3468 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 66, NO.

5, MAY 2019

Frequency Optimization of a Loosely Coupled

Underwater Wireless Power Transfer System
Considering Eddy Current Loss
Zhengchao Yan , Student Member, IEEE, Yiming Zhang , Member, IEEE,
Tianze Kan, Student Member, IEEE, Fei Lu , Member, IEEE, Kehan Zhang , Baowei Song,
and Chunting Chris Mi , Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—Wireless power transfer (WPT) has attracted source and the load [1]–[4], which is suitable for battery charg-
much attention in recent years. In an underwater WPT sys- ing of underwater electrical equipment [5]–[10] without a com-
tem, the eddy current loss tends to be non-negligible as the plex and costly sealing structure. Feezor et al. [8] developed a
frequency or the coil current increases. Thus, it is crucial to
analyze the eddy current loss in an underwater WPT system. wireless charging system, which could transfer 200 W of power
The analytical model of the eddy current loss of a coreless and signals for autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs). Since
WPT system in the seawater is established with Maxwell’s then, McGinnis et al. [9] proposed a WPT system for AUVs
equations. The expressions of the electric field intensity and to transfer 240-W power with 70% dc–dc efficiency. Li et al.
the eddy current loss are derived. The eddy current loss is [10] studied the effects of gaps between the transmitter and
analyzed in different circumstances to illustrate the impacts
of related factors. For a WPT system in the air, there is an op- the receiver and designed a 400-W system with 90% efficiency
timum resonant frequency, for a higher frequency leads to across a 2-mm gap. Shi et al. [11] introduced a hull-compatible
a larger induced voltage, but will result in larger coil losses coaxial coil structure and evaluated the characteristics of the
simultaneously. However, the optimum resonant frequency semiconductor loss, the copper loss, and the core loss using
will be shifted because of the eddy current loss in the sea- a circuit model and the finite element analysis. Orekan et al.
water. Then, the optimum operating frequency is obtained
based on the analytical model. It is found that the optimum [12] proposed a maximum power efficiency tracking method
operating frequency is supposed to be larger than the reso- to estimate the real-time coupling coefficient in an underwater
nant frequency to achieve the maximum dc–dc efficiency in WPT system, which can effectively track the maximum effi-
the seawater. An underwater WPT prototype was built and ciency of over 85%. Fang et al. [13] developed an underwater
the experimental results verified the theoretical analysis. WPT system, containing two couplers and a closed cable, which
Index Terms—Wireless power transfer (WPT), eddy cur- can transfer power and data to the underwater sensors. He et al.
rent loss, resonant frequency, analytical model, underwater. [14] presented a three-dimensional omnidirectional underwater
WPT system, the transmitter coil of which is made up of three
I. INTRODUCTION mutually orthogonal loops. The simulation results showed the
IRELESS power transfer (WPT) technology has a num- output power and the transmission efficiency can be improved
W ber of advantages compared to the traditional power
delivery due to its nonphysical connection between the power
greatly by adjusting the phase differences among the three loops
compared to the conventional system.
In the seawater environment, the eddy current loss generated
in the seawater must be taken into account, which will also af-
Manuscript received January 18, 2018; revised April 19, 2018 and May
22, 2018; accepted June 17, 2018. Date of publication July 9, 2018; date fect the transmission efficiency of the WPT system. Cheng et
of current version December 28, 2018. This work was supported in part al. [15] proposed an underwater WPT system based on a semi-
by the Natural Science Basic Research Program of Shaanxi Province closed core structure. The power loss was studied comparatively
under Grant 2018JM5033 and in part by the China Scholarship Council.
(Corresponding author: Chunting Chris Mi.) in the air, freshwater, and seawater. It is shown that the core loss
Z. Yan is with the School of Marine Science and Technology, North- and copper loss in these three media were essentially the same.
western Polytechnical University, Xi’an 710072, China, and also with the The significant difference occurs in the eddy current loss. Itoh
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, San Diego State
University, San Diego, CA 92182 USA (e-mail: [email protected]). et al. [16] designed a WPT system for the swimming robot fish,
Y. Zhang, T. Kan, F. Lu, and C. C. Mi are with the Department which showed the eddy current loss had a sharp rise due to the
of Electrical and Computer Engineering, San Diego State Univer- increasing frequency. Yan et al. [17] proposed an arc electro-
sity, San Diego, CA 92182 USA (e-mail: [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]). magnetic coupler. The eddy current loss and the transmission
K. Zhang and B. Song are with the School of Marine Science and efficiency are analyzed by the finite element method. Zhou et al.
Technology, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an 710072, China [18] proposed a single-turn model of a circular coil with a ferrite
(e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available core to calculate the eddy current loss of the underwater WPT
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. system. Then, the transmission efficiency is analyzed. However,
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIE.2018.2851947

