2019 IEEE International Conference on Automatic Control and Intelligent Systems (I2CACIS 2019), 29 June 2019, Selangor, Malaysia
A New MPPT based on Queen Honey Bee
Migration (QHBM) in Stand-alone Photovoltaic
1st Kusmayanto Hadi Wibowo
Department of Electrical Engineering
Universitas Negeri Malang
Malang, Indonesia
hadi.wibowo.1505366@students.um.ac.id
2nd Aripriharta *
Department of Electrical Engineering,
Centre of Advanced Material of Renewable Energy
Universitas Negeri Malang
Malang, Indonesia
aripriharta.ft@um.ac.id
* corresponding author
3rd Irham Fadlika
Department of Electrical Engineering
Universitas Negeri Malang
Malang, Indonesia
irham.fadlika.ft@um.ac.id
Abstract— This paper presents a new maximum power point
tracking algorithm (MPPT) which developed by using Queen
Honey Bee Migration (QHBM) [11]. The proposed QHBM
based MPPT uses Queen for making a decision in searching
MPPT on the stand-alone PV panel. The Queen migrates from
initial voltage to the voltage at MPP and finally stopped her
journey and build a hive. The simulation results show that
QHBM could surpass P and O, PSO and Fuzzy in term of
computation speed, robustness, and error margin to the MPP.
Moreover, our QHBM based MPPT could perform better
respond to the irradiation change compare to its competitors.
Keywords— QHBM, MPPT, Dc-Dc Converter, Boost
Converter, Standalone Photovoltaic
I. INTRODUCTION
The increasing energy demand causes the increasing
expense of fossil fuel. On the other hand, fossil fuel cause
pollution to the environment. Thus, the development of
renewable energy supply is required to reduce the carbon
emission [1]. In [2-3], authors have a particular concern in
photovoltaic (PV) due to its advantages, such as direct
conversion to electricity, unlimited raw energy, and zero
emission. However, PV has a low conversion efficiency of
around 8-25% [4], environmental dependence, and its output
is influenced by irradiation and temperature.
There are various techniques to solve this problem, one of
the best is maximum power point tracking (MPPT) [1,6]. The
development of Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT)
techniques has been carried out in literature. According to [7],
one of the most commonly used algorithms under normal
conditions is Perturb and Observe (P&O). P&O is simple and
easy to use so that it often used in low-cost commercial
products. However, the disadvantage of P& O is it fails under
irradiation that rapidly changes, and it has bad performance
under partial shade [5]. Other examples of the development
of MPPT techniques are Partial Swarm Optimization (PSO)
[8], and Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC) [10]. Author [10] has
succeeded in developing a new MPPT algorithm using fuzzy
cognitive networks. The method succeeded in providing
978-1-7281-0784-4/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE
4th Gwo Jiun Horng
Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering
Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology
Tainan, Taiwan
grojium@mail.stust.edu.tw
5th Slamet Wibawanto
Department of Electrical Engineering
Universitas Negeri Malang
Malang, Indonesia
slamet.wibawanto.ft@um.ac.id
6th Fitrah Wicaksono Yunianto Saputra
Department of Electrical Engineering
Universitas Negeri Malang
Malang, Indonesia
fitrah.yunianto.1505366@students.um.ac.id
excellent operation on MPPT with different conditions such
as changes in temperature and solar irradiation. In [8], a PSO
method combined with P&O technique, where PSO used to
find the reference point at the beginning, while the P&O
technique is used at the end to approve the PSO results.
However, those methods were work in hybrid modes. Thus,
we argue that their performances may not good enough for a
single mode.
In this paper, we proposed a new method for MPPT,
where Queen Honey Bee Migration (QHBM) is used for
searching the MPPT on stand-alone PV grid. Previously, the
algorithm had been used for optimization in many
applications [11] which give a faster computation speed than
its competitors. For the best of our knowledge, QHBM has
not been implementing to MPPT. Thus, we used QHBM for
MPPT and tested on the PV module with 250 Wp.
The rest of this paper is organized as follow. Section 2
describes the related works. The proposed method is
explained in Section 3. Section 4 is the result and analysis.
Finally, the conclusion is in Section 5.
II. RELATED WORKS
According to [5], Perturbation and Observation (P&O)
and Incremental Conductance (IC) are the algorithms that
often used for MPPT. The author [12] discusses IC for
tracking maximum power points based on direct power
variations. The measured voltage and current from PV output
are used to calculate conductance. The advantages of IC are
environmental adaptation and high accuracy [13]. P&O
algorithm is developed based on perturbing the voltage and
observing the power variations. The purpose of P&O is to
reduce the direction of change to the desired voltage (Vreff).
The shortcoming of those methods is they have not involved
the environmental uncertainty.
In [14], the Authors uses FLC for MPPT, which has 3
stages, namely Fuzzification; Inference; and Defuzzification.
The input variable used by the author is Change of Error (CE)
as ∆(dPpv/dIpv) and Error (E) as ∆dE, where Ppv and Ipv are
123
 2019 IEEE International Conference on Automatic Control and Intelligent Systems (I2CACIS 2019), 29 June 2019, Selangor, Malaysia

