Decoupling Control of Input-Paralleled System
with Dual Active Bridge Converters
Choul-Woo Jung
Dept. of Electrical Engineering,
Yeungnam University
Gyeongsan, Korea
21111573@ynu.ac.kr
Abstract—This paper proposes a new control strategy for DC-
DC converter systems consisting of multiple dual active bridge
(DAB) modules. At first, the relations between input current
sharing control and output voltage regulation (OVR) in input-
paralleled systems are investigated, which is based on small signal
model. Then, an input current sharing (ICS) control loop is
designed, which is decoupled with the OVR control loop. In the
proposed method, the model of the modular converter is
simplified, in which a decoupling control scheme is easily derived.
In addition, the modeling technique is applied not only to the
input-parallel output-parallel (IPOP) system but also to the input-
series output-series (IPOS) system. The effectiveness of the
proposed control strategy has been verified by simulation results
for a 30-kW system.
Keywords— input current sharing, decoupled control, dual
active bridge, input-paralleled system
I. INTRODUCTION
In recent years, due to the rapid electrification of
transportation and the increasing demand of renewable energy,
DC-DC conversion systems which can handle higher power
capacity and higher voltage and current are increasingly
required. One of the promising candidate for these systems is a
modular converter structure, which has many advantages [1]-[5]:
1) The system can be expanded easily since it is composed
of the same modules. The system reliability is also improved due
to the redundancy of modular converters.
2) Power semiconductor devices are operated at much lower
voltage and current stresses. Therefore, the system can be
operated at higher switching frequency to reduce the volume and
weight of passive components. As a result, the total system cost
can be reduced while high efficiency and high power density are
achieved.
The modular DC-DC converters can be categorized into
four types depending on whether the input and output terminals
of constituent modules are series- or parallel-connected: input-
parallel output-parallel (IPOP), input-parallel output-series
(IPOS), input-series output-series (ISOS), input-series output-
parallel (IPOP).
Among the modular converter types, input-parallel-
connected systems, which are IPOP and IPOS, have advantages
in the current distribution between modules. Since the input is
connected in parallel, the input current Iin can be reduced to
978-1-7281-5353-7/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE
Dong-Choon Lee
Dept. of Electrical Engineering,
Yeungnam University
Gyeongsan, Korea
dclee@yu.ac.kr
Iin / N , where N is the number of modules. In addition, the
interleaved PWM control scheme can reduce the currents ripple
of the whole system. It means that the size of filter inductor can
be reduced. The output terminal of the modular converter is
connected in series for high voltage or in parallel for high
current applications.
In the modular converters, power imbalance can occur due
to the parameter mismatch among modules, which can cause
transformer saturation, thermal stress imbalance, poor
performance and excessive power concentration of the specific
module. For this reason, the power sharing between individual
modules should be maintained even if the parameters of the
individual modules are different. In order to solve this issue,
several control techniques such as droop control and active
current sharing have been proposed [6] - [10]. Droop control
method is easy to implement and has the advantage of achieving
the power sharing without communication between modules.
The main disadvantage is the degradation of the load current
sharing performance when the load power is changed rapidly.
On the other hand, the active sharing method ensures not only
excellent current control sharing but also output voltage
regulation. In the active sharing control in a modular system,
output current sharing (OCS) or output voltage sharing (OVS)
should be guaranteed to achieve power sharing between
modules for IPOP and IPOS systems. Fortunately, OCS and
OVS are automatically achieved by ensuring ICS due to the
characteristics of input-paralleled system. Also, an output
voltage regulation (OVR) loop is required to control the
common output voltage. However, the control variables of the
OVR and ICS between the modules affect each other. In order
to ensure both the input current balance and common voltage
control, an appropriate compensation is needed [11]-[12].
In this paper, a new decoupling control method is proposed
for the IPOP and IPOS systems, which consists of three dual
active bridge (DAB) converter modules (Fig. 1). The problem
of the conventional method for ICS and OVS in the input-
paralleled system is investigated. By introducing the error of the
ICS as a control quantity, the modeling of the system is
simplified. With the proposed decoupling control scheme, an
independent control between input current sharing control loop
and common output voltage control loop can be achieved. The
validity of the proposed decoupling control scheme has been
verified by simulation results for 30-kW input-paralleled
converter systems.
226
Fig. 1. Modular DC-DC converters. (a) IPOP structure. (b) IPOS structure.

+ +
vˆi iˆij iˆoj Cout R vˆo

- -

Fig. 3. Simplified small signal model of DAB module.

