3-A Comprehensive Review and Classified Comparison of MPPT Algorithms in PV Systems-21

Energy Systems
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12667-021-00427-x
REVIEW ARTICLE
A comprehensive review and classified comparison

of MPPT algorithms in PV systems
Mohammad Sarvi1 · Ahmad Azadian1
Received: 4 November 2020 / Accepted: 5 February 2021

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2021
Abstract
One of the most available energy sources in the world is solar energy, while in the
category of renewable and nonrenewable energies is in the first group. Power gen-
eration of a photovoltaic (PV) system is a technique which is possible by using solar
cells. Since photovoltaic systems cannot force solar cells to operate at MPP, a con-
troller is needed to do so. If the controller can operate more accurately, or in other
words, be optimized, the system will have an appropriate output. Many papers have
been presented on maximum power point tracking algorithms. This paper intends
to review the previous articles and provide a proper division, performance method.
This explains the performance, application, advantages and disadvantages of algo-
rithms to be a good reference for selecting the appropriate algorithm. Algorithms
in this paper are divided into four categories methods based on measurement, cal-
culation, intelligent schemes and hybrid schemes. The exhibition of new algorithms
and the optimization of previous algorithms have led to the number of articles in
this field over the years. In order to review the methods a comparative table is also
provided. Finally, a PV system has been controlled by using three algorithms P&O,
IC and Fuzzy-PI. The outputs control signals from the MPPT have been applied by
Boost and SEPIC converters, and the outputs have been compared. Simulations have
been performed in MATLAB/Simulink software.
Keywords MPPT · PV system · Intelligent algorithms · Hybrid methods
* Mohammad Sarvi
sarvi@eng.ikiu.ac.ir
Ahmad Azadian
ahmadazadian@edu.ikiu.ac.ir
1
Electrical Engineering Department, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
M. Sarvi, A. Azadian
1 Introduction
Solar energy is the most important source of energy on earth and without it,
there would be no life. All of energies that derived from the sun and the sunlight
directly can be used to generate electricity; photovoltaic system and solar ther-
mal applications are used for applications such as heating, cooling and electricity
generation [1, 2]. Due to the advancement of technology and the use of different
types of energy, it has been determined that the electrical energy produced by
using solar cells (PV systems) is one of the most valuable and effective in the
world. According to the report of International Energy Agency (IEA), during past
years the world’s energy consumption has increased a lot [2–4].
All over the world, PV power generation has been popular for some factors:
low maintenance, minimal depreciation of components because of the lack of
moving parts, low noise, lack of cost for fuel, and pollution-free operation after
installation. PV energy is clean, simple in design and their biggest advantage is
the output of microwatt to the megawatt. Applications of the photovoltaic system
include power supply, pumping water, control of buildings, home solar systems,
communications, astronautically applications (space vehicles) and for power
plants [5–7]. Given the widespread use of this energy, it is normal that annually
the demand will increase in this area as well.
Considering the physical properties of semiconductors (the main building
blocks of solar cells) and its non-linearity behavior, the maximum possible output
power can be found on the peak of the power–voltage (or power–current) curve
of solar cells. This point is called maximum power point (MPP) [8]. Due to the
special properties of the solar cell building materials, MPP varies with change
of temperature and irradiance, as shown in Fig. 1. In order to keep the operat-
ing point of the PV system always at or at least near the MPP, it is necessary to
use a maximum power point tracking (MPPT) controller. Due to the importance
and practicality of this issue, many researchers have worked in this field in recent
years [9, 10]. This increasing trend of research in this field is illustrated by the
number of papers published in reputable journals. Figure 2 shows the number of
articles published in MPPT over the past decade.
Despite numerous maximum power point tracking algorithms, there are
researches in this area that had categorized the relevant articles. Each of them has
its own category and has studied a specific topic. These review articles categorize
the performance of the algorithms and the articles that use them. In [9], MPPT
methods are divided to three general categories. Traditional, intelligent and algo-
rithms used in partial shading conditions. This paper, with more attention to the
issue of partial shading, points to the superiority of the third group methods over
others in this situation. In [10], the algorithms are divided into the categories
conventional, modified conventional, novel, modified novel, hybrid, and modi-
fied hybrid. Then, by placing the algorithms in these categories, the algorithms
are compared in different aspects. This article focuses more on the parameters
affecting the PV system, such as voltage, current, irradiance, and temperature. In
[11], the meta-heuristic algorithms that have been used as MPPT methods have
13
A comprehensive review and classified comparison of MPPT…
Fig. 1 Characteristics of a typical PV cell; a relation between VMPP vs. VOC and IMPP vs. ISC; b power–voltage curve under constant temperature; c power–voltage curve
under constant insolation
13
Fig. 2 Number of MPPT articles over past decade
been investigated. The main focus of this article is on algorithms particle swarm
optimization (PSO), cuckoo search (CS), incremental resistance (INR), and their
combination. Finally, using these three algorithms and in partial shading con-
ditions, it simulated and compared the results. The algorithms used in partial
shading conditions are reviewed in [12]. In this paper, a new classification for
MPPT algorithms is presented. This classification is applied according to the per-
formance process of the methods. After reviewing the algorithms, a method was
selected from each group and a PV system is simulated and results are analyzed.
The studied methods are compared by two power electronic converters (Boost
and SEPIC). Finally, comparative analyses are given in a table.
The rest sections of paper are organized as follows: In Sect. 2, system overview
is presented. Operation principle of a MPPT system is discussed in Sect. 3. Clas-
sification of MPPT methods are presented in Sect. 4. Simulation are performed in
Sect. 5. Discussions are expressed in Sect. 6. Finally, the conclusion is stated in
Sect. 7.
Fig. 3 Single diode circuit of

solar cell
13
2 System overview
A typical PV system consists of solar arrays, MPPT tracker (controllers and power
electronic converters) and load. Efficiency increasing in each part caused improving
the PV system. The single diode model of solar cell is illustrated in Fig. 3 [13]. With
put the solar cells next to each other, the module will be obtained. A panel consists
of connecting several modules, and an array consists of connecting several panels.
The connections between these different modes can be done in series or in parallel.
For example, a solar panel is created by connecting a series or parallel of modules.
The relationship between the voltage and current of a solar cell is defined by Eq. (1).
( q(V+I⋅RS ) ) V +I⋅R
S
I = IL − ID − ISH = IL − IO e nkT − 1 − (1)
RSH
Here q is the charge of the electron; K is the Boltzmann constant; T is the abso-
lute temperature of the P–N junction; V is diode voltage; n is an ideality factor; RS is
series resistance; and RSH is the parallel resistances; Io is the saturated reverse cur-
rent; IL is the current that obtained directly from the sun; ID is diode current; ISH is
parallel branch current and I is the cell’s current.
The presence of a DC–DC converter leads in control and adjustment of the unreg-
ulated DC voltage of PV output to optimal voltage. The advantages of presence of
a DC–DC converter include increase or decrease the dc voltage and adjusting the
output voltage according to load changes. These benefits are possible with change of
the duty cycle (D) [14]. Depending on their output voltage value, different DC–DC
converter configurations exist in literatures boost, buck, buck-boost, flyback, for-
ward, half and full bridge and etc.
3 Operation principle of a MPPT system
Photovoltaic power–voltage characteristics’ curve is presented in Fig. 1. The MPP

is created near the top of the P–V curve, or the famous knee point of the P–V curve,
where the generated PV power is maximized. As the MPP depends on solar radia-
tion (S) and temperature (T), and these environmental conditions vary randomly,
the MPP position is continuously changed. In order to ensure the operation point is
always on the maximum power point, or near it, specific circuits, called MPP track-
ers, are employed. The DC–DC also applies the controller signal and brings the out-
put to the desired level. Thus, by measuring different parameters (voltage, current or
temperature), the maximum power point tracking algorithms calculate the optimal
duty cycle (D) and deliver it to the converter to increase the power. Figure 4 shows
the overview of PV system.
As it is known, the MPP system must operate continuously in real time because the
parameters to which the system depends (temperature and radiation) change through-
out the day. Changes in the amount of radiations and temperature during the day are
13
Fig. 4 Implementation of MPPT system
perfectly normal or there may be partial shading [12]. As a result, duty cycle needs to
be updated accurately and rapidly (as appropriate).
4 Classification of MPPT algorithms
Reaching the operating point of a PV cell to MPP is an important subject in a PV

system. A large number of existing methods, may cause problems to determine the
best algorithm to adopt when implementing a PV system. The specifications of the
algorithms such as complexity, number of sensors required, digital or analog imple-
mentation, convergence speed, exact tracking ability, and cost effectiveness are dif-
ferent [14]. Various categories are proposed for MPPT algorithms [9–12]. The divi-
sion of this article is as follows:
– MPPT methods based on measurement: These methods behave assuming

measuring the cells’ parameters (voltage, current) and features of light produced
by the sun. In this category, the algorithms operate based on the calculations and
comparing the results with previous calculations or a predefined MPP parameter.
– MPPT methods based on calculation: The equation calculations of each algo-
rithm in this category can be used to determine the MPP.
– MPPT methods based on intelligent schemes: New optimization schemes
based on intelligent methods can also find MPP.
– MPPT methods based on hybrid schemes: In these methods, the combination
of traditional and intelligent algorithms is used.
4.1 MPPT methods based on measurement and comparison
4.1.1 Open‑circuit voltage (OCV) method
According to the physics of solar cells and the information obtained from its data
sheet, it can be seen that between the open-circuit voltage VOC and the maximum
voltage that can be obtained from it VMPP there is a linear relationship [15].
VMPP = kOC VOC (kOC < 1), (2)
13
Converter parameter of these two voltages is constant of proportionality (kOC).

