Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Maximum power point tracking of solar photovoltaic system

using modified perturbation and observation method
G. Dileep n, S.N. Singh
Alternate Hydro Energy Centre, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Uttarakhand 247667, India

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Solar energy is one of the important renewable energy resources as it is pollution free, clean, never-
Received 27 June 2014 ending and abundant. Solar photovoltaic technologies are mounting vigor attention in the modern
Received in revised form electrical power applications due to fast growth in the relative sectors of semiconductor and power
21 March 2015
electronics. It is significant to operate solar photovoltaic energy conversion systems to its maximum
Accepted 24 April 2015
power output to raise the efficiency. Maximum power point tracking plays a very important role for
extracting maximum power from the solar photovoltaic module and transferring that power to the load.
Keywords: The present work highlights a survey on perturb and observe method maximum power point tracking
MPPT technique for solar photovoltaic system undertaken by considering the various works already listed
SPV system
relative study has been carried out, which includes different perturb and observe method on maximum
Perturbation and observation (P&O)
power point tracking techniques and draw their advantages and drawbacks. These techniques vary in
Renewable energy
many aspects, which can be broadly categorized on the basis of simplicity, way of implementing, type of
sensors, total cost of the system, range of effectiveness, hardware requirement and speed of
convergence. It is expected that this review work will provide precious information for solar
photovoltaic professionals to keep alongside with the latest progress in this area, as well as for new
researchers to get started on maximum power point tracking.
& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
2. SPV system description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
2.1. SPV system with MPPT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
2.2. SPV characteristic curves. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
2.3. DC–DC converter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
3. Conventional P&O algorithm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
4. Modified P&O methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
4.1. Soft computing based P&O MPPT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
4.1.1. Artificial neural network (ANN) method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
4.1.2. Fuzzy logic controller (FLC) method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
4.2. FLC based improved P&O MPPT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
4.2.1. Particle swarm optimization (PSO) method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
4.3. Field programmable gate array (FPGA) method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
4.3.1. Operation and previous work using FPGA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
4.3.2. FPGA based improved P&O MPPT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
4.4. Variable step based method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
4.4.1. Operation and previous work using variable step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
4.4.2. Variable perturbation step P&O MPPT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
4.4.3. P&O MPPT with Dead Beat Control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
4.4.4. Modified P&O MPPT with two-step algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
4.5. Bisection search theorem (BST) method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120

n
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: dileepmon2@gmail.com (G. Dileep).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.072
1364-0321/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
110 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129

4.5.1. Operation and previous work using BST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120

4.5.2. BST based P&O MPPT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
4.6. Duty-cycle perturbations adaptation (DCPA) method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
4.6.1. Operation and previous work using DCPA method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
4.6.2. DCPA based P&O MPPT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
5. Power ratio based variable step P&O MPPT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
6. Comments and remarks on various P&O MPPT techniques. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
7. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

1. Introduction some of disadvantages (steady state power loss) associated with

Solar photovoltaic (SPV) systems have been commercialized
around the globe for its long term economic prospects and more
importantly, the concerns over the environment [1,2]. SPV system can
be integrated into grid [3–9] or can be operated in standalone mode
[10–16] or can be used along with other sources such as wind or diesel
in hybrid mode [17,18]. Standalone or off grid systems are preferred
for the applications such as street lightning, home applications, solar
water pumping and supplying power to remote areas were grid is not
available for power supply. Standalone systems are designed with or
without battery backup. Grid integrated systems are those connected
to the grid to reduce the stress of grid. Hybrid SPV system involves two
or more power sources intelligently connected together. Generally SPV
system is connected with wind, hydro, biomass or diesel generators.
Hybrid system provides better reliability than standalone SPV system.
Maximum power point tracking (MPPT) is regarded as the critical
component of SPV system. Maximum power of an SPV module,
corresponding operating voltage and PV output current varies with
insolation and temperature. So in order to extract maximum power,
SPV module must be operated at the voltage corresponding to the
MPP. Plenty of research is going on this area, since it improves the
overall system efficiency with minimum cost. Several classical meth-
ods are there to track the MPP. Voltage based and current based, P&O,
incremental conductance (INC), artificial neural network (ANN), fuzzy
logic control (FLC), etc. are the commonly used MPPT techniques. The
voltage and current based MPP tracking algorithm is simple but has
low accuracy and efficiency. Short circuit current based MPPT [19–23]
require only one sensor and simple to implement but it requires a
momentarily short circuiting of SPV module with a switch to
determine the short circuit current (Isc). Open circuit voltage (Voc)
based MPPT [24–28] is also simple but it requires measurement of Voc
periodically by temporarily shutting down the converter. But this
incurs a few disadvantages, including temporary loss of power. To
prevent this, use pilot cells from which Voc can be obtained. These pilot
cells must be carefully chosen to closely represent the characteristics
of the PV array. Under open circuit and short circuit conditions SPV
module will not deliver any power to the load, this reduces the
efficiency. Gradient descent which uses variable step size overcomes
the drawbacks of usually used techniques [29]. Ripple correlation
control (RCC) method resolve some problems associated with P&O
technique and are discussed in [30–34]. Slide mode control [35–38]
technique track MPP precisely when compared to other methods but
hardware implementation is complex. Less number of sensors are
required for temperature based MPPT [39–41]. Hence it is economical
and simple in implementation. Bisection Search Theorem based MPPT
[42] can be used to track MPP of PV modules which exhibits more
than one local MPP's under varying climatic conditions. Dual MPPT
tracking system is discussed in [43]. Mechanical tracker moves PV
module towards maximum sunlight and an FLC based P&O MPPT
electrical tracker to track MPP.
The P&O and INC methods are widely used classical methods
with some advantages and disadvantages. Steady state power loss
associated with P&O technique is high due oscillations of operating
point around MPP. Incremental resistance method (INR) overcomes
P&O and INC methods by choosing variable perturbation step size.
P&O MPPT method is widely used because it is simple and can
implement easily. Analog [44] and digital [45–48] implementation
are possible with P&O MPPT technique. P&O method is slow process
it requires some time to track MPP [49] because it compares power
at old reference voltage before perturbation and power at new
reference voltage after perturbation, this process will continue still
MPP is reached. Response time of a DSP based P&O for tracking MPP
is only few seconds as discussed in [50]. In FLC method [51–58] array
voltage and reference voltage are compared to generate an error
signal to vary duty ratio of the converter. The reference voltage
changes with the solar radiation. Artificial Neural Network (ANN)
[59–63] based MPPT estimates the reference voltage in reference to
the solar insolation and cell temperature. ANN does not require
complete information about the system. The neural fuzzy based
approach [64–66] combines the advantage of neural network and
fuzzy controller both. In this approach optimal voltage will be
determined by the neural network and the fuzzy controller is
designed to change duty cycle of the converter. System oscillation
control based MPPT [67,68] need one sensor for measuring voltage.
This technique can be implemented easily and does not have any
complicated mathematical computations. State space based MPPT
[69] transforms the nonlinear time varying SPV system to linear
dynamic system because it is easy to track the MPP for linear system.
Linearization based MPPT [70] is very simple, quick and cost
effective. This method is similar to system oscillation control based
MPPT, here nonlinear current and power equations are transformed
to linear one first then MPPT is tracked. Array reconfiguration
method [71] is a mechanical method; in this method PV arrays are
combined in series or parallel combinations to achieve MPP. β-MPPT
method [72,73] is used along with other conventional methods to
track MPP quickly. This is a variable perturbation method which
tracks MPP quickly during rapidly changing atmospheric conditions.
Numerical calculation based MPPT [74–76] calculates the voltage at
MPP using quadratic interpolation method. This algorithm calculates
the exact voltage value at MPP by numerical calculations; hence
MPP can be reached by single step. This method is very complicated.
Techniques that discussed above have certain merits and
demerits. Some of the methods provide better tracking speed
while some other techniques provide better steady state perfor-
mance. A detailed review about some of the modified P&O MPPT
method is made in this paper. Modified P&O MPPT papers for
review purpose are chosen according to the relevance of the paper
and year of publication. Different techniques are compared based
on the desirable factors such as number of sensors required,
implementation easiness, performance under steady state, overall
efficiency implementation cost and tracking speed.
2. SPV system description
SPV system is an arrangement of components such as PV
module, Maximum Power Point Tracker, DC or AC load, battery
 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129 111

input as given in Eq. (1)

V out ¼ V in =l  D ð1Þ

where D, Vout and Vin are duty cycle, output voltage and input
voltage of the boost converter. Duty cycle (D) of the converter is
varied by pulse-width modulated (PWM) output of the proposed
algorithm. MPP can be tracked with higher stability of operating
point and higher efficiency by controlling the converter with PWM
output of the proposed algorithm. By varying the duty cycle of the
Fig. 1. Block diagram of SPV system with MPPT [36].
converter the output voltage can be varied. In practical boost
converters there will be switching losses and losses in passive
elements, but efficiencies around 90% can be achieved by careful
selection of system components such as inductor and capacitor
and operating parameters such as switching frequency.

Fig. 2. P–V characteristics of solar cell [80].

and power conditioning unit (converter or inverter depending on

type of load). Typical SPV system is described below.

2.1. SPV system with MPPT

Fig. 1 shows a block diagram of a Solar PV system. SPV system

consists of an SPV module and several electrical loads. This may Fig. 3. Plot of power vs. voltage for a SPV module [80].
also have a Power conditioning unit (PCU) which may comprise of
an inverter (to convert dc into ac) or a converter(to convert dc into
dc), charge controller (to prevent reverse flow of current during Table 1
dark) and most importantly from the efficiency point of view the P&O technique.
Maximum Power Point Tracker (MPPT). By changing duty cycle of
Old perturbation Slope of power New perturbation
the power converter source impedance can be matched with that
of load impedance for maximum power transfer. An MPPT con- Positive ( þve) Positive ( þ ve) Positive (þ ve)
troller with P&O algorithm is used to vary duty cycle of the Positive ( þve) Negative (  ve) Negative (  ve)
converter. Negative (  ve) Positive ( þ ve) Negative (  ve)
Negative (  ve) Negative (  ve) Positive (þ ve)

2.2. SPV characteristic curves

Fig. 2 shows SPV characteristic curves, voltage–current (V–I)

curve and voltage–power (V–P) curve. Both V–I and V–P curves are
nonlinear in nature. The voltage corresponding to zero current is
called open circuit voltage (Voc) and the current corresponding to
zero voltage is called as Short circuit current (Isc). Power supplied
by the SPV module is zero at Voc and Isc. The maximum power
point is at knee of the current–voltage characteristic curve, where
the product voltage and current is maximum. Voltage and current
at MPP is indicated as Vmax and Imax respectively. MPP is unique, as
can be seen in Fig. 2, where the previous points are represented.

2.3. DC–DC converter

A DC–DC converter is included in between the SPV module and

the load in order to provide load matching. Boost converter, buck
converter and buck–boost converter are commonly used DC–DC
converters. Boost converter is preferred for SPV application due its
better performance. Boost converter provides higher output than Fig. 4. Flowchart of classical P&O algorithm [80].
112 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129

3. Conventional P&O algorithm
P&O is widely used MPPT technique because it is intuitive and
easy to implement. The conventional P&O method [77–81] mea-
sures voltage and current from the solar panel and perturb the
operating voltage and compares the power received at old voltage
with the power received at new voltage.
Direction of new perturbation depends upon the value of
measured power; perturbation will be in same direction, if higher
power is measured at new voltage, otherwise it will go in the
opposite direction as shown in Fig. 3. Conventional P&O MPPT
employs fixed perturbation step size. Larger perturbation size
increases the convergence speed but operating point will oscillate
around MPP and slightly reduces the efficiency. Smaller perturba-
tion will reduce the oscillations around MPP but it results in
slower convergence to MPP. “Hill climbing method” is an alternate
name for conventional P&O MPPT technique. It is summarized in
Table 1. SPV module's output power vs. voltage curve (PV curve) at
constant module temperature and the constant irradiance is
shown in the Fig. 3. When the operating point of SPV module is
away from the MPP, operating voltage will be perturbed by a small
increment, and the change of power (ΔP) is noticed.
If ΔP is positive, it means that the operating point is moving
towards MPP. Further voltage perturbations will be provided in the
same direction as earlier in order to move operating point much closer
to MPP. If ΔP is negative, it means that the operating point is moving
away from MPP. Further voltage perturbations will be provided in the
reverse direction in order to move operating point much closer to
MPP. Fig. 4 shows the flowchart of classical P&O algorithm.
Conventional P&O algorithm have some restrictions which
reduce the MPPT efficiency. First, it cannot determine exactly
whether the operating point has reached the MPP or not. The
operating point will oscillates around the MPP and reduces the
SPV module efficiency under constant irradiance condition [82].
Second, MPPT can be fooled under quickly changing atmospheric
conditions [83]. When there is sudden increase in the irradiation
ΔP will be positive, MPPT will assume that the operating point is
moving towards the MPP and further voltage perturbation in same
direction. When there is sudden decrease in the irradiation ΔP will
be negative, MPPT will assume that the operating point is moving
away from the MPP and further voltage perturbation will be in
reverse direction. When there is sudden increase in the irradiation
continuously the operating point will move towards left and MPPT
algorithm will be fooled continuously. When there is a sudden
decrease in irradiation continuously the operating point will move
towards right.
the peak power. The implemented proposed control scheme with
DSP and it was found that there is an increase in 0.5% tracked power
with modified tracking algorithm. Khaehintung et al. [86] proposed
an FPGA based variable step P&O MPPT technique for battery
charging application. Dynamic and steady state performance of
the proposed algorithm was found to be superior to conventional
P&O MPPT. Femia et al. [87] proposed a method to optimize P&O
MPPT parameters to improve the dynamic behavior of the whole
system including DC–DC converter and PV array. Houssamo et al.
[88] did experimental analysis and compared energy efficiency of
four MPPT techniques. Four identical PV panels with P&O MPPT
with fixed step size, INC MPPT with fixed step size, variable step
P&O MPPT and Fuzzy Logic based MPPT was used for the experi-
mental analysis. Improved P&O MPPT was found to be superior over
other MPPT methods. Srikumar et al. [89] proposed a new method
which tracks peak power quickly than conventional P&O MPPT.
Convergence speed as well as accuracy of proposed algorithm was
found superior to conventional method. Rezvani et al. [90] proposed
a new method which incorporates artificial neural network and
genetic algorithm (ANN-GA). Data optimization is done GA and
optimized values are trained by ANN and reference voltage is
determined. Convergence speed of proposed algorithm is superior
to conventional P&O MPPT, oscillations around MPP was found to
minimum more importantly produces well regulated power output.
Quamruzzaman et al. [91] proposed a single stage grid connected
PV system with modified P&O MPPT technique which reduces the
oscillations around MPP. Some of the modified P&O MPPT techni-
ques are discussed and compared based on the desirable factors
such as number of sensors required, implementation easiness, and
performance under steady state, overall efficiency implementation
cost and tracking speed.
4.1. Soft computing based P&O MPPT
Soft computing methods [92–95] such as particle swarm opti-
mization (PSO), ANN, FLC and other evolutionary algorithms (EA)
are utilized to optimize certain parameters of conventional MPPT's.
Soft computing techniques are used along with conventional P&O
MPPT to add extra intelligence and thereby improving performance

