This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JESTPE.2022.3174010, IEEE Journal
of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics
Steady-state Analysis for Modular Multilevel
Converters with Considering the Modified Arm
DC Reference and Average Capacitor Voltage
Zhijie Liu, Member, IEEE, Yu-chuan Li, Liangzi Li, Student Member, IEEE, Zhonglin Guo, Student
Member, IEEE, Ke-Jun Li*, Senior Member, IEEE, and Jinyu Wang, Member, IEEE
Abstract—For modular multilevel converters (MMC), it is
generally considered that the arm DC reference and average
capacitor voltage are both constant values, which equal to Udc/2
and Udc/N, respectively. However, it is identified in this paper that
these two voltages do not have such a simple constant value
relationship as claimed in most of the published studies. The
research is conducted based on an enhanced MMC model, where
a detailed expression describing their relationship is derived with
a high precision of 0.02%. Based on the research, some newfound
conclusions can be drawn. 1) The average capacitor voltage is
composed of the well-known major component and the minor
component neglected in most of the present studies. 2) The average
capacitor voltage has a downtrend with the arm DC reference
increasing due to its major component; meanwhile, influenced by
the minor component, their exact relationship highly depends on
the practical power condition of MMCs. 3) The average capacitor
voltage control is requisite for an MMC, but the conventional
strategy has negative effects when the MMC provides reactive
power for AC systems. Finally, the conclusions in this paper were
proved through simulations and experiments.
Index Terms—Average capacitor voltage; steady-state analysis;
arm reference voltage; mathematical model; modular multilevel
converter (MMC).
I. INTRODUCTION
M odular multilevel converters (MMC) have become the
competitive solution in voltage-source converter (VSC)-
based medium- and high-voltage applications [1]-[3]. Due to
the cascade connection of submodules (SM), the direct series
connection of semiconductor is avoided; the switching loss is
reduced; and the harmonic performance is improved [4]-[8].
In MMCs, the SM capacitor is one of the most important
components. In practical projects, the capacitor size generally
takes half of the total SM size, and its cost is approximately
equal to the semiconductor cost [9, 10]. Usually, the number of
the SM capacitor in an MMC is huge; in the high-voltage DC
____________________________________
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China under Grant 52007108, and the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong
Province under Grant ZR2021QE158 (Corresponding author: Ke-Jun Li).
Zhijie Liu, Liangzi Li, Zhonglin Guo,and Ke-Jun Li are with the School of
Electrical Engineering, Shandong University, Shandong 250061, China (e-mail:
liuzj@sdu.edu.cn; zlguo@mail.sdu.edu.cn; llzpe@mail.sdu.edu.cn; lkjun@
sdu.edu.cn).
Yu-chuan Li is with the Department of Electrical & Electronic Engineering,
Imperial College London, London SW72AZ, UK (yl6921@ic.ac.uk).
Jinyu Wang is with the State Key Laboratory of Electrical Insulation and
Power Equipment, Xian Jiaotong University, Xian 710061, China (jinyu88330
@126.com).
2168-6777 (c) 2021 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.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. Downloaded on May 13,2022 at 12:55:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
applications, there will be thousands of capacitors in one
converter [11]. Moreover, the output voltage of the MMC are
made up of SM capacitor voltages. In a word, the SM capacitor
plays a crucial role in the volume weight, project cost, and
operation performance, of an MMC. Thus, numerous studies
are carried out on the SM capacitor, such as the capacitance
selection, capacitor voltage reduction, and capacitor voltage
balance. Among them, it is the research basis to analyze the
characteristics of the SM capacitor voltage [12]-[14]. Different
from the two- and three-level converters, the arm current of the
MMC will flow through the SM capacitor. Consequently, the
capacitor voltage will fluctuate around its average value and
contain low-order harmonics [15]. Since the capacitor voltage
is coupled with many other electrical quantities of the MMC,
the capacitor voltage harmonics will significantly complicate
the analysis. Most of the arm energy is stored in SM capacitors;
hence, Hiller et al. [16] proposed to obtain the capacitor voltage
by indirectly calculating the arm energy fluctuation. By means
of this approach, the influence of the circulating current was
considered in [17] and [18], and the improved models were
proposed for capacitor voltage ripple estimation. References
[19]-[22] proposed to calculate the capacitor current through
multiplying the arm reference voltage with the arm current; and
hence, the expressions of capacitor voltage could be directly
derived by integrating the obtained arm current. Based on the
harmonic steady-state (HSS) modelling method, the small-
signal models that considering the capacitor voltage harmonics
were proposed in [23] and [24]. By means of this method, the
harmonics included in the capacitor voltage expression can be
extended to any required frequency. In [25], this HSS model is
improved by further considering the zero-sequence voltage,
which is caused by the inner coupling of MMCs; and with
considering the non-ideality of ac-side system, this HSS model
is further improved in [26].
In the research above, the generation mechanism, steady-
state characteristics, and calculation method, of the capacitor
voltage ripple are well studied. However, there are two critical
issues required to be further focused.
 Firstly, the study on average capacitor voltage is over-
looked. It is assumed that the average capacitor voltage is
a constant value and equal to 1/N of the DC-side voltage
under all situations.
 Secondly, the modifiability of the arm DC reference is
not considered. The arm DC reference is assumed to be
half of the DC-side voltage.
The average capacitor voltage is a determinant factor of the
capacitor voltage peak, and thereby it is closely related to the
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JESTPE.2022.3174010, IEEE Journal
of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics

SM capacitor selection [27]. In addition, the working life of SM
capacitor is influenced by the average capacitor voltage [28].
The arm DC reference is a main component in the arm reference
voltage, and thereby the risk of over-modulation and the
operation region of the MMC are strongly affected by the arm
DC reference. Thus, the studies of these two quantities are
necessary and meaningful. It was studied in [29] that the
average capacitor voltage was closely related to the arm DC
reference. Konstantinou et al. in [30] verified that the average
capacitor voltage could be intentionally changed by adjusting
the arm DC reference. In [31], an impedance model that can
reflect the influence of average capacitor voltage control is built
based on the HSS modelling method, and the paper concludes
that the average capacitor voltage control is helpful to damp the
oscillations in the medium-frequency bands. Antonopoulos et
al. in [32] proposed to reduce the maximum capacitor voltage
by adding a specified DC-offset component into the original
arm reference voltage when the motor, driven by the MMC,
operated below the rated speed. Konstantinou et al. in [33] and
[34] proposed to reduce the average capacitor voltage to
suppress the capacitor voltage increment caused by the
unbalanced AC-grid voltage.
However, the present research on the average capacitor
voltage and its relationship with the arm DC reference are still
in its infancy. For instance, their relationship may be various
when the transmitted power of the MMC is different. Moreover,
the present MMC model is not detailed enough to accurately
describe their relationship because some minor but important
factors are not considered. These issues have limited the further
development and application of the average capacitor voltage
control strategy. For example, although the average capacitor
voltage controller is applied in [35] and [36], it is simply
realized by using a proportional-integral (PI) unit to track a
constant reference value: 1/N of the DC-side voltage. The
converter may have better performance if the reference value of
the average capacitor voltage is specified according to the
power condition of the MMC. Thus, the following research is
conducted in this paper.
1) The paper makes a concise analysis to show that the average
capacitor voltage is closely related to the arm DC reference.
The reason why their relationship cannot be accurately
described by most of the present models is explained
through the formula derivation.
2) An enhanced steady-state MMC model is proposed, where
the modifiability of the arm DC reference is considered. In
addition, the capacitor voltage can be calculated at one
stroke and no iteration is needed.
3) A comprehensive study is conducted on the relationship
between the average capacitor voltage and the arm DC
reference. It is identified that their relationship is not as
simple as claimed in previously published studies. Then, the
variability of the average capacitor voltage is deeply studied
under modifiable DC reference voltage and various power
conditions. Several important new conclusions are found in
this paper, and the deficiency of the present average
capacitor voltage control strategy is discovered.
Based on the study in this paper, more research can be
conducted on the average capacitor voltage control strategy.
The newfound conclusions and proposed high-accurate model
can broaden the view of the research on improving the
performance of the MMC.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. A concise
analysis is made to show the foundation of the research and the
insufficiency of the present MMC model in Section II. In
Section III, an enhanced MMC model is proposed with
considering the modifiable arm DC reference. The relationship
between the average capacitor voltage and the arm DC
reference is comprehensively studied in Section IV. In Section
V, the research results are verified by both simulation and
experiment. The conclusions are summarized in Section VI.
II. CONCISE ANALYSIS OF CAPACITOR VOLTAGE
AND ARM REFERENCE VOLTAGE
The topology of an MMC is shown in Fig. 1 [10]-[12]. There
two arms in each phase leg, and each arm consists of N cascade-
connected SMs and an arm inductor Lm. The ac-side connected
transformer is denoted by Lt.
Fig. 1. Topology of an MMC.
Phase A is taken as an example. Based on Kirchhoff's law,
the actual value of the arm voltage can derived as (1).
 U dc dia (t ) diap ( t )
 uap ( t )  2  ua ( t )  Lt dt  Lm dt
 (1)
 u ( t )  U dc  u ( t )  L dia ( t )  L dian ( t )
 an 2
a t
dt
m
dt
where, uap(t) and uan(t) are the actual values of the upper and
lower arm voltages, respectively; iap(t) and ian(t) denote the
upper and lower arm currents, respectively; Udc is the DC-side
voltage; ua(t) and ia(t) denote the AC-side voltage and current;
their expressions are shown in (2).
ua (t )  U s cos(t )
 (2)
ia (t )  I s cos(t   )
where, ω is the fundamental angular frequency. And, Is and β
can be calculated by (3); S and φ denote the three-phase
apparent power and the power factor angle, respectively.

2168-6777 (c) 2021 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.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. Downloaded on May 13,2022 at 12:55:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JESTPE.2022.3174010, IEEE Journal
of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics

 I s  2 S 3U s where, the symbol | equation |DC means the DC component in

 (3) the equation.
   
The upper arm is taken as an example. If the capacitor
As shown in Fig. 1, the arm voltage of an MMC is formed by voltage fluctuation is not considered, the relationship between
the sum of turn-on SMs, and it is controlled by the modulation the average capacitor voltage Uc,avg and the arm DC reference
2
unit according to its reference voltage [8]. The arm reference Uref,dc can be easily derived as: Uc,avg =Udc/(2N·Uref,dc); and the
voltage can be expressed as in (4), which is composed of the analysis to their relationship is very easy. However, in practice,
DC reference voltage Uref,dc, fundamental reference voltage the arm current of the MMC will flow through the SM capacitor,
uref,1ω(t), and 2nd harmonic reference voltage uref,2ω(t) [12]-[22]. which can cause the fluctuation of the capacitor voltage. The
maximum value of capacitor voltage fluctuation can reach up
 u ref ,ap ( t )  U ref ,dc  u ref ,1 ( t )  u ref ,2 ( t ) to 10% of the rated capacitor voltage [27]. As a result, the
 (4)
 u ref ,an ( t )  U ref ,dc  u ref ,1 ( t )  u ref ,2 ( t ) neglect of capacitor voltage fluctuation can introduce serious
errors in the research. Then, the analysis will be much more
where, uref,ap(t) and uref,an(t) denote the arm reference voltages difficult when the capacitor voltage fluctuation is fully
in the upper and lower arms, respectively; uref,1ω(t) and uref,2ω(t) considered, because it is not only non-linear but also highly
are shown in (5). coupled with other electrical quantities. This will be further
studied in Section IV in detail
 u ref ,1 ( t )  M 1 cos( t   1 )
 (5) In this paper, since the modifiability of the arm DC reference
 u ref ,2 ( t )  M 2 cos(2 t   2 ) and the influence of the capacitor voltage fluctuation are fully
In (4), the arm fundamental reference voltage uref,1ω(t) is considered at the same time, the existing mathematical model
generated from the inner current controller, and is used for of MMC cannot satisfy the research requirement. An enhanced
controlling the output power of the MMC [12],[19]. The arm MMC model is required.
2nd harmonic reference voltage uref,2ω(t) is used for suppressing
the 2nd harmonic circulating current [20]-[22]. There has been
much research regarding these two components. III. ENHANCED MODEL WITH CONSIDERING THE MODIFIED
The research on the arm DC reference Uref,dc is rare. It is ARM DC REFERENCE AND AVERAGE CAPACITOR VOLTAGE
generally considered that the Uref,dc in (4) can only be set to a
An equilibrium equation can be established in (8), which is
constant value of Udc/2 [12]-[22]. This is because the DC
based on two approaches of calculating uap(t). In (8), Tleft(t) and
component of the actual arm voltage, shown in (1), equals to
Tright(t) are derived from the internal and external electrical
Udc/2; and hence it is thought that the reference voltage Uref,dc
quantities, respectively.
should meet the requirement of the actual voltage to maintain
the DC-side voltage of the MMC at a constant value of Udc. Tleft  t   uap ( t )  Tright  t  (8)
However, due to the ac harmonic components in SM capacitor
voltages, the arm reference voltage uref,ap/an(t) and the arm actual where
voltage uap/an(t) are different.
Since the arm voltage is formed by the sum of turn-on SMs,  uref ,ap (t )  uref ,ap (t )  iap (t ) 
 Tleft  t     U c ,dc   dt 
the relation between uref,ap/an(t) and uap/an(t) can be derived as:  U dc N  CM U dc 
 (9)
  ucap ,ap (t )   U dc dia (t ) di ap ( t )
uap (t )     uref ,ap (t ) Tright  t   2  ua (t )  Lt dt  Lm dt
  U dc N 
 (6)
u (t )   ucap ,an (t )   u Uc,dc represents the DC component in the capacitor voltage; CM
 an   ref ,an (t ) denotes the SM capacitance.
  U dc N 
In Tleft(t), the DC component of uref,ap(t)·iap(t) should be zero;
where, ucap,ap(t) is the upper arm capacitor voltage; ucap,an(t) is otherwise, the integration can cause the continuous increment
the lower arm capacitor voltage. of arm voltage. Substituting (2), (3), and (4) into uref,ap(t)·iap(t),
It can be found from (6) that the DC-side voltage of the the equivalent equation (10) can be obtained as follows.
MMC can be maintained at a constant value of Udc when the
relation shown in (7) is satisfied. Namely, the value of Uref,dc is u ref ,ap ( t )  iap ( t ) DC  0
not necessary to be a constant value of Udc/2. In addition, the  (10)
modification of Uref,dc will certainly have great effects on the
capacitor voltage; and the performance of an MMC might be I dcU ref ,dc SU ref ,1
 cos(1   )  0
improved through the modification of Uref,dc. Thus, it is 3 6U s
meaningful to conduct research on this subject.
Any sinusoidal expression can be transformed as in (11).
2
 U
 uref ,ap ( t )  ucap ,ap ( t ) DC  2 N
dc Ak cos(kt  k )  AkD cos(kt )  AkQ sin(kt ) (11)
 (7)
u U dc2 where AkD and AkQ are shown in (12).
( t )  u ( t ) 
 ref ,an cap ,an DC 2N

