International Journal of Electronics

ISSN: 0020-7217 (Print) 1362-3060 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tetn20

A model predictive control based hybrid MPPT

method for boost converters

Erdal Irmak & Naki Güler

To cite this article: Erdal Irmak & Naki Güler (2019): A model predictive control based
hybrid MPPT method for boost converters, International Journal of Electronics, DOI:
10.1080/00207217.2019.1582715

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00207217.2019.1582715

Accepted author version posted online: 20

Feb 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 13

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tetn20
Publisher: Taylor & Francis

Journal: International Journal of Electronics

DOI: 10.1080/00207217.2019.1582715
A model predictive control based hybrid MPPT method for boost
converters

Erdal Irmaka* and Naki Gülerb

t
ip
a
Electrical and Electronics Engineering Department, Faculty of Technology, Gazi
University, Ankara, Turkey; b Technical Sciences Vocational School, Gazi University,
Ankara, Turkey

cr
erdal@gazi.edu.tr , irmakerdal@gmail.com

us
an
M
ed
pt
ce
Ac

1
A model predictive control based hybrid MPPT method for boost
converters

Abstract: In this study, Perturb and Observe Maximum Power Point Tracking

t
(P&O MPPT) algorithm and Model Predictive Control (MPC) algorithm are

ip
combined to improve the dynamic performance of the control structure of boost
converters used in renewable energy systems. For this purpose, a digital control

cr
method that does not need any comparator is developed. The maximum power
point current value is determined from MPPT algorithm and it is used as the

us
reference for current control operation in MPC algorithm. Dynamic capability
and tracking performance of the proposed control method is validated by
an
simulation and experimentally. The dynamic behavior of the control algorithm is
analyzed by carrying out step change tests. Results show that the control method
has excellent dynamic performance thanks to its feature of reference tracking in
M
only one switching period. Furthermore, overshoots and undershoots are
successfully eliminated.
ed

Keywords: Model predictive control, MPPT, boost converter, photovoltaic

system, current control
pt

1. Introduction
ce

Photovoltaic energy sources are widely used in renewable energy applications. The

significant role of power converters in energy conversion and power flow control of
Ac

photovoltaic energy sources is one of the reasons of increasing studies in this subject

lately. Because the most PV panels have low voltage levels, boost converters are usually

preferred in these systems [1, 2]. In the control side, MPPT algorithms have an

important role for obtaining the maximum power that produced from PV panels.

Among several MPPT algorithms, Perturb and Observe (P&O) and Incremental

Climbing (IC) techniques are well-known and most preferred ones. Tracking efficiency

2
of both algorithms are over %98 [3] and they not requires system parameters, which can

make them easy to apply. These algorithms determine the maximum power point (MPP)

by continuously observing the changes of power and voltage levels. Furthermore, they

can calculate the related current, voltage or duty cycle values to achieve the MPPT

operation. The operating point is shifted to match MPP condition by decreasing or

increasing the voltage or current [4].

t
ip
For P&O method, the switching signal can directly be generated by comparing

the duty cycle with a triangle waveform. Thus, power flow is controlled by adjusting the

cr
duty cycle [5]. Because of the slow response times usually occurred during the use of

us
this method, there may be delays in power flow control [6, 7]. Increasing the step size

can be considered as a solution to overcome this issue; however, this process causes
an
some undesired situations like overshoots and undershoots over the system responses. A

detailed information about these overshoot issues can be found in [8] that proposes the
M

variable step P&O algorithm to improve the dynamic response of the control method.
ed

For all MPPT algorithms, the dynamic response speed is especially important

when some instant changes are occurred on the system. These changes may be
pt

generated due to partial shading effect [9]. To increase the response time in such

situations, some algorithms are presented in literature such as Artificial Neural

ce

Networks (ANN), Genetic Algorithm, Fuzzy Logic (FL), Sliding Mode(SM) and MPC
Ac

[10-14]. All these studies report that these control methods need high computational

capability to obtain fast dynamic response. As an alternative and more recent technique,

MPC approach has led to increase in processing capabilities of digital hardware [15].

Beside fast dynamic response and sensitive control capability, MPC method has some

other advantages such as easily adaptation of multivariable case, easy inclusion of non-

3
linearity, easy implementation of controller and suitable structure for the inclusion of

modifications and extensions depending on specific applications [15].

