MODIFIED THREE-POINT WEIGHT COMPARISON METHOD FOR
ADAPTIVE MPPT OF PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEMS
C. P. Roy1, B. K. Naick2, G. Shankar3
1, 2, 3
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad, Jharkhand, India
1
prakashroy2507@gmail.com, 2krishnalalitha.b@gmail.com, 3gauri1983@gmail.com
Abstract: Output of PV systems is a nonlinear function
of environmental parameters like temperature,
irradiance and shading. To extract maximum energy
from PV arrays and to increase its overall efficiency,
maximum power point tracking control is inevitable. In
this paper, a modified perturb and observe technique
based on three-point weight comparison (TWC) with
variable step size is proposed in order to overcome the
demerits of traditional perturb and observe and TWC
approaches. The modified TWC method (MTWC) is
adaptive to load changes and solar radiation.
Keywords: Maximum power point tracking, three point
weight comparison method, boost converter, state-space
model.
INTRODUCTION
Now-a-days whole world is suffering from energy
crisis. The rising price of conventional energy has
compelled us to move towards non-conventional
sources of energy among which solar energy is the best
one. Hence, it is the need of to develop an efficient
system for conversion of solar energy to other useful
forms like - electricity as it can be easily extracted and
at the same time can easily be converted into other
forms of energy.
Photovoltaic technology is costly owing to its
high cost of storage devices and poor efficiency which
can be improved by its operations in grid connected
mode and incorporating MPPT methods to increase its
conversion efficiency. Experimental data shows that
MPPT with efficiency of 85% can increase the
harnessed energy by 17% [1]. This may be a physical
method to track the sun in order to get maximum
perpendicular sun-rays or a maximum power point
tracking (MPPT) method to make output resistance as
seen from the array terminals equal to the input
resistance.
In case of changing insolation a technique is
required which can initiate a control mechanism to
immediately track the changes to reduce the energy loss.
This is provided by MPPT algorithms. The most widely
used algorithms are incremental conductance (IC) [12],
perturb & observe (P&O) [11], modified perturb &
observe (MPO) [13], three-point weight comparison
(TWC) [4, 8], constant voltage (CV) [14], extremum
seeking control (ESC) [17], curve fitting [16] and many
others based on expert systems such as fuzzy logic
control (FLC) [9], neural network (NN) [10], ant colony
146
optimisation (ACO) [18], particle swarm optimisation
(PSO)[15] etc. The basic concepts behind all these
methods are related to perturb and observe (P&O)
algorithm or incremental conductance (IC) algorithm
approaches only.
P&O method has advantage of less complexity in
computation and ease of implementation as it is based
on simple hill climbing approach to track maximum
power point (MPP) [11]. But at the same time it suffers
from drawbacks of wastage of energy due to oscillation
of output power around MPP even under steady state of
illumination as it fails to determine whether it has
reached MPP or not. The demerit of this method is that
it shows poor dynamic performance under steep change
in solar irradiance. But higher efficiency can be
achieved by using predictive and adaptive hill climbing
approach to P&O algorithm [2].
The dynamic performance of P&O method can
be improved by introducing variable step-size for
perturbation. If the perturbation is very small, it would
take more time to reach MPP making the algorithm
inefficient, and on the other hand if it is large enough
then MPP couldnt be tracked efficiently. Hence, a
system with large step-size perturbation is introduced in
the beginning, which keeps on decreasing uniformly
until operating point reaches MPP as presented in
[3].Same concept is also reported in fuzzy logic
controller (FLC) based MPPT. However, determining a
suitable factor by which step-size perturbation could be
modified is a challenging task as it depends upon the PV
system configuration and the purpose of the specific
application.
An algorithm based on TWC method has been
recognised in [4, 8] to increase the efficiency of MPP
tracking. However, it is observed that very little work
has been done using TWC approach. In this paper, an
attempt has been made to modify the existing TWC as
reported to make it more adaptive to changes in load
condition and insolation level to achieve MPP more
efficiently.
The rest of the paper is organised as follows: In
Section 2modelling of photovoltaic system is presented.
The existing TWC algorithm and the proposed MTWC
algorithm along with SIMULINK model of the studied
system are presented in Section 3.Results and
discussions are made in Section 4 and finally
conclusions are drawn in Section 5.
PV SYSTEM MODELLING 2
4 T
,
Eg 1.17  4.37 u 10 (9)
PV Array T  636

