TELKOMNIKA Telecommunication, Computing, Electronics and Control

Vol. 18, No. 2, April 2020, pp. 1113~1121

ISSN: 1693-6930, accredited First Grade by Kemenristekdikti, Decree No: 21/E/KPT/2018
DOI: 10.12928/TELKOMNIKA.v18i2.14845 1113

MPPT control of PV array

based on PSO and adaptive controller

Totok Winarno1, Lucky Nindya Palupi2, Agus Pracoyo3, Lunde Ardhenta4

1,2,3
Department of Electrical Engineering, State Polytechnic of Malang, Indonesia
4
Department of Electrical Engineering, Brawijaya University, Indonesia

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: In general, Photovoltaic (PV) array is not able to generate maximum power
automatically, because some partial shading caused by trees, clouds,
Received Aug 15, 2019 or buildings. Irradiation imperfections received by the PV array are
Revised Jan 11, 2020 overcome by applying maximum power point tracking (MPPT) to the output
Accepted Feb 21, 2020 of the PV array. In order to overcome these partial shading problems, this
system is employing particle swarm optimization (PSO) as MPPT method.
Keywords: It optimizes the output power of the solar PV array by Zeta converter. Output
voltage of MPPT has high rate such that it needs stepdown device to regulate
Adaptive PID certain voltage. Constant voltage will be the input voltage of buck converter
Buck converter and controlled using adaptive PID. Adaptive control based on model
MPPT reference adaptive control (MRAC) has design that almost same as
PSO the conventional PID structure and it has better performance in several
conditions. The proposed system is expected to have stable output and able to
perfectly emulate the response of the reference model. From the simulation
results, it appears that PSO have high tracking accuracy and high tracking
speed to reach maximum power of PV array. In the output voltage regulation,
adaptive control does not have a stable error status and consistently follows
the set point value.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Totok Winarno,
Department of Electrical Engineering,
State Polytechnic of Malang,
Soekarno Hatta St. 9 Malang 65144, Indonesia.
Email: [email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION
The utilization of electricity represents economic and social development in every country. Energy
resources, environmental pollution, global warming, and energy inefficiency are big issues in dany countries.
Most of researchers around the world are studying renewable resources, such as PV [1-3]. PV generally
cannot work directly at its maximum power, because the PV operating voltage mostly follow the battery
voltage connected to the PV. Therefore, the application of maximum power point tracking (MPPT) must be
used to regulate PV module in order to achieve Maximum Power Point (MPP) [4-6]. Commonly problem in
PV that are connected in an array is the different level of irradiation. Some of them may be covered in
shadows caused by trees, clouds, or other objects. The power generated from each PV module becomes
nonuniform, such that the total output power will be less than maximum power and it causes multi-peak on
the PV characteristic curve [7-11].

Journal homepage: http://journal.uad.ac.id/index.php/TELKOMNIKA

1114 ISSN: 1693-6930

Many researchers have developed various MPPT methods to track MPP and overcome problems
caused by partial shadows. Several methods [12-15] have reached an optimal solution such as fuzzy logic,
neural network, firefly algorithm, and other metaheuristic algorithm. An examination concept of
metaheuristic is employed as an optimization problem without defining a definite objective function. Particle
Swarm Optimization (PSO) can obtain global peaks by utilizing randomization to avoid trapping algorithms
at local peak [16-18].
In order to regulate constant voltages, the robust controller is needed [19-21]. The maximum power
value obtained by MPPT is not able to be set as output value of the system because the output voltage is
extremely unstable. The other DC converter is used to keep and maintain the output voltage according to
the reference value. DC-DC converters are a real form of DC voltage regulators for step up, step down, or
both. System dynamics are needed to design controllers that are able to achieve the desired value. PID
control is widely applied in the industrial world with a variety of adjustment techniques [22, 23]. One of
the adaptive techniques is that Model Reference Adaptive Control (MRAC) has succeeded in increasing
the system response rather than the fixed parameter PID controller [24, 25] by providing a reference model
followed by the system response. MIT rules are used in this study to determine adaptive PID parameters [26].
Therefore, the main objective of this research is to emphasize how to design an MPPT system that has
a constant output voltage.

