International Journal of Innovative

Computing, Information and Control ICIC International ⃝2018

c ISSN 1349-4198
Volume 14, Number 1, February 2018 pp. 323–339

EFFICIENT PHOTOVOLTAIC MPPT SYSTEM USING COARSE

GAUSSIAN SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINE AND ARTIFICIAL
NEURAL NETWORK TECHNIQUES

Adedayo Mojeed Farayola, Ali Nabil Hasan and Ahmed Ali

Department of Electrical Engineering Technology
University of Johannesburg
P.O. Box 524, Auckland Park 2006, South Africa
lordfaraday@yahoo.com; alin@uj.ac.za; axmedee@live.com

Received June 2017; revised October 2017

Abstract. The use of machine learning techniques for PV system controllers has im-
proved the maximum power point tracking (MPPT) process which increased the PV sys-
tems efficiency. However, some of these powerful machine learning techniques such as
artificial neural network (ANN) and artificial neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) still
require huge and concise training data for successful MPPT. This paper introduces an
innovative maximum power point tracking (MPPT) algorithm that combines two power-
ful machine learning techniques of coarse-Gaussian support vector machine (CGSVM)
and ANN as ANN-CGSVM technique. The results of the proposed MPPT algorithm
were compared with that of ANFIS, conventional ANN, and the hybrid of ANN and Per-
turb&Observe (ANN-PO) results to verify the proposed algorithm performance for MPPT
task. This work was implemented to investigate the feasibility of using the combined
ANN-CGSVM technique for MPPT and thereafter improve the PV system performance.
Two experiments were conducted to determine the ANN-CGSVM efficiency and the con-
vergence speed of the algorithm using Soltech 1STH-215-P photovoltaic (PV) panel with
modified CUK DC-DC converter under three different weather conditions. The training
data sets were generated using PSIM software. Findings suggest that the ANN-CGSVM
technique has a fast-tracking speed and can be used to achieve a reasonable maximum
power.
Keywords: ANFIS, ANN, Classifiers, Machine learning, CGSVM, MPPT, Stand-alone
system, Perturb&Observe, PV system, SVM

1. Introduction. Photovoltaic (PV) solar energy is the most growing type of renewable
energy that obtains its energy from the sun, and can be used as an alternative to the
fossil energy source. This form of energy is preferred to other energy sources as PV
energy is considered inexhaustible, readily available, scalable, silent, and less-pollutive.
In PV systems, a PV cell converts the sunlight energy into an electrical energy and a
photovoltaic panel comprises several cells connected in series and/or parallel in order to
increase the power wattage of the entire cells [1]. Figure 1 illustrates the equivalent circuit
of a five-parameter solar cell. However, PV system that lacks a working maximum power
point tracking (MPPT) controller usually supplies an inconsistent voltage, current, and
power which leads to the low performance of the PV system due to the inability of the
PV system to extract maximum power from the connected PV panel(s). Hence, it is
important to use MPPT charge controllers to extract maximum power from PV systems
[2,3].
The maximum power point tracking (MPPT) is a technique that is commonly used
to optimize some energy sources that exhibit varied power such as photovoltaic systems,

323
324 A. M. FARAYOLA, A. N. HASAN AND A. ALI

Figure 1. Equivalent circuit diagram of a PV solar cell

wind turbine systems, optical power transmission systems, and thermophotovoltaic sys-
tems. The MPPT technique is usually embedded in the microcontroller of an MPPT
charge controller as an algorithm [4]. The MPPT algorithm works to ensure that the
input impedance (Zi ) of the PV panel equals the load impedance (Zo ) of the panel for
optimum power to be extracted from the PV panel [5,6]. Basically, MPPT techniques are
classified into three categories: Offline methods or machine learning techniques, online
methods or power electronic techniques, and hybrid methods. Machine learning tech-
niques are designed using certain PV information such as the current-to-voltage (I-V)
curve characteristics of the PV panel, the temperature (T), and the irradiation levels (G)
[7]. Some machine learning techniques use advanced intelligent technology such as artifi-
cial neural network (ANN), fuzzy logic control (FLC), and artificial neuro-fuzzy inference
system (ANFIS) [7,8]. The online methods require the instantaneous measurements of
the PV current, voltage, and/or power [8,9]. Some of the popular online methods include
the Hill climbing (HC), Perturb&Observe (P&O), incremental conductance (IC), and ex-
tremum seeking control (ESC) techniques. Online methods are considered cheap and easy
to implement whereas offline methods are considered to be more expensive, complex but
more efficient than online methods [9,10]. Advantages of offline methods include the fast
convergence speed, no oscillating power issue around MPP, higher efficiency, commonly
used to extract maximum and stable power from the PV cells, and performs well even
under partial shading weather conditions [11]. Nevertheless, offline MPPT techniques still
have some drawbacks. For example, ANN and ANFIS that are classified as supervised
machine learning techniques still require large and accurate training data sets, and a large
memory consumption with curve fitting polynomial technique [12]. The hybrid methods
are the cascaded combination of the online methods and the offline methods. The hybrid
method is used to improve the overall performance of the combined online and offline
methods. Example of a hybrid method is the cascaded combination of ANN and P&O as
ANN-PO technique [12,13].
Recent work related to the use of machine learning techniques in PV systems incorpo-
rates the use of artificial intelligence algorithms such as ANN, FLC, and ANFIS algorithms
for maximum power point tracking in photovoltaic systems [7,9]. However, few work is
done using the hybrid MPPT techniques and the state-of-the-art support vector machine
(SVM) technique to track the maximum power point in photovoltaic systems. Basically,
the SVM techniques are commonly used for classification and regression learning analy-
sis. In this paper, the use of a particular type of SVM technique known as the non-linear
coarse-Gaussian support vector machine (CGSVM) classifier is introduced. The CGSVM
was used to generate large and accurate training data sets that were used to train an ANN
controller and thus improve the tracking capability of ANN in PV systems, and then the
results of this non-conventional ANN that was optimized using CGSVM technique were
compared to that of three-powerful and popular MPPT techniques in order to determine
 EFFICIENT PHOTOVOLTAIC MPPT SYSTEM 325

