Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman

A Salp-Swarm Optimization based MPPT technique for harvesting maximum T

energy from PV systems under partial shading conditions
⁎
Adeel Feroz Mirzaa, Majad Mansoora, Qiang Linga, , Baoqun Yina, M. Yaqoob Javedb
a
Department of Automation, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230027, China
b
Department of Electrical Engineering, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology (CIIT), Defence Road, Off Raiwind Road, Lahore, Pakistan

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In recent years, solar photovoltaic power generation has been widely used in the world because of its eco-
Photo Voltaic (PV) friendly and recyclable nature. It is therefore critical to extract maximum power from solar photovoltaic systems.
Salp Swarms Optimization (SSO) Numerous maximum power point tracking (MPPT) techniques of solar photovoltaic systems have been proposed.
Partial Shading (PS) Conventional MPPT techniques are usually limited to uniform weather condition. This paper presents a novel
Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT)
bio-inspired technique for Photovoltaic (PV) systems under various weather condition, which utilizes Salp
Global Maxima (GM)
Local Maxima (LM)
Swarm Optimization (SSO) for effective MPPT. It makes use of the confined exploitation property of salps to
DragonFly Optimization (DFO) track the maximum available power, especially under Partial Shading (PS), which may severely degrade the
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) output power. Moreover, robustness and efficiency are significantly improved by the proposed SSO technique.
The results of SSO in five different weather cases are tested against conventional MPPT techniques, such as
Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) Optimization, Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), PSO-Gravitational Search
(PSOGS), DragonFly Optimization (DFO), Cuckoo Search (CS) Optimization, and, Perturb and Observe (P&O)
algorithms. The proposed SSO technique can successfully tackle the global maxima (GM) under various weather
conditions and demonstrates performance superiority in terms of efficiency, faster tracking, and stable output.

1. Introduction weather, the current-voltage (I-V) and power-voltage (P-V) curves of PV

The past century has seen tremendous utilization of nonrenewable
power production, mostly utilizing hydrocarbons, such as oil, coal, and
gas. The increase in Sulphur and Carbon dioxide footprint in the at-
mosphere, causing global warming, chronic diseases, and rapid deple-
tion of fossil fuels, has forced the need for cleaner power production
technologies. Lack of reliable alternatives is soon coming to an end
because of rapidly depleting nonrenewable resources. Due to techno-
logical advancements and governmental interests in alternative re-
newable energy resources, a lot of work is being devoted to renewable
power generation. In comparison with other renewable sources like
geothermal, wind, tidal and biomass, solar energy is the most effective
source.
Solar energy is usually harvested by photovoltaics (PV) systems. The
output of PV systems strongly depends on weather conditions. The
shade of clouds and building may affect the output. Due to varying
systems are non-linear in nature [1]. In the I-V and P-V curves, it is
observed that for instantaneous I and V produced by the system, there is
a region in which maximum power can be produced. It is done by in-
creasing or decreasing the duty cycle of the DC-DC converter in such a
way that the maximum power is obtained. For this purpose, the Max-
imum Power Point Tracking (MPPT) is required to extract the max-
imum output from PV systems. Under different weather conditions, the
behavior of PV systems varies. Under Partial Shading (PS) condition
multiple Local Maximum (LM) appear on the I-V and P-V curves, and a
Global Maximum (GM). Partial shading usually occurs due to clouds,
shadow or non-uniform irradiance. The DC-DC converter is used to
transfer regulated DC Electric Power to load according to utilization.
The control action is provided by pulse signal, i.e. duty cycle. The
controller is designed to optimize the duty cycle to achieve the desired
optimization.
The classical layout of a typical PV system is shown in Fig. 1.

Abbreviations: PV, Photovoltaic; SSO, Salp swarm optimization; DFO, Dragonfly optimization; SI, Swarm intelligence; LM, Local maxima; CPS, Complex partial
shading; RE, Relative error; MPPT, Maximum power point tracking; ABC, Artificial bee colony; PSO, Particle swarm optimization; CS, Cuckoo search; RMSE, Root
mean square error; PSOGS, PSO-gravitational search; PS, Partial shading; MAE, Mean absolute error; P&O, Perturb and observe; GM, Global maxima; CHM, Cluster
head maxima
⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: qling@ustc.edu.cn (Q. Ling).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.112625
Received 14 October 2019; Received in revised form 15 February 2020; Accepted 17 February 2020
0196-8904/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A.F. Mirza, et al.
Fig. 1. Block diagram of a typical PV system.
Exhaustive study has been made to design a controller to extract
maximum power from the PV system. Classical Hill Climbing (HC) al-
gorithms, Perturb and Observe (P&O) and Incremental Conductance
(IC) [1,2] are used traditionally for tracking MPP. These techniques
involve a small periodic addition in the output power. A comparison is
made with the reference voltage, and power samples to the current
position and its effects are utilized to determine an operation in the
positive or negative direction. This process is repeated unless the de-
sired MPP is achieved. These techniques have lower efficiency and
significant steady-state error with the inability to find Global Maxima
(GM). The tradeoff between the high-power convergence efficiency and
the least GM tracking duration makes them a less effective choice for
MPPT operations.
In [3], Ghosh et al. introduced a simplified technique for optimized
power generation onboard of a Solar PV integrated lighter than air
platform (LTAP) [4]. A large amount of power generation losses occur
due to non-uniform illumination installed on the PV array, by using
distributed MPPT power generation can be increased by 8% in com-
parison with scanning window technology. The availability of robust,
smaller, affordable and reliable microcontrollers, efficient sensors and
portable programming tools has enabled several new bio-inspired al-
gorithms to be implemented on MPPT of PV systems. A most effective
way to increase the output of the system is Maximum Power Point
Tracking (MPPT). Recently, some intelligent control-based methods are
used to perform control action of MPPT. AI-based Artificial Neural
Networks (ANN) [5,6], Fuzzy Logic controllers (FLC) [7], and Genetic
Algorithm (GA) [8,9] are used in exploring the most effective solution
for MPPT. Their efficiency is highly dependent upon extensive training,
which usually takes a long time and consumes much computation
power.
Merits of an MPPT algorithm include robustness, adaptiveness,
convergence, and efficiency. In recent years, a new class of bio-inspired
algorithms have emerged to achieve desirable MPPT merits [10].
Heuristic MPPT algorithms, such as Ant Colony Optimization (ACO)
[11], Cuckoo search (CS) [12,13], Adoptive Cuckoo Optimization Al-
gorithms (ACOA) [14], have been proposed. Some recent MPPT tech-
niques of PV system are proposed [15–19] to solve the PS problem, but
may not work well under CPS (complex partial shading). Grey Wolf
Optimization (GWO) and Pattern Search (PS) have been proved to be
useful for optimization recently. Performance of these algorithms de-
pends upon many factors, including population size, convergence
2
Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625
speed, number of iterations, and information sharing efficiency in the
mechanism. For example, ACO utilizes pheromones for sharing in-
formation. A careful selection is required because each ant is a particle
representing a possible solution. Due to the probabilistic nature of the
selection of the candidate’s solution and their position in the search
space, undesired outputs may be generated. Similarly, CS may assign
sudden random values using Levy flight, which causes unwanted fluc-
tuation in the output signal. The smaller size of the population mag-
nifies these defects significantly. When a larger number of population
particles are utilized, it takes a toll on computational power and con-
vergence time of GM. Furthermore, the already existing bio-inspired
MPPT techniques mostly cover the PV systems under PS conditions.
Most of these bio-inspired techniques are able to catch the MPP in
uniform or in PS case. Furthermore, they may encounter some major
problems in PV applications. The first problem is related to the time-
varying GM positions in P-V curves, most of which can track the first
GM at the beginning and stays there. But if GM changes over time, these
MPPT algorithms will not be re-configured. Another problem is the
power oscillation under steady-state conditions due to the random
variables related to all these bio-inspired soft computing techniques.
Bio-inspired techniques, like PSO, generate oscillation because of the
randomized parameters modeled in the velocity and position updating
equations [20,21]. [22] presents a study on GWO to solve the random
oscillation problem around the GM. Under the CPS, many bio-inspired
based MPPT techniques get stuck at a local GM and fail to track the true
GM. These problems will be solved in this paper with some novel, ef-
ficient, robust, and smart techniques.
Keeping these disadvantages in mind, a new meta-heuristic algo-
rithm, Salp Swarm Optimization Algorithm (SSO), is introduced into
this paper. MPPT under CPS has not caught much attention. In this
paper, we will study the problem of complex partial shading. This
problem occurs when a large number of PV modules are connected in
series and parallel formation, i.e. solar power stations. SSO makes use of
swarm intelligence to track GM under PS and CPS conditions. The
transitional motion of SSO between exploration and exploitation en-
ables fast transient convergence and an efficient tracking with least
oscillations in the steady state. It has the capability of effective tracking
of GM. Results show the superior performance of the proposed algo-
rithm for various irradiation patterns. Extensive study has been made to
validate the effectiveness and controllability of SSO in this study. The
main contributions of this study are summarized below.
A.F. Mirza, et al.
1. A novel MPPT technique is introduced to handle the PS and CPS
problem for the solar PV system. It can effectively track the GM
under the PS and CPS conditions. Moreover, it requires less itera-
tions to reach GM and prevent energy loss.
2. Applicability of the proposed technique is validated by the experi-
ments and statistical analysis with other meta-heuristic MPPT
techniques. Under the proposed technique, we can achieve the
power conversion efficiency up to 99.7% and can tackle CPS with
the 100% GM tracking capability. Furthermore, its steady-state os-
cillation at GM can be less than 1 W.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. 1 gives introduction
and literature review. The Electrical characteristics of PV models are
introduced in Section 2. Section 3 introduces some related Bio-inspired
MPPT techniques and proposes the SSO MPPT technique. The proposed
SSO technique is compared with some well-known MPPT techniques
using experimental simulations in Section 4. Section 5 presents some
concluding remarks.
2. PV model characteristics for partial shading and uniform
condition
2.1. PV array model
A comprehensive PV model is necessary to take into account the
effects of temperature, irradiance levels, heat dissipation in PV arrays
and the combination of series and parallel modules to form an array to
efficiently maximize the basic structure of PV system. Fig. 2 shows the
circuit of a PV cell. The ideal PV cell acts as a DC source and is bounded
by a red dotted line region. The junction resistance and internal re-
sistance of a diode are incorporated and included in a practical model of
the cell as a series and parallel combination to model actual behavior of
the PV cell. Fig. 2 presents an equivalent circuit of a PV cell using a
single diode model.
The output in the form of current is given by Eq. (1).
V + Rs I ⎞ V + Rs I
I = Ipv − Io ⎜⎛exp ⎛ ⎜ − 1⎟⎞ −
⎟
⎝ ⎝ Vt a ⎠ ⎠ Rs
PV cell current, saturation current, and thermal voltage are given by
Eq. (2), Eq. (3) and Eq. (4), respectively, where T is the operating
temperature and G is the irradiance level.
G
Ipv = (Ipv, n + KI (T − Tn ))
Gn
Saturation current
(Isc + KI (T − Tn ) )
Io =
(
exp Voc +
Kv (T − Tn )
aVt )−1
Thermal voltage
Ns KT
Vt =
q (4)
Fig. 2. Equivalent circuit single diode model of PV cell.
Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625
A PV system consists of an array of PV cells. The series combination
adds voltage V, and the parallel combination of cells enhances current I.
The P-V and I-V characteristics remain the same as shown in Fig. 2. Nm
is the number of series cells and Np is the number of cells in parallel.
The general Eq. (1) is modified into the form of Eq. (5).
V + Rseq I ⎞ V + Rseq I
I = Np Ipv − Np Io ⎛⎜exp ⎛ ⎜ ⎟ − 1⎞⎟ −
⎝ N V
⎝ m t ⎠ a ⎠ Rpeq (5)
The I-V and P-V characteristics of the PV cell are shown below in
Fig. 3
A detailed block diagram of the proposed SSO MPPT control system
is presented in Fig. 1. It includes all the essential components of a
standalone PV system. DC-DC boost converter is used which provides
two essential functions. First, it provides an interface between load and
PV arrays. Second and more important is that it provides the control
action through its duty cycle. By adjustment of a pulse width modulated
(PWM) duty cycle signal, the system is forced to operate on MPP.
Table 1 provides the electric characteristics of “SunPower SPR-315E-
WHT-D” PV array.
2.2. Partial shading
As depicted in Fig. 4, the 4 × 1 array is considered as partially
shaded using 4 different patterns. Graphical presentation of partial
shading is shown in Fig. 5 for P-V curves and Fig. 6 for I-V curves. Fig. 5
presents 4 different scenarios of PS. PS has been the fundamental pro-
blem of PV MPPT techniques because PS significantly reduces the ef-
ficiency of the system. MPPT techniques are devised to tackle this
problem. Conventional gradient-based MPPT techniques, such as P&O
and IC, are unable to distinguish between global and local maxima.
These techniques can only operate on one point, and the decision is
based merely upon the positive or negative gradient. Since PS produces
multiple peak points on the curves, the efficiency of these gradient-
based techniques is highly compromised. Bio-inspired optimization
techniques have the ability to locate the GM and have been successfully
utilized for PV MPPT application. In Section 3, such techniques, namely
(1) PSO, PSOGS, CS, and ABC, are elaborated. Their merits and limitations
are also weighted and a novel SSO based system is devised.
3. Bio-inspired MPPT techniques and the proposed MPPT
technique
(2) 3.1. PSO
Particle swarm optimization (PSO) is a bio-inspired optimization
technique which makes use of the collective intelligence of identical
(3)
individuals to maximize the efficiency of operation [23,24]. This
technique provides the foundation of swarm intelligence. Due to this
reason, this technique is added to draw a comparison in this paper as
well. In PSO, particles are associated with a flock of birds, fish or mobile
species and entities. Each member of the crowd is called a particle. The
crowd searches the area for food resources. In an optimization problem,
this food source is considered to be the objective function. Particles
with individual direction and velocity are initialized in a search space.
Each particle represents a potential solution. In every iteration, the
particles move in search of the optimized solution under the influence
of its own direction inertia, known as personal best, and also share the
information with the other particles. The best position and direction are
updated to the neighboring swarm particles, i.e., sharing of intelligence
enhances the candidate solution. The complete mathematical model of
PSO is given in the next part of this section.
Position of the particle is initialized in the search space randomly
using Eq. (6) and the corresponding velocity is given by Eq. (7)
x i = (x i1 + x i2 + ...+x iN ) (6)
3
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 3. The effects I-V and P-V characteristics of the PV under different irradiance levels.

