You are on page 1of 10

A Study on Maximum Power Point Tracking Algorithms for Photovoltaic Systems

A Study on Maximum Power Point Tracking Algorithms for Photovoltaic Systems


Ting-Chung Yu Yu-Cheng Lin

Department of Electrical Engineering Lunghwa University of Science and Technology Abstract


The purpose of this paper is to study and compare three maximum power point tracking (MPPT) algorithms in a photovoltaic simulation system. The Matlab/Simulink is used in this paper to establish a model of photovoltaic system with MPPT function. This system is developed by combining the models of established solar module and DC-DC buck-boost converter with the algorithms of perturbation and observation (P&O), incremental conductance (INC) and hill climbing (HC), respectively. The system is simulated under different climate conditions and MPPT algorithms. According to the comparisons of the simulation results, it can be observed that the photovoltaic simulation system can track the maximum power accurately using the three MPPT algorithms discussed in this paper. P&Q MPPT algorithm possesses fast dynamic response and well regulated PV output voltage than hill climbing algorithm. Since the deterministic process of INC algorithm is more complicated than the other two algorithms, therefore, the simulation time spent by INC algorithm is also a little longer than the other two algorithms.

Keywords: Maximum power point tracking (MPPT), perturbation and observation,


incremental conductance, hill climbing.

1. Introduction
According to numerous use of the fossil fuel, the reserves of petroleum substantially and rapidly reduced and will be depleted in a few decades. In Taiwan, ninety-five percentages of the needed energy resources is imported from abroad. Since the crisis of energy depletion wont happen in a short period of time, however, researchers and scientists have done a lot of researches for the development of alternative energy sources. Solar energy is one of the alternative clean energy sources which are paid close attention by humans. Taiwan is located in the subtropical region, and possesses excellent sunshine conditions. It is very suitable for Taiwan to develop photovoltaic power generation. 27

However, in addition to the excellent geographical conditions, it is very important to have an effective and appropriate maximum power point tracking (MPPT) algorithm for the photovoltaic system. If there is a good irradiance condition, the photovoltaic system can generate maximum power efficiently while an effective MPPT algorithm is used with the system. A lot of MPPT algorithms have been developed by researchers and industry delegates all over the world. They are voltage feedback method, perturbation and observation method, linear approximation method, incremental conductance method, hill climbing method, actual measurement method, fuzzy control method and so on [1]-[5]. In the literature proposed by C.

,2010.12

Hua, J. Lin and C. Shen [2], they used DSP chips to implement the function of MPPT in order that the output of solar modules can approach its maximum power by continuous perturbing and observing. In the research [3] proposed by Fangrui Liu, Yong Kang, Yu Zhang and Shanxu Duan, the response speed and applicability of the perturbation and observation and hill climbing methods are compared for the grid connected system. Moreover, C. C. Hua, J. R. Lin [4] and W. Xiao [5] improve the efficiency of the perturbation and observation and hill climbing methods in their researches. The requirements of implementing maximum performance of a photovoltaic system are not only good weather conditions, but also with the appropriate MPPT method [6]-[8]. The purpose of this paper is to study and compare advantages, shortcomings and execution efficiency for three power-feedback type MPPT methods, including perturbation & observation (P&O), incremental conductance (INC) and hill climbing (HC) methods. Matlab/Simulink is used in this paper to implement the modeling and simulations tasks, and to compare execution efficiency and accuracy for the selected MPPT methods. This paper is organized as follows. Section 1 is the introduction which includes the background of renewable energy, the purpose of this paper, and literature reviews of MPPT algorithms. Sections 2 to 4 illustrate basic operation principles, advantages and shortcomings for P&O, incremental conductance and hill climbing methods respectively. Section 5 is the simulation, analysis and discussion for the three MPPT algorithms. The summary and conclusion are given in Section 6.