the feasibility of the proposed algorithm (non-conventional ANN) and to realize the al-
gorithm that tracks the maximum power point successfully and within a short period of
time. The three-famous MPPT techniques considered were conventional ANN, ANFIS,
and ANN-PO technique.
The contribution of this paper is to introduce and investigate the feasibility of using the
CGSVM classifier for fast tracking of the MPP in a PV system. The CGSVM classifier
predicts and generates the new training data sets that were used to train the supervised
machine learner (e.g., ANN) from few data sets (19 instances) that were collected from the
PSIM software. The second contribution is the comparison done to compare the results
of the non-conventional ANN technique and that of the conventional ANN, ANFIS, and
ANN-PO under different weather conditions.
2. MPPT Machine Learning Techniques. The maximum power point tracking (MP-
PT) techniques used in this project are briefly explained as follows.
2.1. Artificial neural network (ANN). The ANN technique is a supervised machine
learning technique that is commonly used in PV systems for MPPT purpose due to its
adaptiveness in solving non-linear tasks, fast-tracking speed, improved performance, and
its adaptiveness with microcontrollers. The ANN model is a computational model that
imitates the biological neural network, where a neuron processes and weighs the input
linearly, then relates it with its sum by means of a non-linear function known as activation
function, and sends the result to other neurons [14]. The ANN neuron is modelled using
Equation (1),
∑M
Z= W m Xm + α (1)
m=1
where X1 , X2 , X3 , . . . , Xm are the inputs and W1 , W2 , W3 , . . . , Wm are the respective
weight for an individual input (m).
The structure of an ANN comprises three layers: the input layer, the hidden layer,
and the output layer [15-17]. The input layer receives the information (training data),
processes the data through learning, and produces the predicted outputs at the output
layer. The hidden layer is an imperceptible layer that has its output interconnected to
the inputs of some other neurons [18]. Mathematically, the neurons in the hidden layer
of an ANN are estimated by using Equation (2),
(Ni + No ) √
Nh = + Ne (2)
2
where Nh is the hidden layer, Ni is the input layer, and No is the output layer. For MPPT
task in a PV system, the ANN input layer is trained to accept different variables, e.g.,
the irradiance levels (G) and temperature levels (T) as input variables and for training
purposes, and outputs a predicted response as output variables. In an ANN MPPT
controller, the output variables can be the duty cycle (D), predicted PV current, predicted
PV voltage, or predicted PV power. In addition, the ANN uses a power-integral (PI)
controller for fine tuning and error optimization purpose [19]. An ANN technique has two
known connection types; the feed-forward neural network and the feed-back or recurrent
neural network [20,21].
In this paper, the type of ANN technique that was considered is the Levenberg-
Marquadt recurrent neural network and its working principle is briefly explained using
Equations (3)-(5),
[ ]−1 T
Xk+1 = Xk − J T J + µI J e (3)
[ T ]−1 T
Xk+1 = Xk − J J J e (4)
326 A. M. FARAYOLA, A. N. HASAN AND A. ALI

Xk+1 = Xk − αgk (5)

where Xk+1 is the steep size, α is the learning constant, g is the gradient, e is the vector
of network errors, and J is the Jacobian matrix containing first derivatives of the network
errors with respect to the network weights and biases. The Levenberg-Marquadt algorithm
uses the sum-square-error (SSE) for training process. The Levenberg-Marquadt algorithm
combines the function of W-steepest descent algorithm and the Gauss-Newton algorithm
as a single algorithm. The Levenberg-Marquadt algorithm operates in such a way that if
the scalar (µ) is zero, Gauss-Newton’s method is activated, but if µ is large, W-steepest
gradient descent (13) method is activated [22].

2.2. Adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS). The ANFIS is another type
of supervised machine-learning technique that combines the functions of ANN and fuzzy
logic control (FLC) as a single technique [23-25]. Basically, FLC has two common types
of inference system (Sugeno and Mamdani inference system). However, the Sugeno fuzzy
logic inference system (Sugeno-FIS) is used in an ANFIS technique as the Sugeno-FIS is
considered more computationally efficient and a useful tool for optimization task (both
adaptive and linear technique) [26,27]. The modelling of an ANFIS-MPPT is done in
twofold. The first fold (ANN task) is the collection of data, training, testing, and valida-
tion. The second fold is the FLC task that comprises four stages (fuzzification, inference,
rules, and defuzzification). A well trained ANFIS technique works proficiently with the
non-linear characteristics of PV cells and helps to improve the dynamic performance of
a PV system. The ANFIS training data sets can be obtained from real-time systems,
or via simulation by developing a dynamic PV panel [28,29]. For MPPT improvement,
a power-integral (PI) error controller is usually incorporated with the ANFIS [30]. The
PI controller works for tuning and to ensure that the PV system works at the referenced
ANN output response [31,32].

