Comparative study of five maximum power point tracking techniques

for photovoltaic systems

Ramdan B. A. Koad, Ahmed. F. Zobaa

Brunel University, London, United Kingdom

Abstract – Since the output characteristics of photovoltaic (PV) system depends on the ambient temperature, solar
radiation and load impedance, its maximum power point (MPP) is not constant. Under each condition PV module has a
point at which it can produce its MPP. Therefore, maximum power point tracking (MPPT) methods can be used to
uphold the PV panel operating at its MPP. In this survey, five MPPT algorithms are presented and compared under
different atmosphere conditions: Perturb and Observe (P&O) Methods, Incremental Conductance (IncCond) Methods,
Constant Voltage (CV), Short Circuit Current (SCC) and Open Circuit Voltage (OCV). These algorithms are widely
used in PV systems as a result of their easy implementation as well as their low cost. These techniques were analysed
and their performance was evaluated by using the Matlab tool Simulink under various types of solar radiation and
temperature. The IncCond method was the most efficient, at rapidly changing conditions.

Keywords: Photovoltaic (PV) Systems, Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT), Perturb and
Observe (P&O) Method, Incremental Conductance (IncCond) Method, Constant Voltage (CV),
Short Circuit Current (SCC) and Open Circuit Voltage (OCV).

I. Nomenclature produced in the United States for use in the space

I, V -PV cell output current and voltage. programme. However, its high cost, low efficiency and
Isc- PV cell short circuit current. limited power generation ensured its usage remained
Voc-PV cell open circuit voltage. only the space programme until the oil crises erupted in
Iph-generated current. the 1970s [1]-[2]. Recently, the use of PV systems has
I0 - diode reverse saturation currents. become a popular method of power generation, due to its
T - Cell temperature in Kelvin. environmental credentials, free energy source, well-
G-Solar radiation. known technology, lack of maintenance and increasing
A - The diode ideality factors. efficiency while costs have decreased. In addition, a PV
K - Boltzmann’s constant. system generates electricity without moving parts and
Q - Electron charge. has a long lifespan compared to other renewable sources.
Vs - Input voltage, Despite the fact that, PV systems have a number of major
Vout - Output voltage. advantages, it has particular disadvantages that means it
f - Switching frequency. is unable to replace conventional sources, including the
Rs, Rp - series and shunt resistance. ability to only produce direct current (DC) electricity;
D - Converter duty ratio. however, most electricity applications require alternative
L1 , L2-Input and output Inductor. current (AC). The other disadvantages include high costs,
C1, C2 - Input and output capacitor. limited capacity compared to other renewable sources,
R – Load resistance. low conversion efficiency, and dependence on weather
Vmpp- Impp-Voltage and Current at maximum power point conditions as it generally relies on atmospheric
Pmax-Maximum power. conditions [1]-[5]. Therefore, it can only produce
electricity for a limited time during the day depending on
the ambient temperature and solar radiation. In addition,
II. Introduction variations in atmospheric conditions result in PV systems
In general, a photovoltaic (PV) cell is a material of having nonlinear characteristics. Furthermore, under each
semiconductor that can produce direct current electricity weather condition PV module has a point at which it can
once the sunlight hits its surface. The first photovoltaic produce its maximum output current and voltage; known
effect was discovered by a French experimental physicist as the maximum power point (MPP). Therefore, it is
in 1839, and later in 1954, the first photovoltaic cell was essential to control the photovoltaic module in order to
operate it at its MPP. According to Ref. [4], maximum For this study the selected PV module is MSX-60 PV
power point tracking (MPPT) can increase the production module, which is able to generate an output power 60
of electricity by 25%. watt. Its electrical specifications are shown in Table I.
Several MPPT methods have been developed for use in TABLE I
ELECTRICAL SPECIFICATIONS OF THE SIMULATED PV MODULE
PV systems in order to reach the MPP, ranging from Maximum Power (Pmax) 60 W
simple to more complex methods depending on the Voltage @ Pmax (Vmp) 17.1 V
weather conditions and the application [4]-[5]-[14]. The Current @ Pmax (Imp) 3.5 A
Open-circuit voltage (Voc) 21.1 V
main aim of the MPPT is to extract maximum output Short-circuit current (Isc) 3.8 A
power from the PV module under different sunlight Temperature coefficient of Short- .(0.065±0.015)%/°C
circuit current (Isc)
radiation and temperatures. Numerous MPPT methods Temperature coefficient of Open- –(80±10)mV/°C
have been discussed in the literature; the Perturb and circuit voltage (Voc)
Temperature coefficient of power –(0.5±0.05)%/°C
Observe (P&O) Methods [2]-[5], the Incremental
Conductance (IncCond) Methods [6], and the Fuzzy
Logic Method [7]-[8]. These methods can be compared III.1. THE PV MODULE PERFORMANCE
through several characteristics: their simplicity, cost, the By using the equations that were derived above, and the
efficacy of their convergence, application hardware, the electrical specifications of the selected PV module, the
number of sensors, etc. [6]. In this survey, five MPPT current-voltage (I-V) characteristics of the selected PV
algorithms are presented and compared under different module at different environmental conditions,
atmospheric conditions: P&O Methods [10], IncCond temperature and irradiance are displayed in Fig. 2 and
Methods [11], Constant Voltage (CV), Open Circuit Fig. 3 the performance was simulated in Matlab.
Voltage (OCV) [6] and Short Circuit Current (SCC) [8].
These algorithms are widely used in PV system as a
result of their easy implementation as well as their low
cost [5]-[12]-[13].

