A Novel Zonal based MPPT control scheme for a Full Bridge series
resonant Converter
Niraja Swaminathan, Lakshmi Narasamma N, M Kumaravel, Ashok Jhunjhunwala
Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India
Abstract—The limitations of the conventional MPPT tech-
nique are oscillations of the system at steady state leading
to energy loss, slower response and the occurrence of drift.
A simple zonal based MPPT controller is proposed in this
paper which addresses the above limitations without additional
requirement of sampling or sensors apart from the basic voltage
and current sensors. The proposed system is simple, cost effective
and easy to implement. Phase shift reference (Duty) for the
DC-DC converter is varied dynamically by the proposed MPPT
controller depending upon the operating point voltage to have
a better dynamic response. The error in the perturbation
direction, if any, is corrected by the controller while computing
the change in duty reference (ΔD). This ensures the drift free
operation. The response speed of the proposed controller is
improved compared to the conventional controller by having
a variable step size. Solar PV fed full bridge series resonance
DC-DC converter with resistive load is considered for evaluating
the proposed control scheme. The performance of the proposed
MPPT control technique is verified by simulations and hardware
results.
Index Terms—Drift free operation, Maximum Power Point
Tracking (MPPT), MPPT Efficiency, Perturb and Observe
(P&O), Photovoltaic (PV).
I. I NTRODUCTION
The conventional (non-renewable) power generation re-
quires fossil fuels, which emit harmful gases polluting the
environment. In recent years, due to depletion of fossil
fuels, the electricity rates have seen hiked. Considering these
adverse effects of conventional energy, need for renewable
energy has come to a spotlight. Usage of solar energy in most
part of the world is rapidly increasing due to it’s benefits like
silent operation, eco-friendly, no rotating part and hence less
maintenance.
Solar irradiance varies from time to time during a day.
This variation causes the variations in the power and voltage
from the solar PV array. So it becomes necessary to utilize
the maximum power available from the solar PV array at
every instant. This is achieved by using Maximum Power
Point Tracking (MPPT) techniques. MPPT is the control
scheme which continuously moves the system’s operating
point to the maximum power point. Various MPPT techniques
like hill climbing techniques, fractional short circuit current
techniques (FSCC), fractional open circuit voltage techniques
(FOCV) and fuzzy logic control techniques are commonly
reported in the literature [1]. For FSCC and FOCV techniques,
the system needs to be interrupted by short circuiting and
open circuiting the PV module respectively. These algorithms
are not feasible for the high voltage or high power applica-
978-1-5090-2724-8/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
tions [1, 2]. Fuzzy logic schemes are complex techniques.
Hill climbing techniques are simple which constitute Perturb
& Observe (P&O) technique and incremental conductance
technique [1].
P&O MPPT technique is widely used technique as it
is simple, low cost and easy to implement [1–12]. The
conventional P&O technique has three major problems, (i)
slower response, (ii) existence of steady state oscillations and
(iii) drift in the perturbation direction during the change in
irradiance [3–7]. Various techniques are proposed to address
the steady state oscillations and speed of response issues [6–
12]. Drift issue is addressed in [5, 6].
A novel control technique is proposed in this paper to
overcome the above stated three problems associated with
the conventional P&O technique. This scheme is verified
by simulation and hardware experimentation. The results are
discussed in this paper. The performance of the proposed
scheme is compared with the conventional, drift avoidance
[5] and adaptive [10] schemes proposed in the literature in
simulation and hardware implementation.
Introduction on various MPPT techniques are discussed in
section 1. In section 2, techniques proposed in [5, 10] are
explained. The proposed MPPT scheme is explanined and
the performance of this scheme is compared with that of
other schemes mentioned in literature [5, 10] in section 3.
The simulation and the experimental results evaluating the
performance of the proposed MPPT control algorithm are
presented in section 4. [5] and [10] schemes are implemented
in the simulation and hardware and the results are presented
in section 4. Conclusion is briefed in section 5.
