Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6

2017 IEEE Electrical Power and Energy Conference (EPEC)

A New Modified Maximum Power Extraction


Technique for Wind and Hybrid Renewable Energy
Systems
Kajanan Kanathipan, IEEE Student Member, John Lam, IEEE Senior Member
Advanced Power Electronics Laboratory for Sustainable Energy Research
Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Lassonde School of Engineering, York University
4700 Keele Street, Toronto, M3J 1P3, Canada

Abstract— The power extracted from solar and wind energy models or search algorithms. Energy systems do not naturally
systems vary with the change of the weather, reducing the operate at this condition. Therefore, a maximum power point
efficiency of the system. As a result, an energy efficient method is tracking (MPPT) controller is required to locate the optimal
required to locate the optimal operating point to extract the operating point such that the maximum power can be extracted at
maximal amount of energy under different atmospheric conditions. different operating conditions.
This paper proposed a modified perturb and observe maximum
power point tracking controller for wind and solar-wind hybrid Several MPPT techniques [7]-[19] have been presented in
energy systems. The controller uses a modified fixed perturb and literature for solar and wind energy systems such as first order
observe method to reach MPP by varying the duty cycle of each differential, fuzzy logic [7][9], perturb and observe
input module. Results are provided on a 200W wind system as well [7][8][10][12], and incremental conductance [7][13]-[14]. Each
as a 400W solar-wind energy system with varying irradiation method has its own advantages and disadvantages. Among these
intensity and wind speed to highlight the merits of the work. methods, the basic perturbation and observation (P&O) technique
requires less system parameters and is relatively simple to
Keywords— MPPT; P&O method; Wind energy system; Solar implement [8][18]. Conventional MPPT techniques oscillate
Energy systems; Hybrid energy systems around the maximum power point (MPP) which leads to ripple
losses. They also rely on complex mathematical functions such as
I. INTRODUCTION a proportional-integral (PI) controller [20]-[23]. This paper
Solar and wind energy are one of the most promising proposes a MPPT controller for a wind energy as well as hybrid
renewable energy resources due to their simplicity and the solar-wind energy systems. The proposed control method, which
advancement in their field. Solar energy has the highest growth is a modified perturb and observe (P&O) method, is able to
rate among renewable energy resources with its global capacity extract the maximum power from the energy while minimizing
having increased from 5.1GW to 227GW from 2005 to 2015. the output voltage and power ripple by varying the converters
Wind power global capacity increased from 59GW to 433GW in duty cycle. The controller is able to track the MPP for both solar
the same time period [1]. Solar and wind energy systems have a and wind energy modules without requiring change to its code.
variety of applications. The two major areas of application for The implemented logic design does not require complex
photovoltaic (PV) systems are stand-alone (water pumping, street mathematical functions and is compatible with both single and
lighting, electric vehicles and space applications) [2] and grid- multi-input converters. The operating principle of the proposed
connected configurations (hybrid systems, power plants) [3]. controller is presented in this paper. The performance of the
Application areas for low power wind turbines also include grid controller is verified through a 200W wind energy system as well
connected configurations [4]-[5] as well as battery charging [6]. as a 400W solar-wind energy system.
Global Energy Capacity (2005 to 2015)
However, PV and wind turbine modules do not generate
constant amount of power. Their output is directly affected by
factors including the position of the sun, cloud cover, wind speed,
and the clarity of the atmosphere. Wind turbine modules’ speed-
Gigawatts

power characteristics are nonlinear and change with wind speed.


