IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO.

2, JUNE 2015 525

Comparative Study of Wind Turbine Power

Converters Based on Medium-Frequency
AC-Link for Offshore DC-Grids
Rene Barrera-Cardenas and Marta Molinas, Member, IEEE

Abstract— This paper considers an offshore wind turbine

modular power converter (ac/dc) with permanent magnet
synchronous generator based on three stages: an ac–ac converter,
a medium-frequency transformer, and a full-bridge diode rectifier
with LC output filter. Six converter topologies are compared;
three of them are based on back-to-back (B2B) topology: the
conventional B2B with three-phase sinusoidal waveform, the
B2B with three-phase squared waveform, and the B2B with
single-phase squared waveform. The other solutions are based
on matrix topologies: the direct matrix converter, the indirect
matrix converter, and the reduced matrix converter (RMC).
A systematic methodology and main component models are
introduced to evaluate the power loss, volume, and mass of the
Fig. 1. DC offshore wind park layout with series-connected turbines and
wind energy conversion system for all considered topologies as HVDC transmission.
a function of the medium-frequency transformer operational
frequency and the number of modules parallel connected. The
comparison involves a tradeoff study between total power losses, Fig. 1 shows a dc offshore wind park layout where the WTs
size and weight of 10 MW modular converters. It was found that are series connected, and this layout is also considered in
when Metglas alloy 2605SA1 is the transformer core material, the this paper. In [3], an all-dc offshore wind farm with series-
RMC topology leaves the best tradeoff between the considered connected WTs is proposed as an alternative to classical
performance indicators with an extra benefit in reducing the parallel ac model to reduce investment cost and power losses,
semiconductor devices cost of the modular converter.
because the length of cable is shorter than in parallel connec-
Index Terms— AC–DC power converters, design methodol- tion and the expensive offshore platform is not required. It is
ogy, matrix converters (MCs), power transformers, wind power reported in [3] that for 10 MW WT, the dc series park had
generation.
approximately 10% lower losses than ac radial park, but these
results are linked to the choice of a high-efficiency converter
I. I NTRODUCTION topology in the wind energy conversion system (WECS) of
each WT.
T HE increasing development of power electronics
technology besides the advantages of dc-grids compared
with ac-grids, such as reactive power and harmonics [1], are
For dc series-connected wind parks, two types of full-scale
WECSs can be found in the literature: those including a
the main reasons to consider the dc-grid in future offshore medium-/high-frequency transformer (MFT) [3], [6], [7],
wind park layouts. Therefore, power collection systems using [10]–[12] and the WECS without transformer [13]–[16].
a dc-grid within a wind farm are a very important topic in off- In this paper, WECS based on full-scale converter and
shore wind applications [1]–[9]. Even more, a series connec- MFT are considered. The motivation to use an MFT-based
tion of dc wind turbines (WTs) is presented in [3] and [8]–[10] converter is not only to ensure that the generator voltage can
as an attractive option if converter technology in the WT can be increased to the desired high output dc voltage, but also to
maximize efficiency and reduce investment cost. From [3], achieve the galvanic isolation between generator and dc-grid
as well as the reduced size and weight of the magnetic
Manuscript received May 28, 2014; revised August 4, 2014; accepted components [17], which enables the possibility to place the
September 3, 2014. Date of current version April 30, 2015. This work was power converter inside the nacelle for reducing complexity
supported by the Norwegian Research Center for Offshore Wind Technology,
Norway. Recommended for publication by Associate Editor J. O. Ojo. and cost of the structure and foundation of the WT [18].
R. Barrera-Cardenas is with the Department of Electrical Power Engi- For MFT-based WECS, two main converter architectures
neering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim 7491, can be identified: those displaying an intermediate dc link
Norway (e-mail: reneabarrera@gmail.com).
M. Molinas is with the Department of Engineering Cybernetics, Norwegian which connects an ac/dc converter with a dc/dc converter [2],
University of Science and Technology, Trondheim 7491, Norway (e-mail: [4], [6], [7], [9], [19], and WECS with a direct ac/ac converter
marta.molinas@ntnu.no). between generator and MFT avoiding the intermediate dc
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. link [3], [10], [12], [18], [20], as are shown in Fig. 2.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/JESTPE.2014.2360578 For WECS with intermediate dc link (see top of Fig. 2),
2168-6777 © 2014 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
526 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO. 2, JUNE 2015
Fig. 2. Possible configurations for MFT-based WECS. Top: WECS
with intermediate dc link and dc/dc converter. Bottom: WECS with direct
ac/ac converter without dc link.
different dc/dc converters have been proposed and compared,
for example, in [7], 5 MW WECS including a controlled volt-
age source converter (VSC) connected to a dc/dc converter is
studied, and the energy efficiency of three different dc/dc con-
verter topologies are compared: the full-bridge (FB) con-
verter with phase-shift control, the single active bridge (SAB)
converter, and the series parallel resonant converter. This
comparison found that the FB converter is the suitable choice
on considering the losses, contribution to the energy produc-
tion cost, simple design, and easy control. A similar conclusion
was found in [19], where the FB converter is compared with
a FB-isolated boost converter topology.
Later, a WECS with direct ac/ac converter (see bottom
of Fig. 2) based on reduced matrix converter (RMC) topology
is proposed in [11], and a comparison between RMC and a
WECS including SAB dc/dc converter is presented in [21]
for a 20 kVA system, and in [22] for a 2 MW WT. Then,
a complete study of efficiency in a RMC for offshore wind
farms is introduced in [10], which includes the possible
most suitable modulation and operation modes for series- or
parallel-connected WTs. From these works, it was concluded
that for series-connected WTs and current source operation
of the WECS, the RMC topology is more efficient than
SAB-converter-based WECS when the ac-link frequency
(nominal frequency of the MFT) increases above 6 kHz for
a 2 MW WT. However, this comparison did not include the
FB converter, which was more efficient than SAB converter
as reported in [7] and [19]. Additionally, all these results
are dependent on WT power rating, and because there is a
clear trend toward increasing the turbine ratings, a 10 MW
rating could be more suitable in offshore wind parks. Also,
all the mentioned solutions claim that the use of MFT could
improve the power density of the WECS as an increase of
ac-link frequency allows for a reduction in the volume/weight
of the MFT, but higher frequencies in the power electronic
components will generate higher switching losses and there-
fore deteriorate the efficiency of the system. Thus, higher
efficiency and power density are two conflicting objectives
from the design perspective, and should be taken into account
when WECS are compared, and there is a lack of studies on
these performance indicators compared with that on WECS
for offshore dc series-connected WTs.
Additionally, the aforementioned solutions are based on
single-phase MFT and some studies suggests that a three-phase
MFT could allow for a reduced size/weight compared with
Fig. 3. WECS architecture inside of the turbine nacelle. Modular power
converter based on medium-frequency ac-link for offshore WT.
single-phase schemes. Such an idea is expressed in [3],
where three WECS solutions including three-phase MFT
are proposed and their efficiencies were compared but
size/weight characteristics of the solution were not presented,
and moreover, no comparison with single-phase schemes was
reported. The compared WECS in [3] were: the direct matrix
converter (DMC), the indirect matrix converter (IMC), and a
WECS including intermediate dc link with two VSC back-to-
back (B2B) connected and sinusoidal output waveform (named
here as B2B3p). It was found that for 10 MW turbines, DMC
is more efficient than other considered solutions when the
bidirectional switches are implemented with series and parallel
connections of low rating IGBTs. However, combination of
series and parallel connections of IGBTs is not usual in real
applications, where high rating IGBTs are parallel connected
at the low-voltage side of the converter, and at the high-voltage
side, the series connection of semiconductors devices is used
to reach the required blocking voltage. Also, the analysis was
carried out taking into account a modular architecture of the
WECS, that is, converter modules are parallel connected to
reach high power levels as in the 2.5 MW Liberty WT [23];
the modules of 625-kW rating (16 modules parallel connected
to reach 10-MW total rating) were assumed with not clear
justification, even when efficiency and power density of
a modular converter depends on the number of modules
selected, as it was shown in [24], where an optimized design
of two and three-level full-scale VSC for multi-MW WTs in
an ac-grid park layout was presented.
This paper investigates the impact of the ac-link frequency
and the number of modules (Nm ) of the power converter, on
the power losses, the volume, and the mass of the WECS as
shown Fig. 3, when a total rated power of 10 MW is required.
BARRERA-CARDENAS AND MOLINAS: COMPARATIVE STUDY OF WT POWER CONVERTERS 527

In the proposed WECS, each unit consist of a turbine,

a permanent magnet synchronous generator (PMSG) with Nm
insulated stars or a split drive train feeding Nm PMSGs, and
a modular power converter consisting of Nm ac/dc converter
modules. The MFT-based ac/dc converter module, as shown
in Fig. 3 (at bottom), is composed of three main stages: an
ac/ac converter (which could or not include intermediate dc
link), an MFT, and an FBD rectifier with LC output filter to
convert the medium-frequency voltage waveform in a dc one.
The analysis is carried out for six potential solutions based
on different ac/ac converters (B2B versus matrix topologies),
ac-Link waveforms (sinusoidal versus square), and phases of
the MFT (single phase versus three phases). The three WECS Fig. 4. Function Sfun for different converter topologies.
solutions presented in [3] are considered in this paper: B2B3p,
DMC, and IMC. Additionally, the other three WECS solutions
are based on: RMC, FB converter (named here as B2B1p), where VCE ∗ is the voltage in the switch device at moment
and the B2B with three-phase squared waveform (B2B3pSq). before of turn on action or after turnoff action, IC∗ is the
Then, a comprehensive comparison of the most relevant current through the switch device at moment before of turnoff
MFT-based WECS found in the literature is presented in this action or after turnon action, and the values of E test , Vtest , Itest
paper. Analytical models as well as numerical simulations can be found in the data-sheet of the devices for each type
have been considered to get the main representative variables of commutation [turnon, turnoff, or reverse recovery (rr)].
of these topologies as a function of the ac-Link operating To calculate the average switching loss, the sum of each
frequency and Nm . commutation energy (E sw ) over a period and dividing by the
Section II presents the main models, design constraints, and period are computed and added
parameters considered to evaluate the power losses, volume,
and mass of the power switches and diodes. In Section III, 1 
Psw = (E sw,on + E sw,off + E sw,rr ). (4)
the basic relations between volume, mass, and losses of T
inductor and capacitors are given. Section IV is dedicated
to the medium-frequency transformer design methodology. To reduce the complexity in the evaluation of (4), an
The design criteria of the compared topologies are presented empirical engineering approximation has been performed to
in Sections V and VI, for B2B and matrix topologies, approximate (4) according to the simulation data for each
respectively. The results of the six modular WECS solutions topology. Then, the following expression is used:
and their direct comparison are shown in Section VIII. Finally,
in Section IX, a compilation of the key findings is provided. Psw ≈ (K E,on + K E,off + K E,rr ) · Vin · Io · S f un( f sw )

II. P OWER S EMICONDUCTORS M ODELS S f un( f sw ) = kpi · ( f sw )i (5)
i=0...2
A. Power Losses
The semiconductor losses are divided into two parts: where Vin is the RMS input voltage of the voltage source
conduction and switching. The average dissipated power due to inverter (VSI) or matrix converter (MC), Io is the RMS
the conduction in each device in one period T is calculated as output current of the VSI or MC, depending of the case,
f sw is the switching frequency, and kpi is the polynomial
T
1 regression coefficient in function of the topology, modulation
Pcond = · VCE · IC · dt. (1)
T strategy, and power factor. As an example, Fig. 4 shows
0 the function S f un( f sw ) for different converter topologies
Voltage VCE in the IGBT as well as the diode is calculated with 0.9 power factor and the modulation strategies com-
as a function of the collector current (IC ) mented in Section V. As shown in Fig. 4, VSI-SVPWM
VCE = K cond1 + K cond2 · IC . (2) is VSI with sinusoidal output and space vector Pulse-Width
Modulation (PWM) modulation [25], DMC-ISV is the DMC
The parameters K cond1, K cond2 are calculated using the data with indirect space vector (ISV) modulation [26], [27],
sheets for each device. Then, the conduction losses can be IMC-CSR-ISV is the current source rectifier of IMC with
expressed as [combining (2) in (1)] ISV modulation [26], [27], IMC-VSI-ISV is the VSI of
Pcond = K cond1 · IC,avg + K cond2 · IC,rms
2
. (3) the IMC with ISV modulation [26], [27], RMC-SVM
is the RMC with space vector modulation [10], and
On the other hand, the switching losses in the IGBTs and
VSI-1SQ means VSI with single-phase square wave out-
diodes are calculated with a slightly simpler loss model that
put [6]. S f un( f sw ) is a linear function of the switch-
involves only linear functions
ing frequency for almost all the considered topologies
E test ∗
E sw = · VCE · IC∗ = K E · VCE
∗
· IC∗ with exception of IMC-CSR-ISV, which has a quadratic
Vtest · Itest behavior.
528 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO. 2, JUNE 2015
B. Volume and Mass (Heat Sink and Thermal Model)
The volume of a power switch (Volsw ) is given by the
IGBT/diode module itself and by the heat sink
Volsw = Volmod + VolHS .
The IGBT/diode module volume (Volmod ) can be
found in the data sheet of the power module, the heat
sink volume (VolHS ) given by the aluminum structure
volume (VolHSal ), and the fan volume (Volfan ). The air forced
heat sink is designed based on a fix fan velocity of 10 m/s
and the fan volume is proportional to the aluminum structure
volume. The aluminum structure volume (VolHSal ) is inversely
proportional to the thermal resistance of the heat sink for
a given fan velocity [28], and combining this model with
the definition of thermal resistance (Rth = T /Ploss ), the
following model is proposed:
 
Ploss,mod K HS1
VolHSal = K HS0 ·
THSmax
Volfan = K fan0 · (VolHSal ) K fan1
where THSmax is the maximum allowable heat sink-to-
ambient temperature, Ploss,mod is the total power losses of
the power module (IGBT/Diode), and K HS1 , K HS0 , K fan0
and K fan1 are proportionality regression coefficients found by
taking data from reference heat sink DAU series BF-XX and
the axial fans SEMIKRON series SKF-3XX. In this paper,
K HS1 = 1.4321, K HS0 = 9.322, K fan0 = 0.3811, K fan1 =
0.8741, and THSmax is calculated on the basis of average
thermal analysis of IGBT module with the model
THSmax + Tamb = K SFT · T j max − T j Cmax
T j Cmax = max{Rth,igbt · Pigbt , Rth,diode · Pdiode }
Pigbt = Pcond,igbt + Psw,On + Psw,Off
Pdiode = Pcond,diode + Psw,RR
where T j max is the maximum junction temperature of the
semiconductor module, K SFT is the safety factor of thermal
design (K SFT = 0.8 in this paper), and Rth,igbt and Rth,diode
are the junction-to-case thermal resistance of the IGBT and
diode, respectively, which can be found in the data-sheet of the
device. A minimum heat sink thermal resistance of 15 K/kW
and an ambient temperature (Tamb ) of 40 °C are considered.
The mass of the switch can be expressed by the density and
volume of the each element (IGBT module, heat sink, and fan)
Masssw = ρmod · Volmod + ρal · VolHSal + ρfan · Volfan
where the density values are calculated from the reference data
sheet for each element. In this paper, ρmod = 1187.2 Kg/m3 ,
ρal = 1366 Kg/m3 , and ρfan = 769.23 Kg/m3 are the density
values used.
C. Semiconductor Parameters
In this paper, the IGBT devices selected to implement the
power switches are the 1.7 kV IGBTs owing to the generator
output voltage considered, 690 V, and the large availability
of the components on the market [24]. The parameters of
Fig. 5. Dependence of the electrical and thermal parameters for
Infineon IGBT modules IGBT4 technology. (a) Electric resistance.
(b) Thermal resistance.
TABLE I
PARAMETER OF THE S EMICONDUCTOR M ODULES
the Infineon IGBT modules IGBT4 technology FZXXR17HP4
have been used in this paper. Because these parameters depend
on the power rating of the IGBT module and use a high-power
semiconductor module in low-power applications which is not
cost effective, it is proposed to use the semiconductor power
rating as a design parameter to determine the best semicon-
ductor for each modular design. Therefore, the semiconductor
(6) parameters are a model as a function of the power rating. From
the analysis of the parameters of Infineon 1.7 kV IGBTs, it is
(7)
possible to determinate that the thermal and electrical resis-
tances Rth,igbt/diode and K cond2,igbt/diode are inversely propor-
tional to the nominal current of the semiconductor as shown in
Fig. 5, and the other parameters can be considered constant for
this type of technology. Then, the following model is proposed:
K cond21
K cond2 = + K cond20
In
K Rth1
Rth = + K Rth0
In
where In is the nominal current of the IGBT module and the
main parameters are given in Table I. Because high power
rating is studied in this paper, parallel connection of IGBT
modules is considered to fulfill the power requirement, and
the nominal current of the IGBT module In must satisfy [29]
Ipsw ≤ 1.6 · In · n p · kcdp
 
1 (1 − δC I )
kcdp = · 1 + (n p − 1) · (8)
np (1 + δC I )
where Ipsw is the peak current of the switch, n p is the number
of IGBT modules parallel connected, and δC I is the current
imbalance rate (considered like 15%). An IGBT module
maximum nominal current of 3600 A is considered as a limit
BARRERA-CARDENAS AND MOLINAS: COMPARATIVE STUDY OF WT POWER CONVERTERS 529

for the selected technology, and then the minimum number TABLE II
n p of parallel-connected module is calculated according to 8. PARAMETERS OF I NDUCTOR M ODEL
Additionally, current imbalance in the parallel-connected
module can be taken into account for power losses calculation,
then the current of one IGBT module IC parallel connected
is calculated by
kInp
IC = · IC,Total
np
 
1 1
kInp = · −1 +1
2 kcdp
where IC,Total is the total current of the array of IGBT modules
parallel connected, and kInp is an increase factor calculated
like the average of the maximum increase in current of one B. Inductor Power Losses
device given by the current imbalance rate δC I .
The inductor power losses are divided into winding and core
On the other hand, the FBD is implemented with power
losses. To estimate winding and core losses in the inductor,
diodes for 3.3 kV applications. The parameters of the Infineon
the model presented in [30] is considered
power diode modules IGBT3 DDXXS33HE3 series have been
considered. The same analysis has been done for these devices PLF = Pw,LF + Pcore,LF (10)
and the parameters are shown in Table I. Considering the appli- ⎡  2 ⎤
3 + ffsw1  
cation notes from semiconductor manufacturer, the following ⎢ δi L 2 ⎥ K ρw1
Pw,LF = ⎣1 + · √ ⎦ · K ρw0 · VolLF
requirement must be satisfied (without considering voltage 4 6
imbalance for series connection of nonidentical devices):       
VPmax VDCmax f1 f sw α L δi L β L K
≤ 0.8 · VCEblock and ≤ 0.6 · VCEblock (9) Pcore,LF = + · · K ρc0 · VolLFρc1
ns ns fref f ref 2
where VPmax is the maximum voltage amplitude to be blocked where f sw is the switching frequency, f1 is the fundamental
for the switch, VDCmax is the maximum dc voltage of the frequency, f ref is the reference frequency, δi L is the ratio
switch, VCEblock is the blocking voltage of a single module, of current ripple in the inductor to maximum fundamental
and n s is the number of devices series connected. It is possible inductor current (assuming triangular harmonic components),
to calculate the minimum number of series connected devices α L and β L are the Steinmetz coefficients, and K ρw0 and
to fulfill the aforementioned conditions K ρc0 are the power loss density in the winding and core,

VPmax VDCmax respectively.
n s = max , .
0.8 · VCEblock 0.6 · VCEblock
C. Capacitors
III. PASSIVE C OMPONENTS
The volume of the capacitor is proportional to the stored
A. Inductor Volume and Mass
energy. Then, the volume scales for a given rated voltage
The inductor volume (VolLF ) is [24] linearly with the capacitance

3
3 L · ILF
2 4 VolCap = K VC1 · C + K VC0 (11)
VolLF ∝ E LF ∝
4
2 where K VC1 and K VC0 are, respectively, dependents of the
where E LF is the stored energy of the inductor, ILF is the rated voltage and the capacitor type (dc link or ac capacitors).
inductor current, and L is the inductance. Then, the overall Capacitor weight is calculated according to the average density
inductor volume and active mass can be expressed as of the capacitor (ρcap ) by

 K VLf1
L · ILF
2 MassCap = ρcap · VolCap . (12)
VolLF = K VLf0 ·
2 The losses in the dc-capacitor are neglected owing to the
KρLF1 low equivalent series resistance of the used polyethylene
MassLF = KρLF0 · (VolLF )
capacitors. DC-link capacitors are used in the B2B topologies
where KρLF0 , KρLF1 , K VLf1 , and K VLf0 are proportionality at 1.1 kV and in the dc output filter of the power converter
regression coefficients found by taking data from reference at 33 kV. EPCOS is the reference manufacturer selected.
inductors and their values are shown in Table II. The The capacitor of reference MKP dc B256xx-series are used
three-phase nanocrystalline inductors TPC series from to estimate the parameters of (11) and (12). AC capac-
CWS manufacturer are used to estimate the parameters for itors are used in the matrix topologies at rated voltage
ac filter inductors. On the other hand, the inductors Siemens of 690 V. The 780 V capacitors of EPCOS reference MKP ac
series 4ETXX are used to estimate the parameters for the B2536-series are used to estimate the parameters and these are
dc filter inductors. shown in Table III.
530 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO. 2, JUNE 2015

TABLE III that the transformer will carry, the following equation can be
DC L INK AND AC C APACITOR M ODEL PARAMETERS written:
ITrMax π
= K sfw · Jmax · · ds2 (15)
Ns 4
where K sfw is the safety factor of the maximum current of the
conductor, which is set to be 0.8. Then solving (14) and (15)
for Ns and ds , an optimal selection is achieved.
On the other hand, the core losses depend of the magnetic
IV. M EDIUM -F REQUENCY T RANSFORMER material, core volume (Vc ), working frequency ( f Tr ), flux
A. Power Losses density amplitude (Bm ), and waveform factor (K wf ). The
The power losses in the medium-frequency transformer modified Steinmetz equation is often used to evaluate the core
consist mainly of core and copper losses. The cooper losses losses, and it can be expressed simply as a function of the
are the sum of ohmic losses of all windings waveform factor of the voltage [17]
     

nw
ρcu · N(i) · MLT(i) 2 fTr αC Bm β C K wf 2(αC −1)
PW,Tr = (Fsk(i) · Fpe(i) ) · · ITr(i) PC,Tr = ρc · Vc · pc0 · · ·
Aw(i) f0 B0 K wf0
i=1
where the coefficients αC and βC are determined by
where nw is the number of windings, ITr is the rms current
material characteristics, and pc0 , f 0 , B0 , K wf0 are reference
value in each winding, ρcu is the resistivity of the conductor, core losses which can be established from the manufacturer
MLT is the mean length of a turn in the winding, Aw is
data sheet. The waveform factor (K wf ) of a waveform is
the wire conduction area, N is the number of turns in each
defined as the ratio between its rms value and its average value
winding, Fsk is the skin-effect factor, and Fpe is the proximity- of the impressed voltage over the period between the point
effect factor. In medium-frequency transformers, eddy current
where the flux density is zero and its maximum value [17].
losses in windings, that is, the losses due to skin and prox-
imity effects, cannot be ignored. The approximate model for
estimating the proximity-effect factor for a litz wire conductor, B. Thermal Constraint
presented in [31], is used in this paper Transformer temperature estimation is needed during the

5· · Ns − 1
2
player optimization process to verify that temperature specifications
Rac
Fpe = =1+ · 4 are not exceeded. In a transformer with natural air cooling,
Rdc 45
 as considered in this paper, the dominant heat-transfer
ds  ρcu mechanism is by convection [34]. The Newton’s equation
= · π · K layer ; δ = (13)
2δ π · μ0 · f Tr of convection is therefore used to determine the temperature
 ds  rise (TTr ) of the magnetic component [32], [33]
K layer = π Ns ; D L = kpf · ds · Ns
2D L 1.42 · At
PC,Tr + PW,Tr = h Tr · At · TTr = · TTr
1.25
where f Tr is the working frequency, δ is the skin depth, player 0.25
HTr
is the number of layer of winding, Ns is the number of strands
of the litz wire conductor, ds is the diameter of a strand, D L is where At is the external surface area of the core and
the diameter of the litz wire conductor,  is the ratio of the windings, h Tr is the convection heat transfer coefficient
thickness of a equivalent rectangular conductor to the skin (h Tr = 1.42 · (TTr/HTr )0.25 [32]), and HTr is the height of the
depth, and kpf is the packing factor (kpf = 1.28 for Ns > 25). transformer.
The approximate model for estimating the skin-effect factor,
presented in [32], is used in this paper C. Evaluation of Volume and Mass

4 The design process is developed for dry shell-type trans-
1 + 48+0.8  < 1.7
Fsk = 4
formers. Fig. 6 shows the front and top section views of
0.25 + 0.5 + 32 3
 ≥ 1.7. the single-phase and three-phase transformers. The relevant
In a litz wire conductor, the proximity-effect factor is core dimensions (a, bw , h w , d) are indicated on the diagram.
more predominant than skin-effect factor [31]. The strand Table IV shows the geometric characteristics defined using this
diameter ds of litz wire conductor and the number of strands relevant core dimensions. The transformer overall volume and
Ns are selected taking into account a derived expression active mass can be calculated by
presented in [32] and [33] to estimate the optimal , which
VolTr = (d + 2bw )(4a + 2bw )((n φ + 1) · a + n φ · h w )
minimizes (13)
MassTr = ρc · Volc + n φ · ρcu (Volcu(1) + Volcu(2) )
15 π
4 = . (14) Volcu(i) = Ns(i) · · ds(i)
2
N(i) · MLT(i)
5 · player · Ns − 1
2
4
Additionally, if winding is not overheated, the simplest prac- where ρc is the density of the core material, ρcu is the density
tical assumption is that a certain current density ( Jmax ) should of the conductor material, N is the number of turns (subscript
not be exceeded, and with the maximum current (ITrMax ) i = 1 is low voltage and i = 2 is high voltage), n φ is the
BARRERA-CARDENAS AND MOLINAS: COMPARATIVE STUDY OF WT POWER CONVERTERS
Fig. 6. Shell-type transformer structure. (a) Front view of single-phase
transformer. (b) Front view of three-phase transformer. (c) Top view of both
transformers.
TABLE IV
G EOMETRIC C HARACTERISTIC OF THE T RANSFORMER D ESIGN P ROCESS
number of phases (1 or 3), and the other variables defined as
before.
The optimization criterion for minimum losses and the
optimum flux density expression presented in [32] has been
taken into account to get an estimation of transformer
volume, mass, and power losses. That optimum flux den-
sity is subjected to design requirements and constraints. The
main constraints considered in this paper are: the maxi-
mum allowed temperature rise (TT r ), the saturation flux
density Bsat , and the copper fill constraint to ensure that
the transformer windings fit into the transformer window.
An optimization algorithm is developed to estimate the core
dimensions (a, bw , h w , d) and the number of layers of each
winding ( player1, player2), which minimizes the objective func-
tion (OFTr ) defined by (16) for a given set of input variables
(nominal power, input voltage, voltage ratio, maximum input
current, waveform factor, and frequency)
PTr VolTr MassTr
OFTr = + +
PTr,min VolTr,min MassTr,min
PTr = PW,Tr + PC,Tr .
Fig. 7 shows the results of optimization algorithm for
a 3 MW–500 Hz single-phase shell-type transformer with
specification of Table V. To show how the Pareto of the
531
Fig. 7. Results of design example of a 3 MW–500 Hz single-phase shell-type
transformer. (a) Power losses versus volume. (b) Mass versus volume.
TABLE V
T RANSFORMER S PECIFICATIONS OF D ESIGN E XAMPLE [17]
Fig. 8. Back-to-back topologies.
proposed methodology compares with a real transformer
design, Fig. 7 includes a reference design, which refers to
transformer design results presented in [17] for the same
transformer specifications and similar constraints. In addition,
a selected design is shown in Fig. 7, which means the design
which minimize objective function (16). Unlike the proposed
model, the transformer design presented in [17] takes into
account the use of cooling ducts for the thermal design,
enabling a more compact solution.
V. BACK - TO -BACK T OPOLOGIES
(16)
In this paper, the conventional B2B converter is
the reference topology which is a well-established
technology [35]. It features a dc-link capacitor separating
the two VSI and smoothing inductors. From the variation
of the number of phases and waveform in the output, three
532 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO. 2, JUNE 2015

converter topologies have been taken into account for the

comparison study: B2B3p, B2B3pSq, and B2B1p. Fig. 8
shows the considered B2B topologies where transformer
side VSI is modified to get the target output waveform. The
space vector PWM modulation presented in [25] is used
for each VSI in the B2B3p, which is also considered in [3]
for a B2B topology in MFT-based offshore WECS. The
characteristics of these topologies are briefly discussed below.

A. Generator Side VSI and Input Filter

The generator side VSI and the input filter are common
in these three topologies. Because dc-link capacitor provides
decoupling in switching operation, the generator side converter
can be operated at different switching frequencies unlike the
transformer side converter. The dc-link capacitance is designed
according to suggestions presented in [36], which is derived
taking into account that in one switching cycle, the input power
drops to zero while the inverter keeps the maximum output
power, or vice versa
Pm
CB2B = 2   (17)
Vdc1 · δVdc1 + 0.5 · δVdc1
2 · f sw1
where δVdc1 is the relative peak-to-peak dc-link ripple (limited
to 5%), VDC1 is the dc-link voltage of the B2B converter,
Pm is the input power of the module, and fsw1 is the switching
frequency of the generator side VSI. The input inductance
is sized according to [35], where a theoretical derivation is
presented on the basis of the current ripple at the switching
frequency for a given input voltage amplitude and a dc-link Fig. 9. (a) and (b) Evaluation of power losses and volume for generator
side VSI. Example for 1 MW output power and different switching
voltage. The inductance value is calculated as follows: frequencies.

√ 
Vg2 · cos(θg ) 3Vg
L B2B = √ 1− (18)
2 · Pm · δiLin · f sw1 2 · VDC1
From the models presented in Sections II and III, it is
where δiLin is the relative peak-to-peak current ripple of the possible to evaluate the power losses, volume, and mass for the
input current (limited to 3%), Vg is the rms line to line VSI at generator side as a function of the switching frequency
generator voltage, and cos(θg ) is the power factor at generator ( f sw1 ) and the input power of the module (Pm ). Fig. 9 shows
side. The dc voltage is related with generator voltage by an example of the power losses and volume of the VSI as
√ a function of the switching frequency for an output power
2 2 · Vg
VDC1 = √ (19) of 1 MW. Because of the limited space, evaluation of mass
3 · m S1 is not presented, but its behavior is similar to the volume
where m S1 is the modulation index of the converter. The as shown in Fig. 9(a). From Fig. 9, it can be noted that
dc voltage itself is designed taking a 10% safety margin on power losses increases with switching frequency, but there is
operation of the VSI (m S1 = 0.9). a switching frequency that minimize the volume (and also the
The power losses in this stage are defined by semiconductor mass). Then an optimal switching frequency can be obtained
losses and inductor losses for each nominal power of the module. The criterion to select
the switching frequency is to minimize the following function:
Ploss,VSg = 6 · n pg · (Pigbt,VSg + Pdiode,VSg) + PLF,B2B
where n pg is the number of parallel connected IGBT modules Ploss,VSg VolVSg MaVSg
OF g = + +
at generator side VSI, PLF,B2B is the inductor losses (10), and min{Ploss,VSg} min{VolVSgen } min{MaVSg }
Pigbt,VSg and Pdiode,VSg are the IGBT and diode losses of one s.t. TjCmax,VSg < K SFT Tjmax − 1.5 · Tamb .
switch at generator side VSI, defined by 7 and 7, respectively.
The average and rms collector current (IC ) of each switch is Fig. 10 shows the results of this suboptimization. Fig. 10(a)
calculated according to the models presented in [25] for space shows the selected optimal switching frequency as a function
vector PWM modulation. of the module nominal power; the switching frequencies that
On the other hand, the volume and mass are calculated by minimizing the power losses, volume, and mass are also shown
in Fig. 10(a). Discontinuities in the curves are due to different
VolVSg = 6 · n pg · Volsw + VolLF,B2B + Volcap,B2B numbers of IGBT modules parallel connected (n pg ), which
MaVSg = 6 · n pg · Masssw + MassLF,B2B + Masscap,B2B . is indicated in each figure. On the other hand, Fig. 10(b)
BARRERA-CARDENAS AND MOLINAS: COMPARATIVE STUDY OF WT POWER CONVERTERS 533

where m S2 is the modulation index of the converter. Following

the same criteria as for generator side converter, a 10% safety
margin on operation of the VSI is considered (m S2 = 0.9).
Then the output voltage at√nominal operation is equal to
nominal generator voltage ( 3 · Vϕ = Vg ). The three-phase
transformer turn ratio for this topology is calculated by (22),
where it is assumed that the transformer is D–Y connected and
the LC filter output voltage is equal to the converter output
voltage
π · VDCout
NTr−B2B3 p = √ . (22)
3 · 6Vg
The dc output LC filter is designed to fulfill requirements of
relative peak-to-peak current ripple of the output current (δiDC ,
limited to 10%) and the relative peak to peak dc-voltage ripple
(δvDC, limited to 5%). Then, considering sinusoidal voltage at
secondary side of transformer the following expression can be
obtained from theoretical derivation:
√
(6 − 3 · π) · VDCout2
L DC−B2B3 p = (23)
36 · π · δiDC · ftr · Pm
δiDC · Pm
CDC−B2B3 p = . (24)
12 · π · f tr · δvDC · VDCout
2

