2016 IEEE International WIE Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (WIECON-ECE)

19-21 December 2016, AISSMS, Pune, India

Implementation of Cost-effective MPPT Solar

Photovoltaic System Based on the Comparison
between Incremental Conductance and P&O
Algorithm
Niloy Barua∗ , Ananya Dutta, Shoilie Chakma, Avijit Das and Sayeed Shafayet Chowdhury
∗ BRAC University, Bangladesh
Email:neelbarua1991@gmail.com

Abstract—This paper presents design of a maximum power This paper presents a comparative analysis of IC and P&O
point tracker (MPPT)charge controller which is economical method based on hardware implementation.The IV and PV
and efficient. Incremental Conductance and Perturb & Observe curves are plotted at varying irradiance and the data is
(P&O) method are the two most popular methods based on
their simplicity and cost-effectiveness. The paper focuses on analysed to reach a conclusion. This paper also focuses on
estimating the most suitable algorithm for the implementation reducing the size of the circuit and the cost of implementation.
of charge controller based on data collected at different An Arduino based charge controller is designed incorporated
irradiance level. Proposed system also incorporated a custom with a BUCK converter to obtain the maximum power point.
made MOSFET driver circuit for the BUCK converter which is
cheaper compared to available MOSFET driver ICs . Another
advantage of this driver circuit that it is smaller in size and II. P ROPOSED S YSTEM
the two transistors in the driver circuit will never turn on at
the same time. Introduction of snubber circuit, addition of Hall The block diagram shown in the figure 1 represents the
effect current sensor has reduced the not only resistive and whole system. From the solar panel we will get current
switching losses but also the voltage spikes .The main focus of and voltage from which the voltage will be converted by
this paper is the reduction of cost of the charge controller by
DC-DC buck converter. After calculating the power from
choosing the most suitable algorithm.
the acknowledged data we used an incremental conductance
Index Terms : PV(photo voltaic), implementation, compari- algorithm for the maximum power point calculation. We have
son, MPPT(maximum power point tracker),DC-DC converter, used hall effect current sensor to measure current which will
IC(incremental-conductance),P&O(perturb &observe) not only reduce 𝐼 2 𝑅 loss but also the complexity and size of
the PCB [5].
I. I NTRODUCTION
Solar energy is one of the promising source of renewable
energy . That is why new technologies utilizing this energy
are emerging day by day. But the problem with it is that
harnessing the desired amount of energy which is mostly
dependent on weather condition and temperature [1]. A
Photovoltaic panel has a specific operating condition when
it can provide maximum power. Operating the PV panel
at maximum power point is one of the popular research
topics over the decades. Several algorithms emerged for
extracting maximum power from the PV panel namely Open
circuit voltage method, Short circuit current method [2],
Perturb and Observe method [3], Incremental Conductance Fig. 1. Block diagram of proposed system
method, Artificial Neural Network, Fuzzy Logic control [4].
As the algorithms became more sophisticated and complex
the accuracy also increased with the increase of hardware A. Selection of Buck Converter as DC-DC converter
implementation cost. Amongst all the algorithms Incremental We chose buck converter as DC-DC converter in our cir-
conductance and Perturb and Observe are the two most cuitry because of its easy working principle and designing.
reliable methods. Though they cannot provide as accurate Buck converter pulls down the input voltage to a lesser level.
estimation as Fuzzy logic and Neural Network based methods, In our case our panel voltage is higher than the battery voltage
their implementation cost is cheaper . so implementation of buck converter is justified. In addition, it