II. MPPT CONTROL SCHEMES IN THE L ITERATURE
In the conventional P&O technique, the system is perturbed
continuously to make the system operate at maximum power
point (MPP). The direction of perturbation is decided depend-
ing upon the power and voltage change and the system is
perturb in that direction to track the maximum power point.
The conventional MPPT control scheme is shown in Fig.1.
The perturbation step size is fixed constant in this scheme.
When the step size is fixed small, the time taken to reach
the maximum power point will be more. On the other hand
when the step size is kept large the steady state oscillations
will be predominant. So the step size is fixed trading off the
steady state oscillations and the speed of response. Hence
the conventional scheme has the limitations of continuous
oscillations around MPP due to perturbation leading to energy
3263
waste, slower response due to fixed step size and drift in
tracking during rapidly varying irradiance [3–7, 13]. Various
P&O algorithms have been proposed considering these dis-
advantages, some of which is explained in this section.
Fig. 1. Conventional MPPT control scheme
In Adaptive P&O algorithm [10], the tracking response and
steady state oscillations are addresses by varying the step size
according to the slope of the power versus voltage curve
according to the Eq. 1. The value of N is fixed according
to the maximum duty perturbation allowed, as given in Eq.
2. Due to the variable step, when the step size is more, the
drift is more [5]. Also due to constant scaling factor N, there
will be instability under certain irradiance condition [5]. This
adaptive P&O algorithm is implemented in the simulations
for full bridge phase modulated DC - DC converter and the
results are discussed in this paper.
 
 P (k) − P (k − 1) 
D(k) = D(k − 1) ± N   (1)
V (k) − V (k − 1) 
 
 ΔP 
N   < ΔDmax (2)
ΔV @ΔDmax
Ref [5] proposes the drift free algorithm. By continuously
monitoring the direction of change in PV voltage and PV
current, the change in irradince is identified and hence drift
is avoided. When both the voltage and current changes are
in same direction, it is identified that irradiance has changed.
The simulation results for this scheme are presented in this
paper.
III. P ROPOSED C ONTROL A LGORITHM
The P&O algorithm is simpler and most popular tech-
nique used for MPPT control [1–12]. In the conventional
P&O technique, the speed of response of MPPT tracking
is slow due to fixed step size. This could be improved by
having a larger step size, but steady state oscillations will
be resulting in more energy loss. So optimum step size is to
be chosen to trade-off between the response time and steady
state oscillations [6–12]. During the change in irradiance, the
conventional technique losses it s control, which is commonly
termed as drift [5, 6]. Drift is the phenomenon during which
the direction of perturbation is wrongly determined by the
MPPT controller due to change in irradiance. A Novel control
technique is proposed in this paper for the better performance
of the system with less energy loss and drift free operation.
978-1-5090-2724-8/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
This technique doesn’t need any additional sampling, thereby
reducing the complexity of the system. The control block
diagram of the proposed scheme is shown in Fig.2. From
Fig.2, it is observed that the MPPT control produces the duty
reference for the converter so as to control the output power.
The proposed scheme is explained in the sections below.
Fig. 2. Block Diagram of the system considered
A. Zonal Approach - Better response and low energy loss
The proposed algorithm is based on zonal approach. The
solar PV curve is divided into two zones namely MPP zone
and non-MPP zone as shown in Fig.3(a) according to the
voltage levels. The zone in which the voltage range is ±5%
of VM P P is called MPP zone, which is determined from the
PV curves as shown in Fig.3(b). The other regions are called
non-MPP zone. The flowchart of the proposed control scheme
is shown in the Fig.4.
(a) Zones of a PV curve (b) PV curves indicating MPP range
Fig. 3. Solar Power vs Voltage curve
The proposed controller computes the PV power from
the solar PV voltage and PV current input. The change in
PV voltage and PV Power are compared by the controller
and then determines the perturbation direction (increase or
decrease) similar to conventional algorithm. Once the per-
turbation direction is determined, depending upon the present
PV voltage value, the zone of the operating point is identified.
