A new HVDC-DC converter with inherent fault clearing

capability

Andre Schon, Mark-M. Bakran

U NIVERSITY OF BAYREUTH , D EPARTMENT OF M ECHATRONICS
Universitatsstr. 30
95447 Bayreuth, Germany
Phone: +49 (921) 55-7811
Fax: +49 (921) 55-7802
Email: andre.schoen@uni-bayreuth.de

Keywords
DC grid, HVDC, High voltage power converters, Fault tolerance, Efficiency, Multilevel converters,
Multiterminal HVDC, Power transmission, Transformer, Voltage Source Converter (VSC)

Abstract
For the upcoming need to transfer bulk power over long onshore distances, HVDC power transmission is
the preferred choice. However, components like HVDC-DC converters and a protection concept for DC
line faults present challenges, that still have to be solved. As up today, the sections of a segmented DC
transmission corridor would still be linked via an AC connection, leading to high transformation losses,
and high investment costs. With the newly presented HVDC-DC auto transformer[1] it is possible to
directly link two DC lines with different voltage levels. In this paper the ability of this HVDC-DC
converter to interrupt DC faults is investigated and compared to the state of the art topology of linking
two DC lines via an AC connection.

I Introduction
For decades HVDC power transmission has been well established. In Europe, it is mainly used to connect
AC grids across the sea or to transmit offshore wind power to the shore. On shore power is still transmit-
ted through the AC grid. But for offshore wind power, the long distances between the connection point
at the shore and the actual load centers in the south of Germany are bringing the AC grid to its limit.
Therefore in the foreseeable future HVDC power transmission will move from the periphery of the AC
grid to its center. New onshore DC transmission lines, connecting the load centers in the heart of Europe
directly to the onshore connection points are planned or already under construction.[2] The possibility of
long distance power transportation without stability issues and the capability of modern voltage source
converters (VSC) to control both active and reactive power makes HVDC power transmission a vital
asset for future energy transportation.
However, long distance DC power transmission brings new challenges and offers new opportunities. Off-
shore generated power is already transferred to the shore via HVDC. There it is converted into AC and
fed into the AC grid. The newly planned HVDC connections will also only be connections between two
AC grid points. In general different DC voltage levels are being used preventing the direct interconnec-
tion of the offshore and the onshore transmission lines. The multiple power conversion between DC and
AC produces a lot of losses and the number of converter stations needed, causes substantial investment
costs. In the long run, it will be more efficient to maintain DC power transportation from the remote
source to the actual load center. HVDC-DC converters allowing the direct interconnection of DC lines
with different voltage levels can massively reduce both the conversion losses and the investment costs.
The transmission of power greater than 1000MW also has high demands on the transmission security.
On the feeding end of the DC transmission line, to the AC grid, the converter station acts as a substantial
load and on the receiving end as a high power generator. If, due to a DC fault, power transportation is
corrupted, the AC grid has to handle the additional power which will most likely lead to an overload.
For DC cables, DC faults are catastrophic and interrupt the power transmission permanently. Faults
on overhead lines, on the other hand, most likely due to lightning or tree strikes, can be cleared by
interrupting the current for a short period until the natural insulation is restored. This can either be done
on the DC side or at the converters AC connection. Conventional AC breakers are able to interrupt the
converters AC feed within 10ms to 100ms, leading to a restart of the converters operation. This restart is
likely to take more than 2s [2] during which the converter station is not able to support the AC grid. It
is doubtful that this interruption can be tolerated. Hence, the DC fault has to be cleared on the DC side,
leaving the converter station operational, to support the AC grid with reactive power during the fault and
to quickly restore DC power transportation.
Besides stand-alone HVDC breakers installed within the DC line [3][4][5], the ability of HVDC converter
stations to suppress DC fault currents is widely discussed. In this paper the capability of the HVDC-DC
converter presented in [1] to interrupt DC faults is investigated and compared to a HVDC-DC converter
topology with two full scale voltage source converters linked via an AC grid.
All converters are based on modular multilevel converters (MMC) [6][7] build with discrete submodules
of a fixed power rating.
ia Id
L+
La La La
im
Vm
SM SM SM

SM SM SM

SM SM SM
L1 Vd (a) Half-Bridge-Submodule [7]
L2
L3
SM SM SM
im Vm
SM SM SM

SM SM SM

La La La
L- (b) Full-Bridge-Submodule [7]