III. TERMINAL CHARACTERISTICS OF

PHOTOVOLTAIC CELLS
Fig. 1 shows the equivalent-circuit model of PV that
consist of a generated current (Iph), a diode (D), and
series and parallel resistances.

Fig. 2. MSX-60 I-V Characteristics with Variable Temperatures and

Constant Irradiance (1KW/m2).

Fig. 1. Single-diode model equivalent circuit of PV cell [14].

The output current-voltage (I-V) characteristics can be

calculated as follows:
. / 1 . (1)

Where, I is the cell current and V is the PV cell output

voltage, I is the photon current, and Io is the diode
ph
reverse saturation currents. A is the diode ideality factors, Fig. 3. MSX-60 I-V Characteristics with Different Irradiance Values
and a Constant Temperature (25°C).
T is the cell temperature in Kelvin, K is the Boltzmann’s
-23 When connecting the PV module directly to the load, it
constant (K=1.380 x 10 J/K), q is the Electronic charge will operate at the intersection point of its I-V
=1.6×10−19C), Rs series resistance and Rp shunt characteristic and the load curve. Fig. 4 shows an
resistance [14]. example, when a resistive load was directly connected to
the PV module. The figure indicates clearly that the PV The Cùk converter was designed according to the electric
module operating point is dictated by the load specification shown in TABLE II.
impedances, and in practice this point is rarely the same Below;
as the PV module MPP. Ref. [1] reports that when TABLE II
THE ELECTRIC SPECIFICATION OF CUK CONVERTER
connecting the PV module directly to the load, it Specification
generates just 31% of its maximum power.
Input Voltage (Vs) 12-18V
Input Current (Is) 0-5A(<5% ripple)
Output Voltage (Vout) 40V(<5% ripple)
Output Current (Io) 0-5A(<5% ripple)
Maximum Output Power (Pmax) 60W
Switching Frequency (f) 10KHz
Duty Cycle (D) 0.6≤D≤1

