IETE Journal of Research

ISSN: 0377-2063 (Print) 0974-780X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tijr20

Adaptive PID Controller with P&O MPPT Algorithm

for Photovoltaic System

Jyotirmaya Sahoo, Susovon Samanta & Shamik Bhattacharyya

To cite this article: Jyotirmaya Sahoo, Susovon Samanta & Shamik Bhattacharyya (2018):
Adaptive PID Controller with P&O MPPT Algorithm for Photovoltaic System, IETE Journal of
Research, DOI: 10.1080/03772063.2018.1497552

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/03772063.2018.1497552

Published online: 02 Aug 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 4

View Crossmark data

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

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tijr20
IETE JOURNAL OF RESEARCH
https://doi.org/10.1080/03772063.2018.1497552

Adaptive PID Controller with P&O MPPT Algorithm for Photovoltaic System
Jyotirmaya Sahoo, Susovon Samanta and Shamik Bhattacharyya

Department of Electrical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Rourkela, Rourkela 769008, India

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
In order to extract maximum power from a Photovoltaic (PV) panel different Maximum Power Point Adaptive controller; DC–DC
Tracking (MPPT) algorithms have been developed, among which Perturb and Observe (P&O) MPPT converter; Maximum power
algorithm is widely used. The P&O algorithm can be executed either by direct duty ratio or by volt- point tracking (MPPT);
age reference control. Both have drawbacks in tracking time and oscillation around MPP. In the latter Perturb and observe (P&O);
Photovoltaic (PV);
case, the reference voltage generated by the algorithm is fed to a controller (PI/PID) to generate Proportional integral
the corresponding duty ratio. The gains of PID controller are calculated under the standard test differential controller (PID
conditions (STC) (1000 W/m2 , 25°C) of PV panel and the same values are used for other operating controller)
conditions too, which does not provide satisfactory performance under varying operating condi-
tions. In this paper, an adaptive method is proposed to calculate the controller gains for different
operating conditions without using any additional sensors. The proposed method establishes a lin-
ear relation between the PID gains calculated for the STC and those for other operating conditions,
and this relation adaptively changes the PID gains for different operating conditions. It is observed
from the simulations and experimental results that the proposed adaptive method precisely tracks
the maximum power and optimizes the perturbation characteristics.

NOMENCLATURE
NS Number of series connected cells in PV
α Temperature coefficient of I SC panel
α1 Diode ideality factor Pmax Peak power of PV panel
αc Degree of freedom Pmpp PV panel power at MPP
β Temperature coefficient of V OC Tα Perturbation time
θc Required phase boost Td Derivative sampling time
θPV PV panel phase Ti Integral sampling time
ωc Crossover frequency R Load resistor
κ Required adaptive value Req PV panel equivalent resistance
Cin and Co Input and output capacitor rL Series resistance of inductor
d Duty ratio of the DC–DC converter Rs PV panel series resistance
D 1-(duty ratio of DC–DC converter) Rsh PV panel shunt resistance
Gc (s) Transfer function of PID controller vCin Input capacitor voltage
Gvpv d (s) Transfer function of the system vCo Output capacitor voltage
fc Bandwidth Veq Linearized equivalent panel voltage
Io Reverse saturation current Vmpp PV panel voltage at MPP
i_O Output current of DC–DC converter VOC PV panel open circuit voltage
iL Inductor current VPV PV panel voltage
iPV PV panel current VO DC–DC converter output voltage
Isc PV panel short circuit current Vt Thermal voltage
Impp PV panel current at MPP V ref Perturbation step size
KD Derivative gain
KI Integral gain
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
KP Proportional gain
L Inductor PID Proportional integral derivative
Mpv Gain of the PV system PV Photovoltaic

