Scribd
Upload
20 views3 pages

Extended Abstract ICASE2022 - Oran

The document summarizes a comparative study between conventional and metaheuristic MPPT algorithms for solar applications under standard testing conditions. It compares the Perturb and Observe (P&O) method, Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) technique, and Cuckoo Search Algorithm (CSA). The simulation found that while PSO converged fastest at 0.12 seconds, P&O had a slightly higher efficiency at 99.97%. PSO performed better in response time while P&O was slightly more efficient.

Uploaded by

Ayoub Mederbel
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
20 views3 pages

Extended Abstract ICASE2022 - Oran

The document summarizes a comparative study between conventional and metaheuristic MPPT algorithms for solar applications under standard testing conditions. It compares the Perturb and Observe (P&O) method, Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) technique, and Cuckoo Search Algorithm (CSA). The simulation found that while PSO converged fastest at 0.12 seconds, P&O had a slightly higher efficiency at 99.97%. PSO performed better in response time while P&O was slightly more efficient.

Uploaded by

Ayoub Mederbel
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

The International Conference On Applied

Science And Engineering (ICASE-22)

Comparative Study Between Conventional And Metaheuristic MPPT


Algorithms For Solar Applications Under Standard Testing Conditions.

A. Mederbel*1, M. Khadraoui1, K. Sahraoui1, M. Medles1, A. Nekrala1 A. Bouzidi1,


R. Miloua1
1
Laboratoire d’Elaboration et Caracterisation des Materiaux LECM, Electronics Department,
Electrical Engineering Faculty, University of Djilali Liabes, Sidi Bel Abbes, Algeria
e-mail: [email protected]
Keywords: Boost; CSA; MPPT; P&O; PSO; PV

EXTENDED ABSTRACT

Photovoltaic (PV) energy has been the center of interest of industry and research in the last
few decades because it is a clean and inexhaustible energy. However, to maximize the out of a
PV array, since it varies under different conditions, Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT)
controllers have been introduced. In the recent years many MPPT methods have been proposed,
ranging from simple conventional methods to more advanced and complex metaheuristic
algorithms each having their own strong points and weaknesses.

The boost converter (figure 1) consists of an input capacitor Cin, an inductor L, a power
MOSFET, a diode D, a filter capacitor Cout and a load resistance RL. The MOSFET which is
considered as a switch is turned ON and OFF at the switching frequency fs=1/T with the ON
duty ratio D=ton/T where ton is the time interval where the MOSFET is ON. [1]

Figure 1. Boost converter design

The conventional MPPT used is the Perturb and Observe method which consists of
increasing or decreasing the PV module’s voltage and observing wither the output power
increases or decreases. Maintaining or reversing the process to keep track on the MPP.[2]

Comparing the latter with the Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) technique which is
based on the population-based stochastic optimization algorithm inspired from schools of
fish or birds flock. Mimicking the performance gained by interaction between the different
individuals or particles. The movement of these particles is defined as follows: [3]

𝑋𝑖𝑘+1 = 𝑋𝑖𝑘 + 𝑉𝑖𝑘+1 (1)


𝑉𝑖𝑘+1 = 𝑤𝑉𝑖𝑘 + 𝑐1 𝑟1 (𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖 − 𝑋𝑖𝑘 ) + 𝑐2 𝑟2 (𝐺𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖 − 𝑋𝑖𝑘 ) (2)

where X is the position of the particle; i the particle number, k the number of iteration; V
the velocity; w the inertial weight; 𝑐1 and 𝑐2 the particle acceleration coefficients; Pbest and
Gbest are the best local position and the best global position respectively; 𝑟1,𝑟2 ∈ [0.1] are
uniformly distributed random coefficients.

ICASE-22 Page 1
The International Conference On Applied

Science And Engineering (ICASE-22)

Cuckoo Search Algorithm (CSA) which imitates the behaviors of the cuckoo birds and
relies on the Lévy flight search to find a suitable host nest to lay its egg on, the MPP in our
case. [4]

𝑉 (𝑡+1) = 𝑉𝑖𝑡 + 𝛼 ⊕ 𝐿é𝑣𝑦(𝜆) (3)


where 𝛼 = 𝛼0 (𝑣𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 + 𝑣𝑖 ) (4) and 𝐿é𝑣𝑦(𝜆) ≈ 𝑢 = 𝑙 − 𝜆 , (1 < 𝜆 < 3) (5)
𝑉𝑖𝑡 is samples/eggs, i is the sample number, t is the number of iteration and 𝛼 > 0 is the step
size l is the flight length and 𝜆 is the variance. Since l < 𝜆 < 3, thus u has an infinite variance.
The simulation was performed on Matlab/Simulink, where the output of the Matlab
function MPPT bloc was the duty cycle generated by the algorithm, the duty cycle was by
its turn injected into a DC-DC PWM generator to be injected into the IGBT. The three
algorithms have been tested and compared under the same testing condition at 1000w/m²
and 25°C on the same boost converter layout.

The output of each algorithm has been visualized and drawn side by side on the same
figure, Figure 2, to observe the difference in the tracking converging speed and stability
time.
As it can be seen in Table 1, PSO is the fastest to converge to the MPP with 0.12s
compared to CSA 0.21s and 0.44s for the conventional P&O. However, regarding
efficiency, P&O slightly outperforms both PSO and CSA.

Figure 2. Side by side comparison of the different algorithm power outputs at 1000w/m².

Algorithm Convergence Settling Efficiency Error


time (s) time (s) (%) (%)
P&O 0.44 0.56 99.97 0.03
PSO 0.12 0.54 99.93 0.07
CSA 0.21 0.65 99.74 0.26
Table 1. Comparison between the three algorithm simulation results at 1000w/m².

Conclusion:
In this paper, the performance of two MPPT meta-heuristic optimization algorithms are
compared with the conventional P&O method. The meta-heuristic algorithms consist of PSO
and CSA. The simulation results show that the PSO algorithm performs better than CSA and
P&O in response time. On the other hand, the P&O method is slightly more efficient than the
two other methods.

ICASE-22 Page 2
The International Conference On Applied

Science And Engineering (ICASE-22)

References
[1] M. Kazimierczuk, Pulse-width Modulated DC-DC Power Converters, Wiley, Dayton,
Ohio, USA (2008).
[2] Salman, S., AI, X. & WU, Z. Prot Control Mod Power Syst. Volume 3, 25 (2018).
[3] F. M. Oliveira, S. A. O. da Silva, F. R. Durand and L. P. Sampaio, 2015 IEEE 13th Brazilian
Power Electronics Conference and 1st Southern Power Electronics Conference
(COBEP/SPEC), 2015, pp. 1-6.
[4] Hussaian Basha, C., Bansal, V., Rani, C., Brisilla, R.M., Odofin, S. Soft Computing for
Problem Solving. Volume 1048. pp 727–736 (2019).

ICASE-22 Page 3

You might also like