PV modules by means of iteratively perturbing, observing and comparing the power generated by the PV modules. It is widely applied to the maximum power point tracker of the photovoltaic system for its features of simplicity and convenience. According to the structure of MPPT system shown in Fig. 1, the required parameters of the power-feedback type MPPT algorithms are only the voltage and current of PV modules. Shown in Fig. 2 is the relationship between the terminal voltage and output power generated by a PV module. It can be observed that regardless of the magnitude of sun irradiance and terminal voltage of PV modules, the maximum power point is obtained while the condition dP/dV = 0 is accomplished. The slope (dP/dV) of the power can be calculated by the consecutive output voltages and output currents, and can be expressed as follows, dP P(n) P(n 1) ( n) = (1) dV V (n) V (n 1) where P(n) = V(n) I(n)

Fig.1 A structure of PV system with MPPT function

2. Perturbation and Observation Method


P&O method [3], [4], [9]-[11] is the most frequently used algorithm to track the maximum power due to its simple structure and fewer required parameters. This method finds the maximum power point of 28

Fig. 2 P-V characteristic of a PV module Basically, three MPPT algorithms discussed in this paper have to achieve the condition (dP/dV = 0) to find the maximum power point of PV modules. The difference among the selected three MPPT algorithms

A Study on Maximum Power Point Tracking Algorithms for Photovoltaic Systems

is the method used to meet the condition. The basic operating procedure of P&O method is shown in Fig. 3. In a fixed period of time, the load of the PV system is adjusted in order to change the terminal voltage and output power of the PV modules. The variations of the output voltage and power before and after changes are then observed and compared to be the reference for increasing or decreasing the load in the next step. If the perturbation in this time results in greater output power of PV modules than that before the variation, the output voltage of PV modules will be varied toward the same direction. Otherwise, if the output power of PV modules is less than that before variation, it indicates that the varying direction in the next step should be changed. The maximum output power point of a PV system can be obtained by using these iterative perturbation, observation and comparison steps. The advantages of the P&O method are simple structure, easy implementation and less required parameters. The shortcomings of the P&O method can be summarized: (a) The power tracked by the P&O method will oscillate and perturb up and down near the maximum power point. The magnitude of oscillations is determined by the magnitude of variations of the output voltage. (2) There is a misjudgment phenomenon for the P&O method when weather conditions change rapidly. From the diagram shown in Fig. 4, the starting point is point A, and a + V voltage perturbation will move the operating point from A to B and cause a decreasing power when the weather condition is steady. According to the judgment rules of the P&O method, the next perturbation should be changed to V in the opposite direction. However, if the sun irradiance increases in one sampling period, the power curve will be moved from P1 to P2, and the operating point will be moved from A to C instead of A to B. This results in the power to be increased continuously, and the voltage perturbation still moves toward + V direction. The operating point is then
29

farther away from the maximum power point. If the sun irradiance continuously increases, the distance between operating point and maximum power point will be farther. Consequently, the power loss of PV modules will increase, and the efficiency of the PV system will reduce.

Fig. 3 The flow diagram of the P&O method

Fig. 4 The separation diagram of the maximum power point for the P&O method

3. Incremental Conductance Method


The theory of the incremental conductance method [9]-[13] is to determine the variation direction of the terminal voltage for PV modules by measuring and comparing the incremental conductance and instantaneous conductance of PV modules. If the value of incremental conductance is equal to that of

,2010.12

instantaneous conductance, it represents that the maximum power point is found. The basic theory is illustrated with Fig. 5.

Gs =

I V

(4)

dI (5) dV The maximum power point (operating voltage is Vm) can be found when Gd V =Vm = Gs V =Vm (6) Gd =
When the equation in (3) comes into existence, the maximum power point is tracked by MPPT system. However, the following situations will happen while the operating point is not on the maximum power point: dI I dP > ; (Gd > Gs , > 0) (7) dV V dV dI I dP < ; (Gd < Gs , < 0) (8) dV V dV Equations (7) and (8) are used to determine the direction of voltage perturbation when the operating point moves toward to the maximum power point. In the process of tracking, the terminal voltage of PV modules will continuously perturb until the condition of (3) comes into existence. Fig. 6 is the operating flow diagram of the incremental conductance algorithm. The main difference between incremental conductance and P&O algorithms is the judgment on determining the direction of voltage perturbation. When static conductance Gs is equal to dynamic conductance Gd, the maximum power point is found [8]. From the flow diagram shown in Fig. 6, it can be observed that the weather conditions dont change and the operating point is located on the maximum power point when dV = 0 and dI = 0. If dV = 0 but dI > 0, it represents that the sun irradiance increases and the voltage of the maximum power point rises. Meanwhile, the maximum power point tracker has to raise the operating voltage of PV modules in order to track the maximum power point. On the contrary, the sun irradiance decreases and the voltage of the maximum power point reduces if dI < 0. At this time the maximum power point tracker needs to
30