Table 1 where the current solution is x ki (particle position) at the k-th

Electric characteristics of SunPower SPR-315E-WHT-D. iteration while c1, c2 represent constants, r1, r2 are two random variables
ranging between 0 and 1, w is the inertial weight which impacts the
Description SunPower SPR-315E-WHT-D
vector of velocity on new velocity vector, velocity is checked into limit
Maximum power (Pmax) 315.072 W by imposing vmax limit on vectors which are initialized as a function of a
Voltage at MPP (Vmax) 54.7 V range of the problem. In the PV MPPT utilization, the position xi is
Current at MPP (Imax) 5.76 A
considered to be the duty cycle of the boost converter and velocity
Short circuit current (ISC) 6.14 A
Open circuit voltage (V OC) 64.6 V vi acts as the small step addition in the duty cycle. The Pulse Width
Temperature coefficient of VOC −0.176.6 mV/K Modulation (PWM) provides the control action based on Duty Cycle.
Temperature coefficient of ISC 3.5 mA/K
Temperature coefficient of power −0.38%/K
Peak Efficiency 19.3% 3.2. PSO-GS MPPT

A popular heuristic technique named Gravitational Search

Algorithm (GSA) was first presented in 2009. It is based upon the
natural gravitational aspect of mass and its influence in the vicinity. Its
foundation is based on the general gravitational law. It has very high
efficiency in exploring localized search. Due to the random numbers
rooted in its velocity equation, PSO shows random oscillation at GMPP.
Hence GSA has been incorporated with PSO [25]. General equations of
GSA are given below.
The general form of the law of gravity is given by Eq. (10)
M1 M2
F = G.
R2 (10)

The above Eq. (10) is modified into Eq. (11)

Mpl (t ) ∗ Mat (t )
Flkd = G (t ) (xkd (t ) − xld (t ))
Rlk (t ) + ε (11)

In GSA, R is used instead of R2 which [26] gives better results, G(t) is

the instantaneous gravity, Mak , Mpl are active gravitation and passive
gravitation, respectively. Rlk is the Euclidian distance from agent l to k
andε > 0 is a small positive constant. The insertion of ε is necessary to
avoid division by zero, which otherwise occur for agents in the same
location. The difference (x dk (t) − x dl (t)) gives distances of active agent’s
positions. The instantaneous gravitational constant is given by Eq. (12)
Fig. 4. Uniform irradiance at STC (left) and PS depiction (right) irradiance
cases. α ∗ iter ⎞
G (t ) = Go ∗ exp ⎛− ⎜ ⎟

⎝ maxite ⎠ (12)
The velocity of the particle is assigned as where Go is the initial value of gravity, α is descending coefficient, iter
vi = (vi1 + vi2 + ...+viN ) (7) is the iteration index, maxite is the maximum number of iterations.
Hence the total force being induced upon candidate is given by Eq. (13)
Velocity of ith particle is updated by the following Eq. (8)
as
vik = wvik + c1 τ1 (pbest k − x ik ) + c2 τ2 (gbest k − x ik ) (8) Na

ith
Updating the position of particle using Eq. (9). The instantaneous Fld (t ) = ∑ rk Flkd (t )
k = 1, l ≠ k (13)
velocity is added to update the position of each particle.
where d is the search space dimension, rk is a random number. General
x i(k + 1) = x ik + vi(k + 1), (9)
equation of Newtonian acceleration is deduced by Eq. (14)

