On the Perturb-and-Observe and Incremental Conductance MPPT Methods for PV Systems
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper presents a detailed analysis of the two most well-known hill-climbing maximum power point tracking (MPPT) algorithms: the perturb-and-observe (P&O) and incremental conductance (INC). The purpose of the analysis is to clarify some common misconceptions in the literature regarding these two trackers, therefore helping the selection process for a suitable MPPT for both researchers and industry. The two methods are thoroughly analyzed both from a mathematical and practical implementation point of view. Their mathematical analysis reveals that there is no difference between the two. This has been confirmed by experimental tests according to the EN 50530 standard, resulting in a deviation between their efficiencies of 0.13% in dynamic and as low as 0.02% under static conditions. The results show that despite the common opinion in the literature, the P&O and INC are equivalent.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Photovoltaic System Optimization Techniques · Solar Radiation and Photovoltaics · solar cell performance optimization
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Energy Technology , Aalborg University, 9220 Aalborg, Denmark
References (43)
Show source-provided references
1. Development of a 250�kW PV PCS and adaptive MPPT method
2. 10.1109/TPAS.1983.31810910.1109/TPAS.1983.318109 ↗
3. 10.1049/ip-epa:1999011610.1049/ip-epa:19990116 ↗
4. 0
5. 10.1109/TEC.2012.221881610.1109/TEC.2012.2218816 ↗
6. 10.1109/IECON.2002.118292410.1109/IECON.2002.1182924 ↗
7. 10.1049/ip-gtd:1995157710.1049/ip-gtd:19951577 ↗
8. 10.1109/ISIE.2007.437498110.1109/ISIE.2007.4374981 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.solmat.2007.05.02110.1016/j.solmat.2007.05.021 ↗
10. A new approach for semi-automated measurement of PV inverters, especially MPP tracking efficiency, using a linear PV array simulator with high stability
11. 10.1109/PVSC.2000.91623010.1109/PVSC.2000.916230 ↗
12. 0
13. 10.1109/TPEL.2002.80559410.1109/TPEL.2002.805594 ↗
14. 10.1109/APEC.2003.117926310.1109/APEC.2003.1179263 ↗
15. 10.1109/TEC.2006.87423010.1109/TEC.2006.874230 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.solmat.2005.10.02310.1016/j.solmat.2005.10.023 ↗
17. 10.1109/TAES.2007.438358410.1109/TAES.2007.4383584 ↗
18. 10.1109/ISIE.2004.157192310.1109/ISIE.2004.1571923 ↗
19. An improved maximum power point tracking algorithm with current-mode control for photovoltaic applications10.1109/PEDS.2005.1619736 ↗
20. 10.1109/TIE.2008.92403610.1109/TIE.2008.924036 ↗
21. 10.1109/TIE.2006.87833110.1109/TIE.2006.878331 ↗
22. 10.1108/0332164071071397610.1108/03321640710713976 ↗
23. 10.1109/TPEL.2005.85097510.1109/TPEL.2005.850975 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.egypro.2011.05.07710.1016/j.egypro.2011.05.077 ↗
25. 10.1109/ISCAS.2006.169343510.1109/ISCAS.2006.1693435 ↗
26. 10.1109/PESC.2004.135541410.1109/PESC.2004.1355414 ↗
27. 10.1109/IECON.2005.156930010.1109/IECON.2005.1569300 ↗
28. 10.1109/PESC.2004.135542510.1109/PESC.2004.1355425 ↗
29. Development of a novel hybrid maximum power point tracking methodology for photovoltaic systems
30. 10.1016/j.eswa.2009.06.06810.1016/j.eswa.2009.06.068 ↗
31. femia · Power Electronics and Control Techniques for Maximum Energy Harvesting in Photovoltaic Systems · 2013
32. An all-round success
33. 10.1109/PCC.2002.99762710.1109/PCC.2002.997627 ↗
34. 10.1109/TIE.2006.87832910.1109/TIE.2006.878329 ↗
35. Comparative study of peak power tracking techniques for solar storage system
36. 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.01.17610.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.01.176 ↗
37. How fast does an MPP tracker really need to be?
38. 10.1109/IECON.1999.82222910.1109/IECON.1999.822229 ↗
39. 10.1109/EPEPEMC.2006.477863510.1109/EPEPEMC.2006.4778635 ↗
40. A novel maximum power point tracking control for photovoltaic power system under rapidly changing solar radiation
41. 10.1016/j.solener.2003.08.03810.1016/j.solener.2003.08.038 ↗
42. 0
43. 10.1109/41.66131010.1109/41.661310 ↗