0278-0046 © 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
YAN et al.: FREQUENCY OPTIMIZATION OF A LOOSELY COUPLED UNDERWATER WPT SYSTEM CONSIDERING EDDY CURRENT LOSS 3469

Fig. 1. SS WPT system. (a) Topology. (b) Equivalent circuit.

the ferrite is assumed to be infinite in the analytical model,

which is not precise.
In this paper, a coreless WPT system is established, which
has a lower weight than that with the ferrite. The model based Fig. 2. General overview of the underwater WPT system.
on Maxwell’s equations to calculate the eddy current loss in the
seawater is proposed, which is more accurate. Finite element
analysis is applied to verify the proposed calculation model.
Both the resonant frequency and the operating frequency are
optimized based on the analytical model. An underwater WPT
prototype is set up to validate the analysis.

II. WIRELESS CHARGING SYSTEM IN THE AIR

The topology and the equivalent circuit of a wireless charg-
ing system with series–series (SS) compensation are shown in
Fig. 1. The SS compensation topology is chosen because it has
the advantage of constant current output, which can be easily
controlled to charge the battery. In Fig. 1, Uinv and U1 denote the
dc and ac voltages of the inverter, respectively; L1 , C1 , and R1
are the self-inductance, capacitance, and equivalent resistance
of the transmitter; I1 is the root-mean-square value of the trans- Fig. 3. Simplified calculation model of the electric field.
mitter current. Urec , U2 , I2 , L2 , C2 , and R2 are the counterparts
on the receiver side. M is the mutual inductance between the
transmitter and the receiver. where TQ is the figure of merit [19], defined by TQ = kQ, and a
Neglecting the equivalent resistances of the transmitter and higher TQ results in a higher maximum transmission efficiency.
the receiver at the resonant state, the transmitter and the receiver
currents are III. EDDY CURRENT LOSS IN SEAWATER
U2 In the application of a WPT system in the air, the power
I1 = . (1)
ω0 M losses mainly lie in the core loss of the ferrite and the copper
U1 loss of the coils. However, when it comes to the application in
I2 = (2) the seawater environment, the eddy current loss generated in
ω0 M
the seawater must be taken into account, which will also affect
where ω0 denotes the resonant angular frequency. Then, the the transmission efficiency of the WPT system. Fig. 2 shows the
output power can be expressed as general overview of an underwater WPT system. The secondary
Pout = ω0 M I1 I2 . (3) side and primary side are installed on the abdomen of the AUV
and the base station, respectively. The system parameters can be
Assume that R1 = R2 and L1 = L2 in the system, the trans- kept relatively stable through this docking structure. To calculate
mission efficiency η can be calculated as the eddy current loss in the seawater, the electric field intensity
Pout 1 should be calculated firstly.
η= =   (4)
Pout + I12 R1 + I22 R2 1+ 1 I1
+ I2
kQ I2 I1
A. Electric Field Intensity
where k is the coupling coefficient, Q is the quality factor of the Zhou et al. [18] proposed a single-turn model of a circular
transmitter and the receiver, defined by coil with a ferrite core to calculate the eddy current loss of the
ω0 L1 ω0 L2 underwater WPT system. However, the ferrite is assumed to
Q= = . (5)
R1 R2 be infinite, which is not precise. This paper proposes a spiral
The transmission efficiency is maximized when I1 = I2 , and planar coil without ferrite to theoretically calculate the eddy
the maximum transmission efficiency is current loss in the seawater, which is more accurate. A single-
turn transmitter coil is first studied in the cylindrical coordinate.
1 TQ Fig. 3 shows the simplified model of the electric field. The
ηm ax = 2 = T +2 (6)
1 + kQ Q entire space is full of seawater. It is assumed that the coil is on
3470 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 66, NO. 5, MAY 2019

