Applied Energy 179 (2016) 523–530

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

Photovoltaic maximum power point tracking under fast varying

of solar radiation
A. Belkaid a,b,⇑, I. Colak c, O. Isik c
a
Department of Electromechanics, University of Bordj BouArreridj, El-Anasser 34030, Bordj Bou Arreridj, Algeria
b
Automatic Laboratory of Setif (LAS), University of Setif 1, El Maabouda, Street of Bejaia, 19000 Setif, Algeria
c
Engineering and Architecture Faculty of Istanbul Gelisim University, Turkey

h i g h l i g h t s

An INC-MPPT technique is improved for PV plant.

Dynamic efficiency of the basic INC under a gradual irradiance profile is improved.

Energy conversion efficiency is increased by approximately 5%.

Stringent irradiance profile with different shapes is selected as in EN50530.

A robust tracker is proposed for variable irradiance, temperature and load.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Perturb and Observe (P&O) and Incremental Conductance (INC) are widely used as Maximum Power
Received 29 January 2016 Point Tracking (MPPT) techniques in Photovoltaic (PV) systems. But, they fail under rapidly varying of
Received in revised form 1 June 2016 sunlight levels. This paper proposes a new MPPT technique, which can make a distinction between per-
Accepted 10 July 2016
turbation in the reference voltage and sudden-changing of sunlight and thus optimize the PV system effi-
ciency. This method consists on a modified INC algorithm, which is used to fine-tune the duty cycle of the
DC/DC converter in order to avoid divergences of the maximum power point (MPP) when using basic INC
Keywords:
under fast varying of luminosity levels.
Photovoltaic system
Incremental Conductance
The proposed PV-MPPT system, which is composed by a step-up converter as the interface to feed the
Maximum power point tracker load, is tested by simulation within the Matlab/Simulink software by taking into account the luminosity,
Step-up converter the temperature and the load variation. The simulation results are satisfactory and demonstrate that the
Modeling improved INC technique can track the PV maximum power at diverse operating conditions with the most
Simulation excellent performance, the energy conversion efficiency is increased by approximately 5%.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The solar energy has many advantages compared with fossil-fuel
energy. It is inexhaustible, free of charge, naturalness, clean, no eco-
logical pollution, and with modular character, which allows con-
struction of the solar array at different power levels. On the other
hand, it has an important disadvantage, which is the low efficiency
of conversion of light to electrical energy [1]. Moreover, the power
harvested by a PV generator depends on a number of factors, such
as the luminosity, the temperature, and the load in that it is con-
⇑ Corresponding author at: Department of Electromechanics, University of Bordj
BouArreridj, El-Anasser 34030, Bordj Bou Arreridj, Algeria.
E-mail addresses: belkaid08@yahoo.fr (A. Belkaid), icolak@gelisim.edu.tr
(I. Colak), omer@gelisim.edu.tr (O. Isik).
nected. In each operating condition, there is just one and unique
particular point that makes the PV array in functioning at its max-
imum power. In most PV applications (stand-alone system, hybrid
system and public grid connected system), it is very important to
exploit the peak power provided by the photovoltaic generator.
To achieve this goal, a power electronics device with an adequate
MPPT technique is needed [1–5]. Many of these MPPT algorithms
have been published in several references [6–9]. These methods
vary in many aspects such as the necessary sensors, the complexity,
the cost, the efficiency, the convergence rapidity, the accurate
tracking when temperature and/or luminosity vary, and equipment
required for the implementation or popularity [10]. A full analysis
of 30 different MPPT algorithms can be found in [6].
Among these techniques, Perturb and Observe [11–17] and
Incremental Conductance [2,17–21] are algorithms most