2. RESEARCH METHOD
This research is using metaheuristic algorithms for MPPT to generate maximum power in PV arrays
under partial shadow conditions. PSO as MPPT method and adaptive control based on MRAC are the theory
used to compose this research.

2.1. PV array model

PV cells are defined as technologies that produce DC power supplies with light effect. As long as
the semiconductor material acquires sunlight, the PV cell will always generate electricity and the PV cell will
stop producing electricity when there is no received sunlight. Exponential equations for modeling
photovoltaic cells are derived from the physical laws for pn junction and are generally accepted as
representations of PV cell characteristics indicated by (1).
𝑞(𝑉+𝐼𝑅𝑆 ) (𝑉+𝐼𝑅𝑆 )
𝐼 = 𝐼𝑝ℎ − 𝐼𝑠 (𝑒𝑥𝑝 − 1) − ( ) (1)
𝑁𝐾𝑇 𝑅𝑠ℎ

where 𝐼𝑝ℎ is the current generated by the diode, 𝐼𝑠 is the reverse saturation current of the diode, 𝑞 is
the electron charge with the value of 1.602 × 1019 Coulombs, 𝑇 is the cell temperature in Kelvin, 𝑁 is
the dimensionless diode ideality factor as measure of how closely the diode follows the ideal diode (1) and 𝑘
is the Boltzmann constant with the value of 38 × 10−23 𝐽/𝐾. PV equivalent circuits can be specified as given
in Figure 1.
The output of PV modules is strongly influenced by environmental conditions, namely solar
radiation and cell temperature. As shown in (2) shows the current equation generated by photons, 𝐼𝑝ℎ .

𝜆
𝐼𝑝ℎ = [𝐼𝑆𝐶 + 𝑘1 (𝑇 − 298)] 100 (2)

where 𝐼𝑆𝐶 is the cell short-circuit current at 25°C, 𝐾𝐼 is coefficient of short circuit current temperature, and 𝜆
is the solar radiation in 𝑊/𝑚2. Temperature changes in PV modules can affect short circuit currents, 𝐼𝑠𝑐 , as
shown by (2) and saturation currents of diodes, 𝐼𝑠 , and as indicated by (3).

𝑇 3 𝑇 𝐸𝑔
𝐼𝑠 (𝑇) = 𝐼𝑠 [ ] 𝑒𝑥𝑝 ⌊( − 1) ⌋ (3)
𝑇𝑛𝑜𝑚 𝑇𝑛𝑜𝑚 𝑁𝑉𝑡

where 𝐼𝑆 is the reverse saturation current, 𝐸𝑔 is the band gap energy semiconductor in 𝑉, and 𝑉𝑡 is
the terminal voltage of solar cell in 25𝑜 . Low voltages generated PV cell is not enough to be used
commercially, therefore, photovoltaic cells are integrated and connected in a module to produce the least
voltage that can be used to charge 12 volt batteries [8]. The PV array is a series and/or parallel combination
of several PV modules. The I-V curve of the PV arrangement is a curve with a larger scale than the I-V curve
of a single module, as illustrated in Figure 2.

TELKOMNIKA Telecommun Comput El Control, Vol. 18, No. 2, April 2020: 1113 - 1121
TELKOMNIKA Telecommun Comput El Control 1115

Figure 1. Equivalent circuit of PV cell Figure 2. PV array curves that are formed from
a series-parallel arrangement of PV modules

2.2. MPPT-particle swarm optimization

The variable controlled by MPPT is the reference voltage generated by the DC converter, so the
particle position is 𝑉𝑟𝑒𝑓 and the best value is PV (𝑃) compared to that position. Some PSO variables that are
converted to PV systems can be seen in Table 1.

Table 1. PSO variables to PV systems

PSO PV Systems
Particle Position (𝑃𝑖 ) Reference voltage (𝑉𝑟𝑒𝑓 )
Particle speed (𝑉𝑖 ) The range of voltage increase when the particle moves
The best fitness value of particles The best power of particles (𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡,𝑖 )
The best position of particles (𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡,𝑖 ) The voltage that produces the best particle power (𝑉𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡,𝑖 )
The best global fitness value Global best power (𝑃𝐺𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 )
Global best position (𝐺𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 ) The voltage that produces the best global power (𝑉𝐺𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 )

The first step to start the PSO algorithm is to determine the value of the parameters used in the PSO
algorithm, namely the number of particles (𝑁), the weight of inertia (𝑊), cognition-only learning factor (𝐶1),
and social-only learning factor (𝐶2). The second step is to initialize the stress value and the initial velocity
of the particle. The initial particle voltage is arranged randomly in the search space where it is possible to fine
local peak. Particle velocity in this PV system is the range of voltage increases when the particle moves.
The velocity of each particle is given an initial value of zero, then the velocity will vary according to
the particle velocity equation for PSO (4) and (5).

( ) (
Vi j +1 = W  Vi j + C1  rand1  Pbest,i − Pi j + C2  rand 2  Gbest − Pi j ) (4)

Pi j +1 = Vi j +1 + Pi j (5)

The next step is to multiply the voltage (𝑉) and current (𝐼) of each particle in order to obtain
the power (𝑃). The recent power will be compared with the previous best power (𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 ) that has been saved
by the particle. If the particle power is higher than 𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 , then the value of 𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 will be replaced by the value
of 𝑃, as well as the voltage that produces 𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 will be replaced by 𝑉 particles. When the initial iteration
does, the particle does not have the 𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 saved previously, so the current particle power automatically
becomes the initial 𝑃𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑡 value of the particle. Then, the best value of the particles will be compared with
the best value of the group. If the best value of particles is higher, then the best value of the group will be
replaced by that value. But if there is no changed, the best value of the group will remain the same. This step
is carried out by 5 particles one by one alternately.
After getting the best particle values and the best group values, the voltage and velocity of each
particle are updated using the PSO equation. The convergence criteria is the difference between the best
power and the power of each particle is zero and less than 𝜀1 . In this condition, the algorithm stops at
the maximum point. However, if it is not met, then the algorithm will repeat the calculation of the power of
each particle to reach the maximum point.

MPPT control of PV array based on PSO and adaptive controller (Totok Winarno)
1116 ISSN: 1693-6930

2.3. Buck converter

The configuration of buck converter is shown in Figure 3. The desired output voltage is a step-down
voltage which is generated by the Pulse width modulation (PWM). PWM sets the ignition on the buck
converter switch based on the duty cycle value. In this study, buck converter operates in CCM (continuous
conduction mode) so that the inductor current is always greater than zero. The advantages of buck
configuration are high efficiency, simple circuit, no need for transformers, low stress level on switch
components, and small ripple at the output voltage, furthermore, the filter needed is relatively small.
The buck converter circuit does not have an isolation component to maintain the system between input and
output. The switch ON state and OFF state are depicted in Figure 4.

Figure 3. Buck converter Figure 4. Buck converter when switch is ON and switch is OFF

The vector 𝑥 have two parameters, 𝑥1 is represented as the inductor current 𝑖𝐿 and 𝑥2 is represented
as the capacitor voltage 𝑣𝐶 . When the switch is ON, the derivative of 𝑥1 and𝑥2 are defined in (6) and (7)
respectively. Now the derivative of 𝑥1 and 𝑥2 when the switch is OFF are presented in (8) and (9). The state
space averaged model is obtained by combining the ON and OFF condition, the mathematical expression for
buck converter is shown in (10).

1 1
x1 = − x2 + Vin (6)
L L

1 1
x2 = x1 − x2 (7)
C RC

1
x1 = − x2 (8)
L

1 1
x2 = x1 − x2 (9)
C RC

 1 
 x1   0 − d 
L   x1  +  V (10)
 x  =  1   
1  x2   L  in
 2  −  0
C RC 

2.4. Adaptive control

The PID controller has a simple structure so that this controller is easy to apply in many systems.
However, the PID parameter has a character that is suitable for setting system with a single input and has
a single output (SISO) and therefore not able to compensate various conditions in the actual environment.
Designing an adaptive control according to reference model (MRAC) is one type of adaptive control structure
by developing adaptation parameters for PID control using certain rules. The block diagram in Figure 5 shows
the structure of the MRAC. The Buck converter uses one inductor and one capacitor, which means this
system is a 2nd order system. The system model is described as:

Yp (s ) b
= (11)
U (s ) s + a1s + a2
2

The second-order reference model given by:

TELKOMNIKA Telecommun Comput El Control, Vol. 18, No. 2, April 2020: 1113 - 1121
TELKOMNIKA Telecommun Comput El Control 1117

Ym (s ) bm s 2 + bm s + bm3 (12)
= 3 1 2 2
U (s ) s + am1s + am2 s + am3

The adaptation error:

 = Yp − Ym (13)

The cost function is denoted as:

 2 ( )
J ( ) = (14)
2

where  is the difference between the output system and the output model reference or error. MIT rule is
employed in this adaptive control design, the change in error respects to the parameter θ and the change in
parameter θ respects to time can determine the value of the cost function to be close to zero so that it obtains
the same value as the reference value. γ is a definite positive value that indicates the adaptability of
the controller.

d J 
= − = − (15)
dt  

dK p J J  Yp (16)
= − p = −
dt K p  Yp K p

where: J =  ,  = 1 . The adaptive PID controller parameters 𝐾𝑝 , 𝐾𝑖 , and 𝐾𝑑 are shown in (27), (28),
 Y p
and (29).

J
(R(s ) − Y p (s ))
dK p bs
= − p = − p  3 (17)
dt K p (
s + (a1 + bK d )s 2 + (a 2 + bK p )s + bK i )
J
dK i
= − i = − i  3
b
(R(s ) − Y p (s )) (18)
dt K i (
s + (a1 + bK d )s + (a 2 + bK p )s + bK i
2
)
J
dK d
= − d = − d  3
bs 2
(R(s ) − Y p (s )) (19)
dt K d (
s + (a1 + bK d )s + (a 2 + bK p )s + bK i
2
)
b , a1 , and a2 have an unknown number, then we define am1 = a1 + bK d ; am2 = a2 + bK p ; am3 = bK i .

Reference Ym
Model

Adjustment
Controller mechanism
Parameter
R
U Yp
Controller Plant

Figure 5. Block diagram of a basic model reference adaptive control

MPPT control of PV array based on PSO and adaptive controller (Totok Winarno)
1118 ISSN: 1693-6930

3. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

In this system uses two converters, a zeta converter and a buck converter that connects the PV array
to generate power in load demand. The zeta converter is used to obtain the maximum power of the PV array
and the buck converter is used to control the output voltage at 12V. The system will be simulated according
to the original conditions, starting from the PV array, zeta converter, buck converter and load as a given
disturbance. The block diagram of the proposed system is illustrated in Figure 6.
In this study, using 3 PV modules installed in series as PV array. The use of PV array aims to get
a graph that has a maximum of 3 peaks, two local peaks and one global peak. The SP-100-P36 is chosen for
PV array modeling. The module has maximum power 60W and 36 series connected polycrystalline cells.
The parameters of SP-100-P36 are provided in Table 2. In this research using the PSO method to explore
the maximum power value at the output of the PV array. Some parameter for PSO are summarized
in Table 3.
The output of the zeta converter is unstable at a certain value, so controller is required to make
the output voltage stable. Constant voltage will be controlled using adaptive PID controller and the output
voltage will be constant in setpoint. The second DC converter used in this research is buck converter. Buck
converters have the following parameters, 𝐿 = 1𝑚𝐻, 𝐶 = 470𝜇𝐹, 𝑅 = 100Ω and input voltage of 52𝑉.
In this system will have two scenarios, which are a situation where the PV array is affected by the shadow
or not; and the second scenario is the alteration of input voltage in buck converter. Table 4 shows MPP
of each case.

DC/DC Converter DC/DC Converter

PV Array Load
(Zeta) (Buck)

Vin
MPPT Adaptive PID Vout
Iin (PSO) (MRAC)

Figure 6. Block diagram system

Table 2. SP-100-P36 solar module parameters

Parameters Value
Maximum Power (𝑃𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) 100 W
Voltage at Maximum Power (𝑉𝑚𝑝 ) 17.6 V
Current at Maximum Power (𝐼𝑚𝑝) 5.69 A
Open Circuit Voltage (𝑉𝑜𝑐 ) 22.6 V
Short Circuit Current (𝐼𝑠𝑐 ) 6.09 A

Table 3. PSO parameters Table 4. MPP in several case

Parameter Value Case Iradiation ( 𝑊 ⁄𝑚 2) MPP (W
Particle number (N) 5 M1 M2 M3
Inertia weight (W) 0.4 1 1000 1000 900 284.456
Cognition-only learning factor (C1 ) 0.2 2 700 600 500 219.371
Social-only learning factor (C2) 0.8
Tolerance value (ε1 ) 1

In Figure 7 and Figure 8 show the MPPT signal from the zeta converter to output voltage of buck
converter experiences different partial shadows on each module. Figure 7 (a) shows the output power of
MPPT accordance with the maximum power of PV is 284,456 W. There is a little error that occurs due to
the determination of the parameters of the PSO that is not optimal yet. The voltage generated by the buck
converter matches the desired voltage which is 12V. The same results are shown in Figure 7 (b), when
the PV array gets unequal irradiatian, the maximum power value obtained is 219,371. Clearly, MMPT
systems are able to achieve maximum power with tracking accuracy up to 98.76% and tracking time is less
than 0.6 seconds. This shows that the designed MPPT and controller are work properly.
Because of unstable MPPT output voltage, the second converter is given some input voltage values.
In order to investigate the controller is working properly, the output voltage response is presented in

TELKOMNIKA Telecommun Comput El Control, Vol. 18, No. 2, April 2020: 1113 - 1121
TELKOMNIKA Telecommun Comput El Control 1119

Figure 8. The input voltage starts at 53V and then rises to 58 V at t = 0.2s, the response of output voltage in
accordance with the desired value of 12 V. The same thing happens when the input voltage drops to 45V
at t = 0.3s, the output voltage is fixed and has no overshoot at setpoint value. The proposed controller has
robust and reliable response from disturbances.

(a)

(b)
Figure 7. Output power of MPPT of zeta converter in (a) case 1 and (b) case 2

(a)

(b)
Figure 8. (a) Input voltage variations, (b) Output voltage when the input voltage changes

MPPT control of PV array based on PSO and adaptive controller (Totok Winarno)
1120 ISSN: 1693-6930

4. CONCLUSION
Output voltage of PV array have high rate voltage and unstable value. In order to find maximum
power point accurately, PSO method is employed in this research. The MPPT algorithm provides constant
maximum output power that always has an ever-changing value. The output voltage of the adaptive controller
produces a stable output voltage. MRAC is the adaptive control structure for this research. In simulation
results, high tracking accuracy and high tracking speed are working properly. It means that PSO is able to
reach maximum power of PV array. The output voltage regulation using adaptive control does not have error
steady state and consistently follows the reference value.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work is supported by Technical Implementation Unit in the field of Research and Community
Service (UPT-P2M) through Program Penelitian Unggulan 2019.

REFERENCES
[1] Chao, K. H., Chang, L. Y., & Liu, H. C., “Maximum Power Point Tracking Method Based on Modified Particle
Swarm Optimization for Photovoltaic Systems,” International Journal of Photoenergy, vol. 2013, no. 2, pp. 1-6,
November 2013.
[2] J. Liu, J. Li, J. Wu, W. Zhou, "Global MPPT algorithm with coordinated control of PSO and INC for rooftop PV
array," The Journal of Engineering, vol. 2017, no. 13, pp. 778-782, 2017.
[3] S. K. Kollimalla, M.K. Mishra, "Variable perturbation size adaptive P&O MPPT algorithm for sudden changes in
irradiance," IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 718-728, July 2014.
[4] Balasubramanian, I. R., Ilango Ganesan, S., Chilakapati, N. “Impact of partial shading on the output power of PV
systems under partial shading conditions,” IET Power Electronics, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 657-666, March 2014.
[5] M. A. M. Ramli, S. Twaha, K. Ishaque, and Y. A. Al-Turki, “A review on maximum power point tracking for
photovoltaic systems with and without shading conditions,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviewas, vol. 67,
pp. 144–159, January 2017.
[6] S. M. R. Tousi, M. H. Moradi, N. S. Basir, and M. Nemati, “A function-based maximum power point tracking
method for photovoltaic systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 2120–2128, March 2016.
[7] L. Ardhenta, Wijono, “Photovoltaic Array Modeling under Uniform Irradiation and Partial Shading Condition,”
International Journal of Applied Power Engineering (IJAPE), vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 144-152, December 2017.
[8] A. Badis, M. H. Boujmil, M. N. Mansouri, "A comparison of global MPPT techniques for partially shaded
grid-connected photovoltaic system," International Journal of Renewable Energy Research (IJRER), vol. 8, no. 3,
pp. 1442-1453, September 2018.
[9] A. G. Galeano, M. Bressan, F. J. Vargas, C. Alonso, "Shading ratio impact on photovoltaic modules and correlation
with shading patterns," Energies, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 852, April 2018.
[10] J. Ma, T. Zhang, Y. Shi, X. Li, H. Wen, "Shading pattern detection using electrical characteristics of photovoltaic
strings," 2016 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES),
Trivandrum, pp. 1-4, 2016.
[11] A. R. Jordehi, “Maximum power point tracking in photovoltaic (PV) systems: A review of different approaches,”
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 65, pp. 1127–1138, November 2016.
[12] A. A. Elbaset, H. Ali, M. Abd-El Sattar, and M. Khaled, “Implementation of a modified perturb and observe
maximum power point tracking algorithm for photovoltaic system using an embedded microcontroller,” IET
Renewable Power Generation, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 551-560, April 2016.
[13] K. Amara et al., "Improved Performance of a PV Solar Panel with Adaptive Neuro Fuzzy Inference System ANFIS
based MPPT," 2018 7th International Conference on Renewable Energy Research and Applications (ICRERA),
Paris, pp. 1098-1101, 2018.
[14] D. Haji, N. Genc, "Fuzzy and P&O Based MPPT Controllers under Different Conditions," 2018 7th International
Conference on Renewable Energy Research and Applications (ICRERA), Paris, pp. 649-655, 2018.
[15] T. T. Yetayew, T. R. Jyothsna, G. Kusuma, "Evaluation of incremental conductance and firefly algorithm for PV
MPPT application under partial shading condition," 2016 IEEE 6th International Conference on Power Systems
(ICPS), New Delhi, pp. 1-6, 2016.
[16] K. Sundareswaran, V. Vigneshkumar, P. Sankar, S. P. Simon, P. S. R. Nayak, S. Palani, "Development of an
improved P&O algorithm assisted through a colony of foraging ants for MPPT in PV system," IEEE Transactions
on Industrial Informatics, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 187-200, Feb. 2016.
[17] D. F. Teshome, C. H. Lee, Y. W. Lin, K. L. Lian, "A modified firefly algorithm for photovoltaic maximum power
point tracking control under partial shading," in IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power
Electronics, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 661-671, June 2017.
[18] M. Dwivedi, G. Mehta, A. Iqbal, H. Shekhar, "Performance enhancement of solar PV system under Partial Shaded
Condition using PSO," 2017 8th International Conference on Computing, Communication and Networking
Technologies (ICCCNT), pp. 1-7, 2017.
[19] L. Ardhenta, et al., “Adaptive Control for Buck Converter in Hybrid Power System based on DMRAC Method,”
2018 Electrical Power, Electronics, Communications, Controls and Informatics Seminar (EECCIS), Batu, East
Java, Indonesia, pp. 282 – 286, 2018.

TELKOMNIKA Telecommun Comput El Control, Vol. 18, No. 2, April 2020: 1113 - 1121
TELKOMNIKA Telecommun Comput El Control 1121

[20] Y. Jeung, I. Choi, D. Lee, "Robust voltage control of dual active bridge DC-DC converters using sliding mode
control," Proc. 2016 IEEE 8th International Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference (IPEMC-ECCE
Asia), pp. 629-634, 2016.
[21] S. Oucheriah, L. Guo, “PWM-based adaptive sliding mode control for boost DC/DC converters,” 2016 IEEE 8th
International Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference (IPEMC-ECCE Asia), Hefei, 2016, pp. 629-634.
[22] K. Ang, G. Chong, Y. Li, "PID control system analysis design and technology," IEEE Transactions on Control
Systems Technology, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 559-576, July 2005.
[23] D. E. Seborg, T.F. Edgar and D.A. Mellichamp. “Process Dynamic and Control. 2nd edition,” Wiley:
New York, 2004.
[24] P. C. Parks. “Liapunov Redesign of Model Reference Adaptive Control Systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic
Control, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 362-367, July 1966.
[25] E. Lavretsky and K. A. “Wise, Robust and adaptive control: With aerospace applications, ser. Advanced textbooks
in control and signal processing,” London and New York: Springer, 2013.
[26] M. Krstic, I. Kanellakopoulos, and P. V. Kokotovic, “Nonlinear and adaptive control design,” New York:
Wiley, 1995.

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS
Totok Winarno received B.Eng degree in Electrical Engineering from Sepuluh Nopember
Instutute of Technology, Surabaya, Indonesia in 1989 and the M.Eng degrees from
Brawijaya University, Malang, Indonesia in 2009. He is currently a senior lecturer in
Department of Electrical Engineering, State Polytechnic of Malang, Malang, Indonesia.
His research interests include embedded system and artificial intelligence.

Lucky Nindya Palupi received B.Eng degree in Electrical Engineering from Brawijaya
University, Malang, Indonesia in 2011 and the M.Sc degrees from National ChiaYi
University, Chiayi, Taiwan in 2014. She is currently a lecturer in Department of Electrical
Engineering, State Polytechnic of Malang, Malang, Indonesia. Her research interests include
digital signal processing and embedded system.

Agus Pracoyo received B.Eng degree in Electrical Engineering from Yogyakarta State
University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia in 1982 and the M.Eng degrees from Brawijaya
University, Malang, Indonesia in 2010. He is currently a senior lecturer in Department of
Electrical Engineering, State Polytechnic of Malang, Malang, Indonesia. His research
interests include embedded system.

Lunde Ardhenta was born in East Java Province, Indonesia, in 1988. He is currently
a junior lecturer at Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Brawijaya,
Indonesia. He received the M.S. degree in Department of Electrical Engineering, National
ChiaYi University, Taiwan in 2015. He completed his Bachelor degree in Department of
Electrical Engineering, University of Brawijaya, Indonesia in 2011. His research interests
include renewable energy applications, linear control and digitalized control techniques, and
power electronics.

MPPT control of PV array based on PSO and adaptive controller (Totok Winarno)