Fig. 5 The schematic diagram of the incremental conductance method When the operating behavior of PV modules is within the constant current area, the output power is proportional to the terminal voltage. That means the output power increases linearly with the increasing terminal voltage of PV modules (slope of the power curve is positive, dP/dV > 0). When the operating point of PV modules passes through the maximum power point, its operating behavior is similar to constant voltage. Therefore, the output power decreases linearly with the increasing terminal voltage of PV modules (slope of the power curve is negative, dP/dV < 0). When the operating point of PV modules is exactly on the maximum power point, the slope of the power curve is zero (dP/dV = 0) and can be further expressed as, dP d (VI ) dV dI dI = =I +V = I +V dV dV dV dV dV (2) By the relationship of dP/dV = 0, (2) can be rearranged as follows, dI I = (3) dV V dI and dV represent the current error and voltage error before and after the increment respectively. The static conductance (Gs) and the dynamic conductance (Gd, incremental conductance) of PV modules are defined as follows,

A Study on Maximum Power Point Tracking Algorithms for Photovoltaic Systems

reduce the operating voltage of PV modules.

indicates that perturbation phenomenon is still happened near the maximum power point under stable weather conditions after doing some experiments. This is due to the reason that the probability of meeting condition dI/dV =I/V is extremely small.

4. Hill Climbing Method


The basic operating theory of the hill climbing method [3], [5], [10], [11] is similar to that of the P&O method. Both method use the condition that P(n) is greater than P(n1) or not to make the judgment. As described in previous Section, the P&O method uses the condition dP/dV to determine whether the maximum power point has been found or not. However, the hill climbing method uses the condition dP/dD to judge. In most applications, DC-DC converters and DC-AC inverters are usually used as the power interface devices between PV modules and loads. The hill climbing method uses the duty cycle (D) of these switching mode power interface devices as the judging parameter when the task of the maximum power point tracking is implemented. When the condition dP/dD = 0 is accomplished, it represents that the maximum power point has been tracked. The flow diagram of the hill climbing algorithm is shown in Fig. 7.

Fig. 6 The flow diagram of the incremental conductance method Furthermore, when the voltage and current of PV modules change during a voltage perturbation and dI/dV > I/V (dP/dV > 0), the operating voltage of PV modules is located on the left side of the maximum power point in the P-V diagram, and has to be raised in order to track the maximum power point. If dI/dV < I/V (dP/dV < 0), the operating voltage of PV modules will be located on the right side of the maximum power point in the P-V diagram, and has to be reduced in order to track the maximum power point. The advantage of the incremental conductance method, which is superior to those of the other two MPPT algorithms, is that it can calculate and find the exact perturbation direction for the operating voltage of PV modules. In theory, when the maximum power point is found by the judgment conditions (dI/dV = I/V and dI = 0) of the incremental conductance method, it can avoid the perturbation phenomenon near the maximum power point which is usually happened for the other two MPPT algorithms. The value of operating voltage is then fixed. However, it
31

Fig. 7 The flow diagram of the hill climbing method

,2010.12

The duty cycle in every sampling period is determined by the comparison of the power at present time and previous time. If the incremental power dP > 0, the duty cycle should be increased in order to make dD > 0. If dP < 0, the duty cycle is then reduced to make dD < 0. The advantages of the hill climbing method are similar to those of the P&O method which are simple structure and less required parameters. Shortcomings of the hill climbing method are described below. Fig. 8 is the P-D curve diagram of PV modules when the power interface device is DC-DC buck converter. If the initial operating point of the PV system is located on the left side of the maximum power point, the duty cycle has to be continuously increased on the basis of the judgment procedure of the hill climbing method in order to track the maximum power point. When the operating point of the PV system is located on the right side of the maximum power point, the duty cycle should be continuously reduced to return back to the maximum power point. However, if the operating point wants to move toward the maximum power point (dP > 0) the incremental duty cycle should be greater than zero (dD > 0) according to the judgment procedure of the hill climbing method shown in Fig. 7. This will cause the operating point to move farther away from the maximum power point. Therefore, a misjudgment of tracking direction may happen under this kind of situation. For the hill climbing method, this misjudgment is a fatal weak point [5].