4. Modified P&O methods

P&O MPPT method is simple and easy to implement but it has

certain disadvantages. It cannot dictate when MPP is reached.
Operating point will no settle at MPP, it oscillate around MPP and
reduces the SPV efficiency under constant irradiance condition. Fig. 5. Basic ANN structure [97].
Under quickly changing atmospheric conditions this algorithm
exhibit unpredictable behavior. Modified P&O methods are intro-
duced to reduce these effects.
Several modified P&O MPPT methods are there to track the MPP.
Liu et al. [84] proposed an improved peak power tracking technique
with peak current control for reducing oscillations of operating
point around MPP. Instantaneous values of PV currents and voltages
along with small perturbation step were used to track peak power.
The implemented proposed control scheme with DSP, experimental
results too shown increase in tracking speed. Jung et al. [85]
proposed an adaptive algorithm which automatically varies the
perturbation step size and hysteresis bandwidth in order to track Fig. 6. Block diagram of ANN based MPPT [103].
 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129
MPPT controller. Conventional P&O MPPT along with soft comput-
ing techniques will give better performance when compared to
their individually performances. An attempt is made in this section
to carry out a review on P&O MPPT technique which employing soft
computing techniques such as PSO, ANN, FLC etc. One selected
paper from each improved method is also described in detail.
4.1.1. Artificial neural network (ANN) method
Theory, operation, previous work on FLC based MPPT techniques
and an improved FLC based P&O MPPT technique is explained below.
4.1.1.1. Operation and previous work using ANN. Artificial neural
networks (ANNs) [96–98] are learning algorithm inspired and
developed based on central nervous systems of animals. ANN
consists of neurons and connectors similar to brain neuron
structure. In ANN neurons are aligned in layers and neuron of
each layer is connected to neuron of previous and subsequent layers
as shown in Fig. 5. Due to the adaptive nature, ANN is able to
pattern recognition and machine learning [99,100]. ANN is trained
continuously with the input parameters such as irradiation, PV
voltage, PV current and temperature or any combination of these.
Based upon the training of selected input parameters maximum
current (IMPP), maximum voltage (VMPP) or duty ratio is generated
for controlling power converter.
ANN with three layers: input layer, output layer and hidden
layer are shown in Fig. 5. Weights associated with each neuron are
calculated carefully through training process. ANN can be used for
generating reference signals once training is over.
Schematic diagram of an ANN based MPPT technique is shown in
Fig. 6. ANN based MPPT techniques are generally used track peak
power under changing atmospheric conditions. Veerachary et al.
[101] proposed an ANN based peak power point tracking technique
for a PV system connected to separately excited DC motor. Proposed
system tracks peak power accurately even under changing
Fig. 7. P–V characteristic slop-irradiance variations dependency [108].
Fig. 8. Artificial intelligence (AI) block [108].
113
atmospheric condition also. Peak power tracking with ANN based
gradient descent method under varying atmospheric condition is
explained in [102]. Several P&O and INC MPPT techniques with ANN
to improve performance are also proposed by authors. Jinbang et al.
[103] proposed ANN based improve P&O MPPT with insolation data
and temperature as inputs. Performance under rapidly changing
atmospheric condition was superior in the proposed method. Islam
et al. [104] combined ANN with conventional INC MPPT to improve
the tracking features. Proposed method provides better accuracy and
dynamic response than conventional method. Large number of
intermediate/hidden layer improves performance of tracking system
but increases the complexity. Most of the ANN based MPPT techni-
ques uses back propagation method for MPPT. Once ANN is trained
with sufficient data it will track MPP accurately without extensive
knowledge of PV parameters. Since all PV modules exhibit different
characteristics, ANN must be trained individually for each module/
array. Output characteristics of PV module/array vary with time also
hence it is better to train ANN continuously for good results.
Continuous training process requires more time which is a drawback
of this method. A novel technique to solve P&O drawbacks by auto
tuning the perturbation step in order to make the control algorithm
adaptive to the operational state is presented in literature below.
4.1.1.2. ANN based Improved P&O MPPT. In order to solve the P&O
drawbacks, most MPPT system adjust the perturbation step (ΔV). A
small ΔV value decreases the amplitude of oscillations around MPP
and reduces the power loss. But it slow down the response of the
control algorithm to changing atmospheric condition and decreases
the system efficiency [105,106]. On other hand large ΔV can ensure
quick convergence to MPP but it increases the amplitude of
oscillations around MPP. In [107] a new technique to solve P&O
drawbacks by auto tuning the perturbation step in order to make the
control algorithm adaptive to the operational state is presented. To
do this, they exploited the slope of P–V curve during the previous
perturbation period to predict the suitable step of perturbation for
Fig. 9. Flowchart of AI based P&O MPPT [108].
Fig. 10. Basic fuzzy logic structure [110].
114 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129

the next cycle as shown in Fig. 7. By considering the output voltage and provide better dynamic and steady state performances. Yuen
variation and power of the SPV module the perturbation step is et al. [123] proposed a method to track power under changing
determined continuously. Information about the operating point and atmospheric conditions. Simoes et al. [124] proposed a method with
how much it is far from MPP can be obtained from the characteristic change in power and duty ratio as crisp inputs to FLC. Masoum et al.
slope. When there is a sudden variation in atmospheric conditions [125] proposed a new method with array current, power and duty
information from the slope will fool the algorithm and there is a ratio as three FLC inputs. Patcharaprakiti et al. [126] proposed grid
chance that the operating point may move away from the MPP. integrated PV system with adaptive FLC which tunes rule base and
Above mentioned problem is solved in this algorithm by choosing membership functions continuously to improve performance. System
perturbation step by considering the variations in atmospheric consists of DC–DC boost converter along with a single phase grid tied
conditions. inverter. Wu et al. [127] proposed self tuned FLC based MPPT for grid
SPV module output power varies with variation in the atmo- connection. Purnama et al. [128] proposed a single input single
spheric conditions. In [108] a new idea, to use an artificial neural output FLC by applying “signed distance method” [129].
network (ANN) to detect deviation in atmospheric conditions is
proposed. ANN predicts the power value during the next pertur-
bation cycle from the available data. Information's about atmo- 4.2. FLC based improved P&O MPPT
spheric conditions is obtained by comparing ANN output value
and the real measured power. Based on this information next Fig. 11 shows the block diagram of FLC based P&O MPPT. The
perturbation step value is chosen. proposed MPPT technique [130] eliminates the oscillations around
Using AI based P&O MPPT method output power delivered to the operating point by varying the perturbation step size using
load can be maximized. Fig. 9 shows flowchart of this algorithm. FLC. The absolute power slope, P and old perturbation step size,
Flow chart and working is similar to conventional P&O MPPT,
additionally an AI block is included to vary the perturbation step
size with changing atmospheric conditions. Fig. 8 shows AI block,
SPV module voltage, current and old perturbation step size is the
input to the AI block. Equ 1 block compares the power predicted
by ANN and the real power. Based on the difference between the
power next perturbation step size is chosen. As shown in the
Fig. 7, if there is a large change in power for small increment in
voltage it means that atmospheric conditions are varying. ANN
will sense this change and by comparing the slope. This algorithm
helps to track MPP under quickly varying atmospheric conditions
as well as eliminates the oscillations around MPP.

4.1.2. Fuzzy logic controller (FLC) method

Theory, operation, previous work on FLC based MPPT techni-
ques and an improved FLC based P&O MPPT technique is
explained below.

4.1.2.1. Operation and previous work using. Fuzzy logic [109–119] is a Fig. 11. Block diagram of FLC based P&O MPPT [130].
superset of conventional (Boolean) logic that has been extended to
handle the concept of partial truth: the truth values between
“completely true” and “completely false”. Value between truth and
false can be recognized by Fuzzy logic. With fuzzy logic, propositions
can be represented with degrees of truthfulness and falsehood. For
example, the statement today is sunny, might be 100% true if there
are no clouds, 80% true if there are a few clouds and 0% true if it rains
all day. Mathematical model of system is not required in FLC; hence
nonlinear systems can easily dealt with FLC [120]. Process structure
for a critical FLC is shown in Fig. 10.
FLC is implemented in three stages: (1) Fuzzification, crisp inputs
are fuzzified into linguistic variables based on the membership
functions. (2) Fuzzified inputs are then compared with the fuzzy Fig. 12. MF of the two inputs Pa and Vold [130].
rule base for making decision. Rule base provides certain possible
combinations to satisfy various conditions. (3) Defuzzification, lin-
guistic variable are converted back to analog signal by defuzzification
process which control the power converter. Error and change in error
is given as input to FLC. Error is calculated from irradiance, tempera-
ture, PV voltage, PV current or out power. Several FLC based MPPT
techniques had been proposed researchers. Mahmoud et al. [121]
proposed peak power tracking using FLC with seven linguistic
variables. Implementing complexity of proposed system is high,
and selection of membership functions and fuzzy rules require
excellent knowledge of the system. Khaehintung et al. [122] pro-
posed MPP technique with less number of membership function for
solar powered light flasher application. Their system is less complex Fig. 13. MF of the output ΔV [130].
 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129
ΔVold are taken as the inputs to FLC to calculate the new change in
step size ΔV. Two inputs P and ΔVold are fuzzified by using
normalized fuzzy sets with three triangular membership functions
(MFs): Small, Medium, and Large as shown in Fig. 12. The output
variable consists of a normalized fuzzy set with triangular MF:
Negative Big (NB), Negative Small (NS), Zero (ZO), Positive Small
(PS), and Positive Big (PB) as shown in Fig. 13. After fuzzification of
the crisp inputs the resulting fuzzy are compared with rule-base.
The rule base is a set according to the system requirement.“If
premise then consequent” is the rule base used in this method.
SPV panel curve shown in Fig. 2 can be divided into three
regions based on based on the absolute power slope. On the left
side of MPP the slope is small while on the right side of MPP slope is
large and slope is zero on MPP. Referring to Fig. 2, if absolute value
of the slope Pa is Large, it indicates that the operating point of SPV
module is away from MPP. Under this condition old perturbation
step, Vold can have three different values. Change in step size ΔV will
be Positive Big if Vold is small, in order to reach the MPP quickly.
Change in step size ΔV will be Positive Small if Vold is Medium, in
order to reach the MPP without oscillating around it. Finally ΔV will
be Zero if Vold is Large, in order to avoid tracking of MPP in the
opposite direction finally leading to oscillations. First part of the
rule, premise is calculated using the inference minimum operator.
The rules which are ON during each input MFs are compared and
the minimum rule is chosen for operation.
Defuzzification is the final step in this method, the fuzzy set
corresponding to change in step size ΔV is transformed back to a real
Fig. 14. PSO model [133].
Fig. 15. (a) PV system with shaded modules, (b) V–I characteristics; and (c) P–V characteristics [153].
115
continuous function. Defuzzification method can be chosen accord-
ing to the knowledge of operator about the system. The center of
gravity (COG) defuzzification method is used for this work [131,132].
This method varies the perturbation step size to achieve better
results. When the operating point is away from the MPP larger step
size is used to increase the convergence speed. When the operating
point is near to the MPP smaller step size is used to avoid the
oscillations around MPP. This method provides better result under
rapidly varying atmospheric condition s also. The proposed system is
transparent, provides better dynamic response but it is wearisome to
develop fuzzy rules and membership functions and fuzzy outputs
and lot of data and knowledge is needed for designing the system.
FLC has certain advantages: Works with imprecise inputs, exact
mathematical model of PV array is not required, nonlinear system
can be easily handled. Accuracy and learning ability of FLC
depends greatly on number of fuzzy levels and form of member-
ship function. Trial and error method is generally used to deter-
mine fuzzy rules and membership functions associated with
fuzzification and defuzzification which is time consuming.
4.2.1. Particle swarm optimization (PSO) method
Theory, operation, previous work on PSO based MPPT techni-
ques and an improved PSO based P&O MPPT technique is
explained below.
4.2.1.1. Operation and previous work using PSO. Particle swarm
optimization (PSO) is based on the behavior of a colony or swarm
of bees, ants, wasps and termites; a train of fish or a group of birds
[133–136]. PSO mimics the behavior of theses social organisms. The
word particle denotes a bee in a colony or a bird in a flock etc. Each
individual or particle in a swarm behaves in a distributed way using
its own intelligence and the collective or group of intelligence of the
swarm. As such, if one particle discovers a good path to food, the rest
of the farm will also be able to follow the good path instantly even if
their location is far away in the swarm [137–139]. Optimization
methods based on swarm intelligence are called evolution-based
procedures. For multivariable optimization like SPV system, swarm is
assumed to be fixed with each particle located initially at random
locations in multi dimensional space. Each particle is assumed to
have two characteristics: a position and a velocity [140,141]. Each
particle wanders around in the design space and remembers the best
position it has discovered. The particles communicate information or
good positions to each other and adjust their individual positions and
velocities based on the information received on the good positions.
PSO model is shown in Fig. 14.
116 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129
Qiang et al. [142] implemented an improved MPPT technique
using PSO. Performance of under partial shaded condition is
superior to conventional methods and implementing complexity
is more. Ishaque et al. [143] proposed a method to determine the
parameters of PV modules using differential evolution. A new peak
power tracking method with PSO which improves the dynamic
performance is proposed in [144]. Abdulkadir et al. [145] proposed
an improved PSO MPPT to track peak power under rapidly
changing atmosphere. Inertia weight and learning factor are varied
continuously to speed up searching of MPP. Weighting factor is
linearly decreased with increase in iteration number. During
starting of iteration weighting factor will be large, it will decrease
as iteration progress hence MMP can be tracked quickly and
precisely. Chen et al. [146] proposed a sun tracking method with
PSO which can act as dual axis sun tracking, single axis sun
tracking and fixed peak power point tracking. Gali et al. [147]
proposed an improved PSO MPPT method to track peak power
under partial shaded condition. Shi et al. [148] proposed an
improved method to track peak power under partial shaded
condition. They used PSO to find out the global peak and INC to
track the peak power. PSO increases the convergence speed while
INC provides precise tracking facility. Suryavanshi et al. [149]
proposed a new technique to track peak power under changing
atmospheric condition. PSO was used to find the global peak and
P&O MPPT for precisely MPP. Kamejima et al. [150] proposed a
method for tuning parameters of PSO for peak power point
Fig. 16. Flowchart of P&O MPPT combined with particle swam optimization (PSO) [153].
tracking. Nattapol et al. [151] proposed an improved PSO with
Sugeno fuzzy control to avoid frequency fluctuations in grid
connected PV system. Koad et al. [152] compared and analyzed
performance of various peak power point tracking methods with
PSO MPPT.
4.2.1.2. PSO based Improved P&O MPPT. Series-parallel combination
of PV modules with string of series connected PV cells is used for
large PV systems. Due to the effect of clouds, shadows of trees and
large buildings some part of PV module may receive less amount
irradiation when compared to other modules. Under partial shading
condition voltage across series connected module varies while
current remains constant, in case of parallel connected module
string current varies, this leads to multiple peaks. There will be
many local peaks (LP) depending upon number of PV modules used
and one global peak (GP) as shown in Fig. 15.
Conventional tracking algorithms cannot ensure the conver-
gence to GP, operating point may trap on any of the LP's. The
proposed method [153] combines PSO and P&O MPPT technique to
track GP under partial shading condition. Initially PSO is activated
to determine the optimal value of duty ratio for tracking GP. Once
optimal value of duty ratio is determined P&O MPPT is initiated
with this optimal duty ratio to track GP. Flow chart of the proposed
technique is shown in Fig. 16.
Initially a set of particles (duty ratio) within the maximum and
minimum values of the duty ratio of converter is selected. Converter
 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129
then activated with these selected particles and corresponding
power is calculated. Power corresponding to ith particle is calcu-
lated and if it is greater then than personal best (pbest), pbest is
replaced by present power and duty ratio corresponding to perso-
nal best (dpbest) is replaced by present duty ratio. Global best (gbest)
is then compared with pbest, if gbest is less than by pbest then it is
replaced by pbest. And duty ratio corresponding to global best
(dgbest) is replaced by dpbest. After entire iteration dgbest is chosen as
doptimal and P&O MPPT is initiated. Check for insolation change is
done frequently once there is change PSO is initiated for determin-
ing doptimal.
MPP can be tracked accurately under partial shading condition
using this method. Misbehavior of conventional P&O MPPT during
rapidly changing atmospheric condition can be also solved using
this method. Determining optimal duty ratio using PSO requires
commendable amount of time is disadvantage of this method.
4.3. Field programmable gate array (FPGA) method
Theory, operation, previous work on FPGA based MPPT techni-
ques and an improved FPGA based P&O MPPT technique is
explained below.
4.3.1. Operation and previous work using FPGA
Field programmable gate array (FPGA) [154–157] is an integrated
circuit configured by customer after manufacturing in field. Config-
uration of FPGA is generally done by hardware description language
(HDL). Reprogrammable logic blocks [158–161] are arranged in
arrays so that it can be configured and inter connected in different
ways. FPGA provides very fast I/O ports and bidirectional buses
which makes it more attractive. Because of high accuracy, better
dynamic response and less quantization errors FPGA is used as a
controller for solar power tracking. Several MPPT techniques with
FPGA controller had been introduced so far. Chekired et al. [162]
proposed a comparative study intelligent peak power point tracking
using FPGA. Messai et al. [163] implemented two input single
output FLC implemented on FPGA chip. Voltage and current was
chosen as the input and duty ratio of converter as output. Simula-
tion and experimental results showed good matching with better
performance than conventional method. Chettibi et al. [164] pro-
posed FPGA controlled grid connected system, MPPT control and
inverter control is done by FPGA. Rajkumar et al. [165] proposed a
multilevel cascaded inverters with space vector modulated PWM
for PV system. Mellit et al. [166] proposed a P&O MPPT technique
implemented using FPGA. Bharatiraja et al. [167] implemented
neutral point clamped multilevel inverters (NPC-MLI) for autono-
mous operation PV system with capacitor balancing using FPGA.
Parlak [168] proposed an improved MPPT with FPGA to track peak
power under shaded conditions. A review on artificial intelligence
Fig. 17. Principle of new MPPT [170].
117
based MPPT implemented using FPGA is presented in [169] by
Mellit and company.
4.3.2. FPGA based improved P&O MPPT
In this method [170] perturbation step is made constant with
an offset which makes the FPGA [171–176] data acquisition process
much easier. As shown in Fig. 17, the first step consists varying PV
voltage consequently PV power by providing constant triangular
perturbation. Old power P1 corresponding to old voltage, V1 and
new power P2 corresponding to new voltage, V2 is measured and
compared. If old power is greater than new power, operating point
will be right of the MPP. Hence, the operating point is moved (in
step 2 and step 3) to attain equality between P1 and P2. The
operating point will oscillate around MPP.
Fig. 18 shows circuit diagram of the FPGA based PV conversion
system. Power part consists of a DC–DC converter, an SPV module
and an electrical load. DC–DC converter is controlled by FPGA part,
which can be divided into different simple functions. Value of
power, P1 on the rising edge and the value of and power, P2 on
falling edge of perturbation signal can be recovered using a switch
block. Fig. 19 shows principle algorithm of controller block. When
P1 ¼P2 OFFSET remains unchanged. When P2 oP1, the OFFSET
signal is incremented by one, else the signal is decremented by
one. The triangular waveform produced by the integration of
perturbation signal is added with OFFSET to create order signal.
Thus the perturbation step size is varied with respect to the slope
of power curve. When operating point is away from MPP pertur-
bation step size will be chosen as big to track MPP quickly. If
operating point is near to MPP perturbation step will become
small to track MPP precisely without oscillations. From the order
signal digital pulse width modulation block (DPWM) creates
duty cycle.
Fig. 18. FPGA based P&O MPPT [170].
Fig. 19. Details of controller block [170].
118 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129

This technique uses a constant triangular perturbation signal to method. But in this method the perturbation step size changes from
reach MPP. Frequency of analog to digital converter (ADC) is big one to small one in order to reduce the power pulsation around
reduced to 200 samples/s with perfect synchronization between MPP, hence the module approaches MPP slowly. Perturbation step size
data acquisition process and signal perturbation. FPGA based P&O is varied by considering sign change of J as in Eqs. (2) and (3).
MPPT provides fast dynamic response, less quantization errors, Fig. 20 shows the flow chart of variable perturbation step based
and high accuracy. P&O method. If J 40 and ΔP/ΔV 40, it shows that SPV module
departs from MPP. In this case, larger perturbation step size is
4.4. Variable step based method chosen to move SPV module to MPP quickly. On the other hand
smaller perturbation step size is chosen when ΔP/ΔV decreases
Theory, operation, previous work on variable step based MPPT abruptly, which will precisely move SPV module to MPP. Larger
techniques and an improved variable step based P&O MPPT perturbation step size is chosen when the SPV module deviates
technique is explained in sections below. from MPP. These larger perturbations help the SPV module to
reach near the MPP very quickly. When J o0 and ΔP oLimP
(provided value) this shows that SPV module is near MPP, under
4.4.1. Operation and previous work using variable step this condition smaller perturbation step is chosen to track MPP
For hill climbing methods like P&O method, INC method and precisely and reduce the oscillations. When J o0 and ΔP 4LimP
RCC method perturbation step size must chosen carefully. If this indicates SPV module deviates from MPP hence larger
perturbation step size is large convergence speed can be increased perturbations are chosen to track MPP quickly. The smaller
while oscillations of operating point around MPPT will be large. perturbations track MPP precisely and eliminate oscillations.
Hence certain amount of power will be lost. On the other hand if Choice of two perturbations helps to reduce the power loss due
we decrease the perturbation step size oscillations around MPP to oscillations around MPP, and hence increase overall efficiency of
can be reduced while the tracking speed will also reduce. Due to the system.
slow tracking of MPP certain amount of power will be lost. MPPT
with variable perturbation step size can address this issue and J ¼ ΔP k =ΔV k nΔP k  1 =ΔV k  1 40 ð2Þ
make tracking system more attractive. In variable step P&O MPPT Operating point away from MPP
the step size will be large when the operating point is away from
MPP and small when operating point is near to MPP. Convergence J ¼ ΔP k =ΔV k nΔP k  1 =ΔV k  1 o 0 ð3Þ
speed as well as tracking precision can be improved with variable Operating point near to MPP
step P&O MPPT. Several modified MPPT techniques has been When there is a slight change in illumination, value of ΔP will be
proposed by researchers so far. Amine et al. [177] proposed an less than LimP, perturbation step will remain small and MPP can be
improved MPPT technique with variable perturbation step size. tracked precisely without oscillations around peak point. When there
Dynamic and steady state performance of proposed method was is sudden increase in the illumination, J and ΔP will increase abruptly,
found to be superior. Ansari et al. [178] proposed variable step P&O larger perturbation step size is chosen to track MPP quickly. When
MPPT algorithm to reduce oscillations of operating point around
MPP and increase convergence speed. Zhang et al. [179] proposed
an improved variable step for grid connected system using
extreme seeking control (ESC). Ahmed et al. [180] proposed a
new approach to design scaling factor variable step operation. Liu
et al. [181] proposed a variable step MPPT technique in which step
size is a function of ratio of change in power and change in voltage.
Jae et al. [182] proposed an improved MPPT with variable
perturbation step size. Li et al. [183] proposed a novel MPPT
tracking method with variable perturbation step size, space vector
modulation scheme was used for controlling inverter. Tang et al.
[184] proposed a method which utilizes the slope of PV curve to
obtain variable perturbation step size. Menniti et al. [185] pro-
posed a method which utilizes change in conductance and
instantaneous conductance for varying perturbation step size.
Khaehintung et al. [186] proposed FPGA based variable step P&O
MPPT with duty cycle perturbation adaptation. Mei et al. [187]
proposed a novel variable step MPPT technique to which improves Fig. 20. Flow chart of variable perturb step based P&O MPPT [195].
the response speed, steady state performance and accuracy
simultaneously. Roy et al. [188] an improved method with FLC,
simulated and compared the results with conventional methods.
Hosseinil et al. [189] proposed Newton–Raphson method based
variable perturbation step MPPT technique implemented through
model predictive control. Chen et al. [190] proposed a variable step
MPPT method with single sensor. Conventional hill climbing
methods uses voltage and current sensors while modified method
uses voltage sensor only which reduces the cost. Yan et al. [191]
proposed an improved MPPT technique with variable step.

