An Improved Evolutionary Programming (IEP)
Method Under the EN 50530 Dynamic MPPT
Efficiency Test
1st Norazlan Hashim 2nd Zainal Salam
Faculty of Electrical Engineering Centre of Electrical Energy Systems
Universiti Teknologi MARA School of Electrical Engineering
40450 Shah Alam, Malaysia Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
azlan4477@uitm.edu.my 81310 Johor Bahru, Malaysia
zainals@fke.utm.my
Abstract—Photovoltaic (PV) system is an attractive
renewable energy source as PV systems are environmental
friendly, utilize inexhaustible resource, and provide long-term
economic benefits. However, PV systems suffer a common
drawback which is the lack of efficiency of the maximum power
point tracking (MPPT) used to extract the maximum available
power from PV system. Typically, the efficiency of a PV system
is evaluated using the static MPPT performance and the
dynamic MPPT performance where the latter is usually
analyzed using simple irradiance profiles that do not truly
reflect the real environmental conditions. In order to achieve an
evaluation that is more accurate and closer to the actual
performance of a PV system, a dynamic MPPT efficiency test
based on international standards such as the European
Standard EN 50530 is deemed vital. With regard to Soft
Computing (SC) MPPT methods, there are hardly any
publication that analyzes the MPPT performance based on the
EN 50530 standard. This paper presents the design and
experimental evaluation of an improved Evolutionary
Programming (EP)-based MPPT method that complies with the
EN 50530 standard. The proposed concept is simulated in
MATLAB/Simulink platform and is validated experimentally
using a custom-designed PV array simulator (PVAS), DC-DC
boost converter, and a resistive load. The results show that the
proposed method achieves better performance compared to the
conventional EP with improvement in efficiency of 30% and
40% for low gradient and medium/high gradient irradiance
respectively.
Keywords—Soft Computing (SC), Maximum Power Point
Tracking (MPPT), Evolutionary Programming (EP), EN 50530
I. INTRODUCTION
Renewable energy (RE) sources are becoming
increasingly important as a result of the growing energy
demand and concerns about global warming caused by
burning fossil fuels. Among RE sources, solar photovoltaic
(PV) is the most popular choice, owing to its long-term
economic benefits, inexhaustible resource, and environmental
friendly system [1]. Generous financial schemes such as
subsidized policies and feed-in tariffs have been introduced by
governments from many countries, which led to the rapid
growth of the PV industry [2]. A PV system features a
nonlinear power-voltage (P-V) characteristic with one definite
maximum power point (MPP) where the location of the MPP
is largely influenced by the solar irradiance (G) and
temperature (T). To extract maximum power from a PV
system, PV cells need to operate at their MPP which requires
tracking due to unpredictable changes in the atmospheric
conditions. Therefore, the maximum power point tracking
(MPPT) method is usually embedded with the power
converter as the electric load is applied. The efficiency of a
978-1-7281-3433-8/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE
147
3rd Nik Fasdi Nik Ismail
Faculty of Electrical Engineering
Universiti Teknologi MARA
40450 Shah Alam, Malaysia
nikfasdi@uitm.edu.my
PV system relies on the efficiency of the PV panel, the
efficiency of the converter, and the efficiency of the MPPT
method. Any attempt to improve the efficiency of either the
PV panel or the converter would involve employment of
advanced technologies and sophisticated components which
would drastically increase the installation cost. A much better
alternative is by improving the MPPT method with new
control algorithms. This approach is simpler, less costly, and
can be implemented without having to shut down the
operation of PV systems. Over the years, various MPPT
methods have been introduced. Each MPPT method varies in
effectiveness, cost, convergence speed, complexity, and
hardware implementation. MPPT methods can be classified
into the conventional method and the SC method [3]. In the
former, the methods that are commonly employed are perturb
and observe (P&O) [4, 5], hill climbing (HC) [6] and
incremental conductance (IC) [5, 7]. The conventional method
is widely used, owing to its simple structure, robustness, and
ease of implementation . However, the conventional methods
lack the ability to track MPP within P-V curve with multiple
peaks (several local peaks and one global peak [8]) which is
