International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems (IJPEDS)

Vol. 15, No. 1, March 2024, pp. 491~497

ISSN: 2088-8694, DOI: 10.11591/ijpeds.v15.i1.pp491-497  491

Particle swarm optimization for enhanced maximum power

point tracking: design and implementation in Proteus

Murugesan Vishnu Priya1, Gopal Anandha Kumar2

1
Department of Electronic Instrumentation Systems, Saveetha School of Engineering,
Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Chennai, India
2
Department of Energy and Environmental Engineering, Saveetha School of Engineering,
Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Chennai, India

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: This study introduces a photovoltaic (PV) system model tailored for PV
design, incorporating a particle swarm optimization (PSO) MPPT technique
Received Jul 8, 2022 to achieve optimal efficiency, swift responsiveness, and cost-effectiveness.
Revised Apr 15, 2023 To initiate, a PV module model is formulated within Proteus using SPICE
Accepted May 3, 2023 coding. Subsequently, an experimental test setup is deployed to authenticate
and validate the model. Following this, a PSO-based MPPT algorithm is
proposed, which overcomes the limitations of conventional perturb and
Keywords: observe (P&O) and incremental conductance MPPT methods, notably
reducing the reliance on mathematical divisions. To substantiate the
Low cost MPPT effectiveness of the proposed approach, both methodologies are
Particle swarm optimization implemented on an affordable Arduino Uno platform utilizing the simulated
MPPT PV module model. The outcomes highlight that the PSO-based MPPT
Perturb and observe algorithm excels in terms of rapid response (0.09 s), minimal steady-state
Proteus oscillation, and an impressive 99 percent efficiency.
PV panel
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Murugesan Vishnu Priya
Department of Electronic Instrumentation Systems, Saveetha School of Engineering
Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences
Chennai, India
Email: [email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION
The utilization of non-conventional fossil power resources like petroleum and natural gas is widely
recognized as unsustainable. In response, sustainable and renewable energy sources are emerging as the viable
alternatives to fulfill upcoming energy needs [1]. Among these, solar energy holds significant promise due to its
abundant and reliable nature. Notably, photovoltaic (PV) technology stands out as a means to generate clean
energy [2]. Nonetheless, the efficiency of PV systems remains suboptimal, and their cost remains relatively
high. Researchers have dedicated substantial efforts to enhance PV converters, striving to elevate efficiency
while simultaneously reducing manufacturing expenses. Moreover, the intricate non-linear behavior of PV
panels, coupled with their strong reliance on external weather conditions and load profiles, presents a
formidable challenge in maximizing PV energy generation. One strategy proposed to alleviate the problem in
existing methods and to address this problem of operating PV panels at their maximum power point (MPP) [3].
Consequently, several algorithms for maximum power point tracking (MPPT) have been introduced. To assess
the efficacy of MPPT algorithms, subjecting them to controlled weather conditions becomes an apparent
approach for evaluation. Due to the random nature of ambient meteorological data, such circumstances are
difficult to achieve. PV emulators, rather than PV panels, are commonly employed for this PV emulators, on the
other hand, are not always accessible and are expensive, especially in underdeveloped nations [4].

