# A Hybrid Maximum Power Point Tracking Method for Photovoltaic Systems for Dynamic Weather Conditions

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

^{11}MW, which is far larger than the global energy consumption rate [2,3]. The photovoltaic technology is considered the most prominent method of utilizing solar energy. The power generated from PV (Photovoltaic) system depends on irradiance levels, temperature, shading, and other weather conditions. The MPP (maximum power point) varies with the radiation, thus the maximum power point MPP tracking algorithm is crucial to find and maintain maximum power levels. Using DC/DC convertors, PV generators are continuously being driven to operate at the voltage proposed by the algorithm to supply the load with the maximum available power.

## 2. PV Modeling and Characteristics

_{PV}is the current generated by the cell, I

_{ph}is the solar generated current, I

_{sh}is the shunt resistance current and ID is the diode current, q is an electron charge (1.6 × 10

^{−19}C), T is the cell’s operating temperature, K

_{b}is the Boltzmann’s constant (1.38 × 10

^{−23}J/K), A is the diode ideality factor, R

_{s}is the series resistance, V

_{PV}and I

_{PV}are the photovoltaic operating voltage and current respectively, I

_{DS}is the diode saturation current. Equation (1) is modeled in MATLAB/Simulink employing 72 cells connected in series based on the electrical specifications provided by SUNTECH STP270-24/Vd PV module datasheet shown in Table 1.

_{o}to the input voltage Vi as:

## 3. MPPT Algorithms

#### 3.1. P&O Algorithm

#### 3.2. Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC)

^{2}) in partial and full shading conditions. The second one not shown was used to seek the optimum duty cycle manually in an iterative manner and to record the corresponding open circuit voltage and the short circuit current. Fifty-five input–output data sets are finally produced. It is worth mentioning that these types of modelling work well if there are a large number of data to be used for training.

#### 3.3. Proposed Hybrid MPPT Algorithm

## 4. Results and Discussion

#### 4.1. Performance of FLC Alone

#### 4.2. Performance of P&O Alone

^{2}.

#### 4.3. Performance of the Hybrid Proposed Algorithm

^{2}to 700 W/m

^{2}, the power obtained from P&O controller changed from 259 W to 70 W in 0.4 s while it took only 0.15 s for the proposed controller to change the power from 267 W to 72 W. Table 4 lists comparisons between P&O with different step sizes, Fuzzy and the proposed hybrid controllers. It is clear from simulation results listed in Table 4 that the proposed hybrid controller successfully outcome the shortages of fuzzy and P&O algorithm alone.

#### 4.4. Testing the Performance at Random Weather Conditions

^{2}and the other 36 cells are exposed to 317 W/m

^{2}. These weather conditions points were not utilized for training. It can be seeing in Figure 11 that that P&O got trapped in the local maximum i.e., local maximum power point is 89 W, where the global maximums power point for this weather condition is 118 W. Moreover, the accuracy of FLC was extremely low. i.e., FLC alone was only able to deliver only 84.5% of the maximum available power. Finally, the proposed hybrid controller skipped the fake maxima because of the initial guess generated from fuzzy controller and improved this interpolation and successfully reached the maximum available power of 118 W. Finally, Table 5 compares between the performance of the proposed hybrid algorithm with FLC alone for several cases at weather conditions not utilized for training. It is clear that the hybrid algorithm was successfully able to harvest over 99% of the maximums power available for all random weather conditions, while the FLC efficiency decreases significantly when conditions points are far from those used for training.

