Received 25 April 2023, accepted 22 May 2023, date of publication 25 May 2023, date of current version 1 June 2023.

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3280129

Optimal Gearbox Ratio to Minimize the Power

Converter Ratings in DFIG-Based Type-3
Wind Turbines
HUSSAIN A. HUSSAIN , (Member, IEEE)
Department of Electrical Engineering, College of Engineering and Petroleum, Kuwait University, Safat, Kuwait City 13060, Kuwait
e-mail: h.hussain@ku.edu.kw
This work was supported by the Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences under Project PN18-15EE-02.

ABSTRACT Type-3 wind turbines based on the doubly-fed induction generator with a partial-scale power
converter are commonly implemented in wind energy conversion systems. This paper investigates the effects
of the rated slip and, thus, the gearbox ratio of the wind turbine on the ratings of the partial-scale power
converter. Three design methods are proposed to select the optimal rated slip and gearbox ratio. The first
design method minimizes the converter’s rated power compared to the system’s rated power. The analysis
showed that a rated slip of −11.84% will minimize the converter ratings. The second design method is
based on selecting the rated current of the converter, while the third design method aims to maximize the
power produced at low wind speeds. The three proposed design methods are analyzed and compared to the
conventional design method for a 2 MW wind energy conversion system. Simulation results for the complete
system were performed where the dynamics in the wind speed and the thermal model of the Silicon-Carbide
MOSFET power converter are considered. The simulation results verified the effectiveness of the proposed
methods. Using the first proposed method, the power converter rating is only around 10% of the rated power.
The third proposed method can be used to maximize the power produced at low wind speeds to maximize
the annual energy production.

INDEX TERMS Doubly fed induction generators, partial-scale power converters, power electronics, wind
energy conversion systems.

I. INTRODUCTION through a power-electronics converter. Commonly, three-

New installations of wind energy conversion systems phase windings are used for both the stator and the rotor.
(WECS) are growing exponentially. The three-blade, However, five-phase windings can improve the reliability [2].
horizontal-axis wind turbines (HAWT) dominate the high- The system is designed so that most power flows through
power market where most new installations are in the MW the main set of windings which is connected directly to the
range. The main components of a wind energy conversion grid. The other set of windings which is connected to the grid
system are the blades, gearbox, generator, power-electronics through a power electronics converter, is rated to carry around
converter, filter, and transformer. 30% of the power. One of the most commonly used genera-
The most common types of WECS in new installations are tors in Type-3 systems is the doubly fed induction generator
Type-3 and Type-4, whereas Type-1 and Type-2 are becoming (DFIG) [3]. In DFIG, the main set of windings is placed on
obsolete [1]. In Type-3 systems, the generator has two sets the stator, while the other set of windings is placed on the
of windings where the main set of windings is connected rotor and connected to the power converter using slip rings
directly to the grid while the other is connected to the grid and brushes. Alternatively, brush-less DFIG [4] or brush-
less doubly fed reluctance generator (DBFRG) [5] could be
The associate editor coordinating the review of this manuscript and used. In Type-4 systems, the generator has only one set of
approving it for publication was Ahmed F. Zobaa . three-phase windings connected to the grid through a power
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.
For more information, see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
52158 VOLUME 11, 2023
H. A. Hussain: Optimal Gearbox Ratio to Minimize the Power Converter Ratings
electronics converter which must be rated to handle the full
power of the WECS. The most common generators used in
Type-4 systems are the permanent-magnet synchronous gen-
erator (PMSG), squirrel-cage induction generator (SCIG),
and synchronous generator with electrical excitation.
The generator in Type-3 or Type-4 can have different drive-
train requirements [6]. For synchronous generators in Type-4,
the gearbox may be eliminated if the generator is designed for
low-speed operation. These generators are known as direct-
drive and have a high number of poles and higher cost. How-
ever, using a single-stage gearbox can improve the reliability
[7] and reduce the cost [8]. For Type-3 systems, usually,
a multi-stage gearbox is used. A cost and annual energy yield
comparison for different generators with different gearbox
options is presented in [9]. The DFIG system with a three-
stage gearbox was found to be less expensive. However, the
DFIG system with a single-stage gearbox had a higher energy
yield per cost.
The main advantage of Type-3 is the partial rating of the
power-electronics converter. The partially rated power con-
verter can be used to control the active and reactive powers
injected into the grid [10]. Direct power control strategy
[11], [12] and sensorless control techniques [13] could also
be implemented. The reduction in the converter rating reduces
the cost and size of the converter and the filter. The main dis-
advantage of the DFIG system is the need for brushes which
could be a reliability issue, especially for offshore WECS.
Another issue is the high vulnerability to grid disturbances
and faults. For this reason, modifications to the system are
required to have a low-voltage-ride-through (LVRT) capabil-
ity [14], [15].
The objective of this paper is to optimize the power con-
verter ratings in a DFIG-based Type-3 system based on the
selection of the optimal gearbox ratio. The optimal selection
of the gearbox ratio and the power converter rating for a
DFIG based on the annual energy yield and the initial cost is
presented in [16]. In [17], the optimal selection of the power
converter of a DFIG is presented from a reliability perspec-
tive. The optimal selection of the gearbox ratio for a DFIG in
DC system [18] is presented in [19]. In [20], the cost-effective
ranges of gearbox ratios and the ratings of a Type-4 full-scale
power converter are investigated. The converter rating for the
brushless doubly-fed generator is analyzed in [21] concerning
reactive power management and grid LVRT requirements.
In [22], stator slot magnetic wedges are designed to adjust the
inductance of the brushless generator and, thus, the converter
power rating. Compared to the existing literature, this paper
proposes a system-level design including the mechanical sys-
tem (gearbox ratio) and the electric generator (turns ratio) for
the optimal power converter design. Moreover, the detailed
analysis of the voltage and current ratings of the back-to-
back converter for a wide speed range is presented in this
paper since the power rating is not enough indication of the
converter size. The main contribution of this paper is the
proposal of three methods to select the optimal gearbox ratio
of the WECS and turns ratio of the DFIG. The first design
VOLUME 11, 2023
method minimizes the converter’s rated power compared to
the system’s rated power. The second design method selects a
specific rated current of the converter, while the third method
maximizes the power produced at low wind speeds. Increas-
ing the power production at low wind speeds can significantly
increase the annual energy production [23].
This paper is organized as follows: Section II presents
a background regarding the DFIG-based wind turbine sys-
tem. The analysis of the effects of the gearbox ratio on the
converter ratings and the proposed methods are presented in
section III. Finally, simulation results for a 2MW WECS are
presented in Section IV.
II. BACKGROUND
In this section, the overall wind energy conversion system
shown in Figure 1 is described. The wind turbine may be
connected to the DFIG through an optional gearbox. The
stator winding of the DFIG is connected directly to the grid,
while the rotor winding is connected to the grid through
a partial-scale, back-to-back converter, and an LCL filter.
The back-to-back converter consists of two three-phase, two-
level converters connected through a DC bus. The rotor-side
converter controls the wind turbine’s speed for maximum
power point tracking (MPPT), while the grid-side converter
controls the DC bus voltage and the reactive power.
A. WIND TURBINE
The mechanical power that can be captured from the wind is
given by [24],
1
Pm = ρπR2 Vw3 cp (1)
2
where ρ is the air density which is generally taken as its value
at sea level at 15o C, which is 1.225 kg/m3 , R is the radius of
the area swept by the blades in meters, Vw is the wind speed
in m/s, and cp is the power coefficient which is given by [25],
 
116 −12.5
cp = 0.22 − 0.4β − 5 e λi (2)
λi
1 1 0.035
= − 3 (3)
λi λ + 0.08β β +1
where β is the pitch angle of the blades and λ is the tip-speed
ratio defined as [24],
ωturbine R
λ= (4)
Vw
where ωturbine is the angular speed of the wind turbine in
rad/s. The gearbox ratio N is defined as the ratio between
the rotor and turbine angular speeds,
ωrm
N = (5)
ωturbine
where ωrm is the generator angular speed in rad/s.
To achieve MPPT, it is desirable to control the turbine
speed such that the value of the power coefficient is maxi-
mized. Equations (2) and (3) could be used to find the tip-
speed ratio λ that will maximize power coefficient cp . Based
52159
 H. A. Hussain: Optimal Gearbox Ratio to Minimize the Power Converter Ratings

FIGURE 1. Block diagram showing the wind turbine system.

TABLE 1. Wind Turbine Parameters [25]. flux linkages are given by [27],
λds = (Lls + Lm )ids + Lm i′dr (11)
λqs = (Lls + Lm )iqs + Lm i′qr (12)
λ′dr = (Llr′ + Lm )i′dr + Lm ids (13)
λ′qr = (Llr′ + Lm )i′qr + Lm iqs (14)
where Lls and Llr′ are the stator and rotor leakage inductances
respectively in H , and Lm is the magnetizing inductance in H .
The rotor parameters are donated with a prime to show that
on the value of the optimal tip-speed ratio λopt that results they have been referred to the stator using the turns ratio a
in the maximum power coefficient cp(max) , the wind turbine defined as,
rotation speed is controlled to be, Ns
a= (15)
Vw λopt Nr
ωturbine = (6)
R where Ns is the number of turns of the stator windings, and Nr
The wind turbine parameters are listed in Table 1. is the number of turns of the rotor windings. The mechanical
model is given by [27],
B. DOUBLY-FED INDUCTION GENERATOR MODEL 3P ′ ′ 
Te = λdr iqr − λ′qr i′dr (16)
Assuming that the three-phase windings on the stator and 22
the rotor are sinusoidally distributed, the DFIG model in an dωrm
J + Bωrm = Te − Tm (17)
arbitrary dq rotating reference frame can be obtained using dt
the winding function theory and Park transformation [26]. P
ωr = ωrm (18)
The dq stator quantities are obtained using Park transfor- 2
mation with an arbitrary angle T (θ). In contrast, the rotor where Te and Tm are the electromagnetic torque and the
quantities are obtained using Park transformation with an mechanical torque respectively in N .m, P is the number of
angle T (θ − θr ) and referred to the stator side using the turns poles, J is the total moment of inertia in Kg.m2 , B is the
ratio. The voltage equations in the arbitrary reference frame damping coefficient in Kg.m2 /s.
are given by [27], Using a reference frame rotating with the synchronous
dλds frequency ωe , the sinusoidal steady-state model could be
vds = Rs ids + − ωλqs (7) derived as,
dt
dλqs Ṽs = (Rs + jXs )Ĩs + jXm Ĩr′ (19)
vqs = Rs iqs + + ωλds (8)
dt Ṽr′ = (R′r + jsXr′ )Ĩr′ + jsXm Ĩs (20)
dλdr′
v′dr = R′r i′dr + − (ω − ωr )λ′qr (9)
dt where Ṽs and Ṽr are the stator and rotor voltage phasors
dλ′qr respectively, Ĩs and Ĩr are the stator and rotor current phasors
v′qr = R′r i′qr + + (ω − ωr )λ′dr (10) respectively, Xm is the magnetizing reactance in , Xs and Xr
dt
are the stator and rotor reactances respectively in  and are
where Rs and R′r are the stator and rotor resistances respec-
given by,
tively in , ω and ωr are the reference frame angular speed
and the rotor electric angular speed respectively in rad/s. The Xm = ωe Lm (21)

52160 VOLUME 11, 2023

H. A. Hussain: Optimal Gearbox Ratio to Minimize the Power Converter Ratings

TABLE 2. DFIG and converter parameters. Selecting the turns ratio a to be sṼs /Ṽr , the magnitude of
the rotor voltage is limited to the rated voltage magnitude
within this operating range. In this case, the gearbox ratio N
could be selected as,
2 R
N = (1 − srated )ωe (31)
P Vw(rated) λopt
and the minimum wind speed for maximum power production
is,
1 − smin
Vw(min) = Vw(rated) (32)
1 − srated
For srated = −1/3, the minimum wind speed for which the
maximum wind extraction is possible is Vw(rated) /2. This is
usually acceptable as a practical lower limit since the actual
wind power production at this wind speed is 12.5% of the
rated power. Below this wind speed, the slip must be kept
constant at smin for the rotor voltage to not exceed the rated
Xs = ωe (Lls + Lm ) (22) value. Power production is still possible; however, it will
Xr′ = ωe (Llr′ + Lm ) (23) not be the maximum possible power. Figure 2 shows the
and s is the slip defined as, steady state analysis of the conventional method. Figure 2(a)
shows that the reduction in power for wind speeds below
ωe − ωr
s= (24) Vw(min) is negligible. Figure 2(b) and Figure 2(c) show that the
ωe maximum rotor power is almost 33% of the stator power as
Neglecting the copper losses and leakage flux, expected from (28). The values are not exact since the copper
loss and leakage flux were considered in this steady-state
Ṽs = jXm (Ĩs + Ĩr′ ) (25)
analysis. Figure 2(d) shows that the maximum rotor voltage
Ṽr′ = jsXm (Ĩr′ + Ĩs ) = sṼs (26) is below the rated value. Although the system works properly
Then, the actual rotor voltage is [17], with this value of srated = −1/3, the rotor current and power
ratings and, thus, the converter ratings are not optimized.
Ṽr′ s
Ṽr =
= Ṽs (27)
a a III. PROPOSED METHODS
and the rotor power Pr could be written in terms of the stator In this section, various methods to design the value of the
power Ps and the mechanical power Pm as, rated slip are proposed. The effect of changing the rated slip
s value on the rotor power, rotor voltage, and the operational
Pr = −sPs = − Pm (28) wind speed range is studied. Three methods are proposed to
1−s
select the srated value. Once the value of srated is determined,
Table 2 shows the DFIG parameters [25]. Field-oriented
the turns ratio a is selected based on (27) to keep the rotor
control (FOC) is used to control the rotor-side converter,
voltage limited to the rated voltage. Moreover, the slip at
while voltage-oriented control (VOC) is used to control the
minimum wind speed smin is selected as −srated to limit the
grid-side converter [29].
rotor voltage to the rated value. Table 1 and Table 2 show the
wind turbine parameters considered in this paper. However,
C. CONVENTIONAL DESIGN (METHOD 0)
the methods could be applied to any system with different
The slip for optimal power could be derived using the above
parameters.
equations as,
PN λopt A. METHOD 1
s=1− Vw (29)
2Rωe In this method, the objective is to minimize the converter’s
Then, it can be shown that, rated power. The ratio between the converter power Pr and
Vw 1−s the rated power of the system Prated is defined as r,
= (30)
Vw(rated) 1 − srated Pr Pr Pm
r= = (33)
Equations (27) and (28) could be used to design the system. Prated Pm Prated
It is a common practice to choose to limit the operation region Using (1) and (28),
such that the slip s is limited between smin = 1/3 to srated =
s Vw
−1/3 [28]. Within this range of operation, the rotor power is r =− ( )3 (34)
limited to 1/3 of the stator power. 1 − s Vw(rated)

VOLUME 11, 2023 52161


FIGURE 2. Analysis of the convectional design method (a) mechanical
power, (b) stator power, (c) rotor power, (d) rotor voltage and current.
At rated conditions, r becomes,
srated
rrated =−
1 − srated
The maximum value of r could be found to be,
4 1
rmax =−
27 (1 − srated )3
Setting rrated = −rmax , the value of the rated slip srated could
be found to be −0.1184. This value for the rated slip will
guarantee the minimization of r to 0.1059, which means the
inverter power rating is minimized to 10.59% of the rated
power. Once srated is selected, the gearbox ratio N could be
found using (31), and the minimum wind speed at which the
maximum power production is possible could be determined
using (32).
Figure 3 shows the steady state analysis results for this
proposed method. Figure 3(a) shows that the reduction in
power for wind speeds below Vw(min) is more significant since
Vw(min) is 9.46 m/s in this case. Figure 3(c) shows that the
maximum rotor power is below 10% of the rated power.
Again, the value is not precisely 10.59% since the copper loss
and leakage flux are considered in the steady state analysis.
52162
H. A. Hussain: Optimal Gearbox Ratio to Minimize the Power Converter Ratings
FIGURE 3. Analysis of design method 1: (a) mechanical power, (b) stator
power, (c) rotor power, (d) rotor voltage and current.
Figure 3(d) shows that the rated current of the converter is
reduced significantly to 185.9A compared to the conventional
(35) case.
B. METHOD 2
In this method, the objective is to choose the rated slip based
(36)
on the converter’s rated current Irated . In this case, the rated
slip can be selected to be,
1
srated = 2 Prated
(37)
1− 3 Vrated Irated
where the resistance and leakage inductance terms are
dropped for convenience.
Figure 4 shows the steady state analysis of method 2. In this
analysis, the rated current is selected to be 300A. Figure 4(a)
shows that the reduction in power for wind speeds below
Vw(min) is less significant compared to method 1. Although
the maximum rotor power is higher than method 1, as shown
in Figure 4(c), it is still lower than the conventional method.
Figure 4(d) shows that desired rated current of the converter
(300A) is achieved and that the maximum rotor voltage is
below the rated value.
VOLUME 11, 2023
H. A. Hussain: Optimal Gearbox Ratio to Minimize the Power Converter Ratings

FIGURE 4. Analysis of design method 2: (a) mechanical power, (b) stator FIGURE 5. Analysis of design method 3: (a) mechanical power, (b) stator
power, (c) rotor power, (d) rotor voltage and current. power, (c) rotor power, (d) rotor voltage and current.

TABLE 3. Comparison of the design methods.

C. METHOD 3
This method aims to select the rated slip based on the desired
minimum wind speed at which maximum power production
is possible. Using (32) and setting smin = −srated , the rated
slip could be found as,
Vw(min) − Vw(rated)
srated = (38)
Vw(min) + Vw(rated)
The results of the steady state analysis for method 3 are
shown in Figure 5 where the minimum wind speed is
selected to be 3.5 m/s which is the cut-in speed for this
wind turbine. Figure 5(a) shows that there is no reduc-
tion in power for lower wind speed range up to Vw(min) .
However, the maximum rotor power and current ratings IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
are higher compared to the other methods, as shown in The schematic diagram shown in Figure 6 was implemented
Figure 5(c) and 5(d). using PLECS® software for the system parameters shown
Table 3 compares the main results of the three proposed in Table 2. The conventional method (method 0) and the
methods with the conventional method. In general, method 1 three proposed methods were simulated for different wind
is preferred if the objective is to minimize the converter rating, speeds. The wind speed was changed in steps from 4 m/s
while method 3 is preferred if the aim is to increase power to 12 m/s as shown in Figure 7 (a). In all simulations, the
production. Method 2 represents a trade-off between the other same wind turbine model was used for all methods while only
two methods. changing the gearbox ratio N based on (31). The DFIG model

VOLUME 11, 2023 52163

 H. A. Hussain: Optimal Gearbox Ratio to Minimize the Power Converter Ratings

FIGURE 6. Schematic diagram of the simulated system.

FIGURE 7. Dynamic simulation results of the conventional design FIGURE 8. Dynamic simulation results of design method 1: (a) wind
method: (a) wind speed, (b) generator reference and actual speed, speed, (b) generator reference and actual speed, (c) mechanical, stator,
(c) mechanical, stator, and rotor power, (d) rotor voltage and current, and rotor power, (d) rotor voltage and current, (e) MOSFET junction
(e) MOSFET junction temperature. temperature.

The converter was designed using Silicon Carbide (SiC)-

parameters are also fixed except for the turns ratio a, which is based MOSFET switches. The current rating of the con-
calculated from (27). For each method, the value of the rated verter in method 1 is much smaller compared to the other
slip is shown in Table 3, and the slip was limited between methods. However, in these simulations, the same devices
srated to −srated . were selected for all proposed methods. The converter

52164 VOLUME 11, 2023

H. A. Hussain: Optimal Gearbox Ratio to Minimize the Power Converter Ratings
FIGURE 9. Dynamic simulation results of design method 2: (a) wind
speed, (b) generator reference and actual speed, (c) mechanical, stator,
and rotor power, (d) rotor voltage and current, (e) MOSFET junction
temperature.
was designed using 650A, 1700V, half-bridge SiC modules
from Wolfspeed (CAB650M17HM3). The main advantage of
operating the SiC module at a reduced current is increasing
the switching frequency. Increasing the converter’s switching
frequency allows for reducing the filter size and cost.
Figure 7 shows the dynamic simulation results for the
conventional design. The mechanical power at a wind speed
of 4 m/s is 0.05 MW which is slightly less than the maximum
possible power, which is 0.076 MW. At the rated wind speed
of 12 m/s, the rotor current is 439.4 A. At rated power, the
MOSFET junction temperature is 51.5o C.
The dynamic simulation results for the proposed design
method 1 are shown in Figure 8. The mechanical power at
a wind speed of 4 m/s is negative, indicating that this is
not a feasible operating point. At 6 m/s, it produces less
power compared to the conventional method. However, at the
rated wind speed, the rotor current is 185.9A which is much
less than the conventional method. The MOSFET junction
temperature in this design method is reduced to 33.4o C.
VOLUME 11, 2023
FIGURE 10. Dynamic simulation results of design method 3: (a) wind
speed, (b) generator reference and actual speed, (c) mechanical, stator,
and rotor power, (d) rotor voltage and current, (e) MOSFET junction
temperature.
Figure 9 shows the dynamic simulation results for the
proposed design method 2. The mechanical power at a wind
speed of 4 m/s and 6 m/s is less than the conventional method.
However, as desired, the rotor current at the rated wind speed
is 300.0 A. The MOSFET junction temperature at rated wind
speed is 39.8o C.
The dynamic simulation results for the proposed design
method 3 are shown in Figure 10. The mechanical power at
a wind speed of 4 m/s equals the maximum possible power.
However, at the rated wind speed, the rotor current is 623.4 A
which is higher than the conventional method. The MOSFET
junction temperature is 75.8o C.
To make a clear comparison among the three proposed
cases, the simulation results of the three methods at different
wind speeds are summarized in Table 4 and Figure 11 and
compared to the conventional method (Method 0). The simu-
lation results clearly show that there is a trade-off between
52165

TABLE 4. Summary of the dynamic simulation results.
maximizing the power produced at low wind speeds and
minimizing the rotor current at the rated wind speed. At the
rated wind speed of 12 m/s, the first proposed design method
minimizes the rotor power Pr to 0.199 MW; thus, the con-
verter rating is minimized to around 10% of the rated power.
However, the power produced at low wind speeds of 4 m/s
and 6 m/s is not maximized. For instance, at 6 m/s, only
0.147 MW is produced using the first method out of the
available 0.256 MW.
On the other hand, the third proposed design method max-
imizes the power produced at low wind speeds of 4 m/s with
all available 0.076 MW produced. However, at 12 m/s, the
rotor power Pr is 0.713 MW which is much higher than the
rotor power in the first method, which is 0.199 MW. This
means that the converter power for the third method must
be more than three times the converter rating in the first
method.
The first method minimizes the converter ratings, while
the third method maximizes the power produced at
low wind speeds. The second proposed design method
represents a trade-off between the other two proposed
methods.
52166
H. A. Hussain: Optimal Gearbox Ratio to Minimize the Power Converter Ratings
FIGURE 11. Results for all designs: (a) Mechanical power at low wind
speeds of 4 m/s and 6 m/s, (b) stator and rotor powers at a rated wind
speed of 12 m/s.
V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, the effects of the rated slip and the gearbox
ratio of the wind turbine on the ratings of the converter are
investigated. Three design methods are proposed to select the
rated slip. Once the rated slip is selected, the gearbox ratio
can be found using (31).
The first design method is based on minimizing the con-
verter’s rated power compared to the system’s total power.
It was found that a rated slip of −11.84% will minimize
the converter’s rated power. However, the power produced at
low wind speeds is not optimal. The second design method
is based on the rated current of the converter as given by
(37). This method could be helpful if the system is to be
designed for a specific switching device. The third design
method is based on the cut-in wind speed as given by (38).
This method maximizes the operating wind speed range and
improves power production at lower wind speeds. However,
the converter’s current rating is increased.
These proposed methods were analyzed and compared
to the conventional method for a 2 MW wind energy con-
version system. Method 1 is preferred if the objective is to
minimize the converter rating, while method 3 is preferred
if the aim is to increase power production at low wind
speeds. Method 2 represents a trade-off between the other
two methods. Dynamic simulations for the complete system
were performed in PLECS® software. The power converter
was implemented using Silicon-Carbide MOSFET devices
and simulated with the device thermal model. The simulation
results verified the proposed methods for different wind
speeds.
In the future, this work can be extended by includ-
ing a more detailed model of the DFIG based on finite
element analysis (FEA) and a more detailed gearbox
model.
VOLUME 11, 2023
H. A. Hussain: Optimal Gearbox Ratio to Minimize the Power Converter Ratings

REFERENCES [18] G. D. Marques and M. F. Iacchetti, ‘‘DFIG topologies for DC

[1] V. Yaramasu, B. Wu, P. C. Sen, S. Kouro, and M. Narimani, ‘‘High- networks: A review on control and design features,’’ IEEE Trans.
power wind energy conversion systems: State-of-the-art and emerging Power Electron., vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 1299–1316, Feb. 2019, doi:
technologies,’’ Proc. IEEE, vol. 103, no. 5, pp. 740–788, May 2015, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2018.2829546.
10.1109/JPROC.2014.2378692. [19] S. Yan, A. Zhang, H. Zhang, J. Wang, and B. Cai, ‘‘An optimum
design for a DC-based DFIG system by regulating gearbox ratio,’’ IEEE
[2] R. Ryndzionek, K. Blecharz, F. Kutt, M. Michna, and G. Kostro,
Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 223–231, Mar. 2018, doi:
‘‘Fault-tolerant performance of the novel five-phase doubly-fed induc-
10.1109/TEC.2017.2741104.
tion generator,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 59350–59358, 2022, doi:
[20] H. Li, Z. Chen, and H. Polinder, ‘‘Optimization of multibrid permanent-
10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3179815.
magnet wind generator systems,’’ IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 24,
[3] B. Kroposki, B. Johnson, Y. Zhang, V. Gevorgian, P. Denholm, B. Hodge,
no. 1, pp. 82–92, Mar. 2009, doi: 10.1109/TEC.2008.2005279.
and B. Hannegan, ‘‘Achieving a 100% renewable grid: Operating electric
[21] A. Oraee, R. A. Mcmahon, E. Abdi, and S. Abdi, ‘‘A study of converter
power systems with extremely high levels of variable renewable energy,’’
rating for brushless DFIG wind turbines,’’ in Proc. 2nd IET Renew. Power
IEEE Power Energy Mag., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 61–73, Mar. 2017, doi:
Gener. Conf. (RPG), 2013, pp. 1–4, doi: 10.1049/cp.2013.1848.
10.1109/MPE.2016.2637122.
[22] E. Abdi, R. A. Mcmahon, S. Abdi, and A. Oraee, ‘‘Design of the brushless
[4] O. I. Olubamiwa, T. Hutton, and N. Gule, ‘‘Brushless doubly fed
DFIG for optimal inverter rating,’’ in Proc. 7th IET Int. Conf. Power
machine design evaluation with power factor considerations,’’ IEEE
Electron., Mach. Drives (PEMD), Manchester, U.K., 2014, pp. 1–6, doi:
Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 1457–1468, Mar. 2023, doi:
10.1049/cp.2014.0502.
10.1109/TIA.2022.3217750.
[23] A. H. Kasem, E. F. El-Saadany, H. H. El-Tamaly, and M. A. A. Wahab,
[5] M. Aghakashkooli and M. G. Jovanovic, ‘‘A dual observer for parameter-
‘‘Maximizing the wind power production of DFIG-based wind turbines at
free encoderless control of doubly-fed reluctance generators,’’ IEEE
low wind speed operation,’’ in Proc. 40th North Amer. Power Symp., Cal-
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 70, no. 4, pp. 3461–3470, Apr. 2023, doi:
gary, AB, Canada, Sep. 2008, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1109/NAPS.2008.5307335.
10.1109/TIE.2022.3179555.
[24] T. Ackermann, Wind power in Power Systems. Chichester, West Sussex:
[6] E. Taherian-Fard, R. Sahebi, T. Niknam, A. Izadian, and M. Shasadeghi,
Wiley, 2012.
‘‘Wind turbine drivetrain technologies,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 56,
[25] J. G. Slootweg, H. Polinder, and W. L. Kling, ‘‘Dynamic modelling of a
no. 2, pp. 1729–1741, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1109/TIA.2020.2966169.
wind turbine with doubly fed induction generator,’’ in Proc. Power Eng.
[7] D. Zhou, F. Blaabjerg, T. Franke, M. Tønnes, and M. Lau, ‘‘Com- Soc. Summer Meeting. Conf., Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2001, pp. 644–649,
parison of wind power converter reliability with low-speed and doi: 10.1109/PESS.2001.970114.
medium-speed permanent-magnet synchronous generators,’’ IEEE Trans. [26] T. A. Lipo, Analysis of Synchronous Machines. Boca Raton, FL, USA:
Ind. Electron., vol. 62, no. 10, pp. 6575–6584, Oct. 2015, doi: Taylor & Francis, 2012.
10.1109/TIE.2015.2447502. [27] P. C. Krause, O. Wasynczuk, and S. Pekarek, Electromechanical Motion
[8] D. Mcmillan and G. W. Ault, ‘‘Techno-economic comparison of opera- Devices. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley-IEEE Press, 2012.
tional aspects for direct drive and gearbox-driven wind turbines,’’ IEEE [28] G. Abad and G. Iwanski, ‘‘Properties and control of a doubly fed induc-
Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 191–198, Mar. 2010, doi: tion machine,’’ in Power Electronics for Renewable Energy Systems,
10.1109/TEC.2009.2032596. Transportation, and Industrial Applications, H. Abu-Rub, M. Malinowski,
[9] H. Polinder, F. F. A. Van Der Pijl, G.-J. De Vilder, and P. J. Tavner, ‘‘Com- and K. Al-Haddad, Eds. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley/IEEE, 2014, ch. 10,
parison of direct-drive and geared generator concepts for wind turbines,’’ pp. 310–311.
IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 725–733, Sep. 2006, doi: [29] R. Cardenas, R. Pena, S. Alepuz, and G. Asher, ‘‘Overview of con-
10.1109/TEC.2006.875476. trol systems for the operation of DFIGs in wind energy applications,’’
[10] H. J. Baesmat and M. Bodson, ‘‘Pole placement control for doubly-fed IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 60, no. 7, pp. 2776–2798, Jul. 2013, doi:
induction generators using compact representations in complex variables,’’ 10.1109/TIE.2013.2243372.
IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 750–760, Jun. 2019, doi:
10.1109/TEC.2018.2867630.
[11] S. Gao, H. Zhao, Y. Gui, D. Zhou, and F. Blaabjerg, ‘‘An improved
direct power control for doubly fed induction generator,’’ IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 4672–4685, Apr. 2021, doi:
10.1109/TPEL.2020.3024620.
[12] H. Chojaa, A. Derouich, O. Zamzoum, S. Mahfoud, M. Taoussi,
H. Albalawi, H. Benbouhenni, and M. I. Mosaad, ‘‘A novel DPC
approach for DFIG-based variable speed wind power systems
using DSpace,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 9493–9510, 2023, doi:
10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3237511.
[13] P. Mondal, M. K. Malakar, P. Tripathy, S. Krishnaswamy, and U. K. Saha,
‘‘Robust observer design for sensorless voltage and frequency con-
trol of a doubly fed induction generator in standalone mode,’’ IEEE
Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 844–854, Jun. 2022, doi:
10.1109/TEC.2021.3126779. HUSSAIN A. HUSSAIN (Member, IEEE)
[14] O. P. Mahela, N. Gupta, M. Khosravy, and N. Patel, ‘‘Comprehen- received the B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering
sive overview of low voltage ride through methods of grid integrated from Kuwait University, Kuwait, in 2007, and the
wind generator,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 99299–99326, 2019, doi: M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering
10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2930413. from Texas A&M University, College Station, TX,
[15] V. R. F. B. De Souza, L. S. Barros, F. B. Costa, and G. P. D. S. Junior, ‘‘Dou- USA, in 2012 and 2017, respectively.
bly fed induction generator low voltage ride through improvement through
He was with Kuwait National Petroleum Com-
modular multilevel converter,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 57914–57929,
pany (KNPC), Shuiaba Refinery, Kuwait, as a
2022, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3178960.
Design Engineer and Texas Instruments, Dallas,
[16] D. Aguglia, P. Viarouge, R. Wamkeue, and J. Cros, ‘‘Selection of
gearbox ratio and power converters ratings for wind turbines equipped TX, USA, and the Kilby Laboratories as a
with doubly-fed induction generators,’’ in Proc. IEEE Int. Electric Research Engineer. Currently, he is an Assistant Professor with the Electrical
Mach. Drives Conf., Antalya, Turkey, May 2007, pp. 447–452, doi: Engineering Department, Kuwait University, Kuwait. His research interests
10.1109/IEMDC.2007.382709. include designing and controlling multi-phase and linear machines, including
[17] D. Zhou, G. Zhang and F. Blaabjerg, ‘‘Optimal selection of power con- sensorless control and fault control of electric machines, wide band gap
verter in DFIG wind turbine with enhanced system-level reliability,’’ IEEE (WBG) devices, and distributed energy resources, including photovoltaic,
Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 3637–3644, Jul./Aug. 2018, doi: wind, and hydropower.
10.1109/TIA.2018.2822239.

VOLUME 11, 2023 52167