Journal homepage: http://ijpeds.iaescore.com

492  ISSN: 2088-8694

To build and validate the performance of MPPT algorithms, researchers employ PSIM or
MATLAB/Simulink environments [5]. However, these software tools lack the inclusion of integrated boards
or processors chips (such as FPGA, Arduino, PIC, or DSP) suitable for the implementation and real-world
testing of MPPT algorithms as physical prototypes [6]. In this context, Proteus stands out as a unique
solution, offering the capability to replicate electrical systems utilizing hardware elements like
microcontrollers, FPGA, DSP, embedded boards (including Arduino), sensors, and actuators. This distinct
feature permits simulation and debugging of the system with hardware components, minimizing the potential
for errors. Notably, Proteus has been notably absent of a PV panel model [7]. Significantly, this study
introduces the integration of the one-diode PV model into Proteus for the first time in the available literature.
An empirical setup has been constructed to validate the proposed model. Consequently, the MPPT technique
can be effectively executed utilizing Proteus' array of experimental blocks. This approach thus serves as a
cost-effective PV emulator, particularly when a physical prototype is unfeasible [8].
Conversely, a multitude of MPPT algorithms have been put forth in scholarly works by researchers.
The selection of an appropriate MPPT algorithm warrants considerations of response time, stability in steady-
state operation, implementation intricacy, and sensor requisites. Notably prominent MPPT techniques
encompass fuzzy logic control (FLC) [9], artificial neural network (ANN) [10], perturb and observe
(P&O) [11], and incremental conductance (INC) [9]. The distinct advantage of FLC and ANN methodologies
lies in their adeptness at managing the non-linear characteristics of PV panels, thereby yielding consistent
MPPT outcomes. For instance, an FLC-based MPPT was meticulously designed and realized on an FPGA
platform, attaining a commendable efficiency rating of 98 percent. Additionally, an adjustable step size
ANN-MPPT was conceptualized and implemented on a DSP board, showcasing favorable tracking precision
and response time [12]. Notably, the intricacy associated with PV systems founded on artificial intelligence
paradigms like FLC and ANN poses significant challenges to successful implementation [13].
Rule implementation and training of these methods demand substantial memory capacity, along with
high-speed processing capabilities and proficiency in high-level programming languages. Consequently, the
utilization of costly integrated boards, such as FPGA or DSP, becomes a significant contributor to escalated
expenses within a PV system. Conversely, P&O and INC stand out as the prominently adopted MPPT
algorithms in the market [14]. Notably, owing to its simplicity, the P&O technique finds widespread
application in PV standalone setups. In the context of such PV systems, a pragmatic approach to cost reduction
involves the implementation of MPPT algorithms through economical microcontrollers [15]. However, it's
noteworthy that the effective deployment of INC MPPT is comparatively more intricate than P&O, owing to
the numerous division computations intrinsic to its operation. This mandates a swifter calculation mechanism
and the use of more potent microcontrollers [16]. It's crucial to highlight that P&O may occasionally yield
inaccurate responses, leading to system fluctuations around the MPP and consequential power losses. For
instance, a customized P&O algorithm was adopted on the budget-friendly FRDM-KL25Z Freescale
development processor chip, yielding an extreme efficiency of 96 percent—though still insufficient for optimal
PV system performance. In contrast, INC MPPT demonstrates swift MPP tracking with minimal steady-state
oscillations, especially in the face of rapid fluctuations in solar irradiation [17].
This study aims to introduce a PSO algorithm-based MPPT technique characterized by its simplicity
and exceptional performance. This methodology eliminates the need for division operations, enhancing
comprehensibility and facilitating decreases on line conversions demands, thus accommodating the
utilization of cost-effective processor chips. A comprehensive assessment of its technical viability and
comparative advantages against conventional methods is undertaken through both system-level simulation
and practical validation. This innovation holds particular promise for compact or portable PV systems where
cost-effectiveness is pivotal for widespread adoption, especially in economically challenged regions. The
ensuing structure of this article unfolds as follows: i) Section 2 describes the development of photovoltaic
panel model using spice in Proteus; ii) Section 3 delineates the PSO technique for MPPT; iii) Moving on,
section 4 offers insight into the implementation and outcomes of the proposed system, subject to detailed
analysis; and iv) Ultimately, section 5 encapsulates the key findings derived from this simulation.

2. DEVELOPMENT OF PHOTOVOLTAIC PANEL MODEL USING SPICE IN PROTEUS

The photovoltaic phenomenon facilitates the conversion of sunlight into electrical energy within the
PV panel. Illustrated in Figure 1 is the single-diode model characterizing the PV panel. While more intricate
and accurate models have been introduced in existing literature, the choice of employing the single-diode
model in this study stems from its inherent simplicity [18]. This model strikes a harmonious balance between
precision and straightforwardness, finding utilization across various studies with varying degrees of
simplification while consistently maintaining the core elements of a current source and a parallel diode. For
power electronics practitioners seeking an uncomplicated yet efficient model for PV panel simulations

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 15, No. 1, March 2024: 491-497
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  493

alongside power converters, the single-diode model proves advantageous. Essential constituents of this model
encompass a photon current source (Is) interconnected with a diode that emulates the P-N junction,
supplemented by a shunt resistor (Rsh) and a series resistor (Rs), depicted in Figure 1. Consequently, the (1)
serves as a representative formulation for PV current [19].
𝑉𝑝𝑣 +𝐼𝑝𝑣 𝑅𝑠𝑒
( ) 𝑉𝑝𝑣 +𝐼𝑝𝑣 𝑅𝑠𝑒
𝐼𝑝𝑣 = 𝐼𝑠 − 𝐼𝑑 (𝑒 𝛼×𝐾×𝑁𝑛 ×𝑇 − 1) − ( ) (1)
𝑅𝑠