4
A.F. Mirza, et al.
Fig. 5. P-V curves of the photovoltaic array under partial shading condition.
F = ma (14)
The acceleration is given by Eq. (15)
F the timeframe so that its eggs hatch earlier than host bird. New cuckoo
a=
m (15)
In GSA, the localized search is controlled by Eq. (16)
Fld (t )
acld (t ) = ,
Ml (t ) (16)
where Ml is the mass of agent l . Velocity and position of each agent are
given by Eq. (17) and Eq. (18), respectively,
Vld (t + 1) = rl ∗ Vld (t ) + acld (t ) (17)
Updating the position of each agent by Eq. (18)
Xld (t + 1) = Xld (t ) + Vld (t + 1) (18)
PSO-GS was first incorporated by [27]. The motivation of PSO-GS
combination is to utilize the attractive social intelligence of PSO and
incorporate this social intelligence with the precise local search cap-
ability of GSA, i.e., acl (t) . Hence a practical approach is to maximize the
search for GM and avoid to be trapped in LMs. Also, oscillations due to
perturbation and power loss are minimized. GSA’s local search ability
acl (t) is a representation of the duty cycle, the velocities and positions of
agents are updated using Eq. (19) and Eq. (20), respectively
Vl (t + 1) = w ∗ Vl (t ) + c1′ ∗ r ∗ acl (t ) + c2′ ∗ r ∗ (gbest − xl (t )) (19)
Xl (t + 1) = Xl (t ) + Vt + 1 (20)
3.3. Cuckoo search (CS)
CS is a swarm-based bio-inspired optimization technique introduced
by [28]. It has been utilized for MPPT applications. This technique uses
a unique mechanism for a step change of control action known as Levy
flight for updating the position of swarm particles in the search space.
CS optimization is developed according to the aggressive reproduction
behavior of the cuckoo bird (CB). Considering the generalized
Fig. 6. I-V curves of the photovoltaic array under partial shading condition.
5
Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625
algorithm in which the strategy of the CB is mimicked, the mathema-
tical model is devised to function as an optimization function. CB
searches the space and explores for host nest. CB purpose fully manages
chicks break a few host birds’ eggs to increase the availability of food.
which also increases the chances of survive-ability of its species. usually
when host birds find CB eggs, host either abandons the nest of destroys
egg. In either scenario, CB increases its survival chances by laying large
number of eggs in multiple host nests. By doing so eggs survival rate
increases Cuckoo search uses nest searching mechanism similar to Lévy
flight. Lévy flight utilizes randomly generated haphazard steps sizes by
distribution according to power law given by the Eq. (21)
y = l−λ (21)
where λ s tands for the variance and lies within the range of l < λ <
3, and l is the flight length. Generating a new generation x (ti + 1) in CS is
achieved by utilizing Eq. (22)
x i(t + 1) = x tj + α ⊕ Levy (λ ) (22)
where t is the iteration index, and α is scaling factor. Tuning α is vital
for every search space. Mostly α is calculated using the following Eq.
(23).
α = αo (x tj + x it ), (23)
where α o is the initial random value defines as the step change.
3.4. Artificial Bee Colony (ABC)
Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) optimization technique is another bio-
inspired optimization technique. ABC optimization was developed for
various nonlinear, numerical function optimization, and constrained
classical optimization problems [29,30].
ABC is a swarm-based intelligence technique. This metaheuristic
algorithm is utilized to solve multimodal and multi-dimensional opti-
mization problems [31]. The model under consideration is proposed by
[32] for the foraging behavior of honeybee. The model of forage se-
lection leads to the emergence of the collective intelligence of honey
A.F. Mirza, et al.
bee. Honey bee swarm consists of three necessary components, i.e.,
food sources, employed foragers and unemployed foragers. Moreover,
the model defines two characteristic modes of bee behavior to the
benefit of swarm intelligence, the recruitment to a rich nectar source
and the abandonment of a poor source. Recruitment and abandonment
of food resources lead to better results in MPPT of PV module under PS
conditions.
The step involved in the formulation of PV MPPT optimization
problem is consecutively explained as following
STEP 1. The population is initialized to represent candidate solu-
tions; the size of the population is taken as “n”; each solution is in-
itialized within the limits of search space using Eq. (24).
x i j = x min
j j
+ rand [0 − 1](x max j
− x min )
j
where i = 1, 2, ⋯, n and j = 1, 2, ⋯, D. Moreover x min is the minimum
j
and x max is the maximum of the concerned parameter, D is the number
of optimization parameters.
STEP 2. Initialized population undergoes repeated cycles of
searching mechanism, also known as iterations, i.e., c = 0,1, 2,…, MCN
(Max-Cycle Number, MCN). It involves enhanced activity of employed
bees, onlooker and scout bees. Also, each cycle gives a new solution
vijusing Eq. (25) and again fitness is evaluated by the fitness functionfiti .
vij = x ij + ∅ij (x ij − xkj )
where k ∈ 1, 2, ⋯, CS and j ∈ 1, 2, ⋯, D are randomly chosen. More-
over, i and k have to be different. ∅ij has a random value between −1
and 1. After an employed bee distributes evaluation information, on-
looker evaluates a new solution vijwithin the vicinity of xi following Eq.
(26) based on the probability which is characterized by the fitness of
each solution.
fiti
Pi = CS
∑N = 1 fitn
where, for each solutionxi, fiti is the calculated fitness value. As the
expression shows the probability of ith solution increases with increase
in its fitness value. The values of vij, which exceeds the limit bounded by
Eq. (24), are replaced by new random values. Fitness of new vijis
compared with the previous one. If the updated fitness is enhanced, the
previous value is replaced; otherwise, the last best is retained. At the
end of the iterative cycles, if the fitness of the candidate solution doesn’t
improve even after certain fixed iterations, the solution will be aban-
doned. The new random solution will be generated using Eq. (24). The
process is repeated until predefined stopping criteria is met or a max-
imum number of iterations are done.
3.5. Dragon fly optimization (DFO)
Dragon fly optimization is motivated by the natural behavior of
dragonflies. The collective intelligence leads to an algorithm capable of
dealing with global optimization problems. While navigating, ex-
plorative and exploitative behavior is displayed by DF swarm. DFO
exhibit following characteristics.
1. Separation. The distance between neighboring DF to avoid collision
and maximize search space. Separation Si of the ith individual is
N
calculated by Si = − ∑k = 1 (X − Xk)
2. Where X is the location of DF under consideration and Xk is position
of kth DF.
3. Alignment. Matching the velocities of moving DF exhibiting syn-
chronization is called alignment. It is denoted by Ai and calculated
∑N Xk
usingAi = k =N1 , Vk is the velocity of kth individual.
4. Cohesion. All individuals tent to move towards the center of mass of
neighborhood.
5. It is represented by Ci and it gives the cohesion of individual DF with
∑N
k = 1 Xk
N neighboring DF and, Ci = N
− X , X is the mean position of
Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625
DFO swarm particles
6. Food. Individuals tent to move towards food. Attraction of food at
location XFood is given by the equation Fi = XFood − X
7. Enemy. Individuals tend to distant themselves from enemy. If enemy
is at location X enemy It is given by equation Ei = X enemy + X
Combining the effects of these five attributes the updated location of
individual DF is given by Eq. (27)
Xi = Xi + ΔXi (27)
where ΔXi is calculated using Eq. (28)
ΔXi = (sSi + aAi + cCi + fFi + eEi ) + w ΔXi (28)
(24)
ΔXi is the step change in DF location, w is the inertial weight, Ei is
enemy position, e is enemy factor, Fi is food attraction, f is food factor, Ci
is cohesion of ith DF, c is cohesion weight, Ai is alignment of DF, a is the
alignment weight, Si is separation and s represents separation weight.
3.5.1. Implementation on PV MPPT under PS conditions
Individuals are initiated in search space existing between Dmin and
Dmax using confined space search for solution proposed by [33] Current
Position of individual fly depicts the duty cycle. The objective function
(25) is taken as max of output power. DFA is implemented in the following
sequence using step 1–9
Step1 initialization In first step population is initialized in search
space (Dmin − Dmax )
Step 2 Step size calculation In this step the values of step size is calculated
using Eq. (28).
Step 3 Power calculation Power of each DF calculated by respective duty
cycle to determine Food and enemy factor
(26) Step 4 Weights assigned Values of s, a, c, f, and e are assigned.
Step 5 Individual DF characters Values of Si , Ai, Ci , Fi, Ei are calculated
calculated
Step 6 Neighbor Radius Neighbor radius is updated for exploitation/
exploration
Step 7 Position of DF updated Position of DF are updated by Eq. (27) and if it
(change in duty-cycle) lies outside the search limits, DF are initiated at
opposite boundary.
Step 8 Check termination If the termination conditions are met, exit
algorithm. (Termination condition (2)–(5)%
change is steady state power for certain amount
of time)
Step 9 restart An abrupt change in input power exhibits the
effects of change in operating conditions (irra-
diance/temp effect) and is (ΔV ≥ Vthreshhold )
3.6. Proposed salp swarm optimization (SSO) for MPPT
3.6.1. Salp swarm optimization (SSO) for MPPT
Slow convergence and multiple solutions are the main problems for
single-multi objective optimization in the search space. Deterministic
solutions of single-objective optimization algorithms do not have ran-
domized behavior incorporated in their mathematical model; that is
why they suffer from local optima stagnation [34]. The focus of this
study is to utilize established properties of salp swarm optimization for
MPPT under PS. PS has both multiple maxima and nonlinear char-
acteristics. The adaptive mechanism enables the convergence of entire
swarm towards a global solution. This property helps the swarm to
enhance exploitation. In general, it is observed that the exploration of
SSO is constrained.
Salps are marine organisms. They have jelly-like tissues with barrel-
shaped body as shown in Fig. 7. Their locomotion is carried out by jet
action propulsion of water. They form spiral-like chains, as shown in
Fig. 7 for food exploration and better sustainability. SSO is first in-
troduced in [35] for optimization purposes. Salp chains are made up of
a leader and followers. The leader leads the movement, and the
6
A.F. Mirza, et al.
Fig. 7. A single salp and a salp chain.
followers update their positions accordingly. Locomotion of Salp swarm
is for exploration and exploitation. Since both are carried out in n -di-
mensional space following the leader, a balance between the leader and
Fig. 8. Flow chart of SSO.
7
Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625
followers is essential for exploration of search space quickly and ex-
ploitation in a localized area for better consumption of food. This cre-
ates a balance between movement of the leader and its followers.
The goal of a heuristic algorithm in MPPT is to locate GM with the
shortest time in its transient state and minimize oscillations in the
steady-state around GM to reduce power loss. SSO is implemented for
optimizing MPPT, taking into account these two characteristics. Duty
cycle is the search space in our model which takes values from the
range of [0, 1]. The position of the salp leader is associated with the
output duty cycle. The population is initiated randomly in the search
space. Each particle is a candidate solution. The particle located the
closest to the food positionF is assigned leadership. The positions of
leader and follower particles are updated using the following Eq. (29)
bounded regions.
Fi + ci ((ubj − lbj ) c2 + lbj ) c3 ⩾ 0
x 1j = ⎧
⎨
⎩ Fi + ci ((ubj − lbj ) c2 + lbj ) c3 ⩽ 0 (29)
where x1j is the position of the swarm leader, Fj is the food position,
ubj and lbj are upper and lower bound, respectively. The weights c1, c2
and c3 are constraints on the motion of the particles. The most essential
particle is a leader. The leader motion in the search space determines
exploration and exploitation. Exploration enhances the convergence
speed around MPP and exploitation is utilized to minimize the power
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

loss. Hence the weight c1 becomes crucial to balance between ex- boost converter and remains constant for a few ms while all the other
ploitation and exploration phenomenon, and is given by Eq. (30). particles keep on searching the solution space. The position update of a
2 particle is a vector addition of its inertial direction, personal best and
c1 = 2e L( )
− 4l
(30) global best. In case a particle is stuck at a LM, its personal best and
inertial movement is negligible. However, it is only influenced by the
L is the total number of iterations, l is the current iteration. Both Step global best vector. As soon as a new global best is found, the output is
size and the positive or negative direction are dictated by c1 and c2. assigned to the particle which searches the global best solution. Within
Newtonian motion equations are utilized to update the position of the 140 ms, the GM has been found, and all the particles settle at the GM
follower particles by Eq. (31). successfully. It can be observed that the voltage oscillations are suc-
1 2 cessfully reduced and the tracking mechanism successfully tracks GM
x ij = at + v0 t
2 (31) with high robustness and least fluctuation.

