International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems (IJPEDS)

Vol. 13, No. 4, December 2022, pp. 2450~2459

ISSN: 2088-8694, DOI: 10.11591/ijpeds.v13.i4.pp2450-2459  2450

A comparison of various P&O algorithm in order to truck the

MPPT of solar panel

Ismail Isknan, Abdellah Asbayou, Amine Aamoume, Ahmed Ihlal, Lahoussine Bouhouch
Laboratory of Materials and Renewable Energies, University Ibn Zohr, Agadir, Morocco

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: A maximum power point track (MPPT) circuit should be used to improve and
maximize photovoltaic (PV) power production. Different algorithms are
Received Mar 16, 2022 proposed in the literature, and it is imperative to compare them in order to
Revised Jun 26, 2022 identify which MPPT approach is best for a specific application or to provide
Accepted Jul 17, 2022 recommendations for future MPPT research. This article presents a
benchmarking of the most widely used MPPT algorithms, such as the
perturbation and observe classic (POC), the perturbation and improved
Keywords: adaptive observer (POAM), the perturbation and observe modified (POM) as
well as the combination of the POM and POAM algorithms called PAMM.
Energy The comparative study presented in this work will confirm that the PAMM is
MPPT technic the best MPPT technic to improve the performance of a PV system.
P&O
Photovoltaic
Solar panel This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Ismail Isknan
Laboratory of Materials and Renewable Energies, Department of Electrical Engineering
Ibn Zohr University, 80000 Agadir, Morocco
Email: [email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION
The increasing request of electrical energy and the pollution caused by the use of fossil fuel have
prompted the scientific committee to encourage the use of renewable energy [1]. In these situations, solar PV
is classified as one of the most important renewable energy sources. Moreover, this energy seems to be the
most promising, clean and inexhaustible [2], [3]. However, the generation of this energy is random since it
varies with daylight and temperature. Therefore, the maximum power point (MPP) of a PV panel does not
always necessarily correspond to its maximum power point given at standard test conditions (STC) of
1000 W/m², AM 1.5 and a module temperature 25 °C. The research for an MPPT method allowing the
monitoring of A PV panel's MPP is important [4].
Several research on the methodologies for finding the PPM of PV systems have been conducted in
this regard. These technics are based on algorithms to extract the maximum energy converted by the PV panel
thus inducing an optimal operation of the solar energy system [5]. Algorithms based on several methods are
found in the literature, such as perturb and observe (PO) and increment conductance (INC) [6], [7]. Other
commands have been developed, such as the measurement of a short circuit current fraction (CCF) or the
measurement of an open circuit voltage fraction (COF) [8]. The PO technique is the most MPPT method used
because of its simplicity. As the name suggests, it works by introducing a disturbance (Offset) of the voltage
or current of an operating point n. The enormity of the problem, this disturbance will depend on the variation
in the operating power observed with the samples of voltage V(n) and current I(n) [9]. This will make it possible
to make a decision on the value and the sign of the disturbance to be imposed. This article is structured as
follows: after the introduction, section 2 is reserved for the description of a PV system.

Journal homepage: http://ijpeds.iaescore.com

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  2451

Section 3 focuses on the methods of the MPPT command. Indeed, we will deal with the four most
popular algorithms of the basic technique perturb and observe, mentioned above; namely POC, POAM, POM
and POMM. In paragraph 4, the simulation is shown below results with discussion to evaluate the algorithms
presented. Finally, we end with a conclusion.

2. SOLAR CELL MATHEMATICAL MODEL

Explaining research there are several models to electrically identify a PV panel; models single diode
and two diodes have been widely used to represent the I(V) output characteristic of a PV cell or module [9].
However, the model with a single diode is the simplest configuration in which a constant-current source is
connected to a diode in parallel [10]. Taking into account a series resistor R s output of the PV cell. Due to the
simplicity of this model, the prediction of PV cell performance is incorrect under adverse conditions, when
subjected to temperature differences [11]. An additional shunt resistor or parallel resistor R sh can be used to
improve the model [12]. Although a significant development has been achieved, this approach requires a
considerable computational effort. In addition, its accuracy decreases at low irradiance, especially in the
vicinity of the open circuit voltage VOC.
According to the one-diode model in Figure 1, the electric current of the PV panel (Ipv) is given by (1)
[13], [14]:

𝐼𝑝𝑣 = 𝐼𝑝ℎ − 𝐼𝑑1 − 𝐼𝑠ℎ (1)

Where the photocurrent Iph depends essentially on solar radiation G and temperature T, according to
the )2( [16], [17]:
𝐺
𝐼𝑝ℎ = (𝐼𝑝ℎ,𝑟𝑒𝑓 + 𝛼0 ∆𝑇) (2)
𝐺𝑟𝑒𝑓

Figure 1. PV cell's equivalent circuit with one diode1 [15]

In the standard test conditions (STC): Gref = 1000 W/m², Tref = 298 K and AM = 1.5), the expression
of Iph,ref is given by :

𝑅𝑠
𝐼𝑝ℎ,𝑟𝑒𝑓 = (1 + ) 𝐼𝑠𝑐,𝑟𝑒𝑓 (3)
𝑅𝑠ℎ

Therefore:

𝑅𝑠 𝐺
𝐼𝑝ℎ = ((1 + ) 𝐼𝑠𝑐,𝑟𝑒𝑓 + 𝛼0 ∆𝑇) (4)
𝑅𝑠ℎ 𝐺𝑟𝑒𝑓

According the Meshe law, the Ish is expressed by:

𝑉𝑝𝑣 + 𝑅𝑠 𝐼𝑝𝑣
𝐼𝑠ℎ = (5)
𝑅𝑠ℎ

Id1 is given by:

𝑉𝑝𝑣 + 𝑅𝑠 𝐼𝑝𝑣
𝐼𝑑1 = 𝐼01 [exp ( ) − 1] (6)
𝑛1 𝑉𝑡ℎ

With:

A comparison of various P&O algorithm in order to truck the MPPT of solar panel (Ismail Isknan)
2452  ISSN: 2088-8694

𝐼𝑠𝑐,𝑟𝑒𝑓 + 𝑎0 ∆𝑇
𝐼01 = 𝑉𝑜𝑐,𝑟𝑒𝑓 + 𝛽0 ∆𝑇 (7)
𝑒𝑥𝑝( )−1
𝑉𝑡ℎ

So, the relation Ipv = f (Vpv) is given by the following relation [18]:
𝑉𝑝𝑣 + 𝑅𝑠 𝐼𝑝𝑣 𝑉𝑝𝑣 + 𝑅𝑠 𝐼𝑝𝑣
𝐼𝑝𝑣 = 𝐼𝑝ℎ − 𝐼01 [𝑒𝑥𝑝 ( ) − 1] − (8)
𝑛1 𝑉𝑡ℎ 𝑅𝑠ℎ

3. MPPT TECHNICS
Each MPPT technique mentioned in the introduction will be discussed in the following. For
comparison purposes, we try to test these methods MPPT represented by their algorithms under the same
conditions, on PV production systems by simulation, under the MATLAB/Simulink environment. Each of the
simulation cases will lead to the results that we will discuss. These results will finally allow us to designate the
best MPPT algorithm(s) to be implemented in a PV installation.
As illustrated in Figure 2, the system offered under MATLAB/Simulink is composed of a PV panel,
a DC-DC booster with its MPPT control block and a battery. The MPPT control block ensures, under certain
conditions, the command of the blocking and conduction of the MOSFET by changing the duty cycle of the
PWM signal driving this MOSFET [19].
Table 1 shows the specifications of the PV modules used (XXR-SFSP-H50-62W) [20]. As for
Table 2, it shows the characteristics of this boost converter. In addition, Table 3 shows the specifications of the
battery used as the output charge of the converter.