© 2018 IETE
2 J. SAHOO ET AL.: ADAPTIVE PID CONTROLLER WITH P&O MPPT ALGORITHM FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM
P&O Perturb and observe
MPP Maximum power point
MPPT Maximum power point tracking
STC Standard test condition
1. INTRODUCTION
Photovoltaic (PV) power generation has become the
most emerging renewable source of energy around the
world because of advantages such as lesser maintenance,
absence of moving parts which eliminates the noise effect,
low cost and increasing efficiency of solar cells. The effi-
ciency of the PV system depends on the operating point
of characteristics curve of the PV panel [1–3]. In addi-
tion, the maximum power point (MPP) on the char-
acteristics curve is influenced by solar irradiation and
temperature. Figure 1(a,b) illustrates the change of MPP
and characteristics curves for different operating con-
ditions. To extract maximum available power from PV
panel, a DC–DC converter is interfaced with the panel
and controlled by suitable MPPT technique to operate the
panel at MPP. Till date various MPPT algorithms [4–9]
have been developed to increase the efficiency of the PV
panel, the effectiveness of which is decided by the steady
state oscillations and tracking time. This paper uses P&O
algorithm for MPPT, as it has advantages like ease of
implementation and execution. The P&O algorithm is
developed based on the slope change of (P–V) char-
acteristics of the PV panel. The slope of the curve is
ideally zero at MPP, positive to the left of MPP, and
negative to the right of MPP. The panel voltage and cur-
rent are measured for every perturbation and the control
parameter is changed by a small amount (step size). If
power increases from the present iteration, perturbation
of the system continues alike previous iteration, other-
wise counter action is taken. The performance of the
P&O algorithm depends on its perturbation time and
perturbation step size.
There are two approaches to implement the P&O
algorithm, the direct duty ratio control and the voltage
reference control. For direct duty ratio control [10–14],
P&O algorithm directly provides the required duty ratio
for the DC–DC converter to reach MPP. The step size
of the duty ratio can either be fixed or varied adaptively.
For a higher value of step size, the response time to
reach MPP will be less while the steady state oscillations
will increase. Therefore, fixed perturbation cannot satisfy
both the performance and efficiency simultaneously. In
case of adaptive perturbation, there is no systematic pro-
cedure to decide the scaling factor for the adaptation of
the step size.
(a)
(b)
Figure 1: I-V curves of the ELDORA 40-P PV panel
Reference voltage perturbation [15,16] has an advantage
of using a controller (PI/PID) to generate the duty ratio
for converter. This method provides better performance
over direct duty ratio control [17–19]. The PID controller
gains can be calculated by using different tuning meth-
ods by linearizing the PV panel characteristics around
the MPP under standard test condition (STC). Once cal-
culated, these same set of values are also used for other
operating conditions. However the MPP of the panel
changes with change in operating conditions which leads
to the changes in the panel equivalent linear model and
the transfer function of the system. Due to these changes,
PID controller with fixed gains does not perform satis-
factorily at different operating conditions as the perfor-
mance criteria like steady state oscillations, overshoot,
settling time are affected.
The above problem can be solved by tuning the con-
troller gains according to the changes in operating con-
ditions. This can be implemented with a lookup table
containing different controller parameters for respective
operating conditions. In [20], such look up table for adap-
tive reference voltage based MPPT algorithm was dis-
cussed. However, this method requires an extra sensor
to observe the changes in irradiation. In addition, it is
difficult to calculate the controller gains for all possible
operating conditions and requires a microcontroller with
high processing power for its implementation.
The proposed adaptive method does not require any
extra sensor for its implementation; rather it utilizes the
 J. SAHOO ET AL.: ADAPTIVE PID CONTROLLER WITH P&O MPPT ALGORITHM FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM 3

same voltage and current sensors as required for imple-

menting the P&O algorithm. By observing the controller
gains for different operating conditions, a linear rela-
tion is developed between the gains calculated for STC
and other operating conditions. This linear equation uses
the power change of the panel to calculate the controller
(a) (b)
gains for different operating conditions. Because of the
adaptive nature, steady state oscillations, overshoot and Figure 2: Non-linear characteristics and the linearized
settling time at every perturbation are reduced, and the
tracking time of the algorithm is improved. To validate
the proposed method, a boost converter topology is con-
sidered in this paper. However, this algorithm can be slope of the tangent line obtained from (1) is
applied to other converter topologies also. dipv
g(Vpv, Ipv ) =
dvpv
 
2. SMALL SIGNAL MODELING FOR SYSTEM Io vpv + Rs ipv 1
DESIGN =− exp − (2)
αVt Ns αVt Ns Rsh
The MPPT system comprises of a PV panel, a DC–DC
The linear model described by the equation of tangent
converter and a load (resistance or battery). The PV panel
line in Figure 2(a) at a given point (V,I) is
and the DC–DC converter both have nonlinear and time-
variant characteristics. So it is essential to linearize the ipv = gvpv + (−gV + I) (3)
system for classical controller design.
This linear model can be equivalently represented [22]
by the circuit shown in Figure 2(b), whose current
2.1 Equivalent Linear Model of PV Panel
equation is -
PV panel presents the non-linear I–V characteristics,
vpv Veq
which is dependent on the solar irradiation and tem- ipv = − + (4)
perature. An ELDORA 40P PV panel is used for the Req Req
experimental purpose and its I–V characteristics under
The equivalent parameters in this case are :
STC (1000 W/m2 , 25°C) is shown in Figure 3. The rela-
tionship between PV panel voltage and current can be Req = −1/g
described by using single-diode model [1] as follows:
Veq = V − I/g (5)
   
