JEEE, Volume 15, Number 2, October

2022
FUZZY BASED INTELLIGENT MPPT CONTROLLER
FOR SOLAR BASED TRACTION APPLICATIONS
1
Syed Nikhat Asfia, 1Farheen Sultana, 2Sai Nikhil Vodapally, 1Nagarjuna Reddy Poreddy
1
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Kakatiya Institute of Technology and Science, Warangal
2
Deparment of Electrical Engineering, University of Memphis, Tennesse, USA

Abstract— The need to employ non-conventional sources temperature, with normal shading conditions, there exists only
for generation of electric energy, such as solar photovoltaic one operating point to extract maximum power from the PV
(PV), has been emphasized as the demand for electricity has array. Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT) is a technique
increased. Solar PV modules convert solar energy directly into for extracting the maximum power from a PV module. MPPT
electrical energy. With the increase in applications of electric controllers are used in PV systems to extract maximum power
traction in modern day life, the energy consumption of traction from PV systems and to achieve the highest potential efficiency
can be reduced using PV systems by employing PV modules on [3]. The commonly employed MPPT techniques that are
the surface of the traction units. In the case of a PV module, for available are
a given atmospheric condition, neglecting partial shading  Incremental conductance (IC)
conditions, there is only one single point where maximum
 Perturb and observe (P&O)
power can be extracted, known as the Maximum Power Point
(MPP), which must be tracked. Many ways of achieving the  Fuzzy Logic Control
maximum power that PV modules can produce under various  Current Sweep Method
weather conditions are available in the literature. The present  Fractional Open-Circuit Voltage
work discusses an intelligent approach for maximum power  Fractional Short-Circuit Current
point tracking based on a fuzzy logic (FL) controller. This has
been compared with incremental conductance (IC) based MPP Of all the techniques mentioned above, the first two
tracking controller. MATLAB Simulink models of both the methods of IC and P&O are widely used as they are easy to
controllers have been designed and the system performance has implement and take less time for tracking MPP [4]. If there is
been analysed for different weather conditions and motor any change in irradiance level (due to sudden changes in
torque levels. The results show that FL based controller offers weather), the MPP may change continuously which may result
less settling time for output voltage and power when compared in faulty computations by P&O technique. This is because of
to IC based controller. the reason that P&O considers the change in irradiance as that
of perturbation.[5]. This problem of misinterpretation of
Index terms— Photo Voltaic (PV) array, Fuzzy logic controller,
change in irradiance as perturbance can be avoided in IC
incremental conductance, boost converter, MATLAB Simulink.
technique as it considers both the voltage and current samples
I. INTRODUCTION to compute MPP [6]. Also, IC technique has higher efficiency
when compared to P&O technique. Hence, incremental
Energy is crucial not only in our daily lives but also in the
conductance technique is used in this work for comparison with
overall economic development of any country. The industrial
system using fuzzy logic.
revolution has increased the demand for electric energy.
Energy generation in the advanced countries, such as US, A high-precision sun tracking controller should be
China, India, is primarily based on non-renewable resources. considered since the maximum quantity of solar energy
The Monthly Energy Review magazine released by US energy captured by the collector is connected to the accuracy for
information administration (EIA) for the month of May 2022, tracking the sun's location[7]. Several methods based on
revealed that the transportation sector consumes approximately orientation and tilt motion control have been presented in
27.67% of the total energy consumption of which only 5.49% earlier years to improve tracking systems for sun radiations [8],
comes from renewable energy sources [1]. There is an [9]. Using information of geographical latitudes to optimise tilt
immediate requirement for renewable energy sources that are and orientation angles of solar collectors [10], mathematical
less expensive, more sustainable, and produces fewer carbon models [11], and tracking algorithms [12]–[14]are some of
emissions. Because of the massive usage and expiration of these approaches. In the field of control engineering, some
fossil fuels, renewable energy sources are becoming systems based on motion control [15], [16], and signal
increasingly important. There are numerous non-conventional processing using information from electronic devices [17], [18]
energy sources, such as wind, sun, and hydropower. The has been developed to automatically modify tilt and orientation
photovoltaic system is the most efficient renewable energy angles with respect to the sun position. Fuzzy logic based
source that has gotten researchers' attention [2]. Solar control systems have been developed recently to track MPPT
electricity is also the most readily available energy source, based on light-sensors, ambient temperature, and electric load
and it is clean, pollution free, maintenance free. The growing fluctuations[19]. Recent advances in MPPT applications
demand for solar energy in a variety of fields, as well as its include development of fuzzy algorithms for connecting
applications as a renewable and clean source of energy, household appliances to the grid or a solar panel [6], [10], [17],
necessitates the need to improve photovoltaic system [20], [21] , three-point weight comparison method [22]–[24],
performance. control using PV current [22]–[24], and solar-powered hybrid
systems using mean value theorem [25]. Voltage and Current
PV modules have a low energy conversion efficiency.
based MPPTs have been developed and employed for tracking
Besides, for a given atmospheric condition of irradiance and
21
 JEEE, Volume 15, Number 2, October