4.4.2. Variable perturbation step P&O MPPT

This algorithm [192–198] works by considering the value of ΔP/ΔV.
SPV module works around MPP when ΔP/ΔV (J) decreases signifi-
cantly. The perturbation step size is kept unaltered in conventional P&O Fig. 21. Power variation due step size [202].
 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129
there is a sudden decrease in the illumination J and ΔP will fall below
zero, thus the algorithm will be fooled for a moment.
By using variable perturbations, MPP can be tracked quickly
and precisely. When SPV module is away from MPP larger
perturbation step is used to track MPP quickly. When SPV module
is working near the MPP smaller perturbation step size is used to
avoid the oscillations. This algorithm increases the overall effi-
ciency of the system by reducing the power loss due to oscillations
around MPP and improves the tracking speed. The main disad-
vantage of this method is that the system will be fooled momen-
tarily under rapidly varying atmospheric condition.
4.4.3. P&O MPPT with Dead Beat Control
In this method two step sizes and a power threshold are used in
MPPT algorithm. One step size is for quick convergence to MPPT and
second step size is for eliminating the oscillations around MPP [199–
201]. Power threshold is chosen after considering the output power
oscillations. In this method step size is chosen sinusoidal with a peak
amplitude of Vstp, operating voltage of PV panel is given by Eq. (4),
V PV ¼ V MPP þ V stp sin ðωtÞ
Variation in power is given by Eq. (5),
ΔP ¼ V PV IPV  P PV
VPV, IPV, and PMPP are the instantaneous voltage, instantaneous
current and maximum power of the SPV module under given
atmospheric conditions. Fig. 21 shows power variation with time
Fig. 22. Flow-chart of the modified P&O MPPT algorithm with Dead Beat Control
[202].
Fig. 23. Location of operating points around MPP of a PV module [211].
119
for different perturbation steps. The step-size is made smaller to
reduce the power variation in steady state, and Eq. (6) is satisfied,
j ΔPj 4 P th ð6Þ
Power threshold is denoted by Pth, it is chosen larger than ΔP1 as
shown in Fig. 15 in order to achieve quick and precise tracking of
maximum power.
This MPPT [202–206] method can be described as: when |ΔP|
rPth, the step size is chosen as Vstp2 (smaller), and it could track
MPP precisely; when |ΔP|4Pth, the step size become Vstp1 (larger),
which will track MPP quickly. Fig. 22 shows the flow chart of this
modified MPPT method. As shown in Fig. 22 power ratio, Pr, defined
by Eq. (7) is also included into this control algorithm in order to
reduce the additional power losses under very low solar irradiance.
P ins
Pr 9 ð7Þ
P mn
where Pins is instantaneous power and Pmn is nominal maximum
power under standard test condition. To achieve these goals high
resolution sensors are required which increase the complexity of
ð4Þ technique.
In order forecast the pulse width of the next switching period
[207–210], state equation of the inverter system is calculated by
ð5Þ Dead Beat Control with filter and feedback signal from the voltage.
This algorithm improves the tracking speed and reduces the
oscillations around MPP under low irradiance condition also.
4.4.4. Modified P&O MPPT with two-step algorithm
P&O MPPT with Dead Beat Control also uses two steps to track
MPP quickly and precisely. Like Dead Beat Control this algorithm
[211] also uses two steps for tracking MPP but the tracking method
is different. Here two steps are used align the operating point
symmetric to the MPP and force one point near to MPP. Fig. 23
shows the location of operating points around MPP of PV module
Fig. 24. Four point behavior under steady state [211].
Fig. 25. Symmetric behavior under steady state [211].
120 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129
Fig. 26. Flow-chart of the modified P&O MPPT algorithm with two step algorithm [211].
Fig. 27. Operating voltage correction with two level MPPT [211].
when we are choosing a perturbation step which takes two
perturbations to cross MPP. As shown in Fig. 23 operating points
will be symmetric in case of PV operating voltage (x axis) but they
are asymmetric about MPP (y axis).
MPPT efficiency will get reduced due the asymmetry; also this
will led the algorithm to take a wrong decision leading to a four
point sequence under noisy environment as shown in Fig. 24. This
four point oscillation further reduces the MPPT efficiency and
increases the oscillations around MPP. Around MPP PV curve has a
concave nature, due to this four point oscillations cannot be simply
removed by choosing an optimal perturbation step size. Only
method to avoid this asymmetric behavior is by pushing any of
the operation points 2 or 3 much closer to MPP as shown in Fig. 25.
This helps to change four point sequences to three point sequence
and hence helps in improving the overall efficiency. This method
avoids the asymmetric behavior of the operating point by forcing
operating point towards MPP. Flow chart for this method is shown
in Fig. 26. This method is similar to classical P&O with variable step
size under steady state condition. Main difference of this algo-
rithm with other variable step modified algorithm is that this does
not require information about the PV module used; hence it can be
used for any systems easily. Primary perturbation step size is
chosen after considering the resolution of ADC and measurement
circuit noise level [212]. Application of primary perturbation is
similar to classical P&O MPPT method. If change in power after
perturbation is positive Nsteps will be incremented once. Else check
for Nsteps is done, if Nsteps less than three primary perturbation is
given else secondary perturbation will be triggered and after
perturbation Nsteps will be made one. As shown in Fig. 26 second-
ary perturbation will be activated when two conditions are
satisfied first when change in power (ΔP) is less than zero and
second Nsteps 43 (four or more primary perturbation in same
direction), first three will be due to increase in power and fourth
will be due to reversal of sign. Secondary perturbation is used to
force the central operating point towards the MPP. Secondary sign
perturbation (SSP) can have values 0 or 1. If it is zero secondary
perturbation will be Δx1 else Δx2.
This secondary perturbation will provide small increment or
decrement in operating voltage of SPV module and align the
operating point symmetric to the MPP and force the middle point
towards MPP. Fig. 27a shows operating voltage of SPV module with
unsymmetrical placing of operating points and Fig. 27b shows the
secondary perturbation for alignment of operating point symmetric
to the MPP. Fig. 27c shows operating voltage of SPV module which
will force central point of the three points towards MPP. This
method improves the efficiency of MPPT by reducing the steady
state error. This technique does not need any complex mathema-
tical calculation, hence can be implemented using cheap controllers.
4.5. Bisection search theorem (BST) method
Theory, operation, previous work on BST based MPPT techni-
ques and an improved BST based P&O MPPT technique is
explained in sections below.
4.5.1. Operation and previous work using BST
Bisection search method (BST) [213–215] is generally a classical root
finding method which bisect intervals regularly and check whether the
 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129
optimum lies in the present point. This method is also called as interval
halving method. In order to find root of a function y¼f(x) in an interval
{a,b}, BST moves the end points symmetrically towards optimum value
(root) by halving the interval. First midpoint of the interval is
determined (c¼(aþb)/2) then f(c) is determined. Three possible
conditions are analyzed then; if f(c) is zero root is c, if f(a) and f(c)
have opposite sign one root lies in {a,c} and if f(b) and f(c) have
opposite sign one root lies in {b,c}. If either case (2) or (3) occurs
interval corresponding to them is halved and process is continued until
roots are obtained. In case of PV module [216] change in power
corresponding to maximum voltage is zero. Similarly power corre-
sponding to open circuit voltage and short circuit voltage is zero; peak
power should not happen at these points even though change in
power is zero. Tracking maximum power from PV module is finding
out root of the function dP by changing the voltage of PV module.
Change in power dP is considered as f(x), where x is voltage of PV
module.
4.5.2. BST based P&O MPPT
By implementing bisection method [217] based P&O MPPT
maximum power point can be reached much quickly. Like con-
ventional P&O MPPT first measurement of current, voltage calcu-
lation of power and slope checking (dP/dV) are done to check
whether the operating point lying on left hand side of MPP or in
the right hand side of MPP or on MPP. A specific increment is
provided to the reference voltage if the operating point is moving
towards MPP and resultant power is corresponding to the new
Fig. 28. Flowchart of bisection method based P&O algorithm [217].
Fig. 29. Flow chart for slope checking [217].
121
reference voltage is calculated. Slope checking is done again with
new power. If slope is positive it means that operating point is
moving towards MPP the perturbation step is increment again. If
the slope is negative it means that the operating point is moving
away from the MPP. Then the voltage corresponding to the new
power is updated as Vx and voltage corresponding to the old
power is updated as Vy. Slope checking for the average of the two
voltages Vx and Vy is done. If the slope lies near to zero(less than
0.1) then that operating point is read as MPP.
If slope is positive, Vx will continue to exist as earlier and the
new average voltage will be updated as Vy. Slope checking is again
done for the average of two updated voltage. When the slope
reaches near zero (less than 0.1) this process will be terminated and
that operating point will be chosen as MPP. If slope is negative, Vy
will continue to exist as earlier and the new average voltage will be
updated as Vx. Slope checking is again done for the average of two
updated voltage and the process is terminated if slope lies within
the limit. If the slope corresponding to new average voltage lies
within the specified range, then corresponding voltage is consid-
ered as the maximum voltage. Else the process is continued till MPP
is reached. If initially the slope corresponding to measured voltage
is negative then the voltage is decremented till the slope becomes
positive. The voltage corresponding to negative slope is updated as
Vx and voltage corresponding to positive slope is updated as Vy.
Slope checking is done after calculating average of two voltages. Vy
is updated if slope is positive and Vx is updated if slope is negative.
This process will continue till the slope corresponding to the
average voltage lies within the specified range.
Flow chart of this MPPT technique is shown in Fig. 28. Sub-
routine which is working as the decision box for calculation of
power and checking of slope is shown in Fig. 29.
Fig. 30. Operating point shifting [221].
122 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129

MPP can be tracked quickly and precisely by implementing
bisection based P&O MPPT. This method eliminates the oscillations
of operating point around the MPP and improves the efficiency.
Tracking speed and precision of this method is superior to the
conventional P&O algorithm.
4.6. Duty-cycle perturbations adaptation (DCPA) method
Theory, operation, previous work on DCPA based MPPT tech-
niques and an improved DCPA based P&O MPPT technique is
explained in sections below.
module output power due change in irradiance, ΔH and a constant
duty cycle d(k)¼d(k l)  Δd).
If Eq. (9) is satisfied as shown in Fig. 13a algorithm will not be
fooled and it will track MPP precisely. If Eq. (9) is satisfied as
shown in Fig. 13b algorithm will be fooled and the operating point
will move away from MPP. Using duty cycle perturbation adapta-
tion [221–223] technique MPP can be tracked under varying
irradiance; hence the maximum power can be tracked from the
PV module. Change in module output power due variation in duty
cycle is shown in Eq. (10)
ΔP d ¼ V max ΔI d þ Imax ΔV d þ ΔV d ΔId ð10Þ

4.6.1. Operation and previous work using DCPA method Vmax and Imax are the voltage and current corresponding to
In classical P&O MPPT reference voltage value is varied to track MPP. ΔVd and ΔId are change in voltage and current proportional
MPP. Reference voltage value is used further for generating the duty to change in duty ratio. Relation between ΔVd and Δd are shown
ratio for converter. In duty cycle perturbation adaptation technique in Eq. (11). DC gain is denoted by G.
duty cycle of converter is directly varied by the MPPT algorithm.
Selection of duty cycle perturbation step size has a vital role in ΔV d ¼ G: Δd ð11Þ
efficient tracking of peak power. Several duty cycle perturbation
Change in module output power due variation in irradiance is
step MPPT technique has been proposed by researches. Zhang et al.
shown in Eq. (12)
[218] made a comparative study on duty ratio perturbation and
observation method and reference voltage perturbation and obser- ΔP s ¼ V max ΔI s þ ΔV d ΔIs ¼ KV max ΔH ð12Þ
vation method. Hsieh et al. [219] proposed an improved MPPT
technique using variable frequency constant duty cycle control and where K is material constant and ΔH is change in irradiance. Eq.
constant frequency variable duty ratio control. Harshavardhana (7) can be derived from Eqs. (9)–(12).
et al. [220] proposed an improved MPPT technique using duty cycle 

 
modifier to reduce the DC voltage ripples.   HV max þ 1 ðG:ΔdÞ2 4 V max K j ΔHj ð13Þ
 Rmax 
4.6.2. DCPA based P&O MPPT Minimum magnitude of duty cycle perturbation step (Δdmin)
In this method duty cycle of the DC–DC converter varied can be determined from Eq. (13), it is shown in Eq. (14)
directly to track MPP. Duty cycle for (k þ1)th sampling interval is
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
shown in Eq. (8). By choosing the sampling interval (Ta) perfectly 1 V max K j ΔHj T a
oscillations of operating point around MPP is eliminated in this ¼ Δdmin ð14Þ
G HV max þ Rmax 1
method. Amplitude of duty cycle perturbation (Δd) must be
chosen carefully; large value will track MPP quickly but will From Eq. (14) we can determine the sampling interval (Ta),
increase the steady state losses. Small value will reduce steady perfectly selected sampling time interval eliminates the oscillation
state loss but it reduces the tracking speed. This method gives an of operating point around MPP. This algorithm determines ampli-
idea to choose Ta to eliminate the oscillations of operating point tude of duty cycle perturbation and sampling interval numerical,
around MPP and to select Δd. perfectly selected Δdmin and Ta will track MPP under quick
dððk þ 1ÞT a Þ ¼ dðkT a Þ þ ðdðkT a Þ  dððk  1ÞT a ÞÞ:signðpððk þ 1ÞT a  pðkT a ÞÞ changing condition precisely. By using this algorithm steady state
ð8Þ losses can be minimized hence the efficiency can be improved.

The reason for low efficiency under rapidly varying atmospheric

condition is that the algorithm cannot find the exact reason for Start
variation in the measured power. Consider a PV module working
near MPP at kth sampling interval with illumination H. When a Sense V K , V K+1 ,IK ,IK+1Calculate P K ,P K+1
positive perturbation, Δd is given operating point of the PV module and Power ratio S=P=(P MAX - P K+1)/ P MAX
will move away from the MPP towards point A as shown in Fig. 30,
ΔV= V K+1 - V K
if there is a change the irradiance between the instants kTa and
ΔP= P K+1 - P K
(kþl)Ta as shown in Fig. 13a. At (kþ1)Ta operating point will move
to point B rather than point A if there is an increase in irradiance.
The P&O MPPT algorithm will track MPP correctly if be ΔP = 0
confused only if Y
N
j ΔP d j 4 j ΔP s j ð9Þ
ΔP > 0
where ΔPd is the module output power variation at constant
Y
N
irradiance, H and variable duty cycle and ΔPs is the variation in Y
ΔP > 0 ΔP > 0
N
Table 2 Y
Variable step P&O MPPT using power ratio.
N
D K+1= D K +S*ΔD D K+1= D K -S*ΔD
Sl. no. Operating point Power ratio (S) Perturbation step (Δd)

1. Away from MPP Large Large

2. Mid way Medium Medium Return
3. Near to MPP Small Small
Fig. 31. Flowchart of variable step P&O algorithm using power ratio.
 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129 123

Fig. 32. MATLAB simulation of MPPT controller with boost converter.

1000 will decrease hence absolute value of power ratio will also
decrease. As mentioned above duty cycle perturbation step for
Ppv

500
next perturbation is product of power ratio and a fixed step size
0 (Δd) given by Eq. (16). Duty cycle for next perturbation is given by
0 0.5 1 1.5 Eq. (17)
20
ΔD ¼ S n Δd ð16Þ
Ipv

10
DK þ 1 ¼ DK 7 ΔD ð17Þ
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 When operating point is far away from MPP instantaneous
100 power produced by PV panel will small hence power ratio will be
large making duty cycle perturbation step large. When operating
Vpv

50 point move towards MPP power ratio and perturbation step size
decreases as a result operating point will move to precisely
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 towards MPP without too much oscillations around MPP. It is
summarized in Table 2. Flow chart of proposed algorithm is shown
1
in Fig. 31.
Duty

0.5 Simulink model of proposed algorithm is shown in Fig. 32, PV

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
time(sec)
Fig. 33. Simulation results.
5. Power ratio based variable step P&O MPPT
Detailed review on various modified P&O MPPT techniques
shown that variable perturbation step P&O MPPT provides perfor-
mance than classical method. Soft computing based P&O MPPT also
shows better performance, but cost and complexity of implementa-
tion is higher than variable step P&O MPPT. Various modified P&O
MPPT techniques with variable perturbation step size is described
in detail in above sections. In this section design, analysis and
simulation results of an improved P&O MPPT technique with power
ration is described in detail.
In this method duty cycle perturbation step size is varied
continuously by multiplying with a new variable power ratio (S)
defined by Eq. (15).
P max  P ins
Power ratio ðSÞ ¼
P max
where Pins is instantaneous power and Pmax is nominal maximum
power under standard test condition. When operating point move
towards MPP instantaneous power increases as a result P max  P ins
panel with 800 W peak power was used for simulation.
0.4 0.45 0.5 Simulation results are shown in Fig. 33, when compared to
conventional P&O MPPT proposed technique reduces oscillations
of operating point around MPP and move operating point precisely
towards MPP.
Computation time for the proposed algorithm is less than that
of bisection method P&O MPPT, Dead Beat Control and two step
based algorithms. Artificial intelligence based P&O MPPT posse's
greater accuracy than proposed method but its implementation is
costly. Accuracy of proposed algorithm can be further by increased
using FPGA or DSP controllers
6. Comments and remarks on various P&O MPPT techniques
Comparison of various P&O MPPT methods are done based on
tracking accuracy, complexity, convergance speed, efficiency under
partial shading condition, cost and sensors used. Table 3 depicts
comparison of different P&O MPPT methods. AI, FPGA, PSO and FLC
based P&O MPPT method provides better result under quickly
changing atmospheric conditions and the tracking accuracy is
ð15Þ superior to other methods but the complexity of implementation
is high. Particle swarm optimization (PSO) based P&O MPPT tracks
global maximum effectively under partial shaded conditions.
Bisection method is simple and the tracking accuracy is high but
it is not efficient under partial shading condition. Duty-Cycle
124 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129

Table 3
A comparison of different P&O MPPT methods.

Sl. Algorithm PV array Efficient Tracking Complexity Parameters Cost Converter Advantages Disadvantages Applications
no. dependenT partial speed sensed used
shading

1. ANN based Yes Yes High High Voltage and High Both Higher accuracy Training time Both
current required is more
2. FLC based No Yes High High Voltage and High Buck– Work with imprecise Tedious not good Both
current boost input,fast convergence under partially
transparent shaded condition
3. PSO based No Yes High High Voltage and Low Boost Higher accuracy Tracking time is large Both
current
4. FPGA based No Yes High High Voltage and High Boost High accuracy, good Slightly costlier Both
current dynamic response,
quantization errors less
5. Variable No No Medium High Voltage and Low Buck Reduced oscillations Fooled under rapidly Stand-alone
perturbation current around MPP changing conditions
step
6. Dead Beat No No High Simple Voltage and HIgh DC–AC Good tracking speed, High resolution Grid
Control current reduced oscillations sensors are required
based around MPP
7. Two-step No No High Simple Voltage and Low Boost Implemented on cheap Not efficient under Stand-alone
based current digital controllers partial shading
8. Bisection No No High Simple Voltage and Low Buck Good tracking speed, Fooled under rapidly Stand-alone
method current good precision changing
atmospheric
condition
9. Duty-cycle No No Medium High Voltage and Low Boost Better dynamic response Fooled under rapidly Both
perturbation current changing
atmospheric
condition
10. Variable step No No High Simple Voltage and Low Boost Good precision, reduced Not efficient under Both
using power current oscillations around MPP partial shading
ratio

Perturbation based and Variable Perturbation Step P&O MPPT is
provide better tracking accuracy and cost of Implementation is low
but provides less accurate results under partially shaded condi-
tions. Dead Beat Control based P&O MPPT is economic and simple
in hardware implementation. Variable step P&O MPPT using
power ratio reduces oscillations of operating point around MPP
and move operating point more precisely towards MPP. The
problem of convergance speed, tracking accuracy, stability in
conventional P&O MPPT algorithm can be nullified by modifying
P&O MPPT algorithm. Application of FLC, AI and FGPA improves
P&O MPPT algorithm.
With respect to review of above mentioned papers following
key points can be made:
(1) Artificial intelligence based P&O MPPT techniques provides good
dynamic performance, faster convergence speed, less oscillations
of operating point around MPP, will track global maxima under
partial shaded condition effectively, operating point will not
diverge too much from MPP under quickly changing atmospheric
condition and it is more effective and efficient.
(2) Robustness of artificial intelligence based P&O MPPT techni-
ques depends on training accuracy and generalization cap-
ability. Radial basis function (RBF) network based P&O MPPT
techniques provides better generalization capability than back
propagation based P&O MPPT. ANN based P&O MPPT techni-
ques will fail when the PV modules start degrading, to counter
the effects of degrading ANN must be trained periodically with
new data's.
(3) FLC based P&O MPPT techniques can be implemented much
easier than ANN based P&O MPPT system. Nonlinear systems
can be modeled much easier using fuzzy controller and exact
knowledge of PV module is not required for FLC. FLC based
P&O MPPT system provides better results under rapidly chan-
ging atmospheric conditions also.
(4) Robustness and reliability of fuzzy based system relies on
selection of proper membership functions and fuzzy rules.
Prior knowledge of the system is required for obtaining proper
membership functions and fuzzy rules. Genetic algorithm (GA)
can be used to optimize the membership function. GA-FLC
system provides better results compared to FLC systems and
GA systems.
(5) Particle swarm optimization (PSO) based P&O MPPT tracks
global maximum effectively under partial shaded conditions.
Implementation cost of PSO based MPPT system is on higher
side due to the complexity of the algorithm. More memory
space is required to implement PSO controllers; hence
improved versions of FPGA must be used.
(6) Hybrid methods such as FLC-ANN combined with P&O, GA-FLC
combined with P&O, and FLC-ANN combined with P&O pro-
vides better results. The main drawback of hybrid methods are
implementation complexity, requirement of more space and
response time is more.
(7) Duty cycle perturbation adaptation technique tracks peak
power efficiently even in the absence of PI control loop.
(8) FPGA based P&O MPPT system provides good dynamic perfor-
mance and less quantization errors. ANN, PSO, FLC and
combinations of these can be implemented using FPGA chips
easily. Flexibility, deployment easiness integration with heri-
tage systems makes FPGA chips more attractive than other
controllers. When compared to other controllers like DSP and
dSPACE cost to function ratio of FPGA is less, hence allows low
cost implementation. Using FPGA soft computing based MPPT
techniques can be implemented easily. It provides better
performance than DSP while implementing complex algo-
rithms and performs DSP related computations easily.
(9) Variable step P&O MPPT techniques increases the convergence
speed and reduces the steady state oscillations of operating
around MPP. Variable step methods were found to be simple
 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129
and easy to implement. Provides better performance under
uniform atmospheric conditions, but performance under chan-
ging atmospheric condition as well as shaded condition was
found to be inferior.
Most of the modification in P&O MPPT technique increases
overall cost of tracking system as it requires more number of
precise sensors and controllers for the operation. Some modifica-
tion increases computation time of controller and memmory
requirement of hard drive. In this paper a new P&O MPPT
technique is proposed, which tracks MPP more precisely and
quickly than conventional P&O MPPT.
7. Conclusion
A review on various improved P&O MPPT techniques to track peak
power of SPV system is described in this paper in detail. The modified
P&O MPPT techniques reduces the problems associated with classical
P&O method, such as oscillations of operating point around the MPP
and issues with quickly changing irradiance. Artificial intelligence
based MPPT techniques was found superior to classical methods
especially to track power under partial shading condition. But com-
plexity of the circuit and implementing cost is high. Introduction of
controller chip like FPGA allowed researchers to implement artificial
intelligence based MPPT techniques much easier. FPGA provides the
memory required for these AI techniques and provide better dynamic
performance with less quantization errors. Variable step P&O MPPT
techniques are cost effective and does not requires much costly
converters but performance under quickly changing atmospheric
condition and partially shading was found to be superior.
Still there is chance of plenty of improvement in the area of MPPT
especially in case of partial shading condition. Hybrid method which
combines soft computing techniques with conventional P&O MPPT
technique is quite attractive due to the cost effective performance.
This review is expected to be helpful for the researchers working in
the area of maximum power point tracking of solar power.
References
[1] Beghin G, Nguyen VT. Phonoc, power conditioning unit for photovoltaic
power systems. In: Proceedings of the 3rd European communities photo-
voltaic solar energy conference. Cannes, Reidel, Dordrecht; October 1980. p.
1041–5.
[2] Hernanz R, Martin C, Belver Z, Lesaka L, Zulueta G, Pérez GP. Modeling of
photovoltaic module. In: Proceedings of the international conference on
renewable energies and power quality (ICREPQ'10). Granada, Spain; 23–25
March, 2010.
[3] Bakhsh FI, Khatod DK. Application of variable frequency transformer (VFT)
for grid interconnection of PMSG based wind energy generation system.
Sustain Energy Technol Assess 2014;8:172–80.
[4] Bae Y, Vu TK, Kim RT. Implemental control strategy for grid stabilization of
grid-connected PV system based on German grid code in symmetrical low-
to-medium voltage network. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2013;28(3).
[5] Chang JM, Chang WN, Chiang SJ, Single-Phase Grid-Connected PV. System
using three-arm rectifier-inverter. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst 2006;42
(1).
[6] Khanh LC, Seo JJ, Kim YS, Won DJ. Power-management strategies for a grid-
connected PV–FC hybrid system. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 2010;25(3).
[7] Quesada GV, Gispert FG, López RP, Lumbreras MR, Roca AC. Electrical PV
array reconfiguration strategy for energy extraction improvement in grid-
connected PV systems. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2009;56(11).
[8] Riffonneau Y, Bacha S, Barruel F, Ploix S. Optimal power flow management
for grid connected PV systems with batteries. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy
2011;2(3).
[9] Krithiga S, Gounden GA. Power electronic configuration for the operation of
PV system in combined grid-connected and stand-alone modes. IET Power
Electron 2014;7(3):640–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/iet-pel.2013.0107.
[10] Bollinger JD, Corzine K, Chowdhury B, Ferdowsi M. Applications of solar
energy to power standalone area and street lighting [Master of Science in
Electrical Engineering]. University of Missouri-Rolla; 2007.
[11] Ritchie. Using sunlight for your own solar electricity. Oregon: Springfield;
1999.
125
[12] Strong Steven, Scheller William. The solar electric house. USA: Sustainability
Press; 1993.
[13] Shone B, Stapleton G, Russell M, Wilmot Nigel. Electricity from the sun: solar
PV systems. 3rd ed.. Australia: Clean Energy Council; 2008.
[14] Davis M, Dougherty B, Fanney A. Short-term characterization of building
integrated photovoltaic panels. J Sol Energy Eng 2003;125(1):13–20.
[15] IEEE Guide for Array and Battery Sizing in Stand-Alone Photovoltaic Systems,
IEEE Std 1562, 200.
[16] Maintenance and Operation of Stand-Alone Photovoltaic Systems, Naval
Facilities Engineering Command, Southern Division, DoD PV Review Com-
mittee, Sandia PV Design Assistance Center, December 1991.
[17] Kane M, Larrain D, Favrat D, Allani Y. Small hybrid solar power system.
Energy 2003;28:1427–43.
[18] Nfah EM, Ngundam JM, Tchinda R. Modelling of solar/diesel/battery hybrid
power systems for far-north Cameroon. Renew Energy 2007;32:832–44.
[19] Kobayashi K, Takano I, Sawada Y. A study on a two stage maximum power
point tracking control of a photovoltaic system under partially shaded
insolation conditions. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Power Engineering Society
general meeting; 2003. p. 2612–7.
[20] Jun P, Chenghua W, Feng H. Research of photovoltaic charging system with
maximum power point tracking. In: Proceedings of the ninth international
conference on electronic measurement & instruments ICEMI'2009: vol. 4;
September 2009. p. 478–81.
[21] Mohammad AS, Hooman D, Ewald FF. Theoretical and experimental analyses
of photovoltaic systems with voltage- and current based maximum power-
point tracking. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2002;17:514–22.
[22] Chen YY, Man YK. Constant current-based maximum-power-point tracking
for photovoltaic power systems. In: Proceedings of the 2009 Chinese control
and decision conference (CCDC 2009), September 2009. p. 3422–5.
[23] Mummadi V, Tomonobu S, Uezato K. Voltage based maximum power point
tracking control of PV system. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst
2002;38:262–70.
[24] Jung CW, Liahng JH, Chang WJ. Maximum power point tracking method for
the voltage-mode grid-connected inverter of photovoltaic generation sys-
tem. ICSET, IEEE; 2008.
[25] Sokolov M, Shmilovitz D. Photovoltaic maximum power point tracking based
on an adjustable matched virtual load. IEEE; 2007. p. 1480–4.
[26] Noguchi T, Togashi S, Nakamoto R. Short-current pulse based adaptive
maximum-power point tracking for photovoltaic power generation system.
In: IEEE and ISIE'2000, Cholula, Puebla, Mexico; 2000. p. 157–62.
[27] Toshihiko N, Shigenori T, Nakamoto R. Short-current pulse-based maximum-
power-point tracking method for multiple photovoltaic and-converter mod-
ule system. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2002;49(1):217–23.
[28] Hanju C, Sanghoey L Design and implementation of photovoltaic power
conditioning system using a current based maximum power point tracking.
ICSET, IEEE; 2008. p. 295–300.
[29] Weidong X, William G, Patrick R, Capel Antoine. Application of centered
differentiation and steepest descent to maximum power point tracking. IEEE
Trans Ind Electron 2007;54(5):2539–49.
[30] Ana A, Saied MH, Mostafa MZ, Abdel-Moneim TM. A survey of maximum PPT
techniques of PV systems. In: Proceedings of the IEEE EnergyTech2012; 2012.
p. 1–17, 29–31.
[31] Giustiniani A, Petrone G, Spagnuolo G, Vitelli M. Low frequency current
oscillations and maximum power point tracking in grid-connected fuel cell
based systems. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2010;57(6):2042–53.
[32] Trishan E, Jonathan W, Philip T, Patrick L, Pallab M. Dynamic maximum
power point tracking of photovoltaic arrays using ripple correlation control.
IEEE Trans Power Electron 2006;21(5):1282–91.
[33] Jonathan W, Philip T. Discrete-time ripple correlation control for maximum
power point tracking. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2008;23(5):2353–62.
[34] Domenico C, Gabriele G, Claudio R. Single-phase single-stage photovoltaic
generation system based on a ripple correlation control maximum power
point tracking. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2006;21(2):562–8.
[35] Miao Z, Jie W, Hui Z. The application of slide technology in PV maximum
power point tracking system. In: Proceedings of the world congress on
intelligent control and automation. Hangzhou, PR China; 15–19 June 2004.
[36] Yang Z. DC/DC converter sliding mode control. Electra Technol J
2000;2:13–5.
[37] Il-Song K, Bok KM, Joong YM. New maximum power point tracker using
sliding-mode observer for estimation of solar array current in the grid-
connected photovoltaic system. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2006;53(4):1027–35.
[38] Aghatehrani R, Kavasseri R. Sensitivity-analysis-based sliding mode control
for voltage regulation in microgrids. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy 2013;4
(1):50–7.
[39] Coelho RF, Concer FM, Martins DC. A MPPT approach based on temperature
measurements applied in PV systems. In: Proceedings of the IEEE interna-
tional conference on sustainable energy technologies; 2010. p. 1–6.
[40] Park M, Yu I. A study on the optimal voltage for MPPT obtained by surface
temperature of solar cell. In: IECON: vol. 30; 2004.
[41] Mutoh N, Matuo T, Okata K, Sakai M. Prediction-data-based maximum
power-point-tracking method for photovoltaic power generation systems.
In: Proceedings of the IEEE power electronics specialists conference: vol. 33;
2002. p. 1489–894.
[42] Peng W, Haipeng Z, Weixiang S, Choo H, Chiang F, Poh L, et al. A novel
approach of maximizing energy harvesting in photovoltaic systems based on
bisection search theorem; 2010. p. 2143–8.
126 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129
[43] Al Nabulsi A, Dhaouadi R. Efficiency optimization of a DSP-based standalone
PV system using fuzzy logic and dual-MPPT control. IEEE Trans Ind Inform
2012;8(3):573–84.
[44] Pandirajan N, Ranganath Muthu. Development of power electronic circuit-
oriented model of photovoltaic module. Int J Adv Eng Technol 2011;2(4).
[45] Longatt FG Model of photovoltaic in Matlab” do Congreso Iberoamericano de
Estudiantes de Ingeniería Eléctrica, Electrónica y Computación (II CIBELEC
2005). Puerto la Cruz – Venezuela; April 2006.
[46] Tsai HL. Development of generalized photovoltaic model using MATLAB/
SIMULINK. In: Proceedings of the world congress on engineering and
computer science 2008, WCECS 2008. San Francisco, USA; October 22–24
2008.
[47] Kumari JS, Babu S. Mathematical modeling and simulation of photovoltaic
cell using Matlab–Simulink environment. Int J Electr Comput Eng 2012;2
(1):26–34.
[48] Sarwar A, Asghar MJS, Bakhsh FL. microcontroller based novel DC-to-AC grid
connected inverter topology. Int J Electr Power Eng 2011;02(03):14–8.
[49] Jalade J, Marpinard I, Valentin M, Haroen Y. Maximum power point tracking
for PV arrays in microprocessor controlled autonomous triangular systems.
In: Proceedings of the 5th European communities solar photovoltaic con-
ference Athens. Reidel, Dordrecht; October 1983. p. 540–44.
[50] Azevedo GM, Cavalcanti MC, Oliveira KC Evaluation of maximum power
point tracking methods for grid connected photovoltaic systems. In: Pro-
ceedings of the IEEE power electronics specialists conference (PESC); 2008.
p. 1456–62.
[51] Noppadol K, Chaiboon K, Phaophak S, Anatawat K. Grid-connected photo-
voltaic system with maximum power point tracking using self-organizing
fuzzy logic controller. IEEE PEDS; 2005. p. 517–21.
[52] Mummadi V, Tomonobu S, Katsumi U. Feed forward maximum power point
tracking of PV systems using fuzzy controller. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron
Syst 2002;38(3):969–81.
