I.

INTRODUCTION

Protection Devices for Aircraft Electrical Power Distribution Systems: State of the Art

D. IZQUIERDO EADS and Universidad Carlos III de Madrid A. BARRADO, Member, IEEE C. RAGA, Student Member, IEEE M. SANZ, Member, IEEE A. LAZARO, Member, IEEE Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

The development of all electric aircraft (AEC) has provided new opportunities in the field of electronic devices and power electronics. One of the most interesting areas is focused on the protection devices field and the management of the loads by means of the solid state power controllers (SSPC). This is mainly due to the great increase of these devices in the electrical power distribution system architectures used in the new airplanes such as A380 and B787. This paper presents a survey of conventional and future trends of protection devices in onboard platforms. Moreover a virtual test bench is developed in order to analyze the potential problems that could appear by using SSPC in new onboard platforms. In addition an experimental validation with commercial SSPC and its model are presented.

Manuscript received June 6, 2008; revised December 17, 2008; released for publication January 22, 2010. IEEE Log No. T-AES/47/3/941746. Refereeing of this contribution was handled by S. Mazumder. This work was partially supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science through the research project DIMOS (Code: DP12006-14866-C02-02) and by a private contract with EADS-CASA, through the research project HVDC Load Distribution System, phase II (Code: 04-AEC0527-000050/2005) financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) via the Aerospace Sector Plan of the Community of Madrid. Authors addresses: D. Izquierdo, EADS, John Lennon Avenue, s/n, 28906 Getafe, Madrid, Spain, E-mail: (dizquier@ing.uc3m.es); zaro, Departamento de A. Barrado, C. Raga, M. Sanz, and A. La nica, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Grupo de Tecnologia Electro nicos de Potencia, Avda. Universidad, 30: 28911, Sistemas Electro s, Madrid, Spain. Legane

Conventional aircrafts are evolving towards airplanes with a greater amount of equipment and electronic/electrical devices such as dc/ac inverters, dc/dc converters, and even electronic protections. In addition new technology developments in the fields of power electronics and microcontrollers provide important advantages. Both features have rekindled the concept of all electric aircraft (AEA) [1, 2]. In the AEA, mechanics, pneumatics, and hydraulics systems have been replaced by electrical ones. These changes provide better performance, lower maintenance, and higher overall efficiency [36]. However it is important to highlight that power electronic equipments have a major role in the new power distribution systems (PDS) since the power transferred to the load is processed almost three times [7]. The protection devices of these new PDS are one of the most interesting areas for power electronics systems since they are replacing conventional protection devices. The objective of this paper is described as follows. In Section II, onboard PDS trends are presented. In Section III, the onboard protections devices for all these PDS are reviewed and compared, like circuit breaker (CB), arc fault circuit breaker (AFCB), remote controlled circuit breaker (RCCB), and solid state power controller (SSPC). Particularly SSPC have drastically evolved over the last decade, and their use has been extended to new onboard PDS, since they are an attractive solution due to their advantages compared with conventional devices. Furthermore in Section IV the areas of interest for research groups related to SSPC in the onboard PDS have been presented. One of the main research fields is the modeling of the SSPC because simulation is a necessary tool in the analysis and design of the PDS. Thus in Section V, an SSPC model has been proposed and simulated in a virtual test bench. In addition in Section VI, this SSPC model has been validated with experimental measurement using a commercial SSPC. II. ALL ELECTRIC AIRCRAFT ARCHITECTURES

c 2011 IEEE 0018-9251/11/$26.00 1538

The concept of AEA is being developed by different research groups of the European Union and the United States as well as by private companies. All of them are developing or have developed R&D projects/programmes focused on the definition and implementation of these types of architectures. In the late 1990s, the Division of Militaries Aircrafts of Northrop/Grumman developed the MADMEL project related to the PDS and the power management for building more electric aircraft [8]. A combat aircraft joint strike fighter (JSF), which includes more electric technology and a distribution bus of 270 Vdc , is being developed by several American companies [9]. The
JULY 2011