According to the zone, the perturbation step size is decided.
When the system is in MPP zone, the step size is fixed
constant and is ΔDmin . When the system is in non- MPP
zones, the step size is decided according to how far the
operating point is from the MPP point. Farther the operating
point from the MPP voltage, larger will be the step size, so as
to bring the operating point to the MPP faster. The equation to
determine the step size in non-MPP zone is defined in Eq.3.
 
ΔD = dir ∗ Vopr − VM P P ∗ S (3)
3264

Fig. 4. Proposed MPPT Control Algorithm
where,
s = scaling factor, fixed according to the system, Volt−1
VM P P = Solar PV voltage at maximum power point, Volts
Vopr = Solar PV operating voltage, Volts
dir = Direction of Perturbation, is 1 for increase and is -1 for
decrease.
1) To determine the scaling factor S: The scaling factor S
is determined according to the boundary voltage of the MPP
zone and the minimum change in duty limit (ΔDmin ) of the
system. Usually the MPP zone boundary is fixed at VM P P
± 5%. From the Eq.3 scaling factor S can be determined by
applying the boundary condition when Vopr is VM P P ± 5%
and ΔD is ΔDmin as shown in Eq.4.
 
 
 (VM P P ± 5%) − VM P P  ∗ S = ΔDmin (4)
 
where, VM P P ± 5% is the boundary voltage of MPP zone.
For the system considered, the boundary of MPP zone for
50VM P P PV module is 47.5V and 52.5V. The minimum
change in duty (ΔDmin ) is fixed as 2% for the design
considered. According to Eq.4, the value of S for the system
considered is calculated as S = 0.8.
B. Drift Free Operation
The conventional MPPT controller fails to differentiate the
power change due to irradiance change and due to perturba-
tion of the system. This leads to inappropriate determination
of the perturbation direction and thus drift occurs. Zonal
algorithm not only improves the speed of response and
reduces the steady state oscillations, but also provides a drift
free operation of the system during the irradiance change.
In this controller, during the normal operation (at constant
irradiance), the ΔD value determined will be positive. During
change in irradiance, the ΔD value determined will be neg-
978-1-5090-2724-8/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
ative, thereby correcting the perturbation direction deviation
(drift).
1) Illustration: Consider an operating point A moved to
point B due to perturbation of the system as shown in Fig.5.
The increase in irradiance automatically shifts the operating
point to C. Voltage and power at point A and C will be
compared for the next perturbation. Let VA and VC be the
PV voltage at point A and C respectively. Similarly let PA and
PC be the PV power at point A and C respectively. From the
Fig.5, it is seen that PC > PA , VC > VA and VC > VM P P .
With this condition, the direction of perturbation determined
by the MPPT controller will be decrease. There is an error
in the perturbation direction determined by the controller
which pushes the system away from MPP . The proposed
algorithm will then correct this deviation in perturbation
while calculating the step size. The step size for decrease
perturbation direction from Eq.3 and the duty reference is
calculated as shown below.
ΔD = (−1) ∗ (VC − VM P P ) ∗ S (5)
ΔD = negative, as VC > VM P P (6)
D = Dprev − ΔD (7)
Fig. 5. PV curve showing drift free operation of Proposed
Scheme
From the Eq.6, it can be see that the ΔD value calculated is
negative. The duty reference, in this case, will be incremented
as shown in Eq.7 as ΔD is negative. Thus, the drift in direc-
tion of perturbation is corrected by the MPPT controller to
provide the drift free operation of the system. The controller
performance is evaluated experimentally and the results are
shown in the next section.
