1

Maximum power point tracking using

fuzzy logic control

Erdal KILI1, aban YILMAZ2, Hasan Rza ZALIK3

1

4
5
6

Kahramanmaras, Turkey
2

Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University, Vocational School of Kahramanmaras, 46000

Kahramanmaras, Turkey
3

Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University, Department of Electrical and Electronics

9
10

Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University, Vocational School of Afsin, 46000

Engineering, 46000 Kahramanmaras, Turkey

ABSTRACT

11

Environmental problems increase as the need for and cost of energy increase.

12

Alternative energy sources are today preferred despite their high costs. Photovoltaic

13

(PV) solar energy has recently become widespread. The efficiency of PV systems is of

14

vital importance due to its high costs. Maximum power point tracking (MPPT) has

15

drawn attention in order to increase efficiency in PV systems. This study focuses on the

16

contribution of Artificial Intelligence (AI) based MPPT techniques, such as fuzzy logic

17

controller (FLC), to the output power. Perturb and Observe (P&O) algorithm was

18

analyzed in the Matlab/Simulink. The findings demonstrate that the the contribution of

19

FLC to the MPPT yielded a profit of 19.6 percent while PID reached a profit of 7.67

20

percent.

21
22

Keywords: Photovoltaic (PV), MPPT, Solar Energy, Fuzzy Logic Controller

1

INTRODUCTION

As the conventional energy sources are consumed day by day, solar photovoltaic

(PV) energy comes to the forefront to replace other energy resources. Due to its clean,

pollution-free, and inexhaustible nature, researchers have paid attention to the PV power

generation system, and its terrestrial applications. In addition, since PV arrays costs

decrease gradually and their efficiency increases remarkably, PV power generation

system is promising as a renewable energy source in the future [1,2].

Solar energy has been offered as an alternative to solve the problems of the energy

crisis and global warming [3]. The PV industry has grown rapidly and the annual

10

growth rate has been more than 40% for the last decade [4]. A power electronics

11

interface is required to transfer AC power from the PV modules to the grid, which is at

12

220240 Vrms in most countries. This interface has two main functions: conversion of

13

DC voltage to an appropriate AC current for the grid or load and tracking the maximum

14

power point of the PV module for maximum power output [5].

15

Several techniques have been proposed for the maximum power point tracking

16

(MPPT) [6-9]. P&O, hill climbing (HC) and incremental conductance (INC) are three

17

most widely discussed MPPT methods, to name a few. The P&O method perturbs the

18

operating voltage of a PV array and, afterwards, observes the extracted power to modify

19

the perturb direction [10].

20

Fuzzy logic based controller plays an important role in the success of the system.

21

The system operating with fuzzy logic, evaluation and fuzzification of input variables,

22

and other rules create a suitable value and transfers it to the output, making it possible to

23

create control signs or make decisions for controllers. Definite inputs here reach

24

fuzzification unit and definite results are fuzzified. Afterwards, input values sent to the
2

unit where rules are processed are processed and finalized here. Finally, obtained values

are clarified and definite outputs are obtained.

Fuzzy sets are mathematical models which transfer verbal expressions to the

computer. Fuzzy logic resembles human thinking capacity. It does not necessarily

require a mathematical model for its application. The simplicity of its software makes it

more economical. Fuzzy logic can be easily understood, and membership values make it

more flexible compared to other controlling techniques. Inexact information can be used

and it allows modelling non-linear functions. A fuzzy logic based model can be

designed by just resorting to an experienced person. It is compatible with conventional

10

controlling techniques and thus can be used successfully in MPPT applications.

11

Fuzzy logic has been successfully used in numerous fields such as control systems

12

engineering, image processing, power engineering, industrial automation, robotics,

13

consumer electronics and optimization. Complex, non-linear and imprecisely systems

14

are unlikely to be efficiently controlled by conventional controller such as PID. FLC has

15

proven to be very effective in complex and non-linear systems. FLC offers advantages

16

as its parameters can be determined without a precise and complicate mathematical

17

model, and it is capable of operating under highly non-linear systems. Therefore, an

18

artificial intelligent control technique using fuzzy logic control associated with a MPPT

19

controller can be used to improve energy conversion efficiency of the photovoltaic

20

system [11-15].

