Electric Power Systems Research 123 (2015) 100–107

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electric Power Systems Research

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

MPPT for PV systems based on a dormant PSO algorithm

Jiying Shi, Wen Zhang ∗ , Yongge Zhang, Fei Xue, Ting Yang
School of Electrical Engineering and Automation, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Since the power–voltage characteristic curve of photovoltaic (PV) arrays has multiple peaks under par-
Received 30 September 2014 tially shaded conditions, the conventional maximum power point tracking (MPPT) control methods will
Received in revised form 28 January 2015 fail to work. However, the particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm is very suitable to solve the
Accepted 3 February 2015
multi-extreme optimization problem. Then this paper proposes a dual-algorithm search method: first,
Available online 25 February 2015
a dormant particle swarm optimization (DPSO) algorithm is activated to search the area of global peak,
and then the algorithm will be switched to conventional incremental conductance (INC) algorithm to
Keywords:
track the maximum output power of photovoltaic arrays. During the iteration process of DPSO, if parti-
Dormant particle swarm optimization
(DPSO)
cles happen to search repeatedly or sway in a small region, they will be turned into dormant state so as
Maximum power point tracking (MPPT) to reduce convergence time and improve efficiency. Due to the elimination of searching repeatedly, the
Partially shaded conditions number of particles can be large to strengthen optimization capability. In addition, the optimal number of
Search sequence of particles particles for DPSO is found by analysis and simulation. Furthermore, the searching sequence of particles
Voltage spike is optimized to effectively reduce fluctuation of voltage and suppress output voltage spike. Finally, the
excellent performance of the proposed model is verified by simulations and experiments.
© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Solar energy is a very popular source of renewable energy due
to several advantages. Photovoltaic (PV) power systems have been
widely used in many countries. However, there are many urgent
issues to tackle in the application of PV power systems. One of the
central problems is how to improve efficiency [1–3]. Since the PV
arrays exhibit a nonlinear power–voltage (P–V) characteristic curve
which varies with insolation and temperature, how to achieve max-
imum power point tracking (MPPT) is a very important technology
[4,5].
To date, various conventional MPPT schemes have been pro-
posed including hill-climbing (HC) [6–8], perturb and observe
(P&O) [9–12], and incremental conductance (INC) [13–16], etc.
These methods have simple structures and low equipment require-
ment, but they cannot handle the partially shaded conditions (PSC)
because P–V curve displays multiple peaks with several local peaks
and a global peak (GP), which cannot be differentiated by con-
ventional algorithms. However, PSC occur quite commonly due to
sun position, clouds, buildings, trees, and so on, so it is necessary
to improve these algorithms to track the actual GP. Then sev-
eral attempts have been suggested by researchers in Ref. [17–20].
∗ Tel.: +86 15122160704.
E-mail address: eewenzi@163.com (W. Zhang).
Authors in Ref. [17] have reported an MPPT scheme that uses
Fibonacci sequence to track the GP under PSC. However, the method
does not guarantee GP tracking under all conditions. Authors in Ref.
[18] proposed a two-stage method to track the GP. In the first stage,
the region of the GP is detected using the load line, and in the second
stage, the operating point converges to the GP. But, this method may
fail to track the GP if the GP lies on the left side of the load line. In
another work [19], authors proposed a two-stage approach. Despite
its effectiveness, the method needs to scan almost 80% of the I–V
curve to find the GP, which will lead slow response. In Ref. [20],
authors proposed a dividing rectangle (DIRECT) search method,
which is based on a Lipschitz condition to find the GP. However,
the algorithm is very complex, which will increase the burden of
system significantly.
The essential issue of MPPT control is an optimization prob-
lem which can be achieved by using evolutionary algorithm. PSO
algorithm owns the characteristics of parallel processing, good
robustness, and high probability of finding global optimal solution.
Because of its good performance in multiple-peak function opti-
mization, PSO is very suited for MPPT control of PV system under
PSC [21–27]. However, in all of these PSO methods, the search-
ing paths of particles will overlap. Because some particles will go
through the path which have been searched by others lying on
the same side of GP. This phenomenon of searching repeatedly is
very common in above PSO methods, which results in slow con-
vergence speed. Additional, due to the initial positions of particles