C. B2B With Single-Phase Square Wave Output (B2B1p)

The converter topology analyzed for B2B1p is shown in
Fig. 8 (at right bottom). The main difference with the B2B3p
topology is that in this topology the output is square wave
Fig. 10. Results of suboptimization of generator side VSI. Discontinuity in form and then can suppress the filter in the output. Also,
the curves are due to different number of IGBT modules parallel connected
(n pg ), which is indicated in each figure. (a) Selection of the optimal switching a reduction in the number of switches is achieved and the
frequency. (b) Mass (yellow), volume (green), and power losses (blue) switching frequency in the dc/ac converter (transformer side)
evaluated at optimal switching frequency. is equal to the ac-link frequency. This topology including
the transformer side VSI, a transformer, and an FBD is
shows the volume, mass, and relative power losses for different normally called a FB converter. Because it has been found
nominal power evaluated at optimal switching frequency. that phase-shift modulation is the most efficient for this type of
topology [7], [38], then it is considered in this paper for B2B1p
B. Conventional B2B With Sinusoidal Output (B2B3p) topology. The design guidelines reported in [6] for this type
of converter with phase-shift modulation are considered. First,
The B2B3p topology is shown in Fig. 8 (at right top)
the transformer leakage inductance (lsk1 ) should be considered
and this is the converter that is traditionally used for
to limit the amount of duty loss (Dl1 )
ac–ac conversion. An output LC filter is considered to obtain
a smoothing waveform in the transformer input and allows a
2
VDC1 · Dl1 · (Dn1 − Dl1 )
lsk1 ≤ (25)
unity input displacement factor operation at maximum voltage 4 · Pm · ftr
transfer ratio. LC filter is sizing according to [37], where where Dn1 is the duty cycle (Dl1 < Dn1 ≤ 1), which is
equations are originated from theoretical derivation to obtain designed to be 0.9 at nominal operation with a duty loss of 0.1.
minimum displacement angle at transformer terminals. Then, Then, single-phase transformer turn ratio is calculated by
inductance and capacitance are calculated by VDCout
3Vϕ2 NT r−B2B1 p = (26)
Pm Def1 · VDC1
COF = ; L OF = (20)
3 · π · f cut · Vϕ2 4 · π · f cut · Pm where Def1 is the effective duty cycle, defined like the differ-
where fcut is the cutoff frequency, setting it to be two times the ence between duty cycle and duty loss (Def1 = Dn1 − Dl1 ).
ac-link frequency ( f tr ), and Vϕ is the output phase voltage of The dc output filter inductor and capacitor for this topology
the converter. The switching frequency in the dc/ac converter are calculated according to theoretical derivations presented
(transformer side, f sw2 ) is set to be eight times higher than in [6], as follows:
the ac-link frequency. The output voltage of the converter is (1 − De f 1 ) · VDCout
2
related with dc voltage by L DC−B2B1 p = (27)
2 · δiDC · Pm · f tr
√
2 2 · Vϕ δiDC · Pm · Def1
VDC1 = (21) CDC−B2B1 p = . (28)
m S2 f tr · δvDC · VDCout
2
534 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO. 2, JUNE 2015

D. B2B With Three-Phase Square Wave Output (B2B3pSq)

Fig. 8 (at right middle) shows the topology of the B2B3pSq.
In this case, output filter is not required because the square
wave output voltage is applied to the transformer winding.
Also, in this topology the switching frequency in the trans-
former side converter ( f sw2 ) is equal to the ac-link frequency.
Phase-shift modulation reported in [39] is considered for this
topology. Following a similar design process as for B2B1p
topology, the transformer leakage inductance per phase (lsk3 )
should be considered to limit the amount of duty loss (Dl3 ):
2
VDC1 · Dl3
lsk3 ≤ (29)
3 · (Dn3 − Dl3 ) · Pm · f tr
1 (1 + δiDC )
Dl3 < Dn3 ≤ − Dl3 ·
3 (1 − δiDC )
where Dn3 is the duty cycle, which is designed to be 0.2633
at nominal operation with a duty loss of 0.0333. Then, the
three-phase transformer turn ratio is calculated by
VDCout
NT r−B2B3 pSq = (30)
6 · Def3 · VDC1
where Def3 is the effective duty cycle, defined like the differ-
ence between duty cycle and duty loss (Def3 = Dn3 − Dl3 ).
The output dc filter inductor and capacitor for this topology
are calculated following the same criteria of the B2B1p with
theoretical derivations given by:
(1 − 3 · Def3 ) · VDCout
2
L DC−B2B3 pSq = (31)
3 · δiDC · Pm · f tr
δiDC · Pm · Def3
CDC−B2B3 pSq = . (32)
f tr · δvDC · VDCout
2

VI. MC T OPOLOGIES
A. Direct and Indirect Matrix Converters
The DMC, shown in Fig. 11(a) is a direct ac–ac converter
which unlike the B2B does not feature a dc-link capacitor
saving volume and possibly increasing the lifetime. The IMC,
in Fig. 11(b), possesses a dc bus stage, but no capacitor. The
modulation scheme used for both MCs is the ISV modulation
explained in [27], which has been presented as a convenient
modulation for this application. Bidirectional switches are
required in the DMC and in the CSR part of the IMC.
A bidirectional switch can be implemented using two
IGBTs and two diodes connected as shown in Fig. 11(a).
The switching frequency ( f swMC ) is selected to be eight times
the frequency of the ac link ( f tr ) [26]. The output line-to-line
voltage of the MC is related with generator voltage by
Vomc = m Smc · Vg (33)
where m Smc is the modulation index of the MC
(0 < m Smc ≤ (3/2)1/2 ). Following the same criteria as for the
B2B converter, a 10% safety margin on nominal operation
of the converter is considered (m Smc = 0.78). Then, the
output voltage at nominal operation is equal to 0.78 times the
nominal generator voltage. The input capacitor of the matrix
topologies is chosen based on the capacitor voltage ripple
Fig. 11. Matrix topologies. (a) DMC. (b) IMC. (c) RMC.
criteria presented in [35], which is originated from a mixture of
empirical engineering approximation and theoretical derivation
Pomc
CMC = (34)
4 · m Smc · Vg2 · fswMC · δVmc · cos(θomc )
where cos(θoMC ) is the power factor at output of the matrix
converter and δVmc is the relative peak to peak capacitor
voltage ripple of the input voltage, which is limited to
10% as in [35]. An output LC filter is also needed to filter
out switching frequency harmonics. The inductance and
capacitance of LC filter are designed with the same criteria
of the B2B3p converter with (20).
The three-phase transformer turn ratio for this topology is
calculated using (35), where it is assumed that the transformer
is D–Y connected and the LC filter output voltage is equal
BARRERA-CARDENAS AND MOLINAS: COMPARATIVE STUDY OF WT POWER CONVERTERS
Fig. 12. Considered protection scheme for matrix topologies.
to the converter output voltage. The dc output LC filter is
designed with the same assumptions of the B2B3p converter
and the values are calculated with (23) and (24)
π · VDCout NT r−B2B3 p
NTr−MC = √ = . (35)
3 · 6 · Vomc 0.78
B. Reduced Matrix Converter
The RMC is a direct ac–ac converter with three-phase
sinusoidal wave as input and single-phase high-frequency
square wave as output. This topology is widely studied
in [10], [22], and [40] and its basic scheme is shown in
Fig. 11(c). The RMC is operated as a current source converter,
and the modulation schemes for RMC are presented and
analyzed using [22]. Because SVM is reported as the most
efficient modulation, it is considered in this comparison and
its characteristics and parameters are taken from our report.
The input capacitor of the RMC is chosen in the same way of
the DMC and IMC converters (34).
Following the criteria presented in [22], the single-phase
transformer turn ratio is calculated by:
 bridge diode rectifiers (BDR), clamp capacitor, and IGBT
2 VDCout
NTr−RMC = · (36)
3 m S R · Vg · cos(θg )
where m S R is the modulation index of the RMC (0 <
m S R ≤ 1), which is considered to be 0.9 at nominal operation
to keep a safety margin of 10% like in the other converters.
The dc output filter inductor and capacitor for this topology
are considered to be the same of the B2B1p topology, and are
calculated using (27) and (28).
C. Clamp Circuit
All MC topologies considered in this paper require a
clamp circuit as they do not have a natural freewheeling path
like the B2B converter in case of converter shutdown [41].
The protection scheme (clamp circuit) presented in [10] is
considered in this paper, and it is shown in Fig. 12. The main
design criteria for clamp circuit capacitor is that the energy
accumulated in the machine, when an abnormal operation
is forced, must be transferred to the capacitor, which is
connected with an increase in voltage given by
2 parameters for the considered converter topologies; some of
 2  Pm
Ccl · VclMax − Vcl = 3 · L g · √
2
(37)
3 · Vg · cos(θg )
cl is the clamp circuit steady-state voltage
where V√
(Vcl  2Vg ), VclMax is the maximum voltage of the
535
TABLE VI
G ENERAL T RANSFORMER D ESIGN PARAMETERS
circuit, and L g is the phase inductance of the generator.
The maximum voltage VclMax is limited to protect the
semiconductor devices in the MC. Because 1.7 kV IGBTs are
used to implement the power switches, the maximum voltage
is selected to be 1.36 kV (0.8VCEblock ). The clamp capacitor
can be calculated from (37) for a given power, then volume
and mass can be evaluated using (11) and (12), respectively.
Current and voltage ratings of semiconductor devices in the
clamp circuit are assumed to be the same as the main converter.
Two bridge diode rectifier modules are considered for clamp
circuits of matrix converter topologies. The main parameters
are shown in Table I. Because the clamp circuit does not
consume any power at normal operation of the system, clamp
circuit power losses are not included in the calculation of total
losses. It is also assumed that the clamp circuit module is
cooled by mounting it on top of the heat sink of the main
switches of the converter. The volume and mass of the clamp
circuit are calculated adding the volumes and masses of the
module
Volclamp = 2VolBDR + VolC,clamp + Volmod,clamp
Massclamp = 2MassBDR + MassC,clamp + Massmod,clamp .
VII. T RANSFORMER VOLUME AND M ASS E VALUATIONS
FOR D IFFERENT C ONVERTER T OPOLOGIES
The design methodology presented in Section IV is used to
evaluate the volume, mass, and power losses of the medium-
frequency transformer for the different converter topologies.
General parameters used in the transformer design are pre-
sented in Table VI. Metglas alloy 2605SA1 was chosen
as core material, because it is suggested for offshore wind
farms in [17]. Besides the parameters presented in Table VI,
there are some parameters which depend on the converter
topology, these are: the transformer turn ratio (NTr ), the
waveform factor (K wf ), the RMS primary voltage (Vprms ),
the total apparent power (Sm ), and the maximum primary
current Ipmax ). Table VII presents a comparison of these
these parameters are normalized to ease the comparison.
An example of volume/mass evaluation of a 3.3 MW
power transformer with the design parameters for the six
different converters is shown in Fig. 13. Fig. 13 also shows
the transformer volume–mass dependence to frequency when
536 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO. 2, JUNE 2015
TABLE VII
C OMPARISON OF T RANSFORMER D ESIGN PARAMETERS FOR D IFFERENT T OPOLOGIES
Fig. 13. Transformer volume–mass frontier variation with ac-link frequency
for 3.33 MW transformer.
it increases from 500 Hz to 20 kHz. The values shows in
Fig. 13 are the results of transformer design which minimize
objective function (16) for each frequency. In general,
transformer volume and mass decrease when frequency
increases. Also, it can be observed that solutions with
single-phase transformer (B2B1p and RMC) presents higher
volume and mass compared with three-phase transformer
solutions (B2B3p, B2B3pSq, and DMC/IMC).
VIII. R ESULTS
The volume, mass, and power losses are evaluated for a
10 MW complete modular power converter with different num-
ber of modules. The WECS shown in Fig. 3 and the topologies
for the ac–ac converter shown in Figs. 8 and 11 are compared.
The system parameters and design constraints used in the
comparison are indicated in Tables VI–VIII. Configurations
which do not correspond to the requirements in thermal and
magnetic design are not shown. The FBD is implemented by
discrete diodes and one LC output filter is considered to limit
the dc-voltage and dc-current ripple. The parameters of the
Infineon diode modules are shown in Table I and they have
been used in this paper to estimate the power losses, volume,
and mass with the models presented in Section II. The volume
and mass of the dc capacitor and inductor are calculated by
the methodology presented in Section III.
TABLE VIII
S YSTEM PARAMETERS AND D ESIGN C ONSTRAINTS
A. Minimum Losses
First, an optimization problem has been solved to find
the solutions with minimum losses in function of the ac-
link frequency and the number of modules. Fig. 14 shows
the solutions with minimum power losses for each converter
topology analyzed. From Fig. 14(a), it can be noted that
the power losses increases exponentially with the ac-link
frequency. In general, it can be observed that topologies
based on squared waveform are more efficient than topologies
based on sinusoidal waveform, mainly because sinusoidal
waveform requires higher switching frequencies in the ac–
ac converter. The dependence of the number of modules is
shown in Fig. 14(b). It can be observed that power losses
increase with the number of modules for B2B topologies-based
solutions; however, for matrix topologies-based solutions, a
small increase in the number of modules reduces the total
power losses, and it is noted that five, six, and three modules
will leave less losses in solutions with IMC, DMC, and
RMC topologies, respectively. The RMC-based solutions are
the most efficient for any frequency and number of modules
selected, the lowest losses of 1.41% are achieved for RMC
when the number of modules is 3 and the frequency is
1.062 kHz.
B. Minimum Volume
Fig. 15 shows the results of the optimization of the total
volume of the converters for a range of ac-link frequencies and
number of modules. From Fig. 15(a), it can be observed that
the compactest solutions are achieved using RMC topology
BARRERA-CARDENAS AND MOLINAS: COMPARATIVE STUDY OF WT POWER CONVERTERS
Fig. 14. Lowest power losses for the complete modular converter with
rated power of 10 MW. (a) Minimum power losses versus ac-link frequency.
(b) Minimum power losses versus number of modules.
and ac-link frequencies above 7 kHz. However, compared with
RMC solutions, the B2B3pSq topology-based solutions show
results with an increase in volume around 16% in the range of
frequencies between 2 and 3 kHz. Although RMC topology
will leave the compactest solution, it can be noted from
Fig. 15(a) that RMC solution presents the bulkiest solutions for
frequencies below 3 kHz, where solution based on B2B3pSq
and DMC topologies shows lower volume.
On the other hand, from Fig. 15(b), it can be noted that
solutions with RMC topologies present the more compact
solutions for a number of modules greater than one, when
one module is selected the compact solution is achieved using
B2B1p topology. Also, it can be noted that all topologies
achieve the minimum volume for a number of modules in
the range 12–15.
Finally, the lowest volume of 9.48 m3 is achieved for
RMC topology when 12 and 20 kHz are the number of
modules and ac-link frequency, respectively. On the other
hand, B2B3pSq solution achieves a volume of 11.01 m3 when
the number of modules is 14 and the frequency is 2.62 kHz,
whereas that DMC solution with a frequency of 1.8 kHz and
14 modules leave a volume of 11.45 m3 (21% more than the
minimum found).
C. Minimum Mass
A third optimization has been done to find the solutions with
minimum mass in function of the ac-link frequency and the
537
Fig. 15. Lowest volume of the complete modular converter with rated power
of 10 MW. (a) Minimum volume versus ac-link frequency. (b) Minimum
volume versus number of modules.
number of modules, the results are shown in Fig. 16. From
Fig. 16(a), it can be observed that an increase in frequency
is beneficial for solutions based on square waveform but
not for the other solutions (based on sinusoidal waveform).
The lightest solutions are achieved with B2B3p and DMC
topologies for ac-link frequencies below 1 kHz. However,
compared with the lightest solution, the solutions based on
B2B3pSq and B2B1p topologies show results with a increase
in mass around 20% for frequencies above 10 kHz. Also,
it can be noted from Fig. 16(a) that RMC topology will
leave the heaviest solutions for frequencies below 4 kHz, but
for frequencies above 16 kHz, the resulting mass with RMC
topology is comparable with the resulting mass with B2B3pSq
topology (around 21% more).
On the other hand, from Fig. 16(b), it can be noted that
solutions with B2B3p and DMC topologies present the lighter
solutions for any number of modules. Also, it can be noted
that an increase in the number of modules will increase the
total mass of the solution, except for B2B1p and B2B3pSq
topologies, which show their minimum masses when three
modules are used. From Fig. 16, it can be noted that solutions
with similar waveforms present similar behaviors in the total
mass dependence to frequency and number of modules.
Finally, the lowest mass of 10.15 t is achieved for B2B3p
topology when 1 and 600 Hz are the number of modules and
ac-link frequency, respectively. However, a mass of 10.78t
(6% more) is achieved with DMC topology for a frequency
538 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO. 2, JUNE 2015

Fig. 16. Lowest mass of the complete modular converter with rated power of
10 MW. (a) Minimum mass versus number of modules. (b) Minimum mass
versus ac-link frequency.

of 630 Hz and three modules. Additionally, B2B3pSq solution

achieves a mass of 12.23t (20% more) when the number of
modules is three and the frequency is 12.73 kHz, whereas that
RMC solution with a frequency of 20 kHz and one module
leave a mass of 12.81t (26% more than the minimum found).

D. Comparison of the Optimal Solutions—Paretofront

From Figs. 14–16, it can be observed that there is no unique
solution that minimizes all performance indexes. Instead of
one solution, there is a set of solutions with the best tradeoff
between the volume, mass, and power losses. This set of
solutions is called the Pareto set, and in the case of three
performance indexes, it is a Pareto surface. Fig. 17 shows the
projection of the Pareto surface to the 2-D planes creating the
Paretofront of each couple of performance indicators: power
losses versus volume [Fig. 17(a)], power losses versus mass
[Fig. 17(b)], and volume versus mass [Fig. 17(c)].
From Fig. 17(a), it is evident that RMC topology-based
solutions present the best tradeoff between volume and
power losses or equivalently efficiency and power density.
Moreover, it can be noted that the slope of the Paretofront
in RMC solutions suggest that it is possible to achieve even
more compact solutions without substantially increasing in
the total power losses; this improvement can be achieved
by increase the ac-link frequency above 2 kHz, as can be
Fig. 17. Projection of the paretosurface to the 2-D planes creating the
paretofront of each couple of performance indicators for a 10 MW modular
power converter and considering different topologies. (a) Power losses versus
volume. (b) Power losses versus mass. (c) Volume versus mass.
seen in Fig. 15(a). In terms of mass and power losses, there
are two topologies which constitute the Paretofront, B2B3p,
and RMC, as is shown in Fig. 17(b). However, only two
B2B3p-based solutions are in the Paretofront, compared with
the number of solutions based on RMC topology. On the
other hand, when only mass and volume are considered, as is
shown in Fig. 17(c), the Paretofront is constituted by solutions
based on four topologies-based: B2B3p, DMC, B2B3pSq, and
RMC. Finally, it can be remarked that solutions based on
RMC topology belong to all Paretofronts shown in Fig. 17,
and solutions based on IMC topology do not belong to any
Paretofront.
BARRERA-CARDENAS AND MOLINAS: COMPARATIVE STUDY OF WT POWER CONVERTERS
TABLE IX
S UMMARY OF R EPRESENTATIVE S OLUTIONS P ROPERTIES
Fig. 18. Comparison of the representative solutions using six performance
indicators.
To quantify the tradeoff between the three performance
indexes and choose a representative solution for each topology,
the following indicator can be used:
PLoss VolTotal MassTotal
= + + (38)
PlossMin VolMin MassMin
where PLossMin , VolMin and MassMin are the minimum power
losses, volume, and mass, respectively. In this paper,
PLossMin = 1.41%, VolMin = 9.48 m3 and MassMin = 10.15t
have been selected according to the results shown in
Figs. 14–16. Then, the representative solution for each
topology is selected to minimize (38), and these are high-
lighted in gray color as shown in Fig. 17. It can be noted that
representative solutions do not belong to all Paretofronts.
Finally, the resultant main properties of the representative
solutions of the B2B3p, B2B3pSq, DMC, and RMC are
summarized in Table IX and six characteristic performance
indicators are shown in Fig. 18. In this last comparison,
IMC and B2B1p topologies are not considered because
these solutions do not belong to the Paretosurface. The two
additional performance indicators are defined as follows.
539
1) Normalized total cost of the semiconductor modules in
the ac–ac converter
 Inpm
C̄PM = Nm · Nsw · n p · (39)
Iref1
where Nsw is the number of unidirectional switches in
the ac–ac converter, Inpm is the nominal current of the
power module, and Iref1 is the reference current rating
for IGBT modules (Iref1 = 3.6 kA is considered). This
performance indicator assumes that cost of semiconduc-
tor module is proportional to the semiconductor power
rating.
2) Normalized total cost of the power diodes in the FBD
 InD
C̄FBD = Nm · N D · ns · (40)
Iref2
where N D is the number of diodes in the FBD (six in
three-phase and four in single-phase), In D is the nominal
current of the power diode, and Iref2 is the reference
current rating for power diodes (Iref2 = 750 A is
considered). This performance indicator assumes that
cost of power diode is proportional to the diode power
rating.
In Fig. 18, the area spanned by the polygon curves can be
considered as a relative measure for comparison. The better
the solution is the smaller is the area.
IX. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, a systematic approach and the fundamental
component models required for evaluation of power losses,
volume, and mass of six different MFT-based WECS with the
scheme as shown in Fig. 3 have been presented and applied
to perform a comparative study of B2B3p, B2B3pSq, B2B1p,
DMC, IMC, and RMC in the ac–ac converter stage for a
10 MW WECS with PMSG suitable for offshore dc-grids.
Modular approach in the power converter is considered and
the impact of the number of modules variation on performance
indicators is studied.
All six ac–ac converters are designed to be connected to a
PMSG with a line-to-line voltage of 3 × 690 V (rms), 50 Hz,
and 0.9 power factor at nominal operation. Three performance
indicators (power losses, volume, and mass) are investigated
for a ac-link frequency in the range of 500 Hz to 20 kHz.
1.7 kV IGBT4 modules and 3.3 kV diodes (Infineon) are
used to get the main parameters of the semiconductor devices
as function of its nominal current. Semiconductor device
cooling system is designed such that at nominal operation the
maximum junction temperature does not exceed 135 °C with
a worst case scenario of 30 K maximum junction temperature
variation. Parallel connection of IGBT modules is considered
and the main implications of this connection are considered
in power losses model of the switches.
The considered MFT design methodology takes into account
different parameters and the variations of these parame-
ters regarding the ac–ac converter topology are evaluated.
The magnetic alloy 2605SA1 from Metglas is considered as
core material of the MFT; however, other magnetic materials
540 IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 03, NO. 2, JUNE 2015
can be considered in futures works by applying the methodol-
ogy presented, because transformer volume/mass at the lower
frequencies of the range considered constitute more than 60%
of the total volume/mass (in most of the cases) and the use
of amorphous or nanocrystalline core materials can improve
power density of MFT.
The modulation technique selected for each topology has a
big impact on the comparison, because power losses of the
converter are dependent on modulation. The most efficient
modulation techniques for each topology have been selected
from the previous reported work in the same application area
(offshore dc-grid series-connected wind turbines). However,
more efficient modulation techniques for B2B3p topology
have been reported in other type of applications [25]. Then,
this could be considered in the future work to study the
impact of the modulation technique in the performance metric
considered in this paper.
Within the considered ac-link frequency range of
500 Hz to 20 kHz, the selection of the RMC topology
as the topology of the ac–ac converter in Fig. 3, will
leave the most efficient solution for any frequency and
number of modules connected. RMC topology enables
more than 1.5-times lower power losses compared with the
B2B topologies based on squared waveform and more than
2.6-times lower power losses compared with the topologies
based on ac-link sinusoidal waveform (Fig. 14). Also, it has
been found that power converters with RMC topology will
leave the compactest solution when more than one module
is connected and the ac-link frequency is higher than 7 kHz.
In general, an increase in the frequency from 500 Hz will
produce a reduction in the total volume, but this behavior
is limited until around 3 kHz (except for RMC topology),
above which, volume increases with the frequency and this
trend is more predominant for topologies with sinusoidal
waveform (Fig. 15), where losses in the converter will
require more switches parallel connected and a bulky cooling
system. The RMC topology enables a 1.16-times lower
volume compared with the lowest volume achieved with other
topologies.
Although RMC topology will leave the more efficient and
compactest solution, this topology also leaves the heaviest
solutions for frequencies below 4 kHz, and more than
1.26-times higher mass at frequencies above 4 kHz compared
with the B2B3p topology that allows the minimum mass
at lower frequencies. Then, there is no unique solution that
minimizes all performance indicators.
Finally, the use of an additional indicator which quantifies
the tradeoff between the three performance indexes is
suggested. Representative solutions for B2B3p, B2B3pSq,
DMC, and RMC, selected to minimize the suggested indicator,
are compared. The representative solution based on RMC
topology enables a volume reduction of 41% and 2.14-times
lower losses compared with the B2B3p solution, which
has 1.25-times lower mass than RMC solution. The DMC
representative solution enables a mass reduction of 17%
compared with RMC solution but with an increase in volume
of 17% and 2.1-times more losses. On the other hand, the
B2B3pSq representative solution enables only 2% of reduction
in mass despite an increase in volume of 20% and 1.5-times
more losses are needed, compared with RMC solution.
Additionally, when two additional performance indicators,
regarding the cost of semiconductors in the ac–ac converter
and the FBD, are taken into account, RMC solution enable a
reduction around 50% in the cost of FBD devices compared
with other topologies, and a similar, 1.38-times lower and
1.33-times higher cost in the IGBT modules compared with the
B2B3p, DMC, and B2B3pSq solutions, respectively (Fig. 18).
From the point of view of the considered performance
indicators, the RMC clearly is the preferred choice for
WT modular converters based on medium-frequency ac-link
with Metglas alloy 2605SA1 as core material of the MFT
and the system parameters considered in this paper. However,
total cost of the converter, reliabity and complexity of the
considered solutions could influence the obtained conclusion,
and these performance indicators should be taken into account
in the future work to get a most general conclusion.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This paper is part of a Ph.D. project in Work Package 4 of
NOWITECH project, Norway.
R EFERENCES
[1] C. Meyer, M. Hoing, A. Peterson, and R. W. De Doncker, “Control and
design of DC grids for offshore wind farms,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,
vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 1475–1482, Nov. 2007.
[2] W. Chen, A. Q. Huang, C. Li, G. Wang, and W. Gu, “Analysis and
comparison of medium voltage high power DC/DC converters for
offshore wind energy systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 28,
no. 4, pp. 2014–2023, Apr. 2013.
[3] N. Holtsmark, H. J. Bahirat, M. Molinas, B. A. Mork, and
H. K. Hoidalen, “An all-DC offshore wind farm with series-connected
turbines: An alternative to the classical parallel AC model?” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 2420–2428, Jun. 2013.
[4] F. Deng and Z. Chen, “Control of improved full-bridge three-level
DC/DC converter for wind turbines in a DC grid,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 314–324, Jan. 2013.
[5] J. Robinson, D. Jovcic, and G. Joos, “Analysis and design of an offshore
wind farm using a MV DC grid,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 25, no. 4,
pp. 2164–2173, Oct. 2010.
[6] L. Max, “Design and control of a DC collection grid for a wind farm,”
M.S. thesis, Dept. Energy Environ., Chalmers Univ. Technol., Gothen-
burg, Sweden, 2009. [Online]. Available: http://webfiles.portal.chalmers.
se/et/PhD/MaxLenaPhD.pdf
[7] L. Max and S. Lundberg, “System efficiency of a DC/DC converter-
based wind farm,” Wind Energy, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 109–120, Jan. 2008.
[Online]. Available: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/
we.259/abstract
[8] C. Meyer, Key Components for Future Offshore DC Grids. Maastricht,
The Netherlands: Shaker, 2007.
[9] S. Lundberg, “Wind farm configuration and energy efficiency
studies—Series DC versus AC layouts,” M.S. thesis, Dept.
Energy Environ., Chalmers Univ. Technol., Gothenburg,
Sweden, 2006. [Online]. Available: http://publications.lib.
chalmers.se/publication/24835-wind-farm-configuration-and-energy-
efficiency-studies-series-dc-versus-ac-layouts
[10] A. Garces and M. Molinas, “A study of efficiency in a reduced matrix
converter for offshore wind farms,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 59,
no. 1, pp. 184–193, Jan. 2012.
[11] A. Mogstad, M. Molinas, P. Olsen, and R. Nilsen, “A power conversion
system for offshore wind parks,” in Proc. 34th Annu. Conf. IEEE Ind.
Electron. (IECON), Nov. 2008, pp. 2106–2112.
[12] N. Holtsmark and M. Molinas, “Thermal analysis of matrix and
back-to-back converters for series-connected wind turbines,” in Proc.
39th Annu. Conf. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. (IECON), Nov. 2013,
pp. 4967–4972.
BARRERA-CARDENAS AND MOLINAS: COMPARATIVE STUDY OF WT POWER CONVERTERS
[13] S. S. Gjerde, P. K. Olsen, K. Ljokelsoy, and T. M. Undeland, “Control
and fault handling in a modular series-connected converter for a trans-
formerless 100 kV low-weight offshore wind turbine,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Appl., vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 1094–1105, Mar. 2014.
[14] E. Veilleux and P. W. Lehn, “Interconnection of direct-drive wind
turbines using a series-connected DC grid,” IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy,
vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 139–147, Jan. 2014.
[15] H.-J. Lee and S.-K. Sul, “Wind power collection and transmission with
series connected current source converters,” in Proc. 14th Eur. Conf.
Power Electron. Appl. (EPE), Aug. 2011, pp. 1–10.
[16] S. Nishikata and F. Tatsuta, “A new interconnecting method for wind
turbine/generators in a wind farm and basic performances of the inte-
grated system,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 468–475,
Feb. 2010.
[17] S. Meier, T. Kjellqvist, S. Norrga, and H. P. Nee, “Design considerations
for medium-frequency power transformers in offshore wind farms,” in
Proc. 13th Eur. Conf. Power Electron. Appl. (EPE), Sep. 2009, pp. 1–12.
[18] M. R. Hanssen, A. G. Ruiz, and M. Molinas, “Operation features of a
reduced matrix converter for offshore wind power,” in Proc. IEEE Int.
Symp. Ind. Electron. (ISIE), Jul. 2010, pp. 2443–2448.
[19] J. Esteban, “Study and design of a DC/DC converter for series con-
nected wind farms,” M.S. thesis, Dept. Energy Environ., Chalmers
Univ. Technol., Gothenburg, Sweden, 2005. [Online]. Available:
http://studentarbeten.chalmers.se
[20] R. Barrera-Cardenas and M. Molinas, “Multi-objective design of
a modular power converter based on medium frequency AC-link for
offshore DC wind park,” Energy Proc., vol. 35, pp. 265–273, Aug. 2013.
[Online]. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S1876610213012654
[21] A. Garces and M. Molinas, “Electrical conversion system for offshore
wind turbines based on high frequency AC link,” in Proc. 9th Int. Conf.
Exhibit. Renewal Energy Ecol. Veh. (EVER), Mar. 2009, pp. 1–8.
[22] A. Garces, “Design, operation and control of series-connected
power converters for offshore wind parks,” Ph.D. dissertation,
Dept. Elect. Power Eng., Norwegian Univ. Sci. Technol., Trondheim,
Norway, 2012. [Online]. Available: http://ntnu.diva-portal.org/smash/
record.jsf?pid=diva2:541812
[23] (2011). Clipper Windpower—Wind Turbine Manufacturer. [Online].
Available: http://clipperwind.com/
[24] M. Preindl and S. Bolognani, “Optimized design of two and three level
full-scale voltage source converters for multi-MW wind power plants at
different voltage levels,” in Proc. 37th Annu. Conf. IEEE Ind. Electron.
Soc. (IECON), Nov. 2011, pp. 3634–3639.
[25] L. Helle, “Modeling and comparison of power converters for doubly fed
induction generators in wind turbines,” M.S. thesis, Inst. Energiteknik,
Aalborg Univ., Aalborg, Denmark, 2007.
[26] N. Holtsmark and M. Molinas, “Matrix converter modulation for series-
connected wind turbines with high frequency link,” in Proc. 39th Annu.
Conf. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. (IECON), Nov. 2013, pp. 4880–4885.
[27] N. Holtsmark and M. Molinas, “Matrix converter efficiency in a high
frequency link offshore WECS,” in Proc. 37th Annu. Conf. IEEE Ind.
Electron. Soc. (IECON), Nov. 2011, pp. 1420–1425.
[28] B. Wen, D. Boroyevich, and P. Mattavelli, “Investigation of tradeoffs
between efficiency, power density and switching frequency in three-
phase two-level PWM boost rectifier,” in Proc. 14th Eur. Conf. Power
Electron. Appl. (EPE), Aug. 2011, pp. 1–10.
[29] Fuji Electric Co. (May 2011). Fuji IGBT Modules Application Manual.
[Online]. Available: http://www.fujielectric.com
[30] R. Barrera-Cardenas and M. Molinas, “Optimized design of wind energy
conversion systems with single-phase AC-link,” in Proc. IEEE 13th
Workshop Control Modeling Power Electron. (COMPEL), Jun. 2012,
pp. 1–8.
[31] W.-J. Gu and R. Liu, “A study of volume and weight vs. frequency for
high-frequency transformers,” in Proc. 24th Annu. IEEE Power Electron.
Specialists Conf. (PESC), Jun. 1993, pp. 1123–1129.
[32] W. G. Hurley, W. H. Wolfle, and J. G. Breslin, “Optimized transformer
design: Inclusive of high-frequency effects,” IEEE IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 651–659, Jul. 1998.
541
[33] W. G. Hurley, “Optimizing core and winding design in high frequency
transformers,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Power Electron. Congr. (CIEP),
Oct. 1996, pp. 2–13.
[34] R. A. Jabr, “Application of geometric programming to transformer
design,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 41, no. 11, pp. 4261–4269, Nov. 2005.
[35] T. Friedli, J. W. Kolar, J. Rodriguez, and P. W. Wheeler, “Comparative
evaluation of three-phase AC-AC matrix converter and voltage DC-link
back-to-back converter systems,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 59,
no. 12, pp. 4487–4510, Dec. 2012.
[36] R. Lai et al., “A systematic topology evaluation methodology for
high-density three-phase PWM AC-AC converters,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 2665–2680, Nov. 2008.
[37] M. Hamouda, F. Fnaiech, and K. Al-Haddad, “Input filter design for
SVM dual-bridge matrix converters,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind.
Electron., vol. 2. Jul. 2006, pp. 797–802.
[38] C. Versele, O. Deblecker, and J. Lobry, “Multiobjective optimal choice
and design of isolated dc-dc power converters,” in Proc. 14th Eur. Conf.
Power Electron. Appl. (EPE), Sep. 2011, pp. 1–10.
[39] C. P. Dick, A. Konig, and R. W. De Doncker, “Comparison of
three-phase DC-DC converters vs. single-phase DC-DC converters,” in
Proc. 7th Int. Conf. Power Electron. Drive Syst. (PEDS), Nov. 2007,
pp. 217–224.
[40] A. Garces and M. Molinas, “Comparative investigation of losses in a
reduced matrix converter for off-shore wind turbines,” in Proc. 5th IET
Int. Conf. Power Electron., Mach. Drives (PEMD), Apr. 2010, pp. 1–6.
[41] P. W. Wheeler, J. Rodriguez, J. C. Clare, L. Empringham, and
A. Weinstein, “Matrix converters: A technology review,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 276–288, Apr. 2002.
Rene Barrera-Cardenas received the B.S. degree
in electronic engineering and the M.Sc. degree in
electrical engineering from the Industrial Univer-
sity of Santander, Bucaramanga, Colombia, in 2006
and 2010, respectively. He is currently pursuing
the Ph.D. degree with the Norwegian University of
Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
His current research interests include power elec-
tronics modeling, wind energy conversion systems,
parallel computing, and evolutionary algorithms.
Marta Molinas (M’94) received the Dr.Ing. degree
from the Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo,
Japan, in 2000.
She was with the University of Padua, Padua,
Italy, in 1998, as a Guest Researcher. From 2004 to
2007, she was a Post-Doctoral Researcher with the
Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Trondheim, Norway, where she has been a Professor
since 2008. She was a JSPS Research Fellow with
the Energy Technology Research Institute, National
Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Tech-
nology, Tsukuba, Japan, from 2008 to 2009. Her current research inter-
ests include wind/wave energy conversion systems, and power electronics
applications in power systems.
Dr. Molinas is currently an Associate Editor of the IEEE T RANSACTIONS
ON P OWER E LECTRONICS .