DAYANANDA SAGAR COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

(An Autonomous Institute affiliated to VTU, Belagavi - 590018)

Accredited by National Assessment & Accreditation Council (NAAC) with ‘A’ grade

A Technical Seminar On

A comparative study between two MPPT algorithms for Photovoltaic

Energy Conversion System Based on Modular Multilevel Converter
Bachelor of Engineering
in
Electrical and Electronics Engineering
Submitted by
ADARSH D SHETTY
1DS16EE005
8th SEMESTER ‘A’ SECTION
DATE-10/02/2020
Under the Guidance of
Satish B.A
Assistant Professor
Dept. of E&E Engg.
DSCE, Bengaluru
VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
JNANASANGAMA, BELAGAVI-590018
2019-2020
Contents
• Characteristics of a PV Array
• Introduction to MPPT
• Different types of MPPT algorithms
• Perturb and Observe method
• Incremental Conductance technique
• Comparison between the two algorithms
• Proposed controller based on MPPT
• Conclusion
CHARACTERISTICS OF A PV ARRAY
PV Characteristics for different
Temperatures
PV Characteristics for different
Irradiance Levels
Definition Of MPPT

MPPT or Maximum Power Point Tracking is an

algorithm used for extracting maximum available
power from PV module under certain conditions.
The voltage at which PV module can produce
maximum power is called maximum power point
(or peak power voltage).
Different types of MPPT algorithms
DIRECT MPPT TECHNIQUES
PV current and voltage are measured continuously, and
such measurements are used to realize a proper
adjustment of the system operating conditions to catch
the MPP.
These direct methods have the advantage of being
independent from the prior knowledge of the PV
generator characteristics.
Examples of Direct MPPT techniques:
1)Perturb and Observe Method
2)Incremental Conductance Method
INDIRECT MPPT TECHNIQUES
These are based on the estimation or on occasional
measurement of one current or one voltage or on the use
of a database of parameters that include data of typical P-
V curves of PV systems for different irradiances and
temperatures, or on the use of mathematical functions
obtained from empirical data to estimate the MPP.
Example of Indirect MPPT technique
Open Circuit Voltage (OCV) Method Simplest indirect
method , this algorithm is based on the concept that the
voltage of PV generator at the Maximum Power point
which is approximately linearly proportional to its open-
circuit voltage, Voc. 𝐾1 = 𝑉𝑚𝑝𝑝 /Voc.
PERTURB AND OBSERVE METHOD
• Perturb and observe algorithm is simple and does not require
previous knowledge of the PV generator characteristics or the
measurement of solar intensity and cell temperature and is easy
to implement with analogue and digital circuits. It perturbs the
operating point of the system causing the PV array terminal
voltage to fluctuate around the MPP voltage even if the solar
irradiance and the cell temperature are constants .
• Moreover, it is the most widely used and workhorse MPPT
algorithm because of its balance between performance and
simplicity. However, it suffers from the lack of speed and
adaptability which is necessary for tracking the fast transients
under varying environmental conditions . It is simple and
straightforward technique but degraded performance is achieved
due to the trade-off between accuracy and speed upon selecting
the step size .
• The P&O algorithm periodically measures the PV voltage (VPV)
and PV current (IPV) and computes PV power (PPV), compares it with
the PV power calculated in previous perturbation cycle and applies
perturbations to PV reference voltage (VREF) by incrementing or
decrementing it.
• The PV voltage is perturbed by small step (dV) and corresponding
change in PV power (dP) is calculated. If dP/dv is positive, then the PV
voltage is incremented in next perturbation cycle. For negative dP/dv,
the voltage needs to be decremented. This process is continued till
the operating point reaches MPP.
ALGORITHM USED IN PERTURB AND
OBSERVE METHOD
INCREMENTAL CONDUCTANCE METHOD
• The INC MPPT method calculates the instantaneous conductance I /V and
incremental conductance dI/ dV of I-V characteristics of PV array and compares
them to create the VREF.

• It is observed that when VREF lies at the left side of MPP, the dI/ dV is
greater than – I/V for VREF lying right side of MPP, dI/dV is less than – I/V . MPP
is reached when dI/dV = - I/V VREF is incremented or decremented until it is
equals to VMPP. To account for the change in the atmospheric conditions,
additional checking on change in PV current (dI) is also considered.
ALGORITHM USED IN INCREMENTAL
CONDUCTANCE METHOD
COMPARISON BETWEEN P&O AND INC METHODS OF MPPT
INCREMENTAL CONDUCTANCE METHOD