Parameter Value
the power and current Pv while E shows the direction of
displacement from the point. The output variable used by the Open Circuit Voltage 37.6 V
author is dD, which represents a change of duty ratio of a Short Circuit Current 8.79 A
switch or commonly called duty cycle. The method used in the
inference method is Mamdani’s method. Whereas the Maximum Power Voltage (Vmp) 31.0 V
defuzzification is the center of area (COA) and the max Maximum Power Current (Imp) 8.08 A
criterion method (MCM).
Module Efficiency 15.1%
Based on the statement [15] that PSO is one of the
algorithms to solve complex optimization problems based on Reference points from each different irradiation got from
evolutionary calculations. The author [16], combines the PSO the datasheet [9]. The PV characteristics graph that we use can
algorithm with the P&O technique. The step of the hybrid be seen in Figure 2.
algorithm is the first track on MPP with the PSO algorithm
and evaluated by P&O. The particle population in the PSO The proposed algorithm was tested 3 times with different
used is duty cycle. Each particle i spreads with the same environmental conditions. The irradiation data we got from
distance and each particle i has a fitness value (power). The [19], while the temperature in PV is considered to be all 25ᵒC.
particle i that has the highest fitness value is called (Pbesti) The following data we use:
and changes the previous position to the Pbesti position. After
that, there is a swarm that has the highest fitness value TABLE II. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
(Gbesti). If particle i is greater than Gbesti, change Gbesti to Irradiance Temperature
that particle. Calculate the speed and particle i position in the (W/m2) (Celsius)
iteration k. After getting the update speed value, the particle 1000 25
moves to a new position. The PSO algorithm stops when the
800 25
value of Gbesti and all Pbesti is smaller than 1%. The duty
cycle value obtained from PSO is optimized again using the 1000 25
P&O technique.
B. Dc-Dc Converter
A. Specification of PV
This study used Boost Converter. In this paper, a dc-dc
The PV that use in this study is Mitshubisi Electric with converter is to adjust the voltage to match the value desired by
the type PV-MLU250HC [9] as shown in Table 1. Vpv. In addition, the converter also has a function to stabilize
the voltage generated by PV. The duty ratio (D) we can
TABLE I. SPESIFICATION OF PV-MLU250HC through the equations that we take from references [20].
Parameter Value
1
Power Maximum (Pmax) 250 Wp = (1)
(1 − )

Boost Converter
(equation 1)
Send Send
Current and Voltage Voltage and Current
Inductor Diode
Mosfet Load
DC Source
Capacitor

Ipv and Vpv Get DutyCycle from QHBM Algorithm

Vload and Iload
Measurement Measurement
Photovoltaic
System Send
Vpv Duty Cycle Vload

Ppv=Vpv*Ipv QHBM ALGORITHM Pload=Vload*Iload

(equation 2-7)

Fig. 1. System block diagram

978-1-7281-0784-4/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE 124

 2019 IEEE International Conference on Automatic Control and Intelligent Systems (I2CACIS 2019), 29 June 2019, Selangor, Malaysia

[Cell temperature 25 ᵒC]

10 300
9
250
8
7
200

POWER (WP)
CURRENT (A)

6
5 150
4
100
3
2
50
1
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
VOLTAGE (V)

100 W/m2 900 W/m2 800 W/m2 700 W/m2

Fig. 2. PV characteristics

III. THE PROPOSED QHBM BASED MPPT ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

In QHBM [1], Queen roles as the decision maker and
Scout Bee as guiders. Queen migrates to a new hive based
on a sector that has the highest energy tracked by Scout Bee.
The sector is divided into 8 sectors based on the cardinal
direction. In general, QHBM has 3 stages, namely
initialization conditions, probabilities in sectors, and
journey. The following is an explanation of the stages:
1) Initialize the condition. Initially, the initial position
of Queen Honey Bee (Vpv,Ppv), the distance of the Queen
Honey Bee to the pole (RQHBM), and resistance of the Queen
Honey Bee (Gs) were setted
2) Sector probability calculation. After getting
initialization conditions, scout bees spread to several 8
sectors. Every scout bee (cj) has its own value of
excitement. Next, calculate the probability value (pk) in
each sector. Equation (2) is used for excitement values,
while (3) is used for probability values:
1
= ( ) (2)
= (3)
∑
where j is the identity of scout bees, k is the sector identity,
n is the number of scout bees, and er(ij) is the remaining
energy for each scout bees.
3) The journey of Queen Honey Bee. Queen Honey Bee
moves to a sector that has the highest probability. The
transfer of Queen Honey Bee is influenced by the
resistance, so the actual radius value in (4). Equation (5) is
used to update the Vpv value, while (6) for the value of Ppv.
On the next journey, Queen Honey Bee resistance is also
updated using (7).
( )
= 1−
( )
(4)
= cos (5)
( ) ( ) ( )
= sin ( ) (6)
( ) ( )
= (1) (7)
where ith is the iteration value at that time and ith =1,2,..,n.
IV. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
The proposed algorithm has been simulated. The
parameters tested were the number of scout bees, radius,
and maximum iterations of QHBM. While the second
simulation aims to determine the comparison between the
proposed algorithm (QHBM) with the previous algorithm
(P&O, PSO, and Fuzzy) in the MPPT application.
Comparisons tested were accuracy and sensitivity to
changes in environmental conditions and steady-state
duration. This simulation has been done on
Matlab/Simulink.
The simulation results are shown in table 3. The
parameters tested were the maximum iterations, radius, and
values of scout bees varied in the same environmental
conditions (solar irradiation and temperature). The good
performance criteria in this study are voltage and power
errors of less than 1%. The average MPPT based on QHBM
results has good performance. The best result is the value
of scout bee 18, radius 5, and maximum iteration of 100. It
reaches the intended point in the 98th iteration with a value
of 30.09 as Voltage and 249.8 as Power. The result shows
that the Voltage error is 0.03% while the Power error is
0,0008%. Figure 3 is the best journey to the reference point.
The worst result is number 5. The simulation uses the value
of scout bee 24, radius 5, and maximum iteration of 50.
Until maximum iteration, Queen's position is only at point
30.1 as voltage and 193.1 as power. That means Queen has
poor performance compared to other simulation results.

978-1-7281-0784-4/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE 125

 2019 IEEE International Conference on Automatic Control and Intelligent Systems (I2CACIS 2019), 29 June 2019, Selangor, Malaysia

The worst simulation is shown in Fig. 4. This is due to the performance. Radius is also very influential in the
short maximum number of iterations, this statement is simulation, can be seen in table 3 number 6-8 have a good
confirmed from the simulation results number 1-4 with a performance because the radius used is longer than the
higher maximum iteration can produce a good radius number 5.

TABLE III. THE SIMULATION RESULT

Scout Bee Maximum

No Radius Vin Vreff Vbest Pin Preff Pbest
Value Iteration.