Figure 1. Equivalent circuit of the PV cell in single diode model

For this study, the TDC-M20-36 panel was employed, with its specifications outlined in Table 1. It's
important to highlight that any absent datasheet parameters were derived through the utilization of
MathWorks' “PV array” tool, as elucidated in [20]. The electrical configuration for the photovoltaic panel
within Proteus is structured as follows: an interconnected voltage-controlled current source and diode
arrangement (the SPICE code tailored according to the PV panel's specifics), accompanied by a pair of
resistors in parallel and series to simulate the series and shunt resistors [21]–[23]. Figure 2 provides a
depiction of the Proteus model alongside the corresponding SPICE code.

Figure 2. Proteus model of PV cell and corresponding PV and IV characteristics

Table 1. Specification of TDC-M20-36 PV panel

S. No Description Values Unit
1 Open circuit voltage 22.6 V
2 Short circuit current 1.17 A
3 Voltage at peak power 18.76 V
4 Current at peak power 1.07 A
5 Voltage temperature coefficient -0.35 %/C
6 Current temperature coefficient 0.043 %/C
7 Reverse saturation current of diode 2.6797× 10−11 A
8 Resistance in shunt 405.96 Ω
9 Resistance in series 1.0547 Ω
10 Number of PV cells 36 -
11 Ideality factor 1.0036 -
Particle swarm optimization for enhanced maximum power point tracking … (Murugesan Vishnu Priya)
494  ISSN: 2088-8694

3. PARTICLE SWARM OPTIMIZATION MPPT

The concept of PSO was introduced by Eberhart and Kennedy in 1995 as a form of intelligent
optimization theory [24]. This algorithm drew inspiration from the collective behavior of birds and fish
schooling, applying their principles to search and optimization processes. Similar to birds, each particle in the
algorithm possesses a distinct fitness value evaluated by an objective function and a velocity component that
dictates its movement relative to other particles in the given space. Crucially, information from each particle's
individual search journey is exchanged with others within the swarm as shown Figure 3. The movement of
particles is governed by two key variables: Pbest, which stores the best position for each particle as an
individual's optimal state, and Gbest, determined by comparing the individual positions of the particle swarm
and signifying the collective best position. As particles in the swarm gravitate towards the optimal position,
their direction and velocity continually adjust, facilitating rapid convergence toward a local or global
optimum. The standard PSO method is governed by (2) and (3) [25], [26].

𝑉𝑖 (𝑘 + 1) = 𝜔 × (𝑉𝑖 (𝑘) + 𝐶1 × 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑 × (𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡,𝑖 − 𝑋𝑖 (𝑘)) + 𝐶2 × 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑 × (𝐺𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 − 𝑋𝑖 (𝑘))) (2)

𝑋𝑖 (𝑘 + 1) = 𝑋𝑖 (𝑘) + 𝑉𝑖 (𝑘 + 1) (3)

This section explains how to use the PSO method to solve the MPPT controller problem in a PV
system. Figure 4 illustrates how the proposed PSO-based MPPT algorithm works, the main blocks of this
algorithm are as follows: i) All particles were seeded with a random position and velocity in a uniform
distribution across the search space in order to generate a random duty cycle and a random fitness value
evaluation function for the proposed MPPT algorithm. ii) After the controller has sent the duty cycle
command, which represents particle position, the fitness value of particle is computed. iii) Recalculate each
particle's fitness values, as well as its individual and global best positions, and replace the P best and Gbest
values corresponding to those positions as necessary, using the newly calculated fitness values. iv) Update
the velocities and positions of each particle in the swarm using the PSO formulas (2) and (3) after evaluating
all of the particles in the system. v) The criterion for convergence is either finding the best solution or
completing the maximum number of iterations possible. In this case, the process would end if all of Steps 2
through 5 were completed; if not, repeat them.