where x ijgives
the position of the i − th particle in the jth dimension,
3.6.3. Complex partial shading (CPS) for SSO
i ≥ 2 . By utilizing the initial velocity vo = 0 , time for optimization an
This type of shading occurs when a large number of modules are
iteration and discrepancy of iteration is taken as 1, therefore, accel-
V x−x connected in series and undergo comprehensive partial shading. Due to
eration a becomes a = final , The velocity of particles v = t 0 (I have
vo this reason, multiple closely associated peaks are formed. A collection
no idea what you want to say). Utilizing this notion and substituting it
of such LMs is called cluster. Every cluster has a unique maxima, called
into Eq. (31), new Eq. (32) is obtained to update follower particles
cluster head maxima (CHM). The number of peaks appearing in a PV
positions.
curve is equal to the number of partially shaded modules in a string. If
1 i there are many partially shaded modules and shading is extensively
x jj = (x j + x ij − 1)
2 (32) distributed, a unique kind of P-V curves appear with multiple closely
associated maximum points on the P-V curve, which are shown in
where, i ≥ 2 , x ij
is the position of the i − th follower salp in the j − th
Figs. 11 and 12. A group of such LMs is called a PS cluster. Figs. 11 and
dimension. The positions of the leader and followers in the salp chains
12 show two different CPS conditions. In Fig. 11, it is observed that two
and their movement are simulated utilizing equations of motion.
clusters are formed, namely cluster 1 and cluster 2. Cluster 1 is in the
Leading swarm moves towards the optimum solution, so do the
left half of the P-V curve and includes four peak points. The corre-
whole chain. All particles are initialized randomly in the search space.
sponding power from left to right of each LM is 729.5w, 898.2w 989.8w
Fitness of each particle is calculated. The fittest particle becomes the
and 1011w. The max power in cluster 1 is 1011 W whose corresponding
leader. In each iteration, the distance between the food source and
CHM is 345.7 V. In cluster 2, three MPPs are included. Their powers
particles is calculated to update position. The closest distance is con-
from left to right are 1078w, 1025w and 831w. The CHM occurs at the
sidered the fittest in this study, and followers’ positions are updated
left-most peak, and it is also the GM. An interesting fact is that the CHM
accordingly. If any particle exceeds the pre-determined boundary, it is
1 and LM2 of cluster 2 have extremely close values, i.e., 1011 and 1025,
initiated randomly. It acts as a scout and increases the probability to
whose difference is only 6 W and less than 2% of PMPP , the peak power
avoid LM trap. The algorithm steps except initialization are repeated
at GM. Consequently, the activation or re-initialization of MPPT tech-
unless stopping criterion is met or the max iterations are done. The
nique does not occur and particles of swarm cannot search the region
fitness function is the maximum value of PV power at GM. Leader and
between these two points.
followers’ position are continuously updated based on the population to
Similarly, the CPS case presented in Fig. 12 has two distinct clusters,
track the maximum power. The flowchart of SSO is given in Fig. 8 and
namely cluster 1 and cluster 2. Each cluster contains three closely as-
Table 2 gives the step by step process of SSO for MPPT application. The
sociated LMs. The LM powers associated with cluster 1 from left to right
intermediate results of one example is shown in Fig. 9.
are 1124w, 1268w and 1162. The GM is located in cluster 1 and is equal
to CHM. In cluster 2, powers associated with LMs from left to right are
3.6.2. Tracking mechanism for GM of proposed SSO
1193w, 1169 and 1209w, respectively. Since the LMs are distributed in
In Fig. 10, the tracking mechanism of SSO is illustrated using an
such a manner that two distinct peaks appear in the P-V curves. The
experimental elaboration. It represents the power transients, the P-V
movement of swarm particles on curves becomes complicated. The
curve, and the output voltage. The top right corner gives the P-V curve.
searching mechanism most likely shifts entirely in the cluster 2 region.
It has 4 LMs and a GM. For tracking the GM, 4 particles of SSO are
Because cluster 2 holds larger average power than cluster 1, which is
initialized namely P1, P2, P3andP4 with blue, yellow, orange and green
1190w and 10–13 W higher than the average of cluster 1. It means that
colored dots on the P-V curve. The fitness is calculated, and the output
the velocity vectors govern the movement of particles rapidly towards
is assigned to the fittest particle. The motion of each particle is updated
cluster 2. In the final iterations, the particles quickly converge in cluster
using Eq. (33). As depicted in Fig. 10, in the first iteration P2 has the
2. The LM lies at 1209w. The GM is missed, which has a significantly
fittest value and the output is assigned to the fittest value. Since no
high value of 1268w. The loss of 4.652% of the available power occurs.
particles encounter an LM trap, the positions are updated robustly. At
As that power loss does not come from the re-initialization of swarm
the 40–50 ms, a rapid increase in power is observed. At this instance, P2
particles, the termination condition and convergence of swarm are
encounters the LM2 trap, the control output is the duty cycle of the
achieved with less power efficiency.
The simplest solution can be achieved by introducing larger popu-
Table 2
lation sizes, but the resources needed to perform the algorithm rise
The step by step implementation of the Proposed SSO.
exponentially with respect to the number of swarm particles. So, to
Step. No. Step by step implementation implement such an algorithm on cost-effective microcontrollers be-
comes impossible and hence its applicability is greatly reduced.
Step 1 Initialize the salp population in region bounded by ub and
lb , xi = 1, 2, 3, ⋯N Normally 3–6 particles for MPPT applications are utilized. In the pro-
Step 2 Calculate the fitness of salp population posed SSO, a mechanism is incorporated to make sure GM is definitely
Step 3 Find the best particle and update c1 by Eq. (30) tracked based on a closely relative calibrated technique [21]. It utilizes
Step 4 Update leader’s position by Eq. (29) the search skip jump (SSJ) [36] mechanism and section division point
Step 5 Update follower’s position by Eq. (31)
(SDP) to explore the search space. This mechanism uses a hybrid ap-
Step 6 Check termination condition and bound of variables
Step 7 Update control action accordingly and repeat proach to determine the region of GM. In the proposed technique, the
mobility is ensured to be maximized by means of explorative behavior

8
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 9. SSO chain movement of an optimal solution for MPPT under PS.

incorporated in velocity vectors given by Eq. (33). Using Eq. (34) the overlaps the interval scanned by P(x) when its updated position using
initialization and movement of each salp group are monitored. SSO is inside the interval of P(x) . Clearly, there is no requirement for
P(n) to explore the section that has been previously scanned by P(x) .
Fi + ci ((ubj − lbj ) c2 + lbj ) c3 ⩾ 0
x 1j = ⎧ Therefore, onceP(n) overlaps an interval tracked by P(x) , the mer-
⎨
⎩ Fi + ci ((ubj − lbj ) c2 + lbj ) c3 ⩽ 0 (33) geandcheck function is utilized to determine the following information.
Vp max(n) = max(Vp max(n), Vp max(x )) (35)
1 2
x ij = at + v0 t
2 (34)
Vp max(x ) = max(Vp max(n), Vp max(x )) (36)
where vo is the velocity of particle P in gth iteration. Moreover a and c2
where VPmax(n), VPmax(other) are the higher voltage limits of the tracked
are acceleration factor and inertial weight, which determine the effects intervals by P(n) and P(other) . Correspondingly, for the lower voltages.
of exploration and exploitation in the search space bounded by LM
regions. When the called particles P(n) are scanned in an interval, there Vp min(n) = min(Vp min(n), Vp min(x )) (37)
are chances that this interval may have already been scanned by an-
Vp min(x ) = min(Vp min(n), Vp min(x )) (38)
other particle, e.g., P(2) . The possible scenes defined as P(n) overlaps
the interval scanned by P(x) during its movement in the search space. The best-positioned salps are updated by,
P(n) overlaps the interval scanned by P(x) when the upper bound of its
skipped interval is located inside the interval scanned by P(x) . P(n) Vpbest (n) = best (Vpbest (n), Vpbest (x )) (39)

Fig. 10. Tracking mechanism of SSO under partial shading condition.

9
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 11. Complex Partial Shading condition (1) and cluster formation.

Fig. 12. Complex Partial Shading condition (2) and cluster formation.

Table 3 After calculating the best-positioned salps with the highest power,
Irradiance schemes of Case 1 to 3. the positions of others are also updated according to the global best
Case Pmax value. After checking the entire search space of LMs and CHM, the GM
Irradiance Si ( )
kW
m2 is expected to be found at Vgbest .