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2015.02.001
0378-7796/© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 J. Shi et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 123 (2015) 100–107 101

and distribution of local peaks and global peak, some particles will
sway or cannot get to the GP under certain conditions. This paper
proposes a new dormant particle swarm optimization (DPSO) algo-
rithm, in which the particles searching repeatedly or swaying in a
small region will be turned into dormant state. Thus, the speed and
efficiency of MPPT will be greatly improved. The DPSO algorithm,
together with INC algorithm which aims at tracking the maximum
power point precisely, constitutes the dual-algorithm model, which
is simple to implement and can achieve MPPT rapidly and accu-
rately under PSC.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section
II briefly introduces the conventional PSO (CPSO); Section III
describes the proposed DPSO, the optimal number of particles and
reasonable searching sequence; While in Section IV and V, the Fig. 1. Distribution, trend, and neighborhoods of particles.
performance of DPSO to track GP is simulated and experimented,
respectively; the main conclusions are made in Section VI.

2. Overview of CPSO
the probability of converging to a local peak instead of GP. There-
fore, in the initial particles are settled evenly at some fixed values.
PSO, as a new swarm intelligence optimization algorithm, firstly
Regardless of environment varying, all particles should be able to
proposed by Kennedy and Eberhart in 1995 [28], has been devel-
gather at GP for the most types of P–V curves. During search pro-
oping rapidly in recent 20 years. It is modeled according to the
cess, the region which has been searched by a particle is defined as
behavior of bird flocks. Its advantages are simple realization and
its neighborhood.
fast convergence, and it is well applied to find the global optimal
Let us assume that three particles (P1, P2, and P3) are used when
solution in a nonlinear, discontinuous, nondifferentiable curve [29].
PV arrays are under PSC. The distribution, trend, and neighborhoods
In this algorithm, several cooperative particles are used in an n-
of these particles are shown in Fig. 1. In the process of iteration,
dimensional space. Each particle owns its position pi (distributed
three cases that particles search their neighborhoods repeatedly or
randomly) and velocity vi (vi = 0 in initiation). The position of a par-
sway in a small region may occur, leading to long search time and
ticle is influenced by its best position so far, Pbesti , and the best
low efficiency. However, in DPSO they will be turned into dormant
position of all particles so far, Gbest . Velocity and position of particles
state and not participate in the next iteration.
are calculated by

vk+1
i
= ωvki + c1 r1 (Pbesti − pki ) + c2 r2 (Gbest − pki )
pk+1 = pki + vk+1
i i
where i = 1,2,. . ., Np , Np is the number of particles, ω is the inertia
weight, c1 and c2 are the acceleration coefficients, r1 , r2 are random
variables uniformly distributed within [0,1], k is iteration number.
This paper has analyzed and improved the structure and param-
eters of CPSO to make it more practical and effective. Random
numbers in equation (1) mainly help to ensure the capacity to
search any potential local peaks; however, they are not necessary
in MPPT control based on simple P–V curve. Moreover, two poten-
tial problems can be observed when simulating [30]. First, if the
random number is small with the present information of control
variable (duty cycle is adopted in this paper), only a small change in
the velocity term of the PSO equation is obtained, which will result
in more iterations needed by CPSO. Second, if the random number
is close to 1 when the power values of local peaks and GP are simi-
lar, CPSO may escape from the GP. To handle these drawbacks, the
random numbers are removed and velocity factor is limited to a cer-
tain value Vmax , which is set according to the distance between two
peaks. Therefore, the iteration formulas of CPSO can be rewritten
as
vk+1
i
= ωvki + c1 (Pbesti − pki ) + c2 (Gbest − pki )
pk+1 = pki + vk+1
i i
 