Figure 1: Modular Multilevel Converter (MMC) [7] for AC-DC conversion

The number of submodules per phase leg depends on the lines DC voltage and the submodules rated
voltage. The rated power of a modular multilevel converter is given by the lines DC voltage and its
maximum rated DC current. Depending on the operation point and the switching frequency, every phase
leg of MMC submodules can carry a maximum DC current. The sum of all maximum phase leg currents
is the maximum DC current of the converter.
A unit of measurement for the installed submodule power is the chip area of the IGBTs and diodes in
use. In theory, perfectly scalable submodules, that fit the converters power demand, are possible. Never
the less, in this paper in every submodule the same IGBTs and the same diodes are used. This leads to
an identical power rating with one maximum DC current for every submodule and is more realistic.
The properties of the two submodule types pictured in Fig. 1 are summarized in Tab. 1. The Half-Bridge-
Submodule (HBSM, Fig. 1(a)) only supports one voltage direction. The Full-Bridge-Submodule (FBSM,
Fig. 1(b)) supports both voltage directions.
The semiconductor demand of each submodule type is normalized to that of the HBSM and is also given
in Tab. 1. With this normalization a FBSM has twice the power electronic effort as a HBSM.

Table 1: Comparison of the three submodule types from Fig. 1

HBSM FBSM
Positive blocking voltage Vm Vm
Negative blocking voltage - Vm
Normalized semiconductor demand 1 2

In section II the state of the art technology in HVDC-DC conversion and the newly proposed HVDC-DC
auto transformer [1] are presented, and in section III their capability to interrupt DC fault currents is
investigated and compared.

II A new Modular Multilevel HVDC-DC Converter

In [1] a new type of HVDC-DC converter has been introduced. Based on a topology similar to an
AC auto transformer, this HVDC-DC converter allows the direct interconnection of HVDC lines with
different DC voltage levels. For clarity, the working principle and the advantages of this new HVDC-DC
converter in comparison to the state of the art technology are summarized here.
All proposed HVDC-DC converters from previous publications are based on a two stage topology with
a full AC link (e.g. [8][9][10][11]). The basic principle of this HVDC-DC converter topology is inde-
pendent of the actual converter technology. The incoming DC power is converted into AC, transferred
through an AC link and then rectified by a second converter. This Front-to-Front[1] (F2F) topology,
build with three phase modular multilevel converters is shown in Fig. 2. Given a fixed submodule power
rating, the low level DC voltage and therefore the subconverters power rating, decline with a rising trans-
formation ratio. The transferable DC power of that topology is limited by the current rating of the low
level subconverter and is proportional the reciprocal transformation ration n with n > 1. Also, since there
are two power conversion stages, both subconverters have to be rated for their individual DC-AC power.
Hence, the installed converter power is at least twice the nominal DC-DC power. If identical submod-
ules are being used in both conversion stages, the installed conversion power is even higher. For future
reference, the number of submodules needed for the high level subconverter of the F2F topology is only
proportional to the high level DC voltage VDC,I . The number of submodules needed for the low level
subconverter is proportional to the high level DC voltage divided by the transformation ratio. Scaled
to the high level DC voltage the number of submodules needed for the F2F topology is proportional to
(n + 1)/n.
IDC,I IDC,II

La La La La La La

SM SM SM SM SM SM

SM SM SM SM SM SM

SM SM SM SM SM SM

VDC,Ia VDC,IIa

SM SM SM SM SM SM

SM SM SM SM SM SM

SM SM SM SM SM SM

La La La La La La

Figure 2: Front-to-Front HVDC-DC converter (F2F)

Unlike the F2F topology, the newly proposed HVDC-
DC auto transformer (HVDC-AT) from [1] is a single IDC,I
stage HVDC-DC converter. It consists of two DC side
series connected voltage source converters where the La La La
sum of both DC voltages forms the high level DC volt-
SM SM SM
age and the lower subconverter forms the low level DC
voltage. Both subconverters are connected through an SM SM SM
AC link allowing an energy transfer between the upper
and the lower converter. The HVDC-AT, also build with SM SM SM
three phase modular multilevel converters, is shown in
Fig. 3. Again, the number of MMC submodules per
phase leg depends only on the converters DC voltage
SM SM SM
and the submodules rated voltage. Hence, the HVDC-
AT needs exactly the same amount of submodules as the
high level side converter of the F2F topology. SM SM SM

