PSMG Dfig PDF
PSMG Dfig PDF
PSMG Dfig PDF
AbstractEmerging technologies for marine current turbines Synchronous reference frame index.
are mainly related to works that have been carried out on wind
turbines and ship propellers. It is then obvious that many electric Voltage (V) [current (A)].
generator topologies could be used for marine current turbines. As
in the wind turbine context, doubly-fed induction generators and Active (reactive) power (W).
permanent magnet generators seem to be attractive solutions for Flux (Wb).
harnessing the tidal current energy. In this paper, a comparative
study between these two generator types is presented and fully an- Electromagnetic torque (mechanical torque)
alyzed in terms of generated power, maintenance, and operation (Nm).
constraints. This comparison is done for the Raz de Sein site (Brit-
tany, France) using a multiphysics modeling simulation tool. This Resistance .
tool integrates, in a modular environment, the resource model, the
turbine hydrodynamic model, and generator models. Experiments Inductance (mutual inductance) (H).
have also been carried out to conrm the simulation results.
Total leakage coefcient, .
Index TermsControl, doubly-fed induction generator, marine
current turbine, modeling, permanent magnet synchronous gener- Rotor position (rad).
ator. Angular speed (synchronous speed) (rad/s or
r/min).
NOMENCLATURE Viscosity coefcient (Nm/s).
Fig. 2. Harnessed tidal power and power ratings versus MCT diameter.
(1)
and practical model for tidal current speeds has been derived
However, an MCT can only harness a fraction of this power due [2]
to losses, and (1) is modied as follows:
(3)
(2)
where 95 and 45 are, respectively, the spring and neap tide
For MCTs, is estimated to be in the range 0.350.5 [1]. medium coefcients.
Thus, the extracted power depends mainly on the tidal velocities It can be noticed that an MCT experiences less perturba-
and the turbine sizes (Fig. 2). tions than wind turbine because they are immerged systems. For
2) Resource Model: Tidal current data are given by the MCTs, the main perturbation is the swell effect. Nevertheless,
French Navy Hydrographic and Oceanographic Service at this study is limited to normal operating conditions and does
hourly intervals starting at 6 h before high waters and ending 6 not include swell and other disturbance effects which were pre-
h after. Therefore, knowing the tide coefcient , a simple viously presented and analyzed in [6].
556 IEEE JOURNAL OF OCEANIC ENGINEERING, VOL. 37, NO. 3, JULY 2012
TABLE I
GENERATOR TOPOLOGIES COMPARISON
III. MARINE CURRENT TURBINE VARIABLE-SPEED CONTROL The simulation time has been reduced to seconds to limit the
computation time to realistic ones. In real-world application, the
To illustrate the variable-speed control, a low-power variable-
system mechanical dynamics will be slower than in simulations.
speed xed-pitch MCT-driven DFIG and PMSG have been sim-
Therefore, the MCT inertia was reduced in simulations to take
ulated. The proposed variable-speed control strategy is based on into account the reduced calculation time. The variable-speed
an MPPT. First, the optimal speed reference at each time is control strategy is tested by using a resource rst-order model
computed from the tidal velocity knowledge. This speed refer- for a marine current turbine of 1.44-m diameter and 7.5-kW
ence corresponds to the maximum power which can be mechan- DFIG. This low power corresponds to the test model used for
ically extracted by the turbine for the uid velocity value. Then, experimental validation in Section IV.
classicalspeedcontrolofthegeneratorensures thattherotorspeed The main merit of the DFIG is its capability to deliver con-
converges to based on PI control. The above proposed con- stant voltage and frequency output for 30% speed variation
trol strategy for a DFIG-based MCT is illustrated in Fig. 7. around conventional synchronous speed. It is also possible to
For speed references given by the MPPT strategy, the DFIG- extend the speed variation range from 30% to 50%, however
based MCT control performance is shown in Figs. 8 and 9, re- this requires a larger power converter.
spectively, illustrating the rotor speed tracking performance and The same variable-speed strategy has been adopted for the
the generated active power. PMSG-based MCT control. The obtained results show good
558 IEEE JOURNAL OF OCEANIC ENGINEERING, VOL. 37, NO. 3, JULY 2012
tracking performance for the PMSG rotor speed (Fig. 10). to the type of control which is based on speed control and not
Fig. 11 illustrates the generated active power. While real-world on a direct power control.
applications might take advantage of a direct-drive PMSG, the It can be noticed that the harnessed global power is bigger
simulations presented here use a geared PMSG to be able to with a PMSG-based MCT than with a DFIG-based one. This is
compare them with experimental data. Indeed, experiments mainly due to the limited speed range of the system. Indeed, the
were carried out in a test bench using a geared PMSG driven DFIG cannot reach the MPPT strategy required speed for all the
by a DC motor that emulates hydrodynamic loads as shown tidal velocities. This point will be more detailed in Section V.
in Section IV [2]. This geared PMSG is able to follow the
MPPT in all the speed range. Therefore, as a rst approach, IV. EXPERIMENTAL TESTS
it will have the same behavior as the direct-drive system in
terms of harnessed energy (excluding the supplementary losses A. Experimental Setup
introduced by the gearbox). Experiments were carried out on the experimental setup illus-
In the two cases there are minor differences between the pre- trated in Fig. 12 [2]. This setup allows the physical simulation of
dicted and simulated power. These differences are mainly due a marine power system. The MCT is emulated by a DC motor,
BENELGHALI et al.: GENERATOR SYSTEMS FOR MARINE CURRENT TURBINE APPLICATIONS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY 559
Fig. 8. DFIG rotor speed and its reference. Fig. 9. DFIG active power.
which reproduces the torque and the inertia with respect to cur-
rent tidal speeds and the turbine rotational speed. The DC motor
is rst connected to a 7.5-kW DFIG [Fig. 12(a)] and then con-
nected to a 7.5-kW PMSG [Fig. 12(b)]. Ratings of test equip-
ment are given in Appendixes IIII.
B. Experimental Tests
The experimental test conditions were set closely to the sim-
ulation conditions for both MCT topologies.
For comparison purposes, Figs. 1316 show simulation and
experimental results of the rotor speed tracking performances
and the generated power.
Considering real-world marine conditions, the obtained
results are satisfactory. It should be noted that the setup is
equipped with current and torque limitations that explain some
of Figs. 14 and 16 differences, particularly for high power Fig. 10. PMSG rotor speed and its reference.
generation.
yield and cost. In this study, the comparative criterion is the cap-
tured energy regarding the MCT topology and the effect of the
V. GENERATOR TOPOLOGY COMPARATIVE STUDY
variable-speed range.
The comparison of different generator systems in the liter- The DFIG appears slightly more advantageous than the
ature is generally discussed with criteria based on the energy PMSG since it is a lightweight and low-cost concept [18], [19].
560 IEEE JOURNAL OF OCEANIC ENGINEERING, VOL. 37, NO. 3, JULY 2012
Fig. 13. Experimental and simulated DFIG rotor speed tracking performances.
Fig. 11. PMSG active power.
Fig. 16. PMSG output power: experiments versus simulation [2]. Fig. 18. DFIG-based MCT harnessed energy histogram in one year.
the major prototypes that have been recently tested [1]. Fig. 17
shows the Raz de Sein site tidal histogram, and Figs. 18 and 19
illustrate the annual power extracted by each generator system
for the above MCT rated power.
In this case and for calculation time reasons, simulations are
only based on the use of the resource and the turbine hydrody-
namic model. This means that the turbine generator speed con-
trol is considered to be able to perfectly track the MPPT refer-
ence speed. This assumption appears to be realistic considering
simulations and experiments in low power cases previously pre-
Fig. 20. Rim-driven prototype integrating a radial permanent magnet gener-
sented in Figs. 14 and 16. ator.
The harnessed power from DFIG-based MCT is estimated to
be about 1530 MWh/year. However, the PMSG-based MCT can
extract up to 1916 MWh/year. Thus, over a year, there is a differ- VI. CONCLUSION
ence of about 25% between the two generator systems and this According to the comparative study based on simulation
percentage will grow when using a larger turbine. This differ- and experiments, the PMSG-based MCT has the highest en-
ence is due to speed restrictions imposed on the DFIG. Indeed, ergy yield. It can be concluded that, if solutions based on a
the speed references are limited to 30% of the rated speed. doubly-fed induction generator have been very successful for
These limited speeds, when imposed as reference, correspond wind turbine applications due to the low converter cost, it is
generally to a poor leading to a reduced extracted power. probably not the case in marine turbine applications, except in
562 IEEE JOURNAL OF OCEANIC ENGINEERING, VOL. 37, NO. 3, JULY 2012
special cases where regular maintenance is possible. Moreover, [4] S. Benelghali, M. E. H. Benbouzid, and J. F. Charpentier, Comparison
PMSG direct drives seem much more applicable for marine of PMSG and DFIG for marine current turbine applications, in Proc.
Int. Conf. Electr. Mach., Rome, Italy, Sep. 2010, DOI: 10.1109/ICEL-
applications which require very robust and maintenance-free MACH.2010.5608118.
systems. In this case, the system cost increase is compensated [5] J. S. Couch and I. Bryden, Tidal current energy extraction: Hydro-
by a higher amount of harnessed energy and lower maintenance dynamic resource characteristics, Proc. IMechE M, J. Eng. Maritime
Environ., vol. 220, no. 4, pp. 185194, 2006.
constraints. [6] S. Benelghali, M. E. H. Benbouzid, and J. F. Charpentier, Modeling
In this context, the presented study will be further extended to and control of a marine current turbine driven doubly-fed induction
include direct-drive systems. In fact, a rim-driven prototype has generator, IET Renewable Power Generat., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 111,
Jan. 2010.
been built and its performance will be evaluated and compared [7] G. Mattarolo, P. Caselitz, and M. Geyler, Modelling and simulation
to the above classical topologies (Fig. 20). techniques applied to marine current turbine, in Proc. Int. Conf. Ocean
Energy, Bremerhaven, Germany, 2006.
[8] L. Wand and C. T. Hsiung, Dynamic stability improvement of an
APPENDIX I integrated grid-connected offshore wind farm and marine-current farm
using a STATCOM, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 26, no. 2, pp.
PARAMETERS OF THE SIMULATED AND TESTED DFIG 690698, May 2010, DOI: 10.1109/TPWRS.2010.2061878.
[9] J. W. Park, K. W. Lee, and H. J. Lee, Wide speed operation of a
0.455 doubly-fed induction generator for tidal current energy, in Proc. Annu.
Conf. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc., Busan, Korea, Nov. 2004, vol. 2, pp.
0.084 H 13331338.
0.62 [10] M. Liserre, R. Cardenas, M. Molinas, and J. Rodriguez, Overview of
multi-MW wind turbines and wind parks, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
0.081 H vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 10811095, Apr. 2011.
[11] O. Keysan, A. S. McDonald, and M. Mueller, A direct drive perma-
0.078 H nent magnet generator design for a tidal current turbine (SeaGen), in
0.3125 kg m Proc. IEEE Int. Electr. Mach. Drives Conf., Niagara Falls, ON, Canada,
May 2011, pp. 224229.
6.73 10 Nms [12] J. Clarke, G. Connor, A. Grant, C. Johnstone, and S. Ordonez-Sanchez,
Analysis of a single point tensioned mooring system for station
keeping of a contra-rotating marine current turbine, IET Renewable
APPENDIX II Power Generat., vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 473487, Nov. 2010.
[13] O. Keysan, A. McDonald, M. Mueller, R. Doherty, and M. Hamilton,
PARAMETERS OF THE SIMULATED AND TESTED PMSG C-GEN, a lightweight direct drive generator for marine energy
converters, in Proc. IET Int. Conf. Power Electron. Mach. Drives,
7.5 kW 3000 r/min, 22 Nm Brighton, U.K., Apr. 2010, DOI: 10.1049/cp.2010.0021.