978-1-5090-3745-2/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE 143

Authorized licensed use limited to: NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS). Downloaded on September 26,2021 at 08:33:18 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply
 gives low noise output. With increasing frequency the output
ripple reduces [6]. Furthermore, it is easy to get feedback
and simple circuit configuration to implement [7]. Most im-
portantly, it is cheaper than other types of DC-DC converter
available that operates in high power situation. On the other
hand, buck-boost converter topology is a combination of both
buck and boost converter so it is a little bit complex. The
complexity arises because of its output polarity problem. Input
current ripple is much higher as input current is discontinuous.
It needs additional filter for reduction of harmonic component
in the current [8].After that the SEPIC converter has poor
efficiency and two inductors have to be used in a coupling Fig. 2. schematic of proposed system
configuration for reducing the input current ripple [9]. The
converter is difficult to stabilize. Complex compensation cir-
cuitry is often needed to make the converter operate properly. III. R ESULTS AND ANALYSIS
This compensation also tends to slow down the response of the
converter, which inhibits the PWM dimming capability of the IV. PANEL S PECIFICATION
converter [10]. So considering all these drawbacks we chose
to implement buck converter topology in our system. The PV panel used in the research is a 50W panel. Its
specification are as follows:
Power(max): 50 W
B. MOSFET Driver Selection Cell type & efficiency : polycrystalline
voltage at maximum power point (𝑉𝑚𝑝 ) : 17 V
As mentioned above, for supplying PWM signal to the current at maximum power point (𝐼𝑚𝑝 ): 2.78 A
buck converter a MOSFET is needed. The MOSFET needed open circuit voltage (𝑉 𝑜𝑐) : 21 V
to be turned on for the appliance of PWM to the buck short circuit current (𝐼𝑠𝑐):3.10 A
converter.That is why a MOSFET driver is required. We used
Optocoupler to use as MOSFET driver. Optocouplers are good
devices for conveying analog information across a power
A. Data Collected from IC Method
supply isolation barrier; they operate over a wide temperature
range and are often safety agency approved [11].The driver The table I shows the data obtained by implementing
will supply the current that the MOSFET will need. As we incremental conductance method .We can see that at maximum
are using buck converter, the PWM signal will be applied power point the the current is 2.78 A which is quite close to
with respect to MOSFET source. That is why the MOSFET short circuit current (Isc) 3.1 A.
driver will also provide ground isolation capability so that the
source of the MOSFET and ground are not shorted. We have TABLE I
used two Optocouplers to form the driver. The advantage VOLTAGE , C URRENT AND P OWER DATA FROM PROPOSED SYSTEM
of this driver is that it is cheap compared to available pull
Voltage at MPP(volts) Current at MPP(amps) Maximum power(watts)
up driver in the market. Its does not need additonal input 12.83 2.71 34.77
from the microcontroller other than the pwm signal.Moreover 13.12 2.77 36.34
it compensates dead time as the two MOSFETs will never 13.45 2.76 37.12
13.91 2.78 38.67
be turned on together. This decreases cost of the circuit further. 15.30 2.73 41.77
16.54 2.72 45.01
17.13 2.38 40.76
17.84 1.96 34.97
C. Protection System 18.56 1.21 22.46
18.72 1.19 22.28
For the balancing of the entire circuit we have to add
a protection part that will provide security for the entire By using Incremental Conductance algorithm we got data
circuitry as well as for the load. By putting up an additional of different day. Then we plot Voltage vs Power and Voltage
circuitry we designed the protection part. The components vs Current. We can perceive from Fig 4 that there is less
we used are a fuse and two n-channel MOSFETs. The circuit oscillation and it almost becomes stable when it proceeds
can provide protection against a) short circuit or overcurrent toward maximum power point (MPP). So it is easier to identify
condition, b) reverse polarity of battery, c) low voltage MPP. Again from Fig 3 we can understand that when current
disconnection, d) high voltage disconnection and e) LCD increases voltage also increases to reach MPP. And current
indicator for indicating charging state of battery. oscillates to its max Isc and when the battery is almost charged
then slowly current flow decreases.

144

Authorized licensed use limited to: NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS). Downloaded on September 26,2021 at 08:33:18 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply
 IC method : Voltage Vs Current P&O method: Voltage Vs Current
3.5 3.5

3 3

2.5 2.5
Current(A)

Current(A)
2 2

1.5 1.5

1 1

0.5 0.5

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
Voltage(V) Voltage(V)

Fig. 3. IV curve obtained from incremental conductance method Fig. 5. IV curve obtained from perturb and observe method

P&O method :Voltage Vs Power

40
IC method: Voltage Vs Power curve
45
35
40
30
35

Power(W)
25
30
Power(W)

20
25

20 15

15 10

10 5

5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 Voltage(V)
Voltage(V)

Fig. 6. PV curve obtained from perturb and observe method

Fig. 4. PV curve obtained from incremental conductance method
Comparison of two methods Voltage Vs Power
45
Incremental Conductance method
40
Perturb and observe method

B. Data Collected from P&O Method 35

30
Power(W)

Data collected from our system using P&O method is shown 25

in Table II. We also used Perturb & Observe algorithm to see 20

how it behaves to reach maximum power point (MPP). We 15

can easily see from Fig 6 that power oscillates frequently and 10

it increases more when it moves toward MPP. Then from Fig

5
5 we see that current also try to be stable when it try to reach
0
MPP. 0 5 10
Voltage(V)
15 20 25