where vk+1  ≤ Vmax .
i case 2 or 3 into dormant state is that they do not update their Pbesti
3. Application of DPSO
3.1. DPSO
Initially the particles of CPSO are settled randomly, which may
lead to over-concentration distribution. As a result, particles have
(1) (1) P1 is already close to the neighborhood of P2 and will enter
into it in next iteration. According to principle of CPSO, P1 will
(2)
repeatedly search the neighborhood of P2; however, in DPSO,
P1 will be turned into dormant state and not participate in the
later iterations. Moreover, P2 will possess the neighborhood of
P1 and update Pbesti and Gbest in its new neighborhood. It is the
most common case which is named case 1.
(2) Because of the far distance of Pbesti (point LP3) and Gbest (point
LP2) of P3 and parameters setting in equation (3), P3 will keep
swaying between LP2 and LP3. This case is named case 2.
(3) The initial position of P2 is close to GP (point LP2), so P2 can find
GP at the beginning. In the later iterations, P2 will sway around
GP continuously due to parameter ω, circuit characteristic and
accuracy of sensors. This case is common, too, and named case
3.
So particles in DPSO have two states: dormant state and active
state. And particles dormancy is just as same as volcano dormancy.
The dormant volcano is divided into live and dead volcano, as well
as dormant particles. Case 1 shown in Fig. 1 is called as dead dor-
mancy, i.e., the particles will not be activated to participate in later
iterations forever. Meanwhile, both case 2 and 3 are called as live
dormancy, i.e., the dormant particles are possible to be activated
(3)
to participate in later iterations. Certainly, the reactivated particles
(4) may be turned into dormant state again in later iterations.
In essence, the reason of turning the particles which happen to
or Gbest in several iterations. Therefore, the judgment of live dor-
mant particles reactivation is whether the Pbesti or Gbest is updated
to new values. The initial position of reactivated particles is located
at the point of its neighborhood boundary toward the location of
new Gbest in order to reduce the iteration number k.
To make clear the tracking of maximum power point, an exam-
ple is given to explain how DPSO works and how particles be turned
102 J. Shi et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 123 (2015) 100–107

Fig. 2. Operation process of DPSO.

into dormant state during iterations. The coefficients in equations
(3) and (4) are w = 0.4, c1 = 0.8, c2 = 1, Vmax = 0.02. Fig. 2a–e show the
corresponding iteration process. In the process, Nap is the number
of the active particles, and k is the iteration number.
Suddenly, a great change in environmental condition occurs; the
P–V curve shown in Fig. 2a exhibits multiple peaks. DPSO is acti-
vated and initiated to start up the optimization process [22]. The
number of particles is assumed as 6 (P1–P6). Those particles start
to iterate according to equation (3) and (4), as shown in Fig. 2a. P3 is
the current Gbest that represents the global optimal position and its
velocity is calculated by ωv3 , so v3 gets smaller and smaller before
other particles update new Gbest . In the third iteration, P3 is turned
into dormant state as it happens to case 3. Thus, there are 4 active
particles left in the fourth and fifth iterations, as shown in Fig. 2b. In
the fifth iteration, both P4 and P6 are turned into dormant state due
to entering into the neighborhoods of P3 and P5 (case 1), respec-
tively. Furthermore, P5 owns the neighborhood of P6 and update
its Pbesti in new neighborhood. The number of active particles Nap
turns to 3. They are P1, P2, and P5 shown in Fig. 2c. In the seventh
iteration, P1 is turned into dormant state due to case 1. Meanwhile,
because of the distance between Gbest and its new Pbesti , P5 happens
to case 2 and is turned into dormant state. In the eighth iteration,
there is only one active particle (P2) left shown in Fig. 2d. In all of
the dormant particles, P3 and P5 are live dormant particles, and
the others are dead dormant particles. In this iteration, P2 happens
to case 1 and P3 owns the new neighborhood. What is different is
that P2 finds new global optimal position and updates Gbest . The
change of Gbest satisfies the judgment of reactivation, so P3 and P5
are reactivated, as shown in Fig. 2e. The number of active particles
Nap turns to 2. Afterwards, both P3 and P5 are turned into dormant
will make the situation of searching repeatedly more serious. In the
application of CPSO, most studies choose to reduce convergence-
time by using a minimum number of particles, regardless of the
unstable optimization capability of CPSO during complex shaded
conditions [31].
Considering about the potential local peaks in P–V curve under
complex conditions, the search area decided by initial positions of
all particles is fixed. In theory, the convergence time in DPSO is
approximately equivalent value. So DPSO could use a large number
of particles to improve the optimization capability. However, if the
particles are obviously too many, the dormant judgment may waste
time and power. The formula for power loss is written as
 
