You are on page 1of 6

Abstract — The current confluence of energy needs, enhanced

environmental awareness and technical developments has led
vigorous global efforts toward making wind power a key
component of renewable and sustainable energy resources. The
conventional wind generators are induction machine types
having small and limited wind power production and high cost
per unit. Large wind plants involving interior permanent magnet
(IPM) synchronous generators in modern power system is
becoming an engineering challenge throughout the world. Using
IPM wind generator system, the wind turbine can be operated at
its maximum power production point for various wind speeds by
adjusting its shaft speed to its optimal generated electrical power
from wind energy. The objective of this invited paper is to
provide a brief outline of the background and recent advances
in the design and development of IPM wind generators to take
advantage of high efficiency, high power factor, compact size,
large rating, high controllability, stable operation, additional
reluctance torque and low per unit cost. The IPM wind generator
system yields maximum output power, while taking into accounts
wind turbine characteristics and constraints of power electronic
converters.

I. INTRODUCTION
In the 21
st
century, global warming has become an
important issue. Carbon dioxide (Co
2
) gas emissions should be
reduced to preserve the correct air quality as per Kyoto
protocol, implemented on February 16, 2005 by most of the
countries. One of the major contributors to global climate
change is due to excessive burning of limited fossil fuels like
oil, coal and natural gas. During the recent years the
combination of advanced wind turbines, power electronics,
and control techniques have significantly influenced the wind
power technology in terms of clean and safe renewable energy
sources. In only seven years from 2000 -2007 wind energy has
become an important resource in many electric power systems,
with nearly 100 GW of nameplate capacity installed
worldwide. The ratings of available induction wind generators
vary from 100kW to 3.5 MW. The present large commercial
wind energy technology consists of doubly fed induction
generators, power electronic converters, dc link capacitors and
voltage source inverters [1]. There exist significant challenges
for successful integration of wind energy system into the
power grid. The technical issues are dynamic modeling of
wind turbines, power converter/inverter system, power and
frequency fluctuations, wind speed and pitch angle control of
turbine blades, reactive power compensation and power
system stability. Some of these issues are addressed for the
grid connected wind generation system. Because of large stand
alone infrastructure of tower, huge turbine blades, complex
pitch angle control and associated gearbox maintenance as
well as small output ratings, the per unit production cost of a
conventional wind generator is about 2-3 times that of a
commercial hydro/thermal generator[2-25]. The per unit
production cost could be competitive when the ratings of new
wind generators exceed 10MW or so.
II. CHALLENGES FOR IPM WIND GENERATION
The principle of conventional salient pole synchronous
generators is well known. The inputs are the prime mover
turbine power at fixed synchronous speed and dc excitation
power fed through slip rings in the rotor salient poles. The
obvious disadvantage is that dc power is supplied in the rotor
poles through brushes and slip rings. This dc power can be
replaced by modern permanent magnets (PM) in IPM
generators. The developed power in a salient pole synchronous
generator has two distinct components; the first is the
electrical power arising out of dc excitation and the second is
the reluctance power due to the variation of machine air gap
(d-q) axis reactances [2]. Thus there exists physical variation
of the air-gap, which in turn causes reluctance changes of the
salient pole generator. Unlike in non-salient pole synchronous
generators, the salient pole generator develops more stable
power for a given excitation level, because the total developed
power is greater than each of the electrical power

and
reluctance power

components individually. The challenges for
designers of an IPM wind generator system are follows:
(a) Create variation of d-q axis inductances without
varying air gap
(b) Vary and control of excitation for permanently excited
rotor of IPM generator
(c) Optimize PM and reluctance power components for
maximum power output
(d) Reduction of cost, weight and size of IPM wind generator
(e) intelligent converter and inverter system for IPM wind
generator.


Figure 1 IPM Wind Generator System

Advances of Interior Permanent Magnet
(IPM) Wind Generators

M.A. Rahman, Life Fellow, IEEE
Power and Energy Research Laboratory, Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science
Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, NL, Canada A1B 3X5
Email: rahman@engr.mun.ca
2228
Figure 1 shows the IPM generator is connected to the wind
mill via single gear system [4-5]. The output of the IPM
generator is fed into the power converter systems. The gear
box can be dispensed with for direct driven IPM wind
generator systems.
The major challenge for creation of reluctance
variation of the IPM generator can been met by inserting
modern high energy permanent magnets (PM) like
Neodymium Iron Boron (NdFeB) in various arrangements
and magnet polarity orientations below the conduction cage of
the IPM rotor such that the machine reluctance variations are
made possible but keeping the air-gap length uniformly
constant. The critical properties of permanent magnets for
IPM wind generators are high (BH)

energy product. The
commercially available Nd
2
Fe
14
B magnets have energy
product approaching 60 MG Oe. These are quite adequate for
large IPM wind generators having ratings exceeding 10MW
per unit. Another challenge has been to operate the IPM
generator with permanently excited PM poles at variable
power factors. By using innovative vector control technique,
the level of d-q axis currents can be controlled for maximum
wind power output at any power factor.
III. STEADY STATE ANALYTICAL MODEL
Figure 2 shows IPM wind generator schematic with details of
stator and rotor including 4-pole NdFeB straight –type
magnets polarity.

Figure 2. Schematic of 4-pole IPM wind generator with
straight-type NdFeB permanent magnets [3].


The developed power P
d
in a 2-pole 3-phase Y-connected
salient pole synchronous wind generator can be given as [2-3];

δ 2 sin
X 2X
) X (X 3V
sin
X
E 3V
P
q d
q d
2
p
d
0 p
d

+ = δ (1)

Where V
p
is generated voltage/per phase,
E
o
is excitation voltage/per phase;
X
d
and X
q
are d-q axis reactances per phase, respectively.
Furthermore, these synchronous d-q reactances are given as

X
d
= X
l
+ X
md
(2)

X
q
= X
l
+ X
mq
(3)

Where X
l
is the stator leakage reactance , X
md
and X
mq
are d-q
axis magnetizing reactances, respectively;
and δ is load angle between V
p
and E
o
.


Figure 3. Phasor Diagram of IPM Wind Generator

In conventional salient pole synchronous machines, the
airgap length at the direct (d) axis is small and the airgap
length at the quadrature (q) axis is large. Thus there exists
physical variation of the airgap, which in turn causes
reluctance changes, when the rotor shaft of the synchronous
generator is propelled by the wind turbine.
The equation (1) can be rewritten as;

δ 2 sin P sin P P
r e d
+ = δ (4)

Where, P
e
= [3V
p
E
o
]/ X
d
(5)


and P
r
= [3V
p
2
(X
d
-X
q
)]/ 2 X
d
X
q
(6)


It is to be noted that the power developed in (5) is identical
to the dc excited cylindrical-rotor (non-salient pole)
synchronous generator. It is important for an IPM wind
generator. The terms in equation (6) constitute the reluctance
torque. Efficient utilization of this reluctance torque
component of equation (6) is most critical for higher power
and more stable operation and relatively higher efficiency
improvement in IPM wind generators.

P
e
is the peak power component due to dc field excitation
and P
r
is the peak power component due to reluctance
variation at the airgap. The latter is called the reluctance
power. The contribution of each power component to the total
generated power P
d
is significant for the optimum design of a
salient pole synchronous generator. For fixed parameter values
2229
it is obvious that the equation (5) is maximum when δ is 90
0
,
and the equation (6) is maximum for δ = 45
0
. The salient
pole synchronous generator develops more steady state power
for a given excitation level, because the total developed peak
power P
d peak
is greater than each of the P
e
and P
r
components
individually. The optimum value of δ
max
lies between 60
0
and

75
0
.
Figure 3 shows the sinusoidal phasor diagram of an IPM
wind generator, where the voltage E
o
is obtained due to the
interior permanent magnet excitation.
In a practical IPM generator, the accurate determination of
machine parameters is difficult. Further more the magnitude of
a permanently magnetized field excitation E
o
can not be
changed.
Figure 4 shows the Norton’s equivalent of an IPM generator
with PM excitation as an equivalent current source I
f
.
~
j Xm
If
If
Is
Im
Vp
Norton's Equivalent Circuit of IPM Generator

Figure 4. Equivalent Circuit of IPM Wind Generator

By changing the angleδ between I
m
and I
f
, one achieves the
same objective of varying the power factors of the IPM wind
generator. Figures 5 (a-c) show the power factor control of
the IPM wind generator in unity, lagging and leading modes of
operation.
IV. LINEAR IPM MODEL
The challenge for designers for an IPM generator is to
create reluctance variation of the generator by keeping airgap
length constant. This has been done by inserting permanent
magnets in various arrangements and magnet polarity
orientations below the amortissuer windings (damper bars) of
the IPM rotor pole assembly such that the machine reluctance
variations are made possible but keeping the airgap length
uniformly constant [20].
The developed torque T
d
is obtained by dividing equation
(1) by angular synchronous speed. An IPM generator develops
its power due to both the permanent magnet rotor excitation
and reluctance variation in the airgap without varying the
physical air gap.
The developed torque T
d
for an IPM generator can also be
expressed for synchronously revolving d-q axis reference
frame as ;

[ ]
q d q d q m d
i )i L (L i λ
2
3p
T − + = (7)



If
Im
Is
Vp
β
If cos(β)=Im, so Is is in-phase with
Vp
Is


(a) Unity Power Factor Operation


If cos(β)<Im, so Is is lagging Vp
θ
β
Vp
Is
Im
If
Is


(b) Lagging Power Factor Operation

If
Im
Is
Vp
β
θ
If cos(β)>Im, so Is is leading Vp
Is


(c)Leading Power Factor Operation

Figure 5. Phasor Representations of Power Factor Control
for IPM Wind Generator

Where, p is number of pole pairs,
m
λ is flux linkage due
to permanent magnet excitation, L
d
and L
q
are d-q axis
inductances, respectively; i
d
and i
q
are d-q axis currents,
respectively.


2230
The stator phase current i
s
is expressed as

d q i i i
2 2
s
+ = (8)

It is to be noted that the first term in (7) is identical to the
dc excited cylindrical-rotor (non-salient pole) synchronous
generator. It is important for indirect vector control of an IPM
wind generator. The 2
nd
term in equation (7) constitutes the
reluctance torque. Efficient utilization of this reluctance torque
component of equation (7) is most critical for higher
developed torque and more stable operation and relatively
higher efficiency improvement in IPM wind generators.
V. NON-LINEAR IPM MODEL

It is also to be noted that the torque equation (7) is quite
non-linear, because
m
λ , L
d
, L
q
, i
d
and i
q
are not constants. The
flux linkage
m
λ is responsible for excitation voltage E
o
, hence
it is also quite nonlinear. Figure 6 shows the second quadrant
of the B-H characteristic of the NEOREC 38SH permanent
magnets. It illustrates the remnant magnetization of NdFeB
magnet is reduced from 1.2 (T) at no load to 1.0 (T) along the
recoil line , when IPM wing generator is loaded. This in effect
changes the excitation voltage E
o
due to anisotropic NdFeB
magnet.


Figure 6. Second Quadrant of B-H Curve for NdFeB magnet


All these
m
λ , L
d
, L
q
, i
d
and i
q
five quantities vary during
dynamic operating conditions [7]. The requirements for
quality NdFeB magnets are high energy product, very large
coercive force, high Curie temperature, long life and corrosion
free environment, etc.
The non-linearity arises due to the intrinsic nature of
Nd
2
Fe
14
B metallic magnets. Like in other hard permanent
magnetic materials, the net spin moment of electrons in the
atomic structure of Neodymium material is not zero. When
magnetized by external magnetizing field, the metallic NdFeB
magnets are produced by sophisticated sintered axially pressed
process along the easy axis of magnetization. Furthermore,
when the IPM wind generator is delivering power, the
demagnetization of anisotropic NdFeB magnets takes place
along the principal stress axis, which is different from the easy
axis of magnetization. This process of magnetization and
demagnetization in the metallic Nd
2
Fe
14
B magnets gets further
complicated, when the magnets are oriented to an inclined
direction. The magnetic field produced by the inclined
permanent magnets has significant effect on the
demagnetization process. This will ultimately affect the d-q
axis inductance parameters L
d
and

L
q
more, depending on the
degree of magnet orientation and generator loading. Thus it
is perhaps obvious that the classical armature reaction of the
conventional synchronous wind generator or the surface
mounted permanent magnet wind generator is not strictly
applicable for the highly non-linear IPM wind generator with
inclined (v-shaped) NdFeB magnets under loaded conditions
even in the steady state mode of operations.
Another problem of IPM wind generator is the non-linear
demagnetization effect which occurs due to the combined
armature reaction and the rotor core high temperature, when it
is loaded. Analytically, the three dimensional (3-D) finite
element (FE) analysis is becoming essential to accurately
determine and verify the complex demagnetization effects of
the anisotropic Nd
2
Fe
14
B metallic magnets in an IPM wind
generator.
Nahata, el [13] have recently proposed a technique to
determine the remnant magnetization distribution from an
applied demagnetization field in anisotropic hard permanent
magnets using a combination of the 3-D variable
magnetization Stoner-Wohlfarth method in conjunction with
the 3-D FE analysis. It has been particularly noted in reference
[13] that the effect of the demagnetization fields is severe at
the edges of the metallic NdFeB magnets embedded inside the
rotor core of the IPM generator.
Like in conventional synchronous generators, the damper
(amortissuer) windings also play significant role in
reducing/eliminating the non-linear hunting/vibration of the
rotor of an IPM generator. It is quite obvious that the
electromagnetic fields induced in the damper/conductor cages
further complicate the field analysis of IPM wind generators.
Finite element (FE) analysis is a requirement for fine-tuning
the parameters determination of the IPM wind generators for
their optimum performances.
In summary, it may be stated that the linear model for
determining the developed power and torque in an IPM wind
generator is perhaps not adequate. One of the solutions to
approximate these non-linear effects is to modify the
developed torque expression of equation (7) by the following
expressions [7];

[ ]
[ ]
q d q mq lq q lmd ld
d0 q q m d
i ))i (i L (L - )) (i L (L
2
3p

) (i )i (i λ
2
3p
T
+ + +
=

(9)
and

2231
( )








+

=
md
q
md
d0
q
2
q d
d
X
di
dX
i
i X X
i (10)
Figure 7 shows the finite element based d-q axis magnetic
flux density distribution of rotor permanent magnets at full-
loads in IPM wind generator with straight magnet orientation
of figure 2. Design optimization of the IPM wind generator
system can also be carried out by various methods [24].
Another IPM wind generator schematic with v-shaped rotor magnets
arrangements is shown in figure 8. The finite element (FE) grid as
well as flux lines and flux density contours of figure 8 are shown in
figures 9-10, respectively. It is evident from figure 10 that the flux
distribution in an IPM wind generator undergoes significant changes
when loaded.



Fig 7. Flux Density distribution of IPM Wind Generator at full-load










Fig. 8. Stator and rotor schematic of IPM wind generator with
V-shaped rotor magnet







Fig. 9. Finite element grids and flux distribution of Fig.8








Fig. 10. Flux density contours of IPM Generator at full load

VI CONCLUSIONS
This paper provides a brief introduction of the classical
background and recent but timely updates on the advances in
the design, analysis and development of IPM wind generators.
It highlights many of their inherent advantages and serious
limitations. It ends with a short list of pertinent references in
order to stimulate further thorough investigations on all
aspects of the IPM wind generator technology worldwide.

REFERENCE
[1] H. Li and Z. Chen, “Overview of Different Wind Generator Systems and
their Comparisons” , IET Renewable Power Generation Journal , Vol.2,
No. 2, 2008, pp.123-138.
[2] M. A. Rahman, “Advances of Modern IPM Motor Drives for High
Performance Applications”, A keynote lecture, Proceedings of ICEMS-
2006 , Nagasaki, Japan, November 20-23, 2006.
[3] P.Zhou, “Field and Circuit Combined Analysis of Permanent Magnet
Synchronous Motor”, PhD Thesis, Memorial University of
Newfoundland, Canada, 1994
[4] S. Morimoto, H. Kato, M. Sanada and Y. Takeda, “Output Maximization
Control for Wind Generation System with Interior Permanent Magnet
Synchronous Generator”, Proceedings of IEEE –IAS Annual Meeting,
Tampa, FL, October 4-8, 2006, pp. 503-510.
[5] S. Morimoto, H. Nakayama, M. Sanada and Y. Takeda, “ Sensorless
Output Maximization Control for Variable-Speed Wind Generation
System using IPMSG”, IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications,
Vol. 41, No. 1, January/February 2005, pp. 60-67.
[6] W. Wu, V. S. Ramsden, T. Crawford and T. Hill, “ A Low speed High –
torque , Driect- Permanent Generator for Wind Turbines”, Proceedings
2232
of IEEE – IAS Annual Meeting, Rome, September 4-8, 2000, pp.
147-154.

