Controller arrangement for boost converter systems sourced from solar photovoltaic arrays or other maximum power sources

J.A.Gow and C.D.Manning

Abstract: Conventional power converter systems, such as boost converters, derive their input from sources that may be considered to have negligible output impedances, and as such the use of quite simple conventional control algorithms sufice to give acceptable performance. When the output impedance of the source to such a converter is no longer negligible, and moreover if the source has a markedly nonlinear output impedance, the simple conventional algorithms will no longer be adequate to satisfy the control requirements of the converter. The effect of driving such a converter from a type of source, for example a photovoltaic array whch has a point of maximum power delivery withm the operating range is discussed, as is the impact that the use of such a source has upon the control requirements of the converter. A novel control arrangement, which includes a complete embedded maximum power tracker, is then presented together with results validating the proposed controller.

List of principal symbols

= = Il = I,,, = k, = V,, =
E

small-signal duty cycle maximum power tracker output inductor current converter output current gain of maximum power tracker input voltage V,,, = output voltage A = large-signal duty cycle I,, = converter input current Ilovg= average inductor current I,, = array short-circuit current P = array power V,, = array open-circuit voltage double-exponentialmodel parameters Iph= array photocurrent Z , , = array first saturation current Is2 = array second saturation current R, = array series resistance Rp = array parallel resistance
1

'in

Input
D

3L

LZC

toload aGND

control
D

from source

H
control

boost converter

1 I

to load

Fig.2

voltuge-modecontrol

Introduction

A simple step-up DC to DC converter is shown in Fig. 1. This takes power from its input at a voltage V,, and sup0LEE, 2000
IEE Proceedkgs online no. 200000 18 DO1 IO. 1049/ipepa:20000018 Paper fmt received 10th March and i n revised form 2nd August 1 9 9 The authors are with the Department of Electronic and Electrid Engineering, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK
IEE ProcElectr.. Power. Appl.. Vol. 147, No. I , Junuury 2000

Several types of control algorithms are used with this type of converter. The simplest of these, voltage-mode control (Fig. 2), senses the output voltage and compares it with a reference. The result, suitably compensated to avoid instability, forms the control signal input to the PWM modulator. A slightly more advanced type, known as average current-mode control (Fig. 3), uses a pair of nested loops. The inner loop derives an error signal from the difference of the inductor (or output) current and the output of the outer loop, in which the error signal is derived as for voltage-mode control. Current-mode control carries a
15

number of advantages over voltage-mode control where selection of component values to optimise loop speed is concerned, and it is primarily with this form of control that this investigation is concerned.
boost converter
to load

maximum power point is well within the normal operating region of the source (and load) and therefore must be taken into consideration. The class of sources to which PV arrays and other sources exhibiting this characteristic belong may thus be defined as maximum power sources.

System analysis

I
comp

uu
Fig.3 Current-mode control

When such a current-mode controlled system is driven from a conventional power source, it is expected that the input voltage wdl not change as a function of switching duty cycle A and therefore small-signal perturbations in A will normally be around an easily predictable operating point. Thus compensator parameters may be easily calculated based around this operating point to optimise loop performance. Power sources such as photovoltaic (PV) arrays, however, possess a characteristic whch dlffers from that of a conventional stiff power source. The terminal voltage changes with current in such a manner as to give the source a unique value of terminal voltage and current at which it is providing maximum power. Either side of this point, the power provided by the source will drop. The general form of the equation relating current to voltage in a photovoltaic cell is known as the double-exponential model (eqn. 1) [I, 21.

2. I Boost-convertercontrol scheme In conventional average current-mode converters, the current loop conventionally aims to control the average inductor current. While average current-mode control can make for a much faster converter than can voltage-mode control, this approach is not without its problems. One of these is that the right-hand halfplane zero, a characteristic of the topology, appears in the voltage loop, whose bandwidth must be reduced to avoid instability. The current loop contains a pair of complex poles which also require careful compensation to achieve stability. The net result is that with the boost converter topology, the benefits achieved by current-mode control are offset by the reduction in loop bandwidth necessary to acheve stability. In this converter system, a novel approach has been taken which goes some way to compensate for the problems of inductor current control. The current loop of this system controls the average diode current, whch is effectively the output current. The use of linearised time-averaged state-space modelling [3] applied to Fig. 1 operating with continuous inductor current allows small-signal transfer functions and steady4 ] .The small-signal state characteristics to be obtained [ transfer functions of interest relate the average current flowing in the diode id to the duty cycle of the switch 6 and the output voltage v, to the diode current id. The smallsignal transfer functions are given in eqn. 2, while the steady-state characteristics are given in eqn. 3.