Ploss = P tpg − Paop t cg (5)
where tcg is convergence time, Paop is the average output power of
systems in convergence, Ptpg is theoretical power generation.
As sample time is 0.02 s, convergence time and power loss of
several simulations with different number of particles are shown
in Table 1. These simulations are implemented in MATALB when the
PV arrays are under standard test conditions (STC, the insolation is
1000 W/m2 , and the temperature is 25 ◦ C). In these simulations, the
PV arrays consist of three PV modules connected in series and the
MPPT circuit is the standard Boost DC/DC converter, as shown in
Fig. 5. Also, the P–V curve of this PV arrays under STC is shown in
Fig. 6 (curve 1). The data in Table 1 is obtained by simulating the
Table 1
Performance of two PSO with different number of particles (sample time = 0.02 s).
NP CPSO DPSO

state again in tenth iteration. Then there is no active particle and tcg (s) Ploss (W s) tcg (s) Ploss (W s)
the GP region is found. 3 0.789 56.43 0.795 55.43
4 0.805 65.52 0.760 52.84
5 1.005 80.20 0.735 51.72
3.2. Number of particles 6 1.320 85.82 0.780 54.95
8 1.675 123.25 0.805 57.68
The number of particles Np is an important parameter in CPSO. A 10 2.125 140.78 0.830 62.70
large of particles can improve the optimization capability to find GP, 12 2.670 155.62 0.845 63.56
14 3.125 168.73 0.905 72.63
but it will spend more time to converge all of particles, moreover, it
 J. Shi et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 123 (2015) 100–107 103

Fig. 3. Voltage waveforms with different searching sequences.

CPSO and DPSO with different number of particles. The data here
confirms the previous analysis. When the number is increasing,
the tcg and Ploss of CPSO are increasing quickly; however, the data
of DPSO is relatively stable. Then, five particles are chosen as the
optimal selection for DPSO.

3.3. Searching sequence

The parameters Pbesti , Gbest , pi , and vi in equations (3) and (4) are
not affected by different searching sequences of particles because
they are updated at the end of each iteration, and so are the iter-
ation number and convergence time. Nevertheless, the searching
sequence determines, at one level, the quality of output voltage
waveform, and also affects power loss of systems in a degree. Three
typical searching sequences and the corresponding output volt-
age waveforms in four iterations tested under STC are shown in
Fig. 3. The sampling period of DPSO (TDPSO ) is 0.02 s and the particle
number is five, then iteration time is 0.1 s.
As shown in Fig. 3, for three searching sequences, the output
voltage waveforms have many points in common, and the conver-
gence time is same, moreover, the power losses which should be
same in theory are 46.44, 44.73, and 44.67 W s, respectively. Among
these sequences, sequence 1 is the most common used but its effect
is the worst.
In terms of fluctuation of waveform, the voltage of sequence 1
shocks most quickly with one peak and one trough in each iteration
under STC. In contrast, the voltage fluctuation is obviously slight in
sequence 2, and especially gentle in sequence 3 with one peak and
one trough in every two iterations. As for voltage spike, the reason
of its generation is that there is at least one local peak between two
continuous particles. i.e., the more times two continuous particles
leap over local peaks, the more voltage spikes generate. Sequence
1 will leap over each local peak one time in each iteration, and
leap over all local peaks between two continuous iterations where
sequences 2 and 3 generate less voltage spikes. However, what is
different is sequence 3 has more voltage spikes than sequence 2
due to leaping over local peaks frequently.
After considering comprehensively, sequence 2 is regarded as
the optimal selection and adopted in the DPSO proposed in this
paper. The reason is that searching in sequence 2, both the fluc-
tuation of output voltage waveform and the voltage spike can be
ensured in the acceptable range, which is helpful to maintain sta-
bility of DC-bus voltage in PV power system.
3.4. Dual-algorithm model
A dual-algorithm model is proposed in this paper consisting of
DPSO algorithm and INC algorithm. If the inequality in equation (6)
is fulfilled during the period of INC algorithm maintaining system
Fig. 4. Flowchart for the dual-algorithm model.
work, the occurrence of PSC is confirmed and DPSO is activated
immediately. DPSO is applied to find the area of GP rapidly with
local peaks interfering. During iteration, the particles are turned
into dormant state one after one until there is no activate particle
(i.e., Nap = 0), and at this moment the area of GP is located. Then, it
will be replaced by INC algorithm which has stable performance in
single peak curve [32]. The flowchart of this dual-algorithm model
is shown in Fig. 4. To deal with the condition of a local peak changing
into a new GP with shading varying slowly [33], the delay time to
restart automatically is set as 2 min [34].
 