This coefficient is obtained experimentally by measuring voltages in differ-
ent condition continuously. After calculating Eq. (2) in different periods, MPP
is found and the voltage of that point is selected as the optimal voltage. Then,
by comparing the open-circuit voltage, the proportional constant selected in that
weather condition is checked.
However, the simplicity of this algorithm will not be without problems; to
measure the voltages in each time period and in each weather condition, there is
an interruption in the process of the algorithm, which is accompanied by energy
loss and according to the description, in partial shading it is not very accurate
[16, 17].
4.1.2 Short‑circuit current (SCC) method
According to the solar cell characteristics, it can be seen that between the short-
circuit current ISC and the maximum current that can be obtained from it IMPP,
there is a linear relationship.
IMPP = KSC ISC , (KSC < 1) (3)
As stated in the OCV method, the constant of proportionality depends on the
type and technology of the PV cell. Therefore, this method has advantages and
disadvantages as described previous method. The disadvantages of the open-cir-
cuit algorithm are also stated for this algorithm [18, 19].
4.1.3 Pilot cell algorithm
This algorithm uses two previous algorithms’ processes, thus unlike them, the open-
circuit voltage VOC and short circuit current ISC are measured by another cell, named
a pilot cell, which the electrical circuit is separate from other cells in PV module.
This cell should be exactly the same in terms of specifications as other cells. Use
of pilot cell in a maximum power point tracking system is performed. One of the
advantages of this algorithm compared to the OCV and SCC methods is the pilot
cell measuring eliminates power losses caused by short circuit current and open-
circuit voltage measurements (PV array cells). The continuous interruptions that
occurred for measuring each open-circuit voltage and short circuit current in the
previous two algorithms are eliminated in this method [20]. If there is a difference
between the pilot cell and other cells, the control system will malfunction, because
the information read is various for both elements. Furthermore, if partial shading is
created and the amount of irradiances received by two elements are different, the
inaccuracy in measuring and reading the voltage occurs. Providing conditions where
the specifications of both cells are the same at all times can generate more financial
burden. To use this algorithm, the pilot cells should be selected correctly and close
to the characteristics of the photovoltaic array cells.
13
4.1.4 Temperature algorithm
According to solar cell data sheets, open-circuit voltage change is directly depend-
ing on changes in cell-surface temperature, while short-circuit current change is
directly depending on irradiance changes. Normally, the cell-surface temperature
changes are almost constant [21]. In the MPPT algorithm employing temperature
sensor (MPPT-temp), the common parameter measurement sensors are replaced
with a temperature sensor, which is often installed behind the cell screen to accurate
measure the temperature. According to the description, to use this method in order
to track MPP, the temperature and the open-circuit (VOC) of PV cell must be used.
Equation (4)
( ) ( )
VMPP (T) = VMPP Tref + kVMMP T − Tref (4)
where VMPP(T) is MPP voltage at the actual temperatures; VMPP(Tref) is maximum

power point voltage at data sheet temperature (reference); kVmpp is the temperature
coefficient of maximum power point voltage (data sheet information); T is meas-
ured temperature and Tref is reference temperature. Based on the definition, param-
eters that obtained from data sheet are VMPP(Tref), kVmpp and Tref. The voltage in MPP
(VMPP) depends only on the temperature (T) clearly. To track the exact MPP, cell-
surface temperature must be measured accurately [22, 23].
4.1.5 Look up table
In this algorithm, the specified values of voltage and current that determined in table
are compared with the measured voltage and current of the photovoltaic arrays.
These values are referring to the MPP under unpredictable climate conditions. In
this method, a simple controller (as conventional PI) regulates the duty cycle of the
converter. When the Measured parameters are in accordance with the predefined
value (IMPP, PMPP) in the table, it means that the controller has reached its destina-
tion. Any changes in weather conditions and loads can lead system interruptions,
then the controller brings the current and power to the desired values [24]. This
control algorithm requires a very large amount of storage space, because performs
assuming the data sheet information, PV modeling data and experimental data [25].
4.1.6 Load current or load voltage maximization
This controlling algorithm for MPP tracking maximizes the power received from
the PV array. The control algorithm maximizes the output power by adjusting the
duty cycle of electronic converters; this power maximization also peaks the system
output power. In contrast, maximizing the output power of the converter should also
increase the power received from the photovoltaic array, assuming a loss fewer con-
verters. Due to the Fig. 5, this is one of the categories of loads; voltage sink, current
sink, resistive and combination type [26]. Concerning Fig. 4, clearly to obtain the
MPP in output if the load is a voltage sink, the current of load (Iout) must reach its
13
Fig. 5 Load types (I) voltage

sink, (II) resistive, (III) resistive
and voltage source, (IV) current
sink [27]
maximum value and if the load is a current sink, the voltage of load (Vout), must
reach its maximum value and if other types of load are to be examined both voltage
and current (Vout or Iout) can be used. However, for other types of loads, this algo-
rithm can also be used to reach MPP, as long as the impedance characteristic is not
negative. So, if different types of loads are used, it can be said that this algorithm
can have a good performance and load voltage or current is sufficient. This is known
as an important advantage and just one sensor to measure the voltage or current is
enough. In some photovoltaic systems, batteries as the primary or backup load are
used, and a positive feedback also controlled the output power. So output current is
maximized then PV modules are operating near the MPP. In the following, it should
be noted about this algorithm that it is impossible to track the exact location of MPP
by load current or load voltage maximization method, because it does not take into
account a series of lost powers [26–28].
4.1.7 The only‑current of PV
Methods like the only current of PV, operates with measurement and comparison of
current and voltage of the PV array. However, there are algorithms like this method
that only require the current of PV arrays. [29, 30] performs nonlinear modeling of
the photovoltaic array, which is in the form of IPV = f (VPV, IPV), Eq. (5). The intro-
duction of the elements of this relationship is as follows. IPV and VPV are the PV
current and voltage; RS and RSH are the cell’s series and shunt resistors; m is junction
constant; Io is the cell reverse saturation current; and IL is cell photo current. Then,
according to equation, the current can be reset (adjusted again), which is a suitable
input for electronic power converters.
VPV + IPV RS
IPV (VPV , IPV ) = IL − Io (e(VPV +IPV RS ∕mvt ) − 1) − (5)
RSH
13
Fig. 6 Flowchart for POS algorithm
The function of this algorithm is defined by the flowchart shown in Fig. 6. The
MPP tracking procedure starts with predefined initial duty cycle and by using
this and measuring the PV current IPV(t), the power P*(t) is calculated and in the
following duty cycle increases as much as ΔD1. The PV current in next period
IPV(t + Δt) is measured and the power P*(t + Δt) is computed for the second time.
After calculating both power P*(t) and P*(t + Δt), the controller issues an order
to increase or decrease the duty cycle. It is obviously depending on the operating
point situation. This tracking of the maximum power point repeats indefinitely
until it reaches the MPP point.
13
An important advantage of POS algorithm is using the PV current only in com-

parison with direct methods, that they utilize both the V and I. It is also very suit-
able for constantly changing climatic conditions. The adaptation with any type of
DC–DC converter is another advantage of this algorithm.
4.1.8 PV output senseless control
The main application of PV output senseless (POS) algorithm is in very large photo-
voltaic systems that only use load current as the input of the control system (Fig. 7).
This control method will work better and safer than the conventional system in
large-scale PV power generation systems.
Since in very large photovoltaic systems, the load voltage drop is negligible,
the maximum power can be achieved by receiving the maximum current. Like-
wise, receiving the load maximum power means receiving maximum power from
PV arrays. As the clear, by-product of the voltage and current of load terminal, the
load power is obtained. According to the expressed topics, the load current can be
related to the output power of the arrays. Therefore, this simple control system can
be implemented with the low cost in photovoltaic power plants [31, 32]. Based on
the general trend of PV systems, increasing the duty cycle also leads to increasing
the output current as well as increasing the load current. POS control system process
can be done by duty cycle and control of PWM, which will eventually lead to a price
reduction of a control system. The larger system, obtain more efficient and better
performance of this control system, because voltage changes are very small and no
feedback is needed.
4.1.9 Perturbation and observation (P&O) method
This algorithm is one of the most common methods among researchers, which has
been widely used in industry and laboratory. To track and find the MPP, P&O is
categorized in measurement and comparison group. For each operation period, the
control system of the PV measures the photovoltaic parameters and then excites
the operating point to change direction (perturbation). When the power derivative
in terms of voltage (dPPV/dVPV = 0) is zero, it reaches the MPP. Many models have
Fig. 7 POS block diagram
13
Fig. 8 P&O algorithm flowchart
been proposed for this algorithm [33–36]. Figure 8 shows the P&O flowchart. The
method of doing this algorithm shown in the flowchart and is such that the operat-
ing voltage of the PV generator is changed. After the calculations, if the numerical
value of the power difference (ΔPPV) is positive, the amount of excitation should
increase in the same direction and if ΔPPV is negative, the amount of excitation
should increase in the opposite direction [37, 38]. Actually, operating point voltage
is increasing or decreasing. One of the main problems of P&O is that the exact time
13
of reaching the MPP cannot be determined, and it constantly oscillates around the
maximum point so, and in the same way the excitation sign is changing.
4.2 MPPT methods based on mathematics calculation
4.2.1 State‑space based MPPT method
Using state space equations, the photovoltaic system is modeled in state space, and
a maximum power point tracking operation is performed by using a nonlinear time-
varying dynamic feedback controller. To take the PV system, the system must be
modeled by the time-averaged switch. Due to maximum power delivery conditions
structural information of the system, a nonlinear dynamic feedback controller that is
varying with time is proposed. In addition, the controller can track the time-varying
MPP reference point and to reject static load disturbances. Accurate calculations
and derivatives are the main factors in Precision tracing [39, 40]. Of the advantages
of this method is its robustness and insensitivity to the change of parameters that
proven in researches. It can also accurately track MPP in the case of partial shading
and sudden weather change. Regarding all of these issues, there is still no experi-
mental confirmation.
4.2.2 dP/dV or dP/dI feedback control
This is an obvious computational method for tracking the MPP. In this method, the
slope of the power curve by voltage and current (dP/dV and dP/dI) is calculated by
using the microcontrollers or digital signal processors. Then, with a feedback loop,
the change of this parameter is checked and tends it to zero. As other algorithms and
with respect to the values of these parameters, to track MPP, the control system must
increase or decrease the duty cycle. Additionally, if variable step size is used for this
method, it can help to improve the system respond speed [41].
4.2.3 Linear reoriented coordinates method (LRCM)
This method repeatedly computes the characteristic equation of the photovoltaic array
to obtain the maximum power point, that the equations have been manipulated to
reach the MPP. According to [42] this algorithm requires the measurements of some
PV parameters such as open circuit voltage (VOC), short circuit current (ISC) and etc.
to reach the information that will be used in Linear reoriented coordinates method
(LRCM) method. Failure to reach the MPP is reported in this paper at around 0.3%,
which is a good value. The linear reoriented coordinates (LRC) algorithm uses a close
approximation around the MPP at I–V curve to track the MPP. Due to the equations of
this algorithm, the slope of the I–V curve at the MPP is the element of estimation. The
knee point of I–V curve (MPP) determines the optimal voltage (Vopt) and current (Iopt).
Then it becomes easy to calculate the maximum power (Pmax). By using this curve and
initial and final values, the linear current equation can be distinguished. If the equation
13
of photovoltaic cell characteristics is considered as follows, where b is the characteristic