Fig. 7. PV Curve plot of P&O and IC method

TABLE II
VOLTAGE , C URRENT AND P OWER DATA FROM PROPOSED SYSTEM

Voltage at MPP(volts) Current at MPP(amps) Maximum power(watts) C. Comparison Between Methods and Outcome
13.12 2.17 28.47 The Fig 7 shows the Incremental and P&O MPP shape.
13.35 2.19 29.24
14.11 2.22 31.32 From this graph we can easily say that IC is more accurate
15.19 2.25 34.18 than P&O. As P&O curve oscillates too much which creates
16.28 2.24 36.47 problem to identify MPP [12]. On the other hand IC is more
16.88 2.21 37.31
17.23 2.19 37.73
accurate and do not oscillate with the weather varying [13]. IC
18.31 2.16 39.55 is more efficient and takes less time to reach MPP and always
18.63 1.98 36.88 power remains much higher than P&O curve. From our panel
19.33 1.83 35.38 specification we know that our panel is 50 watt and 𝐼𝑠𝑐 is

145

Authorized licensed use limited to: NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS). Downloaded on September 26,2021 at 08:33:18 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply

Fig. 8. MPPT charge controller
3.1 amps. Due to implementation of MPPT we were able to
harness 45.01 W in sunny day and 22.46 W in cloudy days. In
sunny days we get 2.72 A current which is almost close to our
𝐼𝑠𝑐 . We can measure efficiency by calculating Fill Factor. Fill
Factors range from 0.5 to 0.82. The higher the value indicates
more efficient system is.
Fill Factor (FF)
R EFERENCES
[1] R. Gules, J. De Pellegrin Pacheco, H. L. Hey, and J. Imhoff, A maximum
power point tracking system with parallel connection for PV stand-alone
applications, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 7,pp. 26742683, Jul.
2008.
[2] A.Khaligh, O.C.Onar, Energy Harvesting: Solar, Wind and Ocean Energy
Conversion,CRC Press
[3] R. Mastromauro, M. Liserre, andA. DellAquila, Control Issues in Single-
Stage Photovoltaic Systems:MPPT, Current and Voltage Control,IEEE
Trans. Industrial Informatics, vol. 8, no. 2,pp. 241-254, May 2012
[4] Y.-H. Chang and C.-Y. Chang, ”A Maximum Power Point Tracking of
PV System by Scaling Fuzzy Control,” presented at International Multi
Conference of Engineers and Computer Scientists, Hong Kong, 2010
[5] Chakma, Shoilie, et al. ”Implementation of microcontroller based Maxi-
mum Power Point Tracker (MPPT) using SEPIC converter.” 2015 IEEE
International WIE Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering
(WIECON-ECE). IEEE, 2015.
[6] Hurt, D.W. (2011) Power Electronics. New York: Mcgrew-hill
[7] Rashid, M.H. (2011) Power Electronics circuits, devices and apllication.
3rd edn. Pearson
[8] Duran, E., Sidarch-de-Cardona, M. Galan, J. Andujar,J.M, ”Comparative
analysis of buck-boost converters used to obtain I-V characteristic curves
of photovoltaic modules”,Power ElectronicsSpecialists Conf. ,pp. 2036-
2042,June 2008.
[9] Patarau, T., Daraban, S.R., Petreus, D. and Etz, R. (2011) ”A Comparison
between Sepic and BuckBoost Converters Used in Maximum Power Point
Trackers”, Romania: ISSE
[10] Winder, S. (2008) Power supplies for LED driving. Oxford, United
Kingdom: Newnes (an imprint of Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd )
[11] Williams, D.A. (2009) ”Optocoupler selection for high frequency power
supplies”, (0), pp. 195. doi: 10.1109/APEC.1995.469005
[12] Md. H. Rahman, Md. T. Yeasin, and M. Alaul, ” Extreme Power Point
Tracker of a Large Photovoltaic System Battery Charge Controller &
Reducing Weather Effect ”, International Journal of scientific research
and management (IJSRM), vol. 1,Issue :3 ,pp. 132-136 ,June 2013.
[13] H. S.-H. Chung., Tse, K.K., R. Hui, S.Y.,Mok, C.M., Ho, M.T, ”A
Novel Maximum Power Point Tracking Technique for Solar Panels using
a SEPIC or Cuk Converter ”, IEEE Trans. on power electronics, vol. 18,
no. 3, pp.717-724,May 2003

= 𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥 /𝑉𝑜𝑐 𝐼𝑠𝑐

for IC method
21 × 3.1
𝐹𝐹 = = 0.69
44.91
for P&O method
21 × 3.1
𝐹𝐹 = = 0.61
39.55
from the values of Fill factors we can also conclude that
IC method is more efficient than P& O method.

V. C ONCLUSION

In the final analysis, we can say that in our proposed

system and our comparison between the two algorithms proved
that Incremental conductance method showed more promising
output than the P&O method. It has superiority in adverse
weather condition. This proposed system can be reliable
charge controller in developing country like Bangladesh where
price is also main concern besides efficiency.
146

Authorized licensed use limited to: NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS). Downloaded on September 26,2021 at 08:33:18 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply