As discussed in Section 2, [Z.sub.0] should be far greater than p in order to ensure the robustness and stability of the proposed SMESC scheme.
Figure 10 presents the simulation results obtained for the output power using the proposed SMESC scheme given a uniform irradiance of 1000 W/[m.sup.2].
To evaluate the robustness and ability of the SMESC scheme to track the MPP given dramatic variations in the irradiance conditions, a simulation was performed in which the irradiance was suddenly reduced from 1000 W/[m.sup.2] to 400 W/[m.sup.2] after 1.5 s and then restored to 1000 W/[m.sup.2] after an interval of 2.5 s.
Figure 13 compares the MPPT performance of the P&O, INC, and SMESC schemes given a uniform irradiance of 1000 W/[m.sup.2].
Having demonstrated the basic validity of the proposed SMESC controller via MATLAB simulations, a series of experimental investigations was performed using the hardware architecture shown in Figure 14 to evaluate the real-world applicability of the proposed scheme.
Figure 15 presents a block diagram showing the implementation of the SMESC scheme using the dSPACE control board.
In addition, it is observed that the SMESC controller responds rapidly to the step change in the irradiance, thereby further reducing energy losses during the MPPT procedure.
It is seen that the SMESC controller accurately and rapidly tracks the MPP as the irradiance is first reduced and then increased.
Figure 19 compares the experimental output power waveforms obtained using the P&O, INC, and SMESC control schemes, respectively, given a uniform irradiance of 1000 W/[m.sup.2].