I–V curve constant [42–44]:
[ ( )]
ISC V
− 1b
I(V) = −1
1−e bVOC
(6)
1−e b
According to the calculations and derivations performed from the PV output volt-
age and current, the VMPP and IMPP can be obtained. They can be used to calculate the
power of MPP.
( −1
)
VMPP = VOC + bVOC ln b − be b (7)
By placing (7) in (6), the current of MPP can be obtained. As it is clear, the MPP
power is equal to MPP voltage multiplying by MPP current.
−1
1 − b + be b
IMPP = ISC −1 (8)
1−e b
4.2.4 Sliding mode control method
Calculating the PV power derivative in terms of PV voltage can be considered as the

main procedure of this algorithm for tracking the maximum power point. According to
the Eq. (9), it can be taken that the S specifies the location of the operating point (volt-
age) relative to MPP.
dPPV d(VPV × IPV ) dI
S= = = IPV + VPV PV = 0 (9)
dVPV dVPV dVPV
Photovoltaic systems include sliding mode have two fast and slow control loops.
Voltage, current and temperature are the parameters that fast loop (sliding mode) can
use them to get close to the MPP; voltage and current are the slow loop (for example,
P&O) parameter to reduce the steady-state fault. In sliding mode controlling system,
a linear combination of voltage, current and power of PV module in state space will
be taken to sliding surface, which include MPP or near the MPP. When they reach the
sliding surface (reach to the MPP) they are kept at the same surface. Sliding mode con-
trol has two main advantages; by select the best sliding function the optimal dynamic
responds can be achieved and uncertainties will not be effective on closed-loop respond
[45, 46]. The sliding mode control law and slide surface are presented in Eqs. (10) and
(11).
𝜎 = iL − 1.45vPV − 0.455T + sref = 0 (10)
}
u = 0 , if 𝜎 < 0 → S ≥ 0
(11)
u = 0 , if 𝜎 > 0 → S < 0
13
This is how it operates; if dP/dV > 0 means that operating point is not reach the MPP
and if dP/dV < 0 means that the operating point passes the MPP [47, 48].
To implement this control system, a micro controller performs the measurement
of the PV voltage and current. Simulations and experiments indicate that MPP track-
ing operations take place within a few milliseconds, but its switching frequency is not
constant.
4.2.5 Ripple correlation control
In the photovoltaic system, the switching of the converter which is connected to the
array will generate voltage and current ripples on the photovoltaic arrays. The result of
this switching is the presence of ripple in result of voltage and current (output power) of
the system. RCC uses this generated ripple by a converter to perform maximum power
point tracking. To detect the maximum power point, using the correlation between
power and current or voltage derivatives over time is performed. MPP is obtained when
the power derivative is zero. If the voltage or current is less than the voltage or current
at MPP, it means that the operating point is to the left of MPP, so it must move to the
right (V < VMPP or I < IMPP). And in the other case if the voltage or current is higher
than the voltage or current at MPP, it means that the operating point is to the right of
MPP, so it must move to the left (V > VMPP or I > IMPP). Since the voltage and current
of an inductor can be related, it can be an easier computational method to calculate
derivatives by measure the inductor voltage. Since the inductor time constant is bigger
than converter switching period, core losses or existence of resistance (non-ideality) in
inductor have little effect [49–52].
4.2.6 Parasitic capacitance method
Depending on the system circuit, reactive parasitic components (parallel capacitor or

series inductor) may be placed in the cell’s internal circuit. The effects of these com-
ponents are examined in frequency and time domains. For a photovoltaic system,
including a maximum power tracker, these components can be considered as impor-
tant parameters [9, 53]. Parasitic capacitance method was presented by [54], and also
is similar to the IC method with the difference that a capacitor (CP) is added to the
system. This method uses a parasitic capacitor of the P–N junction in PV cells and an
inductance between the PV cells. By using this method, the reaching to MPP accu-
racy is increased and low error signal is received for the correct tracking. The distor-
tion around the MPP is also reduced. So the accuracy of the control system is high,
but due to the presence of two multiplications, it has complexities, and it is difficult to
implement.
Like other methods, this algorithm uses photovoltaic output power analysis for its
operations. With the addition of a parasitic capacitor in a PV cell circuit, the cells’ cur-
rent–voltage characteristic will change like Eq. (12).
[ ( ) ]
V + RS I dv dv
I = Ig − Io exp − 1 + C = F(v) + C (12)
q∕NS AKT dt dt
13
It is quite clear that in order to calculate the cell’s power the voltage must be multi-
plied by the current. The derivative of this equation is as follows:
( � )
dF(v) V V �� F(v)
+C + � + =0 (13)
dv V V v
Equation (13) shows instantaneous conductance, voltage ripple from parasitic

capacitance and incremental conductance. In this equation, if the value of the capacitor
is assumed zero, this method will be similar to IC algorithm. As a result, in high-power
photovoltaic systems that have a large number of parallel arrays, the efficiency of para-
sitic capacitance method also becomes maximum.
4.2.7 Incremental conductance (IC) method
The incremental conductance (IC) method operates based on differentiating the PV

power with respect to voltage. The MPP is obtained when the differentiation result of
this division is zero [55, 56]. By calculating and comparing the two fractions incremen-
tal conductance (dIPV/dVPV) and conductance (IPV/VPV), the power point in the peak of
the curve is determined.
dPPV d(VPV IPV ) dI
= = IPV + VPV PV = 0 (14)
dVPV dVPV dVPV
which implies that:

IPV dI
+ PV = 0 (15)
VPV dVPV
In other words, the incremental variations (dVPV and dIPV) can be approximated by
the increments of both parameters (ΔVPV and ΔIPV) using the measured values of VPV
and IPV at different instants. The parameters are expressed as follows:
dVPV (t2 ) ≈ ΔVPV (t2 ) = VPV (t2 ) − VPV (t1 )
(16)
dIPV (t2 ) ≈ ΔIPV (t2 ) = IPV (t2 ) − IPV (t1 )
This algorithm is based on the fact that at the moment the MPP is being reached, the
slope of the PV array power curve is zero, positive is on the left side, and negative is on
the right side of the MPP. The mathematical relations of IC are given below:
VPV ΔV
= − PV at MPP
IPV ΔIPV
VPV ΔV
< − PV left to MPP (17)
IPV ΔIPV
VPV ΔV
> − PV right to MPP
IPV ΔIPV
13
Fig. 9 The IC flowchart
The MPP can thus be tracked by comparing the instantaneous conductance term
(I/V) with the incremental conductance term (ΔI/ΔV) as shown in the flowchart of
Fig. 9. The reference voltage at which the PV module has to operate is Vref. At the
MPP, Vref equals the voltage value at the MPP. The main advantage of IC method is the
very fast adaptability under rapidly changing weather conditions. Furthermore, in this
method the oscillation around the MPP is much less than the P&O method, but when
the P&O is optimized, the efficiency of these two algorithms will be approximately the
same [57–59]. However, this algorithm requires a complex control circuit.
13
Fig. 10 Circulation chart of FL inference system
Fig. 11 Common types of

membership function of FL
controller
4.3 MPPT methods based on intelligent methods
4.3.1 Fuzzy logic control
One of the linkers between human knowledge and linguistic expressions in a control
system is fuzzy logic. A photovoltaic system that optimizes the process of maxi-
mum power point tracking by a FL is known as an intelligent system. Even if the
inputs are ambiguous, the system can track. The convenience of this algorithm in
mathematical modeling is one of the important advantages. The inference system of
fuzzy logic illustrated in circulation charts in Fig. 10. In the FL control system, the
following steps are the main operation process of this controller [60–65].
13
• Fuzzification: Fuzzification is the first step in a fuzzy control system that con-
verts the desired input (crisp) into a fuzzy variable (linguistic) according to
the system data (membership function). Triangular, Gaussian and trapezoidal
are the useful curves in Fig. 11.
• Decision-making: If the system data is vague and inaccurate, with single or
multi criteria techniques, the best option is selected. Individual, multi person,
multi objective and multi attribute are the types of decision. Fuzzy controller
behavior is determined by the rules that are a set of IF–THEN statements at
the decision making stage.
• Defuzzification: In this step, a kind of reverse of the first step occurs that the
obtained fuzzy set (linguistic) is converted into a numerical value, which gen-
erates the appropriate analog signal for drive and controlling the power elec-
tronic converter.
4.3.2 Neural network
Artificial neural networks are inspired by the function of the human brain, which
are a suitable solution for large and complex systems. The operation principles
of an ANN are that the structure of a biological neural network is modeled using
a mathematical modeling. Nerve cells are generally made up of three parts; den-
drites, cell body and axon. The signals are transmitted through the dendrites to
the cell body, and in the core of the cell operations are performed on the signal,
and at the end the signal is transmitted through the axon to the next nerve cell.
So a lot of this signal processing and signal transmission has to be done in neural
network. The basis of NN work is information-processing [66]. A large number of
these neurons receive inputs, and according to the training (weighting) processes
are performed on them, and then they will have an output. Cognitive patterns play
an important role in this procedure. The high ability of this algorithm to process
a lot of data is one of its advantages. The following four operations show the gen-
eral process of ANN algorithm:
• Select input and output variables: An appropriate variable that is effective on

respond and examine it improve the performance of the system. Variable such
as VOC, ISC, temperature, irradiance and a combination of them can be consid-
ered.
• Apply training in the system: Data is generated according to the type of system
and its specific conditions.
• Select network structure: One of the famous types of these structures is multi-
layered feedforward back propagation, that consists of input, hidden and output
layers.
• Training: The most important and sensitive step is this procedure. Gradient
descent, Newton method, conjugate gradient, Quasi Newton method, Levenberg–
Marquardt algorithm, etc. are some training methods.
13
Fig. 12 Example of neural

network
As shown in Fig. 12, the layers of neural networks consist of three parts, input,
hidden and output layers. Depending on the type of system and structure, the number
of nodes can vary. The output in this control system is a reference signal for compar-
ison, such as the duty cycle, which reaches the input of the converter switches and is
used to track MPP. Links between nodes also have their own weight [67].
For example, in Fig. 12, clearly the wij is used to show the weight between nodes,
i and j. In order to identify the exact MPP training process has been carefully per-
formed. The training and patterns included in this control system and the procedures
to be followed must be maintained because the module has been used for many
years. Since the photovoltaic modules, each had their own characteristics, to use the
ANN in PV system, this control system must be trained separately for each mod-
ule. Since the characteristics of solar cells vary with the weather (or time) changes,
the control algorithm must be periodically trained to determine the exact location of
MPP [68, 69].
Since partial shading occurs frequently and has many negative effects on the
photovoltaic system, improving system performance under these conditions is the
research of researchers, [70–72] uses these conditions to test the ANN algorithm.
4.3.3 Particle swarm optimization
The biological swarm chasing method is an artificial intelligent algorithm that works
by studying the behavior of decentralized systems [73]. This algorithm in short,
PSO is a swarm intelligence method that optimizes with a population-based evo-
lutionary algorithm. Group movement of birds and train the fishes are the meth-
ods that PSO used them. PSO is a general optimization algorithm that can solve
multi-dimensional problems. This algorithm is exchanges available information and
obtained it from respective search by using several cooperative agents. Each agent
in this optimization method is considered as a particle that follows two procedures;
best-performing particle is followed and moving toward a particle that has the best
location (found by itself). As such, each particle in PSO method, reaches or at least
approaches a desired solution. The standard PSO algorithm contains the following
equations [74, 75].
13
ui (k + 1) = I ⋅ ui (k) + 𝛽1 𝛼1 ⋅ (qbest,i − pi (k)) + 𝛽2 𝛼2 ⋅ (gbest − pi (k))