Figure 2. MPPT diagram in MATLAB

Table 1. PV panel electrical characteristics used in MATLAB/Simulink

Parameter Symbol Value
Maximum power (W) Pmp 62
Open circuit voltage (V) VOC 21
Short circuit current (A) ISC 3.8
Voltage at maximum power point (V) Vmp 18
Current at the maximum power point (A) Imp 3.5
Number of PV cells per module Ncell 18

Table 2. Boost converter specifications Table 3. Battery Specifications

Parameters Symbol Value Parameters Symbol Value
Switching Frequency (kHz) F 30 Nominal voltage (V) Vn 48
Booster Inductance (μH) L 330 Nominal capacity (Ah) Cn 10
Input Capacitor (μF) C 100 Initial state of charge (%) SOC 10

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 13, No. 4, December 2022: 2450-2459
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  2453

Figure 3 shows the disturbance of the irradiation used at fixed temperature (25 °C) during 0.15 s. As
for Figure 4, it represents the maximum power corresponding to the radiation profile considered. This power
corresponds to the power that the panel can provide under the environmental conditions imposed by the chosen
irradiation and temperature profile. Four variants of the perturb and observe PO technique: POC, POAM, POM
and PAMM are described below while presenting some associated algorithms as well as the results of the
commented simulations of each case. Towards the end of this paper, we expose the comparison of the numerical
results; concerning the convergence time and the oscillation deviation. This will allow evaluating the
performance of each of the four study methods.

Figure 3. The irradiation used in the simulations Figure 4. Ideal power of the system used in
system used in MATLAB/Simulink MATLAB/Simulink

3.1. Disturbance and classical observation method (POC)

The POC algorithm is the most used for solar PV cells due to the simplicity of its development. In this
algorithm, the voltage of the module is measured and then it will be continuously disturbed and compared to
the previous measurement. This method induces slight fluctuations. Due to these, the power generated by PV
module will also fluctuate. If the power increases, the disturbance will continue to develop in this direction.
After reaching the peak, the power variation at the MPP is zero and then decreases, thus causing the disturbance
to reverse in this direction [21]. The flowchart explaining the principle of operation of this algorithm “POC”
is shown in Figure 5 [22], [23]. Under the conditions mentioned at the beginning of this work, the simulation
results (PPV) of the POC algorithm on MATLAB/Simulink are presented in Figure 6. These results show that
the PV system converges on the best value Pmpp and has oscillations around it, as shown in zoom 2 of
Figure 6. The main drawback of this algorithm is its bad behavior after a sudden change in illumination, as
shown in zoom 1 of Figure 6.

3.2. Enhanced adaptive PO method (POAM)

Given the contradiction between the tracking accuracy and the POC convergence speed, we propose
here an improved algorithm, namely the variable-step “adaptive PO” (POAM) method. The basic idea is as
follows that when the point of operation is far from the MPP, a sufficiently high step must be selected to
accelerate the speed of convergence. When close to MPP, it is necessary to choose a size of not small enough
to make the accuracy more important.
The curve P(V) is divided into three parts, as shown in Figure 7. Let k = dP/dV, the slope at an n point
of this curve; in zone A, k is basically positive and in zone C it is negative. In addition, the absolute value of k
in zones A and C is greater than its absolute value in zone B. The point of operation can be determined
according to the sign of k. When k>0, mainly in zone A, the disturbance can be adjusted larger (d1). When k<0
(zone C), we can choose a small disturbance step (d2). When | k | < while tending towards 0, the system works
in region (B), corresponding to an operation around the MPP i.e.  ∙|dV|-|dP|>0. In this case, we just have to
fix a small step of disturbance (d3). Subsequently, based on the value of the variation step dx, determined by
the algorithm, we can estimate the appropriate value of the duty cycle . The calculation of this duty cycle is
carried out according to the following logic: if P. V > 0 then this duty cycle  will be decreased according
to the step dx determined before, otherwise  will be increased according to the step dx. This principle of
operation is illustrated by the flowchart of the algorithm POAM given in Figure 8. By analyzing the simulation
results, we observe that after reaching the maximum value Pmpp, the traditional POC method fluctuates near the MPP,
which can lead to a loss of power. While the results in Figure 9, obtained by the adaptive method POAM can be
stabilized with negligible fluctuation and thus having good dynamic characteristics in steady state.
A comparison of various P&O algorithm in order to truck the MPPT of solar panel (Ismail Isknan)
2454  ISSN: 2088-8694

Figure 5. Algorithm of the method perturbed and observer classic (POC)

Figure 6. Response in terms of PV panel power Figure 7. PV module characteristics P(V)

with the POC algorithm

Figure 8. POAM algorithm flowchart

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 13, No. 4, December 2022: 2450-2459
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  2455

