257

Adaptive Perturb & Observe MPPT for PV System

with Experimental Validation
Alivarani Mohapatra1, Byamakesh Nayak2, Chidurala Saiprakash3
1, 2, 3
School of Electrical Engineering, KIIT Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, India
1
aliva.priti@gmail.com, 2electricbkn11@gmail.com, 3saiprakash.ace@gmail.com

Abstract— Maximum power point tracking (MPPT) plays a vital MPP, and to operate the PV module at MPP by the help of a
role in photovoltaic (PV) system to utilize PV energy efficiently. suitable dc-dc converter to extract maximum power from the
The maximum power point (MPP) of PV system varies with PV module [6]. MPPT uses the dc-dc converter to operate the
atmospheric conditions and to track it, an efficient tracking PV module at MPP by load matching as shown in Fig.1.
system is needed. There are different MPPT algorithms available
to track the maximum power. Among different MPPT techniques
P&O MPPT is mostly used because of its plain structure and it is
easy to implement. But conventional P&O method is slow in
nature and suffers from steady state oscillations. To avoid this,
this paper emphasizes on an adaptive P&O MPPT which can
able to track the MPP rapidly with less steady state oscillation as
compared with conventional P&O MPPT algorithm. The efficacy
of the proposed method is verified considering both simulation
and experimental results.

Keywords—Photovoltaic (PV); MPPT; Perturb and Observe
(P&O);Adaptive P&O.
I. INTRODUCTION
Renewable energy is an ultimate energy source to reach
high energy demand and to alleviate the greenhouse effect. PV
is the most popular energy source among all alternative
renewable sources because it produces maintenance free clean
energy [1]. The major advantage of PV energy is that it can be
generated locally and can be used in remote places where
there is no provision of grid power. Although PV energy is
becoming popular and benefitting environment; it is facing
lots of challenges because it is highly dependent on
environment [2]. To make PV electricity more popular and to
reach every corner of the globe, there is lots of research
opportunities exist in PV generation system.
Fig.1. PV Module with dc-dc converter through resistive load.
MPPT should be designed in such a manner that it should
extract maximum power accurately and quickly with less
steady state oscillations. Among all classical MPPT
controllers perturb and observe (P&O) is a simple and
effective controller which is most popularly used. But the
major problem with the conventional P&O MPPT is that it
suffers from steady state oscillations and is sluggish in nature.
To overcome this many improvised P&O MPPT algorithms
have been designed [7]. If the perturbation size of the P&O
method becomes adaptive such that when the operating point
is far off from the MPP point the perturbation amplitude is
more and when it is closer to MPP it is less, then it will solve
the problem of conventional P&O method i.e sluggishness and
steady state oscillations. This paper validates the simulation
results of an earlier proposed adaptive P&O method by the
same author as discussed in [8].

Maximum power point tracking (MPPT) plays a crucial II. MODELLING OF PV MODULE
role in photovoltaic (PV) system to utilize PV energy
efficiently [3][4]. Whenever the load is directly connected to A single diode PV module is described by an equivalent
the PV module, the operating point of the PV system is circuit as represented in Fig.2. PV module output current is
anywhere on the I-V characteristic where load line and I-V expressed by an equation (1) [9].
characteristic intersect. This point is seldom at MPP; therefore
it is not possible to draw maximum power from the PV
module, and the system efficiency will decreases. Since the I-
V characteristic of the PV module changes with irradiation
and temperature, the MPP also changes. Therefore it is
difficult for the PV module to operate at MPP under different
weather conditions [5]. To figure out this problem an MPPT is
essential to operate the PV panel at MPP under different
weather conditions. The basic components of an MPPT consist
Fig.2. PV module equivalent circuit
of a dc-dc converter, MPPT algorithm, and a controller circuit.
Applying KCL, the output current of the PV module can
Mainly MPPT controller has two objectives: to identify the
be written as equation (1).
 258

I pv = I pg -I d -I sh (1)
Table 1. Manufacturer datasheet of PV module (KC200GT) at standard test
condition

Id represented the current through the diode and expressed as

Values
equation (2). Parameters
Short circuit current (ISC) 8.21A
ª § V pv + Rse I pv · º Open circuit voltage (VOC) 32.9V
I d = I s « exp ¨ ¸ − 1» (2) Voltage at MPP (VMPP) 26.3V
¬ © N sVt a ¹ ¼ Current at MPP (IMPP) 7.61A
Number of series cell in a module (Ns) 54
Where, Vt is the thermal voltage, which can be Open-circuit voltage/temperature coefficient (KV) -0.123V/K
mathematically expressed as Vt=kT/Q in which k is the Short-circuit current/temperature coefficient (KI) 0.0032 A/K

Boltzmann’s constant (1.3806 ×10−23 J / o K) , T is the junction

temperature in Kelvin, Q is the charge of an
−19
electron (1.602 ×10 coulomb) , and Ns represent the number
of series cells in the module. The leakage current of the PV
module is expressed as equation (3).
Vpv + Rse I pv
I sh = (3)
Rsh

Substituting Id from equation (2) and Ish from equation (3) in

equation (1), the PV module output current is expressed as
equation (4). Fig.4.Variation of MPP with change in irradiation

ª § V pv + Rse I pv · º V pv + Rse I pv A. Perturb and Observe (P&O) MPPT Technique

I pv = I pg -I s « exp ¨ ¸ − 1» −
¬ © N sVt a ¹ ¼ Rsh
The electrical characteristic of PV module changes
with temperature and solar irradiation. Therefore MPP
also changes with weather conditions and it makes the
MPPT algorithm complex [10].
III. MPPT PROBLEM
The purpose of any MPPT controller is to draw maximum
power from the PV module in all environmental conditions.
This is only possible by the help of an accurate MPPT
algorithm with a suitable converter to operate the PV module
at its MPP. An MPPT algorithm identifies the maximum
power point and forces the solar panel to the MPP by
providing suitable duty signal to the converter [11]. The block
diagram of a PV system with converter is shown in Fig. 3. The
variation PV output power with solar irradiation is shown in
Fig. 4.
+ DC-DC
PV - Converter
Panel
(4)
According to this MPPT technique, at first voltage and
current values at the starting operating point is measured and
equivalent power value P1 is calculated. A small perturbation
in voltage is given and corresponding power P2 is calculated.
After comparing P2 with P1 next perturbation is decided. If
P2>P1, perturbation is continued in the same direction until
MPP is achieved. In the reverse case perturbation is given in
the opposite direction. This is the most popular technique
utilized in PV module to extract maximum power [12][13].
The performance of P&O method is decided by its tracking
speed and steady state oscillations, which mainly depends
upon perturbation step size. Large perturbation step size
speeds up the tracking time but creates large oscillations in
steady state. A small perturbation step size reduces the steady
state oscillations but makes the system sluggish. Therefore
perturbation magnitude must be chosen carefully to reduce the
steady state oscillations and simultaneously increase the speed
of response. To overcome these problems the perturbation
magnitude is made adaptive to improve the tracking speed and
to reduce the steady state oscillations [14][15].
L
O
B. Review of Adaptive Perturb and Observe (P&O)
A
Technique
D

In this method perturbation amplitude is made adaptive to

V Gate
MPPT speed up the tracking process and simultaneously reducing the
Algorithm PWM steady state oscillations. According to this technique the
I
Iref u perturbation amplitude is large if the operating point is far off
e the MPP and is small if operating point is near to the MPP. In
Controller
I this technique current perturbation is considered instead of the
Fig.3. PV system with MPPT controller voltage perturbation to speed up the performance of the
 259

