use of solar PV for shading using MATLAB. PSO and CS showed faster
electricity generation. PV generated electricity is a clean and convergence to MPP than incremental resistance. CS based
noise less source of energy with low maintenance cost. tracker was superior to PSO due to less tracking time
The energy generated by PV modules relies on factors requirement. Mosaad et al. [6] applied CS and compared the
like temperature, solar irradiance and shading condition [1]. results of the MPPT technique with ANN and IC based MPPT
PV modules have non-linear voltage-current (V-I) methods. It was found that CS gave the maximum power
characteristics. The voltage-power (V-P) characteristic curve compared to IC and ANN with varying conditions. Also,
of PV module has a single point where it produces maximum there were no fluctuations in output power on reaching near
power (Pmax). With varying ambient condition MMP also MPP. Koad and Zobaa [7] performed a comparative study
varies. This causes a discrepancy between load and source between the conventional MPPT methods (IC, P&O) and
characteristics, reducing the maximum power delivered to the PSO used in PV systems. These MPPT methods are
load. Maximum power point tracking (MPPT) is used to implemented using Cuk converter in MATLAB to compare
match the characteristics of PV module with load and reduce them on the basis of accuracy,tracking speed, cost and
the power loss [1,2]. The MPPT controller helps in adjusting performance. From simulations it was found that PSO can
the duty cycle of a DC-DC converter, which acts as an track MPP accurately under all conditions. Its tracking
interface between the load and PV modules. efficiency is also high as compared to the other methods. It
In different PV applications to extract the maximum also has fast convergence and easy implementation as
power provided by the PV modules several MPPT techniques compared to IC and P&O. Ahmed and Salam [8] performed
are found in literature. Some commonly used MPPT simulations of CS for tracking MPP in PV system. The results
techniques include Perturb and Observe (P&O), Fractional were correlated against the conventional P&O method. The
Short Circuit Current (FSCC), Incremental Conductance simulation results showed that the CS method tracks the MPP
(IC), etc. Some advanced soft computing based MPPT quickly even under rapidly changing atmospheric conditions
techniques includes Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), with zero steady state oscillations.
Fuzzy logic method and Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)
methods.

978-1-7281-3455-0/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE 1

 represent the number of PV modules connected in series and
parallel respectively, 𝑛𝑠 is the number of PV cells connected
in series in a single string, 𝑅𝑠 and 𝑅𝑝 represents series and
parallel resistances (Ω) of PV module respectively, 𝑎
represents p-n junction ideality factor. The PV module
modelled in this paper is Solarex MSX-60 whose
specifications are compiled in Table 1.

TABLE I. SPECIFICATIONS OF SOLAREX MSX-60

Parameters Abbreviation Values
Fig. 1. PV System with MPPT No. of series connected cells Ns 36
Maximum power Pmp 59.85 W
In the present work, a correlative study of three MPPT Maximum current Imp 3.5 A
techniques viz, PSO, CS and P&O is done at standard test Maximum voltage Vmp 17.1 V
condition (STC) as well as at the changing conditions of Short circuit current Isc 3.8 A
irradiance. The article is organized in five sections. Section I
Open circuit voltage Voc 21.1 V
encloses the introduction and objective. Section II contains
Temperature coefficient of Voc α -0.8 %/oC
the description of the system and its component. Section III
discusses the MPPT techniques used. Interpretation of the Temperature coefficient of Isc β 0.00247 %/oC
simulation results is discussed in Section IV. Conclusion is
of the study is stated in Section V. A series combination of four such PV modules has been
used in this study. The I-V and P-V curve of PV array of four
II. SYSTEM COMPONENTS series connected modules at different solar irradiance (G) and
Schematic of PV system with Maximum Power Point temperature (T) is presented in Fig. 3.
Tracking is illustrated in Fig. 1. For tracking MPP, the
impedance between the load and PV array under varying
atmospheric conditions should be matched by employing a
DC-DC converter. The MPPT controller regulates the duty
cycle of the DC-DC converter by acquiring the real-time
operating parameters required by the governing MPPT
algorithm [9]. The modelling of the components in the above
schematic is discussed the following sub-sections.