3.3. Modified PO method (POM)

This method corresponds to a three-level operation called POM technology to achieve an optimal state
as illustrated in Figure 10. Indeed, assuming that the point of operation has been moved from point 1 to point
2 and that a decision must be taken at point 2 according to the algorithm associated with this technique, then
in this case, considering the dP and dV values; such that dP=P2-P1> 0 and dV =V2-V1> 0, Because the algorithm
reduces the duty cycle, the operating point shifts to point 3, and the operating point returns to point 2. At point
3, as dP=P2-P1<0 and dV=V2-V1>0, As a result of the algorithm increasing the duty cycle, the operating point
returns to point 2. At point 2, as dP=P2-P1>0 and dV=V2-V1< 0, the algorithm increases the duty cycle again
so that the operating point will be placed again at point 1. At point 1, when dP=P 2-P1<0 and dV=V2-V1< 0, a
gain’s the algorithm decreases the duty cycle so that the operating point returns again to point 2.

Figure 9. Power response with the POAM algorithm Figure 10. Slope variation curve k=dP/dV steady state

In this diagram, the algorithm oscillates the operating point at three points around the MPP. With the
increase in illumination, the problem of drift will appear which will be all the more serious during a rapid
variation of solar radiation; results usually take place in cloudy weather. A drift can occur from one of the three
points in the steady state, as shown in Figure 11(a).
This problem of drift is because it is not known whether the increase in power (dP>0) is due to the
disturbance or a sudden increase in irradiation. Assuming that the irradiation increases during the operation at
point 1, as shown in Figure 11(a), so the operating point is moved from point 1 to the new point 4, when dP=P 2-
P1>0 and dV=V2-V1>0 and consequently the algorithm decreases the duty cycle, thus moving away from the
MPP to point 5 of the new curves which is called drift. As shown in Figure 11(b), with the rapid increase in
radiation, the problem of drift will become more accentuated and more complex for control [24].

(a) (b)

Figure 11. Drift analysis: (a) drift in case of normal increase and (b) drift in case of sudden increase in
sunshine

The modified PO is developed by considering the characteristics P(V) of the PV modules on the basis
of taking into account the variations dP and dV. As mentioned earlier, the PO technique has a drift demerit in case
of a significant increase in sunshine thus causing confusion. This confusion can be eliminated or at least
minimized by evaluating and introducing another parameter due to the variation of the PV current (d1).
Figure 12(a) shows the characteristics I(V) of the PV modules and the change in the point of operation
due to the increase in sunshine. The positive value of dP for the reason that the solar irradiance has undergone
A comparison of various P&O algorithm in order to truck the MPPT of solar panel (Ismail Isknan)
2456  ISSN: 2088-8694

an increase; this effect can be detected by using an additional parameter dI As shown in Figure 12(a), assuming
that there is an increase in solar irradiance while the module is operating at point 3, the operating point stabilizes
at a new point 4 in the new solar irradiance curve. Now, the decision must be made by the point 3 algorithm as
shown in Figure 12(a).
At the same time, on the characteristics P-V, at point 4 point 4, both dP>0 and dV=>0 as shown in
Figure 12(b). Thus, all three parameters dP, dV and dI are positive at point 4, as shown in Figure 12(a) and
Figure 12(b). The positive value of dP is due to a disturbance or increase in sunlight, which can be detected
using the additional parameter dI. From the I-V characteristics, it can be observed that the two parameters dV
and dI can never have the same sign for a single insolation. Both parameters dV and dI will only be positive for
an increase in insolation as shown in Figure 12(a). Thus, an increase in insolation can be detected using the
additional parameter dI. And thus, by increasing the duty cycle (by decreasing the operating voltage). When both
dV and dI are positive, can eliminate the drift problem by moving the operating point.
Drift problem by moving the operating point closer to the MPP as shown in Figure 12(b). Similarly, for
an increase in sunlight at point 1 and point 2, the drift problem can be solved by incorporating dI into the algorithm.
By incorporating dI into the algorithm, and moving the operating point with the proposed drift method. The
flowchart associated with this technique POM without drift is presented in Figure 13 [25].