often the case in partial shading condition. The tracker would
typically oscillate around the MPP and often fail to track the
global MPP. Such shortcomings of the conventional methods
contribute to significant power loss [2, 9] and therefore reduce
the overall MPP tracking efficiency. Various SC-based MPPT
methods have been proposed in the literature to address the
said problems. An extensive review on the application of SC-
based MPPT methods can be found in references [9-15]. The
MPPT methods include fuzzy logic controller (FLC), artificial
neural network (ANN), genetic algorithm (GA), ant colony
optimization (ACO), differential evolution (DE), particle
swarm optimization (PSO), cuckoo search (CS), chaotic
search (ChS), and Bayesian fusion (BF). SC-based MPPT
methods produce higher efficiency compared to conventional
MPPT methods. However, the performance of the SC-based
MPPT method are usually evaluated under a fixed
environmental conditions (i.e. fixed G and T) which do not
represent the constantly changing irradiance in real-world
conditions. Under rapidly changing irradiance conditions, the
tracker in the SC method is very likely to lose its direction
while tracking the true MPP [2]. To solve this problem, few
authors have proposed an improvement via hybridization of
some conventional SC methods such as PSO [2], GWO [16],
WO & DE [17], and GA [18]. However, the dynamic MPPT
performance of these methods is often analyzed using a rather
simplistic irradiance profile (e.g. staircase, trapezoidal) that
misrepresent the actual environmental conditions. With regard
to these concerns, this paper proposes an improved SC-based
MPPT method based on the modification of the conventional III. THE PROPOSED IMPROVED EVOLUTIONARY
Evolutionary Programming (CEP) method. EP is chosen due PROGRAMMING (IEP) METHOD
its promising performance [12, 19]. The proposed method is
A. Conventional Evolutionary Programming (CEP)
able to succeed in the MPP tracking under conditions of
changing irradiance according to the EN 50530 standard. Evolutionary Programming (EP) is categorized under the
family of population based global optimization SC method
II. THE EN 50530 TEST SEQUENCE and is designed to simulate an evolution process. A population
The dynamic MPPT efficiency tests in EN 50530 standard of random candidates is first generated before the candidates
are carried out under rapidly changing solar irradiance evolve towards a global optimal solution. The evolution
conditions. The tests are composed of different rising and involves three important stages which are initialization,
falling ramps with a dwell time of 10 seconds between the reproduction, and selection.
transitions [20]. There are two irradiance variations which are At the initialization stage, a population of individuals
(A) low to medium irradiance (100-500W/m2) and (B) known as Parent is randomly initialized to cover the search
medium to high irradiance (300-1000W/m2). Irradiance space of the optimization problem [21]. For a population size
gradient for the former varies from 0.5 W/m2/s to 50 W/m2/s, of NP, a problem dimension of D, and a search space
whereas that of the latter varies from 10 W/m2/s to 100 boundary of [Xmin, Xmax], the formulation for the initial Parent
W/m2/s. This sequence is repeated n times during the period is given by Eq. (2). At the reproduction stage, a variation of
under the test as illustrated in Fig. 1. In the present study, only new candidate solutions known as Offspring is created via
three out of the six slopes in Case (B) are considered which addition of a step size (ΔX) to the Parent through the
are B1, B4, and B6 that represents low slope, medium slope, application of the mutation operator as shown in Eq. (3).
and high slope respectively as shown in Table I. Furthermore, Parentinitial = X min + rand ( D, NP).* ( X max − X min ) (2)
the sequence is repeated only once because the MPPT method
responds identically. The calculation of the dynamic MPPT
efficiency is as follows; Offspring = Parent + ΔX (3)
For the CEP approach, a Gaussian mutation operator is
ηMPPTdyn = 
VDC ⋅ I DC ⋅ ΔT
(1) employed in which the step size is sampled from a scaled and
P MPP ⋅ ΔT normally distributed random number with a mean of zero and
a standard deviation of one as shown in Eq. (4) where, α is a
where VDC and IDC are sampled values of the PV’s output
strategy parameter which determined the degree of step size
voltage and current respectively. Variable PMPP is the
change from one generation to another.
maximum power point whereas ΔT is the period between two
subsequent sample values. ΔX = α .* randn(0,1) (4)

TABLE I. RAMP PROFILE FOR B SEQUENCE (MEDIUM-HIGH Typically, α is designed to take into account the exploration-
IRRADIANCE) exploitation trade-off. At the initial stages of the search, the
Test Time (s) α size should facilitate exploration to ensure that the search
Slope space is covered as much as possible. As generations
Case Ramp Ramp
(W/m2/s) Dwell Total
up down increase, the size of α decreases to allow individuals to
B1 (Low) 10 70 10 70 1900 exploit the information obtained in the search space to fine
B2 14 50 10 50 1500 tune solutions. For maximization problem as used in the
B3 20 35 10 35 1200 present study, the value of α is proportional to the normalized
B4 (Medium) 30 23 10 23 960
fitness values [22] as shown in Eq. (5) where; ƒi is the fitness
of the individual of i=1 to NP and β is the proportionality
B5 50 14 10 14 780
constant.
B6 (High) 100 7 10 7 640
NP

f i
(5)
(A) Low – Medium
α i = βi × i =1
(B) Medium – High n repeating sequence fi
1000
A discriminatory process is conducted at the selection
stage to select the best individual in a population which would
Irradiance (W/m2)

survive for the next generation. Due to simplicity and the

Dwell
ability of yielding good results, the ranking selection scheme
500
time is preferred as the discriminatory method in the present study.
In the ranking selection scheme, both parent and offspring are
300 combined together before being sorted in descending order
Initial
waiting Dwell (for maximization problems) based on their corresponding
100
time time fitness function value. Next, NP best individuals are chosen
to survive in the next generation.
Test Time (s) The reproduction and selection processes are then
Fig. 1. Dynamic efficiency test procedure based on the EN 50530 repeated iteratively until a stopping condition is reached. The
standard.
stopping condition is typically designed based on the type of

148
algorithm employed and necessary optimality conditions for
the problem encountered. In the present study, the iteration is
terminated when the difference between the maximum and
minimum value of an individual’s fitness score is less than
the prescribed tolerance as expressed in Eq. (6).
f max − f min < Tolerance (6)
B. Limitations and Improvements In the Reproduction
The reproduction stage is crucial as it determines the
ability of the CEP to produce the next population’s generation
[12] by using a strategy parameter as shown in Eq. (5). As the
iteration increases, the strategy parameter which controls the
step size gradually decreases as it approaches the global MPP.
When the environmental conditions change rapidly, as is the
case for the change from normal condition to partial shading
condition, there exists a large step change in solar irradiance
and a new global MPP is generated in the P–V curve. CEP
will not react fast enough and will likely retain its tracking
direction towards the local MPP instead of the new global
MPP [2] which results in high power losses. To address this
drawback, CEP needs to be re-initialized when a substantial
change in irradiance such as partial shading occurs. Due to
the almost linear relationship between the solar irradiance and
the PV output power, the occurrence of partial shading can be
detected based on normalization of power as described by Eq.
(7) and Eq. (8).
ΔP = Pnew − Pold (7)
ΔP / Pnew > Threshold1 (8)
Based on Eq. (7) and Eq. (8), variables ΔP > 0 and ΔP < 0
indicate increasing and decreasing in irradiance respectively.
The condition of |ΔP|/Pnew > Threshold1 indicates the
occurrence of partial shading. When partial shading is
detected, the CEP method must restart the process of finding
a new global MPP. In CEP, the step size (ΔX) will reduce to
a very small value as generations increase towards global
MPP. Without re-initialization, the CEP will not react to
small changes in operating point which can happen via small
changes in irradiance or changes in the parameter values of
the converter’s components due to heating. Re-initialization
of the CEP for each small changes in an operating point is not
a practical approach since such measure will cause high
power loss. To solve this problem, the following
improvement is proposed in this work.
The measurement of two consecutive power samples and
the irradiance changes are detected using Eq. (7). Once the
MPPT method has converged to the new global MPP as
determined by Eq. (6), the number of population (NP)
operating in CEP is set to 1 and the process of MPPT is
governed by Eq. (9) and Eq. (10).
Offspring = Parent + ΔX ⋅ φ (9)
+1 if Pnew > Pold
 method as shown in Fig. 3. The PV array simulator in
φ = −1 if Pnew < Pold (10)
 0 if
 Pnew = Pold
Variable ΔX in Eq. (9) is the perturbation step size and φ is
the direction of the perturbation. The initial Parent for the
MPPT is set to be equal to the best candidate in the previous
149
population which represents the actual global MPP. The
Parent that is referred here is the duty cycle D of the converter
switch. By using Eq. (9) and Eq. (10), a Parent will be
perturbed to produce an Offspring only if there is a small
change in the operating point. Otherwise, the Offspring will
have the same value as the Parent. Therefore, the loss of
power due to the steady state oscillations around the MPP can
be minimized. Also, the wrong direction of perturbation as
encountered in the conventional MPPT methods can be
avoided. In this case, ΔX is calculated from the fact that the
normalized change in power is equivalent to the normalized
change in irradiance [23]. Also, ΔX is different for conditions
where solar irradiance gradually changes as is the case for the
EN 50530 standard. The value of ΔX is calculated based on
Eq. (11).
0.02 × X max − X min if ΔP / Pnew < Threshold 2
ΔX =  (11)
 M ×  ΔP / Pnew  if ΔP / Pnew > Threshold 2
As the tracking progresses, the amount of normalized
power change (|ΔP|/Pnew) is measured and compared with a
threshold value Threshold2. For conditions where |ΔP|/Pnew <
Threshold2, it is inferred that the gradual change in solar
irradiance is not sufficiently large. Therefore, ΔX is set to a
very low value (2% of the search space size) which is
effective enough to cater for the slow change of irradiance.
On the other hand, if |ΔP|/Pnew > Threshold2, gradual changes
in solar irradiance is said to have occurred. Accordingly, ΔX
is calculated based on the scaled normalization of power,
where M is the controllable constant which serves to fine-tune
the step size towards optimum value, XMPP. In the EN 50530,
the gradient of the ramp of G is fixed for a given sequence
(e.g. gradient is held constant at 10W/m2/s for the B1
sequence). Ideally, ΔX should increase or decrease linearly
with the rate of change of irradiance (ΔG). However, there
are conditions where ΔX might forge ahead or lag behind of
ΔG. Therefore, ΔX should be decreased if it is forging ahead
of ΔG and should be increased if it lags behind ΔG. To do so,
the trending value of the normalized change in power
|ΔP|/Pnew needs to be recorded for two consecutive samples
as described by Eq. (12)-(14).
Trend = ΔP / Pnew (12)
ΔTrend = Trend new − Trendold (13)
ΔTrend > Threshold 3 (14)
The condition where |ΔTrend|> Threshold3 indicates that ΔX
is lagging behind of ΔG. If this condition is fulfilled, the value
of M in Eq. (11) will be raised to push the operating point
closer to XMPP. The overall process of the proposed method is
shown in Fig. 2.
C. Simulation and Experimental Set-Up
A MATLAB/Simulink simulation platform is employed to
carry out the improved evolutionary programming (IEP)
reference [24] that is based on the two-diode model is
employed in the present study. In the present study, five PV
modules with solar irradiance of 1000W/m2 are connected in
series to produce approximately 299.3W of nominal
maximum PV output power. The PV module under study is
the MSX-60 where the specifications of the PV module at
standard test conditions (STC) are summarized in Table II.
Fig. 2. The proposed Improved Evolutionary Programming Method
Fig. 3. Schematic of the Matlab simulation platform
TABLE II. THE SPECIFICATIONS OF PV MODULE (MSX60) AT STC
Parameters
Maximum Power (Pmax)
Voltage at Pmax (Vmpp)
Current at Pmax (Impp)
Open circuit voltage (Voc)
Short circuit current (Isc)
Temperature coefficient of Voc
Temperature coefficient of Isc
Temperature coefficient of power
NOCT
Operating temperature
The values of G and T are fed into the simulator and the
output current of the PV is delivered to a DC-DC boost
converter. The said converter is selected in the present study
for its stability and efficiency over other types of converters
[25]. The optimum values of the circuit parameters follow
those discussed in reference [26] where the switching
frequency f, inductance L, and load resistance R for a sampling
time of 100 ms are 20 kHz, 1 mH, and 200 Ω respectively.
The capacitance value for Cin and Cout is fixed at 47 μF [26].
In the present study, the real PV array simulator (PVAS) [27]
is used to simulate the EN50350 irradiance sequence. The
hardware setup that is used for the simulation works in the
present study is shown in Fig. 4. The PVAS in Fig. 4 provides
a real-time simulation capability of any time series of
irradiance (G), temperature (T), fill factor (FF) and any
arbitrary P–V curves measured in real testing conditions [5].
Also, the PVAS consists of an integrated RAM which holds
the P–V curves and a microprocessor unit that provides
complete measurement, monitoring, and communication
capabilities. The dynamic MPPT efficiency measurement is
based on Eq. (1) and is depicted in Fig. 5(b), 5(d), 5(f), 5(h),
5(j), and 5(l). The proposed MPPT method is implemented in
the dSPACE 1104 platform using a TMS320F240 digital
signal processor. At the converter side, voltage and current are
measured by sensors and recorded by PVAS via oscilloscope
and data logger.
Fig. 4. The hardware setup.
IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
In the present study, only three ramp profiles of B
sequence (B1, B4 & B6) are considered for the calculation of
the dynamic MPPT efficiencies which is done based on Eq.
(1). Furthermore, the same ramp profile is not repeated as in
the original EN 50530 standard because the MPPT method
responds identically. Despite these exclusions, the validity of
the calculated MPPT efficiency is not affected. A comparison
Values on the tracking performance of the B1, B4, and B6 sequences
60 W between the CEP and the IEP approach is shown in Fig. 5. The
17.1 V respective MPPT efficiencies for the B1, B4, and B6
3.5 A
sequences are tabulated in Table III. Based on Table III, it can
21.1 V
3.8 A be inferred that at low gradient (10 W/m2/s), the tracking of
-(80±10) mV/0C conventional EP diverged from the MPP tracking locus which
-(0.065±0.015) %/0C results in a MPPT efficiency of 70.46%. This can be attributed
-(0.5±0.05) %V/0C to the fact that conventional EP method is not able to react fast
47±2 0C enough to new irradiance changes after convergence is
25 0C reached at the previous cycle.
150
 EN 50530
Results for Conventional EP Results for Improved EP
Pattern

(a) (g)
(Low Gradient= 10 W/m2/s)
B1

(b) (h)
(Medium Gradient= 30 W/m2/s)

(c) (i)
B4

(d) (j)
(High Gradient= 100 W/m2/s)

(e) (k)
B6

(f) (l)

Fig. 5. The tracking performance of the conventional EP and improved EP for B1, B4, and B6 sequences provided by oscilloscope readings (subfigures (a),
(c), (e), (g), (i), and (k)) and PVAS (subfigures (b), (d), (f), (h), (j), and (l)).

151
 At steeper gradients, the loss of MPP tracking direction is
more prominent which, in turn, decreases the MPPT
efficiency. This can be observed from the MPPT efficiency of
the conventional EP for the B4 sequence (30 W/m2/s) which
drops from 60.30% to 58.73% as the gradient is increased to
100 W/m2/s for the B6 sequence. In contrast, the improved EP
tracks all ramps with higher precision which results in
99.64%, 98.73%, and 98.64% of MPPT efficiency for the B1,
B4, and B6 sequences respectively. The MPPT efficiency is
improved by approximately 30% at lower irradiance
conditions whereas nearly 40% improvement in efficiency is
obtained at higher irradiation gradients when the IEP method
is employed.
TABLE III. PERFORMANCE OF CONVENTIONAL EP AND THE PROPOSED
IMPROVED EP METHOD
EN 50530 Pattern MPPT Efficiency
MPPT Method
(Medium-High) (ηMPPT %)
B1 Conventional EP 70.46%
(Gradient= 10 W/m2/s) Improved EP 99.64%
Conventional EP 60.30%
B4
(Gradient = 30 W/m2/s) Improved EP 98.73%
B6 Conventional EP 58.73%
(Gradient = 100 W/m2/s) Improved EP 98.64%
V. CONCLUSION
In the present study, an improved EP (IEP) method is
developed to improve the tracking efficiency of the dynamic
MPPT. The performance of the IEP is compared to the
conventional EP via a dynamic efficiency test that complies
with the EN 50530 standard. The proposed IEP is able to
minimize power loss due to inaccurate tracking direction. The
success of the IEP is attributed to its ability to detect changes
in irradiance and its capability of controlling the step size
dynamically which prevents the final solution from diverging
from the MPP. For all cases under study, the IEP shows
significant improvement in terms of tracking efficiency
compared to the conventional EP. Results show that the
efficiency is enhanced by approximately 30% under low
irradiation gradient and about 40% for medium and high
irradiation gradient.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research is supported and funded by Faculty of Electrical
Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Shah
Alam.
REFERENCES
[1] B. K. Bose, "Global warming: Energy, environmental pollution, and
the impact of power electronics," IEEE Industrial Electronics
Magazine, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 6-17, 2010.
[2] K. Ishaque, Z. Salam, M. Amjad, and S. Mekhilef, "An improved
particle swarm optimization (PSO)–based MPPT for PV with reduced
steady-state oscillation," IEEE transactions on Power Electronics,
vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 3627-3638, 2012.
[3] L. L. Jiang, D. Nayanasiri, D. L. Maskell, and D. Vilathgamuwa, "A
hybrid maximum power point tracking for partially shaded
photovoltaic systems in the tropics," Renewable energy, vol. 76, pp.
53-65, 2015.
[4] N. Femia, G. Petrone, G. Spagnuolo, and M. Vitelli, "Optimization of
perturb and observe maximum power point tracking method," IEEE
transactions on power electronics, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 963-973, 2005.
[5] K. Ishaque, Z. Salam, and G. Lauss, "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.
152
[6] W. Xiao and W. G. Dunford, "A modified adaptive hill climbing
MPPT method for photovoltaic power systems," in 2004 IEEE 35th
annual power electronics specialists conference (IEEE Cat. No.
04CH37551), 2004, vol. 3, pp. 1957-1963: Ieee.
[7] Q. Mei, M. Shan, L. Liu, and J. M. Guerrero, "A novel improved
variable step-size incremental-resistance MPPT method for PV
systems," IEEE transactions on industrial electronics, vol. 58, no. 6,
pp. 2427-2434, 2010.
[8] J. Ahmed and Z. Salam, "An accurate method for MPPT to detect the
partial shading occurrence in a PV system," IEEE transactions on
industrial informatics, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 2151-2161, 2017.
[9] H. Patel and V. Agarwal, "Maximum power point tracking scheme for
PV systems operating under partially shaded conditions," IEEE
transactions on industrial electronics, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 1689-1698,
2008.
[10] J. Ahmed and Z. Salam, "A critical evaluation on maximum power
point tracking methods for partial shading in PV systems," Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 47, pp. 933-953, 2015.
[11] F. Belhachat and C. Larbes, "Comprehensive review on global
maximum power point tracking techniques for PV systems subjected
to partial shading conditions," Solar Energy, vol. 183, pp. 476-500,
2019.
[12] N. Hashim and Z. Salam, "Critical evaluation of soft computing
methods for maximum power point tracking algorithms of
photovoltaic systems," International Journal of Power Electronics
and Drive Systems, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 548, 2019.
[13] K. Ishaque and Z. Salam, "A review of maximum power point
tracking techniques of PV system for uniform insolation and partial
shading condition," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol.
19, pp. 475-488, 2013.
[14] J. P. Ram, T. S. Babu, and N. Rajasekar, "A comprehensive review on
solar PV maximum power point tracking techniques," Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 67, pp. 826-847, 2017.
[15] Z. Salam, J. Ahmed, and B. S. Merugu, "The application of soft
computing methods for MPPT of PV system: A technological and
status review," Applied Energy, vol. 107, pp. 135-148, 2013.
[16] A. M. Eltamaly and H. M. Farh, "Dynamic global maximum power
point tracking of the PV systems under variant partial shading using
hybrid GWO-FLC," Solar Energy, vol. 177, pp. 306-316, 2019.
[17] N. Kumar, I. Hussain, B. Singh, and B. K. Panigrahi, "MPPT in
dynamic condition of partially shaded PV system by using WODE
technique," IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 8, no. 3,
pp. 1204-1214, 2017.
[18] M. B. Smida and A. Sakly, "Genetic based algorithm for maximum
power point tracking (MPPT) for grid connected PV systems
operating under partial shaded conditions," in 2015 7th International
Conference on Modelling, Identification and Control (ICMIC), 2015,
pp. 1-6: IEEE.
[19] N. Hashim, Z. Salam, and S. Ayob, "Maximum power point tracking
for stand-alone photovoltaic system using evolutionary
programming," in 2014 IEEE 8th International Power Engineering
and Optimization Conference (PEOCO2014), 2014, pp. 7-12: IEEE.
[20] C. Yen, "Overall Efficiency of Grid Connected Photovoltaic
Inverters," European Standard EN, vol. 50530, 2010.
[21] A. P. Engelbrecht, Computational intelligence: an introduction. John
Wiley & Sons, 2007.
[22] L. L. Lai and J. Ma, "Application of evolutionary programming to
reactive power planning-comparison with nonlinear programming
approach," IEEE Transactions on power systems, vol. 12, no. 1, pp.
198-206, 1997.
[23] J. Ahmed and Z. Salam, "A modified P&O maximum power point
tracking method with reduced steady-state oscillation and improved
tracking efficiency," IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol.
7, no. 4, pp. 1506-1515, 2016.
[24] K. Ishaque and Z. Salam, "A comprehensive MATLAB Simulink PV
system simulator with partial shading capability based on two-diode
model," Solar energy, vol. 85, no. 9, pp. 2217-2227, 2011.
[25] B. Hasaneen and A. A. E. Mohammed, "Design and simulation of
DC/DC boost converter," in 2008 12th International Middle-East
Power System Conference, 2008, pp. 335-340: IEEE.
[26] N. Hashim, Z. Salam, D. Johari, and N. F. N. Ismail, "DC-DC Boost
Converter Design for Fast and Accurate MPPT Algorithms in Stand-
Alone Photovoltaic System," International Journal of Power
Electronics and Drive Systems, vol. 9, no. 3, p. 1038, 2018.
[27] "User’s Manual, Programmable Photovoltaic Array Simulator PVAS1,"
Arsenal Research, AIT Austrian Institute of Technology, 2017.