MPC algorithm is applied to most of power converters and dynamic responses

are discussed in boost converters for voltage control studies. Dynamic response analysis

shows that MPC technique performs voltage control processes with slight overshoots

[16]. According to some comparison studies [17, 18], MPC technique gives better

t
ip
results than conventional methods. Furthermore, MPC based hybrid control methods

increase the sensitivity [19, 20]. For this purpose, many algorithms are combined with

cr
MPPT algorithm to obtain hybrid structure where the current or voltage values at the

us
MPP are usually derived from the MPPT algorithm, and then it is used as a reference for

MPC [21]. For example, MPP tracking capability is tested in [22] that combines the FL
an
and P&O MPPT algorithms. Similar to this study, some other studies have shown that

hybrid algorithms have much better control capabilities than classical algorithms. But,
M

delayed response time is emphasized as a disadvantage in [22]. As a solution, model-

ed

based MPPT and ANN technique are combined in [10] to increase the dynamic

response capability; thereby the transition time has reduced up to 45ms. In another
pt

study, MPC and P&O MPPT techniques are adapted and dynamic performance of the

control structure is tested under variable irradiance conditions. MPP voltage that is
ce

determined by the MPPT algorithm is used as a reference in MPC algorithm. According

Ac

to the results, the proposed algorithm has considerably reduced the dynamic response

time [23].

In brief, overall efficiency of a PV system depends on PV panel structure, DC–

DC converter and the control effectiveness of the MPPT technique [24]. To increase the

PV module efficiency, advanced fabrication technology is needed which will increase

the cost of modules. Because of that, efforts are focused on other system components.

4
Recent studies show that, DC-DC converter efficiency changes between 92% and 98%

[25].

Considering all issues summarized above, this study is focused on improving the

dynamic capability of the control method. For this purpose, classical P&O MPPT

algorithm is combined with MPC algorithm. Mathematical background, detailed

analysis of proposed control method and its hybrid structure are given in Section 2.

t
ip
Control capability of the proposed model is tested and verified both in the simulation

environment and experimentally in real time, results of which are given in Section 3 and

cr
4, respectively. Finally, a brief conclusion is presented in the last Section.

us
2. Analysis of the boost converter and current control schema
an
In order to achieve the power flow control, this study uses a boost converter structure

connected to PV module outputs. Figure 1 illustrates the block schema of whole system.
M

In this circuit, the switch, the capacitor and the diode are considered as ideal elements.

In control side, P&O algorithm is used to determine the current value at the
ed

maximum power point (MPP). This value is used as the reference in MPC algorithm

that controls the input current of the converter. MPC algorithm produces appropriate
pt

switching signals to equalize the inductor current to the reference value. Thus, a hybrid
ce

control algorithm consisting of MPC based MPPT structure is achieved for power flow

control of PV modules.
Ac

5
 t
ip
Figure 1. General block diagram of the system

cr
us
2.1. Continuous conduction mode analysis
an
DC/DC boost converters are power electronic circuits that are typically used to increase

the input voltage. Therefore, they are especially preferred in low voltage power sources
M

such as PV modules. DC-DC converters are analyzed according to some basic operating

conditions such as possible switching states, continuous conduction mode (CCM) and
ed

discontinuous conduction mode (DCM). DCM or CCM operations are based on

switching frequency, input voltage and passive components of the converter. Depending
pt

on the system parameters of this study, control method of the converter is developed for
ce

CCM condition.

The converter can be analyzed according to two possible states of the switch,
Ac

diagrams of which are presented in Figure 2(a) and (b), separately. When the switch is

ON, the inductor current ( ) can be calculated with Equation (1). Figure 2(b) illustrates

the circuit model for OFF position of the switch. In this case, the load is supplied from

both the inductor and the input source. Thus, the input current can be expressed with

Equation (2).

6
 = ( − ) (1)

= ( − − ) (2)
where;
L, RL: Inductance and resistance values of the inductor, respectively.
Vin, Vout: Input and output voltages.
: Inductor current
Equations (1) and (2) can be combined as in Equation (3), which gives the input

t
ip
current during a switching period.

