Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 17 (2013) 216–227

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

A current and future study on non-isolated DC–DC converters

for photovoltaic applications
M.H. Taghvaee a,n, M.A.M. Radzi a, S.M. Moosavain b, Hashim Hizam a, M. Hamiruce Marhaban a
a
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
b
Department of Engineering, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran

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

Article history: Photovoltaic (PV) is a fast growing segment among renewable energy (RE) systems, whose develop-
Received 6 March 2012 ment is owed to depleting fossil fuel and climate-changing environmental pollution. PV power output
Received in revised form capacity, however, is still low and the associated costs still high, so efforts continue to develop PV
8 September 2012
converter and its controller, aiming for higher power-extracting efficiency and cost effectiveness.
Accepted 15 September 2012
Different algorithms have been proposed for Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT). Since the choice
Available online 23 October 2012
of right converter for different application has an important influence in the optimum performance of
Keywords: the photovoltaic system, this paper reviews the state-of-the-art in research works on non-isolated
DC–DC converter DC–DC buck, boost, buck–boost, Cúk and SEPIC converters and their characteristics, to find a solution
Photovoltaic (PV)
best suiting an application with Maximum Power Point Tracking. Review shows that there is a
Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT)
limitation in the system’s performance according to the type of converter used. In can be concluded
Non-isolated
Topology that the best selection of DC–DC converter which is really suitable and applicable in the PV system is
Efficiency the buck–boost DC–DC converter since it is capable of achieving optimal operation regardless of the
load value with negotiable performance efficiency and price issue.
& 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
2. Methods of measuring PV module I–V curves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
3. DC–DC buck converter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
4. DC–DC boost converter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
5. Comparing characteristics of buck and boost converters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
6. DC–DC buck-boost converter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
7. Comparing buck, boost, and buck-boost converters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
8. DC–DC cúk converter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
9. DC–DC sepic converter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
10. Comparing main types of non-isolated converters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
11. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225

1. Introduction Meanwhile, world primary energy demand will have increased

almost 60% between 2002 and 2030, averaging 1.7% increase
Climate change and the implications of its threats are the most annually, increasing still further the GHG [2]. Oil reserves would
challenging problems facing the world today [1]. The main reason have been exhausted by 2040, natural gas by 2060, and coal by
for climate change is the burning of fossil fuels, which releases 2300 [3]. Electricity generation by RE sources is one way to overcome
greenhouse gases (GHG). Almost 80% GHG are fossil-fuel-based. global warming and future energy shortage [4,5]. RE is in short,
sustainable and clean energy sourced from nature [6].
PV is one of the more important sources of RE [7]. Its
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ60 3 89464470; fax: þ 60 3 89466327. contribution to the world’s energy portfolio is significant and
E-mail address: [email protected] (M.H. Taghvaee). will, by 2040, have contributed the most to electricity generation

1364-0321/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.09.023
 M.H. Taghvaee et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 17 (2013) 216–227 217

among all RE candidates [8–10]. Its weakness, however, is its 30%–40% more energy than does PV systems without sun tracking
intermittent, variable, and non-linear nature (see Fig. 1). This [16,17]. Directly connecting a PV module to the load enables
causes issues of high per-kW installation cost but low efficiency extraction of 31% energy, which increases to 97% through use of
in PV generators [11–13]. More research works that focus on how MPPT [18,19].
to extract more power more effectively from PV cells are needed. The maximum extractable power from PV panels depends not
Two common such ways are sun-based tracking and MPPT only on the strength of the solar irradiation but also on the
[14,15]. Surveys show PV systems with sun tracking collecting operating point of the energy conversion system. MPPT is of
paramount importance to the system as it not only maximizes
system efficiency but also minimizes the return of investment on
the PV installation [20]. To ensure maximum extraction of power,
the maximum power point (MPP) should first be found before the
system’s operation point is driven to that point. A DC–DC
converter will vary the apparent impedance Ri of a PV module
to match with the RMPP value. The action is as formulated in the
last column of Table 1. Various MPPT algorithms are used for this,
in various DC–DC converter topologies. Converters have two
tasks: interface a PV panel and an RE source or the grid (or etc.),
and drive the operating point of the PV panel to the MPP [21].
Converter configuration thus matters to optimal performance of a
PV system. Fig. 2 is the block diagram of a PV system comprising
MPPT and DC–DC converter.
Converters are divided into categories of application, types of
Fig. 1. Non-linear I–V and P–V curve characteristics of PV panel. switching, current modes, etc. Frequently-used terms for DC–DC

Table 1
Different non-isolated DC/DC converter and representation of input resistance versus duty cycle and conversion ratio.

Non-isolated DC–DC converters circuit diagrams Input resistance curve versus duty cycle I Voltage conversion ratios Resistance conversion ratios

Vo Rl
Vs ¼D Ri ¼ D2

Vo 1
Vs ¼ 1D Ri ¼ ð1DÞ2 :Rl

Vo D ð1DÞ2
Vs ¼ 1D Ri ¼ :Rl
D2

Vo D ð1DÞ2
Vs ¼  1D Ri ¼ :Rl
D2

Vo D ð1DÞ2
Vs ¼ 1D Ri ¼ :Rl
D2
218 M.H. Taghvaee et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 17 (2013) 216–227

load connected to the PV module. To ensure PV module operation

point always at MPP, DC–DC converters are used [32].
Table 1 gives the non-isolated DC–DC converter circuit dia-
gram, input resistance curve versus duty cycle D, the voltage
conversion ratios for Continuous Current Mode (CCM), and the
resistance conversion ratios.

3. DC–DC buck converter

In DC–DC buck converter or step-down converter, the output

voltage magnitude is always lower than the input voltage magni-
Fig. 2. PV panel with DC–DC converter and MPPT. tude [33,34], so this topology can be used for connecting high
module voltages to low load or battery voltages.
PV apparent impedance Ri is converter input impedance. By
converter types are non-isolated and isolated. ‘‘Isolation’’ refers changing the duty cycle D, Ri value can be matched with that of
to the electrical barrier separating the input and the output of a the optimum resistance RMPP. Table 1 has the resistance conver-
DC–DC converter. This paper reviews the application of various sion ratio of a buck converter. As D is in the interval [0,1], a buck
non-isolated converter topologies used in PV systems. converter cannot reflect impedances that are smaller than the
Methods of extracting I–V curve will be introduced first before load impedance and therefore does not achieve values that are
main topologies of non-isolated DC–DC converters (buck, boost, near the short-circuit current Isc of the PV module [35], i.e., a buck
buck–boost, Cúk and Single Ended Primary Inductor Converter converter operates only with Rload 4 ¼Rmpp.
(SEPIC)) are reviewed. The review is categorized by converter Fig. 3 shows that a buck converter does not allow tracing of PV
topology, operational region, application, and advantages or I–V curve points that are close to Isc and that when the buck
disadvantages of the topologies. Each section will be addressed converter is used as MPPT, the MPP will be tracked as if it is
with a comparison of the converters. Conclusions will be drawn at restricted to within the operation region.
the end of the paper. General categories of buck converters are those that modulate
the input voltage through PWM to generate the output voltage
required for battery charging, and those that cause the PV panel
2. Methods of measuring PV module I–V curves to operate at the MPP. Most of the papers studied show common
use of buck topology to track MPP and extract maximum power
Various instrumentation systems can be used to measure from PV panels [36–41].
efficiency and other parameters of PV panels. Methods of extract- Koutroulis et al. discussed an autonomous PV system that has
ing the I–V curves of PV panels have been reviewed. a microcontroller-based DC–DC buck converter. The system is
One method is the capacitive method, which uses capacitor as highly efficient, costs less, and can be simply adapted to energy
load [22,23]. As capacitor charge increases, current drops and sources such as wind turbine. The PV array output power directly
voltage rises. When charging completes, the current supplied by controls the DC–DC buck, simplifying the converter. Experiment
the PV panel becomes zero, achieving an open circuit. results show use of the proposed MPPT control increasing PV
Another method is the electronic-load method, which uses output power by as much as 15% when the DC–DC converter duty
transistor as load. To trace the I–V curve of the module, a MOSFET cycle is set so that the PV array produces maximum power at
must operate in its three modes of operation: cut-off, active, and 1 kW/m2 and 25 1C [42]. Chian-Song showed DC–DC buck con-
ohmic [24,25]. verter regulating the output power of a standalone PV system via
Yet another method is the four-quadrant-power-supply method, Takagi–Sugeno fuzzy approach to adjust the converter’s duty
which simulates DC output resources such as PV panels, fuel-cell cycle in generating the PWM signal switching the MOSFET. The
stack, etc. [26–28]. frequency of the PWM signal was set to 100 KHz [43].
Bipolar power amplifier method uses traditional power ampli- Chew and Siek presented standalone PV system for battery
fiers (two BJT transistors) as load for forward and reverse currents charging and fed the resistive load through use of single-inductor
[29,30]. quad-input-dual-output (QIDO) DC–DC buck converter to reduce
The simplest method to measure PV current–voltage charac-
teristic curve is through use of a variable resistor. For such
measurement, it is the most popular method, focused on in this
review.
In variable–resistor method, the resistor value is adjusted in
steps from zero to infinity and from short circuit (full load) to
open circuit. The voltage and the current in each step are
measured, to obtain the current–voltage curve. Resistors for high
powers are almost unavailable, so this method is applicable only
to low-power stacks and modules [31].
The operating point of a load-connected PV generator is the
point its characteristic curve intersects the load curve. This point
sometimes is not the same as the PV generator’s MPP, causing the
PV generator to be not maximally efficient. In a unique case when
both curves intercept each other exactly at MPP, the PV module
output power is at the maximum.
Generation curve typically changes with radiation and tem- Fig. 3. Operational and non-operational regions of the I–V curve in buck DC–DC
perature variations, whereas load curve depends on the type of converters.
 M.H. Taghvaee et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 17 (2013) 216–227 219

the number of components. QIDO can regulate three PV modules

independently through four buck converters; each PV module can
operate at its own MPP. This translates to 56.25% fewer compo-
nents, reducing system cost and increasing system cost-efficiency,
the percentage as compared with a system of four buck con-
verters [44].
A new topology by Zhang et al. for MPPT controller with buck
DC–DC converter for solar micro-grid applications has variable
inductance. The inductance reduces with the increased current
corresponding to increased incident solar irradiation. The meth-
od’s advantages are the up to 75% smaller inductor, the stable step
response to changes in the solar input, and the extended range of
operation to low light levels and partial shading of the solar
panels [45]. Veerachary proposed a novel fourth-order buck
converter that tracks maximum PV power at all levels of solar
insolation. As compared with conventional buck, the novel Fig. 4. Operational and non-operational region of I–V curve for Boost DC–DC
converters.
topology better reduces the source current ripple but has similar
steady-state performance. Ripple is further reduced through use
of a coupled inductor, which, for specific combinations of induc-
tance and coupling coefficient not only reduces the core size but cannot reflect impedances that are greater than load impedance
also improves converter performance through the reduced ripple. and therefore does not achieve values near a module’s open-circuit
The coupled inductor of this topology also eliminated the problem voltage [35], i.e., boost converter operates only if Rload o ¼Rmpp.
of zeroes in the right half of the s-plane (RHP). Note that this Fig. 4 shows boost converter not following the curve points
paper presents MPPT operation of the load tracking region of a that are near the open-circuit voltage, and when the boost
fourth-order buck converter [46] (see Fig. 3). converter is used as MPPT, the MPP will be tracked as if it is
Yang et al. compared multiple-input converters instead of restricted to within the operation region.
several single-input converters; the former has simpler circuits Note that under low irradiation condition, a boost converter
and cost less. They also proposed as MPPT, a one-cycle control of a cannot track MPP because the point is in the non-operating
double-input buck converter, to eliminate the interactions of the region.
control loops and simplify the controller design. One-cycle control Many research works have developed applications for DC–DC
does not need a current regulator, and the design conditions of boost converter in PV systems [51–60]. Li and He reviewed and
the output voltage regulator in various operating modes are the summarized cost and efficiency of non-isolated DC–DC boost
same [47]. Villalva et al. regulated PV panel output voltage converters of PV and fuel-cell systems. Low-cost and high-
through use of a buck DC–DC converter that interfaces the PV efficiency (based on circuit structure) boost converter topologies
array and the load. The converter input voltage is controlled to are [61]:
regulate the array operating point. Besides reducing losses and
stress through limited-bandwidth regulation of the converter ’ Boost converter with coupled inductor,
duty cycle, control of the converter input voltage reduces settling ’ Boost converter with switched capacitor,
time and avoids oscillation and overshoot, easing function of ’ Boost converter with inductor and switched capacitor and
MPPT methods [48]. ’ Boost converter with coupled inductor and switched capacitor
Pernıa et al. presented a buck-topology standalone PV system.
A controller connects the PV panels to 12 V or 24 V batteries so Kwon et al. presented a three-phase PV system that has three-
the converter operates at the PV panel MPP. The experiment level boosting of MPPT control. The three-level boost converter
results show the topology (buck with synchronous rectification) reduces diode reverse recovery losses and reduces input-filter
to theoretically increase efficiency to 95% [49]. size by canceling input current ripple. The IGBT used in the three-
Linear Current Booster (LCB) is an extended application of level boost converter has half the rating of that in conventional
DC–DC buck converter. It is a special-purpose MPPT, designed to boost converter. The capacitive turn-on loss is eight times less.
match PV array characteristics to those of dc motors, and was Experiment results obtained from a 10-kW prototype showed
designed for daytime operations such as pumping, and especially high performance: wide-ranging PV voltage, high (99.6%) MPPT
for low illumination levels. LCB enables pumping of up to 20% efficiency, high (96.2%) power conversion efficiency, near-unity
more fluid [16]. power factor, and low (2.0%) Total Harmonic Distortion (THD) of
Oi et al. investigated direct coupling between PV and water the current [62]. Jung et al. discussed a soft-switching interfaced
pump and considered the problem of starting a water pump in boost converter of a PV system, and did a numerical analysis of its
low irradiance. The LCB they used converted the low current and design. The topology raised efficiency of the DC–DC PV converter
high voltage of the MPP into high-current and low-voltage power, and minimized switching losses through the resonant soft-
satisfying pump motor characteristics [50]. switching. The experiment results for a 1.2 kW prototype con-
verter implied 97.28% efficiency in full-load condition. Conse-
quently, the overall efficiency was confirmed as having increased
4. DC–DC boost converter 1.5% more than achieved by a conventional hard-switching
interfaced boost converter [63].
In DC–DC boost or step-up converter, the output voltage Agorreta et al. proposed placing boost DC–DC converter
magnitude is always higher than the input voltage magnitude between PV module and inverter in grid-connected PV system,
[33], so this topology can be used to connect high load/battery and use of fuzzy switching technique and cascaded-loop control
voltages and low module voltages. algorithm for the boost converter, with a new inner-loop strategy
As is theorized of buck converter resistance conversion ratio, that adequately deals with variable operating points, so the
because the value of duty cycle is between [0,1], a boost converter DC–DC converter is able to perform in mixed-conduction mode.
220 M.H. Taghvaee et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 17 (2013) 216–227

