Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings 8 (2019) 642–651 www.materialstoday.com/proceedings

ECT_2017

Electrical network of the automotive multi-sectional thermoelectric

generator with MPPT based device usage
Pavel Shiriaeva*, Konstantin Shishova, Alexey Osipkova
a
Bauman Moscow State Technical University, 2-ya Baumanskaya 5/1, Moscow 105005, Russian Federation

Abstract

In this paper, we design a DC/DC converter with maximum power point tracking (MPPT) function for harvesting maximum
output energy from the automotive exhaust thermoelectric generator (AETEG) regardless of the engine operating conditions and
values of the connected electrical load. Our developed AETEG has a multi-section structure. Due to non-uniform temperature
distribution over the surface of the AETEG each section has its own temperature difference. Application of MPPT devices for
such types of thermoelectric generators is accompanied by certain difficulties. Different thermal conditions of each section may
cause effectivity losses of MPPT device application. Experiments are conducted with a real car engine and AETEG in order to
identify the most suitable connection type between AETEG sections and MPPT device.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of 15th European Conference on Thermoelectrics.

Keywords: automotive exhaust thermoelectric generator; multi-sectional thermoelectric generator; maximum power point tracking; perturb and
observe algorithm

1. Introduction

The thermoelectric generator is an environmentally friendly electrical power source. This paper considers the
automobile exhaust thermoelectric generator (AETEG), which is supposed to be one of the most promising
applications in the field of renewable energy [1]. AETEG for internal combustion engine (ICE) allows increasing
fuel economy and overall system efficiency of a vehicle by producing electricity from exhaust gases.
There are different ways of increasing an output power from AETEG: thermoelectric material choice, design
optimization, heat transfer optimization, changes in the influence of hydraulic AETEG resistance on gasoline engine

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +7-910-490-1253.

E-mail address: shiriaevp@gmail.com

2214-7853 © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of 15th European Conference on Thermoelectrics.
 Pavel Shiriaev et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 8 (2019) 642–651 643

efficiency and etc. This article discusses AETEG electrical network and potential solutions for the issue of the
AETEG resistance and electric load resistance mismatch, which leads to the loss of power, as shown in Fig. 1.
There is the method of connecting thermoelectric module (TEM) directly to the load resistance in the case if TEM
internal resistance is similar to it. This technique is suitable only for systems with stable operating conditions. The
engine power does not have a constant value. It depends on driving style and leads to changes in TEM temperature
difference, which affects TEM internal resistance [2]. In this way the usage of the DC/DC converter with maximum
power point tracking (MPPT) function is necessary. It allows automatically matching the electronic load parameters
with the internal AETEG resistance. Consequently, its main advantage is the possibility of harvesting maximum
output power from AETEG in any conditions. The choice of AETEG electrical network should be done with taking
into account converter electrical losses. In addition, vehicle electronic systems should be supplied by stable voltage,
so MPPT cannot be of random volt-ampere characteristics as in other systems [3]. In this paper, we consider how to
most effectively apply the MPPT controller for the existing multi-sectional AETEG.

Fig. 1. TEM Power P vs. hot side temperature Thot and load resistance Rload at cold side temperature Tcold = 50 °С.

2. AETEG system overview

MPPT technique executes continuous adjustment of the electrical system impedance to keep it operating at the
peak power point under varying conditions. Since thermoelectric modules are DC sources we use a non-inverting
buck-boost DC/DC converter as a basis of our device to implement MPPT function in the electrical system [4]. This
converter is basically the result of cascading a Buck converter with a Boost converter. It can be controlled by two
pulse-width modulation (PWM) signals. Its schema includes protection diode, transistors as main switchers and only
one inductor. The operation of the device is based on STM32 microcontroller. It collects and processes current and
voltage sensors data and generates PWM signals by the decision of the MPPT algorithm. The device works with
power up to 150 W. Its operating frequency is 50 kHz. The schematic diagram of our device is represented in Fig. 2.
644 Pavel Shiriaev et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 8 (2019) 642–651

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of MPPT controller.

There are many MPPT algorithms and their applications have been considered by different researchers to date.
The most widely used of them are constant voltage method [5], perturb and observe (P&O) algorithm [6]
incremental conductance algorithm [7], fuzzy control method [8] and etc. There is the tendency of MPPT controller
development with higher processing speed [9,10]. However, algorithm speed for thermoelectric systems is not as
relevant as its accuracy due to the inertia of AETEG processes. We modify the conventional P&O MPPT algorithm
by adding the subfunction for determining the size of the duty ratio step. This subfunction calculates the size of the
duty ratio step for each iteration of the cycle. The subfunction purpose is obtaining higher speed for ascending and
descending parts of the P-V curve and maintaining higher accuracy for the peak part of the P-V curve. The block
diagram of our algorithm is represented in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Modified P&O MPPT algorithm.

The shape of the developed AETEG is chosen based on the design optimization [11,12]. The AETEG presents a
hollow hexahedral prism and consists of five sections. Its design is shown in Fig. 4. This kind of shape provides
uniform heat flux distribution over the cross-section. Such design can be easily scaled by increasing the length of the
structure and the size of its side. The geometry of the inner side of the heat exchanger is chosen on the basis of
exhaust gas flow simulation. Using the structure with multi-directional ribs as the heat intensifiers can significantly
increase the amount of heat flow through the edges of the TEG, which makes it more effective [13,14].
 Pavel Shiriaev et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 8 (2019) 642–651 645

Fig. 4. AETEG design.

The thermoelectric modules with different ZT-values (PbTe & GeTe TEMs for sections №1-2 and PbTe & BiTe
for №3-5 sections) are used due to the fact that each section has the different temperature state.
The necessary temperature difference of the thermoelectric modules is ensured by equipped AETEG water
cooling system. The cold side of the module is cooled by an aluminum heat exchanger with a fluid channel inside it.
The heat exchanger uniform clamping force to the module is ensured by the pressure plates. The plates are attracted
by two bolts through the disc springs to the frame of the thermoelectric generator to compensate the thermal
expansion. The source of combustion gases is the automotive internal combustion engine VAZ-21127. The
hydraulic load device is SuperFlow BW. Exhaust gases flow through the thermoelectric generator and heat it. Later
on, gases exit through the muffler. Programmable DC electronic load BK Precision 8520 is used as an imitator of
the electric automobile system. The data acquisition system monitors and collects data from the sensors about the
engine state, the AETEG state and other parts of the test-stand. It is based on the National Instruments Compact RIO
with a built-in controller. Table 1 lists main parameters of relevant components of this complex system.

Table 1. Parameters of relevant components of the AETEG.

Name Parameter Value
Engine Bore/stroke 75.6/82 mm/mm
Cylinder number and arrangement Straight-4
Compression ratio 11
Rated power 78 kW
Rated speed 5800 rpm
Max. torque 148 Nm
Hydraulic load device Capacity Up to 2237 kW
Torque Up to 3390 Nm
Water pump Pumping capacity 0.07 gpm
Liquid pressure 2.5 kg/cm2
Fan Capacity 110 W
Power supply 12 VDC
Battery Chemistry Lead acid
Capacity 60 Ah
646 Pavel Shiriaev et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 8 (2019) 642–651

Voltage 12 - 13 V
Electronic load Operating voltage 0.1 VDC to 120 VDC
Rated current 0 A to 240 A
Power 2400 W
Resolution 1 mV/10 mV, 1 mA/10 mA
CC mode accuracy 0.1%+0.1% FS
CV mode accuracy 0.05%+0.02% FS
Thermoelectric module Name TEG1-PB-12611-6.0
Materials PbTe & BiTe
Size 56 x 56 mm
Hot side temperature range 260 °С to 360 °С
Matched load resistance 0.97 Ohm
Matched load output voltage 4.6 V
Matched load output current 4.7 A
Matched load output power 21.7 W

3. TEMs connection modeling and discussion

TEMs can be connected in series or in parallel. The serial connection type is used, in the case of increasing the
output voltage range. The parallel connection allows increasing total current. However, these connection types have
different maximum output power conditions and depend on modules electrical characteristics consistency. We create
the mathematical model for predicting system electrical power parameters and power losses, which are calculated
from converter efficiency [15].
Vehicle electrical systems require the higher constant voltage that the single installed TEM can produce. The
serial connection of TEMs with the identical electrical characteristics increases summary voltage and has practically
no maximum power loss. Fig. 5 shows the sum power of 6 separate TEMs and the power characteristic of 6 TEMs
connected in serial. The output power for serial connection is:

( E1  E2 )2  Rload
Pserial  (1)
(r1  r2  Rload )2

where r1, r2 are TEMs internal resistances and E1, E2 are their thermoelectric power. Pserial depends on the applied
electrical load resistance Rload.
Basing on the modeling results TEMs are connected in series for each AETEG section. Accordingly, 5 separate
supply circuit sections of thermoelectric modules are formed.
 Pavel Shiriaev et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 8 (2019) 642–651 647

Fig. 5. Model of TEMs powers.

The MPPT controller is used for obtaining the maximum output power from these sections. Specifications of the
MPPT device allow providing each AETEG circuit section with its own MPPT controller or combining sections into
parallel pairs with common MPPT controller. There is the mathematical model of power curves with calculated
conversion losses for proposed connection types of AETEG sections, see Fig. 6. Its order to investigate which
connection mode has the highest efficiency. The output power for parallel sections connection mode is:

( E1r2  E2 r1 ) 2  Rload
Pparallel  (2)
( Rload r1  r1r2  Rload r2 ) 2

Using the parallel connection of supply circuit sections with different electrical characteristics decreases
maximum output power of the system. Although conversion losses of parallel connection with common MPPT
controller can be less in percentage, this connection mode stays not profitable. Modeling shows us that providing
each AETEG section with its own MPPT controller allows generating more output power.
Based on the simulation results, it can be concluded that the use of separate MPPT controllers for circuit sections
is the most effective AETEG connection type.
648 Pavel Shiriaev et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 8 (2019) 642–651

Fig. 6. Modeled connection types.

4. Experimental verification

The experiments are carried out for the 3rd and 4th sections of the AETEG. Each section consists of 6 TEMs,
module specifications are given from product description and shown in table 1. TEMs are connected in series and
sections are connected in parallel. Their characteristics are shown in Fig. 1. The purpose of the tests is to estimate
overall efficiency for different types of AETEG electrical network: with common and with separate MPPT
controllers (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7. AETEG electrical network: (a) separate MPPT controllers; (b) common MPPT controller.

Designed test stand (Fig. 8) allows simulating the operation of the engine by the hydraulic load device. The
coolant is circulated through AETEG heat exchangers by the water pump. Since the waterway is looped, during the
circulation the water has time to warm up. There are no additional sources of cold water in the system, which is
typical in case of application in a real car. This fact limits getting a higher cold temperature. However configured
operation mode of the pump maintains an average cold side temperature Tcold about 50 °С, which is enough to create
a temperature difference. The ICE exhaust gases pass through the bypass and heat TEMs to Thot hot side
temperature. The data acquisition system and temperature probes provide monitoring of the AETEG and the engine
parameters. The electronic load is used for measuring output electrical power and to imitate resistance of the vehicle
electric system. The battery provides a constant supply voltage in a range of 12 V to 13 V. According to the
 Pavel Shiriaev et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 8 (2019) 642–651 649

principle that in a parallel circuit the voltage is the same for all elements and that the voltage of vehicle electrical
devices is also 12 V, using the battery in the electrical network makes it possible to properly power all car systems.

Fig. 8. Physical map of the designed AETEG test stand.

Each operation mode of the engine is accompanied by waiting time for setting the constant temperature
difference. Table 2, 3, 5 illustrates the results of electrical power for each connection mode.
After measuring the power of the direct connection to a matched load, the connection schema goes to the mode,
when AETEG supplies the battery and electronic load. In this state MPPT controller is disabled, consequently
AETEG resistance and resistance of the electronic load, battery and wires may not match, that leads to power loss.
The mismatched load can have a wide value range, because it depends on engine operation mode, battery charge
value and value of the electronic load. However, in the course of our experiment, we decide to stay the value of
electronic load after matching in direct connection mode constant until the start of measuring next section.
The experimental results confirm the efficiency of the MPPT controller usage. The MPPT controller allows
increasing AETEG output electrical power from 13 – 28%.
However electrical losses on the MPPT controller affect the electrical power, which reaches vehicle electric
system. Consequently, the conversion efficiency varies from 91 – 95%. The total percentage of electrical power
losses on the conversion to the connection mode with separate MPPT controllers and the percentage of conversion
losses for the connection mode with common MPPT controller is shown in Fig. 9.
The experimental result, that the power losses in common converter are higher than in separated converters,
confirms the model which is based on Eq. (1) and Eq. (2). Also, it may be explained by electronic components
choice. Although the power components of the converter can maintain their efficiency despite the increase in the
power transmitted through them, such components, as current sensors, have less sensitivity to current increasing.
This fact affects the measurement accuracy and operation of the algorithm. The verification of the experiment and
the mathematical model is illustrated in Fig. 10.

Table 2. AETEG experimental results of different connection modes at 2500 rpm@33 kW.
Connected sections Hot side Cold side Direct Connection Connection Sum Losses on
temperature temperature connection to with battery to with enabled power the MPPT
Thot (°С) Tcold (°С) matched load mismatched MPPT (W) (W) controller
(W) load (W) (W)
Section №3 208 50 26.41 22.71 26.36 1.57
49.63
Section №4 200 50 23.49 19.35 23.27 1.40
Section №3 & Section №4 50 49.28 40.86 49.28 49.28 3.83
650 Pavel Shiriaev et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 8 (2019) 642–651

Table 3. AETEG experimental results of different connection modes at 3250 rpm@45 kW.
Connected sections Hot side Cold side Direct Connection Connection Sum Losses on
temperature temperature connection to with battery to with enabled power the MPPT
Thot (°С) Tcold (°С) matched load mismatched MPPT (W) (W) controller
(W) load (W) (W)
Section №3 257 50 44.09 34.32 44.08 2.32
86.64
Section №4 254 50 42.61 34.16 42.56 1.53
Section №3 & Section №4 50 86.40 66.29 86.36 86.36 7.34

Table 4. AETEG experimental results of different connection modes at 4000 rpm@59 kW.
Connected sections Hot side Cold side Direct Connection Connection Sum Losses on
temperature temperature connection to with battery to with enabled power the MPPT
Thot (°С) Tcold (°С) matched load mismatched MPPT (W) (W) controller
(W) load (W) (W)
Section №3 308 50 69.46 51.24 69.37 4.92
135.93
Section №4 301 50 66.69 49.19 66.56 3.03
Section №3 & Section №4 50 137.29 98.02 136.89 136.89 12.04

Fig. 9. Electrical conversion losses.

Fig. 10. Mathematical model verification: (a) at 2500 rpm@33 kW; (b) at 3250 rpm@45 kW; (c) at 4000 rpm@59 kW.
 Pavel Shiriaev et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 8 (2019) 642–651 651

5. Conclusions

The MPPT controller is the solution to the problem of harvesting maximum possible output power from AETEG
in any ICE operation conditions. It provides increasing the conversion efficiency up to 28% in the case of
mismatched load resistance.
The verification gap between the mathematical model and the experimental tests is no more than 13%. This result
allows us to state that the mathematical model can be used for predicting AETEG power characteristics and
electrical conversion losses on the MPPT controller.
The modeling concludes that in the case of AETEG sections with different thermal conditions, it is required to
use the connection mode with separate MPPT controllers since otherwise the maximum output power is reduced.
During the experiment, sections have not the significant temperature difference between each other, due to the long
heating time. Consequently, the essential power difference between the electrical network with separate MPPT
controllers and with common MPPT controller is not observed. However, the conversion losses on the common
MPPT device are higher by 3% than summarized losses on the separate MPPT controllers. This confirms the
decision to use the separate connection mode.

References

[1] Champier, D., 2017. Thermoelectric generators: A review of applications. Energy Conversion and Management, 140, pp.167-181.
[2] Mitrani, D., Tomé, J.A., Salazar, J., Turó, A., García, M.J. and Chávez, J.A., 2005. Methodology for extracting thermoelectric module
parameters. IEEE transactions on instrumentation and measurement, 54(4), pp.1548-1552.
[3] Jun, H., Peng, X., Hongfei, W. and Yan, X., 2015, June. A distributed MPPT control for a hybrid centralized-distributed TEG power
generation system. In Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA), 2015 IEEE 10th Conference on (pp. 741-744). IEEE.
[4] Microelectronics, S.T., 2007. An MCU-based Low Cost Non-inverting Buck-boost Converter for Battery Chargers. Application note
AN2389.
[5] Xiong, Y., Yu, L. and Xu, J.M., 2009. MPPT control of photovoltaic generation system combining constant voltage method with perturb-
observe method. Electric Power Automation Equipment, 29(6), pp.85-88.
[6] Brunton, S.L., Rowley, C.W., Kulkarni, S.R. and Clarkson, C., 2010. Maximum power point tracking for photovoltaic optimization using
ripple-based extremum seeking control. IEEE transactions on power electronics, 25(10), pp.2531-2540.
[7] Safari, A. and Mekhilef, S., 2011. Simulation and hardware implementation of incremental conductance MPPT with direct control method
using cuk converter. IEEE transactions on industrial electronics, 58(4), pp.1154-1161.
[8] Li, J. and Wang, H., 2009, April. Maximum power point tracking of photovoltaic generation based on the fuzzy control method. In
Sustainable Power Generation and Supply, 2009. SUPERGEN'09. International Conference on (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
[9] Fang, W., Quan, S.H., Xie, C.J., Tang, X.F., Wang, L.L. and Huang, L., 2016. Maximum power point tracking with dichotomy and gradient
method for automobile exhaust thermoelectric generators. Journal of Electronic Materials, 45(3), pp.1613-1624.
[10] Quan, R., Zhou, W., Yang, G. and Quan, S., 2017. A Hybrid Maximum Power Point Tracking Method for Automobile Exhaust
Thermoelectric Generator. Journal of Electronic Materials, 46(5), pp.2676-2683.
[11] Leontiev, A.I., Kavtaradze, R.Z., Onishchenko, D.O., Golosov, A.S. and Pankratov, S.A., 2016. Improvement of piston engine operation
efficiency by direct conversion of the heat of exhaust gases into electric energy. High Temperature, 54(1), pp.105-112.
[12] Onishchenko, D.O., Pankratov, S.A., Zotov, A.A., Osipkov, A.S. and Poshekhonov, R.A., 2017. Study of Influence of Hydraulic
Thermoelectric Generator Resistance on Gasoline Engine Efficiency. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 12(5), pp.721-
727.
[13] Leontyev, A.I., Onishchenko, D.O. and Arutyunyan, G.A., 2016. Selecting the optimum method of heat transfer intensification to improve
efficiency of thermoelectric generator. Thermophysics and Aeromechanics, 23(5), pp.747-754.
[14] Poshekhonov, R.A., Arutyunyan, G.A., Pankratov, S.A., Osipkov, A.S., Onishchenko, D.O. and Leontyev, A.I., 2017. Development of a
mathematical model for optimizing the design of an automotive thermoelectric generator taking into account the influence of its hydraulic
resistance on the engine power. Semiconductors, 51(8), pp.981-985.
[15] Schelle, D. and Castorena, J., 2006. Buck-converter design demystified. Power Electronics Technology.