vpv + Rs ipv vpv + Rs ipv
ipv = Isc − Io exp −1 − The values of V eq and Req will change with change in
α1 Vt Ns Rsh
operating conditions. Here three specific operating con-
(1)
ditions are considered for experimental purpose. Table 1
represents the values of equivalent parameters and max-
where I sc is the short-circuit current, I o is the reverse imum power for different operating conditions. It can
saturation current, V t is the thermal voltage, α1 is the be clearly observed that the equivalent parameters are
diode ideality factor, N s is the series connected cells in dependent on the operating conditions. For other operat-
PV panel, Rs is the series resistance, and Rsh is the shunt ing conditions, the changes in the equivalent parameters
resistance of the PV panel. The parameters of ELDORA can be calculated similarly.
40P under STC obtained from the data sheet are Peak
Power, Pmax : 38 W, Open Circuit Voltage, V OC : 21.8 V,
2.2 Linearization of PV System
Short Circuit Current, I SC : 2.4 A, Voltage at MPP, V mpp :
17.2 V, Current at MPP, I mpp :2.2 A, Temperature Coeffi- A boost converter fed by the linearized PV panel is
cient of V OC , β:-0.31%/°C, Temperature Coefficient of depicted in Figure 3. The main aim here is to control
I SC , α:0.058%/°C . Modeling of PV panel and determina- the switching of the boost converter in such a way that
tion of the parameters for (1) are described in [21]. The the PV panel voltage (Vpv) tracks the reference voltage
nonlinear I–V characteristics is linearized at the MPP by obtained from the MPPT algorithm. So the transfer func-
drawing a tangent to the I–V curve at the MPP (V, I). The tion between the output variable, panel voltage v
pv and
4 J. SAHOO ET AL.: ADAPTIVE PID CONTROLLER WITH P&O MPPT ALGORITHM FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM

Table 1: Equivalent parameters of PV panel at different operating conditions

Irradiation Power
(W/m2 ) Temp. (°C) Vmpp (V) Impp (A) Veq (V) Req () Pmax (W)
1000 25 17.2 2.2 32.12 6.78 37.84
500 45 16.4 1.1 66.24 45.3 17.9
100 38 16.1 0.23 37.3 95.1 3.58

equations are obtained as:

⎡ ⎤
rL 1 D
⎡ ⎤ ⎢ − − ⎡ ⎤
LL L ⎥
d ⎣ L ⎦ ⎢ ⎥ iL
i 1 1
⎢ 0⎥
vCin = ⎢ − ⎥ ⎣vCin ⎦
dt ⎢ Cin Req Cin ⎥
vCo ⎣ D 1 ⎦ vCo
0−
Co RCo W
⎡ v ⎤
o
Figure 3: PV system equivalent circuit model ⎢ L ⎥
⎢ ⎥
+ ⎢ 0 ⎥ d̂ (8)
⎣ IL ⎦
−
the control variable, duty ratio d̂ is obtained using the Co
State-Space averaging technique [23]. ⎡
⎤
iL
The state variables for the system are inductor current pv = [010] ⎣vCin ⎦
y = v (9)
iL , input capacitor voltage vCin , and output capacitor vCo
voltagevCo . The ON time state equations are: Using Laplace transformation, the transfer function of
the system is obtained from eqn (8) and (9) as:
diL
L = Vcin − iL rL v
pv b1 s + b0
dt Gvpv d (s) = = (10)
d̂ s3 + a2 s2 + a1 s + a0

dvCin 1 where
Cin = (Veq − vCin ) − iL
dt Req rL 1 1
a2 = + +
L Cin Req Co R

dVco 1 ⎛ r ⎞
Co = (−vCo ) (6) L
+  
dt R ⎜ L ⎟ 1
a1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠
Co R
Cin Req
The OFF time state equations are:   
rL 1 D 2 1
+ + +
diL Cin Req Cin Co L
L = Vcin − iL rL − vCo
dt
  
1 rL 1 D 2
dvCin 1 a0 = + +
Cin = (Veq − vCin ) − iL Cin Co LReq R R Req
dt Req  
Vo 1 Vo 
b1 = , b0 = + D IL (11)
Cin L Cin Co L R
dVE 1
Co = iL − (−vCo ) (7)
dt R 2.3 Analysis and Validation of System Transfer
Function
By applying the State Space Averaging technique to Equa- The system transfer function as discussed in Equation
tions (6) and (7), and perturbing and linearizing around (10) contains the equivalent parameters of PV panel.
a stable operating point, the small-signal state-space Therefore, for different operating conditions the variation
 J. SAHOO ET AL.: ADAPTIVE PID CONTROLLER WITH P&O MPPT ALGORITHM FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM 5

Table 2: Boost converter parameters 3.1 P&O MPPT Algorithm

Switching frequency 50 kHz
Inductor, L 200 μH The reference PV voltage is varied by controlling the per-
Series resistance of inductor, rL 0.5  turbation step size (V ref ) for the direction of slope vari-
Input and output capacitor, C in and C o 220 μF
Load resistor, R 250  ation. For three-level operation of the P&O algorithm,
the perturbation time T α should be higher than the set-
tling time of the system. Similarly V ref is decided for
minimum tracking oscillation in the steady state of MPP.
Therefore, V ref and T α are two essential parameters in
this MPPT algorithm [16].

3.2 Fixed Gain PID Controller Design

Figure 4: Bode plot of the PV System for different operating con-
ditions
in the equivalent parameters will also change the transfer
function of the system. Table 2 contains the parame-
ters for the boost converter considered for analyzing the
variation on Gvpv d (s). Figure 6 illustrates the frequency
response analysis of Gvpv d (s) for different operating con-
ditions, based on the system parameters given in Tables 1
and 2.
From Figure 4, it can be observed that the variation due
to the changes in operating conditions are more in case
of magnitude plots while the phase plots are less affected.
The decrease in both temperature and irradiation, results
in a decrease in the low frequency gain and the peak over-
shoot. The crossover frequency also decreases slightly.
Therefore, for closed-loop design the controller gains
need to be changed.
The gains of the PID controller are calculated for the
parameters of the PV panel at STC, which then gener-
ates the required duty ratio for the boost converter to
operate in MPP region. The continuous-time equivalent
expression for PID control is [24],
KI
Gc (s) = KP + + KD s (12)
s
where KP , KI and KD are proportional, integral and
derivative gains of the controller, respectively. Here these
gains are calculated for a specific phase margin (PM) and
crossover frequency (ωc ) of the closed loop system.
The polar form of (13):
Gc (jω) = M(ω)ejθ (ω) (13)
In addition the system can be expressed as
GVpv d (jω) = |GVpv (jω)|ej∠Gpv d(jω) (14)
From (14) and (15), the loop transfer function consider-
ing unity feedback closed loop system, is
GVpv d (jω) ∗ Gc (jω)
= |GVpv d (jω)| ∗ M(ω)ej∠GVpv d (jω)+jθ (ω) (15)
At the specified phase margin (PM) and crossover fre-
quency (ωC ) the above eqn. reduces to –
Mpv < (PM − 180◦ − θpv ) = M(ω) < θ (ω) (16)

3. CLOSED LOOP DESIGN where Mpv = 1

|GVpv d (jω)| , θpv = ∠GVpv d (jωc )

Based on the system transfer function derived in the Now we can express:
previous section, the closed-loop controller is designed
for the PV panel-boost converter system. In a Voltage KI = KP /Ti , KD = KP Td (17)
reference control P&O algorithm implementation, the
MPPT controller decides the value of the reference volt- Assuming
age which is then compared with the PV panel voltage, Td = αC Ti (18)
and the resulting error value is fed to the PID controller
to decide the duty ratio for the boost converter. where αC = degree of freedom.
6 J. SAHOO ET AL.: ADAPTIVE PID CONTROLLER WITH P&O MPPT ALGORITHM FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM

The required PID gains can be calculated by equating the

real and imaginary parts of eqn. (17) and using the eqns
(18) and (19) which gives:

tanθc + tan2 θc + 4αC
KP = Mpv cos(θc ), Ti = (19)
2ωc αC
where θc = PM − 180◦ − ∠θpv
(a)
The open loop transfer function of PV-boost system
under STC is
2.25 × 103 s + 8.182 × 1010
GVpv d (s) =
s3 + 1439s2 + 2.398 × 107 s + 9.16 × 108
The gains of the controller for fC = 1 KHz, PM = 50°
and αC = 0.1 under STC are

KP = 0.0095, KI = 10.8and KD = 7.67 × 10−7 (b)

Figure 5 illustrates the Bode plot of the open-loop and

closed loop system for STC. It can be observed from
Figure 5 that the calculated PID gains helps to improve
the PM of the system by around 50° and the bandwidth
is also reduced to 1 kHz as is desired.

Figure 6(a,b) represents the effect of controller gain for

change in operating conditions when the controller gains (c)
are calculated by considering STC (1000 W/m2, 25 °C).
In Figure 6(a), the operating conditions are changed
from STC to (100 W/m2, 38°C) at 0.5 s, and vice-versa
in Figure 6(b). The presence of the 3-level tracking
waveforms verifies the proper operation of the P&O
algorithm.

(d)

(e)

(f)