40 -

30 -

a
i

20
10

a
L

I I I I I I I I I

In effect, a photovoltaic array combines the characteristics of a current source with those of a voltage source. Below the maximum power point (MPP), when the current is low, the source approximates a voltage source. Once the maximum power point is traversed, the source appears as a current source. At the maximum power point the source may be considered to be a combination of both. All sources possess a maximum power point, but in the conventional source used to provide power the maximum power point is outside the normal operating range of the source; fuses etc. would fall long before the maximum power point was reached. With a PV source, however, the
16

A is the steady-state value of the duty cycle of the switch, and represents the magnitude of the input to the PWM modulator. Note that in the derivation of eqns. 2 and 3 the output impedance of the source has been assumed to be zero. Ths is a valid assumption for conventional stiff supplies, and is not wildly short of the mark for photovoltaic power sources in the region close to the array Vac. Controlling diode current effectively buries the right-hand halfplane zero in the current loop and thus allows the current loop bandwidth to be maximised without excessive concern with the voltage loop. The transfer function of output voltage to diode current reduces to a single pole, and with the current loop set for m a x i possible bandwidth the voltage loop becomes very easy to compensate. A further advantage is that discontinuous mode operation will result in a smaller drop in closed-loop bandwidth compared to conventional current-mode control. Therefore it becomes possible to design the converter with smaller inductors than would otherwise be possible with inductor-current control.
IEE Proc.-Electr. Power Appl., Vol. 147, No. I , January 2000

2.2 PV sourced boost converter performance

If a converter using conventional control algorithms to control output voltage is fed from a PV source, then it will not operate optimally [5]. This is because the source can appear as either a voltage source or a current source depending upon the position of the operating point. Fig. 5 shows the output voltage with respect to A of a converter sourced from a PV array. The curve is generated with the aid of a previously developed PV cell circuit modelling system [6] and the MATLAB software package [I.
'O0O[
900 -

800 -

700 -

600 500 400 -

' 8.6

0.7 O
delta

0.8

0.9

Fig.5

PV-sourced curve superimposed on constant-voltuge mi cOnSimt rent curves

LUT-

In the current fed boost converter the output voltage falls with increasing A, whereas when voltage-fed, output voltage rises with increasing A. T h s will require significantly dlfferent controller operation depending upon the region of the source characteristic in which operation is taking place. The small-signal dynamics of the converter will also change radically. The second-order characteristic of the control to diode current transfer function will reduce to the simple function I,JS = I3,>(1s> when the converter is current-fed, eluninating dynamic effects from the current loop. As A increases, so does the average current in L (I,,), and there will come a point A = A, where V , will start to fall off rapidly as the operating point moves on to the constant current portion of the array characteristic. Any further increase in A will cause V , to fall still further until it reaches zero and V,,, will fall similarly. Note that if the output load is fned, then the point of maximum voltage must also be the point of maximum power, therefore AI is the value of A to give maximum power when sourced by an array under these conditions into a load of the specified value. AI also marks the transition between constant-voltage and constant-current operation. In the region A < AI, the similarity between the constantvoltage and PV-sourced characteristics indicates that for all A in t h s region, a PV-sourced current-mode converter should function correctly using conventional control arrangements. To allow a controller to operate in the region where A > AI it would appear that it is necessary to change the sign of the current error signal such that an increase in error causes A to fall. The requirement is for a controller which for loads below maximum power operates normally, but as A traverses A, will reverse the sign of the current error signal. The net result will be for loads exceeding maximum power, that the output voltage of the coni " power to the verter will fall to a level supplying m load and the operating point will oscillate around the maximum power point; in effect a maximum power tracker.
~

There are a number of problems with ths arrangement. One is that if the load is reduced while A > AI then the controller will reduce the throughput power by increasing A and operating in the constant-current region, remaining in this region until A, is once again traversed. This is not the best way of using the PV array for low powers, the high currents in this region leading to inefficient operation of the converter being only one of the reasons for this. The second problem is associated with the action of the controller while the system is oscillating about the maximum power point. The source is unable to completely meet a hgh demand which is causing the system to enter the constant-current region; it can only provide maximum power. The amplitude of the oscillations about the maximum power point are controlled by the output of the current loop controller. If the system cannot meet the demand, the output of the integrator in the controller will rise and continue to do so until it reaches its saturation limit. This will not only result in large excursions around the maximum power point during tracking but will also take longer to recover when demand falls, resulting in a possibly catastrophic rise in output voltage. To avoid these problems, the controller can contain an embedded maximum power tracker which comes into effect if the load exceeds that for maximum power at the specified rail voltage. Therefore, instead of implementing the maximum power tracker by changing the sign of the current error, a maximum power tracker could form an integral part of the controller, only coming into effect for demands at or exceeding maximum power. The subject of maximum power tracking systems has been treated extensively in published literature, since to obtain maximum efficiency from photovoltaic arrays such a system is essential [7-121. However, most published maximum power tracking systems possess significant disadvantages owing to the manner in which they are implemented. To determine the position of an operating point on the array characteristic it is necessary to determine the slope of the array characteristic at this point. This requires the operating point to move slightly so that a comparison of differences may be used to determine the slope. The method by which the operating point is moved can limit the converter. Some methods [SI require an AC inverter as a load as they make use of the fluctuating currents, while others [10-12] have speed disadvantages. As part of this system a type of maximum power traclung system was developed whch would be very fast and would address the problems and limitations of existing maximum power tracking systems. The method to be described makes use of a characteristic of the boost converter itself to provide the necessary operating point variation and thereby determine the array operating point. Since the calculations are performed on a percycle basis, the only limiting factor to the speed of maximum power tracking is the bandwidth of the converter. The method is independent of load type and does not produce any extraneous signals superimposed upon the converter output that are a function of the maximum power algorithm that would otherwise require filtering.
3 Complete embedded MPP controller

A discrete version of the above mentioned controller was implemented, together with a converter power chain, as a simulation model using the 'Saber' [13] simulator. A block diagram of the complete embedded maximum power tracking controller is shown in Fig. 6, and this details the links between the maximum power tracker and the PI current loop controller together with the conditions evaluated to
17

IEE Proc -Eleclr Power Appl

Vol 147, No I January 2000

2* 1/25000 s
delay inductor current
f -

-4

f
Off.

comp 2
{+st

(PWM modulated)

boost converter

conditions: on each cycle: IF (P~=PI) & (Ierr'O) SWITCH= MPP ENDIF IF (SWITCH=MPP) & (lerr<O) SWITCH=COMP 1 ENDIF ENDON

Fig.6 Comjdete embedded-MPPcontroller

control the algorithm selection. The two-switchmg cycle delay in the current measurement is a function of calculation delays when a per-cycle average current is required in a digital implementation of the system. The conditions for the switch are also given in the Figure where P1 is the power sample taken just before the start of the switch ontime and P2 is the sample taken just before the switch turns The maximum power trackmg operates as follows: if the demand increases, so the algorithm attempts to adjust A to provide power to meet it. If A1 is exceeded, the sign of the current error is changed and A is reduced, whereas below A1 A is increased. The result is that if the demand increases beyond the maximum power point the PV array operating point oscillates about the maximum power point. The maximum power tracker essentially provides an error signal used for modulating A by solving eqn. 4.
E

of eqn. 2 and conventional frequency domain techniques. This method of selection of the PI parameters allowed the compensator parameters to be arrived at using a trade-off between compensator speed and stability into a wide variety of loads. The final s-domain compensator parameters arrived at in this manner are (using the notation in Fig. 6) ul = 2, b, = 100 for the inner current loop and u2 = 0.05, b2 = 7.5 for the voltage loop. The MPP integrator gain constant k, = 0.001. The converter system was then sourced from a 200 x 200 cell PV array whose currentlvoltage and powerlvoltage characteristics are given in Fig. 7. The characteristics were produced at a temperature of 37C and a fmed level of irradiance. This clearly shows the maximum power point and gives a clear frame of reference to demonstrate the action of the complete controller.
5550 -

k,

1($)

2.62.42.2-

dt

(4)

45 -

Note that dPldV instead of dPldI may be used. Note also that k, is the gain of the integrator. The differences lie in the way dPldV or dPldI is calculated; in every case this implies tracing a portion of the PV array characteristic to determine slope information. In this system a very fast method was developed using the input current waveform of the boost converter. This is a ramp. Samples of array current and voltage were taken at the start of the switch-on time and also at the end. Input current is rising throughout t h s period independent of the position of the average value on the characteristic, and thus the required slope information is obtained by multiplying voltage and current and then subtracting the later of the two samples from the earlier [6].The result is integrated to form the power error signal.
4 Results

30-

1.6-

5-

0.6-

-15-

-0.20

10

'

20

'

30

'

40

'

50
volts, v

'

60

'

' 70

80

'

90 100

'

Fig. 7 Simulated arruy Ivcmrlpower chructeristic

~

____

arraypower array current

A Saber template was written embodying the entirety of Fig. 6 so that a set of simulation results could be obtained. PI controller constants were selected for a voltage-fed converter system with a 110V voltage source input and a 400V DC output using an inductor of 1.2mH and a capacitor of lOOOpF at a switching frequency of 25kHz, by making use
18

The first of the Saber simulation runs was that of the starting transient of the converter, i.e from the instant of switch-on until the output voltage reaches the design level. Fig. 8 shows the output voltage curves of the system run fnst with the embedded MPP, and secondly with a pure PIcompensated system only (i.e. without the embedded MPP) using the previously derived constants. The regulation output voltage is 400V DC into a 200Q load. It can be seen clearly that the system with the embedded maximum power
IEE Proc.-Electr. Power Appl.. Vol. 147, No. I , January 2000

tracker gives considerably superior performance in terms of speed of response compared with the controller using PI compensators alone, reaching its output voltage much quicker. The action may be seen in the time domain curves of array power over the same period of time (Fig. 9) where the action of the maximum power tracker may be seen.
425 r

>
m ai
c -

225 200 175

100

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

Fig.8
~

t, ms cotryarkon of output voltage curyes during starting trmient

withoutMPP

_ _ _ ~ with MPP

2.6 r

2
5

2.4 2.2 2.0 1.8 1 . 61.4 1.2 0.8 0.6 -

1 c
/ /
/

;
I

,----I
I
I

/I

< 250ms 200Q 25C300ms 100052 30C350ms 10052 35MOOms 50Q > 400ms 100052 The 35M00ms region clearly exhibits maximum power tracking in the system containing the embedded MPP, where the array is supplying maximum power to the load. Without the embedded MPP the PI-only system cannot supply enough power to sustain voltage across the load approaching demand voltage. The differences here between the embedded MPP system and the PI-only system are very marked, the PI system displaying the anticipated problems of integrator windup in the constant current portion of the array I-V characteristic. As the array operating point passes the maximum power point and enters the constant current region, so the power, and hence output voltage, fall off. The difference between the demand and reference at the inputs to the PI compensators becomes increasingly positive, and the integrators within the compensators ramp up and effectively bring about a duty cycle increase. In thls region of operation, increases in duty cycle actually bring about a fall in output power. The error at the input of the PI compensators thus increases further, and the integrators quickly ramp up into saturation. The output voltage clearly falls off as seen in Fig. 10. The time histories of the array current (Fig. 11) and power (Fig. 12) serve to show the differences between the two systems.
40 35 -

---__ -------__
4

30 25 -

--

20

9 -0.2 o~ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

t, ms

5 150

10

__

Fig.9 Time domrrin array power curves &ring starting trunsient

50-51 I I I I I I I I I I I 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 t, ms

withoutMPP -~~~ with MPP

410 400 - ' 390 380 370 ' 360 m

c -

- I

Fig.11 Time&min array current with step load changes

~

____

with MPP without MPP

II

I I
\

! !
\ \ \ \
\ \ \

8 9

350 -

I I I I I I I I

2.2

340 330 -

300 320 310 290I

,
'\

,
, I

I
, \\ I II

'

I I I

2
5
I I

'

'

:E

1.4 1 . 2

0.2

The output voltage transient response for step load changes forms the second set of results, as shown in Fig. 10. Load changes used were
IEE Proc.-Electr. Power Appl., Vol. 147, No. 1. January 2000

-0.21 I I I I I I I I I I 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 t, ms

'

Fig. 12
~

____

with . . . MPP .. .. without MPP

Time domuin array power with step load chmges

19

A hardware prototype of the controller was constructed based around a TMS320C50 DSP as the control element. As only low-power PV arrays were available with which to test the system, it was designed to provide a regulated output voltage of 15V for loads below maximum power. The array used was illuminated to provide a maximum power of 1.88W. Fig. 13 shows the array power as a function of load current, while Fig. 14 shows the converter output voltage as a function of load current. The three curves in Fig. 13 correspond to three different values of the maximum power tracker integrator gain and show that, for this instance, variation of this parameter has limited effect.
1 . 81.6 1.4-

Conclusions

3 1.2 --

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2I 0

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

load current, A

This paper has discussed the effects of supplying a boost DC-DC converter from maximum power sources such as a PV array. Using state-space modelling and analysis techniques, a stable converter system has been proposed whch includes an MPP tracker together with conventional current and voltage loops in the controller. It has been demonstrated that the PI with embedded MPP approach to PV converter control gives far superior results when compared with a pure PI-compensated controller, where fuced-voltage DC outputs are required. For values of power demand from the load at or exceeding array maximum power point, the converter tracked the array maximum power point and supplied the load with this level of power. Once the load was shed the constant-voltage output was restored. As a general purpose front-end converter, allowing PV arrays to supply many different types of load through the same piece of hardware, this system could find a place in many applications where photovoltaic power, or any other form of maximum-power energy source, has been considered but has been previously thought to be impractical owing to the lack of general purpose power conversion systems designed to handle such sources with the minimum of installationspecific requirements. A hardware prototype has been constructed to show that the system behaves as expected and is a viable proposition in these applications
6
1

Fig. 13 Array power characteristicfor hrdvure prototype

Track power: 1.76W (i) kc = 1.953 x lo=? (ii) k, = 0.5 (iii) k, = 128

References
ENEBISH, N., AGCHBAYAR, D., DORJKHAND, S., and BAATAR, D.: Numerical analysis of solar cell current-voltage characteristics, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, 1993, 29, (3), pp. 201-208 PROTOGEROPOULOS, C., BRINKWORTH, B.J., MARSHALL, R.H., and CROSS, B.M.: Evaluation of two theoretical models in simulating the performance of amorphous silicon solar cells. Proceedings of the 10th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy conference, 8-12 Lisbon, Portugal, April 1991, pp. 412415 MOHAN, UNDELAND, and ROBBINS: Power electronics: Converters, applications and design (Wiley Intemational) SEVERNS, R., and BLOOM, G.: Modem DC-DC switchmode power converter circuits (Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1985) COW, J.A.: Modelling, simulation and control of photovoltaic converter systems. Thesis submitted to Loughborough University, England for the degree of PhD, May 1998 GOW, J.A., and MANNING, C.D.: Development of a model for photovoltaic arrays suitable for use in simulation studies of solar energy conversion systems. Proceedings of the Sixth international conference on Power electronics and variable speed drives, Nottingham University, United Kingdom, 2>25 September 1996, pp. 69-74 THE MATHWORKS Inc, MATLAB mathematical simulation software COCCONI, A., CUK, S., and MIDDLEBROOK, R.D.: High frequency isolated 4kW photovoltaic inverter for utility interface. Proceedings of the Seventh intemational PCI83 conference, Geneva, Switzerland, 13-15 September 1983 DECKER, B., and GENTZ, M.: Development and evaluation of a 20W MPP tracking charge controller for PV supplied remote monitoring stations. I99 1 international Solar Photovoltaics conference, Lisbon, Portugal, 8-12 April 1991 BODUR, M., and ERMIS, B.: Maximum power point tracking for low-power photovoltaic solar panels. Mediterranean Electrotechnical conference MELECON, 1994, Vol. 2, pp. 758-761 SNYMAN, D.B., and ENSLIN, J.H.R.: Simplified maximum power point controller for PV installations. IEEE Photovoltaics Specialists conference, 1993, pp. 124C124S SPEER, J.H.: Microprocessor control of power sharing and solar array peak power tracking for high power (2.SkW) switching power converters. PESC Record - IEEE Power Electronics Specialists conference, 1981, Vol. 3, pp. 6C89 ANALOGY Inc SABER circuit modelling and simulation software

3 4

5
6

7
0 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 load current, A Converter output voltage characteristicfor llardvare prototype 0.05 0.10

Fig. 14

The behaviour of the system can clearly be seen. Where the system operates in voltage-regulating mode for loads below maximum power, once the demand from the load exceeds maximum power the converter switches to maximum power tracking mode. The actual value of power throughput is slightly below actual array maximum, in the low-power prototype. This is due to the inductor current ramp being large in comparison with the array short-circuit current. In a high-power system, the track power will be much closer to the array maximum. The array power falls off at very high loads as the converter is operating then in regions of inefficiency at high boost ratios.

10

11 12

I3

20

IEE ProcEIectr. Power Appl., Vol. 147, No. I , Juanriary 2000