= ( − − (1 − )) (3)

cr
where;

us
0 ℎ
=
1 ℎ an
M

(a) (b)
ed

Figure 2. Circuit diagram of the converter, a: the switch is ON (S=1), b: the switch is
OFF (S=0)
pt

2.2. Discrete-time model predictive current control of the converter

ce

MPC is a powerful control technique that predicts system behavior according to

possible control states. The optimal next control actuation is then selected based on the
Ac

predicted future system states, in order to minimize the cost function. The cost function

evaluation for each sampling period is determined by prediction horizon (N) that can be

selected depending on system type and performance requirement. When the prediction

horizon is selected greater than one, predictions are shifted one-step and the next

optimization is performed [23].

7
 In this study, prediction horizon is selected as one (N=1) to determine the

optimal next switching state. Thus, a cost function that includes the future states,

references, and future actuations can be defined as follows [23]:

= ( ( ), ( ), . . . . . . , ( + − 1)) (4)

To obtain the total cost function, the discrete-time MPC method can be applied

in three steps as following [15]:

t
ip
• Modelling the converter for all possible switching states.

• Obtaining the discrete-time model for predictions in each sampling time.

cr
• Defining the cost functions.

us
The first step is presented in the previous section. To obtain the discrete-time

model as the second step, some discretization methods are used in literature. Among
an
them, forward-difference Euler approximation method given in Equation (5) is widely

used in first-order systems [15]. By combining Equations (3) and (5), Equation (6) can
M

be obtained to predict the next value of the inductor current.

ed

( ) ( )
≈ (5)

( + 1) = ( ( )− ( )− ( )(1 − )) + ( ) (6)
pt

where;
Ts: Sampling time
ce

k: Iteration number
( + 1): predicted current value
Ac

At each sampling time, the optimization problem given in Equation 6 is solved

again by using a new set of measured data to determine the new state of the switch.

The MPC method cannot determine the optimal key state only based on

predictions. The minimization of the error between the reference and the predicted value

is also required, which is carried out using the cost function mentioned as the third step

8
above. This is the reason why the cost function is one of the key points of MPC based

applications.

In this study, the cost function given in Equation (7) is used. In order to

determine this function in MPC method, the error between the reference value and the

predicted value is calculated as seen from the equation.

( + 1) = − ( + 1) (7)

t
ip
where;
: Reference current

cr
The fixed-step control method that predicts the next value in each sampling

us
period needs a second cost function to decrease the switching frequency [3]. Since

digital control methods do not use comparators to produce the switching signal, they
an
may have variable switching frequencies. If the switching frequency approximately

equals to the sampling frequency, the control error will increase. To decrease the
M
switching frequency, the cost function in Equation (8) is used and a weighting factor (λ)

is utilized to limit the effects of it on the complete cost function. In this study, weighting
ed

factor is determined as 0.1 by using cost function classification method proposed in

[15].
pt

( + 1) = ∗ ( ) − ( − 1) (8)
ce

For simultaneously controlling both the current and the switching frequency,
Ac

two cost functions are needed as mentioned above. One of the significant advantage of

MPC method is its capability of controlling multiple parameters in a single function.

Thus, a complete cost function is created as given in Equation (9) which is the

combination of Equations (7) and (8). Since the use of squared error technique in

multiple terms cost functions serves better results as reported in [15], the same approach

9
is preferred in this study to obtain more accurate results. This is the reason why the

squares of Equation (7) and Equation (8) are used.

( + 1) = ( + 1) + ( + 1) (9)

Total cost function is calculated in each sampling time for all possible switching

states and then minimized as seen in Equation (10). By using the Equation (11), the d(k)

t
ip
value that gives the smallest value of the cost function is calculated and the switching

state is selected according to this process.

cr
( ) = 1 0 (10)

us
( + 1) ( ) = ( ( + 1) + ( + 1))

(11)
an
For detailed analyze of this process, a sample control result when the converter
M
operates with 3A reference value is given in Figure (3). In this figure, the cost function

results are given separately for ON (S=1) and OFF (S=0) positions.
ed
pt
ce
Ac

Figure 3. Generation of switching signals according to 3A reference current

As obviously seen from Figure 3, the control method decides the switch position

by considering the smaller cost function. For example, if the calculated cost function for

10
ON position of the switch is less than its value for OFF position, the control method

selects ON state for the switch. Furthermore, the proposed control structure does not

need any average calculation method because the cost function includes all system

parameters.

