Comparative MPPT performance of particle swarm optimization, grey wolf optimizer, and crested porcupine optimizer under partial shading conditions

Öz

In this study, Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), Grey Wolf Optimizer (GWO), and Crested Porcupine Optimizer (CPO) algorithms were comparatively evaluated for global maximum power point tracking in photovoltaic systems under standard test and partial shading conditions. The MATLAB/Simulink model consists of four series-connected 250 W PV modules, bypass diodes, a boost DC–DC converter, a PWM generator, and an MPPT controller that directly determines the duty cycle of the converter. The algorithms were tested under three operating scenarios: standard test conditions, mild partial shading, and severe partial shading. To ensure a fair comparison, identical PV system parameters, converter settings, duty-cycle limits, and a common true GMPP reference were used for all algorithms. The performance of each method was assessed using steady-state average power, common-reference-based MPPT efficiency, settling time, steady-state power oscillation, and energy yield. Under standard test conditions, PSO showed the most balanced performance in terms of tracking accuracy and low oscillation, achieving a steady-state power of 998.972 W. Under mild partial shading conditions, CPO provided the best combined performance, with a steady-state power of 485.000 W, a power oscillation of 0.000055%, and a settling time of 0.15273 s. Under severe partial shading conditions, GWO achieved the steady-state power closest to the common GMPP reference, with 363.798 W, whereas PSO provided the fastest response and the lowest steady-state oscillation. The results indicate that no single algorithm is superior under all operating conditions. Therefore, the most suitable MPPT method should be selected by jointly considering tracking accuracy, convergence speed, steady-state stability, and application-specific requirements.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Photovoltaic system
• Maximum power point tracking
• Partial shading
• Metaheuristic optimization
• DC–DC boost converter

Kaynakça

1. [1] Alkan S, Ates Y. Pilot Scheme Conceptual Analysis of Rooftop East–West-Oriented Solar Energy System with Optimizer. Energies 2023; 16(5): 2396. doi: 10.3390/en16052396.
2. [2] Gosumbonggot J, Nguyen DD, Fujita G. Partial Shading and Global Maximum Power Point Detections Enhancing MPPT for Photovoltaic Systems Operated in Shading Condition. 2018 53rd International Universities Power Engineering Conference (UPEC) 2018: 1-6. doi: 10.1109/UPEC.2018.8541880.
3. [3] Rezk H. A comprehensive sizing methodology for stand-alone battery-less photovoltaic water pumping system under the Egyptian climate. Cogent Eng 2016; 3(1): 1242110. doi: 10.1080/23311916.2016.1242110.
4. [4] Rezk H, Dousoky GM. Technical and economic analysis of different configurations of stand-alone hybrid renewable power systems – A case study. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev 2016; 62: 941-953. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.023.
5. [5] Ishaque K, Salam Z, Amjad M, Mekhilef S. An Improved Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)–Based MPPT for PV With Reduced Steady-State Oscillation. IEEE Trans. Power Electron 2012; 27(8): 3627-3638. doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2012.2185713.
6. [6] Sharma P, Mishra RK. Comprehensive study on photovoltaic cell’s generation and factors affecting its performance: A Review. Mater. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2025; 14: 21. doi: 10.1007/s40243-024-00292-5.
7. [7] Green MA, Dunlop ED, Siefer G, Yoshita M, Kopidakis N, Bothe K, Hao X. Solar cell efficiency tables (Version 61). Prog. Photovoltaics Res. Appl 2023; 31(1): 3-16. doi: 10.1002/pip.3646.
8. [8] Ponkarthik N, Kalidasa Murugavel K. Performance enhancement of solar photovoltaic system using novel Maximum Power Point Tracking. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst 2014; 60: 1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ijepes.2014.02.031.

9. [9] Ramli MZ, Salam Z. Analysis and experimental validation of partial shading mitigation in photovoltaic system using integrated DC-DC converter with maximum power point tracker. IET Renew. Power Gener 2019; 13(13): 2356-2366. doi: 10.1049/iet-rpg.2019.0188.
10. [10] Liu YH, Huang SC, Huang JW, Liang WC. A Particle Swarm Optimization-Based Maximum Power Point Tracking Algorithm for PV Systems Operating Under Partially Shaded Conditions. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers 2012; 27(4): 1027-1035. doi: 10.1109/TEC.2012.2219533.
11. [11] Chen K, Tian S, Cheng Y, Bai L. An Improved MPPT Controller for Photovoltaic System Under Partial Shading Condition. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2014; 5(3): 978-985. doi: 10.1109/TSTE.2014.2315653.
12. [12] Refaat A, Khalifa AE, Elsakka MM, Elhenawy Y, Kalas A, Elfar MH. A novel metaheuristic MPPT technique based on enhanced autonomous group Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm to track the GMPP under partial shading conditions - Experimental validation. Energy Convers. Manag 2023; 287: 117124. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2023.117124.
13. [13] Seyedmahmoudian M, Mekhilef S, Rahmani R, Yusof R, Renani ET. Analytical modeling of partially shaded photovoltaic systems. Energies 2013; 6(1): 128-144. doi: 10.3390/en6010128.
14. [14] Xiao W, Dunford WG. A modified adaptive hill climbing MPPT method for photovoltaic power systems. 2004 IEEE 35th Annual Power Electronics Specialists Conference 2004; 3: 1957-1963. doi: 10.1109/PESC.2004.1355417.
15. [15] Üzmuş H, Genç N, Çelik MA. DSP based hybrid control method for PV systems. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University 2023; 38(4): 2251-2260. doi: 10.17341/gazimmfd.1062711.
16. [16] Liu F, Duan S, Liu F, Liu B, Kang Y. A Variable Step Size INC MPPT Method for PV Systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron 2008; 55(7): 2622-2628. doi: 10.1109/TIE.2008.920550.
17. [17] Safari A, Mekhilef S. Simulation and Hardware Implementation of Incremental Conductance MPPT With Direct Control Method Using Cuk Converter. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron 2011; 58(4): 1154-1161. doi: 10.1109/TIE.2010.2048834.
18. [18] Kimball JW, Krein PT. Discrete-Time Ripple Correlation Control for Maximum Power Point Tracking. IEEE Trans. Power Electron 2008; 23(5): 2353-2362. doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2008.2001913.
19. [19] Zafar MH, Khan NM, Mirza AF, Mansoor M, Akhtar N, Qadir MU, Khan NA, Moosavi SKR. A novel meta-heuristic optimization algorithm based MPPT control technique for PV systems under complex partial shading condition. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments 2021; 47: 101367. doi: 10.1016/j.seta.2021.101367.
20. [20] Guo K, Cui L, Mao M, Zhou L, Zhang Q. An Improved Gray Wolf Optimizer MPPT Algorithm for PV System With BFBIC Converter Under Partial Shading. IEEE Access 2020; 8: 103476-103490. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2999311.
21. [21] Dagal I, Akın B, Akboy E. MPPT mechanism based on novel hybrid particle swarm optimization and salp swarm optimization algorithm for battery charging through simulink. Sci. Rep 2022; 12(1): 2664. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-06609-6.
22. [22] Manna S, Singh DK, Akella AK, Kotb H, AboRas KM, Zawbaa HM, Kamel S. Design and implementation of a new adaptive MPPT controller for solar PV systems. Energy Reports 2023; 9: 1818-1829. doi: 10.1016/j.egyr.2022.12.152.
23. [23] Xia K, Li Y, Zhu B. Improved Photovoltaic MPPT Algorithm Based on Ant Colony Optimization and Fuzzy Logic Under Conditions of Partial Shading. IEEE Access 2024; 12: 44817-44825. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3381345.
24. [24] Naser AT, Mohammed KK, Aziz NFA, Kamil Kb, Mekhilef S. Improved coot optimizer algorithm-based MPPT for PV systems under complex partial shading conditions and load variation. Energy Conversion and Management: X 2024; 22: 100565. doi: 10.1016/j.ecmx.2024.100565.
25. [25] Endiz MS, Gökkuş G, Coşgun AE, Demir H. A Review of Traditional and Advanced MPPT Approaches for PV Systems Under Uniformly Insolation and Partially Shaded Conditions. Applied Sciences 2025; 15(3): 1031. doi: 10.3390/app15031031.
26. [26] Chiu CS, Chen YT. MPPT-Based Chaotic ABC Algorithm for a Photovoltaic Power System Under Partial Shading Conditions. Energies 2025; 18(7): 1710. doi: 10.3390/en18071710.
27. [27] Abdel-Basset M, Mohamed R, Abouhawwash M. Crested Porcupine Optimizer: A new nature-inspired metaheuristic. Knowledge-Based Systems 2024; 284: 111257. doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2023.111257.
28. [28] Alpsalaz F, Özüpak Y, Aslan E, Uzel H. Hybrid Machine Learning Approach for Enhanced Fault Detection and Power Estimation in Photovoltaic Systems. IET Renew. Power Gener 2026; 20(1): e70153. doi: 10.1049/rpg2.70153.
29. [29] Uzel H. SCADA-Based AC Power Forecasting in a Utility-Scale PV Plant: Explainable HistGradientBoosting and Thermal Derating Quantification. Gazi University Journal of Science Part A: Engineering and Innovation 2026; 13(1): 452-482. doi: 10.54287/gujsa.1818552.
30. [30] Demirbas M, Duman S, Ozkaya B, Balci Y, Ersoy D, Döşoğlu MK, Guvenc U, Altun BE, Uzel H, Kaymaz E. Fuzzy-Based Fitness–Distance Balance Snow Ablation Optimizer Algorithm for Optimal Generation Planning in Power Systems. Energies 2025; 18(12): 3048. doi: 10.3390/en18123048.
31. [31] Uzel H, Hinislioğlu Y, Dalcali A, Güvenç U. Fuzzy Fitness Distance Balance Gradient-Based Optimization Algorithm (fFDBGBO): An Application to Design and Performance Optimization of PMSM. IEEE Access 2025; 13: 155898-155915. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3604649.
32. [32] Uzel H. An Explainable Hybrid Deep Learning Approach for Power Quality Disturbance Classification. Bull. Polish Acad. Sci. Tech. Sci 2026; 74(2): e157326. doi: 10.24425/bpasts.2026.157326.
33. [33] Ghani F, Rosengarten G, Duke M, Carson JK. The numerical calculation of single-diode solar-cell modelling parameters. Renew. Energy 2014; 72: 105-112. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2014.06.035.
34. [34] Nguyen-Duc T, Nguyen-Duc H, Le-Viet T, Takano H. Single-Diode Models of PV Modules: A Comparison of Conventional Approaches and Proposal of a Novel Model. Energies 2020; 13(6): 1296. doi: 10.3390/en13061296.
35. [35] Chalh A, El Hammoumi A, Motahhir S, El Ghzizal A, Derouich A, Masud M, AlZain MA. Investigation of Partial Shading Scenarios on a Photovoltaic Array's Characteristics. Electronics 2022; 11(1): 96. doi: 10.3390/electronics11010096.
36. [36] Teo JC, Tan RHG, Mok VH, Ramachandaramurthy VK, Tan CK. Impact of Partial Shading on the P-V Characteristics and the Maximum Power of a Photovoltaic String. Energies 2018; 11(7): 1860. doi: 10.3390/en11071860.
37. [37] Ding K, Wang X, Zhai QX, Xu JW, Zhang JW, Liu HH. Improved Global Maximum Power Point Tracking Method Based on Voltage Interval for PV Array under Partially Shaded Conditions. Journal of Power Electronics 2014; 14(4): 722-732. doi: 10.6113/JPE.2014.14.4.722.
38. [38] Freitas D, Lopes LG, Morgado-Dias F. Particle Swarm Optimisation: A Historical Review Up to the Current Developments. Entropy 2020; 22(3): 362. doi: 10.3390/e22030362.
39. [39] Huang B, Song K, Jiang S, Zhao Z, Zhang Z, Li C, Sun J. A Robust Salp Swarm Algorithm for Photovoltaic Maximum Power Point Tracking Under Partial Shading Conditions. Mathematics 2024; 12(24): 3971. doi: 10.3390/math12243971.
40. [40] Yakubu AO, Adıgüzel E, Ersoy A. Enhanced particle swarm optimization and P&O for MPPT of photovoltaic systems under partial shading conditions. International Journal of Energy Applications and Technologies 2023; 10(2): 80-91. doi: 10.31593/ijeat.1283665.
41. [41] Wirateruna ES, Millenia AFA. Design of MPPT PV using Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm under Partial Shading Condition. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence & Robotics 2022; 4(1): 24-30. doi: 10.25139/ijair.v4i1.4327.
42. [42] Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Lewis A. Grey Wolf Optimizer. Adv. Eng. Softw 2014; 69: 46-61. doi: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.12.007.
43. [43] Celikel R, Aydogmus O, Yilmaz M. An improved grey wolf optimization-based MPPT algorithm for photovoltaic systems under partial shading conditions. Scientific Reports 2026; 16: 16671. doi: 10.1038/s41598-026-45860-z.
44. [44] Youssef AR, Hefny MM, Ali AIM. Investigation of single and multiple MPPT structures of solar PV-system under partial shading conditions considering direct duty-cycle controller. Scientific Reports 2023; 13(1): 19051. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-46165-1.