For analysis purpose, one-diode model of solar cell has 1 1
Rs R s (Tr , Go )  K G   K TS (T  Tr ) ,(10)
Go
been considered in this paper as shown in Fig-1.
However, two-diode model is more appropriate and G
gives better accuracy over wide range of variation of K (T Tr )
temperature and insolation. The working of a PV cell is Rsh Rsh (Tr )e TSh . (11)
governed by equations (1-14) [5-7].
Where n is number of solar cells, m is diode ideality
factor, Rs is series resistance (), Rsh is the shunt
resistance (), ILis photo-generated current (A), q is
electronic charge (= 1.609 ), IO is diode
saturation current (A), K is Boltzmanns Constant
(1.38 J/K), T is absolute climatic temperature
(K), Irr is reverse biased saturation current at reference
temperature (A), R is load resistance (), VD is voltage
drop across diode (V), ID is diode current (A), Ish is shunt
current (A), Tr is reference temperature (298K), Ki is
short-circuit current temperature coefficient (A/K), KTsh
is temperature coefficient for shunt resistance (/K), KTs
is temperature coefficient for series resistance (/K), KG
is illumination coefficient for series resistance (-
Fig.1 Single diode equivalent model for single solar W/m2) , G is insolation (W/m2) , GO is standard
cell.
irradiance condition (1000W/m2) , Eg is band gap
voltage of semiconductor (=1.12eV for Si cells), Isc is
From Fig.1, the output voltage (V) and output current (I)
can be given as: short-circuit current at reference temperature &
irradiance per cell (A), Voc is open-circuit voltage at
V VD  IR , (1) reference temperature and irradiance per cell (V) and VT
is thermal voltage at room temperature.
I I L  I D  I sh , (2)
Output power from PV cell is given as
E (V  IR s ) V  IRs
I L  I o (e  1)  .(3) E (V  IRS ) V  IR S
Rsh P VI L  VI o (e  1)  V .(12)
R
sh
Where,
The I-V &P-V characteristics for a single solar cell
IL I L (Tr )(1  K i (T  Tr ) , (4) under different conditions are shown in Fig.2 (a) and
Fig 2(b), respectively.
G In solar panels a number of solar cells are arranged in
I L (Tr ) I sc , (5) series and parallel. Hence, equations for PV arrays can
G
0 be obtained in terms of equations of a solar cell. If NS be
the number of cells in series and Np be the number of
3
qEg 1 1 such strings in parallel, then equation for the PV array
T m mK Tr T can be given as:
I0 I rr e , (6)
Tr E (V  IRs ) N p (V  IRs )
I panel N p I L  N p I o (e  1)  . (13)
q V R sh
E T , (7)
mKT m Here,
1 I
qV panel
oc I , (14)
mKTr N
p
I I e  1 , (8)
rr sc
V
panel
V , (15)
N
s

147
 4

2
3.5 400 W/m

3
I-V 2
600 W/m
Icell (A) / Pcell (W) 2
2.5 800 W/m

2
2
1000 W/m
P-V
1.5

0.5

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Vcell (V)

(a)
4

3.5
340 K
I-V
3 320 K
Icell (A) / Pcell (W)

2.5 300 K

2
280 K
P-V
1.5

0.5

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Vcell (v)
(b)
Fig.2 I-V and P-V characteristics of a solar cell at different (a) insolation levels (at 298K) and (b) temperatures (at
1000W/m2).
60

2
P-V 1000 W/m
50

800 W/m2
Ipanel (A) / Ppanel (W)

40

600 W/m2
30

20

10
I-V
0
0 5 10 15 20 25

Vpanel (V)
Fig.3 P-V and I-V characteristics of solar panel (at 298K).