IV. P ROOF OF C ONCEPT
A Novel MPPT algorithm proposed in this paper is verified
in simulations and hardware. The system considered is solar
PV fed DC - DC converter for resistive load. Phase modulated
full bridge LC series resonance DC-DC converter with the
specification of 48 V to 400 V, 400W is used. The input
to the DC - DC converter is fed from solar simulator with
the PV curve parameters as 50 VM P P and 400 WP . Test
curves specified in the European standard EN 50530 [14] are
considered for the implementation and are shown in Fig.6(a)
and Fig.6(b). The performance of MPPT control schemes
are expressed in terms of MPPT efficiency. According to
the European standard EN 50530 [14], MPPT efficiency is
3265
defined as the ratio of average power to maximum power.
MPPT efficiency of various schemes are presented at different
conditions in this section.
(a) Test waveform for the ramp (b) Test waveform for the step
change in irradiance with the slope change in irradiance from of 500
of 50 W/m2 /s W/m2 to 1000 W/m2
Fig. 6. Irradiance test waveforms
A. Simulation Results
1) Steady state oscillations: One of the major issues with
the conventional technique is the steady state oscillations.
With the zonal approach, the steady state oscillations are
reduced. The steady state oscillations at 1000 W/m2 for
proposed, conventional, drift avoidance and adaptive algo-
rithms are shown in Fig.7(a). From the results, it is seen that
frequency of oscillation in the proposed system is lesser than
the other systems, reducing the energy loss. The steady state
average power for the proposed system at 1000 W/m2 is 362.1
W and is more than the adaptive scheme which is 360.7 W.
The steady state MPPT efficiency for the proposed algorithm
at 1000 W/m2 is 98.67%.
(a) Steady state oscillation of the (b) Starting of the system with pro-
system posed and other schemes
Fig. 7. Simulation Results at 1000 W/m2
2) Time to reach the steady state: The time taken by
the system to reach steady state is one of the performance
parameters of the MPPT algorithm. Time taken to reach
steady state becomes more critical during starting at constant
irradiance level of 1000 W/m2 . This condition is simulated
for various techniques and the results are compared which is
shown in Fig.7(b). From the results it is seen that the time
taken by the proposed scheme to reach the steady state is 9
sec, which is 40% lesser than conventional scheme and 10%
lesser than adaptive scheme.
For the step change in irradiance from 1000 W/m2 to
500 W/m2 , the time taken by the proposed scheme to reach
the steady state is 2 sec, Conventional scheme takes 3 sec
and adaptive scheme takes 6 sec. The simulation results
978-1-5090-2724-8/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
of the proposed, drift avoidance, conventional and adaptive
techniques are shown in Fig.8(a).
(a) Performance during step change (b) Drift free operation of proposed
in irradiance from 1000 W/m2 to scheme and drift occurrence in other
500 W/m2 schemes during change in irradiance
Fig. 8. Simulation Results during change in irradiance
3) Drift free operation: The performance for proposed,
conventional, drift avoidance [5] and adaptive algorithms
[10] for ramp change in irradiance from 500 W/m2 to1000
W/m2 with the slope of 50 W/m2 /s as shown in Fig.6(b) are
simulated and the results are shown in Fig.8(b). The results
of the proposed algorithm shows the drift free operation.
B. Hardware Results
The hardware setup of the system is shown in Fig.9. The
experimental results of the proposed technique are compared
with the conventional, drift avoidance [5] and adaptive tech-
nique [10] in Table.I. In the results shown in Fig.10 to Fig.13,
t0 indicates the time at which the irradiance is changed and t1
indicates the time at which the controller reaches the steady
state.
Fig. 9. Hardware setup of the system
1) Steady state oscillations: The experimental results of
the steady state oscillations at 1000 W/m2 irradiance level
for proposed, conventional, drift avoidance [5] and adaptive
algorithms [10] are shown in Fig.10(a), Fig.10(b), Fig.10(c)
and Fig.10(d) respectively. From the results, the peak - peak
oscillations in power with proposed scheme is 43W which
is 10% lesser than adaptive scheme and 12% lesser than the
conventional and drift avoidance schemes. Refer Table.I. The
steady state efficiency with the proposed algorithm at 1000
W/m2 is 96%.