2.3. Coarse-Gaussian support vector machine (CGSVM) technique. Coarse-

Gaussian support vector machine (CGSVM) technique is a type of non-linear SVM learn-
ing technique classified as a data mining technique. Data mining techniques are commonly
used for classification learning and regression learning analysis [33,34]. CGSVM can be
used for optimization task, classification of data (classifier), and the prediction of new
data sets from few given samples [35,36]. In classifiers, a kernel is a fitness function that
makes computation process easier and faster [37]. To make the CGSVM functional for
MPPT task, the CGSVM is first trained through the importation of small data sets that
comprise input variables (X) as predictors and the output variables (Y ) as responses and
a cross-validation is performed. The cross-validation helps to prevent a classifier from
being over-fitted and does that by partitioning the imported data sets into folds and
determines the accuracy in each fold [38].
The CGSVM algorithm works with fast binary and hard medium, slow and large mul-
ticlass, and kernel scale set [39]. Equations (6) and (7) display the mathematical repre-
sentation of the coarse-Gaussian kernel and the kernel scale set, where P is the number
of predictors.
Gaussian kernel: K(X, Xi ) = e−Y |X−Xi |
2
(6)
Kernel scale set = (P ) ∗ 4 (7)
In PV systems, the CGSVM predictors can be represented and modelled using different
levels of irradiance (G) and temperature (T) as the input variables while the predicted
response (output variables) can be represented using different levels of predicted PV
currents, PV voltage, and/or PV power [40,41].
 EFFICIENT PHOTOVOLTAIC MPPT SYSTEM 327

2.4. Hybrid of artificial neural network and Perturb and Observe (ANN-PO).
The ANN-PO technique is an example of a hybrid MPPT technique that combines the
technique of artificial neural network (offline method) and Perturb&Observe technique
(online method) as a cascaded network system abbreviated as ANN-PO technique [42].
The ANN-PO technique was introduced to improve the overall performances of ANN
and Perturb&Observe technique for MPPT task [43]. The hybrid ANN-PO technique
advantages include possible solution to the steady state error problems (i.e., drift in
maximum power) common with Perturb&Observe technique and the tracking-speed issue
with conventional artificial neural network technique [44]. Figure 2 displays the block
diagram of an ANN-PO MPPT technique and can be used to explains how the ANN-PO
technique tracks the maximum power point in a complete photovoltaic system. The ANN-
PO MPPT technique is designed in twofold. The first fold is the ANN part, where the
inputs of the trained ANN sense the irradiance level (G) and the ambient temperature
(T) and output the predicted PV current as Iref and the predicted PV voltage as Vref
under different weather conditions. These predicted responses (referenced PV currents
and voltages) are then transmitted as the input signals of the Perturb&Observe controller
and outputs the duty cycle signal (D) for MPPT task in the PV system [45-47].

Figure 2. Hybrid ANN and Perturb&Observe MPPT

3. Simulation Model. To investigate the feasibility with the use of classification learner
(CGSVM classifier) in order to track the maximum power point in a standalone PV
system, two experiments were conducted using a complete PV system that comprises a
Soltech 1STH-215-P panel, modified Cuk DC-DC converter, MPPT controller, a twenty-
ohm resistive load and under three-known weather conditions (NOCT, STC, and PTC) for
experimental analysis (see Table 1). The NOCT is the normal operating cell temperature
where the irradiance (G) is 800 W/m2 and the ambient temperature (T) is 47.40◦ C. STC is
the standard test condition where G is 1000 W/m2 and T is 25◦ C. PTC is the PVUSA test
condition where G is 1000 W/m2 and T is 20◦ C. The first experiment was conducted to
compare the tracking efficiency of the above-mentioned MPPT techniques which comprise
conventional ANN, ANFIS, ANN-PO, and the proposed non-conventional ANN that is
referred to as the ANN-CGSVM technique. The second experiment was done to compare
the maximum power point (MPP) tracking time of the four-mentioned MPPT techniques.
Table 2 presents the full specification of the used PV panel (Soltech 1STH-215-P) and
the DC-DC converter. From 1STH-215-P data-sheet, the theoretical maximum power
(Pmp ) of the panel at STC is 213.15 W. The PSIM software was used to obtain the data
sets (129 samples of irradiance levels, temperature levels, and the PV currents) that were
used for the training, testing, and validation of the machine learning techniques. The
PV efficiency, load efficiency at the 20 Ω, and the DC-DC converter losses were obtained
using Equations (8)-(10),
∫t
Ppv(max)t.dt
PV Efficiency at MPPT = ∫ t 0 (8)
0
P Vpv(mppt)t.dt
328 A. M. FARAYOLA, A. N. HASAN AND A. ALI
∫t
Po(max)t.dt
Output power efficiency = ∫ t 0 (9)
0
P Vpv(mppt)t.dt
MCUK Losses = input power (Ppv ) − output power (Po ) (10)
where Ppv(mppt) is the 1STH-215-P rated power at STC (standard test condition) and
equals 213.15 W, Ppv(max) is the PV extracted power, and Po(max) is the output power at
the 20 Ω resistive load.
Table 1. Environmental condition used