The same applies to the voltage-power characteristic of the PV
modules which vary with irradiation and temperature. For both
cases, there is only one operating point, known as the Maximum
Power Point (MPP), at which the PV and wind turbine modules
operate at maximum efficiency. The location of the MPP is
Renewable Resource
unknown, but can be located, through the use of calculation Figure 1: Global Energy Capacity of Solar and Wind Energy Systems

978-1-5386-0817-3/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE


2017 IEEE Electrical Power and Energy Conference (EPEC)

II. OPERATING PRINCIPLE OF PROPOSED MPPT CONTROLLER is performed by first measuring the operating speed and torque of
The operating speed and torque of a wind turbine are directly the wind turbine and then calculating the corresponding power.
related to the wind speed. At each wind speed there is a different From here the controller calculates the change in the output
speed-power curve. For each curve there is a single operating power (∆P) as given by (1), the change in the operating speed
turbine speed at which the maximum amount of power can be (∆v) given by (2) and the direction of duty cycle perturbation.
obtained. Fig. 2 shows an example of two different speed-power Based on the calculated parameters, the controller will increase
curves for a wind turbine. In this example, when the wind speed or decrease the operating duty cycle by a fixed amount given by
changes from low to high (Fig. 1(a) and Fig. 1(b)) the optimal (3), where k represents the current iteration and δ represents the
operating point shifts from 9 rad/s to 15 rad/s. However the small step change in the duty cycle.
operating point of the turbine has not changed. The turbine is still ΔP = P ( k ) − P ( k − 1)
rotating at a speed of 9 rad/s. As a result a controller is required (1)
to move the operating point from its current location to the Δv = v ( k ) − v (k − 1) (2)
optimum location so that the maximal amount of energy can be
extracted. This can be achieved by changing the operating d ( k ) = d ( k − 1) ± δ (3)
frequency or duty cycle of the converter. In a series of iterations γ = f ( P ) = αP (4)
the controller will move the operating point of the wind turbine
from 9 rad/s to 15 rad/s as seen in Fig. 1(c). The same process is The frequency of the generated waveform is directly related
performed with MPP tracking for PV panels. For each light to the time-step of the simulation. As this process continues the
intensity, there is a different voltage-power curve which has an output power of the module will be brought to the MPP. If the
optimal operating point. As the intensity changes, the controller input power has changed by less than a specified amount (γ)
will shift the operating voltage of the panel to its optimal point. when compared to the previous cycle, the controller will maintain
The controller used in this paper is a modified duty cycle based the existing duty cycle as given by (4), where α = 0.002 in this
P&O controller. By varying the duty cycle of the converter’s design example.
switch, the operating speed of the turbine and operating voltage
of the PV panel can be changed such that the best operating point
can be reached.

(a) (b)

Figure 3: Control principle of the proposed MPP tracker


(c) Varying the duty cycle causes the operating speed of the
Figure 2: Maximum power point tracking using conventional P&O turbine to change. From this the search for the optimum
operating speed at which MPP occurs is performed and the
The logic flow chart of the proposed MPPT algorithm is output power can be brought to MPP. The controller uses the new
shown in Fig. 3. The controller tracks the MPP by varying the duty cycle and the step size of the simulation to control the
duty cycle of the converter. In each iteration, the control function switch while maintaining a constant frequency.
2017 IEEE Electrical Power and Energy Conference (EPEC)