A. PV modelling
Equivalent electrical circuit of a PV cell with single
diode is illustrated in Fig. 2. It has a light dependent current
source that produces photocurrent (Iph). A diode is connected
in parallel to the current source which represents the
phenomenon of diffusion current (Id). The contact resistance
between the metal contact and the silicon is represented by
(a)
series resistance (Rs). Loss of power due to manufacturing
defects is represented by the shunt resistance (Rsh)

Fig. 2. Equivalent electrical circuit of the single diode solar cell model
The output current of solar cell is directly proportional
to the solar irradiation falling on it. The series combination of
solar cells forms a PV module whose current is given by (1):
𝑁
𝑉𝑝𝑣+(𝑁 𝑠 )𝑅𝑠 𝐼
𝑝
𝐼 = 𝑁𝑝 𝐼𝑝ℎ − 𝑁𝑝 𝐼𝑠 [𝑒𝑥𝑝 ( ) − 1] −
𝑛𝑠 𝑎𝑣𝑡
𝑁
𝑉𝑝𝑣+(𝑁 𝑠 )𝑅𝑠 𝐼
𝑝
( 𝑁
) (1)
(𝑁 𝑠 )𝑅𝑝 (b)
𝑝

Fig. 3. (a) I-V and P-V characteristics curves at varying G and T=25 oC (b)
where the output current (A) of PV module is designated by
I-V and P-V characteristics curves at varying T and G=1000W/m2
I, 𝑉𝑝𝑣 is output voltage (V) of the PV array, 𝑁𝑠 and 𝑁𝑝

2
B. DC-DC Boost Converter even on reaching the MPP and hence, leading to power losses.
Herein, a boost converter is adopted to transfer maximum It is a major limitation of this method. Also, this method
power from PV module to a load (Fig.4.). The boost converter sometimes is unable to find MPP under frequently changing
helps in stepping up the voltage from supply side to load side. solar irradiance.
The boost converter is turned ON when switch (S) is closed.
ON-state of the converter causes an increase in the inductor
current. On the other hand, opening of switch (S) , shifts the
boost converter into OFF state. In this case, the current flows
through the load (R), diode (D), and capacitor (C).

Fig. 4. Boost converter circuit with PV source and resistive load

TABLE II. VARIOUS PARAMETERS OF DC-DC CONVERTER

Parameters Abbreviation Value
Resistor R 50 Ω
Inductor L 1.15 mH
Fig. 5. Flow diagram showing operation of Perturb and Observe method
Capacitor C1 10 µF
Capacitor C2 470 µF 2) Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)

The boost converter has input and output voltages, 𝑉𝑖 & It is based upon the behavior of bird flocks. It considers a
𝑉𝑜 respectively related to each other by the following swarm of particles in the n-dimensional space and each of
relation: these particles represent a solution. The particles in the
𝑉𝑜
=
1
(2) multidimensional space keep on adjusting their position to
𝑉𝑖 1−𝑑 find the desired location based on their own previous
where 𝑑 represents duty cycle of the boost converter. experiences and also their neighbors. The best particle in the
The output voltage always exceeds the input voltage as neighborhood ( 𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑖 ) influences the position of each
described by (2) as the duty cycle ranges from 0 to 1. The individual particle. The position of each particle is also
parameters of DC-DC boost converter are summarised in influenced by the best solution found by the whole population
Table 2. of the particles (𝐺𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 ) [12]. The particle is brought to the best
C. MPPT Algorithms position by incrementing or decrementing the initial velocity
depending on present value. If the current value of position is
1) Perturb and Observe (P&O) less than best value then there is an increase in the velocity
Its operation involves periodic perturbation (increment or
value and vice versa. The position ( 𝑥𝑖 ) of the particle is
decrement) of terminal voltage or current of the PV array and
adjusted based on [13]:
comparison of the PV output power with the previous
𝑥𝑖𝑘+1 = 𝑥𝑖𝑘 + 𝑣𝑖𝑘+1 (3)
perturbation cycle output power. If operating voltage of the
The velocity (𝑣𝑖 ) in (3) is calculated using [13]:
module changes and power increases, the operating point is
moved to that direction by the control algorithm otherwise, it 𝑣𝑖𝑘+1 = 𝑤𝑣𝑖𝑘 + 𝑐1 𝑟1 {𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑖 − 𝑥𝑖𝑘 } + 𝑐2 𝑟2 {𝐺𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 − 𝑥𝑖𝑘 } (4)
moves in the opposite direction. The P&O algorithm follows where 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 are coefficients of acceleration, inertia
similar principle in the next cycle of perturbation [10]. weight is represented by 𝑤 , 𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑖 represents the best
The flow diagram of P&O MPPT technique is shown in personal position of particle 𝑖 , 𝐺𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 represents the
Fig. 5. This method has been previously used in [11]. A small neighborhood position of the particle 𝑖 and 𝑟1 , 𝑟2  𝑈 . The
increment in system voltage (V) that causes a change in flow diagram of PSO is shown in Fig. 6. This method has
power (P). A positive change in power causes the operating previously been discussed in [13].
voltage of the system to perturb in the same direction as the 3) Cuckoo Search (CS)
increment. On contrary, if P is negative then the operating It is based on the brood parasitism method (laying eggs in
voltage moves in the direction opposite to the increment. In other birds’ nest) followed by Cuckoo birds for laying eggs.
this method the terminal voltage of PV array is perturbed in Three elementary rules govern CS [14]: (a) each individual
every MPPT cycle that causes the output power to oscillate cuckoo will lay a single egg at a time and place it in any nest