Where Vpanel is panel output voltage and Ipanel is panel provided by the manufacturer in the specification sheet.
output current. The value of Rs is very small (generally < 1). Equation
Generally, value of Rsh is very large (in the order for output power (Ppanel) for the panel can be derived as:
of K), hence for practical applications the third term of
E (V  IRs )
eqn (13) is neglected. Now, the only unknown Ppanel V panel {N p I L  N p I o (e  1)} (16)
parameter in eqn (13) is Rs. Its value can be calculated
from eqn (13) using the fact that when Vpanel is taken I-V&P-V curves of the modelled PV panel with
aspanel output voltage at MPP (Vmax) then Ipanel will be different values for solar insolation and temperature are
panel output current at MPP (Imax). These values are together presented in Fig. 3. It may be observed from
148
Fig. 3 that I-V&P-V curves for panel show the same MATLAB/SIMULINK model of the considered PV
nature as that of a PV cell but the magnitude of power panel is shown in Fig.4 and its parameters details are
and open-circuit voltage has increased. listed in Table.1.

Fig.4 MATLAB model of solar panel.

Parameter Values effect of changes in temperature and insolation on the

Vmax 17 V locus of MPP which are shown in Fig. 5(a) and Fig .5(b)
Imax 3.5 A respectively. It is reported in literature that to achieve
Pmax 60 W maximum power transfer from array to load, the internal
VOC 22.5 V load resistance as seen from PV panel side should match
ISC 3.7 A the internal resistance of PV panel. Applications of
Encapsulated solar cell 15 % different switched-mode DC-DC converters such as
efficiency buck, boost and buck-boost have been reported in [19]
Module efficiency 12.1 % .These converters modify the load resistance as seen
Size of Panel 93.75125 mm2 from PV array side to match it with PV internal
Cell type Mono Crystalline resistance corresponding to changing environmental
m 1 conditions even though load resistance remains
NP 1 constant. In this paper authors have used a model of
NS 36 boost converter to achieve the maximum power transfer
Ki 1.7103 A/K from PV array under changing environmental conditions
KTs 210-4 /K as shown in Fig. 6.
KTsh -8.510-3 /K The average state-space model for this converter can be
KG 5 -W/m2 given as:
RS 0.03
Rsh 10000

0
1 d  1
STC(Standard Test Condition) 1000 W/m2, 298 K L L
d 1
0 0 . (17)

Table.1 Parameter details for solar panel dt C1

1  d  1
0
Power Converters for PV Applications C 2 RC 2

As environmental conditions such as insolation level Equation (17) can be expressed as:
and temperature change, internal resistance of PV panel x
X >A@>X @  >B@I g , (18)
also changes. The model was simulated to study the
149
 (a)
80

280 K
70 290 K
300 K
MPP
60
310 K
320 K
330 K
50
340 K
Ppanel (W)

40

30

20

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25

Vpanel (V)

(b)
Fig.5 Locus of MPP for varying (a) insolation level (at 298K) and (b) temperature (at 1000W/m 2).

Y >C @>X @  >D@I g . (19)

Solving eqn (17&18) for the steady state solution and

taking = and [D] = in eqn (19), the
expression for internal resistance (Rin) as seen from
output terminal of PV panel as shown in Fig. 6 is given
as:

Rin
V
I

 >C @>A@
1
>B@ , (20)
Fig.6 Circuit diagram of boost converter.
2
(1  d ) R LOAD . (21) Parameter Values
Rc1 11.23 m
From eqn (21) it may be observed that Rin can be
controlled by varying the duty-cycle (d). In Fig.6, a C1 76.8 mF
Rc2 9.44 m
practical boost converter is modeled considering the
internal resistances of capacitors C1 and C2 and inductor C2 74.8 mF
L. The model is developed in MATLAB/SIMULINK RL 18.92 m
and its parameter details are mentioned in Table. 2. The L 4.2912 mH
purpose of capacitors C1 and C2 is to reduce the effects Diode threshold voltage 0.7 V
of fluctuation at input and output terminals of the boost Diode ON resistance 190
converter. MOSFET ON resistance 20 m
Switching frequency 5 kHz
Table.2 Parameter details for boost converter
150
Load line for a fixed load remains unchanged until duty-
cycle (d) of the converter is changed. I-V curves as in
Fig. 7(a) show that its intersection with load line (i.e.
operating point) changes continuously due to varying
insolation level and temperature. Thus, d must be varied
5
continuously in order to track MPP. If d increases then
Rin will decrease and vice versa as given by eqn (21).
The corresponding panel output powers are shown on P-
V curves in Fig. 7(b).

4.5

1000 W/m2, 310 K

4
1000 W/m2, 298 K
2
3.5 800 W/m , 298 K
800 W/m2, 290 K
3
2
600 W/m , 290 K
Ipanel (A)

2
2.5 600 W/m , 310 K
LOAD LINE
2

1.5

0.5

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Vpanel (V)

(a)
70

2
1000 W/m , 310 K X: 16.01
60 2 Y: 57.14
1000 W/m , 298 K
2
800 W/m , 298 K X: 15.7
50 2 Y: 54.45
800 W/m , 290 K
600 W/m2, 290 K X: 13.44
Y: 39.73
2
Ppanel (W)

40
600 W/m , 310 K
X: 13.15
Y: 38.37

30
X: 10.2
Y: 23.11

20 X: 9.906
Y: 21.69

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25

Vpanel (V)

(b)
Fig.7 Effect of changing environmental conditions on (a) Operating Point with constant load-line (on I-V curves) and
(b) Corresponding Power (on their respective P-V curves) of PV panel.

MPPT ALGORITHMSAND SIMULINK MODEL to change in power observed (with proper weightage +
or - sign). Working of the existing TWC algorithm is
Existing TWC algorithm shown in Fig.9 [8].
From the algorithm shown in [8], it can be deduced that
In P&O method, output power from PV panel after for each decision, the control variable is perturbed thrice
perturbation is compared with that of operating point (for A, B, C separately) which takes longer time for
prior to perturbation, in order to determine the step-size computation and hence, makes it slower. The proposed
and direction of successive perturbation. In the TWC modified TWC (i.e. MTWC) algorithm tries to
algorithm, instead of comparing the powers at two overcome this demerit.
different points as in case of P&O, powers at three
consecutive points are compared as shown in Fig.8 [8].
Fig.8 shows the different possible cases corresponding