(a) (b)

Figure 12. Analysis without drift with the MPPT POM, (a) variation of the current with the output voltage
of the PV module and (b) point increase in sunshine [25]

Figure 13. Flowchart of the POM algorithm without derivative

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 13, No. 4, December 2022: 2450-2459
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  2457

3.4. Modified enhanced adaptive PO (PAMM) method

The simulation results of Figure 14 (POM) compared to those of Figure 6 (POC) show that the POM
technique makes it possible to reduce relatively the oscillations during rapid changes in solar irradiation, and
weeklies during the sudden switching from 100 W/m² to 1000 W/m² (zoom 1). Nevertheless, the POM
algorithm still present slight oscillations around the optimal values (Zoom 2). The so-called PAMM method
obtained by combining technic 2 and 3 makes it possible to solve the contradiction or rather the confusion
between the tracking accuracy and the convergence speed, in addition to the elimination of the effect of the
drift during a sudden variation of the solar illuminance. Figure 15 shows the optimal simulated results of the
PAMM method.

Figure 14. Response in terms of power s of the PV Figure 15. Response in terms of power of the PV
module with the algorithm POM module with the algorithm

4. COMPARISON OF MPPT ALGORITHM PERFORMANCE

To ensure an adequate comparative study between the MPPT algorithms processed, we evaluated
some performance parameters; namely the oscillation difference o, extracted from the curves of Figures 6, 9,
14 and 15, and the convergence time c for a tilting irradiation from 600 to 1000 W/m² for each of the four
algorithms. Table 4 summarizes the results of the calculations. The results of this table show that the best of
the four algorithms is the PAMM. It presents almost zero oscillations and a static deviation of less than 0.1 W
at steady state.

Table 4. Calculated performance parameters

MPPT method Convergence Time c (ms) Oscillation gap o (W)
LITTLE 87.0 1.31
POAM 83.5 0.50
POM 83. 1 0.76
PAMM 82. 5 0.10

5. CONCLUSION
In this work, devoted to the study of MPPT methods, we started with the most widely used method
which is disrupt and observe classic (POC), and its improved versions. The POAM (disrupt and adaptive
observer), the POM (disrupt and observe modified), and finally the POMM (disrupt and adaptive observer
modified). These technics have simple algorithms to implement to control a boost converter. In general,
conventional algorithms (POC) give good results, but have major drawbacks. To remedy their improved
versions have been processed. In order to make a ranking in terms of performance, we carried out
Benchmarking between these methods. This enabled us to evaluate and comprehend the benefits and drawbacks
of each method. As a result of our comparative analysis, we were able to conclude that the PAMM method is
the best with a convergence time (82.5 ms) the lowest compared to the other methods. Similarly, the deviation
of the oscillations obtained for this method PAMM is minimized to a value of 0.1 s against 1.31 s for the
method POC. This presents almost 93% reduction of oscillations by this method PAMM.

REFERENCES
[1] M. A. El-Hakeem, “Solar Irradiance estimation of photovoltaic module based on Thevenin equivalent circuit,” International Journal
of Renewable Energy Research, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 971-977, 2015, doi: 10.20508/ijrer.v5i4.2548.g6666.

A comparison of various P&O algorithm in order to truck the MPPT of solar panel (Ismail Isknan)
2458  ISSN: 2088-8694

[2] M. E. Basoglu and B. Çakir, “Comparisons of MPPT performances of insolated and non-isolated DC-DC converters by using a new
approach,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 60, pp. 1100-1113, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.128.
[3] N. Kumar, U. Sinha, S. P. Sharma and Y. Nayak, “Prediction of solar energy based on intelligent ANN modelling,” International
Journal of Renewable Energy Research, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 183-188, 2016, [online]. Available at:
https://www.ijrer.org/ijrer/index.php/ijrer/article/viewFile/3307/pdf#:~:text=The%20prediction%20of%20solar%20radiation%20
using%20ANN%20models,based%20models%20have%20been%20successfully%20trained%20to%20model
[4] S. Motahhir, A. El Hammoumi and A. El Ghzizal, “The Most Used MPPT Algorithms: Review and the Suitable Low-cost Embedded
Board for Each Algorithm,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 246, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118983.
[5] H. N. Zainudin and S. Mekhilef, “Comparison study of maximum power point tracker technic for PV systems,” Proceedings of the
14th Middle East Power Systems Conference, Mepcon'10, Cairo University, Egypt, December 2010.
[6] I. Isknan, A. Asbayou, A. Ihlal and L. Bouhouch, “Benchmarking of the conductance increment method and its improved versions,”
The International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Engineering 2022 (ICAIE’2022), Rabat, Morocco, February 9-10, 2022,
doi: 10.1051/itmconf/20224301011.
[7] J. Chauhan, P. Chauhan, T. Maniar and A. Joshi, “Comparison of MPPT algorithms for DC-DC converters based photovoltaic
systems,” 2013 International Conference on Energy Efficient Technologies for Sustainability, 2013, pp. 476-481, doi:
10.1109/ICEETS.2013.6533431.
[8] S. Balakrishna, Thansoe, A. Nabil, G. Rajamohan, A. S. Kenneth, and C. J. Ling, “The study and evaluation of maximum power
point tracking systems,” International Conference on Energy and Environment (ICEE 2006), pp. 17-22, 2006.
[9] A. Asbayou, A. Soussi, I. Isknan, A. Aamoume, A. El Fanaoui, A. Ihlal, and L. Bouhouch, “Method using simple RLC circuit for
electrical characterization of PV panels,” Materials Today Proceedings, vol. 58, pp. 1033-1038, 2022, doi:
10.1016/j.matpr.2022.01.034. 2022.
[10] I. Kashif, S. Zainal and L. George, “The performance of perturb and observe and incremental conductance maximum power point
tracking method under dynamic weather conditions,” Applied Energy, vol. 119, pp. 228-236, 2014, doi:
10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.12.054.
[11] J. J. Soon, K. -S. Low and S. T. Goh, “Multi-dimension diode photovoltaic (PV) model for different PV cell technologies,” 2014
IEEE 23rd International Symposium on Industrial Electronics (ISIE), 2014, pp. 2496-2501, doi: 10.1109/ISIE.2014.6865012.
[12] J. Hyvarinen and J. Karila, “New analysis method for crystalline silicon cells,” 3rd World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy
Conversion, vol. 2, pp. 1521-1524, 2003, doi: 10.1109/WCPEC.2003.1306216.
[13] M. Yaichi, M. K. Fellah and A. Mammeri, “A neural network based MPPT technique controller for pumping system,” International
Journal of Power Electronics and Drive System (IJPEDS), vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 241-255, 2014, doi: 10.11591/ijpeds.v4i2.5875.
[14] S. R. Nandurkar and Mini Rajeev, “Design of photovoltaic array with MPPT control techniques,” International Journal of Applied
Power Engineering (IJAPE), vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 41-50, 2014, doi: 10.11591/ijape.v3.i1.pp41-50.
[15] A. Asbayou, M. Agdam, A. Aamoume, A. Soussi, A. Ihlal and L. Bouhouch, “Utilization of MOSFET transistor as an electronic
load to trace I-V and P-V curve of a solar panel,” The 3rd International Conference of Computer Science and Renewable Energy
(ICCSRE'2020), 22-24 dec, Agadir, Morocco, 2020, doi: 10.1051/e3sconf/202122901021.
[16] S. Dorahaki. “A survey on maximum power point tracking methods in photovoltaic power systems,” Bulletin of Electrical
Engineering and Informatics, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 169-175, 2015, doi: 10.11591/eei.v4i3.499.
[17] A. Asbayou, A. Aamoume, M. Elyaqouti, A. Ihlal, and L. Bouhouch, “Benchmarking study between capacitive and electronic load
technic to track I-V and P-V of a solar panel,” International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE), vol. 12,
no. 1, pp. 102–113, 2021, doi: 10.11591/ijece.v12i1.pp102-113.
[18] A. Hemza, H. Abdeslam, C. Rachid, and N. Aoun, “Simplified methods for evaluating the degradation of photovoltaic module
and modeling considering partial shading,” Measurement, vol. 138, pp. 217–224, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.measurement.2019.01.098
[19] M. Elyaqouti, S. Hakim, S. Farhat, L. Bouhouch, A. Ihlal “Implementation in Arduino of MPPT Using Variable Step Size P&O
Algorithm in PV Installations,” International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive System (IJPEDS), vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 434-443.
2017, doi: 10.11591/ijpeds.v8.i1.pp434-443.
[20] M. C. Alonso-Gracia, J. M. Ruiz, F. Chenlo, “Experimental study of mismatch and shading effects,” Solar Energy Materials and
Solar Cells, vol. 90, no. 13, pp. 329-340, 2006, doi: 10.1016/j.solmat.2005.04.022.
[21] Datasheet of solar panel XXR-SFSP-H50-62W, [online]. Available at: https://enfsolar.com/pv/panel-datasheet/crystalline/42960
[22] H. H. Ammar, A. T. Azar, R. Shalaby and M. I. Mahmoud, “Metaheuristic optimization of fractional order incremental conductance
(FO-INC) maximum power point tracking (MPPT),” Complexity, vol. 2019, pp. 1-13, 2019, doi: 10.1155/2019/7687891.
[23] J. Hahm, J. Baek, H. Kang, H. Lee, and M. Park, “Matlab-based modeling and simulations to study the performance of different
MPPT technic used for photovoltaic systems in partially shaded conditions,” International Journal of Photoenergy, vol. 2015, pp.
1-10, 2015, doi: 10.1155/2015/979267.
[24] S. Motahhir, A. El Ghzizal, S. Sebti, and A. Derouich, “Modeling of photovoltaic system with modified incremental conductance
algorithm for fast changes of irradiance,” International Journal of Photoenergy, vol. 2018, pp. 1-13, 2018, doi:
10.1155/2018/3286479.
[25] M. Killi, and S. Samanta, “Modified perturb and observe MPPT algorithm for drift avoidance in photovoltaic systems,” IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 62, no. 9, pp. 5549-5559, doi: 10.1109/tie.2015.2407854.