The Cùk converter components that used in simulation

Fig. 4: The PV module operating point were calculated as following:
Input Inductor (LI)
IV. CÙK CONVERTER The assumption that was made when calculating the
inductor size is that the change in the current across the
Both Cùk and buck-boost converters can provide inductor is not more than 5%, and the change in the
either lower or higher output voltage. The buck-boost inductor current can be calculated as following:
converter has a lower efficiency than the Cùk converter .
as it has disadvantages such as: the high current stress on ∆ 3
.
the power component discontinues input current, and it Where: Vs the input voltage, D the duty cycle, and f the
takes a longer time than the Cùk one for the transient switching frequency.
response. Although the Cùk converter is more expensive From the above equation the inductor L can be calculated
than the buck-boost converter it has certain advantages as:
over the buck-boost converter such as its continuous .
input current, low switching loss, and provision of a 4
∆ .
ripple-free output current due to the output stage And the current ripple is 5% of the average current,
inductor. Therefore, among the various DC-DC therefore ∆ is given as:
converters, the Cùk converter is the most appropriate to ∆ 5%. 5
be applied in an MPPT system. Fig. 5 illustrates the Cùk Therefore the inductor (L1):
converter circuit diagram which uses a capacitor as its .
main energy storage, and therefore it has a continuous 1 6
∆ .
input current, it can extract free current ripple from the Using the same assumption, the output inductor (L2) size
PV module, has less switching losses and higher can be calculated as:
efficiency [14]. .
2 7
∆ .
Capacitor selection
In choosing the capacitor size, the voltage ripple across it
should be no more than 5%.
The voltage cross the input capacitor can be calculated
Fig. 5. Basic Electrical Circuit of DC-DC Cùk Converter [14].
as:
Therefore, the voltage transfer function can be written as 1 8
following; For calculating the load resistance:
2 9
1
Where: D is the duty cycle, is the input voltage, The following equation is used to calculate the value of
and is the output voltage. C1:
 .
1 10
.∆ .
Where: Vout the output voltage, D the duty cycle, R the
load resistance, and f the switching frequency.
By using the output voltage ripple equation, the output
capacitor (C2) can be calculated as:
∆ 1
11
8. . .
Therefore C2 can be given as:
1
12
∆
8. . .
Fig. 6. P-V Curves of MSX-60 PV Module at Standard Test
Conditions, Simulated with the MATLAB model (1kw/m2, 25°C).
V. TECHNIQUES OF MAXIMUM POWER
Start
POINT TRACKING
Since the power obtained by using the PV system is Measure Vk,Ik
primarily dependent on the solar radiation, temperature
P=Ik*Vk
and the load impedance, it is important to operate the dP=Pk-P(k-1)
system at its MPP. Recently, a number of authors have
given different explanations of the problems relating to Yes No Yes
Yes
dI/dV =0 dV= 0 dI=0
the MPPT controller. There are numerous different
No No
methods that can maximize the power from a PV system;
Increase Module Decrease Decrease Increase Module
this variety ranges from using simple methods to more Voltage Module Voltage Module Voltage Voltage
complex analysis [16]-[17].
Update History
Fig. 7. Flowchart of P&O method
V.1. Perturbation and Observation algorithm (P&O)
This method is based on investigating the relationship
between PV module output power and its voltage: the V.2. Incremental Conductance (IncCond)
power-voltage (P-V) curve is shown in Figure 6. When
Incremental Conductance (IncCond) was developed by
the PV module operating point is on the left of the P-V
students of Saga University, and was used to overcome
curve (dP is positive), which means the PV module
the drawback of the P&O method under rapidly changing
output power increases, then the perturbation of the PV
environmental conditions. The method is achieved by
module voltage will continue in the same direction
calculating the sign of dP/dV using the PV module
towards the MPP. If the operating point of the module
incremental and its direct conductance (dI/dV and I/V)
was on the right side of the P-V curve then the controller
[8]-[19], In the IncCond method only two sensors (the
would move the PV module operating point back
voltage and current sensors) are required in order to
searching for the true MPP. This can be achieved by
measure the PV module output current and voltage,
reversing the perturbation direction, the flowchart of this
assuming there is only one point on the P-V
method is shown in Fig. 7 [2]-[10]-[14].
characteristic in which the PV module can produce its
MPP (see Fig. 6).
The relationship between the voltage and power can be
expressed as follows;
dP
0 13
dV
dP
0 14
dV
dP
0 15
dV
The P-V characteristic slope (dP/dV) can be calculated
using the PV module output voltage and its output
current as follows:
dP d I dV dV dI
dV dV dV dV
dV
16
Hence, the PV module operating point at its maximum
output power can be calculated based on equation (16) as
follows
dI I Fig. 9. Flowchart of CV method.
17
dV V
dI I V.4. Open Circuit Voltage (OCV)
18
dV V
The open circuit voltage (OCV) method is another well-
dI known MPPT controller based on the fact that, the ratio
19
dV V between the PV module maximum output voltage and its
open circuit voltage is equal to constant K
The flowchart of the IncCond algorithm is depicted in
K1 0.76 20
Fig. 8.
Where: Vmpp is the PV module maximum output voltage,
Voc the module open circuit voltage and K1 is a constant,
and assuming that it slightly changed with the solar
radiation, then the operating point set to a fixed value of
the open circuit voltage, A number of authors have been
suggested good values for K1 within the range 0.7–0.80
[7]-[20]-[21]. The OCV flowchart is shown in Fig. 10.

Fig. 8. Flowchart of the IncCond Algorithm

V.3. Constant Voltage (CV)

The constant voltage (CV) method algorithm is the

simplest MPPT controller, and has a quick response. The Fig. 10. Flowchart of OCV method
constant voltage methods does not require additional
equipment or input except for the measurement of the PV
V.5. Short Circuit Current (SCC)
voltage which requires a PI controller to adjust the duty
cycle of the converter order to maintain the PV voltage The short circuit current (SCC) technique is based on the
near the MPP [32]-[33]. In this method, the controller measurement of the PV module SCC when its output
regulates the PV module voltage and operates it close to voltage is equal to zero, and the PV module maximum
its MPP, by matching the PV module output voltage to a output current at MPP is linearly proportional to its SCC
constant reference voltage (Vref). The value of Vref is [3]-[9]-[16]. In order to match the two currents, the error
equal to the measured PV module maximum output current is used to regulate the duty ratio of DC-DC
voltage at standard test conditions (STC) or set to a fixed converter and the relationship between the PV module
calculated value [12]-[ 25]. output current and SCC at MPP is
Impp K2 ∗ Isc 21
Where K2 is a constant (K2<1) that can be calculated efficiency (98%) was better than other techniques under
from the PV curve. Its value has been estimated by a this condition, while the SCC method had the lowest
number of authors; according to Ref. [23], it is between efficiency (94.6%).
0.78-0.92. Ref.[18], suggests a technique of measuring
the true value of K2 by tracking the PV module MPP Perturbation and Observation
under changing weather conditions and suggests the 50
value of the proportional K2 to be approximately 0.92 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

PV M odule Output Power (W)

[22]-[23]. The SCC flowchart is shown in Fig. 11. Incremental Conductance
50
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Constant Voltage
50
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Open Circuit Voltage
50
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Short Circuit Current
50
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Time
Fig. 11. Flowchart of SCC method. Fig. 13. The PV Module Output Power (w) Simulated with the
MATLAB Model at 1000kw/m2, 25°C.

The simulation results highlight that the tracking

VI. DESIGN AND SIMULATION OF MPPT efficiency of these algorithms depends mainly on the
ALGORITHMS method of used to optimize output. The tracking process
The circuit diagram (Fig. 12) illustrates the Simulink of the IncCond method was around 98.5% efficient,
module of the MPPT system that was used in this work, while the P&O efficiency was lower at 96%, However,
in which the PV module output was fed to the DC-DC the IncCond response time is better as a result of its
Cùk converter, and the converter output was coupled to independence from the radiation level. Therefore, this
the load. Different MPPT algorithms were used to algorithm can be used at high and fast radiance
control the switch of the converter in order to study and variations. The OCV and SCC are simple and easily
compare their efficiency under various conditions. implemented with analogue software, but their tracking
efficiency was low than other techniques.
Perturbation and Observation
20
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
PV M odule O utput Pow er (W )

Incremental Conductance
20
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Fig. 12: Simulink Model of the MPPT System. Constant Voltage
20
The simulated model of the system was tested in two 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
stages; first, it was simulated at constant weather
20 Open Circuit Voltage
conditions; and, second it was simulated under varying
atmospheric conditions. The compared MPPT techniques 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
used for comparison were: classical P&O, IncCond, CV,
Short Circuit Current
OCV and SCC. Every MPPT technique performance was 20
evaluated when the steady state condition was reached. 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Fig. 13 shows the PV module output power, when the Time
system was simulated at STC (G=1000W/m2, T= 25°C). Fig. 14. The PV Module Output Power (w) Simulated with the
MATLAB Model at 200w/m2, 25°C.
The tracking efficiency of P&O method was about 96%,
while the IncCond was 98.5%. However, the CV method
Fig. 14 shows the PV module output power, when the Perturb and Observe (P&O)
system was simulated at low solar radiation 1000 W/m2 800 W/m2
50 600 W/m2
(G=200w/m2). The results indicate that at low levels of 200 W/m2 400 W/m2
irradiance, the MPPT tracking efficiency of P&O was 0

PV M odule Output Power (W )

Incremental Conductance (IncCond)
less than 60%. As the solar radiation decreased, the 50
output power decreased, while the direction of
perturbation changed and the controller remains 0
Constant Voltage (CV)
perturbing in the same direction until the irradiance 50
increases. This is one of the most common disadvantages
0
of the P&O algorithm. The IncCond (87%) and CV’s
Open Circuit Voltage (OCV).
(86.5%) efficiency were better than the P&O algorithm 50
under this condition, while the OCV (51%) and SCC
0
(47%) methods performed worse. Despite the fact that Short Circuit Current (SCC)
P&O cannot track the MPP at low solar radiation, it has 50
advantages over the IncCond method as it is cheaper and
0
its dynamic response is superior. However, the P&O 0 1 2 3 4 5
algorithm has limitations in its performance such as in Time
steady state it causes an oscillation around the MPP and Fig. 15. The PV Module Output Power (w) Simulated with the
MATLAB Model at Rapidly Changing Solar Radiation, 25°C.
has a lower efficiency at low solar radiation.
The CV method is the simplest MPPT algorithm which
Fig. 15 shows the PV module output power under
keeps the operating point of the PV module near to its
rapidly changing atmospheric conditions. The results
MPP. This is achieved by adjusting the module output
highlight that the systems with OCV and SCC method
voltage and matching it to a fixed value of reference
had large volumes of power losses, while the systems
voltage (Vref). The reference voltage value is equal to the
with CV and IncCond method had excellent
PV module maximum output voltage. This method
performances. Therefore, both the CV and IncCond
ignores the impact of temperature and solar radiation as it
algorithms have high efficiency and their performances
assumes the reference voltage is equal to the real MPP.
and dynamic responses were similar. The simulation
Hence, the operating point of the module cannot be the
results of the five MPPT algorithms at rapidly changing
true MPP, and different data needs to be installed for
radiation of 200W/m2, 600 W/m2, 1000 W/m2, 800
different geographical regions. Furthermore, this method
W/m2and 400 W/m2show clearly that the tracking
does not require the calculation of the output power as do
efficiency of MPP with the IncCond method is relatively
the previous methods; instead, it measures the PV
good when irradiation was changing. The PV module
module output voltage that is needed to set up the duty
operating point when the IncCond method was
cycle of the converter. This method is cheaper, its
implemented at G=1000 W/m2and G=600 W/m2were
efficiency is high under low solar radiation, and is easy
59.4 W and 33.7 W respectively which are close to the
to implement compared to other method. However, it
MPP of the module while the P&O results were 58 W
cannot track the MPP correctly under rapidly changing
and 22.8 W under the same condition.
atmospheric conditions. From Fig. 15, it is important to
Despite the fact that the IncCond method offers a good observe that at low insulation conditions, the tracking
performance under different atmospheric conditions, it process of the CV technique was more effective than
may not operate the PV model at the MPP. Although it either the P&O or the IncCond method. As a result, the
has better tracking efficiency than the P&O method, it CV method can be more suitable if it is combined with
requires more sensor devices for the relevant computing another MPPT method, such as P&O or the IncCond
which means its response time for conversion is slower, method.
leading to greater power losses. However, this method
The SCC method performance was less efficient than
has an advantage over the P&O method in that it can
other techniques under rapidly changing weather
provide high efficiency under rapidly changing weather
condition, as it failed to operate the PV module at its