Figure 3. Particle movement in PSO algorithm Figure 4. Flowchart of PSO algorithm

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 15, No. 1, March 2024: 491-497
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  495

4. SIMULATION AND RESULTS DISCUSSION

The implementation of the MPPT algorithm involves the integration of various hardware
components, encompassing current and voltage sensors, an integrated board, a drive and converter, r. Proteus
furnishes all these essential experimental elements. Integrated Board: To fulfill the goal of constructing an
economical PV system, the study employs the UNO Arduino board, which is centered around the budget-
friendly ATMega328 microprocessor. Voltage Sensor: Facilitating the conversion of PV high voltage to the 5
V input analog of the Arduino, a voltage sensor is indispensable. The “B25 Voltage Sensor Module”
(“Voltage Sensor Module-Arduino Compatible,” n.d.) was selected as the sensor of choice for this project.
Current Sensor: Essential for detecting PV current, the study mandates the use of a current sensor. The
“INA169 Analog DC Current Sensor” was the selected current sensor, with its output voltage directly
reflecting the flowing current through it (“INA1×9 Datasheet,” 2017). Modulator: For mitigating the
disparity between the load and panel, ensuring operation at the MPP, the step-up converter is adopted. This
functional aspect is illustrated in Figure 5.
The step-up converter configuration is as follows: Fs = 1000 Hz, Cin = 220 micro–Farad, L = 20 milli
Hendry, Co = 470 micro-Farad, and the load impedance R equals 70 Ω. It is important to emphasize that the
selection of the IRFP250N transistor for the planned Boost converter is motivated by its low Rds (on) value of
0.075 Ω, effectively minimizing power losses associated with this switch. Furthermore, the inclusion of a
Schottky diode is justified due to its low forward voltage drop and swift recovery time, contributing to enhanced
overall efficiency of the Boost converter. Driving the MOSFET transistor, the processor chip interfaces with the
driver. In this study, the TC4420 driver is employed, leveraging its CMOS design for reduced power
consumption and improved efficiency compared to bipolar drivers. For enhanced clarity, the PV Proteus panel
model is encapsulated within a “Subcircuit,” subsequently linked to the load through the Boost converter
arrangement, as depicted in Figure 5. The embedded board (Arduino) integrates current and voltage sensors,
thereby detecting PV voltage and current. These acquired data are then utilized by the embedded board's MPPT
algorithm to regulate the Boost converter via the driver, employing the calculated duty cycle to achieve the
MPP. Additionally, the LCD panel provides a visual display of PV power, voltage, and current.

Figure 5. Proteus simulation of PSO MPPT for PV Panel

In this simulation, an assessment of the PSO MPPT strategies encompassed both dynamic and
steady-state performance considerations. As depicted in Figure 6, the simulation results for the PV panel
operating at 1000 W/m² are presented. Similarly, Figure 7 illustrates the PV panel's performance in response

Particle swarm optimization for enhanced maximum power point tracking … (Murugesan Vishnu Priya)
496  ISSN: 2088-8694

to an irradiance transition from 1000 W/m² to 500 W/m². Notably, the adoption of the enhanced method is
evidenced to curtail steady-state oscillations, as discerned from these graphical representations. This outcome
underscores how the PSO MPPT technique, by eliminating all division computations, contributes to an
improved performance marked by diminished steady-state oscillations and heightened tracking speed.

Figure 6. The results of PV panel Figure 7. The results of PV panel for change in
at 1000 W/m2 Irradiance from 1000 W/m2 to 500 W/m2

5. CONCLUSION
This research introduces and validates the inaugural Proteus PV panel model, serving as a
foundational achievement. In cases where a tangible prototype is absent, this PV model coupled with the
available hardware elements in Proteus assumes the role of a cost-effective PV simulator, facilitating the
construction and validation of MPPT algorithm performances. This simulator is poised to substantially ease
future system enhancements. Additionally, a noteworthy contribution is the presentation of a PSO MPPT
algorithm achieved by the elimination of all division operations from the traditional MPPT methodology.
This streamlined framework not only permits straightforward implementation utilizing low-cost
microcontrollers but also translates to reduced system expenses. Drawing insights from the modeling and
simulation outcomes, it is evident that the PSO MPPT approach, relative to conventional MPPT techniques,
excels in achieving precise MPP tracking, characterized by swifter response times and minimized steady-
state oscillations during abrupt changes. Consequently, the proposed system emerges as a pragmatic and
economical avenue for PV power generation.