Environmental conditions Irradiance (G) in Wm−2 Temperature (T) in ◦ C

Case 1 (NOCT) 800 47.4
Case 2 (PTC) 1000 20.0
Case 3 (STC) 1000 25.0

Table 2. PV specification & modified CUK specification

Solar panel specification MCUK specification

PV model at STC 1soltech Sth-215-P L1 4 mH
Standard Test Condition (STC) 1000 W/m2 , 25◦ C L2 4 mH
Maximum Voltage (Vmp ) 29.0 V C1 100 µF
Maximum Current (Imp ) 7.35 A C2 100 µF
Maximum Power (Pmp ) 213.15 W C0 270 µF
Ns – Number of cell in series 60 R0 20 Ω
Isc – Short circuit current 7.84 A
Voc Open Circuit Voltage 36.30 V
Temp. Coefficient of Isc −0.36099%/◦ C
Temp. Coefficient of Voc 0.102%/◦ C
A – Diode Ideality Factor 0.98117
Rs – Series Resistance 0.39383 Ω
Rsh – Shunt Resistance 313.3991 Ω

Starting with the ANFIS technique, the 129 PSIM data sets were split to 70% for
training, 15% for testing, and the remaining 15% for validation. The two-input variables
(predictor data sets) were used to train the ANFIS and with values that ranged from
50 W/m2 to 1000 W/m2 irradiance levels and 15◦ C to 75◦ C temperature levels. The
chosen temperature boundary conforms with the operating temperature of the 1STH-
215-P photovoltaic panel (−40◦ C to 85◦ C). Figure 3 displays the block diagram of a
complete PV system designed using either ANFIS or ANN technique. The used ANFIS
controller has two inputs (irradiance (G) and temperature (T)) and an output response
(predicted PV current (Iref )) that was compared to the PV current (Ipv ) as error signal
e(t). The measured error signal was transmitted to the discrete PI controller for tuning
and to obtain the duty cycle signal (D) that was transmitted to the pulse width modulator
(PWM) operating at a switching frequency of 50 kHz as pulse signal. The pulse signal was
then used to activate the Mosfet gate of a non-isolated modified CUK DC-DC converter
and the PV current (Ipv ), PV voltage (Vpv ), load voltage (Vo ), load current (Io ), and the
load power (Po ) were measured and recorded under the stated weather conditions (NOCT,
PTC, and STC). The optimization method used to train the ANFIS was the hybrid
optimization, a combination of the least-square estimation method (LSE) as forward pass
 EFFICIENT PHOTOVOLTAIC MPPT SYSTEM 329

Figure 3. Block diagram of a PV system designed using ANFIS or ANN

MPPT technique

Table 3. Average testing error of an ANFIS controller

ANFIS (6 ∗ 6 Membership Function, 1800 Epoch) Samples Average Testing Error

Training 91 0.0017483
Testing 19 0.0441830
Validation or Checking 19 0.0104150

Table 4. ANN regression and mean square error (MSE) statistics

ANN Samples Mean Square Error (MSE) Regression (R)

Training 91 9.50282e-6 9.99998e-1
Validation 19 1.14413e-5 9.99998e-1
Testing 19 2.11741e-5 9.99990e-1

and the back-propagation gradient-descent methods as backward pass. Table 3 presents

the ANFIS average testing error with an estimated error value of 4e-4 using 1800 epochs.
Figure 4 presents the algorithm of the used ANFIS controller.
For the ANN MPPT technique, the ANN technique was implemented using the same
PSIM data sets (129 samples) in the proportion 70%, 15%, 15% for training, testing, and
validation respectively. The above-mentioned Figure 3 represents the block diagram of a
complete PV system designed using an ANN MPPT technique. The ANN input layer has
two neurons, in which a neuron is used for input 1 as irradiance (G) and the second neuron
characterizes the second input (temperature (T)). The output layer or target (Iref ) has
a single neuron and thirteen hidden neurons. The hidden neurons were computed using
Equation (11),
√
Nh = 0.5 ∗ (Ni + No ) + Ne = 13 (11)
where Nh is the number of neurons in the hidden layer, Ni is the input layer neurons =
2, No is the output layer neuron = 1, and Ne is the number of instances = 129 samples.
Table 4 shows the mean square error (MSE) and regression (R) of the trained ANN
system, where a value of R that is close to 1 and an MSE value close to zero signifies a
well-trained artificial neural network model.
For the complete PV system designed using the combination of ANN and the proposed
CGSVM classifier technique as ANN-CGSVM or non-conventional ANN technique, Figure
5 presents the algorithm of the ANN-CGSVM technique. The ANN-CGSVM modelling
330 A. M. FARAYOLA, A. N. HASAN AND A. ALI