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 47, NO. 3

first important integration initiative in Europe was the power optimized aircraft (POA) programme. One of the main research lines has been the introduction of electrical loads management, which allows us to introducing new technologies in onboard systems, like the power electronics [3]. This initiative derived in the more open electrical technology (MOET) programme, within the Sixth Framework programme, is based on analysis and selection of electric distribution architectures for the electrical systems defined in the POA programme [10]. Other minor projects performed in Europe are the TIMES and DEPMA programmes [11, 12]. Taking into account all these aforementioned projects, the CleanSky Joint Technology Initiative was started in 2007 under the Seventh Framework programme. This project will be finished in 2014 with the first set of flights of a major efficiency aircraft with less fuel consumed thanks to an all electric distribution system [13]. Recently Boeing in collaboration with a European research center located in Madrid has developed a totally electric propeller aircraft, promoted by a hybrid power system. This system is based on a fuel cell in combination with an ion-lithium battery which provides the energy for an electric engine connected to a conventional propeller. The fuel cell is able to supply the overall energy during the cruise-flight stage. During the take off or landing the energy is provided by both the fuel cell and the ion-lithium battery [14]. As a consequence of general electrification in the AEA, new architectures and designs are appearing in the electrical aircraft PDS with a great number of systems that depend on power electronics. In these architectures it is important to emphasize a noticeable increase of power electric demand, which is provoking an increase in the voltage levels in direct current (dc) and alternating current (ac) of the main distribution systems. The main objective is to reduce the conduction losses and therefore the wire size by decreasing the current levels. Thus the volume and weight of the whole aircraft can be reduced. Hence the traditional levels of voltage 28 Vdc and 115 Vac , have been changed to 270 Vdc [7, 15, 16], usually for military applications, and voltage levels of 230 Vac [17, 18] for civil applications. Other approaches are focused on applications with higher voltage levels like 540 Vdc [20]. Whereas 270 Vdc is obtained from rectification of the traditional 115 Vac , 230 Vac can be easily obtained by doubling the existing voltage level provided by the generator 115 Vac . Regarding 540 Vdc voltage level is a consequence of using the differential voltage provided by two buses of 270 Vdc with a common reference on ground. It is possible to prevent undesirable physics effects (such as the corona effect) by means of using two different dc buses [19].

Fig. 1. High voltage direct current (HVDC) distribution system.

Fig. 2. 28 Vdc CBs manufactured by KLIXON.

In the new aircraft power architectures, high voltage levels have to coexist with conventional voltage levels and equipments that is powered using these conventional voltage levels. As a consequence there are architectures composed of a high voltage main distribution bus and secondary distribution buses that maintain conventional distribution levels of 28 Vdc and 115 Vac , as shown in Fig. 1 [17, 18]. Other projects have been developed in parallel with the AEA, trying to reduce the wire-harness weight by introducing fiber optics or fly-by-light technology [21, 22]. Fly-by-light technology replaces electrical control signal wires with fiber optic. These new systems are based on optically controlled power electronics devices, which are electromagnetic interference (EMI) immune, a common problem in the onboard systems [23]. III. AIRCRAFT ELECTRICAL PROTECTIONS In all the reviewed architectures protection devices play an important and essential part in the PDS by preventing possible damages to the cables and the onboard equipment [24]. Up until now the CB is the most common wire protection device in the 28 Vdc and 115 Vac architectures of aircraft PDS. The CB (Fig. 2) is based on a magnetothermal component, which opens the circuit before the current through the circuit reaches the maximum limit or before its duration is equal to the maximum time. Nevertheless the CB cannot detect the arc failure due to its short time of duration. However this event
1539

IZQUIERDO ET AL.: PROTECTION DEVICES FOR AIRCRAFT ELECTRICAL POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS

Fig. 3. AFCB manufactured by EATON.

Fig. 4. RCCB manufactured by E-T-A.

increases the temperature inside the area close to the arc and this increased temperature can cause catastrophic damage to the wires as well as provoke ignition of isolating material or fuel close to the arc fault. In some cases despite the wire was damaged, the CB upstream remains intact [25]. It is also important to emphasize that CBs are not suitable for protecting the new PDS because they have a poor performance at high dc voltage [26]. Moreover it should not be forgotten that the monitoring of CBs is complex, and they require the use of monitoring units when they are not located on cabin. In consequence extra weight and equipment inside the aircraft are added. In addition, CBs do not allow the implementation of remote control. The AFCB (Fig. 3) is a more recent protection than the CB. These components provide the same type of protection as CB, but they also protect the circuit against the electric arc fault. The AFCB, by means of advanced electronics, measures the current through the load in submillisecond intervals, and it stores the data of all momentary isolation interruptions. This event is a possible cause of a future arc fault. When the number of these interruptions exceeds a fixed quantity, the AFCB provokes an interruption of the circuit, avoiding a critical failure [27, 28]. The fault identification is based on determining the arc fault by means of algorithms and patterns of common working currents. The arc faults and other similar signals like engine transitory current during starting or stopping or the engine pulsating current during normal operation can be differentiated [29] depending on the complexity of the AFCB patterns and algorithms.
1540

The use of this technology in aircrafts considerably improves the security levels and reduces costs, limiting the damages from arc faults in the electric cables in the areas located close to the event [24]. However this kind of device has the same monitoring and control problems as the CB. Nowadays this type of device is only used in ac PDS. The RCCB (Fig. 4) is a more recent protection device applied in the onboard systems in comparison with the use of CB and AFCB. The RCCB combines the functionality of the relay and the CB; therefore its behaviour is very similar to the CB. On the other hand this device allows the remote control by means of electronic circuits included inside the device [30, 31]. Furthermore the RCCB does not present a problem of aging, which is very common in the CB as a consequence of thermal cycles through the bimetal. This is due to the substitution of the bimetal by electronic monitoring circuits inside the RCCB. The main advantages of RCCB are remote control, the improvement of PDS efficiency due to new wire distribution with the lower voltage drop across the wires, a lower cost and also a lower weight than in conventional distribution systems based on relays and conventional CB. Nevertheless RCCB has the same mechanical characteristics that limit its use in more complex systems like in the high voltage PDS. In order to solve the disadvantages of the protection devices previously described, new technologies have been introduced. One of the most interesting devices is the SSPC. These components (Fig. 5) are based on power semiconductors such as metal oxide semiconductor field effect transistor (MOSFET) [32] or insulated gate bipolar transistor (IGBT) [33]. The SSPC combines the function of connecting loads to a main bus and the function of protecting
JULY 2011

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 47, NO. 3

Fig. 7. Secondary distribution constituted by SSPC.

TABLE I Aircraft Electrical Protection Devices Fig. 5. SSPC manufactured by DDC. Remote Control Arc Fault Protection Mechanical/Electronic (M/E) Device Wiring Reduction 28 Vdc Applications 270 Vdc Applications CB X X M X p X AFCB X p M X X X RCCB p X M p p X SSPC p p E p p p

Fig. 6. Aircraft electrical protection devices comparative [25], [3032].

the electric installations from overloads and short circuits. In addition, the SSPC can protect the wire with an I 2 t curve equally as it is performed by a CB. Other SSPC characteristics are high reliability (life cycles), low power dissipation, and remote control capability by means of software. Moreover the devices based on power semiconductors like SSPC provide fast response (instant trip), less weight and lower susceptibility to vibrations in comparison to electromagnetic and electromechanic components such as CB, RCCB, and AFCB; see Fig. 6. All these characteristics and benefits are a consequence of the development in power electronics and microelectronics [3236]. It is remarkable that the use of SSPC technology improves the PDS control and wire-harness protection as compared with the previous electromechanical devices. Because of its small size it is possible to group SSPCs inside equipment. This equipment can be located in a certain area of the onboard system, close to the loads, and it can be connected to the main dc bus by means of a big gauge and a long wire. Finally the power is

delivered to the loads through a small gauge and short wires, see Fig. 7. Therefore this secondary power distribution line provides electric power to the loads with shorter wires and a lower gauge by means of the SSPC. This allows us to minimize the weight and volume of the wires in comparison with other kinds of protection devices [3436]. In summarizing Table I provides the comparison between different aircraft electrical protection devices, regarding their applications and capabilities. IV. ONBOARD SYSTEMS WITH SOLID STATE POWER CONTROLLER TECHNOLOGY SSPCs provide a similar behaviour to conventional electro/mechanic contactors using solid state technology. From the first SSPC design to the current SSPC architecture, a noticeable evolution has been introduced by the designers. In this way the solid state technology was initially installed as a support to the conventional mechanical systems prolonging the life of the components and their reliability [37]. Before the SSPC other similar devices appeared, for example, the remote power controller (RPC), which combines mechanical switch and MOSFET [38]; see Fig. 8. The first patent of SSPC appeared at the end of the 1980s. In this patent a modern SSPC architecture with several blocks was described. The main advantage of the aforementioned SSPC was the load remote control operation and the protection under overload conditions [32].
1541

IZQUIERDO ET AL.: PROTECTION DEVICES FOR AIRCRAFT ELECTRICAL POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS

Fig. 8. RPC block diagram.

Fig. 10. SSPC block diagram manufactured by DDC.

Fig. 9. Solid state dc power switch.