21

Photovoltaic panels operate at a maximum efficiency and output at the maximum

22

power point, which is influenced by the angle of solar irradiation on the panel surface

23

and panel temperature. MPPT independently controls voltage and current of the panel. It

24

is a method to use PV panels efficiently. It is a controlling structure which identifies the

3

highest performance point of the solar panel. This point is influenced by variables such

as irradiation, temperature, PV tilt angle and PV panel age. When PV System operates

at this point, it reaches the maximum efficiency, and maximum output is obtained from

the PV panel. MPPT can only be identified by calculation methods and tracking

algorithms. To this aim, the controller evaluates PV panel variables based on the

controlling technique and changes the reference of the inverter in order for it to reach

the highest power point.

Many MPPT control techniques were developed for this purpose in the last decades

[16,17]. Maximum power point tracking algorithms:

10

Perturb and observe algorithm.

11

Incremental conductance algorithm.

12

Parasitic capacitances.

13

Constant voltage control.

14

Constant current control.

15

Pilot cell.

16

Artificial intelligent method. (Fuzzy logic control, neural network etc.)

17

They can be classified as:

18

Voltage feedback based methods which compare the PV operating voltage with

19

a reference voltage in order to generate the PWM control signal of the DCDC

20

converter [18].

21

Current feedback based methods using the PV module short circuit current as a

22

feedback to estimate the optimal current corresponding to the maximum power.

4

Power based methods based on iterative algorithms to track the MPP

continuously through PV module current and voltage measurement [19,20].

Several methods may be employed for the maximum power point tracking such as

perturb and observe method [21,22], incremental conductance method [23], and

intelligence-based methods [24-26]. These methods vary in their simplicity,

convergence speed, and hardware implementation [27].

The fast dynamic response of P&O to regulate the output voltage of PV system is

displayed by a comparison of P&O algorithm with hill climbing method. However,

slow convergence of maximum operating point creates problems for the hill climbing

10

algorithm. It results from the misperception of covering maximum operating point and

11

leads to power losses in the system. The operation of hill climbing algorithm at the

12

steady state condition causes fluctuations in the region of optimal power points of

13

power characteristics. In addition, the operating point rapidly diverges from the

14

optimum operating point during a cloudy day with the nonlinear changes in solar

15

irradiation. Therefore, artificial Intelligence (AI) based MPPT techniques such as fuzzy

16

logic and neural network enable to overcome these complications and drawbacks of

17

conventional MPPT techniques [28-30].

18

AI based maximum power tracking is mainly based on the controller input and

19

output parameters of the system. It is necessary to adjust appropriate input and output

20

parameters for an analysis of AI based MPPT controller efficiency. In a fuzzy based

21

modified hill climbing algorithm [31], the tracking was modified by decision making

22

rules considering the derived input and output control parameters of system: changes in

23

voltage, power and duty cycle respectively. The fuzzy logic based feed forward MPPT

24

method is proposed [32] to control the change of PWM signal with respect to the error
5

and change in error voltage of PV system. In reference [33], a PWM maximum power

point control model was proposed in which the control action is based on fuzzy logic.

The input of the MPPT model is the charging and discharging current of connected

storage device of PV system.

The control action of fuzzy logic based MPPT varies depending on input and

output control parameters. At global irradiation conditions [34], the maximum power

obtained from the PV system through fuzzy logic fluctuates. The control performance of

fuzzy logic based MPPT can be improved through paying attention multiple input

control parameters. The general requirements for maximum power point tracker are

10

simplicity and cost-effectiveness, quick tracking under changing conditions, and low

11

output power fluctuation. Therefore, a more efficient method should be offered to this

12

problem. Hence, this paper proposes a method for maximum power point tracking via

13

fuzzy logic control. Fuzzy logic control is appropriate for non-linear control and it is not

14

complex in terms of mathematical calculation. The fuzzy logic controller behavior

15

depends on the membership functions, their distribution, and the rules influencing the

16

different fuzzy variables in the system. No formal method exists to accurately determine

17

the parameters of the controller. However, fuzzy logic parameters for an optimal

18

operating point and efficient control system can be found through trial and error

19

method.