PV1 PV2 PV3 PV4 (W) Vgbest (n) = gbest (Vpbest (1), Vpbest (2), Vpbest (3), Vpbest (4)) (41)

Case 1: Fast- 1,0.7,0.3 1,0.7,0.3 1,0.7,0.3 1,0.7,0.3 1260,880,380

Changing 3.6.4. Advantages of SSO
Case-2: PS1 0.5 0.8 1 0.9 796 Some of the well-established advantages of SSO under different
Case-3: PS2 0.8 0.25 0.7 0.4 449.5
optimization tasks are listed as follows

1. It has simple implementation and requires tuning of the least

Vpbest (x ) = best (Vpbest (n), Vpbest (x )) (40)
number of parameters.

Fig. 13. Case 1 Duty Cycle comparison.

10
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 14. Case 1 zoom duty cycle comparison.

Fig. 15. Case 1 power comparison.

Fig. 16. Case 1 zoomed-in power comparison.

Fig. 17. Case 1 current comparison.

2. SSO makes use of only one controlling parameter for exploration
and exploitation of the search space, i.e., the controlling parameter
c1.
3. As parameter c1 is decreased adaptively over the course of iterations,
the SSO algorithm first explores the search space and then exploits
it.
4. The proposed SSO can effectively track the GM under the CPS
condition. The proposed SSO requires less iterations to reach GM.
5. The best solution obtained so far is attained by a leader and used as
food source variable.
6. SSO can be effectively utilized to optimize unimodal, multimodal
and composite mathematical problem functions.

11
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 18. Case 1 voltage comparison.

Fig. 19. Case 2 PS duty cycle comparison.

Fig. 20. Case 2 PS duty cycle zoom comparison.

Fig. 21. Case 2 PS power comparison.

4. Simulations and results
In this section, six cases with different weather conditions are ela-
borated. Performance of SSO is compared with DFO, P&O, ABC, PSOGS,
PSO, and CS. In case 1, fast varying irradiance is studied. In case 2 and
case 3, partial shading scenarios are studied. In case 4 and case 5, CPS is
elaborated and conclusions are made on the base of comparative
analysis. A detailed performance analysis is presented in Table 6. The
results are analyzed for tracking time, settling time, power con-
vergence, steady-state oscillations, voltage and current transients,
power efficiency, and energy. Moreover, statistical analysis is presented
in Figs. 51–55 to study relative error (RE), mean absolute error (MAE),
and root mean square error (RMSE).

12
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 22. Case 2 PS power zoomed-in comparison.

Fig. 23. Case 2 PS voltage comparison.

Fig. 24. Case 2 PS current comparison.

Fig. 25. Case 3 PS duty cycle comparison.

4.1. Case 1: Fast varying irradiance
In case 1, all PV modules receive equal irradiance levels, but the
irradiance changes over time. The test pattern is given in Table 3, and
the corresponding PV curves are shown in Fig. 3. The irradiance level is
changed after every 2 s. The comparison of power is made in Fig. 15
and detailed zoomed power transients are presented in Fig. 16. The
control action provided by the DC-DC boost converter duty cycle is
shown in Fig. 13 and zoomed behavior is given in Fig. 14. In the first
interval, the power efficiency achieved by SSO is the highest by
reaching 1260 W as compared to 1259w, 1248w, 1258w,
1259w,1257w and 1258w achieved by DFO, P&O, ABC, PSO-GS, PSO,

13
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 26. Case 3 PS duty cycle zoomed-in comparison.

Fig. 27. Case 3 PS power comparison.

Fig. 28. Case 3 PS power zoomed-in comparison.

Fig. 29. Case 3 PS voltage comparison.

and CS, respectively. The proposed SSO achieves the power con- average power. PSO-GS, PSO, and CS achieve 831w, 830.7w, 829.9w
vergence efficiency of 99.98%. Case 1 has three distinct regions of and 828w watts of the average power, respectively. It indicates the
operations, whose average value is a better indicator of performance. highest average, i.e., 832.1 W, is achieved by SSO. Competing techni-
DFO, SSO, P&O and ABC achieves 832.1w, 832.1w, 828w and 831w ques are overtaken by SSO with the average of 2–5 W more power

14
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 30. Case 3 PS current comparison.

Table 4 4.2. Case 2: Partial shading

Irradiance levels for Cases 4 and 5.
Case Pmax
The irradiance pattern for this PS case is given in Table 3. The
Irradiance Si ( )
kW
m2 corresponding P-V and I-V curves are shown in Figs. 5 and 6. PS occurs
when the modules of PV array do not receive equal irradiance levels.
Case 4 PV1:0.4 PV5: 0.5 PV9:1.0 Pmax = 1078W
Multiple peaks appear on curves and complicate the tracking. These
PV2:0.2 PV6: 0.4 PV10:0.8
PV3:0.6 PV7: 0.2 PV11:0.7 peaks are classified into local and global maxima. Classical MPPT
PV4:0.3 PV8: 0.3 PV12:1.0 techniques cannot distinguish between LM and GM so that their effi-
Case 5 PV1:0.40 PV5: 0.57 PV9:0.33 Pmax = 1268W ciency may drop significantly.
PV2:0.15 PV6: 0.44 PV10:0.64 The test pattern of irradiance under PS is given as pattern 2 of
PV3:0.60 PV7: 0.10 PV11:0.80
PV4:0.60 PV8: 0.35 PV12:0.73
Table 3. The P-V curves in Fig. 5 show that 3 LMs and 1 GM exist on the
curve. The GM is 796 W. The SSO successfully tackles MPPT, achieving
outstanding results as compared to competing techniques. Fig. 21 gives
produced. The SSO tracks the GM effectively and settles at GM about results for power comparison. The control provided by the duty cycle is
50% faster than ABC, PSO-GS, PSO and CS. The SSO reduces the shown in Fig. 19. The detailed comparison of the duty cycle and power
overshoot and helps to save power loss due to the undesired oscillations is given in Figs. 20 and 22, respectively. Voltage transient is shown in
(Figs. 15 and 16). Fig. 23 and the current transient is shown in Fig. 24.
The P&O converges to GM, but can not settle down at GM due to In Case 2, the maximum power obtained by DFO, SSO, P&O and
oscillations produced by continuous perturbation. To reduce oscilla- ABC, is 793.5w, 795.8w, 238w and 789.4w, respectively. PSOGS, PSO,
tions, the step size has to be reduced considerably, which consequently and CS tracks 783.8w, 791.5w, and 778.6w, respectively. The highest
increases the tracking time. Undesired oscillations dissipate power, efficiency of 99.8% is achieved by SSO, followed by 99.7% by DFO,
causing power loss and reducing efficiency. To balance the tracking 99.4% by PSO. The lowest efficiency achieved by P&O is 32%, which is
time and the efficiency, the step size of the boost converter is kept in- equal to LM1 because P&O is stuck at LM1. ABC, PSOGS and CS produce
side a range which only generates oscillations within 2–5% of the stated the efficiency of 99.1%, 98.4% and 99.5%, respectively.
power of PV arrays. The oscillations produced by P&O are 22 W in this The tracking time of DFO, SSO, ABC, PSOGS, PSO and CS is 0.19 s,
case. SSO successfully reduces the magnitude of the oscillations to less 0.19 s, 0.35 s, 0.32 s, 0.68 s and 0.35 s, respectively. Their settling time
than 1 W, which corresponds to a 94% reduction in oscillations. is 0.21 s, 0.22 s, 0.45 s, 0.49 s, 0.70 s and 0.45 s, respectively. During
Random oscillations by PSO remain significantly high. The prominent tracking GM, SSO stands close to DFO by 10 ms. Due to fast settling
effect of Levy flight is observed in Fig. 14 in the interval between 0.2 time, undesired oscillations are successfully removed under SSO. The
and 0.5 s. A large fluctuation of CS results from Levy flight. We can tracking time of P&O is neglected because it gets stuck at LM and
conclude that quick re-tracking, least oscillations, and high efficiency cannot locate GM. In Fig. 20, the duty cycle updating indicates that SSO
prove that the proposed SSO technique is robust. In Figs. 17 and 18, can detect and converge at GM in less iterations. The output is stable
current and voltage transients are presented for comparison. The os- and Figs. 23 and 24 show that voltage and current have zero oscilla-
cillations produced by P&O are successfully minimized by the proposed tions.
SSO technique.

Fig. 31. Case 4 CPS duty cycle comparison.

15
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 32. Case 4 CPS duty cycle zoomed-in comparison.

Fig. 33. Case 4 CPS power comparison.

Fig. 34. Case 4 CPS power zoomed-in comparison.

Fig. 35. Case 4 CPS voltage comparison.

4.3. Case 3: Partial shading
Case 3 presents another partial shading condition. The P-V and I-V
curves are shown in Figs. 5 and 6. Table 3 gives the shading irradiance
magnitude for 4 × 1 PV array. In this case, the GMPP is 450 W. The
proposed SSO is compared with DFO, ABC, PSOGS, and CS. The com-
parison is shown in Fig. 25 for the duty cycle. Duty cycle is further
elaborated in Fig. 26 in the steady state to show the oscillations and
undesired disturbance in the control action of implemented techniques.
Certain MPPT techniques imply the random selection of searching
particles to break the LM trap. As seen in results, although CS locates
GM within 0.3092 s as compared to PSO within 0.40 s, b PSO extracts
the power of 439.2w as compared to the power of 430w by CS. PSO-GS
further improves the oscillation reduction and on average produces

16
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 36. Case 4 CPS current comparison.

Fig. 37. Case 5 CPS duty cycle comparison.

Fig. 38. Case 5 CPS duty cycle zoomed-in comparison.

Fig. 39. Case 5 CPS power comparison.