2.3. Model predictive based maximum power point tracking control

t
ip
MPPT algorithms determine the MPP by observing power parameters. Typical

characteristic of a PV array is given in Figure 4. As it is shown in Figure 4(a), the point

cr
where dP/dV=0 can be expressed as the maximum power point. Similarly, the MPP can

us
also be obtained from I - V characteristics as given in Figure 4(b).

In order to determine the MPP, P&O algorithm is a popular approach that can
an
be applied by changing the output parameter. As mentioned earlier, this parameter can

be duty cycle of the switching signal, the current value or the voltage value at MPP.
M

Among them, the current value is selected as the output parameter in this study and it is

used as a reference in MPC algorithm.

ed
pt
ce
Ac

(a) (b)

Figure 4. Characteristic curves of PV array

A complete flowchart of the proposed control structure is given in Figure 5. As

seen from the figure, the control process starts with measuring power parameters.

Changes on the reference value is determined by comparing the previous and the next

power parameters. After this procedure, MPC algorithm starts with defining some

11
values such as passive component parameters, possible switching state matrix and

sampling time. During a sampling step, prediction algorithm (Equation 6) and cost

function (Equation 11) are calculated for all possible switching states. The switch

position is determined according to the smaller cost function. Thus, MPC algorithm

performs the current control based on the MPPT reference.

t
ip
cr
us
an
M

Figure 5. Flowchart of the proposed control algorithm

ed

3. Simulation results
pt

To verify the effectiveness of the proposed control algorithm, the designed system
ce

previously given in Figure 1 is simulated in MATLAB/Simulink platform. Simulation

parameters are presented in Table 1. Two series connected panels are used as the main
Ac

energy source. PV array output is connected to the boost converter for power flow

control.

Table 1. Simulation parameters

Parameter Value
2
PV Power (1000W/m ) 470W
Capacitors (C and Cin) 1000µF

12
 Inductance (L) 5mH
Resistance of Inductor (RL) 0.2Ω
Load Resistance (RLOAD) 30Ω
Sampling Time of MPC (Ts) 15µs
Sampling Time of MPPT 100µs

A test scenario is created with variable irradiance and constant temperature

conditions as seen in Figure 6 where the simulation starts with 400W irradiance. The

t
ip
MPPT algorithm calculates the reference value after increasing PV voltage. As clearly

cr
seen from the figure, MPPT algorithm changes the reference in line with the irradiance.

On the other hand, the MPC algorithm provides the current control operation

us
simultaneously with MPPT process.

To test the dynamic capability of the proposed algorithm, step changes are
an
created over the irradiance (points A and B on Figure 6) and detailed graphs for

transition times are given in Figure 7. At the first point (A), the irradiance is suddenly
M

decreased as 25%. Accordingly, the MPPT algorithm updates the reference current to an
ed

appropriate value as seen from Figure 7(a). Based on the new reference, MPC algorithm

makes the switch position OFF. Thus, the average value of inductor current is decreased
pt

to the MPP current. Similar test is repeated at point B where the irradiance is increased

instantly.
ce
Ac

13
 t
ip
cr
us
an
Figure 6. Simulation results
M

According to Figure 7(b), the new MPP is determined by increasing the

ed

reference current. When the reference increases, MPC algorithm changes the switch

state from OFF to ON. In both situations, transitions are realized in a very short time
pt

thanks to the fast dynamic response of MPC algorithm.

ce
Ac

(a) (b)
Figure 7. Simulation results against instant transitions, a: Decreasing irradiance, b:
Increasing irradiance

14
 t
ip
Figure 8. Power tracking results

cr
Power graphs obtained during the control process are given in Figure 8. As seen,

us
the proposed control algorithm successfully tracks the maximum power curve of PV
an
array. Tracking capability of the proposed method is over 99%. Moreover, the dynamic

behavior of the method is also successful as obviously seen in zoomed parts on Figure 8
M
where detailed views for the transition times (A and B) are presented.
ed

4. Experimental studies

In order to test the performance of the proposed control method in real operational
pt

conditions, a prototype boost converter is designed. A complete view of the

experimental set is given in Figure 9. Two series connected PV panels are used. The
ce

power value of each panel is 235W. The output of panels is connected to a boost
Ac

converter in laboratory.

