Downloaded from https://iranpaper.

ir

Journal of Power Electronics (2022) 22:629–640

https://doi.org/10.1007/s43236-021-00361-2

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Optimal strategy for energy management of DC multi‑microgrids

considering power loss
Weiliang Zhang1 · Hui Zhang1,2 · Na Zhi1 · Hanwei Wang1

Received: 13 July 2021 / Revised: 25 November 2021 / Accepted: 26 November 2021 / Published online: 10 February 2022
© The Author(s) under exclusive licence to The Korean Institute of Power Electronics 2022

Abstract
DC multi-microgrids (DC MMG) improve power supply efficiency. However, they also increase transmission power loss.
To reduce the power loss of the DC MMG, an optimization strategy of energy management with an adaptive distribution
coefficient is proposed in this paper. By adjusting the power distribution coefficient of each DC microgrid (DC MG), the
power distribution of the DC MMG is optimized to reduce power loss. In addition, to quickly predict changes of the DC MG
power, the traditional finite control set model predictive control (FCS-MPC) is improved. The duty cycle of the converter is
directly calculated according to the change of the current. Finally, experimental verification and comparison show that the
proposed method can minimize the power loss of a DC MMG and speed up the balance of power.

Keywords  DC multi-microgrid · Power loss · Adaptive allocation coefficient · Coordinated control · Finite set model
prediction control

1 Introduction MMG. The key technologies to reduce the power loss of

It is believed that the DC MG will be an important part of
smart grids in future. However, the inherent intermittence
and randomness of distributed microsources make it unable
to fully connect with AC distribution networks [1–3]. To
improve the connection between DC MGs and AC distribu-
tion networks, DC MGs with the same geographical loca-
tion are interconnected [4, 5]. This improves the power sup-
ply efficiency and reliability of the DC MG. However, it
increases the difficulty of DC MMG power coordination [6].
As an interconnected system of multiple AC and DC MGs,
the energy management of a DC MMG is a multi-objective
optimization problem with multiple constraints [7]. How-
ever, the multi-objective optimization of energy manage-
ment is usually transformed into a single objective [8].
The frequent interaction of DC MG power causes a lot
of power loss [9]. However, a reasonable allocation of the
power of each DC MG can reduce the power loss of a DC
* Hui Zhang
zhangh@xaut.edu.cn
1
School of Electrical Engineering, Xi’an University
of Technology, Xi’an, China
2
State Key Laboratory of Power Systems, Tsinghua
University, Beijing, China
DC MMGs are the accurate prediction of unbalanced power
and the reasonable allocation of power [10]. The traditional
model predictive control needs to traverse all of the possi-
ble working states of a power electronic converter and find
the optimal control vector according to optimization con-
straints [11]. Thus, it is often called FCS-MPC [12–14]. In
[15], a maximum power tracking algorithm based on FCS-
MPC was proposed. It realizes the maximum energy utili-
zation of a cascaded photovoltaic power generation system.
In [16], a robust model predictive control (MPC) strategy
was proposed. It is used for photovoltaic inverter control
with fault ride-through capability. In [17], FCS-MPC was
applied to the control of a multi-terminal HVDC network
connected with an AC power grid. When compared with
PI control, it improves the frequency modulation capabil-
ity and reduces the power loss of the DC MMG. However,
the computational complexity affects the accuracy of the
prediction results. An algorithm combining a model-based
state observer and an optimizer based on deep reinforcement
learning was proposed in [18]. This was done to reduce the
computational complexity. In [19], the MPC was reviewed
in terms of model mismatch, unfixed switching frequency,
and a large number of on-line computations. At the same
time, depending on the application requirements, the MPC
has good prospects.

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir

630 W. Zhang et al.

To coordinate and optimize the power of DC MMGs,
a hierarchical control strategy for a DC MMG was pro-
posed [20]. According to the state of charge of the energy
storage and bus voltage, the power flow between different
MGs is managed to improve the bus voltage quality. In
[21], a secondary control based on centralized, distrib-
uted, and decentralized methods was discussed in detail
for the hierarchical control strategy. In [22], the hierarchi-
cal control was further refined and a three-layer control
method was proposed for the power coordination of DC
MMGs. By adjusting the voltage set point of each DC MG,
the energy flow between the DC MMGs is realized. In
[23], an optimization strategy based on bacterial foraging
optimization technique predictive control was proposed
for standalone MGs. By controlling the two-stage struc-
ture, the DC-link voltage constant is maintained, the AC
voltage and frequency are regulated, and the power qual-
ity is improved. The application of different intelligent
algorithms in energy management has been used to opti-
mize power distribution and improved its efficiency [24,
25]. For islanded DC MGs, a power management strategy
was proposed to ensure the power balance when a system
switches between the battery discharging mode, battery
charging mode, and battery standby mode [26]. In [27],
an improved iterate calculation method was proposed,
which improved the charged-state prediction accuracy
of lithium-ion battery packs. Machine learning has been
widely used in power systems. However, it is applicable
to central urban areas with developed measurement sys-
tems and sufficient resources. Meanwhile, the DC MMG
is mainly aimed at remote areas and attempts to improve
power supply quality.
This paper aims to reduce the transmission power loss
of the DC MMG and proposes an optimization strategy
for energy management based on pulse width modulation
model predictive control (PWM-MPC). This strategy con-
sists of the prediction of the DC MG power difference and
the power optimization of the DC MMG. The main con-
tributions of this paper are briefly summarized as follows:
ing the distribution coefficient of the DC MG power, the
power loss of the DC MMG is minimized.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In
Sect. 2, the structure of a ring DC MMG is given, and the
simplification of the DC MMG is analyzed. Details of the
optimization strategy are discussed in Sect. 3. Experimental
results obtained from an experimental platform are illus-
trated in Sect. 4. Finally, Sect. 5 summarizes this paper and
discusses future work.
2 Equivalent analysis of a DC MMG
A schematic diagram of the ring DC MMG structure is
shown in Fig. 1. It is formed by a DC MG, a centralized
energy storage, and distributed electric vehicles. The DC
MG is composed of distributed microsources, an energy
storage, an electric vehicle charging station and an AC/DC
load. The bus of the DC MG and DC MMG is connected
through a contact converter. When a short-circuit fault
occurs, the power supply of the normal line is not affected
after the fault is removed. Therefore, the ring structure has
higher reliability and is more suitable for DC MMGs.
The interconnection of DC MGs with the same geograph-
ical location improves the stability of the DC MG and the
utilization of distributed generation. However, the complex
architecture of the DC MMG increases the difficulty of fault
detection and power coordination. To accurately analyze
changes of the fault branch current and voltage, the DC MG
is transformed as shown in Fig. 2a.
As can be seen from Fig. 2:

1. To accurately adjust the power distribution of a DC

MMG, the relationship between the distributed power
sources and the DC bus voltage is derived. Based on the
results of this, the DC MMG is simplified.
2. The FCS-MPC is improved. The duty cycle of the
PWM-MPC is directly calculated by predicting the con-
verter current, which reduces the on-line calculations.
The response speed and the stability of the bus voltage
are improved.
3. An optimization strategy with an adaptive allocation
coefficient is proposed and a constraint function aiming
at minimum loss established. By automatically adjust-
Fig. 1  Schematic diagram of a ring DC MMG

13
Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir

Optimal strategy for energy management of DC multi‑microgrids considering power loss 631

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 2  Equivalent circuit of a radial DC MG: a parallel circuit of Fig. 3  Equivalent diagram of a DC MG, where the ΔP is the power
multi micro sources; b equivalent circuit of multiple micro sources in difference of the DC MG
parallel; c equivalent circuit of multi micro sources in parallel with a
load, where PLƩ is the total power of the DC MG load
Similarly, the electromotive force of the equivalent micro-
source can be expressed as:
∑
P1 + P2 + ⋯ + Pn = P i (1) ∑
� �n
R i �
n
Yi
E i= Ei = Ei ∑ (5)
where P1, P2, and Pn are the output power of the photo- i=1
Ri i=1
Y i
voltaic, wind turbine, and energy storage of the DC MG,
The relationship between the bus voltage of the DC MG
respectively. In addition, PƩi is the equivalent power of the
and the power supply or the equivalent power supply is as
DC MG.
follows:
The relationship between the power and voltage for each
of the microsources is as follows: ⎧ udc = Ei − Pi Ri
⎪ udc ∑
⎧ Pi = udc Ei − udc ⎨ � P i � (6)
⎪ Ri ∑ ⎪ udc = E i− R i
⎨ � (2) ⎩ udc
E i − udc
⎪P i = udc ∑
⎩ R i The expressions of the DC bus voltage, the electromotive
force, and the output power can be expressed as:
where udc is the bus voltage of the DC MG. In addition, Pi,
Ei, and Ri are the interactive power, electromotive force, and ⎧ Pi = 1 �−u2 dc + udcEi�
resistance of the i power source; and PƩi, EƩi, and RƩi are the ⎪ Ri
⎨ � � � � (7)
equivalent power, electromotive force, and resistance of the ⎪P
1
i = ∑ −u2 dc + udcE i
DC MG. ⎩ R i
By calculating Eqs. (1) and (2), it can be concluded that:
∑ According to the above analysis, the DC MG can be sim-
E1 − udc E2 − udc En − udc E i − udc plified as shown in Fig. 3:
+ +⋯+ = ∑ (3)
R1 R2 Rn R i

where E1, E2, and En are the electromotive force of the pho-
tovoltaic, wind turbine, and energy storage, respectively. In 3 Energy management optimization
addition, R1, R2, and Rn are the resistances of the photovol- strategy for a ring DC MMG
taic branch, wind turbine branch, and energy storage branch.
The equivalent resistance and admittance of the branch A DC MG can autonomously switch between the island
when the microsource experiences an open circuit can be mode and the parallel mode to realize energy coordination
concluded by Eq. (3): and self-regulation. In the island mode, there is no energy
interaction between the DC MG and the DC MMG. In the
⎧ 1 �n
1 parallel mode, the DC MG interacts with external two-way
⎪ ∑ =
⎪ R i i=1 Ri energy, which is similar to the working state of the energy
⎨ (4) storage [28]. The equivalent circuit and working state equiv-
⎪ � �n
Y i = Yi alent circuit of the connected converter are shown in Figs. 4
⎪
⎩ i=1 and 5, respectively.
In Fig. 4, ­G1 and G­ 2, are the two switches of the con-
where Yi is the admittance of the i power source, and YƩi is nected converter. The switching state is complementary
the equivalent admittance of the DC MG. on–off. In Fig. 5a, ­G2 is on, and ­G1 is off. ­Lj is charged