1.76% more power as compared to PSO. It is concluded that oscillations PSO-GS and CS are compared for case 3. The efficiency and power are
reduce power harvesting significantly. Therefore, SSO is devised to calculated against GMPP located at 450w. DFO, SSO, ABC, PSOGS, PSO,
minimize oscillations in the steady state at GMPP. and CS obtain 448.7w, 449.7w, 448.8, 444.7w, 439.2w, and 430w,
In Figs. 27 and 28, power curves obtained by PSO, DFO, SSO, ABC, respectively, with SSO being the most efficient technique. SSO has

17
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 40. Case 5 CPS power zoomed-in comparison.

Fig. 41. Case 5 CPS voltage comparison.

Fig. 42. Case 5 CPS current comparison.

Table 5
Summary of the results of the field atmospheric data of case 6 in Hong Kong.
City Season Measure SSO DFO P&O ABC PSOGS PSO CS

Hong Kong Spring Energy (KWh) 3.594 3.508 3.231 3.472 3.450 3.413 3.431
Peak P (W) 894.4 881.1 837.8 868.4 863.5 856.2 858.7
Avg. P (W) 149.8 146.2 134.6 144.7 143.8 142.8 143
Summer Energy (KWh) 5.918 5.734 5.054 5.701 5.663 5.584 5.584
Peak P (W) 1010 979.8 910.4 972.7 966.0 937.1 952.1
Avg. P (W) 246.7 239 210.7 237.6 236 232.1 232.8

99.93% efficiency followed by ABC 99.73%, PSOGS 99.35%, CS 97.7%,
DFO 99.4%, and PSO has the least efficiency of 97.6%. Robustness of a
technique is exhibited by the fast-tracking of GM and efficient settling
time at GM. Results show that it takes DFO, SSO, ABC, PSOGS, PSO, and
CS 0.26 s, 0.19 s, 0.33 s, 0.33 s, 0.41 s, and 0.31 s to track GM. Settling
time is 0.43 s, 0.37 s, 0.56 s, 0.45 s, 0.81 s, and 0.84 s, respectively, for
DFO, SSO, ABC, PSOGS, PSO, and CS. The current and voltage curves
are presented in Figs. 29 and 30.
4.4. Case 4: Complex partial shading
Case 4 deals with the CPS condition given in Fig. 11. In this case, 12
PV arrays are connected in series. The CPS irradiance pattern is given in
Table 4. Performance of SSO is compared with those of DFO, P&O, ABC,
PSOGS, PSO, and CS. All techniques are optimized for better perfor-
mance. The results of comparative power are given by Fig. 33. The
control action in MPPT is provided by the duty cycle of the boost

18
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Table 6
Quantitative analysis of SSO with competing techniques.
Tech. Irradiance Pattern Converge time (s) Settling Time GM (s) GM located Power at GM Power tracked (W) Energy Effie (%)

DFO Case 1 0.24 0.28 Yes 1260 1259 1.66 × 103 99.9
Case 2 PS 0.19 0.21 Yes 796 793.5 1.55 × 103 99.7
Case 3 PS 0.26 0.43 Yes 450 448.7 0.85 × 103 99.5
Case 4 CPS 0.19 0.22 Yes 1078 1075 2.12 × 103 99.8
Case 5 CPS 0.26 0.45 Yes 1268 1259 2.41 × 103 95.2
SSO Case 1 0.16 0.20 Yes 1260 1259.7 1.66 × 103 99.9
Case 2 PS 0.19 0.22 Yes 796 795.8 1.56 × 103 99.8
Case 3 PS 0.19 0.37 Yes 450 449.7 0.86 × 103 99.9
Case 4 CPS 0.17 0.25 Yes 1078 1077 2.12 × 103 99.8
Case 5 CPS 0.16 0.22 Yes 1268 1265 2.46 × 103 97.3
P&O Case 1 0.12 0.12 Yes 1260 1237 1.65 × 103 98.1
Case 2 PS LM LM No 796 238 0.47 × 103 32
Case 3 PS LM LM No 450 220 0.46 × 103 67.7
Case 4 CPS LM LM No 1078 262 0.51 × 103 24.7
Case 5 CPS LM LM No 1268 1124 2.22 × 103 88.6
ABC Case 1 0.33 0.38 Yes 1260 1259 1.66 × 103 99.9
Case 2 PS 0.35 0.45 Yes 796 789.4 1.52 × 103 99.1
Case 3 PS 0.33 0.56 Yes 450 448.8 0.85 × 103 99.7
Case 4 CPS 0.25 0.31 Yes 1078 1066 2.10 × 103 99.0
Case 5 CPS 0.22 0.29 No 1268 1211 2.31 × 103 90.9
PSOGS Case 1 0.45 0.62 Yes 1260 1259 1.66 × 103 99.9
Case 2 PS 0.32 0.49 Yes 796 783.8 1.52 × 103 98.4
Case 3 PS 0.33 0.45 Yes 450 447.1 0.84 × 103 99.3
Case 4 CPS 0.31 0.40 Yes 1078 1070 2.12 × 103 99.4
Case 5 CPS 0.23 0.77 Yes 1268 1258 2.39 × 103 94.6
PSO Case 1 0.47 0.70 Yes 1260 1257 1.64 × 103 99.7
Case 2 PS 0.68 0.70 Yes 796 791.5 1.48 × 103 99.4
Case 3 PS 0.41 0.81 Yes 450 439.2 0.83 × 103 97.6
Case 4 CPS 0.42 0.50 Yes 1078 1068 2.10 × 103 99.2
Case 5 CPS 0.36 0.93 No 1268 1209 2.29 × 103 90.6
CS Case 1 0.46 0.69 Yes 1260 1258 1.65 × 103 99.8
Case 2 PS 0.35 0.45 Yes 796 778.6 1.49 × 103 99.5
Case 3 PS 0.30 0.84 Yes 450 430 0.83 × 103 97.7
Case 4 CPS 0.40 0.51 Yes 1078 1067 2.10 × 103 99.2
Case 5 CPS 0.24 0.54 No 1268 1208 2.30 × 103 90.4

Fig. 43. The irradiance levels in Hong Kong in different seasons.

converter and is given by Fig. 31. In Figs. 34 and 32, zoomed-in ver-
sions of the power and duty cycle are given. A comparison is made to
study the behavior of implemented techniques.
The maximum power achieved by DFO, SSO, P&O, ABC, PSOGS,
PSO, and CS is 1075w, 1077w, 729.54w, 1066w, 1070w, 1068w and
1067w, respectively. SSO achieved the efficiency of 99.953%. P&O has
achieved the lowest efficiency of 67.79%, DFO 99.98%, ABC 99.07%,
PSOGS 99.44%, PSO 99.256%, and CS 99.163%. Fig. 32 depicts that
SSO can successfully track GMPP in the least number of iterations. The
oscillations are minimum for SSO and DFO. The voltage and current
comparisons corresponding to case 4 are given by Figs. 35 and 36, re-
spectively. Stable output power and steady current are advantageous
behaviors of the proposed SSO.
The time taken by DFO, SSO, ABC, PSOGS, PSO, and CS to track GM
is 0.19 s, 0.17 s, 0.25 s, 0.31 s, 0.42 s, and 0.40 s, respectively. Settling
time of each technique is 0.22 s, 0.26 s, 0.31 s, 0.40 s, 0.50 s, and 0.51 s
respectively. As illustrated in comparative results, SSO has a minimum
settling time followed by DFO. It settles within 0.3 s and is 56 ms-

19
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 44. Hong Kong spring power comparison of SSO with DFO, PSO, ABC, CS, and P&O.

Fig. 45. Hong Kong spring energy comparison of SSO with DFO, PSO, ABC, CS, and P&O.

Fig. 46. Hong Kong summer power comparison of SSO with DFO, PSO, ABC, CS, and P&O.

300 ms faster that others under this CPS condition. CS, PSO, and PSOGS
take over 600 ms to settle at the searched maxima.
4.5. Case 5: Complex partial shading
In case 5, another complex partial shading is discussed. A power
comparison is made in Figs. 39 and 40. Comparison of duty cycles is
shown in Figs. 37 and 38. Analysis of the proposed SSO is made with
DFO, SSO, ABC, PSOGS, PSO, and CS. The P-V curves of case 5 are
shown in Fig. 12. In Case 5, Complex Partial Shading condition (2) and
cluster formation are different from those of case 4. As shown in Fig. 12,
the CPS of case 5 has two regions of interest, namely cluster 1 and
cluster 2. Both clusters contain 3 closely associated LMPPs. The powers
associated with LMPPs of cluster 1 from left to right are 1124w, 1268w
and 1162w, respectively. The GMPP is located in cluster 1 and is equal
to CHM with the MPP of 1268 W. In cluster 2, powers associated with
LMPPs from left to right are 1193w, 1169w and 1209w, respectively.
The calculated average power in cluster 1 is 1.1223 × 103 watts while
the average power in cluster 2 is 1.1391 x103 watts. First, we discuss
the techniques trapped in CHM. PSO, CS, and ABC are entrapped in
cluster 2. The power tracked by PSO, CS, and ABC is 1209w, 1208w,
and 1211w, respectively. Since CHM2 lies in 1211w, it can be con-
cluded that the local efficiency of ABC has not been compromised.
However, GM lies in cluster1 at 1268w, so the overall efficiency is
94–95%. SSO is 5.5% more efficient. DFO, as presented in Fig. 40,
searches in cluster 2. Furthermore, as seen in Fig. 38, successfully
breaks out of cluster 2 and tracks GM effectively in 22 and 23 iterations.
SSO and PSO-GS track GM with more than 98% efficiency.

20
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 47. Hong Kong summer energy comparison of SSO with DFO, PSO, ABC, CS, and P&O.