the imaginary inner boundary surface: z = 0, which means the where λ ∈ (0, +∞), an intermediate
√ variable, will be eliminated
boundary conditions on both sides of the surface are known. in the later derivation; u = λ2 − k 2 ; C1i and C2i are the unde-
Then, the study area is divided into two regions by the inner termined coefficients. J1 (x) is the first-order Bessel function of
boundary surface to calculate the electromagnetic field. Thus, the first species. By substituting (15) into (13) and (14), C1i and
there are no external excitation currents in the study area, which C2i can be determined. Then, the electric field intensity caused
merely distribute on the inner boundary surface. by the ii-turn can be obtained
The surface current density on an arbitrary point Q(ρ,ϕ,0) of
∞
the inner boundary surface is E 1ϕt,ii = − j ω μI21 a i i 0 uλ · J1 (λaii )J1 (λρ) eu z dλeϕ , z < 0
∞ .
K (ρ, ϕ, 0) = I1 δ (ρ − a) eϕ (7) E 2ϕt,ii = − j ω μI21 a i i 0 uλ · J1 (λaii )J1 (λρ) e−u z dλeϕ , z > 0
(16)
where ρ denotes the radius, a represents the radius of the coil, Assume that the turn numbers of the transmitter and the re-
and eϕ is the circumferential unit vector. ceiver are the same, namely N1 = N2 = N . The electric field
Assume that the medium is linear, homogeneous and intensity of an arbitrary point (ρ, z) in the study area E 2t , which
isotropic, then the electromagnetic field is expressed based on is caused by the N-turn transmitter coil, is obtained based on the
Maxwell’s equations. For convenience, the dot on the complex principle of superposition
vector is omitted

N
∂D ∂B E 2t = E 2ϕt,ii . (17)
∇×H =J + = J + jωD, ∇ × E = − = −jωB
∂t ∂t ii=1
(8)
The same procedure can be easily adopted to obtain the elec-
∇ · B = 0, ∇ · D = 0 (9) tric field intensity caused by the receiver current, which can be
expressed as
B = μH, J = σE, D = εE (10)
⎧
j ω μI 2 a j j  ∞ λ
⎪
⎪ E 1ϕr,j j = − 0 u J1 (λaj j ) J1 (λρ) e
−u (z −d)
dλeϕ ,
where H and B denote the magnetic field intensity and the ⎪
⎪ 2
⎪
⎪
magnetic flux density, respectively. E and J are the electric ⎪
⎪ z >d
field intensity and the conduction current density, respectively. ⎪
⎨ j ω μI 2 a j j  ∞ λ u (z −d)
E 2ϕr,j j = − 2 0 u J1 (λaj j ) J1 (λρ) e dλeϕ ,
D is the electric displacement vector. Eliminating H gives the ⎪
⎪
⎪ z<d
following constraint equation: ⎪
⎪
⎧ 2 ⎪
⎪ 
N
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ∇ E i + ki2 E i = 0 ⎩E 2r = E 2ϕr,j j
⎨ j j =1
∇ · Ei = 0 . (11) (18)
⎪
⎪ where d is the gap between the transmitter and the receiver. E 2r
⎩
i = 1, 2 is the electric field intensity of an arbitrary point (ρ, z) in the
Due to the cylindrical symmetry, the electric field intensity study area, which is caused by N-turn receiver coil.
E i merely has the circumferential component, namely E i =
Eiϕ eϕ . In the cylindrical coordinate system B. Unilateral Eddy Current Loss
 The permeability of the air and the seawater are almost the
∂ 2 Eiϕ 1 ∂Eiϕ ∂ 2 Eiϕ 1
+ + + ki − 2 Eiϕ = 0, i = 1, 2
2
same, while there is a significant difference in the electrical con-
∂ρ2 ρ ∂ρ ∂z 2 ρ
(12) ductivity. The alternating electromagnetic field, generated by the
where E i denotes the electric field intensity in each area, and high-frequency alternating currents in the coils, will eventually
the space wave number is defined as k 2 = −jωμ(σ + jωε), give rise to the eddy current loss. In the underwater WPT sys-
wherein, μ, σ, and ε denote the permeability, the electrical con- tems, the eddy current loss should be all dimensional. However,
ductivity, and the permittivity of the medium, respectively. The the transmitter is in the base station and the receiver is in the
boundary conditions and the infinity conditions are vehicle, such as an AUV. The vicinity below the transmitter

and above the receiver is indeed full of air. In the previous
E2ϕ − E1ϕ = 0, z = 0 simulations and experiments, we made a comparison of plac-
(13) ing the seawater between the transmitter and the receiver and
1 ∂ E2ϕ 1 ∂ E1ϕ
μ r ∂ z − μ r ∂ z = jωμ0 I1 δ(ρ − a), z = 0 putting the seawater all dimensional. The results show that the

limz →−∞ E1ϕ = 0 total losses of these two cases are almost the same, which indi-
(14) cates most of the eddy current loss exists in the space between
limz →+∞ E2ϕ = 0 the transmitter and the receiver in the practical applications.
where μr is the relative permeability and μ0 is the permeability Therefore, this paper only considers the eddy current loss in the
of the vacuum. Based on the separation of variables [20], the seawater between the transmitter and the receiver. The eddy cur-
general solution of (12) can be expressed as rent loss caused by the transmitter is calculated as (19), shown
 ∞ at the bottom of the next page. V is the study domain. h_sea
 and r_sea denote the seawater height and the seawater radius,
Eiϕ (ρ, z) = J1 (λρ) C1i eu i z + C2i e−u i z dλ (15)
0 respectively.
YAN et al.: FREQUENCY OPTIMIZATION OF A LOOSELY COUPLED UNDERWATER WPT SYSTEM CONSIDERING EDDY CURRENT LOSS 3471

C. Bilateral Eddy Current Loss and the gap between the transmitter and the receiver, which can
be expressed as (23), shown at the bottom of this page.
In an underwater WPT system, the electric field E 2 is the
When the system dimension is fixed, m is a constant. Then,
vector sum of the electric field E 2t and E 2r in the direction
the ratio of the eddy current loss and the output power can be
of eϕ , caused by the transmitter current I1 and the receiver
obtained as
current I2 , respectively. I1 equals I2 in the system. There is a
phase difference θ between the transmitter current I1 and the mω0
receiver current I2 , which is approximately the same as the Peddy /Pout = . (24)
M
phase difference of E 2t and E 2r [21]. Thus, the eddy current
loss, which can be calculated as (20), shown at the bottom of It can be seen that the ratio is proportional to the resonant
this page, is generated by the synthesized electric field intensity frequency, and is independent of the coil currents. Therefore, for
E2 . a constant power output, it is practical to decrease the resonant
frequency to reduce the proportion that the eddy current loss
IV. FREQUENCY OPTIMIZATION occupies the output power. However, decreasing the coil currents
makes no difference to this ratio. For a WPT system in the air,
The eddy current loss has a significant rise as the resonant
there is an optimum resonant frequency, a higher frequency leads
frequency and coil currents increase [21]. Therefore, it is nec-
to a larger induced voltage, but will result in larger coil losses
essary to choose a lower resonant frequency or a smaller coil
simultaneously. However, the optimum resonant frequency will
current for underwater WPT systems. While in some underwa-
be shifted to a smaller value in the seawater than that in the air
ter applications, the coreless WPT system is preferred for its
to restrain the ratio of the eddy current loss.
low weight and elimination of magnetic losses. Moreover, in or-
der to make the system compact, the resonant frequency should
be relatively high [22]. With the same coil currents, the higher B. Operating Frequency
frequency leads to a larger induced voltage, thus a larger output
As shown in the previous section, the eddy current loss is
power and higher efficiency can be achieved. Therefore, there
generated by the synthesized electric field intensity E 2 , which
is an optimum frequency in the underwater WPT system.
is the vector sum of the electric field intensity E 2t and E 2r in
the direction of eϕ , caused by the transmitter and the receiver
A. Resonant Frequency
currents, respectively. Therefore, changing the phase difference
At the resonant state, the output power of a WPT system can θ between the transmitter current I1 and the receiver current I2
be approximately calculated as by frequency tuning to the optimum resonant point, will result
Pout = ω0 M I1 I2 = ω0 M I 22 (21) in a variation of the phase difference between E 2t and E 2r .
In Fig. 1(b), by applying Kirchhoff’s law in the receiver side,
where I1 = I2 is settled in the system. The mutual inductance we have
M is a constant value as the system setup is fixed. Based on the
aforementioned derivation, the eddy current loss in the seawater U2 − R2 I2 = jX2 I2 + jωM I1 (25)
can be expressed as
Peddy = mω02 I22 (22) where ω denotes the operating angular frequency, X2 is the
reactance of the receiver, i.e.,
where m is a coefficient, relative to the permeability and the
electrical conductivity of the seawater, the dimension of the 1
seawater region, the radii of the transmitter and the receiver, X2 = ωL2 − . (26)
ωC2

   N   2
σμ2 ω 2 I12 2π  ∞ λ
r sea h sea 
 
Peddy1 = σ|E 2t | dV =2
 · aii J1 (λaii ) J1 (λρ) e−u z dλ dϕdρdz (19)
V 4 0 0 0  u 
ii=1 0
     
N 
σμ2 ω 2 I22 2π r sea h sea   ∞ λ
Peddy = 2
σ|E 2 | dV = 2
σ|E 2t + E 2r | dV =  · aii J1 (λaii ) J1 (λρ) e−u z dλ
V V 4 0 0 0  0 u
ii=1
2
N  ∞ 
 λ 
+e jθ
· aj j J1 (λaj j ) J1 (λρ) eu (z −d)
dλ dϕdρdz (20)
j j =1 0
u 

 2
 2π r sea h sea
  ∞  N  ∞ 
σμ 2  N λ λ 
m=  · a J (λa ) J (λρ) e−u z
dλ+ejθ
· a J (λa ) J (λρ) eu (z −d)
dλ  dϕdρdz.
4  ii 1 ii 1 jj 1 jj 1 
0 0 0 ii=1 0 u j j =1 0
u 
(23)
3472 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 66, NO. 5, MAY 2019

TABLE I
SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS AND CIRCUIT PARAMETERS

Fig. 4. Phasor diagram of the WPT system.

be calculated as

X2 I2 ωL2 − ω C1 2 1 ω2
cos(π − θ) = = = 1 − 02 . (28)
ωM I1 ωkL2 k ω
Thus
  2 
1 ω0
θ = arccos −1 . (29)
k ω2
As for ω < ω0 , the same equation can be obtained.
As shown in Fig. 5, the phase difference between I1 and I2 is
approximately proportional to the normalized operating angular
Fig. 5. Phase difference varying with normalized operating angular frequency, which means the phase difference between E 2t and
frequency.
E 2r increases as the operating frequency rises around the reso-
nant frequency. Based on the Cosine Theorem, the synthesized
electric field intensity E 2 decreases, thus the eddy current loss
will decrease. Therefore, the optimum operating frequency is
supposed to be larger than the resonant frequency to restrain the
eddy current loss in the seawater.

V. CALCULATIONS, SIMULATIONS, AND EXPERIMENTS

In order to verify the aforementioned theoretical analysis, an
underwater experimental prototype is implemented, as shown
in Fig. 6. The system specifications and the circuit parameter
values are tabulated in Table I. Planar spiral coils are adopted as
the transmitter and the receiver with a turn number of 16, which
are composed of tightly wound AWG 38 Litz wires with 3.9-mm
diameter. The inverter input voltage and current, the battery volt-
Fig. 6. Experimental prototype.
age and current, the dc–dc efficiency, the input power, and the
output power are all measured by YOKOGAWA Power Ana-
lyzer WT1800. The seawater is placed in a bucket, of which the
diameter is larger than the coil diameter. The gap between the
The resonant angular frequency ω0 is transmitter and the bottom surface of the seawater is 7 mm and
the gap between the receiver and the top surface of the seawater
1 1
ω0 = √ =√ . (27) is 14 mm. The resonant frequency ranges from 60 to 600 kHz
L1 C1 L2 C2 by changing the matching capacitances.
With frequency tuning in Fig. 1(b), if ω > ω0 , the phasor
A. Analysis of Eddy Current Loss
diagram of the ac currents and voltages is plotted in Fig. 4
In this paper, L1 and L2 are designed to be the same and I1 The eddy current loss caused by the transmitter current in
and I2 are adjusted to be identical. The phase difference θ can the seawater is firstly studied. The experiments are carried out.
YAN et al.: FREQUENCY OPTIMIZATION OF A LOOSELY COUPLED UNDERWATER WPT SYSTEM CONSIDERING EDDY CURRENT LOSS 3473

Fig. 9. Electric field distribution.

Fig. 7. Simulation model. (a) Only transmitter. (b) Transmitter and

receiver.

Fig. 10. Eddy current loss caused by the transmitter and the receiver.

receiver current. The arrow points to the electric field distribu-

tion on the intermediate cross-section of the seawater region,
Fig. 8. Eddy current loss with seawater height.
which is parallel to the transmitter and the receiver. It is shown
that the electric field only has the circumferential component
and is much stronger in the vicinity of the coils.
The corresponding simulations in Comsol Multiphysics are also The transmitter current and the receiver current, which are
conducted as displayed in Fig. 7(a). Two-dimensional axisym- identical, are kept the same under the cases with and without
metric simulation model is adopted due to the circular dimen- the seawater. Therefore, the eddy current loss will be also indi-
sion of the transmitter and the receiver. The transmitter currents rectly measured by the difference of the total losses of the two
are kept the same under the cases with and without the sea- cases, namely, Peddy = Ploss seawater − Ploss air . Fig. 10 shows the
water. Therefore, the eddy current loss in the seawater will calculated, simulated, and experimental results caused by the
be the difference of the total losses of the two cases, namely, combined effect of the transmitter and the receiver varying with
Peddy1 = Ploss seawater − Ploss air . resonant frequencies when I1 = I2 = 2 A and I1 = I2 = 5 A.
When the transmitter current is 5 A and the resonant fre- It indicates that the eddy current loss rises as the resonant fre-
quency is 504.5 kHz, the calculated, simulated, and experimen- quency or the coil current increases. When the resonant fre-
tal eddy current losses with different seawater heights are shown quency is higher than 100 kHz, the eddy current loss increases
in Fig. 8. The experimental and the simulated results agree well sharply with the increasing resonant frequencies. The experi-
with the calculations. Furthermore, the eddy current loss has a mental results well match the simulated and calculated results.
moderate ascent with an increasing seawater height. The eddy
current loss is 10.3 W when the seawater height is 66 mm.
B. Frequency Optimization
Then, the eddy current loss generated by the transmitter and
receiver currents is investigated with a seawater height of 44 mm. The ratio of the eddy current loss and the output power vary-
Simultaneously, the gap between the transmitter and the receiver ing with the resonant frequency and the coil current are shown
is fixed at 66 mm, which is large enough for the underwa- in Fig. 11. It can be seen that the ratio between the eddy cur-
ter equipment. The experiments are carried out and the corre- rent loss and the output power is proportional to the resonant
sponding simulations in Comsol Multiphysics are established as frequency and is independent of the coil current, which veri-
displayed in Fig. 7(b). Fig. 9 shows the magnitude of the elec- fies the theoretical analysis. Thus, we can decrease the resonant
tric field of the study domain caused by the transmitter and the frequency other than the coil current to decrease this ratio.
3474 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 66, NO. 5, MAY 2019

Fig. 11. Ratio of the eddy current loss and the output power. (a) With
resonant frequency. (b) With coil current.
Fig. 13. Eddy current loss with operating frequency. (a) f0 =
215.5 kHz. (b) f0 = 504.5 kHz.

seawater is 215.5 kHz, smaller than that in the air of 248.4 kHz
due to the eddy current loss in the seawater.
With frequency tuning, the output power is fixed at 200 W
and two cases are studied. Case 1: f0 = 215.5 kHz; Case 2:
f0 = 504.5 kHz. The eddy current losses of these two cases
varying with the operating frequency are shown in Fig. 13. It is
interesting that the eddy current loss significantly decreases with
the increasing operating frequency in both cases. It is because
the phase difference between I1 and I2 becomes larger with the
increasing operating frequency. It demonstrates the theoretical
analysis in Section IV.
Fig. 14 shows the system efficiency with the increasing op-
erating frequency in both cases. It can be seen that the system
Fig. 12. System efficiency varying with the resonant frequency. efficiency in the air peaks when the operating frequency equals
the resonant frequency. While in the seawater, the optimum op-
erating frequency should be larger than the resonant frequency
In practical applications, it is necessary to satisfy the power to achieve the maximum dc–dc efficiency. This is because the
requirement. By regulating the output power to be 200 W and electric fields caused by I1 and I2 counteract with each other
I1 = I2 , the dc–dc efficiency varying with the resonant fre- versus an increasing operating frequency at the vicinity of the
quency is plotted in Fig. 12. It indicates that the system effi- resonant frequency, leading to a decreased eddy current loss,
ciency peaks at a certain resonant frequency in the air and the as analyzed in Section IV-B. The phenomenon is not that sig-
seawater, respectively. The optimum resonant frequency in the nificant because of the limited seawater region between the
YAN et al.: FREQUENCY OPTIMIZATION OF A LOOSELY COUPLED UNDERWATER WPT SYSTEM CONSIDERING EDDY CURRENT LOSS 3475

current loss in the experiment. Nevertheless, this paper helps

to better understand and optimize the design of the underwater
WPT systems.

REFERENCES
[1] C. C. Mi, G. Buja, S. Y. Choi, and C. T. Rim, “Modern advances in
wireless power transfer systems for roadway powered electric vehicles,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 63, no. 10, pp. 6533–6545, Oct. 2016.
[2] Y. Zhang, T. Lu, Z. Zhao, F. He, K. Chen, and L. Yuan, “Employing load
coils for multiple loads of resonant wireless power transfer,” IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 30, no. 11, pp. 6174–6181, Nov. 2015.
[3] J. P. K. Sampath, A. Alphones, and D. M. Vilathgamuwa, “Optimization
of wireless power transfer system with a repeater against load variations,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 64, no. 10, pp. 7800–7809, Oct. 2017.
[4] S. Li and C. C. Mi, “Wireless power transfer for electric vehicle applica-
tions,” IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 4–17,
Mar. 2015.
[5] A. P. Hu and S. Hussmann, “Improved power flow control for contactless
moving sensor applications,” IEEE Power Electron. Lett., vol. 2, no. 4,
pp. 135–138, Dec. 2004.
[6] T. Kan, R. Mai, P. P. Mercier, and C. Mi, “Design and analysis of a three-
phase wireless charging system for lightweight autonomous underwater
vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 33, no. 8, pp. 6622–6632,
Aug. 2018.
[7] T. Kojiya, F. Sato, H. Matsuki, and T. Sato, “Automatic power supply
system to underwater vehicles utilizing non-contacting technology,” in
Proc. OCEANS’04. MTTS/IEEE TECHNO-OCEAN’04, 2004, pp. 2341–
2345.
[8] M. D. Feezor, F. Y. Sorrell, and P. R. Blankinship, “An interface system
for autonomous undersea vehicles,” IEEE J. Ocean. Eng., vol. 26, no. 4,
pp. 522–525, Oct. 2001.
[9] T. McGinnis, C. P. Henze, and K. Conroy, “Inductive power system for
autonomous underwater vehicles,” in Proc. OCEANS 2007, 2007, pp. 1–5.
[10] Z. Li, D. Li, L. Lin, and Y. Chen, “Design considerations for electro-
magnetic couplers in contactless power transmission systems for deep-sea
applications,” J. Zhejiang Univ.—Sci. C, vol. 11, pp. 824–834, 2010.
[11] J. Shi, D. Li, and C. Yang, “Design and analysis of an underwater in-
ductive coupling power transfer system for autonomous underwater vehi-
Fig. 14. System efficiency with operating frequency. (a) f0 = cle docking applications,” J. Zhejiang Univ.—Sci. C, vol. 15, pp. 51–62,
215.5 kHz. (b) f0 = 504.5 kHz. 2014.
[12] T. Orekan, P. Zhang, and C. Shih, “Analysis, design and maximum power
efficiency tracking for undersea wireless power transfer,” IEEE J. Emerg.
transmitter and the receiver, however, it is capable of under- Sel. Topics Power Electron., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 843–854, Oct. 2017.
standing the characteristics of the underwater WPT systems. [13] C. Fang, X. Li, Z. Xie, J. Xu, and L. Xiao, “Design and optimization of
an inductively coupled power transfer system for the underwater sensors
of ocean buoys,” Energies, vol. 10, 2017, Art. no. 84.
VI. CONCLUSION [14] Z. He, Y. Wang, L. Ding, and X. Nie, “Research on three-dimensional
omnidirectional wireless power transfer system for subsea operation,” in
In this paper, the eddy current loss of a coreless underwater Proc. OCEANS 2017-Aberdeen, 2017, pp. 1–5.
WPT system was modeled and analyzed. The expressions of the [15] Z. Cheng, Y. Lei, K. Song, and C. Zhu, “Design and loss analysis
of loosely coupled transformer for an underwater high-power inductive
electric field intensity and the eddy current loss were derived un- power transfer system,” IEEE Trans. Magnet., vol. 51, no. 7, pp. 1–10, Jul.
der arbitrary frequencies. The eddy current loss was analyzed for 2015.
different gaps, frequencies, and transmitter currents. Based on [16] R. Itoh, Y. Sawahara, T. Ishizaki, and I. Awai, “Wireless power transfer
to moving ornamental robot fish in aquarium,” in Proc. IEEE 3rd Global
the eddy current loss model, the resonant frequency and operat- Conf. Consumer Electron., 2014, pp. 459–460.
ing frequency were optimized. An underwater WPT prototype [17] Z. Yan, K. Zhang, H. Wen, and B. Song, “Research on characteristics of
was built and the experimental results verified the theoretical contactless power transmission device for autonomous underwater vehi-
cle,” in Proc. OCEANS 2016-Shanghai, 2016, pp. 1–5.
analysis. [18] J. Zhou, D. Li, and Y. Chen, “Frequency selection of an inductive contact-
It was found that the eddy current loss in the seawater has a less power transmission system for ocean observing,” Ocean Eng., vol. 60,
sharp increase with the increasing resonant frequency, because pp. 175–185, 2013.
[19] Y. Zhang, K. Chen, F. He, Z. Zhao, T. Lu, and L. Yuan, “Closed-form
of which the optimum resonant frequency in the seawater is oriented modeling and analysis of wireless power transfer system with
shifted to a smaller value than that in the air. Moreover, the constant-voltage source and load,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 31,
optimum operating frequency of a WPT system in the seawater no. 5, pp. 3472–3481, May 2016.
[20] D. A. Hill et al., Time-Harmonic Electromagnetic Fields. New York, NY,
should be larger than the resonant frequency to achieve the max- USA: Wiley, 1961.
imum dc–dc efficiency, different from the fact that the optimal [21] K. Zhang, Z. Zhu, B. Song, and D. Xu, “A power distribution model
operating frequency of a WPT system in the air should equal of magnetic resonance WPT system in seawater,” in Proc. IEEE Annu.
Southern Power Electron. Conf., 2016, pp. 1–4.
the resonant frequency of the receiver. [22] F. Lu, H. Zhang, H. Hofmann, and C. Mi, “A high efficiency 3.3 kW
Due to the limitation of the experimental condition, the phe- loosely-coupled wireless power transfer system without magnetic mate-
nomenon is not so obvious because of a relatively small eddy rial,” in Proc. IEEE Energy Convers. Congr. Expo., 2015, pp. 2282–2286.
3476 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 66, NO. 5, MAY 2019

Zhengchao Yan (S’18) received the B.S. degree Kehan Zhang was born in Shaanxi, China, in
in mechanical design, manufacturing, and au- 1971. He received the Ph.D. degree from Xi’an
tomation from Northwestern Polytechnical Uni- Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China, in 2000.
versity, Xi’an, China, in 2013, where he is cur- He is currently an Associate Professor and
rently working toward the Ph.D. degree in elec- Master Instructor with Northwestern Polytechni-
trical engineering. cal University. His research interests focus on
In 2017, he received funding from the China DSP-based brushless dc motor control system
Scholarship Council and became a joint Ph.D. and wireless power transfer.
student with the Department of Electrical and
Computer Engineering, San Diego State Univer-
sity, San Diego, CA, USA. His research interests
focus on wireless power transfer, including electromagnetic field calcu-
lation, coil design, and compensation topologies.
Baowei Song received the B.S. degree in me-
chanical engineering from Northwestern Poly-
technical University, Xi’an, China, in 1986 and
Yiming Zhang (S’13–M’16) received the B.S. the Ph.D. degree in mechatronic engineering
and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from from Northwestern Polytechnical University in
Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, in 2011 and 1999.
2016, respectively. He is currently a Professor and the Vice-
He is currently a Postdoctoral Researcher President of Northwestern Polytechnical Univer-
with San Diego State University, San Diego, sity. His research interests include general tech-
CA, USA. His research interests include wire- nical research of underwater vehicles.
less power transfer for electric vehicles and mo-
bile phones, and resonant converters.

Tianze Kan (S’15) received the B.Eng. degree

Chunting Chris Mi (S’00–A’01–M’01–SM’03–
in electrical engineering and automation from
F’12) received the B.S.E.E. and M.S.E.E. de-
Huazhong University of Science and Technol-
grees in electrical engineering from Northwest-
ogy, Wuhan, China, in 2011, and the M.S. de- ern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, China, in
gree in electrical engineering from the University
1985 and 1988, respectively. He received the
of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA,
Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the
in 2013. He is currently working toward the Ph.D.
University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada,
degree in electrical and computer engineering in in 2001.
the joint doctoral program between San Diego
He is a Professor and Chair of Electrical and
State University, San Diego, CA, USA, and the
Computer Engineering and the Director of the
University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA.
Department of Energy funded Graduate Auto-
His research interests include power electronics and inductive-based motive Technology Education Center for Electric Drive Transportation,
wireless power transfer, especially on coil design and compensation
San Diego State University (SDSU), San Diego, CA, USA. Prior to join-
topologies.
ing SDSU, he was with with the University of Michigan, Dearborn, MI,
USA, from 2001 to 2015. His research interests include electric drives,
power electronics, electric machines, renewable-energy systems, and
Fei Lu (S’12–M’17) received the B.S. and M.S. electric and hybrid vehicles.
degrees from Harbin Institute of Technology,
Harbin, China, in 2010 and 2012, respectively,
and the Ph.D. degree from the University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA, in 2017,
all in electrical engineering.
He is currently a Postdoc Researcher with
San Diego State University, San Diego, CA,
USA. His research topic focuses on the appli-
cation of electric vehicle charging.