Figure 6: Tracking waveforms for P&O algorithm with fixed

Figure 5: Bode plot of open-loop and closed-loop transfer func-
and adaptive gain PID controller where V ref = 0.25 V and
tions at STC
Ta = 20 ms; (a,b) – PID gains calculated for STC. (c,d) – PID gains
calculated for (100 W/m2 , 38°C). (e,f) – adaptive PID gains
 J. SAHOO ET AL.: ADAPTIVE PID CONTROLLER WITH P&O MPPT ALGORITHM FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM
Figure 7: Power output for different operating conditions
Table 3: Controller gains at different operating conditions
Serial no. Irradiation (W/m2 ) Temp. (°C) Kp KI
I 1000 25 0.0095 10.8
II 500 45 0.015 13.4
III 100 38 0.105 21.6
It can be observed from Figure 6(a) that, as the controller
gains were calculated based on STC, at the instant of
change in operating conditions from STC to (100 W/m2 ,
38°C), there is a sharp decrease in PV voltage down to
12.5 V. Moreover, a transient overshoot occurs at the next
perturbation and the system reaches the steady state at
around 0.8 s. It is also noted that, in the steady state,
the settling time is increased for each level and there
also appears a steady-state error at each level. In case of
Figure 6(b), after the operating condition changes and the
system attains steady state at around 0.75 s, the settling
time at each perturbation level is reduced as compared
to previous case, and the steady state error is also absent.
From Figure 7 it can be found that the output power of
the system at STC is 37.84 W and this power level drops
to 3.5 W at the condition of 100 W/m2 , 38°C.
Table 3 provides the information about changes in con-
troller gains for different operating conditions which
are calculated for the corresponding changes in sys-
tem transfer function. The PID parameters at STC
(1000 W/m2 , 25°C) are K P = 0.0095, K I = 10.8 and
K D = 7.67 × 10−7 . Now with the change in operating
condition (decrease in irradiance or increase in temper-
ature or both) the panel power reduces. From Table 3
it can be found that with the decrease in panel output
power the PID parameters values will increase. Theo-
retically it can be concluded from the relation between
PID parameters and panel output power that, when the
panel power output will be zero the PID parameters value
will be infinite. In case of Figure 6(c,d), the controller
gains are calculated considering (100 W/m2 , 38°C) as the
operating conditions.
To verify the effects of the same, the operating conditions
are changed from STC to (100 W/m2 , 38°C) at 0.5 s in
7
Figure 6(c) and vice-versa in Figure 6(d). In Figure 6(c),
it is interesting to note that the instantaneous dip in volt-
age at 0.5 s is only down to 15.2 V as compared to 12.5 V
in Figure 6(a). Moreover, the transient overshoot is absent
unlike Figure 6(a). The settling time at each perturbation
level is reduced and the steady state error is also absent. In
case of Figure 6(d), it can be observed that the oscillations
are increased for each level under STC, along with an
increase in settling time compared to that of Figure 6(b).
This occurs as the controller gains have been calculated
for (100 W/m2 , 38°C) in Figure 6(c,d), as compared to the
gains calculated for STC in case of Figure 6(a,b). A voltage
KD dip occurs in the system with a sudden decrease in irra-
7.67 × 10−7 diance from a higher value a as shown in Figure 6(a,c). A
1.77 × 10−6 high value of dip voltage would drive the PV panel toward
8.55 × 10−6
the constant current region on the P–V curve, which
is relatively less stable to the constant voltage region.
Thus the value of the dip voltage should also be con-
trolled to prevent the system from being driven toward
instability.
So from the observations in Figure 6(a–d), we can con-
clude that the tracking characteristic is better when the
PID controller gains are set for their respective operating
conditions.
The controller gains can be changed with the help of a
lookup table containing the values of the controller gains
for different operating conditions. However, this method
requires extra sensors for sensing the values of irradia-
tion and temperature. In addition, it is difficult to store
the controller parameter values for all possible operating
conditions which would also require a microcontroller
with higher processing power. That would increase the
cost of the system. Therefore, in next section an adaptive
PID controller is proposed where the gains of the con-
troller are changed according to the change in operating
conditions.
3.3 Adaptive PID Controller
Different adaptive methods [25–29] such as adaptive hill
climbing, fuzzy controller, adaptive fuzzy gain schedul-
ing PID controller are used to control the duty ratio of
the converter, however they have complexity and com-
plicated optimization algorithms. The proposed adaptive
method is designed by observing the changes in PID
gains for different operating conditions. A linear relation-
ship has been observed between the PID gains calculated
for STC and other operating conditions. For validation of
the relationship, Table 4 details the changes in controller
gains between STC, i.e. (1000 W/m2 , 25°C), to different
operating conditions.
8 J. SAHOO ET AL.: ADAPTIVE PID CONTROLLER WITH P&O MPPT ALGORITHM FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM
Table 4: Observed changes in PID gains from STC to other
operating conditions
K P(OC)
Operating condition (OC) K P(STC) K I(OC) − K I(STC)
500 W/m2 , 45°C 2.21 2.6
100 W/m2 , 38°C 11.05 10.8
From Table 4, nearly a constant gain value is required to
change the PID gains from STC to the other operating
conditions of (500 W/m2 , 45°C) and (100 W/m2 , 38°C).
From the above observation, a linear equation is derived
which will change the controller gains from STC to dif-
ferent operating conditions as given in eqn (21), where an
operating condition is represented by “oc” and “κ” stands
for required adaptive value.
KP(oc) = KP(STC) × κ
KI(OC) = KI(STC) + κ
KD(OC) = KD(STC) × κ
Due to the change in operating condition, the power of
PV panel will change and this change in power from STC
to a specific operating condition will provide the required
adaptive value (κ). As an example, the calculation for
power gain from STC to different operating conditions
is very close
Pmpp(STC)
Pmpp (500W/m2 , 45◦ C)
Pmpp(STC)
= 2.5 = 10.56
Pmpp (100W/m2, 38◦ C)
to the ideal κ for (500 W/m2 , 45°C) and (100 W/m2 ,
38°C) conditions, respectively. Therefore, this power rela-
tionship will help to generate the required PID gains at
every instant for the varying operating conditions. In
the case of P&O algorithm, PV panel voltage and cur-
rent are available from the voltage and current sensors
respectively. Using that data it is possible to calculate the
power at every perturbation P(perturbation) . The value of
power at MPP under STC conditions is already available
in the datasheet of the PV panel. So without using any
extra sensor, the adaptive value κ can be easily updated as
follows:
Pmpp(STC)
κ=
P(perturbation)
To justify the proposed method various simulations have
been performed and it is observed that the PID controller
gains obtained from Equation (21) are given approxi-
mately the same value if it has been calculated by lin-
earizing at MPP in different operating conditions. In this
K D(OC)
K D(STC)
2.3
11.15
Figure 8: EN 50530 verification with a slope of 50 W/m2
adaptive PID controller, the gains are calculated only for
STC and the required gains for other operating condi-
tion can be decided from (21) and (22). In addition, the
proposed logic can be implemented in a low-cost micro-
(20) controller without using any extra sensors. Figure 6(e,f)
represents the tracking waveform for P&O algorithm
with the proposed adaptive PID controller. In Figure 6(e),
the operating conditions change from STC to (100 W/m2 ,
38°C) and in 6(f), change from (100 W/m2 , 38°C) to STC.
It is interesting to note here that the overshoot present in
Figure 6(c) is totally absent in Figure 6(e). As the over-
shoot may be a reason of distortion so it can be said that
by using adaptive PID method the chances of distortion
has been reduced. The tracking waveform of V pv for V ref
has better results than that shown in Figures 6(b,c) for
their respective PID gains. The perturbation settling time
under (100 W/m2 , 38°C) becomes better and the oscilla-
tions for perturbation under STC are absent. Therefore,
with this adaptive controller the performance and pertur-
bation characteristics of the P&O algorithm is improved
for all operating conditions.
The proposed adaptive PID method has also been ver-
ified by using EN 50530 standard. This algorithm gives
an efficiency of 99.73%. Figure 8 shows the waveform
of Ppv and Pmpp with time, when the irradiance value
has been changed from 100 to 500 W/m2 with a slope of
100 W/m2 /s.
4. EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION
To validate the performance and functionality of the P&O
MPPT algorithm with the proposed adaptive PID con-
(21) troller, a prototype of PV-Boost system has been designed
as shown in Figure 9. The parameters for the designed
Boost converter along with the specifications of the PV
panel used are presented in Section II. For the digi-
tal implementation of the proposed PID controller, an
ARDINUO UNO microcontroller has been used. The
analog data for voltage and current of the PV Panel
 J. SAHOO ET AL.: ADAPTIVE PID CONTROLLER WITH P&O MPPT ALGORITHM FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM 9