3266
 (a) Proposed MPPT algorithm (b) Conventional algorithm
(c) Drift Avoidance algorithm (d) Adaptive P&O algorithm
Fig. 10. Hardware Results - Steady State Oscillations at 1000 W/m2
2) Time to reach the steady state: The proposed technique
takes 10s to reach steady state during starting of the system at
1000 W/m2 constant irradiance level, which is less compared
to other techniques shown in Table.I. The MPPT efficiency of
the proposed scheme is 85.5% which is higher than the other
techniques. The hardware results of proposed, conventional,
drift avoidance and adaptive algorithm are shown in Fig.11(a),
Fig.11(b), Fig.11(c) and Fig.11(d) respectively.
(a) Proposed MPPT algorithm (b) Conventional algorithm
(c) Drift Avoidance algorithm (d) Adaptive P&O algorithm
Fig. 11. Hardware Results - Starting of the system at constant irradiance
1000 W/m2
For the step change in irradiance from 1000 W/m2 to 500
W/m2 , time taken by the proposed system is 2.6 s which
is 50% lesser compared to adaptive technique. The results
of proposed, conventional, drift free and adaptive algorithm
are shown in Fig.12(a), Fig.12(b), Fig.12(c) and Fig.12(d)
respectively.
978-1-5090-2724-8/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
(a) Proposed MPPT algorithm (b) Conventional algorithm
(c) Drift Avoidance algorithm (d) Adaptive P&O algorithm
Fig. 12. Hardware Results - Step change in irradiance from 1000 W/m2 to
500 W/m2
3) Drift free operation: The proposed MPPT algorithm is
the drift free algorithm which is validated experimentally. For
the ramp change in irradiance from 500 W/m2 to1000 W/m2
with the slope of 50 W/m2 /s as shown in Fig.6(a), proposed,
conventional, drift avoidance [5] and adaptive algorithms [10]
are tested and the results are shown in Fig.13(a), Fig.13(b),
Fig.13(c) and Fig.13(d) respectively. From the results, it can
be seen that in adaptive and conventional algorithm drift is
occurred, whereas, drift is avoided in proposed technique.
(a) Proposed MPPT algorithm (b) Conventional algorithm
(c) Drift Avoidance algorithm (d) Adaptive P&O algorithm
Fig. 13. Hardware Results - Performance of the system for a ramp change
in Irradiance from 500 W/m2 to 1000 W/m2 with the slope of 50 W/m2 /s
V. C ONCLUSION
A novel, zonal based control scheme for tracking MPP of
solar PV is proposed in this paper. The design guidelines for
choosing the scaling factor and choosing the MPP zone are
3267
 TABLE I
C OMPARISON OF VARIOUS MPPT CONTROL A LGORITHM
Performance Parameters Proposed Conventional Drift Avoidance Adaptive
[Peak power at STC condition is 368 W] Scheme Scheme Scheme [5] Scheme [10]
Time to reach steadystate during starting 10 s 14 s 14 s 12 s
Average Power during starting at 1000 W/m2 314.62 W 292.23 W 293.77 W 303.34 W
MPPT Efficiency during starting at 1000 W/m2 85.5% 79.4 % 79.83 % 82.43 %
Steadystate Average Power at 1000 W/m2 353.85 W 351.69 W 350.85 351.48
MPPT Efficiency during steadystate at 1000 W/m2 96.15 % 95.57 % 95.34 % 95.5 %
Peak-Peak oscillation of power during
steadystate at 1000 W/m2 43 W 49 W 49 W 48 W
Drift No Yes No Yes

presented here. Proposed, conventional, drift avoidance [5]
and adaptive techniques [10] are implemented in simulation
and hardware and the performance of the same are compared
and presented in this paper. The proposed control scheme
is proved to be faster in response and has lesser steady
state oscillations than the other schemes considered without
any additional sensors and sampling requirement. The drift
free operation of the proposed scheme is verified from the
simulation and hardware results.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research is based upon the partial support by the Solar
Energy Research Institute for India and the U.S. (SERIIUS)
funded jointly by the U.S. Department of Energy subcon-
tract DE AC36-08G028308 (Office of Science, Office of
Basic Energy Sciences, and Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy, Solar Energy Technology Program, with support
from the Office of International Affairs) and the Government
of India subcontract IUSSTF/JCERDC-SERIIUS/2012 dated
22nd Nov. 2012.