(18)
pi (k + 1) = pi (k) + ui (k + 1) , i = 1,2, … ,N
In these equations pi is the position of the ith particle; particle’s velocity is ui; k is
the count of repetitions; inertia weight is I; α1 and α2 are variables that are randomly
selected between 0 and 1; and β1 is cognitive coefficient; and β2 is social coefficient.
The variables qbest,i and gbest are for represent the best place selected by ith particle
and for represent the best place in all particles, respectively.
An important feature of PSO is the tracking of the global range of MPP, which
leads to the accurate tracking of the maximum power point in under partially shad-
ing condition. The flowchart of the basic PSO algorithm is shown in Fig. 13. The
performance of PSO based on flowchart behavior is described below [76–79]:
Step 1 is the generation of initial population of particles with random position and
velocity and its evaluation.
Step 2 is the assessment of fitness function for each particle.
Step 3 is the update best fitness values (pbest,i and gbest).
Fig. 13 Flowchart of a standard

PSO
13
Step 4 is the update the velocity and position.

Step 5 is steps 2, 3, and 4 are done again until the convergence criterion is met.
At the end of this procedure (iterations), the solution of the problem is the best
position of swarm.
4.3.4 Ant colony optimization
This algorithm in short, ACO is a probabilistic optimization method which uses

ant’s lifestyle for finding food to discover the optimal path. In fact, ants move ran-
domly in along trails to search the food. Aunt’s behavior to find food has an interest-
ing case; they mark the path by secreting a chemical pheromone from their body
so that other ants can identify the path and find food. Depending on the amount of
food, this chemical pheromone increase. The pheromone may evaporate over time,
so finding pheromone probability is more for the shortest path. This procedure is
repeated to find the optimal path. In recent years, this algorithm has been used more
frequently for solve nonlinear equations and to continuous optimization problems.
This algorithm has the three basic steps of this optimization algorithm. In the first
step, the ant finds the food place and remains pheromone; then other ants go for food
from different paths; finally, the best path is chosen [80–82].
Using this optimization method to track the MPP is as follows. In first, each ant
searches for a target in an area, then the solutions are archived randomly. In each
iteration based on the pheromone, a new solution is created, until the best path is
identified [83]. Then all ants move to the nearest desirable path. By repeating this
procedure, the ants move from the best path to the target (MPP).
4.3.5 Artificial bee colony optimization
This algorithm in short, ABC, acts according to the behavior of honey bees to find-
ing food (foraging). The goal of all bees (colony) is to find a biggest source of nec-
tar. This algorithm divided the bees onto three categories; employed bees, onlooker
bees, and scout bees. Food information is found by employed bees after search-
ing for food and delivered it to onlooker bees; and according to this procedure,
onlooker bees prefer to choose the best and highest quality source by examining all
the sources introduced by employed bees. The scout bees are the small number of
employed bees that give up their nectar to find new food sources. In a colony, the
count of employed bees and onlooker bees must be (approximate) equal [84, 85].
The standard ABC algorithm consists of four main steps. The initial role is for the
employed bees. The first step is that the employed bees move to obtain nectar that
they already had access to it. They announce the location of the nectar to other bees
using visual signs. This sign is waggle dance movements. If the new location has
more nectar than the previous one, the employed bees forget the previous location
and memorize the new one. Here, the onlooker bees move towards the position of
new nectar position. Then the scout bees leave this food source to find a new nectar
[86]. In the process of maximum power point tracking with ABC, the nectar is used
as the output power and the decision is used as a duty cycle. The main thing in this
13
Fig. 14 Flowchart of MPP tracking with ABC method
algorithm is to obtain global optimum solution with the least time. The flowchart of
MPP tracking with ABC method is shown in Fig. 14.
4.3.6 Cuckoo search algorithm
This algorithm in short CS, is one of the intelligent optimization methods that use
cuckoo birds’ parasitic reproduction strategy. The behavior of these birds is such
that in order to take care of their eggs by other birds; cuckoos lay the eggs (brood
parasitism) in other birds’ nests (host). In the incubation stage to brood over para-
sitism, there are three behavioral models; owning nests, bringing eggs to the nests
and laying in other nests. Some of these birds for increases its reproduction prob-
ability, choose bird nests that are apparently self-similar. It is also common that host
birds identify the cuckoo eggs and break them down. In some cases, they leave their
nests and build another. Suitable nest search is an important part of this algorithm.
13
Generally, finding a nest to lay eggs (host) is like finding food and randomly. Mod-
eling searching for food or desired paths by animals is possible by mathematical
equations. Lévy flight is one of the common and widely used. [87, 88]. A study [89]
shows that fruits fly (kind of bird), discover their path with using a series of direct
routes that marked by a sudden changes of direction (90°), which leads to Lévy
flight style. This path is the same as finding the nest step in the cuckoo algorithm. In
the cuckoo search algorithm, the nest search stage is modeled by this mathematical
function. The CS flowchart is shown in Fig. 15.
To track the MPP with using the cuckoo search algorithm, a method has been
proposed that describes partial shadow tracking [87, 90]. At the beginning, the sam-
ples are distributed at different points throughout the P–V curve. Among the points
of first iteration, the Y0 has the best location; that’s why the other two points (X0 and
Z0) leave their locations and move to the Y0. Then in the next iteration, the location
of Z2 is better than the others, so the other points move to this one. According to
Fig. 16, clearly the MPP is on the right side of Z 2. Lévy flight allow the local points
to pass through the best point, X and Y reach the MPP.
Fig. 15 Cuckoo search flowchart
13
Fig. 16 MPP tracking in partial shading with cuckoo search
4.3.7 Chaotic search algorithm
This word can be easily defined in one word: randomness. That’s because of the
system’s sensitivity to small changes in the initial conditions. Things to know
about chaos are that this is a nonlinear phenomenon, chaos behavior is complex,
and seemingly random, but it has an inherent regularity. Furthermore, chaotic
search important features are: sensitive, random, regular, and ergodic [91]. That’s
why the chaotic search method can be used in PV system as a controller. In the
photovoltaic system, voltage is known as the optimizable variable and power is
known as the compatibility function. For optimization with this algorithm, the
single and the multiple carrier searches are the methods. The first method (single
carrier) isn’t applicable in all cases, because to obtain the MPP it takes a long
time. Whereas if the multiple carrier searches are used, the system’s robust-
ness and efficiency will be increased. With repeated iterations, the search area
decreases and becomes zero when it reaches a certain value. Then MPP conver-
gence happens faster.
4.3.8 Other metaheuristic algorithms
As optimization problems become more complex and traditional analysis methods

do not work well, the need for more powerful tools to solve problems was felt. To
meet this, metaheuristic algorithms emerged. These algorithms with their special
operators are able to escape the local optimization and discover the global opti-
mality. The required computation time will be longer as the size of the problem
increases [92]. Usually in metaheuristic algorithms, there are two methods, accu-
rate and approximate. Accurate algorithms are able to find the optimal solution, but
they are not efficient enough in the case of hard optimization problems, and their
execution time increases exponentially according to the dimensions of the problems.
Approximate algorithms are able to find near optimal answers in a short time for dif-
ficult optimization problems [93, 94]. These algorithms are also divided into three
13
13
Table 1 Review of MPPT metaheuristic algorithms
Ref’s Metaheuristic algorithm Description Validation
[95] Improved team game optimization (TGA) Increasing the convergence speed and validated performance in Simulation and experiments
partial shading
[96] PSO meta-heuristic and finite set model predictive controller Compared with conventional P&O, increasing the convergence Simulation
(FS-MPC) speed and fewer oscillation
[97] variable steepest gradient ascent (VSGA) and salp swarm algo- Increasing the convergence speed in partial shading condition, Simulation and experiments
rithm (SSA) validated performance in partial shading, find GMPP accurately
and less oscillation
[90] Cuckoo search (CS) and golden section search (GSS) The CS finds range of MPP and GSS finds the GMPP in partial Simulation and experiments
shading condition and stability in steady state
[98] Improved chaotic and PSO (ICPSO) Compared with five methods, examined under four irradiance Simulation
level, increasing the convergence speed in partial shading con-
dition, find GMPP accurately and less oscillation
[99] Fuzzy logic for MPPT and TLBO, FFA, BBO and PSO for fuzzy Compared with conventional P&O, good performance in low and Simulation
optimization high irradiance, validated performance in transient condition
[100] P&O, PSO, DE and ACO Compared the algorithms in MPP convergence Simulation
[101] Fractional order incremental conductance (FOIC) with PSO, Compared the algorithms in MPP convergence Simulation
ACO and ALO
[102] ANN and PSO Compared the algorithms in MPP convergence at partial shading Simulation
condition
categories heuristic, metaheuristic and hyper-heuristic. Table 1 shows a number of

articles on metaheuristic method.
4.3.9 MPPT methods based on hybrid schemes
In general, by choosing the right MPP methods, the hybrid algorithms perform bet-
ter at tracking speed, tracking accuracy and finding the maximum point in the partial
shading of the individual algorithms [103]. High-precision tracking and fast con-
vergence are crucial for maximum power point tracking algorithms; for this, hybrid
algorithms are developed (combined) to optimize these features. With appropriate
combining, algorithms can take advantage of both approaches simultaneously; there-
fore, the use of hybrid methods to identify the MPP in partial shading is very com-
mon. Table 2 show some of the hybrid algorithms discussed so far in the literatures.
5 Simulation result
In this section, the performance of a PV system based on P&O, IC and Fuzzy-PI