The amount of power, that has to be transferred through SM SM SM

the AC link, depends on the voltage difference between VDC,Ia
La La La
the high and low level DC voltage and the high level DC IDC,II
current. Unlike the F2F topology, where the full DC-
DC power is routed through the AC link, with the new La La La
topology only a fraction of the actual DC-DC power has
to be converted into AC and back into DC. Therefore the SM SM SM
conversion losses and the power rating of the installed SM SM SM
AC transformer can be minimized [1].
SM SM SM
PTrans f ormer = (VDC,I VDC,II ) IDC,I (1)
VDC,IIa
= VDC,II (IDC,II IDC,I ) (2)
SM SM SM
n1
= VDC,I IDC,I (3)
n SM SM SM
n1
= PDC (4) SM SM SM
n
La La La
Since the voltage difference is given by the transforma-
tion ration between the upper and the lower DC side, the
rated current of each sub converter determines the trans-
ferable DC-DC power. While the upper subconverter
sees the full high level DC current, the lower subcon- Figure 3: HVDC-DC auto transformer (HVDC-AT)
verter only sees the negative difference between the low
and the high level DC current.
For a transformation ratio of n 2 the DC current through the upper subconverter is higher than the DC
current through the lower subconverter. Hence, given the premises that identical submodules are being

0.8
PDC /PDC ,max

0.6

0.4

0.2 MMC DC-DC converter

MMC DC-DC auto transformer
0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
n
Figure 4: Transferable DC-DC power, scaled to the maximum AC-DC power of the high level subconverter of
Fig. 2 [1]
used in both subconverters, for a transformation ratio of n 2 the maximum DC-DC power is limited
by the upper subconverter. Since the DC current through the upper subconverter is equal to the high
level DC current, in that transformation ratio range the transferable DC power is equal to the maximum
DC-AC power of a modular multilevel converter with the same rated DC voltage.
For a transformation ratio of n > 2 the lower subconverter is the limiting component. Its DC current is
limited to the maximum rated current of the used submodules and the high level DC current, and therefore
the transferable DC-DC power, decline proportional to 1/(n 1). The transferable DC power of both
topologies scale to the AC-DC conversion power of the high level subconverter of Fig. 2 is compared in
Fig. 4

III DC fault handling with HVDC-DC Converters

Because of the low inductance values, rapidly rising fault currents due to DC line to line faults pose the
greatest risk for the power electronic components of the converter stations. A DC fault current, only
limited by the short circuit impedance of the feeding AC grid and the DC lines inductance can easily
reach 3.5kA/ms [4]. Hence, being able to limit and to break the DC fault current is imperative to the
operation of a DC line. The capability to selectively disconnect single line branches becomes even more
important in a multiterminal HVDC transmission configuration, where a single line fault must not lead
to a complete grid outage.
The F2F topology inherently allows to form an AC grid with its AC link. So additional power can
either be drawn from or feed into each DC line. By using a three-winding transformer the HVDC-AT
topology can also offer that possibility. In this section, the capability to interrupt DC fault currents and the
power electronic effort of the regarded topologies in two different application scenarios of a HVDC-DC
converter are compared. In the first scenario, the HVDC-DC converter stands alone as pictured in Fig. 2
and Fig. 3 only connecting two single DC lines. In the second scenario, an AC grid with an associated
short circuit power is attached to the AC link of both topologies.

A Blocking voltage requirements

In [4] it is proposed to insert additional semiconductor switches into the DC transmission line to dis-
connect faulty DC lines. To interrupt a DC fault, the available blocking voltage has to exceed the lines
DC voltage plus an additional overvoltage due to the line inductance. The great advantage of a F2F type
HVDC-DC converter is its capability to suppress a fault current as soon as the converters current exceeds
its nominal DC current.
Assuming only HBSMs are being used in both subconverters, in case of a DC fault, the fault side AC-DC
converter acts as a diode rectifier with no possibility to influence the fault current. However, without
an AC grid attached to the AC link between both subconverters, the feeding DC-AC subconverter stays
operational and can easily limit the fault current to the allowed maximum by simply reducing the voltage
level of the AC link. Furthermore, a F2F converter can break such a fault current by blocking the feeding
DC-AC subconverter or by opening the AC switches of the fault side AC-DC subconverter, leaving the
fault free DC line operational.
The proposed HVDC-AT lacks this simple ability to suppress fault currents. As shown in Fig. 5 de-
pending on which DC side is corrupted, the upper subconverter has to support either the full high side
DC voltage in forward direction or the full low side DC voltage in reverse direction to block the fault.
Depending on the transformation ratio additional HBSMs and FBSMs have to be installed. The lower
subconverter has no possible influence on the fault on either DC side. Therefore it can be built with only
the minimum number of HBSMs.
In general, three requirements have to be met by the upper subconverter of the new HVDC-AT to enable
that topology to break DC faults:
1. There must be enough blocking capability in forward direction to withstand a short circuit on the
low level DC side (Fig. 5(a))
2. There must be enough blocking capability in reverse direction to withstand a short circuit on the
high level DC side (Fig. 5(b))
3. There must be enough blocking capability in forward direction to ensure the converter functionality
These three requirements are summarized in Fig. 6. The overvoltage caused by the line inductance,
usually limited up to 1.5 VDC by the insulation coordination, has to be considered, regardless of the
 IDC,I IDC,I

Converter I
Converter I
VDC,I VDC,II

VDC,I IDC,II VDC,I = 0 IDC,II

Converter II
Converter II

VDC,II = 0 VDC,II

(a) Low level DC side fault (b) High level DC side fault

Figure 5: HVDC auto transformer blocking capability demand in case of a DC line to ground fault

breaker capability of the HVDC-DC converter. In general, this is done by an additional overvoltage
factor in the converter design. For this evaluation and the comparison, this additional factor has no
influence and can be neglected.
1.8
functional blocking capability in forward direction
1.6 fault blocking capability in reverse direction

1.4 fault blocking capability in forward direction

overall forward blocking capability

1.2
HBSMs
V B /V DC,I

0.8
HBSMs
0.6

0.4
FBSMs
0.2

0
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3
n
Figure 6: Required blocking capability in the upper subconverter of the HVDC-AT topology

At a transformation ratio of n = 2 the forward blocking capability is sufficient to ensure the converter
operation and to block the full high level side DC voltage. At a lower transformation ratio the overall
forward blocking capability stays constant, since it cannot be lower than the high level side DC voltage.
To ensure the reverse blocking capability mainly FBSMs have to be used in that range. By installing
these modules, inherently a blocking capability in forward direction is also installed. So, to meet the
requirements 1 and 3 only the difference has to be installed with HBSMs. At a transformation ratio
of n > 2 the number of submodules needed for the converter operation exceeds the forward blocking
demand. Therefore, besides the partial use of FBSMs there is no additional power electronic effort to
ensure the DC breaker capability.
If there is an AC grid attached to the AC link and only HBSMs are being used, the fault side AC-DC
converter would act as a diode rectifier feeding the fault with the AC grids short circuit power. Hence,
additional reverse blocking capability has to be installed into each subconverter, allowing the fault side
AC-DC converter to limit the fault current on its own. In that scenario both subconverters of the F2F
topology have to be built with FBSMs. Since the upper subconverter of the HVDC-AT in any case has
to be equipped to withstand both DC voltage directions, only the lower subconverter has to be specially
designed for that case. It has to be built with FBSMs, too.

B Semiconductor effort

To enable the HVDC-AT topology to withstand DC faults, additional blocking capability has to be in-
stalled. Compared to the simple topology, with the sole task to convert one DC level to another, the MMC
phase leg no longer consists of a series connection of only HBSMs but of a series connection of HBSMs
and FBSMs. The increased semiconductor effort can be quantified with the normalized semiconductor
demand per submodule type from Tab. 1. The overall semiconductor effort is a measurement for the
installed conversion power and therefore a measurement for the converter costs.
All pictured semiconductor efforts are normalized to the high level DC voltage VDC,I and the submodule
voltage Vm . In Fig. 7 the initial semiconductor demand of the F2F topology and the HVDC-AT topology,
both build with HBSM are plotted. The high level subconverter of the F2F topology is always rated
for the high level DC voltage VDC,I . Per phase leg, twice that voltage has to be installed, meaning two
HBSMs times VDC,I /Vm . Therefore the semiconductor effort for this converter, normalized to VDC,I /Vm ,
is 2. The normalized semiconductor effort per phase leg of the low level subconverter starts at the same
value and declines with a rising transformation ratio. The number of submodules per phase leg needed for
the basic HVDC-AT topology is for all transformation ratios equal to that of the high level subconverter
of the F2F topology.
Front-to-Front with HBSMs HVDC auto transformer with HBSMs
4 4
Normalized semiconductor eort per phase leg