In order to model the modular system, at first, a constituent

module converter should be defined. Individual DAB modules
can be represented by small-signal modeling of input and output
currents with resistive load as shown in Fig. 3 [13]. The currents
for the input and output can be expressed as

iˆij = gid dˆ j + givo vˆo (2)

iˆoj = god dˆ j + govi vˆi

Fig. 2. Waveform of DAB converter #1. (3)

II. MODELING OF IPOP/IPOS MODULAR DAB CONVERTERS where gid , g ivo god and g ovi are given by
The DAB converter is suitable for a constituent module of
high power modular DC-DC converters due to its bi- Vo2 (1 − 2 D ) Vo
g id = = g od
directional power transfer capability, zero-voltage switching Vi (1 − D ) DR Vi
(ZVS) property, and simple control scheme. The key Vo
waveforms for the individual DAB module are shown in Fig. g ivo = g ovi = .
Vi R
2. Converter modules are controlled with a single phase shift (4)
(SPS) modulation. In the SPS modulation, all the switches turn Vo (1 − 2 D )
on and off at the same constant duty ratio (50%) and the power g od =
(1 − D ) DR
is controlled by the phase shift between the voltages of the
primary and the secondary bridges. The output power equation Vo
g ovi = .
is expressed as Vi R
nv v In (2) and (3), dˆ j is the control variable of individual modules,
P = 1 2 d (1 − d ) (1)
2 fLs
iˆij and iˆoj mean the perturbation for the input and output
where n is transformer turn ratio, f is switching frequency and currents of the module, respectively, R is load resistance and
Ls is the sum of the auxiliary inductance and the leakage j represents module number ( j = 1, 2, 3).
inductance in the transformer, and d is the phase shift ratio To apply small signal modeling of a single DAB to the
between the primary and secondary voltages. modular system, some assumptions are needed as follows:

227
 iˆin iˆout iˆin iˆout Then, substituting (3) into (9), the total output voltage is
iˆi1 iˆo1 + iˆi1 iˆo1 obtained as,
vˆi Co vˆo
-
vˆi Co
(
vˆo _ s = Gvo _ s ( s ) dˆ1 + dˆ2 + dˆ3 . (10) )
g od R
iˆi 2 iˆo 2 iˆi 2 iˆo 2 + where, Gvo _ s =
( 3 + RCi s ) 1 2 3
(
dˆ + dˆ + dˆ . )
Co vˆo
- From (6) and (10), it is observed that output voltages of the
IPOP and IPOS systems are expressed with the transfer
iˆi 3 iˆo3 iˆi 3 iˆo3 function and the phase-shift ratios of the three modules.
Co
III. PROPOSED CONTROL STRATEGY
(a) (b) A. Problem of conventional decoupling control strategy
The current of one remaining module is automatically
Fig. 4. Simplified small signal model for input-parallel-connected systems, shared by controlling the N-1 input currents. Therefore, the
(a) IPOP, (b) IPOS
overall control system may have N-1 ICS control loops and an
OVR control loop for power sharing of individual modules.
• The parameters of each module are equal.
Substituting (6) and (10) into (2), the input current of the
• The nominal phase shift ratio at the operating point is individual modules in both structures can be expressed as
the same, but the perturbation is different dˆ1 ≠ dˆ2 ≠ dˆ3 . ( )
(
iˆij = gid dˆ j + givo Gvo ( s ) dˆ1 + dˆ2 + dˆ3 .) (11)
• Since the input voltage is constant, the perturbation of
the input voltage is zero ( vˆi = 0 ) . Gvo _ p ( s ) for IPOP
where, Gvo ( s ) = 
Based on the above assumptions, simplified small-signal  Gvo _ s ( s ) for IPOS
models of IPOP and IPOS systems are illustrated in Fig. 4.
From (6), (10) and (11), the 3x3 matrix form of the input-
In the IPOP system, since the output terminals are connected paralleled system for the output voltage and input currents can
in parallel, the total output current of the system is equal to the be derived as
sum of the currents of the individual modules. Therefore, the
ˆ
output voltage is expressed, with the output current, as  iˆi1   gid + givo ⋅ Gvo ( s ) givo ⋅ Gvo ( s ) givo ⋅ Gvo ( s )   d1 
ˆ    ˆ 
R ii 2  =  givo ⋅ Gvo ( s ) gid + givo ⋅ Gvo ( s ) givo ⋅ Gvo ( s )  d2  (12)
vˆo _ p = iˆout vˆo    
RCout s + 1    G ( s ) Gvo ( s ) Gvo ( s )   dˆ3 
vo
 