controller with Boost and SEPIC converters is presented. A diagram of a standalone
photovoltaic system is illustrated in Fig. 17. The system is modeled by MATLAB/
Simulink. The electrical parameters of PV module used in this case are taken from
Canadian Solar Clean Power CS5T-130 and are listed in Table 3. To study the
behavior of algorithms and converters, five changes of radiation level are consid-
ered as inputs to the PV modules. The irradiance is 800 W/m2, 300 W/m2, 900 W/
m2, 400 W/m2, 1000 W/m2 and 500 W/m2 respectively. According to the MPPT
algorithm classification, P&O, IC and Fuzzy-PI have been used to track the maxi-
mum power point in this controller. Boost and SEPIC converters are used to apply
the control signal generated by the controller to the load. For better understanding
simulation and a comparative study between P&O, IC and Fuzzy-PI methods and
boost and SEPIC converters have been demonstrated, where the different aspects
of the system and parameters have been implemented using MATLAB/Simulink
model. The power that system can obtain from the PV modules with the three MPPT
algorithms and boost converter, under the conditions that mentioned until investi-
gate the performance of each MPP tracking method as well as the steady state and
dynamic response are illustrated in Figs. 18 and 19. Figure 18 shows an overview of
the output power, and Fig. 19 provide a more detailed study of the oscillation of the
algorithms. The operation performed for the boost is also run for SEPIC converter.
The PV output power of these three algorithms with SEPIC converter is shown in
Figs. 20 and 21. Figure 20 shows an overview of the output power, and Fig. 21 pro-
vide a more detailed study of the oscillation of the algorithms.
According to the simulation results and review of Figs. 18, 19, 20 and 21, among
these three algorithms (P&O, IC and Fuzzy-PI), the P&O voltage ripple is the high-
est. This voltage ripple can lead to two major defects; steady-state energy wastage
and find the local MPP. Furthermore, to examine the IC method, it can be mentioned
that this method can work much better than the other two methods in sudden climate
conditions change. However, to express its defect, we can point to the complexity of
13
Table 2 Hybrid MPPT algorithms
Hybrid Ref’s Description Advantages Disadvantages
methods (first/
13
second)
OCV/P&O [104, 105] Using the OCV (calculate VMPP) to Easy implementation, accurate, convenient Accuracy is inversely related to convergence
approaches the MPP range (Eq. 2), then convergence speed speed, offline measurements, inappropriate
uses P&O to reach the MPP accurately performance in partial shading
SCC/P&O [18, 106] Speed convergence and accuracy are Easy implementation, accurate, conveni- Accuracy is inversely proportional to
solved by SCC and P&O respectively. ent convergence speed, small step size of convergence speed, offline measurements,
After approximating the current by SCC, P&O and less power oscillation inappropriate performance in partial shad-
system goes to P&O and finds the exact ing, oscillation surround MPP
location of maximum power
CV/RCC [107] RCC doesn’t perform well when radiation Fast convergence speed, less oscillation Complex implementation, inappropriate
is changing, so it combined with CV surround MPP performance in partial shading
method to overcome this. CV is activated
in the variable irradiation mode and RCC
works in the constant irradiation mode
FLC/P&O [108, 109] FLC keeps the operation point of system Appropriate performance in partial shading Very complex implementation, requires prior
around the MPP, then determine the duty and rapid varying condition, fast conver- knowledge
cycle by comparing two sequential points gence speed
by P&O
FLC/PI [110–112] FLC performs MPPT system and PI Appropriate performance in partial Very complex implementation
controller improves the performance of shading, fast convergence speed, high
FLC by changing its coefficients (due to accuracy
climate change)
PSO/P&O [113, 114] PSO solve the problem of the fixed step Appropriate performance in partial shad- Very complex implementation
size of P&O that partial shading cause it ing, fast convergence speed, accurate
DE/PSO [115] In this simultaneously method the odd Appropriate performance in partial shad- Very complex implementation
iterations with PSO and the even itera- ing, fast convergence speed, accurate
tions with the DE are performed
Table 2 (continued)
Hybrid Ref’s Description Advantages Disadvantages
methods (first/
second)
ANN/P&O [116, 117] Using ANN, the operating point Fast convergence speed, appropriate perfor- Requires prior knowledge, training of ANN
approaches the MPP range and then mance in partial shading, high efficiency
switches to P&O to determine the exact
location
ANN/fuzzy [118, 119] Fuzzy logic uses the global MPP voltage Very high accuracy, high efficiency, appro- Complex implementation, training of ANN
that ANN is determined as a reference priate performance in partial shading
voltage to generate the duty cycle
ANN/PSO [102, 120, 121] PSO used for prediction and reduce the Fast convergence speed, high efficiency Requires prior knowledge, training of ANN,
root mean square error, main optimiza- and appropriate performance in partial complex implementation
tion and GMPP shading
ANFIS/ABC [84] ABC is tuned the ANFIS membership High efficiency Complex implementation, training of ANN
function
ACO/P&O [122] Global search is on ACO method and P&O Lower CPU usage, fast convergence speed, Complex implementation
is doing the local search high efficiency and appropriate perfor-

mance in partial shading
ABC/P&O [123] ABC identify the GMPP then P&O is Eliminates the steady state oscillations, Complex implementation
replaced to find out more accurately appropriate in partial shading, minimum
payback time and high efficiency
Bat-fuzzy [124] Fuzzy is going to optimize the bat and bat Fast convergence speed, high efficiency Complex implementation and high cost
is find the optimal value of controller and appropriate performance in partial
shading
13
Fig. 17 Block diagram of stan-

dalone PV system
Table 3 Parameters of PV Parameter Description Value

source
PMAX Maximum power 130 (W)
VOC Open circuit voltage 36.3 (V)
ISC Short circuit current 4.82 (A)
VMPP Voltage at maximum power point 29.2 (V)
IMPP Current at maximum power point 4.45 (A)
NS Series connected modules per string 1
NP Parallel strings 1
RS Series resistance 1.0362 (Ω)
nVocT Temperature co-efficient of V
OC − 0.35 (%/°C)
nIscT Temperature co-efficient of I SC 0.06 (%/°C)
Fig. 18 Comparison of PV output power with P&O, IC and Fuzzy-PI method and boost converter
13
Fig. 19 Close view of Fig. 18
Fig. 20 Comparison of PV output power with P&O, IC and Fuzzy-PI method and SEPIC converter
its implementation. This complexity is the result of more computation and difficulty
of implementation of IC. Since the P&O algorithm can be improved by resizing the
perturbation step of conventional P&O, but the oscillations near the MPP of the
IC algorithm are still less. The performance of conventional P&O and IC method
depends on the step size which changes voltage size. So these algorithms have an
optimal step size selection problem.
MPPT control applied the PI controller, and the fuzzy controller is difficult to
expect satisfactory MPPT control performance due to the fixed gain of PI control
and the cumulative error by integral calculus of fuzzy control. Therefore, Fuzzy-PI
method proposed, which is compensated a cumulative error of the fuzzy control by
13
Fig. 21 Close view of Fig. 20
the PI control and a problem of the PI control that is weakened by an operating con-
dition changing is complementary by the fuzzy control through series connection of
fuzzy and PI control. The Fuzzy-PI MPPT controller analyzes characteristics about
radiation changing. In steady-state fault and also MPPT tracking speed, the MPPT
control performance of Fuzzy-PI controller indicated more excellent than perfor-
mance of perturbation and observation and incremental conductance.
6 Discussion
In the past years, MPPT studies have grown significant growth due to their use in
many subjects. Many articles on MPPT techniques were reviewed in this paper.
Therefore, clearly choosing the best algorithm will be difficult. Depending on the
application and the specification of each algorithm, the desired algorithm can be
selected. Table 4 provides a summary of the methods specifications required by
users to use them in the PV systems. Another parameter with which MPPT algo-
rithms can be compared and not listed in the table, is the cost of designing the con-
trollers. In general, controllers use different devices depending on the application
and their sensitivity, which can change the total cost of the controller. But to com-
pare the cost of designing and implementing MPPT algorithms it can be pointed out
that whatever, the calculation and implementation are complex, the cost will also
increase. According to the classification made in this article, the cost of algorithms
designing and implementing is increased from the first to the fourth category.
The number of articles that have specifically researched the subject of each of
the four categories (methods based on measurement, calculation, intelligent schemes
and hybrid schemes) are shown in Fig. 22. This is according to the general statistics
of the number of articles in the last decade that were presented in the introduction
and the classification of MPPT algorithms by this paper. This is a statistic of articles
13
Table 4 MPPT algorithm comparisons
# MPPT technique Sensor Tracking speed Previous informa- Complexity Alternative MPP converge Robustness
tion/training tuning
1 Open-circuit voltage V Medium Yes Low Yes Yes No

2 Short-circuit current C Medium Yes Medium Yes Yes No
3 Pilot cell V/C Medium No Medium Yes Yes No
4 Temperature algorithm V Medium No High Yes Yes No
5 Look-up table I/T Medium Yes Medium Yes Yes No
6 V or I maximization V/C Slow No Low No No Yes
7 The only-current PV C Slow No Medium No Yes No
8 PV output senseless C Slow No Medium No Yes No
9 Perturb and observe (P&O) V/C Varies No Low No Yes Yes
10 State space based V/C Slow No High Yes Yes No
11 dP/dV or dP/dI feedback V/C Slow No Medium No Yes No
12 Linear reoriented coordinate V/C Slow No High No No No