conditions.
MPP when the solar radiation was changed at t=2000ms
the irradiance was 1000 W/m2and t=3000ms the
irradiance level dropped to 800 W/m2and then went
down to 400 W/m2at t=4000ms (see Fig. 15). This is
because it shifted the duty cycle in the wrong direction VII. CONCLUSION
until the new measurement of the SCC was taken, which
refreshed the value of the reference current. Therefore, This study presents the performance of five widely used
low regulation speed can be better than high speed MPPTs in terms of their performance, speed, cost and
especially in fast changing weather condition. The main efficiency. The simulation results show that the best
advantages of this method are: ease of implementation performance was obtained from the IncCond method as it
without a complicated algorithm; it does not cause any provided the highest efficiency. While the P&O method
oscillations around the MPP; and it has a relatively fast showed a good efficiency, it experienced low efficiency
response. However, it requires additional components at low irradiance level. Both P&O and IncCond
such as a current sensor that needs to measure the SCC. techniques require a microcontroller with a higher
Moreover, this method cannot always operate the PV performance than other the three techniques CV, OCV
module at its maximum output power as it uses an and SCC). Of the three other techniques, the CV method
estimation of the K2 factor which cannot be the real gave acceptable results, and its performance under low
value of the MPP in a real situation. This is because the solar radiation was better than the P&O method. The CV
PV module has a non-linear characteristic that varies method is the simplest technique and can provide a good
with the environmental conditions. Furthermore, the performance when minimizing the cost is required. The
online measurement of the SCC result in reducing the OCV and SCC methods proved to be the worst
output power of the module and its MPP is not always performers in terms of efficiency, especially, under
matched. In addition, in this method the measurement of rapidly changing conditions. The IncCond method has
the SCC (ISC) is frequently required which means several advantages over other algorithm method
shorting the module on each occasion. However, by including: higher efficiency under rapidly changing
using several loads this issue may not arise but this weather condition; it can operate the module at an
requires additional components; thereby increasing the accurate MPP without any oscillation around the MPP
cost of the system. unlike P&O method. However, the implementation of
The OCV algorithm is also simple and easy to implement this method is more complicated than the P&O method
as it does not required any inputs. However, the PV as it requires a fast controller with high sampling
module voltage needs to be measured to set the reference accuracy resulting in increasing the system cost.
voltage which requires adjusting the PV module References
operating point in order that it is close to the MPP. This
can be done by regulating the duty cycle of the converter [1] Oi, Akihiro, Design and simulation of photovoltaic water pumping
system, Ph.D. dissertation, California Polytechnic State University,
to match the module voltage with the maximum voltage. 2005.
However, this method, as with the CV method, ignores
the impact of solar radiation and temperature on the PV [2] W. Xiao, N. Ozog and W. G. Dunford, Topology study of
photovoltaic interface for maximum power point tracking, Industrial
module output. Thus, it is not accurate and the MPP is Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 54, 2007, pp. 1696-1704.
not achieved at all times. In this technique, the
measurement of the OCV is required; therefore, a switch [3] H. N. Zainudin and S. Mekhilef, Comparison study of maximum
needs to be inserted between the PV module and the power point tracker techniques for PV systems, in Proceedings of the
14th International Middle East Power Systems Conference
converter. Moreover, the OCV method requires (MEPCON’10), Cairo University, 2010, Egypt.
additional valves in order to compute the OCV, and also
a capacitor needs to be inserted between the module and [4] W. Xiao and W. G. Dunford, A modified adaptive hill climbing
MPPT method for photovoltaic power systems, in Power Electronics
the converter in order to supply the load with power Specialists Conference, 2004. PESC 04. 2004 IEEE 35th Annual, 2004,
when the switch opens the circuit. In additions, the ratio pp. 1957-1963.
of the OCV and the maximum voltage is not constant
with the ambient temperature. Therefore, this technique [5] A. N. A. Ali, M. H. Saied, M. Z. Mostafa and T. M. Abdel-
Moneim, A survey of maximum PPT techniques of PV systems, in
can only optimize the power at a single temperature. Energytech, 2012 IEEE, 2012, pp. 1-17.
Therefore, this technique does not provide the high
efficiency of the P&O and IncCond techniques, but it is [6] A. Dolara, R. Faranda and S. Leva, Energy comparison of seven
MPPT techniques for PV systems, Journal of Electromagnetic Analysis
generally is better than the SCC method. and Applications, vol. 1, 2009,pp. 152-162