(5)
R
=
RCout s + 1
(
iˆo1 + iˆo 2 + iˆo3 . ) It can be seen that the control-to-output transfer functions
are cross-coupled through non-diagonal elements in (12). Based
on [14], it is necessary to make a single-input single-output
Assuming the input voltage is constant, when (3) is substituted (SISO) system by introducing a decoupling matrix for
into (5), the output voltage is expressed as independent control of the control variables. However, the
decoupling strategy cannot be applied directly due to the sum
(
vˆo _ p = Gvo _ p ( s ) dˆ1 + dˆ2 + dˆ3 ) (6) of the transfer functions, which is gid + givo ⋅ Gvo ( s ) . Therefore,
it is necessary to define a new control quantity.
where Gvo _ p =
R
RCout s + 1
(
g od dˆ1 + dˆ2 + dˆ3 and the output) B. Novel ICS contorl strategy
voltage is controlled by the phase shift ratios of individual The total input current is equal to the sum of the individual
module currents, as
modules.
Similarly, according to Kirchhoff's law, the output current iˆin = iˆi1 + iˆi 2 + iˆi 3
and capacitor current of each module in the IPOS system are (13)
expressed, respectively, as ( )
= gid dˆ1 + dˆ2 + dˆ3 + 3givo vˆo

iˆoj = iˆout + iˆcj (7) To achieve the ICS, the input current reference of the individual
module is 1 / N of the total input current, which is expressed as
iˆcj = vˆoj Co s . (8)
Considering the connection of output terminal is series, the
output current of each module is the same, so total output
1
3
( )
iˆij* = gid dˆ1 + dˆ2 + dˆ3 + givo vˆo . (14)

current is expressed as The error of the current control is expressed as

3iˆout = ( iˆo1 + iˆo 2 + iˆo 3 ) − vˆo _ s Co s (9)

228
 Input current sharing
eˆij = iˆij* − iˆij . (15)
+
0 Ci(s)
Substituting (13) and (14) into (15) and summarizing them in - δ1 -
DAB #1
terms of control variables, * + d1
ei1 = i − ii1
i1

1
3
(
eˆij = gid dˆ1 + dˆ2 + dˆ3 − 3dˆ j . ) (16) +
-
Ci(s)
δ2 -
Phase-
Shift DAB #2
contorl
* + d2
Compared with (11), it is observed that the transfer function ei 2 = i − ii 2
i2

between the output voltage and the input current, givo , does not +
Output voltage regulation DAB #3
exist. The control-to-output system with the newly defined term + d3
V* + +
of current control errors is expressed as o
-
Cv(s)
δ3
Vo interleave clock
ˆ
 eˆi1   −2Gid Gid Gid   d1 
 eˆ  =  G   
 i 2   id −2Gid Gid   dˆ2  Fig. 5. Decoupling control strategy of IPOP and IPOS systems.
 
 vˆo  Gvo ( s ) Gvo ( s )
 Gvo ( s )   dˆ3 
  The actual inputs of the DAB modules are the phase shift
(17)
 dˆ1 
 
( )
ratios dˆ1 , dˆ2 , dˆ3 , which can be easily obtained from (21),
= G ( s ) ⋅  dˆ2  with the inverse of matrix D(s), as
ˆ 
 d 3   dˆ1   δˆ1   −1 0 1  δˆ1 
     
 dˆ2  = D ( s ) δˆ2  =  0 −1 1 δˆ2 
−1
where Gid = gid / 3. Even though there are interactions (22)
between two current control loops and one voltage control ˆ  ˆ    ˆ 
 d3  δ 3   1 1 1 δ 3 
loop, it can be observed that the transfer function matrix G(s)
of the system has been simplified. Fig. 5 shows the control block diagram for the overall
To achieve independent control loops, system matrix G(s) system. It consists of two input current sharing control loops
and an output voltage regulation loop. To eliminate the errors,
is decomposed of a product of diagonal matrix X ( s ) and
the reference of the current controller is set as zero. The
arbitrary matrix D ( s ) , as outputs of the whole controller are new control variables
( )
δˆ1, δˆ2 , δˆ3 . The d̂1 and d̂ 2 are determined by subtracting the
3Gid 0 0 
  output of the ICS control loop from the output of the OVR
G ( s) = X ( s) D ( s) =  0 3Gid 0  ⋅ D ( s)
(18)
control loop, and d̂3 is determined by the sum of the total ICS
 0 0 3Gvo ( s ) 
control loop output and the OVR control loop.
By substituting (18) into (17), IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
ˆ
 eˆi1  3Gid 0 0   δ1  To verify the proposed control scheme, a 30-kW IPOP/
ˆ      IPOS system with three DAB modules has been simulated
 ei 2  =  0 3Gid 0  δˆ2  , (19) using PSIM. The power rating of each module is 10-kW. The
 