20

The modified multi input fuzzy logic model [35] performs as a single set of

21

decision-making and does not incorporate variations in all input parameters. However,

22

fuzzy logic behavior is controlled by membership function and decision making rules.

23

In the aforementioned fuzzy logic based MPPT models, decision making rules vary

24

depending on each input and output parameter. Fuzzy logic based MPPT techniques are
6

usually used to control the duty cycle of DCDC boost converter. In case of a voltage-

led duty cycle controlled by DCDC converter, switching failures may arise due to

extreme current flow [36].

MPPT systems consist of two main structures as software and hardware. In the

software, the current or voltage point of PV module at maximum power point is

determined based on the voltage and current changes at the PV model output. On the

other hand, in the hardware, the maximum power point determined by the software is

transferred from PV module to load via DC-DC converter and/or DC-AC inverters. If

the selected load group, battery system or grid matches MPPT design selected for load

10

group, DC-DC converter and DC-AC inverter configuration change. In stand-alone

11

systems, PV systems generate daily electricity energy and store it in the batteries. The

12

energy needed by the load is supplied by the battery. On-grid systems can be divided

13

into two groups as single phase and two phase systems. DC-DC converter and/or DC-

14

AC inverters are combined in two phase systems. In these systems, DC-DC converters

15

enable the output voltage of PV modules to reach the suitable level. DC-AC inverters

16

obtain voltage level determined by the software from PV modules. In single phase

17

systems, DC-AC inverters obtain the voltage at maximum power point from PV

18

modules and transformers allow reaching grid voltage.

19

Multiple control parameters are considered here to control the PV system

20

effectively. Hence, a multi-fuzzy interference system is introduced to reach the

21

maximum power operating point of photovoltaic systems. The input parameters are the

22

change in PV power, the change in PV voltage and the change in converter duty cycle.

23

Among three parameters, a combination of two parameters is taken as the input to each

24

fuzzy interference system [37].

7

Algazar et al. analyzed daily operation of a photovoltaic system with MPPT

under different temperature and irradiation conditions by using fuzzy logic controlling

method. However, in this study, MPPT was tested for different conditions in which the

irradiation increased slowly, remained fixed, decreased suddenly and decreased slowly,

and its success rates were determined. Fuzzy logic based MPPT systems are available in

the literature, and P&O, one of the most important MPPT algorithms, was performed

with Mamdani method. The contribution of FLC and PID to the MPPT in terms of

profit was compared under the same conditions.

In this paper, a current controller based converter is used to improve the dynamic

10

performance of converter which is able to protect the system against the abnormal

11

current failures as well as using the information in normal operation to provide better

12

control. In general, the control action of such type of controllers depend on one or two

13

control parameters such as voltage, current, power and duty cycle. This study focuses on

14

analyzing the performance of MPPT System, which was created by analyzing power-

15

current graph of PV panel and determining rule base of fuzzy logic controller, in instant

16

and slow irradiation. Linguistic variables were used in the system design as required by

17

the structure of fuzzy logic and MPPT System was designed in the form of a FLC

18

controller.

19

2. Photovoltaic Panel

20

The properties of the PV panel used are shown in Table 1. Its maximum power is

21

250 W while its nominal current is 8.28 ampere and its nominal voltage is 30.2 volts. Its

22

efficiency is remarkably high, being 15.32%.

23
24
8

3. PV panel modelling

A solar cell is designed to convert sunlight to electricity. When light interacts

with solar cell, current and voltage generate electricity. The sunlight is absorbed in the

solar cell and excites electrons to higher energy state and the excited electron is

transferred to the grid. Energy conversion between sunlight and electronic circuit is

carried out by semiconductor materials with p-n junction [38].

The theoretical equivalent circuit of a PV panel is performed by linear and non-linear

electronic components. The properties of each component are separately defined

depending on the temperature and magnitude of solar energy for different PV panels.

10

An equivalent circuit of the PV panel is represented by one diode and resistors and one

11

current source [39].