Fig. 48. Experimental setup.

Table 7 China (CMA) provides the meteorological data on irradiance levels and
The electrical characteristics of TDC-M20-36 PV array module. seasonal temperatures [37]. Total direct solar irradiance and tem-
Description TDC-M20-36
perature of is considered for a complete day. The PV system consists of
a 4 × 1 array with a rated power of 315.072 W each making the total
Maximum power (Pmax) 20 W capacity 1.2602 KW of the PV system. The data provides the irradiance
Voltage at MPP (Vmax) 18.76 V and temperature weather conditions to the PV system. The 24 h tran-
Current at MPP (Imax) 1.07 A
Short circuit current (ISC) 1.17 A
sients have a resolution of 10 min sampling. The impact of the MPPT
Open circuit voltage (VOC) 22.7 V technique is gauged in terms of peak power, average power, and energy
Temperature coefficient of VOC −0.35%/K harvested over the period of 24 h. Table 5 provides a summary of case
Temperature coefficient of ISC 0.043%/K 6. Hong Kong lies in the subtropical region in the south of China.
Number of cells Ns 36
Sudden rain showers and cloudy weather with windy conditions in
Peak Efficiency 19.3%
Shunt resistance Rsh 405.96Ω winter and spring lower the productivity of the PV system. In such
Series resistance Rs 1.0547Ω conditions, it is crucial to design a PV system with a robust MPPT
Ideality factor 1.0036 controller to attain maximum available energy. Hong Kong is located at
22.3193oN/114.1694oE. The irradiances levels are given in Fig. 43.
Results show that the SSO harvests the most energy with the highest
Time taken to track GM by proposed techniques are presented in average power. The SSO under all-weather scenarios harvests more
Table 6. However, as shown in Fig. 39 for power comparison and in energy. The average consumption of households ranges from 6 to 10
Fig. 38 for zoomed-in duty cycle comparison, only SSO, DFO and KWh in terms of electric power. This results in cleaner energy pro-
PSOGS can successfully track GM. The efficiency of power convergence duction and utility which is crucial to avoid the issue of global warming
mainly depends upon quick GM tracking, faster settling, and least os- and greenhouse gas effects. The addition of such a PV system lowers the
cillations around GM. The power tracked by DFO, SSO, ABC and PSOGS carbon footprint significantly.
1259w, 1265w, 1211w, 1258w, respectively. PSO and CS track 1209w, Detailed comparison of SSO with DFO, PSO, PSOGS, CS, and P&O is
and 1208w. Transient behavior of current and voltage are given by given in Figs. 44–47 for spring and summer yields of power and energy
Figs. 42 and 41. in 24 h in Hong Kong. Results clearly indicate the better results and
higher efficiency of proposed HGO.
4.6. Case 6: Field atmospheric data In Hong Kong (HK), for spring weather conditions elaborated in
Fig. 43, the total energy produced by SSO is 3.594 KWh, DFO 3.508
The feasibility of any system is a combination of many factors. Case KWh, PSO 3.413 KWh, PSOGS 3.45 KWh, ABC 3.472 KWh, CS 3.431
6 deals with a study of cities of China namely Hong Kong. The field KWh, and P&O 3.231. KWh, respectively. SSO produces 11% more
atmospheric data is utilized to gauge the impact of the proposed MPPT energy than P&O. Fig. 44 shows SSO yields significant oscillation re-
technique in real-world applications. The meteorological agency of duction. Similar trend is observed in all operating conditions and

21
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 49. Experimental results showing power transients: [a] PSO; [b] SSO.

Fig. 50. Average efficiency, convergence time and settling time of MPPT techniques.

parameters under consideration.
4.7. Experimental validation
The experimental setup is given below. The aim of that work is to
develop a low cost PV system. The experimental results are done based
on the field atmospheric data [37] under the setup similar to [38]. The
concerned experimental setup is shown in Fig. 48. A low cost PV
emulator is designed to function according to the principles recently
presented in [38]. The model is designed to exhibit the electrical
properties of TDC-M20-36 PV panel. The load is provide by a 10Ω
100 W load. The electrical characteristics of the PV array are provided
in Table 7. The comparison of results is made between PSO and SSO.
The algorithms are implemented on Atmel ATMEGA-2560. The data
acquisition is done with Atmel ATMEGA-328P and Matlab interfacing.
Hall Effect-based ACS-712 current sensors and voltage sensors are uti-
lized for sensing the output of a PV emulator, which is used to provide
the characteristics of TDC-M20-36 PV array. The power obtained by
PSO is presented in Fig. 49(a) and the one by SSO is given in Fig. 49(b).
The effective tracking by SSO is obtained under varying conditions. PSO

22
A.F. Mirza, et al. Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625

Fig. 51. Average Power of MPPT techniques.

Fig. 52. Average MAE of MPPT techniques.

Fig. 53. Average RE of MPPT techniques.

needs up to 600 ms to properly track and settle down at MPP while SSO
spends less than 250 ms. Undesired fluctuations are also successfully
minimized under SSO as shown by the zoomed-in portion of the figures.
The calculated power tracking efficiency of SSO is 99%. It harvests
more energy, produces less fluctuation and generates more stable
output than PSO (Fig. 50).
4.8. Efficiency and performance evaluation
techniques are conducted to draw the general characteristics of each
technique.
• P&O is a fairly fast algorithm due to its simplicity and gradient-
based control. However, LM trap in Cases 2–5 and undesired oscil-
lations in case 1 make it less useful. PSO has 100% efficiency in
locating GM region. However, its power conversion efficiency is low
in the range of 94%-98%. It also takes the longest time duration
between tracking and settling at GM.

The performance evaluation and statistical analysis of implemented

• PSO-GS is utilized to undertake drawbacks of PSO. The performance

23
A.F. Mirza, et al.
Fig. 54. Average RMSE of MPPT techniques.
Fig. 55. Average S.R of MPPT techniques.
is slightly improved. The oscillations at GM cannot be reduced to
zero.
• CS shows good performance in tracking GM, but its transient state
performance is not efficient because of Levy flight. Under CS, un-
desired large fluctuations are observed in case 4 and case 5, and its
transient time is long around 600 ms.
• ABC has similar problems, especially in PS and CPS cases. Slower
convergence and minor oscillations in the duty cycle control signal
cause larger oscillations and fluctuations in voltage output and
hence reduce the power significantly.
• DFO performs better. However, it has lower power conversion effi-
ciency.
• SSO successfully tackles the transient and steady-state oscillations.
Its overshoot is minimum, and the efficiency in all operating con-
ditions is above 99% on average. Moreover, it successfully tackles
the PS and CPS because of its closely associated salp follower po-
sitions.
It is observed that SSO and DFO track the GM with the highest ef-
ficiency and the output is oscillation free. PSO the PSO-GS has mini-
mized the loss in the transient state. PSO performance is compromised
because of the random initialization of particles, even after converging
to GM. ABC and CS shows oscillations in both transient and steady-
state, which yield power dissipatition. The tracking performance is
reduced due to Levy flight and random values embedded in CS, ABC,
and PSO. The convergence time of CS, ABC, PSO, PSOGS, and P&O is
longer than that of the proposed SSO. Case 4 and case 5 shows again
that the proposed SSO can handle CPS effectively. Results indicate that
the proposed SSO is applicable in a real-world scenario with high ef-
ficiency and reliability. This study facilitates the applicability and ef-
fectiveness.
24
Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625
4.9. Statistical analysis of the proposed MPPT techniques
The statistical analysis of the proposed SSO and other MPPT tech-
niques is presented in this section. The sensitivity of the techniques is
measured by Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), Relative Error (RE),
Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and Median, which are defined below.
n
∑ (Ppvi − Ppv )
RE = i=1
∗ 100%
Ppv (42)
n
∑ (Ppvi − Ppv )
MAE = i=1
n (43)
n
∑ (Ppvi − Ppv )2
RMSE = i=1
n (44)
Ppv is the MPP value for the concerned case, n represents the number of
runs, here n = 20000. Ppvi represents the output power achieved in the
i-th run. In addition, the measures in Eqs. (42)–(44) are utilized for
statistical analysis. The successful rate (SR), which is defined as the
ratio between the numbers of successful GM tracking to the total
number of runs. Table 6 illustrates the results of compared techniques
for 5 cases. It can be seen that the proposed SSO is highly adaptive and
robust. The proposed SSO achieves smaller RMSE, RE, and MAE than
ABC, PSOGS, PSO, and CS. Although the tracking time of P&O in the
fast-changing irradiance of Case 1 is the least, but it does not converge
in any PS and CPS conditions (Cases 2, 3, 4, 5). Its efficiency is lower
than those of SSO, DFO, and ABC in Case 1. In Case 2, 3, 4 and Case 5,
the proposed SSO is better than PSO because of the particles’ random
movement, even after successfully tracking the GM. The performance of
A.F. Mirza, et al.
ABC is lower than that of the proposed SSO. As CS shows oscillation in
both transient and steady states, it continuously dissipates power and
its efficiency is compromised. Theses stats are compared graphically in
Figs. 51–55.
5. Conclusion
In this paper, a novel SSO based MPPT technique is proposed for
extracting maximum energy from the solar PV system. The proposed
technique has been tested against renowned MPPT techniques. 6 dif-
ferent scenarios are considered for the comparison of the MPPT tech-
niques. The results, analytical analysis and statistical data show that the
proposed technique significantly outperforms the existing techniques in
terms of tracking time, power conversion efficiency, and robustness.
The proposed SSO technique is able to track GM within 0.1–0.35 s as
compared to the time taken by ABC, PSO-GS, PSO, and CS techniques,
showing 20–30% quicker tracking. In term of power efficiency, SSO
also outperforms ABC, PSO-GS, PSO, and CS. Depending upon the op-
erating conditions, a power increase of the average 5% from other bio-
inspired algorithms and 8–46% from conventional P&O is achieved.
Faster GM tracking and shorter settling time enable SSO to save power
in the transient state. Moreover, the oscillations in the transient state
are also less under SSO, which helps to reduce overshoot and ripples.
Ripple reduction and robustness are prominent features of the proposed
SSO. SSO has shown significant efficiency and redundancy in some
extreme MPPT conditions. However, complex partial shading is a sce-
nario where much work is still needed to be done for the future re-
search.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Adeel Feroz Mirza: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal
analysis, Methodology. Majad Mansoor: Investigation, Project ad-
ministration, Resources, Software. Qiang Ling: Supervision. Baoqun
Yin: Funding acquisition. M. Yaqoob Javed: Validation.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China under Grant 61973289, in part by the National
Key Research and Development Program of China under Grant
2016YFC0201003, and in part by the Technological Innovation Project
for New Energy and Intelligent Networked Automobile Industry of
Anhui Province.
References
[1] Liu B, Duan S, Liu F, Xu P. Analysis and improvement of maximum power point
tracking algorithm based on incremental conductance method for photovoltaic
array. In: 2007 PEDS'07 7th International Conference on Power Electronics and
Drive Systems, IEEE; 2007. pp. 637–41. https://doi.org/10.1109/PEDS.2007.
4487768.
[2] Lasheen M, Abdel-Salam M. Maximum power point tracking using Hill Climbing and
ANFIS techniques for PV applications: a review and a novel hybrid approach.
Energy Convers Manage 2018;171:1002–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.
2018.06.003.
[3] Ghosh K, Guha A, Duttagupta SP. Power generation on a solar photovoltaic array
integrated with lighter-than-air platform at low altitudes. Energy Convers Manage
2017;154:286–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.10.039.
[4] Ghosh K, Gupta S, Pal S, Arosh S. Estimation of Solar Irradiance on a Contoured
Platform for Optimized Solar Power Generation. ICCCE 2019. Springer; 2020. pp.
443-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8715-9_53.
[5] Muthuramalingam M, Manoharan P. Comparative analysis of distributed MPPT
25
Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625
controllers for partially shaded stand alone photovoltaic systems. Energ Convers
Manage 2014;86:286–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2014.05.044.
[6] Rizzo SA, Scelba G. ANN based MPPT method for rapidly variable shading condi-
tions. Appl Energy 2015;145(32):124–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.
2015.01.077.
[7] 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 Trans Power Electron 2011;26(4):1022–30. https://doi.
org/10.1109/TPEL.2010.2090903.
[8] Chatrenour N, Razmi H, Doagou-Mojarrad H. Improved double integral sliding
mode MPPT controller based parameter estimation for a stand-alone photovoltaic
system. Energy Convers Manage 2017;139:97–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2017.02.055.
[9] Hadji S, Gaubert J-P, Krim F. Real-time genetic algorithms-based MPPT: study and
comparison (theoretical an experimental) with conventional methods. Energies
2018;11:459. https://doi.org/10.3390/En11020459.
[10] Javed MY, Mirza AF, Hasan A, Hussain Rizvi ST, Ling Q, Gulzar MM, et al. A
comprehensive review on a PV based system to harvest maximum power.
Electronics 2019;8:1480. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8121480.
[11] Jiang LL, Maskell DL, Patra JC. A novel ant colony optimization-based maximum
power point tracking for photovoltaic systems under partially shaded conditions.
Energy Build 2013;58:227–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.12.001.
[12] Ahmed Z Salam. A Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT) for PV system using
Cuckoo Search with partial shading capability. Appl Energy 2014;119:118–30.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.12.062.
[13] Ma J, Ting TO, Man KL, Zhang N, Guan S-U, Wong PWH. Parameter estimation of
photovoltaic models via cuckoo search. J Appl Math 2013;2013:1–8. https://doi.
org/10.1155/2013/362619.
[14] Mirza AF, Ling Q, Javed MY, Mansoor M. Novel MPPT techniques for photovoltaic
systems under uniform irradiance and Partial shading. Sol Energy
2019;184:628–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.04.034.
[15] Li S. A variable-weather-parameter MPPT control strategy based on MPPT con-
straint conditions of PV system with inverter. Energy Convers Manage 2019;197.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.111873.
[16] Yang B, Yu T, Zhang X, Li H, Shu H, Sang Y, Jiang L. Dynamic leader based col-
lective intelligence for maximum power point tracking of PV systems affected by
partial shading condition. Energy Convers Manage 2019;179:286–303. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.10.074.
[17] Satpathy PR, Sharma R. Power and mismatch losses mitigation by a fixed electrical
reconfiguration technique for partially shaded photovoltaic arrays. Energy Convers
Manage. 2019;192:52–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.04.039.
[18] Tatabhatla VMR, Agarwal A, Kanumuri T. Improved power generation by disper-
sing the uniform and non-uniform partial shades in solar photovoltaic array. Energy
Convers Manage 2019;111825(197). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.
111825.
[19] Chen Z, Chen Y, Wu L, Cheng S, Lin P, You L. Accurate modeling of photovoltaic
modules using a 1-D deep residual network based on I-V characteristics. Energy
Convers Manage 2019;186:168–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.02.
032.
[20] Ahmed J, Salam Z. A critical evaluation on maximum power point tracking methods
for partial shading in PV systems. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2015;47:933–53. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.03.080.
[21] Kermadi M, Salam Z, Ahmed J, Berkouk EM. An effective hybrid maximum power
point tracker of photovoltaic arrays for complex partial shading conditions. IEEE
Trans Ind Electron 2019;66(9):6990–7000. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.4110.
1109/TIE.2018.2877202.
[22] Eltamaly AM, Farh HMH. Dynamic global maximum power point tracking of the PV
systems under variant partial shading using hybrid GWO-FLC. Sol Energy
2019;177:306–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2018.11.028.
[23] Phimmasone V, Kondo Y, Kamejima T, Miyatake M. Evaluation of extracted energy
from PV with PSO-based MPPT against various types of solar irradiation changes.
In: 2010 International Conference on Electrical Machines and Systems (ICEMS).
IEEE; 2010. pp. 487–92.
[24] Ishaque K, Salam Z, Amjad M, Mekhilef S. An improved particle swarm optimiza-
tion (PSO)–based MPPT for PV with reduced steady-state oscillation. IEEE Trans
Power Electron 2012;27(8):3627–38. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2012.
2185713.
[25] Abdourraziq MA, Maaroufi M, Ouassaid M. A new variable step size INC MPPT
method for PV systems. In: 2014 International Conference on Multimedia
Computing and Systems (ICMCS), IEEE; 2014. pp. 1563–8. https://doi.org/10.
1109/ICMCS.2014.6911212.
[26] de Moura Oliveira P, Oliveira J, Cunha JB. Trends in gravitational search algorithm.
International symposium on distributed computing and artificial intelligence.
Springer; 2017. p. 270–7. 10.1007/978-3-319-62410-5_33.
[27] Mirjalili S, Hashim SZM. A new hybrid PSOGSA algorithm for function optimiza-
tion. In: 2010 international conference on Computer and information application
(ICCIA). IEEE; 2010. pp. 374–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCIA.2010.6141614.
[28] Yang X-S, Deb S. Cuckoo search via Lévy flights. In: 2009 NaBIC 2009 World
Congress on Nature & Biologically Inspired Computing. IEEE; 2009. pp. 210–4.
https://doi.org/10.1109/NABIC.2009.5393690.
[29] Karaboga D, Basturk B. A powerful and efficient algorithm for numerical function
optimization: artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm. J Global Optim
2007;39:459–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10898-007-9149-x.
[30] Karaboga D, Basturk B. Artificial bee colony (ABC) optimization algorithm for
solving constrained optimization problems. International fuzzy systems association
world congress. Springer; 2007. p. 789–98. 10.1007/978-3-540-72950-1_77.
A.F. Mirza, et al.
[31] Gao W, Liu S. Improved artificial bee colony algorithm for global optimization. Inf
Process Lett 2011;111:871–82.
[32] Karaboga D, Gorkemli B, Ozturk C, Karaboga N. A comprehensive survey: artificial
bee colony (ABC) algorithm and applications. Artif Intell Rev 2014;42:21–57.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-012-9328-0.
[33] Raman G, Raman G, Manickam C, Ganesan SI. Dragonfly algorithm based global
maximum power point tracker for photovoltaic systems. International Conference
on Swarm Intelligence. Springer; 2016. pp. 211–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
319-41000-5_21.
[34] Ahmed J, Salam Z. An enhanced adaptive P&O MPPT for fast and efficient tracking
under varying environmental conditions. IEEE Trans Sustainable Energy
2018;9:1487–96. https://doi.org/10.1109/Tste.2018.2791968.
[35] Mirjalili S, Gandomi AH, Mirjalili SZ, Saremi S, Faris H, Mirjalili SM. Salp Swarm
26
Energy Conversion and Management 209 (2020) 112625
Algorithm: a bio-inspired optimizer for engineering design problems. Adv Eng
Softw 2017;114:163–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2017.07.002.
[36] Wang Y, Li Y, Ruan X. High-accuracy and fast-speed MPPT methods for PV string
under partially shaded conditions. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2016;63:235–345.
https://doi.org/10.1109/Tie.2015.2465897.
[37] Zhang X, Li S, He T, Yang B, Yu T, Li H, Jiang L, Sun L. Memetic reinforcement
learning based maximum power point tracking design for PV systems under partial
shading condition. Energy 2019;174:1079–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.
2019.03.053.
[38] Motahhir S, Chalh A, El Ghzizal A, Derouich A. Development of a low-cost PV
system using an improved INC algorithm and a PV panel Proteus model. J Clean
Prod. 2018;204:355–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.246.