energies

Article
A Nature-Inspired Optimization-Based Optimum
Fuzzy Logic Photovoltaic Inverter Controller
Utilizing an eZdsp F28335 Board
Ammar Hussein Mutlag 1,2, *, Azah Mohamed 1 and Hussain Shareef 3
1 Department of Electrical, Electronic and Systems Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment,
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia; azah@eng.ukm.my
2 College of Electrical and Electronic Engineering Techniques, Middle Technical University, 10022 Baghdad, Iraq
3 Department of Electrical Engineering, United Arab Emirates University, 15551 Al-Ain, UAE;
shareef@uaeu.ac.ae
* Correspondence: ammar_alqiesy@yahoo.com; Tel.: +6011-2325-1760

Academic Editor: Peter J S Foot

Received: 9 December 2015; Accepted: 5 February 2016; Published: 23 February 2016

Abstract: Photovoltaic (PV) inverters essentially convert DC quantities, such as voltage and current,
to AC quantities whose magnitude and frequency are controlled to obtain the desired output. Thus,
the performance of an inverter depends on its controller. Therefore, an optimum fuzzy logic controller
(FLC) design technique for PV inverters using a lightning search algorithm (LSA) is presented in
this study. In a conventional FLC, the procedure for obtaining membership functions (MFs) is
usually implemented using trial and error, which does not lead to satisfactory solutions in many
cases. Therefore, this study presents a technique for obtaining MFs that avoids the exhaustive
traditional trial-and-error procedure. This technique is implemented during the inverter design phase
by generating adaptive MFs based on the evaluation results of the objective function formulated
with LSA. The mean squared error (MSE) of the inverter output voltage is used as an objective
function in this study. LSA optimizes the MFs such that the inverter provides the lowest MSE for the
output voltage, and the performance of the PV inverter output is improved in terms of amplitude
and frequency. First, the design procedure and accuracy of the optimum FLC are illustrated and
investigated through simulations conducted in a MATLAB environment. The LSA-based FLC
(LSA-FL) are compared with differential search algorithm (DSA)-based FLC (DSA-FL) and particle
swarm optimization (PSO)-based FLC (PSO-FL). Finally, the robustness of the LSA-FL is further
investigated with a hardware that is operated via an eZdsp F28335 control board. Simulation and
experimental results show that the proposed controller can successfully obtain the desired output
when different loads are connected to the system. The inverter also has a reasonably low steady-state
error and fast response to reference variation.

Keywords: lightning search algorithm (LSA); fuzzy logic controller (FLC); inverter; photovoltaic (PV);
space vector pulse width modulation (SVPWM); eZdsp F28335

1. Introduction
Nowadays, renewable energy (RE) has become the main impetus of the energy sector, primarily
because it is environment friendly, clean, and a secure energy source [1]. Among REs, photovoltaic (PV)
power generation is one of the most promising technologies that can be utilized in industrial power
systems and rural electrification [2]. Given that PV generators can only supply DC power, an inverter
is required to connect the load to PV generators [3]. The main feature of a good power inverter is

Energies 2016, 9, 120; doi:10.3390/en9030120 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2016, 9, 120 2 of 32

its capability to provide clean, high-quality power and constant amplitude sinusoidal voltage and
frequency, regardless of the load type to which it is connected. Furthermore, a power inverter must
also have the capability to recover quickly from transients caused by external disturbances without
causing power quality problems. In the context of a stand-alone PV generator, the output voltage
and current waveforms should be controlled based on the reference values. Therefore, an efficient PV
inverter controller is required [4]. However, the extensive use of PV generators raises many challenges,
such as harmonic pollutions, low efficiency of energy conversion, fluctuation of output power, and
reliability of power electronic converters [5].
Numerous PV inverter controllers have been suggested by many researchers to solve these
problems. A proportional integral (PI) controller is a widely accepted technique in inverter controls.
Selvaraj et al. [6] implemented a digital PI current control algorithm in a PV inverter through a eZdsp
F2812 to maintain the current fed into the utility grid network to be sinusoidal. However, this PI
controller requires trapezoidal sum approximation to transform the integral term into a discrete-time
domain. Similarly, Sanchis et al. [7] proposed a traditional PI controller to control a DC-to-AC boost
converter. However, their controller requires the differential equations of the system to obtain good
performance. In a related work, PI controllers were implemented for a three-phase inverter utilizing
dSPACE DS1104 control hardware [8]. However, the method of tuning the gains of PI controllers
has not been elaborated. In recent years, researchers have focused on the utilization of optimization
techniques in PI controller tuning to achieve improved performance. An optimal DC bus voltage
regulation strategy with PI controllers for a grid-connected PV generator was suggested in [9]. In this
research, PI control parameters were optimized through simplex optimization technique. Various
other optimization methods, such as particle swarm optimization (PSO), have also been used in PI
controller parameter tuning for different applications [10–13]. The performance of a PI controller is
limited to small load disturbances. Its design is based on an accurate mathematical model of the real
system under consideration, and it needs appropriate setting of its parameters.
Artificial intelligence-based controllers have been used in inverters with high efficiency and great
dynamics. Various methods, including artificial neural network (ANN), fuzzy logic, and adaptive
neuro fuzzy inference system (ANFIS)-based controllers, were reported in the literature. ANN-based
maximum power point tracking controller in a PV inverter power conditioning unit was proposed
in [14]. In this work, the ANN module was used to estimate the voltages and currents corresponding
to a maximum power delivered by PV panels. The module was then utilized to obtain the desirable
converter duty cycle. Nonetheless, this proposed controller requires a large amount of training data
before it can be trained and implemented in the controller. Fuzzy logic controllers (FLCs) have become
increasingly popular in designing inverter controls because of their simplicity and adaptability to
complex systems without a mathematical model [15]. Some good examples of FLCs for inverter
control can be found in [16,17]. In these studies, two individual FLCs were used to control both the
DC–DC and DC–AC converter in a fuel cell grid-connected inverter and stand-alone PV inverter,
respectively. The authors claimed that acceptable results can be achieved with seven membership
functions (MFs) and that the proposed technique can be implemented easily. In [18], the interval
type-II fuzzy rule-based static synchronous compensator (STATCOM) for voltage regulation in a
power system has been investigated. The interval type-II fuzzy rule base utilizes the output of the
PID controller to tune the signal applied to the STATCOM to mitigate bus voltage variation caused
by large changes in load and intermittent generation of PV arrays. Nonetheless, the performance
of FLC depends on the rule base, number of rules, and MFs. These variables are determined based
a trial-and-error procedure which is time consuming [19]. Therefore, various techniques, such as
neuro-fuzzy model and other optimization techniques were proposed in the literature to overcome the
limitations of the FLC design. In [20], Collotta et al. developed a neuro-fuzzy model for dynamic and
automatic regulation of indoor temperature. The ANN is applied to forecast indoor temperatures that
are used to feed a FLC unit to manage the on/off switching of the ventilating and air-conditioning
system and the regulation of the inlet air speed. However, neuro-fuzzy model requires extensive
Energies 2016, 9, 120 3 of 32

training data similar to ANN controllers and that training data are difficult to obtain in many cases.
In [21], a particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm was applied to optimize a FLC for maximum
power point tracking of a PV system. The selection of a proper optimization technique is important
because PSO is prone to premature convergence. To date, such adaptive MF tuning method has not
been applied in a FLC for PV inverter control.
In the proposed research, the LSA is developed to enhance the performance of the fuzzy logic
controller for the three-phase PV inverter. The proposed approach aims to solve the problem
of trial-and-error procedure in obtaining MFs used in the conventional FLC. LSA is a novel
nature-inspired technique‐ formulated to solve both single-modal and multimodal optimization
‐ ‐
problems. This algorithm is particularly recommended to solve multimodal problems, such as for
‐ ‐
tuning the MFs of the FLC [22]. Therefore, the utilization of the LSA improves the performance of the
FLC for PV inverters. LSA optimizes the MFs of the FLC based three-phase inverter by minimizing
the objective function which is the mean squared error (MSE) of the output voltage.
‐ The system is
first modeled in the MATLAB environment and then implemented in the eZdsp F28335 control board
(Spectrum Digital Inc, Stafford, TX, USA) to validate the performance of the proposed controller by
considering perturbation such as change in DC input voltage and load.