Figure 9: Experimental set-up for the developed PV System

are read using a voltage divider circuit and a LEM LA-

55P current sensor respectively. Two 500 W Halogen and
four 100 W incandescent lamps have been used to pro-
vide the necessary irradiation artificially. In order to be
able to properly verify the performance characteristics,
the experiment is carried out with V ref = 0.25 V and
T α = 0.5 s. Figure 9 represents the experimental results
for both fixed and adaptive PID gains.

In Figure 10(a–c), the PID gains are set for STC (500
W/m2 , 45°C), (100 W/m2 , 38°C) conditions respectively,
while in Figure 8(d) the proposed adaptive PID gains
are used. From Figure 8 it can be clearly observed that
the tracking time required for a sudden decrease in irra-
diation is lower. The reason for this can be attributed
to the fact that due to a fall in irradiation, the operat-
ing point momentarily moves to the Constant Current
region in the PV characteristic curve. This leads to an
increase in dynamic resistance, which in turn reduces the
damping factor, and thus the tracking is faster. For a sud-
den increase in irradiation, the tracking time required is
higher, which is due to the momentary shift of the oper-
ating point to the Constant Voltage region, resulting in a
decrease in dynamic resistance and thus in an increase in
damping factor.

From Table 5, it can be clearly observed that the tracking

time is minimal when the PID gains are set for the
required operating conditions. For adaptive PID gains,

