International Journal of Physics

and Research (IJPR)

ISSN(P): 2250-0030; ISSN(E): 2319-4499
Vol. 5, Issue 6, Dec 2015, 21-30
TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

AN IMPROVED CONTROLLER BASED ON MPPT CONTROL

STRATEGY FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEMS
SANUSI Y.K1 & ABIODUN AYODELE O. JOSHUA2
Pure and Applied Physics Department, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology Ogbomoso, Nigeria
ABSTRACT
Improvement in the conversion of solar energy into electrical energy and also the cost reduction has helped
increaseits growth. Maximum Power Point Trackingplays a vital role in photovoltaic (PV) system because they increase
the efficiency of the solar photovoltaic system by increasing the power output. In this paper, two different controllers
which are the Conventional (CVN) and the modified Maximum Power Point Tracker (MPPT) were considered. Different
MPPT techniques were also considered and the best among the techniques was discovered. A modified algorithm was
then developed using the known and efficient algorithms reported such as the P&O, OV and SC. The two controllers
were constructed and their performance was evaluated by analyzing the electrical parameters gotten from them in
various seasons. The modified algorithm which can be referred to as the modified P&O was compared with the

the results of the performance of the two algorithms that the efficiency of modified MPPT is 45% more than that of
convectional system.
KEYWORDS: Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT), Photovoltaic (PV), Constant Voltage (CV), Open Voltage
(OV), Short Circuit Current (SC), Performance,

Original Article

convectional algorithm and a MATLAB program was used to implement all the algorithms. It was then deduced from

Received: Sep 22, 2015; Accepted: Nov 23, 2015; Published: Dec 11, 2015; Paper Id.: IJPRDEC201504

INTRODUCTION
Solar energy is one of the most important renewable energy sources, it is very clean, inexhaustible and
free. Among several solar energy applications is photovoltaic system.Photovoltaic system is used in solar water
pumping, solar battery charging, hybrid vehicles, and other photovoltaic solar devices.
The performance of a photovoltaic (PV) power system depends on the operatingconditions as well as the
solar cell and array design quality [1]. The output voltage, currentand power of a PV array vary as functions of
solar irradiation level, temperature, and loadcurrent. Therefore, the effects of solar irradiation, temperature, and
load current must beconsidered in the design of PV arrays so that any change in the temperature and solarradiation
should not adversely affect the photovoltaic output power to theload which is either a power company utility grid
or any stand-alone electrical typeload. To overcome the undesired effects of the variable temperature and solar
irradiationon the output power of PV systems, different control systems need to be applied. Thesecontrol systems
may be either controlling the sun input to the PV array or by controlling the power output from the PV array. The
two systems may include electric or thermal energystorage systems or auxiliary power sources which supply
electricity during the nights orcloudy days. Sun input to the PV systems is kept as high as possible either by
rearrangingthe solar cell configurations of PV arrays with respect to the changes in weatherconditions[3,7,8] or by
designing and controlling the position of sun tracking solarcollectors[7,9,10]. There are many different approaches
www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

22

Sanusi Y.K & Abiodun Ayodele O. Joshua

to maximizing the power from a PV system, these range from using simple voltage relationships to more complex multiple
sample based analysis. Depending on the end application and the dynamics of the irradiance, the power conversion
engineer needs to evaluate the various options
The PV system is characterized with a non-linear current-voltage varying with solar radiation received on the
earth surface and the ambient temperature which affects the output power given by the system. Hence, maximum power
point tracking techniques are introduced to boost the PV systems operation point by monitoring the MPP and trying to
ensure the array operates at its MPP at all times[11].
The power delivered by a PV system of one or more photovoltaic cells is dependent on the irradiance,
temperature, and the current drawn from the cells. Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT) is used to obtain the
maximum power from these systems[12]. Such applications as putting power on the grid, charging batteries, or powering
an electric motor benefit from MPPT. In such applications, the power require by the load may be higher than the power
generate by the PV system.In this case, a power conversion system is used to maximize the power from the PV system[13].
However, in this present work, development of modified maximum power point tracking technique was done by
combination and modification of existing techniques. The performance evaluation of the new technique was carried out by
writing a program using Matlab to implement the algorithms and simulate the readings and compared it with the
convectional controller photovoltaic system[14].
There are different techniques used to track the maximum power point. Few of the most popular techniques
considered are[16];

Constant Voltage method

Short-Current Pulse method

Open Voltage method

Perturb and Observe method

Constant Voltage Method

The constant voltage method is one of the very simple MPPT control technique. The operating point of the PV
system is held near to the MPP by adjusting the voltage of PV module and matching it to a particular fixed reference
voltage equal to the MPP voltage of the characteristic PV system. The constant voltage technique considers that both the
solar radiation and temperature variations on the PV module are not so important factors on the MPP voltage and that the
fixed reference voltage is almost equal to the real MPP voltage. Thus, the operating point is not exactly at the MPP and
locality data needs to be obtained for different geographical locations. The technique requires PV module voltage
measurement in order to set up the duty-cycle of the DC\DC boost converter.