maximum power points [26]–[28]and it 2022 has been shown that  PV Module
voltage based MPPT techniques can offer higher efficiency  DC-DC Boost converter
with least noise and expenditure. MPPT if combined with one  DC motor
cycle control based on PV current can improve efficiency of
the PV power extraction with lower expenditure. [26]–[28] A. PV module
Switching frequency modulation can help locate the maximum
PV modules are made up of cells that are joined in series,
power point of a PV panel under wide insolation conditions
parallel, or in a combination of modules to make panels. In a
[26]–[28]Multiple intelligent techniques can be combined for
series connection, the overall voltage is increased, and in a
effective operation of MPPT controllers. For example, the
parallel connection, the overall current is increased. The output
advantage of combining fuzzy logic and neural networks,
power of a PV array does not remain constant due to changes in
known as neuro-fuzzy, owes to neural networks' learning
irradiance and temperature.
capabilities and fuzzy logic's human-like reasoning .
The efficiency of the PV systems relies upon the converter B. DC-DC boost converter
that is employed. Converters are used to match the impedance The boost converter is also known as the step-up converter
of the PV module to the load in any loading condition [29]. A and its MATLAB model is shown in fig. 2. The name implies
boost converter-based PV system, with MPPT controller, can its typical application of converting a low input- voltage to a
provide maximum power at 70% duty ratio [30], [31]. As a high output voltage, essentially functioning like a reversed
power conditioning unit, DC-DC converters are used to buck converter.
regulate and improve PV panel output voltage to the optimum
output between the source and the load. A converter's duty
cycle must be modified to maintain a constant voltage level
[31]. The unregulated DC supply from the PV system is
converted to a regulated output voltage using a boost converter.
Traditional switching converters cause power losses while
switching, lowering system efficiency [32].
When Fuzzy Logic Control (FCL)-based MPPT is
compared to a traditional MPPT method, the efficiency of
conventional MPPT is 94.8 percent versus 95.8% for fuzzy Fig. 1. Block diagram of proposed system
MPPT under standard conditions[33]. FLC-based MPPT is
found to be more successful for nonlinear systems than
standard controllers due to the increased flexibility [34] . It is
possible to reach MPP in a short period of time by combining
MPPT with FLC and a boost converter, demonstrating that the
FLC, under both moderate and rapid variations in irradiance,
can identify and approach MPP [35].
Different types of motors are used for electric traction
among which DC separately excited motors can be suitably
employed for propulsion and as actuators. These motors can Fig. 2. MATLAB model of boost converter
offer smooth variation of speed from low value to high value
very precisely [36]. C. Separately excited DC motor
The main objective of this work is to implement a fuzzy A motor is an electromechanical device that converts
logic based MPPT controller for a PV based traction system. In electrical energy into mechanical energy. In separately excited
the second stage, the performance of the fuzzy logic controller DC motor, the supply is given separately to the field and
is compared with incremental conductance based MPPT armature windings. This type of DC motor is utilised in a
controller. In the present work, a separately excited DC motor variety of applications, including trains, air compressors, fans,
is employed as traction vehicle. The motor is powered by a PV traction applications, high starting torque applications, and
array and a boost converter. The converter is controlled by a constant speed applications.
MPPT controller with two different approaches of incremental Table 1. Specifications of the proposed system
conductance and fuzzy logic and the results are compared. Parameter Value
This work is structured as follows: Section II presents the PV array (User defined)
components of proposed system and their ratings. Section III Cells per module 60
shows the design and modelling of MPPT controllers based on Series modules per string 40
incremental conductance and fuzzy logic approaches. Section Parallel strings 10
IV shows the simulation results for different operating
Open circuit voltage per module 36.3V
conditions established in MATLAB-Simulink. Finally, Section
V summarizes the main conclusions. Short circuit current per module 7.84A
Maximum power per module 213.15W
II. THE PROPOSED SYSTEM Capacitance across PV array 4.7mF
The efficiency of the proposed system is determined by Boost converter
employing a PV based DC motor system, the block diagram is MOSFET switching frequency 5kHz
shown in fig.1. The specifications of the proposed system are Inductance 2.5mH
given in Table.1.The major components of the system are listed
Capacitance 0.4mF
below.
Load: DC separately excited motor
22
 JEEE, Volume 15, Number 2, October
Armature resistance and inductance 2022
0.6ohms and 12mH the help of membership functions that are employed. Different
Field resistance and inductance 240ohms and 120H types of membership functions are available in the literature
Total inertia 1kgm2 but the gaussian function has been employed in this work.
Type Wound field
Once the fuzzy inputs are available, they are subjected to the
rules available in the rule base which have been developed
Torque 100 Nm
depending on the circumstances of the given case resulting in
Field excitation 240V
fuzzy output. The final fuzzy output is subjected to
defuzzification to convert it to a crisp value.
III. IMPLEMENTATION OF MAXIMUM POWER
POINT TRACKING
A. MPPT based on incremental conductance method
In this method, the algorithm, shown in fig. 3 shows that to
get maximum power, negative value of conductance is
compared with incremental conductance value [37] According
to the relationship the PV module operates either right or left
side of MPP in the P-V curve. Incremental conductance
algorithm is used to detect the slope of the PV curve.

