2021 7th International Conference on Advanced Computing & Communication Systems (ICACCS)
Comparative Analysis of Different Control
strategies in Single phase Standalone Inverter
2021 7th International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Systems (ICACCS) | 978-1-6654-0521-8/20/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/ICACCS51430.2021.9441547
Nithara P V
Assistant Professor, Department of Electrical and
Electronics Engineering
CMR Institute o f Technology,
Bengaluru , India
nithara.p@cmrit.ac.in
Abstract— In this research paper the analysis between
different controllers used in standalone Single-phase Photovoltaic
(PV) inverters has been presented. Mainly 2 controllers are used
such as Proportional Integral controller (PI) and Proportional
Resonant (PR) controller. Both PI controller and PR controller
can regulate the voltage during load variation. By using PR
controller the steady state error of the system can be reduced.
The PR controller with standalone PV inverter has better
performance by comparing to the PI controller, it has shown by
using simulation results. The proposed control methods are
significant for the single phase standalone inverter to get the
desired output. The reenactment results demonstrate the
legitimacy of the proposed PR control conspires. Both simulation
and experimental results will be presented. A 3kW isolated PV
Inverter was designed and simulated for this research.
Keywords— PI controller; PR controller; Single phase
inverters; Photovoltaic.I.
I. In t r o d u c t io n
Sustainable sources are having more significance because
low carbon emission, accessibility of resources in remote
locations, low voltage ride through capability. Microgrid is a
controllable system which comprises of various distributed
generation, energy storage devices, loads, sophisticated
control, security, and energy management system. From
different varieties of DER in microgrid photovoltaic system
(PV) has more interest [1]. As interfacing DG units is not
possible directly, it needs a power electronic interfacing and a
controller to give control action over injected power and load
variation.
In this system DC/AC inverter is important part in
standalone PV system. Because to get good quality output to
the load a control action is required for the PV inverter[2],
accordingly, it is significant that the controller gives an
excellent sinusoidal yield by limiting the ripples made by
these inverters to keep away from the negative consequences
for the power quality.
To maintain the rated voltage in a single phase system
during load variation required different controllers. In this
research two controllers are compared with respect to the
transient response of the system. Controllers such as PI
controller and the PR controller are used in standalone PV
inverters. The principle expectation of this work is centered
around an examination among PI and PR controllers of an
978-1-6654-0521-8/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: San Francisco State Univ. Downloaded on July 02,2021 at 00:48:35 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Reshma P Eldho
Assistant Professor, Department of Electrical and
Electronics Engineering
CMR Institute o f Technology,
Bengaluru, India
independent Photovoltaic framework under load variety [3]. In
the first part, voltage feed forward effect is considered with PI
and PR controllers. The feed forward impact of the PR
regulator is eliminated and the PR gains are tuned to keep the
unique presentation. Likewise, the force feed forward is taken
out and the external circle PI regulator is tuned to keep up the
framework dynamic execution. The paper is finished with
simulation results, which feature the upsides of utilizing PR
regulator[4].
The design of a single phase 3kW standalone PV inverter is
presented in this paper, which includes filter and the current
control. A comparative analysis between PI and PR current
controllers used in standalone PV inverters and characteristics
of each controller has been analyzed through simulation result
also presented[5]. Figure 1given below shows a block diagram
of the standalone PV Inverter system connected to the load
through an LC filter.
Converter
Fig.1. Basic structure of standalone single phase PV inverter
The structure of the paper is given as follows: Section
II gives the detailed explanation of the system. Different types
of controller used in standalone PV inverter and its literature
review is presented in section III and simulation results given
in the section IV and section V concludes the paper.
II. De s c r ip t io n o f t h e s y s t e m
A. Single phase 4 quadrant inverter system
The output of the PV system cannot be connected
directly to the islanding load. so a DC/DC buck or boost
converter along with DC/AC inverter is required. so a
controller has a significant role to give the quality supply to
the load. In this study a 4 quadrant inverter system has been
1105
 2021 7th International Conference on Advanced Computing & Communication Systems (ICACCS)
used. The basic structure of single-stage four-quadrant inverter
is appeared in Figure 1. The topology of inverter consists of 4
MOSFET along with 4 diodes. Diode is connected with
MOSFET in antiparallel manner for reverse blocking
capability.
B. L C filter
The output of the inverter contains ripples. A LC
filter is used to filter it. Then output of the filter is connected
to the load.
C. Load
The regulated output of converter is directly
connected to the loads. Loads are mainly classified as AC and
DC load as per its nature. If load is DC in nature then
regulated input can be given directly to the load. But for an
AC load an inverter is required.
Fig.2. Basic structure of standalone PV inverter with controller
III. Co m p a r is o n b e t w e e n d if f e r e n t c o n t r o l
TECHNIQUES
Distributed generations (DG) have more significance because
less loss and reduced cost due to transmission of power
supply. Most attraction of DG is towards the photovoltaic
system. Basic structure of the standalone PV inverter is shown
in figure 2. The systems consist of DC source such as PV
panel, four quadrant inverter[6], LC filter and load. But during
the load variation the output voltage of the system will be
varied. To maintain rated voltage during load variation
controllers are required. Different control strategies have been
adopted for islanded PV inverter[7]. So, 2 types of controllers
are mainly used, such as PI controller and PR controller. Table
1 illustrates the comparison between Varity of control logic
available in the standalone PV inverters.
A. Proportional Integral (PI) controller
PI controller is an example for linear controller. Compared
to other linear controllers PI controller is more economical.
Proper tuning of parameters with the help of PI controller can
be utilized for different application such as active and reactive
power control due to frequency and voltage variation. so PI
control action is required where the fluctuation in power,
cascading outage, load variation and stochastic nature of RES
are available. The speed of PI controller depends upon integral
part of the PI controller. The control action is slowing due to
intelligent part is weak. But for fast response integral part
should be strong. But it may leads to system become stable.
PI controllers have advantages such as optimal performance,
reliable and robust. optimal performance obtained through
Authorized licensed use limited to: San Francisco State Univ. Downloaded on July 02,2021 at 00:48:35 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
tuning of gains. Demerits of PI controllers are tuning of PI
controller is difficult for nonlinear and complex structures. To
avoid this drawback self-tuning PI controller developed. A
reliable power control scheme in DC distribution system by
using PI controller proposed in [16]. Distributed control
method by using PI control for improving voltage and
frequency stability, power sharing was proposed. Robustness
and ideal execution of PID controller is gotten by utilizing
linear matrix inequality was proposed in [8].
V ref error
O fap IjQyRel
Kp
n
V loadI 7 ^
Iload
1/s
Ki
Fig.3. Block diagram o f PI controller
B. Proportional Resonant (PR) controller
This controller mainly used to fix the voltage and frequency of
microgrid. PR controller is compelling strategy to follow
reference with zero steady state error compared to another
controller[9]. Grid connected mode of microgrid suffer
frequency offset may leads current distortion and distribution
of grid voltage. So due to this effect system needs power
controller[10]. Along with this controller by cascading an
integrator, fundamental frequency harmonic compensation can
be achieved.
Y ( s ) = E ( s )* f K p + - ^ 0 (1)
V s +w J
General equation corresponds to PR controller is given by (1).
Where Y(s) is the output of the controller and E(s) is the error
between reference voltage and actual voltage[11]. Main
practical application of PR controller because of 1) Better
disturbance rejection capability 2) Improved power factor 3)
Reduction in the magnitude of gain with harmonic component
to ensure system stability in PR controller. 4) It has 2
crossover frequencies, where phase margin of practical PR can
be widened by adjusting phase crossover frequency.
Fig.4. Block diagram o f PR controller
1106
 2021 7th International Conference on Advanced Computing & Communication Systems (ICACCS)