Figure 4. ANFIS MPPT algorithm

was done in threefold. The first fold dealt with the generation of a fitness function (yfit)
and the reproduction of optimized data sets from few samples of the PSIM data sets (19
samples), and using the CGSVM technique. The PSIM data sets comprised two input
variables (irradiance and temperature) and one output variable (PV current as Iref ). The
fitness function was then used to predict the responses (Iref ) of an additional 110 CGSVM
optimized data sets that were used to train the ANN controller in the second fold.
The second fold dealt with the training, testing, and validation of the ANN system
using the newly predicted data sets (110 samples). The generated CGSVM data sets
were split in the proportion 70% for training, 15% testing, and 15% validation. Table
 EFFICIENT PHOTOVOLTAIC MPPT SYSTEM 331

Figure 5. ANN-CGSVM algorithm

Table 5. ANN-CGSVM regression (R) and mean square error (MSE) statistics

ANN-LSVM Samples MSE Regression (R)

Training 91 1.94247e-9 9.99999e-1
Testing 19 1.26600e-8 9.99999e-1
Validation 19 6.20523e-7 9.99999e-1

5 displays the error results of the ANN-CGSVM regression (R) and mean square error
(MSE).
For the third fold, Figure 6 displays the block diagram of a complete PV system designed
using a working ANN-CGSVM MPPT technique. From the diagram, the ANN-CGSVM
predicted response values (I∗ref ) were compared to the PV operating current (Ipv ) as error
signal (I∗ref – Ipv ). The error signal was transmitted to the PI controller for fine tuning
and outputs the duty cycle signal (D). The duty cycle signal was then passed through a
pulse width modulator (PWM) as pulse signal that was used to activate the Mosfet gate
of the DC-DC converter.
332 A. M. FARAYOLA, A. N. HASAN AND A. ALI

Figure 6. PV system designed using ANN-CGSVM technique

Figure 7. PV system using hybrid method of ANN and Perturb&Observe

Figure 7 displays the block diagram of a complete PV system designed using an ANN-
PO technique. The ANN-PO controller was modelled in twofold. The first fold dealt
with the training of the ANN using an approach similar to that of a conventional ANN.
The trained ANN controller then sensed the operating weather conditions (irradiance and
temperature levels) as the ANN inputs and outputs two responses (predicted reference
voltage Vref and predicted reference current Iref ) that were transmitted to be the inputs
of the online Perturb&Observe controller. The Perturb&Observe controller then outputs
the duty cycle signal (D) that was used to directly activate the Mosfet gate of the DC-DC
converter as shown in the block diagram below.

4. Experimental Results. Table 6 and Figures 8-13 present the tabulated results and
the graphical results for the first conducted experiment that was done to compare the
PV system efficiency using conventional ANN technique, non-conventional ANN as ANN-
CGSVM, ANFIS, and ANN-PO MPPT technique under three different weather conditions
(NOCT, PTC, and STC).
 EFFICIENT PHOTOVOLTAIC MPPT SYSTEM 333

Table 6. Result at varied insolation and temperature

Weather Conditions Values ANFIS ANN ANN-CGSVM ANN-PO

PV Current (A) 6.004 5.983 5.257 6.148
PV Voltage (V) 25.98 26.08 28.08 25.22
Load Current (A) −2.733 −2.734 −2.659 −2.718
G = 800 Wm−2 Load Voltage (V) −54.66 −54.67 −53.17 −54.37
T = 47.40◦ C PV Power (W) 156.8 156.8 147.8 156.2
(NOCT) Load Power (W) 149.4 149.4 141.4 147.8
CASE 1 DC-DC Losses (W) 7.40 7.40 6.40 8.40
PV Efficiency (%) 73.56% 73.56% 69.34% 73.28%
Load Efficiency (%) 70.09% 70.09% 66.34% 69.34%
PV Current (A) 7.337 7.335 6.525 7.313
PV Voltage (V) 29.62 29.63 31.61 29.79
Load Current (A) −3.233 −3.233 −3.149 −3.234
G = 1000 Wm−2 Load Voltage (V) −64.66 −64.66 −62.98 −64.68
T = 20◦ C (PTC) PV Power (W) 218.4 218.4 206.4 218.3
CASE 2 Load Power (W) 209.0 209.0 198.3 209.1
DC-DC Losses (W) 9.40 9.40 8.10 9.20
PV Efficiency (%) 102.46% 102.46% 96.83% 102.42%
Load Efficiency (%) 98.05% 98.05% 93.03% 98.10%
PV Current (A) 7.356 7.356 7.022 7.548
PV Voltage (V) 28.96 28.96 29.99 28.08
Load Current (A) −3.201 −3.201 −3.182 −3.184
G = 1000 Wm−2 Load Voltage (V) −64.01 −64.01 −63.64 −63.69
T = 25◦ C (STC) PV Power (W) 213.10 213.03 211 212.5
CASE 3 Load Power (W) 204.9 204.9 202.5 202.8
DC-DC Losses (W) 8.20 8.13 8.50 9.70
PV Efficiency (%) 99.977% 99.944% 98.99% 99.695%
Load Efficiency (%) 96.13% 96.13% 95.00% 95.14%