Vw4
maintain the duty cycle shown in Case 5 in Table 1. This is
Vw4 > Vw3 > Vw2 > Vw1 performed by comparing the change in the output power with a
fraction of itself. As the turbine approaches the MPP, the change
in power decreases. From this it is possible to estimate if the
Vw3 system is operating at the MPP.
Vw2 III. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Two different designs have been implemented to verify the
validity of the controller. The first design consisted of an input
Vw1
source connected to a wind turbine along with a single phase
diode-bridge rectifier and a DC-DC buck converter as shown in
Fig. 5. The duty cycle of the converter was controlled to achieve
MPPT. Fig. 7(a) displays the results for the wind turbine
MP Curve operating at wind speeds from 10m/s to 13.4m/s. When the wind
speed changed the controller took approximately 7ms to bring the
turbine power to the MPP while limiting the power ripple to
Speed (rad/s) approximately 1% of the MPP.
The second design consisted of a PV panel and a wind turbine
Figure 4: Speed-power curve and MPP curve for different wind speeds based on connected to a multi-input converter as shown in Fig. 6. The
Zefr 250W Small Wind Turbine parameters for the wind turbine and PV panel are given in Table
TABLE I. MPPT Control
II and III respectively. Three scenarios, namely, changes in solar
irradiation, wind speed, or the simultaneous changes in both,
Case #
Change in Change in Duty were tested to see if the controller could track the MPP. In all
Power Speed Cycle three cases, the controller was able to bring the output power of
the module to the maximum. Fig. 7(b) displays the results for the
1 ↑ ↑ ↓ hybrid system with the wind speed and light intensity varying
from 10m/s to 13m/s and 400W/m2 to 700W/m2 respectively.
2 ↑ ↓ ↑ When the value of the input sources changed the controller took
approximately 7ms and 8ms to bring the output power to its
3 ↓ ↓ ↓ maximum for wind and PV respectively. The controller shifted
the operating point to its maximum for the PV panel and the wind
4 ↓ ↑ ↑ turbine.

5 ? ? ?

The basic P&O method consists of four scenarios which are


dependent on the change in power with respect to the previous
iteration and the location of the turbine’s operating point. These
cases are shown in Fig. 4 and Table I. The operating speed of the
turbine and the duty cycle of the converter’s switch are inversely Figure 5: Wind turbine module connected to a DC-DC buck converter with
proportional. We can use this relationship to estimate the current proposed MPP controller
operating location of the turbine and the direction of the MPP. If PV Panel S1
Lf
the operating speed and the output power have increased C1
R11
D11
compared to the previous iteration we know that the turbine is R12
D1

operating to the left of the MPP and the direction of perturbation Gate Driver # 1

is correct. This is shown in Case 1 located in Table I. However, if i1 v1


Cf
both the operating speed and the output power decreased then the Proposed
Controller

direction of perturbation is incorrect and needs to be reversed. To i2 v2 Gate Driver # 2

correct this the duty cycle must be decreased as shown in Case 3.


The main issue with the basic P&O method is that it is unable to La
Lb
D4 D6 D8 C2 R21
D21
S2 D2
guarantee MPPT as the controller will eventually oscillate around Lc R22
D7 D9 D5
the MPP. To minimize this ripple, the designed controller checks
if the turbine is operating close to the MPP and if so, will
Figure 6: Hybrid system connected to a multi-input converter with proposed
MPP Controller
2017 IEEE Electrical Power and Energy Conference (EPEC)

700

13
650
Light Intensity
Wind Speed 600

[W/m2]
12
[m/s]

550
11
500

10 450

400
9
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 1.5 2 2.5

0.3375 Duty Cycle 180

0.325
160 Actual Power

[W]
140
0.3125

120
0.3
100 Reference Power
0.2875
80

1.5 2 2.

250
13

200 Wind Speed


12.5
Actual Power
[W]

150 [m/s]
12

100
Turbine Power 11.5

50
11
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
1.5 2 2.5

0.435714
Duty Cycle
220
0.428571

200
Turbine Power
0.421429

180
[W]

0.414286

0.407143 160

0.4 140 Actual Power


120

1.5 2 2.5

13
400
12.5

Turbine Speed Ideal Input Power


12 350
[m/s]

11.5
[W]

300
11

10.5 250 Total Output Power


10
200
9.5

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 150


1.5 2 2.5

Time [s] Time [s]


(a) (b)

Figure 7: Operation of the proposed controller with (a) wind energy system (b) solar wind hybrid energy system
2017 IEEE Electrical Power and Energy Conference (EPEC)