 Pnew − Pold 
 P  ≥ P (6)
old
where Pnew (equals as IPV VPV ) and Pold are power values of PV arrays
in two successive sample periods during INC algorithm working.
P is a limited parameter analyzed in Ref. [31].
4. Simulation
4.1. Simulation environment
Standard boost converter is utilized to implement MPPT control
in this paper, as shown in Fig. 5. In the mode, the PV arrays consist
of three commercial PV modules MSX-60 connected in series.
Table 2 provides the key parameters of the module including
sampling time of two algorithms TDPSO and TINC , number of particles
Np , and initial positions of these particles pi . The other parameters
are analyzed in Refs. [30,31].
104 J. Shi et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 123 (2015) 100–107

MPPT
CONTROL

Fig. 5. Simulation model of PV system.

Table 2
Basic parameters. Fig. 6. Varied P–V curves used in the simulation.

NP 5 ω 0.4 Vmax 0.02

(curve 2). Then at t = 2 s, the insolation changes to 400, 900, and
n 1 c1 0.8 TDPSO (s) 0.020
1200 W/m2 , and temperature changes to 40 ◦ C (curve 3). And the
P 0.15 c2 1.0 TINC (s) 0.001
pi 0.3,0.45,0.6,0.75,0.9 optimal operating points for every P–V curve are labeled as points
GP1, GP2, and GP3.

Fig. 6 shows the simulation P–V curves of the PV arrays under 4.2. Simulation results and analysis
three different complex environments. Initially, the PV arrays are
under STC (curve 1). At t = 1 s, the insolation suddenly changes Fig. 7 shows the simulation results for the output power,
to 240, 400, and 800 W/m2 , and temperature changes to 10 ◦ C duty cycle, and number of activated particles, respectively. At the

Fig. 7. Simulation curves of DPSO and INC.

Fig. 8. Simulation curves of CPSO and INC.

 J. Shi et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 123 (2015) 100–107 105

Fig. 9. Simulation curves of conventional INC.

