Experimentation of MPPT Control Driving a Buck Converter with PV Module Disturbances and Variable Load in a Nanogrid
Sandaniaina Sedinirina Andriamihaingo Ranaivoson1, Nicolas Saincy2, Eric Jean Roy Sambatra3, Todizara Andrianajaina4, Nirinason Jean Razafinjaka5

1Sandaniaina Sedinirina Andriamihaingo Ranaivoson, Nanoé Company – Decentralized Electrification, Ambanja, Madagascar.
2Nicolas Saincy, Nanoé Company – Decentralized Electrification, Madagascar.
3Eric Jean Roy Sambatra, School of Industrial Engineering, Higher Institute of Technology, Antsiranana, Madagascar.
4Todizara Andrianajaina, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Higher Polytechnic School, Antsiranana, Madagascar.
5Nirinason Jean Razafinjaka, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Higher Polytechnic School, Antsiranana, Madagascar.
Manuscript received on 27 April 2023 | Revised Manuscript received on 08 May 2023 | Manuscript Accepted on 15 May 2023 | Manuscript published on 30 May 2023 | PP: 95-101 | Volume-12 Issue-1, May 2023 | Retrieval Number: 100.1/ijrte.A76260512123 | DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.A7626.0512123

Open Access | Editorial and Publishing Policies | Cite | Zenodo | Indexing and Abstracting
© The Authors. Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering and Sciences Publication (BEIESP). This is an open access article under the CC-BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Abstract: The objective of this paper is to perform a laboratory test on the performance of MPPT control in a nanogrid. The components used for tests are described, namely (i) a PV module SPP031001200 manufactured by Victron energy, a prototype of a synchronous buck converter controlled by Arduino Atmel ATmega V-2560, and a DC electronic load programmable 72-13210 manufactured by TENMATM. Among several MPPT controls, the choice falls on the methods Perturb and Observe “P&O” and Increment of the conductance “INC” which are more widely used than others. Laboratory tests with different PV module conditions and variable output voltage were performed. In full sunlight, the input power of the buck converter gives a better result with the INC method compared to the P&O method. For a PV module exposed to horizontal or vertical total shading, INC method gives a small advantage compared to the P&O method, which can be beneficial for a long time. Compared to the P&O method, INC method always gives better results due to its more complex algorithm. Due to the lack of measuring instruments, the different tests were performed without considering irradiance and temperature.
Keywords: Buck Converter, DC Electronic Load, MPPT, Solar Home System.
Scope of the Article: Control and Automation