2168-6777 (c) 2021 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.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. Downloaded on May 13,2022 at 12:55:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JESTPE.2022.3174010, IEEE Journal
of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics

 AkD  Ak cos( k ) B12  B22

 (12) M2  (19)
 AkQ   Ak sin( k ) B32  B42
Substitute (2), (3),(4) and (5) into Tleft(t) and Tright(t) in (9);
and then, the obtained result is transformed into the form of   B1B3  B2 B4 
atan  B B  B B  , when B1B4  B2 B3  0
“AkD·cos(kωt)+AkQ·sin(kωt)” based on the transformation in   1 4 2 3 
2   (20)
(11). Hence, Tleft(t) and Tright(t) can be derived to be (14) and
atan  B1B3  B2 B4    , when B B  B B  0
(13), respectively.  BB B B  1 4 2 3
 1 4 2 3 

Tleft  t   U 0  U 1D cos( t )  U 1Q sin( t )

(13) where Idc denotes the DC-side current; A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, B3, and
 U 2 D cos(2 t )  U 2Q sin(2 t )   Tleft  B4 are substitutions, which are shown in (A2) in Appendix.
The upper arm capacitor voltages ucap,ap(t) and the lower arm
U dc  S  2 Lt  Lm   capacitor voltage ucap,an(t) can be expressed as in (21).
Tright  t    sin( )  U s  cos( t )
2  3U s 
(14)  uref ,ap ( t )  I dc ia ( t ) 
 S  2 Lt  Lm    ucap ,ap ( t )  U c ,dc   C U   3  2  dt
 cos( )  sin( t )  M dc
 3U s   (21)
u u (t )  I i (t ) 
( t )  U c ,dc   ref ,an   dc  a  dt
where U0 is the DC component in Tleft(t); U1D and U1Q are the  cap ,an C M U dc  3 2 
parameters of 1ω harmonic components; U2D and U2Q are the
parameters of 2ω harmonic components; o[Tleft] denotes the Substituting (4), (5), (2), and (3) into (21), yields:
other higher-frequency harmonic components. To make the
paper succinct, the expressions of U0, U1D, U1Q, U2D, and U2Q  u cap ,ap ( t )  U c ,dc  u c ,1 ( t )  uc ,2  ( t )  u c ,3 ( t )
 (22)
are shown in (A1) in Appendix.  ucap ,an ( t )  U c ,dc  u c ,1 ( t )  u c ,2  ( t )  u c ,3 ( t )
Then, based on the Undetermined Coefficients Method [37]
and the equivalence relation Tleft(t)=Tright(t), the simultaneous where the expression of Uc,dc has been presented in (16); uc,kω(t)
equations can be derived from (8)-(13); and the results are represents the harmonic components, which are shown in (23).
shown as follows.
 U ref ,dc S sin( t   ) M S sin( t   2   )
 U dc  2
 u c ,1 ( t ) 
U 0  2  0  3  C M U U
s dc 6 C M U sU dc
  M I sin( t   1 )
 S   2 Lt  Lm   1 dc
sin( )  0 
U 1Q  3U s  3 C M U dc (23)
 
I U SU ref ,1  u ( t )   M 2 I dc sin(2 t   2 )  M 1 S sin(2 t   1   )
 dc ref ,dc  cos(1   )  0 (15)  c ,2 6 C M U dc 12 C M U sU dc
 3 6U s 
  u ( t )   M 2 S sin(3 t   2   )
U 2 D  0  c ,3 18 C M U sU dc

U 2 Q  0
where the expressions of U0, U1Q, U2D, and U2Q are shown in
(A1) in Appendix.
Hence, the expressions of Uc,dc, M1, α1, M2, α2 with respect to
Uref,dc can be obtained by solving the five equivalent equations
in (15). The simplified results are shown in (16)-(20). It is
worth noting that M1, α1, M2, α2 are all related to the power
conditions of the MMC; and the influence of power condition
on them have already been considered in this paper.
U dc2 SM1 sin(1   ) M1M 2 S sin(1  2   )
U c,dc    (16)
2U ref ,dc N 6CMU sU dc 24U ref ,dcCMU sU dc

1 A 1 A2 A
M1  2
 3 4
 22  33 (17)
2 A1 A1 4 A1 A1 A1 Fig. 2. Flow diagram of calculation procedure.

  2U ref ,dc I dcU s  It should be noted that, although the above expressions seem
   acos  , when A1 M 12  A3  0 complicated, they are simple to be used. This is because that the
  SM 1 
1   (18) algebraic expressions of all required variables have been
   acos  2U ref ,dc I dcU s  , when A1 M 12  A3  0 deduced out; and there is no variable that requires numerical
  
  SM 1  solution. Moreover, for facilitating the understanding, a flow

2168-6777 (c) 2021 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.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. Downloaded on May 13,2022 at 12:55:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JESTPE.2022.3174010, IEEE Journal
of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics

diagram of calculation procedure is presented in Fig. 2. Based

on this flow diagram, the steady-state values of electrical
quantities can be calculated step by step.