5. Analysis and Discussion of the Simulation Results


In order to compare the accuracy and efficiency of the three MPPT algorithms selected in this paper, Matlab/Simulink is used to implement the tasks of modeling and simulation. The PV module used in the PV system is the product of Sanyo Company whose model is HIP-200NHE1. This kind of PV module is composed of 72 solar cells in series, and the electrical specification tested by the factory under 1000W/m2, AM1.5 and 25oC conditions is listed in Table 1. Table 1 Electrical specification of a Sanyo PV module
Item Rated maximum power (W) Rated voltage (V) Rated current (A) Open circuit voltage VOC (V) Short circuit current ISC (A) ISC temperature coefficient (mA/) VOC temperature coefficient (V/) Value 200 40.0 5.00 49.6 5.50 1.65 0.129

Fig. 9 is the block diagram of the PV simulation system used in this paper. The hardware specification of the computer used for simulation is Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.40GHz).

Fig. 9 The block diagram of the PV simulation system Figs. 10 to 12 are comparison diagrams of output powers for the PV system with three selected MPPT algorithms under the conditions of 700W/m2, 28oC and the load of 15. Fig. 13 is the P-V curve diagram of PV modules under the same weather conditions, which is used to collate the tracking results simulated by the PV system. From Figs. 10-12, it can be observed that the output
32

Fig. 8 The P-D curve diagram of PV modules

A Study on Maximum Power Point Tracking Algorithms for Photovoltaic Systems

powers with MPPT algorithms are obviously greater than those without MPPT algorithms. After cross matching procedures, the output tracking powers of three MPPT algorithms can all approach the ideal maximum power. They are very close to each other. It indirectly indicates that the three MPPT algorithms discussed in this paper have considerable accuracy.

Fig. 13 P-V curve diagram of a PV module under weather conditions of 700W/m2 and 28oC Table 2 lists the tracking and modification number for three MPPT systems under the conditions of three different sun irradiances, PV module temperatures, and the same voltage oscillations. Since both the P&O and incremental conductance methods use voltage perturbations (dV) to track the maximum power of PV modules, the tracking number needed for MPPT is almost the same. However, the hill climbing method uses duty cycle perturbation (dD) to track the maximum power, the required tracking number is a little more. Table 2 Comparison of the tracking number for different MPPT system Fig. 11 Comparison diagram of the output power with and without the incremental conductance method Tracking number of MPPT Irradiance 400 W/m2 700 W/m2 1000 W/m2 25 28 Temperature 22 P&Q INC HC 131 132 135 134 135 139 137 138 142

Fig. 10 Comparison diagram of the output power with and without the perturbation & observation method

Fig. 12 Comparison diagram of the output power with and without the hill climbing method
33

Table 3 is the computer elapsed time when the PV simulation system is executed with three MPPT methods under three different weather conditions. According to the results shown in Table 3, the elapsed times of the P&O method are the shortest under all conditions, which is followed by the hill climbing method. The incremental

,2010.12

conductance method has the longest elapsed times owing to its more complicated judgment procedure than those of the other two methods. Table 3 Comparison of the elapsed time for different MPPT systems Elapsed time of MPPT (s) Irradiance 400 W/m2 700 W/m2 1000 W/m2 25 28 Temperature 22 P&Q INC HC
1.3507432 1.6773661 1.5453032 1.8756287 1.4887982 1.7955157 1.7038632 1.9110148 1.8577312

The elapsed times of the MPPT simulation systems are dependent not only on computer specifications, but also on perturbation sizes of MPPT algorithms. For P&O and incremental conductance methods, since both methods use voltage perturbations of PV modules to track the maximum power point, the tracking number will be close to each other based on the condition of the same perturbations. However, incremental conductance method spends more time tracking the maximum power point because of its complicated judgment procedure. Moreover, the perturbing parameter of hill climbing method is the duty cycle. It will have greater voltage variations [3] than the P&O method under the condition of same size of perturbations. Therefore, the oscillations of output voltage for the hill climbing method are greater than those of the P&O methods under the same perturbations. In order to have the same oscillations for both methods, the hill climbing method has to reduce the magnitude of the perturbation and it will cause longer simulation times.