Figure 8. Graph of 1STH-215-P input power at NOCT for 0.1 s

334 A. M. FARAYOLA, A. N. HASAN AND A. ALI

Figure 9. Graph of 1STH-215-P output power at NOCT for 0.1 s

Figure 10. Graph of 1STH-215-P input power at PTC for 0.1 s

Figure 11. Graph of 1STH-215-P output power at PTC for 0.1 s

 EFFICIENT PHOTOVOLTAIC MPPT SYSTEM 335

Figure 12. Graph of 1STH-215-P input power at STC for 0.1 s

Figure 13. Graph of 1STH-215-P output power at STC for 0.1 s

For case 1, a condition where G is 800 Wm−2 and T is 47.40◦ C, the obtained results
show that the conventional ANN and ANFIS had tie results at both the PV end and
at the 20 Ω resistive-load end (73.56% PV efficiency and 70.09% output load efficiency).
At NOCT weather condition, the obtained results show that ANN and ANFIS had the
best efficiency results while ANN-CGSVM efficiency result was the lowest (69.34% PV
efficiency, 66.34% load efficiency). However, ANN-CGSVM exhibited the lowest DC-DC
converter loss as 6.40 W was dissipated at the DC-DC converter while the biggest DC-DC
converter loss (8.40 W dissipation) occurred with the ANN-PO technique under NOCT
weather condition. Figures 8 and 9 display the graphical results of the extracted PV power
and the output load power from the PV system using ANN, ANFIS, ANN-CGSVM, ANN-
PO under NOCT weather condition.
For case 2, where G is 1000 Wm−2 and T is 20◦ C, ANN and ANFIS had the best
efficiency results (102.46% PV efficiency and 98.05% resistive load efficiency), while ANN-
CGSVM underperformed (96.83% PV efficiency and 93.03% load efficiency). The obtained
results also show that the DC-DC converter loss with ANN-CGSVM classifier was the
smallest (8.10 W dissipated) while the conventional ANN and ANFIS had the biggest
DC-DC Cconverter losses (9.40 W dissipated). Figures 10 and 11 display the graphical
336 A. M. FARAYOLA, A. N. HASAN AND A. ALI

results of the extracted PV power and the output load power from the PV system under
PTC weather condition.
For case 3, where G is 1000 Wm−2 and T is 25◦ C, the ANFIS had the overall best
result as the ANFIS controller could extract 213.10 W power from the PV system at the
PV end, 204.9 W at the load end, and with an efficiency of 99.977% at the PV end, and
96.13% efficiency at the load end while ANN-CGSVM had the lowest result as the PV
system could only extract 211.0 W power from the PV system at the PV end, 202.5 W
at the load end, and with an efficiency of 98.99% at the PV end, and 95.00% efficiency
at the load end with the ANN-CGSVM technique. Results also showed that under STC
condition, ANN exhibited the smallest DC-DC converter loss as 8.13 W was dissipated
with ANN while ANN-PO had the biggest DC-DC converter loss as 9.70 W power was
dissipated from the extracted PV power with ANN-PO MPPT technique. Figures 12 and
13 display the graphical results of the extracted PV power and the output load power
from the PV system under PTC weather condition.
For the second experiment, Table 7 presents the results of the measured peak power
and the time required to track the maximum power point of the 1STH-215-P panel using
conventional ANN, ANFIS, ANN-CGSVM, and ANN-PO technique under standard test
condition (STC). Results show that the ANN-PO technique tracked the maximum power
point within the shortest period of time of 0.266 s, followed by ANN-CGSVM (1.486 s).
On the other hand, ANN took the longest time (1.978 s) before a stable maximum power
point could be attained, followed by ANFIS (1.968 s).
Table 7. MPPT techniques peak powers and time at STC (1000 Wm−2 , 25◦ C)

ANN-
ANFIS ANFIS ANN ANN- ANN-PO ANN-PO
ANN time CGSVM
power time power CGSVM power time
(second) time
(W) (second) (W) power (W) (W) (second)
(second)
213.1 1.944 213.0 1.946 204.3 0.006 212.5 0.134
213.1 1.954 213.0 1.958 203.7 1.482 212.5 0.256
213.1 1.968 213.0 1.978 203.7 1.486 212.5 0.266

5. Conclusions. This paper presents an innovative use of a particular type of classifica-

tion learning technique known as the coarse-Gaussian support vector machine (CGSVM)
classifier algorithm for MPPT improvement in PV systems. The obtained results sug-
gested that the CGSVM classifier could extract considerable power from the photovoltaic
panel under varied weather conditions. Also, the CGSVM technique generated the large
and near accurate training data sets that were required to train the ANN successfully,
thereby making the implementation of the supervised machine learning techniques such
as ANN and ANFIS much easier and less complex. The obtained results also confirmed
that both the ANN-CGSVM and the ANN-PO technique exhibited a fast convergence
speed and the issue of oscillating power near MPP that is common with conventional
Perturb&Observe MPPT technique was greatly reduced using hybrid ANN-PO MPPT
technique. The low performance of the ANN-CGSVM MPPT technique could be due to
the insufficient training data sets that were used to train the CGSVM classifier or the
high marginal errors between the PSIM data sets and the predicted CGSVM optimized
data sets which in turn affects the fitness function (yfit) of the CGSVM kernel. Future
recommendations suggest the use of sufficient and more accurate training data sets for
the CGSVM MPPT optimization task as merely locating one hyperplane that separates
the training data sets might not be satisfactory to produce an accurate learning.
 EFFICIENT PHOTOVOLTAIC MPPT SYSTEM 337