IV. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AVERAGE CAPACITOR

VOLTAGE AND ARM DC REFERENCE
Based on the enhanced model, a study is conducted on the
relationship between the average capacitor voltage Uc,avg and
the arm DC reference Uref,dc. The parameters of the MMC, taken
as an example for research, are given in the Simulation column Fig. 3. Curves of Uc,avg with respect to Uref,dc in different power conditions.
in Table I.
TABLE I The above theoretical analysis can be illustrated by Fig. 3 and
MAIN CIRCUIT PARAMETERS OF THE MMC Fig. 4. In Fig. 3, the curves of Uc,avg with respect to Uref,dc are
Experiment Simulation shown under three typical power conditions. The changes of
Items
SI p.u. SI p.u. Uc,avg with respect to Uref,dc have the same trend no matter the
DC-side voltage Udc 400 V 2.083 320 kV 2.065 power condition. However, the deviation from the curve of the
Number of SMs per arm N 4 - 200 - major component is influenced by the power condition. When
Fundamental frequency f 50 Hz 1 50 Hz 1 φ=-/2, the Uc,avg - Uref,dc curve is above the red curve; when
Rated capacitor voltage 100 V 2.083 1600 V 2.065 φ=π/2, the Uc,avg-Uref,dc curve is below the red curve. The
Rated line voltage (rms) 192 V 1 155 kV 1 simulated results fit well with the results calculated by (24),
Rated AC current Is 21 A 1.414 1054 A 1.414
which can prove that the calculation results are high-accurate
Rated capacity Srated 5000 VA 1 200 MVA 1
and the obtained analysis results are correct.
In Fig. 4, the relationships of Uc,avg and Uref,dc under different
Arm inductance Lm 5 mH 0.2131 80 mH 0.2092
power conditions are shown more clearly by means of the three-
AC-link inductance Lt 2.5 mH 0.1065 40 mH 0.1046
dimensional diagram. In the figure, the MMC operates at the
SM Capacitance CSM 2000 uF 0.8635 6100 uF 0.8688
rated power 200 MVA, and the power factor angle changes
from -π to π. The calculated results of the average capacitor
The expression of Uc,avg in (16) can be derived to be (24). voltage and its major component are denoted by the coloured
1 T surface and the grey surface, respectively. From the figure, the
Uc,avg  ucap,ap/ an (t )dt
T 0
relationship of the major component to Uref,dc can be described
by a sloping plane. In fact, the relationship of Uc,avg to Uref,dc is
 U c,dc (24) a sinusoidal curved surface. This discrepancy is caused by the
2
U dc  SM1 sin(1   ) M1M 2 S sin(1  2   )  influence of the capacitor voltage fluctuation
  
2NU ref ,dc  6CMU sU dc 24U ref ,dcCMU sU dc 
 
Major component Minor component

where, M1, α1, M2, and α2 are shown in (17)-(20).

From (24), the average capacitor voltage can be divided into
two parts: the major component part and the minor component
part. The major component part has an inverse-proportional
relation with the arm DC reference; and this part is independent
with the output power. In comparison, the expression of minor
component contains S and φ, which means it can be influenced
by the power condition.
Thus, from (24), the major component makes Uc,avg have an
inverse relationship with Uref,dc, which can be described by
2
(U dc 2 N )·(1 U ref ,dc ) . Meanwhile, the minor component makes
their detailed relationship influenced by the power condition. In Fig. 4. Relationship between Uc,avg and Uref,dc when S is the rated value (200
MVA) and φ changes from –π to π.
addition, if the capacitor voltage fluctuation in (9) is not
considered, the U0 in (13) will only be composed of the item:
NUc,dcUref,dc/Udc; hence, the obtained equation (24) will only Based on the detailed expression (24) and the relationship
contain the major component. That is to say, the influence of curve presented in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, the relationship between
the capacitor voltage fluctuation on the average capacitor Uc,avg and Uref,dc can be clearly shown; and some research
voltage is not taken into consideration if this minor component conclusions are summarized as follows.
is ignored. Firstly, the average capacitor voltage is composed of not only
the major component but also a minor component. The minor
component results from the capacitor voltage fluctuation, and
its influence is unneglectable. For instance, from point A and

2168-6777 (c) 2021 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.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. Downloaded on May 13,2022 at 12:55:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JESTPE.2022.3174010, IEEE Journal
of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics

point B in Fig. 4, the difference of Uc,avg can reach up to 6.9%

of the nominal capacitor voltage (1600 V). However, this minor
but important component is not taken into consideration in most
of the present studies.
Secondly, Uc,avg has a downtrend with the increment of Uref,dc
under all power conditions, due to the effect of the major
component. The major component is not affected by the power
condition of the MMC, and is inversely proportional to the arm
DC reference.
Thirdly, the relationship of Uc,avg to Uref,dc is highly
influenced by the power condition of the MMC due to the effect
of the minor component. The curve of their relationship is Fig. 5. Control diagram of simulation and experiment
2
above and below the curve of (U dc 2 N )·(1 U ref ,dc ) , respectively,
when φ=[-π, 0) and φ=[0, π). The analysis results show that
A. Simulation Verification
Uc,avg can be higher than its nominal value (Udc/N) when the
average capacitor voltage control is not applied, which will In Section III, an enhanced MMC model with considering the
result in the increment of the maximum capacitor voltage. As a modifiable arm DC reference is proposed. Based on the model,
result, the SM capacitor with larger capacitance is required, Table II shows the comparisons between the calculated results
which thereby increases the size and cost of the MMC. and the simulated results under different Uref,dc. From Table II,
Therefore, the average capacitor voltage control strategy is the calculation errors of Uc,avg under three different Uref,dc are
requisite for an MMC because of the variability of Uc,avg with 0.011%, 0.012%, and 0.006%, respectively. The calculation
precision can reach up to one ten-thousandth. In addition, the
respect to the power conditions.
value of capacitor voltage ripple can also be accurately
Fourthly, there is an incompatible relationship between Uref,dc
calculated by the proposed model. For example, the calculation
and Uc,avg. When the arm DC reference is set to be a constant
errors of uc,1ω(t) under three different Uref,dc are 0.091%, 0.134%,
value, the average capacitor voltage will vary with S and φ.
and 0.093%, respectively; the calculation error is small enough
Conversely, when the average capacitor voltage is controlled to
to be ignored.
be a fixed value, the arm DC reference will vary with S and φ.
That is to say, these two parameters cannot be specified at the
same time. It is worth mentioning that both of Uref,dc and Uc,avg TABLE II
COMPARISON BETWEEN CALCULATION AND SIMULATION
are considered as a constant value in most of the present UNDER DIFFERENT Uref,dc
research. This can introduce errors into the analysis of the
MMC, which will be shown in Section V. Calculation/ Simulation
Values of
The above research is significant to the controller design and Items
Uref,dc (kV)
practical application of the MMC. For instance, based on the Amplitude (V) Phase angle (rad)
above analysis, the conventional average capacitor voltage 150.0 1647.66/1647.48 /
control strategy, shown in [30] and [31], has negative effects Uc,avg 160.0 1537.49/1537.31 /
when the MMC provides reactive power for the AC-side grid. 170.0 1439.97/1439.89 /
In the conventional methods, Uc,avg is always controlled to be 150.0 132.19/132.31 3.142/3.138
Udc/N. However, from the third conclusion, Uc,avg will naturally uc,1ω(t) 160.0 141.46/141.65 3.142/3.138
decrease to lower than Udc/N in the power condition of 170.0 150.82/150.96 3.142/3.140
generating reactive power when the average capacitor voltage
150.0 29.12/29.17 6.283/6.283
control is not used. In other words, the conventional method
uc,2ω(t) 160.0 30.80/30.83 6.283/6.285
will increase the maximum capacitor voltage under this power
170.0 32.43/32.49 6.283/6.285
condition, and thereby increase the requirement of capacitance,
which will increase the volume, weigh and project cost, of an 150.0 1.112/1.200 6.283/6.255
MMC. Moreover, this paper can provide the research basis for uc,3ω(t) 160.0 1.340/1.458 6.283/6.280
the improvement of the conventional method. 170.0 1.595/1.614 6.283/6.351

V. SIMULATION AND EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION
In this section, simulations and experiments are carried out
to verify the enhanced model and the theoretical findings. The
main circuit topology and parameters of the MMC have been
shown in Fig. 1. and Table I. The simulations are performed in
MATLAB/Simulink; and the experimental verifications are
performed by a down-scaled MMC prototype. The classical
control scheme, shown in Fig. 5, is used in the simulation and
experiment, which can refer to [35] and [38].
To further validate the proposed MMC model, comparisons
between simulation and calculation are carried out under four
different power conditions, which are “S=200 MVA, φ=0”,
“S=200 MVA, φ=π/2”, “S=200 MVA, φ=π”, and “S=200 MVA,
φ=-π/2”. The results are shown in Table III. It can be seen that
the calculated results have high precision under all power
conditions. For example, the calculation errors of Uc,avg are
0.002%, 0.012%, 0.006%, and 0.004%, respectively, under four
different power conditions.

2168-6777 (c) 2021 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.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. Downloaded on May 13,2022 at 12:55:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JESTPE.2022.3174010, IEEE Journal
of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics

TABLE III
COMPARISON BETWEEN CALCULATION AND SIMULATION
UNDER DIFFERENT POWER CONDITIONS (Uref,dc=160 kV)

Operating
Calculation/ Simulation
Items Conditions
S (MVA) φ (rad) Amplitude (V) Phase angle (rad)
200 0 1592.57/1592.60 /
200 π/2 1537.49/1537.31 /
Uc,avg
200 π 1592.57/1592.47 /
200 -π/2 1647.28/1647.22 /
200 0 95.04/94.76 4.626/4.625
200 π/2 141.46/141.65 3.142/3.138
uc,1ω(t)
200 π 95.04/95.40 1.657/1.658
200 -π/2 134.39/134.43 6.283/6.285
200 0 27.46/27.43 1.737/1.738 Fig. 7. Comparisons between the proposed MMC model and the traditional
MMC model: ucap,ap(t).
200 π/2 30.80/30.83 6.283/6.285
uc,2ω(t)
200 π 27.45/27.40 4.546/4.548
From Fig. 6, the maximum values of uref,ap(t) are 277.8 kV,
200 -π/2 23.91/23.97 3.142/3.145
294.1 kV, and 309.9 kV, respectively, when Uref,dc is set to be
200 0 0.933/0.914 3.228/3.229
150 kV, 160 kV, and 170 kV. The difference can reach up to
200 π/2 1.340/1.458 6.283/6.280
uc,3ω(t) 11.6%, which means that the maximum value of the arm
200 π 0.933/0.913 3.055/3.079 reference voltage is highly influenced by Uref,dc. This influence
200 -π/2 1.017/1.019 6.283/6.236 can be well reflected by the proposed MMC model. From
Fig. 6, an over-modulation will be caused if Uref,dc is set to be an
In Fig. 6 and Fig. 7, the proposed MMC model is compared overlarge value. Due to the high-precision, the proposed model
with the traditional model. Since the modifiability of the arm can be used to accurately judge whether the MMC has the risk
DC reference has not been considered in the present models, we of over-modulation. In comparison, since the influence of Uref,dc
chose one of the most cited MMC models as the benchmark for are not considered, the calculation results of the traditional
comparisons, which is presented in [19] and [20]. In the figure, model are always the same in the three situations. The
the power condition of “S=200 MVA, φ=π/2” is taken as an calculation errors are thereby introduced. From Fig. 6, the
example. Fig. 6 shows the arm reference voltage, and Fig. 7 calculation error of the traditional model is 6.2% when Uref,dc is
shows the SM capacitor voltage. The simulation waveform is set to 170 kV.
denoted by the blue line; The calculation results of the proposed In Fig. 7, the red points fit well with the blue line under all
model and the traditional model are denoted by the red point three situations, which proves again that the proposed MMC
and the black dashed line, respectively. model is high-accurate. the maximum capacitor voltages are
1809 V, 1709 V, and 1622 V, respectively, when Uref,dc is set to
be 150 kV, 160 kV, and 170 kV. The big difference is mainly
caused by the influence of Uref,dc on Uc,avg. In addition, Fig. 7
shows that the capacitor voltage ripple is also related to the
value of Uref,dc, though the influence is relatively smaller. The
capacitor voltage ripples are increased from 264 V to 301 V
when Uref,dc is changed from 150 kV to 170 kV. The increment
can reach up to 14.0%. Compared with the proposed model, the
traditional model can reflect neither the influence on the
maximum capacitor voltage nor the influence on the capacitor
voltage ripple. From Fig. 7, the results of the traditional model
are the same under all three situations, and the calculation errors
are thereby introduced.
Moreover, from Fig. 6 and Fig. 7, Uc,avg is not equal to Udc/N
when Uref,dc is set to be Udc/2. The neglect of the minor
component will introduce errors. For instance, the maximum
Fig. 6. Comparisons between the proposed MMC model and the traditional capacitor voltage is 1770 V in the traditional model; however,
MMC model: Uref,ap(t). its actual value is 1709 V, and the calculation error is 3.8% of
the nominal capacitor voltage. In contrast, the calculation error
of the proposed model is small enough to be ignored.
The above simulations prove that the proposed MMC model
is high-accurate under various situations; the calculation error
of Uc,avg is smaller than 0.02%. Moreover, it can be concluded
from the comparisons that the traditional model will introduce

2168-6777 (c) 2021 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.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. Downloaded on May 13,2022 at 12:55:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JESTPE.2022.3174010, IEEE Journal
of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics

big errors when the arm DC reference is modifiable; the

enhanced MMC model proposed in this paper is necessary and
meaningful.

B. Experimental Verification
The experimental verification is performed by a down-scaled
MMC prototype, shown in Fig. 8. The MMC prototype contains
four SMs per arm. The control system is realized based on the
cooperation of a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) chip,
called EP4CE30F23, and a Digital Signal Processor (DSP) chip,
called TMS320f28335. The main circuit parameters of the
MMC prototype are shown in Table I.
Fig. 9 shows the capacitor voltage, arm reference voltage,
arm current, and circulating current under different Uref,dc. In the
four sub-figures, the values of Uref,dc are set to be 190 V, 200 V,
205 V, and 210 V, respectively. The waveforms of the electrical
quantities are obtained from the oscilloscope. The waveforms
of the arm reference voltage are obtained from the DSP chips (b)
via the software called Code Composer Studio (CCS), because
they are actually signals used to control the MMC. The
experiments are performed in the power condition of “P=3 kW,
Q=-4 kVar”.

(c)

Fig. 8. Photograph of the down-scaled MMC prototype.

(d)
Fig. 9. Experimental waveforms under different Uref,dc:
(a) Uref,dc=190 V; (b) Uref,dc=200 V; (c) Uref,dc=205 V; (c) Uref,dc=210 V.

(a)

2168-6777 (c) 2021 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.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. Downloaded on May 13,2022 at 12:55:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JESTPE.2022.3174010, IEEE Journal
of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics
From Fig. 9, the average capacitor voltages Uc,avg are 106.5V,
102.2 V, 100.2 V and 97.1 V, respectively, when the values of
Uref,dc increase from 190 V to 210 V. The experimental results
prove that the average capacitor voltage has a downtrend with
the increment of the arm DC reference. Hence, the increment of
the average capacitor voltage can lead to a significant increment
of the maximum capacitor voltage. From Fig. 9, the maximum
capacitor voltages are 113.7 V, 108.9 V, 107.2 V and 104.6 V,
respectively. The experimental results show that the maximum
capacitor voltage can be reduced by adjusting the arm DC
reference.
From (24), the major component of the average capacitor
voltage is Udc/N=100V when Uref,dc is set to be Udc/2 (200 V).
As shown in Fig. 9(b), the actual average capacitor voltage is
102.2 V under this situation. This proves that there is a minor
component in the average capacitor voltage, and the minor
component makes the average capacitor voltage higher than
Udc/N under the power condition of “P=3 kW, Q=-4 kVar”. The
average capacitor voltage is reduced from 102.2 V to Udc/N
when Uref,dc is decreased to 195 V. This validates that Uref,dc
cannot be Udc/2 when Uc,avg is controlled to be Udc/N . The
incompatible relationship between Uref,dc and Uc,avg can thereby
be proved. The experimental result is consistent with the
conclusion drawn in Section IV.
Moreover, the maximum values of the arm reference voltage
are 334.3 V, 349.3 V, 359.6 V, and 371.2 V when Uref,dc are set
to be 190 V, 200 V, 205 V, and 210 V, respectively. It is known
that the over-modulation will occur if the arm reference voltage
exceeds Udc. Hence, the experimental results conclude that the
risk of over-modulation is increased with the increment of Uref,dc.
Meanwhile, from the experimental waveforms, the arm current
and circulating current are same in all four situations; they are
not influenced by the modification of arm dc reference.
Fig. 10. Experimental waveforms under different power conditions:
(a) P=0 kW, Q=5 kVar; (b) P=5 kW, Q=0 kVar; (c) P=0 kW, Q=-5 kVar.
2168-6777 (c) 2021 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.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. Downloaded on May 13,2022 at 12:55:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
In addition, in Fig. 9(a) and Fig. 9(c), the comparisons are
performed. It can be seen that the calculation results fit well
with the simulation and experiment waveforms. This can
further prove that the proposed enhanced model in this paper is
accurate.
To further prove the conclusions drawn in this paper, the
capacitor voltage under different power conditions are shown
in Fig. 10, where the arm DC reference is invariably set to be
Udc/2=200 V. In the three different power conditions, S is
always rated, and φ are π/2, 0, and -π/2, respectively.
As shown in Fig. 10, the average capacitor voltages under
three power conditions are 96.5 V, 99.2 V, and 103.1 V,
respectively. The experimental results further prove that the
average capacitor voltage is highly influenced by the power
condition when the arm DC reference is set to be a constant
value. From the analysis in Section IV, this influence is caused
by the minor component of the average capacitor voltage.
Due to the above reason, the average capacitor voltage
control is required. In the conventional strategy, the average
capacitor voltage is normally controlled to be Udc/N. However,
as shown in Fig. 10, the average capacitor voltage is greater
than 100 V(Udc/N) when the MMC consumes reactive power;
and it is smaller than 100 V(Udc/N) when the MMC generates
reactive power. Hence, the conventional strategy will have
negative effects when the MMC provides reactive power for the
AC-side grid. The experimental result is consistent with the
theoretical analysis.
Moreover, from Fig. 10(a) and Fig. 10(c), the difference of
the maximum capacitor voltage between two power conditions
is evident, though the capacitor voltage ripple does not differ
greatly. The capacitor voltage ripples are 17.5 V and 16.8 V,
respectively; and the maximum capacitor voltages are 106.8 V
and 110.2 V, respectively. The results show that the maximum
capacitor voltage is far more influenced by the average
capacitor voltage than by the capacitor voltage ripple. This
further shows that the study of the average capacitor voltage is
important.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, a study is carried out on the relationship
between the average capacitor voltage and the arm DC
reference for MMCs.
Firstly, the limitations of the present MMC models are
analyzed. Thus, an enhanced MMC model is proposed in this
paper, where the modifiability of the arm DC reference and the
influence of the capacitor voltage fluctuation on Uc,avg are fully
considered. In the model, the expressions are derived by solving
the established equilibrium equation rather than direct
derivation; hence, the calculation result can be high-accurate
and can fully reflect the interactions among quantities. It has
been proved that the calculation error of Uc,avg is smaller than
0.02% under various situations, which is smaller enough to be
ignored. Moreover, comparisons are carried out between the
traditional and the enhanced MMC model. The comparisons
show that the traditional model can introduce big errors when
the arm DC reference is modifiable; and the calculation
prevision of the enhanced model is significantly improved.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JESTPE.2022.3174010, IEEE Journal
of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics
Then, the relationship between Uref,dc and Uc,avg are studied
based on the proposed model. Several newfound conclusions
are obtained and summarized as follows.
1) The detailed expression of Uc,avg with respect to Uref,dc is
derived and shown in (24). Based on the expression, the
average capacitor voltage consists of not only a major
component but also a minor component. This minor but
important component is not considered in most of the
present studies.
2) The average capacitor voltage always has a downtrend
with the increment of Uref,dc due to its major component.
Meanwhile, their relationship is highly influenced by the
power condition of the MMC due to the effect of the
minor component. The curve of their relationship is
2 circuit current for MTDC grids considering MMC control," IEEE Trans.
above and below the curve of (U dc 2 N )·(1 U ref ,dc ) ,
respectively, when φ=[-π, 0) and φ=[0, π). As a result,
Uc,avg is highest at φ=-π/2 and is lowest at φ=π/2 under the
same Uref,dc. From calculation results, the difference can
reach up to 6.9% of the nominal capacitor voltage, which
means that this influence should not be ignored.
3) There is an incompatible relationship between Uref,dc and
Uc,avg, which means these two parameters cannot be
specified at the same time. In most of the present research,
both of Uref,dc and Uc,avg are assumed as constant values;
this assumption can introduce errors into the analysis of
the MMC.
4) The research concludes that the average capacitor voltage
control strategy is requisite for an MMC because of the
variability of Uc,avg with respect to the power conditions.
Moreover, the conventional strategy has negative effects
when the MMC provides reactive power for the AC-side
grid. The performance of the conventional strategy could
be further improved.
The proposed model and obtained conclusions are significant
to not only the main circuit parameter selection but also the
operation performance optimization of MMCs. This paper can
enlighten the future study relating to the average capacitor
voltage control. More research can be conducted in this area
based on the study of this paper.
VII. REFERENCE
[1] Z. Liu, K. Li, Z. Guo, and et al., "A Comprehensive Study on the
Modulation Ratio for Modular Multilevel Converters," IEEE Trans. Ind.
Appl., Eearly Access, doi: 10.1109/TIA.2022.3155472.
[2] A. Dekka, B. Wu, R. L. Fuentes, M. Perez, and N. R. Zargari, "Evolution
of topologies, modeling, control schemes, and applications of modular
multilevel converters," IEEE Trans. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron.,
vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1631-1656, Dec. 2017.
[3] Z. Liu, K. Li, Z. Guo, J. Wang and et al., "Evaluating the Over-modulation
Risk of Modular Multilevel Converters by Using Dynamic Modulation
Ratio," IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron., Eearly Access, doi:
10.1109/TIA.2022.3155472.
[4] D. Vozikis, G. Adam, P. Rault, and et al. “Enhanced modular multilevel
converter for HVDC applications: Assessments of dynamic and transient
responses to AC and DC faults.” IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power
Electron., vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 6997-7008, Dec. 2021.
[5] X. Liu et al., “A fast finite-level-state model predictive control strategy
for sensorless modular multilevel converter,” IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics
Power Electron., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 3570–3581, Jun. 2021.
[6] F. Yan, P. Wang, X. Zhang, J. Xie, X. Li, C. Tang, and Z. Zhao,
"Coordinated start-up control and inter-converter oscillations damping for
MMC-HVDC grid," IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 65093-65102, Mar. 2019.
2168-6777 (c) 2021 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.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. Downloaded on May 13,2022 at 12:55:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[7] D. Ramirez, M. E. Zarei, M. Gupta, and J. Serrano, "Fast model-based
predictive control (FMPC) for grid connected modular multilevel
converters (MMC)," Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 119, pp.
105951, Feb. 2020.
[8] Z. Liu, K. Li, Y. Sun, J. Wang, Z. Wang, K. Sun, and M. Wang, "A steady-
state analysis method for modular multilevel converters connected to
permanent magnet synchronous generator-based wind energy conversion
systems," Energies, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 461, Feb. 2018.
[9] Y. Tang, M. Chen and L. Ran, "A Compact mmc submodule structure
with reduced capacitor size using the stacked switched capacitor
architecture," IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 6920-
6936, Oct. 2016.
[10] Q. Song, W. Yang, B. Zhao, J. Meng, S. Xu, and Z. Zhu, "Low-
capacitance modular multilevel converter operating with high capacitor
voltage ripples," IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 66, no. 10, pp. 7456-
7467, Oct. 2019.
[11] S. Gao, H. Ye and Y. Liu, "Accurate and efficient estimation of short-
Power Del., vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 1541-1552, Jun. 2020.
[12] H. Xiao, Z. Xu and Z. Zhang, "Selection methods of main circuit
parameters for modular multilevel converters," IET Renew. Power Gener.,
vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 788-797, Feb. 2016.
[13] Z. Ke, J. Pan, M. A. Sabbagh, R. Na, J. Zhang, J. Wang, and L. Xu,
"Capacitor voltage ripple estimation and optimal sizing of modular multi-
level converters for variable-speed drives," IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
vol. 35, no. 11, pp. 12544-12554, Nov. 2020.
[14] P. Hu, R. Teodorescu and J. M. Guerrero, "State observer based capacitor-
voltage-balancing method for modular multilevel converters without arm-
current sensors," Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 113, pp. 188-196,
May 2019.
[15] M. Mehrasa, E. Pouresmaeil, S. Zabihi, I. Vechiu, and J. P. S. Catalão, "A
multi-loop control technique for the stable operation of modular
multilevel converters in HVDC transmission systems," Int. J. Electr.
Power Energy Syst., vol. 96, pp. 194-207, Nov 2017.
[16] M. Hiller, D. Krug, R. Sommer, and S. Rohner, “A new highly modular
medium voltage converter topology for industrial drive applications,” in
Proc. 13th Eur. Conf. Power Electron. Appl., Sept. 2009, pp. 1-10.
[17] M. Vasiladiotis, N. Cherix and A. Rufer, "Accurate capacitor voltage
ripple estimation and current control considerations for grid-connected
modular multilevel converters," IEEE Trans. power Electron., vol. 29, no.
9, pp. 4568-4579, Sept. 2014.
[18] C. D. Townsend, G. C. Goodwin, G. Konstantinou, N. Petranovic, G.
Mirzaeva, G. Farivar, and J. Pou, "Identifying circulating currents and
zero-sequence voltages for reduction in stored capacitor energy in
modular multilevel converters," IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 68, no.
1, pp. 454-465, Jan. 2021.
[19] Q. Song, W. Liu, X. Li, H. Rao, S. Xu, and L. Li, "A Steady-state analysis
method for a modular multilevel converter," IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 3702-3713, Aug. 2013.
[20] X. Li, Q. Song, W. Liu, S. Xu, Z. Zhu, and X. Li, "Performance analysis
and optimization of circulating current control for modular multilevel
converter," IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 716-727, Feb.
2016.
[21] J. Wang, X. Han, H. Ma, and Z. Bai, "Analysis and injection control of
circulating current for modular multilevel converters," IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 2280-2290, Mar. 2019.
[22] L. Lin, A. Li, C. Xu, and Y. Wang, "Multi-objective genetic algorithm
based coordinated second- and third-order harmonic voltage injection in
modular multilevel converter," IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 94318-94329, Jun.
2020.
[23] J. Lyu, X. Zhang, X. Cai, et al., “Harmonic state-space based smallsignal
impedance modeling of a modular multilevel converter with consideration
of internal harmonic dynamics,” IEEE Trans. Power Electro., vol. 34, no.
3, pp. 2134–2148, 2019.
[24] J. Lyu, X. Cai, and M. Molinas, “Optimal design of controller parameters
for improving the stability of MMC-HVdc for wind farm integration,”
IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 40–53, Mar.
2018
[25] Z. Xu, B. Li, S. Wang, S. Zhang, and D. Xu, “Generalized single-phase
harmonic state space modeling of the modular multilevel converter with
zero-sequence voltage compensation,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol.
66, no. 8, pp. 6416–6426, Aug. 2019.
[26] Z. Xu et al.“A complete HSS-based impedance model of MMC
considering grid impedance coupling,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol.
35, no. 12, pp. 12929–12948, May 2020.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JESTPE.2022.3174010, IEEE Journal
of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics

[27] Z. Liu, K. Li, J. Wang, Z. Javid, M. Wang, and K. Sun, "Research on
capacitance selection for modular multi-level converter," IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 34, no. 9, pp. 8417-8434, Sept. 2019.
[28] M. S. Bilgin, G. Poyrazoglu, M. Aktem, and E. Er, "DC-link capacitor
lifetime under various operating conditions," in Proc. 13th IEEE Int. Conf.
Compat., Power Electron. Power Eng (CPE-POWERENG), Apr. 2019,
pp. 1-6.
[29] L. Angquist, A. Antonopoulos, D. Siemaszko, K. Ilves, M. Vasiladiotis,
and H. Nee, "Open-loop control of modular multilevel converters using
estimation of stored energy," IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 47, no. 6, pp.
2516-2524, Nov./Dec. 2011.
[30] G. Konstantinou, H. R. Wickramasinghe, S. Ceballos, and J. Pou, "Offset
PWM in modular multilevel converters for stored arm energy reduction,"
in Proc. IEEE 2nd Annual SPEC, Dec. 2016, pp. 1-6.
[31] S. Zhu, K. Liu, J. Le, and et. al., " Stability Assessment of Modular
Multilevel Converters Based on Linear Time-Periodic Theory: Time-
Domain vs. Frequency-Domain," IEEE Trans. Power Del., Early Access:
DOI 10.1109/TPWRD.2022.3142751.
[32] A. Antonopoulos, L. Angquist, L. Harnefors, and H. Nee, "Optimal
selection of the average capacitor voltage for variable-speed drives with
modular multilevel converters," IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 30, no.
1, pp. 227-234, Jan. 2015.
[33] G. Konstantinou, H. R. Wickramasinghe, S. Ceballos, and J. Pou, "Offset
PWM in modular multilevel converters for stored arm energy reduction,"
in Proc. IEEE 2nd Annual SPEC, Dec. 2016, pp. 1-6.
[34] J. Li, G. Konstantinou, H. R. Wickramasinghe, C. D. Townsend, and J.
Pou, "Capacitor voltage reduction in modular multilevel converters under
grid voltages unbalances," IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 35, no. 1, pp.
160-170, Feb. 2020.
[35] S. Du, A. Dekka, B. Wu, N. Zargari, Modular multilevel converters:
analysis, control, and applications, 1st ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA, Wiley,
2018, pp. 79-101, 154-160.
[36] Y. Sun, Z. Li and Z. Zhang, "Hybrid predictive control with simple linear
control based circulating current suppression for modular multilevel
converters," CES Trans. Electr. Mach. and Sys., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 335-341,
Dec. 2019.
[37] A. U. Keskin, Ordinary Differential Equations for Engineers, 1st ed,
Cham, Switzerland, Springer Nature, 2018, pp. 129-140.
[38] Q. Tu, Z. Xu, and L. Xu, "Reduced switching-frequency modulation and
circulating current suppression for modular multilevel converters." IEEE
Trans. Power Del. vol.26, No.3, pp. 2009-2017, Jul. 2011.

APPENDIX
The expressions of U0, U1D, U1Q, U2D, and U2Q in (13) are shown as follows.
 NU ref ,dc S  M 1 sin(1   ) M 1 M 2 sin(1   2   ) U c ,dc 
 U0  
 6 C U U
  
 U dc  M s dc 24 C M U sU dcU ref ,dc S 


 U 1D  U ref ,dc M 1I dc N  sin(1 )  M 1 M 2 I dc N  sin(1   2 )  M 1 NU c ,dc   cos(1 )  (3M 12  4 M 22  24U ref
2
, dc ) NS   sin( ) 
 U    3 C U 2  cos( )   12 C U 2   cos(   )   U  sin( )   72  C U U 2  cos( ) 
 1  dc  2      (A1)
 
1 Q M dc M 1 dc 1 M s dc


 U 2 D  M 2 NU c ,dc   cos( 2 )  M 1 M 2 NS  sin(1   2   )  M 1 M 2 NS   sin(1   2   )  M 12 I dc N  sin(21 ) 
 U      2    2   2  
  2Q  U dc  sin( 2 )  12 C M U sU dc  cos(1   2   )  36 C M U sU dc  cos(1   2   )  6 C M U dc  cos(21 ) 
 U M NS  sin(1   )  U ref ,dc M 2 I dc N  sin( 2 ) 
  ref ,dc 1 2  
 4 C M U sU dc  cos(1   )  6 C M U dc2  cos( 2 ) 

The expressions of A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, B3, and B4 in (16)-(20) are shown as follows.

 NSU ref ,dc

 A1  4 C U 3 U ；
 m dc s

 2 I dcU sU ref ,dc

 A2 
 S
2
 8U ref ,dc A1 2  Lm  2 Lt  SU ref ,dc
 A3    A2 tan( )；
 3 3U dcU s

 B  I dc M 1 sin(2 )  U ref ,dc sin(   )； (A2)
 1 6S
1
4U s
1

 I dc M 1 U
 B2   cos(21 )  ref ,dc cos(1   )
 6S 4U s
 I dcU ref ,dc cos(1   )
 B3   ；
 6SM 1 9U s
 3
 B4   CmU dc  sin(1   )
 2 NSM 1U ref ,dc 18U s

2168-6777 (c) 2021 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.
Authorized licensed use limited to: VISVESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. Downloaded on May 13,2022 at 12:55:40 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.