6. Conclusion
The purpose of this paper is to study and compare advantages, shortcomings and execution efficiency for three power-feedback type MPPT methods, including perturbation & observation, incremental conductance and hill climbing methods. The PV simulation system used
34

in this paper is set up under Matlab/Simulink environment. The model of PV modules used in PV simulation system is established according to the electrical specifications of the PV module HIP-200NHE1. After accomplishing the model of PV modules, the models of DC-DC buck-boost converter and MPPT systems are combined with it to complete the PV simulation system with the MPPT function. The accuracy and execution efficiency for each MPPT algorithm can then be simulated under different weather conditions. According to the results shown in Figs. 10 to 12, the tracking powers of all three MPPT algorithms are close to the corresponding maximum power. The algorithms discussed in this paper show considerable superior accuracy. From the discussion and interpretation described in previous Sections and the simulation results listed in Table 2 and 3, it can be found that the oscillations of terminal voltage of PV modules for the hill climbing method are comparatively larger under the condition of the same perturbations. P&O algorithm has well regulated PV output voltage than hill climbing algorithm. However, perturbation magnitude of the hill climbing method will be getting smaller under the condition of having similar oscillations of PV output voltage. This causes a longer simulation elapsed time for the hill climbing method to track the maximum power point. Therefore, P&O algorithm possesses faster dynamic response than hill climbing algorithm. Besides, the tracking elapsed time of the incremental conductance method is longer than the other two methods owing to its complicated judgment procedure in every perturbing period. The incremental conductance method has advantages of exact perturbing and tracking direction and steady maximum power operating voltage. However, the other two methods have the possibility of misjudgment for determining the perturbing and tracking direction. Therefore, the incremental conductance method is more competitive than the other two methods in the PV system which uses

A Study on Maximum Power Point Tracking Algorithms for Photovoltaic Systems

hardware technology to implement the MPPT algorithms.

References
[1] C. A. P. Tavares, K. T. F. Leite, W. I. Suemitsu, M. D. Bellar, Performance evaluation of photovoltaic solar system with different MPPT methods, Industrial Electronics, 2009. IECON '09. 35th Annual Conference of IEEE, pp.719-724, 3-5 Nov. 2009. [2] C. Hua, J. Lin, C. Shen, Implementation of DSP-controlled photovoltaic system with peak power tracking, IEEE Trans. On Industrial Electronics, Vol. 45, No. 1, 1998, pp. 99-107. [3] Fangrui Liu, Yong Kang, Yu Zhang, Shanxu Duan, Comparison of P&O and hill climbing MPPT methods for grid-connected PV converter, 3rd IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications, 2008 (ICIEA 2008), pp.804-807, 3-5 June 2008. [4] Chih-Chiang Hua, Jong-Rong Lin, Fully digital control of distributed photovoltaic power systems, Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Industrial Electronics (ISIE 2001), vol. 1, pp. 1-6, June 2001. [5] Weidong Xiao, A modified adaptive hill climbing maximum power point tracking control method for photovoltaic power system, Master Thesis, The University of Brtish Columbia, July 2003. [6] Ting-Chung Yu, Yi-Ting Shen, Analysis and Simulation of Maximum power point tracking for photovoltaic systems, Proceedings of the 30th ROC Symposium on Electrical Power Engineering, Taoyuan, Taiwan, pp. 92-96, Nov. 28-29, 2009. [7] N. Mutoh, M. Ohno, T. Inoue, A method for MPPT control while searching for parameters corresponding to weather conditions
35

for PV generation systems, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol.53, no.4, pp.1055-1065, June 2006. [8] NianChun Wang, Zuo Sun, K. Yukita, Y. Goto, K. Ichiyanagi, Research of PV model and MPPT methods in Matlab, Asia-Pacific Power and Energy Engineering Conference (APPEEC 2010), pp.1-4, 28-31 March 2010. [9] Jia-Chen Zhuang, Photovoltaic Engineering-Solar Cells, Chuan Hwa Book CO., LTD, Taipei, 1997. [10] D. P. Hohm, M. E. Ropp, Comparative study of maximum power point tracking algorithms, Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 4762, January 2003. [11] T. Esram, P. L. Chapman, Comparison of Photovoltaic Array Maximum Power Point Tracking Techniques, IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 22, no. 2, June 2007. [12] Jae-Ho Lee, HyunSu Bae, Bo-Hyung Cho, Advanced incremental conductance MPPT algorithm with a variable step size, 12th International Conference on Power Electronics and Motion Control, 2006 (EPE-PEMC 2006), pp.603-607, Aug. 30-Sept. 1, 2006. [13] Y. Yusof, S. H. Sayuti, M. Abdul Latif, M. Z. C. Wanik, Modeling and simulation of maximum power point tracker for photovoltaic system, Proceedings of Power and Energy Conference, 2004 (PECon 2004), pp. 88- 93, 29-30 Nov. 2004.

,2010.12


(MPPT) Matlab/Simulink - (PV )

36

You might also like