The strategy is reliable even if the inductor varied 50% up or down This topology avoid the over voltage due to the leakage inductor.
from its nominal value, allowing a wide range of inductor Then a recovery stage recycling this voltage directly to the output
variance [64]. Veerachary et al. developed a feed-forward MPPT was proposed to add to the earlier converter. This architecture
for a coupled-inductor interfaced-boost-converter-fed PV system obtain an efficiency of 98.6% for an output power equal to 58 W
that has a fuzzy controller. It has lower switch-current stress and under an output voltage equal to 180 V [76].
improved efficiency of non-coupled converter. Depending on the Nejabatkhah et al. proposed a new three-input DC–DC boost
error and changes to the error signals, the fuzzy controller converter which applied to hybridize a PV, an FC, and a battery
generates a control signal for the PWM generator, adjusting the storage system. Four independent duty ratios of the converter
duty ratio of the converter. The reference voltage corresponding facilitate power flow among input sources and the load. Three
to the MPP of the feed-forward loop is obtained by an offline- different power operation modes are defined for the converter
trained neural network that uses a back-propagation algorithm and its corresponding transfer function matrix is obtained in each
[65]. Hsieh et al. used the same DC–DC boost-converter-with- operation mode. The experimental result provides good transient
coupled-inductor-and-switched-capacitor technique [66]. and steady-state responses for the converter with respect to the
Akkaya et al. tested a prototype DSP implementation of a PV different step changes in the PV power generation and the load
system through a genetic-assisted, multi-layer perceptron neural- condition [77].
network-based MPPT controller and a 3-phase brushless DC
motor drive that included a DC–DC boost converter. Results
acquired in a day with high irradiation show the proposed MPPT
controller providing a power increase averaging 25.35%. Also, 5. Comparing characteristics of buck and boost converters
training the neural network with the genetic-assisted Levenberg–
Marquardt algorithm gave better results than did other systems Buck and boost converters differ in their operational purpose
trained by standard gradient-descent algorithms, through less and have individual characteristics. Research works finding the
chances of converging to local minima. [67]. Choi et al. presented better when buck and boost converters replace each other have
a new high-gain floating-output boost converter that uses basic been reported. They compared the effect of buck and boost
non-floating boost and versions of floating boost in PV and fuel- converters on system efficiency, the frequency characteristics of
cell systems. The topology offers modularity, lower ripple in both each, component costs, operational conditions, etc.
input current and output voltage, and lower voltage and current Xiao et al. investigated PV panel operation in non-ideal
ratings of the various circuit elements, all as compared with basic conditions and for two topologies with parallel module minimiz-
boost converter [68]. ing performance loss caused by those conditions. They compared
Elshaer et al. presented a novel smart-PID controller for the dynamics of the models, frequency characteristics, and
optimal control of a DC–DC boost converter used as voltage component costs, concluded that boost converter’s advantages
controller in a PV system and which maximizes stable operating over buck converter are cheaper implementation and better
range through use of genetic algorithms to tune PID parameters at dynamic response, and discussed these:
various loading conditions. Fuzzy logic added intelligence to the
controller so it could move among the various PID values. The ’ Considering the inductor; to achieve the same inductor–
controller allowed optimal control of the boost converter at any current ripple, boost converter needs higher inductance than
loading condition [69]. Park et al. proposed a soft-switching boost does buck converter.
converter; they added a simple auxiliary resonant circuit to a ’ Considering the input capacitors; buck converter needs a large
conventional boost converter to improve PV-system energy con- and expensive capacitor to smooth the discontinuous input
version efficiency. The soft-switching boost converter is easy to current of the PV module.
control because the same PWM controls the two switches. At ’ Considering the power MOSFETs and drivers; the current
turn-on/off, all the switching devices in the converter achieve rating is lower in boost topology. Also, buck converter needs
zero-current switching (ZCS) and zero-voltage switching (ZVS) a high-side MOSFET driver, which is more complex and
through the resonant inductor and capacitor. The switching losses expensive than the low-side driver of boost converter.
dramatically reduced [70].
Bratcu et al. investigated optimization of cascaded DC–DC
boost converter for PV system with regard to irradiance condi- In considering the blocking diodes, boost topology shows
tions and with the advantages of per-panel-converter approach. significant advantages over buck topology. In boost topology,
Such systems can be concluded as guaranteeing good efficiency the free-wheeling diode can serve as the blocking diode avoiding
and rather low cost (both as compared with parallel configura- reverse current. In the buck interface, however, the blocking
tions), mostly because the individual converters are not required diode is an additional component conducting the full PV current
to have high boost ratios [71,72]. Rosas-Caro et al. proposed a [78].
DC–DC multilevel boost converter that combines the functions of Walker compared buck against boost MPPT topologies and also
a boost converter and of a switched capacitor to provide various against direct connection to load battery. On sunny days, the
output voltages and a self-balanced voltage. The converter was boost and the buck converters performed similarly, and both
proposed for use in applications where several controlled voltage collected roughly 4% more energy than did direct connection. On
levels are needed with self-balancing and unidirectional current cloudy days, buck converter gave the same results as those of
flow, such as PV or fuel-cell generation systems [73,74]. direct connection, but boost converter collected about 6% more
Noguchi et al. described a multiple-power-boost-converter energy than did the other topologies. Boost converter therefore
system for short-current pulse-based MPPT method. Each module has slight advantage over buck, mainly at low radiation and
is easily linked parallel to each other on the DC-bus side, and each because it can constantly track the MPP [79]. Coelho et al. studied
output power is maximized by individual MPPTs. The system is the behavior of buck and boost converters in PV system to extract
very flexible in its module connection and highly efficient by its MPP under variations to irradiation and temperature and accord-
maximized total output power [75]. ing to operating and non-operating regions. Their analysis verified
Pierre Petit et al. designed magnetically coupled coils in a that under low irradiation, boost converter cannot track MPP
boost converter, which balances the voltage applied to the MOSFET. because the point is in the non-operating zone [32,80].
 M.H. Taghvaee et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 17 (2013) 216–227 221

6. DC–DC buck-boost converter cycle D and PV array voltage through a new variable d ¼D/1 D; it
increases flexibility. A DSP was programmed to provide pulses to
In buck–boost, step-up/down, or bi-directional converters, the the power semiconductor switch of the DC–DC converter for
output voltage magnitude may be lower or higher than the input tracking of the PV array MPP [89]. Orellana et al. and Ren et al.
voltage magnitude [33], so this topology can be used in connect- suggested use of high-efficiency Four-Switch Buck–Boost (FSBB)
ing nearly-matched battery or load and module voltages. A structure for PV systems. FSBB has the same voltage step-up/
negative output also results from the common terminal of the down function as that of traditional buck–boost converter, and
input current. has advantages such as positive output and lower voltage stress
Buck–boost topology can be achieved through cascade con- across the power devices. It has a non-inverted output voltage as
nection of the two basic converters (buck converter and boost in other buck–boost converters [90,91].
converter). The output–input voltage conversion ratio is the Wu et al. demonstrated a fuzzy-logic-controlled single-stage
conversion ratio of the two converters in cascade when the converter (SSC) for PV-powered lighting system. The SSC is an
switches in both the converters have the same duty cycle. integration of a bidirectional buck–boost charger/discharger. Both
Buck–boost conversion ratio obtained through buck converter in fuzzy logic and MPPT control algorithms are implemented in a
the first stage results in a buck-boost-cascaded converter. A boost single-chip microprocessor, simplifying the control circuits and
converter in the first stage forms a boost–buck-cascaded con- lowering the system cost. Simulation and experiment results
verter. The main difference between both configurations is the verified the feasibility, adaptivity, and robustness of the proposed
fewer devices in the buck–boost-cascaded converter [81]. system [92]. de Britto et al. presented the implementation of a
Fig. 5 shows PV module operation point determined by the boost–buck quadratic converter with a large input voltage range
intersection of the load and generation curves. The resistance that can be supplied by a 12 V PV system or the 110 V/220 V of
conversion ratio of buck–boost converter (see Table 1) shows that the electricity grid, ideal to drive the LED lamps of private and
increasing D decreases the input impedance Ri thus the PV public lightings. The converter also presents just one switch and
operating voltage moves to the left region of the I–V curve, and only two operation stages. When the converter is supplied by a PV
that decreasing D increases Ri thus the operating voltage moves to system, the utility-power-grid user saves money. Energy need
the right of the I–V curve. Buck-boost converter thus does not only be bought when the PV system is under maintenance or
have a non-operational zone, so changing the duty cycle enables when the weather is cloudy [93]. Ic et al. evaluated three direct
operation from short-circuit current to open-circuit voltage. The MPPT algorithms with non-adaptive voltage step for their perfor-
topology is also the only one able to trace the load resistance, mance in PV system under dynamic conditions and resistive load.
which ranges from zero to infinite. A microcontroller-based buck–boost DC–DC converter platform
As working in MPP is the main goal of the operation, and the implemented and compared the algorithms [94].
MPP point can be set up anywhere on the I–Vcurve, buck–boost
DC–DC converter topology is the only one allowing follow-up of
the PV module MPP regardless of temperature, irradiance, and
connected load, but the input current of buck–boost topology is 7. Comparing buck, boost, and buck-boost converters
always discontinuous (because the switch is in series with the
generator), so the current has many harmonic components As with past comparisons between buck and boost converters,
producing high input ripple and significant noise problems. These surveys to discover the best topology for PV systems from among
converters are thus more complex and expensive [82]. buck, boost, and buck–boost converters have been done and
The main disadvantages of this topology are notably high published.
input-voltage ripple and high electrical stresses to the switch Enrique et al. sought the best converter configuration for MPPT
[81]. Research works attempting increasing use of buck–boost system from among three basic topologies of DC–DC converters
converters and their control strategy in MPPT systems have been (buck, boost, and buck–boost) with resistive load connected to the
published, as have investigations on how buck–boost converters PV panels. They drew two fundamental conclusions: one, buck–
affect system performance [83–88]. boost DC–DC converter topology is the only one allowing tracking
Peftitsis et al. presented a PV array system with a DC–DC buck- of PV MPP whatever the temperature, irradiance, and load
boost converter, focusing on the control strategy for the system to connection condition, and two, connecting a PV buck–boost
operate in MPP and for the converter output voltage to remain DC–DC converter to the PV panel output possibly improves
constant. They proposed the simplest method of controlling duty performance. Despite the study being theoretical, buck and boost
converters practically are notably the most effective topologies at
any price. Its voltage flexibility varies, but buck–boost converter is
always either efficiency, or price, disadvantaged [95].
Poshtkouhi et al. compared and analyzed the effectiveness of
buck–boost, boost–buck, and boost topologies in PV systems
through switching losses, gate-drive losses, and conduction losses
of all the components. Fig. 6 gives the efficiency of the three
converters versus the current, for a fixed irradiance Gtot of 400 W/
m2 and temperature T¼25 1C. The boost converter yielded 0.3%
more energy than did the boost–buck converter for Vbus ¼ 280 V;
this, despite its inability to maintain MPPT under all conditions of
shade, was owed to its higher efficiency [96,97].
Snyman and Enshn compared the efficiencies of Parallel Power
Conversion (PPC), buck, and buck–boost converters. Basic PPC
principle was applied to the standard buck topology, changing
only the negative terminal connection of the input capacitor. All
Fig. 5. Operational and non-operational regions of the I–V curve for buck–boost, three converter topologies were evaluated with a 12 V battery
Cúk, and SEPIC DC–DC converters. and an 18 V array input voltage V. The efficiencies differed:
222 M.H. Taghvaee et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 17 (2013) 216–227