 vˆo   0 0 3Gvo ( s )  δˆ3  system parameters are listed in Table 1. In the IPOP system,
  since the input and output terminals are connected in parallel,
where it is obvious that the system variables can be input and output voltages of all modules are the same at 750V.
independently. In (19), new control variables are obtained as On the other hand, in the case of IPOS, the output terminal is
connected in series, so the common output voltage is 2250V.
 δˆ1   dˆ1  To verify the power-sharing performance between each
    module, about 10% parameter mismatch in leakage inductance
δˆ2  = D ( s )  dˆ2  (20) and turn ratio is considered.
ˆ ˆ 
δ 3   d3  Fig. 6 shows the control performance without decoupling
control in the IPOS system. The ICS is controlled by DAB
where module #1 and #2 and the output voltage is controlled by
module #3. The output voltage is well controlled, but when the
 2 1 1 load changes, power imbalance occurs between modules due
− 3 3 3 to the cross-coupling between the ICS and OVS control loops.
 
1 2 1 . (21)
D(s) = X (s) G (s) = 
−1
− Fig. 7 shows the control performance of the proposed
 3 3 3
  decoupling control in the IPOP system with the different
 1 1 1
inductance cases, where the load is changed from 15-kW to
 3 3 3  30-kW and back to 15-kW.

229
 TABLE I. PARAMETERS OF DAB CONVERTER MODULE 20
Ii_1_input Ii_2_input Ii _3_input

15
15[A]
Parameters Value

(a)
10

Input voltage(Vi) 750 V 5

0
[5A/div]
Output voltage(Vo) 750 V Vdc_LV Vdc_out_ref

760

Transformer turn ratio 1:1 755

(Primary : Secondary) (nominal)

(b)
750
750[V]
Leakage inductance (Lk1, Lk2, Lk2) 210uH,234uH,257uH 745

[5V/div]
Switching frequency 10kHz
740

0.16 0.18 0.2

Time 0.02[s/div]
Time (s)

Output capacitance 1000uF

Power rate of the module DAB 10kW Fig. 7. Performance of individual module currents and ouput voltage for
proposed decoupling control strategy in IPOP system. (a) Input currents of
three modules. (b) Common output voltage of three modules.
Ii_1_input Ii_2_input Ii_3_input

Ii2
Io1_f Io2_f Io3 _f
15
15[A]
14[A]
Ii1
14

10

Ii3 12
(a)

(a)
5 10

[5A/div]
0

2.28K
Vdc_LV Vdc_out_ref
6
[2A/div]
modual_1_power mo dual_2_power modual_3_power

2.27K

10K
10[kW]
2.26K
(b)

2250[V]
8K
2.25K

(b)
2.24K
6K

2.23K
[10V/div]
0.1 0.11

Time 5[ms/div]
Time (s)
0.12 4K

[2kW/div]
0.145 0.15 0.1 55 0.16

Time 5[ms/div]
Time (s)

Fig. 6. Performance of individual module current and ouput voltage without

decoupling method in IPOS. (a) Input currents of three modules. (b) Common Fig. 8. Performance of power sharing for proposed decoupling control
output voltage of three modules. strategy in IPOP, (a) Output currents of three modules. (b) Output powers of
three modules.
The individual module input current is shown in Fig. 7(a).
Even though there are parameter mismatches in the inductance
( Ls ) and turn ratio (1:1.12, 1:1, 1:1.2), the current sharing is
well achieved in the transient and steady-state conditions. Fig.
7(b) shows the control performance of the common voltage
where the reference value is 750 V. It can be seen that the
output voltage is regulated well. Fig. 8 shows the performance
of power-sharing for the proposed decoupling control strategy
in the IPOP system with same conditions. Fig. 8(a) and (b)
show individual output currents and power of each module,
when the load is changed from 30-kW to 15-kW. As can be
seen, the proposed control scheme distributes power equally
among the modules. Fig. 9. Performance of individual module currents and ouput voltage for
proposed decoupling control strategy in IPOS system. (a) Input currents of
Likewise, the IPOS system was also simulated in the same three modules. (b) Common output voltage of three modules.
load profile. Fig. 9 shows the performance of ICS and OVR for
the proposed decoupling control strategy. As shown in Fig. 9(a)
vo1 vo2 vo3