12

If Kirchhoff current law is applied to the circuit in Figure 1 [40]:

13
14

(1)

The net electron, hole and diode current with Boltzmann distribution;

15

= . ( 1)

16

= . ( 1)

17

= + = . ( 1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

18

where, q, electron load (

C), k, Boltzmann constant (

J/K).

19

The solar cell equivalent circuit is shown in Figure 1. Source current expression is

20

obtained in Eq.(5) via Kirchhoffs voltage law [41-43]:

21
22

= . ( 1) = . (

(+.)

1)

(5)

23
9

Current-voltage and power-voltage characteristics obtained through a diode model

are shown in Figure 2. Under nominal conditions, a radiation rate of 1000 W/m2 and a

temperature of 25oC, PV panel generates 250.3 Watt. At 25oC, the amount was

calculated as 199.9 Watt, 148.8 Watt, 97.8 Watt and 47.2 Watt for radiations rates of

800 W/m2, 600 W/m2, 400 W/m2 and 200 W/m2, respectively. Although changes in

radiation do not lead to significant voltage changes, it causes remarkable changes in

current and power.

4. Materials and Methods

The MPPT system configuration is shown Figure 3. The system consists of PV

10

modules, converter, MPPT controller and resistive load.

11

4.1. Fuzzy Logic Based MPPT Controller Design

12

The main parts of FLC are fuzzification, rule-base, inference and defuzzification,

13

which are shown in Figure 4. The first step in FLC system design is to determine

14

variables for fuzzy control system. In this paper, MPPT FLC is designed with two input

15

variables (P, V) and one output variable (D).

16
17
18

Two inputs of proposed fuzzy controller are the change in PV array power (P)
and the change in PV array voltage (V). The variables of FLC are defined by:
= [( ) ( 1)] 1

(6)

= [ ( ) ( 1)] 2

(7)

( + 1) = [ ] 3

(8)

19
20
21
22

10

where k is time index, P(k) is the instantaneous power of PV panel generator, V(k) is

the corresponding instantaneous voltage and K1, K2, K3 are gain coefficient. The

controller flowchart is shown in Figure 5.

The inputs variables are assigned to the linguistic variables through five fuzzy

sets. The linguistic terms associated with the variables are NB (negative big), NS

(negative small), ZE (zero), PS (positive small) and PB (positive big). All membership

functions are defined between -1 and 1 interval by means of input scaling factors K1

and K2 and the output scaling factor K3. Although membership functions were

randomly selected, Triangle, Trapezium, Cauchy, Bell, Sigmoid, Gaussian types can

10

also be observed. Due to a trial and error procedure and expert opinions, triangle and

11

trapezium type membership functions were used together as shown in Figure 6-8.

12

The control surface presents the relationship between P and V on input side

13

and controller output D on the output side result from FLC. The control surface for

14

fuzzy controller is shown in Figure 9.

15

The rule base is usually developed based on expert knowledge after understanding

16

the system as well as some trial and error manipulations [44]. The rule base developed

17

for system is shown in Table 2. The fuzzy inference is carried out through Mamdanis

18

method.

19

Fuzzy logic is the easiest software compared to other intelligence algorithms.

20

Fuzzy logic controllers are used in various applications. In general, structures with a

21

base of 49 rules in high performance applications bring about a high computational

22

burden. However, in this study, a base of 25 rules was used for a lower computational

23

burden. Low computational burden increases reaction speed of the system and makes

24

practical studies easier. P-V characteristics of the panel was taken into consideration in
11

order to find MPPT operation point, and power change (deltaP) and voltage change

(deltaV) were selected as input parameters. Fuzzy rule base was created thanks to

power-voltage characteristics.

The output variable is the pulse width modulation (PWM) signal called D, which

is transmitted to the boost DC/DC converter to drive the load [45]. The defuzzification

uses the gravity center to compute the output of this FLC, which is the duty cycle [46]:
n

D .
i

i 1

( Di )

(9)

i 1

( Di )

8
9

5. FLC Based MPPT Simulation on MATLAB/Simulink

10

FLC based MPPT was modeled and simulated using MATLAB/Simulink; thus,

11

this is a simulation study. It was obtained via current and voltage measurement tools

12

available in Matlab/Simulink/Simpowersys/Measurement. The model was used to

13

compared the power obtained using MPPT with FLC and PID. The developed Simulink

14

model is shown in Figure 10. In Figure 11, irradiation was considered as the input

15

variable for the system which was created in Matlab Simulink to test FLC based MPPT

16

performance.