[53] Song CC. T–S fuzzy maximum power point tracking control of solar power
generation systems. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2010:6–10.
[54] Syafaruddin, Karatepe E, Hiyama T. Artificial neural network-polar coordi-
nated point tracking control under partially shaded conditions. In: Power
Generation 2009: vol. 3 (2); 2008. p. 239–53.
[55] Mummadi V, Tomonobu S, Katsumi U. Neural-network based maximum-
power-point tracking of coupled-inductor interleaved-boost converter-
supplied PV system using fuzzy controller. IEEE Trans Ind Electron
2003;50:4.
[56] Al Nabulsi A, Dhaouadi R, Rehman H. Single input fuzzy controller (SFLC)
based maximum power point tracking. In: Proceedings of the ICMSAO'11,
Malaysia.
[57] Salhi M, El-Jouni Abdeslam, Rachid El-Bachtiri. Maximum power point
tracker using fuzzy control for photovoltaic system. Int J Emerg Res Manag
Technol2278-9359 2013.
[58] Ibrahim HEA, Ibrahim M. Comparison between fuzzy and P&O control for
MPPT for photovoltaic system using boost converter. J Energy Technol Policy
2012;2(6).
[59] Krishna SM, Muthuvel GL. FLC based Maximum Power Point Tracking of
Solar Photovoltaic System. Int J Comput Sci Appl2278-1080 2012;1(6).
[60] Lee HH, Khoa LD,Phuong LM, Dzung PQ. The new maximum power point
tracking algorithm using ANN-based solar PV systems. IEEE TENCON Region
10 Conference; 2010.
[61] Younis MA, Khatib T, Najeeb M, Ariffin AM. An improved maximum power
point tracking controller for PV systems using artificial neural network.
Przegląd Elektrotechniczny (Electrical Review), ISSN 0033-2097, R. 88 NR 3b/
; 2012.
[62] Hatti M, Meharrar A. Novel approach of MPPT for photovoltaic module
neural network based. In: Proceedings of the EFEEA'10 international sym-
posium on environment friendly energies in electrical applications; 2010.
[63] Ramaprabha R, Mathur BL. Intelligent Controller based Maximum Power
Point Tracking for Solar PV System. Int J Comput Appl 2011;12(10).
[64] Kulaksiz AA, Aydogdu O. ANN-based maximum power point tracking of
photovoltaic system using fuzzy controller. In: Proceedings of the interna-
tional symposium on innovations in intelligent systems and applications
(INIISTA). Trabzon; July 2012.
[65] Putri RI, Rifa M. Maximum power point tracking control for photovoltaic
system using neural fuzzy. Int J Comput Electr Eng 2012;4(1).
[66] Kamarudheen N,Anoop K. Assessment of artificial intelligence based
approach to optimal power tracking of photovoltaic system. In: Proceedings
of the national conference on signal processing, instrumentation and
communication (SPINCON), India; December 2013.
[67] Mutoh N, Matuo T, Okata K, Sakai M. Prediction-data-based maximum power
point tracking method for photovoltaic power generation systems. In:
Proceedings of the IEEE power electronics specialists conference: vol. 33;
2002. p. 1489–894.
[68] Ho BMT, Chung HSH, Lo WL. Use of system oscillation to locate the MPP of
PV. IEEE Power Electron Lett 2004;2(1).
[69] Eugene SV, Shengyi L, Roger AD. Power controller design for maximum
power tracking in solar installations. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2004;19:5.
[70] A fast maximum power point tracker for photovoltaic power systems. In:
Proceedings of the 25th annual conference of IEEE Industrial Electronic
Society; 1999. p. 390–3.
[71] El-Shibini MA, Rakha HH. Maximum power point tracking technique. In:
Proceedings integrating research, industrial educational energy communica-
tion engineering and electrotechnical conference; 1989. p. 21–4.
[72] Syafaruddin, Karatepe E, Hiyama T. Performnace enhancement of photo-
voltaic array string and central based MPPT system under non-uniform
irradiance conditions. Energy Convers Manag 2012;62:131–40.
[73] Brito MAG, Junior LG, Sampaio LP, Canesin CA. Evaluation of MPPT techni-
ques for photovoltaic applications. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international
symposium on industrial electronics—ISIE 20; 2011. p. 1039–44.
[74] Horst AE, Sandblom Carl-Louis. Linear programming and its applications.
Springer; 2007.
[75] Jing H, Jiancheng Z, Hongbo W. A novel MPPT control algorithm based on
numerical calculation for PV generation systems. In: IPEMC; 2009. p. 2103–7.
[76] John HM, Kurtis KF. Numerical method using MATLAB. Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey, USA: Prentice-Hall Inc; 2004.
[77] Singh GK. Solar power generation by PV(photovoltaic) technology: a review.
Energy 2013;53.
[78] Bharma MD, Deb S, Nandi C. Maximum photovoltaic power tracking using
perturb and observe algorithm In MATLAB/SIMULINK Environment. In:
IJEET; May–June 2010,p. 71–84.
[79] Alsadi S, Alsayid B. Maximum power point tracking simulation for photo-
voltaic systems using perturb and observe algorithm. Int J Eng Innov Technol
2012;2(6).
[80] Esram T, Chapman PL. Comparison of photovoltaic array maximum power
point tracking techniques. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2007;22(2):439–49.
[81] Nicola F, Giovanni P, Giovanni S, Massimo V. Optimization of perturb and
observe maximum power point tracking method. IEEE Trans Power Electron
2005;20(4):963–73.
[82] Surawdhaniwarand S, Diwan R. Study of Maximum Power Point Tracking
Using Perturb and Observe Method. Int J Adv Res Comput Eng Technol
2012;1(5).
[83] Patel H, Agarwal V. MPPT scheme for a PV-fed single-phase single-stage grid-
connected inverter operating in CCM with only one current sensor. IEEE
Trans Energy Convers 2009;24(1):256–63.
[84] Xuejun Liu, Luiz AC, Lopes An improved perturbation and observation
maximum power point tracking algorithm for PV arrays. In: Proceedings of
the 35th annual IEEE power electronics specialists conference. Aachen,
Germany; 2004.
[85] Jung Y, So J, Yu G, Choi J. Improved perturbation and observation method
(IP&0) of MPPT control for photovoltaic power systems. IEEE; 2005. 0-7803-
8707-4/051$20.00.
[86] Khaehintung N, Sirisuk P, Kurutach W. A novel ANFIS controller for
maximum power point tracking in photovoltaic systems. In: Proceedings of
the IEEE fifth international conference on power electronics and drive
systems: vol. 2; 17–20 November 2003. p. 833–6.
[87] Femia N, Petrone Spagnuolo G, Vitelli M. Increasing the efficiency of P&O
MPPT by converter dynamic matching. 0-7803-8304-4/04/$20.00 @i2004
IEEE.
[88] Houssamo I, Locment F, Sechilariu M. Experimental analysis of impact of
MPPT methods on energy efficiency for photovoltaic power systems. Electr
Power Energy Syst 2013;46:98–107.
[89] Srikumar K, Babu S. A new maximum power point tracking methods for PV
system. In: Proceedings of IRF International Conference. Tirupati, India; 01
November 2014. ISBN: 978-93-84209-61-2.
[90] Rezvani A, Izadbakhsh M, Gandomkar M, Vafaei S. Investigation of ANN-GA
and modified perturb and observe MPPT techniques for photovoltaic system
in the grid connected mode. Indian J Sci Technol 2015;8(1):87–95.
[91] Quamruzzaman M, Rahman KM. A modified perturb and observe maximum
power point tracking technique for single-stage grid-connected photovoltaic
inverter. WSEAS Trans Power Syst 2014;9.
[92] Zadeh Lotfi A. Fuzzy logic, neural networks, and soft computing. Commun
ACM 1994;37(3):77–84.
[93] Yang XS, Cui ZH, Xiao R, Gandomi A, Karamanoglu M. Swarm intelligence
and bio-inspired computation: theory and applications. Elsevier; 2013.
[94] Chaturvedi DK. Soft computing: techniques and its applications in electrical
engineering. Springer; 2008.
[95] Yudong Zhang, Saeed Balochian, Bhatnagar Vishal. Emerging trends in soft
computing models in bioinformatics and biomedicine. Sci World J 2014.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/683029.
[96] Davalo Eric, Naim Patrick. Neural networks. Houndmills: Macmillan Press;
1991.
[97] Kosko B. Neural networks and fuzzy systems. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall;
1992.
[98] Kosko B. fuzzy thinking. New York: Hyperion; 1993.
[99] Hewitson Bruce, Crane Robert, editors. Neural nets: applications in geogra-
phy. Dordrecht: Kluwer; 1994.
[100] Kohonen Teuvo. Self-organizing maps. 2nd ed.. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1997.
[101] Veerachary M, Yadaiah N. ANN based peak power tracking for PV supplied DC
motors. Sol Energy 2000;69:343–50.
[102] Alabedin AMZ, El-Saadany EF, Salama MMA, Maximum power point tracking
for photovoltaic systems using fuzzy logic and artificial neural networks, In:
IEEE Proceedings of the power and energy society general meeting, IEEE
2011. p. 1–9.
 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129
[103] Jinbang X, Anwen S, Cheng Y, Wenpei R, Xuan Y. ANN based on IncCond
algorithm for MPP tracker. In: Proceedings of the sixth international
conference on bio-inspired computing: theories and applications (BIC-TA);
2011. p. 129–34.
[104] Islam MA, Kabir MA. Neural network based maximum power point tracking
of photovoltaic arrays. In: Proceedings of the TENCON 2011–2011 IEEE region
10 conference; 2011, p. 79–82.
[105] Aashoor FAO, Robinson FVP. A variable step size perturb and observe
algorithm for photovoltaic maximum power point tracking. In: Proceedings
of the IEEE universities power engineering; 2012.
[106] Femia N, Petrone G, Spagnolo G, Vitelli M. Optimizing duty-cycle perturba-
tion of P&O MPPT technique. In: Proceedings of the 35th Annual IEEE power
specialists conference. Aachen, Germany; 2004.
[107] Radjai T, Rahmani L, Mekhilef S, Gaubert JP. Implementation of a modified
incremental conductance MPPT algorithm with direct control based on a
fuzzy duty cycle change estimator using dSPACE. Sol Energy
2014;110:325–37.
[108] Amrouche B, Belhamel M, Guessoum A. Maximum power point tracking
acceleration by using modified P&O method for photovoltaic systems. In:
Proceedings of the second international congress on environment and
renewable energies. Mahdia, Tunisia; 6–8 November 2006.
[109] Novák V, Perfilieva I, Močkoř J. Mathematical principles of fuzzy logic
Dodrecht. Kluwer Academic; 1999 ISBN: 0-7923-8595-0.
[110] Ahlawat Nishant, Gautam A, Sharma N, International Research Publications
House. Use of logic gates to make edge avoider robot. Int J Inf Comput
Technol 2014;4(6):630 ISSN 0974-2239 (Retrieved 27 April 2014).
[111] “Fuzzy Logic”. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University.
2006-07-23. Retrieved 30.09.08.
[112] Zadeh LA. Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 1965;8(3):338–53. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/s0019-9958(65)90241-x.
[113] Pelletier Jeffry F. Review of metamathematics of fuzzy logic” (PDF). Bull
Symbolic Logic 2000;6(3):342–6.
[114] Zadeh LA, et al. Fuzzy Sets, fuzzy logic, fuzzy systems. World Scientific Press;
1996 ISBN 981-02-2421-4.
[115] Bansod Nitin A, Kulkarni M, Patil SH. Soft computing – a fuzzy logic approach.
Allied Publishers; 2005. p. 73.
[116] Zaitsev DA, Sarbei VG, Sleptsov AI. Synthesis of continuous-valued logic
functions defined in tabular form. Cybern Syst Anal 1998;34(2):190–5.
[117] Novák V. Are fuzzy sets a reasonable tool for modeling vague phenomena?
Fuzzy Sets Syst 2005;156:341–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2005.05.029.
[118] Valiant Leslie. Probably approximately correct: nature's algorithms for learn-
ing and prospering in a complex world. New York: Basic Books; 2013 ISBN
978-0465032716.
[119] Cejas Jesús. Compensatory Fuzzy Logic. La Habana: Revista de Ingeniería
Industrial; 2011. ISSN 1815-5936.
[120] Ishaque K, Abdullah SS, Ayob SM, Salam Z. A simplified approach to design
fuzzy logic controller for an underwater vehicle. Ocean Eng 2011;38:271–84.
[121] Mahmoud AMA, Mashaly HM, Kandil SA, El Khashab H, Nashed MNF. Fuzzy
logic implementation for photovoltaic maximum power tracking, In: indus-
trial electronics society. IECON 2000. In: Proceedings of the 26th annual
conference of the IEEE; 2000. p. 731, 735–40.
[122] Khaehintung N, Pramotung K, Tuvirat B, Sirisuk P. RISC-microcontroller built-
in fuzzy logic controller of maximum power point tracking for solar-powered
light-flasher applications. In: Industrial Electronics Society; 2004.
[123] Yuen WC, Heon KD, Chan KS, Sam KW, Sung KH. A new maximum power
point tracker of photovoltaic arrays using fuzzy controller. In: Proceedings of
the 25th annual IEEE power electronics specialists conference, PESC'94
record; 1994, p. 391, 396–403.
[124] Simoes MG, Franceschetti NN, Friedhofer M. A fuzzy logic based photo-
voltaic peak power tracking control. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international
symposium on industrial electronics, 1998, ISIE'98; 1998. p. 300–5.
[125] Masoum MAS, Sarvi M. Design, simulation and implementation of a fuzzy-
based maximum power point tracker under variable insolation and tem-
perature conditions. Iran J Sci Technol 2005;29:6.
[126] Patcharaprakiti N, Premrudeepreechacharn S. Maximum power point track-
ing using adaptive fuzzy logic control for grid-connected photovoltaic
system. In: Proceedings of the IEEE power engineering society winter
meeting; 2002. p. 371–77.
[127] Wu TF, Yang CH, Chen YK, Liu ZR. Photovoltaic inverter systems with self-
tuning fuzzy control based on an experimental planning method, In: industry
applications conference, 1999. In: Proceedings of the IEEE thirty-fourth IAS
annual meeting. Conference record; 1999. p. 1883, 1887–94.
[128] Purnama I, Kang LY, Jen CH. A fuzzy control maximum power point tracking
photovoltaic system. In: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE international con-
ference on fuzzy systems (FUZZ); 2011, p. 2432–9.
[129] Jae CB, Woo SK, Kook BK. Design and stability analysis of single-input fuzzy
logic controller. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B: Cybern 2000;30:303–9.
[130] Al Nabulsi A, Dhaouadi R. Fuzzy logic controller based perturb and observe
maximum power point tracking. In: Proceedings of the international con-
ference on renewable energies and power quality (ICREPQ'12). Santiago de
Compostela, Spain; 28–30th March 2012.
[131] Matsuo H, Kurokawa F. New solar power supply system using a boost type
bidirectional dc–dc converter. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 1984;31(1):51–5.
127
[132] Passino K, Yurkovich S. Fuzzy control. CA, USA: Addison Wesley Longman,
Inc.; 1998.
[133] Roy R, Dehuri S, Cho SB. A novel particle swarm optimization algorithm for
multi-objective combinatorial optimization problem. Int J Appl Metaheur
Comput 2012;2(4):41–57.
[134] Tu Z, Lu Y. Corrections to “A robust stochastic genetic algorithm (StGA) for
global numerical optimization”. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 2008;12(6):781.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2008.926734.
[135] Zhan Z-H, Zhang J, Li Y, Chung HS-H. Adaptive Particle Swarm Optimization.
IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 2009;39(6):1362–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
TSMCB.2009.2015956.
[136] Cheung NJ, Ding X-M, Shen H-B. OptiFel: a convergent heterogeneous
particle swarm optimization algorithm for Takagi–Sugeno fuzzy modeling.
IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2013.2278972.
[137] Spears WM, Green DT, Spears DF. Biases in particle swarm optimization. Int J
Swarm Intell Res 2010;1(2):34–57.
[138] Zhan Z-H, Zhang J, Li Y, Shi Y-H. Orthogonal learning particle swarm
optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 2011;15(6):832–47. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1109/TEVC.2010.2052054.
[139] Miranda V, Keko H, Duque ÁJ. Stochastic star communication topology in
evolutionary particle swarms (EPSO). Int J Comput Intell Res 2008;4
(2):105–16.
[140] Clerc M, Kennedy J. The particle swarm – explosion, stability, and conver-
gence in a multidimensional complex space. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 2002;6
(1):58–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/4235.985692.
