Robust Variable step P&O MPPT algorithm

based on wind generation system using

compensation technique for the effect of the
wind speed

Abstract Keywords

In this paper, we will develop an improvement in
the P&O optimization algorithm where will
consider different step sizes according to the
power-speed curve. For that, we will subdivide the
power-speed curve into several sectors, where the
corresponding step size will be predefined. VS-PO
algorithms showed their effectiveness in accessing
MPPT, in a suitable environment for the selected
system. Despite this improvement, the previous
techniques suffered from many problems, On the
one hand, No directives about step size selection. In
the event of important continuous variation of the
wind speed, either in increasing or decreasing,
direct power variation calculation from power
measurement may provide inexact values which
induce divergence from the maximum power point.
In this work, we suggest the new strategy of
systematic step size selection on the basis of power
and speed measurements normalization as a
solution, an intelligent and robust P&O (RVS-PO)
algorithm is tested for variable-speed wind energy
conversion systems (WECSs). In addition, The
proposed RVS-PO algorithm reduces the oscillation
around the area of the maximum power point by
using through correction of power variation
calculus. The proposed RVS-PO algorithm
enhanced the MPPT with more robustness against
high and long wind speed variation. In this study,
we will consider a wind-turbine system composed
of the following parts : a three-blade wind turbine, a
Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator
(PMSG) with a required power of 10 kW, a three
phase controlled rectifier, DC link capacitor, three
phase controlled inverter, and an electrical grid. The
simulation results show the high level of the
improvement in eliminating distortions resulting
from wind speed changes, as well as showing its
superiority over the traditional algorithm.
Perturb & Observe (PO). Wind Energy Conversion
System (WECS) . Maximum Power Point Tracking
(MPPT) . Permanent Magnet Synchronous
Generator (PMSG) - Robust Variable Step Perturb
& Observe (RVS_PO) . SOSMC.
1. Introduction
Traditional energy sources, such as fossil fuels,
occupied a high percentage of more than 75% of
the global energy for electricity production MAD,
as they are considered the most sources of
environmental pollution and global warming due to
the gases resulting from them. To reduce its effects
PRO-VAR, the world has turned to exploiting
alternative resources in what is known as renewable
energy as a vital solution. Wind energy is the
source that contains the largest potential energy and
the fastest growing, reaching an average of 20%
annually in the energy sector. Wind energy is clean
and sustainable.
Nowadays, studies on increasing the power of wind
turbines installed in the world are accelerating more
and more every year. And the development of a
system for converting kinetic energy into electrical
energy. The includes pneumatic parts, mechanical
systems, electrical installations, and control
techniques for energy systems [2]. In the global
market, we find two different types of wind
turbines that we distinguish according to the nature
of speed, fixed-speed turbines characterized by ease
of operation, variable-speed turbines improve the
capture and control of power points on a large
scale.
Variable speed wind turbine systems (VSWT's)
have been in receipt of extensive attention among
the various renewable energy systems. Many
references have studied variable speed wind energy
conversion systems (VSWT)Rw42. Generators are
used as an essential part in the work of energy
systems mpo5, , the most important of which are
the double-feed induction generator (DFIG) and the
permanent magnet synchronous generator (PMSG).
The direct drive generators (PMSG) have high
efficiency and reliability, which makes them of
interest and preferred over (DFIG) mpo2.
In the aim to produce maximum power of wind
source, several techniques were established under
the denomination MPPT or maximum power point
tracking techniques. In the research filed, we find
several algorithms of MPPT which are employed to
maximize the production of the provided power
under varying wind speed conditions WECSs at any
given instant. For each wind speed, the system must
find the maximum power, which is equivalent to
finding the optimum speed of rotation. In the
literature, most of the MPPT algorithms and
designs were classified as illustrated in table 1
Among the method used in MPPT, we find the
disturbance and observation (PO) technique which
is based on the application of variation of
disturbance on the speed setpoint followed by
observing its influence on the observed power.
Among the method used in MPPT, we find the
disturbance and observation (PO) technique is
based on the application of variation a variation of
disturbance on the speed setpoint followed by
observing its influence on the observed power.
Several works by researchers such as (N,S) have
focused on the quantification of observation and
disturbance by adopting fixed The P&O algorithms
mainly depend on fixed step size or variable step
size. Conventional (CPO) algorithms apply Small
or large fixed step sizes. Adopting fixed steps in the
speed adjustment: the control response makes it
possible to reach the point of maximum power but
with relatively slow non-optimal dynamics in the
event of a small step. Otherwise, applying a large
step size has a high oscillation around the
maximum power point (MPP) which reduces the
system efficiency.
The P&O algorithms mainly depend on fixed step
size or variable step size. Conventional (CPO)
algorithms apply Small or large fixed step sizes
when using the small step size increases the output
power losses. Otherwise, applying a large step size
has a high oscillation around the maximum power
point (MPP) which reduces the system efficiency.
As a result, (E, A) work is moving towards the
adoption of variable steps to reduce the CPO
drawbacks and ameliorate its efficiency. The results
show a marked improvement in the response in
terms of damping quality (F) speed. (B.E) The
controller reaches the point of maximum power and
maintains its position with a rapid response. So that
the authors classify them into two categories. First
the modified P&O (MPO) algorithms to improve
the speed tracking response, large oscillations less,
and slow tracking speed(C). Second, Adaptive P&O
algorithms (AD-PO) are used to reduce the inertia
influence in addition to eradicating solve the loss-
tracking problem for power. (F)
This article proposes a robust variable-step P&O
(RVS-PO) MPPT algorithm. A technique that
lessens drawbacks of conventional P&O MPPT
techniques such as slow speed tracking response
and inertia influence. It also improves and
addresses two problems.
The regulator requires the readjustment of the PSF Power Signal Feedback
ORB
increments of the setpoint steps according to the LS-PO Large Step P&O
MPO Modified P&O
power and the rotation speed. Indeed, with high-
VS-PO Variable Step P&O
speed machines, the increment step must also be AD-PO Adaptive Step P&O
RVS-PO Robust Variable Step P&O
increased in order to always keep or optimal (fast H-MPPT Hybrid MPPT
response). Otherwise, it is necessary to reduce it to
obtain damped dynamics (not oscillatory)
2. Mathematical Model of WECS