[14] K. Yuen, K. Thomas, M. Grabbe, P. Deglaire, M. Bouquerel, D. Os-
0.173 m terberg, and M. Leijon, Matching a permanent magnet synchronous
0.085 mH generator to a xed pitch vertical axis turbine for marine current en-
ergy conversion, IEEE J. Ocean. Eng., vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 2431, Jan.
0.951 mH 2009.
[15] S. Moury and M. T. Iqbal, A permanent magnet generator with PCB
0.112 Wb stator for low speed marine current applications, in Proc. IEEE Int.
0.0048 kg m Conf. Develop. Renewable Energy Technol., Dakha, Bangladesh, Dec.
2009, pp. 14.
8.5 10 Nms [16] L. Drouen, J. F. Charpentier, E. Semail, and S. Clenet, Study of an
innovative electrical machine tted to marine current turbine, in Proc.
IEEE OCEANS Conf., Aberdeen, Scotland, Jun. 2007, DOI: 10.1109/
APPENDIX III OCEANSE.2007.4302284.
[17] M. Tazil, V. Kumar, R. C. Bansal, S. Kong, Z. Y. Dong, W. Freitas,
PARAMETERS OF THE DC MOTOR and H. D. Mathur, Three-phase doubly fed induction generators: An
overview, IET Power Appl., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 7589, Feb. 2010.
6.5 kW 3850 r/min, 310 V, 24.8 A [18] D. Bang, H. Polinder, G. Shrestha, and J. A. Fereira, Review of gener-
ator systems for direct-drive wind turbines, in Proc. Eur. Wind Energy
78 Conf., Brussels, Belgium, Mar.Apr. 2008, pp. 111.
[19] Y. Duan and R. G. Harley, Present and future trends in wind turbine
0.78 generator designs, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron. Mach. Wind Appl.,
3.6 H Lincoln, NE, Jun. 2009, DOI: 10.1109/PEMWA.2009.5208401.
0.02 kg m
Mohamed El Hachemi Benbouzid (S92M95 INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE
SM98) was born in Batna, Algeria, in 1968. He ENERGY, and the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY. He was
received the B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering an Associate Editor of the IEEE/ASME TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS
from the University of Batna, Batna, Algeria, in from 2006 to 2009.
1990, the M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical and
computer engineering from the National Polytechnic
Institute of Grenoble, Grenoble, France, in 1991 and
1994, respectively, and the Habilitation Diriger des Jean Frdric Charpentier (M02) was born in
Recherches degree from the University of Picardie Tananarive, Madagascar, in 1969. He received the
Jules Verne, Amiens, France, in 2000. M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering
After receiving the Ph.D. degree, he joined the from the National Polytechnic Institute of Toulouse,
Professional Institute of Amiens, University of Picardie Jules Verne, where Toulouse, France, in 1993 and 1996, respectively,
he was an Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering. Since and the Habilitation Diriger des Recherches degree
September 2004, he has been with the Institut Universitaire de Technologie of from the University of Brest, Brest, France, in 2010.
Brest, University of Brest, Brest, France, where he is a Professor of Electrical From 1996 to 1997, he was a Postdoctoral Fellow
Engineering. His main research interests and experience include analysis, at Laval University, Qubec, QC, Canada. From 1997
design, and control of electric machines; variable-speed drives for traction, to 2002, he was an Assistant Professor at the Institut
propulsion, and renewable energy applications; and fault diagnosis of electric Universitaire de Technologie of Brest, University of
machines. Brest, Brest, France. Since 2002, he has been an Associate Professor at the
Prof. Benbouzid is a Senior Member of the IEEE Power Engineering, French Naval Academy, Brest, France. His current research interests include
Industrial Electronics, Industry Applications, Power Electronics, and Ve- design aspects on electrical machines and drives, electrical naval propulsion
hicular Technology Societies. He is an Associate Editor of the IEEE systems, and marine renewable energy.
TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON