Fractional-Order PID Controller Optimized by SCA for Solar System

  • Raj Kumar Sahu
  • Binod Shaw
  • Jyoti Ranjan Nayak
Conference paper


In this paper, the maximum power point tracking (MPPT) technique is enhanced by implementing fractional-order proportional-integral derivative (FOPID) to improve the output of DC-DC boost converter of solar system and justified by competing alongside perturb and observe (P&O) and PID-based MPPT technique. The gain variables of FOPID and PID controller highly influenced the performance of the system. Sine Cosine Algorithm (SCA) is a novel technique to explore the best couple of gain factors of both PID and FOPID controllers to provide appropriate gate pulse to converter to improve performance of the output response. In this paper, the performance of the photo-voltaic (PV) system is enhanced by conceding the oscillation, time response, settling time and maximum values of voltage, current and power of the system by adopting FOPID controller.


Perturb and observe (P&O) Proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controller Fractional-order PID (FOPID) Sine Cosine Algorithm (SCA) 



Fractional-order PID


Maximum power point tracking

P &O

Perturb and observe






Sine Cosine Algorithm


  1. 1.
    Esram T, Chapman PL (2007) Comparison of photovoltaic array maximum power point tracking techniques. IEEE Trans Energy Convers 22(2):439–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Al-Diab A, Sourkounis C (2010) Variable step size P&O MPPT algorithm for PV systems. Proc Int Conf Optim Electr Electron Equip OPTIM:1097–1102Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ishaque K, Salam Z (2013) A review of maximum power point tracking techniques of PV system for uniform insolation and partial shading condition. Renew Sust Energ Rev 19:475–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ahmed J, Salam Z (2014) A maximum power point tracking (MPPT) for PV system using Cuckoo Search with partial shading capability. Appl Energy 119:118–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kamarzaman NA, Tan CW (2014) A comprehensive review of maximum power point tracking algorithms for photovoltaic systems. Renew Sust Energ Rev 37:585–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reza A, Hassan M, Jamasb S (2013) Classification and comparison of maximum power point tracking techniques for photovoltaic system: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 19:433–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Femia N, Petrone G, Spagnuolo G, Vitelli M (2005) Optimization of perturb and observe maximum power point tracking method. IEEE Trans Power Electron 20(4):963–973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hoffmann S, Koehl M (2013) Investigation on the impact of macro- and micro-climate on the potential induced degradation, pp 1822–1825Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cheng PC, Peng BR, Liu Y-H, Cheng YS, Huang JW (2015) Optimization of a fuzzy-logic-control-based MPPT algorithm using the particle swarm optimization technique. Energies 8(6):5338–5360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nagarajan R, Yuvaraj R, Hemalatha V, Logapriya S, Mekala A, Priyanga S (2017) Implementation of PV – based boost converter using PI controller with PSO algorithm. Int J Eng Comput Sci 6(3):20479–20484Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Neçaibia A, Ladaci S, Charef A, Loiseau JJ (2015) Fractional order extremum seeking approach for maximum power point tracking of photovoltaic panels. Front Energy 9(1):43–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mirjalili S (2016) SCA: a sine cosine algorithm for solving optimization problems. Knowl-Based Syst 96:120–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raj Kumar Sahu
    • 1
  • Binod Shaw
    • 1
  • Jyoti Ranjan Nayak
    • 1
  1. 1.National Institute of TechnologyRaipurIndia

Personalised recommendations