3.5 3.5
Total Front-to-Front
3 3

2.5 2.5
High level subconverter Total DC auto transformer
2 2

1.5 1.5 Lower subconverter

Low level subconverter
1 1

Upper subconverter
0.5 0.5

0 0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
n n
Figure 7: Required normalized semiconductor effort for both HVDC-DC converter topologies with HBSMs

If an AC grid is attached to the AC link of both topologies, FBSMs must be used in both subconverters of
the F2F topology and the lower subconverter of the HVDC-AT topology to enable each subconverter to
limit and break its DC side current independently. In that case, the semiconductor effort of the regarded
subconverter is doubled.
As mentioned before, only the upper subconverter of the HVDC-AT topology can actually influence a
DC fault current. To break fault currents, this subconverter has to block the full high level DC voltage in
its normal operation direction and the full low level DC voltage in the reverse direction. The necessary
FBSMs also deliver their module voltage in both directions. Therefore the modules needed for a sufficient
reverse blocking capability also deliver a part the blocking capability in forward direction and the normal
converter operation. The additional forward blocking voltage needed for a low level DC fault (green line
in Fig. 6 and Fig. 8) and for the functionality of the subconverter (blue line in Fig. 6 and Fig. 8) is
delivered by additional HBSMs in series to the other submodule types. The normalized semiconductor
effort is given in Fig. 8. For the total semiconductor effort the effort for the lower subconverter build
with HBSMs is added.
 Normalized semiconductor eort per phase leg
4
FBSMs for reverse blocking capability
3.5 HBSMs for forward blocking capability

Additional HBSMs for converter function

3
Total DC auto transformer
2.5

1.5

0.5

0
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3
n
Figure 8: Normalized semiconductor effort for the upper subconverter of the HVDC-AT with additional HBSMs
and FBSMs

C Utilization of the installed converter power

To compare all given variants the semiconductor effort, as a measure for the installed converter power is
set into relation to the transferable DC-DC power of the given topology (Fig. 4). The possible topology
variants are given in Tab. 2. For clarity, the plain HVDC-AT with no breaker capability has been added
since this topology gives the lower limit in semiconductor effort and the maximum converter utilization.
As reference for the installed converter power, the high level subconverter of the F2F topology, build
with HBSMs, is used. This subconverter with a semiconductor effort of 4 IGBTs per Vm has an installed
conversion capability of 1 PDC .
With the plain HVDC-AT with no breaker capability, for a transformation ratio of n 2, the installed
converter power can actually be transferred. Therefore the converter utilization is 1. This is also the
theoretical limit under the assumption, that submodules with an identical power rating are being used in
all subconverters.
If no AC grid is attached to the converters AC link, at a transformation ratio of n = 1, the F2F and the
HVDC-AT topology actually have the same converter utilization. For a DC-DC converter, this operation
point has no practical use, since the DC voltage on both sides is identical. Depending on the desired fault
behavior other topologies than the F2F and the HVDC-AT are better suited for such a task.
At higher transformation ratios up to n = 2 the utilization of the installed converter power increases and
reaches 80% of its theoretical limit. At that operation point the converter utilization of the HVDC-AT is
more than twice of the converter utilization of the F2F topology.
If due to an attached AC grid FBSMs are needed, at a transformation ratio of n = 1, the utilization of the
installed converter power of the F2F topology is only 25% , meaning only one fourth of the installed the
converter power can be transferred from one DC side to the other. Due to the lower semiconductor effort
in the high level subconverter, the HVDC-AT has a utilization factor of one third at that transformation
ratio, which also increases with a rising transformation ratio. The theoretical limit for that case is at
about 57% at a transformation ratio of n = 2 which is more than 3 times the converter utilization of the
F2F converter at that operation point.
At a transformation ratio of n > 2 the transferable DC power of the HVDC-AT topology declines due
to the maximum power rating of the lower subconverter. Therefore the utilization of the installed con-
verter power also declines (Fig. 4). But, at all possible transformation ratios, the HVDC-AT has a lower
semiconductor effort and a higher utilization of the installed converter power than a comparable F2F
converter.
 Table 2: Topology Variants