TABLE I. Comparison between different controllers of grid connected mode microgrid

Control
M erits Dem erits
Techniques
Control structure is basic, simple to actualize, controller have Disturbances affect the control action, unbalance system
PI control minimum steady state error (0.921%) and settling time for PI suffer steady state error and tuning is difficult for higher
controller is 1.6091sec order system.
Zero steady state error, robust inner current controller improved Sensitive for frequency variety, troublesome in controlling
Proportional the performance[12], less calculation burden and difficulty in harmonics and require exact tuning.
Resonant (PR) implementation and THD of the current is 3.84%

IV. Si m u l a t io n Re s u l t s

The proposed single phase standalone inverter with

different controllers was simulated using MATLAB/ Simulink
software. Performance of different controllers have analyzed
under load variations. The 3kW standalone PV Inverter was
modeled and simulated parameters are: Switching frequency
(fs) =10 KHz, Filter capacitance (Cf) = 6.23^F and its
resistance (Rc ) =0.00420. Filter inductance (Lf) = 4.06mH and
its resistance (Rl ) =0.0010.
For PI controller, voltage controller gains are {KP,
KI}={0.03115, 21} and current controller gains is
KP=0.03115.
For PR control, voltage controller gains are {KP, Fig.7. Step responses of the PI controller
KI}={0.03115, 21} and current controller gain is {KP,
KR}={0.03115, 100}.

Fig.8. FFT analysis of THD voltage for PI controller

Fig.5. Output voltage of PI controller at 10 ohm load

Fig.6. Output voltage of PI controller at 100 ohm load

Fig.9. Output voltage of PR controller at 10 ohm load

1107

Authorized licensed use limited to: San Francisco State Univ. Downloaded on July 02,2021 at 00:48:35 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2021 7th International Conference on Advanced Computing & Communication Systems (ICACCS)

TABLE II. Characteristics of PI controller and PR controller

Specifications PI Controller PR controller

Steady state error 0 0
Settling time 0.377Sec 0.0784Sec
Rise time 0.213Sec 0.0002Sec

V. Co n c l u s io n

In this paper a single phase standalone inverter with

different controller has been presented. Based on the
comparative study described in this paper, it can be concluded
that PR controller can be used to cover the draw-back of PI
Fig.10. Output voltage of PR controller at 100 ohm load
controller. A steady-state analysis of those two controllers has
been presented in this paper. From that PR controller has good
performance than PI controller in the view of steady state error
and power quality. PR controller can provide infinite gain at
fundamental frequency and hence achieve zero steady state
error. To verify the properties and performance of the
suggested control, a simulation using MATLAB/Simulink has
been implemented.