Furthermore in [39] is shown the new capabilities of these devices like arc fault detection and the reduction of bounce effect produced in the contacts of the conventional contactors; see Fig. 9. This SSPC was designed with thyristor technology. In the SSPC field it is important to point out different areas of interest inside the onboard system from the research groups point of view: applications, operational problems, modeling, implementation, and new capabilities. All these points are detailed in the following paragraphs. A. Applications In 1992 the first commercial SSPC that appeared was manufactured by DDC, Fig. 10. These new devices were recommended specially for applications inside the more electric aircraft architectures as they were able to work with voltage levels of 270 Vdc and 28 Vdc , for maximum current ranges of 15 A and 25 A, respectively [40]. From the introduction of these components, the application of SSPC technology has begun to be considered a key element to improving the PDS security as well as the power management and distribution inside aircrafts. Comparing with CBs the major benefits of these devices are the switching time (SSPC requires 3 s, whereas CB needs 10 ms), the simplicity of the control, and the state monitoring. In addition the temperature stability, the reliability,
1542

and the active control in the limitation of current are improved [41]. In one of its different applications, the SSPC has been evaluated with different levels of ionising radiation or linear transference of energy. These tests show how the SSPC is able to work with a radiation level of 80 LET (linear energy transference), whereas other electronic equipment (dc/dc converters) make errors or even shut down under these conditions. This shows the great potential of SSPC in the onboard PDS [42]. Also modules of various SSPCs have been included in the International Space Station (ISS). These modules are constituted by two types of SSPC. Each module can support loads powered by 120 Vdc and 28 Vdc because it distributes the electric power and protects the wire [43]. These kind of modules allow the use of a higher number of SSPCs with lower size and weight in comparison with the conventional protection systems and load-switching elements, constructed by CBs and relays [36, 44]. At the same time the evolution of the component has allowed researchers to add new functions and capabilities to the SSPC, which can be used to control loads with variable frequency in ac [45, 46]. B. Operational Problems In the short lifeline of the component some problems have been identified. NASA has published studies on cable security and how the activation levels of I 2 t protection affect the correct working order. So high levels of the I 2 t curves are inefficient at detecting arc fault, increasing the probability of wire damage. By contrast a minimization of the level of the I 2 t curves can also raise the probability of false alarms [47]. Another problem which has been detected in the SSPCs is related to the electronic systems/equipments regards EMI. Function failures have been detected due to the EMI events. These events produce instant SSPC shutdowns, which interrupt SSPC
JULY 2011

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 47, NO. 3

Fig. 11. SSPC model block diagram.

Fig. 13. SSPC implemented with IGBT.

environmental temperature, or thermal heat dissipation produced in the wire. All these factors depend on the surroundings where the wire-harness and the SSPCs are located; see Fig. 12 [50]. D. Implementation SSPCs are commonly implemented with FET technology, which presents yet another unsolved problem related to current limitations. For this reason the use of SSPC is now limited in architectures of 270 Vdc until 25 A. Beyond these levels the use of electromechanical contactors is necessary [7]. Other technologies that allow higher current levels are being investigated, for example IGBT; see Fig. 13 [33]. This technology also provides a reduction of the voltage drop between the device terminals, and consequently reduces power losses. In addition it has lower cost, compared with the CoolMOS technology, and it is also applicable in higher voltages scenerios. It is remarkable that the increase of the current levels can be confronted with other types of semiconductors, like silicon carbide (SiC), that allow us to increase the device operating temperature range and its efficiency [5154]. E. New Capabilities Among the new capabilities the development of the components which permit them to connect big capacitive loads is especially notable. It is possible to connect this type of load using a digital SSPC by limiting the current level using foldback. With this type of load connection, the maximum current supplied to the load is limited and controlled. Therefore during the switching of a load, the current can be limited by 20% above the nominal current. In this way the SSPC control circuit makes the current level inversely proportional to the voltage in the downstream load during the connection of the load [55]. The limited current avoids the generation of high peaks of voltage/current during the connection of the loads; it also avoids possible short circuits
1543

Fig. 12. SSPC with thermal memory effect.

