UPEC2010
31st Aug - 3rd Sept 2010
Voltage and Current Based MPPT of Fuel Cells
under Variable Temperature Conditions
M. Sarvi
Imam Khomeini International University
Qazvin, Iran
sarvi@ikiu.ac.ir
Abstract-There are a few devices for storage the electrical
energy. Fuel cell (FC) is one of them. FCs have advantages such
as high efficiency, low emission (of pollutant gases), and flexible
modular structure In this paper Voltage-based (VMPPT) and
current-based (CMPPT) maximum power point tracking is
proposed to minimizing the fuel consumption of a fuel cell. In
these two methods, first a model is used for configuring the
polarization curve and then the effect of temperature variation
investigates on the characteristics of FC. In VMPPT technique
the relation between open circuit voltage and the voltage
corresponding to maximum power of FC is investigated in for
different temperatures. In CMPPT technique we find it between
short circuit current and the current corresponding to maximum
power of FC is investigated. Simulations are carried in
MATLAB environment.
Index Terms--Fuel cell, MPPT, VMPPT, CMPPT.
I. INTRODUCTION
There are a few devices for storage the electrical energy.
Fuel cell is one of them. FCs have advantages such as high
efficiency, low emission (of pollutant gases), and flexible
modular structure [1]. As other devices, ability of fuel cell
systems to produce power is limited. So it is necessary to
force the system to operate in conditions which match up with
fuel cell maximum power point (MPP). A MPP tracking
(MPPT) which utilizes a MPPT algorithm can undertake this
duty. When fuel cell operates in this condition, since MPP is a
unique and fixed point of operation, load power requirements
are not taken into account and output voltage will vary with
variations of load resistance.
Different maximum power point tracking (MPPT)
techniques for photovoltaic systems have been reported [2-9].
Among them Perturbation and Observe (P&O) is the most
commonly used method because of its simple algorithm. Also
Voltage-based (VMPPT) and current-based (CMPPT)
maximum power point tracking are simple and practical
approaches for improving the efficiency of photovoltaic
systems [2-3]. This paper investigates VMPPT and CMPPT
methods for FC. Also the impact of varying temperatures on
the performance of VMPPT and CMPPT techniques is
M. M. Barati
Imam Khomeini International University
Qazvin, Iran
mm.barati@yahoo.com
analyzed. The simulated and theoretical results are compared.
Simulations are carried in MATLAB facilities.
II. FUEL CELL CHARACTERISTIC
Fuel cell voltage as a function of current density in a steady
state can be represented by a polarization curve, which is
influenced by such parameters as the cell temperature, oxygen
partial pressure, hydrogen partial pressure and membrane
water content [10]. When current is drawn from a fuel cell,
the cell voltage Vcell decreases from its equilibrium
thermodynamic potential Enernst (open circuit voltage) [10].
This voltage drop consists of activation loss ( η act ), ohmic
loss ( ηohmic ) and concentration loss ( ηcon ). The basic
expression for the cell voltage is
Vcell = Enernst + η act + η ohmic + ηcon (1)
Reversible thermodynamic potential E nernst is described
by the Nernst equation. This voltage is
Enernst = 1.229 − 8.5 × 10 −4 ( T − 298.15 ) + ...
(2)
4.308 × 10 − 5 T (ln PH 2 + 0.5 ln PO2 )
Activation overvoltage ( ) is described by the Tafel
equation as the following
η act = ξ 1 + ξ 2 T + ξ 3T ln C O2 + ξ 4 T ln I (3)
where ξ (i = 1:4) are parametric coefficients for each cell
model. is the concentration of dissolved oxygen at the
gas/liquid interface ( mol .cm −3 ), which can be calculated as
PO2
CO2 = (4)
( 5.08 × 10 6 ) × exp( −498 / T )
 Ohmic overvoltage ηohmic results from the resistance of the RT I
polymer membrane in electron and proton transfers. It can be ηcon = ln( 1 − ) (11)
nF iL A
written as

ηohmic = − IRm where iL is the limiting current. It denotes the maximum

(5)
rate at which a reactant can be supplied to an electrode.
The resistance Rm is given by:
III. POLARIZATION CURVES
rm t m
Rm = (6) By considering the model parameters in [10] and using
A
MATLAB facilities, V-I and P-I curves are obtained as Figs.
where rm is membrane resistivity ( Ωcm ) to proton 1 and 2, respectively.
conductivity, t m membrane thickness ( cm ), A cell active
area ( cm 2 ). Membrane resistivity depends strongly on 1.6

membrane humidity and temperature, and can be described by 1.4

the following empirical expression 1.2

181.6 [ 1 + 0.03( I / A ) + 0.0062( T / 303 )2 ( I / A )2.5 ]

1

rm = (7) Increasing of temperature

[ λm − 0.634 − 3( I / A )] exp[ 4.18( T − 303 / T )] 0.8

V(v)
0.6

where λm is the membrane water content. The membrane 0.4

water content is a function of the average water activity a m
0.2

0.043 + 17.81am − 39.85am 2 + 36 am 3 , 0 < am ≤ 1

0

λm = { 14 + 1.4( am − 1 ), 1 < am ≤ 3
(8) -0.2

-0.4
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
The average water activity is related to the anode water I(A)

vapor partial pressure Pv ,an and the cathode water vapor Fig. 1. Fuel cell output voltage versus current.
partial pressure Pv ,ca :

1 1 p v ,an + Pv ,ca 1400

am = ( a an + a ca ) = (9)
2 2 Psat 1200

1000
The saturation pressure of water Psat can be calculated
with the following empirical expression: 800

600
log10 Psat = −2.1794 + 0.02953T − ...
P(w)

(10)
9.1813 × 10 − 5 T 2 + 1.4454 × 10 −7 T 3
400
Increasing of temperature
200

The value of λ m varies between 0 and 14, which is 0

equivalent to the relative humidity of 0% and 100%. Under -200

supersaturated conditions, however, the maximum possible
value of λm can be as high as 23. In addition, λm is -400
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
influenced by the membrane preparation procedure, the I(A)

relative humidity of the feed gas and the membrane age. In

this paper, λm is considered as an adjustable parameter with a Fig. 2. Fuel cell output power versus current.
possible value between 0 and 23. Concentration overvoltage
η con results from the concentration gradient of reactants as
they are consumed in the reaction. The equation for
concentration overvoltage is shown by In the CMPPT technique, the fuel cell current
corresponding to maximum power ( I mp ) is considered
proportional to the fuel cell short current ( I sc ) as the (*) are the computed data and the continuous line is curve
following
fitted of them.
The voltage factor ( K v ) is not constant and depends on
I mp = K I I sc (12)
array temperature but the changing of K v is approximately
insignificant.
where K I is the constant "current factor".
In the VMPPT technique, the relation between fuel cell
voltage corresponding to maximum power ( Vmp ) and fuel
cell open circuit voltage is considered to be linear as the
following

Vmp = KV Voc (13)

where KV is the constant "voltage factor".

The impact of temperature on factors K I and KV is
considered and will be investigated in the next section.

IV. ANALYSIS OF SIMULATED RESULTS FOR VMPPT AND

CMPPT TECHNIQUES

In order to investigate the impact of temperature variations

on the performance and accuracy of VMPPT and CMPPT
Fig. 3. Current factor ( K I ) versus temperature.
techniques, theoretical values of array voltage ( Voc , Vmp ),
array current ( I sc , I mp ) current factor ( K I ) and voltage factor
( KV ) for different temperature conditions are compared.
Simulations are done in MATLAB environment for two
techniques

A. Analysis of the Current-Based MPPT

Fuel cell characteristics including the short circuit current

( I sc ) and the current corresponding to the maximum power
point ( I mp ) are calculated and then current factor
K I = I mp / I sc are determined. Fig. 3 shows the current
factor ( K I ) versus temperature. The stars (*) are the
computed data and the continuous line is curve fitted of them.
The voltage factor ( K I ) is not constant and depends on
Fig. 4. Voltage factor ( KV ) versus temperature.
array temperature but the changing of K v is approximately
insignificant.
V. CONCLUSION

B. Analysis of the Voltage-Based MPPT
In order to investigate the accuracy of VMPPT technique
under variable temperature conditions, cell open circuit
voltage ( Voc ) and the voltage corresponding to maximum
power ( Vmp ), as well as the voltage factor ( K v = Vmp / Voc )
are computed for different temperature conditions. Fig. 4
shows the current factor ( K I ) versus temperature. The stars
This paper proposes VMPPT and CMPPT techniques for
MPP tracking of fuel cell. In VMPPT techniques, by
increasing the temperature, K V is decreasing and the
variation of the voltage factor with respect to temperature is
linear and slop of variation is approximately constant.
In CMPPT techniques, by increasing the temperature K I
is increasing and the variation of the current factor with
respect to temperature is linear and slop of variation is
approximately constant. In spite of this, the variation of K V
and K I is very insignificant at It can be assumed constant.
Therefore these two techniques are very simple practical
tracking approaches.
REFERENCES
[1] Nehrir.H, Caisheng Wang, Shaw, S.R, “Fuel cells: promising devices
for distributed generation”, IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, vol.4,
no.1, pp.47-53, 2006.
[2] M.A.S. Masoum, H. Dehbonei, “Theoretical and Experimental analyses
of Photovoltaic Systems with Voltage- and Current- based Maximum
Power Point Tracker”, IEEE Trans. On Energy Conversion, vol.17,
no.4, pp.514-522, Dec.2002.
[3] M.A.S. Masoum, H. Dehbonei, “Optimal Power Point Tracking of
Photovoltaic System under all Operating Conditions”, in 17th Congress
of the world Energy Council, Houston, TX, Sept. 12-18, 1998.
[4] M. Sarvi, M.A.S. Masoum, “Impact of Temperature and Insolation
Variations on Fuzzy MPP Tracking of Solar Panels”, 17th International
Power System Conference, Tehran, Iran, PSC 2002, 28-32 Oct. 2002,
pp.35-45.
[5] M.A.S. Masoum, M. Sarvi, “A New Fuzzy-Based Maximum Power
Point Tracker for Photovoltaic Applications”, International Journal of
Engineering Science, vol.1, no.1, pp.28-35, 2005.
[6] A. D. Karlis, “A novel maximum power point tracking method for PV
systems using fuzzy cognitive networks,” Electric Power Systems
Research vol.77, pp.315-327, 2007.
[7] K. Hussein, I. Muta, T. Hoshino, and M. Osakada, “Maximum
Photovoltaic Power Tracking: An Algorithm for Rapidly Changing
Atmospheric Conditions”, IEE Proc. Of Generation, Transmission,
Distribution, vol.142, no.1, pp.59-64, 1995.
[8] T. Noguchi, S. Togashi, R. Nakamoto, “Short-Current Pulse-Based
Maximum-Power-Point Tracking Method for Multiple Photovoltaic and
Converter Module System”, IEEE Trans. On Industrial Electronics,
vol.49, pp.217-223, 2002.
[9] J. H.R.Enslin, M.S.Wolf, D.B.Snyman and W.Swiegers, 1997.
“Integrated PhotovoltaicMaximum Power Point Tracking Converter”,
IEEE Trans. on Industrial Electronics, vol.44, pp.769-773, 1997
[10] Z. Zhi-dan, H. Hai-bo, Z. Xin-jian, C. Guang-yi, R. Yuan, “Adaptive
maximum power point tracking control of fuel cell power plants”,
Journal of Power Sources, vol.176, pp.259–269, 2008.