## 5. Conclusions

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Bataineh, K.M. Optimisation analysis of solar powered organic Rankine cycle system. IET Renew. Power Gen.
**2016**, 11, 342–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Allataifeh, A.; Bataineh, K.; Al-Khedher, M. Maximum Power Point Tracking Using Fuzzy Logic Controller Under Partial Conditions. Smart Grid Renew. Energy
**2015**, 6, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Parida, B.; Iniyan, S.; Goic, R. A review of solar photovoltaic technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
**2011**, 15, 1625–1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Salas, V.; Olías, E.; Barrado, A.; Lázaro, A. Review of the maximum power point tracking algorithms for stand-alone photovoltaic systems. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells
**2006**, 90, 1555–1578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Abdelsalam, A.K.; Massoud, A.M.; Ahmed, S.; Enjeti, P. High-performance adaptive perturb and observe MPPT technique for photovoltaic-based microgrids. IEEE Trans. Power Electron.
**2011**, 26, 1010–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Patel, H.; Agarwal, V. Investigations into the performance of photovoltaics-based active filter configurations and their control schemes under uniform and non-uniform radiation conditions. IET Renew. Power Gen.
**2010**, 4, 12–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Salem, F.; Moteleb, M.S.A.; Dorrah, H.T. An enhanced fuzzy-PI controller applied to the MPPT problem. J. Sci. Eng.
**2005**, 8, 147–153. [Google Scholar] - Tafticht, T.; Agbossou, K.; Doumbia, M.L.; Cheriti, A. An improved maximum power poin FLC algorithm t tracking method for photovoltaic systems. Renew. Energy
**2008**, 33, 1508–1516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ramprava, R.; Mathur, B.L. Intelligent controller based maximum power point tracking for solar PV system. Int. J. Comput. Appl.
**2011**, 12, 37–41. [Google Scholar] - Chowdhury, S.; Saha, H. Maximum power point tracking of partially shaded solar photovoltaic arrays. Sol. Energy Mater Sol. Cells
**2010**, 94, 1441–1447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Nguyen, T.L.; Low, K. A Global Maximum Power Point Tracking Scheme Employing DIRECT Search Algorithm for Photovoltaic Systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.
**2010**, 57, 3456–3467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Cui, Y.; Yao, W.; Luo, J. A Research and Improvement on a Maximum Power Point Tracking Method for PV System under Partially Shaded Conditions. Procedia Eng.
**2012**, 29, 2583–2589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Lin, C.H.; Huang, C.; Du, Y.; Chen, J. Maximum photovoltaic power tracking for the PV array using the fractional-order incremental conductance method. Appl. Energy
**2011**, 88, 4840–4847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ahmed, R.; Namaane, A.; M’Sirdi, N.K. Improvement in Perturb and Observe Method Using State Flow Approach. Energy Procedia
**2013**, 42, 614–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Taheri, H.; Salam, Z.; Ishaque, K. A Novel Maximum Power Point Tracking Control of Photovoltaic System Under Partial and Rapidly Fluctuating Shadow Conditions Using Differential Evolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Industrial Electronics and Applications, Penang, Malaysia, 3–5 October 2010; pp. 82–87. [Google Scholar]
- Jiang, L.; Maskell, D.L.; Patra, J.C. A novel ant colony optimization-based maximum power point tracking for photovoltaic systems under partially shaded conditions. Energy Build.
**2013**, 58, 227–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Liu, Y.; Liu, C.; Huang, J.; Chen, J. Neural-network-based maximum power point tracking methods for photovoltaic systems operating under fast changing environments. Sol. Energy
**2013**, 89, 42–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Punitha, K.; Devaraj, D.; Sakthivel, S. Artificial neural network based modified incremental conductance algorithm for maximum power point tracking in photovoltaic system under partial shading conditions. Energy
**2013**, 62, 330–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Younis, M.A.; Khatib, T.; Najeeb, M.; Ariffin, A.M. An Improved Maximum Power Point Tracking Controller for PV Systems Using Artificial Neural Network. Przegląd Elektrotechniczny (Electr. Rev.)
**2012**, 88, 116–121. [Google Scholar] - Subiyanto, S.; Mohamed, A.; Hannan, M.A. Intelligent maximum power point tracking for PV system using Hopfield neural network optimized fuzzy logic controller. Energy Build.
**2012**, 51, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Alajmi, B.N.; Ahmed, K.H.; Finney, S.J.; Williams, B.W. A Maximum Power Point Tracking Technique for Partially Shaded Photovoltaic Systems in Microgrids. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.
**2013**, 60, 1596–1606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Singh, S.; Mathew, L.; Shimi, S.L. Design and Simulation of Intelligent Control MPPT Technique for PV Module Using MATLAB/SIMSCAPE. Int. J. Adv. Res. Electr. Electron. Instrum. Eng.
**2013**, 2, 4554–4566. [Google Scholar] - Rezaei, A.; Gholamian, S. Optimization of New Fuzzy Logic Controller by Genetic Algorithm for Maximum Power Point Tracking in Photovoltaic System. ISESCO J. Sci. Technol.
**2013**, 9, 9–16. [Google Scholar] - Kharb, R.K.; Ansari, M.F.; Shimi, S.L. Design and Implementation of ANFIS based MPPT Scheme with Open Loop Boost Converter for Solar PV Module. Int. J. Adv. Res. Electr. Electron. Instrum. Eng.
**2014**, 3, 6517–6524. [Google Scholar] - Zaki, A.M.; Amer, S.I.; Mostafa, M. Maximum Power Point Tracking for PV System Using Advanced Neural Networks Technique. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Adv. Eng.
**2012**, 2, 58–63. [Google Scholar] - Messalti, S.; Harrag, A.; Loukriz, A. A new neural networks MPPT controller for PV systems. In Proceedings of the 2015 6th International Renewable Energy Congress (IREC), Sousse, Tunisia, 24–26 March 2015; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radjai, T.; Gaubert, J.P.; Rahmani, L.; Mekhilef, S. Experimental verification of po mppt algorithm with direct control based on fuzzy logic control using CUK converter. Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst.
**2015**, 25, 492–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Radjai, T.; Rahmani, L.; Mekhilef, S.; Gaubert, J.P. Implementation of a modified incremental conductance {MPPT} algorithm with direct control based on a fuzzy duty cycle change estimator using dspace. Sol. Energy
**2014**, 110, 325–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - D’Souza, N.S.; Lopes, A.C.; Liu, X. Comparative study of variable size perturbation and observation maximum power point trackers for PV systems. Electr. Power Syst. Res.
**2010**, 80, 296–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Salah, B.; Ouali, B. Comparison of fuzzy logic and neural network in maximum power point tracker for PV systems. Electr. Power Syst. Res.
**2011**, 81, 43–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Algarín, C.R.; Giraldo, J.T.; Álvarez, O.R. Fuzzy Logic Based MPPT Controller for a PV System. Energies
**2017**, 10, 2036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Lee, C.; Ko, J.; Seo, T.; Chung, D. MPPT control of photovoltaic system using FLC-PI controller. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems (ICCAS 2013), Gwangju, Korea, 20–23 October 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Cheng, P.C.; Peng, B.R.; Liu, Y.H.; Cheng, Y.S.; Huang, J.W. Optimization of a Fuzzy-Logic-Control-Based MPPT Algorithm Using the Particle Swarm Optimization Technique. Energies
**2015**, 8, 5338–5360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Abu-Rub, H.; Iqbal, A.; Ahmed, S.M.; Peng, F.Z.; Li, Y.; Ge, B. Quasi-Z-source inverter-based photovoltaic generation system with maximum power tracking control using ANFIS. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy
**2013**, 4, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Karlis, A.D.; Kottas, T.L.; Boutalis, Y.S. A novel maximum power point tracking method for PV systems using fuzzy cognitive networks (FCN). Electr. Power Syst. Res.
**2007**, 77, 315–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chiu, C.S. fuzzy maximum power point tracking control of solar power generation systems. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers.
**2010**, 25, 1123–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Algarín, C.; Hernández, D.; Leal, D. A Low-Cost Maximum Power Point Tracking System Based on Neural Network Inverse Model Controller. Electronics
**2018**, 7, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wang, Y.; Ding, L.; Li, N. The application of fuzzy parameters self-tuning PID controller in MPPT of photovoltaic power system. In Proceedings of the Transportation, Mechanical, and Electrical Engineering (TMEE), Changchun, China, 16–18 December 2011; pp. 1129–1132. [Google Scholar]
- Dounis, A.I.; Kofinas, P.; Alafodimos, C.; Tseles, D. Adaptive fuzzy gain scheduling PID controller for maximum power point tracking of photovoltaic system. Renew. Energy
**2013**, 60, 202–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Jiang, L.L.; Nayanasiri, D.; Maskell, D.L.; Vilathgamuwa, D. A hybrid maximum power point tracking for partially shaded photovoltaic systems in the tropics. Renew. Energy
**2015**, 76, 53–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Seyedmahmoudian, M.; Rahmani, R.; Mekhilef, S.; Maung Than Oo, A.; Stojcevski, A.; Soon, T.K.; Ghandhari, A.S. Simulation and hardware implementation of new maximum power point tracking technique for partially shaded PV system using hybrid DEPSO method. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy
**2015**, 6, 850–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Daraban, S.; Petreus, D.; Morel, C. A novel {MPPT} (maximum power point tracking) algorithm based on a modified genetic algorithm specialized on tracking the global maximum power point in photovoltaic systems affected by partial shading. Energy
**2014**, 74, 374–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Lian, K.; Jhang, J.; Tian, I. A maximum power point tracking method based on perturb-and-observe combined with particle swarm optimization. IEEE J. Photovolt.
**2014**, 4, 626–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sundareswaran, K.; Kumar, V.V.; Palani, S. Application of a combined particle swarm optimization and perturb and observe method for {MPPT} in {PV} systems under partial shading conditions. Renew. Energy
**2015**, 75, 308–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Tsai, H.; Tu, C.; Su, Y. Development of Generalized Photovoltaic Model Using MATLAB/SIMULINK. In Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science (WCECS), San Francisco, CA, USA, 22–24 October 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Seyedmahmoudian, M.; Mekhilef, S.; Rahmani, R.; Yusof, R.; Renani, E. Analytical Modeling of Partially Shaded Photovoltaic Systems. Energies
**2013**, 6, 128–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Ramabadran, R. MATLAB Based Modelling and Performance Study of Series Connected SPVA under Partial Shaded Conditions. J. Sustain. Dev.
**2009**, 2, 85–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Salmi, T.; Bouzguenda, M.; Gastli, A.; Masmoudi, A. MATLAB/Simulink Based Modelling of Solar Photovoltaic Cell. Int. J. Renew. Energy Res.
**2012**, 2, 213–218. [Google Scholar] - Arcman Solar Power. Available online: http://www.arcmansolar.com/products/28.aspx?cid=7-12-11 (accessed on 16 November 2016).

**Figure 1.**Characteristics of STP270-24/Vd module under different radiation levels, (

**a**) P–V uniform; (

**b**) I–V characteristics, uniform; (

**c**) P–V, partial shading; (

**d**) I–V, partial shading.

**Figure 6.**Performance of FLC alone under different radiation conditions. (

**a**) Uniform radiation of 1000 W/m

^{2}; (

**b**) partial shading of (800, 400) W/m

^{2}; (

**c**) uniform radiation of 635 W/m

^{2}; (

**d**) partial shading of (985, 317) W/m

^{2}.

**Figure 7.**P&O performance. (

**a**) Effect of step size uniform shading; (

**b**) PV curve under partial shading; (

**c**) P&O controller performance under partial shading.

**Figure 8.**Simulation results under uniform shading conditions, (

**a**) insolation level of 800 W/m

^{2}; (

**b**) insolation level of 1000 W/m

^{2}; (

**c**) insolation level of 600 W/m

^{2}; (

**d**) insolation level of 400 W/m

^{2}.

**Figure 9.**Simulation results under partial shading conditions, (

**a**) (1000, 300) W/m

^{2}; (

**b**) (800, 300) W/m

^{2}; (

**c**) (500, 200) W/m

^{2}; (

**d**) (400, 100) W/m

^{2}.

**Figure 10.**Simulation results under sudden changes in radiation levels. (

**a**) Dropping from 1000 to 300 W/m

^{2}; (

**b**) Dropping from 900 to 400 W/m

^{2}; (

**c**) rising from 250 to 850 W/m

^{2}; (

**d**) rising from 300 to 700 W/m

^{2}.

**Figure 11.**Simulation results under partial shading conditions of 985–317 W/m

^{2}, (

**a**) performance of; (

**b**) P–V characteristics of STP270 PV module with the power levels obtained by the three controllers.

**Table 1.**Electrical specifications the STP 270-24/Vd PV module [49].

Electrical Characteristic | STP270-24/Vd |
---|---|

Optimum Operating Voltage (V_{mp}) | 35.0 V |

Optimum Operating Current (I_{mp}) | 7.71 A |

Open-Circuit Voltage (V_{oc}) | 44.5 V |

Short-Circuit Current (I_{sc}) | 8.20 A |

Maximum Power at STC (P_{max}) | 270 W |

Temperature Coefficient of V_{oc} | −0.34%/°C |

Temperature Coefficient of I_{sc} | 0.045%/°C |

Fuzzy Logic Type | Sugeno |
---|---|

Number of inputs | 2 |

Number of membership function | 10 |

No of TRAINING a epochs | 3000 |

Input membership function type | Gaussian |

output membership function type | Linear |

Algorithm used | Grid partitioning |

Optimization method | Hybrid |

**Table 3.**Performance of fuzzy controller under partial shading conditions at points not utilized in training.

Case No. | Weather Condition | Ir1 (Watt/m^{2}) | Ir2 (Watt/m^{2}) | Nominal Power (Watt) | Power after Fuzzy (Watt) | Efficiency |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

1 | Uniform Irradiation | 1000 | 1000 | 258 | 258 | 100% |

2 | 900 | 900 | 232 | 232 | 100% | |

3 | 800 | 800 | 207 | 206 | 99.6% | |

4 | 700 | 700 | 181 | 179.1 | 99% | |

5 | 600 | 600 | 155 | 154.2 | 99.5% | |

6 | 500 | 500 | 128.5 | 127.6 | 99.3% | |

7 | 400 | 400 | 103.2 | 102.6 | 99.6% | |

8 | 740 | 740 | 190.3 | 163.4 | 85.7 | |

9 | 585 | 585 | 150.63 | 139.2 | 92.4 | |

10 | 597 | 597 | 153.8 | 151.6 | 98.5 | |

11 | Partial Shading | 1000 | 300 | 128.1 | 122.5 | 96% |

12 | 800 | 300 | 101.4 | 99.3 | 98% | |

13 | 500 | 200 | 58.1 | 56.2 | 96.7% | |

14 | 400 | 100 | 46.3 | 44.8 | 96.5% | |

15 | 700 | 300 | 48.7 | 47.5 | 99% | |

16 | 892 | 407 | 126.3 | 106.8 | 84.4% | |

17 | 644 | 596 | 103.7 | 92.3 | 89.0% | |

18 | 400 | 100 | 46.3 | 38 | 82.1% |

**Table 4.**Comparison between P&O with different step sizes, fuzzy and the proposed hybrid controllers.

Controller | Accuracy | Convergence | Oscillations | Trapping |
---|---|---|---|---|

Fuzzy | Moderate | Fast | Low | No |

P&O/large step size | Low | Fast | High | Yes |

P&O/small step size | High | Slow | Moderate | Yes |

Hybrid | High | Fast | Moderate | No |

**Table 5.**Performance of hybrid algorithm under partial shading conditions at points not utilized in training.

Case No. | Ir1 (Watt/m^{2}) | Ir2 (Watt/m^{2}) | Nominal Power (Watt) | FLC Alone (Watt) | Hybrid Proposed Algorithm (Watt) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|

1 | 1000 | 300 | 128.1 | 122.5 | 127.9 |

2 | 800 | 300 | 101.4 | 99.3 | 101.2 |

3 | 500 | 200 | 58.1 | 56.2 | 57.9 |

4 | 400 | 100 | 46.3 | 44.8 | 46.2 |

5 | 700 | 300 | 48.7 | 47.5 | 48.5 |

6 | 892 | 407 | 126.3 | 106.8 | 126.2 |

7 | 644 | 596 | 103.7 | 92.3 | 103.5 |

8 | 400 | 100 | 46.3 | 38 | 46.1 |

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Bataineh, K.; Eid, N. A Hybrid Maximum Power Point Tracking Method for Photovoltaic Systems for Dynamic Weather Conditions. *Resources* **2018**, *7*, 68.
https://doi.org/10.3390/resources7040068

**AMA Style**

Bataineh K, Eid N. A Hybrid Maximum Power Point Tracking Method for Photovoltaic Systems for Dynamic Weather Conditions. *Resources*. 2018; 7(4):68.
https://doi.org/10.3390/resources7040068

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Bataineh, Khaled, and Naser Eid. 2018. "A Hybrid Maximum Power Point Tracking Method for Photovoltaic Systems for Dynamic Weather Conditions" *Resources* 7, no. 4: 68.
https://doi.org/10.3390/resources7040068