13
Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir

632 W. Zhang et al.

According to Eq. (8), when ­G2 is on, the corresponding

inductance current increment of the converter in the output
mode is shown in Eq. (9):
Δtu
ΔiL,j = (u − i ⋅ R )
Lj j L,j L (9)

where ΔiL,j is the increment of the inductor current; and Δtu

is the increment of the G ­ 2 conduction time. Under the rated
condition, iL,j ⋅ RL is negligible relative to uj. It can be seen
from Eq. (9) that ΔiL,j changes with respect to Δtu . Accord-
ingly, the equivalence relation among ΔiL,j , iL,j,bref  , and Δij
is shown in Eq. (10):

Fig. 4  Equivalent circuit of a connected converter ΔiL,j = iL,j,ref − iL,j − Δij (10)

where Δij and iL,j,bref are the secondary correction current

and the reference current of DC MG j.
In the output mode, the difference between iL,j and iL,j,bref
can be reduced or eliminated by changing Δtu . Thus, it can
strictly follow the reference setting.
By combining Eqs. (9) and (10), the conduction time incre-
(a) (b) ment Δtu(k + 1) of switch G­ 2 in the next time is obtained as
follows:
iL,j,ref − iL,j − Δij
Δtu(k + 1) = Lj (11)
uj

When ­G2 is on, in the output mode, the increment of the duty
(c) (d)
cycle Δd2u(k+1)
Boost
to the voltage model is as follows:

Fig. 5  Equivalent circuit of connected converter states Boost

Lj iL,j,ref − iL,j − Δij
Δd2u(k+1) = (12)
Ts uj

where ­TS is the sampling period of the converter; and

by DC MG j. In Fig. 5b, ­G2 is off, and G ­ 1 is on. DC MG j Boost
Δd2u(k+1) is the increment of the duty cycle. According to the
outputs power to the DC MMG. In Fig. 5c, ­G1 is on, and
KVL, the duty cycle of G ­ 2 in the next time, corresponding
­G2 is off. The DC MMG injects power into DC MG j. In
to the output mode voltage model, can predicted as
Fig. 5d, ­G1 is off, and G
­ 2 is on. The DC MMG charges the
follows:
port capacitor C ­ B, and the energy stored by the inductor is
injected into DC MG j through ­G2. Boost
d2u(k+1) Boost
= d2u(k) Boost
+ Δd2u(k+1)
ubusref − uj Lj iL,j,ref − iL,j − Δij (13)
= +
3.1 DC MG output power ubusref Ts uj

where d2u(k+1)
Boost
is the G
­ 2 duty cycle corresponding to the out-
An equivalent circuit is shown in Fig. 5a when ­G2 is on
and ­G1 is off. According to Fig. 5, the KVL equation is put mode voltage model.
as follows: Similarly, according to Fig. 5a, the G­ 2 duty cycle corre-
sponding to the current model in the next time can be predicted
diL,j by the KCL as follows:
uj = Lj + iL,j ⋅ RL (8)
dt Boost Boost Boost
d2i(k+1) = d2i(k) + Δd2i(k+1)
where uj is the bus voltage of DC MG j; il,j is the inductive ibusref − ibus Cb uL,j,ref − ubus − Δuj (14)
current of the converter; Lj is the equivalent inductance of = +
ibusref Ts ibus
DC MG j; ­RL is the equivalent resistance of DC MG j; and j
is the serial number of the DC MG, where j ∈ n.

13
Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir

Optimal strategy for energy management of DC multi‑microgrids considering power loss 633

where d2i(k)
Boost
is the duty cycle of the output mode current Buck
d2i(k+1) Buck
= 1 − d1i(k+1) Boost
= d2i(k+1)
model ­G2; ubus and ubusref are the DC bus voltage and its iL,j,ref − ibus Cb ibusref − ibus − Δij (19)
reference value; and iBus is the port current of the connected = +
iL,j,ref Ts ibus
converter. Considering the influence of the voltage model
and current model on the control effect of the system, the ­G2 To sum up, the duty cycle of G
­ 2 in the input and output
duty cycle in the next time in the output mode can be modes of the connected converter can be expressed by the
obtained as: same prediction model, as shown in Eq. (20):
Boost Boost Boost
d2(k+1) = 𝛿u d2u(k+1) + 𝛿i d2i(k+1) (15) d2(k+1) = 𝛿u d2u(k + 1) + 𝛿i d2i(k + 1) (20)

𝛿 u + 𝛿i = 1 (16) ⎧ Boost Buck

⎪ d2(k+1) = d2(k+1) = d2(k+1)
where δu and δi are the weight of the voltage term and cur- ⎪
rent term, respectively. ⎪ Boost Buckt
⎨ d2u(k + 1) = d2u(k+1) = d2u(k+1) (21)
An increase of δu can reduce the ripple of the inductor ⎪
current. However, it also increases the bus voltage offset. ⎪
An increase of δi can reduce the bus voltage offset. How- ⎪ d2i(k + 1) = d2i(k+1)
Boost Buck
= d2i(k+1)
⎩
ever, it can also increase the ripple of the inductor current.
Generally, δu≈ (4–5) δi, and in the following simulations, It can be seen that the improved PWM-MPC method does
δu and δi are 0.8 and 0.2, respectively. not need to traverse all of the switching states of the con-
M verter. The duty cycle of the bus converter can be calculated
directly by predicting the converter current. Thus, the on-
line calculation is reduced.
3.1.1 DC MG power injection mode To prevent all of the converter switches from being on
in one cycle, the predicted switch duty cycle is limited, as
Figure 5c shows an equivalent circuit of the DC MG input shown in Eq. (22):
mode. The ­G 1 duty cycle corresponding to the voltage {
model can be predicted by the KVL equation as follows: 0.9, d2(k+1) ≥ 0.9
d2(k+1) =
0.2, d2(k+1) ≤ 0.2 (22)
Buck Buck Buck
d1u(k+1) = d1u(k) + Δd1u(k+1)
uj Lj iL,j,ref − iL,j − Δij (17)
= +
ubusref Ts −uj 3.2 DC MMG optimization strategy based
where d1u(k)
Buck
is the duty cycle at the moment of ­G1 corre-
on minimum power loss
sponding to the input mode voltage model, and Δd1u(k+1)
Buck
is
The power variation of the DC MG based on the PWM-MPC
the duty cycle increment corresponding to the input mode is as follows:
voltage model. Due to the complementary conduction of ­G1
and ­G2, the conduction duty cycle of the voltage model ­G2 ΔPj = (i2j(k+1) − i2j(k) )Rj (23)
in the input mode can be obtained correspondingly.
where ΔPj is the power variation of the MG j; ij(k+1) is the
Buck Buck
d2u(k+1) = 1 − d1u(k+1) predicted current of the MG j in the next cycle; ij(k) is the
ubusref − uj Lj iL,j,ref − iL,j − Δij (18) current of the MG j in the current cycle; and Rj is the equiva-
=
ubusref
+
Ts uj lent resistance of the MG j.
As can be seen from Eq. (24), the total power variation
It is found that Eq. (18) is the same as Eq. (3). This of the DC MMG can be obtained according to the power
shows that the G2 duty cycle corresponding to the voltage variation of a single MG.
model can be predicted by the same model in the input and
∑
n
∑
n
∑
n
output modes. A further analysis shows that the duty cycle ΔPΣ = ΔPj = (i2j(k+1) − i2j(k) )Rj = hj ⋅ ΔPΣ (24)
of ­G2 corresponding to the current model in the input and j=1 j=1 j=1
output modes can be predicted by the same model.
where ΔPΣ is the total power variation of the DC MMG
with n MGs; and hj is the adaptive allocation coefficient of
the DC MG.

13
Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir

634 W. Zhang et al.

Based on the minimum power loss, the total power variation

of the DC MMG is optimized to balance the power fluctuation
of the DC MG. According to the power variation of the DC
MG after secondary regulation, the optimized power loss of
the DC MMG can be obtained as follows:
( )2
∑
n
hj ⋅ ΔPΣ
Ps = ⋅ Rz,j (25)
j=1
U

where Ps is the power loss of the DC MMG with the pro-

posed optimization strategy; U is the rated voltage of the Fig. 6  Experiment platform of a DC MG
DC MMG bus; and Rz,j is the resistance between DC MG j
and DC MG z. As can be seen from Eqs. (24) and (25), the
minimum loss of DC MMG can be calculated by formula 26: (a)
⎧ � n

⎪ 𝜑(h1 , h2 , ⋯ , hn ) = hj ⋅ ΔPΣ − ΔPΣ = 0

⎨ j=1 (26)
⎪
⎩ 0 ≤ hj ⋅ ΔPΣ ≤ Pj,SOC

where Pj,SOC is the power of DC MG j that can participate in

the scheduling; and φ(h1, h2,…,hn) is the equality constraint
equation of the minimum loss. To achieve the minimum
value Ps , the objective function is constructed:
( )2 ( n )
∑
n
hj ⋅ ΔP ∑
L(h1 , h2 , ⋯ , hn ) = ⋅ Rzj + 𝜆 hj ⋅ ΔPΣ − ΔPΣ
j=1
U j=1
(b)
(27)
By calculating the partial derivatives of the variables in
Eqs. (27), (28) can be obtained as:

⎧ 𝜕L(h1 ) 2h1 ⋅ ΔP2

⎪ = ⋅ Rz1 + 𝜆 ⋅ ΔPΣ = 0
⎪ 𝜕h1 U2
⎪ 𝜕L(h2 ) 2h2 ⋅ ΔP2
⎪ = ⋅ Rz2 + 𝜆 ⋅ ΔPΣ = 0
⎪ 𝜕h2 U2
⎪⋮
⎨ (28)
⎪ 𝜕L(hn ) 2hn ⋅ ΔP2
⎪ = ⋅ Rzn + 𝜆 ⋅ ΔPΣ = 0
⎪ 𝜕hn U2 Fig. 7  Experiment 1: a current of a DC MG; b current of MG 1 based
⎪� n on FCS-MPC and PWM-MPC
⎪ hj ⋅ ΔPΣ − ΔPΣ = 0
⎪
⎩ j=1
4 Experimental results
Therefore, hj can be obtained from Eq. (28). Then, the cor-
rection of the secondary regulation voltage and current of DC To verify the effectiveness of the proposed method, a ring
MG j can be obtained as: DC MMG experiment platform was established, as shown
in Fig. 6. It is composed of a computer, an oscilloscope,
⎧ hj ⋅ ΔPΣ
⎪ Δij = a TMS320F28335 controller and a PLECS RT box1. The
⎨ U (29) computer is mainly used to debug the control algorithm,
⎪ Δuj = Δij ⋅ Rj and to write the algorithm for the TMS320F28335 control-
⎩
ler. The voltage and current signals are connected to the
TMS320F28335 controller through the input and output
ports of the PLECS RT box1. After the voltage and current

13
Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir

Optimal strategy for energy management of DC multi‑microgrids considering power loss 635

signals are calculated by the TMS320F28335, the control (a)

command is output to adjust the power distribution. The
oscilloscope is connected to the PLECS RT box1 output
port to display the voltage and current signals.

4.1 Experiment verification of a PWM‑MPC

Experiment 1: Initially, the power shortage of MG 1 and

MG 2 are 1 kW and 3 kW, which are balanced by MG 3. The
current of each MG is shown in Fig. 7a. It is defined that the
output power of the DC MG is positive and the input power
(b)
is negative. From 112 to 216 ms, the internal power of MG
1 is balanced, and the output power of MG 3 is reduced by
1 kW. The currents of MG 1 corresponding to the PWM-
MPC and the FCS-MPC are shown in Fig. 7b. It can be
seen from Fig. 7b that the improved model predictive control
has better following performance. When compared with the
FCS-MPC, the current fluctuation amplitude is reduced by
about 0.2 A and the response time is reduced by about 3 ms.
Experiment 2: Initially, the output power of MG 3 is con-
stant at 4 kW, and the power difference between MG 1 and
MG 2 is balanced. At 96 ms, the load of MG 2 increases, and
the output power of MG 1 changes from -1 kW to + 0.5 KW.
Fig. 9  Experiment 3: a bus and current voltage of each MG; b current
At 290 ms, the power difference of MG 2 is 0.5 kW, and the of MG 1 based on FCS-MPC and PWM-MPC
output power of MG 1 is increased by 0.5 kW. The bus volt-
age and current are shown in Fig. 8a. The currents of MG
1 corresponding to the PWM-MPC and the FCS-MPC are shown in Fig. 8b. As can be seen from Fig. 8b, the current
amplitude corresponding to the PWM-MPC decreases by
about 1 A, and the response time decreases by about 5–9 ms.
(a) Experiment 3: Initially, the output power of MG 3 is
4 kW. At 200 ms, MG 3 is out of interconnection due to a
fault and it is in island operation. The power shortage of MG
2 is compensated by MG 1. The bus voltage and the current
of MG are shown in Fig. 9a. The currents of MG 1 corre-
sponding to the PWM-MPC and the FCS-MPC are shown in
Fig. 9b. As can be seen from Fig. 9b, the current amplitude
corresponding to the PWM-MPC decreases by about 4.7 A,
and the response time decreases by about 12 ms.
In conclusion, the PWM-MPC has a smaller overshoot
and a faster follow-up, where the amplitude of the current
(b)
fluctuation is reduced by about 20%, and the response time
is reduced by about 3 ms.

4.2 Experimental verification of the optimization

strategy

To verify that the proposed method has the minimum power

Fig. 8  Experiment 2: a bus and current voltage of a MG; b current of
MG 1 based on FCS-MPC and PWM-MPC
loss, the power optimization strategy based on the capacity
ratio is compared. Since the follow-up experiments involve
short-circuit faults, to ensure safety, the output current is
reduced by one-tenth.
Experiment 1: The current of the bus is shown in Fig. 10.
First, there is no interactive power in the bus of the DC

13
Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir
636
(a)
(b)
Fig. 10  Experiment 1 (the power shortage of MG 3 is 5  kW in the
case of an F­ 1 short circuit): a bus current based on the minimum
power loss; b bus current based on the capacity ratio
MMG. At 10 ms, there is a 5 kW power shortage in MG
3. According to Eq. (28), the adaptive allocation systems
of MG 1 and MG 2 are: h1 = 0.714 and h2 = 0.286. Accord-
ingly, the optimal power allocation of MG 1 and MG 2 can
be obtained by:
∆P1 = 5 × 0.714 = 3.57 kW; i13 = 3.57/0.4 = 8.93A
∆P2 = 5 × 0.286 = 1.43 kW; i12 = 0A, i23 = 3.57A
At 40 ms, F­ 1 is short-circuited and l13 is removed. Then,
the architecture is reorganized. According to Eq. (28), the
distribution coefficients are changed to h1 = 0 and h2 = 1. The
optimal power allocations of MG 1 and MG 2 are as follows:
∆P1 = 0 kW; i12 = 0A, i13 = 0A
∆P2 = 5 kW; i23 = 5/0.4 = 12.5A
The current distribution based on the minimum power
loss is shown in Fig. 10a. Similarly, the power allocations
based on the capacity ratio are presented below.
At 10 ms, the power allocations of MG 1 and MG 2 based
on the capacity ratio are as follows:
∆P1 = 5 × 0.33 = 1.67 kW; i13 = 1.67/0.4 = 4.18A
∆P2 = 5 × 0.67 = 3.33 kW; i12 = 0; i23 = 8.32
At 40 ms, the power allocations of MG 1 and MG 2 based
on the capacity ratio are as follows:
∆P1 = 5 × 0.33 = 1.67 kW; i13 = 0A; i12 = 4.18A
∆P2 = 5 × 0.67 = 3.33 kW; i23 = (3.33/0.4) + i12 = 12.5A
13
W. Zhang et al.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 11  Experiment 2 (the power shortage of MG 3 is 5  kW in the
­ 2 short circuit): a bus current based on the capacity ratio;
case of an F
b bus current based on the minimum power loss
The current distribution in terms of the capacity ratio is
shown in Fig. 10b.
Experiment 2: A short-circuit occurs in ­F2 at 40 ms, and
the other conditions are the same as those in experiment 1.
The current distributions are shown in Fig. 11.
According to the current distribution, the power distribu-
tion, power loss, and transmission loss ratio under the two
allocation strategies are calculated and shown in Table 1.
Experiment 3: The current of the bus in the case of a
20 kW power shortage is shown in Fig. 12. First, there is no
interactive power in each of the DC MGs. At 10 ms, there
is a 20 kW power shortage in MG 3. According to formula
(28), the adaptive allocation systems of MG 1 and MG 2 are:
h1 = 0.714 and h2 = 0.286. The optimal power allocations of
MG 1 and MG 2 can be obtained as:
∆P1 = 20 × 0.714 = 14.28 kW; i13 = 14.28/0.4 = 35.7 A
∆P2 = 20 × 0.286 = 5.72 kW; i12 = 0 A, i23 = 14.3 A
At 40 ms, ­F1 is short-circuited and l13 is removed. After
the fault is removed, the architecture is reorganized. Accord-
ing to formula (28), the distribution coefficients are h1 = 0
and h2 = 1. The optimal power allocations are as follows:
∆P1 = 0 kW; i12 = 0A, i13 = 0 A
∆P2 = 20 kW; i23 = 20/0.4 = 50 A
The current distribution based on the minimum power
loss is shown in Fig. 12a. Similarly, the power allocations
Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir

Optimal strategy for energy management of DC multi‑microgrids considering power loss 637

Table 1  Power distribution, power loss, and line loss ratio of two optimization strategies when the power shortage is 5 kW
∆PƩ: 5 kW 0.01 s 0.04 s
3 4
MG 1(kW) MG 2(kW) ∆P (W) η% MG 1(kW) MG 2(kW) ∆P (W) η%

Short circuit in F
­1 Sj/SƩ1 1.67 3.33 6.64 0.133 1.67 3.33 17.7 0.354
Ps2 3.57 1.43 4.46 0.089 0 5 15.62 0.312
Short circuit in ­F2 Sj/SƩ1 1.67 3.33 6.64 0.133 1.67 3.33 14.57 0.29
Ps 3.57 1.43 4.46 0.089 5 0 6.25 0.125
1
 Is an optimization strategy based on the capacity ratio
2
 Is an optimization strategy based on the minimum power loss
3
 Is the loss power of a ring DC MMG bus
4
 Is the transmission loss ratio of a bus

(a) based on the capacity ratio are as follows. At 10 ms, the

(b)
Fig. 12  Experiment 3 (the power shortage of MG 3 is 20 kW in the
case of an ­F1 short circuit): a bus current based on the capacity ratio;
b bus current based on the minimum power loss
power allocations of MG 1 and MG 2 based on the capacity
ratio are as follows:
∆P1 = 20 × 0.33 = 6.6 kW; i13 = 6.6/0.4 = 16.5 A, i12 = 0
∆P2 = 20 × 0.67 = 13.4 kW; i23 = 33.5 A
At 40 ms, the power allocations of MG 1 and MG 2 based
on the capacity ratio are as follows:
∆P1 = 20 × 0.33 = 6.6 kW; i13 = 0A; i12 = 16.5 A
∆P2 = 20 × 0.67 = 13.4 kW; i23 = (3.33/0.4) + i12 = 50 A
The current distribution and the capacity ratio are shown
in Fig. 12b. The power distribution, the power loss, and the
line transmission loss ratio under the two allocation strate-
gies are shown in Table 2.
Experiment 4: The short-circuit conditions in F ­ 2 are
the same as those of experiment 3. The current distribu-
tions based on the two optimization strategies are shown in
Fig. 13. The power distribution, the power loss, and the line
transmission loss ratio under the two allocation strategies
are shown in Table 2.
Experiment 5: Another special case is considered in
Fig. 14, when the optimization result exceeds the con-
straint condition. At 18 ms, there is a 20 kW power short-
age in MG 3. According to formula (28), the adaptive
allocation systems of MG 1 and MG 2 are: h1 = 0.714 and
h2 = 0.286. The optimal power allocations of MG 1 and
MG 2 are 14.28 kW and 5.72 kW. At 48 ms, F ­ 2 is short-
circuited. After the fault is removed, the architecture is

Table 2  Power distribution, power loss, and line loss ratio of two optimization strategies under different conditions when the power shortage is
20 kW

∆PƩ: 20 kW 0.01 s 0.04 s

MG 1 (kW) MG 2 (kW) ∆P (W) η% MG 1 (kW) MG 2 (kW) ∆P (W) η%

Short circuit in ­F1 Sj/SƩ 6.67 13.33 122.15 0.611 6.67 13.33 283.39 1.417
Ps 14.3 5.7 71.42 0.357 0 20 250 1.25
Short circuit in ­F2 Sj/SƩ 6.67 13.33 122.15 0.611 6.67 13.33 283.39 1.417
Ps 14.3 5.7 71.42 0.357 20 0 100 0.5
Ps'1 14.3 5.7 71.42 0.357 16 4 112 0.56
1
 Minimum power loss optimization strategy when the callable power of MG 1 does not exceed 16 kW

13
Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir
638
(a)
(b)
Fig. 13  Experiment 4 (the power shortage of MG 3 is 20 kW in the
case of an ­F2 short circuit): a bus current based on the capacity ratio;
b bus current based on the minimum power loss
Fig. 14  Experiment 5: bus current based on the minimum power loss
strategy when the shortage power exceeds the call power of MG 1
reorganized. According to formula (28), the adaptive allo-
cation systems are changed to h1 = 0.8 and h2 = 0.2, and the
output powers of MG 1 and MG 2 are 16 kW and 4 kW.
The current, the power loss, and the line transmission loss
ratio are also shown in Table 2. It can be seen from Table 2
that the proposed strategy is effective when the callable
power of the MG is insufficient.
In conclusion, the experimental results obtained under
different working conditions are consistent with the
13
W. Zhang et al.
theoretical analysis results, which verifies the effectiveness
of the proposed method.
5 Conclusion
This paper proposed a control strategy with an adaptive allo-
cation coefficient for a ring DC MMG. The power loss of
the DC MMG was minimized by modifying the predicted
power of the DC MG. In addition, an improved PWM-MPC
has been exploited to predict the unbalanced power of the
DC MG. The major conclusions are drawn as follows:
(1) When compared to a strategy based on capacity ratio,
the power loss of the DC MMG is reduced by about
32.8% under a light load and by about 41.5% under a
heavy load.
(2) In case of a short circuit, the power loss can be mini-
mized after the DC MMG architecture is reconstituted.
The power loss can be reduced by about 11.7–64.6%
regardless of where the fault occurs.
(3) The proposed strategy reduces the response time at
least 3 ms when the power fluctuates, and the ampli-
tude of the current fluctuation is reduced by about 20%
under a short circuit.
This paper focused on reducing the power loss of a DC
MMG. The stability of a system will be studied in future.
Acknowledgements  The authors would like to acknowledge the
financial support of the National Natural Science Foundation of China
(51877175 and 52077176); The Key Research Program of Shaanxi
Province (2017ZDXMGY-003).
References
1. Dragičević, T., Xie, L., Blaabjerg, F.: Review on advanced control
technologies for bidirectional DC/DC converters in DC micro-
grids. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron. 9(2), 1205–
1221 (2021)
2. Gupta, A., Doolla, S., Chatterjee, K.: Hybrid AC–DC microgrid:
systematic evaluation of control strategies. IEEE Trans. Smart
Grid. 9(4), 3830–3843 (2018)
3. Dragičević, T., Lu, X., Vasquez, J.C.: DC microgrids—Part II: a
review of power architectures, applications, and standardization
issues. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 31(5), 3528–3549 (2016)
4. Nguyen, D.L., Lee, H.H.: Cooperative control strategy for volt-
age restoration and power allocation in DC microgrids. J. Power
Electron. 20(3), 1025–1036 (2020)
5. Meng, L., Shafiee, Q., Trecate, G.F., et al.: Review on control
of DC microgrids and multiple microgrid clusters. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 5(3), 928–948 (2017)
6. Shafiee, Q., Dragičević, T., Vasquez, J.C., et al.: Hierarchical
control for multiple DC-microgrids clusters. IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers. 29(4), 922–933 (2014)
7. Zheng, Y., Song, Y., Huang, A., Hill, D.J.: Hierarchical opti-
mal allocation of battery energy storage systems for multiple
Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir

Optimal strategy for energy management of DC multi‑microgrids considering power loss 639

services in distribution systems. IEEE Trans. Sustain Energy soft actor-critic DRL algorithm. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 17(6),
11(3), 1911–1921 (2020) 3751–3761 (2021)
8. Parisio, A., Rikos, E., Glielmo, L.: A model predictive control 25. Wu, J., Wei, Z., Liu, K., et al.: Battery-involved energy manage-
approach to microgrid operation optimization. IEEE Trans. ment for hybrid electric bus based on expert-assistance deep deter-
Control Syst. Tech. 22(5), 1813–1827 (2014) ministic policy gradient algorithm. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol.
9. Xu, Q., Zhao, T., Xu, Y., et al.: A distributed and robust energy 69(11), 12786–12796 (2020)
management system for networked hybrid AC/DC microgrids. 26. Shan, Y., Hu, J., Chan, K.W., et al.: Model predictive control of
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid. 11(4), 3496–3508 (2020) bidirectional DC–DC converters and AC/DC interlinking convert-
10. Kelly, J.J., Leahy, P.G.: Sizing battery energy storage systems: ers—a new control method for PV-wind-battery microgrids. IEEE
using multi-objective optimization to overcome the investment Trans. Sustain Energy 10(4), 1823–1833 (2019)
scale problem of annual worth. IEEE Trans. Sustain Energy 27. Wang, S., Fernandez, C., Yu, C., et al.: A novel charged state
11(4), 2305–2314 (2020) prediction method of the lithium ion battery packs based on the
11. Gao, N., Zhang, B., Wu, W., et al.: Finite control set model composite equivalent modeling and improved splice Kalman fil-
predictive control integrated with disturbance observer for bat- tering algorithm. J. Power Sources 471, 228450 (2020)
tery energy storage power conversion system. J. Power Electron. 28. Zhi, N., Ding, K., Du, L., et  al.: An SOC-based virtual DC
21(7), 342–353 (2021) machine control for distributed storage systems in DC microgrids.
12. Pippia, T., Sijs, J., De Schutter, B.: A single-level rule-based IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 35(3), 1411–1420 (2020)
model predictive control approach for energy management of
grid-connected microgrids. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Tech.
28(6), 2364–2376 (2020) Weiliang Zhang  was born in
13. Ali, H.H., Kassem, A.M., Al-Dhaifallah, M., et al.: Multi-verse Hebei, China, in 1982. He
optimizer for model predictive load frequency control of hybrid received his B.S. and M.S.
multi-interconnected plants comprising renewable energy. IEEE degrees in Electrical Engineer-
Access. 8(8), 114623–114642 (2020) ing from the Guilin University of
14. Hu, B., Chen, Z., Zhang, Z., et al.: Model predictive DC-com- Electronic Technology, Guangxi,
ponent power control for grid-connected inverters under unbal- China, in 2005 and 2009, respec-
anced network. J. Power Electron. 21(13), 235–246 (2021) tively. Since 2017, he has been
15. Merabet, A., Labib, L., Ghias, A.M.Y.M.: Robust model predic- working towards his Ph.D.
tive control for photovoltaic inverter system with grid fault ride- degree in Power Electronics and
through capability. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid. 9(6), 5699–5709 Electrical Drives at the Xi’an
(2018) University of Technology, Xi’an,
16. McNamara, P., Milano, F.: Model predictive control based AGC China. His current research
for multi-terminal HVDC-connected AC grids. IEEE Trans. interests include energy coordi-
Power Syst 33(1), 1036–1048 (2018) nation control and the fault anal-
17. Deshmukh, R.R., Ballal, M.S.: Integrated control scheme for ysis protection of DC
dynamic power management with improved voltage regulation multi-microgrids.
in DC microgrid. J. Power Electron. 20(15), 1550–1561 (2020)
18. Wei, Z., Quan, Z., Wu, J., et al.: Deep deterministic policy gra- Hui Zhang  received his B.S.,
dient-DRL enabled multiphysics-constrained fast charging of M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in Elec-
lithium-ion battery. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 99, 1–1 (2021) trical Engineering from the
19. Xiao, J., Wang, P., Setyawan, L.: Hierarchical control of hybrid Huazhong University of Science
energy storage system in DC microgrids. IEEE Trans. Ind. Elec- and Technology (HUST),
tron. 62(8), 4915–4924 (2015) Wuhan, China, in 1985, 1990,
20. Gao, F., Kang, R., Cao, J., Yang, T.: Primary and secondary and 2002, respectively. He was a
control in DC microgrids: a review. J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean Post-Doctoral Researcher at the
Energy 7(2), 227–242 (2019) Xi'an University of Technology
21. Moayedi, S., Davoudi, A.: Distributed tertiary control of DC (XAUT), Xi’an, China, and at
microgrid clusters. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 31(2), 1717– the Yongji Electric Machine Fac-
1733 (2016) tory of the CNR Corporation,
22. Dubuisson, F., Rezkallah, M., Ibrahim, H., et al.: Real-time Yongji, China, from 2003 to
implementation of the predictive-based control with bacte- 2005. He served as a Senior Vis-
rial foraging optimization technique for power management in iting Scholar at Tsinghua Uni-
standalone microgrid application. Energies 14(6), 1722–1737 versity, Beijing, China, from
(2021) 2007 to 2008; and as a Senior Visiting Professor at Virginia Tech,
23. Wang, Z., Wang, P., Bi, H., et al.: A bidirectional DC/DC con- Blacksburg, VA, USA, from 2010 to 2011. He is presently working as
verter with wide-voltage gain range and low-voltage stress for a Professor, a Ph.D. Supervisor, and an Academic Leader of Power
hybrid-energy storage systems in electric vehicles. J. Power Elec- Electronics and Power Drives at XAUT. His current research interests
tron. 20(10), 76–86 (2020) include MG control, energy storage control, wheel-driven electric vehi-
24. Wu, J., Wei, Z., Li, W., et al.: Battery thermal- and health-con- cles, electric traction, and electric propulsion.
strained energy management for hybrid electric bus based on

13
Downloaded from https://iranpaper.ir

640 W. Zhang et al.

Na Zhi  received her B.S. degree Hanwei Wang  was born in

in Automatic Control from the Shaanxi, China, in 1988. He
Xi’an University of Science and received his B.S. degree in Elec-
Technology, Xi’an, China, in trical Engineering from the
2001; and her Ph.D. degree in China Three Gorges University,
Electrical Engineering from the Hubei, China, in 2012; and his
Xi’an University of Technology, M.S. degree in Electrical Engi-
Xi’an, China, in 2016. She is neering from the Xi'an Univer-
presently working as an Associ- sity of Technology, Xi'an, China,
ate Professor in the Department in 2015, where he is presently
of Electrical Engineering, Xi’an working towards his Ph.D.
University of Technology. Her degree in Power Electronics and
current research interests include Electrical Drives. His current
renewable energy generation sys- interests include renewable
tem, dc microgrids, and energy energy generation, energy stor-
storage. age and control, multilevel con-
verters, and the application of power electronics in power systems.

13