Fig. 4. Flow chart of MPPT using fuzzy logic control [37]

Fig. 3. Flowchart of incremental conductance algorithm [36]

With the maximum power point at the peak of the curve,
the incremental conductance algorithm uses dI/dV and –I/V.
 If dI/dV is equal to –I/V then it is the voltage at which
maximum power occurs in the PV curve.
 If dI/dV is greater than –I/V, the operating point is
Fig. 5. Membership functions of input and output variables of FLC
present in the left half of the PV curve then voltage is
increased by decreasing the duty ratio.
 If dI/dV is less than –I/V, the operating point is
present in the right half of the PV curve then voltage
is decreased by increasing the duty ratio.

B. MPPT based on Fuzzy Logic Control (FLC)

FLC deals with the imprecise input, which does not need
any accurate mathematical model for the controller [38], [39].
FLC process can be assorted into three categories:-
1. Fuzzification
2. Rule Evaluation
3. Defuzzification. Fig. 6. 3-D View of the output surface of the FLC logic
To obtain the duty cycle using fuzzy logic controller, the
Fuzzification is a process where crisp inputs, like input voltage and current of the PV array are measured continuously
voltage of the system, can be converted into fuzzy input with
23
 JEEE, Volume 15, Number 2, October
and the power is computed using the product2022 of them. If I, V Fig. 10 shows the output voltage of the PV array when the
and P represent the output current, voltage and power from PV system is controlled using incremental conductance (IC) and
array, letting fuzzy logic (FL) based MPPT controllers. It can be observed
∆𝐼 = 𝐼(𝑘) − 𝐼(𝑘 − 1) … . (1) that the rated voltage of the PV array (36.3*10=363 volts) has
been achieved at approximately 2 seconds. In the due process,
∆𝑉 = 𝑉(𝑘) − 𝑉(𝑘 − 1) … . (2) it can be observed that with IC based controller, the output
∆𝑃 = 𝑃(𝑘) − 𝑃(𝑘 − 1) … . (3) voltage takes time for stabilizing its value before reaching
Defining error, steady state at 3.2 seconds as against the FL based controller
∆𝑃 ∆𝑃 which stabilizes at 2 seconds itself. Similarly, the voltage at the
𝐸= = … (4) load terminals can be observed in fig. 10 when the system is
∆𝑉 ∆𝐼
controlled using IC and FL based MPPT controllers
∆𝐸 = 𝐸(𝑘) − 𝐸(𝑘 − 1) … . (5) respectively.
In the current work based on [38], [39], the two inputs are Fig. 11 indicates the motor torque of the separately excited
error (E) and change in error (CE or ∆E), which are fed into the motor when IC and FL based controllers are employed for
fuzzy logic control system. The output is the duty ratio (D), obtaining MPP of PV array. As mentioned in Table.1, the
which is fed to the boost converter. The duty cycle obtained torque of the DC motor is specified at 100Nm. As the DC
from the fuzzy logic controller is used to regulate the pulse motors have high starting torque, the DC motor employed in
width modulator, which produces pulses that drive the the present study has been observed to draw a starting torque of
MOSFET switch in the converter model. The algorithm around 290Nm and finally reaches the steady state value of
employed for FLC based MPPT has been taken from [38], [40] 100Nm in either of the cases considered. It can be seen that
and is shown in fig.4. The gaussian membership functions has with IC controller, the settling time is nearly 3.8 seconds while
been employed for the inputs and output of fuzzy logic system the settling time with FL controller is nearly 3 seconds.
as they are smooth and offer non-zero values [41]. Five ranges Fig. 12 shows the load power which is absorbed by the
of each of the input and output variables have been chosen and separately excited DC motor when the system is controlled