780

and (b), the proposed method distributes the power equally not 760

only in the IPOP system but also in the IPOS system. Fig. 10 750[V]
(a)

shows the output voltage and power of each module, when the
740

load is changed from 30-kW to 15-kW. As mentioned above, 720

[20V/div]
it can be seen that the OVR is automatically ensured through modual_1_power modual_2_power modual_3_power

10[kW]
ICS although the output voltage is not directly controlled.
10K

8K
(b)

V. CONCLUSION 6K

In this paper, a novel decoupling control strategy of the 4K

[2kW/div]
input-parallel-connected system based on DAB modules has
0.095 0.1 0.105 0.11

Time 5[ms/div]
Time (s)

been proposed. The IPOP and IPOS systems have been modeled
through the small-signal analysis of the DAB module and the Fig. 10. Performance of power sharing for proposed decoupling control
limitations of the conventional decoupling method have been strategy in IPOS. (a) Output voltage of three modules. (b) Output powers of
described. By setting the error of current controller as a new three modules.

230
control variable, the model of the input-paralleled system has
been simplified. With the decoupling control, an independent
control between the ICS and OVR control loops has been
obtained. The proposed decoupling control scheme has shown
that the power of each module is distributed equally not only in
the steady-state but also in the transient state even with a
parameter mismatch. The validity of the proposed method has
been verified by simulation results for IPOP/IPOS systems
consisting of three DAB converters.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was supported by the National Research
Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea
government (MSICT) (NRF-2017R1A2A2A05069629).
REFERENCES
[1] W. Chen X. Ruan. "Modularization Structure for Series-Parallel
Connected Converters " in Proc. 2008 IEEE Appl. Power Electron.Conf.
Expo. (APEC) pp: 1531-1535.
[2] R. Ayyanar R. Giri N. Mohan "Active input-voltage and load-current
sharing in input-series and output-parallel connected modular DC–DC
converters using dynamic input-reference scheme" IEEE Trans. Power
Electron. vol. 19 no. 6 pp. 1462-1473 Nov. 2004.
[3] C. Chang and Knights M.A., “Interleaving technique in distributed
power conversion systems,” IEEE Trans. Circuits and Systems I:
Fundamental Theory and Applications, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 245–251,
May, 1995.
[4] J. Cheng J. Shi X. He "A novel input-parallel output-parallel connected
dc-dc converter modules with automatic sharing of currents" Proc. IEEE
Power Electron. Motion Control Conf. vol. 3 pp. 1871-1876 Jun. 2012
[5] K. Sano M. Takas Aki "A boost conversion system consisting of
multiple DC-DC converter modules for interfacing wind farms and
HVDC transmission" 2013 IEEE Energy Convers. Congr. Expo. ECCE
2013 pp. 2613-2618 2013.
[6] X. Zhou, P. Xu, and F. C. Lee, “A novel current-sharing control
technique for low-voltage high-current voltage regulator module
applications,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1153–
1162, Nov. 2000.
[7] D. Sha Z. Guo X. Liao "Control strategy for input-parallel–output-
parallel connected high-frequency isolated inverter modules" IEEE
Trans. Power Electron. vol. 26 no. 8 pp. 2237-2248 Aug. 2011 .
[8] S. Lee, Y. Jeung and D. Lee, “Voltage Balancing Control of IPOS
Modular Dual Active Bridge DC/DC Converters Based on Hierarchical
Sliding Mode Control”, IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 9989-9997, Jan. 2019
[9] S. Luo Z. Ye R.-L. Lin F. C. Lee "A classification and evaluation of
paralleling methods for power supply modules" Proc. IEEE PESC pp.
901-908 1999.
[10] J. W. Kim, H. S. Choi, and B. H. Cho, “A novel droop method for
converter parallel operation,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 17,
pp. 25–32, Jan. 2002
[11] W. Chen X. Ruan H. Yan C. K. Tse "DC/DC conversion systems
consisting of multiple converter modules: Stability control and
experimental verifications" IEEE Trans. Power Electron. vol. 24 no. 6
pp. 1463-1474 2009.
[12] X. Ruan W. Chen L. Cheng C. K. Tse T. Zhang "Control strategy for
input-series-output-parallel converters" IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. vol.
56 no. 4 pp. 1174-1185 Apr. 2009
[13] A. Rodriguez, A. Vazquez, D. G. Lamar, M. M. Hernando, J.
Sebastian, "Different purpose design strategies and techniques to
improve the performance of a dual active bridge with phase-shift
control", IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 790-804,
Feb. 2015
[14] Z. Pablo et al., “Modular dual-active bridge converter architecture,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 2444–2455, May 2016
231