tracking. The flow chart of the adaptive P&O method is shown Among all PWM techniques, the HCC has been popularly
in Fig.5. The magnitude of the current perturbation is made used in various applications to control the flow of current in a
adaptive according to the equation(5) [8] limited bandwidth as per current command value. Because of
its fast response, easy implementation, inherent peak current
ΔI = f (ΔP, ΔV ) + ΔI min (5) limiting capabilities, unconditional stability and good accuracy
HCC is popularly used [16]. The block diagram of HCC
Where, f ( Δ P , Δ V ) = 0 .1 × e x p [ ( − Δ V / Δ P ) ] MPPT controller is shown in Fig. 6. For better performance,
HCC is utilized here for maximum power extraction for P&O
ΔV = V (n + 1) − V (n)
and adaptive P&O and their performance has been compared.
ΔP = P (n + 1) − P(n)
ΔI min =0.001 A.

Fig.6. Block diagram of control unit using HCC for generation of pulse

The tracking response for power, voltage, and current of

the HCC MPPT is sown in Fig. 7. From the tracking curve, it
is seen that the response for P&O is slow in comparison to
adaptive P&O. The required time to reach at the steady state
response for power is approximately 0.75 second. For the
adaptive P&O MPP tracker, the lapsed time to reach steady
state for power curve is very small and is approximately about
0.001second. At 1 second, irradiation is changed from 1000
W/m2 t0 600 W/m2, and is found that P&O technique takes
some time to reach at MPP. This delay in tracking is not seen
in adaptive P&O method. The oscillations around MPP point
for the conventional P&O method is 0.5%, 3.8% and 4.6% for
power, voltage and current respectively. For an adaptive P&O
method, the steady state oscillation decreases because the step
size reduces at or near MPP. The oscillations around MPP for
Fig.5. Flow chart of adaptive P&O MPPT algorithm adaptive P&O method have been reduced to 0.24%, 2.54%
and 2.6% for power, voltage and current respectively.
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Simulation Results
The adaptive P&O technique performance is compared
with conventional P&O technique by considering KC200GT
PV module. The parameters of KC200GT PV module is
represented in Table1. To validate the efficacy of the adaptive
P&O technique, a step change of irradiation is carried out at 1
second from 1000 W/m2 to 600 W/m2. The MPP data of
KC200GT PV panel at said irradiation at temperature of 25o C (a)
is tabulated in Table 2. To track the maximum power from the
PV panel, a robust hysteresis band current controller (HCC) is
used.
Table 2. MPP data of the KC200GT PV module at different irradiation

Irradiation Temperature VMPP (V) IMPP(A) PMPP(W)

(W/m2) (°C)
1000 25 26.348 7.5956 200.1301
600 25 26.057 4.5408 118.3229
(b)
 260

(c)
Fig.7. MPPT performance (a) Power (b) Voltage (c) Current

B. Experimental Results (a)

To validate the performance of the proposed adaptive P&O

method, experiments are conducted on the PV system in a
laboratory setup. The experimental setup is shown in Fig. 8.
The experimental setup is placed inside the laboratory and PV
emulator is used as a virtual PV panel. DC-DC boost converter
and dsPIC30F4011 microcontroller are used for MPPT
implementation. The design parameters of the IGBT based
boost converter are C = 330 μ F , L = 2mH , Vin= (0-100V) and
Vout= 300V. Switching frequency of the converter is
considered as 20 kHz. LEM LV 25P voltage sensor with a
voltage gain of 0.02 and HE055T01 current sensor with a
current gain of 0.5 are used for voltage and current
measurements, respectively. Both conventional and adaptive
P&O MPPT methods are implemented and it is seen that (b)
adaptive P&O method tracks faster than conventional P&O
Fig.9. Experimental results (a) P&O method (b) adaptive P&O
method. The experimental results of both conventional P&O
and adaptive P&O are shown in Fig. 9. The Conventional
P&O method can track maximum power in 13.8 seconds V. CONCLUSION
whereas adaptive P&O can track the same power in 10.1
seconds. The oscillations around MPP are found to be more For maximum power extraction from the PV panel, current
for the conventional P&O method in comparison to the based adaptive P&O MPPT algorithm is implemented in
adaptive P&O method. At MPP the voltage, current, and MATLAB/ Simulink and subsequently an experimental set up
power values are measured to be 51.8V, 3.92A, and 201.5 W is developed in the laboratory. From the obtained results it is
in that order. found that adaptive P&O method gives better result in
comparison to conventional P&O method. For adaptive P&O
method, the tracking is faster and it has less oscillation for
power, voltage and current curve in its steady state.