151

Fig.8 Possible cases in the direction of step-size
perturbation in TWC method.
Proposed Modified TWC Algorithm
The modified TWC algorithm also works with
continuous perturbation of control variable but the
number of perturbation per decision is limited to one
which makes it time efficient. The same cases as shown
in Fig.8 have been considered for MTWC algorithm
also.
Out of these cases, case (g), case (h) and case (i) are
related to PV panel under non-uniform illumination (as
having trough like nature). Under uniform illumination
P-V curve has a single peak but there can be multiple
crests and troughs under non-uniform illumination.
These cases are not considered here. Case (a) and case
(d) indicate that MPP lies on right-hand side of the
current operating point, hence d should be decreased.
From case (c) and case (f), it may be inferred that MPP
lies on left-hand side of the current operating point, so d
must be increased. The case (b) and case (e) show that
MPP has been reached and hence d should not be
altered.
In MTWC method, control variable is always
perturbed in the direction towards MPP as shown by the
two arrows at the bottom in Fig.9. If the operating point
lies in left of MPP, then the perturbed power is assigned
to point B and is fed back to point A and point C in
subsequent perturbations as P1i and P2i respectively.
Fig.9 Modified three-point comparison method.
152
However, if operating point lies in the right of MPP,
then the perturbed power is assigned to point C and
transferred to point A and point B in subsequent steps
(as P1i and P2i respectively) as shown in Fig.9. When the
operating point reaches MPP, the perturbed power is
assigned to point A and is fed back to both of the points
- point B and point C simultaneously in subsequent
steps so that the operating condition can be directly
changed from case (b) to case (e) without disturbing the
operating point (which is already at MPP).
The logic behind the proposed algorithm is
shown as flowchart in Fig.13.
Start
Feed Value of Vmax & Dmin
Read V
Y
V > Vmax
N
Eqn(22) (a) Eqn(22) (b)
Update Dm using eqn(23)
Return
Fig.10 Flowchart for estimation of D.
Algorithm in flowchart as shown in Fig.10is used
to calculate D(a constant signal which is being
compared with a ramp signal to generate pulses of
desired duty-cycle, d (=1-D) for the switching element
in boost converter as shown in Fig.11). At each instant
perturbed value of output voltage from PV panel is fed
and compared with the expected maximum output
voltage (Vmax) of PV panel corresponding to MPP using
a comparator. The error signal thus generated is used to
calculate change in duty cycle ( )using eqn (22). An
exponential expression is considered in eqn (22) to
obtain a better variation in step-size of perturbation [3]
as shown in Fig.12.
RAMP
PULSES
Fig.11 Pulse generation.
 stable MPP tracking, one more term is added in eqn (22)
to yield eqn (23).

Dm 'D  Dmin (23)

Where, Dmin is the minimum value of step-size for

perturbation which will become equal to Dm when
operating point has reached expected Vmax. Finally,
updated value of Dm (23)as obtained from flowchart
shown in Fig.10, is fed as input to MPPT algorithm
based on MTWC as shown in Fig.13.
Algorithm in flowchart as shown in Fig.13is used to
Fig. 12 Variation in step-size perturbation.
track the MPP. Here, K is a dummy variable which
stores a value representing direction of perturbation of

previous perturbation. Power output at the operating
 (22)
point A is compared with power at preceding point C
 
and successive perturbed point B of the P-V curve.
Where a and k are constants and V is the current
operating point voltage of the PV panel.
In the present work, a is taken as e (=2.71).Since Vmax
refers to voltage at expected MPP, so for efficient and

Start X

Read I & V, P=I*V D=Di+Dm,

Y
Ki=1
K=1
Set M=0 N
Y D=Di+3Dm,
Y Ki=-1
Ki=0 K=1
N
P(A)=P,
P(B)=P1i, D=Di, K=0
N
P(C)=P2i
Y
Ki=1 Return
N P(B)=P,
P(A)=P1i,
P(C)=P, Y
P(C)=P2i
P(A)=P1i,
P(B)=P2i Y D=Di-3Dm,
Ki=1
K=-1
N
N Y D=Di-Dm,
P(B)>=P(A) M=M-1 Ki=-1
K=-1
Y N
M=M+1 D=Di, K=0

N Return
P(A)>P(C) M=M-1
Y Z
M=M+1
Y D=Di-Dm,
Ki=1
Y K=0
M=2 X N
N Y D=Di+Dm,
Ki=-1
K=0
Y
M=-2 Y N

N D=Di, K=0

Z Return

Fig. 13 Flowchart for proposed MTWC algorithm.