Fig. 6. Efficiencies of buck–boost, boost–buck, and boost converters for Fig. 8. Efficiencies of DC–DC converters [101,102].
Gtot ¼ 400 W/m2 and T¼ 25 1C [96].

the input voltage [33]. This topology can be used for connecting
nearly-matched battery or load to module voltages.
The operation region of Cúk converter in PV panel is the same
as buck–boost converter’s (see Fig. 5). Both converters do not
have non-operating zone, so changing the duty cycle enables
them to operate through short-circuit current to open-circuit
voltage. The main difference between Cúk converter and basic
DC–DC configurations is the addition of a capacitor and an
inductor (see Table 1d). Inductor L1 filters the DC input
(to prevent large harmonics) and capacitor C1 is the energy-
transfer device (unlike inductor in the basic configurations).
An important advantage of this topology is the continuous
current at the converter input and output; the sweep of the I–V
characteristic is thus more reliable and the converter is less noisy
[82]. Disadvantages of the Cúk converter are the high number of
passive components and high electrical stresses on the switch,
diode, and capacitor C1.
Fig. 7. Comparing the MPPT efficiencies [98–100]. Among converter topologies, Cúk topology has intensively
progressed. Many researchers have focused on it [104–108] for
94% for PPC, 86% for buck, and 76% for buck–boost (see Fig. 7) maximum power extraction from PV panels through various
[98–100]. algorithms such as fuzzy-logic control, direct control, etc.
Hua and Shen investigated and compared various MPPT Safari and Mekhilef used DC–DC Cúk converter to extract MPP
techniques and DC–DC converter (buck, boost, buck–boost) effi- from PV system by direct-control method. The main difference of
ciencies in differently-controlled systems. A simple method the proposed system to existing MPPT systems includes elimina-
combining discrete time control and PI compensator tracked the tion of the proportional–integral control loop and investigation of
MPPs of the PV panels. Fig. 8 shows efficiency curves versus the effect of simplifying the control circuit. A DSP controlled the
output powers, for buck, boost, and buck–boost converters. The switching of the IGBTs [109]. Bae and Kwasinski proposed
efficiency of buck converter is a bit higher than that of boost and multiple-input Cúk DC–DC converter for MPPT to extract max-
buck–boost converters [101,102]. imum power from PV panel in any weather. This method provides
Velasquez-Vasquez et al. presented control-oriented models current-source interface and is capable of stepping up and down
for buck–boost, buck, and boost DC–DC converters. The proposed input voltages [110].
models have been validated by means of frequency responses of Lin et al. presented an integrated Cúk-forward converter in a
all the states. The applicability of the proposed models was PV-based LED lighting system. Power switches in the Cúk con-
verified by means of experiments performed in a proof of concept verter and ZVS forward converter are integrated for fewer
PV system based on a boost converter. Such a case was selected components, and synchronous switch in the circuit reduced
because it requires low-side circuitry for driving the Mosfets, conduction losses and increased circuit efficiency. Active-
which simplify the implementation in comparison to the buck clamping technique realized ZVS turn-on of all the switches
and buck–boost cases. [103] [111]. Chung et al. presented a novel technique for effective
extraction of maximum output power from a solar panel in
various weathers. This method connects a PWM DC–DC SEPIC or
Cúk converter with a solar panel and a load or a battery bus. The
8. DC–DC cúk converter converter operates in discontinuous capacitor voltage mode
whereas its input current is continuous. The nominal duty cycle
Cúk converter is a DC-to-DC converter that performs like of the main switch in the converter is adjusted to a value at which
buck–boost converter, capable of stepping up or down input the converter input resistance equaled the equivalent output
voltage with reverse polarity through the common terminal of resistance of the solar panel at MPP. This approach ensures
 M.H. Taghvaee et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 17 (2013) 216–227 223