1 18 5 100 20 31 30.09 150 250 249.8

2 18 10 100 20 31 30.09 150 250 244.6

3 24 10 100 20 31 28.06 150 250 234.74

4 24 5 100 20 31 27.62 150 250 235.5

5 24 5 50 20 31 30.1 150 250 193.1

6 18 10 50 20 31 30.81 150 250 242.3

7 24 10 50 20 31 30.25 150 250 223.9

8 18 5 50 20 31 30.51 150 250 216.94

Fig. 3. The best performance of QHBM

Fig. 4. The worst performance of QHBM

We also validated our QHBM based MPPT with P&O,
Fuzzy, and PSO. The parameters compared are accuracy
and sensitivity to changes in environmental conditions.
Environmental change data can be seen in table 2 and the
dc-dc converter used can be seen in Figure 1. According to
the second simulation results, all algorithms have
succeeded in tracking the reference point at the beginning
of the condition (irradiation= 1000W /m2). But when the
second condition (irradiation= 800W/m2), P&O does not
track the reference point. The P&O simulation results prove
the reference statement [5], that the P&O technique is weak
against irradiation changes. PSO performance is almost the

978-1-7281-0784-4/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE 126

 2019 IEEE International Conference on Automatic Control and Intelligent Systems (I2CACIS 2019), 29 June 2019, Selangor, Malaysia

same as QHBM performance. The difference is that QHBM
sensitivity is slow when irradiation falls. However, the
QHBM has a longer duration while steady-state. Duration
of PV at its peak is 5.5 seconds with a total simulation time
of 6 seconds. The difference in QHBM with PSO is 0.1
seconds, the best QHBM performance compared to other
algorithms. According to table 4, QHBM has the smallest
error from other algorithms. QHBM simulation results and
other algorithms can be seen in Fig. 5, Fig. 6, Fig. 7, and
Fig. 8.

Fig. 5. Graph of MPPT Based on QHBM Fig. 6. Graph of MPPT Based on PSO

Fig. 7. Graph of MPPT Based on Fuzzy Fig. 8. Graph of MPPT Based on P&O

TABLE IV. PERFORMANCE COMPARISON OF QHBM BASED MPPT WITH COMPETITORS

Irradiation = 1000W/m2 Irradiation = 800 W/m2 Irradiation = 1000 W/m2

Method Power Power Power
Time (s) Error (%) Time (s) Error (%) Time (s) Error (%)
(Wp) (Wp) (Wp)
QHBM 250 1.9 0 195.9 1.8 0.02 238.6 1.8 0.04

PSO 237.1 1.7 0.04 199.9 2 0.03 237.1 1.7 0.05

P&O 237.15 1.8 0.05 125 1.8 0.3 124.5 1.5 0.38

Fuzzy 237.1 1.95 0.04 199.9 1.5 0.03 237.1 1.95 0.04

V. CONCLUSION
The QHBM-based MPPT has been developed and
simulated. Based on the simulation results, a good
parameter for MPPT is the number of iterations is high with
a radius and the number of scout bee is small. Thus tracking
the maximum point can be accurate and optimal. In
addition, the algorithm can also be applied to rapidly change
environmental conditions. The QHBM algorithm can track
faster than the previous algorithm with good accuracy,
besides that the algorithm can be stable in steady-state
conditions with a longer time than the previous algorithm.
Thus, this paper can be used as a reference for the
development of the QHBM algorithm on MPPT. This paper
will also continue to develop the QHBM algorithm for PV
implementation in other problems.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work is supported by PNBP Universitas Negeri
Malang (UM) 2019, Malang, Indonesia. Thanks to Mr.
Quota Alief, ST., MT. for his kind suggestion.
REFERENCES
[1] P. Sivakumar, A. Abdul Kader, Y. Kaliavaradhan, and M.
Arutchelvi, “Analysis and enhancement of PV efficiency with
incremental conductance MPPT technique under non-linear loading
conditions,” Renewable Energy, vol. 81, pp. 543–550, Sep 2015.
[2] L. M. Elobaid, A. K. Abdelsalam, dan E. E. Zakzouk, “Artificial
neural network-based photovoltaic maximum power point tracking
techniques: a survey,” IET Renewable Power Generation, vol. 9, no.
8, pp. 1043–1063, Nov 2015.
[3] A. B. Bahgat, N. Helwa, G.. Ahamd, dan E.. El Shenawy,
“Estimation of the maximum power and normal operating power of
a photovoltaic module by neural networks,” Renewable Energy, vol.
29, no. 3, pp. 443–457, Mar 2004.
[4] M. A. Green, Y. Hishikawa, E. D. Dunlop, D. H. Levi, J. Hohl-
Ebinger, and A. W. Y. Ho-Baillie, “Solar cell efficiency tables
(version 51),” Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications,
vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 3–12, Jan 2018.
[5] B. Bendib, H. Belmili, and F. Krim, “A survey of the most used
MPPT methods: Conventional and advanced algorithms applied for
photovoltaic systems,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,
vol. 45, pp. 637–648, May2015.
[6] A. Fathy, “Reliable and efficient approach for mitigating the shading
effect on photovoltaic module based on Modified Artificial Bee
Colony algorithm,” Renewable Energy, vol. 81, pp. 78–88, Sep
2015.