3
which is selected randomly. (b) The finest nest possessing The CS algorithm follows the Lévy distribution, which
superior eggs will be passed on further to the succeeding allows it to obtain local maxima points and, at the same time,
generation. (c) The statistic of convenient nests is pre- shortens the tracking time required to reach global maximum
established and the probability of discovery of the egg laid by power point [15]. The flow diagram of CS [16] is presented
a cuckoo in such pre-determined nests by the host bird is Pa, in Fig. 7.
where Pa∈ [0, 1]. Here, the cuckoo birds represent the
particles assigned to find the solution and the cuckoo bird III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
eggs represent the solution of present iteration process.
Comparison of the three MPPT (i.e. P&O, PSO and CS)
methods has been carried out under the following three cases:
(i) Standard Test Condition (ii) Partial shading conditions and
(iii) Fast varying solar radiation. The MATLAB Simulink
model for the system designed is shown in Fig. 8. The MPPT
algorithms are compared on the basis of their tracking speed
and tracking efficiency (Teff); which is calculated using [17]:
𝑡
∫0 𝑃𝑀𝑃𝑃
𝑇𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 𝑡 . 100 (5)
∫0 𝑃𝑃𝑉

A. Under Standard Test Condition (STC)

The array output power at STC is found to be 238.2 W.
At this condition the radiation is 1000 W/m2 and ambient
temperature is 25 oC. The power output comparison of the
three MPPT methods at STC is illustrated in Fig. 9 (a). Here,
it is observed that P&O, PSO and CS MPPT algorithms take
approximately 0.119 s, 1.457 s and 0.646 s, respectively to
track the MPP. The tracking efficiencies calculated for P&O,
PSO and CS are 99.8%, 99.9% and 99.8%, respectively. In
this case the time response of P&O is better than the other
two methods. PSO method takes the maximum time for
tracking MPP with comparable tracking efficiency with the
Fig. 6. Flow diagram of Particle Swarm Optimization method
other two methods.
B. Under Partial Shading Condition (PSC)
In this case the radiation on the four series connected PV
modules are different; 1000, 800, 400 and 600 W/m2
respectively while the temperature was set as 25 oC. In this
case the global maximum power point was found to be 116.2
W. The power output comparison of the three MPPT methods
under partial shading condition is shown in Fig. 9 (b). It was
observed that the time required by the PSO and CS algorithms
to track GMPP (i.e. 116.2 W) is 0.943 s and 0.472 s,
respectively. Contrarily, the P&O algorithm gets trapped at a
local maximum point at around 95.56 W. The tracking
efficiencies of both PSO and CS MPPT algorithms under
partial shading condition is 99.65% while the P&O method
has a low tracking efficiency of 82.23%. The accuracy of
PSO and CS in this case is much higher than the P&O
algorithm.
C. Under Fast Varying Solar Radiation (FVSR)
The fast-changing radiation (Fig.10 (a)) in the form of a
step signal is provided to the PV array. The response of the
three MPPT algorithm in terms of power output to this fast-
changing radiation is presented in Fig. 10 (b). It is found that
from 0-1s of simulation, the P&O algorithm tracks the MPP
fastest (0.077s) with a tracking efficiency of 99.8%. Here, the
PSO and CS track the MPP in 0.55 s and 0.65s with tracking
Fig. 7. Flow diagram showing Cuckoo Search method efficiencies of 99.8%.

4
 Fig. 8. Model of PV array with boost converter in Simulink

(a) (b)
Fig. 9. Comparison of power output from PSO, CS and P&O (a) at STC (b) under PSC

(a) (b)
Fig. 10. (a) Fast changing solar irradiance input, (b) Power output comparison of PSO, CS and P&O under FVSR

and 99.9%. With abrupt change in solar irradiance (at 1s), the and 99.774 %, respectively. In this case as well MPP tracking
P&O tracks the new MPP in 0.05 s with a tracking efficiency by CS has better accuracy and fast tracking.
of 98.42 %. The time taken by PSO and CS for tracking the
MPP is 0.11 s and 0.13 s with tracking efficiency of 99.2 %