maximum power transfer in all weather and no use of micro- analog-to-digital converter (ADC) interrupt. The processor
processors for calculation [112]. enabled tracking of the maximum power within 200 ms [118].
Jiménez-Toribio et al. demonstrated MPPT in a separately- Duran et al. exemplified the methodology and an experimental
excited DC motor fed by PV panels through Cúk and SEPIC system based on interfaced SEPIC converters for measuring I–V
converters. Linear Reoriented Coordinate Method determined and P–V curves of PV modules. To reduce curve ripple, four
the optimal voltage of the PV panels [113]. CRathge and Mecke parallel-connected SEPIC converters and interleaved operation
proposed a high-efficiency Cúk converter topology for interfacing mode were used. The new development provided a new level of
the PV and the battery storage, converting the variable output speed, portability, and ease of measurement of peak power, in
voltage (60VDC–90VDC) of the storage components into constant both the modules and the PV arrays [119].
DC voltage of up to 650 V. An essential problem is the voltage dos Santos et al. presented the computer simulations of a
peaks in the IGBT during switch-off instants considerably exceed- proposed system of integration of energy sources in which Triple
ing the maximum blocking voltage of the power semiconductor Active Bridge (TAB) converter served as interface. The system had
devices. The problem was solved by a special snubber circuit a load, a main voltage source, and an auxiliary power source
[114]. formed by a PV panel and a SEPIC converter. The TAB converter
Mahmoud et al. simulated and implemented a fuzzy-logic was fed voltage, and it applied a method of decoupling loops for
controller for a Cúk converter in a standalone PV system. The control of the voltage. The proposed system is applicable to UPS
experiment-built system was validated by comparing the output and micro-grids [120]. Huang-Jen Chiu et al. presented a high-
voltage with and without Cúk converter, and through MMP- intensity-discharge street-lighting PV system with a SEPIC con-
matched and non-MPP-matched resistive loads [115]. verter for MPPT and battery charging. The converter has high
conversion efficiency and shows high MPPT accuracy in various
weathers. A SEPIC power-factor correction converter draws
9. DC–DC sepic converter energy from the ac-line utility, preventing over-discharging of
the battery. Experiment results of a laboratory prototype verified
Single-Ended Primary Inductor Converter (SEPIC) is a kind of the feasibility of the proposed method [121].
buck-boost converter capable of stepping up or down input voltage Chiang et al. presented a PV battery charger implemented with a
and belonging to the class of converter that has two inductors. It has SEPIC converter. The SEPIC design used peak-current-mode control
the non-inverting characteristic of buck-boost converters. SEPIC with the current command generated from the input PV voltage
converter, as does Cúk converter, has the desirable feature of the regulating loop, where the voltage command was determined by both
switch control terminal being connected to ground; this simplifies the PV module MPPT control loop and the battery-charging loop.
the gate-drive circuitry. As Table 1.e shows, the converter operates Comparison of various buck–boost converters (see Table 2)
via capacitive (C1) and inductive (L1) energy transfer, so voltage through various points of view shows that among these conver-
stresses in C1 is lower than those in Cúk converter. The converter ters, though SEPIC is not the best in terms of efficiency and cost, it
also has non-pulsating input current [33,34]. still has the merits of non-inverting polarity, easy-to-drive switch,
The input currents of the Cúk and SEPIC topologies are and low input-current pulsation for a high-precision MPPT that
continuous, and they can draw ripple-free current from a PV makes its integral characteristics suitable for low-power PV
panel; this is important for effective MPPT. SEPIC topology, charger systems [116].
however is notably only applicable to applications where the Tse et al. presented a novel technique for efficiently extracting
battery voltage is higher than the PV module voltage [116]. The maximum output power from a solar panel. A PWM DC–DC SEPIC
principle of SEPIC converter is based on buck–boost converter, so or Cúk converter operating in discontinuous inductor–current
their characteristics are the same. SEPIC converter, too, thus does mode or capacitor–voltage mode matched the output resistance
not have a non-operating region in the PV panel (see Fig. 5). of the panel by injecting the switching frequency with a small
Lin and Huang discussed integrated SEPIC forward converter sinusoidal-signal variation. The tracking capability was verified
that uses synchronous switching technique for a PV-based LED by an experiment with a 10 W solar panel [122].
lighting system. In charging mode and during daytime, the SEPIC Chen et al. In order to obtain the high efficient solar cell energy
converter delivers solar energy to the battery bank via PV cell conversion, using SEPIC converter circuit board and implemented
modules. At night and in discharging mode, soft-switching the fuzzy control strategy with the dsPIC30F4011 control chip
forward converter drives the LED lighting system [117]. [123].
Veerachary demonstrated voltage-based power tracking of
nonlinear PV sources through coupled-inductor SEPIC converter,
which was capable of reducing array current ripple and improving 10. Comparing main types of non-isolated converters
converter efficiency. The proposed algorithm was implemented in
real-time, aided by ADMC-401 DSP evaluation module analog As mentioned, buck, boost, buck–boost Cúk and SEPIC converters
device. A tracking program was developed for an experiment with are classified as main non-isolated converters in PV application.

Table 2
Comparing various buck–boost converters [103].

Converter

Buck-Boost Cúk Positive buck–boost SEPIC

Output voltage Invert Invert Non-invert Non-invert

polarity
Input current Pulsating Non-pulsating Depends o operation mode Non-pulsating
Switch drive Floated Floated One floated one grounded Grounded
Efficiency low medium High with only one stage active Medium
Cost Medium due to float Medium due to additional block High due to an additional switch and diode, a more Medium due to additional block
drive capacitor complex drive circuit capacitor
224 M.H. Taghvaee et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 17 (2013) 216–227

Each converter topology has some specific characteristics in terms

of efficiency, tracking capability, cost, etc. This section presents
some reviews that compared various converter topologies.
Farahat et al. investigated the effect of changing cell tempera-
ture and solar irradiance on choice and design of various non-
isolated topologies of DC–DC converter in PV systems. Shown was
that when the duty cycle changes with climate changes, the
boundary of the converter design parameters, too, changes. The
design parameters must thus be chosen for the highest perfor-
mance. The study concluded that only buck–boost and Cúk
converters are capable of achieving optimal operation whatever
the load value. For permanent operation in continuous conduc-
tion mode (CCM), the filter inductance of all the converter
topologies must be greater than the maximum value of the
boundary inductance. Also, to limit to below a specific value the
output voltage ripple, the filter capacitance must be larger than
the maximum value of the boundary capacitance [124].
Tse et al. presented a comparative study of PV-panel MPPTs
that uses Switching-Frequency Modulation Scheme (SFMS). The
tracking capability of buck, boost, buck–boost, Cúk, and SEPIC Fig. 11. Theoretically calculated efficiencies of four DC–DC converter configurations:
were compared. Authors categorize performance of converters buck, boost, buck–boost, Cúk [126].
under Discontinuous Inductor Current Mode (DICM) and Discon-
tinuous Capacitor Voltage Mode (DCVM). The study showed the
input current ripple in DCVM to be smaller than that in DICM.
Variation of the panel-converter operating point in DCVM is thus
smaller than in DICM. Also, for the same panel and voltage
conversion ratio, the voltage stress on the switch in DCVM is
higher than that in DICM. Conversely with the same panel, the

Fig. 12. Efficiency of various DC–DC converters in normal and PPP operations
[127,128].

Fig. 9. Comparing the tracking capabilities of the converters in DICM [125].

current stress in DICM is higher than that in DCVM. For the same
panel, DICM is thus more suitable for panels in series connection
whereas DCVM better suits parallel connection [125]. Figs. 9 and 10
compare the tracking capability of the converters according to DICM
and DCVM.
Walker and Sernia proposed an alternative topology of non-
isolated per-panel DC–DC converter connected in series to create
a high-voltage string connected to a simplified DC/AC inverter.
Buck, boost, buck–boost, and Cúk converters were considered as
DC–DC converters that could be cascaded. Fig. 11 shows theore-
tically calculated efficiencies of four DC–DC converter configura-
tions: buck, boost, buck–boost, and Cúk. For a given cost, buck,
followed by boost, converters, are the most effective topologies,
with buck best suiting long strings and boost, short strings. For
flexibility in voltage ranges, buck–boost and Cúk converters are
always either efficiency, or cost, disadvantaged [126].
Dehbonei et al. comprehensively compared Parallel Power
Processing (PPP) and Direct Energy Transfer (DET) schemes in
Fig. 10. Comparing the tracking capabilities of the converters in DCVM [125]. DC–DC converters for PV systems. DET was shown to be the key
 M.H. Taghvaee et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 17 (2013) 216–227 225

increaser of DC–DC converter performance. PPP can provide DET References

to those DC–DC converters suffering from little or no DET in their
turn-on/off modes of operation. It can lead to even higher DET in [1] Valkila N, Saari A. Urgent need for new approach to energy policy: the case
those converters that had already benefited from DET in their turn of Finland. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2010;14:2068–76.
[2] Olejarnik P. World energy outlook. Paris, France: International Energy
on and/or turn off modes of operation (e.g., Cúk with a coupled Agency; 2010.
inductor). A coupling inductor was shown to provide DET to Cúk [3] Chang J, et al. A review on the energy production, consumption, and
converter at various modes of operation, but was not as effective prospect of renewable energy in China. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews 2003;7:453–68.
as PPP.
[4] Abbasi T, Abbasi SA. Decarbonization of fossil fuels as a strategy to control
To better compare various DC–DC converters and their per- global warming. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 2011;15:1828–34.
formance, the efficiency curves of the converters are graphed. [5] Abbasi T, et al. The return to renewables: will it help in global warming
Fig. 12 shows the efficiency of various DC–DC converters, in control? Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 2011;15:891–4.
[6] Huang Y, Wu JH. Technological system and renewable energy policy: a case
normal operation and in PPP operations. This study showed study of solar photovoltaic in Taiwan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
96.2% highest efficiency rate to be obtainable from a buck, Reviews 2007;11:345–56.
buck–boost in PPP, or Cúk with coupled inductor in PPP. The [7] Hernandez JA, et al. Analysis of the effect of the implementation of
photovoltaic systems like option of distributed generation in Colombia.
other DC–DC converters performed lower: 94% (Cúk with PPP), Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 2011;15:2290–8.
93.1% (Cúk with coupled inductor), 87.2% (buck–boost), and 82% [8] Figueres E, et al. Sensitivity study of the dynamics of three-phase
(standard Cúk) [127,128]. photovoltaic inverters with an LCL grid filter. IEEE Transactions on Indus-
trial Electronics 2009;56:706–17.
Thomas Bennett et al. investigated the effect of modeling base
[9] Li Q, Wolfs P. A review of the single phase photovoltaic module integrated
on ideal or nonideal buck, boost, buck–boost and Cúk converter- converter topologies with three different DC link configurations. IEEE
s.it could be seen that with these small differences in modeling, Transactions on Power Electronics 2008;23:1320–33.
some significant differences in the dynamic behavior of the [10] Li W, He X. Review of non-isolated high step-up DC/DC converters in
photovoltaic grid-connected applications. IEEE Transactions on Industrial
converter systems. On the other hand, the converters used with Electronics 2011:1.
the models should realistically have some nonidealities which [11] Dincer F. The analysis on photovoltaic electricity generation status, poten-
could potentially smooth out some differences. This would then tial and policies of the leading countries in solar energy. Renewable &
Sustainable Energy Reviews 2011;15:713–20.
seem to indicate that converter systems need not be built [12] Salas V, Olias E. Overview of the photovoltaic technology status and
dependent on the modules being used in the system. [129] perspective in Spain. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009;13:
1049–57.
[13] Eltawil MA, Zhao Z. Grid-connected photovoltaic power systems: technical
and potential problems–A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
11. Conclusion Reviews 2010;14:112–29.
[14] Mousazadeh H, et al. A review of principle and sun-tracking methods for
maximizing solar systems output. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews
Maximizing energy generation from solar energy has become
2009;13:1800–18.
highly interested. One popular way to maximize the PV genera- [15] Abu-Khader MM, et al. Evaluating multi-axes sun-tracking system at
tion is use of MPPT and DC–DC converter. In order to help different modes of operation in Jordan. Renewable & Sustainable Energy
researcher to be able to choose the best converter for their Reviews 2008;12:864–73.
[16] Messenger R, Ventre J. Photovoltaic systems engineering. Boca Raton: CRC
under-studied system, this paper has concisely reviewed various Press; 2004.
non-isolated DC–DC converters. [17] Gules R, et al. A maximum power point tracking system with parallel
Optimal operating performances by different converter topol- connection for PV stand-alone applications,’’. IEEE Transactions on Indus-
trial Electronics 2008;55:2674–83.
ogies are one of the main points which can be summarized. The [18] Hohm D, Ropp M. Comparative study of maximum power point tracking
buck converter should be used with load impedance close to but algorithms. Progress in photovoltaics: Research and Applications 2003;11:
less than RMPP at the highest condition. However, the boost 47–62.
[19] Hussein KH, et al. Maximum photovoltaic power tracking: an algorithm for
converter must be used with load impedance close to but larger
rapidly changing atmospheric conditions. IEE Proceedings on Generation,
than RMPP at lowest condition, with a drawback of poor tracking Transmission and Distribution 1995;142:59–64.
behavior under low radiation. Only the buck–boost, CÚK and [20] Kazmi SM Raza , et al. Review and critical analysis of the research papers
SEPIC converters are reviewed to be capable of achieving optimal published till date on maximum power point tracking in wind energy
conversion system. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE energy conversion
operation regardless of the load values. congress and exposition (ECCE); 2010. pp. 4075–4082.
The next point, in term of efficiency, the Buck and Boost [21] Kjaer SB, et al. Power inverter topologies for photovoltaic modules-a
converters are the most efficient topologies for a given price. review. In: Proceedings of the 37th IAS annual meeting conference record
of the industry applications conference, vol. 2; 2002, pp. 782–788.
However, they have tracking problems under different connected [22] Marwan M. Transient analysis of a PV power generator charging a capacitor for
load, radiation and temperature combinations. In addition, the measurement of the I–V characteristics. Renewable Energy 2006;31:2198–206.
Buck–Boost, Cúk and SEPIC converters are ideal to MPPT applica- [23] Muñoz J, Lorenzo E. Capacitive load based on IGBTs for on-site character-
ization of PV arrays. Solar Energy 2006;80:1489–97.
tions, due to their operations are independent from radiation and
[24] Kuai Y, Yuvarajan S. An electronic load for testing photovoltaic panels.
temperature which allow them track maximum point. Journal of Power Sources 2006;154:308–13.
Besides that, the Cúk and SEPIC converters have the highest [25] Forero N, et al. Development of a monitoring system for a PV solar plant.
values of reactive component, which contribute to their main Energy Conversion and Management 2006;47:2329–36.
[26] Malik AQ, Damit SJBH. Outdoor testing of single crystal silicon solar cells.
drawback. Although they operate with the best efficiency, alter- Renewable Energy 2003;28:1433–45.
natively, high cost may become their main disadvantage. [27] Fernández-Reche J, et al. PSA Solar furnace: a facility for testing PV cells
This review paper concludes that the best type of converter for under concentrated solar radiation. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells
2006;90:2480–8.
PV system is the buck–boost DC/DC converter. This converter [28] de Blas MA, et al. Selecting a suitable model for characterizing photovoltaic
should be able to ensure optimum MPPT operation for any solar devices. Renewable Energy 2002;25:371–80.
irradiation, cell temperature and load conditions. [29] Recart F, et al. Simple data acquisition of the current–voltage and illumination-
voltage curves of solar cells. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 4th world conference
Efforts continue to make converter and control schemes more
record of the photovoltaic energy conversion; 2006. pp. 1215–1218.
efficient and cost effective, aiming for an economically viable [30] Guvench MG, et al.. Solar simulator and I–V measurement system for large
solution to increasing concern over environmental issues. Solar area solar cell testing. In: Proceedings of the 2004 american society for
power generation has tremendously grown in the past decade, engineering education annual conference & exposition. 2004.
[31] van Dyk EE, et al. Monitoring current–voltage characteristics and energy
and will continue to do so as power electronic technology output of silicon photovoltaic modules. Renewable Energy 2005;30:
continues to advance. 399–411.
226 M.H. Taghvaee et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 17 (2013) 216–227

[32] Coelho RF, et al. A study of the basic DC–DC converters applied in maximum [63] Doo-Yong J, et al. Interleaved soft-switching boost converter for photo-
power point tracking. In: Proceedings of the power electronics conference, voltaic power-generation system. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics
COBEP ’09, Brazilian; 2009. pp. 673–678. 2011;26:1137–45.
[33] Rashid MH. Power electronics handbook. Academic Press; 2001. [64] Agorreta JL, et al. Fuzzy switching technique applied to PWM boost
[34] Mohan NT, Undeland M, Robbins WP. Power electronics: converters, converter operating in mixed conduction mode for PV systems. IEEE
applications and design. 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons: New york; 2004. Transactions on Industrial Electronics 2009;56:4363–73.
[35] Enrique JM. et al. A new approach to obtain I–V and P–V curves of [65] Veerachary M, et al. Neural-network-based maximum-power-point tracking
photovoltaic modules by using DC-DC converters. In: Photovoltaic Specia- of coupled-inductor interleaved-boost-converter-supplied PV system using
lists Conference, 2005. Conference Record of the Thirty-first IEEE, Florida, fuzzy controller. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 2003;50:749–58.
2005, pp. 1769–1772. [66] Yi-Ping H, et al. Novel high step-up DC–DC converter with
[36] Solodovnik EV, et al. Power controller design for maximum power tracking coupled-inductor and switched-capacitor techniques,’’. IEEE Transactions
in solar installations. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics 2004;19: on Industrial Electronics 2012;59:998–1007.
1295–304. [67] Akkaya R, et al. DSP implementation of a PV system with GA-MLP-NN
[37] Femia N, et al. Optimized one-cycle control in photovoltaic grid connected based MPPT controller supplying BLDC motor drive. Energy Conversion and
applications. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems 2006;42: Management 2007;48:210–8.
954–72. [68] Choi S, et al. Analysis, design and experimental results of a floating-output
[38] Ilango GSaravana, et al. Single-stage sine-wave inverter for an autonomous interleaved-input boost-derived DC–DC high-gain transformer-less conver-
operation of solar photovoltaic energy conversion system. Renewable ter. IET Power Electronics 2011;4:168–80.
Energy 2010;35:275–82. [69] Elshaer M, et al. Smart optimal control of DC–DC boost converter in PV
[39] Masoum MAS, et al. Microprocessor-controlled new class of optimal systems. In: Transmission and distribution conference and exposition, Latin
battery chargers for photovoltaic applications. IEEE Transactions on Energy America (T&D-LA), 2010 IEEE/PES; 2010. pp. 403–410.
Conversion 2004;19:599–606. [70] Sang-Hoon P, et al. Design and application for PV generation system using a
[40] Elgendy MA, et al. Assessment of perturb and observe MPPT algorithm soft-switching boost converter with SARC,’’. IEEE Transactions on Industrial
implementation techniques for PV pumping applications. IEEE Transactions Electronics 2010;57:515–22.
on Sustainable Energy 2012;3:21–33. [71] Bratcu AI, et al. Cascaded DC–DC converter photovoltaic systems:
[41] Mazouz N, Midoun A. Control of a DC/DC converter by fuzzy controller for a power optimization issues. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics
solar pumping system. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy 2011;58:403–11.
Systems 2011. [72] Bratcu AI, et al. Power optimization strategy for cascaded DC–DC converter
[42] Koutroulis E, et al. Development of a microcontroller-based, photovoltaic architectures of photovoltaic modules. In: Proceedings of the IEEE interna-
maximum power point tracking control system. IEEE Transactions on Power tional conference on industrial technology, ICIT; 2009. pp. 1–8.
Electronics 2001;16:46–54. [73] Rosas-Caro JC, et al. A DC–DC multilevel boost converter. IET Power
[43] Chian-Song C. T–S fuzzy maximum power point tracking control of solar Electronics 2010;3:129–37.
power generation systems. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion [74] Mayo-Maldonado JC, et al. Modelling and control of a DC–DC multilevel
2010;25:1123–32. boost converter. IET Power Electronics 2011;4:693–700.
[44] Chew KWR, Siek L.Single inductor quad-input-dual-output buck converter [75] Noguchi T, et al. Short-current pulse-based maximum-power-point track-
for photovoltaic systems. In: Proceedings of the IECON 2010 – 36th annual ing method for multiple photovoltaic-and-converter module system. IEEE
conference on IEEE industrial electronics society; 2010. pp. 704–709. Transactions on Industrial Electronics 2002;49:217–23.
[45] Longlong Z, et al. A new approach to achieve maximum power point [76] Petit P, et al. New architecture for high efficiency DC–DC converter
tracking for PV system with a variable inductor. IEEE Transactions on Power dedicated to photovoltaic conversion. Energy Procedia 2011;6:688–94.
Electronics 2011;26:1031–7. [77] Nejabatkhah F, et al. Modeling and control of a new three-input DC–DC
[46] Veerachary M. Fourth-order buck converter for maximum power point boost converter for hybrid PV/FC/battery power system. IEEE Transactions
tracking applications. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic on Power Electronics 2011:1.
Systems 2011;47:896–911. [78] Xiao WD, et al. Topology study of photovoltaic interface for maximum
[47] Yang D, et al. One-cycle control for double-input DC/DC converter. IEEE power point tracking. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 2007;54:
Transactions on Power Electronics 2011:1. 1696–704.
[48] Villalva MG, et al. Voltage regulation of photovoltaic arrays: small-signal [79] Walker G. Evaluating MPPT converter topologies using a matlab pv model.
analysis and control design. IET Power Electronics 2010;3:869–80. Journal of Electrical Electronics Engineering 2001;21.
[49] Pernı́a AM, et al. A modular strategy for isolated photovoltaic systems [80] Coelho RF, et al. Analytical and experimental analysis of DC–DC converters
based on microcontroller. Renewable Energy 2009;34:1825–32. in photovoltaic maximum Power Point Tracking applications. In: Proceed-
[50] Taufik AO, et al. Modeling and simulation of photovoltaic water pumping ings of the IECON 2010 – 36th annual conference on IEEE industrial
system. In: Proceedings of the third asia international conference on electronics society; 2010. pp. 2778–2783.
modelling & simulation, AMS ’09; 2009. pp. 497–502. [81] Duran E, et al. Comparative analysis of buck-boost converters used to obtain
[51] Santos JL, et al. A maximum power point tracker for PV systems using a I–V characteristic curves of photovoltaic modules. In: Proceedings of the IEEE
high performance boost converter. Solar Energy 2006;80:772–8. power electronics specialists conference, PESC; 2008. pp. 2036–2042.
[52] Nejabatkhah F, et al. Modeling and control of a new three-input DC–DC [82] Durán E, et al. A high-flexibility DC load for fuel cell and solar arrays power
boost converter for hybrid PV/FC/battery power system. IEEE Transactions sources based on DC–DC converters. Applied Energy 2011;88:1690–702.
on Power Electronics 2011:1. [83] Zegaoui A, et al. Dynamic behaviour of PV generator trackers under
[53] Benavides ND, Chapman PL. Modeling the effect of voltage ripple on the irradiation and temperature changes. Solar Energy 2011;85:2953–64.
power output of photovoltaic modules. IEEE Transactions on Industrial [84] Chakraborty S, et al. A review of power electronics interfaces for distributed
Electronics 2008;55:2638–43. energy systems towards achieving low-cost modular design. Renewable and
[54] Du Y, Lu DD-C. Battery-integrated boost converter utilizing distributed Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009;13:2323–35.
MPPT configuration for photovoltaic systems. Solar Energy 2011;85: [85] Veera CM. Steady-state and dynamic performance analysis of PV supplied
1992–2002. DC motors fed from intermediate power converter. Solar Energy Materials
[55] Park S-J, et al. New parallel driving strategy based on modified converters and Solar Cells 2000;61:365–81.
and peak current mode control for photovoltaic power generation systems. [86] Patel H, Agarwal V. A single-stage single-phase transformer-less doubly
Solar Energy 2006;80:524–34. grounded grid-connected PV interface. IEEE Transactions on Energy Con-
[56] Femia N, et al. Optimization of perturb and observe maximum power point version 2009;24:93–101.
tracking method. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics 2005;20:963–73. [87] Jain S, Agarwal V. A Single-stage grid connected inverter topology for solar
[57] Kottas TL, et al. New maximum power point tracker for PV arrays using PV Systems with maximum power point tracking. IEEE Transactions on
fuzzy controller in close cooperation with fuzzy cognitive networks. IEEE Power Electronics 2007;22:1928–40.
Transactions on Energy Conversion 2006;21:793–803. [88] Ishaque K, Salam Z. A deterministic particle swarm optimization maximum
[58] Bandyopadhyay S, Chandrakasan AP. Platform architecture for solar, ther- power point tracker for photovoltaic system under partial shading condition.
mal, and vibration energy combining with MPPT and single inductor. IEEE IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 2012:1.
Journal of Solid-State Circuits 2012:1–17. [89] Peftitsis D, et al. Photovoltaic system MPPTracker investigation and imple-
[59] Kadri R, et al. Nondissipative string current diverter for solving the mentation using DSP engine and buck–boost DC–DC converter. In: Proceed-
cascaded DC–DC converter connection problem in photovoltaic ings of the power electronics and motion control conference, EPE-PEMC;
power generation system. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics 2012;27: 2008. pp. 1840–1846.
1249–58. [90] Orellana M, et al. Four switch buck–boost converter for photovoltaic DC–DC
[60] Park J, Kim S. Maximum power point tracking controller for thermoelectric power applications. In: Proceedings of the IECON 2010 36th annual
generators with peak gain control of boost DC–DC converters. Journal of conference on IEEE industrial electronics society; 2010. pp. 469–474.
Electronic Materials 2012:1–5. [91] Xiaoyong R, et al. Three-mode dual-frequency two-edge modulation
[61] Wuhua L, Xiangning H. Review of nonisolated high-step-up DC/DC con- scheme for four-switch Buck–boost converter. IEEE Transactions
verters in photovoltaic grid-connected applications. IEEE Transactions on on Power Electronics 2009;24:499–509.
Industrial Electronics 2011;58:1239–50. [92] Tsai-Fu W, et al. A fuzzy-logic-controlled single-stage converter for
[62] Kwon JM, et al. Three-phase photovoltaic system with three-level boosting PV-powered lighting system applications. IEEE Transactions on Industrial
MPPT control. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics 2008;23:2319–27. Electronics 2000;47:287–96.
 M.H. Taghvaee et al. / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 17 (2013) 216–227 227

[93] de Britto JR, et al. Proposal of a DC–DC converter with wide conversion [111] Lin BR, et al. Integrated Cuk-forward converter for photovoltaic-based LED
range used in photovoltaic systems and utility power grid for the universal lighting. International Journal of Electronics 2009;96:943–59.
voltage range. In: Proceedings of the 2010 twenty-fifth annual IEEE on [112] Chung HSH, et al. A novel maximum power point tracking technique for
applied power electronics conference and exposition (APEC); 2010. solar panels using a SEPIC or Cuk converter. IEEE Transactions on Power
pp. 2258–2263. Electronics 2003;18:717–24.
[94] Andrejas, et al. Comparison of direct maximum power point tracking [113] Jimenez-Toribio EE, et al. Sensorless control of SEPIC and Ćuk
algorithms using EN 50530 dynamic test procedure. IET Renewable Power converters for DC motors using solar panels. In: Proceedings of the IEEE
Generation 2011;5:281–6. international electric machines and drives conference, IEMDC ’09; 2009.
[95] Enrique JM, et al. Theoretical assessment of the maximum power point
pp. 1503–1510.
tracking efficiency of photovoltaic facilities with different converter topol-
[114] Rathge C, Mecke R Converter for energy storage integration in photovoltaic
ogies. Solar Energy 2007;81:31–8.
plants. In: Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE international symposium on
[96] Poshtkouhi S, et al. A general approach for quantifying the benefit of
distributed power electronics for fine grained MPPT in photovoltaic appli- industrial electronics, ISIE, vol. 3; 2002. pp. 959–963.
cations using 3D modeling. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics 2011:1. [115] Mahmoud AMA, et al. In: Proceedings of the 26th Annual Confjerence of the
[97] Poshtkouhi S, et al. A general approach for quantifying the benefit of IEEE Fuzzy logic implementation for photovoltaic maximum power tracking
distributed power electronics for fine grained MPPT in photovoltaic appli- in industrial electronics society, ECON, vol. 1. 2000. pp. 735–740.
cations using 3-D modeling. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics [116] Chiang S, et al. Modeling and control of PV charger system with SEPIC
2012;27:4656–66. converter. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 2009;56:4344–53.
[98] Snyman D, Enslin J. An experimental evaluation of MPPT converter [117] Lin BR, Huang CL. Analysis and implementation of an integrated sepic-
topologies for PV installations. Renewable Energy 1993;3:841–8. forward converter for photovoltaicbased light emitting diode lighting. IET
[99] Snyman DB, Enslin JHR. Analysis and experimental evaluation of a new Power Electronics 2009;2:635–45.
MPPT converter topology for PV installations. In: Proceedings of the 1992 [118] Veerachary M. Power tracking for nonlinear PV sources with coupled
international conference on industrial electronics, control, instrumentation, inductor SEPIC converter. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic
and automation, power electronics and motion control, vol. 1; 1992. Systems 2005;41:1019–29.
pp. 542–547. [119] Durán E, et al. Methodology and experimental system for measuring and
[100] Snyman DB, Enslin JHR. Novel technique for improved power conversion displaying I–V characteristic curves of PV facilities. Progress in Photo-
efficiency in systems with battery back-up. Renewable Energy 1994;4:
voltaics: Research and Applications 2009;17:574–86.
349–57.
[120] dos Santos WM, et al. Application of the voltage fed TAB converter as
[101] Chihchiang H, Chihming S. Study of maximum power tracking techniques
energy source coupler. IEEE Latin America Transactions (Revista IEEE
and control of DC/DC converters for photovoltaic power system. In:
America Latina) 2011;9:510–5.
Proceedings of the 29th annual IEEE power electronics specialists con-
ference, PESC 98 Record, vol. 1; 1998. pp. 86–93. [121] Huang-Jen C, et al. Design and implementation of a photovoltaic high-
[102] Chihchiang H, et al. Implementation of a DSP-controlled photovoltaic intensity-discharge street lighting system. IEEE Transactions on Power
system with peak power tracking. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electro- Electronics 2011;26:3464–71.
nics 1998;45:99–107. [122] Tse K, et al. A novel maximum power point tracker for PV panels using
[103] Velasquez-Vasquez JC, et al. Control-oriented models of step-up and step- switching frequency modulation. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics
down photovoltaic power systems. Dyna 2012;172:67–76. 2002;17:980–9.
[104] Chong B, et al. Optimal design of cuk step-up converter for photovoltaic [123] Ta-Tau C, et al. Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on design of
energy systems. In: Proceedings of the 5th IET international conference on digital battery charger system based on PV-module in fuzzy systems
power electronics, machines and drives, PEMD; 2010. pp. 1–6. (FUZZ); 2011. pp. 1860–1865.
[105] Miao Z, et al. Novel cuk circuit and its application in photovoltaic system. [124] Farahat MA, et al. Optimal choice and design of different topologies of
In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on power electronics DC–DC converter used in PV systems, at different climatic conditions in
systems and applications, PESA; 2009. pp. 1–4. Egypt. Renewable Energy 2012;43:393–402.
[106] Wei P, et al. Research on maximum power point tracker based on solar cells [125] Tse KK, et al. A comparative study of maximum-power-point trackers for
simulator. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on advanced photovoltaic panels using switching-frequency modulation scheme. IEEE
computer control, ICACC; 2010. pp. 319–323.
Transactions on Industrial Electronics 2004;51:410–8.
[107] Zengshi C. PI and sliding mode control of a cuk converter. IEEE Transactions
[126] Walker GR, Sernia PC. Cascaded DC–DC converter connection of photo-
on Power Electronics 2012;27:3695–703.
voltaic modules. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics 2004;19:1130–9.
[108] Algazar MM, et al. Maximum power point tracking using fuzzy logic
[127] Dehbonei H, et al. Direct energy transfer for high efficiency photovoltaic
control. International Journal of Electrical Power Energy Systems 2012;39:
21–8. energy systems part i: concepts and hypothesis. IEEE Transactions on
[109] Safari A, Mekhilef S. Simulation and hardware implementation of incre- Aerospace and Electronic Systems 2009;45:31–45.
mental conductance MPPT with direct control method using cuk converter. [128] Dehbonei H, et al. Direct energy transfer for high efficiency photovoltaic
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 2011;58:1154–61. energy systems part ii: experimental evaluations. IEEE Transactions on
[110] Sungwoo B, Kwasinski A. Maximum power point tracker for a multiple-input Aerospace and Electronic Systems 2009;45:46–57.
Ćuk dc–dc converter. In: Proceedings of the 31st international [129] T. Bennett, et al., Photovoltaic model and converter topology considerations
telecommunications energy conference, INTELEC; 2009. pp. 1–5. for MPPT purposes Solar Energy, 2012.