they are mentioned as NB (Negative Big), NS (Negative with IC and FL based MPPT controllers respectively. In either
Small), ZE (Zero), PS (Positive Small) and PB (Positive Big). of the cases, the steady state value of the load power is 38kW
The ranges of the membership functions are shown in fig.5 (approximately to 40kW) with the IC controller system taking
while the 3-D view of the output surface of the proposed fuzzy longer time (3.8 seconds) than that of the FL controller system
logic controller is shown in fig.6. A set of 25 rules have been (3 seconds). In both the cases, the motor speed attains the
framed based on the work mentioned in [40] which are steady state value of 350rad/sec at approximately 3.8 and 3
depicted in Table.2. seconds respectively which is shown in the fig. 13.
Table 2. Fuzzy rule base employed The developed circuit has been tested for different
CE
atmospheric conditions (with varying irradiance and
D temperatures) and different load torques for both IC and FL
NB NS ZE PS PB based MPPT controllers. Table 3 shows the parameters
obtained for both configurations for different irradiance levels
NB PB PB PS NB NB
at constant temperature and load torque. For lower values of
NS PS PS PS NB NS irradiance, the IC based controller has not been settling to
provide constant power output and load torque till the
E ZE PS PS ZE NS NS
completion of simulation of five seconds. As the irradiance
PS PS PS NS NS NB level is increased, the settling time decreased for IC controller.
On the other hand, the FL based controller provided parameters
PB PS PS NS NS NB
with less settling time. It can be observed that both the
controllers provided similar results with the FL based controller
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS AND ANALYSIS providing them with less settling time. It can also bee seen that
The proposed system is modeled in MATLAB Simulink the motor (load) current and motor output power are nearly
v2022, and the Simulink model is shown in the fig.7. The constant at 36kW.
ratings of different components have been mentioned in Table 3. Characteristics of the developed models at different irradiance levels
Table.1. Discrete solver with sample time of 50μs has been with constant temperature (25°C) and load torque (100Nm)
considered for the simulation study for a total runtime duration Irradi- IC method FL controller
of 5 seconds. Two different cases of MPPT controllers have ance V V I P V VL IL PL
PV L L L PV
been considered for the analysis. (W/m2) (V) (V) (A) (kW) (V) (V) (A) (kW)
i. MPPT controller based on incremental 600 - - - - 327.9 643.0 55.72 35.88
conductance (IC) 800 - - - - 338.9 661.3 56.74 37.94
ii. MPPT controller based on fuzzy logic 1000 338.9 661.4 54.50 36.24 338.8 661.0 55.56 37.12
Fig. 8 and 9 show the Simulink models of incremental 1200 335.5 657.8 55.56 36.55 335.5 661.4 55.55 36.75
conductance (IC) based MPPT and fuzzy logic (FL) based
1500 330.1 643.1 55.56 35.93 330.1 643.1 55.55 36.13
MPPT controllers respectively. Fuzzy logic controller has been
developed using fuzzy logic toolbox available in MATLAB 1800 321.7 634.6 55.55 35.44 327.1 634.6 55.55 35.44
Simulink with the rules previously mentioned in Section-III. Table 4. Characteristics of the developed models at different temperatures with
The proposed model is simulated for a standard temperature of constant irradiance (1000 W/m2) and load torque (100Nm)
25°C and irradiance of 1000W/m2, the results of which have Tempe- IC method FL controller
been provided in this section. rature VPV VL IL PL VPV VL IL PL
(°C) (V) (V) (A) (kW) (V) (V) (A) (kW)