5
 IV. CONCLUSION PV system Based Cuckoo Search Algorithm; review
In this study a MATLAB Simulink model is developed and comparison. Energy Procedia. 2019 Apr
to compare three MPPT methods (P&O, PSO and CS). These 1;162:117-26.
MPPT methods are compared in terms of tracking efficiency, [7] Koad RB, Zobaa AF. Comparison between the
tracking time and accuracy. The methods were compared conventional methods and PSO based MPPT
under three conditions: STC, partial shading condition and algorithm for photovoltaic systems.
fast changing irradiance. Under STC, the MPP has been [8] Ahmed J, Salam Z. A soft computing MPPT for PV
tracked in 0.119 s with 99.8% tracking efficiency by P&O system based on Cuckoo Search algorithm. In4th
method. Under partial shading condition, MPP has been International Conference on Power Engineering,
tracked with 99.65% efficiency by PSO and CS methods and Energy and Electrical Drives 2013 May 13 (pp. 558-
hence these methods are found to be better than P&O. Also, 562). IEEE.
CS method takes lesser time (i.e. 0.472 s) compared to PSO [9] Wang Y, Yang Y, Fang G, Zhang B, Wen H, Tang
(0.55 s) to track the MPP in this case. In case of fast changing H, Fu L, Chen X. An advanced maximum power
radiation, MPP has been tracked in 0.13 s with 99.74% point tracking method for photovoltaic systems by
tracking efficiency by CS method. As per the simulation using variable universe fuzzy logic control
results, it was found that MPP is tracked with highest tracking considering temperature variability. Electronics.
efficiency by CS method under the three different conditions. 2018;7(12):355.
[10] Faranda R, Leva S. Energy comparison of MPPT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT techniques for PV Systems. WSEAS transactions on
The authors are immensely grateful to the Ministry of power systems. 2008 Jun 1;3(6):446-55.
Human Resources and Development (MHRD) and [11] Go, S. I., Ahn, S. J., Choi, J. H., Jung, W. W., Yun,
Department of Hydro and Renewable Energy, Indian Institute S. Y., & Song, I. K. Simulation and analysis of
of Technology (IIT), Roorkee for providing support during existing MPPT control methods in a PV generation
PhD. system. Journal of International Council on
Electrical Engineering. 2011;1(4), 446-451.
REFERENCES [12] Ishaque K, Salam Z, Amjad M, Mekhilef S. An
improved particle swarm optimization (PSO)–based
[1] Verma D, Nema S, Shandilya AM, Dash SK.
MPPT for PV with reduced steady-state oscillation.
Maximum power point tracking (MPPT) techniques:
IEEE transactions on Power Electronics. 2012 Jan
Recapitulation in solar photovoltaic systems.
23;27(8):3627-38.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2016
Feb 1;54:1018-34. [13] Ishaque K, Salam Z. A review of maximum power
[2] Salam Z, Ahmed J, Merugu BS. The application of point tracking techniques of PV system for uniform
insolation and partial shading condition. Renewable
soft computing methods for MPPT of PV system: A
and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2013 Mar
technological and status review. Applied Energy.
1;19:475-88.
2013 Jul 1;107:135-48.
[14] Yang XS, Deb S. Multiobjective cuckoo search for
[3] Mohanty P, Bhuvaneswari G, Balasubramanian R,
Dhaliwal NK. MATLAB based modeling to study design optimization. Computers & Operations
the performance of different MPPT techniques used Research. 2013 Jun 1;40(6):1616-24.
[15] Nugraha DA, Lian KL. A Novel MPPT Method
for solar PV system under various operating
Based on Cuckoo Search Algorithm and Golden
conditions. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Section Search Algorithm for Partially Shaded PV
Reviews. 2014 Oct 1;38:581-93.
System. Canadian Journal of Electrical and
[4] Ahmed J, Salam Z. An improved perturb and
observe (P&O) maximum power point tracking Computer Engineering. 2019 Jul 23;42(3):173-82.
[16] Mohapatra A, Nayak B, Das P, Mohanty KB. A
(MPPT) algorithm for higher efficiency. Applied
review on MPPT techniques of PV system under
Energy. 2015 Jul 15;150:97-108.
partial shading condition. Renewable and
[5] Rezk H, Fathy A, Abdelaziz AY. A comparison of
Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017 Dec 1;80:854-
different global MPPT techniques based on meta-
heuristic algorithms for photovoltaic system 67.
subjected to partial shading conditions. Renewable [17] Belkaid A, Colak I, Isik O. Photovoltaic maximum
power point tracking under fast varying of solar
and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017 Jul
radiation. Applied energy. 2016 Oct 1;179:523-30.
1;74:377-86.
[6] Mosaad MI, abed el-Raouf MO, Al-Ahmar MA,
Banakher FA. Maximum Power Point Tracking of