Table 5: Tracking time for different PID gains

Tracking Dip voltage
time (s) (Volt)
PID Gains set Change Change Change Figure 10: Tracking waveforms for different PID gains for
for operating from 100 to from 500 to from 500 to
Figure 8 condition 500 W/m2 100 W/m2 100 W/m2 changes in operating condition between (100 W/m2 , 38°C) and
(500 W/m2 , 45°C) to with Vref = 0.25 V and Ta = 0.5 s. Fixed
a STC 7 3 14
b 500 W/m2 4 2 13
PID gains for STC. (b) Fixed PID gains for (G, T) = (500 W/m2 ,
c 100 W/m2 9 1 13 45°C). (c) Fixed PID gains for (G, T) = (100 W/m2 , 38°C). (d)
d Adaptive 4 1 12 Adaptive PID gains
10 J. SAHOO ET AL.: ADAPTIVE PID CONTROLLER WITH P&O MPPT ALGORITHM FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM
tracking time is minimal for both increase and decrease
in irradiation. Therefore, the proposed adaptive PID con-
troller improves the tracking time of P&O algorithm
for all the different operating conditions, and does away
with the need to adjust the PID gain for each change in
operating conditions.
From Table 5 it can be observed that the dip in volt-
age takes place when the irradiance value decreased.
The value of dip voltage has been minimized by using
adaptive PID method. The value of % ripple has found
around 10% for all the conditions as the effect of
adaptive PID control is only to improve the transient
condition.
5. CONCLUSION
The adaptive PID controller for voltage reference P&O
algorithm has been presented in this paper. The basic
idea of the proposed adaptive PID controller and how it
tries to mitigate the drawbacks of fixed PID has been dis-
cussed. Here the PID controller gains change adaptively
when there is a change in the operating conditions. As
the MPP of the PV panel changes with different operat-
ing conditions accordingly the transfer function between
PV panel voltage and duty ratio of the DC–DC con-
verter changes due to the change in the linear model of
the PV panel. So obviously, PID controller with fixed
gains does not perform satisfactorily at different oper-
ating conditions. After calculating the PID controller
gains for different operating conditions, a linear relation
is developed between the gains calculated for STC and
other operating conditions. This linear equation uses an
adaptive value (κ) which is calculated by dividing the
MPP power at STC with the available PV power at every
perturbation. Therefore, PID controller gains change
in a truly adaptive fashion in the proposed algorithm.
A DC–DC Boost converter has been used for simula-
tion and experimental purposes. In order to verify the
proposed method with different operating conditions
EN50530 testing standard were conducted. The simula-
tion and experimental results prove that the proposed
adaptive PID controller is able to generate a required PID
gains for different operating conditions and is accurately
tracking the MPP for the PV panel with improved per-
turbation characteristics. The experimental observations
have been performed with a slight change in perturba-
tion time to validate the effectiveness of the proposed
controller. In future the proposed method can be applied
for different DC–DC converters for high power applica-
tions.
FUNDING
Authors would like to thank Department of Science and Tech-
nology for providing the grant SR/2016/EE/036 for carrying out
the research work.
ORCID
Susovon Samanta http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7740-0318
REFERENCES
1. Y. T. Tan, D. S. Kirschen, and N. Jenkins, “A model of
PV generation suitable for stability analysis,” IEEE Trans.
Energy Convers., Vol. 19, pp. 748–55, Dec. 2004.
2. W. D. Soto, S. A. Klein, and W.A. Beckman, “Improve-
ment and validation of a model for photovoltaic array
performance,” Solar Energy, Vol. 80, pp. 78–88, Jan. 2006.
3. W. Xiao, W. G. Dunford, P. R. Palmer, and A. Capel, “Reg-
ulation of photovoltaic voltage,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
Vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 1365–74, June 2007.
4. D. P. Hohm and M. E. Ropp, “Comparative study of max-
imum power point tracking algorithms,” Prog. Photovolt.
Res. Appl., Vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 47–62, Jan. 2003.
5. V. Salas, E. Olias, A. Barrado, and A. Lazaro, “Review of
the maximum power point tracking algorithms for stand-
alone photovoltaic systems,” Solar Energy Mater. Solar
Cells, Vol. 90, no.11, pp. 1555–78, Jul. 2006.
6. T. Esram, and P. L. Chapman, “Comparison of photovoltaic
array maximum power point tracking techniques,” IEEE
Trans. Energy Convers., Vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 439–49, June.
2007.
7. A. S. Oshaba, E. S. Ali, and S. A. Elazin, “MPPT con-
trol design of PV system supplied SRM using BAT search
algorithm,” Sust. Energy Grids Netw., Vol. 2, pp. 51–60,
2015.
8. A. S. Oshaba, E. S. Ali, and S. A. Elazin, “PI controller
design using ABC algorithm for MPPT of PV system sup-
pling DC motor pump load,” Neural Comput. Appl., Vol.
28, no. 2, pp. 353–64, 2017.
9. A. S. Oshaba, and E. S. Ali. “Bacteria foraging: a new tech-
niqye for speed control of DC series motor supplied by
photovoltaic system,” Int. J. WSEAS Trans. Power. Syst., Vol.
9, pp. 185–95, 2014.
10. L. Piegari, and R. Rizzo, “Adaptive perturb and observe
algorithm for photovoltaic maximum power point track-
ing,” IET Renew. Power Gener., Vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 317–28,
Jul. 2010.
11. A. K. Abddelsalam, A. M. Massoud, S. Ahmed, and P. N.
Enjeti, “High-performance adaptive perturb and observe