[141] Eberhart R, Kennedy J. A new optimizer using particle swarm theory. In:
Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on micro machine and
human science, 1995. MHS'95; 1995. p. 39–43.
[142] Qiang F, Nan AT. Complex-method-based PSO algorithm for the maximum
power point tracking in photovoltaic system. In: Proceedings of the interna-
tional conference on information technology and computer science (ITCS);
2010. p. 134–7.
[143] Ishaque K, Salam Z. An improved modeling method to determine the model
parameters of photovoltaic (PV) modules using differential evolution (DE).
Sol Energy 2011;85:2349–59.
[144] Ishaque K, Salam Z., Shamsudin A. Application of particle swarm optimiza-
tion for maximum power point tracking of PV system with direct control
method. In: Proceedings of the 37th annual conference on IEEE industrial
electronics society; 2011, p. 1214–9.
[145] Abdulkadir AM, Yatim HM, Yusuf ST. An improved PSO-based MPPT control
strategy for photovoltaic systems, Hindawi Publishing Corporation. Int J
Photoenergy 2014 Article ID 818232.
[146] Chen JH, Yau HT, Hung TH. Design and implementation of FPGA-based
Taguchi-chaos-PSO sun tracking systems. Mechatronics 2015;25:55–64.
[147] Gali V, Hemakumar K. SEPIC converter based photovoltaic system with
particle swarm optimization MPPT. Int J Emerg Trends Eng Res 2013;1(1).
[148] Shi J, Zhang W, Zhang Y, Xue F, Yang T. MPPT for PV systems based on a
dormant PSO algorithm. Electr Power Syst Res 2015;123:100–7.
[149] Suryavanshi R, Joshi DR, JangamshettI SH. PSO and P&O based MPPT
technique for SPV panel under varying atmospheric conditions. Int J Eng
Innov Technol 2012;1(3).
[150] Kamejima T, Phimmasone V, Kondo Y, Miyatake M. The optimization of
control parameters of PSO based MPPT for photovoltaics. In: IEEE PEDS 2011.
Singapore; 5–8 December 2011.
[151] Nattapol S, Ngamroo I. Intelligent photovoltaic farms for robust frequency
stabilization in multi-area interconnected power system based on PSO-based
optimal Sugeno fuzzy logic control. Renew Energy 2015;74:555e567.
[152] Koad RBA, Zobaa AF. Comparison between the conventional methods and
PSO based MPPT algorithm for photovoltaic systems. Int J Electr Comput
Electron Commun Eng 2014;8(4).
[153] Sundareswaran K, Kumar VV, Palani S. Application of a combined particle
swarm optimization and perturb and observe method for MPPT in PV
systems under partial shading.
[154] Sadrozinski Hartmut F-W, Wu Jinyuan. Applications of field-programmable
gate arrays in scientific research. Taylor & Francis; 2010 ISBN 978-1-4398-
4133-4.
[155] Wirth Niklaus. Digital circuit design an introduction textbook. Springer; 1995
ISBN 3-540-58577-X.
[156] Edwards, John. No room for Second Place: Xilinx and Altera slug it out for
supremacy in the changing PLD market. EDN. [retrieved 11.05.12]; 2006.
[157] Ian K, Jonathan R. Measuring the gap between FPGAs and ASICs. In:
Proceedings of the internation symposium on field programmable gate
arrays – FPGA'06. New York, NY: ACM; 2006. p. 21–30.doi:10.1145/
1117201.1117205. ISBN 1-59593-292-5.
[158] Wilson Richard. Electronics Weekly. Xilinx acquires ESL firm to make FPGAs
easier to use. [retrieved 15.02.11]; 2011.
[159] Maxfield C. Programmable Logic DesignLine, “Xilinx unveil revolutionary
65 nm FPGA architecture: the Virtex-5 family. May 15, 2006. History of FPGAs
at the Wayback Machine [retrieved 05.02.09; archived 12.04.07].
[160] Wisniewski Remigiusz. Synthesis of compositional microprogram control
units for programmable devices. Zielona Góra: University of Zielona Góra;
2009. p. 153. ISBN 978-83-7481-293-1.
[161] Lawrence L. The Inquirer. “FPGA manufacturer claims to beat Moore's Law.
[retrieved 12.05.11]; October 27, 2010.
128 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129
[162] Chekired F, Mellit A, Kalogirou SA, Larbes C. Intelligent maximum power
point trackers for photovoltaic applications using FPGA chip: a comparative
study. Sol Energy 2014;101:83–99.
[163] Messai A, MellitA A, Pavan M, Guessoum A, Mekki H. FPGA-based imple-
mentation of a fuzzy controller (MPPT) for photovoltaic module. Energy
Convers Manag 2011;52:2695–704.
[164] Chettibi N, Mellit A. FPGA-based real time simulation and control of grid-
connected photovoltaic systems. Simul Model Pract Theory 2014;43:34–53.
[165] Rajkumar MV, Manoharan PS. FPGA based multilevel cascaded inverters with
SVPWM algorithm for photovoltaic system. Sol Energy 2013;87:229–45.
[166] Mellit A, Rezzouk H, Messai A, Medjahed B. FPGA-based real time implementation of
MPPT-controller for photovoltaic systems. Renew Energy 2011;36:1652–61.
[167] Bharatiraja C, Jeevananthan S, Latha R. FPGA based practical implementation
of NPC-MLI with SVPWM for an autonomous operation PV system with
capacitor balancing. Electr Power Energy Syst 2014;61:489–509.
[168] Parlak KS. FPGA based new MPPT (maximum power point tracking) method
for PV (photovoltaic) array system operating partially shaded conditions.
Energy 2014;68:399–410.
[169] Mellit A, Kalogirou Soteris A. MPPT-based artificial intelligence techniques for
photovoltaic systems and its implementation into field programmable gate
array chips: review of current status and future perspectives. Energy
2014;70:1–21.
[170] Youssef ELB, Stephane P, Bruno E, Corinne A. New P&O MPPT algorithm For
FPGA implementation. 978-1-4244-5226-2/10/$26.00 2010.
[171] Chekireda F, Larbesa C, Rekiouab D, Haddadc F. Implementation of a MPPT
fuzzy controller for photovoltaic systems on FPGA circuit. Energy Procedia
2011;6:541–9.
[172] Prodic A, Maksimovic D, Erickson RW. Design and implementation of a digital
PWM controller for a high-frequency switching dc–dc power converter. In:
Proceedings of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society Conference: vol. 2;
2001. p. 893–8.
[173] de Castro A, Zumel P, Garcia O, Riesgo T, Uceda J. Concurrent and simple
digital controller of an AC/DC converter with power factor correction based
on an FPGA. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2003;18:334–43.
[174] Leyva R, Schweitz G, Alzieu J. Adaptive digital MPPT control for photovoltaic
applications. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international symposium on
industrial electronics, 2007, ISIE 2007; 4–7 June 2007. p. 2414–9.
[175] Faranda R, Leva S. Energy comparison of MPPT techniques for PV Systems.
WSEAS Trans Power Syst 2008;3(6).
[176] Ahmedand EM, Shoyama M. Variable step size maximum power point tracker
using a single variable for stand-alone battery storage PV systems. J Power
Electron 2011;11(2).
[177] Amine AM, Mohamed M, Mohammed O. A new Variable Step Size INC MPPT
Method for PV Systems; 2014. 978-1-4799-3824-7/14/$31.00.
[178] Ansari F, Chatterji S, Iqbal A. Fuzzy logic-based MPPT controllers for three-
phase grid connected inverters; 21 September 2011. p. 186–95. 10.1080/
14786451.2011.605948.
[179] Zhang C, Zhang Z, Chen M, Qian Z. An Improved variable step-size maximum
power point tracking (MPPT) based on extremum seeking control (ESC) in
gird-connected photovoltaic micro-converter system; 2012. 978-1-4673-
0158-9/12/$31.00.
[180] Ahmed EM, Shoyama M. Scaling factor design issues in variable step size
incremental resistance MPPT in PV systems. In: IEEE PEDS 2011. Singapore;
5–8 December 2011.
[181] 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).
[182] Lee JH, Bae HS, Cho BH. Advanced incremental conductance MPPT algorithm
with a variable step size; 2006. 1-4244-0121-6/06/$20.00.
[183] Li J, Wang H. A novel stand-alone PV generation system based on variable
step size INC MPPT and SVPWM control; 2009. 978-4244-3557-09/09/
$20.00.
[184] Tang L, Xul W, Zengl C, Jinhu L, Jinwei H. One novel variable step-size MPPT
algorithm for photovoltaic power generation. 2012. 978-1-4673-2421-2/12/
$31.00.
[185] Menniti D, Burgio A, Sorrentino N, Pinnarelli A, Brusco G. An incremental
conductance method with variable step size for MPPT: design and imple-
mentation; 2009. 978-1-4244-5172-2/09/$26.00.
[186] Khaehintung N, Wiangtong T, Sirisuk P. FPGA implementation of MPPT using
variable step-size P&O algorithm for PV applications; 2006. 0-7803-9740-X/
06/$20.00 e2006.
[187] Mei Q, Shan M, Liu L, Guerrero JM. A novel improved variable step-size
incremental-resistance MPPT method for PV systems. IEEE Trans Ind Electron
2011;58(6).
[188] Roy CP, Vijaybhaskar D, Maity T. Modelling of fuzzy logic controller for
variable-step mppt in photovoltaic system. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 1st
international conference on condition assessment techniques in electrical
systems; 2013.
[189] Hosseinil SH, Farakhor A, Haghighian SK. Novel algorithm of MPPT for PV
array based on variable step Newton–Raphson method through model
predictive control. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on
control, automation and systems (lCCAS 2013); 2013.
[190] Chen YT, Lai JH. A novel variable step-size MPPT method for PV system with
single sensor; 2014. 978-1-4799-4315-9/14/$31.00_c.
[191] Yan Z, Fei L, Jinjun Y, Shanxu D Study on realizing MPPT by improved
incremental conductance method with variable step-size; 2008. 978-1-4244-
1718-6/08/$25.00.
[192] Elgendy EA, Zahawi B, Atkinson DJ. Assessment of perturb and observe MPPT
algorithm implementation techniques for SPV pumping applications. IEEE
Trans Sustain Energy 2012;3(1).
[193] Ahn C, Choi J, Lee D. Adaptive maximum power point tracking algorithm for
photovolatic power systems. IEICE Trans Commun 2010;E93-B(5):1334–7.
[194] Femia N, Petrone G, Spagnolo G, Vitelli M. Increasing the efficiency of P&O by
converter dynamic matching. In: Proceedings of the 35th annual IEEE power
specialists conference. Aachen, Germany; 2004.
[195] Youngseok J, Junghun S, Gwonjong Y Jaeho C. Improved perturbation and
observation method (IP&O) of MPPT control for photovoltaic power systems.
In: Proceedings of the 31 st photovoltaic specialists conference. Lake Buena
Vista, Florida; 3–7 January 2005. p. 1788–91.
[196] Jiang J, Huang T, Hsiao Y, Chen C. Maximum power tracking for photovoltaic
power systems. Tamkang J Sci Eng 2005;8(2):147153.
[197] Altas IH, Sharaf AM. A novel on-line MPP search algorithm for PV arrays. IEEE
Trans Energy Convers 1996;11(4):748–54.
[198] Femia G, Spagnuolo Petrone G. Vite111i M. Perturb and Observe MPPT
Technique Robustness Improved; 2005.
[199] Kjaer SB, Pedersen JK, Blaabjerg F. A review of single-phase grid connected
inverters for photovoltaic modules. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 2005;41
(5):1292–306.
[200] Jain S, Agarwal V. Comparison of the performance of maximum power point
tracking schemes applied to single-stage grid-connected photovoltaic sys-
tems. IET Electr Power Appl 2007;1(5):753–62.
[201] Al-Diab A, Sourkounis C. Variable step size P&O MPPT algorithm for PV
systems. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on optimiza-
tion of electrical and electronic equipment (OPTIM); 20–22 May 2010. p.
1097–102.
[202] Yongheng Yang, Frede Blaabjerg. A modified P&O MPPT algorithm for single
phase PV systems based on deadbeat control. In: Proceedings of the 6th IET
international conference on power electronics.
[203] Sera D, Kerekes T, Teodorescu R, Blaabjerg F. Improved MPPT algorithms for
rapidly changing environmental conditions. In: Proceeings of the 12th
international power electronics and motion control conference, 2006, EPE-
PEMC 2006, August 30–September 1 2006. p.1614–9.
[204] Sera D, Teodorescu R, Hantschel J, Knoll M. Optimized maximum power
point tracker for fast-changing environmental conditions. IEEE Trans Ind
Electron 2008;55(7):2629–37.
[205] Wu L, Zhao Z, Liu J, Liu S., Yuan L. Modified MPPT strategy applied in single
stage grid-connected photovoltaic system. In: Proceedings of the eighth
international conference on electrical machines and systems: vol. 2; Sep-
tember 2005. p. 1027–30.
[206] Ciobotaru M, Teodorescu R, Blaabjerg F. Control of single-stage single-phase
PV inverter. In: Proceedings of the 2005 European conference on power
electronics and applications; 2005. p.1–10.
[207] Yang Y, Zhou K, Zou Z. A modified P&O MPPT control of photovoltaic systems.
In: Proceedings of the 2011 international conference on electrical machines
and systems (ICEMS 2011); 20–23 August 2011. p. 1–3.
[208] Odavic M, Biagini V, Zanchetta P, Sumner M, Degano M. One-sample-period-
ahead predictive current control for high performance active shunt power
filters. IET Power Electron 2011;4(4):414–23.
[209] Timbus A, Liserre M, Teodorescu R, Rodriguez P, Blaabjerg F. Evaluation of
current controllers for distributed power generation systems. IEEE Trans
Power Electron 2009;24(3):654–64.
[210] Kadri R, Gaubert J, Champenois G, Mostefai M. Design of a single-phase grid-
connected photovoltaic system based on deadbeat current control with LCL filter.
In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on power electronics and
motion control conference (EPE/PEMC); September 2010. p. T3-147–T3-153.
[211] Mamarelis E, Petrone G, Spagnuolo G. A two-steps algorithm improving the
P&O steady state MPPT efficiency. Appl Energy. 〈www.elsevier.com/locate/
apenergy〉.
[212] Mei Q, Shan M, Liu L, Guerrero J. A novel improved variable step-size
incremental resistance MPPT method for PV systems. IEEE Trans Ind Electron
2011;58(6):2427–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2010.2064275.
[213] Bialasiewicz JT. Renewable energy systems with photovoltaic power gen-
erators: operation and modeling. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2008;55(7):2752–8.
[214] Poponi D. Analysis of diffusion paths for photovoltaic technology based on
experience curves. Sol Energy 2003;1(74):331–49.
[215] Markvart Tomas. Solar electricity. John Wiley & Sons Inc.; 2000.
[216 Chun S, Kwasinski A. Analysis of classical root-finding methods applied to
digital maximum power point tracking for sustainable photovoltaic energy
generation. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2011;26(12).
[217] Das B, Jamatia A, Chakraborti A, Kasari PT, Bhowmik M. New perturb and
observe MPPT algorithm and its validation using data from SPV module. Int J
Adv Eng Technol 2012.
[218] Zhang DJ, Li CJ, Yan-bang. Comparison of duty ratio perturbation & observa-
tion and reference voltage perturbation & observation methods applied in
MPPT. In: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE 7th international power electronics
and motion control conference – ECCE Asia. Harbin, China; June 2–5 2012.
[219] Hsieh GC, Cheng-Yuan Tsai, Hung-I Hsieh. Photovoltaic power increment aided
incremental conductance maximum power point tracking using variable frequency
 G. Dileep, S.N. Singh / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 50 (2015) 109–129
and duty controls. In: Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE international symposium on power
electronics for distributed generation systems (PEDG); 2012.
[220] Vardhana JH, Naick BK. Optimization of PV MPPT performance and DC link
voltage ripples compensation using a duty cycle modifier. In: Proceedings of
the IEEE international conference on recent advances and innovations in
engineering (ICRAIE-2014). Jaipur, India; May 09–11 2014.
[221] Kottos TL, Boutalis YS, Karlis AD. New maximum power point tracker for PV
arrays using fuzzy controller in close cooperation with fuzzy cognitive
networks. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 2006;21:793–803.
129
[222] Sera D, Kerekes T, Teodorescu R, Blaabjerg F. Implementation of variable step
size MPPT controller for photovoltaic system on FPGA circuit. Int J Eng Sci
Innov Technol 2014;3(6).
[223] Petrone G, Spagnuolo G, Vitelli M. A multivariable perturb and observe
maximum power point tracking technique applied to a single-stage photo-
voltaic inverter. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2011;58(1):76–84.