13 Sliding mode control V/C Fast No Medium No Yes Yes
14 Ripple correlation V/C Slow No High No Yes Yes
15 Parasitic capacitance V/C Medium No High No Yes Yes
16 Incremental Conductance (IC) V/C Fast No High No Yes Yes
17 Fuzzy logic control V/C Fast Yes High Yes Yes Yes
18 Neural network V/C Fast Yes High Yes Yes Yes
19 Particle swarm optimization V/C Fast No High Yes Yes Yes
20 Ant colony optimization PV char Fast No High No Yes Yes
21 Artificial bee colony PV char Fast No High No Yes Yes
22 Cuckoo search method PV char Fast Yes High Yes Yes Yes
23 Chaotic search method PV char Fast No High Yes Yes Yes
13
Fig. 22 Investigation areas for MPPT algorithms according to this article category
that specially examine an algorithm, not review or comparison articles. Due to this
chart and studies, it has been determined that researchers have paid attention to intel-
ligent and hybrid algorithms in recent years. Since traditional algorithms have prob-
lems, and the issue of partial shading is an inseparable part of the MPPT system,
researchers in this field turned to addressing these barriers. Intelligent algorithms in
any field that have been introduced, have been able to bring about extensive changes.
Furthermore, by combining algorithms, the advantages of both methods can be used
and the disadvantages of each can be covered.
Another parameter to consider about MPPT control systems is the implementa-
tion and their challenges. As it is important to increase system efficiency by intro-
ducing new methods and improving previous algorithms, easy implementation is
also important. High cost, design complexity, the presence of additional hardware
and finally the complexities of implementation are some of the factors that should
be considered. Traditional algorithms such as P&O can be classified as methods
that are not very complex to design and implement. However, presenting intelligent
methods also brought challenges. Using these methods adds additional hardware to
the control system that increase the cost of the entire system. The design of these
algorithms also has complexities. For example, designing fuzzy rules or neural net-
work training can be considered as design complexities. Existence of additional
hardware for implementation, design complexity and increasing implementation
costs are some of the challenges that the control system faces for a real world.
7 Conclusion
The use of solar energy as an efficient energy not only reduces the use of fossil fuels
but also has economic benefits. Providing different solutions to eliminate the prob-
lems of energy production can help the technology to progress faster. Photovoltaic
systems, a new technology that will become an increasingly popular option in the
13
future and can help eliminate conventional power generation systems pollution. The
output power of PV systems reaches its maximum value with the use of the MPP
tracker system. This paper reviews MPPT algorithms’ articles. First, by presenting
a new classification, proposes four general categories for tracking algorithms; meth-
ods based on measurement, methods based on calculation, methods based on intel-
ligent schemes and methods based on hybrid schemes. According to studies in this
field, it has been observed that research in the field of MPPT control system is very
attractive. An investigation area of method and a table are also provided for com-
parison. It is still possible to increase the speed, accuracy and flexibility of MPPT
control systems in different condition by introducing new methods, optimizing pre-
vious schemes and combining methods. Finally, a PV system was investigated using
three algorithms P&O and IC and Fuzzy-PI, and two Boost and SEPIC converters.
System response time, tracking accuracy, and steady-state oscillations were the ele-
ments investigated in this control system, which fuzzy-PI algorithm and SEPIC con-
verter had better results than other one.
One thing that can be mentioned is that the studies of traditional algorithms have
been done well, and their advantages and disadvantages have been mentioned in
many articles. In the last few years, intelligent algorithms have grown significantly,
and their use in the MPPT control system can be seen well. However, there are still
disadvantages, low usage and computational complexity. Introducing new intelligent
control methods and optimizing each of them are the topics that has been explored
and have the potential for improvement. Additionally, the combination of algorithms
and the use of metaheuristic method can be added to it, to increase the efficiency of
the system. The application of these methods in partial shading conditions are also
should be considered.
Another issue to consider is the use of new high gain DC–DC converters in the
MPPT control system. Since power electronics science is constantly developing and
many high-gain converters have been introduced, these converters can also be used
in the control system. The practicality of using these converters and the impact on
the efficiency of the whole PV system are the new issues in this field.
References
1. Ahmadi, M.H., et al.: Evaluation of electrical efficiency of photovoltaic thermal solar collector.
Eng. Appl. Comput. Fluid Mech. 14(1), 545–565 (2020)
2. Ahmadi, M.H., et al.: Solar power technology for electricity generation: a critical review. Energy
Sci. Eng. 6(5), 340–361 (2018)
3. Pandey, A.K., et al.: Recent advances in solar photovoltaic systems for emerging trends and
advanced applications. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 53, 859–884 (2016)
4. Akbar, M., Pourfayaz, F., Ahmadi, M.H.: Design of a cost-effective wind/photovoltaic/hydrogen
energy system for supplying a desalination unit by a heuristic approach. Sol. Energy 139, 666–675
(2016)
5. Belhaouas, N., et al.: PV array power output maximization under partial shading using new shifted
PV array arrangements. Appl. Energy 187, 326–337 (2017)
6. Liu, J., et al.: Global MPPT algorithm with coordinated control of PSO and INC for rooftop PV
array. J. Eng. 2017(13), 778–782 (2017)
7. Khatibi, A., Razi Astaraei, F., Ahmadi, M.H.: Generation and combination of the solar cells: a cur-
rent model review. Energy Sci. Eng. 7(2), 305–322 (2019)
13
8. Li, X., et al.: Comprehensive studies on operational principles for maximum power point tracking
in photovoltaic systems. IEEE Access 7, 121407–121420 (2019)
9. Mao, M., et al.: Classification and summarization of solar photovoltaic MPPT techniques: a review
based on traditional and intelligent control strategies. Energy Rep. 6, 1312–1327 (2020)
10. Hanzaei, S.H., Gorji, S.A., Ektesabi, M.: A scheme-based review of MPPT techniques with respect
to input variables including solar irradiance and PV arrays’ temperature. IEEE Access 8, 182229–
182239 (2020)
11. Rezk, H., Fathy, A., Abdelaziz, A.Y.: A comparison of different global MPPT techniques based on
meta-heuristic algorithms for photovoltaic system subjected to partial shading conditions. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 74, 377–386 (2017)
12. Mohapatra, A., et al.: A review on MPPT techniques of PV system under partial shading condition.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 80, 854–867 (2017)
13. Mehta, H.K., et al.: Accurate expressions for single-diode-model solar cell parameterization. IEEE
J. Photovolt. 9(3), 803–810 (2019)
14. Jeong, H., et al.: Review of differential power processing converter techniques for photovoltaic
applications. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 34(1), 351–360 (2018)
15. Montecucco, A., Knox, A.R.: Maximum power point tracking converter based on the open-circuit
voltage method for thermoelectric generators. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 30(2), 828–839 (2014)
16. Liu, Z., Hsu, Y.-P., Hella, M.M.: A thermal/RF hybrid energy harvesting system with rectifying-
combination and improved fractional-OCV MPPT method. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I Regul.
Pap. 67(10), 3352–3363 (2020)
17. Balato, M., et al.: Optimization of both perturb & observe and open circuit voltage MPPT tech-
niques for resonant piezoelectric vibration harvesters feeding bridge rectifiers. Sens. Actuators A
Phys. 278, 85–97 (2018)
18. Sher, H.A., et al.: A new sensorless hybrid MPPT algorithm based on fractional short-circuit cur-
rent measurement and P&O MPPT. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 6(4), 1426–1434 (2015)
19. Vijayakumari, A.: A non-iterative MPPT of PV array with online measured short circuit and open
circuit quantities. J. King Saud Univ. Eng. Sci. 33(3), 176–185 (2021)
20. Ziouh, A., Abbou, A.: Comparative study of fuzzy logic, ripple correlation control and pilot cell
methods for maximum power point tracking. In: 2016 International conference on electrical sci-
ences and technologies in Maghreb (CISTEM). IEEE (2016)
21. Vicente, E.M., Moreno, R.L., Ribeiro, E.R.: MPPT technique based on current and temperature
measurements. Int. J. Photoenergy 2015, 242745 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/242745
22. da Rocha, N.M.M., Martins, D.C., Passos, J.C.: MPPT method based on temperature control of
the photovoltaic cells. In: 2016 12th IEEE international conference on industry applications
(INDUSCON). IEEE (2016)
23. Madhavadas, M., Thomas, V.C.: FOCV based MPPT control for PV, and sine reference-feedback
oriented control for single phase grid tied solar inverter. In: 2018 Second international conference
on inventive communication and computational technologies (ICICCT). IEEE (2018)
24. Öztürk, S., Çadırcı, I.: A generalized and flexible control scheme for photovoltaic grid-tie microin-
verters. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 54(1), 505–516 (2017)
25. Aref, M., et al.; Microcontroller look-up table of digital control MPPT of PV system. In: 2018
IEEE 59th international scientific conference on power and electrical engineering of Riga Techni-
cal University (RTUCON). IEEE (2018)
26. Zhang, L., et al.: A maximum power point tracking algorithm of load current maximization-pertur-
bation and observation method with variable step size. Symmetry 12(2), 244 (2020)
27. Ramli, N., Walker, S.: Power maximization using multiple step, load-side, current-mode sensing.
In: 2015 3rd International renewable and sustainable energy conference (IRSEC). IEEE (2015)
28. Husain, M.A., et al.: Comparative assessment of maximum power point tracking procedures for
photovoltaic systems. Green Energy Environ. 2(1), 5–17 (2017)
29. Patel, H., Agarwal, V.: MPPT scheme for a PV-fed single-phase single-stage grid-connected
inverter operating in CCM with only one current sensor. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 24(1), 256–
263 (2009)
30. Das, D., et al.: Luenberger observer based current estimated boost converter for PV maximum
power extraction—a current sensorless approach. IEEE J. Photovolt. 9(1), 278–286 (2018)
31. Li, S.: A MPPT speed optimization strategy for photovolatic system using VWP interval based on
weather forecast. Optik 192, 162958 (2019)
13
32. Kebede, A.B., Worku, G.B.: Comprehensive review and performance evaluation of maximum
power point tracking algorithms for photovoltaic system. Glob. Energy Interconnect. 3(4), 398–412
(2020)
33. Ahmed, J., Salam, Z.: A modified P&O maximum power point tracking method with reduced
steady-state oscillation and improved tracking efficiency. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 7(4), 1506–
1515 (2016)
34. Kwan, T.H., Wu, X.: High performance P&O based lock-on mechanism MPPT algorithm with
smooth tracking. Sol. Energy 155, 816–828 (2017)
35. Bhattacharyya, S., et al.: Steady output and fast tracking MPPT (SOFT MPPT) for P&O and InC
algorithms. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 12(1), 293–302 (2021)
36. Li, S., et al.: A variable-weather-parameter MPPT method based on a defined characteristic resist-
ance of photovoltaic cell. Sol. Energy 199, 673–684 (2020)
37. Javed, M.Y., et al.: A novel MPPT design using generalized pattern search for partial shading.
Energy Build. 133, 59–69 (2016)
38. Ahmed, J., Salam, Z.: An enhanced adaptive P&O MPPT for fast and efficient tracking under vary-
ing environmental conditions. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 9(3), 1487–1496 (2018)
39. Batzelis, E.I., et al.: A state-space dynamic model for photovoltaic systems with full ancillary ser-
vices support. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 10(3), 1399–1409 (2018)
40. Batzelis, E.I., Anagnostou, G., Pal, B.C.: A state-space representation of irradiance-driven dynam-
ics in two-stage photovoltaic systems. IEEE J. Photovolt. 8(4), 1119–1124 (2018)
41. Rana, K.P.S., et al.: A novel dPdI feedback based control scheme using GWO tuned PID controller
for efficient MPPT of PEM fuel cell. ISA Trans. 93, 312–324 (2019)
42. Bouchakour, S., et al.: Evaluation of the PV energy production after 12-years of operating. In: AIP
conference proceedings, vol. 1968, no. 1. AIP Publishing LLC (2018)
43. Guerrero-Cabarcas, G.D., et al.: The integral mean value method approach to obtaining the optimal
operating conditions of a photovoltaic system. In: 2019 IEEE power and energy conference at Illi-
nois (PECI). IEEE (2019)
44. Bouchakour, S., et al.: Direct power control of grid connected photovoltaic system with linear reor-
iented coordinate method as maximum power point tracking algorithm. Rev. Roum. Sci. Techn.
Électrotechn. et Énerg 59(1), 57–66 (2014)
45. Pradhan, R., Subudhi, B.: Double integral sliding mode MPPT control of a photovoltaic system.
IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 24(1), 285–292 (2015)
46. Vázquez, N., et al.: Maximum power point tracking based on sliding mode control. Int. J. Photoen-
ergy 2015, 380684 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/380684
47. Meng, Z., et al.: Sliding-mode control based on index control law for MPPT in photovoltaic sys-
tems. CES Trans. Electr. Mach. Syst. 2(3), 303–311 (2018)
48. Karabacak, M.: A new perturb and observe based higher order sliding mode MPPT control of wind
turbines eliminating the rotor inertial effect. Renew. Energy 133, 807–827 (2019)
49. Srinivas, C.L.S., Sreeraj, E.S.: A maximum power point tracking technique based on ripple cor-
relation control for single phase photovoltaic system with fuzzy logic controller. Energy Proc. 90,
69–77 (2016)
50. Costabeber, A., Carraro, M., Zigliotto, M.: Convergence analysis and tuning of a sliding-mode rip-
ple-correlation MPPT. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 30(2), 696–706 (2014)
51. Hammami, M., Grandi, G.: A single-phase multilevel PV generation system with an improved rip-