MPPT technique for photovoltaic-based microgrids,” IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., Vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1010–21, Apr.
2011.
 J. SAHOO ET AL.: ADAPTIVE PID CONTROLLER WITH P&O MPPT ALGORITHM FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM
12. Y. Jiang, J. A. A. Qahouq, and T. A. Haskew, “Adaptive step
size with adaptive-perturbation-frequency digital MPPT
controller for a singlesensor photovoltaic solar system,”
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., Vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 3195–205,
Jul. 2013.
13. M. Killi, and S. Samanta, “Modified perturb and observe
MPPT algorithm for drift avoidance in photovoltaic sys-
tems,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., Vol. 62, no. 9, pp.
5549–59, Sept. 2015.
14. J. Ahmed, and Z. Salam, “A modified P & O max-
imum power point tracking with reduced steady-state
oscillation and improved tracking efficiency,” IEEE
Trans. Sust. Energy, Vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 1506–15, Oct.
2016.
15. N. Femia, G. Petrone, G. Spagnuolo, and M. Vitelli, “Opti-
mization of perturb and observe maximum power point
tracking method,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., Vol. 20, no.
4, pp. 963–73, Jul. 2005.
16. M. A. Elgendy, B. Zahawi, and D. J. Atkinson, “Assess-
ment of perturb and observe MPPT algorithm implemen-
tation techniques for PV pumping applications,”
IEEE Trans. Sust. Energy, Vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 21–33, Jan.
2012.
17. W. Xiao, W. G. Dunford, P. R. Palmer, and A. Capel,
“Application of centered differentiation and steepest
descent to maximum power point tracking,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., Vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 2359–549,
2007.
18. F. Paz, and M. Ordonez, “Zero oscillation and irradiance
slope tracking for photovoltaic MPPT,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., Vol. 61, no. 11, pp. 6138–47, 2014.
19. O. Khan, and W. Xiao, “Integration of start stop mechanism
to improve maximum power point tracking performance
in steady state,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., Vol. 63, no. 10,
pp. 6126–35, 2016.
20. M. Lasheen, A. K. Abdel Rahman, M. Abdel-Salam, and
S. Ookawara, “Adaptive reference voltage-based MPPT
11
technique for PV applications,” IET Renew. Power Gener.,
Vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 715–22, 2017.
21. M. G. Villalva, J. R. Gazoli, and E. R. Filho, “Comprehen-
sive approach to modeling and simulation of photovoltaic
arrays,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., Vol. 24, no. 5, pp.
1198–208, May 2009.
22. M. G. Villalva, T. G. de Siqueira, and E. Ruppert, “Volt-
age regulation of photovoltaic arrays: small-signal analysis
and control design,” IET Power Electron., Vol. 3, no. 6, pp.
869–80, 2010.
23. R. W. Erickson, and D. Makismovic, Fundamentals of
Power Electronics. Springer Science & Business Madia,
2007.
24. K. J. Åström, and T. Hägglund, Advanced PID control, ISA
– The Instrumentation, Systems and Automation Society,
2006.
25. W. Xiao, and W. G. Dunford, “A modified adaptive hill
climbing MPPT method for photovoltaic power systems,”
Proc. IEEE PESC, pp. 1957–63, 2004.
26. N. Femia, D. Granozio, G. Petrone, G. Spagnuolo, and
M. Vitelli, “Predective and adaptive MPPT perturb and
observe method,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., Vol.
43, no. 3, pp. 934–50, Jul. 2007.
27. B. N. Alajmi, K. H. Ahmed, S. J. Finney, and B. W. Williams,
“Fuzzy-logic-control approach of a modified hill-climbing
method for maximum power point in microgrid stan-
dalone photovoltaic system,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
Vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1022–30, Apr. 2011.
28. A. I. Dounis, P. Kofinas, C. Alafodimos, and D. Tseles,
“Adaptive fuzzy gain scheduling PID controller for maxi-
mum power point tracking of photovoltaic system,” Renew.
Energy, Vol. 60, pp. 204–14, Dec. 2013.
29. A. E. Khateb, N. A. Rahim, J. Selvaraj, and M. N. Uddin,
“Fuzzy logic controller based SEPIC converter for maxi-
mum power point tracking,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., Vol.
50, no. 4, pp. 2349–58, Jul. 2014.
12 J. SAHOO ET AL.: ADAPTIVE PID CONTROLLER WITH P&O MPPT ALGORITHM FOR PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM
Authors
Jyotirmaya Sahoo received his BTech
degree in Electrical Engineering in 2013,
and MTech in Control and Automation
from NIT Rourkela in 2017. His research
interest in Battery Management System.
Susovon Samanta (M’11) received the
BE degree from the Regional Engineer-
ing College, Durgapur, India, in 1998,
the ME degree from Jadavpur Univer-
sity, Kolkata, India, in 2003, and the PhD
degree from the Indian Institute of Tech-
nology Kharagpur, Kharagpur, India, in
2012, all in electrical engineering. From 2003 to 2004, he was
a Lecturer with Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, India. In
2009, he joined the National Institute of Technology, Rourkela,
India, where he is currently an Assistant Professor. His research
interests are in the analysis, modeling, and control of power
converters used in various areas such as photovoltaics, electric
vehicles, and space applications.
Corresponding author. Email: samantas@nitrkl.ac.in
Shamik Bhattacharyya received BTech
degree in Electrical Engineering from NIT
Durgapur in 2012. He is presently pursu-
ing his MTech in Control and Automation
from NIT Rourkela. His research interests
are PV Standalone Systems and battery
management system.