4.5 Article

Review, Classification and Loss Comparison of Modular Multilevel Converter Submodules for HVDC Applications

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 15, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en15061985

关键词

high-voltage direct current (HVDC); modular multilevel converter; multilevel converters; submodules; cells

资金

  1. Australian Research Council [DP210102294]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper provides a comprehensive review and classification of different SM circuit topologies proposed for MMC. It analyzes the limitations and drawbacks of certain configurations and quantifies the differences among multiple SMs through loss comparison. It also offers recommendations for the benefits and limitations of different SM topologies and identifies future opportunities.
The circuit topology of a submodule (SM) in an modular multilevel converter (MMC) defines many of the functionalities of the complete power electronics conversion system and the specific applications that a specific MMC configuration can support. Most prominent among all applications for the MMC is its use in high-voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission systems and multiterminal dc grids. The aim of the paper is to provide a comprehensive review and classification of the many different SM circuit topologies that have been proposed for the MMC up to date. Using an 800-MVA, point-to-point MMC-based HVDC transmission system as a benchmark, the presented analysis identifies the limitations and drawbacks of certain SM configurations that limit their broader adoption as MMC SMs. A hybrid model of an MMC arm and appropriate implementations of voltage-balancing algorithms are used for detailed loss comparison of all SMs and to quantify differences among multiple SMs. The review also provides a comprehensive benchmark among all SM configurations, broad recommendations for the benefits and limitations of different SM topologies which can be further expanded based on the requirements of a specific application, and identifies future opportunities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据