REFERENCES
[1] S. Sengar, Maximum power point tracking algorithm for photovoltaic system: A review, International
Review of Applied Engineering Research, vol.4, no.2, pp.147-154, 2014.
[2] A. M. Farayola, A. N. Hasan and A. Ali, Comparison of modified incremental conductance and
fuzzy logic MPPT algorithm using modified CUK converter, The 8th IEEE International Renewable
Energy Congress (IREC), Amman, Jordan, 2017.
[3] S. S. Mohammed, D. Devaraj and T. P. Imthias-Ahamed, Modeling, simulation and analysis of
photovoltaic modules under partially shaded conditions, Indian Journal of Science and Technology,
vol.9, no.16, 2016.
[4] D. Rekioua and E. Matagne, Optimization of photovoltaic power systems, in Green Energy and
Technology, Springer, 2012.
[5] D. C. Jordan, S. R. Kurtz, K. VanSant and J. Newmiller, Compendium of photovoltaic degradation
rates, Progress in Photovoltaic (John Wiley): Research and Applications, vol.24, no.7, pp.978-989,
2016.
[6] A. R. Reisi, M. H. Moradi and S. Jamasb, Classification and comparison of maximum power point
tracking techniques for photovoltaic system: A review, ELSEVIER Renewable and Sustainable En-
ergy Reviews, vol.19, no.1, pp.433-443, 2013.
[7] S. Savaliya and S. Ray, A comparative study on different MPPT techniques applied on photovoltaic
system, International Journal of Advanced Research in Electrical, Electronics and Instrumentation
Engineering (IJAREEIE), vol.4, no.3, 2015.
[8] D. P. Dhande, A. P. Chaudhari and G. K. Mahajan, A review of various MPPT techniques for
photovoltaic systems, International Journal of Innovations in Engineering Research and Technology,
vol.2, no.12, 2015.
[9] S. Suganya, K. Suganya, P. Sharmila and V. Gowthami, Photovoltaic array maximum power point
technique – A comparative survey, Journal of Recent Research in Engineering and Technology (JR-
RET), vol.2, no.5, 2015.
[10] W. Zhang, P. Mao and X. Chan, A review of maximum power point tracking methods for photovoltaic
system, The IEEE International Conference on Sustainable Energy Technologies (ICSET), Hanoi,
Vietnam, 2016.
[11] R. Abdul-Karim, S. M. Muyeen and A. Al-Durra, Review of maximum power point tracking tech-
niques for photovoltaic system, Global Journal of Control Engineering and Technology, vol.2, no.1,
pp.8-18, 2016.
[12] B. Pakkiraiah and G. D. Sukumar, Research survey on various MPPT performance issues to improve
the solar PV system efficiency, Journal of Solar Energy, vol.2016, pp.1-20, 2016.
[13] H. J. El-Khozondar et al., A review study of photovoltaic array maximum power tracking algorithms,
Renewables: Wind, Water, and Solar, vol.3, no.3, 2016.
[14] L. Jie and C. Ziran, Research on the MPPT algorithms of photovoltaic system based on PV neural
network, IEEE Control and Decision Conference, 2011.
[15] S. A. Rizzo and G. Scelba, ANN based MPPT method for rapidly variable shading conditions,
Applied Energy, vol.145, pp.124-132, 2015.
[16] S. Haykin, Neural Networks and Learning Machines, 3rd Edition, Prentice Hall, 2009.
[17] A. H. Mutlag, A. Mohamed and H. Shareef, A comparative study of artificial intelligent-based
maximum power point tracking for photovoltaic systems, International Conference on Advances in
Renewable Energy and Technologies, 2016.
[18] V. K. Garg et al., A review paper on various types of MPPT techniques for PV system, International
Journal of Engineering and Science Research, vol.4, no.5, pp.320-330, 2014.
[19] N. A. Kamarzaman and C. W. Tan, A comprehensive review of maximum power point tracking
algorithms for photovoltaic systems, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol.37, pp.585-598,
2014.
[20] V. L. Brano, G. Ciulla and M. Di-Falco, Artificial neural networks to predict the power output of a
PV panel, International Journal of Photoenergy, vol.2014, pp.1-12, 2014.
[21] L. Thiaw, G. Sow and S. Fall, Application of neural networks technique in renewable energy systems,
The 1st International Conference on Systems Informatics, Modelling, and Simulation, Washington
DC, USA, 2014.
[22] A. Saxena, Maximum power point tracking with artificial neural network, International Journal of
Electronics and Communication Engineering & Technology, vol.7, no.2, pp.47-59, 2016.
338 A. M. FARAYOLA, A. N. HASAN AND A. ALI