17

Irradiation strength directly influences power, current and energy. Irradiation was

18

increased from 0 to 1000 W/m2 linearly within 0-0.3 interval, which created nominal

19

conditions. Irradiation was decreased by 800 W/m2 after 0.5 seconds, and the reactions

20

of the system with and without MPPT were analyzed. Irradiation was decreased by 500

21

W/m2 after 0.8 seconds and outputs in both systems were analyzed. Finally, after 1.1

22

seconds, radiation was decreased to 0 linearly within 3 seconds prior to a system

12

analysis. Conditions such as linear radiation increase, nominal operating condition,

fixed radiation value, low irradiation value and linear radiation decrease were

considered as irradiation signals. Therefore, the dynamic performance of the study was

tested by instant irradiation value change. However, harmful inputs in the current and

voltage were not tested. Figure 12 and 13 show the results of the output power and

difference between powers of outputs.

As seen in Figure 12, FLC based MPPT generates more power compared to the

PV module without the MPPT. Similarly, PID based MPPT generates more power

compared to the PV module without the MPPT. Furthermore, FLC based MPPT

10

generates more power compared to the PID based MPPT. The difference between

11

output power of the system with FLC based MPPT and output power of the system with

12

PID based MPPT is shown in Figure 13. The average output power is shown in Table 3

13

where P1, P2 and P3 represents FLC based MPPT, PID based MPPT and the systems

14

without MPPT, respectively.

15

The system with MPPT generated more energy under any condition compared to

16

the system without MPPT. Between 0 and 0.3 time interval, the irradiation reached 1000

17

W/m2 and FLC based MPPT yielded a profit of 27.66 percent, while PID based MPPT

18

yielded a profit of 10.64 percent. Between 0.3 and 0.5 time interval, the irradiation

19

remained fixed at 1000 W/m2, and FLC based MPPT yielded a profit of 7.93 percent,

20

while PID based MPPT yielded a profit of 4.85 percent. Between 0.5 and 0.8 time

21

interval, the irradiation remained fixed at 800 W/m2, and FLC based MPPT yielded a

22

profit of 25.71 percent, while PID based MPPT yielded a profit of 5.71 percent.

23

Between 0.8 and 1.1 time interval, the irradiation remained fixed at 600 W/m2, and FLC

24

based MPPT yielded a profit of 20 percent, while PID based MPPT yielded a profit of
13

4.55 percent. Between 1.1 and 1.4 time interval, the irradiation decreased to 0 W/m 2,

and FLC based MPPT yielded a profit of 26.19 percent, while PID based MPPT yielded

a profit of 30.95 percent.

4
5

6. Conclusion

In this paper, a single PV system with FLC based MPPT, PID based MPPT and

without MPPT was successfully compared in the Matlab/Simulink. The performance of

the system with FLC based MPPT, PID based MPPT and without MPPT was evaluated

under rapidly changing irradiation. The system with FLC based MPPT generated more

10

energy at five different time intervals compared to the system without MPPT. Between

11

0 and 0.3 time interval, FLC based MPPT yielded more profit by 17.02 percent

12

compared to PID based MPPT. Between 0.3 and 0.5 time interval, FLC based MPPT

13

yielded more profit by 3.08 compared to PID based MPPT. Between 0.5 and 0.8 time

14

interval, FLC based MPPT yielded more profit by 20 compared to PID based MPPT.

15

Between 0.8 and 1.1 time interval, FLC based MPPT yielded more profit by 15.45

16

compared to PID based MPPT. Between 1.1 and 1.4 time interval, PID based MPPT

17

yielded more profit by 4.76 percent compared to FLC based MPPT. As a result, it is

18

evident that FLC contributes to the MPPT by 19.6 percent while PID reaches a profit of

19

7.67 percent. Therefore, the result of simulation demonstrated that the system with FLC

20

based MPPT offers a very efficient algorithm for PV systems. The FLC based MPPT

21

will be implemented to enhance the performance of the most suitable P&O algorithm.

22

The FLC based MPPT methods will be useful for the practical applications to improve

23

the performance of the PV systems.

14

1
2

7. References
[1]

Yu GJ, Jung YS, Choi JY, Kim GS. A Novel Two-Mode MPPT Control

Algorithm Based On Comparative Study of Existing Algorithms. Solar Energy

2004; 76: 455463.

[2]

Saban Y, Hasan RO. Performance analysis of a 500-kWp grid-connected solar

photovoltaic power plant in Kahramanmaras. Turk J Elec Eng & Comp Sci

2015; 23: 19461957.

[3]

Solar photovoltaic electricity: current status and future prospects. Solar Energy

10
11

2011; 85: 1580-1608.

[4]

12
13

Razykov TM, Ferekides CS, Morel D, Stefanakos E, Ullal HS, Upadhyaya HM.

Kroposki B, Margolis R, Ton D. Harnessing the sun an overview of solar

technologies. IEEE Power and Energy Magazine 2009; 7: 2233.

[5]

Yang D, Dylan DCL. Battery-integrated boost converter utilizing distributed

14

MPPT configuration for photovoltaic systems. Solar Energy 2011; 85: 1992

15

2002.

16

[6]

Patel H, Agarwal V. MPPT scheme for a PV-fed single-phase single-stage grid-

17

connected inverter operating in CCM with only one current sensor. IEEE

18

Transactions on Energy Conversion 2009; 24: 256 263.

19

[7]

Liu F, Duan S, Liu F, Liu B, Kang Y. A variable step size INC MPPT method

20

for PV systems. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 2008; 55: 2622

21

2628.

15

[8]

Petrone G, Spagnuolo G, Teodorescu R, Veerachary M, Vitelli M. Reliability

issues in photovoltaic power processing systems. IEEE Transactions on

Industrial Electronics 2008; 55: 25692580.

[9]

Esram T, Chapman PL. Comparison of photovoltaic array maximum power

point tracking techniques. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion 2007; 22:

439449.

[10] Femia N, Petrone G, Spagnuolo G, Vitelli M. Optimization of perturb and

observe maximum power point tracking method. IEEE Transactions on Power

Electronics 2005; 20: 963973.

10

[11] Singh H, Gupta MM, Meitzler T, Hou ZG, Garg KK, Solo AMG, Zadeh LA.

11

Real-Life Applications of Fuzzy Logic. Advances in Fuzzy Systems 2013; 1: 1-

12

4.

13

[12] Nader J, Sufi A. Design and Implementation of Fuzzy Position Control System

14

for Tracking Applications and Performance Comparison with Conventional PID.

15

IAES International Journal of Artificial Intelligence 2012; l: 31-44.

16

[13] Steven WS, Lu W, Branko GC, Andrey VS, Ying G. Modelling and Control for

17

Heart Rate Regulation during Treadmill Exercise. In: Proceedings of the 28th

18

IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society Annual International

19

Conference; Aug 30-Sept 3 2006; New York City, USA. pp. 1238-1246.

20

[14] Vineet K, Rana KPS, Vandna G. Real-Time Performance Evaluation of a Fuzzy

21

PI+Fuzzy PD Controller for Liquid-Level Process. International Journal of

22

Intelligent Control And Systems 2008; 13: 89-96.

16

[15] Liu CL, Chen JH, Liu YH, Yang ZZ. An Asymmetrical Fuzzy-Logic-Control-

Based MPPT Algorithm for Photovoltaic Systems. Energies 2014; 7: 2177-2193.

[16] Hohm DP, Ropp ME. Comparative study of maximum power point tracking

algorithms. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications 2003; 1: 47

62.

[17] Knopf H. Analysis, simulation and evaluation of maximum power point tracking

(MPPT) methods for a solar powered vehicle. MSc, Portland State University,

Portland, ABD, 1999.

[18] Veerachary M, Senjyu T, Uezato K. Voltage-based maximum power point

10

tracking control of PV systems. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst 2002; 1: 262

11

332.

12
13

[19] Akihiro OI. Design and simulation of photovoltaic water pumping system. MSc,
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, ABD, 2005.

14

[20] Mohamed MA, Hamdy A, Hamdy AE, Mohamed EEKS. Maximum power point

15

tracking using fuzzy logic control. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 2012;

16

39: 2128.

17

[21] Salas V, Olias E, Barrado, A, Lazaro A. Review of the maximum power point

18

tracking algorithms for stand-alone photovoltaic systems. Solar Energy

19

Materials and Solar Cells 2006; 90: 15551578.

20

[22] Mellit A, Rezzouk H, Messai A, Medjahed B. FPGA-based real time

21

implementation of MPPT-controller for photovoltaic systems. Renewable

22

Energy 2011; 36: 16521661.

17

[23] Li J, Wang H. A novel stand-alone PV generation system based on variable step

size INC MPPT and SVPWM control. In: IEEE-IPEMC09 6th International

Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference; 17-20 May 2009; Wuhan,

China. pp.21552160.

[24] Chaouachi A, Kamel RM, Nagasaka K. A novel multi-model neuro-fuzzy-based

MPPT fot three-phase grid connected photovoltaic system. Solar Energy 2010;

84: 22192229.

[25] Petreus D, Patarau T, Daraban S, Morel C, Morley B. A novel maximum power

point tracker based on analog and digital control loops. Solar Energy 2009; 85:

10

588600.

11

[26] Messai A, Mellit A, Guessoum A, Kalogirou SA. Maximum power point

12

tracking using a GA optimized fuzzy logic controller and its FPGA

13

implementation. Solar Energy 2011; 85: 265277.

14

[27] Mellit A, Kalogirou SA. Artificial intelligence techniques for photovoltaic

15

applications: a review. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 2008; 34:

16

574632.

17

[28] Datta M, Senjyu T, Yona A, Funabashi T. A fuzzy based method for leveling

18

output power fluctuations of photovoltaic-diesel hybrid power system.

19

Renewable Energy 2011; 36: 6931703.

20

[29] Patcharaprakiti N, Premrudeepreechacharn S, Sriuthaisiriwong Y. Maximum

21

power point tracking using adaptive fuzzy logic control for grid-connected

22

photovoltaic system. Renewable Energy 2005; 30: 17711788.

18

[30] Alabedin AMZ, El-Saadany EF, Salama MMA. Maximum power point tracking

for photovoltaic systems using fuzzy logic and artificial neural networks. In:

IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting; 24-29 July 2011; Detroit

Michigan, USA. pp.19.

[31] Alajmi BN, Ahmed KH, Finney SJ, Williams BW. Fuzzy logic control approach

of a modified hill climbing method for maximum power point in microgrid

standalone photovoltaic system. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics 2011;

26: 10221030.

[32] Veerachary M, Senjyu T, Uezato K. Feedforward maximum power point

10

tracking of PV systems using fuzzy controller. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace

11

and Electronic Systems 2002; 38: 969981.

12

[33] Wu TF, Chang CH, Chen YK. A fuzzy logic controlled single stage converter

13

for PV powered lighting system applications. IEEE Transactions on Industrial

14

Electronics 2000; 47: 287296.

15

[34] Gao L, Dougal RA, Liu S, Iotova AP. Parallel connected solar PV system to

16

address partial and rapidly fluctuating shadow conditions. IEEE Transactions on

17

Industrial Electronics 2009; 56: 15481556.

18

[35] Alajmi BN, Ahmed KH, Finney SJ, Williams, BW. A maximum power point

19

tracking technique for partially shaded photovoltaic systems in microgrids. IEEE

20

Transactions on Industrial Electronics 2013; 60: 15961606.

21
22

[36] Toliyat HA, Campbell SG. DSP Based Electromechanical Motion Control. CRC
Press, Texas A&M University, United States, 2004.

19

[37] Rajesh R, Carolin Mabel M. Efficiency analysis of a multi-fuzzy logic controller

for the determination of operating points in a PV system. Solar Energy, 2014;

99: 7787.