beginning, the PV arrays are under STC. The current P–V curve
labeled as curve 1 is shown in Fig. 6. The DPSO algorithm is acti-
vated immediately to start to search the area of GP by five particles
P1–P5 whose initial positions are fixed. Then, the five particles
start to iterate according to sequence 2. Until the sixth iteration,
P3 is turned into dormant state due to entering into neighborhood
of P2. In the later iteration, P2 happened to case 3 and is turned
into dormant state. At present, there are only three active parti-
cles left. They are turned into dormant state owing to entering to
the neighborhoods of P2, P3, and P4, respectively, in ninth itera-
tion. At t = 0.8 s, the number of activated particles turns to zero,
which confirms that the area of GP1 is successfully located by
DPSO. Then, DPSO is replaced by INC algorithm to maintain oper-
ating point at GP1. Due to the short sample time and small fixed
step of INC algorithm, the corresponding wave fluctuation is very
stable. Fig. 10. Experiment devices.
At t = 1 s, P–V curve is replaced by curve 2 with multiple local
peaks. There are two characteristics in curve 2. First, CPSO may fail
to track GP2 with interference of other local peaks because their complex the P–V curves are. Meanwhile, under three shaded con-
values are quite close. Second, it is easy that particles happen to ditions, the convergence times are almost the same and obviously
sway because of the far distance between GP2 and local peak. At this shorter than CPSO.
point, inequality in equation (6) is fulfilled. As before, DPSO is acti-
vated to start the tracking process. After six iterations, P3 is turned
into dormant state due to case 3, and then, the other particles con- 5. Experimental results
verge with it until they are turned into dormant state in eighth and
ninth iterations. So far, DPSO is replaced by INC algorithm without Solar panel TOP90(12)1210 × 560 is used in experiment with
any activated particles, Nap = 0. following specifications: the maximum power of solar panel
When a sudden change of insolation and temperature occurs at (under STC) PMPP = 90 W, voltage at maximum power point (MPP)
t = 2 s, P–V curve changes to curve 3. In forth iteration, P2 is turned VMPP = 17.5 V, current at MPP IMPP = 5.4 A, open circuit voltage
into dormant state due to case 3. And after several iterations other VOC = 22 V, short circuit current ISC = 6.02 A. The switching fre-
particles are turned into dormant state, too. Then the algorithm is quency of boost converter is 50 kHz. The main experiment devices
switched to INC algorithm to maintain operating point at GP3. are shown in Fig. 10.
As we can see in Fig. 8, with the same sampling time, the dual- The sun is shining brightly at noon during experiments. As
algorithm model with CPSO and INC algorithm need take longer DC/DC converter is connected with purely resistive load, we acquire
time than DPSO to converge all particles under STC. Under some the voltage waveform (similar to power waveform) of load. First,
special conditions, not all particles will converge to GP, and some the output voltage waveform of the PV arrays under partially
of them may sway between Gbest and its Pbesti (i.e., case 2). Then, in shaded condition shown in Fig. 11a is obtained by utilizing global
brief, CPSO is low efficient because particles search repeatedly or scanning method. According to it, we know that the output of
sway. the PV arrays under this partially shaded condition contains a
In addition, Fig. 9 can be obtained by adopting the conventional global peak point and two local peak points. Then the dual-
INC algorithm to track the maximum power point when PV arrays algorithm model with DPSO and INC, dual-algorithm model with
are under partially shaded condition (i.e., insolation is 400, 900, and CPSO and INC and conventional INC algorithm are respectively used
1200 W/m2 in turn, and temperature is 40 ◦ C, so the P–V curve of PV to track the maximum power point when the PV arrays are under
arrays is curve 3. Obviously, the conventional INC algorithm tracks this partially shaded condition. The experiment results shown in
a local peak instead of the GP. So the conventional INC algorithm is Fig. 11b–d prove that both of DPSO and CPSO algorithm can find
not suitable to handle partially shaded conditions. the GP successfully, but conventional INC algorithm falls into a
Simulation results show that the dual-algorithm model consist- local peak point. However, obviously, convergence time of DPSO
ing of DPSO algorithm and INC algorithm could find GP quickly and is quit shorter than CPSO, and voltage waveform of DPSO is gentler,
successfully and maintain the operating point at GP no matter how too.
106 J. Shi et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 123 (2015) 100–107
Fig. 11. Experimental waveforms. a. Output voltage waveform of the PV arrays under partially shaded condition. b. Dual-algorithm model with DPSO and INC. c. Dual-