Topology Used submodule type

Scenario 1: Without AC grid at the converters AC link
Variant 1 F2F HBSMs in both subconverters
Variant 2 HVDC-AT HBSMs in the lower and FBSMs + HBSMs in the upper subconverter
Variant 3 HVDC-AT HBSMs in the lower and HBSMs in the upper subconverter
(no breaker capability)
Scenario 2: With AC grid at the converters AC link
Variant 4 F2F FBSMs in both subconverters
Variant 5 HVDC-AT FBSMs in the lower and FBSMs + HBSMs in the upper subconverter

Semiconductor eort Utilization

8
Normalized semiconductor eort per phase leg

1
7

6
0.8

5
P DC /P I nst

0.6
4

3 0.4

2
0.2
1

0 0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
n n
Variant 1 Variant 4

Variant 2 Variant 5

Variant 3

Figure 9: Normalized semiconductor effort and utilization of the installed converter power of all variants of Tab. 2

IV Conclusion
In this paper, the capability of the HVDC auto transformer presented in [1] to interrupt DC fault currents
has been analyzed and compared to a galvanically separated topology with two converter stations and
a full AC link. It has been shown that DC fault currents on both DC sides can be interrupted by the
new topology. Since no mechanical breakers are involved, the response time to converter overcurrents is
merely instant and real short circuit currents can be avoided. The additional component effort necessary
to enable the new HVDC auto transformer topology to interrupt DC currents depends on the actual
transformation ratio. The optimum transformation ratio for the given topology is n = 2. It also has been
shown, that at any given transformation ratio, even with the DC breaker capability, the HVDC-AT has a
lower converter effort than the conventional two stage topology. Combined with the higher transferable
DC power of the HVDC-AT topology, the investment costs in relation to the power rating of such a
HVDC-DC converter can be massively reduced.
References
[1] A. Schon and M.M Bakran. A new HVDC-DC converter for the efficient connection of HVDC
networks. PCIM Europe, Nurnberg, 2013.
[2] P. Fairley. Germany jump-starts the Supergrid. IEEE Spectrum, (05):3237, 2013.
[3] C. M. Franck. HVDC Circuit Breakers: A Review Identifying Future Research Needs. IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, 26(2):9981007, 2011.
[4] J. Hafner and B. Jacobson. Proactive Hybrid HVDC Breakers - A key innovation for reliable HVDC
grids. Cigre Bologna, (0264), 2011.
[5] D. Schmitt, Y. Wang, Th. Weyh, and R. Marquardt. DC-Side Fault Current Management in ex-
tended Multiterminal-HVDC-Grids. IEEE 9th International Multi-Conference on Systems, Signals
and Devices, 2012.
[6] A. Lesnicar and R. Marquardt. An innovative modular multilevel converter topology suitable for a
wide power range. IEEE Power Tech Conference Proceedings, Bologna, (3):6 , 2003.
[7] R. Marquardt. Modular Multilevel Converter: An universal concept for HVDC-Networks and
extended DC-Bus-applications. International Power Electronics Conference, pages 502507, 2010.
[8] C. Barker, C. Davidson, D. R. Trainer, and R. S. Whitehouse. Requirements of DC-DC Converters
to facilitate large DC Grids: Alstom Grid UK Ltd. Cigre Session 2012, 2012.
[9] D. Jovcic. Bidirectional, High-Power DC Transformer. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
24(4):22762283, 2009.
[10] D. Jovcic and J. Zhang. High power IGBT-based DC/DC converter with DC fault tolerance. In 15th
International Power Electronics and Motion Control Conference (EPE/PEMC), pages DS3b.61
DS3b.66, 2012.
[11] Y. Zhou, D. E. Macpherson, W. Blewitt, and D. Jovcic. Comparison of DC-DC converter topologies
for offshore wind-farm application. IET Power Electronics, Machines and Drives, pages 16, 2012.