Impact Factor (JCC): 2.3529

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

An Improved Controller Based on MPPT Control Strategy for Photovoltaic Systems

23

Figure 1: Flow Chart of the CV Method [16]

Short-Current Pulse Method
The short-circuit pulse technique operate the MPP by providing a reference current to the power converter
controller. The best operating current for maximum power output is directly proportional to short-circuit current under
different atmospheric condition. The technique requires the measurement of the short-circuit current. To achieve this
measurement, it is very important to adopt a static switch in parallel with the PV module in order to establish the shortcircuit condition. Also, the method requires the measurement of the PV module current in order to set up the duty-cycle of
the DC\DC boost converter.

Figure 2: Flow Chart of the SC Method [16]

Open Voltage Method
The basic fundamental of open voltage technique is on the observation that the maximum power point voltage is
usually closed to a fixed percentage of the open-circuit voltage. Solar radiation, temperature and generation spread vary the
position of the MPP within a 2% tolerance band [18]. The open voltage method always applies 76% of open voltage as
reference value voltage for which the maximum power output can be achieved [18]. The technique needs measurements of
the output voltage when the current is opened. The method also requires to adopt a static switch in to the PV module.
Moreso, the method requires the measurement of the PV module voltage by the regulator.

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

24

Sanusi Y.K & Abiodun Ayodele O. Joshua

Figure 3: Flow Chart of the OV Method [18].

Perturb and Observe Method
Perturb and observe method work on intermittent perturbing the module terminal voltage and carry out
comparison between the PV power output and that of the previous perturbation cycle. However, if the PV module voltage
varies and the power increases, the control system adjust the PV modules operating point in the same way, but if the power
decreases, the operating point will be moving in the opposite direction. The algorithm of this method continues in the same
pattern for the next perturbation cycle.

Figure 4: Flow Chart of the P&O Method [19].

METHODOLOGY
There are several things considered in the development of this project. Methodology (process includes the
method, technique, and the tools/equipments) is a process that has to be followed when analyzing data and designing a
project.
Solar Panels
Two similar solar panels were used with specifications below in table 1.

Impact Factor (JCC): 2.3529

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

An Improved Controller Based on MPPT Control Strategy for Photovoltaic Systems

25

Table 1: Electrical Characteristics of PV Panel

Symbol
PMPP
VMPP
IMPP
ISC
VOV

Quantity
Maximum Power
Voltage at PMPP
Current at PMPP
Short-Circuit Current
Open-Circuit Voltage

Value
130W
17.60V
7.39A
8.13A
21.80V

Multi-Meters
Two multi-meters with same resistance were used to measure the current and the voltage of the experimental setup. This is to avoid variations due to difference in resistance of the instrument. (Mastesch MY64)
Batteries
Two blue gate batteries were used to store charges from each setup, each of 100AH.
Controller
The controller: Two controllers were constructed, detail of construction in [24] the Maximum Power Point
Tracker (modified one) and the Conventional controller which have a current rating of 10A each.
Conventional MPPT Techniques
Classification form of MPPT algorithms may be according to the used control techniques. In literature, many
control techniques are developed for this purpose[20]. In the convectional MPPT techniques, P-V characteristic of PV
module is used. The power generated by PV module change with respect to the voltage. The main advantages of the
algorithm are simple structure and ease of implementation, with both stand-alone and grid-connected systems, MPP
tracking can be done with very high efficiency [21, 22, 23,]. But it has limitations that reduce efficiency of MPPT
Modified MPPT Algorithm
After conducting a comprehensive study and analysis of the algorithms considered above, the best three
algorithms were combined and a new algorithm was developed. Since the P&O algorithms operate by periodically
perturbing (i.e. incrementing or decrementing) the array terminal voltage and comparing the PV output power with that of
the previous perturbation cycle, it was used as the base algorithm accepting the output of the voltage from the Open
Voltage algorithm and the current from the Short-Current algorithm, then periodically perturbs the voltage from the Open
Voltage and compares the PV output power with that of the previous perturbation cycle.