15
 t
Figure 9. Experimental set

ip
The circuit parameters of the experimental setup are given in Table 2. Because

cr
the system behavior is dependent on both converter design and control software, Table

2 also includes the sampling times of control software. The sampling time is usually

us
selected according to the execution time of the control software. In this study, the
an
execution time of the proposed control algorithm has been measured as 11µs via the

ControlDesk software. As reported in [15], the sampling time should be greater than the
M
execution time to ensure the operation of the control software without any issue.

Therefore, the sampling time is selected as 15µs during the experimental studies.
ed

Table 2. Specifications of the system elements

Parameter Value
pt

Capacitors (C and Cin) 1000µF

Inductance (L) 0.5mH
ce

Resistance of Inductor (RL) 0.2Ω

IGBT (2MBI100N-060) 100A – 600V
Ac

Fast Recovery Diode (dsei60-06a) 60A – 600V

Load Resistance (RLOAD) 41Ω
Sampling Time of MPC (Ts) 15µs
Sampling Time of MPPT 100µs

In the system, dSPACE ds1104 is used as the controller device and ControlDesk

software is used to display the measured parameters both graphically and numerically in

16
real time. Voltage and current sensors are used to measure the power parameters. The

system evaluates the measurement results according to the control algorithm and an

appropriate switching signal is applied from digital IO channel of dSPACE.

As a typical characteristic of discrete-time MPC technique, the proposed control

algorithm uses variable switching frequencies. In this study, it is observed during the

experimental tests that the control system automatically varies the switching frequency

t
ip
from 3.125kHz to 16.6kHz in accordance with the operational conditions. When the

converter is being operated with a 2A reference value, the inductor, IGBT and diode

cr
currents are given in Figure 10 for a detailed analysis. As obviously seen, the inductor is

us
charged during ON state of the switch. For OFF state, the inductor current is decreased

since it is in discharging mode. At the times when the ON-OFF transitions are occurred,
an
no distorting ripple is observed as seen from the figure.

By using the similar scenario created in simulation studies, capability of the

M

proposed MPC based MPPT control technique is experimentally investigated in real

ed

time conditions. Results obtained under variable irradiances are given in Figure 11. In

order to analyze the system response against the transitional events separately, some
pt

crucial periods are indicated on Figure 11 as following:

ce

• Periods A, C and E: The constant irradiance

• Period B: Increasing irradiance

Ac

• Period D: decreasing irradiance

17
 t
ip
cr
Figure 10. Diode, inductor and IGBT currents

us
an
M

(a)
ed
pt

(b)
ce
Ac

(c)

(d)

18
 (e)

t
ip
(f)

cr
us
(g)
an
Figure 11. Experimental results, a: Reference current, b: PV current, c: Load current, d:
PV voltage, e: Converter output voltage, f: PV power, g: Load power
M
Period A (constant irradiance): As seen in Figure 11(a), the reference current (iref) is

determined about 3.9A by MPPT algorithm. During the first 17s, the PV current is fixed
ed

to the reference by the MPC algorithm with 2% error. To analyze the system parameters

more accurately, Figure 12 illustrates the results in detail. As shown in Figure 12(a),
pt

average value of the inductor current is 3.85A. PV voltage and converter output voltage
ce

are 49.2V and 86.5V, respectively. Converter output current is about 2.1A. Input and

output powers of the converter are 192W and 182W, respectively. Thus, these are
Ac

assumed as the initial conditions for the experimental test scenario.

Period B (increasing irradiance): Irradiance is increased between 17s and 30s.

Consequently, MPPT algorithm increases the reference in this period. Although the

reference is changed, the current control operation is successfully provided by MPC

algorithm. Furthermore, small ripples on the PV voltage shown in Figure 11(d) indicate

that the current value at the MPP has been successfully determined. Since the

19
experimental studies are performed under constant resistive load conditions, voltage and

current of the load vary depending on input current. At the end of this period, the PV

power is increased from 192W to 300W.

t
ip
cr
us
(a) an (b)

Figure 12. Experimental results under constant irradiance, a: low irradiance (Period A),
b: High irradiance (Period C)