In the event of a continuous variation of the wind

The complete architecture of the WECS studied in
speed, either increasing or decreasing, the
the framework of this is illustrated in fig.1. It
observation (the value of the direct measurement of
consists of an horizontal axis wind turbine, a
the power variation) more reflects the influence of
permanent magnet synchronous generator GSAP,
our disturbance on the speed that generates new
a continuous bus DC, two static power converters
adjustments of the non-adequate setpoint speed
of back-to-back sinusoidal pulse-width
which leads to a deviation from the maximum
modulation SPWM a three-phase filter and an
power point.
electrical grid network each block are elucidated

This paper is organized as follows: Statistic in the following sections. (MPO1.mpo6).

previous studies close to this work in Section 2, the

dynamic model of wind turbines are modeled in
Section 3. Section 4 is devoted to the study of
closed control loops. The reactive power control
strategy is optimized in order to maximize the
power output in Section 5. In the last section, the
effectiveness of the proposed method was verified
Fig.1.Wind Power Conversion System
and its results were presented for discussion. And
the good performance of the system was confirmed 2.1. Turbine Model:
by applying the proposed algorithms. The obtained
results using Matlab/Simulink software be
interpreted, where wind data was taken from a real
source (Algeria desert, Adrar city).

Nomenclature
WECS Wind Energy Conversion System
PMSG Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generators
MSC Machine Side Converter
BTBC Back-To-Back Converters
FSWT Fixed Speed Wind Turbine
VSWT Variable Speed Wind Turbine
DFIG Doubly Fed Induction Generator
FOC Field-Oriented Control
MPPT Maximum Power Point Tracking
SOSMC Second Order Sliding Mode Control
SVPWM Space Vector Pulse Width Modulation
DPC Direct Power Control
IPC Indirect Power Control
TSR Tip speed ratio
OT Optimal Torque
The mechanical power Pt of the wind is expressed

depending on the aerodynamic power, it is obtained

by 30RW: angle β . λ is defined as: 25Rw,Maghni art 21

1 nc
Pt = ρ . S . v 3 (1) C p ( λ , β )=∑ ai λi (3)
2
i=0

The actual mechanical power  Pω captures by the wi
In this work we have applied a sinusoidal form of
nd blade is expressed by the following expression
Cp :
MPO1:
−C 7
1 C
Pω= ρ . S C p ( λ , β ) . v 3 (2)
2 (
C p ( λ , β )=C 1 2 −C 3 β−C 4 β C −C 6 e
λi
5

) λi
(4 )

where ρ is the air density, R is the radius of wind Where

blade , v ω is the wind speed, β is the pitch angle
the orientation blade, λ is the tip speed ratio (TSR),
and C p is the power coefficient which is a
C 1=0.073 , C2=151 , C3 =0.058 ,C 4 =0.002 ,C 5=2.14 ,C 6=
nonlinear function of the tip speed ratio λ and the
blade pitch
 Where T mrepresents the mechanical torque, f is the