[23] M. Dragan and N. Srete, ANFIS as a method for determining MPPT in the photovoltaic system
simulated in MATLAB/Simulink, MIPRO 2016/CTS, pp.1289-1293, 2016.
[24] A. M. Farayola, A. N. Hasan and A. Ali, Implementation of modified incremental conductance
and fuzzy logic MPPT techniques using MCUK converter under various environmental conditions,
Applied Solar Energy, vol.53, no.2, 2017.
[25] P. Singh and R. Singh, Comparative study of ANFIS based MPPT techniques, SSRG International
Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering (SSRG-IJEEE), vol.3, no.5, pp.149-152, 2016.
[26] A. M. Farayola, A. N. Hasan and A. Ali, Curve fitting polynomial technique compared to AN-
FIS technique for maximum power point tracking, The 8th IEEE International Renewable Energy
Congress (IREC), Amman, Jordan, 2017.
[27] J. V. D. Reis et al., Comparison between Mamdani and Sugeno fuzzy inference systems for the mitiga-
tion of environmental temperature variations in OCDMA-PONs, The 17th International Conference
on Transparent Optical Networks (ICTON), Budapest, Hungary, 2015.
[28] D. Mlakić and S. Nikolovski, ANFIS as a method for determining MPPT in the photovoltaic system
simulated in Matlab/Simulink, MIPRO 2016 – The 39th International Convention CTS – Computers
in Technical Systems, Opatija, Adriatic Coast, Croatia, 2016.
[29] H. M. El-Zoghby and A. F. Bendary, A novel technique for maximum power point tracking of a
photovoltaic based on sensing of array current using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS),
International Journal of Emerging Electric Power Systems, vol.17, no.5, pp.547-554, 2016.
[30] V. Chopra, S. K. Singla and L. Dewan, Comparative analysis of tuning a PID controller using
intelligent methods, Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, vol.11, no.8, pp.235-249, 2014.
[31] M. Y. Worku and M. A. Abido, Grid connected PV system using ANFIS based MPPT controller in
real time, International Conference on Renewable Energy and Power Quality, 2016.
[32] A. M. Farayola, A. N. Hasan, A. Ali and B. Twala, Distributive MPPT approach using ANFIS and
Perturb&Observe techniques under uniform and partial shading conditions, International Conference
on Artificial Intelligence and Evolutionary Computations in Engineering Systems (ICAIECES-2017)
& Power, Circuit and Information Technologies (ICPCIT-2017), India, 2017.
[33] A. A. Kareim and M. Bin-Mansor, Support vector machine for MPPT efficiency improvement in
photovoltaic system, International Review of Automatic Control (IREACO), vol.6, no.2, 2013.
[34] N. G. Dharaniya, B. Mangaiyarkkarasi and K. Punitha, Support vector machine based MPPT tech-
nique for wind energy conversion systems, International Journal of Emerging Technology in Com-
puter Science & Electronics (IJETCSE), vol.22, no.2, 2016.
[35] D. Sun, D. Zhang and Y. Liu, Research of MPPT using support vector machine for PV system,
Applied Mechanics and Materials, vol.441, pp.268-271, 2014.
[36] A. M. Farayola, A. N. Hasan and A. Ali, Optimization of PV systems using data mining and
regression learner MPPT techniques, The 3rd International Conference on Electrical Engineering
and Control Applications, Constantine, Algeria, 2017.
[37] A. A. Kareim and M. Bin-Mansor, Efficiency improvement of the maximum power point tracking for
PV systems using support vector machine technique, The 4th International Conference on Energy
and Environment (ICEE2013), Mashhad, Iran, Al Alin, United Arab Emirates, 2013.
[38] M. C. Mihaescu, Using learner’s classification methodology for building intelligent interaction design,
International Journal of Computer Science and Applications, vol.9, no.3, pp.128-140, 2012.
[39] D. K. Srivastava and L. Bhambhu, Data classification using support vector machine, Journal of
Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, vol.12, no.1, pp.1-7, 2014.
[40] A. A. Kareim and M. B. Mansor, Support vector machine for MPPT improvement in photovoltaic
systems, International Review of Automatic Control (IREACO), vol.6, no.2, pp.177-182, 2013.
[41] B. S. Harish, M. B. Revanasiddappa and S. V. A. Kumar, A modified support vector clustering
method for document categorization, IEEE the 3rd International Conference on Knowledge Engi-
neering and Applications (ICKEA), Singapore, 2016.
[42] M. Kesraoui, A. Benine and N. Boudhina, Combination of an improved P&O technique with ANN
for MPPT of a solar PV system, International Conference on Renewable Energy: Generation and
Applications (ICREGA), pp.557-570, 2014.
[43] A. F. Murtaza et al., A novel hybrid MPPT technique for solar PV applications using Per-
turb&Observe and fractional open circuit voltage techniques, The 15th International Conference
in MECHATRONIKA, Prague, Czech Republic, 2012.
[44] B. Pakkiraiah and G. D. Sukumar, Research survey on various MPPT performance issues to improve
the solar PV system efficiency, Journal of Solar Energy, vol.2016, pp.1-20, 2016.
 EFFICIENT PHOTOVOLTAIC MPPT SYSTEM 339

[45] S. Maher et al., A comparative study of MPPT techniques for PV system, The 5th International
Renewable Energy Congress IREC, HamMamet, Tunisia, 2014.
[46] C. H. Shalini, G. R. S. Naga Kumar and S. R. Sekhar, Analysis of hybrid ANN-P&O based
MPPT controller for photovoltaic system, International Journal of Control Theory and Applica-
tions (IJCTA), vol.10, no.5, pp.165-175, 2017.
[47] A. M. Farayola, Comparative Study of Different Photovoltaic MPPT Techniques under Various
Weather Conditions, Master Thesis, University of Johannesburg, 2017.