Period C (constant irradiance): As seen from Figure 11(a) and 11(b), the irradiance is
M

almost constant between 30s and 57s and the reference current is about 6A during this
ed

period. In such a situation according to Figure 12(b), the MPC regulates the PV current

to follow the reference with the least error. As defined in Figure 4, it is an inherent
pt

characteristic of MPPT that the panel voltage variation is not tangible when the

maximum power point is changing. This issue is verified in both Figures 11(d) and 12
ce

likewise.
Ac

Period D (decreasing irradiance): As shown in Figure 11(a), the MPPT algorithm

reduces the reference current because of decrease on the irradiance. Nevertheless, the

MPC algorithm successfully provides current tracking. At the end of this control

process, the panel power is decreased from 300W to 190W. Considering the PV current

result, it is seen that the MPC algorithm has such a sensitiveness to show a fast response

against a small change that occurs in current reference at 68s.

20
Period E (constant irradiance): For the last part of the control process, the obtained

results are similar to Period A and the current is tracking the reference successfully.

Concluding, both the steady state and the transient state studies show that MPPT

algorithm determines the MPP current and the PV current is matched to this value by

the MPC algorithm.

t
4.1. Step change analysis

ip
Besides the MPPT based control, dynamic response of MPC algorithm is also tested

cr
with step change analysis that is realized using a 500W DC power supply. To observe

us
the system response against the transient events, the reference current is changed

through the Controldesk software. Results are given in Figure 13(a) for step up change
an
from 2A to 4A. As seen from this figure, the switch is kept in ON position (180µs) by

the MPC algorithm till the inductor current reaches the maximum ripple value of new
M

reference. After this transition time, average value of inductor current is kept on 4A.
ed
pt
ce
Ac

(a) (b)
Figure 13. Step change results, a: Step up result, b: Step down result

In Figure 13(b), the reference current is decreased from 4A to 2A to analyze the

step down response. As seen, the control algorithm keeps the switch in OFF position

(100µs) until the inductor current reaches to the minimum ripple value of the reference.

21
Thus, in both step change tests, the MPC algorithm updates the switch status in

accordance with the reference variations.

The developed discrete time-MPC control methodology is compared with other

techniques as given in Table 3. For this purpose, some of the well-known control

methods such as sliding mode control, continuous time MPC, ANN based MPPT &

t
MPC and only closed-loop control are considered. Some recent studies [10,13,26,27]

ip
using these techniques are compared with the presented study. As seen from Table 3,

cr
dynamic response time varies depending on the control method. Among the compared

studies except from this study, the lowest dynamic response time is obtained in [13], in

us
which the step change analysis has been performed by doubling and then reducing the
an
reference current. The same approach has been also applied during the experimental

tests of the control system proposed in this paper. As clearly seen in Figure 13 that
M
illustrates the results of step change analysis, dynamic responses for step up and step

down are 180µs and 100µs, respectively.

ed

Table 3. Comparison table

[10] [13] [26] [27] Presented study
pt

ANN based Sliding Continuous Discrete time-

Control method Closed-loop
MPPT & MPC mode time-MPC MPC
Dynamic response 40ms 5ms 20ms 400ms 100µs-180µs
ce

Overshoot and
<5% ~0.0% <2% >50% ~0.0%
undershoot
not
Sampling time 10µs 10µs 80µs 15µs
specified
Ac

Comparator usage No No Yes Yes No

Max efficiency not specified not specified 94% 94.14% 98%
Switching 3.125kHz-
not specified not specified 12.5kHz 50kHz
frequency 16.6kHz

Considering the studies compared in Table 3, the fast dynamic response of the

presented system originates from the fact that instead of average values MPC uses

instant values measured in each sampling time and the switch state is determined in

22
each sampling period as well. In some systems where the average value is used, as in

[27], the calculations are continued along one switching period at least. This situation

delays the control operations as well as causes overshoots and undershoots. Therefore,

using instant values instead of average value and determining the switch state position

in each sampling time play an important role for obtaining the fast dynamic response

and eliminating overshoots and undershoots. Thanks to these features, the control

t
ip
system not allows to instant changes on the panel voltage and thereby the ripples on the

voltage is decreased considerably.

cr
In addition to providing a better control system, efficiency of converters has

us
great importance in PV systems. As seen from Figure 14 that illustrates the efficiency
an
graph of the proposed system, minimum efficiency is about 92% that measured when

the PV power increases to upper than 340W. The maximum efficiency is 98% that is
M
acquired at 70W. Thus, the proposed prototype model offers the same efficiency with

similar ones those have proposed for similar power levels in literature [25].
ed
pt
ce
Ac

Figure 14. Efficiency graph

5. Conclusion

This paper presents a MPC based dynamic MPPT algorithm for photovoltaic systems.

For this purpose, mathematical background of boost converters and MPC technique are

23
studied to apply the control method. Dynamic performance of the proposed method is

considerably improved by using the discrete-time MPC technique that requires neither

the average calculation nor the comparator.

The control method proposed uses instantaneous values instead of average

values. In order to determine the switch state, instant values are measured at each

t
sampling period in real time and then the prediction algorithm calculates the current

ip
value for the next sampling time. Thus, the calculation time and the dynamic response

cr
time are shortened considerably that results to eliminate overshoots and undershoots. In

addition, the use of a digital control technique in the proposed method is another

us
important point to overcome such issues. Non-digital control methods have to wait for
an
the next carrier signal to change the switch status, whereas the digital control methods

can make this at each sampling time. Accordingly, the presented control method allows
M
the switch position to be changed when the predicted value reaches the reference.

Therefore, the issues of overshoot and undershoots are significantly eliminated.

ed

Performance of both the control algorithm and the power structure are firstly

tested and verified with simulations. Step change tests verify that the proposed control
pt

method achieves the reference tracking process in a very short time, which is less than
ce

one switching period. Furthermore, overshoots and undershoots are not occurred during

the transient states. These results show that the proposed control method has a
Ac

remarkable performance in terms of dynamic response time and robustness.

Besides the dynamic performance, the system response is tested against both the

constant and variable irradiance conditions. It is observed that the control method

successfully tracks the MPP in any case. In addition to all these advantages, the

efficiency analysis is investigated and it is proved that the proposed prototype model

operates up to 98% efficiency.

24
References

[1] Hernanz, J. R., Guede, J. M. L., Barambones, O., Zulueta, E., & Gamiz, U. F.
(2017). Novel control algorithm for MPPT with Boost converters in photovoltaic
systems. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 42(28), 17831-17855.
[2] Qian, Q., Yu, j., Su, C., Sun, W., & Lu, S. (2017). A LLC resonant converter with
dual resonant frequency for high light load efficiency. International Journal of
Electronics, 104(12), 2033-2047.
[3] Danandeh, M. A., & Mousavi, S. M. G. (2018). Comparative and comprehensive

t
review of maximum power point tracking methods for PV cells. Renewable and

ip
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 82(3), 2743-2767.
[4] Freitas, A. A. A., Tofoli, F. L., Junior, E. M. S., Daher, S., & Antunes, F. L. M.

cr
(2016). Analysis of high voltage step-up nonisolated DC–DC boost converters.
International Journal of Electronics, 103(5), 898-912.

us
[5] Başoğlu, M. E. (in press). An enhanced scanning-based MPPT approach for
DMPPT systems. International Journal of Electronics.
[6] Metry, M., Bayhan, S., Balog, R. S., & Rub, H. A. (2016, February). Model
an
predictive control for PV maximum power point tracking of single-phase
submultilevel inverter. IEEE Power and Energy Conference at Illinois (pp. 1-8).
Urbana, IL.
M

[7] Abbes, H., Abid, H., & Loukil, K. (2015). An Improved MPPT Incremental
Conductance Algorithm Using T-S Fuzzy System for Photovoltaic Panel.
International Journal of Renewable Energy Research, 5(1), 160-167.
ed

[8] Ahmed, J. & Salam, Z. (2016). 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.
pt

[9] Kandemir, E., Borekci, S. & Cetin, N. S. (2018). Comparative Analysis of

Reduced-Rule Compressed Fuzzy Logic Control and Incremental Conductance
ce

MPPT Methods. Journal of Elec Materi, 47(8), 4463–4474.