R EFERENCES
[1] David Sanz Morales, “Maximum Power Point Tracking
Algorithms for Photovoltaic Applications”, M.S. thesis,
Dept. of Elect. Eng., aalto university school of science
and technology, Finland, 2010.
[2] Sathish Kumar Kollimalla and Mahesh Kuma Mishrai,
“Adaptive Perturb & Observe MPPT Algorithm for Pho-
tovoltaic System ”, IEEE Transactions, 2013.
[3] Nicola Femia, Giovanni Petrone, Giovanni Spagnuolo and
Massimo Vitelli, “Optimization of Perturb and Observe
Maximum Power Point Tracking Method ”, IEEE Trans-
actions on Power Electronics, Vol. 20, No.4, July 2005.
[4] Dezso Sera, Remus Teodorescu, Jochen Hantschel,
and Michael Knoll, “Optimized Maximum Power Point
Tracker for Fast-Changing Environmental Conditions”,
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, Vol. 55, No.
7, July 2008.
[5] Muralidhar Killi and Susovon Samanta, “Modified Per-
turb and Observe MPPT Algorithm for Drift Avoidance in
Photovoltaic Systems”, IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, Vol. 62, No. 9, September 2015.
[6] Ashish Pandey, Nivedita Dasgupta, and Ashok Ku-
mar Mukerjee, “High-Performance Algorithms for Drift
Avoidance and Fast Tracking in Solar MPPT System”,
IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. 23, No.
2, June 2008.
[7] Francisco Paz and Martin Ordonez, “Zero Oscillation
and Irradiance Slope Tracking for Photovoltaic MPPT”,
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, Vol. 61, No.
11,November 2014.
[8] L. Piegari R. Rizzoi, “Adaptive perturb and observe algo-
rithm for photovoltaic maximum power point tracking”,
IET Renewable Power Generation, February 2013.
[9] Chao Zhang, Dean Zhao,Jinjing Wang,Guichang Chen,
“A Modified MPPT Method with Variable Perturbation
Step for Photovoltaic System”, IEEE Transactions, 2009.
[10] Fangrui Liu, Shanxu Duan, Fei Liu, Bangyin Liu, and
Yong Kang, “A Variable Step Size INC MPPT Method
for PV Systems”, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Elec-
tronics, Vol. 55, No. 7, July, 2008.
[11] Alivarani Mohapa tra, Byamakesh Nayak, K.B.Mohanty,
“Current Based Novel Adaptive P&O MPPT Algorithm
for Photovoltaic System Considering Sudden Change in
the Irradiance”, IEEE International Conference on Power
Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES), 2014.
[12] D. A. Stone, M. P. Foster, C. M. Bingham and P.
Stewart., “Digitally Controlled Converter with an Adap-
tive Step Size for Maximum Power Point Tracking for
Photovoltaic Applications ”, IEEE Transactions, 2008.
[13] Sathish Kumar Kollimalla and Mahesh Kuma Mishrai,
“A New Adaptive P&O MPPT Algorithm Based on FSCC
Method for Photovoltaic System”, International Confer-
ence on Circuits, Power and Computing Technologies,
2013.
[14] “Overall efficiency of grid connected photovoltaic in-
verters”, European Standard EN 50530, 2010.

978-1-5090-2724-8/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE 3268