[7] H. N. Zainudin and S. Mekhilef, Comparison study of maximum

power point tracker techniques for PV systems, in Proceedings of the
14th International Middle East Power Systems Conference
(MEPCON’10), Cairo University, 2010, Egypt.
[8] H. Abouobaida and M. Cherkaoui, Comparative study of maximum [22] Enrique, J. M., J. M. Andújar, and M. A. Bohórquez. A reliable,
power point trackers for fast changing environmental conditions, in fast and low cost maximum power point tracker for photovoltaic
Multimedia Computing and Systems (ICMCS), 2012 International applications. Solar Energy 84.1, 2010, pp. 79-89.
Conference on, 2012, pp. 1131-1136.
[23]Noguchi, Toshihiko, Shigenori Togashi, and Ryo Nakamoto. Short-
current pulse-based maximum-power-point tracking method for
[9] Chihchiang Hua and Chihming Shen, Comparative study of peak
multiple photovoltaic-and-converter module system. Industrial
power tracking techniques for solar storage system, in Applied Power
Electronics, IEEE Transactions on 49.1, 2002, pp. 217-223.
Electronics Conference and Exposition, 1998. APEC '98. Conference
Proceedings 1998., Thirteenth Annual, vol.2, 1998, pp. 679-685.
[24] C. Liu, B. Wu and R. Cheung, Advanced algorithm for MPPT
control of photovoltaic systems, in Canadian Solar Buildings
[10] J. J. Nedumgatt, K. Jayakrishnan, S. Umashankar, D. Vijayakumar
Conference Montreal, 2004, .
and D. Kothari, Perturb and observe MPPT algorithm for solar PV
systems-modeling and simulation, in India Conference (INDICON),
2011 Annual IEEE, 2011, pp. 1-6. [25] R. Faranda and S. Leva, Energy comparison of MPPT techniques
for PV Systems, WSEAS Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 3,2008,
pp. 446-455.
[11] D. Hohm and M. Ropp, Comparative study of maximum power
point tracking algorithms using an experimental, programmable,
maximum power point tracking test bed, in Photovoltaic Specialists [30] A. Dolara , R. Faranda and S. Leva, Energy comparison of seven
Conference, 2000. Conference Record of the Twenty-Eighth IEEE, MPPT techniques for PV systems, J. Electromagn. Anal. Appl, vol.
2000, pp. 1699-1702. 3, 2009, pp.152 -162.

[12] T. Esram and P. L. Chapman, Comparison of Photovoltaic Array

Maximum Power Point Tracking Techniques, Energy Conversion,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 22, 2007,pp. 439-449. AUTHORS’ INFORMATION
School of Engineering and Design, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UB8
3PH, Middlesex, United |Kingdom.
[13] T. Yu and T. Chien, Analysis and simulation of characteristics and
Corresponding author’s email: Ramdan.Koad@brunel.ac.uk
maximum power point tracking for photovoltaic systems, in Power
Electronics and Drive Systems, 2009. PEDS 2009. International
Conference on, 2009, pp. 1339-1344. Ramdan B A Koad was born in Ghat, Libya, in
1978. He received the MSc. degrees in electrical
Power from the Newcastle University, UK in
[14] Ramdan B. A. Koad, Ahmed. F. Zobaa, A Study of Non-Isolated 2009; he is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree
DC–DC Converters for Photovoltaic Systems, International Journal on in renewable energy sources. His main research
Energy Conversion, Vol. 1. n. 4, July 2013, pp. 219-227. interests include renewable energy sources and
power electronics.
[15] H. Abidi, A. B. Ben Abdelghani and D. Montesinos-Miracle,
MPPT algorithm and photovoltaic array emulator using DC/DC
converters, in Electrotechnical Conference (MELECON), 2012 16th Ahmed Faheem Zobaa received the
IEEE Mediterranean, 2012, pp. 567-572. B.Sc.(Hons.), M.Sc., and Ph.D. degrees in
electrical power and machines from Cairo
University, Giza, Egypt, in 1992, 1997, and
[16] A. N. A. Ali, M. H. Saied, M. Z. Mostafa and T. M. Abdel- 2002, respectively. From 2007 to 2010, he was
Moneim, A survey of maximum PPT techniques of PV systems, in a Senior Lecturer in renewable energy with the
Energytech,IEEE, 2012, pp. 1-17. University of Exeter, Cornwall, U.K. He was
also an Instructor from 1992 to 1997, a
[17] Chihchiang Hua and Chihming Shen, Study of maximum power Teaching Assistant from 1997 to 2002, and an Assistant Professor from
tracking techniques and control of DC/DC converters for photovoltaic 2003 to April 2008 with the Department of Electrical Power and
power system, in Power Electronics Specialists Conference, PESC 98 Machines and the Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, where he
Record. 29th Annual IEEE, vol.1, 1998, pp. 86-93. has also been an Associate Professor since April 2008. Currently, he is
also a Senior Lecturer in power systems with Brunel University,
Uxbridge, U.K. His main areas of expertise are lighting applications,
[18] Liu, Y, Advanced control of photovoltaic converters, Ph.D. power quality, ( marine) renewable energy systems, grid integration,
dissertation, Dept. Elect. Eng. University of Leicester, 2009 smart grids and energy management.
Dr. Zobaa is an Editor-in-Chief for the International Journal of
Renewable Energy Technology. He is also an Editorial Board member,
[19] S. Sreekanth and I. Raglend, A comparitive and analytical study of
Editor, Associate Editor, and Editorial Advisory Board member for
various incremental algorithms applied in solar cell, in Computing,
many international journals. He is a registered Chartered Engineer,
Electronics and Electrical Technologies (ICCEET), 2012 International
Chartered Energy Engineer, European Engineer, and International
Conference , 2012, pp. 452-456.
Professional Engineer. He is also a registered member of the
Engineering Council U.K., Egypt Syndicate of Engineers, and the
[20] Sera, Dezso. Real-time Modelling, Diagnostics and Optimised Egyptian Society of Engineers. He is a Fellow of the Institution of
MPPT for Residential PV systems. Ph.D. dissertation. Aalborg Engineering and Technology, the Energy Institute of U.K., the
University, 2009. Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers and the Higher
Education Academy of U.K. He is a senior member of the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers. He is a member of the
[21] S. Zhou, L. Kang, J. Sun, G. Guo, B. Cheng, B. Cao and Y. Tang,
International Solar Energy Society, the European Society for
A novel maximum power point tracking algorithms for stand-alone
Engineering Education, the European Power Electronics and Drives
photovoltaic system, International Journal of Control, Automation and
Association, the British Institute of Energy Economics, and the IEEE
Systems, vol. 8, 2010,pp. 1364-1371.
Standards Association.