The 12th International Renewable Energy Congress (IREC 2021)

Comparative analysis of thyristor-based and

transistor-based rectifiers for PEM water electrolysis

M.Keddar Z. Zhang
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Innovation Campus Delaware, R&D American Air Liquide,
Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Newark DE, United States
2021 12th International Renewable Energy Congress (IREC) | 978-1-6654-3290-0/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/IREC52758.2021.9624773

Québec, Canada. zhifeng.zhang@airliquide.com

mohamed.keddar@uqtr.ca

C. Periasamy M. L. Doumbia
Innovation Campus Delaware, R&D American Air Liquide, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
Newark DE, United States Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières,
chendhil.periasamy@airliquide.com Québec, Canada.
mamadou.doumbia@uqtr.ca

Abstract— Hydrogen is an important industrial gas for clean
fuel, power-to-gas energy storage, and chemical production. In
large-scale electrolysis systems with a high direct current supply,
power rectifiers are important components to connect to the main
power grid. Currently, Thyristor-based topology is most
commonly used for large-scale industrial proton exchange
membrane (PEM) water electrolysis applications due to its
maturity. However, this topology cannot always satisfy the main
grid requirements and instead lead to higher specific energy
consumption per kilogram of hydrogen produced. Instead, the
transistor-based topology is more promising to reduce the total
system cost. In this research, 6-pulse thyristor-based and
transistor-based topologies are compared and investigated to
improve the power quality for a 20 MW PEM water electrolyzer
in Air Liquide's Bécancour plant. We first built a Matlab/Simulink
model to simulate the water electrolysis system. Then, we
compared the power quality parameters with the plant
measurement.
technologies (solar and photocatalytic-based [1,2] etc.) have
strong potential to play a significant role in the new energy
system that must be defined in the coming years.
On the other hand, water electrolysis has become a
promising process to generate green hydrogen and store
renewable energies. Water electrolysis converts electrical
energy into chemical energy by storing electrons in the form of
stable chemical bonds. Energy storage using gases, or Power-to-
Gas Solution, provides excellent opportunities for industrial gas
suppliers and the hydrogen economy. As one of the front-
running technologies, there have been increasing interests in
water electrolysis due to renewable energy development since
the 1970s, as seen in Figure 1.

Keywords— Hydrogen production; Power electronics; Water-

electrolyzer; 3-phase buck rectifier.

I. INTRODUCTION
Under the current policy assumption, the global carbon
dioxide (CO2) emissions from energy-related sources will
continue to grow in the coming decades. Strongly determined
policies are required to remedy this situation, by further research
and demonstration efforts, particularly on batteries, fuel cells,
and hydrogen. Together with smart grids, they can multiply the
benefits of electromobility for both decarbonization of transport
and the development of renewable energy. Hydrogen has the
Fig. 1 The number of publications related to the "water electrolysis"
capability to store and deliver usable energy. Hydrogen can be technology has been increasing exponentially from the 1970s to the end of
produced from both traditional fossil fuel and carbon-free 2020.
energy sources. However, lower-cost methods are widely used,
such as steam reforming of natural gas or refinery gas. Towards However, Today, only 4% of hydrogen is produced from
low-carbon emission, renewable hydrogen production water electrolysis [3]. One main reason preventing the

978-1-6654-3290-0/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: CAMBRIDGE UNIV. Downloaded on January 25,2023 at 22:02:18 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
popularity of water electrolysis systems is that these systems
usually require dynamic adaptation to the fluctuation in the
renewable power sources both in the short and long terms. When
the electrolyzer is powered from the main grid, an AC-DC
converter provides DC power, introducing power quality
challenges [4-6]. In this work, we are interested in proton
exchange membrane (PEM) technology due to the existing PEM
installation at Bécancour (in Québec). From the power
electronics perspective, the PEM electrolysis system is a low-
voltage and high-current system. For example, the input voltage
of an industrial PEM electrolyzer (high power~MW) is on the
order of a few hundred volts. However, the output current is in
the kilo ampere range. Thyristor-based topology has been
applied and studied on high-current industrial applications for a
long time due to its maturity and low cost. However, in large-
scale electrolysis systems, the in-depth analysis in terms of AC
and DC power quality, such as topologies as well as the dynamic
effect of the DC-current ripple on the PEM cell degradation,
have not been well considered. For the electrolysis system, the
challenge exists in improving the power quality by reducing
harmonics losses and the generated reactive power produced by
the thyristor natural commutation and minimizing the current
ripple. Several studies proved that power quality directly affects
electrolyzer energy consumption [7-9]. Thus, reducing total
harmonic distortion (THD) and improving the power factor
increases the electrolyzer efficiency. Furthermore, reducing the
DC-output current ripple can also reduce stock-specific energy
consumption (SEC) and increase the total system efficiency
[8,9].
In this work, different rectifier topologies are presented in
order to compare their performances. A 6-pulse thyristor bridge
rectifier, similar to the one used at the Bécancour plant, and a 3-
phase interleaved buck rectifier (3PIBR) is modeled and
simulated using MATLAB/Simulink. The simulation results are
supported by experimental results from the Bécancour plant.
Finally, a comparison in terms of power factor, total harmonic
distortion (THD), and current ripple are presented and discussed.
II. PEM WATER ELECTROLYSIS
Air Liquide Canada has built a demonstration plant at the power
level of 20 MW, which is the largest PEM-based water
electrolysis system in the world. A process flowchart is shown
in Figure 2. The following work and experiment results are
based on this process. The power is provided by clean hydro-
energy.
Fig. 2 Process flow chart of the 20 MW PEM
To model the PEM water electrolysis cell, experimental data is
required [10,11]. However, the PEM cell static model can be
defined using the current-voltage characteristic. This
characteristic curve has a nonlinear behavior. For
simplification, the PEM cell can be modeled using a linear
model. This can be developed based on the following equation:
Authorized licensed use limited to: CAMBRIDGE UNIV. Downloaded on January 25,2023 at 22:02:18 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
(1)
where Rint is the equivalent internal resistance, icell is the cell
current, and Vint is the cell reversible voltage and can be defined
as:
(2)
where, ΔG is the Gibbs energy used to split the water molecules,
and it is determined according to the temperature. Z is the
exchanged electrons numbers during the reaction, and F is the
Faraday constant. Then, the equivalent electrical circuit of the
PEM cell can be modeled as depicted in figure 3.
Fig. 3 PEM cell electrical equivalent circuit
Different requirements and specifications should be
considered when selecting the power rectifier. In this paper, a
6-pulse thyristor-bridge and a 3-phase buck rectifier were
selected and compared. The PEM cell equivalent electrical
circuit was used to model the PEM electrolyzer in
MATLAB/SIMULINK as a variable resistor. The value of the
PEM electrolyzer resistance is chosen based on the DC output
current using a lookup table, whose output is the value of the
variable resistor component in SIMULINK. The main grid
supply is 25 kV grid flowed by a step-down transformer, then
connected to rectifiers. The rectifier's output is connected to the
electrolyzer through filters. All components are modeled in
SIMULINK using the simscape library.
A. 6-pulse thyristor bridge
The most widely used technology for high-power industrial
applications is thyristor topology due to its maturity. In addition,
it offers high energy efficiency with a controlled output current.
However, this topology presents several drawbacks, such as a
high current ripple and poor power quality, particularly reactive
power that is directly dependent on the firing angle. At partial
load, the firing angle must be higher to decrease the output
voltage, resulting in a poor power factor with a high current
THD, high losses, and DC-current ripple. Unfortunately, a
higher current ripple increases the specific energy consumption
of the PEM electrolyzer. Moreover, the system will need a bulky
active or passive filtering solution, which increases the total cost.
The output voltage of this topology is directly related to the
firing angle, given by the following expression [10]:
(3)
where, Vm is the maximum input voltage, and α is the firing
angle.
B. 3-phase intervaled buck rectifier
This topology offers an important improvement in terms of
harmonics cancellation with a lower current THD and high-
power factor. In addition, it provides a major advantage in
eliminating the bulky harmonics filters, reducing the current
ripple, and consequently, the electrolyzer energy consumption
will be lower. The topology consists of a diode bridge rectifier
connected to the transformer secondary, then diode bridge
rectifier dc output voltage is connected to a buck converter. The
latter one is connected to the PEM electrolyzer and will decrease
the output voltage following the electrolyzer current demand.
Furthermore, it offers fast dynamics due to the high switching
frequency, offering better stability to the system. The number of
legs can be expanded to increase the rectifier reliability and
decrease the DC current ripple. In this work, a three-phase
interleaved buck is selected, allowing a higher switching
frequency, higher reliability, and fast dynamic. The output
voltage is given by the following expression [5]:
= (4)
where D is the duty cycle (between 0 and 1), and Vin is the
DC input voltage. The relation between Vm in Eq. 3 and Vin in
Eq. 4 is, . L1
III. SIMULATION RESULTS
Both topologies were modeled and implemented using
Simscape toolbox electrical libraries in MATLAB/SIMULINK
software. They are connected to the main electricity grid
(120kV, 60Hz) through a 36 MVA two-winding three-phase
transformer to reduce the voltage to 25kv. Then, the output of
this transformer is connected to the 5.4MVA transformer to
reduce the voltage and afterward connected to the rectifiers.
Figure 4 shows the model of the six pulses thyristor rectifier,
where the thyristor bridge input is connected to the step-down
transformer, and the output is connected to the electrolyzer
through an LC filter. The Simulink model of the 3-phase
interleaved buck rectifier is depicted in figure 5. The input is
connected to a diode bridge rectifier. Then, the output of the
power rectifier is connected to the electrolyzer through an LC
filter. The filter design is carried out to fulfill the output voltage
and current ripple requirement. The capacitance value comes out
to be considerably lower as compared to the thyristor rectifier.
To reduce the switching losses, the switching frequency is kept
at 1 kHz. The simulation and design parameters are shown in
table 1.
Electrolyzer
Grid Transformer Lf
T1 T3 T5

L2
C. Voltage and current ripple Cf
L3
The produced voltage and current by a rectifier generally
contain a ripple. This is due to the alternating current component T6 T2 T4
and the switching frequency. DC current ripple reflects the
presence of an alternating current component in the desired Fig. 4. 6-pulse thyristor bridge rectifier
Grid Transformer Rectifier Three phases Electrolyzer
direct current waveform. It is the percentage of AC current Buck converter

passed through by the rectifier to the electrolyzer DC current. D1 D3 D5 T1 T2 T3

This can be defined by the ripple factor that is the ratio of Lf1
Cdc Lf2
AC component root square mean (RMS) of the output voltage L1
D7 D8
Lf3
D9
Cf
rectifier (Vrms) to the average output voltage (Vdc) as follows L2

L3
D2 D4 D6

[12]. D1' D3' D5'

(5)
D2' D4' D6'

The RMS value of the voltage ripple can be defined as: Fig. 5. 3-phase interleaved buck rectifier.

= = TABLE I. SIMULATION PARAMETERS SETTING

2√2 4√2 (6)
Parameter Value
Input voltage (source) 25kV, 60 Hz
where, Vpp is the voltage ripple peak to pick value, f is the Output voltage 330-400V
switching frequency, and Cf is the value of the filter capacitor. Output current 12.2kA
Then the Vdc is given as:
Thyristor
= − = − Input voltage 350V
2 4 (7) Lf 44mH
Cf 9000µC
Thus, the ripple factor can be written as follows: Switching frequency 360 Hz
3-phase interleaved buck
Input voltage 450V
(8) Cdc 8000µC
Lf 96mH
From Eq. 8, we can notice the ripple factor is directly related Cf 2000µC
to the switching frequency and the filter capacitor value. Switching frequency 1 kHz

Authorized licensed use limited to: CAMBRIDGE UNIV. Downloaded on January 25,2023 at 22:02:18 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Fig. 6.a and 6. b show the transformer current and voltage
respectively, the waves are deformed, leading to a high THD
value. The wave deformation is due to the commuting nature of
the thyristor topology and firing angles. The current ripple is
depicted in Fig. 6.c, and Fig 6.d shows a zoom of this ripple. It
presents a high value with a ripple factor of 23.8%. In addition,
the power factor shows a lower value below the minimum
(0.95). This is due to the high reactive power generated by the
rectifier firing angles. The results of the 3PIBR are presented in
Fig. 7. The transformer current and voltage are shown in Fig. 7.a
and 7. b, where we can see the amelioration resulting in a lower
THD and higher power factor. Additionally, the current ripple is
reduced with a ripple factor of 3.2%, thereby minimizing the
transformer losses and SEC of the PEM electrolyzer (Fig 7. c
and 7.d).

(a) Grid Current at 25kV (b) Current and Voltage shift

(c) Rectifier output DC-current (d) Zoom on DC-current ripple in (c)

Fig. 6. Simulation results for 6-pulse thyristor rectifier

(a) Grid Current at 25Kw (b) Current and Voltage shift

(c) Rectifier output DC-current (d) Zoom on DC-current ripple in (c)

Figure 7. Simulation results for 3-phase buck rectifier.

Authorized licensed use limited to: CAMBRIDGE UNIV. Downloaded on January 25,2023 at 22:02:18 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 A comparison between simulation results of both topologies
and experimental results from the Bécancour plant for the 6-
pulses thyristor rectifier is shown in Fig 8. The plant consists of
four electrolyzer trains with a total power of 20 MW; each is
connected to a 5MW rectifier. The measurements are retrieved
from the DCS (distributed control system). The measurement
was conducted at stack level in a 24 hrs run at 100% load. For
the six-pulses thyristor topology, the simulation results (green
plus) meet the experimental results (blue Asterix). Furthermore,
the 3PIBR simulation results (magenta circle) show a
considerable improvement for the power factor (Fig. 8b) with a
value above the limit reducing the filtering component cost. In
addition, the current THD value is below 5% (Fig 8a), respecting
the grid requirement. This topology provides a better harmonic
cancellation characteristic. Moreover, in partial loads, the
3PIBR THD current value is not too far from the maximum
value (the limit). This significantly reduces the transformer
losses, the harmonic filter, and consequently the cost. Besides,
the power factor is kept at a higher value (>0.95) even at partial
loads.
(a) THD comparison
(b) Power factor comparison
Fig. 8. Simulation results compared to experimental results for 100%
of load
IV. CONCLUSION
This work presents modeling and simulation of two high-
current rectifier topologies for PEM water electrolysis. The
simulation results analysis shows that the 6-pulses thyristor
topology presents a high current harmonic amplitude on AC and
a high DC current ripple, which causes additional losses in the
PEM electrolyzer, and decreases the power factor, thus
requiring filtering equipment. However, the 3PIBR topology
Authorized licensed use limited to: CAMBRIDGE UNIV. Downloaded on January 25,2023 at 22:02:18 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
provides a better power factor, THD, and current ripple,
contributing to the SEC reduction of the PEM electrolyzer and
the filtering equipment size. The simulation results were
compared with experimental data from the Bécancour plant.
The 6-pulses thyristor simulation results agree with the
experimental results, while the 3PIBR simulation results show
improvement in the power quality, as evidenced by a lower
THD value below 5% and a higher power factor above 0.95 at
total load. Corresponding to the grid requirement and reducing
the bulky harmonics passive filters.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was supported by the Mitacs Accelerate
Internship (IT25347) between the University of Québec at
Trois-Rivières and Air Liquide. We would like to acknowledge
the support of American Air Liquide and Air Liquide Canada,
the permission to publish this work, and the input of our
colleagues who commented on the draft.
REFERENCES
[1] Karthik, K. V., Reddy, C. V., Reddy, K. R., Ravishankar, R., Sanjeev, G.,
Kulkarni, R. V., & Raghu, A. V. "Barium titanate nanostructures for
photocatalytic hydrogen generation and photodegradation of chemical
pollutants", Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics,
30(23), 20646-20653. 2019
[2] Sharma, G., Kumar, A., Lichtfouse, E., & Asiri, A. M. (Eds.).
Nanophotocatalysis and Environmental Applications: Materials and
Technology (Vol. 29). Springer, 83-105, 2019
[3] K.W. Harrison, G.D. Martin, T.G. Ramsden, & W.E. Kramer, "The Wind-
to-Hydrogen Project: Operational Experience, Performance Testing, and
Systems Integration", National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2009.
[4] D. Guilbert, S. Maria Collura, A. Scipioni, "DC/DC converter topologies
for electrolyzers: State-of-the-art and remaining key issues", International
Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2017, pp 23966-23985.
[5] Yodwong, B., Guilbert, D., Phattanasak, M., Kaewmanee, W., Hinaje, M.,
& Vitale, G. (2020). Ac-dc converters for electrolyzer applications: State
of the art and future challenges. Electronics, 9(6), 912.
[6] Solanki, J., Fröhleke, N., Böcker, J., Averberg, A., & Wallmeier, P.
(2015). High‐current variable‐voltage rectifiers: state of the art
topologies. IET Power Electronics, 8(6), 1068-1080.
[7] Buitendach, H. P., Gouws, R., Martinson, C. A., Minnaar, C., &
Bessarabov, D. (2021). Effect of a ripple current on the efficiency of a
PEM electrolyser. Results in Engineering, 10, 100216.
[8] Koponen, J., Poluektov, A., Ruuskanen, V., Kosonen, A., Niemelä, M., &
Ahola, J. (2021). Comparison of thyristor and insulated-gate bipolar
transistor-based power supply topologies in industrial water electrolysis
applications. Journal of Power Sources, 491, 229443.
[9] Rashid, M. H. (Ed.). (2017). Power electronics handbook. Butterworth-
Heinemann.
[10] Guilbert, D., & Vitale, G. (2018, June). Experimental validation of an
equivalent dynamic electrical model for a proton exchange membrane
electrolyzer. In 2018 IEEE international conference on environment and
electrical engineering and 2018 IEEE industrial and commercial power
systems europe (EEEIC/I&CPS europe) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
[11] Yodwong, B., Guilbert, D., Phattanasak, M., Kaewmanee, W., Hinaje, M.,
& Vitale, G. (2020). Proton Exchange Membrane Electrolyzer Modeling
for Power Electronics Control: A Short Review. C, 6(2), 29.
[12] Rashid, M. H. Electric Renewable Energy Systems. Academic Press,
2015.