The 42nd Annual Conference of IEEE Industrial Electronics Society
(IECON’2016)Palazzo dei Congressi
Firenze (Florence) - ItalyOctober 24-27, 2016
Abstract
Power electronic interfaces
Results
Evaluation of different power electronic interfaces for control of a rotating brushless PM exciterJonas Kristiansen Nøland1,2, Fredrik Evestedt1, J. José Pérez-Loya1, Johan Abrahamsson1 and Urban Lundin1
1 Department of Engineering Sciences, Division of Electricity, Uppsala University, Uppsala 751 21, Sweden (e-mail: [email protected])2 Faculty of Technology and Maritime Sciences, Department of Engineering, University College of Southeast Norway, 3184 Borre, Norway (e-mail: [email protected])
A passive diode bridge is commonly used as the rotating interface on conventionalbrushless excitation systems. Those systems are known to be slow dynamically, since they cannot control the generator field voltage directly. Wirelessly controlledpower electronic interfaces on the shaft makes the brushless excitation system comparable to the static excitation system. A proper interface should be selected. This paper investigates torque ripple, power factor and ceiling voltagecapability at the nominal working point, for the proposed interfaces of study.
Constructed outer pole PM exciterwith synchronous generator below
Instantaineous torque with 50A excitation current through the field winding
Interface A: Thyristor-based
Interface B: Chopper-based
Interface C: Electrical drive
Conclusion
• Interface C produces sinusoidal current waveforms, the highest ceiling voltage factor, unity power factorand the lowest torque ripple.
• Interface B seems to be the best power electronicsolution for the designed PM exciter, yielding a compromise between complexity and performance. It has a huge benefit regarding few active switches and the lack of need of a triggering circuit for therectification of the armature voltages.
• However, interface A lacks the need of a rotatingcapacitor, yielding increased reliability.
Phase currents with 50A excitation current through the field winding
STEADY STATE PERFORMANCE OF THE DIFFERENT INTERFACES
Experimental setup: a) test-rig, b) external inductor, c) CAD