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS

Ismail Isknan PhD student and supply teacher of Electrical Engineering at the High
School of Technologies in Agadir (EST Agadir). Was born in Agadir Morocco, his research in
the context of national doctoral thesis focuses on the thematic of Renewable Energy. He can be
contacted at email: [email protected].

Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst, Vol. 13, No. 4, December 2022: 2450-2459
Int J Pow Elec & Dri Syst ISSN: 2088-8694  2459

Abdellah Asbayou Was born in Agadir, Morocco, in 1988. Supply teacher of

Electrical Engineering at the High School of Technologies in Agadir (ESTA). His research in the
context of national doctoral thesis focuses on the thematic of Renewable Energy. He can be
contacted at email: [email protected].

Amine Aamoume PhD student, was born in Agadir Morocco, his research in the
context of national doctoral thesis, focuses on the thematic of Renewable Energies. He can be
contacted at email: [email protected].

Ahmed Ihlal was born and brought up in Morocco. He studied Physics and Chemistry
and holds, in 1984, his BSc degree (LicenceEs-Sciences Physique) in Solid State Physics from
the University Mohamed V, Rabat - Morocco. He then joined Paris VII University – France, where
he got, in 1985, a MSc. degree (DEA: Diplome des Etudes Approfondies) in Solar Energy. He
pursued his research on the studies and got, in 1988, a PhD degree from the University of Caen
BasseNormandie - France. Dr. A. Ihlal started his teaching career on I988 as Assistant Professor
in the faculty of Science at University Ibn Zohr. Then he holds a “Doctorat d'Etat” thesis in 1995.
He is currently Full Professor in Faculty of Sciences, University Ibn Zohr, Agadir - Morocco. He
is head of the group working on developing cost effective processes for the fabrication of CIGS
and CZTS absorber layers, buffer layers and TCOs. He is working on PV and CSP systems as
well. He has published 60 scientific papers, and acted as a referee for numerous international
journals. He has contributed to the organization of numerous national and international
conferences and was a member of scientific committees for several international conferences. He
is supervising PhD, MSc as well as BSc students in the field of PV and CSP. He is an expert of
the CNRST in the field of renewable energies. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Lahoussine Bouhouch Professor of higher education at the ESTA (High School

of Technologies of Agadir), Ibn Zohr University, Agadir, Morocco. PhD Electrical Engineering
at the Nancy I University, France in 1988 and state doctorate in Electrical Engineering in 2007.
Responsible of the research team ERTAIER (Research Team in Advanced Technologies and
Engineering of Renewable Energies). His research focuses on topics related to renewable energy,
instrumentation and electromagnetic compatibility (EMC). He can be contacted at email:
[email protected].

A comparison of various P&O algorithm in order to truck the MPPT of solar panel (Ismail Isknan)