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

26

Sanusi Y.K & Abiodun Ayodele O. Joshua

Figure 5: Flow Chart of the Modified Algorithm Measurement and Readings

Experimental Set-up
Figure 6 shown the experimental set-up for the both real experiment, MPPT (modified Controller) and control
experiment, CVN (conventional controller)

Figure 6: Experimental Set-up

Measurement of Electrical Parameters
The performance of two different MPPT techniques (the convectional and the modified technique) were studied
concurrently measuring and recording the following electrical parameters; output current, output voltage and power out of
the systems.
Performance Verification and Comparison
The Performance of the two controllers were evaluated from the recorded parameters and compared.

Impact Factor (JCC): 2.3529

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

An Improved Controller Based on MPPT Control Strategy for Photovoltaic Systems

27

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The variationof mean values of voltage, current and power for the two controllers considered ( modified MPPT
and CNV) are displayed graphically in the figures 7: 11. Figure 7: 8 shows the comparison of average monthly variation of
maximum power and maximum current for the modified MPPT and CNV systems. While figure 9 11 displayed hourly
variation of current, voltage and power output for the both modified MPPT and CNV systems.
Generally, it is deduced from the figures 7: 11 that modified MPPT has a better efficiency than the conventional
controller as such at every point in time regardless of the magnitude of solar radiation reaching the Solar panels, the system
with the MPPT always had a higher output in term of value of current, voltage and power compared to CNV. In the figure
10, the variation of voltage has a seemingly similar curve because the voltage on the battery keeps increasing as it gets
more power. However, for the variation of current, there is adistinct difference with the increase in number of hour of the
day.This was attributed to the fact that the variation in output of the current of photovoltaic system is a function of the
variation in solar radiation of the day. All the figures have similar peak valueat the same time range from 12.00pm to
2.00pm, that is for the both systems, the maximum output power was around 1.00pmwhen the sun is at its zenith. Also, the
higher value in magnitude of modified MPPT voltage compared to that of CNV was due tothe fact that, though the battery
was drained to the same voltage, as soon as they were to be charged, yet, there was a difference even at their first readings
with the modified MPPT having a higher charging rate. It is also important to note that the MPPT charged the battery fully
while the Conventional controller wasnt able to achieve that. In some cases where there was also a a high flunctuation in
solar radiation, the modified MPPT was able to cater for it and still delivered remarkable output.

Figure 7: Comparison of Variation of Maximun Current with Number of the Months

Figure 8: Comparison of Variation of Maximun Power with Number of the Months

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

28

Sanusi Y.K & Abiodun Ayodele O. Joshua

Figure 9: Comparison of Hourly Variation of Mean Current for MPPT and CNV

Figure 10: Comparison of Hourly Variation of Mean Voltage for MPPT and CNV

Figure 11: Comparison of Hourly Variation of Mean Power for MPPT and CNV

CONCLUSIONS
MPPT algorithms employed in photovoltaic solar systems are one of the most vital factors that determine
electrical efficiency of the system. Apart from cost optimization in using MPPT system by the designer, it is also important
to take in to consideration which algorithm will be used in application. In this study, the two different MPPT were
designed and constructed. The performance of the two were tested and compared in the different time of the day and
different months of the year.

Impact Factor (JCC): 2.3529

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

An Improved Controller Based on MPPT Control Strategy for Photovoltaic Systems

29

It was discovered that at every point in time the modified MPPT delivers about twice the power of the
conventional and after simulation with Matlab it was also discovered that for the area of study the best algorithm to be
employed is the perturb and observe method. The simulation was first run with readings from the conventional controller
and it was observed that the power obtained was averagely 58 Watts. It must be noted that the PV panel generated around
130 Watts power. Therefore, the conversion efficiency came out to be very low.
On the other hand, the simulation was then run with readings from the modified MPPT and it was observed that
the power obtained was averagely 97 Watts. Under the same irradiation conditions, the PV panel continued to generate
around 90 Watts power, thus increasing the conversion efficiency of the photovoltaic system as a whole. The loss of power
from the available 130 Watts generated by the PV panel can be explained by switching losses in the switching circuit and
the inductive and capacitive losses in the MPPT circuit.

RECOMMENDATIONS
For further study it would be recommended that other MPPT techniques be considered and compared for better
understanding of the area of study.
REFERENCES
1.

Ackermann T. (2005). Wind power in Power Systems (Book) - Wiley

2.

Bae H.S., Lee S.J., Choi K.S., Cho B.H., and Jang S. S., (2009). Current control Design for a grid connected
photovoltaic/fuel cell DC.AC inverter in Proc. 24th IEEE APEC, pp. 1945.1950. (Conference proceedings)

3.

Carvalho P.C.M., Pontes R.S.T., Oliveira D.S., Riffel D.B., Oliveira R.G.V., and Mesquita S. B. (2004).Control method of
a photovoltaic powered reverse osmosis plant without batteries based on maximum power point tracking, in Proc. IEEE/PES
Transmiss. Distrib. Conf. Expo.: Latin America, pp. 137142.

4.

Emad M.A., and Masahito S., (2011). Variable Step Size Maximum Power Point Tracker Using a Single Variable for Standalone Battery PV Systems, Journal of Power Electronics, Vol. 11, No. 2, JPE.(Journal).

5.

Esram T., and Chapman P.L., (2007). Comparison of photo-voltaic array maximum power point tracking techniques, IEEE
Trans. Energy Conv., Vol. 22, pp. 439449.

6.

Esram T., and Chapman P.L., (Jun. 2007). Comparison of photovoltaic array maximum power point tracking techniques,
IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 439.449. (IEEE Transactions)

7.

Femia N., Granozio D., Petrone G., Spaguuolo G. and Vitelli M. (2006). Optimized one-cycle control in photovoltaic grid
connected applications, IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., Vol. 42, pp. 954972.

8.

Hohm D.P., and Ropp M.E., (2000). Comparative study of maximum power point tracking algorithms using an
experimental, programmable, maximum power point tracking test bed, in Proc. Photovoltaic Specialist Conference, pp.
16991702.

9.

Hsiao Y.T., and Chen C.H., (2002). Maximum power tracking for photovoltaic power system, in Proc. Industry Application
Conference, pp. 10351040.

10. Hua C., and Shen C., (1998). Comparative study of peak power tracking techniques for solar storage system, in Proc.
APEC, pp. 679685.
11. Hussein K.H., Muta I., Hoshino T., and Osakada M., (1995). Maximum power point tracking: an algorithm for rapidly

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

30

Sanusi Y.K & Abiodun Ayodele O. Joshua

changing atmospheric conditions, IEE Proc.-Gener. Transm. Distrib., Vol. 142, pp. 5964.
12. Kim I.S., Kim M.B., and Youn M.Y., (2006). New maximum power point tracking using sliding-mode observe for estimation
of solar array current in the grid-connected photovoltaic system, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., Vol. 53, pp. 10271035.
13. Kottas T.L., Boutalis Y.S., and Karlis A.D., (2006). New maximum power point tracker for PV arrays using fuzzy controller
in close cooperation with fuzzy cognitive net-work, IEEE Trans. Energy Conv., Vol. 21, pp. 793803.
14. Lee D.Y., Noh H.J., Hyun D.S. and Choy I., (2003). An improved MPPT converter using current compensation method for
small scaled PV-applications, in Proc. APEC, pp. 540545.
15. Liu F., Duan S., Liu F., Liu B. and Kang Y. (Jul. 2008). A variable step size INC MPPT method for PV systems, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 7, pp.2622.2628. (IEEE Transactions)
16. Mutoh N., Matuo T., Okada K. and Sakai M. (2002). Prediction data based maximum power point tracking method for
photovoltaic power generation systems in Proc. 33rd Annu. IEEE Power Electron. Spec. Conf., 2002, pp. 1489.1494.
(Conference proceedings)
17. Noguchi T., Togashi S., and Nakamoto R., (2002). Short-current pulse-based maximum-power-point tracking method for
multiple photovoltaic and converter module system, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., Vol. 49, pp. 217223.
18. Noppadol K., Theerayod W. and Phaophak S. (March 2012). FPGA implementation of MPPT using variable step-size P&O
algorithm. International Journal of Scientific &Engineering Research Volume 3, Issue 3, ISSN 2229-5518 IJSER
19. Pandey A., Dasgupta N. and Mukerjee A. K. (2006). Design issues in implementing MPPT for improved tracking and
dynamic performance in Proc. IEEE IECON, pp. 4387.4391.(Conference proceedings)
20. Park M. and Yu I. K. (2004). A study on optimal voltage for MPPT obtained by surface temperature of solar cell, in Proc.
IECON, pp. 20402045.
21. Petrone G., Spagnuolo G., Teodorescu R., Veerachary M. and Vitelli M. (Jul. 2008).Reliability issues in photovoltaic power
processing systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 2569.2580. (IEEE Transactions)
22. Schaefer J. (1990). Review of photovoltaic power plant performance and economics, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., EC-5,
pp. 232238.
23. Sera D., Teodorescu R., Hantschel J. and Knoll. M. (Jul. 2008).Optimized maximum power point tracker for fast-changing
environmental conditions, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 2629.2637.(IEEE Transactions)
24. AbiodunAyodele O. (2015): Study and Analysis of Maximum Power Point Tracker Techniques for a Stand-Alone PV Systems
Sizing: A case Study. Unpublished M.Tech Thesis, P/A Physics Dept, LAUTECH, Nigeria,

Impact Factor (JCC): 2.3529

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0