REFERENCES
[1] M. Alshabi, C. Ghenai, M. Bettayeb, and F. F. Ahmad, “Estimating one-diode-PV model using autonomous groups particle
swarm optimization,” IAES Int. J. Artif. Intell., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 166–174, 2021, doi: 10.11591/ijai.v10.i1.pp166-174.
[2] M. Al-Shabi, C. Ghenai, M. Bettayeb, F. F. Ahmad, and M. E. H. Assad, “Estimating pv models using multi-group salp swarm
algorithm,” IAES Int. J. Artif. Intell., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 398–406, 2021, doi: 10.11591/IJAI.V10.I2.PP398-406.
[3] U. H. Salman, S. F. Nawaf, and M. O. Salih, “Studying and analyzing the performance of photovoltaic system by using fuzzy
logic controller,” Bull. Electr. Eng. Informatics, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 1687–1695, 2022, doi: 10.11591/eei.v11i3.3680.
[4] A. Nazar Ali, K. Premkumar, M. Vishnupriya, B. V. Manikandan, and T. Thamizhselvan, “Design and development of realistic
PV emulator adaptable to the maximum power point tracking algorithm and battery charging controller,” Sol. Energy, vol. 220,
pp. 473–490, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2021.03.077.
[5] A. A. Elbaset, H. Ali, M. Abd-El Sattar, and M. Khaled, “Implementation of a modified perturb and observe maximum power
point tracking algorithm for photovoltaic system using an embedded microcontroller,” IET Renew. Power Gener., vol. 10, no. 4,
pp. 551–560, 2016, doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2015.0309.
[6] M. Killi and S. Samanta, “Modified perturb and observe MPPT algorithm for drift avoidance in photovoltaic systems,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 62, no. 9, pp. 5549–5559, 2015, doi: 10.1109/TIE.2015.2407854.
[7] H. R. Koofigar, “Adaptive robust maximum power point tracking control for perturbed photovoltaic systems with output voltage
estimation,” ISA Trans., vol. 60, pp. 285–293, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.isatra.2015.11.003.
[8] S. Motahhir, A. El Ghzizal, S. Sebti, and A. Derouich, “MIL and SIL and PIL tests for MPPT algorithm,” Cogent Eng., vol. 4, no.
1, 2017, doi: 10.1080/23311916.2017.1378475.
[9] P. C. Sekhar and S. Mishra, “Takagi-Sugeno fuzzy-based incremental conductance algorithm for maximum power point tracking of a
photovoltaic generating system,” IET Renew. Power Gener., vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 900–914, 2014, doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2013.0219.
[10] W. M. Lin, C. M. Hong, and C. H. Chen, “Neural-network-based MPPT control of a stand-alone hybrid power generation
system,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 26, no. 12, pp. 3571–3581, 2011, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2011.2161775.
[11] S. Motahhir, A. El Hammoumi, and A. El Ghzizal, “Photovoltaic system with quantitative comparative between an improved
MPPT and existing INC and P&O methods under fast varying of solar irradiation,” Energy Reports, vol. 4, pp. 341–350, 2018,
doi: 10.1016/j.egyr.2018.04.003.

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 15, No. 1, March 2024: 491-497
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  497

