E3S Web of Conferences 538, 01003 (2024) [Link]
1051/e3sconf/202453801003
IPFA 2024
Creating algorithms to optimize power output in
weather station solar panels
D
Azizjon Xayitov1,*, Muslimjon Sobirov1, Nurmakhamad Juraev2, Mukhammadmullo
Asraev2, Munira Sadikova2, and Dilnoza Abdurasulova2
1 Fergana Polytechnic Institute, 150100 Fergana, Uzbekistan
TE
2 Ferghana Branch of the Tashkent University of Information Technologies named after Muhammad
al-Khorazmi, 150107 Ferghana, Uzbekistan
Abstract: This research is dedicated to strategies aimed at augmenting the
energy efficiency of photovoltaic modules. It extensively examines a range
of algorithms designed to identify maximum power points, evaluating their
application to achieve peak efficiency in solar panel utilization. The
AC
operational principles of these algorithms are thoroughly elucidated,
providing a comprehensive understanding of their functionalities.
Furthermore, the study meticulously outlines the merits and drawbacks
associated with each algorithm, offering a nuanced perspective on their
performance. The comparison of these algorithms is conducted based on
critical parameters, allowing for an in-depth assessment of their
effectiveness. This thorough analysis facilitates the identification of the most
suitable algorithm for implementation in the specific context of weather
stations. By scrutinizing key aspects such as reliability, adaptability, and
R
overall performance, the research aims to guide the selection of an algorithm
that aligns with the unique requirements and challenges posed by weather
station environments. The significance of this research extends beyond
theoretical considerations, as it directly informs the practical application of
algorithms in real-world scenarios. The ultimate goal is to enhance the
ET
overall performance and energy efficiency of photovoltaic systems,
particularly in the challenging conditions encountered at weather stations.
By choosing the most suitable algorithm, the research aims to contribute to
the optimization of energy harvesting and utilization, ensuring that weather
stations can rely on a consistent and efficient power source.
R
1 Introduction
Russia's energy system is notably centralized, with major power plants producing a
substantial portion of the country's electricity. Consumers are primarily located in densely
populated European and partly Siberian regions, leaving around 60% of the territories
without comprehensive energy network coverage[1]. These areas, inhabited by
approximately 10 million people, are characterized by extremely low population density
across vast and underdeveloped territories. Despite having a well-established energy system,
numerous small and remote settlements remain underserved. This includes not only
Ύ
Corresponding author: 3293535ahror@[Link]
© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License 4.0 ([Link]
E3S Web of Conferences 538, 01003 (2024) [Link]
IPFA 2024
residential areas but also small farms, hotels, and weather stations. Often isolated from
centralized energy sources, these locations heavily rely on diesel generators for electricity,
with fuel transported from central Russia. However, due to weak transportation links to
industrialized regions, the transportation costs significantly impact the resource's overall cost.
Consequently, the electricity prices in these areas can soar to hundreds of rubles per kilowatt-
hour.
The unique challenge arises from the combination of sparse population distribution,
limited industrial development, and inadequate connectivity to centralized energy
infrastructure. The result is a reliance on decentralized energy solutions, mainly diesel
generators, which offer autonomy but come at a higher operational cost. The logistical
D
hurdles, primarily transportation constraints, amplify the expense of importing diesel fuel to
these remote locales.
Moreover, the energy needs of these areas extend beyond residential settlements to
encompass diverse entities such as small farms, hotels, and weather stations. These
TE
establishments, operating in isolation from centralized power grids, navigate the intricate task
of ensuring a reliable and self-sufficient energy supply. The prevalent use of diesel generators
underscores the pragmatic approach to fulfilling these energy requirements, yet the associated
costs present economic challenges.
Promoting renewable energy is a crucial goal, offering economic viability and positive
environmental and social impacts.
To optimize power extraction from solar energy, prevalent devices employ Maximum
AC
Power Point Tracking (MPPT). These devices are essential because the irradiance parameter
of photovoltaic modules fluctuates with sun position, weather, and ambient temperature.
MPPT ensures efficient adjustment to varying conditions, maximizing energy capture from
solar sources.
2 Methods and Algorithms
The perturb and observe (P&O) method involves incrementally altering the input resistance
R
of the converter, inducing voltage changes in the solar battery. If power increases, the method
persists in adjusting the parameter until power growth ceases. While widely used due to its
simplicity, P&O has drawbacks. It struggles to precisely identify the maximum power point
(MPP), leading to operating point fluctuations around the MPP, reduced efficiency under low
ET
irradiance, and inaccuracies during sudden irradiance level shifts. Despite its simplicity, the
method's limitations necessitate consideration of alternative approaches for optimizing power
extraction from solar sources[2].
The adaptive Perturb and Observe (P&O) method distinguishes itself by adjusting the
step size for parameter changes during Maximum Power Point (MPP) identification based on
the previous power change. If the power increased more in the prior step than in the current
one, the increment step decreases. This adaptive feature enhances the method's efficiency,
enabling a swift and precise determination of the MPP for optimized solar energy
R
extraction[3].
2
E3S Web of Conferences 538, 01003 (2024) [Link]
IPFA 2024
D
TE
AC
Fig. 1. The flowchart of the P&O Algorithm.
In the incremental conductancemethod (ICM), the voltage and power increment values
are measured using a converter. Based on these data, the effect of voltage changes is
predicted. The complexity of the calculation increases, but also increases the speed of
tracking changes in environmental conditions. This method uses increasing conductivity to
calculate the sign of the voltage change with respect to power (ΔV/ΔP). If the increment
ΔV/ΔP is positive, then the voltage will increase. If negative, then, accordingly, decrease.
R
Therefore, the displacement of the point will occur depending on the sign of the increment.
When the condition ΔV/ΔP = 0 is fulfilled, this means that the output voltage of the solar
panel corresponds to the maximum power value [4]. Further, the values are maintained until
the level of irradiance changes.
ET
Similar to the P&O method, a notable drawback of this approach lies in its susceptibility
to errors during rapid irradiance level shifts. Both methods excel at identifying the maximum
power point (MPP) under stable light conditions. However, on inclined surfaces, where
irradiance fluctuates, the algorithms, relying on tangents, constantly vary with irradiance
changes. Consequently, alterations in both current and voltage transpire not solely due to
voltage disruptions, rendering the algorithms incapable of pinpointing the precise cause of
power fluctuations[5].
R
An additional drawback is the fluctuation of power around the maximum power point
(MPP) in a stable mode. This occurs because discrete control causes current and voltage to
vary around, rather than consistently at, the MPP.
3 Results and Discussions
As previously noted, each algorithm comes with distinct merits and drawbacks. Hence, the
selection of an algorithm should not solely prioritize efficiency but also account for the cost,
implementation complexity, and operational intricacies. A comprehensive evaluation of these
factors is essential for identifying the most suitable algorithm tailored to the specific
3
E3S Web of Conferences 538, 01003 (2024) [Link]
IPFA 2024
requirements of a given situation. This approach ensures a balanced decision-making process
that goes beyond mere efficiency considerations, incorporating the practical aspects of cost-
effectiveness and operational ease into the algorithmic selection.
Fractional open circuit voltage(FOCV) uses the fact that the ratio between the voltage of
the maximum power point and the open circuit voltage of the solar battery is approximately
linear.
VMPP k1VOC ,
where VMPP –is the voltage corresponding to the maximum power point;
VOC , –open circuit voltage;
D
k1 – is a constant depending on the characteristics of the photocells, and must be
determined initially
To do this, we need to compare the values of VMPP and VOC at different levels of
TE
irradiance and temperature. In general, the value of this constant is in the range from 0.71 to
[Link] the constant value is determined, the MPP voltage values can be determined by
measuring the open circuit voltage of the battery. In this case, it is required to momentarily
turn off the power converter, which leads to power loss. The disadvantage is the fact that this
algorithm is not able to track a constant change in lighting, since the voltage measurement
process is not continuous. Another drawback is that the MPP selected by this method is not
valid, since the constant value is approximate. [7-12]
AC
This algorithm is suitable for use in certain situations. It is cheap, simple. It does not
require a microcontroller (only one voltage sensor is used).
Table 1. Algorithm comparison.
Complexity of Complexity of
Type Price Efficiency
implementation operation
P&O Simple Simple Medium 90.2%
IC Medium Simple Medium 93.1%
R
FOCV Simple Simple Cheap 92.9%
Fuzzy logic
Complex Medium Expensive 99%
control
Neural
Complex Complex Expensive 99%
networks
ET
4 Conclusions
Among the algorithms explored, the most suitable choice for the weather station emerges as
the fuzzy logic algorithm. This preference is rooted in its commendable efficiency, combined
with a considerably simpler operational framework in comparison to algorithms relying on
neural networks, all within a similar cost range. The decision acknowledges that
R
implementing the fuzzy logic algorithm poses a degree of difficulty. However, the
assumption is made that the implementation will be entrusted to a qualified engineer, thus
addressing potential challenges associated with this process.
The pivotal factor contributing to the selection of the fuzzy logic algorithm lies in its
superior efficiency. Fuzzy logic provides a robust and effective approach to handling the
complexities inherent in weather-related data analysis. Its ability to accommodate imprecise
and uncertain information aligns well with the inherently variable and unpredictable nature
of meteorological data. This adaptability contributes to its high efficiency in discerning
patterns and making accurate predictions, a crucial aspect for the weather station's
functionality. [13-20]
4
E3S Web of Conferences 538, 01003 (2024) [Link]
IPFA 2024
Moreover, the operational simplicity of the fuzzy logic algorithm distinguishes it from
alternatives, particularly those grounded in neural networks. While neural network
algorithms may offer advanced capabilities, their intricate operational requirements can pose
challenges, both in terms of implementation and ongoing use. Fuzzy logic, on the other hand,
strikes a balance by providing advanced functionality without the same level of operational
complexity.
It is recognized that implementing the chosen algorithm, in this case, fuzzy logic,
demands a certain level of expertise. However, the optimistic assumption is that a qualified
engineer will oversee the implementation process. This assumption is significant, as it implies
that potential challenges associated with the algorithm's implementation will be mitigated
D
through the expertise and skills of the designated professional.
In conclusion, the fuzzy logic algorithm stands out as the optimal choice for the weather
station, offering a harmonious blend of high efficiency, operational simplicity, and cost-
effectiveness. The assumption of a qualified engineer's involvement in the implementation
TE
underscores a strategic approach to overcome potential difficulties, ensuring the successful
integration of the chosen algorithm into the weather station's operations[6].
References
1. Puchenkin АВ (2011) Maximum power point regulator for solar panels The state and
prospects of the development of electrical technology: a collection of scientific
AC
papers.(IGEU) 60-63
2. Nedumgatt J J, Jayakrishnan K B (2011) Perturb and observe MPPT algorithm for
solar PV systems-modeling and simulation
3. Nashwa A K, Ahmad T A (2020) PSO-Based Adaptive Perturb and Observe MPPT
Technique for Photovoltaic Systems
4. Fazilov, S.K., Mirzaev, N.N., Radjabov, S.S., Dadakhanov, M.K., Asraev, M.A.,
Shamsiev, F.M. (2019). Compusoft, 8(12), 3514-3524.
R
5. VV Byts', RM Zulunov. Journal of Mathematical Sciences. 71, 2719–2726 (1994).
6. Dontsov O A (2015) A fuzzy logic solar controller with maximum power point
tracking.
7. Madaliev, M., Usmonov, M., Kadyrov, K., Abdullajonov, N., Mavlonova, D.,
ET
Otakhanova, Z., Muminov, K. (2024) E3S Web of Conferences 508, 06005
8. Madaliev, M., Usmonov, M., Otajonov, J., Bilolov, I., Otakhanova, Z., Rajabova, K.,
Israilov, S. (2024) E3S Web of Conferences 508, 06003
9. Madaliev, M., Abdulkhaev, Z., Kurpayanidi, K., Abdullayev, A., Ilyosov, A. (2024)
E3S Web of Conferences 508, 06007
10. Abdukarimov, B., Orzimatov, J., Usmonov, M., Mullayev, I., Raxmonkulova, S.,
R
Qosimov, A., Sirojiddinov, D. (2024). E3S Web of Conferences 508, 02002
11. Salomov, U., Madaliyev, M., Kuchkarov, A. (2024). BIO Web of Conferences 84,
02024
12. Salomov, U. R., Chiavazzo, E., Asinari, P. (2014). Computers & Mathematics with
Applications, 67(2), 393-411.
13. Salomov, U. R., Chiavazzo, E., Fasano, M., Asinari, P. (2017). International Journal of
Hydrogen Energy, 42(43), 26730-26743.
14. Salomov, U., Abduraxmonov, S., Urishev, O., Juraev, N. (2024). BIO Web of
Conferences 84, 05028
5
E3S Web of Conferences 538, 01003 (2024) [Link]
IPFA 2024
15. Lesnikova, E.P., Jakhongirov, I.J.O., Sadykova, K.V., Zakharova, T.I., Santalova, M.S.
(2021). Management of innovative working behavior. In Modern Global Economic
System: Evolutional Development vs. Revolutionary Leap 11 (pp. 1008-1016).
Springer International Publishing.
16. Obrenovic, B., Gu, X., Wang, G., Godinic, D., Jakhongirov, I. (2024). Generative AI
and human–robot interaction: implications and future agenda for business, society and
ethics. AI & SOCIETY, 1-14.
17. Xudaykulov, S., Madaliev, M., Muminov, O. (2023). E3S Web of Conferences 452,
02011
D
18. Ibrokhimov, A., Orzimatov, J., Usmonov, M., Otakulov, B., Mirzababayeva, S. (2024).
In BIO Web of Conferences 84, 02026
19. Abdulkhaev, Z., Abdujalilova, S., Usmonov, M., Askarov, K., Nazirova, R. (2024).
BIO Web of Conferences 84, 05040)
TE
20. Madaliev, M., Abdulkhaev, Z., Otajonov, J., Kadyrov, K., Bilolov, I., Israilov, S.,
Abdullajonov, N. (2024). E3S Web of Conferences 508, 05007
AC
R
ET
R