References
[1] P. P. Padhi, “DC Microgrids : Architecture and Challenges.”
[2] A. Manoloiu, H. A. Pereira, R. Teodorescu, M. Bongiorno,
Fig. 11. Step responses of the PR controller M. Eremia, and S. R. Silva, “Comparison of PI and PR
current controllers applied on two-level VSC-HVDC
transmission system,” 2015 IEEE Eindhoven PowerTech,
PowerTech 2015, 2015, doi: 10.1109/PTC.2015.7232648.
[3] S. Essaghir, M. Benchagra, and N. El barbri, “Comparison between
PI and PR Current Controllers of a Grid- Connected Photovoltaic
System Under Load Variation,” Int. J. Power Electron. Drive
Syst., vol. 9, no. 3, p. 1311, 2018, doi: 10.11591/
ijpeds.v9.i3.pp1311-1320.
[4] D. Zammit, C. S. Staines, and M. Apap, “ 13_Comparison between
PI and PR Current Controllers,” vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 221-226, 2014.
[5] M. Hlali, I. Bahri, H. Belloumi, and F. Kourda,
“Comparative analysis of PI and PR based Current
Controllers for Grid Connected Photovoltaic Micro-
inverters,” 2019 10th Int. Renew. Energy Congr. IREC 2019, no. Irec,
pp. 1-6, 2019, doi: 10.1109/IREC.2019.8754522.
Fig.12. FFT analysis of THD voltage for PR controller [6] K. Chitra and V. S. Prakash, “Analytical comparison and
implementation of different inverter topologies for three-phase
Figure 5 and Figure 6 show that the single phase output on-line uninterruptible power supply,” Int. J. Ambient Energy, vol.
0, no. 0, pp. 1-10, 2019, doi:
voltage during load variation condition for the PI controller.
10.1080/01430750.2019.1688678.
But in the both the case the output voltage is remain same as [7] L. Liu, H. Li, Z. Wu, and Y. Zhou, “A cascaded
the reference voltage with the help of PI controller. Figure 7 photovoltaic system integrating segmented energy storages with
shows the step response of the PI controller. From the step self-regulating power allocation control and wide range reactive
power compensation,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol.
response we can understand the system is stable. From figure 26, no. 12, pp. 3545-3559, 2011, doi: 10.1109/
8 THD value of output voltage is 0.27%. The output voltage TPEL.2011.2168544.
has similar effect with PR controller during the load variations [8] M. Armin, P. N. Roy, S. K. Sarkar, and S. K. Das, “LMI-Based
from Figure 9 and figure 10. When the load is changed from Robust PID Controller Design for Voltage Control of Islanded
Microgrid,” Asian J. Control, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 2014-2025,
10 ohm to 100 ohm, the voltage remains same as reference 2018, doi: 10.1002/asjc.1710.
voltage. A step response of the PR controller is shown in [9] O. Elma and U. S. Selamogullari, “A new home energy
figure 11. And THD value obtained for PR controller is 0.27% management algorithm with voltage control in a smart home
is shown in figure 12. From the analysis it is clear that PI environment,” Energy, vol. 91, pp. 720-731, 2015, doi:
10.1016/j.energy.2015.08.094.
controller has to take 2 cycles to reach consistent state. But for [10] N. T. Quach, J. H. Ko, D. W. Kim, and E. H. Kim, “An
PR controller, it needs only one cycle to accomplish it. Also,
regulators have better throb and hostile to obstruction
capacity. So the output of the inverter with PR controller is
better than PI controller. Moreover PR controller has good
noise rejection capacity and less time delay.

1108

Authorized licensed use limited to: San Francisco State Univ. Downloaded on July 02,2021 at 00:48:35 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2021 7th International Conference on Advanced Computing & Communication Systems (ICACCS)

application of proportional-resonant controller in MMC-

HVDC system under unbalanced voltage conditions,” J.
Electr. Eng. Technol., vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 1746-1752, 2014, doi:
10.5370/JEET.2014.9.5.1746.
[11] M. Furat, “Experimental Evaluation of Sliding-Mode Control
Techniques Kaymali - Kutup Kontrol Tekniklerinin Deneysel
Degerlendirilmesi,” vol. 27, no. June, pp. 23-37, 2012.
[12] M. S. Mahmoud, N. M. Alyazidi, and M. I. Abouheaf,
“Adaptive intelligent techniques for microgrid control
systems: A survey,” Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 90, pp.
292-305, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ijepes.2017.02.008.

1109

Authorized licensed use limited to: San Francisco State Univ. Downloaded on July 02,2021 at 00:48:35 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.