[7] A. Consoli, G Scarcella ,, G. Scelba and S. Sindoni, “ Modeling Control
of IPM Motors”, Proceedings of IEEE –PES Annual Meeting,
Pittsburgh, July 20-24, 2008, CD ROM
[8] D. M., Vilathmugawa, W. Xiaoyu and C. J Gajanayake, “ Z- Source
Converter Based Grid-interface for Variable-speed Permanent Magnet
Wind Turbine Generators”, Proceedings of IEEE – PELS, PESC2008 ,
Rhodes Island, Greece, June 15-19, 2008, CD ROM
[9] J. A. Wiik, A.Kulka, T. Isobe, K. Usuki, M. Milanas, T. Takaku, T.
Undeland and R. Shimada, “ Control Design and Experimental
Verification of a Series Compensated 50 kW Permanent Magnet Wind
Power Generator”, Proceedings of IEEE – PELS, PESC2008 , Rhodes
Island, Greece, June 15-19, 2008, CD ROM
[10] M. Katter, “Angular Dependence of Demagnetization Stability of
Sintered Nd-Fe-B Magnets,” IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, Vol. 41,
No. 10, October 2005, pp. 3853-3855.
[11] S. Ruoho and A. Arkkio, “Partial Demagnetization of Permanent
Magnets in Electrical Machines Caused by an Inclined Field”, IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics, Vol. 44, No. 7, July 2008, pp. 1773-1778.
[12] R. Skomski and J. M. D. Coey, “Permanent Magnetism”, College Park,
MD, USA, Institute of Physics, P. 230.
[13] Y.Nakahata, T. Todaka and M. Enokizono, “Magnetization Process
Simulation of Anisotropic Permanent Magnets by Using Three-
Dimensional VMSW Method”, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, Vol.
44, No. 6, June 2008, pp. 858- 861.
[14] F.Gurakuq and G. Dieter, “A New Electromagnetic Model for PM
Synchronous Machines”, Proceedings of European Power Electronics
Conference, EPE-2007 , Aalborg, Denmark, September 2-5, 2007, CD
ROM.
[15] F. Marius, T. Lucian and I. Boldea , “ Novel Motion Sensorless Control
of Stand Alone Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generator: Harmonics
and Negative Sequence Voltage Compensation under Nonlinear Load”,
Proceedings of European Power Electronics Conference, EPE-2008 ,
Aalborg, Denmark, September 2-5, 2007, CD ROM.
[16] L. Hui, and C Zhe, “Optimum Direct Drive Permanent Magnet Wind
Generator for Different Rated Wind Conditions”, Proceedings of
European Power Electronics Conference, EPE-2008 , Aalborg,
Denmark, September 2-5, 2007, CD ROM.
[17] O .Kazuhiro, “ Modeling and Simulation of Variable Speed Wind
Generator System using Booat Converter for Permanent Magnet
Synchronous Generator”, Proceedings of European Power Electronics
Conference, EPE-2007 , Aalborg, Denmark, September 2-5, 2007, CD
ROM.
[18] Y Young-Doo, L. Wook-Jin and S. Seung-Ki, “New Flux Weakening
Control of High Saliency Interior Permanent Synchronous Machines
Without any Tables”, Proceedings of European Power Electronics
Conference, EPE-2008 , Aalborg, Denmark, September 2-5, 2007, CD
ROM.
[19] M. Enokizono, “ Magnetic Characteristics Analysis of Electric
Machines by Dynamic Vector Magneto-Hysteretic Modelling”,
Proceedings of International Aegean Conference on Electrical Machines
and Power Electronics, ACEMP-2007, Bodrum, Turkey, September 10-
12, 2007, CD ROM
[20] M. A. Rahman and P. Zhou, “ Field Circuit Analysis of Brushless
Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motors”, IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Electronics, Vol. 43, No. 2, April 1996, pp. 256-267.
[21] S. Jung, H. Jung S. Hahn andH. Jung, „ Optimal Design of Driect-driven
PM Wind Generator for Maximum Annual Energy Production, IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics, Vol. 44, No. 6, June 2008, pp.1062-1065.
[22] H. Li and Z. Chen, “ Optimal Direct Driven Permanent Magnet Wind
Generator Systems for Rated Wind Speeds” , Proceedings of European
Power Electronics Conference, EPE-2007 , Aalborg, Denmark,
September 2-5, 2007, CD ROM.
[23] G. Korouji and R. Hanitsch, “ Design and Construction of a Permanent
Magnet Wind Generator with a New Topology”, Proceedings of ICEM ,
Krakow, Poland, September 5-8, 2004, pp. 87-90
[24] Y. Chen, P. Pillay and A. Khan, “ PM Wind Generation Comparison of
Different Topologies”, Proceedings of IEEE – IAS Annual Meeting,
Salt Lake City, October 3-7, 2004, pp. 1405- 1412.
[25] H. Polinder, F.F.A. van der Piji and P. J. Tavner, “Comparison of Direct-
Drive and Geared Generator Concepts for Wind Turbines”, IEEE
Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. 21, No. 3, September 2006,
pp. 725-733.










.






















































2233