2. Inverter Control Algorithm

Inverter control aims to regulate the AC output voltage at a desired magnitude and frequency
with low harmonic distortion. This regulation is performed by the controller by implementing a
proper control algorithm to maintain the voltage at a set reference. The structure of the standalone PV
inverter used in this study is shown in Figure 1 to illustrate the main control loops for achieving the
aforementioned control objective. This inverter consists of a DC input from the PV source, DC–AC
inverter, transformer, and load. This type of inverter with a DC input source is known as a VSI.

PV
PV Inverter
Inverter Filter Transformer

Loads

G
G11 G
G66 V
Vaa
Controller V
Vbb
Controller
Vc
Vc

‐
Figure 1. Structure circuit of the three-phase inverter system.

‐
To apply the control algorithm in the inverter system, the three-phase output voltages in the
synchronous reference‐ frame must be sensed at the load terminals through the appropriate voltage
sensors. The three-phase output voltages of the load terminal (Va , Vb , and Vc ) can be represented as:
sin ω
Va “ V sin ωt2 (1)
sin ω π
ˆ 3 ˙
2 2
Vb “ V sin
sin ωωt ´ π π (2)
33
ω
ˆ ˙
2
Vc “ V sin ωt ` π (3)
3
‐
where V is the voltage magnitude, and ω is the output frequency. These voltages (Va , Vb , and Vc ) are
then scaled and transformed into a d–q‐ reference frame to simplify the calculations for controlling the
three-phase inverter [23,24]. The two DC quantities, namely, Vd and Vq , can be obtained by applying
Energies 2016, 9, 120 4 of 32

Park’s transformation, as shown in Equation (4). This transformation employs a 50 Hz synchronization

signal from a phase-locked loop block:
ˆ ˙ ˆ ˙
2π 2π
» fi
» fi cos pωtq cos ωt ´ cos ωt ` ¨ ˛
Vd — 3˙ 3˙ ffi Va
ffi 2—
ˆ ˆ
2π 2π
— ffi
– Vq fl “ — ffi ˆ ˝ Vb ‚ (4)
— ffi ˚ ‹
´sin pωtq sin ωt ´ sin ωt `
3— 3 3 ffi
Vo –
1 1 1
fl Vc
2 2 2
2π 2π
cos ω cos ω cos ω
The error E between the measured voltages Vd3and Vq and reference 3 voltages Vdre f and Vqre f
2 2π in error CE2π
per unit can then be computed. Similarly,
sin ω the
sin ωchange sin ω can be determined by taking the
3 3 3
derivative of E. These signals (i.e., E and
1 CE) are then
1 sent to the1controller at each sampling time Ts to
compute the missing components in2Vd and Vq and 2 to generate2 the new Vd and Vq signals. The new
Vd and Vq are again converted into the synchronous reference frame voltages Va , Vb , and Vc through
the following equation:
» fi
» fi cos pωtq ˙ ´sin
ˆ pωtq ˙ 1 ffi ¨ ˛
Va V
ˆ
— 2π 2π d
ffi 2— cos ωt ´ ´sin ωt ´ 1 ffi
– Vb fl “ — ffiˆ˚
ffi ˝ Vq ‚ (5)
— ‹
3 ˙ 3 ˙
3— ˆ ˆ
Vc
cos cos ω 2π ω ` 2π1 1
sin ωt Vo
– fl
ωt ` ´sin
2π
3 2π 3
2 cos ω sin ω 1
3 3
3 2π
These voltages can be applied in generating the pulse2πwidth modulation (PWM) to drive the
cos ω sin ω 1
3 in the inverter3block in Figure 1. As a result of inverter
insulated-gate bipolar transistor IGBT switches
switching, a series of pulsating DC input voltage Vdc appears at the output terminals of the inverter.
Given that the‐ output voltages of the inverter are pulsating DC voltages, an appropriate low-pass
filter must be used (Figure 1) before importing PV-generated electrical energy to the load. The design
procedure of the filter circuits can be found in [25].
‐ ‐
3. Inverter Control Using FLC Strategy
In consideration of the nonlinearity of the power conversion process in PV inverters, fuzzy logic
is a convenient method to adopt in a PV inverter control system. An FLC represents the human expert
decision in the problem solving mechanism. The main advantages of FLC are:

i FLC can be used in many applications especially for control and modeling of non-linear
systems [19]. ‐
ii FLC is less dependent on a mathematical model and system parameters [26].
iii FLC is based on linguistic rules with an if-then general structure, which is the basis of human
‐
logic [27].

Figure 2 shows the inverter control concept with FLC as a control strategy.

Figure 2. Inverter voltage control with FLC.

Energies 2016, 9, 120 5 of 32

The first step in FLC is to select the number of inputs and outputs. In this work, where FLC serves
as a PV inverter controller, E and CE are used as inputs, whereas the missing component of Vd or Vq
defined as O is used as the output of the FLC. The two inputs for the FLC depicted in Figure 2, namely,
E and CE, at the tth sampling step that corresponds to Vd can be described as follows:

E ptq “ Vdre f ´ Vd ptq (6)

CE ptq “ E ptq ´ E pt ´ 1q (7)

The output O for this case can be obtained at the last stage of the FLC design, which is explained
in the next section. The FLC design must pass through the 1 following steps, namely, fuzzification,
inference engine design, and defuzzification [28,29].

3.1. Fuzzification
After the inputs and outputs are defined, the next stage involves the fuzzification of inputs.
This step represents the inputs with suitable linguistic value by decomposing every input into a set
and by defining a unique MF label, such as “big” or “small”. Thus, the number of MFs used in the FLC
depends on the linguistic label. The MFs of E and CE for the FLC can be defined as trapezoidal and
triangular MFs. This process translates the crisp values of “E” and “CE” as the fuzzy set “e” and “ce”,
respectively, through the MF degrees µe (E) and µce (CE), which range from 0 to 1, as shown in Figure 3
μ
for triangular MFs. In Figure 3a, the MF of error μ is defined by three elements, namely, X1 , X2 ,
(MFE)
and X3 , whereas the MF of change of error (MFCE) in Figure 3b is defined by another three elements
represented by X4 , X5 , and X6 .
Degree of membership function

Degree of membership function

MFE MFCE
1 1

0.5 0.5

0 0
0X X12 X23 0X X15 X26
1 4
Error (E) Change of Error (CE)
(a) (b)

Figure 3. Membership functions for (a) E and (b) CE.

μ μ
After defining the MFs, µe (E) and µceμ(CE) canμbe calculated with a basic straight line equation
that consists of two points. For example, µe (E) and µce (CE) for the MFs in Figure 3 can be expressed
as follows:
E ´ X1
$
μ ’ X1 ď E ă X2
X ´ X1
&
µe pEq “ 1 2 (8)
X ´E
% 1` 2
’ X2 ď E ă X3
X3 ´ X2
CE ´ X4
$
μ ’ X4 ď CE ă X5
1 X5 ´ X4
&
µce pCEq “ (9)
% 1 ` X5 ´ CE
’ X5 ď CE ă X6
X6 ´ X5
‐ ‐
In a standard FLC design, the selection of the number of MFs and the boundary values of each
MF must be adjusted by the designer by using the trial-and-error method until the FLC provides
a satisfactory result. However, this process is time consuming and laborious. After the inputs are
fuzzified, the fuzzy inputs are subjected to an inference engine to generate a fuzzy output.
Energies 2016, 9, 120 6 of 32

3.2. Inference Engine Design

This stage represents the decision making process based on the information from a knowledge
base, which contains linguistic labels and control rules. Two types of inference systems mainly exist,
namely, Mamdani type and Sugeno type. The Mamdani-type inference system is adopted in this study
because of its simple implementation steps. The rules with two inputs for the Mamdani type can be
written as follows:
‐

R : IF E is “label” AND CE is “label, ” THEN u is “label.”

The quantity of rules depends on the number of inputs and MFs used in the FLC [28,29]. An FLC
with a large rule base demands great computational effort in terms of memory and computation time.

3.3. Defuzzification
The final step in the FLC is the selection of the defuzzification method. This process generates a
fuzzy control action as a crisp value. Several methods can be used to generate the crisp value. The most
common methods include the center of area (COA) and the mean of maximum (MOM) methods.
The widely used COA method generates the center of gravity of the MFs. In this study, the COA
method given in Equation (10) is used to generate the crisp value because it is more accurate than
MOM method [28]: řn
i “1 w i ¨ u i
COA “ ř n (10)
i “1 w i
∑ .
where n is the number of rules, and wi is the weighted
∑ factor that can be calculated with Mamdani-MIN
between µe (E) and µce (CE), as expressed by:
‐ μ μ
wi “ MI N rµe pEq , µce pCEqs (11)
μ ,μ
The implementation steps of the standard FLC are illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Encoding of the FLC.

4. Proposed Optimum FLC Design Procedure

‐
As noted ‐ ‐ FLC design procedure, the main drawback of FLC design is the
in the standard
time-consuming trial-and-error process used to adjust the boundary values of MFs in the fuzzification

‐
Energies 2016, 9, 120 7 of 32

process. Improper selection of MF boundaries may lead to the poor performance of the overall
system. Therefore, this work presents a methodology to optimize MFs through a heuristic optimization
algorithm. A heuristic optimization algorithm is used to solve complex and intricate problems that
are otherwise difficult to solve with classical methods. It is a population-based method designed
to solve a problem quickly or to determine an approximate solution when classic methods fail to
determine a solution particularly with multimodal optimization problems. LSA has been developed as
a heuristic optimization tool to adjust the boundary values of MFs adaptively because of its suitability
for multimodal problems, such as the FLC design for PV inverter control.

4.1. Overview of LSA

LSA is a nature-inspired metaheuristic optimization algorithm [22]. LSA is based on the natural
phenomenon of lightning. The probabilistic nature and tortuous characteristics of lightning discharges
originate from a thunderstorm. The proposed optimization algorithm is generalized from the
mechanism of step leader propagation. It considers the involvement of fast particles known as
projectiles in the formation of the binary tree structure of a step leader. Three projectile types are used
to represent the transition projectiles that create the first step leader population N, the space projectiles
that attempt to become the leader, and the lead projectile that represents the best positioned projectile
that originated among N number of step leaders. The details of the LSA, including its basic concepts
and algorithms, can be found in [22].

4.2. Optimal FLC Problem Formulation

The three basic components that are considered in any optimization method are input vectors,
objective function formulation, and constraints. Each component is developed and clarified to obtain
the optimal MFs. The optimization technique searches the optimal solution as formulated in the
objective function through manipulation of the input vector subject to the constraints in each generation
of the iterative process.

4.2.1. Input Vector

As the first step in FLC design, the number of MFs must be defined to provide the solution from
the optimization technique. Depending on the number of MFs, the input vector Z can be described by:
” ı
1 2 n
Zi,j “ Xi,j Xi,j . . . Xi,j (12)

k is the kth element

where Zi,j represents the jth solution in the population during the ith iteration, Xi,j
of Zi,j , and n is the total number of parameters. For example, the input vector Zi,j should contain
six parameters indicating the boundaries of MFs that should be optimized to represent the MFs in
Figure 3.

4.2.2. Objective Function

An objective function is required to determine and evaluate the performance of Zi,j for the MFs.
Thus, the objective function to determine the optimal values is formulated in such a way that Zi,j
generates the best fuzzy control action as a crisp value according to Equation (10) described in the
defuzzification process. In the FLC design for the PV inverter control, E and CE at the tth sampling
step that corresponds to Vd (which is the transformed inverter output voltage) indicate the goodness
of the crisp value of the fuzzy control action. Therefore, the MSE (13) obtained from the reference
values Vdre f and the measured values Vd are used as the objective function:

řℓ ´ ¯2
i “1 Vdre f ´ Vd
MSE “ (13)
ℓ
Energies 2016, 9, 120 8 of 32

where Vdre f is the reference value that is equal to (1 p.u.), Vd is the measured value, and ℓ is the number
of the samples used to evaluate MSE. In the optimization process, Equation (13) needs to be minimized.

4.2.3. Optimization Constraints

The optimization algorithm must be implemented while satisfying all constraints used to
determine the optimal values of MF parameters. The boundaries of these parameters should not
k should be between X k´ 1 and X k`1 . If the element X k
overlap. In other words, the element Xi,j i,j i,j i,j
k `1 k ´1
is greater than Xi,j or less than Xi,j , this, element should be, regenerated
, within its boundaries.
,
Therefore, the following, restriction must , be fulfilled to ensure that each MF parameter is within the

prescribed boundaries:
k ´1 k k `1
Xi,j ă Xi,j ă Xi,j (14)
, , ,

‐
Figure 5. Proposed LSA-based optimum FLC design procedure.
Energies 2016, 9, 120 9 of 32

4.3. Implementation Steps of LSA to Obtain the Optimal FLC Design

The implementation starts by resetting the LSA parameters, namely, number of iterations (T),
population size (N), problem dimension (D), and channel time. The initial populations for the MFs
are then generated and encoded according to Equation (12). The next step involves the evaluation
of the objective function through Equation (13). A suitable running time Tr is required to populate
the FLC output for the evaluation of MSE in population N. After the initial population is evaluated,
the direction and position are updated with Equations (15) and (16), respectively: After updating all
‐
the values of, Zi,j in the population, the procedure re-evaluates the objective function, and the process
continues to the next iteration. This updating and objective function reevaluation process is repeated
until the maximum iteration count is reached, as explained in Figure 5.
_ μ
S
pi_new “ piS ˘ exprand pµi q (15)
μ ,σ
L
pnew “ p L ` normrand pµ L , σ L q (16)
_
S
where pi_new L is the new‐ lead projectile.
is the new space projectile, piS is the, old space projectile, and pnew
After updating all the values of Zi,j in the population, the procedure re-evaluates the objective function,
and the process continues to the next iteration. This updating and objective function reevaluation
process is repeated until the maximum iteration count is reached, as explained in Figure 5.

5. FLC Design for PV Inverter Control Using the Proposed Method

A 3 kW, 240 V, 50 Hz PV inverter system is modeled in the Matlab Simulink environment
(Figure 6) to demonstrate the application of an optimum FLC design by supplying various types of
loads continuously. As depicted in Figure 6, the output voltages (Va , Vb , and Vc ) are measured and
converted to Vd and Vq at each sampling time Ts = 2 μµs. The controller block shown in the figure
contains two FLCs that correspond to Vd and Vq in the d–q reference frame. The controllers require E
and CE to generate new Vd and Vq and to convert to Va , Vb , and Vc . The converted signals are then
utilized to create the PWM for driving the IGBT switches of the inverter.

Figure 6. Simulation model for the three-phase inverter.

‐

As explained previously for each input, seven MFs defined as trapezoidal and triangular MFs are
1 to X 7 ) are used to define the
used according to the illustration in Figure 7. Seven parameters (i.e., Xi,j i,j
, ,
8 to X 14 ) are used to define the second input
first input (E), whereas the seven other parameters (i.e., Xi,j i,j , ,
Energies 2016, 9, 120 10 of 32

(CE). Therefore, each controller input Z in the optimum FLC design contains 14 parameters. Thus, the
FLC control rule for the PV inverter control system includes 49 rules (Table 1).

Degree of membership function

Degree of membership function

MFE MFE MFE MFE MFE MFE MFE MFCE MFCE MFCE MFCE MFCE MFCE MFCE
1 1

0.5 0.5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Error (E) Change of error (CE)

(a) (b)

Figure 7. FLC with seven MFs for (a) E and (b) CE.

Table 1. Fuzzy control rules based on seven MFs.

Change of Error (CE)

Error (E)
MFCE1 MFCE2 MFCE3 MFCE4 MFCE5 MFCE6 MFCE7
MFE1 ONB ONB ONB ONB ONM ONS OZ
MFE2 ONB ONB ONB ONM ONS OZ OPS
MFE3 ONB ONB ONM ONS OZO OPS OPM
MFE4 ONB ONM ONS OZ OPS OPM OPB
MFE5 ONM ONS OZ OPS OPM OPB OPB
MFE6 ONS OZ OPS OPM OPB OPB OPB
MFE7 OZ OPS OPM OPB OPB OPB OPB
ONB = output negative big, ONM = output negative medium, ONS = output negative small, OZ = output zero,
OPS = output positive small, OPM = output positive medium, and OPB = output positive big.

The input vector and control rules are then defined. The optimization process described in
the previous section can be performed by evaluating the objective function given in Equation (13)
with the Simulink model shown in Figure 6 for a suitable running time of Tr = 0.2 s. In this design
illustration, the optimization process based on LSA is started by initializing the following parameters:
the number of iterations (T) as 100, number of populations (N) as 20, dimension of the problem (D) as
14, and maximum channels as 10. After the creation of the initial population and the calculation of the
corresponding objective function for each input vector in the population, LSA updates the population
and initiates a new iteration. If LSA reaches the maximum iteration, then the FLC with the best MF is
obtained (Figure 5). This result indicates that the proposed approach provides a systematic and easy
way to design FLCs for PV inverter control systems.

6. Fuzzy Logic PV Inverter Controller Implementation Based eZdsp F28335

The implementation in the hardware of the developed optimized FLC for PV inverter using eZdsp
F28335 control board is essential to appraise the performance of the controller in real time. Therefore,
the implementation to test the optimized FLC-based PV inverter is performed in the laboratory.
‐
6.1. eZdsp F28335 Controller
The eZdsp F28335 board is appropriate for the inverter control platform because of its ability
to link the MATLAB/Simulink inverter model to the real-time hardware. It is an inexpensive
standalone digital controller that contains an analog-to-digital converter (ADC), a digital input/output,
and a TMS320F28335 floating-point DSP. In the controller,‐ Code Composer Studio (CCS) and
‐ ‐
‐

‐ ‐
Energies 2016, 9, 120 11 of 32

MATLAB/Simulink should be operated properly. The Simulink PV inverter model is compiled,

converted to C-code, and then automatically linked to the real-time TMS320F28335 processor through
MATLAB/Simulink. During the linking process, a user should include eZdsp input–output (I/O)
interface blocks, such as ADC, and the enhanced PWM (ePWM) in the Simulink models. The
behavior and performance of the inverter can be monitored in real time by applying the CCS
software. The most important features of the eZdsp F28335 board include a TMS320F28335 digital
signal controller, 150 MHz operating speed, 68 Kb on-chip RAM, 512 Kb on-chip flash memory, 256
Kb off-chip SRAM memory, and on-chip 12-bit ADC with 16 input channels. These components
constitute the eZdsp F28335 board, which is suitable for prototype development and cost-sensitive,
‐ ‐
rapid-control prototyping.
‐ ‐ ‐
6.2. Control Algorithm Implementation ‐
‐
The control algorithm described in Section 2 is implemented with the eZdsp F28335 board.
This algorithm initially reads the measured voltages Va , Vb , and Vc through LEM LV25-P sensors.
Therefore, three sensors are utilized to interface the output voltages of the inverter with the eZdsp
F28335 board. These three sensors decrease the voltages to a level suitable for the‐ eZdsp F28335 working
voltages, and these voltages are fed to the ADC channels of the eZdsp F28335 for additional processing.
Va , Vb , and Vc are then transformed into the d–q reference frame, and E and CE are calculated in
per unit according to Equations (6) and (7), respectively. The resulting E and CE are fed to the FLC to
control the steady-state error and the output voltage.
Space vector PWM (SVPWM) is employed in the inverter control algorithm to produce sinusoidal
‐
AC waveforms from the three-phase voltage source inverter [30,31]. Each output signal cycle is divided
into six sections that resemble a hexagon (Figure ‐ 8). Vre f and α in each sector are the products of two
adjacent nonzero and zero vectors, respectively. The hexagon consists of sixαnonzero vectors, namely,
V 1 , V 2 , . . . , V 6 , and two zero vectors, particularly V 0 and V 7 [32]. The PWM control includes the
modulation index (MI),, which , … , is necessary to improve the accuracy and
by decreasing the total harmonic
distortion (THD) of the output signals from the inverter [33]. The MI is computed as follows:

Vp1
MI “ (17)
Vp1six

where Vp1 is the maximum fundamental voltage, and Vp1six is the maximum fundamental voltage
V 2 V
through a six-step‐ operation. Thus, Vp1six
V “ V , where VVdc is the DC-link
‐ voltage [30]. The remainder
πV ,
dc
of Ts is filled with the zero space vectors V0 and V7 . The time shares are calculated as follows [34]:

Figure 8. Space vector PWM diagram.

√3 ∙ ∙
sin π α
3
Energies 2016, 9, 120 12 of 32

? ˇ ˇ
3¨ Ts ¨ ˇVre f ˇ
ˇ ˇ ´n ¯
T1 “ sin π´α (18)
Vdc 3
? ˇ ˇ
3¨ Ts ¨ ˇVre f ˇ
ˇ ˇ ˆ ˙
n´1
T2 “ √3 ∙ ∙ sin α ´ π (19)
Vdc sin α 3 1π
3
T0 “ Ts ´ pT1 ` T2 q (20)

where n = 1 to 6 are the sectors at 0 ď α ď π/3; T1 , T2 , and T0 are the time vectors of the respective
voltage vectors; Ts is the switching0 time; π⁄3 α is the angle of the reference vector relative to the
α and
space vector. T α
The inverter uses the optocoupler in the driver circuit to establish the interface of the SVPWM to
the IGBT. The voltage values of the produced SVPWM switching signals are appropriate for the IGBT
working voltage to achieve an effective inverter switching operation.

7. Experimental PV Inverter Control System

The real-time model shown in Figure 9 is utilized to implement the PV inverter control system
through eZdsp ‐ F28335 board. In this model, the employed eZdsp F28335 I/O blocks include
C280x/C28x3x ADC, unit16, and C280x/C28x2833x ePWM. The inverter output voltages, particularly
Va , Vb , and Vc , are sampled via C280x/C28x3x ADC. These voltages are then converted to digital
values for processing. The C280x/C28x2833x ePWM block produces the PWM switching signals for
the IGBTs.

‐
Figure 9. Real-time implementation of the eZdsp F28335 inverter system algorithm.

Referring to Figure 9, the first block is the ADC C280x/C28x3x. The ADC module which has
‐
16 channels, is configurable as two independent 8-channel modules (module A and module B) to service
‐
the ePWM modules. The two independent 8-channel modules can be cascaded to form a 16-channel
‐
module. Multiple input channels and two sequencers are available with only one converter in the
‐
ADC module. The two 8-channel modules can auto sequence a series of conversions with each module
having the choice of selecting any one of the respective eight channels available through an analog
‐
MUX. In the cascaded mode, the auto sequencer functions as a single 16-channel sequencer. On each
sequencer, once the conversion is completed, the selected channel value is stored in its respective
ADCRESULT register. Auto sequencing allows the system to convert the same channel multiple times.
‐ ‐
Functions of the ADC module include a 12-bit ADC core with built-in dual sample-and-hold (S/H),
‐ ‐
‐
0 0

4096 0 3
3
Energies 2016, 9, 120 13 of 32

and analog input from 0 V to 3 V. The analog input for the ADC is in the range of 0 to 3 V. As the ADC
is 12-bit, the digital value of the input analog voltage is calculated as:
$
’
’ 0 input ď 0 V
Input Analog Voltage
&
Digital Value “ 4096 ˆ 0 V ă input ă 3 V (21)
’
’ 3
4095 input ě 3 V
%

From Equation (21), the digital output is from 0 to the 4095. To remove the bias from the
digital signal and get the actual signal, it must be subtracted from half of the highest value (4095).
Experimentally, the half of the highest value is found to be 2058. As the control procedure is working
in per unit (p.u.), therefore the actual signal should be converted to p.u. signal. The actual signal
should be divided by the highest value for converting to p.u. signal. Therefore, the actual signal is
dived by 1240 to get the p.u. signal.
The C280x/C28x2833x ePWM block is one of the most important blocks in the eZdsp F28335
control board for PV inverter control. As shown in Figure 9, three ePWM blocks are used. Each ePWM
block is responsible to generate the switching for the switching devices (IGBTs) in each inverter leg.
The dead-time which is the time delay between the upper switch (e.g. IGBT1) turning ON time and
lower switch (e.g., IGBT4) turning OFF time should be taken into account. The dead-band sub-module
supports independent values for rising-edge (RED) and falling-edge (FED) delays. The amount of
delay is programmed using the dead-band RED (DBRED) and dead-band FED (DBFED) registers.
Since the DBRED and DBFED are 10-bits, they can be set to values from 0 to 1023. The rising-edge-delay
and falling-edge-delay can be calculated as:

DBRED
RED “ (22)
CPU clock
DBFED
FED “ (23)
CPU clock
where DBFED is the dead-band FED and DBRED is the dead-band RED.
In the experiment, 25 SolarTIFSTF-120P6 PV modules with a peak capacity of 3 kW are utilized to
supply the load. The modules are subsequently arranged in a series-connected configuration; thus, a
DC output voltage of 435 V is produced. The characteristics of the SolarTIFSTF-120P6 PV module are
shown in Table 2. Solar irradiation and temperature are the two main parameters responsible for the
output power of the solar cell. The mathematical model of the PV electrical circuit is represented by
the output of the cell current, which is obtained as follows [35–38]:

qpV ` I. Rs
¨ ˛
˚ p q
‹ V ` I.Rs
IPV “ I ph ´ Io ˝e n.K B .T ´ 1‚´ (24)
Rsh

where IPV is cell output current (A), I ph is the light-generated current (A), Io is the cell reverse saturation
current or dark current (A), q is the electronic charge (1.6 ˆ 10´19 C), V is the cell output voltage (V),
n is the ideality factor, KB is the Boltzmann’s constant (1.38 ˆ 10´23 J/K), T is the cell temperature (K),
and RS is the internal resistance of the stack.
The short-circuit current Isc,n under the nominal condition and that at the short-circuit current
temperature coefficient α are provided in Table 2. The PV characteristics are programmed in the PV
simulator Chroma 62050H-600s to represent the actual variation of voltage and current.
Energies 2016, 9, 120 14 of 32

Table 2. PV module characteristics.

PV Module Type: SolarTIFSTF-120P6 Values

No. of modules in series (NS ) 25
No. of modules in parallel (NP ) 1
Maximum Power (P MPP ) 3 kW
Open circuit voltage (Voc ) 537.5 V
Short circuit current (Isc ) 7.63 A
Voltage at maximum power (V MPP ) 435 V
Current At maximum power (I MPP ) 6.89 A
Current temperature coefficient (α) 6.928 mA/˝ C
Voltage temperature coefficient (β) ´0.068 V/˝ C

In the inverter input stage, the configuration of the PV modules in series, parallel, or combination
is responsible for the current IPV and voltage VPV of the PV system. In the proposed PV system, IPV
and VPV are expressed as follows:
” ı
VPV “ NS Vre f ´ β pT ´ Tn q ´ Rs pT ´ Tn q (25)
„ ˆ ˙
β
G G
IPV “ NP Ire f ´ α pT ´ Tn q ` ISC ´1 (26)
Gn Gn
α 1
where NS is the series module number, Vre f is the PV reference voltage, β is the voltage temperature
coefficient, T is the stack temperature, Tn is the nominal temperature, NP is βthe parallel module number,
Ire f is the PV reference current, G is the irradiance, and Gn is the nominal irradiance. The inverter
prototype is developed and verified on based on the experimental setup shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Experimental setup for the proposed PV inverter control system.

‐
8. Results and Discussion
‐
‐
The PV inverter system depicted in Figure ‐ 6 is used to
‐ evaluate ‐the proposed ‐ LSA-based FLC
(LSA-FL) optimization method and the robustness of the overall system. Figure 11 shows the
‐
convergence characteristics
‐
of LSA-FL
‐
to determine the best optimal
‐
solution for the test system, along
with the results obtained with‐ DSA-based
‐ FLC (DSA-FL) and PSO-based‐ FLC (PSO-FL) optimization
methods. For a fair comparison, all optimization algorithms used the same parameters (i.e., problem
‐
dimension, population, and iteration). Figure 11 shows that LSA-FL converges faster than DSA-FL and
PSO-FL. The optimal solution generated with LSA-FL is also better than those generated with DSA-FL
Energies 2016, 9, 120 15 of 32

and PSO-FL. The optimum performance of LSA-FL shown in Figure 11 is obtained when both FLCs
that represent Vd and Vq accomplish the MFs shown in Figure 12. In consideration of its effectiveness,
only FL-LSA is used to evaluate the performance of the overall PV inverter system when subjected to
different types of loads.

LSA-FL

Mean objective function

0.3 DSA-FL
PSO-FL
0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0 20 40 60 80 100
Iteration
‐ ‐ ‐
Figure 11. Performance comparisons based on LSA-FL, DSA-FL, and PSO-FL.
‐ ‐ ‐
Degree of membership function

Degree of membership function

MFE1 MFE2 MFE3 MFE4 MFE5 MFE6 MFE7 MFCE1 MFCE2 MFCE3 MFCE4 MFCE5 MFCE6 MFCE7
1 1

0.8 0.8 ‐ ‐ ‐

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0 0
-4 -2 0 2 4 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
Error (E) Change of error (CE)
(a) (b)

Figure 12. Optimized MFs of (a) E and (b) CE using LSA.

8.1. Results with Resistive Load (R)

A simulation is conducted with a resistive load of 1500 W for 0.1 s as can be shown in Figure 13a.
Furthermore, the experiment is conducted in the laboratory to evaluate the overall performance of
the proposed fuzzy logic PV inverter controller. Experimental voltage waveforms are measured with
differential probes with a scale (X200), as depicted Figure 13b.

400 Va Vb Vc
300
200
Voltage (V)

100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Time (s)
(a)

Figure 13. Cont.

Energies 2016, 9, 120 16 of 32

(b)
‐
Figure 13. Output voltage waveforms (i.e., Va , Vb , and Vc ) of the three-phase inverter with R load for
(a) simulation and (b) experimental.
‐

Both the simulation and experimental output voltage waveforms of the inverter, namely, Va ,
Vb , and Vc , are sinusoidal with 50 Hz, and no negative effect exists, such as overshoot or oscillation.
The shift is 120˝ between each phase. The controller distinctly succeeds in regulating the magnitude
‐
of the phase voltage waveform at approximately 339 V and the rms voltage of 240 V. This result
confirms that the‐ proposed FLC is in accordance with the exact voltage reference; therefore, the
proposed inverter control algorithm is efficient. The three-phase load current waveforms should also
‐
be recorded analysis. The load current waveforms are measured, as shown in Figure 14. Similar to
the three-phase output voltage waveform, the phase load current waveforms in the simulation and
‐
the experimental are successfully regulated through the proposed controller within approximately
3.3 A. The load current waveforms are purely sinusoidal with 50 Hz, and a 120˝ shift is demonstrated
between each phase.

Ia Ib Ic
4
3
2
Current (A)

1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Time (s)
(a)

Figure 14. Cont.

Energies 2016, 9, 120 17 of 32

(b)
‐
Figure 14. Output current waveforms (i.e., Ia , Ib , and Ic ) of the three-phase inverter with R load for (a)
simulation and (b) experimental.
‐
‐
Power factor is essential for the three-phase inverter design to indicate the efficiency of the
‐
proposed inverter and its control algorithm. The goal of the design is to obtain a unity power factor.
Therefore, the voltage and the load current waveforms are measured simultaneously (Figure 15) to
depict the phase difference between these signals. The voltage and the current waveforms exhibit
the same phase angle, which is in accordance with the unity power factor operation, as expected.
The phase relationship of load current and voltage signals in the simulation and the experimental
indicates high efficiency (Figure 15).

400
300
200 4
Voltage (V)

Current (A)

100 2
0 0
-100 -2
-200 -4
-300
-400
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Time (s)
(a)

(b)

Figure 15. Output voltage (Va ) and current load (Ia ) of the inverter with R load for (a) simulation and
(b) experimental.
Energies 2016, 9, 120 18 of 32

The THD of the voltage and current signals are measured in the simulation and the experimental
to verify the quality of the inverter output waveforms. The quality of the waveform is inversely
proportional to the THD percentage. Figures 16 and 17 show the THD percentages of the voltages and
currents obtained for the R load analyzed in this study. Figure 16a,b shows that the THD of the voltage
waveform is 0.56% and 2.1% for the simulation and the experimental, respectively, which satisfies the
IEEE-929-2000 international standard [39].
‐ ‐

Fundamental (50Hz) = 584.7 , THD= 0.56%

100
Mag (% of Fundamental)

80

60

40

20

0
0 50 100 150 200
Harmonic order
(a)

(b)
‐
Figure 16. THD for the phase voltage of the three-phase inverter with R load for (a) simulation and
(b) experimental.

Figure 17a,b shows that the THD of the current waveform is ‐ 0.57%
‐ and 3% for the simulation
and the experimental, respectively, which complies with the IEEE-929-2000 international standard.
The low THD in the voltage and current waveforms is mainly achieved with the robustness of the
proposed FLC. Two tests are conducted to appraise the proposed fuzzy logic PV inverter controller.
The robustness and efficiency of any controller are indicated prominently when perturbation occurs in
DC input voltage or when a change in the value of load occurs. Therefore, two tests were performed,
namely, changing R load and changing DC input voltage, to determine the validity and ability of the
proposed fuzzy logic PV inverter controller.
Energies 2016, 9, 120 19 of 32

Fundamental (50Hz) = 3.395 , THD= 0.57%

100

Mag (% of Fundamental)
80

60

40

20

0
0 50 100 150 200
Harmonic order
(a)

(b)
‐
Figure 17. THD for the phase current of the three-phase inverter with R load for (a) simulation and
(b) experimental.

8.1.1. Step Change in R Load

The effect of a large step change in the load should also be investigated. A change in the load
usually disturbs the voltage, and the controller regulates this disturbance by controlling the MI.
The load decreases from 1500 W to 750 W at 0.4 s. Figure 18a,b illustrates the simulation voltage and
current signals, respectively. Meanwhile, Figure 18c illustrates the experimental voltage and current
signals. Figure 18 illustrates that the decrease in load results in an increase in output voltage waveform,
which changes the E and CE signals. The controller possibly detects these signals, and suitable control
signals are supplied to regulate the inverter output waveforms.
Energies 2016, 9, 120 20 of 32

500
Va Vb Vc
400
300
Voltage (V) 200
100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
-500
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Time (s)
(a)
4 Ia Ib Ic
3
2
Current (A)

1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Time (s)
(b)

(c)

Figure 18. Output waveforms with R load decreasing from 1500 W to 750 W. (a) Simulation voltage
waveforms; (b) simulation current waveforms; and (c) experimental voltage and current waveforms
(Ch. 1, Ch. 2, Ch. 3, and Ch. 4 for Va , Vb , Vc , and Ia , respectively).

Figure 19a,b illustrates the simulation voltage and current, respectively, for load that increases
from 750 W to 1500 W at 1 s. Figure 19c shows the experimental voltage and current signals. The change
in the load disturbs the voltage and the current waveforms.
Energies 2016, 9, 120 21 of 32

500
Va Vb Vc
400
300
200
Voltage (V) 100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
-500
0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
(a)
4
Ia Ib Ic
3
2
Current (A)

1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
(b)

(c)

Figure 19. Output waveforms with R load increasing from 750 W to 1500 W. (a) Simulation voltage
waveforms; (b) simulation current waveforms; and (c) experimental voltage and current waveforms
(Ch. 1, Ch. 2, Ch. 3, and Ch. 4 for Va , Vb , Vc , and Ia , respectively).

The controller regulates the inverter output waveforms successfully. Therefore, the inverter
output responses indicate that the proposed controller is sufficiently robust to achieve a favorable
response to a change in step load.

8.1.2. Step Change in Vdc

The intermittent PV characteristics should be appraised to determine the effectiveness of the
proposed controller. The PV system suffers from a fluctuating DC voltage. Therefore, the change in the
step DC voltage, Vdc , should also be examined to analyze the proposed controller. Vdc is increased
 ܸௗ௖
Energies 2016, 9, 120 22 of 32

from 200 V to 300 V at 1.6ܸsௗ௖to test the proposed controller. Figure 20a,b illustrates the voltage
ܸௗ௖ and
current waveforms, respectively. Meanwhile, Figure 20c illustrates the experimental voltage and
current signals. An increase in Vdc also increases the voltage and current waveforms. Therefore,
ܸ
the proposed controller regulates the inverterௗ௖output waveforms successfully; thus, the proposed
controller is implemented successfully.

700
600 Va Vb Vc
Vdc=200V Vdc=300V
500
400
300
Voltage (V)

200
100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
-500
1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9
Time (s)
(a)
7
6 Ia Ib Ic
Vdc=200V Vdc=300V
5
4
3
Current (A)

2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9
Time (s)
(b)

(c)
ܸௗ௖
Figure 20. Output waveforms with Vdc increasing from 200 V to 300 V with R load. (a) Simulation
voltage waveforms; (b) simulation current
ܸௗ௖ waveforms;
ܸ௔ ‫ܫ‬௔ and (c) experimental voltage and current
waveforms (Ch. 1, Ch. 2, and Ch. 3 for Vdc , Va , and Ia , respectively).

Vdc is decreased from 300 V to 200 V at 2.2 s to evaluate further the proposed controller. The voltage
and current waveforms are illustrated in Figure 21a,b, respectively. Meanwhile, Figure 21c shows
the experimental voltage and current waveforms. The decrease in Vdc decreases the inverter voltage
and current output waveforms. The proposed FLC successfully regulates the voltage and current
 ܸௗ௖
Energies 2016, 9, 120 23 of 32
ܸௗ௖

waveforms. This finding indicates that the proposed controller can deal with the change in Vdc with
different
ܸௗ௖ loads, and it can be efficiently used in PV systems.

700
600 Va Vb Vc
Vdc=300V Vdc=200V
500
400
300
Voltage (V)

200
100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
-500
1.9 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5
Time (s)
(a)
7
6 Ia Ib Ic
Vdc=300V Vdc=200V
5
4
3
Current (A)

2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
1.9 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5
Time (s)
(b)

(c)
ܸௗ௖
Figure 21. Waveforms with Vdc decreasing from 300 V to 200 V with R load. (a) Simulation voltage
waveforms; (b) simulation current
ܸௗ௖ ܸ௔waveforms;
‫ܫ‬௔ and (c) experimental voltage and current waveforms
(Ch. 1, Ch. 2, and Ch. 3 for Vdc , Va , and Ia , respectively).

8.2. Results with Resistive and Inductive Load (RL)

Another type of load is used to test the robustness of the controller. In this case, RL load
represented by a motor with a capacity of 1 hp is used. The equivalent circuit for this motor is equal
to (89.9161 + j57.509). Therefore, the values of the RL load are R = 89.9161 Ω and L = 183.1 mH.
Energies 2016, 9, 120 24 of 32

The simulation is performed for 0.1 s, as depicted in Figure 22a. Figure 22bΩshows the experimental
voltage waveforms of the three-phase inverter, namely, Va , Vb , and Vc . The voltage waveforms are
‐
not affected by a change in the load type. The controller still succeeds in preserving the magnitude of
the AC voltage signals for the three-phase inverter at approximately 339 V. The waveforms are stable,
‐
clean, and balanced at 50 Hz. The displacement between each two phase is 120˝ .

400 Va Vb Vc
300
200
Voltage (V)

100
0
-100
-200
300
-400
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Time (s)
(a)

(b)
‐
Figure 22. Output voltage waveforms (i.e., Va , Vb , and Vc ) of the three-phase inverter with RL load for
(a) simulation and (b) experimental.
‐
The simulation and experimental three-phase load current waveforms are presented in
Figure 23a,b, respectively, to observe the effect of RL load on the current waveform. The change
in load type does not affect the quality of the current waveforms. The waveforms remain stable,
and the controller achieves a constant peak level with approximately 1.95 A and an approximately
1.37 A¨ rms. The waveforms remain balanced at 50 Hz, and they are displaced by 120˝ between each
two phases.
Energies 2016, 9, 120 25 of 32

3
Ia Ib Ic
2

1
Current (A)
0

-1

-2

-3
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Time (s)
(a)

(b)
‐
Figure 23. Output current waveforms (i.e., Ia , Ib , and Ic ) of the three-phase inverter with RL load for
(a) simulation and (b) experimental. ‐

The phase shift between the voltage and current with RL load is also measured to evaluate the
controller further. Figure 24a,b illustrates the simulation and experimental output voltage (Va ) and
current load (Ia ). The figure indicates that the power factor of the RL load is 84.2%, which means that
the load current lags behind the voltage waveform by 32.6˝ .

400 4
300 3
200 2
Voltage (V)

Current (A)

100 1
0 0
-100 -1
-200 -2
-300 -3
()
-400 -4
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1
Time (s)
(a)

Figure 24. Cont.

Energies 2016, 9, 120 26 of 32

(b)
ሺܸ௔ ሻ ሺ‫ܫ‬௔ ሻ
Figure 24. Output voltage (Va ) and current load (Ia ) of the inverter with RL load for (a) simulation and
(b) experimental.
ሺܸ௔ ሻ ሺ‫ܫ‬௔ ሻ

The THD for the inverter output waveforms are also measured to verify the quality of the signals
when the inverter is connected with RL load. Figure 25a,b shows the voltage THD for the simulation
and the experimental. Figure 25 clearly shows that the controller succeeds in maintaining the voltage
THD at a small percentage of 0.54% and 2.7% for the simulation and the experimental, respectively.
The current THDs for the simulation and the experimental are shown in Figure 26. The controller also
succeeds in maintaining the current THD of 1.15% and 3.6% for the ‐ simulation
‐ and the experimental,
respectively. This finding indicates that the controller can successfully deal with RL load, and clean
waveforms can be supplied, thereby meeting the IEEE-929-2000 international standard.
‐ ‐

Fundamental (50Hz) = 584 , THD= 0.54%

100
Mag (% of Fundamental)

80

60

40

20
r
0
0 50 100 150 200
Harmonic order
(a)

Figure 25. Cont.

Energies 2016, 9, 120 27 of 32

(b)
‐
Figure 25. THD for the phase voltage of the three-phase inverter with RL load for (a) simulation and
‐
(b) experimental.

Fundamental (50Hz) = 1.953 , THD= 1.15%

100
Mag (% of Fundamental)

80

60

40

20

0
0 50 100 150 200
Harmonic order
(a)

(b)
‐
Figure 26. THD for the phase current of the three-phase inverter with RL load for (a) simulation and
(b) experimental.
Energies 2016, 9, 120 28 of 32

Step Change Vdc

ܸ
The step change inௗ௖Vdc is also implemented for RL load to appraise the robustness of the proposed
FLC controller. Vdc is increasedܸfrom
ௗ௖ 250 V to 350 V to determine the effect of a step change in the DC
ܸௗ௖
on the inverter output waveforms when the inverter is connected to an RL load. Figure 27 shows the
inverter response with DC step change. Figure 27a,b illustrates the simulation voltage and current
signals when Vdc increased from 250 V to 350 V at 0.4 s. Meanwhile, Figure 27c shows experimental
ܸௗ௖
voltage and current waveforms.

700
600 Va Vb Vc
Vdc=250V Vdc=350V
500
400
300
Voltage (V)

200
100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
-500
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Time (s)
(a)
5
Ia Ib Ic
4
Vdc=250V Vdc=350V
3
Current (A)

2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Time (s)
(b)

(c)
ܸௗ௖
Figure 27. Output waveforms with Vdc increasing from 250 V to 350 V with RL load. (a) Simulation
voltage waveforms; (b) simulation current waveforms;
ܸௗ௖ ܸ௔ ‫ܫ‬௔
and (c) experimental voltage and current
waveforms (Ch. 1, Ch. 2, and Ch. 3 for Vdc , Va , and Ia , respectively).

Figure 27 shows that the DC step change leads to an increase in voltage and current waveforms.
In this case, the controller succeeds in regulating the inverter output waveforms, and the effect of the
overshoot is limited with a short time. Figure 28a,b illustrates the voltage and current signals when
Energies 2016, 9, 120 29 of 32

Vdc changes from 350 V to 250 V at 1 s with RL load. Figure 28c shows the experimental voltage and
ܸௗ௖
current waveforms. Figure 28 clearly shows that the proposed FLC controller succeeds in regulating
the voltage and current waveforms with a slight drop. Figure 28 indicates that the proposed FLC can
also effectively deal with RL load with high efficiency.

700
600 Va Vb Vc
Vdc=350V Vdc=250V
500
400
Voltage (V)

300
200
100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
(a)
5
Ia Ib Ic
4
Vdc=350V Vdc=250V
3
Current (A)

2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Time (s)
(b)

(c)

ௗ௖ ܸ
Figure 28. Waveforms with Vdc decreasing from 250 V to 350 V with RL load. (a) Simulation voltage
waveforms; (b) simulation current waveforms; and (c) experimental voltage and current waveforms
ܸௗ௖ ܸ௔ ‫ܫ‬௔
(Ch. 1, Ch. 2, and Ch. 3 for Vdc , Va , and Ia , respectively).

9. Conclusions
‐
‐
This paper has presented a novel nature-inspired optimization technique called as the LSA to
enhance the performance of the three-phase PV inverter and its practical implementation using the
eZdsp F28335 controller board. The LSA is applied to optimally tune the MFs of the FLC based PV
inverter instead of manual tuning. To optimize the MFs of the FLC, a suitable objective function is
Energies 2016, 9, 120 30 of 32

formulated by minimizing the MSE of the inverter output voltage. A comparative study with DSA and
PSO techniques was performed to validate and compare the performance of the LSA. The simulations
results showed that the FLC with optimally tuned MFs using the LSA performs well in tracking the
reference value and regulating the output voltage waveforms at the desired amplitude for various
loads. In addition, the LSA gives better results with high convergence rate compared to the DSA and
PSO techniques.
To demonstrate the functionality of the proposed method, a hardware prototype of the optimal
FLC based PV inverter is developed and compiled using the eZdsp F28335 controller board.
The real-time model for the optimized FLC using LSA was first developed in the MATLAB environment
to generate PWM switching signals for the IGBTs of the inverter. Thereafter, the developed controller
was implemented in hardware using the eZdsp F28335 controller board in a prototype three-phase
voltage source inverter. The developed PV inverter model was compiled, converted to the C-code,
and automatically linked to the real-time TMS320F28335 processor board. The performance and
behavior of the inverter was monitored in real-time by developing a GUI program in the CCS
software. The experimental results with the prototype PV inverter showed that the proposed controller
successfully regulated the inverter output waveform when connected to the resistive and combined
resistive and inductive loads and also demonstrated the ability to handle changing DC input voltage
and changing load. High quality inverter output voltage waveforms were obtained with low voltage
THD values of 2.1% and 2.7% for the resistive and combined resistive and inductive loads, respectively.
Furthermore, low current THD values of 3% and 3.6% are obtained for the resistive and resistive
inductive loads, respectively. Therefore, the developed prototype optimum fuzzy logic based PV
inverter controller implemented using the eZdsp F28335 control board is considered a useful device to
be use in stand-alone and grid-connected PV systems.

Acknowledgments: The authors are grateful to Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia for supporting this research
financially under grant no. ETP-2013-044.
Author Contributions: Ammar Hussein Mutlag is a PhD student implementing the project and he is the
corresponding author of the manuscript. Azah Mohamed is the main supervisor of the student who leads
the project and edits the manuscript. Hussain Shareef is the co-supervisor of the student who has edited the
manuscript and given valuable suggestions to improve the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Sperati, S.; Alessandrini, S.; Pinson, P.; Kariniotakis, G. The Weather Intelligence for Renewable Energies
Benchmarking Exercise on Short-Term Forecasting of Wind and Solar Power Generation. Energies 2015, 8,
9594–9619. [CrossRef]
2. Chel, A.; Tiwari, G.N.; Chandra, A. Simplified method of sizing and life cycle cost assessment of building
integrated photovoltaic system. Energy Build. 2009, 41, 1172–1180. [CrossRef]
3. Blaabjerg, F.; Chen, Z.; Kjaer, S. Power electronics as efficient interface in dispersed power generation systems.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2004, 19, 1184–1194. [CrossRef]
4. Ortega, R.; Figueres, E.; Garcerá, G.; Trujillo, C.L.; Velasco, D. Control techniques for reduction of the total
harmonic distortion in voltage applied to a single-phase inverter with nonlinear loads: Review. Renew. Sust.
Energ. Rev. 2012, 16, 1754–1761. [CrossRef]
5. Ryu, T. Development of Power Conditioner Using Digital Controls for Generating Solar Power. Oki Tech. Rev.
2009, 76, 40–43.
6. Selvaraj, J.; Rahim, N.A. Multilevel Inverter for Grid-Connected PV System Employing Digital PI Controller.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2009, 56, 149–158. [CrossRef]
7. Sanchis, P.; Ursaea, A.; Gubia, E.; Marroyo, L. Boost DC-AC Inverter: A New Control Strategy. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 2005, 20, 343–353. [CrossRef]
8. Ghani, Z.A.; Hannan, M.A.; Mohamed, A. Simulation model linked PV inverter implementation utilizing
dSPACE DS1104 controller. Energy Build. 2013, 57, 65–73. [CrossRef]
Energies 2016, 9, 120 31 of 32

9. Daud, M.Z.; Mohamed, A.; Hannan, M.A. An Optimal Control Strategy for DC Bus Voltage Regulation in
Photovoltaic System with Battery Energy Storage. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 271087. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
10. Liserre, M.; Dell’Aquila, A.; Blaabjerg, F. Genetic Algorithm-Based Design of the Active Damping for an
LCL-Filter Three-Phase Active Rectifier. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2004, 19, 76–86. [CrossRef]
11. Li, W.; Man, Y.; Li, G. Optimal parameter design of input filters for general purpose inverter based on genetic
algorithm. Appl. Math. Comput. 2008, 205, 697–705. [CrossRef]
12. Sundareswaran, K.; Jayant, K.; Shanavas, T.N. Inverter Harmonic Elimination through a Colony of
Continuously Exploring Ants. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2007, 54, 2558–2565. [CrossRef]
13. Mohamed, Y.A.I.; El Saadany, E.F. Hybrid Variable-Structure Control with Evolutionary Optimum-Tuning
Algorithm for Fast Grid-Voltage Regulation Using Inverter-Based Distributed Generation. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 2008, 23, 1334–1341. [CrossRef]
14. Rai, A.K.; Kaushika, N.D.; Singh, B.; Agarwal, N. Simulation model of ANN based maximum power point
tracking controller for solar PV system. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2011, 95, 773–778. [CrossRef]
15. Ali, J.A.; Hannan, M.A.; Mohamed, A. A Novel Quantum-Behaved Lightning Search Algorithm Approach
to Improve the Fuzzy Logic Speed Controller for an Induction Motor Drive. Energies 2015, 8, 13112–13136.
[CrossRef]
16. Sakhar, A.; Davari, A.; Feliachi, A. Fuzzy logic control of fuel cell for stand-alone and grid connection.
J. Power Sources 2004, 135, 165–176. [CrossRef]
17. Thiagarajan, Y.; Sivakumaran, T.S.; Sanjeevikumar, P. Design and Simulation of FUZZY Controller for a Grid
connected Stand Alone PV System. In Proceedings of the EEE Conference on Computing, Communication
and Networking (ICCCn’08), St. Thomas, VI, USA, 18–20 December 2008; pp. 1–6.
18. Hong, Y.-Y.; Hsieh, Y.-L. Interval Type-II Fuzzy Rule-Based STATCOM for Voltage Regulation in the Power
System. Energies 2015, 8, 8908–8923. [CrossRef]
19. Altin, N.; Sefa, I. dSPACE based adaptive neuro-fuzzy controller of grid interactive inverter.
Energy Conv. Manag. 2012, 56, 130–139. [CrossRef]
20. Collotta, M.; Messineo, A.; Nicolosi, G.; Pau, G. A Dynamic Fuzzy Controller to Meet Thermal Comfort by
Using Neural Network Forecasted Parameters as the Input. Energies 2014, 7, 4727–4756. [CrossRef]
21. Cheng, P.C.; Peng, B.R.; Liu, Y.H.; Cheng, Y.S.; Huang, J.W. Optimization of a Fuzzy-Logic-Control-Based
MPPT Algorithm Using the Particle Swarm Optimization Technique. Energies 2015, 8, 8534–8561. [CrossRef]
22. Shareef, H.; Mutlag, A.H.; Mohamed, A. A novel approach for fuzzy logic PV inverter controller optimization
using lightning search algorithm. Neurocomputing 2015, 168, 435–453. [CrossRef]
23. Nasiri, R.; Radan, A. Pole-placement control strategy for 4 leg voltage source inverters. In Proceedings
of the IEEE Conference on Power Electronic & Drive Systems & Technologies (PEDSTC‘10), Tehran, Iran,
17–18 February 2010; pp. 74–82.
24. Thandi, G.S.; Zhang, R.; Zhing, K.; Lee, F.C.; Boroyevich, D. Modeling, control and stability analysis of
a PEBB based DC DPS. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 1999, 14, 497–505. [CrossRef]
25. Mohan, N.; Undeland, T.M.; Robbins, W.P. Power Electronics: Converters, Applications, and Design, 3rd ed.;
John Wiley and Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2003.
26. Altin, N.; Ozdemir, S. Three-phase three-level grid interactive inverter with fuzzy logic based maximum
power point tracking controller. Energy Conv. Manag. 2013, 69, 17–26. [CrossRef]
27. Hazzab, A.; Bousserhane, I. K.; Zerbo, M.; Sicard, P. Real Time Implementation of Fuzzy Gain Scheduling of
PI Controller for Induction Motor Machine Control. Neural Process. Lett. 2006, 24, 203–215. [CrossRef]
28. Cheng, C.H. Design of output filter for inverters using fuzzy logic. Expert Syst. Appl. 2011, 38, 8639–8647.
[CrossRef]
29. Elmas, C.; Deperlioglu, O.; Sayan, H.H. Adaptive fuzzy logic controller for DC–DC converters.
Expert Syst. Appl. 2009, 36, 1540–1548. [CrossRef]
30. Rajkumar, M.V.; Manoharan, P.S.; Ravi, A. Simulation and an experimental investigation of SVPWM
technique on a multilevel voltage source inverter for photovoltaic systems. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst.
2013, 52, 116–131. [CrossRef]
31. Rajkumar, M.V.; Manoharan, P.S. FPGA based multilevel cascaded inverters with SVPWM algorithm for
photovoltaic system. Sol. Energy 2013, 87, 229–245. [CrossRef]
32. Behera, S.; Das, S.P.; Doradla, S.R. Quasi-resonant inverter-fed direct torque controlled induction motor
drive. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2007, 77, 946–955. [CrossRef]
Energies 2016, 9, 120 32 of 32

33. Durgasukumar, G.; Pathak, M.K. Comparison of adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy-based space-vector modulation for
two-level inverter. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst 2012, 38, 9–19. [CrossRef]
34. Saribulut, L.; Teke, A.; Tumay, M. Vector-based reference location estimating for space vector modulation
technique. Electr. Power Syst. Res 2012, 86, 51–60. [CrossRef]
35. Yazdani, A.; Fazio, A.R.D.; Ghoddami, H.; Russo, M.; Kazerani, M.; Jatskevich, J.; Strunz, K.; Leva, S.;
Martinez, J.A. Modeling guidelines and a benchmark for power system simulation studies of three phase
single stage photovoltaic systems. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2011, 26, 1247–1264. [CrossRef]
36. Lijun, G.; Roger, A.; Shengyi, D.L.; Albena, P.I. Parallel-connected solar PV system to address partial and
rapidly fluctuating shadow conditions. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2012, 56, 1548–1556. [CrossRef]
37. El Amrani, A.; Mahrane, A.; Moussa, F.Y.; Boukennous, Y. Solar module fabrication. Int. J. Photoenergy 2007,
2007, 27610. [CrossRef]
38. Young-Hyok, J.; Doo-Yong, J.; Jun-Gu, K.; Jae-Hyung, K.; Tae-Won, L.; Chung-Yuen, W. A real maximum
power point tracking method for mismatching compensation in PV array under partially shaded conditions.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2011, 26, 1001–1009.
39. IEEE Std 929-2000. Recommended Practices for Utility Interface of Photovoltaic System. The Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers: New York, NY, USA, 2000.

© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution
(CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).