24
 JEEE, Volume 15, Number 2, October
15 351.0 690.9 55.0 38.19 350.92022
690.7 55.57 38.57 30 331.6 652.4 53.54 35.11 331.4 651.7 55.56 36.40
20 344.5 678.0 54.68 37.26 344.4 677.7 55.56 37.85 35 325.0 639.0 54.41 34.96 324.9 638.6 55.56 35.68
25 338.9 661.4 54.50 36.24 338.8 661.0 55.56 37.12 40 318.5 626.1 54.18 34.11 318.4 625.6 55.56 34.95

Fig. 7. MATLAB-Simulink connection diagram of proposed system

Fig. 8. MATLAB-Simulink model of incremental conductance based MPPT controller

Fig. 9. MATLAB-Simulink model of fuzzy logic based MPPT controller

Fig. 10. (a)PV array voltage with IC controller (b) load voltage with IC controller (c)PV array voltage with FL controller (d) load voltage with FL controller

25
 JEEE, Volume 15, Number 2, October
2022

Fig. 11. Load torque with (a) IC controller (b)FL controller

Fig. 12. Electrical power at the load terminals with (a) IC controller (b)FL controller

Fig. 13. Motor speed with (a) IC controller (b)FL controller

On the other hand, for varying temperature with constant As the load torque is increased, it is observed that the speed of
irradiance and load torque, it is observed that as the the machine decreases slightly with a minimal decrease in
temperature increases, there was a slight decrease in the output voltage. As the load torque is increased beyond 250Nm ,there
voltage, but the load current is maintained constant by both the was a sudden dip in voltage and the speed of the machine
controllers. The load power also decreased with an increase in which can be seen in Table 5 and fig.15. The load power also
temperature, and it can be observed in table 4 and fig.14. The increased with the increase in torque.
load torque has also been varied to test the FL based controller.
26
 JEEE, Volume 15, Number 2, October
All of the simulation results showed2022
that the steady state transformation,” Energy Strategy Reviews, vol. 24, pp. 38–50, Apr. 2019,
doi: 10.1016/j.esr.2019.01.006.
values of output voltage, power output and motor speed and
[3] M. A. G. de Brito, L. Galotto, L. P. Sampaio, G. de Azevedo Melo, and C.
torque remain the same, but the FL based controller offers A. Canesin, “Evaluation of the main MPPT techniques for photovoltaic
stable values with lower settling times when compared to that applications,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 60, no. 3,
of IC controller. pp. 1156–1167, 2013, doi: 10.1109/TIE.2012.2198036.
[4] S. A. Mohamed and M. Abd El Sattar, “A comparative study of P&O and
Table 5. Characteristics of the FLC system for different torques with constant INC maximum power point tracking techniques for grid-connected PV
irradiance (1000 W/m2) and temperature (25°C) systems,” SN Applied Sciences, vol. 1, no. 2, Feb. 2019, doi:
Torque Speed 10.1007/s42452-018-0134-4.
VPV (V) VL (V) IL (A) PL (kW)
(Nm) (rad/sec) [5] M. T. A. Khan, S. M. S. Tanzil, R. Rahman, and S. M. S. Alam, “Design
100 338.8 661.0 55.56 37.12 350.7 and construction of an automatic solar tracking system,” in International
Conference on Electrical & Computer Engineering (ICECE 2010), 2010,
150 334.4 650.2 84.01 66.91 332.2 pp. 326–329.
[6] N. Femia, D. Granozio, G. Petrone, G. Spagnuolo, and M. Vitelli,
200 317.8 616.9 118.1 72.85 299.3
“Optimized One-Cycle Control in Photovoltaic Grid Connected
250 296.6 562.0 143.2 80.07 264.5 Applications,” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems,
vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 954–972, 2006, doi: 10.1109/TAES.2006.248205.
[7] S. Jain and V. Agarwal, “A new algorithm for rapid tracking of
approximate maximum power point in photovoltaic systems,” IEEE Power
Electronics Letters, vol. 2, no. 1. pp. 16–19, Mar. 2004. doi:
10.1109/LPEL.2004.828444.
[8] A. Iqbal, H. Abu-Rub, and Sk. M. Ahmed, “Adaptive neuro-fuzzy
inference system based maximum power point tracking of a solar PV
module,” in IEEE International Energy Conference and Exhibition, 2010,
pp. 51–56.
[9] T. L. Kottas, Y. S. Boutalis, and A. D. Karlis, “New maximum power
point tracker for PV arrays using fuzzy controller in close cooperation with
fuzzy cognitive networks,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol.
21, no. 3, pp. 793–803, Sep. 2006, doi: 10.1109/TEC.2006.875430.
[10] Wen Long Yu, TIng-Peng Lee, Guan-Hong Wu, Qing Su Chen, Huang-Jen
Chiu, and Yu-Kang Lo, “A DSP-based single-stage maximum power point
tracking PV inverter,” in wenty-Fifth Annual IEEE Applied Power
Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC), 2010, pp. 948–952.
Fig. 14. T vs PL characteristics with FL controller Accessed: Jun. 20, 2022. [Online]. Available:
10.1109/APEC.2010.5433388.
[11] T. Esram and P. L. Chapman, “Comparison of photovoltaic array
maximum power point tracking techniques,” IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 439–449, Jun. 2007, doi:
10.1109/TEC.2006.874230.
[12] Abdulaziz M. S. Aldobhani and Robert John, “MPPT of PV system using
ANFIS prediction and fuzzy logic tracking,” 2008.
[13] C. Hua and C. Shen, “Study of Maximum Power Tracking Techniques an
DC/DC Converters for Photovoltaic Power System,” in PESC 98 Record.
29th Annual IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference (Cat.
No.98CH36196), 1998, pp. 86–93.
[14] J. C. H. Phang, D. S. H. Chan, and J. R. Phillips, “Accurate Analytical
Method for the Extraction of Solar Cell Model Parameters,” Electronic
Letters, vol. 20, pp. 406–408, 1984.
[15] L. Li-qun Wang Zhi-xin, “A Rapid MPPT Algorithm Based on the
Research of Solar Cell’s Diode Factor and Reverse Saturation Current,”
WSEAS Transactions on Systems, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 568–579, 2008.
Fig. 15. Motor characteristics with FL controller [16] G. de Cesare, D. Caputo, and A. Nascetti, “Maximum power point tracker
for portable photovoltaic systems with resistive-like load,” Solar Energy,
vol. 80, no. 8, pp. 982–988, Aug. 2006, doi:
10.1016/j.solener.2005.07.010.
V. CONCLUSIONS [17] T. T. N. Khatib, A. Mohamed, N. Amin, and K. Sopian, “An Efficient
Maximum Power Point Tracking Controller for Photovoltaic Systems
In this paper, the performance of two MPPT controllers Using New Boost Converter Design and Improved Control Algorithm,”
based on fuzzy logic and incremental conductance for PV WSEAS Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 53–63, 2010.
based traction systems were compared. The MPPT controllers [18] W. Xiao, W. G. Dunford, P. R. Palmer, and A. Capel, “Application of
are used to drive the boost converter which is employed for centered differentiation and steepest descent to maximum power point
tracking,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 54, no. 5, pp.
boosting the PV voltage as per the load requirement. For a 2539–2549, Oct. 2007, doi: 10.1109/TIE.2007.899922.
required load torque, under given atmospheric conditions of [19] M. A. Usta, Ö. Akyazı, and İ. H. Altaş, “Design and Performance of Solar
irradiance and temperature, the fuzzy logic based MPPT Tracking System with Fuzzy Logic Controller Used Different Membership
controller offers less settling time than incremental Functions,” in 7th International Conference on Electrical and Electronics
Engineering (ELECO), 2011, pp. 381–385. [Online]. Available:
conductance based MPPT controller in attaining the steady https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241635166
state values of speed, power and torque. This helps in [20] L. L. Oscar, M. T. Penella, and M. Gasulla, “A new MPPT method for
improving the mobility of the traction vehicles thereby low-power solar energy harvesting,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
reducing their start times. The incremental conductance based Electronics, vol. 57, no. 9, pp. 3129–3138, Sep. 2010, doi:
10.1109/TIE.2009.2037653.
MPPT controller exhibits more delay in attaining the desired [21] A. Louchene, A. Benmakhlouf, and A. Chaghi, “Solar tracking system
torque for different atmospheric conditions. with fuzzy reasoning applied to crisp sets,” Revue des Energies
Renouvelables, vol. 10, pp. 231–240, 2007.
VI. REFERENCES [22] Y.-T. Hsiao and C.-H. Chen, “Maximum Power Tracking for Photovoltaic
Power System,” in IEEE Industry Applications Conference. 37th IAS
[1] US Energy Information Administration, “Monthly Energy Review,” 2022.
Annual Meeting, 2002, pp. 1035–1040.
[Online]. Available: www.eia.gov/mer
[23] V. Salas, E. Olías, A. Lázaro, and A. Barrado, “Evaluation of a new
[2] D. Gielen, F. Boshell, D. Saygin, M. D. Bazilian, N. Wagner, and R.
maximum power point tracker (MPPT) applied to the photovoltaic stand-
Gorini, “The role of renewable energy in the global energy
27
 JEEE, Volume 15, Number 2, October
alone systems,” in Solar Energy Materials and 2022
Solar Cells, May 2005, vol.
87, no. 1–4, pp. 807–815. doi: 10.1016/j.solmat.2004.07.053.
[24] N. Pongratananukul, “Analysis And Simulation Tools For Solar Array
Power Systems,” 2005. [Online]. Available:
https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/373
[25] C. Rodriguez and G. A. J. Amaratunga, “Analytic solution to the
photovoltaic maximum power point problem,” IEEE Transactions on
Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers, vol. 54, no. 9, pp. 2054–2060,
2007, doi: 10.1109/TCSI.2007.902537.
[26] M. A. S. Masoum, H. Dehbonei, and E. F. Fuchs, “Theoretical and
experimental analyses of photovoltaic systems with voltage- and current-
based maximum power-point tracking,” IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 514–522, Dec. 2002, doi:
10.1109/TEC.2002.805205.
[27] Y. Chen and K. M. Smedley, “A cost-effective single-stage inverter with
maximum power point tracking,” IEEE Transactions on Power
Electronics, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 1289–1294, Sep. 2004, doi:
10.1109/TPEL.2004.833458.
[28] K. K. Tse, M. T. Ho, H. S. H. Chung, and S. Y. R. Hui, “A novel
maximum power point tracker for PV panels using switching frequency
modulation,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 17, no. 6, pp.
980–989, Nov. 2002, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2002.805594.
[29] S. S. Mohammed and D. Devaraj, “Simulation and analysis of stand-alone
photovoltaic system with boost converter using MATLAB/Simulink,” in
2014 International Conference on Circuits, Power and Computing
Technologies [ICCPCT-2014], 2014, pp. 814–821. doi:
10.1109/ICCPCT.2014.7054991.
[30] Shalini, “Simulation and Modelling of MPPT based PV System Connected
with Boost Converter,” in 2020 IEEE Pune Section International
Conference, PuneCon 2020, Dec. 2020, pp. 83–87. doi:
10.1109/PuneCon50868.2020.9362452.
[31] B. R. Kiran and G. A. Ezhilarasi, “Design and analysis of soft-switched
Buck-Boost Converter for PV applications,” in Annual IEEE India
Conference (INDICON), 2015, pp. 1–5. doi:
10.1109/INDICON.2015.7443509.
[32] M. E. Başoğlu, “Realization of a low cost and fast boost converter based
MPPT for PV system,” in 4th International Conference on Power
Electronics and their Applications (ICPEA), 2019, pp. 1–6. doi:
10.1109/ICPEA1.2019.8911155.
[33] A. K. Mishra and B. Singh, “Design of PV powered SR motor driven
irrigation pumps utilizing boost converter,” in IEEE Uttar Pradesh Section
International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Electronics
Engineering (UPCON), 2016, pp. 264–268. doi:
10.1109/UPCON.2016.7894663.
[34] W. Hayder, A. Abid, M. ben Hamed, and L. Sbita, “Intelligenit MPPT
algorithm for PV system based on fuzzy logic,” in Proceedings of the 17th
International Multi-Conference on Systems, Signals and Devices, SSD
2020, Jul. 2020, pp. 239–243. doi: 10.1109/SSD49366.2020.9364195.
[35] M. S. Bouakkaz, A. Boukadoum, O. Boudebbouz, I. Attoui, N. Boutasseta,
and A. Bouraiou, “Fuzzy Logic based Adaptive Step Hill Climbing MPPT
Algorithm for PV Energy Generation Systems,” in International
Conference on Computing and Information Technology, ICCIT 2020, Sep.
2020, pp. 1–5. doi: 10.1109/ICCIT-144147971.2020.9213737.
[36] R. A. van Eck, “The Separately Excited DC Traction Motor Applied to DC
and Single-Phase AC Rapid Transit Systems and Electrified Railroads,
Part I,” IEEE Transactions on Industry and General Applications, vol. 7,
no. 5, pp. 643–649, 1971.
[37] M. L. Devi and M. Chilambarasan, “Design and simulation of incremental
conductance MPPT using self-lift cuk converter,” in International
Conference on Renewable Energy and Sustainable Energy (ICRESE),
2013, pp. 105–111. doi: 10.1109/ICRESE.2013.6927796.
[38] N. Hussein Selman, “Comparison Between Perturb & Observe,
Incremental Conductance and Fuzzy Logic MPPT Techniques at Different
Weather Conditions,” International Journal of Innovative Research in
Science, Engineering and Technology, vol. 5, no. 7, pp. 12556–12569, Jul.
2016, doi: 10.15680/ijirset.2016.0507069.
[39] M. M. Algazar, H. Al-Monier, H. A. El-Halim, and M. E. E. K. Salem,
“Maximum power point tracking using fuzzy logic control,” International
Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 21–28,
Jul. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.ijepes.2011.12.006.
[40] C. R. Algarín, J. T. Giraldo, and O. R. Álvarez, “Fuzzy logic based MPPT
controller for a PV system,” Energies (Basel), vol. 10, no. 12, Dec. 2017,
doi: 10.3390/en10122036.
[41] P. Harliana and R. Rahim, “Comparative Analysis of Membership
Function on Mamdani Fuzzy Inference System for Decision Making,” in
Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Dec. 2017, vol. 930, no. 1. doi:
10.1088/1742-6596/930/1/012029.

28
 © 2022. This work is published under
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/(the “License”).
Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this
content in accordance with the terms of the License.