153
Depending upon the result of comparison and value
stored in K, a dummy variable M (representing direction
of further perturbation) is incremented or decremented.
If value of M becomes equal to 2 which is possible for
case (a) and case (d), Di is increased by Dm, when the
direction of previous perturbation was towards right (i.e
Ki=1) from origin as shown by arrow in Fig.9. Further,
if M attains the value of 2 with initial perturbation along
left (i.e. Ki=-1), then Di is increased by thrice of value
of Dm to flip the assigned values of powers to point B
and point C and invert the direction of next perturbation.
Similarly, if M becomes -2 (which represents case (c)
and case (f)) with Ki being -1, then Di is decreased by
Dm and by thrice of Dm if Ki is 1. The value of Ki being
0 indicates that MPP was achieved in the previous
perturbation and hence no any modification is required.
The values of M other than 2 and -2 correspond to either
case (b) or case (e) and therefore, Di is either
incremented or decremented by Dm to make the initial
operating point as the current one. This loop is repeated
till MPP is reached.
The MATLAB/SIMULINK model for the
whole PV system is shown in Fig.14. Here, I and V
inputs are used to calculate power at the recently
perturbed operating point, represented as P1 whereas P2
represents previously perturbed power. Both of these
powers P1 and P2along with D and K are fed back to the
same block as P1i, P2i and Di and Ki with some delay
(=sampling time set for the system).

Fig.14 SIMULINK model of the studied system.

RESULTSAND DISCUSSIONS For the given operating condition, it is obtained from

70

Complete model of the PV panel along with the power

electronic interface (boost converter) between the PV 60

panel and the load is developed and simulated in

MATLAB/SIMULINK platform. In the present work, 50

the working temperature (T) and insolation level (G) are

taken as 25C (= 298 K) and 1000 W/m 2, respectively.
power (W)

40

The curve between PV panel output power (Ppanel) and 30

time is plotted in Fig.15. The variation of Ppanel with D

is plotted in Fig.16. It is observed from Fig.17 that D 20

obtained from TWC is quickly settled around 42.5% 10

following an initial transient while tracking the MPP

with less fluctuation. Thus, duty-cycle of boost 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
time (s)
converter in the studied model settles around 57.5% at
steady state. In Fig.18, curve is plotted for changing
Fig.15 MPP Tracking using MTWC algorithm.
insolation condition (from 900 W/m2 to 1000 W/m2)
which shows that even with changing environmental the simulation that the maximum power output from
parameters the proposed algorithm works efficiently. the panel (Pmax) is 60 W. And it may clearly be seen
Simulation is carried out with pre-defined from Fig.16 that MTWC algorithm works well in
environmental conditions for a resistive load of 30: .
154
bringing the operating point closer to 60 W which is the The algorithm takes around 9 s to reach this target. Vmax
MPP of the panel for given operating condition. and Imax corresponding to Pmax at MPP are found to be
around 16.9 V and 3.6 A, respectively. Fig.19 shows the
fluctuation in output power under steady state when
MPP is reached. From the graph its clear that
fluctuation remains in the span of 2W (between 59.5 W
to 61.5 W) which is nearly 3% of its rated output power.
Hence, it can be concluded from the above results that
MTWC algorithm can also be a better option in tracking
MPP.

CONCLUSION

Fig.16 Variation of output power of the panel with D In the present work, a PV array system is modeled and
(=1-d). simulated in MATLAB/SIMULINK platform. Efficacy
of the modified TWC algorithm as proposed is tested in
45
tracking MPP for a particular operating condition.
Results obtained are quite promising for its application
as one of the efficient MPPT algorithm in PV array
44

43
system.

REFERENCES
D (%)

42

41
[1] Snyman D.B., Enslin J.H.R., An experimental
evaluation of MPPT converter topologies for PV
40

installations, Proc. Renew. Energy, 1993, 3, (8), pp.

39
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
841848.
time (s)

Fig.17 Variation of D with time. [2] Femia N., Granozio D., Petrone G., Spagnuolo G.,
70
Predictive & Adaptive MPPT Perturb and Observe
Method, IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst2007,
Vol. 43(3), pp. 934-950.
60

50

[3] Piegari L., Rizzo R., Adaptive perturb and observe

algorithm for photovoltaic maximum power point
power (W)

40

30 tracking, IET Renew Power Gener 2010, Vol. 4 (4),

20
pp. 317328.