[10] Khosravi, M., Heshmatian, S., Khaburi, D. A., Garcia C., & Rodriguez, J. (2017
Ac

April). A novel hybrid model-based MPPT algorithm based on artificial neural

networks for photovoltaic applications. IEEE Southern Power Electronics
Conference (SPEC), Puerto Varas, Chile.
[11] Öztürk, N., & Çelik, E. (2014). An Educational Tool for the Genetic Algorithm-
Based Fuzzy Logic Controller of a Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor Drive.
International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education, 51(3), 218–23.
[12] Mahendran V., & Ramabadran R. (2016). Fuzzy-PI-based centralised control of
semi-isolated FP-SEPIC/ZETA BDC in a PV/battery hybrid system. International
Journal of Electronics, 103(11), 1909-1927.

25
[13] Singh, S., Fulwani, D., & Kumar, V. (2017). Emulating DC constant power load: a
robust sliding mode control approach, International Journal of Electronics, 104(9),
1447-1464.
[14] Kim, J. C., Moon, S. K., & Kwak, S. (2018). Direct model-based predictive control
scheme without cost function for voltage source inverters with reduced common-
mode voltage, International Journal of Electronics, 105(4), 629-644.
[15] Rodriguez, J., & Cortes, P. (2012). Predictive Control of Power Converters and
Electrical Drives, John Wiley & Sons.
[16] Seo, S. W., Kim, Y., & Choi, H. H. (2017). Model predictive controller design for

t
boost DC–DC converter using T–S fuzzy cost function. International Journal of

ip
Electronics, 104(11), 1838-1853.

cr
[17] Ren, H. P., Zheng, M. M. & Li, J. (2015 October). A simplified Mixed Logical
Dynamic model and Model Predictive Control of Boost converter with current
reference compensator. IEEE 24th International Symposium on Industrial

us
Electronics (pp. 61-65), Buzios, Brazil.
[18] Cheng, L., Acuna, P., Aguilera, R. P., Jiang, J., Wei, S., Fletcher, J. E., & Lu, D. D.
an
C. (2018). Model Predictive Control for DC–DC Boost Converters with Reduced-
Prediction Horizon and Constant Switching Frequency. IEEE Transactions on
Power Electronics, 33(10), 9064-9075.
M
[19] Kim, S. K., Park, C. R., Kim, J. S., & Lee, Y. I. (2014). A Stabilizing Model
Predictive Controller for Voltage Regulation of a DC/DC Boost Converter. IEEE
Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 22(5), 2016-2023.
ed

[20] Lashab, A., Sera, D., Guerrero, J. M., Mathe, L. & Bouzid, A. (2018). Discrete
Model-Predictive-Control-Based Maximum Power Point Tracking for PV Systems:
Overview and Evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, 33(8), 7273-
pt

7287.
[21] Adhikari, N. (2018). Design of solar photovoltaic energy generation system for off-
ce

grid applications, Int. J. of Renewable Energy Technology, 9(1/2), 198 – 207.

[22] Priya, T. H. & Parimi, A. M. (2016). Design of adaptive perturb and observe-fuzzy
MPPT controller for high voltage gain multilevel boost converter. IEEE 7th Power
Ac

India International Conference (PIICON), Bikaner.

[23] Metry, M., Shadmand, M. B., Balog, R. S., & Abu-Rub, H. (2017). MPPT of
Photovoltaic Systems Using Sensorless Current-Based Model Predictive Control.
IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, 53(2), 1157-1167.
[24] Mosa, M., Shadmand, M. B., Balog, R. S., & Abu-Rub, H. (2017). Efficient
maximum power point tracking using model predictive control for photovoltaic
systems under dynamic weather condition. IET Renewable Power Generation,
11(11), 1401-1409.

26
[25] Abu-Rub, H., Malinowski, M., & Al-Haddad, K. (2014). Power Electronics for
Renewable Energy Systems, Transportation and Industrial Applications. New
York, NY, Wiley.
[26] Errouissi, R., Al-Durra, A., & Muyeen, S. M. (2016). A Robust Continuous-Time
MPC of a DC–DC Boost Converter Interfaced with a Grid-Connected Photovoltaic
System. IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics, 6(6), 1619-1629.
[27] Valdez-Resendiz, J. E., Sanchez, V. M., Rosas-Caro, J. C., Mayo-Maldonado, J. C.,
Sierra, J.M., Barbosa, R. (2017). Continuous input-current buck-boost DC-DC

t
converter for PEM fuel cell applications. International Journal of Hydrogen

ip
Energy, 42(51), 30389-30399.

cr
us
an
M
ed
pt
ce
Ac

27