algorithm model with CPSO and INC. d. Conventional INC algorithm.
6. Conclusion
In this paper, a dual-algorithm MPPT control model based on
DPSO and INC is proposed. The results of simulation and experi-
ment show that, compared with CPSO and conventional INC, the
DPSO greatly shortens the searching time, reduces the fluctuation
of output waveform and improves the efficiency through parti-
cles dormancy and activation control, optimal number of particles
algorithm and search sequence selection. Meanwhile, the INC guar-
antees that the GP can be tracked precisely. This dual-algorithm
model has good performance no matter how complex shaded con-
ditions the PV arrays are under.
Acknowledgements
This work was sponsored by the National Program of Inter-
national S&T Cooperation (2013DFA11040), the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (61172014), and the Natural Science
Foundation of Tianjin (12JCZDJC21300)
References
[1] Z. Li, S. Kai, X. Yan, et al., A modular grid-connected photovoltaic generation
system based on DC bus, J. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 26 (2011) 523–531.
[2] Y. Bo, L. Wuhua, Z. Yi, H. Xiangning, Design and analysis of a gridconnected
photovoltaic power system, J. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 25 (2010) 992–1000.
[3] N.A. Rahim, K. Chaniago, J. Selvaraj, Single-phase seven-level grid-connected
inverter for photovoltaic system, J. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 58 (2011)
2435–2443.
[4] J. Doo-Yong, J. Young-Hyok, P. Sang-Hoon, et al., Interleaved soft-switching
boost converter for photovoltaic power-generation system, J. IEEE Trans. Power
Electron. 26 (2011) 1137–1145.
[5] T. Esram, P.L. Chapman, Comparison of photovoltaic array maximum power
point tracking techniques, J. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 22 (2007) 439–449.
[6] B.N. Alajmi, K.H. Ahmed, S.J. Finney, et al., Fuzzy-logic-control approach of
a modified hill-climbing method for maximum power point in microgrid
standalone photovoltaic system, J. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 26 (2011)
1022–1030.
[7] W. Xiao, W.G. Dunford, A modified adaptive hill climbing MPPT method for
photovoltaic power systems C, in: 35th Annual Power Electronics Specialists
Conference (PESC), 2004, IEEE, 2004, pp. 1957–1963.
[8] H. Al-Atrash, I. Batarseh, K. Rustom, Statistical modeling of DSP-based
hill-climbing MPPT algorithms in noisy environments, in: Applied
Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC), 2005, 2005, pp.
1773–1777.
[9] N. Femia, G. Petrone, G. Spagnuolo, et al., Optimization of perturb and observe
maximum power point tracking method, J. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 20
(2005) 963–973.
[10] N. Fermia, D. Granozio, G. Petrone, et al., Predictive and adaptive MPPT per-
turb and observe method, J. IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst. 43 (2007)
934–950.
[11] A.K. Abdelsalam, A.M. Massoud, S. Ahmed, et al., High-performance adaptive
perturb and observe MPPT technique for photovoltaic-based microgrids, J. IEEE
Trans. Power Electron. 26 (2011) 1010–1021.
[12] L. Piegari, R. Rizzo, Adaptive perturb and observe algorithm for photovoltaic
maximum power point tracking, J. IET Renew. Power Gener. 4 (2010) 317–328.
[13] Z. Longlong, W.G. Hurley, W.H. Wolfle, A new approach to achieve maximum
power point tracking for PV system with a variable inductor, J. IEEE Trans. Power
Electron. 26 (2011) 1031–1037.
[14] K. Soon, S. Mekhilef, A. Safari, Simple and low cost incremental conductance
maximum power point tracking using buck-boost converter, J. Renew. Sustain.
Energy 5 (2013) 0231061–02310612.
[15] C.H. Lin, C.H. Huang, Y.C. Du, et al., Maximum photovoltaic power tracking for
the PV array using the fractional-order incremental conductance method, J.
Appl. Energy 88 (2011) 4840–4847.
[16] A. Safari, S. Mekhilef, Simulation and hardware implementation of incremental
conductance MPPT with direct control method using Cuk converter, J. IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron. 58 (2011) 1154–1161.
[17] M. Miyatake, T. Inada, I. Hiratsuka, et al., Control characteristics of a
fibonacci-search-based maximum power point tracker when a photovoltaic
array is partially shaded, C, in: The 4th International Power Electron-
ics and Motion Control Conference (IPEMC), 2004, Vol. 2, IEEE, 2004, pp.
816–821.
[18] K. Kobayashi, L. Takano, Y. Sawada, A study of a two stage maximum power
point tracking control of a photovoltaic system under partially shaded insola-
tion conditions, J. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 90 (2006) 2975–2988.
[19] H. Patel, V. Agarwal, Maximum power point tracking scheme for PV systems
operating under partially shaded conditions, J. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 55
(2008) 1689–1698.
 J. Shi et al. / Electric Power Systems Research 123 (2015) 100–107 107

[20] N. Tat, L. Luat, L. Kay-Soon, A global maximum power point tracking scheme
employing DIRECT search algorithm for photovoltaic systems, J. IEEE Trans. Ind. Wen Zhang was born in Zhangjiakou City, China, in 1990.
Electron. 57 (2010) 3456–3467. He received B.E. degree in electrical engineering and
[21] V. Phimmasone, T. Endo, Y. Kondo, et al., Improvement of the maximum power automation from Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin,
point tracker for photovoltaic generators with particle swarm optimization China, in 2013. He is currently working toward the M.E.
technique by adding repulsive force among agents, in: Electrical Machines and degree in Tianjin University, Tianjin, China. His research
Systems (ICEMS), 2009, pp. 1–6. interest includes maximum power point tracking technol-
[22] K. Ishaque, Z. Salam, M. Amjad, S. Mekhilef, An improved particle swarm opti- ogy and power electronic techniques.
mization (PSO)-based MPPT for PV with reduced steady-state oscillation, J. IEEE
Trans. Power Electron. 27 (2012) 3627–3638.
[23] L. Yi-Hwa, H. Shyh-Ching, H. Jia-Wei, et al., A particle swarm optimization-
based maximum power point tracking algorithm for PV systems operating
under partially shaded conditions, J. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 27 (2012)
1027–1035.
[24] H. Jing, W. Si-jie, X. Wei, et al., Application of PV-MPPT control based on particle
swarm optimization, J. Power Electron. 46 (2012) 31–33. Yongge Zhang was born in Shijiazhuang City, China, in
[25] L.L. Jiang, D.L. Maskell, J.C. Patra, A novel ant colony opti’mization-based max- 1988. He received B.E. degree in electrical engineering and
imum power point tracking for photovoltaic systems under partially shaded automation from Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin,
conditions, J. Energy Build. 58 (2013) 227–236. China, in 2012. He is currently working toward the M.E.
[26] K. Sundareswaran, S. Peddapati, S. Palani, MPPT of PV systems under partial degree in Tianjin University, Tianjin, China. His research
shaded conditions through a colony of flashing fireflies, J. IEEE Trans. Energy interest includes maximum power point tracking technol-
Convers. 29 (2014) 463–472. ogy and power electronic techniques.
[27] K.L. Lian, J.H. Jhang, I.S. Tian, A maximum power point tracking method based
on perturb-and-observe combined with particle swarm optimization, J. IEEE J.
Photovolt. 4 (2014) 626–633.
[28] R. Eberhart, J. Kennedy, A new optimizer using particle swarm theory, in:
Proceedings of 6th International Symposium on MHS, 1995, pp. 39–43.
[29] C. Ze, Z. Hang, Y. Hongzhi, Research on MPPT control of PV system based on PSO
algorithm, in: 2010 Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC), 2010, pp.
887–892. Fei Xue was born in Guyuan City, China, in 1994. He
[30] K. Ishaque, Z. Salam, A deterministic particle swarm optimization maximum received B.E degree in electrical engineering and automa-
power point tracker for photovoltaic system under partial shading condition, tion from Tianjin University, China, in 2014. He currently
J. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 60 (2013) 3195–3206. is working toward the M.E degree in Tianjin University,
[31] M. Miyatake, M. veerachary, F. Toriumi, et al., Maximum power point tracking Tianjin, China. His research interest includes maximum
of multiple photovoltaic arrays: a PSO approach, J. IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. power point tracking technology and power electronic
Syst. 47 (2011) 367–380. techniques.
[32] D. Sera, L. Mathe, T. Kerekes, et al., On the perturb-and-observe and incremen-
tal conductance MPPT methods for PV systems, J. IEEE J. Photovolt. 3 (2013)
1070–1078.
[33] R. Bruendlinger, B. Bletterie, M. Milde, et al., Maximum power point tracking
performance under partially shaded PV array conditions, C, in: Proceedings of
21st EUPVSEC, Dresden, Germany, 2006, pp. 2157–2160.
[34] Z. Yanwei, S. Xinchun, D. Yangqing, et al., Application of PSO algorithm in global
MPPT for PV array, J. Proc. CSEE 32 (2012) 42–48. Ting Yang is a Professor of Electrical Engineering at Tianjin
University, China. He is the winner of Education Ministry’s
New Century Excellent Talents Supporting Plan. Professor
Jiying Shi was born in Tianjin City, China, in 1959. He Yang is the author/co-author of four books, more than 60
received M.E. and Ph.D. degrees from Tianjin University, publications in technical journals and conferences, and the
Tianjin, China in 1993 and 1996, respectively. He was a vis- chairman of two workshops of IEEE International Confer-
iting scholar and also a post-doctor with The Hong Kong ence. He is a member of International Society for Industry
University of Science and Technology in Hong Kong from and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), and a senior mem-
July 1996 to November 1999. He is currently an Associate ber of the Chinese Institute of Electronic, the committee
Professor at Electrical Engineering and Automation, Tian- member of electronic circuit and system. Professor Yang’s
jin University, China. His research interests include power research effort is focused on power electronic techniques
electronic techniques, renewable energy, and soft switch- and renewable energy.
ing techniques.