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.07.034
0306-2619/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
524 A. Belkaid et al. / Applied Energy 179 (2016) 523–530
commonly used in the literature due to their simplicity of imple-
mentation and independence to PV array parameters. Other tech-
niques based on different principles are fractional short circuit
current that estimates the optimal current by short circuit current
[22], fractional open circuit voltage that estimates the optimal
voltage by the open circuit voltage [23], the neural network [24],
the fuzzy logic [10,25] and the Sliding Mode Control-based MPPT
(SMC) [1,26–29]. Most of these algorithms are iterative, based on
the disruption of the cyclic ratio of the converter by a small incre-
ment. These techniques can track the MPP with great precision
under stable conditions. But it still reveals compromise between
speed pursuit and the reliability of prosecution when the values
of load or weather conditions change rapidly. A lot of researchers
made changes to these algorithms in the objective to improve
them. In Ref. [30], two different implementations for the INC algo-
rithm were applied to PV pumping system; the first one is with ref-
erence voltage perturbation in combination with a PI regulator to
regulate the power converter duty cycle; the second one is without
PI controller in which the duty cycle is employed straight as the
control parameter. It was found that the direct duty cycle control
exhibits better energy efficiency than the first control by about
2%. The INC direct duty cycle control was firstly implemented in
solar array using Cuk converter by Safari et al. [31]. This last
method is considered in the present paper as basic INC. It perturbs
the duty ratio until the peak power is reached with a fixed step
size. However, it suffers from the low speed tracking and the losing
tracking direction when rapid changes occurred in environmental
conditions. For that reason, many researchers introduce the vari-
able step size in INC MPPT [32,33]. Basic and variable step size
INC techniques are also not capable to respond precisely in fast-
changing of solar radiance [2]. That is why the authors of [2] have
proposed a variant of variable step size INC method with a permit-




dI

ted error
Ipv þ V pv dVppvv
< 0:06 to mitigate inaccurate answers of
the conventional INC (fixed step size) during sudden changes in
sunlight levels. But this last work should be checked with a profile
of gradual change of irradiance. Therefore, this paper proposes a
new and simple INC to reduce the probability of losing tracking
direction that may be occurred and thus to enhance the energy
efficiency of the PV system.
The INC algorithm is among the Hill-Climbing techniques [34].
Through adjusting the duty ratio of the converter, it drives up
the operating point on the power versus voltage curve to achieve
the MPP which is at the top. This method offers advantages such
as simple implementation, fast convergence speed, high efficiency
and low cost [6,19,31], but also some disadvantages: The first one
is the incessant unwanted oscillating of the operating point around
the MPP [35,36], once the tracking control reaches the vicinity of
the PV panel maximum power. As a result, this steady-state undu-
lation causes the energy losses. The second one is that the algo-
rithm can lose its tracking direction, i.e. it can deviate away from
the MPP, when the change in the luminosity is rapid [19,35], espe-
cially if the irradiation varies according to a slope. For the reason
that the algorithm is not capable to determine if the change in
the power is due to the perturbation of the voltage or due to the
change in the irradiance. This divergence also causes the power
loss and thus a decrease in the efficiency. Another problem to con-
sider is that many researchers test their algorithms with simple
irradiance profile (constant or step). Consequently, the improve-
ments in performance cannot be truthfully demonstrated. In order
to reduce the effect of these drawbacks, this paper proposes a new
MPPT control based on a modified incremental conductance. The
proposed tracker is similar to the old one, but it incorporates two
tests consisting in change in current and voltage with same signs.
The added part is for the fast-varying of the sunshine. Therefore,
the new INC can distinguish between perturbation in the reference
voltage and sudden-changing of sunlight and thus avoid diver-
gence from the MPP. An additional contribution is the selecting
of stringent profile for the irradiance variation as suggested by
EN 50530 [17,37]. This irradiance profile consists on different
shapes such as the ramp up, the step down, the step up and the
ramp down. These diverse shapes are capable to confirm truthfully
the efficacy of the proposed tracker under static and dynamic
states. As a result, this work is done to improve the dynamic effi-
ciency of PV conversion chain with a modified INC that can
decrease the probability of diverging away from the peak power.
To compare the proposed tracker with the basic one, the tracking
efficiency parameter is taken into account.
This paper is organized as follows. PV panel and boost chopper
models are given in Sections 2 and 3 respectively. Then Maximum
Power Point Tracking Algorithms are introduced in Section 4.
Subsequently, the basics of classical and modified INC techniques
are given. Thereafter, Section 5 depicts the results of simulation.
Finally, the conclusion section summarizes highlights the achieve-
ments of this study.
2. Equivalent circuit and characteristics of PV panel
The solar cell is the basic elementary component, which can
transform directly the sunlight into electricity. Assembly of cells
in series forms a module. The equivalent circuit of the PV module
is illustrated in Fig. 1 [20,21]. A series-parallel assemblage of mod-
ules forms an array. The PV panel can be described mathematically
by the following set of equations as in [38,39].
" ! #  
V pv þ ðNNps ÞRs Ipv V pv þ NNps Rs Ipv
Ipv ¼ N p Iph  Np Is exp 1    ð1Þ
ns av t Ns
Rp
Np
where Ipv is the PV array output current (A), V pv is the PV array out-
put voltage (V), N s and N p are the number of PV modules connected
in series and parallel, respectively, ns is the number of PV cells
connected in series in one string, Rs and Rp are respectively the PV
module series and parallel resistances (Ω), a is the p-n junction ide-
ality factor.
The photo-current Iph depends on solar irradiance G and tem-
perature T as follows:
G
Iph ¼ ½Isc þ ki ðT  T  Þ ð2Þ
G
where ki is the short circuit current temperature coefficient, Isc is
the short circuit current at standard test conditions (STC) that are:
solar irradiance G ¼ 1000 W=m2 , cell temperature T  ¼ 298 K and
a spectral distribution AM 1.5.
The reverse saturation current Is varies with temperature
according to the following expression:
Isc þ ki ðT  T  Þ
Is ¼   
 ð3Þ
exp V oc þknvs vðTT
t
Þ
1
Fig. 1. Solar module equivalent circuit.
 A. Belkaid et al. / Applied Energy 179 (2016) 523–530 525

Table 1 L iL
MSX 60 solar panel specifications [1].
I pv
Parameter Value D
STC power rating P max 60 W G
Open circuit voltage V oc 21.1 V u =1
G V pv
Short circuit current Isc 3.8 A
P C1 K C2 Vo R
T
Voltage at maximum power V opt 17.1 V V u=0
Current at maximum power Iopt 3.5 A
Temperature coefficient of V oc 0.08 V/°C
Temperature coefficient of Isc 0.003 A/°C

V pv
MPPT
+
PWM I pv

Fig. 4. Diagram schematic of the proposed photovoltaic system.

MPPT algorithm adjusts incessantly the DC–DC Boost converter

duty cycle. Comparing this duty ratio to a saw signal, a PWM signal
is generated. The control input u is the switch position; it takes 0
when the switch is open or 1 when the switch is closed. Based
on the Kirchhoff’s first and second rules, the dynamic model of
the converter can be written [1,5].
8
Fig. 2. PV module curves under diverse irradiance levels, temperature 25 °C: < didtL ¼ V pvLV o þ VLo  u
current-voltage (blue); power-voltage (red). (For interpretation of the references to   ð4Þ
colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.) : dV o ¼  V o þ iL  iL  u
dt RC 2 C2 C2

where V o and iL are the load voltage and the current across the
inductor, respectively.
The output voltage of the boost converter V o can be expressed
in function of the input voltage V pv and its duty cycle d:

Vo 1
¼ ð5Þ
V pv 1  d

Eq. (5) demonstrates that incrementing (decrementing) the voltage

reference V pv can be done by decrementing (incrementing) the con-
verter duty cycle d.

4. Maximum power point tracking algorithms

Fig. 3. PV module curves under diverse temperatures, irradiation 1000 W/m2:
current-voltage (blue); power-voltage (red). (For interpretation of the references to 4.1. Classical INC technique
colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

The INC algorithm tracks the MPP by comparing the sum of

where V oc
is the open circuit voltage at STC conditions, kv is the
open circuit voltage temperature coefficient, and v t ¼ kb T=q is the
thermal voltage, kb ¼ 1:38065  1023 J=K is the Boltzmann’s con-
stant and q ¼ 1:60218  1019 C is the charge of an electron.
The model described by the equations above was implemented
in Matlab software using the known reference specifications for a
60 W solar module (Table 1). The levels of solar irradiance and cell
temperature were varied and the corresponding characteristics
were plotted, as shown in Figs. 2 and 3.
3. Modeling of the step-up chopper
The power converter selected in this study is a kind of step-up
chopper, it is inserted in order to interface the PV output to the
resistor as shown in Fig. 4. Its objective is to track the MPP of the
PV array. A coil, a capacitor, a diode and an IGBT controlled with
a PWM signal, build this converter and it transforms input voltage
to the output voltage as a step up transformer [40]. As shown in
Fig. 4, two sensors are required for measuring V pv and Ipv . The
incremental conductance plus instantaneous conductance of a PV
panel with zero [41]. It is based on the fact that the slope of the
 dP 
curve power vs. voltage dV ¼ I þ DDVI  V of the solar panel is zero
at the MPP, positive on the left of it and negative on the right. If
the slope is positive, the operating point must be moved to the
right by increasing the module voltage. If it is negative, the operat-
ing point must be moved to the left by decreasing the module volt-
age. Finally, when the slope is null, the operating point is at the
MPP and thus the algorithm stop the voltage adjustment. A scheme
describing this algorithm is illustrated in Fig. 5 [17,42,43]. The
accuracy and rapidity in which the algorithm tracks the MPP
depends on the size of the increment of the reference voltage or
of the reference of the duty cycle.
Two main handicaps are reconciled to this method; the first one
is the oscillating of the operating point around the MPP in steady
state, the second is that the algorithm can easily lose the pursuit
of the MPP if the solar radiation varies quickly [14,44]. When the
irradiation varies instantly as step, the MPP tracking sounds well.
But, if the irradiation changes according to a slope, the tracking will
be bad. The algorithm is not able to determine if the change in the
power is due to the perturbation of the voltage or due to the
526 A. Belkaid et al. / Applied Energy 179 (2016) 523–530

Start

Measure V ( k ), I ( k )

No Yes
ΔV = 0

Yes ΔI Yes
I+ V =0
ΔV ΔI = 0
No
No
ΔI
I+ V >0 ΔI > 0
ΔV
No No
Yes Yes

d = d + Δd d = d − Δd d = d + Δd d = d − Δd

Update
V (k ) = V (k − 1)
I (k ) = I (k − 1)

Return

Fig. 5. Flowchart of the basic INC algorithm.

change in solar radiation. This principle is shown in Fig. 6. That’s
why we chose an irradiation profile with various shapes to check
the performance of the proposed method.
4.2. Modified INC technique
In stable conditions of fixed irradiance level and temperature,
the current vs. voltage characteristic shows well that the change
in voltage leads a change in current with differing sign. If perturba-
tion in voltage leads a perturbation with same sign in current, the
PV array is in sudden varying atmospheric conditions. Contrary to
the traditional method, the modified INC algorithm can distinguish
between these two operating conditions and thus avoid divergence
in the case of the second circumstances by changing the direction
of the perturbation. One can say that the new algorithm must act
contrary to the old algorithm when the system functions under
fast-varying conditions. This principle is explained in Fig. 7, which
is given in the flowchart of the modified INC algorithm. The added
part with respect to the old algorithm is indicated in yellow color.
It consists of two tests consisting in change in current and voltage
with same signs. It indicates the fast-varying of sunlight.
5. Results of simulation and discussion
In this section, based on the modeling given above for different
components of the standalone PV system shown in Fig. 4, a
Matlab/Simulink simulation is realized. The system is composed
of the boost converter that is located between an MSX 60 module

Fig. 6. Divergence of INC algorithm when the luminosity varies.

 A. Belkaid et al. / Applied Energy 179 (2016) 523–530 527

Start

Measure V ( k ), I ( k )

No Yes
ΔV = 0
Yes ΔI
I+ V =0
ΔV Yes
No ΔI = 0
Yes ΔI No
I+ V >0
ΔV > 0 ΔV
ΔI > 0
&ΔI > 0
No No
Yes No
ΔV < 0 Yes

&ΔI < 0 Yes

No
d = d + Δd 2 d = d − Δd d = d − Δd1 d = d + Δd d = d − Δd

Update
V (k ) = V (k − 1)
I (k ) = I (k − 1)

Return

Fig. 7. Flowchart of the modified INC algorithm.

as a power supply and a resistance as a load. The boost converter is
controlled by an IGBT gate signal with a switching frequency of
f ¼ 10 kHz. The inductor and capacitors are used as filters:
L ¼ 5 mH, C 1 ¼ 1000 lF, C 2 ¼ 470 lF.
In fact, the article aims at exhibiting the performance and effi-
ciency of the proposed new INC MPPT controller, and comparing
it with the classical one. So, to reach this goal, a stringent profile
was chosen to change the solar radiance, maintaining the temper-
ature fixed at constant value of 25 °C and the resistive load at
R ¼ 30 X. The tests were done for duration of 3.2 s. The duty cycle
increments used for the INC algorithm was about of Dd = 0.0002,
and for the modified method were Dd ¼ 0:0002, Dd1 ¼ 0:0005,
Dd2 ¼ 0:00009.
First of all, the traditional INC tracker was tested under the irra-
diance profile change. Second, the proposed INC tracker was also
tested under the same conditions. The irradiance profile and the
matching simulation results with both algorithms are exposed in
Fig. 8. The results shown in part (b) and (c) of Fig. 8, consist on
the waveforms of PV current Ipv ðAÞ, voltage V pv ðVÞ, power P pv ðWÞ
and output voltage V o ðVÞ.
From these results, it can be confirmed that the different gran-
deurs have achieved similar values as given by the PV characteris-
tics (Fig. 2) for constant solar irradiance. In addition, the
waveforms of Ipv ðAÞ, Ppv ðWÞ are significantly affected by the
change of sunshine than V pv ðVÞ, which is only slightly affected.
Also, by comparing V pv ðVÞ to V o ðVÞ, it can be confirmed that the
power converter used is a step-up voltage type.
Under the standard tests conditions (G = 1000 W/m2, T = 25 °C),
the PV module generates an average of 60 W of power, 17.4 V of
voltage and 3.5 A of current. These output values vary when the
irradiance level decreases or increases. It can be noticed that the
PV voltage is just slightly affected by the change of the irradiance.
Fig. 9 depicts the comparison of the peak power tracking
between the modified and classical INC technique. It can be seen
that the modified algorithm exhibits better performance than the
classical one, especially in dynamic response. The classical method
presents a poorer performance than the new method under
decreasing solar radiation and an even lower performance when
solar radiation is increasing. It demonstrates that the basic INC pre-
sents divergence from the MPP under slope changing irradiance
levels. The proposed MPPT can resolve this problem. One can say
that the new INC improve the performance of the conventional
one.
Fig. 9(b) depicts the evolution of converter duty cycle under the
irradiance change for these two algorithms. Part (c) of the same fig-
ure illustrates the tracking efficiency comparison. The tracking effi-
ciency T eff is the average MPPT efficiency; it is evaluated as [34]:
Rt
PMPP
T eff ¼ R0t  100 ½% ð6Þ
P
0 pv
where P MPP is the power obtained by a given MPPT method and Ppv
is the theoretical available power.
From Fig. 9(c), it was found that the average efficiency of the
basic INC is about T eff ¼ 91:39% and for modified INC is about
T eff ¼ 96:40%. One notices that the tracking efficiency of the pro-
posed MPPT technique is increased by approximately five percent.
According to the above-obtained results, it concludes that the
proposed method guarantees better dynamic response under fast
varying solar radiation when the change follows an upward or
downward slope.
After, we test the proposed controller with two other parame-
ters influencing the PV system, which are the temperature and
the load.
528 A. Belkaid et al. / Applied Energy 179 (2016) 523–530

Fig. 9. Comparison of tracking performance between classical and modified INC

Fig. 8. Results of simulation: (a) irradiance profile, (b) with basic INC algorithm, and algorithm: (a) tracking of MPP, (b) duty cycle evolution, and (c) tracking efficiency.
(c) with modified INC algorithm.

For the temperature, the changing profile is as in Fig. 10(a). It

evolves as stair amount from 0 °C to 25 °C and then to 50 °C. The
irradiation is kept constant at 1000 W/m2 and the resistor is fixed
to 30 Ω. The obtained results are illustrated in Fig. 10(b). It can be
seen that the waveforms of V pv ðVÞ, P pv ðWÞ are reverse proportional
to the change of temperature and Ipv ðAÞ is only slightly affected.
The last test is for the load changing as shown in Fig. 11(a). The
matching results are presented in Fig. 11(b). They demonstrate that
the PV grandeurs the power, the voltage and the current are not
affected by the resistance modification.

6. Conclusion

In this paper, the modeling, simulation and control of a stand-

alone photovoltaic power electricity generation system has been
proposed by incorporating a power electronics converter to permit
the use of the PV array at its maximal power. The proposed PV-
MPPT system has been implemented under MATLAB-SIMULINK
environment.
A control strategy based on an improved INC technique was
developed in order to regulate the power output of a solar system,
which comprises photovoltaic generation, a boost DC-DC converter Fig. 10. (a) Temperature variation profile, and (b) results of simulation with
that is able to step-up the load voltage. proposed algorithm.
 A. Belkaid et al. / Applied Energy 179 (2016) 523–530
Fig. 11. (a) Load variation profile, and (b) results of simulation with proposed
algorithm.
Comparing with traditional INC technique used in the past, the
use of the proposed MPPT control improves the PV system perfor-
mance mainly in dynamic states, thus reducing the loss of power
and enhancing the tracking efficiency by five percent. The results
of simulation are present.
Drawbacks of this study are the slow time response at start-up
in comparison to others techniques such as Sliding Mode Control
and the lack of experimental work.
Future work will continue by extending the principle of MPPT
technique proposed on other more efficient converter topologies
and taking into account the shading phenomenon in the test of
developed MPPT system for an inhomogeneous illumination.
References
[1] Belkaid A, Gaubert JP, Gherbi A, Rahmani L. Maximum power point tracking for
photovoltaic systems with boost converter sliding mode control. In: IEEE 23rd
international symposium on industrial electronics (ISIE), Istanbul, Turkey, 1–4
June. p. 556–61.
[2] Tey Kok Soon, Mekhilef Saad. Modified incremental conductance MPPT
algorithm to mitigate inaccurate responses under fast-changing solar
irradiation level. Sol Energy 2014;101:333–42.
[3] deCesare G, Caputo D, Nascetti A. Maximum power point tracker for portable
photovoltaic systems with resistive-like load. Sol Energy 2006;80:982–8.
[4] Chu CC, Chen CL. Robust maximum power point tracking method for
photovoltaic cells: a sliding mode control approach. Sol Energy
2009;83:1370–8.
[5] Houssamo I, Locment F, Sechilariu M. Maximum power tracking for
photovoltaic power system: development and experimental comparison of
two algorithms. Renew Energy 2010;35:2381–7.
[6] Bhatnagar AP, Nema BRK. Conventional and global maximum power point
tracking techniques in photovoltaic applications: a review. J Renew Sustain
Energy 2013;5:1–23.
[7] Ishaque K, Salam Z. A review of maximum power point tracking techniques of
PV system for uniform insolation and partial shading condition. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2013;19:475–88.
[8] Eltawil MA, Zhao Z. MPPT techniques for photovoltaic applications. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2013;25:793–813.
[9] Subudhi B, Pradhan R. A comparative study on maximum power point tracking
techniques for photovoltaic power systems. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy 2013;4
(1):89–98.
[10] Salam Z, Ahmed J, Merugu BS. The application of soft computing methods for
MPPT of PV system: a technological and status review. Appl Energy
2013;107:135–48.
[11] Kollimalla SK, Mishra MK. A new adaptive P&O MPPT algorithm based on FSCC
method for photovoltaic system. In: International conference on circuits,
power and computing technologies, Nagercoil, India, 21–23 mars. p. 406–11.
529
[12] Murtaza AF, Sher HA, Chiaberge M, Boero D, De Giuseppe M, Addoweesh KE. A
novel hybrid MPPT technique for solar PV applications using perturb & observe
and fractional open circuit voltage techniques. In: 15th intern. symposium on
Mechatronika, Prague, Czech, 5–7 December. p. 1–8.
[13] Bianconi E, Calvente J, Giral R, Mamarelis E, Petrone G, Andres Ramos-Paja C,
et al. Perturb and observe MPPT algorithm with a current controller based on
the sliding mode. Electr Power Energy Syst 2013;44:346–56.
[14] Femia N, Petrone G, Spagnuolo G, Vitelli M. Optimization of perturb and
observe maximum power point tracking method. IEEE Trans Power Electron
2005;20:963–73.
[15] Tafticht T, Agbossou K, Doumbia ML, Cheriti A. An improved maximum power
point tracking method for photovoltaic systems. Renewable Energy
2008;33:1508–16.
[16] Ahmed J, Salam Z. An improved perturb and observe (P&O) maximum power
point tracking (MPPT) algorithm for higher efficiency. Appl Energy
2015;150:97–108.
[17] Ishaque K, Salam Z, Lauss G. The performance of perturb and observe and
incremental conductance maximum power point tracking method under
dynamic weather conditions. Appl Energy 2014;119:228–36.
[18] Lin CH, Huang CH, Du YC, Chen JL. Maximum photovoltaic power tracking for
the PV array using the fractional-order incremental conductance method. Appl
Energy 2011;88:4840–7.
[19] Radjai T, Rahmani L, Mekhilef S, Gaubert JP. Implementation of a modified
incremental conductance MPPT algorithm with direct control based on a fuzzy
duty cycle change estimator using dSPACE. Sol Energy 2014;110:325–37.
[20] Abdulkadir M, Yatim AHM. Hybrid maximum power point tracking technique
based on PSO and incremental conductance. In: IEEE conference on energy
conversion, CENCON. p. 271–6.
[21] Morales-Acevedo A, Diaz-Bernabe JL, Garrido-Moctezuma R. Improved MPPT
adaptive incremental conductance algorithm. In: 40th annual conference of
the IEEE industrial electronics society, IECON. p. 5540–5.
[22] Kollimalla SK, Mishra MK. A new adaptive P&O MPPT algorithm based on FSCC
method for photovoltaic system. In: International conference on circuits,
power and computing technologies, ICCPCT, 21st–23rd March 2013, Nagercoil,
India. p. 406–11.
[23] Lee Dong-Yun, Noh Hyeong-Ju, Hyun Dong-seok, Choy I. An improved MPPT
converter using current compensation method for small scaled PV-
applications. 18th annual IEEE applied power electronics conference and
exposition, APEC ’03, vol. 1. p. 540–5.
[24] Rai AK, Kaushika ND, Singh B, Agarwal N. Simulation model of ANN based
maximum power point tracking controller for solar PV system. Sol Energy
Mater Sol Cells 2011;95:773–8.
[25] Alajmi BN, Ahmed KH, Finney SJ, Williams BW. Fuzzy logic-control approach of
a modified hill-climbing method for maximum power point in microgrid
standalone photovoltaic system. IEEE Trans Power Electron 2011;26
(4):1022–30.
[26] Belkaid A, Gaubert JP, Gherbi A. A fast and accurate maximum power point
tracking for photovoltaic power generation system. Optoelectron Adv Mater –
Rapid Commun 2015;9(3–4):520–4. March – April.
[27] Farhat M, Barambones O, Sbita L. Real-time efficiency boosting for PV systems
using MPPT based on sliding mode. Energy Procedia 2015;75:361–6.
[28] Farhat M et al. A new maximum power point method based on a sliding mode
approach for solar energy harvesting. Appl Energy 2016. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.03.055.
[29] Belkaid A, Gaubert JP, Gherbi A. An improved sliding mode control for
maximum power point tracking in photovoltaic systems. J Contr Eng Appl
Inform 2016;18(1):86–94. ISSN 1454-8658.
[30] Elgendy MA, Zahawi B, Atkinson DJ. Assessment of the incremental
conductance maximum power point tracking algorithm. IEEE Trans Sustain
Energy 2013;4(1):108–17.
[31] Safari A, Mekhilef S. Implementation of incremental conductance method with
direct control. In: Proceedings of the IEEE region 10th conference
TENCON. Bali: IEEE Xplore Press; 2011. p. 944–8. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1109/tencon.2011.6129249. Nov. 21–24.
[32] Fangrui L, Shanxu D, Fei L, Bangyin L, Yong K. A variable step size INC MPPT
method for PV systems. IEEE Trans Industr Electron 2008;55(7):2622–8.
[33] Her-Terng Y, Qin-Cheng L, Chin-Tsung H. Maximum power point tracking and
optimal Li-ion battery charging control for photovoltaic charging system.
Comput Math Appl 2012;64:822–32.
[34] Rizzo Santi Agatino, Scelba Giacomo. ANN based MPPT method for rapidly
variable shading conditions. Appl Energy 2015;145:124–32.
[35] Ishaque K, Salam Z, Amjad M, Mekhilef S. An improved particle swarm
optimization (PSO) based MPPT for PV with reduced steady state oscillation.
IEEE Trans Power Electron 2012;27(8):3627–38.
[36] Petreus D, Moga D, Rusu A, Patarau T, Daraban S. A Maximum Power Point
tracker for photovoltaic system under changing luminosity conditions. In: IEEE
international symposium industrial electronics. ISIE; 2010. p. 556–61.
[37] Bizon Nicu. Global extremum seeking control of the power generated by a
photovoltaic array under partially shaded conditions. Energy Convers Manage
2016;109:71–85.
[38] Yu GJ, Jung YS, Choi JY, Kim GS. A novel two-mode MPPT control algorithm
based on comparative study of existing algorithms. Sol Energy
2004;76:455–63.
[39] Colak I, Kabalci E, Bal G. Parallel DC-AC conversion system based on separate
solar farms with MPPT control. In: 8th international conference on power
electronics- ECCE Asia. Korea: The ShillaJeju; 2011.
530 A. Belkaid et al. / Applied Energy 179 (2016) 523–530

[40] Colak I, Demirtas M, Kabalci E. Design, optimisation and application of a
resonant dc link inverter for solar energy systems. Compel (Int J Comput Math
Electr Electron Eng) 2014;33(5):1761–76.
[41] Kim IS. Sliding mode controller for the single-phase grid-connected
photovoltaic system. Appl Energy 2006;83:1101–15.
[42] Hussein KH, Muta I, Hoshino T, Osakada M. Maximum photovoltaic power
tracking: an algorithm for rapidly changing atmospheric conditions. IEE Proc
Gener, Trans Distrib 1995;142(1):59–64.
[43] Jain S, Agarwal V. Comparison of the performance of maximum power point
tracking schemes applied to single-stage grid-connected photovoltaic systems.
Electr Power Appl, IET 2007;1(5):753–62.
[44] Femia N, Petrone G, Spagnuolo G, Vitelli M. Optimizing sampling rate of P&O
MPPT technique. In: Proc. IEEE PESC. p. 1945–9.