PERTURB AND OBSERVE METHOD

PROPOSED CONTROLLER BASED ON MPPT
• The proposed control strategy of the whole PV-MMC
system is composed of three parts: the MPPT controller,
the closed-loop controller based on energy equations and
the MPC controller, as mentioned .
• The controller is illustrated as shown , a MPPT controller
is used to calculate the reference value of V DC from the
instantaneous PV array voltage and current components.
• Then, the reference DC voltage and the actual value
measured in each sub-module are compared together and
a differential voltage component is generated which is
added to the output of the closed-loop controller.
• It is worth nothing that MPC controller provides the
switching signal based on upper and lower capacitors
voltage and circulating current component in each
individual leg.
Proposed controller for the grid-connected PV-MMC
Simulation result of P&O and incremental conductance
for 800 W/m2 at 25°C.
PERTURB AND OBSERVE METHOD INCREMENTAL CONDUCTANCE METHOD
EFFICIENCY AND TOTAL HARMONIC DISTORTION
VALUES FOR DIFFERENT METHODS
CONCLUSION
The steady state performance of each of the MPPT algorithms has been investigated for
different irradiations ranging from 0.15 KW/m2 to 0.9KW/m2 and compared in terms of tracking
speed, accuracy, and MPPT efficiency.
1)It has been observed that the MPP tracking speed of direct methods viz., P&O and INC
techniques were almost same ranging from 0.038 sec to 0.085 sec. OCV method was slower than
direct methods with tracking speed ranging from 0.082 sec to 0.12 sec.
2)Maximum efficiency reached by INC and P&O methods at higher irradiations of 0.9KW/m2 was
98.26% and 93.47% respectively. OCV MPPT method was more suitable for lower irradiations and
provided an efficiency of 96.1% at irradiation of 0.3 KW/m2.
3)Thus it is concluded that OCV MPPT method provides an effective MPP tracking at low
irradiations up to 0.35KW/m2 and INC MPPT method offers the better steady state performance
at medium and higher irradiations above 0.35KW/m2.
4) Also it has been noted that both P&O and INC techniques provided higher efficiency at medium
and high irradiations when compared to OCV method.
Though implementation of P&O method was simpler than INC method, it incurred
additional power loss due to the oscillations at MPP. INC algorithm has better
performance when compared to P&O algorithm in respect of maximum power point
tracking with very less oscillations in active power extracted from PV panel.
REFERENCES
[1] H. Nademi, A. Elahidoost and L. E. Norum, “Comparative Analysis of Different MPPT Schemes for
Photovoltaic Integration of Modular Multilevel Converter,” IEEE 17th Workshop on Control and Modeling for
Power Electronics (COMPEL), Norway, pp. 1-5, 2016.
[2] S. Rivera et al., “Modular multilevel converter for medium-scale multistring photovoltaic energy
conversion system,” IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), USA, pp. 1941-1946, 2013.
[3] D. M. Scholten, N. Ertugrul and W. L. Soong, “Analysis and control of decentralized PV cascaded multilevel
modular integrated converters,” IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), USA, pp. 1- 9, 2016.
[4] J. D. Stringfellow, T. J. Summers and R. E. Betz, “Control of the modular multilevel converter as a
photovoltaic interface under unbalanced irradiance conditions with MPPT of each PV array,” IEEE Annual
Southern Power Electronics Conference (SPEC), New Zealand, pp. 1-6, 2016.
[5] M. S. Shadlu, “Novel Control of a Modular Multilevel Converter for Photovoltaic Applications,” Trans. on
Electrical and Electronic Materials, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 103-110, 2017.
[6] L. Liu, H. Li, Y. Xue, W. Liu, “Reactive Power Compensation and Optimization Strategy for Grid-Interactive
Cascaded Photovoltaic Systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Electronics, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 188-202, 2014.
[7] B. Xiao, F. Filho, L. Tolbert, “Single-phase cascaded H-bridge multilevel inverter with nonactive power
compensation for gridconnected photovoltaic generators,” IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition,
USA, pp. 2733-2737, 2011.
[8] S. Rajasekar, R. Gupta, “Photovoltaic array based multilevel inverter for power conditioning,” International
Conference on Power and Energy Systems (ICPS), India, pp. 1-6, 2011.
[9] N. Kumar, T. Saha, J. Dey, “Modeling, control and analysis of cascaded inverter based grid-connected
photovoltaic system,” International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol. 78, pp. 165-170, 2016.
[10] Y. Liu, B. Ge, H. Rub, F. Peng, “An Effective Control Method for Quasi-Z-Source Cascade Multilevel
Inverter-Based Grid-Tie SinglePhase Photovoltaic Power System,” IEEE Trans. Industrial Informatics, vol. 10,
no. 1, pp. 399-407, 2014.