2.2. Generator Model (PSMG): coefficient of fraction J t is the moment of inertia.

To easily the process of controlling the dynamic
performance of the electric generator, the equations
based on the stator voltage V d , V q in the Park
transform are described as follows Rw42:
3. Control of the Machine Side Converter
The generator side converter control ensures turbine
speed control while providing a maximum power.
As illustrated in figure 2, two controllers are
needed:

¿ - MPPT controller to generate an optimum

speed reference at all times.
Knowing that the electromotive force is presented - SOSMC speed controller to provide
by the following equation Hal: electromagnetic reference torque for
generator FOC control.
¿
Wind Turbine PMSG
V d , V q , I d , I qare the direct and quadrature
components of voltage and current respectively,
Ÿt

referred to as synchronous reference frame. Ld ,L ¿ q

¿

are the direct and quadrature inductances ,

Vw
P-m es Ÿ -r ef
MPPT Speed Control
ψ f represents the flux of magnets, ω is the speed of Ÿt Te-r ef

the reference frame in radians/second (rad/s) and R s Fig.2. Machine Side Converter Control Strategy.
is the resistances of the stator winding.The describe
3.1. MPPT control
of the electromagnetic torque can by: Meghni Art
21 Although the speed of the wind turbine can be
fixed or variable, maximization of the energy
3 extracted is achievable with only variable speed
T e = p [ ( Ld−Lq ) I d I q + I d ψ f ] (9)
2
wind turbines. The figure 3 depicts the curve of
mechanical turbine power versus the mechanical
Where p is the number of poles.
speed for various wind speed rates. It show that a
It is noticeable that for low speed surface mounted maximum power retrieving can be performed
PMSG, d- and q-axes inductances are the same i.e.
0.6

Ld ≈ Lq ref-15 λopt,Cpmax,β=0
Betz limit

0.5

The mechanical dynamics model of the considered 0.4

Power Coefficient Cp

wind turbine system can be defined by the 0.3

following expression:
0.2

dω
Jt + f φ=T −T (10)
0.1

dt m e 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Tip Speed Ration λ
 through continuous speed adjustment each time The second order sliding mode controllers contain
the wind speed varies. two parts:

I sqref =I sqeq+ I sqN (15)

Fig.3. Graph of Power coefficient C p in function of λ
Where:
The ratio between the power extracted from the
wind and the theoretically available total power has I sqN =I 1+ I 2 (16)
a maximum defined by the Betz limit [mppt-44].
Practically, the MPPT controller tracks the
İ 1=−N 1 sign ( s Ω )
optimum power point at varying wind speeds,
keeping the power coefficient at its maximum value
C P =0.48. [mppt-ref11]
With:
{ I 2=N 2 |sΩ | sign ( s Ω )
√ t
t

t
(17)

In order to ensure the convergence of the sliding

3.2. SOSMC controller
manifolds to zero in finite time, the constants N1
In the same part, the reference speed (along which
tracks the MPPs) is used in the speed regulator input and N 2 can be chosen as follows [48]:
to generate the q-axis current component as shown
in Fig.8. Therefore, a novel SOSMC algorithm is μi

{
proposed to achieve the speed control of PMSG for N1>
Lg
each wind speed in order to maximize the extracted ( 18 )
μi ( k i + μi )
power at the turbine output. In this algorithm, the N2≥
chattering phenomenon can be limited so as to L g2 ( k i−μi )
improve the PMSG performance when compared to
the classical FOSMC and conventional PI control
Where, I sqeq μ i, k i, Lg
Let us introduce the following sliding surface for the
4. MPPT algorithm
speedΩ .
Different available MPPT algorithms are
sΩ =Ωt ref −Ω t (11)
t
described for extracting maximum power which is
Then we have: classified according to the power measurement
i.e. direct, indirect power controller, or hybrid
1
ṡΩ =Ω̇ tref −Ω̇ t =Ω̇ tref − ( T t +T e −F Ω t ) (12) MPPT. Proprieties and comparisons of MPPT
t
J
algorithms are also highlighted on the one hand
If we define the functions G Ωt as follows: wind speed requirements, complexity, speed

1 responses, see table 1.

G Ω =Ω̇ tref − ( T t−F Ω t ) (13)
t
J
4.1. CPO MPPT algorithm

Among the method used in MPPT, we find the

Thus:
perturbation and observation (CPO). This later is a
Ṫ e simple mathematical optimization technique to
s̈Ω =ĠΩ − (14)
t t
J implement. It is used to find the optimal point of a

The control algorithm proposed which is based on given function. This technique does not need the

super twisting algorithm (ST) has been introduced requirement of sensors and specifications of the

by Levant [47]. system; therefore they are more reliable and reduce
the cost [ REF].
 It is implemented through successive adjustment of new characteristic curve is that corresponding to V 2
the reference speed (ω ) and the recording of the ∆ P13 <0then the P&O algorithm
. In this situation
power variation sign ( ∆ P). If ∆ P> 0, we should decrease the speed reference to move the
continue in the same action (speed increment by¿) P4 .But again the wind speed
state point towards
if not we reverse the action. As shown in fig. 4.
decreases at V 3, so the real state point will be at P4
. If speed continues in decrease, there are stagnation
MPP

and very slow convergence to the maximum power

P-Max

(3)
DP23

DP12
(2)
Dw
points.
(1)
M echa nical Power

Dw

W-Max Rotor speed

Pt-MPP

MPP
M echa nical Po wer

DPt
2
Mechanical Power

DŸt

SS 3
V1
1
4 6
LS
V2

Rotor speed 5 7
8 V3

V4

Rotor speed
Fig.4.MPPT Perturb and Observation method

Let us consider the first case where turbine is Fig.5. Wind speed decreasing effect on convergence to

driven by fixed wind speed. . If the initial operating maximum power point.

point is located at point P1, we increment at instant The same situation can be conducted in the case of

k , the reference ω ref ref continuous wind speed rising particularly when the
k by ∆ ωk and we will reach
functioning point is located to the right of the
point P2. Since ∆ P12 >0 then we continue by
maximum power point. The figure 6 illustrates the
incrementing the speed reference again by the same state point trajectory over characteristic curves for
amount ∆ ωref to reach point P3 and so on until we several wind speeds (V 1 <V 2 <V 3 <V 4 ). If speed
reach the peak point of maximum power.
reference is increased when starting at P1, the
Now, we examine the second case of wind speed succession of points will be in order P1, P3 and P3
decreasing from V 1 to V 4 while P&O algorithm . So, in this particular case, the P&O algorithm
control the turbine speed. The characteristic curves produce very slow convergent process.
are illustrated in figure 5. If initially the functioning

point is located at P1 instead to move towards point MPP

P2, the state system point will jump to P3 as the 6

Mechanical Power

V4

V3 4

V2
2
V1 5

1 3

Rotor speed
Fig .6. Illustrates the power versus rotor speed curves Also, we will introduce correction on the variation
when the wind speed varies augmented. power calculus through cancelation of wind
disturbance effect.

Following the same methodology and further

a- Power normalization:
analysis, the table 2 regroups all cases of wind
speed variation and its effect on the P&O algorithm To give a systematic method in sizing the reference

convergence. step size, let us consider a turbine-generator system

Table 2 : Effect Of wind speed variation on P&O under the wind speed v k. The maximum
algorithm convergence rate
mechanical power Pmax
k is given by :

The function point is to the The function point is to the

1
Pmax
k = ρ . s . v k 3 .C p max ( 20)
left of Pmax right of Pmax 2
∆ ω<0 ∆ ω>0 ∆ ω<0 ∆ ω>0
The Moves Convergence Moves Moves Where ρ . s and v k are the volume weight, the
Wind away to towards away to the away to
speed the left of the right of
surface belayed by turbine blades and the wind
Pmax left of Pmax
increases
Pmax Pmax speed at instant k . To maintain the optimal
acceptable
The Very slow convergence Very slow convergence dynamics of the Controller when using it with
Wind turbines of different sizes, we suggest standardizing
speed
the power measurement and the setpoint speed
decreases
increment Standardization of power measurement:

Let us define instantaneous normalized power PkN

4.2. Robust Variable Step P&O
algorithm
From basic analysis of P&O algorithm, we can
remark the two following drawbacks:
1) The P&O algorithm step size is usually fixed
and no information on how it is specified.
Several P&O methods give its value for
particular system and they don’t give
explanation, rules or directives on how to size
it in general case.
2) By observing the Power-speed curve it is more
adequate to adjust the speed reference step
according to the distance to the maximum
power point.
3) The P&O algorithm is developed on the basis
of constant or slow varying wind speed;
however, this is not realistic. Furthermore its
rate convergence will be strongly affected
when wind speed varies.
To overcome the two first drawbacks, we propose
to work with normalized variables of generator
speed and mechanical power.
MPPT
as ratio of actual absorbed power to that of
maximum available as follows :
Pk
PkN = ×100(19)
Pmax
k
It measures the distance in percent between actual
system state and the desired state (maximum power
point).
b- Speed step selection
If the speed reference step is taken constant, for
great variation of wind speed, the controller will
take more time to reach the maximum power point.
Indeed, a non-adaptive step will provide the same
action as taken in the case of small variation of
wind speed. So, avoid slow reaction, we propose to
adapt this step by amount proportional to the
 correction needed to reach the maximum power
point. As measure of this action, we propose to
subdivide the normalized power level in finite
number of sectors (l=1. . L¿ and for each sector, a
corresponding step size will be defined as percent
opt
of the actual optimal speed (ω k ¿ . The figure 7
shows an example of normalized power-speed
curve with three sectors.
c- Compensation of wind speed variation
The P&O algorithm is based essentially on the
sign of the product of power variation and speed
step increment. If positive, it will increment the
speed reference step however in the negative case
it will increase it. Unfortunately, the power
variation also depends on wind speed variation
witch introduce a perturbation on computed

power variation ∆ P k and the usual algorithm

The speed reference step at instant k is proposed as
will appear less efficient.
follows:

For more robustness in front of wind speed

∆ ωref opt
k =α l ×ω k (21)
variation, we propose the Robust Variable Step
Also, we define normalized actual speed as algorithm (RVS) to ensure more accurate speed
reference adjustment. It is necessary to eliminate
this perturbation taking in account only the part of
N ω❑k
ω = k (22) ∆ P k induced by speed adjustment in the previous
ωopt
k
step. Ones done, the proposed algorithm will appear
Where l=1. . L denote the sectors indexes, the more robust to wind speed variation. The proposed
parameters 0< α l <1 :l=1. . L  are weighting Robust Variable Step We know that power at
factors. They reflect the amount of speed instant k is a function of two variables: turbine
adjustment relatively to the optimal speed. These speed and wind speed. So, we can write:
factors should decrease when we move from sector
to upper since fine adjustment is needed near the
Pk =f ( ωk , v k )
maximum power point. (23)

Hence, the power variation at instant k +1 is given

by:
PNK

MPP( Wopt,Pmax)
∆ P k+1=Pk +1 ( ω k+1 , v k +1 )−Pk ( ω k , v k ) (24)
1
α3 α3
Sector
α3
The development in first order of equation (24)
L=3 α3
α3 α3 gives:
Sector α2 α2 α1>α2>α3
∂f
L=2

α2 α2
∆ P k+1 ≃ f ( ωk +1 , v k ) +
∂v |
( ωk+ 1 ,v k )
∆ v k+1−f ( ω k , v k ) (25)
Sector
L=1 The second term in previous equation represents the
α1 α1
wind speed variation perturbation. Indeed, when the
1 WN=W/Wopt wind speed is constant this term goes to zero. So,
the corrected power variation ∆ Pωk+1without wind
Fig.7. RVS-P&O MPPT controller operation disturbance is computed as follows:
 ∂f 1
∆ Pωk+1=∆ P k+1−
∂v | (ωk+ 1 , vk )
∆ v k +1( 26) Pω= ρs v 3 C p ( λ ) because β=0
2

Practically, ∆ P k+1 is easily deduced trough 2- Therefore

subtracting of successive measured or calculated

∂C p
power Pk +1and Pk , however the derivative term is
developed and computed from mathematical power
expression.
∂ Pω 1
[
= ρs 2 v 2 C p ( λ )+ v 3
∂v 2 { ∂λ
∂v
∗∂ λ
}]
3- Since C pdepends on λ i:
Thus, we propose the following organization
general flow chart of RVS algorithm as illustrated ∂C p
in figure.8. ∗∂ λi
∂C p ∂ λ i
=
∂λ ∂λ
4- It should be noted that equation (2) makes it
possible to make the right decision of the speed

increment ( ∆ ω)vis-à-vis the relatively large

START
and continuous variation of wind.
5- Equation (1) makes it possible to make a better
∆𝑃𝐾+1 = 𝑃𝐾 + 𝑃𝐾−1
′
𝜕𝑃
∆𝑃𝐾+1 = ∆𝑃𝐾 + ∆𝑣
𝜕𝑣𝑘

decision to increment the reference speed by

Determiner 𝑙 𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝛼𝑙

Adapter 𝜔𝑜𝑝 𝑡,𝐾+1

+ ∆ ω or−∆ ω.
∆𝜔𝐾 = 𝛼𝑙 . 𝜔𝑜𝑝𝑡 ,𝐾+1 6- But this variation of the setpoint does not take
into account the impact of the force of the
wind. Indeed, to guarantee a rapid convergence
Oui Non
∆𝑃𝐾′ >0
towards the point P MK (therefore ensure, a
C p ≃0.48 it is judicious to adapt the

𝜔𝑟𝑒𝑓 = 𝜔 + ∆𝜔 𝐾
increment step of the reference speed according
𝜔𝑟𝑒𝑓 = 𝜔 − ∆𝜔 𝐾
to the wind speed for example:

t
∂P
∆ ωnew =∆ ω+∫ ( ¿) ∗γdZ ¿
0 ∂v P
Fig.8.a.General flowchart of the RVS-PO MPPT k

Technique.
With:

∂ Pt ∆ ω : P&O without wind variation

The algorithm is given by equation (1) where
∂v
t
is calculated as follows:
∫ ( ∂∂ Pv ¿ ) :¿P&O for wind variation
0 Pk
1- Since

γ :Gain de normalization
 Fig.8.b.Detailed flowchart of the RVS-PO MPPT
technique.

Start

Measure
w(k), Pw(k),V(k)
Wref=w(k1)

Calculate

Popt(k)

DPw=Pw(k+1)-Pw(k)
DPnew-w=DPw-(dPw/dV)*DV

Yes DPnew-w>0 NO

NO α1>S YES YES α1>S NO

W(k+1)=W(k) -DW1 W(k+1)=W(k)+DW1

NO α2>S YES YES α2>S

NO

W(k+1)=W(k)-DW2 W(k+1)=W(k)-DW2

NO αL>S YES
YES αL>S NO

W(k+1)=W(k)-DWK W(k+1)=W(k)-DWL W(k+1)=W(k)+DWL W(k+1)=W(k)+DWK

W(k)=W(k-1)
Pw(k)=Pw(k-1)

Return

Simulation results and discussion
In order to evaluate this work, avoid drawbacks of
Conventional P&O algorithms, the proposed RVS-
PO algorithm is investigated for the MPPT control
of the wind turbine system, and its proposed control
system was implemented in the environment
“MATLAB/Simulink” with PMSG/WT parameters
provided in “Appendix.” Simulation tests were
conducted under two different profiles of wind (the
step-change profile of wind speed with average
speed (11.4 m/s) as shown in Fig. 11a, and real
random wind speed in Fig. 11b).
To demonstrate the effectiveness and the reliability
of the proposed MPPT algorithm, this simulation is
based on an individual comparison of the
performance of the proposed RVS-PO algorithm
with are compared with the conventional fixed step-
size P&O, using small and large step-sizes, and the
VS-PO to illustrate the effectiveness of the
proposed algorithm, In addition, Optimal Rotational
Speed “ORC” and the WECS overall efficiency is
calculated. The results are summarized in Table 3.
The parameters of the wind turbine system with a
PMSG, utilized in the simulation, are presented in
speed where these oscillations around the MPP
badly affect the mechanical energy observed and
the vibration of the machine.
In contrast, RVS-PO has a very fast response of 0
milliseconds than VS-PO with reduces oscillations,
where RVS-PO achieved a settling time without
any oscillations. The proposed technique reached
and maintained a maximum value of CP = 0.48
compared to LS-PO, SS-PO, and VS-PO. Also,
RVS-PO sustains the optimal value of the tip speed
ratio (8.1) faster than the conventional P&O and
algorithms with variable-step as illustrate in fig .11
(c).
The rotor speed tracking of the different examined
P&O algorithms is presented in fig.11.d.The LS-PO
has large oscillation during the change of speed, it
ripple peak = 8.5 rad/sec), decreases the ripple peak
until a settle after about 1.6 s, as for the LS-PO has
small instant not continued oscillations (speed peak
ripples = 6 rad/sec.), then stabilizes after 0.57 s.
Moreover, the VS-PO have deflection takes 0.38 s,
as for RVS-PO, it has proven its strength in
tracking speed without any oscillation and complete
stability. The proposed VS-PO capture the
maximum mechanical power efficiency compared
to studied algorithms as shown in Fig. 11(e).
12
11.4

an appendix. The proposed RVS-PO algorithm is 10

Wind Speed (m/s)

9.5
validated using step wind speed change. The most
8
7.5
important criteria for studying the efficiency of the 6.6

proposed technique are the optimal values of power 5

4
coefficient and tip speed ratio, 0.48 and 8.1, 0 5 10
Time (s)
15 20 25

respectively, which are illustrated in figure A. (a)

However, LS-PO and SS-PO contain large

oscillations around the points near the wind speed
change regions and last about 72 milliseconds
before a settling time and the system maintains its
stability until the second gradual change of wind
 0.5
Ref-PO SS-PO LS-PO VS-PO RVS-PO
The proposed RVS-PO reached the optimal power
0.48 coefficient (Cp=0.48) more rapidly than SS-PO,
Power Coefficient Cp

Zoom
LS-PO, and the VS-PO, It as such achieved high
0.48
efficiency of 97.91% as depicted in Fig. 12.b.
0.4 0.46

0.44

15 15.2 15.4 15.6 15.8 16

If the step size is large (LS-PO), it means a faster
0.35
0 2 4 6 8 10
Time (s)
12 14 16 18 20
response and more oscillations around the peak
MPP as shown in Figure.12.a, and therefore less
(b)
efficient. A small step (SS-PO) improves efficiency
Ref-PO SS-PO LS-PO VS-PO RVS-PO
but reduces the speed of convergence to reach the
10
optimal value as shown in Fig.12.b.
8.1
Tip speed ratio λ

7
6 Zoom On the other hand, we notice for VS-PO has a
9
4
8.1
medium response and small oscillations, but it fails
2 7 to track when the speed reaches 11.42 m /s that is, it
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
15
12
15.2
14
15.4
16
15.6 15.8
18
16
20
does not have high efficiency during a large change
Time (s)
in speed.
(c)
In contrast, the proposed RVS-PO has a fast
Ref-PO SS-PO LS-PO VS-PO RVS-PO
response and very small oscillations that resisted
60
wind speed fluctuation. As such The RVS-PO
50
reaches the optimal value of the tip speed ratio
Rotor Speed (rad/s)

40

30 55
Zoom
compared to other techniques, which fail to achieve
50
20
40
the optimal tip speed ratio as clarified in Fig.12. c.
10
15 15.2 15.4 15.6 15.8
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 The effectiveness of rotor speed tracking for the
Time (s)
studied P&O algorithms is shown in Fig. 12.d. The
(d) RVS-PO has the ability to regulate the generator
speed according to wind speed variations with very
6000
Ref-PO SS-PO LS-PO VS-PO RVS-PO
small ripples compared to SS-PO, LS-PO, and LS-
5000 PO.
Mechanical Power (W)

4000

In addition, the waveform of mechanical power by

3000 Zoom
6000
2000

1000
5000
LS-PO, SS-PO, and VS-PO methods shows some
0 3000
15 15.2 15.4 15.6 15.8 16
oscillations which affect the quality of the energy.
-1000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (s)
This can be explained by its inability to follow the
(e) maximum peak. In addition, it can be noted that
smooth power tracking is achieved using the RVS-
Fig. 11.a The wind speed profile step-change in PO technique, as demonstrated in Fig.12.e.
(m/s), b are the power coefficient, c tip speed ratio,
d rotor speed and e mechanical power of MPPT
methods (LS-PO, SS-PO, and VS-PO), 12

11

respectively, compared with MPPT-(RVS-PO). 10

Wind Speed (m/s)

8
The major drawback of method P&O the 7

continuous variation of the wind speed, increasing 6

or decreasing. In order to demonstrate the 5

performance of the proposed RVS-PO control 0 1 2 3 4 5

Time (s)
6 7 8 9 10

algorithm during varying environmental conditions, (a)

the system was simulated under a wind speed with
an average value of 9m / s, as shown in figure.11.a.
 Ref-PO SS-PO LS-PO VS-PO RVS-PO
of the algorithms (MPPT), there is not a large
0.55

0.48 deviation in tracking and maintaining the optimum

Power Coefficient Cp

0.4

Zoom Zoom operating point. For this reason, the quality of

0.3 0.48
0.48

0.2 0.46
0.46
0.44 extracted power and the mechanical efficiency of
0.44 0.42
0.1 0.42
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 each MPPT technique depend on the methodology
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time (s) of research and tracking of this MPP (the time and
(b) the method of resolution).We have represented in
Fig. 13a–e, the ORC for four conventional MPPT
Ref-PO SS-PO LS-PO VS-PO RVS-PO

10
methods (SS-PO, SL-PO, and VS-PO) compared
9
8.1 with the proposed technique (RVS-PO).
Tip Speed Ratio λ

7
6
Zoom Zoom
5
9
8.1
9
8.1
These results are shown when applying a mean
6
0 0.1 0.2 0.3
6
5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8
wind pro-file (11.55 m/s). The results show clearly
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time (s) the efficiency of RVS-PO in ORC smooth tracking
(c) compared with other methods.

Ref-PO SS-PO LS-PO VS-PO RVS-PO

6000
maximal point (11.42 m/s)
50 5000
Wind power (W)
Rotor Speed (rad/s)

40 4000 Real ORC (MPPT Mode)

30 3000
Zoom
20 40 2000

10 30 1000

5 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 0

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time (s) Rotor speed (rad/s)

(d) (a)

Ref-PO SS-PO LS-PO VS-PO RVS-PO

LS-PO Ref-PO
6000
6000
2500
5000 5000
Mechanical Power (W)

Mechanical Power (W)

Zoom
4000 4000
ORC
5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9
3000 3000

2000 2000

1000 1000

0
0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Rotor Speed (rad/s)
Time (s)

(e) (b)

Fig. 12.a The wind speed profile random in (m/s), b SS-PO Ref-PO
6000

are the power coefficient, c tip speed ratio, d rotor 5000

Mechanical Power (W)

speed and e mechanical power of MPPT methods 4000 ORC

3000

(LS-PO, SS-PO, and VS-PO), respectively, 2000

compared with MPPT-(RVS-PO). 1000

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Rotor Speed (rad/s)
In addition, the wind energy system operates
(c)
around the optimum operating point (Optimal
Rotational Speed “ORC”), while maintaining this
Maximum Power Point (MPP) for each variation in
wind speed. Although the different characteristics
 6000
VS-PO Ref-PO
Stator resistance R s=0.00829 Ω
5000

Ld =0.174 mH
Mechanical Power (W)

4000
ORC
Stator direct inductance
3000

2000
Stator quadrature Lq=0.174 mH
1000
inductance
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Rotor Speed (rad/s)
35 40 45 50 55 Permanent magnet flux ψ m=0.071 wb
(d)
Number of pole pairs n p =6
Inertia J t =0.089 kg . m2
RVS-PO Ref-PO
6000

5000
Mechanical Power (W)

ORC
4000 Friction f =0.005 N . m
3000

2000
Table 3. Wind turbine parameters
1000

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Radius of the turbine Rt =2 m
Rotor Speed (rad/s)

(e) Air density ρ=1.225 kg . m3

Fig. 13 a–e, optimal rotational speed (ORC) for Pitch angle β=0 °
four MPPT methods (SS-PO, SL-PO, VS-PO and
RVS-PO).
Optimal tip speed ratio λ opti=8.1

Conclusion Maximum power C p max=0.48

Coefficient
In this paper, a new MPPT algorithm has logical
been developed and implemented to eliminate some
tracking drawbacks of the PO conventional method
fixed step-size and the method variable step-size
based VS-PO. The proposed RVS-PO algorithm
divides the P-ω curve into modular sectors
horizontal by comparing a newly synthesized ratio
percentage with another specified ratio which is
related to the required power accuracy.
Effectiveness of the proposed RVS-PO algorithm, it
is compared with the CPO and the VS-PO MPPT
technique. The proposed RVS-PO algorithm
exhibits a high-efficiency fast response at different
environmental conditions by utilizing the proposed
RVS-PO algorithm. The loss of tracking and wrong
direction problem is avoided and accurately find the
value of the step amount in each modular sector, to
reach the maximum energy point. The simulation
results are satisfactory because they show a good
agreement between the measured quantities and the
reference quantities.

Appendix A

Table 2. PMSG parameters

Rated power Pe =10 kw

 Table. 1. Classification of MPPT algorithms

MPPT algorithms

Methods’ Classification of MPPT Proprieties

IPC OT The age of the system affects its efficiency
PSF Easy to implement with fast time response
TSR Based on measure Requires devices to measure wind speed, which increases the cost of
the system
Based on estimation Exhibit a mathematically accurate assessment of operational wind
speeds, based on the equation of the power coefficient

DPC ORB Does not need any sensor for speed measurements
INC The advantage of this algorithm is that it offers a good yield method
under changing wind speed
P&O CPO It is independent and does not need sensors.
Slow convergence speed which rises the output power losses.
VS-PO It ensures faster speed tracking, and are reduced oscillation around the
MPO maximum point
AD-PO Enhances the WECS efficiency and rapidly tracks the MPP with low
steady-state oscillations
RVS-PO A robust and highly efficient algorithm to maintain the stability of the
system in the event of changes in wind speed.
IA FL It is superior in terms of efficiency and robustness. However, it
requires a great memory, prior knowledge of the results.
NN Robust, effective, and characterized by the ability to approximate
nonlinear systems.
PSO It finds the optimal solution using a population of particles and forces
the system to reach its equilibrium quickly where the turbine inertia
effect is minimized
MVPO It increases the energy production of the wind farm, which reduces the
cost of the system

Hybrid MPPT MPPT methods present disadvantages but the combination of the two
algorithms allows us to obtain hybrid algorithms more efficiently.