Optimization of a MW Halbach PMSG for
Wind Turbine Applications
Salem Alshibani, Rukmi Dutta, Vassilios G. Agelidis
 Abstract -- Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generators
(PMSGs) are increasingly considered for large, direct-drive
MW level wind energy conversion systems. High-efficiency,
high-power density, low maintenance, and high reliability are
some cited benefits of PMSGs making them attractive for
onshore and offshore wind systems. However, as the PMSG’s
power level increases so would its weight and size. This research
attempted to reduce the size and weight of PMSGs by using
Halbach magnetic array instead of a conventional array. An
analytical model of a MW Halbach array PMSG has been
developed. This Halbach PMSG was optimized using a five-
input particle swarm optimization algorithm. The resultant
optimized Halbach PMSG is more compact and lightweight
when compared to the conventional PMSGs of similar power
ratings. Performance of the optimized design was verified with
finite element analysis.
Index Terms -- particle swarm optimization, permanent
magnet machines, wind power generation
I. INTRODUCTION
A PPLICATION of permanent magnet synchronous
generators (PMSGs) in mega-watt (MW) level wind
turbines have received attention due to the ease of
controllability, high efficiency, and reliability [1]-[7].
PMSGs are quite attractive for offshore sites where
maintenance and repair can be exorbitant [8]-[10]. However,
with increased power level, PMSGs in a direct-drive
application tend to be heavy and large in diameter incurring
extra transportation, construction, and structural costs [1],
[11]-[13]. Attempts to resolve this problem with different
approaches are evident in the technical literature [2], [11]-
[17]. One of such approaches is to use lighter material to
reduce the weight of the machine [12], [18]. The use of low-
ratio gears were also proposed to reduce the size and weight
of PMSGs [2], [11], [13], [15]. With a low ratio gear stage,
the PMSG would have a higher rated speed allowing it to be
smaller than the direct-drive version. Another attempt is to
use modular design where the bulky PMSG is manufactured
and transferred in pieces and assembled onsite or even at hub
height [14], [16], [17].
S. Alshibani is with the Electrical Engineering Technology Department,
The Public Authority for Applied Education and Training, Shuwaikh,
Kuwait. (email: sm.alshibani@paaet.edu.kw)
R. Dutta is with the School of Electrical Engineering and
Telecommunications, University of New South Wales (UNSW), Sydney,
Australia (email: rukmi.dutta@unsw.edu.au)
V. G. Agelidis is with The Australian Energy Research Institute and the
School of Electrical Engineering and Telecommunications, University of
New South Wales (UNSW), Sydney, Australia. (email:
vassilios.agelidis@unsw.edu.au)
l-))) 
Stemming from a similar motivation, the aim of this paper
is to propose a direct-drive PMSG design in which the size,
weight, and, consequently, cost are minimized using a multi-
input optimization technique. A Halbach array was selected
so that a higher magnet flux density at the air-gap can be
achieved than that of a conventional array of the same
magnet volume [19]-[21]. Therefore, the machine should
generate higher torque and power [21]-[23] for a certain
volume than conventional array resulting in a more compact
machine. For this purpose, and to generally evaluate the use
of a Halbach array in low speed, MW power level slotted
PMSGs, a 3MW design was considered in this paper. It was
found through a detailed study in [24] that direct replacement
of the conventional Permanent Magnet (PM) array with a
Halbach array without optimizing the design could not
provide all the expected benefits of a Halbach array. Re-
optimization is necessary to take advantage of the benefits of
Halbach array. This paper attempts to integrate Halbach
array in the optimization process.
Halbach array type PM machines have been designed
previously for low-power and high-speed applications [25]-
[28]. However, application of Halbach array in low-speed,
MW level is emerging only in recent years [18]. A variety of
slotless, ironless 10 MW axial and radial flux generators for
off-shore wind turbines are optimized with genetic algorithm
in [18]. Because of their 10 MW ratings, axial flux, and
ironless natures of the PMSGs discussed in [18], the airgap
radius of these 10MW-machines were much larger than their
conventional counterparts. Nevertheless, this drawback is
compensated for by the overall lightweight of the machines
due to elimination of iron cores. The Halbach array utilized
in [18] is of the basic two-segment form so as not to
complicate the manufacturing process. However, this results
in a less than ideal sinusoidal induced voltage.
The solution suggested in [18] may not be the best option
for generator of 2 to 3MW which are more common in the
existing wind farms. In this paper, the conventional design of
radial flux slotted PMSGs is adhered to with changes
required to accommodate Halbach array, as will be presented
later. Moreover, the use of five-segment Halbach array was
investigated rather than the basic two-segment to achieve a
more sinusoidal output. The proposed PMSG was optimized
with particle swarm optimization (PSO) since it is claimed to
be one of the more efficient multi-objective optimization
methods. In a nutshell, this paper can be thought of as filling
the gap left in the literature between that related to the
conventional PMSGs commonly used in direct-drive wind
turbines and the more ambitious attempts of research like the
one presented in [18].
 The paper is structured as follows: Section II presents a
(a)
brief summary of the Halbach array. Section III discusses the
analytical model of the Halbach array. This model consists of
analytical equations available in the technical literature to
represent the airgap flux density for fast and small Halbach
machines. The accuracy of these equations for the airgap of
large slow machines was also checked in this research.
Section IV summarizes the PMSG’s specifications, analytical
equations, and integration with Halbach array equations. All
of These equations were included in a five-input particle
swarm optimization algorithm, which is suitable for MW (b)
level PMSGs, to find an optimal design based on pre-defined
design goals. Section V presents this optimization algorithm.
Section VI discusses the resultant optimized Halbach PMSG
and a finite element model (FEM) has been developed to
verify the analytically predicted performance characteristics
of the optimized design. Also, in Section VI, the optimized
Halbach PMSG was compared against PMSGs with
conventional array in terms of size and weight. Finally, a
conclusion is provided in Section VII.
Fig. 1. (a) is a conventional array, (b) when converted to Halbach array. (Line
color range in Wb/m where red at a maximum of 3.9x10-2, green at zero, and
II. HALBACH ARRAY blue at a minimum of 3.9x10-2)
When Halbach array was first discovered in 1973 it was
thought of as “A Magnetic Curiosity” [19]. It made the flux
intensify in one side when horizontally magnetized magnets III. HALBACH DESIGN EQUATIONS
are alternated in an array with vertically magnetized ones. It An accurate representation of the Halbach array through
was not, however, referred to as Halbach array until years sets of analytical equations is paramount for finding optimal
later when Klaus Halbach, of the Laurance Berkeley design using optimization techniques such as the particle
National Laboratories, utilized the array in experiments on swarm method.
electron accelerators [29]-[31]. An analytical model to represent the airgap flux density
Fig. 1 compares the flux plots of a Halbach array to that of for a slotted machine with Halbach array with a minimum of
the conventional one. The flux plot of Halbach array in Fig. three segments per pole was described in [25]. In this model,
1(b) shows the concentration of flux on the upper side of the a two-dimensional representation of Halbach array for a
magnet. Arrows in the figure indicate magnetization slotless stator was first developed. The effects of slotting was
direction. Each pole in a Halbach array, compared to the later introduced through calculating the complex relative
conventional array, is segmented into two pieces. The shift in airgap permeance, O, using conformal transformation of the
magnetization direction between adjacent pieces is 90o. If the slot geometry [25]. This resulted in the following analytical
number of segments were three, then the shift in equation of the radial component of the Halbach flux density
magnetization direction between the three pieces would be in the slotted airgap:
60o and so on.
A. Advantages of Halbach array Bsr Br O a  BT O b (1)
One of the advantages of Halbach array include producing
where Br and BT are the radial and tangential components of
higher power density with less magnet volume [20]-[24],
which reduces the cost associated with the PM. It also holds the flux density in the slotless airgap and are defined as
on to most of its airgap flux density without the back iron follows:
[3], [20], [22], [24], [32]. This makes it possible to replace
f
the heavy iron core of the rotor with less expensive lighter p
non-magnetic material. Other advantages include a more
Br r ,T 
rn ¦ n(e
1,3,5
1n r
np
 e2 n r  np ) cos( npT ) (2)
sinusoidal emf waveform [3], [20], [22], [24], [32] offering a
low torque ripple [32] and reduction of voltage and airgap
f
flux density harmonics [20], [23], [24]. Halbach array also p
allows elimination of skewing which would reduce
BT r , T 
r n ¦ n( e
1,3,5
1n r
np
 e2 n r  np ) sin( npT ) (3)
manufacturing cost [22], [32]. It also reduces cogging torque
[22], [32], and provides significantly better torque than
conventional setup [23], thus offer better power density [22] where, p is the number of pole pairs, r is the radius at which
and better power efficiency [3], [21]. the airgap flux density will be calculated, and e1n and e2n are
two constants which can be found from boundary conditions


as shown in (7) and (8). Oa and Ob in (1) are the real and By closely inspecting the equations representing the
complex components of the permeance, respectively, and slotted airgap flux density of the Halbach setup, it can be
they are defined as follows: deduced that they are a function of the number of pole pairs,
p, the rotor radius, Rr, the magnet radius, Rm, the airgap
NO radius, Rs, the number of slots, Q, and the slot width, bs. If all
Oa O0  ¦O an cos(nQT ) (4) these variables were to be known, then the Halbach airgap
flux density for a slotted machine would be calculated.
n 1
In the next two sections, these equations will be
NO incorporated in the design and optimization algorithm of a
Ob ¦O bn sin(nQT ) (5) Halbach MW PMSG using particle swarm optimization. The
n 1 optimized Halbach PMSG resulting from such optimization
will be presented in Section VI.
where Q is the number of slots, and T represent any angle in
the polar coordinates to define the slot width, bs. Oan and Obn IV. PMSG DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
are the Fourier coefficients, and O0 is the DC component of The specifications of the MW wind turbine for which a
the waveform. Details of these components and the direct-drive Halbach PMSG is to be optimized are shown in
derivation of O can be found in [25] and [33]. Table I. The Halbach PMSG is to have the shape shown in
The radius at which the air-gap flux density is calculated Fig. 2. A pole-pair is shown with five segments per pole. The
as, more segments per pole the more sinusoidal is the flux
density. However, to avoid complexity of design and
r Rm  (Rs  Rm ) / 2 (6) simulation, the number of segments was kept at a constant of
five; this gives a fairly sinusoidal output with significant
where Rm is the outer radius of the pole magnet, and Rs is the improvement to overall performance as will be shown later.
stator inner radius or airgap radius. There are three stator slots per pole of this three-phase
What remains to be defined in (2) and (3) are e1n and e2n, machine as shown in Fig. 2. The winding arrangement is
and they are derived in [25] from boundary conditions as shown with two conductor layers per slot.
follows: The dimensional parameters of Halbach PMSG to be
optimized are shown in Fig. 3. These dimensional parameters
2np
e1n e2n Rs (7) are not any different from the conventional PMSGs found in
[10], [13], [34], and [35]. Table II specifies the independent
2np optimization variables and the respective initial ranges used.
1 Rs All other dimensional parameters are either constant or
e2n
§
2 np¨R  R 2np ·
2np
¸ dependent on these optimization variables. Table III shows
© r s
¹
the constant variables [34], [35]. the air-gap clearance, G, as
ª§ np1 ·
u Ǭ2Rr
©
np1 2np
 Rr Rm
np1
 Rr ¸ MTn  \ n
¹   (8) shown in Fig. 3, is defined as 0.001d (but not less than 5mm,
TABLE I
§ 2np  np1 np1 · º
 ¨Rr Rm  Rm ¸np\ n » WIND TURBINE SPECIFICATIONS
© ¹ ¼ Rated Turbine Power (MW) 3
Maximum Aerodynamic Efficiency 0.48
where Rr is the rotor radius or the magnet inner radius, and Optimum Tip Speed Ratio 7
Surface Roughness (mm) 50
\n is defined as follows: Turbine Rotor Diameter (m) 86.71
Hub Height (m) 104.052
npM rn  MTn Rated Turbine Shaft Speed (rpm) 18.502
\n (9) Cut-in Wind Speed (m/s) 2
 
2
np 1 Rated Wind Speed (m/s) 12
Cut-out Wind Speed (m/s) 25

where M rn and MTn are the Fourier coefficients of the radial

and tangential components of the magnetization vector, Conductor
Stator

respectively. For unity pole arc to pole pitch ratio, also b+ c- a+ b- c+ a-

known as pole embrace, they are defined as follows:

M rn MTn ¦ M
n
(10)
Rotor
n 1,3,5
Magnet
Segment Shaft
where, n is the harmonic number and M is the remanence of
the permanent magnet. Fig. 2. Halbach PMSG cross-section and close-up.


 optimization variables and calculating cost and efficiency. It
is expected to achieve the lowest cost possible with as high
an efficiency as it could attain. Cost is directly related to
weight and size, as the unit cost of each active material is
multiplied by its total mass. The optimization method used
was particle swarm optimization [36]-[38]. It should be noted
here that the optimization process of this paper includes the
accurate analytical model of the air-gap flux density of a
Halbach array in a slotted stator described in sections III and
IV.
A swarm of seven particles are flown in a five-
dimensional search space. The number of particles was
chosen thusly to provide acceptable results at a relatively
short computation (execution) time of the algorithm. Each
Fig. 3. Dimensional Characteristics of the Halbach PMSG to be optimized.
particle’s position was mathematically represented by a point
TABLE II in the space. For example, particle a is defined by a(d, Wp, hs,
OPTIMIZATION VARIABLES l, hm). Each particle then calculates its resultant Halbach
Variable Name Symbol Range PMSG’s cost and efficiency. The optimizer is expected to
Air-gap Diameter (m) d 1-11 increase the efficiency and decrease the cost as permissible
Pole Pitch (mm) Wp 25-110 by the design specifications and constraints. The cost is
Slot Height (mm) hs 25-100 represented by the following equation:
Stator Length (m) l 0.2-2
Magnet Height (mm) hm 1-50 Cost C act  C str  C conv  C sub (16)
TABLE III
CONSTANT PARAMETERS
where Cost represent the total cost of the machine, Cact
Name Symbol Value represent the active martial cost, Cstr the structural cost, Cconv
Tooth Tip Height hs1 1 mm the converter cost, and Csub the subsystem costs. The
Slot Wedge Height hs2 4 mm efficiency, K is calculated as follows:
Slot Opening bs1 3 mm
Insulation Thickness hi 1 mm
Pout
K (17)
Pr  Pf
which is the minimum allowable air-gap clearance in large
machines [13]); the number of pole pairs, p, is πd/2Wp; the where Pr is the turbine rated power (in this case 3 MW) and
slot pitch, W, equals (1/3)Wp. The slot and tooth widths, bs and Pf is the friction power loss. Pout is the Halbach PMSG’s
bd are defined respectively as 0.45W and 0.55W [13]. bCu, hs3, output power calculated as follows [35]:
hCu, are, respectively, winding width, winding height and
conductor height, and they are defined as follows [34], [35]: Pout Pr  Pf  Pad  PFe  Plm  PJ (18)

bCu bs  2hi (11) where Pad represents additional stray load losses, PFe is iron
loss, Plm is the magnet loss, and PJ is joule or copper loss
hs3 hs  hs1  hs2 (12) defined as follows:

hCu 0.5(hs3  3hi ) (13) PJ 3RI 2 (19)

The stator yoke height, hys, and the rotor yoke height, hyr, are where R is the armature resistance and I is the rated current.
defined as follows [34], [35], Pout can also be expressed as:

h ys BG 0 bm (l  2G ) / 2.28l (14) Pout 3UI cos M (20)

where U is the rated voltage and cos M is the power factor,

h yr BG 0 bm (l  2G ) / 2.40l (15) which is calculated by the following equation [34], [35]:

where BG 0 is the peak airgap flux density.

§ I ·2
cos M 1 ¨ S fLa¸ (21)
V. OPTIMIZATION PROCESS ©U ¹
The optimization process is based on varying the


where f is the nominal frequency and La is the total armature TABLE VI
WEIGHT OF THE HALBACH PMSG AS COMPARED TO CONVENTIONAL
inductance. Friction, magnet, and stray losses, along with the PMSGS
resistance, inductance and rated voltage can all be calculated Conventional PMSG
Halbach
analytically from the available machine dimensions and Item
PMSG
from
optimization variables [13], [34], [35]. The iron loss [13] [41] [42]
Copper Weight (tons) 1.782 3.31 2.08 2.13
calculations for this research was based on the widely used Iron Weight (tons) 8.827 11.7 8.97 8.04
method in which the iron losses are divided into the three Magnet Weight (tons) 1.561 1.92 1.43 1.27
distinct types of hysteresis, eddy, and excess losses [13], Total Weight (tons) 12.17 16.93 12.48 11.5
[34], [35], [39], [40]. This leaves the rated phase current as specifications were different in these machines compared in
the only unknown. By substituting (19) into (18) and (21) Tables V and VI. Therefore, this is not intended as an exact
into (20), the rated current can be calculated as a solution to comparison but just for a guideline to highlight the
the following equation, which is the result of equating (18) differences and similarities of the optimized Halbach array
and (20): PMSG with the conventional ones. It should be noted here
that the design described in [13] was optimized with Genetic
§ I ·2 Algorithm, while those of the [41] and [42] were optimized
3UI 1 ¨ S fLa¸ Pr  3RI 2  Pf  Pad  PFe  Plm (22) with particle swarm optimization. Moreover, the
©U ¹
conventional machines were optimized with six optimization
variables that include airgap flux density and tooth flux
When the cost and efficiency of the machines produced by density. This was not the case in this paper as presented
each of the seven particles are calculated, the optimizer earlier. In this paper, the machine was optimized for the
updates positions of all particles based on the machine of the lowest cost possible with the highest efficiency. Since the
particle with the best performance. This is repeated for a PMSGs considered here for comparison were not optimized
number of iterations or until a desired value is reached. At for any specific output frequency and for a fixed rated speed,
the end, the machine with the best cost and efficiency is the pole number of each case varies widely. However, all of
returned as the optimum Halbach PMSG. Refer to [41] for these PMSGs were designed for direct-drive 3-MW wind
more details on the optimization process. In the next section, turbines with similar site conditions and input shaft speeds.
the optimized PMSG is presented and discussed in detail. It can be observed from Tables V and VI that the Halbach
PMSG fairs well compared to the conventional PMSGs
VI. OPTIMIZED HALBACH PMSG available in the literature. With Halbach array the PMSG was
Using the analytical equations described in sections III relatively compact in terms of diameter and length and,
and IV and the optimization process described in section V, consequently, would cost less. These qualities are highly
the design of a 3-MW direct-drive PMSG utilizing Halbach desirable in a wind turbine generator considering the
array was obtained. transportation and erection costs associated with MW wind
Table IV provides the resultant specifications of the turbines, especially offshore. Therefore, Halbach array,
optimized Halbach PMSG. For benchmarking purposes, supported by an optimization method based on the reduction
Tables V and VI compare dimensions and weights of the of cost and the increase of efficiency, was able to provide
Halbach PMSG against conventional 3-MW PMSGs good advantage in this low-speed large-scale application of
available from [13], [41], and [42]. Some assumptions and direct-drive MW wind turbine PMSGs. As seen from table
VI, weight of the Halbach array PMSG is comparable with
TABLE IV the conventional machine.
PROPERTIES OF THE OPTIMIZED HALBACH PMSG
Output Power, Pout, (MW) 2.911 A. Disadvantages of the optimised Halbach PMSG
Rated Rotor Speed (rpm) 18.5
Rated Electrical Frequency, f (Hz) 15.4 One of the disadvantages noticed on the Halbach PMSG
Rated Voltage, U (V) 404 was the large magnet weight, which resulted in a large tooth
Rated Current, I (A) 2699 flux density. This was due to the goals set in the optimization
Electrical Efficiency 0.975
Peak Airgap Flux Density (T) 1.183
process. Higher weight was given to efficiency than the
Peak Tooth Flux Density (T) 2.297 lightness of the machine. As a result, iron and copper masses
were reduced to minimize copper and core losses and in
TABLE V compensation, the magnet mass was increased. This increase
DIMENSIONAL SPECIFICATIONS OF THE OPTIMIZED HALBACH PMSG AS
COMPARED TO A CONVENTIONAL PMSGS
in magnet mass provided a large airgap flux density (above
Conventional PMSG one Tesla), which allows the reduction of copper mass to
Halbach
Design Value
PMSG
from increase the efficiency. The reduction in copper and iron
[13] [41] [42] masses would, nonetheless, result in a more compact
Air-gap Diameter, d (m) 3.513 5 4.29 5.41
Stator Length, l (m) 0.70 1.19 1.20 0.75 machine. The concentration of flux toward the airgap side
Pole Pitch, Wp (mm) 110 70 82 94 offered by the Halbach array, along with efficiency oriented
Number of Poles 100 224 166 180 optimization method, have contributed to the increase in flux
Magnet Height, hm (mm) 27 19 17 19 densities. This can be avoided by setting an optimization
Magnet Width, bm (mm) 110 49 57 66


constraint on the airgap flux density or on magnet mass.
Another option, which is considered for future work, is to
include a condition in the optimization process to maintain a
proper balance between the electric and magnetic loading of
the machine.
B. Verification with the Finite Element Analysis
In order to validate the optimized design, a finite element
analysis (FEA) model was constructed using the optimized
dimensions. The airgap flux density obtained from the FEA
model was effectively sinusoidal with little harmonic content
as seen in the Fourier analysis given in Fig. 4. Table VII
compares various values obtained from the FEA model and
the analytical model. It can be observed in Table VII that the
analytical model fairly agrees with FEA one with minor
differences. Overall, the optimized Halbach PMSG was able
to deliver the rated power at the rated speed and rated
current, which was validated with an FEA model.
VII. CONCLUSION
In order to overcome weight and size problems of direct-
drive MW PMSGs, Halbach array has been considered. A 3-
MW PMSG with Halbach array has been optimized using
particle swarm optimization technique to achieve high
efficiency while reducing the cost of, or minimizing the
active materials. The analytical model used in the
optimization process has been found to be fairly accurate
when validated with a FEA model in predicting the power
and key performance criteria of the PMSG.
1.4
1.2
1
Aigrap Flux Density (T)
VIII. REFERENCES
[1] D. Yao and R. G. Harley, "Present and future trends in wind turbine
generator designs," in IEEE Power Electronics and Machines in Wind
Applications, 2009, pp. 1-6.
[2] X. Yu-Shi, H. Li, L. Hui, and X. Li-Dan, "Optimal design and
comparison of different PM synchronous generator systems for wind
turbines," in International Conference on Electrical Machines and
Systems, 2008, pp. 2448-2453.
[3] J. F. Gieras, Advancements in Electric Machines: Springer, 2008.
[4] I. Elosegui, M. Martinez-Iturralde, A. G. Rico, J. Florez, J. M.
Echeverrfa, and L. Fontan, "Analytical design of synchronous
permanent magnet motor/generators," in IEEE International
Symposium on Industrial Electronics, 2007, pp. 1165-1170.
[5] H. Shoudao, L. Xin, C. Luoqiang, H. Keyuan, and G. Jian, "An
engineering design of a 2MW direct-drive permanent-magnet wind-
power generation system," in International Conference on Electrical
Machines and Systems, 2008, pp. 2337-2342.
[6] N. Bianchi and A. Lorenzoni, "Permanent magnet generators for wind
power industry: an overall comparison with traditional generators," in
International Conference on Opportunities and Advances in
International Electric Power Generation, (Conf. Publ. No. 419), 1996,
pp. 49-54.
[7] H. Haraguchi, S. Morimoto, and M. Sanada, "Suitable design of a
PMSG for a large-scale wind power generator," in IEEE Energy
Conversion Congress and Exposition, 2009, pp. 2447-2452.
[8] H. Polinder, S. W. H. De Haan, M. R. Dubois, and J. G. Slootweg,
"Basic operation principles and electrical conversion systems of wind
turbines," European Power Electronics and Drives Journal, vol. 15,
pp. 43-50, 2005.
[9] Siemens. (2010, Accessed Feb. 16 2014). Direct drive wind turbine
SWT-3.0-101. Available:
http://www.energy.siemens.com/hq/pool/hq/power-generation/wind-
power/E50001-W310-A161-X-4A00_SWT-3.0-101_US.pdf
[10] H. Li and Z. Chen, "Optimal direct-drive permanent magnet wind
generator systems for different rated wind speeds," in European
Conference on Power Electronics and Applications, 2007, pp. 1-10.
[11] H. Polinder, F. F. A. van der Pijl, G. J. de Vilder, and P. J. Tavner,
"Comparison of direct-drive and geared generator concepts for wind
turbines," IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion,, vol. 21, pp. 725-
733, 2006.
[12] E. Spooner, P. Gordon, J. R. Bumby, and C. D. French, "Lightweight
ironless-stator PM generators for direct-drive wind turbines," Electric
Power Applications, IEE Proceedings, vol. 152, pp. 17-26, 2005.
[13] L. Hui, C. Zhe, and H. Polinder, "Optimization of Multibrid

permanent-magnet wind generator systems," IEEE Transactions on

0.8 Energy Conversion, vol. 24, pp. 82-92, 2009.
[14] G. Catto, "Direct Coupled Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generators
0.6 for Wind Turbine Application," PhD, University of Manchester
Institute of Science and Technology, Manchester, UK, 1994.
[15] L. Hui and C. Zhe, "Design optimization and evaluation of different
0.4
wind generator systems," in International Conference on Electrical
Machines and Systems, 2008, pp. 2396-2401.
0.2 [16] Z. Jianzhong, C. Ming, and C. Zhe, "A novel stator interior permanent
magnet generator for direct-drive wind turbines," in International
0 Conference on Electrical Machines and Systems, 2007, pp. 723-728.
0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19
Harmonic Number
[17] E. Spooner, A. C. Williamson, and G. Catto, "Modular design of
Fig. 4 The Harmonic content of the airgap flux density. permanent-magnet generators for wind turbines," Electric Power
Applications, IEE Proceedings, vol. 143, pp. 388-395, 1996.
TABLE VII [18] Z. Zhaoqiang, A. Matveev, R. Nilssen, and A. Nysveen, "Ironless
COMPARISON OF ANALYTICAL AND FEA RESULTS Permanent-Magnet Generators for Offshore Wind Turbines," IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applications, vol. 50, pp. 1835-1846, 2014.
Item Analytical FEA
[19] J. Mallinson, "One-sided fluxes -- A magnetic curiosity?," IEEE
Output Power, Pout (MW) 2.911 2.902 Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 9, pp. 678-682, 1973.
Rated Phase Voltage, U (V) 404 388 [20] S. Alshibani, R. Dutta, and V. G. Agelidis, "Flux density analysis of
Rated Phase Current, I (A) 2699 2699 using Halbach array in MW level permanent magnet synchronous
generators for wind turbines: A preliminary linear model," in XXth
Electrical Efficiency, K 0.975 0.977 International Conference on Electrical Machines (ICEM), 2012, pp.
RMS Fundamental Flux Density, BG 1 (T) 0.837 0.886 274-280.
Peak stator Yoke Flux Density, Bys (T) 1.2 1.543 [21] Z. Q. Zhu, "Recent Development of Halbach Permanent Magnet
Machines and Applications," in Power Conversion Conference, PCC -
Peak Tooth Flux Density, Bd (T) 2.297 2.13
Nagoya., 2007, pp. K-9-K-16.
Total Phase Inductance, La (mH) 1.414 1.411 [22] Z. Q. Zhu, Z. P. Xia, K. Atallah, G. W. Jewell, and D. Howe, "Novel
Iron Losses, PFe (kW) 6.302 4.398 permanent magnet machines using Halbach cylinders," in The Third
Copper Losses, PJ (kW) 63.791 63.813 International Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference
Proceedings, IPEMC, 2000, pp. 903-908 vol.2.


[23] J. Ofori-Tenkorrang and J. H. Lang, "A comparative analysis of torque
production in Halbach and conventional surface-mounted permanent-
magnet synchronous motors," in Industry Applications Conference,
Thirtieth IAS Annual Meeting, Conference Record of the IEEE, 1995,
pp. 657-663 vol.1.
[24] S. Alshibani, R. Dutta, and V. G. Agelidis, "An investigation of the use
of a Halbach array in MW level permanent magnet synchronous
generators," in XXth International Conference on Electrical Machines
(ICEM), 2012, pp. 59-65.
[25] K. Boughrara, B. L. Chikouche, R. Ibtiouen, D. Zarko, and O.
Touhami, "Analytical Model of Slotted Air-Gap Surface Mounted
Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motor With Magnet Bars Magnetized
in the Shifting Direction," IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 45,
pp. 747-758, 2009.
[26] M. Markovic and Y. Perriard, "Optimization Design of a Segmented
Halbach Permanent-Magnet Motor Using an Analytical Model," IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 45, pp. 2955-2960, 2009.
[27] W. H. Arof and H. W. Ping, "Analysis of magnetic field distribution of
a cylindrical discrete halbach permanent magnet linear generator,"
Electric Power Applications, IET, vol. 4, pp. 629-636, 2010.
[28] S. Sadeghi and L. Parsa, "Multiobjective Design Optimization of Five-
Phase Halbach Array Permanent-Magnet Machine," IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 47, pp. 1658-1666, 2011.
[29] K. Halbach, "Strong Rare Earth Cobalt Quadrupoles," IEEE
Transactions on Nuclear Science, vol. 26, pp. 3882-3884, 1979.
[30] H. Winick, H. Wiedemann, I. Lindau, K. Hodgson, K. Halbach, J.
Cerino, et al., "An All Wiggler and Undulator Synchrotron Radiation
Source," IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, vol. 30, pp. 3097-
3099, 1983.
[31] G. Rennie. (2004, Oct.) Magnetically levitated train takes flight.
Science & Technology Review. 12-13.
[32] R. Krishnan, "Permanent Magnets and Machines," in Permanent
Magnet Synchronous and Brushless DC Motor Drives, ed: CRC Press,
2009, pp. 3-133.
[33] D. Zarko, D. Ban, and T. A. Lipo, "Analytical calculation of magnetic
field distribution in the slotted air gap of a surface permanent-magnet
motor using complex relative air-gap permeance," IEEE Transactions
on Magnetics, vol. 42, pp. 1828-1837, 2006.
[34] A. Grauers, "Design of Direct-driven Permanent-magnet Generators
for Wind Turbines," PhD, School of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg, Sweden,
1996.
[35] D. Kowal, L. Dupre, P. Sergeant, L. Vandenbossche, and M. De Wulf,
"Influence of the electrical steel grade on the performance of the
direct-drive and single stage gearbox permanent-magnet machine for
wind energy generation, based on an analytical model," IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 47, pp. 4781-4790, 2011.
[36] J. Kennedy and R. Eberhart, "Particle swarm optimization," in IEEE
International Conference on Neural Networks, Proceedings, 1995, pp.
1942-1948 vol.4.
[37] R. Eberhart and J. Kennedy, "A new optimizer using particle swarm
theory," in Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Micro
Machine and Human Science (MHS),, 1995, pp. 39-43.
[38] Y. del Valle, G. K. Venayagamoorthy, S. Mohagheghi, J. C.
Hernandez, and R. G. Harley, "Particle swarm optimization: Basic
concepts, variants and applications in power systems," IEEE
Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 12, pp. 171-195,
2008.
[39] S. Y. R. Hui, J. G. Zhu, and V. S. Ramsden, "A Generalized Dynamic
Circuit Model of Magnetic Cores for Low- and High-Frequency
Applications-Part II : Circuit Model Formulation and Implementation,"
IEEE Transaction on Power Electronics, vol. 11, , p. 251, 1996.
[40] D. Lin, P. Zhou, W. N. Fu, Z. Badics, and Z. J. Cendes, "A dynamic

core loss model for soft ferromagnetic and power ferrite materials in
transient finite element analysis," IEEE Transactions on Magnetics,
vol. 40, pp. 1318-1321, 2004.
[41] S. Alshibani, V. G. Agelidis, and R. Dutta, "Application of particle
swarm optimization in the design of large permanent magnet
synchronous generators for wind turbines," in IEEE International
Conference on Power and Energy (PECon), 2012, pp. 162-167.
[42] S. Alshibani, V. G. Agelidis, and R. Dutta, "Lifetime Cost Assessment
of Permanent Magnet Synchronous Generators for MW Level Wind
Turbines," IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. PP, pp. 1-8,
2013.
IX. BIOGRAPHIES
Salem Alshibani earned his bachelor’s degree in Electrical Engineering
from the University of Hartford, Connecticut, USA in 1999. He then jointed
the Ministry of Electricity and Water in Kuwait where he worked in the
maintenance of power transmission Networks. Through a study leave in
2005 he acquired his Master’s Degree in Advanced Technologies in
Electronics from the University of the West of England, Bristol, UK. In
2007 he joined the College of Technological Studies, Kuwait, as a lecturer in
the Electrical Power Engineering Department. He has recently earned his
PhD at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia.
Rukmi Dutta has received the PhD degree in electrical engineering from
the University of New South Wales, Australia, 2007 and the Bachelors of
Engineering degree in electrical engineering from Assam Engineering
College of Guwahati University, India, 1996. She is currently working as a
lecturer at University of New South Wales, Australia. Before this, she
worked as an Electrical Engineer at CMG Pty Ltd, and as an associate
lecturer at University of New South Wales. She also worked at Institute of
Industrial Science, Tokyo University and Reliance Industry Ltd, India. Her
research interests are PM machine design and control, electromagnetic
analysis of electric devices, renewable energy, distributed generation.
Vassilios G. Agelidis was born in Serres, Greece. He received the B.Eng.
degree in electrical engineering from Democritus University of Thrace,
Thrace, Greece, in 1988, the M.S. degree in applied science from Concordia
University, Montreal, QC, Canada, in 1992, and the Ph.D. degree in
electrical engineering from the Curtin University, Perth, Australia, in 1997.
From 1993 to 1999, he was with the School of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, Curtin University. In 2000, he joined the University of
Glasgow, UK, as a Research Manager for the Glasgow-Strathclyde Centre
for Economic Renewable Power Delivery. In addition, he has authored/co-
authored several journal and conference papers as well as Power Electronic
Control in Electrical Systems (2002). From January 2005 to December
2006, he held the inaugural Chair of Power Engineering in the School of
Electrical, Energy and Process Engineering, Murdoch University, Perth,
Australia. From December 2006 to June 2010, Professor Agelidis held the
EnergyAustralia Chair of Power Engineering at the University of Sydney.
He is currently the Director of the Australian Energy Research Institute and
a Professor of Power Engineering in the School of Electrical Engineering
and Telecommunications at the University of New South Wales, Sydney,
Australia.Dr. Agelidis received the Advanced Research Fellowship from the
United Kingdom’s Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
(EPSRC-UK) in 2004. He was the Vice President Operations within the
IEEE Power Electronics Society for 2006-2007. He was an Associate Editor
of the IEEE POWER ELECTRONICS LETTERS from 2003 to 2005, and
served as the PELS Chapter Development Committee Chair from 2003 to
2005. He was an AdCom member of IEEE PELS for 2007-2009 and the
Technical Chair of the 39th IEEE PESC’08, Rhodes, Greece. He is an
Associate Editor of the IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics since 2010.