[38] Orioli VLB, Ciulla G. On the experimental validation of an improved five-

parameter model for silicon photovoltaic modules. Solar Energy Materials &

Solar Cells 2012; 105: 20-39.

7
8
9

[39] Soto WD, Klein SA, Beckman WA. Improvement and validation of a model for
photovoltaic array performance. Solar Energy 2006; 80: 78-88.
[40] Qi C, Ming Z. Photovoltaic Module Simulink Model for a Stand-alone PV

10

System.

International

Conference

on Applied Physics and Industrial

11

Engineering, Physics Procedia 2012; 24: 94 100.

12

[41] Krismadinataa NA, Pinga RHW, Selvaraja J. Photovoltaic module modeling

13

using simulink/Matlab. The 3rd International Conference on Sustainable Future

14

for Human Security, SUSTAIN 2012, Proceda Environmental Sciences 2012;

15

17: 537 546.

16

[42] Wang J, Li X, Yang H, Kong S. Design and Realization of Microgrid

17

Composing of Photovoltaic and Energy Storage System. In: The Proceedings of

18

International Conference on Smart Grid and Clean Energy Technologies

19

(ICSGCE 2011); 27-30 September 2011; Chengdu, China. Energy Procedia

20

2011; 12: 10081014.

21

[43] Laudania A, Mancilla-Davidb F, Riganti-Fulgineia F, Salvinia A. Educed-form

22

of the photovoltaic five-parameter model for efficient computation of

23

parameters. ScienceDirect, Solar Energy 2013; 97: 122-127.

20

[44] Sakthivel G, Anandhi TS, Natarajan SP. Design of Fuzzy Logic Controller for a

Spherical tank system and its Real time implementation. International Journal of

Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) 2011; 1: 934-940.

[45] Messai A, Mellit A, Guessoum A, Kalogirou SA. Maximum power point

tracking using a GA optimized fuzzy logic controller and its FPGA

implementation. Solar Energy 2011; 85: 265-277.

[46] Venkatanarayanan S, Saravanan M. Fuzzy Logic Based PV Energy System with

Sepic Converter. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology,

10th January 2014; 59: 89-95.

10
11
12

Table 1. The properties of the PV panel

Trademark
Model

Soleos
Soleos 250-9PJ

Solar Cell

Si-poly

Maximum Power at STC (Pmax)

250 W

Optimum Operating Voltage (Vmp)

30.2 V

Optimum Operating Current (Imp)

8.28 A

Open Circuit Voltage (Voc)

37.72 V

Short Circuit Current (Isc)

8.81 A

Module Efficiency

15.32%

Length

1650 mm

Width

990 mm

Weight

18.6 kg

13
14

Table 2. Rule base of fuzzy logic controller

21

Change of
Power (P)
NB
NS
ZE
PS
PB
1
2

NB
NB
NB
ZE
PS
PB

NS
NB
NS
ZE
PS
PS

Change of Voltage (V)

ZE
PS
ZE
PS
ZE
PS
ZE
ZE
ZE
NS
ZE
NB

PB
PB
PS
ZE
NB
NB

Table 3. Average output power

Time (s)

P1 (W) with FLC

P2 (W) with PID

0-0.3

60

52

P3(W)
Without MPPT
47

0.3-0.5

245

238

227

0.5-0.8

220

185

175

0.8-1.1

132

115

110

1.1-1.4

53

55

42

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Figure 1. One-diode equivalent circuit for a PV cell

11
12
13
14
15
16
22

Figure 2. Current-voltage and power-voltage characteristics of PV panel

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

Figure 3. MPPT system

Figure 4. Block diagram of the FLC

15
16

23

1
2

Figure 5. The flow chart of FLC algorithm.

4
5

Figure 6. Membership function of the input variable P.

24

1
2

Figure 7. Membership function of the input variable V.

3
4

Figure 8. Membership function of the input variable D.

6
7

Figure 9. Input-Output surface waveform of the FLC.

25

2
3

Figure 10. Controlling the PV power system using Matlab/Simulink

26

1
2

Figure 11. Changing irradiance input for MPPT testing.

4
5

Figure 12. Output power of the system

6
7
8
27

1
2
3

4
5

Figure 13. Difference between powers of outputs.

28