REFERENCES
[1] Benner, J.P and L. Kazmerski, “Photovoltaic gaining greater
visibility,” IEEE Spectr., vol. 36, no. 9, pp. 34–42, 1999.
[2] P. Das, A. Mohapatra, and B. Nayak, “Modeling and characteristic
study of solar photovoltaic system under partial shading condition,”
Mater. Today Proc., vol. 4, no. 14, pp. 12586–12591, 2017.
[3] T. Esram and P. L. Chapman, “Comparison of Photovoltaic Array
Maximum Power Point Tracking Techniques,” IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 439–449, 2007.
[4] A. Mohapatra, B. Nayak, P. Das, and K. B. Mohanty, “A review on
MPPT techniques of PV system under partial shading condition,”
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 80, pp. 854–867, 2017.
[5] S. Bhattacharjee and B. J. Saharia, “A comparative study on
converter topologies for maximum power point tracking application
in photovoltaic generation,” J. Renew. Sustain. Energy, vol. 6, no. 5,
2014.
[6] R. Rajesh and M. Carolin Mabel, “A comprehensive review of
Fig.8. Experimental setup of the proposed system photovoltaic systems,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 51, pp.
 261

231–248, 2015.
[7] S. K. Kollimalla, S. Member, M. K. Mishra, and S. Member, “A
Novel Adaptive P&O MPPT Algorithm Considering Sudden
Changes in the Irradiance,” IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, vol. 29,
no. 3, pp. 602–610, 2014.
[8] A. Mohapatra, B. Nayak, and K. B. Mohanty, “Current based novel
adaptive P&O MPPT algorithm for photovoltaic system considering
sudden change in the irradiance,” in 2014 IEEE International
Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems,
PEDES 2014,Mumbai, 2014.
[9] M. G. Villalva, J. R. Gazoli, and E. R. Filho, “Comprehensive
Approach to Modeling and Simulation of Photovoltaic Arrays,”
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 1198–1208, May
2009.
[10] W. Xiao, W. G. Dunford, P. R. Palmer, and A. Capel, “Regulation
of photovoltaic voltage,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 3,
pp. 1365–1374, 2007.
[11] B. Nayak, A. Mohapatra, and K. B. Mohanty, “Selection criteria of
dc-dc converter and control variable for MPPT of PV system
utilized in heating and cooking applications,” Cogent Eng., vol. 26,
pp. 1–16, 2017.
[12] M. Killi and S. Samanta, “Modified perturb and observe MPPT
algorithm for drift avoidance in photovoltaic systems,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 62, no. 9, pp. 5549–5559, 2015.
[13] A. Mohapatra, B. Nayak, and B. Misra, “Model validation and
maximum power point tracking of photovoltaic module,” 2014
Power Energy Syst. Towar. Sustain. Energy, no. Pestse, pp. 1–4,
2014.
[14] L. Piegari and R. Rizzo, “Adaptive perturb and observe algorithm
for photovoltaic maximum power point tracking,” IET Renew.
Power Gener., vol. 4, no. 4, p. 317, 2010.
[15] S. Mishra and P. C. Sekhar, “Ts fuzzy based adaptive perturb
algorithm for MPPT of a grid connected single stage three phase
VSC interfaced PV generating system,” IEEE Power Energy Soc.
Gen. Meet., pp. 1–7, 2012.
[16] B. Singh, “A New Control Approach to Three-phase Activt: Filter
for Harmonics and Reactive Power Compensation,” IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 133–138, 1998.