A Distributed Voltage Balancing Method for Modular

Multilevel Converter
Bing Xia1,2, Yaohua Li1, Zixin Li1, Fei Xu1 and Ping Wang1
1. Key LaboratoryofPowerElectronicsandElectricDrive,
InstituteofElectricalEngineering,ChineseAcademyofSciences, Beijing,China
2. UniversityofChineseAcademyofSciences,Beijing,China
xiabing@mail.iee.ac.cn

Abstract—The great number of power modules (PMs) (MPC) algorithm was proposed in [8] with a reduced number
imposes great computational challenge on the voltage balancing of switch states. A simplified nearest level control method [9]
of modular multilevel converter (MMC) as the sorting of the PM reduces theprocessor time for the hardware implementation
capacitor voltages is usually adopted. This paper presents a by using the switching state of the voltage levels. Whereas with
distributed control method for PM capacitor voltage balancing in these methods in [8] and [9], the number of switch states still
MMC. With this method, all PMs in one arm are grouped and becomes impractical as the number of PM increasing. A slow-
the sorting algorithm of the voltage balancing in each group is rate voltage balancing strategy was presented in [10]. The
implemented in decentralized control unit. To keep the voltage sorting process is unnecessary to be executed within each
balancing among different groups, a close-loop control system is
control period. A two-way merge sort algorithm was presented
proposed, using the average capacitor voltage of each group as
the feedback. With this method, the computational load is
in [11]. This method accelerates the sorting by combining two
reduced compared to the conventional method while the voltage ordered voltage sub-arrays into a single ordered voltage array.
balancing effect and the switching frequency are almost the same. A grouping-sorting-optimized MPC method was proposed in
Real-time experimental results on a ±350 kV/1000 MW MMC [12]. The PM capacitor voltages of each arm are evenly
based on RT-LAB (OP7020 and OP5607) verify the feasibility divided into several groups. It needs to sort all the group
and effectiveness of the proposed method. voltage summations and the PM capacitor voltages in each
group. However, the PM capacitor voltage sorting process of
Keywords—modular multilevel converter; capacitor voltage these methods is implemented in a centralized unit, which
balancing; distributed control method usually takes too much time.
Bubble-sort is a conventional sorting method and its time
I. INTRODUCTION complexity is O(N^2) on the array of N numbers. Typically, the
Compared with other voltage-source converter (VSC) control period is usually several hundreds of microseconds or
topologies, modular multilevel converter (MMC) offers many fewer. As a result, controllers with higher CPU rate and larger
technical and economic advantages including modular capacity are required with conventional methods.
structure, high performance, scalability and redundancy, which This paper introduces a distributed voltage balancing
makes it especially suitable for High-Voltage Direct Current method for high-level MMC, greatly accelerating voltage
(HVDC) transmission systems [1]. However, the number of sorting process and reducing the computational load. In this
PMs per arm of MMC is very large when applied to high method, PMs of each arm are grouped and the sorting
voltage and large capacity applications, which imposes huge algorithm of the voltage balancing in each group is
computational challenge on the PM capacitor voltage implemented in decentralized control unit. In order to keep
balancing. voltage balancing among groups, a close-loop control to adjust
Many research efforts have focused on the modulation and the IN state PM number of each control unit through group
capacitor voltage balancing method of MMC in literatures. The average voltage feedback is adopted. The proposed method is
broadly used carrier phase shifting PWM (CPS-PWM), which tested on a ±350 kV/1000 MW MMC based on RT-LAB
has been introduced in several studies [2-4], offers advantages (OP7020 and OP5607). Experimental results demonstrates the
like fixed switching frequency and fast dynamic response. But effectiveness of the proposed method.
these methods increase the control complexity and hardware
costs,especially in hundreds-level MMC. II. PROPOSED DISTRIBUTED VOLTAGE BALANCING METHOD
The nearest level modulation (NLM) together with a The circuit of the three-phase MMC is shown in Fig 1, in
sorting algorithm to achieve capacitor voltage balance is which each phase contains two arms (the upper and lower
introduced in [5-7], in which the capacitor voltages are arms) and each arm contains a reactor L and N PMs. In Fig1,
measured and sorted in each control cycle. Several improved each PM is comprised of two switches and one capacitor. If the
voltage balancing methods have been proposed to reduce upper switch T1 is ON and the lower switch T2 is OFF, the
computational load. An improved model predictive control capacitor of this PM is connected IN series of the arm, and this
This work has been supported by the National High Technology Research state is called switched IN. When the upper switch T1 is OFF
and Development of China 863 Program (2015AA050102).

978-1-5090-5157-1/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE 1944

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Grenoble Alpes. Downloaded on May 07,2025 at 09:29:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
and the lower switch T2 is ON, the capacitor of this PM is A. The studied MMC control system
bypassed from the arm, and this state is called switched OUT. All PMs in each arm are divided into M groups, and the
PMs in each group are controlled by a Valve Group Control
PM PM PM (VGC) system, which is realized by field programmable gate
1 1 1
array (FPGA). All the PM capacitor voltages of each VGC
vau PM vbu PM vcu PM
2 2 2 system are measured and sorted individually. As a result, this
PM PM PM
method decreases the dimension of the sorting array from N to
N N N
Udc/2 N/M in each VGC system, simplifying the implementation
procedure and reducing the computational load by (1-1/M^2).
iau ibu icu
B. In State Number for each VGCsystem
L L L

va ia
The IN state PM number Nonx of group x (x=1, 2…M) in
each control cycle is allocated by the converter control and
vb ib
protection (CCP) system. The CCP system calculates the
vc ic reference voltage for each arm of MMC in each control cycle
according to input instructions. Take one arm unit of MMC
L L L into consideration, the IN state number of PMs of the arm can
ial ibl icl be calculated as
Udc/2 §1 ·
¨ 2 U dc (1 ± m cos (ωt + δ ) ) ¸
PM PM PM
T1 D1 1 1 1
C PM PM PM
N on _ arm = round ¨ ¸ (1)
val
2
vbl
2
vcl
2 ¨¨ U ref _PM ¸¸
T2 D2
PM PM PM
© ¹
N N N
power-module(PM)
where round(x) rounds x to its nearest integer. Udc is the dc bus
voltage, m is the modulation index,  is the fundamental
Fig. 1 Circuit diagram of MMC. angular frequency and δ is the initial phase angle. Uref_PM is the
PM capacitor voltage rated value. The calculated IN state
In order to decrease the computational load, a distributed
number for former (M-1) group in one arm considering the
voltage balancing method for the MMC with redundancy is
number of fault PMs can be calculated as
given in this paper. Fig 2 shows the distributed voltage control
system of one arm unit. The proposed method is implemented § ·
in each arm and the detailed procedure is shown as follows. ¨ N x − N fault_x ¸
N onx = round ¨ N on _ arm × ¸ (2)
MMC Arm ¨ M
¸
¨ N − ¦ N fault_x ¸
© x =1 ¹
Voltage where Nx is the number of PMs in the xth group, Nfault_x is the
Non1 Balancing number of fault PMs in the xth group. The IN state number for
of Group the last group M is calculated as
1
(VGC-1) N onM = N on _ arm − N on1 − ... − N on( M −1) (3)

Due to the error of round function, if there is no fault PMs

in the arm, group 1 to M-1 has same IN state number, which is
Voltage differ from group M according to equation (3). The voltage
Control& Balancing can’t keep balancing among groups and the system can’t work
Non2
Protection of Group eventually. The situation becomes worse when different
System 2 number of PMs fault among groups since the IN state number
(VGC-2) of each group is different. To balance voltage among groups, a
close-loop control based on the average voltage of the group is
proposed in CCP system.

Voltage C. Voltage balancing in each VGC system

Nonm Balancing To keep PM capacitor voltage balancing in each VGC
of Group system, a low switching frequency voltage balancing method
M by introducing balancing adjusting number NBAN is used. The
(VGC-M) detailed procedure is shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 2 Proposed method of one arm.

1945
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Grenoble Alpes. Downloaded on May 07,2025 at 09:29:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Calculate the incremental
number of the IN state PMs
in each control cycle
˂N=Nin_new-Nin_last

Y N
Iarm > 0 ?

˂N ˂N

˂N>0 ˂N=0 ˂N<0 ˂N>0 ˂N=0 ˂N<0

( 1 ) S wi tc h I N th e ( 1 ) S wi tc h I N th e ( 1 ) S wi tc h I N th e ( 1 ) S wi tc h I N th e ( 1 ) S wi tc h I N th e ( 1 ) S wi tc h I N th e
˂N+ N B AN PMs with N B A N PM s with the N B A N PM s with the ˂N+ N B AN PMs with N B A N PM s with the N B A N PM s with the
the lowe st voltages l owe st volt ages l owe st volt ages the highes t voltages h i gh e st v ol t a g es h i gh e st v ol t a g es
among the OUT state among the OUT state among the OUT state among the OUT state among the OUT state among the OUT state
PMs. PMs. PMs. PMs. PMs. PMs.
(2) Switch OUT the (2) Switch OUT the (2) Switch OUT the (2) Switch OUT the (2) Switch OUT the (2) Switch OUT the
N B A N PM s with the N B A N PM s with the N B A N -˂N PMs with N B A N PM s with the N B A N PM s with the N B A N -˂N PMs with
h i gh e st v ol t a g es h i gh e st v ol t a g es the highes t voltages l owe st volt ages l owe st volt ages the lowe st voltages
amon g the IN s tate amon g the IN s tate amon g the IN s tate amon g the IN s tate amon g the IN s tate amon g the IN s tate
PMs. PMs. PMs. PMs. PMs. PMs.

Fig. 3 Voltage balancing method in each VGC system.

D. Voltage balancing of different VGC system III. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

To keep voltage balancing among groups, a close-loop This section evaluates the performance of a 439-level
control is adopted in CCP system to adjust the IN state number MMC-HVDC system that operates based on the proposed
for each group, as shown in Fig 4. If the arm current is positive, distributed voltage balancing method. The system parameters
when the PM average capacitor voltage of the group x (x=1, are given in Table 1.
2…M-1) is lower than the average voltage of the whole arm,
TABLE I. PARAMETERS OF THE MMC
the IN state number for group x is the sum of the calculated
number and the output of the close-loop controller. Thus more
Grid Voltage 550 kV
capacitors of the group x will be charged to eliminate the Transformer ratio 550 kV/375 kV
voltage error of different groups. On the other hand, when the DC Bus Voltage ±350 kV
average voltage of the group x is higher than the average Rated Power 1000 MVA
voltage of the whole arm, fewer capacitors in the group x will Rated PM capacitor voltage 1.6 kV
be charged. The voltage gaps among groups will be eliminated. Arm inductor L 105 mH
PM capacitor C 12 mF
Similarly, if the arm current is negative, when the average PM number per arm 468(3*156)
voltage of the group x is lower or higher than the average Redundant PM number per arm 30
voltage of the whole arm, fewer or more number of capacitors Control Cycle 100 s
than the calculated number will be discharged in order to keep Group number per arm 3
voltage balancing among different VGC systems. Balancing adjusting number per group 2

Average voltage The MMC-HVDC experimental system is shown in Fig 5.

PI Sgn Nonx*
of the arm Fig 5(a) shows the control unit of a phase. Each phase control
unit contains eight Xilinx SPARTAN6-XC6SLX150T based
boards. Six of them are VGC systems and the other two boards
Average voltage Arm
of group x current
Nonx shown in the middle of Fig 5(a) is used to exchange data with
RT-LAB. The real-time simulation of MMC-HVDC circuit is
Fig.4 Block diagram of the close-loop controller.
performed on RT-LAB (OP7020 and OP5607), as shown in
Fig 5(b). The overall control and protection system of MMC-
HVDC is shown in Fig 5(c). The host computer is used for
experimental data acquisition and analysis.

1946
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Grenoble Alpes. Downloaded on May 07,2025 at 09:29:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 From 6(a), when the delivering power is 1000MW, the
peak arm current is 1519 A. From 6(b), the maximum PM
voltage in group1 to group3 is 1.08 p.u, 1.08 p.u and 1.09 p.u
respectively. From 6(c), the minimum PM voltage in group1 to
group3 is 0.88 p.u, 0.88 p.u and 0.89 p.u respectively. The PM
voltage deviation of both the maximum PM voltage and
(a) minimum PM voltage among groups is 0.01 p.u. Therefore, the
proposed distributed voltage balancing method can keep
voltage balancing within and among groups under normal state.

B. One Group with 30 Fault PMs

In order to test the reliability of the proposed method for
the MMC with fault PMs, the PM fault situation is carried out.
(b) (c) At this experiment, there are 30 PMs failed in group 1 under
rated power, which is the worst situation.
Fig.5 The MMC-HVDC control system hardware.(a) VGC systems. (b) RT-
LAB. (c) MMC-HVDC control and protection system. Fig 7 shows the waveforms of the upper arm of phase A
before and after PM fault. Fig 7(a) shows the arm current. Fig
A. Normal State with no Fault PMs 7(b) shows the number of IN state PMs of three groups. Fig
To prove the effectiveness of the proposed method, the 7(c) shows the average PM capacitor voltage curves of three
normal-state experiment is carried out. At this experiment, groups.
rated operation condition with 1000 MW active power transfer 2000
and 0 MVar reactive power transfer are selected. 1500

Arm Current(A)
1000
With the distributed voltage balancing method, the 468 500
PMs in each arm are divided into 3 groups and 156 PMs in 0
each group are controlled by a VGC system. Fig 6 shows the -500
waveforms of the upper arm of phase A. Fig 6(a) shows the -1000
10.4 10.44 10.48 10.52 10.56 10.6
arm current. Fig 6(b) shows the maximum PM capacitor Time(s)
voltage curves of three groups. Fig 6(c) shows the minimum (a) Arm current.
PM capacitor voltage curves of three groups.
2000 Ng1 Ng2 Ng3
150
IN state Number

1500
Arm current(A)

1000 100
500
50
0
-500
0
10.4 10.44 10.48 10.52 10.56 10.6
-1000
6 6.01 6.02 6.03 6.04 6.05 6.06 6.07 6.08 6.09 6.1 Time(s)
Time(s)
(b) IN state number from three VGCs.
(a) Arm current.
1.15
1.15 Vg1av Vg2av Vg3av
Vg1max Vg2max Vg3max 1.1
1.1
Vav(p.u)

1.05
Vmax(p.u)

1.05
1
1
0.95
0.95
0.9
10.4 10.44 10.48 10.52 10.56 10.6
0.9
6 6.01 6.02 6.03 6.04 6.05 6.06 6.07 6.08 6.09 6.1 Time(s)
Time(s)
(c) Average PM capacitor voltage curve in three VGCs.
(b) Maximum PM capacitor voltage curve in three VGCs.
Fig. 7 Curves under PM fault state.
1.05
Vg1min Vg2min Vg3min
From 7(a), the arm current stays unchanged after 30 PM
fault and the peak value is -1530 A. To balance the average
Vmin(p.u)

voltage among groups, the IN state number of group 1 becomes

0.95 smaller than the other two groups since there are 30 fault PMs
in the group, which is shown in Fig 7(b). From 7(c), it is easy
0.9
6 6.01 6.02 6.03 6.04 6.05 6.06 6.07 6.08 6.09 6.1 to see the PM capacitor voltages keep balancing among groups
Time(s)
after 30 PMs failed in group 1. The result validates that the
(c) Minimum PM capacitor voltage curve in three VGCs. proposed balancing method is effective for MMC with fault
Fig.6 Curves under normal state.
PMs.

1947
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Grenoble Alpes. Downloaded on May 07,2025 at 09:29:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
C. Compare with Traditional Voltage Balancing Method MMC-HVDC experimental results verify the effectiveness of
To compare the voltage balancing effect and switch the proposed method and demonstrate the switch frequency and
frequency of proposed method with the traditional method, PM capacitor voltage ripple factor of the proposed method is
experiments using traditional method are also carried out. The almost the same with the traditional voltage balancing method.
balancing adjusting number per arm is six in traditional method.
Figure 8 shows the experimental results. In this experiment, the REFERENCES
MMC-HVDC system works at rated operation condition with [1] Z. Li, F. Gao, F. Xu, X. Ma, Z. Chu, P. Wang, et al., "Power Module
no fault PM. Capacitor Voltage Balancing Method for a ±350 kV/1000 MW Modular
4
Multilevel Converter," IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 31,
x 10 pp. 3977-3984, 2016.
15
ArmSwitchTimes

Proposed Method [2] F. Deng and Z. Chen, "A Control Method for Voltage Balancing in
Traditional Method
10 Modular Multilevel Converters," IEEE Transactions on Power
Electronics, vol. 29, pp. 66-76, 2014.
5 [3] F. Deng and Z. Chen, "Elimination of DC-Link Current Ripple for
Modular Multilevel Converters With Capacitor Voltage-Balancing
0
6 6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7
Pulse-Shifted Carrier PWM," IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics,
Time(s) vol. 30, pp. 284-296, 2015.
(a) Switch times during one second. [4] M. Zhang, L. Huang, W. Yao, and Z. Lu, "Circulating Harmonic Current
Elimination of a CPS-PWM-Based Modular Multilevel Converter With
1.15
Proposed Method Traditional Method a Plug-In Repetitive Controller," IEEE Transactions on Power
1.1 Electronics, vol. 29, pp. 2083-2097, 2014.
Vav(p.u)

1.05 [5] M. Glinka and R. Marquardt, "A new AC/AC multilevel converter
1
family," IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 52, pp. 662-
669, 2005.
0.95
[6] S. Rohner, S. Bernet, M. Hiller, and R. Sommer, "Modulation, Losses,
0.9
10 10.02 10.04 10.06 10.08 10.1 and Semiconductor Requirements of Modular Multilevel Converters,"
Time(s) IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 57, pp. 2633-2642,
2010.
(b) Average voltage of the arm.
[7] G. T. Son, H. J. Lee, T. S. Nam, Y. H. Chung, U. H. Lee, S. T. Baek, et
Fig. 8 Curves under proposed method and traditional method. al., "Design and Control of a Modular Multilevel HVDC Converter With
Redundant Power Modules for Noninterruptible Energy Transfer," IEEE
In Figure 8(a), the total switch times of all the PMs in the Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 27, pp. 1611-1619, 2012.
arm are counted. The switch frequency of proposed method is [8] J. W. Moon, J. S. Gwon, J. W. Park, D. W. Park, and J. M. Kim, "Model
169 Hz (158478/ (2*468)) and the switch frequency of predictive control with a reduced number of considered states in a
traditional method is 168 Hz (157794/ (2*468)).They are modular multilevel converter for HVDC system, " IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 608–617, 2015.
almost same. Figure 8(b) shows the average voltage curves of
[9] P. M. Meshram and V. B. Borghate, "A Simplified Nearest Level
the arm, and they basically coincide with each other. The Control (NLC) Voltage Balancing Method for Modular Multilevel
results demonstrate the PM balancing effect and the switching Converter (MMC)," IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 30,
frequency of the proposed method are almost the same with pp. 450-462, 2015.
traditional method. [10] J. Qin and M. Saeedifard, "Reduced switching-frequency voltage
balancing strategies for modular multilevel HVDC converters, " IEEE
IV. CONCLUSION Trans. Power Del., vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 2403–2410, Oct. 2013.
[11] Z. Fangzhou, X. Guochun, S. Zhishun, and P. Cheng, "Insertion sort
To solve the problem of excessive computational load correction of two-way merge sort algorithm for balancing capacitor
caused by sorting algorithm, this paper proposed a distributed voltages in MMC with reduced computational load," in 2016 IEEE 8th
voltage balancing method for MMC. This method divides PMs International Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference
in each arm of MMC into several groups and each group is (IPEMC-ECCE Asia), 2016, pp. 748-753.
controlled by a VGC system. To keep voltage balancing among [12] P. Liu, Y. Wang, W. Cong, and W. Lei, "Grouping-Sorting-Optimized
Model Predictive Control for Modular Multilevel Converter With
groups, a close-loop control to adjust the IN state number of Reduced Computational Load," IEEE Transactions on Power
each group is introduced in this paper. The 3-group 439-level Electronics, vol. 31, pp. 1896-1907, 2016.

1948
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Grenoble Alpes. Downloaded on May 07,2025 at 09:29:04 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.