TABLE II. Wind Turbine parameters


Zefr 250W Small Wind
Model
Turbine

Generator 3-phase, Rated at 500W

Maximum power rating (Pmax) 240W


Cut-in Speed 1.8 m/s

TABLE III. PV Panel parameters


Model PV-MLU255HC
Number of cells 120 cells
Monocrystalline Silicon,
Cell type
78mm x 156 mm
Maximum power rating
255W Figure 10: Maximum power for each duty cycle
(Pmax)
Open circuit voltage (Voc) 37.8V Fig. 8 and 9 represent the controller efficiency for the wind
Short circuit current (Isc) 8.89A energy system and the hybrid energy system respectively. From
Fig. 8, it can be seen that the maximum power point tracker
efficiency is above 97% for wind speeds from 10m/s to 13.4m/s
with an average efficiency of approximately 98.2%. When the
wind speed is below 10m/s the efficiency is lower however it is
still over 90% with a total efficiency of 97.8%. In Fig. 9 the
maximum power point tracker efficiency is above 99% for light
intensities ranging from 400W/m2 to 800W/m2 with an average
efficiency of approximately 99.6%. The controller’s efficiency
for the PV panel is high due to ripple minimization. Fig. 10
represents the relationship between the wind speed, the turbines
maximum power, and the duty cycle respectively. As the wind
speed increases the maximum power that can be extracted by the
wind turbine increases. In order for this to occur the duty cycle
of the converter must be increased. The higher the maximum
power is the greater the duty cycle required to operate at that
condition. As the duty cycle increases the turbine speed
Figure 8: Maximum power point tracker efficiency with varying wind speed increases until it reaches its peak.
IV. CONCLUSION
This paper has presented a modified perturb and observe
maximum power point controller for wind energy systems.
Simulation results have been provided to highlight the features
of the proposed controller. The controller has shown to be able
to track the MPP within 7ms for wind turbines and 8ms for PV
panels while keeping the MPP oscillation to a minimum. The
controller is able to maintain an average efficiency of 97.7% for
the first system and 99.6% for the second system.

Figure 9: Maximum power point tracker efficiency with varying light intensity
2017 IEEE Electrical Power and Energy Conference (EPEC)

V. REFERENCES [17] B. Wu and S. Keyue, "A current control MPPT method in high power solar
energy conversion system," in Proc. of the 2014 IEEE Applied Power
[1] REN21 “The First decade: 2004-2014” report. http://www.ren21.net
[2] J. Schaefer, “Review of photovoltaic power plant performance and
economics,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Converters. pp. 232–238, 1990. [18] Electronics Conference and Exposition - APEC 2014, Fort Worth, TX, pp.
3021-3025.
[3] N. Femia, D. Granozio, G. Petrone, G. Spaguuolo, and M. Vitelli,
“Optimized one-cycle control in photovoltaic grid connected applications,” [19] Y. M. Chen, S. C. Hung, C. S. Cheng and Y. C. Liu, "Multiinput inverter
IEEE Transactions on Aerospace Electronic Systems, Vol. 42, pp. 954– for grid-connected hybrid PV/wind power system," in Proc. of the 2005
972, 2006. IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition, pp. 850-856.
[20] M. Pahlevaninezhad, S. Eren, A. Bakhshai and P. Jain, "Maximum power
[4] M. Kiani, D. Torregrossa, M. Simoes, F. Peyraut and A. Miraoui, "A novel
point tracking of a Wind Energy Conversion System using adaptive
maximum peak power tracking controller for wind energy systems
nonlinear approach," in Proc. Of the 2010 Twenty-Fifth Annual IEEE
powered by induction generators," in Proc. of the 2009 IEEE Electrical
Power & Energy Conference (EPEC), Montreal, QC, pp. 1-3. Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC), Palm
Springs, CA, pp. 149-154.
[5] G. Gamboa, J. Elmes, C. Hamilton, J. Baker, M. Pepper and I. Batarseh,
"A unity power factor, maximum power point tracking battery charger for [21] W. Xiao, A. Elnosh, V. Khadkikar and H. Zeineldin, "Overview of
low power wind turbines," in Proc. of the 2010 IEEE Applied Power maximum power point tracking technologies for photovoltaic power
Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC), Palm Springs, CA, pp. systems," in Proc. of the 2011 Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial
143-148. Electronics Society, Melbourne, VIC, pp. 3900-3905.
[6] N. Mendis, K. M. Muttaqi, S. Sayeef and S. Perera, "Standalone Operation [22] S. Lyden and M. E. Haque, "Comparison of the Perturb and Observe and
of Wind Turbine-Based Variable Speed Generators With Maximum Power simulated annealing approaches for maximum power point tracking in a
Extraction Capability," IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 27, photovoltaic system under partial shading conditions," in Proc. of the 2014
no. 4, pp. 822-834, Dec. 2012. IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), Pittsburgh,
PA, pp. 2517-2523.
[7] T. Esram and P. L. Chapman, "Comparison of Photovoltaic Array
Maximum Power Point Tracking Techniques," IEEE Transactions on [23] B. Subudhi and R. Pradhan, "A Comparative Study on Maximum Power
Energy Conversion, vol. 22, no. 2, June 2007, pp. 439-449. Point Tracking Techniques for Photovoltaic Power Systems," IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 89-98, Jan. 2013
[8] M. Shirazi, A. H. Viki and O. Babayi, "A comparative study of maximum
power extraction strategies in PMSG wind turbine system," in Proc. of the [24] N. Femia, G. Petrone, G. Spagnuolo and M. Vitelli, "Optimization of
2009 IEEE Electrical Power & Energy Conference (EPEC), Montreal, QC, perturb and observe maximum power point tracking method," IEEE
pp. 1-6. Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 963-973, July 2005.
[9] Yi-Hsun Chiu, Yu-Shan Cheng, Yi-Hua Liu, Shun-Chung Wang and Zong-
Zhen Yang, "A novel asymmetrical FLC-based MPPT technique for
photovoltaic generation system," in Proc. of the 2014 International Power
Electronics Conference (IPEC-Hiroshima 2014 - ECCE ASIA), Hiroshima,
pp. 3778-3783.
[10] S. K. Ji, H. Y. Kim, S. S. Hong, Y. W. Kim and S. K. Han, "Non-
oscillation Maximum Power Point Tracking algorithm for Photovoltaic
applications," in Proc. of the 2014 Power Electronics and ECCE Asia
(ICPE & ECCE), Jeju, pp. 380-385.
[11] S. Poshtkouhi and O. Trescases, "Multi-input single-inductor dc-dc
converter for MPPT in parallel-connected photovoltaic applications," in
Proc. of the 2011 IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and
Exposition (APEC), Fort Worth, TX, pp. 41-47.
[12] I. Colak, E. Kabalci and G. Bal, "Parallel DC-AC conversion system based
on separate solar farms with MPPT control," in Proc. of the 2011 Power
Electronics and ECCE Asia (ICPE & ECCE), Jeju, pp. 1469-1475.
[13] G. Cipriani, V. D. Dio, F. Genduso, R. Miceli and D. L. Cascia, "A new
modified Inc-Cond MPPT technique and its testing in a whole PV
simulator under PSC," in Proc. of the 2015 IEEE Applied Power
Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC), Charlotte, NC, pp. 3060-
3066.
[14] S. Dwari, L. Arnedo, S. Oggianu and V. Blasko, "An advanced high
performance maximum power point tracking technique for photovoltaic
systems," in Proc. of the 2013 IEEE Applied Power Electronics
Conference and Exposition (APEC), Long Beach, CA, 2013, pp. 3011-
3015.
[15] H. Patel and V. Agarwal, "Maximum Power Point Tracking Scheme for
PV Systems Operating Under Partially Shaded Conditions," IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 1689-1698, April
2008.
[16] J. H. R. Enslin, M. S. Wolf, D. B. Snyman and W. Swiegers, "Integrated
photovoltaic maximum power point tracking converter," IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 769-773, Dec
1997.