ple correlation control MPPT algorithm. Energies 10(12), 2037 (2017)
52. Shim, M., et al.: Fully integrated low-power energy harvesting system with simplified ripple cor-
relation control for system-on-a-chip applications. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 34(5), 4353–4361
(2018)
53. Venkatramanan, D., John, V.: Dynamic modeling and analysis of buck converter based solar PV
charge controller for improved MPPT performance. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 55(6), 6234–6246
(2019)
54. Spiazzi, G., Buso, S., Mattavelli, P.: Analysis of MPPT algorithms for photovoltaic panels based on
ripple correlation techniques in presence of parasitic components. In: 2009 Brazilian power elec-
tronics conference. IEEE (2009)
55. Tey, K.S., Mekhilef, S.: Modified incremental conductance algorithm for photovoltaic system
under partial shading conditions and load variation. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 61(10), 5384–5392
(2014)
13
56. Alsumiri, M.: Residual incremental conductance based nonparametric MPPT control for solar pho-
tovoltaic energy conversion system. IEEE Access 7, 87901–87906 (2019)
57. Kumar, N., et al.: Self-adaptive incremental conductance algorithm for swift and ripple-free maxi-
mum power harvesting from PV array. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 14(5), 2031–2041 (2017)
58. Necaibia, S., et al.: Enhanced auto-scaling incremental conductance MPPT method, implemented
on low-cost microcontroller and SEPIC converter. Sol. Energy 180, 152–168 (2019)
59. Shahid, H., et al.: Implementation of the novel temperature controller and incremental conductance
MPPT algorithm for indoor photovoltaic system. Sol. Energy 163, 235–242 (2018)
60. Tang, S., et al.: An enhanced MPPT method combining fractional-order and fuzzy logic control.
IEEE J. Photovolt. 7(2), 640–650 (2017)
61. Li, X., et al.: A novel beta parameter based fuzzy-logic controller for photovoltaic MPPT applica-
tion. Renew. Energy 130, 416–427 (2019)
62. Rakhshan, M., et al.: Maximum power point tracking control of photovoltaic systems: a polynomial
fuzzy model-based approach. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power Electron. 6(1), 292–299 (2017)
63. Jouda, A., et al.: Optimization of scaling factors of fuzzy–MPPT controller for stand-alone photo-
voltaic system by particle swarm optimization. Energy Proc. 111, 954–963 (2017)
64. Rezk, H., et al.: Design and hardware implementation of new adaptive fuzzy logic-based MPPT
control method for photovoltaic applications. IEEE Access 7, 106427–106438 (2019)
65. Corcau, J.I., Dinca, L.: Modeling and analysis of a fuzzy type MPPT algorithm. In: 2019 Interna-
tional conference on electrical drives & power electronics (EDPE). IEEE (2019)
66. Chen, L., Wang, X.: Enhanced MPPT method based on ANN-assisted sequential Monte-Carlo and
quickest change detection. IET Smart Grid 2(4), 635–644 (2019)
67. Harrag, A., Messalti, S.: IC-based variable step size neuro-fuzzy MPPT improving PV system per-
formances. Energy Proc. 157, 362–374 (2019)
68. Bouselham, L., et al.: A new MPPT-based ANN for photovoltaic system under partial shading con-
ditions. Energy Proc. 111, 924–933 (2017)
69. Reddy, K.J., Sudhakar, N.: High voltage gain interleaved boost converter with neural network
based MPPT controller for fuel cell based electric vehicle applications. IEEE Access 6, 3899–3908
(2018)
70. Messalti, S., Harrag, A., Loukriz, A.: A new variable step size neural networks MPPT controller:
review simulation, hardware implementation. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 68, 221–233 (2017)
71. Divyasharon, R., Narmatha Banu, R., Devaraj, D.: Artificial neural network based MPPT with
CUK converter topology for PV systems under varying climatic conditions. In: 2019 IEEE interna-
tional conference on intelligent techniques in control, optimization and signal processing (INCOS).
IEEE (2019)
72. Zhang, W., et al.: A modified hybrid maximum power point tracking method for photovoltaic
arrays under partially shading condition. IEEE Access 7, 160091–160100 (2019)
73. Mirza, A.F., et al.: A salp-swarm optimization based MPPT technique for harvesting maximum
energy from PV systems under partial shading conditions. Energy Convers. Manag. 209, 112625
(2020)
74. Gavhane, P.S., et al.: EL-PSO based MPPT for solar PV under partial shaded condition. Energy
Proc. 117, 1047–1053 (2017)
75. Sarvi, M., Ahmadi, S., Abdi, S.: A PSO-based maximum power point tracking for photovoltaic
systems under environmental and partially shaded conditions. Prog. Photovol. Res. Appl. 23(2),
201–214 (2015)
76. Ibrahim, A.-W., et al.: PV maximum power-point tracking using modified particle swarm optimiza-
tion under partial shading conditions. Chin. J. Electr. Eng. 6(4), 106–121 (2020)
77. Li, H., et al.: An overall distribution particle swarm optimization MPPT algorithm for photovoltaic
system under partial shading. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 66(1), 265–275 (2018)
78. Xu, L., et al.: Improved particle swarm optimization (PSO)-based MPPT method for PV string
under partially shading and uniform irradiance condition. In: 2020 Asia energy and electrical engi-
neering symposium (AEEES). IEEE (2020)
79. Shi, J., et al.: MPPT for PV systems based on a dormant PSO algorithm. Electr. Power Syst. Res.
123, 100–107 (2015)
80. Titri, S., et al.: A new MPPT controller based on the Ant colony optimization algorithm for Photo-
voltaic systems under partial shading conditions. Appl. Soft Comput. 58, 465–479 (2017)
81. Mokhtari, Y., Rekioua, D.: High performance of maximum power point tracking using ant colony
algorithm in wind turbine. Renew. Energy 126, 1055–1063 (2018)
13
82. Sahoo, S.K., et al.: Maximum power point tracking for PV panels using ant colony optimization.
In: 2017 Innovations in power and advanced computing technologies (i-PACT). IEEE (2017)
83. Jiang, L.L., Maskell, D.L., Patra, J.C.: A novel ant colony optimization-based maximum power
point tracking for photovoltaic systems under partially shaded conditions. Energy Build. 58, 227–
236 (2013)
84. Padmanaban, S., et al.: A hybrid ANFIS-ABC based MPPT controller for PV system with anti-
islanding grid protection: experimental realization. IEEE Access 7, 103377–103389 (2019)
85. soufyane Benyoucef, A., et al.: Artificial bee colony based algorithm for maximum power point
tracking (MPPT) for PV systems operating under partial shaded conditions. Appl. Soft Comput.
32, 38–48 (2015)
86. Li, N., et al.: Maximum power point tracking control based on modified ABC algorithm for shaded
PV system. In: 2019 AEIT international conference of electrical and electronic technologies for
automotive (AEIT AUTOMOTIVE). IEEE (2019)
87. Ahmed, J., Salam, Z.: A maximum power point tracking (MPPT) for PV system using cuckoo
search with partial shading capability. Appl. Energy 119, 118–130 (2014)
88. Mosaad, M.I., et al.: Maximum power point tracking of PV system based cuckoo search algorithm;
review and comparison. Energy Proc. 162, 117–126 (2019)
89. Reynolds, A.M., Frye, M.A.: Free-flight odor tracking in Drosophila is consistent with an optimal
intermittent scale-free search. PLoS ONE 2(4), e354 (2007)
90. Nugraha, D.A., Lian, K.-L.: A novel MPPT method based on cuckoo search algorithm and golden
section search algorithm for partially shaded PV system. Can. J. Electr. Comput. Eng. 42(3), 173–
182 (2019)
91. Zhou, L., et al.: New approach for MPPT control of photovoltaic system with mutative-scale dual-
carrier chaotic search. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 26(4), 1038–1048 (2010)
92. Blum, C., et al.: Hybrid metaheuristics in combinatorial optimization: a survey. Appl. Soft Com-
put. 11(6), 4135–4151 (2011)
93. Jamadi, M., Merrikh-Bayat, F., Bigdeli, M.: Very accurate parameter estimation of single-and dou-
ble-diode solar cell models using a modified artificial bee colony algorithm. Int. J. Energy Environ.
Eng. 7(1), 13–25 (2016)
94. Sharifzadeh, H., Amjady, N.: A review of metaheuristic algorithms in optimization. J. Model. Eng.
12(38), 27–43 (2014)
95. Shams, I., Saad, M., Soon, T.K.: Improved team game optimization algorithm based solar MPPT
with fast convergence speed and fast response to load variations. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. (2020).
https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2020.3001798
96. Meddour, S., et al.: A novel approach for PV system based on metaheuristic algorithm connected
to the grid using FS-MPC controller. Energy Proc. 162, 57–66 (2019)
97. Behera, M.K., Saikia, L.C.: A new combined extreme learning machine variable steepest gradient
ascent MPPT for PV system based on optimized PI-FOI cascade controller under uniform and par-
tial shading conditions. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 42, 100859 (2020)
98. Pal, R.S., Mukherjee, V.: Metaheuristic based comparative MPPT methods for photovoltaic tech-
nology under partial shading condition. Energy 212, 118592 (2020)
99. Farajdadian, S., Hassan Hosseini, S.M.: Optimization of fuzzy-based MPPT controller via metaheuristic
techniques for stand-alone PV systems. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 44(47), 25457–25472 (2019)
100. Khanam, N., Khan, B.H., Imtiaz, T.: Maximum power extraction of solar PV system using meta-
heuristic MPPT techniques: a comparative study. In: 2019 International conference on electrical,
electronics and computer engineering (UPCON). IEEE (2019)
101. Ammar, H.H., et al.: Metaheuristic optimization of fractional order incremental conductance (FO-
INC) maximum power point tracking (MPPT). Complexity 2019, 7687891 (2019). https://doi.org/
10.1155/2019/7687891
102. Farayola, A.M., Sun, Y., Ali, A.: ANN-PSO optimization of PV systems under different weather
conditions. In: 2018 7th International conference on renewable energy research and applications
(ICRERA). IEEE (2018)
103. Al-Soeidat, M.R., Cembrano, A., Lu, D.D.: Comparing effectiveness of hybrid mppt algorithms
under partial shading conditions. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on power system technol-
ogy (POWERCON). IEEE (2016)
104. Baimel, D., et al.: Novel optimized method for maximum power point tracking in PV systems using
fractional open circuit voltage technique. In: 2016 International symposium on power electronics,
electrical drives, automation and motion (SPEEDAM). IEEE (2016)
13
105. Bharath, K.R.: A novel sensorless hybrid MPPT method based on FOCV measurement and P&O
MPPT technique for solar PV applications. In: 2019 International conference on advances in com-
puting and communication engineering (ICACCE). IEEE (2019)
106. Sher, H.A., Murtaza, A.F., Al-Haddad, K.: A hybrid maximum power point tracking method for
photovoltaic applications with reduced offline measurements. In: 2017 IEEE international confer-
ence on industrial technology (ICIT). IEEE (2017)
107. Hammami, M., Grandi, G., Rudan, M.: An improved MPPT algorithm based on hybrid RCC
scheme for single-phase PV systems. In: IECON 2016-42nd annual conference of the IEEE indus-
trial electronics society. IEEE (2016)
108. Haji, D., Genc, N.: Fuzzy and P&O based MPPT controllers under different conditions. In: 2018
7th International conference on renewable energy research and applications (ICRERA). IEEE
(2018)
109. Kumar, R., Kumar, B., Swaroop, D.: Fuzzy logic based improved P&O MPPT technique for partial
shading conditions. In: 2018 international conference on computing, power and communication
technologies (GUCON). IEEE (2018)
110. Jin, Y., Wang, H., Wang, C.: Maximum power point tracking of photovoltaic system based on
fuzzy-PI combined controller. In: 2017 Chinese automation congress (CAC). IEEE (2017)
111. Cheng, Z.P., et al.: Coordinated control of independent DC micro-grid based on fuzzy-PI algo-
rithm. J. Eng. 2019(16), 1107–1111 (2019)
112. Kharchouf, I., et al.: Comparative study of MPPT and pitch angle using PI and fuzzy logic con-
trollers. In: 2018 6th International renewable and sustainable energy conference (IRSEC). IEEE
(2018)
113. Yang, Z., et al.: Analysis of improved PSO and perturb & observe global MPPT algorithm for
PV array under partial shading condition. In: 2017 29th Chinese control and decision conference
(CCDC). IEEE (2017)
114. Chaieb, H., Sakly, A.: Comparison between P&O and PSO methods based MPPT algorithm for
photovoltaic systems. In: 2015 16th International conference on sciences and techniques of auto-
matic control and computer engineering (STA). IEEE (2015)
115. Seyedmahmoudian, M., et al.: Simulation and hardware implementation of new maximum power
point tracking technique for partially shaded PV system using hybrid DEPSO method.". IEEE
Trans. Sustain. Energy 6(3), 850–862 (2015)
116. Çelik, Ö., Teke, A.: A hybrid MPPT method for grid connected photovoltaic systems under rapidly
changing atmospheric conditions. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 152, 194–210 (2017)
117. Khanaki, R., Radzi, M.A.M., Marhaban, M.H.: Comparison of ANN and P&O MPPT methods for
PV applications under changing solar irradiation. In: 2013 IEEE conference on clean energy and
technology (CEAT). IEEE (2013)
118. Karatepe, E., Hiyama, T.: Artificial neural network-polar coordinated fuzzy controller based maxi-
mum power point tracking control under partially shaded conditions. IET Renew. Power Gener.
3(2), 239–253 (2009)
119. Rahman, M.M.A., Rahim, A.H.M.A.: Performance evaluation of ANN and ANFIS based wind
speed sensor-less MPPT controller. In: 2016 5th International conference on informatics, electron-
ics and vision (ICIEV). IEEE (2016)
120. Priyadarshi, N., et al.: An experimental estimation of hybrid ANFIS–PSO-based MPPT for PV
grid integration under fluctuating sun irradiance. IEEE Syst. J. 14(1), 1218–1229 (2019)
121. Hamdi, H., Regaya, C.B., Zaafouri, A.: Real-time study of a photovoltaic system with boost con-
verter using the PSO-RBF neural network algorithms in a MyRio controller. Sol. Energy 183, 1–16
(2019)
122. Sundareswaran, K., et al.: Development of an improved P&O algorithm assisted through a colony
of foraging ants for MPPT in PV system. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 12(1), 187–200 (2015)
123. Pilakkat, D., Kanthalakshmi, S.: An improved P&O algorithm integrated with artificial bee colony
for photovoltaic systems under partial shading conditions. Sol. Energy 178, 37–47 (2019)
124. Ge, X., et al.: Implementation of a novel hybrid BAT-fuzzy controller based MPPT for grid-con-
nected PV-battery system. Control Eng. Pract. 98, 104380 (2020)
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.
13

3-A Comprehensive Review and Classified Comparison of MPPT Algorithms in PV Systems-21

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3-A Comprehensive Review and Classified Comparison of MPPT Algorithms in PV Systems-21

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Energy Systems

A comprehensive review and classified comparison

Mohammad Sarvi1 · Ahmad Azadian1

Received: 4 November 2020 / Accepted: 5 February 2021

Keywords MPPT · PV system · Intelligent algorithms · Hybrid methods

Fig. 2 Number of MPPT articles over past decade

Fig. 3 Single diode circuit of

3 Operation principle of a MPPT system

Photovoltaic power–voltage characteristics’ curve is presented in Fig. 1. The MPP

Fig. 4 Implementation of MPPT system

4 Classification of MPPT algorithms

Reaching the operating point of a PV cell to MPP is an important subject in a PV

– MPPT methods based on measurement: These methods behave assuming

4.1 MPPT methods based on measurement and comparison

4.1.1 Open‑circuit voltage (OCV) method

Converter parameter of these two voltages is constant of proportionality (kOC).

4.1.2 Short‑circuit current (SCC) method

4.1.3 Pilot cell algorithm

where VMPP(T) is MPP voltage at the actual temperatures; VMPP(Tref) is maximum

4.1.6 Load current or load voltage maximization

Fig. 5 Load types (I) voltage

Fig. 6 Flowchart for POS algorithm

An important advantage of POS algorithm is using the PV current only in com-

4.1.8 PV output senseless control

4.1.9 Perturbation and observation (P&O) method

Fig. 7 POS block diagram

Fig. 8 P&O algorithm flowchart

4.2 MPPT methods based on mathematics calculation

4.2.1 State‑space based MPPT method

4.2.2 dP/dV or dP/dI feedback control

4.2.3 Linear reoriented coordinates method (LRCM)

of photovoltaic cell characteristics is considered as follows, where b is the characteristic

4.2.4 Sliding mode control method

Calculating the PV power derivative in terms of PV voltage can be considered as the

𝜎 = iL − 1.45vPV − 0.455T + sref = 0 (10)

4.2.5 Ripple correlation control

4.2.6 Parasitic capacitance method

Depending on the system circuit, reactive parasitic components (parallel capacitor or

Equation (13) shows instantaneous conductance, voltage ripple from parasitic

4.2.7 Incremental conductance (IC) method

The incremental conductance (IC) method operates based on differentiating the PV

which implies that:

Fig. 9 The IC flowchart

Fig. 10 Circulation chart of FL inference system

Fig. 11 Common types of

4.3 MPPT methods based on intelligent methods

4.3.1 Fuzzy logic control

• Select input and output variables: An appropriate variable that is effective on

Fig. 12 Example of neural

4.3.3 Particle swarm optimization

ui (k + 1) = I ⋅ ui (k) + 𝛽1 𝛼1 ⋅ (qbest,i − pi (k)) + 𝛽2 𝛼2 ⋅ (gbest − pi (k))

Fig. 13 Flowchart of a standard

Step 4 is the update the velocity and position.

4.3.4 Ant colony optimization

This algorithm in short, ACO is a probabilistic optimization method which uses

4.3.5 Artificial bee colony optimization

Fig. 14 Flowchart of MPP tracking with ABC method

4.3.6 Cuckoo search algorithm

Fig. 15 Cuckoo search flowchart

Fig. 16 MPP tracking in partial shading with cuckoo search

4.3.7 Chaotic search algorithm

4.3.8 Other metaheuristic algorithms

3 Operation principle of a MPPT system

4 Classification of MPPT algorithms

4.1 MPPT methods based on measurement and comparison

4.1.1 Open‑circuit voltage (OCV) method

4.1.2 Short‑circuit current (SCC) method

4.1.3 Pilot cell algorithm

4.1.6 Load current or load voltage maximization

4.1.8 PV output senseless control

4.1.9 Perturbation and observation (P&O) method

4.2 MPPT methods based on mathematics calculation

4.2.1 State‑space based MPPT method

4.2.2 dP/dV or dP/dI feedback control

4.2.3 Linear reoriented coordinates method (LRCM)

4.2.4 Sliding mode control method

4.2.5 Ripple correlation control

4.2.6 Parasitic capacitance method

4.2.7 Incremental conductance (IC) method

4.3 MPPT methods based on intelligent methods

4.3.1 Fuzzy logic control

4.3.3 Particle swarm optimization

4.3.4 Ant colony optimization

4.3.5 Artificial bee colony optimization

4.3.6 Cuckoo search algorithm

4.3.7 Chaotic search algorithm

4.3.8 Other metaheuristic algorithms

4.3.9 MPPT methods based on hybrid schemes