978-1-7281-0784-4/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE 127

 2019 IEEE International Conference on Automatic Control and Intelligent Systems (I2CACIS 2019), 29 June 2019, Selangor, Malaysia
[7] S. Titri, C. Larbes, K. Y. Toumi, and K. Benatchba, “A new MPPT
controller based on the Ant colony optimization algorithm for
Photovoltaic systems under partial shading conditions,” Applied
Soft Computing, vol. 58, pp. 465–479, Sep 2017.
[8] K. Sundareswaran, V. Vignesh kumar, and S. Palani, “Application
of a combined particle swarm optimization and perturb and observe
method for MPPT in PV systems under partial shading conditions,”
Renewable Energy, vol. 75, pp. 308–317, Mar 2015.
[9] Datasheet PV-MLU250HC Mitshubisi Electric.
[10] T. L. Kottas, Y. S. Boutalis, and A. D. Karlis, “New Maximum
Power Point Tracker for PV Arrays Using Fuzzy Controller in Close
Cooperation With Fuzzy Cognitive Networks,” IEEE Transactions
on Energy Conversion, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 793–803, Sep 2006.
[11] G.-J. Jong, Aripriharta, Hendrick, and G.-J. Horng, “A Novel Queen
Honey Bee Migration (QHBM) Algorithm for Sink Repositioning in
Wireless Sensor Network,” Wireless Personal Communications, vol.
95, no. 3, pp. 3209–3232, Aug 2017.
[12] P. Sivakumar, A. Abdul Kader, Y. Kaliavaradhan, and M.
Arutchelvi, “Analysis and enhancement of PV efficiency with
incremental conductance MPPT technique under non-linear loading
conditions,” Renewable Energy, vol. 81, pp. 543–550, Sep 2015.
[13] H. Patel and V. Agarwal, “MATLAB-Based Modeling to Study the
Effects of Partial Shading on PV Array Characteristics,” IEEE
Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 302–310,
Mar 2008.
978-1-7281-0784-4/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE
[14] T. L. Kottas, Y. S. Boutalis, and A. D. Karlis, “New Maximum
Power Point Tracker for PV Arrays Using Fuzzy Controller in Close
Cooperation With Fuzzy Cognitive Networks,” IEEE Transactions
on Energy Conversion, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 793–803, Sep 2006.
[15] A. Jouda, F. Elyes, A. Rabhi, and M. Abdelkader, “Optimization of
Scaling Factors of Fuzzy–MPPT Controller for Stand-alone
Photovoltaic System by Particle Swarm Optimization,” Energy
Procedia, vol. 111, pp. 954–963, Mar 2017.
[16] K. Sundareswaran, V. Vignesh kumar, and S. Palani, “Application
of a combined particle swarm optimization and perturb and observe
method for MPPT in PV systems under partial shading conditions,”
Renewable Energy, vol. 75, pp. 308–317, Mar 2015.
[17] K. Sundareswaran, P. Sankar, P. S. R. Nayak, S. P. Simon, and S.
Palani, “Enhanced Energy Output From a PV System Under Partial
Shaded Conditions Through Artificial Bee Colony,” IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 198–209, Jan
2015.
[18] A. soufyane Benyoucef, A. Chouder, K. Kara, S. Silvestre, and O.
A. sahed, “Artificial bee colony based algorithm for maximum
power point tracking (MPPT) for PV systems operating under partial
shaded conditions,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 32, pp. 38–48, Jul
2015.
[19] https://www.cableizer.com/tools/solar_irradiation/
[20] Ayop R. And Tan C W 2018 Design of boost converter based on
maximum power point resistance for photovoltaic applications Solar
Energy 160 pp 322–33
128