energies

Article
Analysis on Displacement Angle of Phase-Shifted
Carrier PWM for Modular Multilevel Converter †
Qian Cheng , Chenchen Wang and Jian Wang *
School of Electrical Engineering, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China; 17117415@bjtu.edu.cn (Q.C.);
chchwang@bjtu.edu.cn (C.W.)
* Correspondence: jwang4@bjtu.edu.cn
† This paper is an extended version of our paper published in 2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and
Exposition (ECCE), Baltimore, MD, USA, 2019; pp. 4801–4807.




Received: 18 November 2020; Accepted: 17 December 2020; Published: 21 December 2020


Abstract: This paper provides theoretical and experimental discussions on the characteristics of the
modular multilevel converter (MMC) when phase-shifted carrier sinusoidal pulse-width modulation
(PSC-SPWM) is applied. Harmonic-cancellation characteristics of output voltage and circulating
current are analyzed on the basis of a general implementation of PSC-SPWM with two freedom
displacement angles. Five available PSC-SPWM schemes with different carrier displacement angles
were obtained, and a detailed performance comparison about output voltage and circulating current
harmonic characteristics is presented. On the basis of the equivalent circuit with ideal transformer
representation of the SMs, capacitor voltages affected by PSC-SPWM schemes are also briefly
analyzed. The proposed PSC-SPWM schemes can unify two different cases of odd and even SM
situations for output voltage and circulating current harmonic minimization, respectively. Lastly,
the optimal schemes for practical MMC application were verified by simulation and experiments on
an MMC prototype.

Keywords: modular multilevel converter (MMC); phase-shifted carrier SPWM (PSC-SPWM);

displacement angle; harmonic characteristics; capacitor voltage

1. Introduction
The modular multilevel converter (MMC) has been widely studied because it presents great
advantages such as a transformer-less and modular structure, common DC bus, and good harmonic
characteristics [1–3]. These advantages make MMC the most attractive topology for various medium-
and high-voltage, high-power applications, such as high-voltage direct-current (HVDC) transmission
systems [4,5], static synchronous compensators (STATCOM) [6,7], high-voltage isolated DC/DC [8],
and medium-voltage motor drive [9–12].
The MMC allows for the flexible selection of inserted submodules (SMs), so there are various
modulation methods that directly affect the harmonic characteristics of output voltage and circulating
current. The staircase wave-modulation methods in [13] are preferable in applications that require
an extremely high number of SMs, such as HVDC applications. Some optimization schemes for
reducing power losses are mentioned in [14,15]. The selective harmonic eliminating modulation
technology [16], space vector pulse-width modulation (SVPWM) [17,18], and phase-shifted carrier
sinusoidal pulse-width modulation (PSC-SPWM) technology [19–23] are also considered as modulation
methods for MMC applications that need fewer submodules. Among these methods, PSC-SPWM
technology is more used for fewer SMs. Each power unit has the same switching frequency with
PSC-SPWM, which is a benefit for heat-dissipation structure design. When PSC-SPWM is applied,
the output voltage of MMC, as shown in Figure 1, has N + 1 or 2N + 1 levels with different

Energies 2020, 13, 6743; doi:10.3390/en13246743 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2020, 13, 6743 2 of 21

displacement-angle assignments between the carriers of each SM [21]. The displacement angle affects
the harmonic characteristics of output voltage and circulating current. An available implementation
scheme of PSC-SPWM technology for MMC was presented in [22]. The displacement angle is set to
π/N when N is even, and 0 when N is odd for maximal harmonic cancellation of output voltage.
On the other hand, to achieve the greatest harmonic cancellation of circulating current, the displacement
angle should be π/N when N is odd, and 0 when N is even. However, the angle irregularly changes
according to the parity of SM number. Furthermore, how the displacement angle between the adjacent
SMs in the same arm influences the performance of harmonics and the voltage-balancing issue of
capacitors is not considered. Energy distribution is only relatively balanced between submodules when
the right displacement angle is selected. Four available PSC-SPWM schemes were presented with
performance comparison about output voltage and circulating current harmonic characteristics in our
previous paper [23], whereas the selection of displacement angle does not give theoretical derivation.

CSM CSM CSM

CSM CSM CSM

itop ,c itop ,b itop ,a

vDC is ,a L R
is ,b
is ,c
ibot ,c ibot ,b ibot ,a

CSM CSM CSM

CSM CSM CSM

Figure 1. Structure of three-phase modular multilevel converter (MMC).

This paper presents a theoretical derivation of displacement-angle selection based on

harmonic-cancellation characteristics. All possible solutions for harmonic cancellation were obtained,
and the optimal PSC-SPWM schemes were selected on the basis of harmonic-cancellation characteristics
and voltage stability. The proposed PSC-SPWM schemes unify two different cases of odd and even SM
situations. The rest of the paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, the MMC topology is introduced,
and the mathematical model is established. Then, a general PSC-SPWM scheme with two freedom
displacement angles (displacement angle between adjacent SMs in the same arm, and the displacement
angle between top and bottom SMs) is presented in Section 3, and optimal PSC-SPWM schemes for
MMC were obtained on the basis of mathematical analysis of the harmonic-cancellation characteristics
of output voltage and circulating current affected by the displacement angles. Moreover, the capacitor
voltage of SMs affected by displacement angles was analyzed on the basis of the equivalent circuit
with the ideal transformer representation of the SMs in this section. Section 4 gives the simulation and
experiment results with a detailed performance comparison about the characteristics of output voltage
and circulating current, which show that the selected displacement-angle assignment was the most
suitable PSC-SPWM scheme for practical MMC application. Lastly, conclusions are summarized in
Section 5.

2. Basic MMC Operational Principle

2.1. MMC Structure

A schematic diagram of a three-phase MMC is shown in Figure 1. The main circuit consists of
six arms. Each arm is composed of N half-bridge SMs, which are connected with a separated arm
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 3 of 21

inductor in series. Each SM is formed by a DC capacitor CSM and two power switches. Three-phase RL
load is respectively connected to the midpoint of three phases.

2.2. Model of MMC

The mathematical model of MMC can be obtained by Kirchhoff’s voltage law and Kirchhoff’s
current law as
di

 v DC = vsub + vsub + 2L arm z,j

top,j bot,j dt (1)
 v = 1 (vsub − vsub ) − 1 L arm dis,j ,

s,j top,j
2 bot,j 2 dt
where vsub sub
top,j , vbot,j are voltages across N top SMs and bottom SMs in phase j (j ∈ { a, b, c }), respectively.
vs,j , is,j are the output voltage and current of phase j , respectively. L arm is arm inductance, and v DC is
the DC-link voltage. The circulating current circulates through both the top and bottom arms of phase
j, which is expressed as
1 
iz,j = itop,j + ibot,j (2)
2
where itop,j , ibot,j are the top and bottom arm current of phase j, respectively.
The voltage across arm inductors v L,j is :

diz,j  
v L,j = 2L arm = v DC − vsub
top,j + v sub
bot,j (3)
dt
For the SMs of MMC, the output voltage of the kth SM in the top and bottom arms can be
expressed by utop,j (k), ubot,j (k ) respectively:
(
utop,j (k) = Stop,j (k)vtop,j (k)
(4)
ubot,j (k) = Sbot,j (k )vtop,j (k),

where vtop,j (k), Stop,j (k) and vbot,j (k), Sbot,j (k) are the capacitor voltage and switching function of kth
SM of the top and bottom arms, respectively.
The dynamic equation of SM capacitors can be obtained as

dv (k)

 C top,j
 = Stop,j (k)iz,j + 0.5Stop,j (k)is,j
dt (5)
 C dvbot,j (k ) = S
bot,j ( k )iz,j − 0.5Sbot,j ( k )is,j

dt
According to (1), (4), and (5), one phase circuit of MMC can be redrawn by the equivalent circuit
on the basis of the ideal transformer representation of SMs [24], as shown in Figure 2. The notation of
turns-ratio term is abbreviated as the switching function of SMs, which fully represents the switching
action. On the basis of the equivalent circuit, energy was transferred from the DC side to the AC
side through SM capacitors, which acted as intermediate storage elements. In this equivalent circuit,
external and internal characteristics of the MMC could be reflected well.
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 4 of 21

2 Larm iz , j 0.5Larm is , j
Stop , j (1) 0.5Stop , j (1)
SM top , j (1) +
CSM vtop , j (1)
-
-
Stop , j ( N ) 0.5Stop , j ( N ) vs , j
SM top , j ( N )
+
CSM vtop , j ( N ) +
-

vDC Sbot , j (1) 0.5Sbot , j (1)

SM bot , j (1) +
CSM vbot , j (1)
-

Sbot , j ( N ) 0.5Sbot , j ( N )
SM bot , j ( N ) +
CSM vbot , j ( N )
-

DC side AC side

Figure 2. Equivalent circuit of single MMC phase.

3. Phase-Shifted PWM Schemes for MMC

In general, the PSC-SPWM scheme of MMC (N SMs each arm) with two freedom displacement
angles is shown in Figure 3. Each SM is assigned with a specific reference signal and a triangular
carrier with a displacement angle. The state of the SM is determined by the relationship between
reference signal and carrier. When the reference is larger than the carrier value, the corresponding
switching function Stop,j (k) or Sbot,j (k) equals to 1; when the reference is smaller than the carrier value,
the corresponding switching function Stop,j (k ) or Sbot,j (k) equals to 0.

2 1

CT1 CT2 ... CTN

Signals
for the
top
arm

*
vtop
2
,j

*
vbot ,j
... CB1 CB2 ... CBN
Signals
for the
bottom
arm

Figure 3. General MMC phase-shifted carrier sinusoidal pulse-width modulation (PSC-SPWM) schemes.

θ1 , θ2 are the displacement angles between the adjacent carriers of the same arm, and the
displacement angle between the carriers of the top and bottom arms, respectively. Reference voltages
are given as
 v DC Mv DC
 v∗top,j =


 − cos ω0 t + ϕ j
2N 2N
(6)
 v∗ = v DC + Mv DC cos ω t + ϕ


bot,j 0 j
2N 2N
where M is the modulation index, ω0 is the fundamental angle frequency, ϕ j is the phase angle,
and v DC is the voltage of DC bus.
Each SM corresponding to a specific triangular carrier with different displacement angle.
The general carrier function of the top and bottom SMs can be calculated as:
 
v DC 1 1 2
f CT (k ) = + · arcsin [sin (ωc t + (k − 1) θ1 )] (7)
N 2 2 π
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 5 of 21

 
v DC 1 1 2
f CB (k) = + · arcsin [sin (ωc t + (k − 1) θ1 + θ2 )] (8)
N 2 2 π

3.1. Fourier Series Representation of Switching Functions

The double Fourier series based on analysis in [25] is presented to obtain the harmonic feature of
output voltage and circulating current of MMC. In (7) and (8), there are two freedom displacement
degrees, θ1 and θ2 , which constitute different PSC-SPWM schemes. The principle of how θ1 and θ2
affect the harmonics of output voltage and circulating current is presented in this section.
From (6–8), the switching function can be expressed by Fourier representation as
∞ ∞
1 M 2
cos ωo t + ϕ j + ∑ ∑


Stop,j (k) = −
2 2 m=1 n=−∞
mπ
   
(m + n)π Mmπ (9)
× sin × Jn
2 2


× cos m (ωc t + (k − 1)θ1 ) + n ωo t + ϕ j

∞ ∞
1 M 2
cos ωo t + ϕ j + ∑ ∑


Sbot,j (k) = +
2 2 m=1 n=−∞
mπ
   
(m + n)π Mmπ (10)
× sin × Jn
2 2


× cos m (ωc t + (k − 1)θ1 + θ2 ) + n ωo t + ϕ j + π
where m is carrier index variable (m = 1, 2, . . . , ∞), n is the baseband index variable (n = −∞, . . . , −1,
0, 1, . . . , ∞), and Jn ( x )is the Bessel coefficient.
For simplicity, it was assumed that all the capacitor voltage of SMs are naturally balanced and the
voltage fluctuation is ignored. From (1), (9), and (10), the equivalent output voltage of phase j can be
obtained as

Mv DC
1 ∞ ∞
2v DC
us,j = cos ωo t + ϕ j − ∑ ∑
2 2 m=1 n=−∞ mπN
   
(m + n)π Mmπ
× sin × Jn
2 2
N
(11)
m( N − 1 − 2(k − 1))θ1
   
mθ2 + nπ
× 2 sin × ∑ cos
2 k =1
2
m ( N − 1) π
 

mθ2 + nπ
× sin mωc t + n ωo t + ϕ j + +
2 2

From (11), the harmonic characteristic of output voltage is affected by the following items,
which are the function of θ1 , θ2 and N:

N
m( N − 1 − 2(k − 1))θ1
 
k1 = ∑ cos



2




 k =1
  
(m + n)π (12)
k2 = sin


 2
  
mθ2 + nπ


k3 = sin


2
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 6 of 21

Voltage across the arm inductors of phase j can be obtained as

∞ ∞    
2v DC Mmπ (m + n)π
u L,j (k) = ∑ ∑ × Jn × sin
m=1 n=−∞
mπN 2 2
N
m( N − 1 − 2(k − 1))θ1
   
mθ2 + nπ
× 2 cos × ∑ cos (13)
2 k =1
2
m ( N − 1) π
 

mθ2 + nπ
× cos mωc t + n ωo t + ϕ j + +
2 2

Similarly, the harmonic characteristic of voltage across the arm inductors is affected by

N
m( N − 1 − 2(k − 1))θ1
 
k1 = ∑ cos



2




 k =1
  
(m + n)π (14)
k2 = sin


 2
  
mθ2 + nπ


k4 = cos


2

3.2. Harmonic-Cancellation Characteristics of MMC with PSC-SPWM

According to (12) and (14), if one of k1 , k2 and k3 is equal to 0, the corresponding output-voltage
harmonic components (mωc + nω0 ) can be completely eliminated. The corresponding circulating
current harmonic components can be completely eliminated if one of k1 , k2 and k4 is equal to 0 in
the same way. Specifically, if index m is odd/even, and index n is odd/even, k2 equals to 0 in the
expression of both Equations (11) and (13). As a result, odd side-band harmonics are eliminated in
the output waveform and voltage of arm inductors around the odd carrier frequency multiples and
the even side-band harmonics are eliminated in the output waveform and voltage of arm inductors
around the even carrier-frequency multiples.
Harmonic-cancellation characteristics of k1 , k3 and k4 are affected by θ1 and θ2 . Item k1 can
eliminate the harmonics of the whole group mωc with proper θ1 , and the relationship between k1 and
θ1 is shown in Figure 4. If θ1 equals to π/N, all the even multiples carrier-frequency harmonic groups
except those at 2N-multiples and its integral multiple are eliminated. For example, the harmonics
of group 2ωc and 4ωc are eliminated when N = 3. The harmonics of group 2ωc , 4ωc and 6ωc are
eliminated when N = 4. If θ1 equals to 2π/N, all multiples carrier-frequency harmonic groups except
those at N-multiples and its integral multiples are eliminated. For example, the harmonics of group
ωc , 2ωc , 4ωc and 5ωc are eliminated when N = 3. The harmonics of group ωc , 2ωc , 3ωc , 5ωc , 6ωc and
7ωc are eliminated when N = 4.
After eliminating the harmonics of some whole group mωc with proper θ1 , proper displacement
angle θ2 can be selected to eliminate more harmonic components. The harmonic components of
circulating current are the same as the voltage across the arm inductor. However, according to the
relationship of trigonometric functions, k3 in (12) and k4 in (14) are completely different. For a particular
harmonic group mωc , output-voltage harmonics and the circulating current harmonic vary with θ2
at the completely opposite tendency. Displacement angle θ2 should be selected to obtain a zero k3
or k4 item coordinate with the harmonic-cancellation capability of k2 to achieve maximal harmonic
elimination of output voltage or circulating current, respectively.
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 7 of 21

4 4
N=3 N=4

2 2
k1
0 0

−2 −2

−4 −4

(a) (b)

Figure 4. Harmonics of group cancellation characteristics with PSC-SPWM schemes. (a) N = 3.

(b) N = 4.

For MMC, output voltage with lower harmonic distortion means smaller and lower-cost filters,
and better output characteristics, especially when N is small (e.g., in motor drive applications). On the
other hand, the harmonics of circulating current causes higher loss and current stress. For a great
number of SM applications (e.g., HVDC application), the harmonics of circulating current become
the main problem. In this paper, five potential PSC-SPWM schemes (PSC1 to PSC5) for MMC that
achieve maximal voltage harmonic elimination or maximal circulating current harmonic elimination
are presented, as shown in Figure 5. They are described with a modulation wave frequency of 50 Hz,
a carrier frequency of 200 Hz, and four SMs in each arm. Displacement angle θ1 , θ2 of each scheme is
given as follows.
PSC1:
2π

 θ1 =

N (15)
 θ2 = π + π

N
PSC2:
2π

2π

 θ1 =
N ( N is even), θ1 = N ( N is odd)
 
(16)
 θ2 = π
 
θ2 = 0
N
PSC3: 
 θ1 = π
N (17)
θ2 = 0


PSC4: (
θ1 = ∀θ ∈ (0, 2π/N ]
(18)
θ2 = π

PSC5:
2π

 θ1 = 2π

 θ1 =

N ( N is even), N ( N is odd) (19)
π
θ2 = 0 θ2 =
 

N
where PSC2 and PSC5 were mentioned in [22]. PSC1 and PSC3 were first proposed in [23], and PSC4
was added into this paper for discussion. Theoretically, PSC1, PSC2, and PSC3 can achieve maximal
voltage harmonic elimination, and PSC4 and PSC5 can achieve maximal circulating current harmonic
elimination. Compared with PSC2 and PSC5, the proposed PSC1,PSC3, and PSC4 unify two different
cases of odd and even SM situations.
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 8 of 21

2 2 N
CT1 CT2 CT3 CT4 2 2 N 2  N
CT1 CT2 CT3 CT4 CT1 CT2 CT3 CT4

*
vtop *
vtop
 + N *
,j
 N ,j
*
vtop ,j
CB1 CB2 CB3 CB4 vbot ,j CB1 CB2 CB3 CB4
*
vbot 0 CB1CB2 CB3 CB4 *
,j vbot ,j

(a) (b) (c)

2  2 2 N
CT1 CT2 CT3 CT4 CT1 CT2 CT3 CT4
2 2 N CT1 CT2 CT3 CT4

* * *
vtop ,j vtop vtop ,j

,j

*
CB1 CB2 CB3 CB4 vbot ,j CB1 CB2 CB3 CB4 *
vbot ,j 0 CB1 CB2 CB3 CB4 *
vbot ,j

(d) (e) (f)

Figure 5. Proposed PSC-SPWM schemes for MMC that achieve maximal voltage harmonic
elimination or maximal circulating current harmonic elimination. (a) PSC-SPWM1. (b) PSC-SPWM2.
(c) PSC-SPWM3. (d) PSC-SPWM4. (e) PSC-SPWM4 when θ1 = 2π/N. (f) PSC-SPWM5.

For a specific index m, if both even n and odd n can result in a zero k2 or k3 item, the corresponding
harmonic groups are eliminated in output voltage. Similarly, if both even n and odd n can result in a
zero k2 or k4 item, the corresponding harmonic groups are eliminated in circulating current. For PSC1
and PSC2, all harmonics except those even side-band harmonics around the (2l + 1) N-multiples carrier
frequency and the odd side-band harmonics around the (2l ) N-multiples carrier frequency remain
with θ1 = 2π/N. When the m summation index is equal to (2l + 1) N, k2 and k3 of PSC1 and PSC2,
it can be represented as follows.
PSC1: 
((2l + 1) N + n) π
k2 = sin


2 (20)
 (( 2l + 1) ( N + 1) + n) π
k3 = sin

2
In (20), both even n and odd n can result in an even ((2l + 1) N + n) or even ((2l + 1)( N + 1) + n),
which obtains a zero k2 or k3 item. In other words, the harmonics of (2l + 1) N-multiples carrier
frequency are totally eliminated in output voltage with PSC1, resulting in maximal voltage harmonic
elimination.
PSC2: 
 k2 = sin ((2l + 1) N + n) π

2 ( N is even)
 k3 = sin (2l +1 + n) π

 2 (21)
 k = sin ((2l + 1) N + n) π

2
nπ 2 ( N is odd)
 k3 = sin

2
In (21), both even n and odd n can result in an even ((2l + 1) N + n) or ((2l + 1 + n) when N is
even, and an even ((2l + 1) N + n) or even n when N is odd, which obtains a zero k2 or k3 item. As a
result, the harmonics of (2l + 1) N-multiples carrier frequency are totally eliminated in output voltage
with PSC2 the same with PSC1.
On the other hand, when the m summation index is equal to (2l ) N, the k2 and k4 of PSC1 and
PSC2 can be represented as
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 9 of 21

PSC1: 
(2lN + n) π
k2 = sin


2 (22)
 ( 2l ( N + 1) + n) π
k4 = cos

2
PSC2: 
 k2 = sin (2lN + n) π

2 ( N is even)
 k4 = cos (2l + n) π

 2 (23)
 k = sin (2lN + n) π

2
nπ 2 ( N is odd)
 k4 = cos

2
In (22), both even n and odd n can result in an even (2lN + n) or odd (2l ( N + 1) + n),
which obtains a zero k2 or k4 item. Similarly, in (23), both even n and odd n can result in an
even (2lN + n) or odd (2l + n) when N is even, and an even (2lN + n) or odd n when N is odd,
which obtains a zero k2 or k4 item too. As a result, the extra harmonics of group (2l ) N-multiples carrier
frequency are eliminated in circulating current with PSC1 or PSC2.
For PSC3, all harmonics of odd multiples and (2l ) N-multiples carrier frequency are remained
when θ1 = π/N. When the m summation index is equal to (2l + 1), k2 and k3 can be represented as
PSC3:
(2l + 1 + n) π

k2 = sin

2 (24)
k3 = sin
 nπ
2
In (24), both even n and odd n can result in a zero k2 or k3 item. As a result, all odd multiples
carrier-frequency harmonic groups are eliminated in output voltage with PSC3, resulting in maximal
voltage harmonic elimination, the same as in PSC1 and PSC2.
On the other hand, when the m summation index is equal to (2l ) N, the k2 and k4 of PSC3 can be
represented as
PSC3:
(2lN + n) π

k2 = sin

2 (25)
k4 = cos
 nπ
2
Both odd n and even n can result in a zero k2 or k4 . The extra harmonics of group (2l ) N-multiples
carrier frequency are eliminated in circulating current with PSC3.
For PSC4, k2 and k4 can be represented as
PSC4: 
 k2 = sin (m + n) π

2 (26)
 k4 = cos (m + n) π

2
All multiples carrier-frequency harmonic groups are eliminated in the circulating current with
PSC4, while k2 and k3 can be represented as
PSC4: 
 k2 = sin (m + n) π

2 (27)
 k3 = sin (m + n) π

2
Only even side-band harmonics around the even multiples and the odd side-band harmonics are
around the odd multiples are eliminated in the output voltage with PSC4 when θ1 6= π/N and
θ1 6= 2π/N.
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 10 of 21

For PSC5, when the m summation index is equal to lN, k2 and k4 can be represented as
PSC5: 
 k2 = sin (lN + n) π

2 ( N is odd),
 k4 = cos (lN + n) π

 2 (28)
 k = sin (lN + n) π

2
nπ 2 ( N is even)
 k4 = cos

2
All the harmonics of multiples carrier frequency are eliminated in the circulating current with a
zero item k2 or k4 when PSC5 is applied.
On the other hand, when the m summation index is equal to lN, k2 and k3 can be represented as
PSC5: 
 k2 = sin (lN + n) π

2 ( N is odd),
 k3 = sin (lN + n) π

 2 (29)
 k = sin (lN + n) π

2
nπ 2 ( N is even)
 k3 = sin

2
There are no extra harmonics that can be eliminated in output voltage with PSC5.
From the above analysis, the conclusion is that only odd side-band harmonics around
(2l ) N-multiples carrier frequency are retained in output voltage with PSC1, PSC2, and PSC3 applied.
The extra harmonic group of (2l ) N-multiples carrier frequency is eliminated in circulating current
with PSC1 and PSC2, while all even side-band harmonics around odd multiples carrier frequency
remain with PSC3. All carrier-frequency harmonics are eliminated in the circulating current with both
PSC4 and PSC5 applied. Simultaneously, maximal extra harmonic cancellation in output voltage can
be obtained with PSC4 when θ1 = 2π/N, which is equivalent to PSC5.
Carrier angles of each SM for five PSC-SPWM schemes when N = 3 (odd number SMs example)
and N = 4 (even number SMs example) are listed in Figures 6 and 7. PSC1, PSC2, and PSC3 are the
minimal voltage harmonic schemes. PSC4 (when θ1 = 2π/N) and PSC5 are the minimal circulating
current harmonic schemes. Considering that the status of each SM in the same arm is identical, PSC1
and PSC2, PSC4, and PSC5 are equivalent except that SMs in the bottom arm corresponding to the
top arms are different. SMs with the same status (carrier angle) are filled with the same color and
connected by red arrows. Obviously, the proposed PSC1 and PSC4 could automatically distribute the
carrier angle.

Angle PSC1 PSC2 PSC3 PSC4 PSC5

 top (1) 0 0 0 0 0
 top (2) 120 120 60 120 120
 top (3) 240 240 120 240 240
bot (1) 240 0 0 180 60
 bot (2) 0 120 60 300 180
 bot (3) 120 240 120 60 300

Figure 6. Carrier angles of each submodule (SM) for five PSC-SPWM schemes when N = 3.
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 11 of 21

Angle PSC1 PSC2 PSC3 PSC4 PSC5

 top (1) 0 0 0 0 0
 top (2) 90 90 45 90 90
 top (3) 180 180 90 180 180
 top (4) 270 270 135 270 270

bot (1) 225 45 0 180 0

 bot (2) 315 135 45 270 90
 bot (3) 45 225 90 0 180
 bot (4) 135 315 135 90 270

Figure 7. Carrier angles of each SM for five PSC-SPWM schemes when N = 4.

The specific PSC-SPWM scheme is determined according to the number of SMs and
aforementioned harmonic-cancellation characteristics analysis. Considering the harmonic performance
of both output voltage and circulating current, the optimal maximal output voltage and circulating
current harmonic elimination schemes are PSC1 and PSC4 when θ1 = 2π/N, respectively, for which
implementation does not need irregular change with parity of submodule number.

3.3. Capacitor Voltage of SMs Affected by PSC-SPWM Schemes

The above analysis is based on the assumption that all SM capacitor voltages are naturally
balanced and voltage fluctuations are ignored. However, SM voltage is also affected by modulation
methods. From (5), capacitor voltage varies with switching function, load current, and circulating
current. The voltage fluctuation of SM capacitors in one carrier cycle is given as
 Z Ts
1
 ∆vtop,j (k ) =


Stop,j (k)iz,j + 0.5Stop,j (k)is,j dt


CSM Z 0 (30)
1 Ts  
 ∆vbot,j (k) = Sbot,j (k)iz,j − 0.5Sbot,j (k)is,j dt


CSM 0

where Ts is a fundamental period. SM capacitor voltage is affected by switching function, circulating

current and the load current. Natural balancing of the 2-Cell modular multilevel converter with
traditional PSC-SPWM schemes was discussed in [24], which is closely related to harmonic distribution
of output current and circulating current. If the switching function and circulating current contain the
same harmonic components, or the switching function and phase current contain the same harmonic
components in the orthogonal trigonometric system, the right side of (21) could contain a non-negligible
DC component. Voltage variation in a fundamental cycle is not equal to zero, and the capacitor voltage
of each SM deviates from the rated value.
According to the above analysis, even side-band harmonics around the carrier frequency are
remained in circulating current with PSC3. However, these harmonic components are also contained
in switching functions Stop,j and Sbot,j . In an orthogonal trigonometric function system, these large
harmonic components could cause a non-negligible DC current in SM capacitors, which results
in voltage deviation. The capacitor-voltage deviation phenomenon is verified by simulation and
experiments in next section. Similarly, even side-band harmonics around the carrier frequency remain
in output current with PSC4 when θ1 = π/N, which also results in voltage deviation. Therefore, from
the perspective of the effect on capacitor voltage, θ1 = 2π/N should be met for PSC-SPWM schemes.

4. Simulation and Experiment Results

Simulation and experiment results were obtained to verify the analysis of the PSC-SPWM
strategy in a three-phase MMC with four half-bridge SMs. Simulation results were obtained from
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 12 of 21

MATLAB/Simulink, and the experiment results were obtained from a low-power laboratory prototype
as shown in Figure 8. A digital-signal processor (DSP; TI TMS32028335) was used to generate the
reference voltage, while two field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs; Spartan-6 XC6SLX9)were
adopted to generate the triangular carriers and data processing, respectively. PWM signals were
transmitted to SMs via optical fibers. The main parameters of the converter are given in Table 1.

Figure 8. Laboratory prototype.

Table 1. MMC parameters.

Quantity Symbol Values

DC bus voltage v DC 200 V
Submodule capacitance Csm 3.6 mF
Number of submodules N 4
Bridge inductance L arm 2 mH
Carrier frequency fc 1000 Hz
Load inductance L 5 mH
Load resistance R 24 Ω
Modulation index M 0.8

4.1. Simulation Results

Figures 9–13 shows the simulation results of output-phase voltage with five PSC-SPWM strategies.
The equivalent output-phase voltage reached 2N + 1 levels with PSC1, PSC2, and PSC3, which had
maximal output-voltage harmonic-cancellation ability, and voltage total harmonic distortion (THD)
was 14.7% with the main odd side-band harmonics around 2N-multiples carrier frequency and its
integral multiple harmonic groups. The simulation results of PSC4, when θ1 = 2π/N, and PSC5 are
shown in Figures 12 and 13, respectively. Both of these PSC-SPWM schemes had the same output
characteristics. Equivalent output voltage reached N + 1 levels, and voltage THD was much larger
than that of PSC1, PSC2, and PSC3, with 36.223%. The main harmonic components were around N
times the carrier frequency and its integral multiples.
Simulation results of circulating current under five PSC-SPWM strategies are shown in
Figures 14–18. The circulating current included the extra N-multiples carrier frequency and its
odd multiple harmonic groups with PSC1 and PSC2 applied, all odd carrier multiple harmonic groups
remained with PSC3 applied. The circulating current was mainly composed of the DC component and
the secondary component with PSC4 when θ1 = 2π/N and PSC5. All high-frequency harmonics were
completely eliminated, with maximal harmonic-cancellation ability. On the other hand, the harmonic
characteristic of output-phase voltage was decreased. Crculating current harmonic and output-voltage
harmonics varied with θ2 at a completely opposite tendency.
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 13 of 21

100

vs , j (V)
0

−100
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Time(s)
(a)
100

Mag(p.u.)
THD=14.7133%
−1
10
−2
10
0 100 200 300 400
Harmonic order
(b)

Figure 9. Theoretical output voltage of PSC1. (a) Waveform of equivalent output-phase voltage; (b) fast
Fourier transform (FFT) analysis.

100
vs , j (V)

0
−100
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Time(s)
(a)
100
Mag(p.u.)

THD=14.7133%
10−1
10−2
0 100 200 300 400
Harmonic order
(b)

Figure 10. Theoretical output voltage of PSC2. (a) Waveform of equivalent output-phase voltage;
(b) FFT analysis.

100
vs , j (V)

0
−100
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Time(s)
(a)
100
Mag(p.u.)

THD=14.7133%
10−1
10−2
0 100 200 300 400
Harmonic order
(b)

Figure 11. Theoretical output voltage of PSC3. (a) Waveform of equivalent output-phase voltage;
(b) FFT analysis.
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 14 of 21

100

vs , j (V)
0

−100
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Time(s)
(a)
100

Mag(p.u.)
THD=36.223%
10−1
10−2
0 100 200 300 400
Harmonic order
(b)

Figure 12. Theoretical output voltage of PSC4. (a) Waveform of equivalent output-phase voltage;
(b) FFT analysis.

100
vs , j (V)

−100
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Time(s)
(a)
0
10
Mag(p.u.)

THD=36.223%
−1
10
−2
10 0 100 200 300 400
Harmonic order
(b)

Figure 13. Theoretical output voltage of PSC5. (a) Waveform of equivalent output-phase voltage;
(b) FFT analysis.

51
vsub (V)

50

49
3
iz , j (A)

1.5
0
−1.5
0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1
Time(s)
(a)
100
Mag

10−1
10−2
0 100 200 300 400
Harmonics order
(b)

Figure 14. Simulation results of PSC1. (a) Capacitor voltage of SMs and circulating current. (b) FFT
analysis of circulating current.
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 15 of 21

51

vsub (V)
50

49
3

iz , j (A)
1.5
0
−1.5
0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1
Time(s)
(a)
100
Mag

10−1
10−2
0 100 200 300 400
Harmonics order
(b)

Figure 15. Simulation results of PSC2. (a) Capacitor voltage of SMs and circulating current. (b) FFT
analysis of circulating current.

200
vsub (V)

50

0
12
iz , j (A)

4
−4
−12
0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1
Time(s)
(a)
100
Mag

10−1
10−2
0 100 200 300 400
Harmonics order
(b)

Figure 16. Simulation results of PSC3. (a) Capacitor voltage of SMs and circulating current. (b) FFT
analysis of circulating current.

As shown in Figure 16, PSC3 caused the deviation and unbalance of capacitor voltage
because large even side-band harmonics around the carrier frequency (especially h18, h20, and h22)
remained in circulating current with PSC3, which were also contained in switching function of
SMs. These harmonic components caused a non-negligible DC current in the capacitor of the SMs.
This phenomenon can also be intuitively understood from the number of submodules connected to
each phase. Unlike other solutions, 0 to 2N SMs could be put into a phase with PSC3. From (1),
when 2N SMs were inserted, voltage across the arm inductors was v DC , causing high circulating
current and unstable SM capacitor voltages. Therefore, the selection of θ1 and θ2 needs to consider the
harmonic-cancellation characteristic of both output voltage and circulating current. PSC1 and PSC4
when θ1 = 2π/N are the optimal output-voltage harmonic minimization PSC-SPWM scheme and the
optimal circulating current harmonic minimization PSC-SPWM scheme, respectively, with a stable and
balanced capacitor voltage.
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 16 of 21

51

vsub (V)
50

49
3

iz , j (A)
1.5
0
−1.5
0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1
Time(s)
(a)
100
Mag

10−1
10−2
0 100 200 300 400
Harmonics order
(b)

Figure 17. Simulation results of PSC4. (a) Capacitor voltage of SMs and circulating current. (b) FFT
analysis of circulating current.

51
vsub (V)

50

49
3
iz , j (A)

1.5
0
−1.5
0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1
Time(s)
(a)
100
Mag

10−1
10−2
0 100 200 300 400
Harmonics order
(b)

Figure 18. Simulation results of PSC5. (a) Capacitor voltage of SMs and circulating current. (b) FFT
analysis of circulating current.

4.2. Experiment Results

Figure 19 shows the experiment results with PSC1, where displacement angles were selected as
θ1 = 90◦ and θ2 = 225◦ . Experiment results were almost identical to the simulation results, including
output-voltage levels, the harmonic distribution of output voltage and circulating current, and the
voltage stability of capacitors; 2N + 1 voltage levels were generated, and output THD was 13.75%,
which was close to the theoretical 14.71%. Simultaneously, high-frequency harmonic groups (mainly
side-band harmonics around (2l + 1) N-multiples carrier frequency) remained in the circulating current,
which was calculated by a mathematical function of an oscilloscope according to (2). The peak value
of circulating current was approximately equal to 1.5 A capacitor voltage of SMs in the top and bottom
arms, which were naturally balanced with small fluctuation.
Figure 20 shows the experiment results with PSC2, where displacement angles were selected as
θ1 = 90◦ and θ2 = 45◦ . PSC2 achieved the same characteristics as those of PSC1. The equivalence of
PSC1 and PSC2 was verified as analyzed before, and only SMs corresponding to the top and bottom
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 17 of 21

arms were different; the proposed PSC1 unified two different cases of odd and even SM situations for
maximal harmonic elimination of output voltage.
Figure 21 shows the experiment results with PSC3, where displacement angles were selected
as θ1 = 45◦ and θ2 = 0◦ . Only three levels of output voltage were generated. Theoretical 2N + 1
output-voltage levels could not be achieved because the capacitor voltage of SMs deviated to v DC or 0,
which was consistent with the simulation results. This is a validation that PSC3 is not acceptable for
industrial applications, and θ1 = 2π/N should be guaranteed for PSC-SPWM schemes.
Figure 22 shows the experiment results with PSC4, where displacement angles were selected as
θ1 = 90◦ and θ2 = 180◦ . Experiment results were almost identical to the simulation results; N + 1
voltage levels were generated, and output THD was 32.42%, which was close to the theoretical 36.23%.
Simultaneously, all high-frequency harmonic groups were completely eliminated in the circulating
current, and the peak value of the circulating current was approximately equal to 0.5 A, which was
smaller than that with PSC1 and PSC2. Capacitor voltages of SMs in the top and bottom arms were
naturally balanced with small fluctuation. PSC4 when θ1 6= 2π/N caused the deviation and unbalance
of capacitor voltage because of the same reason as that for PSC3.
Figure 23 shows the experiment results with PSC5, where displacement angles were selected as
θ1 = 90◦ and θ2 = 0◦ . PSC5 achieved the same characteristics as those of PSC4. PSC4 and PSC5 were
equivalent as analyzed before, and only SMs corresponding to the top and bottom arms were different.
The proposed PSC4 when θ1 = 2π/N could unify two different cases of odd and even SM situations
for the maximal harmonic elimination of the circulating current.

ch1: (10V/div) iz
ch2: (10V/div)
vbot ch3: (50V/div)
ch4: (5A/div)

vtop
ibot itop
is

is ch1: (5A/div) ch2: (5A/div)

vs ch3: (5A/div) M: (1A/div)
(10ms/div) (10ms/div)

(a) (b)
Figure 19. Experiment results with PSC1. (a) Phase voltage vs , phase current is , capacitor voltage of
SM vtop and vbot ; (b) circulating current iz , phase current is , arm current itop , and ibot .

ch1: (10V/div)
ch2: (10V/div)
iz
vbot ch3: (50V/div)
ch4: (5A/div)

vtop
ibot itop
is

vs is ch1: (5A/div) ch2: (5A/div)

ch3: (5A/div) M: (1A/div)
(10ms/div) (10ms/div)

(a) (b)
Figure 20. Experiment results with PSC2. (a) Phase voltage vs , phase current is , capacitor voltage of
SM vtop and vbot ; (b) circulating current iz , phase current is , arm current itop and ibot .
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 18 of 21

ch1: (10V/div) ch2: (10V/div)

ch3: (50V/div) ch4: (5A/div) iz
vtop vbot

is ibot itop

ch1: (5A/div) ch2: (5A/div)

vs is ch3: (5A/div) M: (1A/div)
(10ms/div) (10ms/div)

(a) (b)
Figure 21. Experiment results with PSC3. (a) Phase voltage vs , phase current is , capacitor voltage of
SM vtop and vbot ; (b) circulating current iz , phase current is , arm current itop and ibot .

ch1: (10V/div)
vbot ch2: (10V/div) iz
ch3: (50V/div)
ch4: (5A/div)

vtop
ibot itop
is

ch1: (5A/div) ch2: (5A/div)

is
vs ch3: (5A/div) M: (1A/div)
(10ms/div) (10ms/div)

(a) (b)
Figure 22. Experiment results with PSC4 when θ1 = 2π/N. (a) Phase voltage vs , phase current is ,
capacitor voltage of SM vtop and vbot ; (b) circulating current iz , phase current is , arm current itop
and ibot .

ch1: (10V/div)
vbot ch2: (10V/div) iz
ch3: (50V/div)
ch4: (5A/div)

vtop
ibot itop
is

ch1: (5A/div) ch2: (5A/div)

is
vs ch3: (5A/div) M: (1A/div)
(10ms/div) (10ms/div)

(a) (b)
Figure 23. Experiment results with PSC5. (a) Phase voltage vs , phase current is , capacitor voltage of
SMs vtop and vbot ; (b) circulating current iz , phase current is , arm current itop and ibot .

The PSC-SPWM of MMC is different from that of CHB, and only those SMs in the identical arm are
equivalent. In order to avoid deviation of capacitor voltage, the selection of θ1 and θ2 needs to consider
harmonic cancellation characteristics of both output voltage and circulating current. A comparison
of five PSC-SPWM schemes is listed in Table 2. Considering these facts and implementations, PSC1
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 19 of 21

(θ1 = 2π/N, θ2 = π + π/N) is the most suitable PSC-SPWM scheme in practical applications
when the number of SMs is small. Only odd side-band harmonics around (2l ) N-multiples carrier
frequency remained in output voltage, and even side-band harmonics around (2l − 1) N-multiples
carrier frequency remained in circulating current; at the same time, the capacitor voltage of SMs was
stable and balanced. On the other hand, PSC4 (θ1 = 2π/N, θ2 = π) is the most suitable PSC-SPWM
scheme in practical applications when the number of SMs is large. Only side-band harmonics around
(l ) N-multiples carrier frequency remained in output voltage, and all carrier-frequency harmonics
were eliminated in circulating current; at the same time, the capacitor voltage of SMs was stable and
balanced. Moreover, the implementations of both PSC1 and PSC4 when θ1 = 2π/N do not need
irregular change with the parity of submodule number.

Table 2. Comparison of five PSC-SPWM schemes.

PSC1 PSC2 PSC3 PSC4 PSC5

Output level 2N + 1 2N + 1 2N + 1 N+1 N+1
Output-voltage harmonics 2lN f c 2lN f c 2lN f c lN f c lN f c
Circulating-current harmonics (2l − 1) N f c (2l − 1) N f c (2l − 1) f c 0 0
Expression of displacement angles fixed Different with parity of N fixed fixed Different with parity of N
Voltage stability of capacitors stable stable unstable stable stable

5. Conclusions
This paper provided theoretical and experimental discussions on the characteristics of the
modular multilevel converter (MMC) when phase-shifted carrier sinusoidal pulse width modulation
(PSC-SPWM) is applied. The harmonic components of output phase voltage and circulating current
were derived in detail. We also analyzed how the displacement angle between SM carriers affects
the harmonic-cancellation characteristics of output voltage, circulating current, and capacitor voltage
of SMs. Displacement angles were found to affect the harmonic magnitudes of both output voltage
and circulating current. On the basis of analysis, five potential PSC-SPWM schemes with maximal
harmonic-cancellation ability for output voltage or circulating current were proposed. Furthermore,
capacitor voltages affected by PSC-SPWM schemes were analyzed. Optimal displacement angles were
selected for minimizing the harmonics of output voltage and circulating current that are suitable for
application with a low and high number of SMs. Lastly, the mathematical analysis and proposed
schemes were verified by simulation and experiments on a low-power MMC prototype.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, C.W. and Q.C.; methodology, Q.C.; software, Q.C. and J.W.; validation,
Q.C.; formal analysis, Q.C.; investigation, Q.C.; resources, J.W.; data curation, Q.C.; writing—original-draft
preparation, Q.C.; writing—review and editing, Q.C., C.W. and J.W.; visualization, Q.C.; supervision, C.W.; project
administration, C.W.; funding acquisition, C.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments: We thank all the journal editors and the reviewers for their valuable time and constructive
comments that have contributed to improving this manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Lesnicar, A.; Marquardt, R. An innovative modular multilevel converter suitable for a wide power range.
In Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE Bologna Power Tech Conference Proceedings, Bologna, Italy, 23–26 June
2003; Volume 3, p. 6.
2. Dekka, A.; Wu, B.; Fuentes, R.L.; Perez, M.; Zargari, N.R. Evolution of Topologies, Modeling, Control
Schemes, and Applications of Modular Multilevel Converters. IEEE Trans. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron.
2017, 5, 1631–1656. [CrossRef]
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 20 of 21

3. Zhang, J.; Xu, S.; Din, Z.; Hu, X. Hybrid Multilevel Converters: Topologies, Evolutions and Verifications.
Energies 2019, 12, 615. [CrossRef]
4. Solas, E.; Abad, G.; Barrena, J.A.; Aurtenetxea, S.; Cárcar, A.; Zajac,˛ L. Modular Multilevel Converter With
Different Submodule Concepts—Part II: Experimental Validation and Comparison for HVDC Application.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2013, 60, 4536–4545. [CrossRef]
5. Yang, X.; Xue, Y.; Chen, B.; Lin, Z.; Mu, Y.; Zheng, T.Q.; Igarashi, S.; Li, Y. An enhanced reverse blocking
MMC with DC fault handling capability for HVDC applications. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2018, 163, 706–714.
[CrossRef]
6. Bina, M.T. A Transformerless Medium-Voltage STATCOM Topology Based on Extended Modular Multilevel
Converters. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2011, 26, 1534–1545.
7. Cupertino, A.F.; Farias, J.V.M.; Pereira, H.A.; Seleme, S.I.; Teodorescu, R. Comparison of DSCC and SDBC
Modular Multilevel Converters for STATCOM Application During Negative Sequence Compensation.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2019, 66, 2302–2312. [CrossRef]
8. Chen, Y.; Zhao, S.; Li, Z.; Wei, X.; Kang, Y. Modeling and Control of the Isolated DC–DC Modular Multilevel
Converter for Electric Ship Medium Voltage Direct Current Power System. IEEE Trans. Emerg. Sel. Topics
Power Electron. 2017, 5, 124–139. [CrossRef]
9. Hagiwara, M.; Nishimura, K.; Akagi, H. A Medium-Voltage Motor Drive With a Modular Multilevel PWM
Inverter. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2010, 25, 1786–1799. [CrossRef]
10. Sau, S.; Fernandes, B.G. Modular Multilevel Converter Based Variable Speed Drive With Reduced Capacitor
Ripple Voltage. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2019, 66, 3412–3421. [CrossRef]
11. Ma, F.; Xu, Q.; He, Z.; Tu, C.; Shuai, Z.; Luo, A.; Li, Y. A Railway Traction Power Conditioner Using Modular
Multilevel Converter and Its Control Strategy for High-Speed Railway System. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif.
2016, 2, 96–109. [CrossRef]
12. Wang, Z.; Zheng, Z.; Li, Y.; Li, G. Modulation and Control Strategy for Electric Traction Drive System of Rail
Transit Vehicles. Trans. China Electrotech. Soc. 2016, 31, 223–232.
13. Konstantinou, G.; Pou, J.; Ceballos, S.; Darus, R.; Agelidis, V.G. Switching Frequency Analysis of
Staircase-Modulated Modular Multilevel Converters and Equivalent PWM Techniques. IEEE Trans.
Power Del. 2016, 31, 28–36. [CrossRef]
14. Samajdar, D.; Bhattacharya, T.; Dey, S. A Reduced Switching Frequency Sorting Algorithm for Modular
Multilevel Converter With Circulating Current Suppression Feature. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2019, 34,
10480–10491. [CrossRef]
15. Tu, Q.; Xu, Z.; Xu, L. Reduced Switching-Frequency Modulation and Circulating Current Suppression for
Modular Multilevel Converters. IEEE Trans. Power Del. 2011, 26, 2009–2017.
16. Pérez-Basante, A.; Ceballos, S.; Konstantinou, G.; Pou, J.; Andreu, J.; de Alegría, I.M. (2N+1) Selective
Harmonic Elimination-PWM for Modular Multilevel Converters: A Generalized Formulation and A
Circulating Current Control Method. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2018, 33, 802–818. [CrossRef]
17. Dekka, A.; Wu, B.; Zargari, N.R.; Fuentes, R.L. A Space-Vector PWM-Based Voltage-Balancing Approach
With Reduced Current Sensors for Modular Multilevel Converter. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2016, 63,
2734–2745. [CrossRef]
18. Ronanki, D.; Williamson, S.S. A Simplified Space Vector Pulse Width Modulation Implementation in Modular
Multilevel Converters for Electric Ship Propulsion Systems. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 2019, 5, 335–342.
[CrossRef]
19. Ilves, K.; Harnefors, L.; Norrga, S.; Nee, H. Analysis and Operation of Modular Multilevel Converters with
Phase-Shifted Carrier PWM. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2015, 30, 268–283. [CrossRef]
20. Zhou, D.; Yang, S.; Tang, Y. Model-Predictive Current Control of Modular Multilevel Converters With
Phase-Shifted Pulsewidth Modulation. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2019, 66, 4368–4378. [CrossRef]
21. Sasongko, F.; Sekiguchi, K.; Oguma, K.; Hagiwara, M.; Akagi, H. Theory and Experiment on an Optimal
Carrier Frequency of a Modular Multilevel Cascade Converter With Phase-Shifted PWM. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 2016, 31, 3456–3471. [CrossRef]
22. Li, B.; Yang, R.; Xu, D.; Wang, G.; Wang, W.; Xu, D. Analysis of the Phase-Shifted Carrier Modulation for
Modular Multilevel Converters. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2015, 30, 297–310. [CrossRef]
Energies 2020, 13, 6743 21 of 21

23. Cheng, Q.; Wang, C. Comparison of Phase-Shifted Carrier PWM Schemes for Modular Multilevel Converter.
In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), Baltimore, MD, USA,
29 September–3 October 2019; pp. 4801–4807.
24. Van der Merwe, W. Natural Balancing of the 2-Cell Modular Multilevel Converter. IEEE Trans. Ind Appl.
2014, 50, 4028–4035. [CrossRef]
25. Lipo, T.; Holmes, D. Pulse Width Modulation for Power Converters: Principles and Practice; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ,
USA, 2003.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.

c 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).