[12] S. Messalti, A. Harrag, and A. Loukriz, “A new variable step size neural networks MPPT controller: Review, simulation and
hardware implementation,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 68, pp. 221–233, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.131.
[13] A. A. Hepzibah and K. Premkumar, “ANFIS current–voltage controlled MPPT algorithm for solar powered brushless DC motor
based water pump,” Electr. Eng., vol. 102, no. 1, pp. 421–435, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s00202-019-00885-8.
[14] I. Marinić-Kragić, S. Nižetić, F. Grubišić-Čabo, and A. M. Papadopoulos, “Analysis of flow separation effect in the case of the
free-standing photovoltaic panel exposed to various operating conditions,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 174, pp. 53–64, 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.310.
[15] Q. Li, S. Zhao, M. Wang, Z. Zou, B. Wang, and Q. Chen, “An improved perturbation and observation maximum power point
tracking algorithm based on a PV module four-parameter model for higher efficiency,” Appl. Energy, vol. 195, pp. 523–537,
2017, doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.03.062.
[16] C. H. Lin, C. H. Huang, Y. C. Du, and J. L. Chen, “Maximum photovoltaic power tracking for the PV array using the fractional-order
incremental conductance method,” Appl. Energy, vol. 88, no. 12, pp. 4840–4847, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.06.024.
[17] D. G. Montoya, C. A. Ramos-Paja, and R. Giral, “Improved Design of Sliding-Mode Controllers Based on the Requirements of
MPPT Techniques,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 235–247, 2016, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2015.2397831.
[18] S. Motahhir, A. El Ghzizal, S. Sebti, and A. Derouich, “Modeling of Photovoltaic System with Modified Incremental
Conductance Algorithm for Fast Changes of Irradiance,” Int. J. Photoenergy, vol. 2018, 2018, doi: 10.1155/2018/3286479.
[19] K. Nishioka, N. Sakitani, Y. Uraoka, and T. Fuyuki, “Analysis of multicrystalline silicon solar cells by modified 3-diode
equivalent circuit model taking leakage current through periphery into consideration,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, vol. 91, no.
13, pp. 1222–1227, 2007, doi: 10.1016/j.solmat.2007.04.009.
[20] S. Motahhir, A. Chalh, A. El Ghzizal, S. Sebti, and A. Derouich, “Modeling of photovoltaic panel by using proteus,” J. Eng. Sci.
Technol. Rev., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 8–13, 2017, doi: 10.25103/jestr.102.02.
[21] S. Nižetić, M. Arıcı, F. Bilgin, and F. Grubišić-Čabo, “Investigation of pork fat as potential novel phase change material for passive
cooling applications in photovoltaics,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 170, pp. 1006–1016, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.164.
[22] S. Motahhir, A. Chalh, A. El Ghzizal, and A. Derouich, “Development of a low-cost PV system using an improved INC algorithm
and a PV panel Proteus model,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 204, pp. 355–365, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.246.
[23] K. Premkumar, M. Vishnupriya, T. Thamizhselvan, P. Sanjeevikumar, and B. V. Manikandan, “PSO optimized PI controlled DC-
DC buck converter-based proton-exchange membrane fuel cell emulator for testing of MPPT algorithm and battery charger
controller,” Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst., vol. 31, no. 2, 2021, doi: 10.1002/2050-7038.12754.
[24] U. Sultana, S. H. Qazi, N. Rasheed, and M. W. Mustafa, “Performance analysis of real-time PSO tuned PI controller for
regulating voltage and frequency in an AC microgrid,” Int. J. Electr. Comput. Eng., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 1068–1076, 2021, doi:
10.11591/ijece.v11i2.pp1068-1076.
[25] K. Premkumar and B. V. Manikandan, “GA-PSO optimized online ANFIS based speed controller for Brushless DC motor,” J.
Intell. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 2839–2850, 2015, doi: 10.3233/IFS-151563.
[26] A. R. Krishnan, A. Shunmugalatha, and K. Premkumar, “An Improved Tuning of PID Controller for PV Battery-Powered
Brushless DC Motor Speed Regulation Using Hybrid Horse Herd Particle Swarm Optimization,” Int. J. Photoenergy, vol. 2023,
2023, doi: 10.1155/2023/2777505.

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS

Murugesan Vishnu Priya is an individual serving as an Assistant at Saveetha

School of Engineering, Chennai, with over 6 years of experience in teaching, research, and
developmental pursuits. Presently, her predominant focus revolves around the advancement
of controllers for maximum power point tracking (MPPT) in photovoltaic (PV) and wind
energy systems. This endeavor encompasses exploration across a spectrum of control
techniques, spanning perturbs and observe (PO), incremental conductance (INC), fuzzy
logic, adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS), artificial neural networks (ANN),
and optimization-based MPPT methods. She can be contacted at email:
[email protected].

Gopal Anandha Kumar is working as a Professor in the Department of Energy

and Environmental Engineering at Saveetha School of Engineering, Saveetha University,
Chennai. He has got nearly 22 years of experience in both teaching and research in various
engineering colleges of Tamil Nadu, India. He manages both undergraduate and postgraduate
students working together on a mixture of theoretical and practical projects. He has authored
over 22 papers in International and National conference proceedings and professional
journals. His current research interests include Power control in wireless communication and
Renewable Energies. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Particle swarm optimization for enhanced maximum power point tracking … (Murugesan Vishnu Priya)