10
[4] Calavia M., Peri J.M., Sanz J.F., Salln J.,
0
Comparison of MPPT strategies for solar modules,
In Proc:International conference on renewable
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
time (s)

rnergies and power quality(ICREPQ10), Granada

Fig.18 MPP Tracking using MTWC algorithm under (Spain), 23 -25th March, 2010.
varying insolation condition.
61 [5] Mohsen Taherbaneh, Mohammad B.Menhaj, A
fuzzy-based maximum power point tracker for body
mounted solar panels in LEO satellites, In Proc:
IEEE Ind&CommPow. Syst Tech., May 2007, pp. 1-
60.5 6.
power (W)

[6] Ahmad Al Nabulsi, RachedDhaouadi, Efficiency

optimization of a DSP-Based standalone PV system
60 using fuzzy logic and dual-MPPT control, IEEE
trans Ind. Informatics, Vol. 8(3), August 2012, pp.
573-584.

59.5
25 25.2 25.4 25.6 25.8 26 26.2 26.4 26.6 26.8 27
[7] Bouzguenda M., Salmi T., Gastli A., Masmoudi A.,
time (s) Evaluating Solar Photovoltaic System Performance
Fig.19 Fluctuation in output power at steady state.
155
 using MATLAB, In Proc: IEEE Renew. Energies
and Vehicular Tech. March 2012, pp. 55-59.
[8] Joe-Air Jiang, Tsong-Liang Huang, Ying-Tung
Hsiao, Chia-Hong Chen, Maximum power tracking
for photovoltaic power systems,Tamkang J SciEng
2005, Vol. 8(2), pp. 147-153.
[9] Won C.-Y., Kim D.-H., Kim S.-C., Kim W.-S., Kim
H.-S., A new maximum power point tracker of
photovoltaic arrays using fuzzy controller. In Proc.
25th Annual IEEE PESC, 2025 June 1994, vol. 1,
pp. 396403.
[10] Himaya T., Kitabayashi K. Neural network
based estimation of maximum power neural network
based estimation of maximum power generation,
IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 1997, 12, pp. 241
247.
[11] Liu X., Lopes L.A.C., An improved
perturbation and observation maximum power point
tracking algorithm for PV arrays, InProc: 35th
Annual IEEE Power Electronics Specialists
Conference ( PESC 04), 2004.
[12] Liu, F., Duan, S., Liu, F., Liu, B., Kang, Y., A
variable step size INC MPPT method for PV
systems, IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2008, 55(7), pp.
26222628.
[13] Fermia, N., Granozio, D., Petrone, G., Vitelli, M.,
Predictive adaptive MPPT perturb and observe
156
method, IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst, 2007,
43(3), pp. 934950.
[14] Kobayashi, K., Matsuo, H., Sekine, Y., An
excellent operating point tracker of the solar-cell
power supply system, IEEE Trans Ind Electron
2006, 53, (2), pp. 495499.
[15] Miyatake M., eerachary M. V., Toriumi F., Fujii
N., Ko H., "Maximum power point tracking of
multiple photovoltaic arrays: a particle swarm
optimization approach", IEEE Trans Aerosp
Electron Syst, Vol. 47(1), pp.367-380, 2011.
[16] Garrigo A., Blanes J. M., Carrasco J. A., Ejea J.
B., "Real time estimation of photovoltaic modules
characteristics and its application to maximum
power point operation," Renew Energy 2007, vol.
32, pp.1059-1076.
[17] Leyvar., Alonso C., Queinnec J., Cid-Pastora.,
Lagranged D., Martinez-Salamero, MPPT of
photovoltaic systems using extremum-seeking
control, IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst 2006,
42(1), pp. 249358.
[18] Besheer A.H., Adly M., Ant colony system based
PI maximum power point tracking for standalone
photovoltaic system, In Proc: IEEE Industrial
Technology, March 2012, pp. 693-698.
[19] Solodovnik E.V., Shengyi Liu, Dougal R.A.,
Power controller design for maximum power
tracking in solar installations, J Trans Power
Electron 2004, 19(5),pp. 1295-1304.