current and affect the load downstream. However the SSPC does not report any information about this state to the external bus. These failures are a consequence of a great internal dependency on electronics [48]. C. Modeling To validate the behaviour of the SSPCs in the PDS and/or with other types of protection, it is necessary to model the SSPCs together with the rest of the conventional protection devices. This allows us to check the whole onboard PDS and the protection system. Therefore it is possible to see the effects of this kind of protection upon the rest of the systems and to predict either failures or malfunctions [38]. Through models in the ISS electrical system the influence of the MOSFET parasitic capacitances, which have an important influence on the stability of the system, have been proven. These capacitors can provoke a coupling between the current control loop, which controls the SSPC by means of an error amplifier, see Fig. 11, and a downstream power converter. This coupling can cause instability of the whole system [49]. Another advantage of the performing model of components is the possibility of including and combining different effects like temperature evolution in the protected wire (thermal memory), the effect of

IZQUIERDO ET AL.: PROTECTION DEVICES FOR AIRCRAFT ELECTRICAL POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS

Fig. 16. Virtual test bench. Fig. 14. Current limiting SSPC.

Fig. 15. SSPC with sleep mode.

this way the load will not be powered even with electric power above the SSPC after the distribution bus bar is switched. So the new SSPC designs are able to support lack of power periods within normative limits by means of a sleep mode, see Fig. 15 [57]. Finally it is important to note that some features of the SSPC like arc fault detection cause a great amount of improvement. This capability is one of the most important since arc fault is considered the main source of damages and breakdowns in aircraft PDS. Therefore future arc fault improved solutions are expected to be implemented. In this way SSPC provides higher security and reliability for the whole system [35, 55, 58]. V. VIRTUAL TEST BENCH

downstream in the SSPC. In addition this avoids the transitions to the PDS of voltage and current perturbations; see Fig. 14 [56]. Another new SSPC capability is to avoid the load disconnections during the switching of the power bus bars, a common event in the onboard systems during the intervals of distribution changes from one bus bar to another. This phenomenon does not appear in the CB device as they are connected mechanically to the bus bar, and they do not depend upon an electronic control. However in the SSPC, a lack of power supply in the SSPC control area could lead to the disconnection of the load. In

According to the previous section, one of the most important research activities is the modeling of the SSPC. Using the SSPC model described in [50], it is possible to test the operation of these devices in a virtual test bench, as is shown in Fig. 16. Fig. 17 compares two different SSPCs connected to the main distribution bus of 270 Vdc . The loads connected to the SSPC have capacitive behaviour (10 =25 F). It is noticeable that depending on the SSPC model used, it is possible to minimize the undesirable effects produced by the overcurrent during the connection of the loads to the distribution bus.

Fig. 17. Voltage and current of connected capacitive load (10 =25 F) using two different SSPCs. 1544 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 47, NO. 3 JULY 2011

Fig. 18. Voltage and current of SSPC and voltage of high capacitive load (125 F=45 ) using SSPC1.

Fig. 19. Voltage and current of SSPC and voltage of high capacitive load (125 F=45 ) using SSPC2

Using the first model (SSPC1) based on a manufactured component, an overvoltage of 386 Vdc is obtained. This voltage level does not fulfill onboard system limits [59]. By modifying the SSPC model parameters (SSPC2), the overvoltage is reduced to a 329 Vdc , a normal level within the standard limits. This SSPC model is also very useful when a connection of higher capacitive loads (125 F=45 ) is simulated. In this model it is possible to include and propose new solutions, which will allow a connection of this type of load without exceeding the device current limits, in this case 45 A. Fig. 18 shows the SSPC disconnection when the SSPC is trying to connect the load. This happens because the overcurrent protection does not permit a current level higher than 45 A. However Fig. 19 shows that the modification of the model parameters allows the SSPC to connect the load to the distribution bus, without overvoltage in the load, as compared with the voltage shown in Fig. 17. The modification of the model parameters is related to the reactivation of the connection when overcurrent protection activation is produced. The model allows us to predict this type of situation and helps to find solutions for an optimal design. Therefore modeling is a fundamental topic of the new onboard PDS in order to find solutions

and predict future problems that can appear as a consequence of the use of new devices like SSPC. It also offers a great potential to design or improve new devices. VI. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS To validate the generic SSPC model described [50], one specific SSPC model has been configured according to the datasheet of Data Device Company (DDC), RP21415D2-600 [60]. In this case the proposed SSPC model is based on the main following characteristics, see Fig. 20: 1) Nominal current IN = 15 A, IMAX = 45 A (300%). 2) Instant trip: ISSPC > 300%. 3) Rise time trise < 1000 s (maximum rate current). 4) Fall time tfall < 1000 s (maximum rate current). The DDC-SSPC model has been tested in a real test bench with a voltage level of 100 Vdc and with pure resistive load. All passive test bench components (resistance and wires) have been measured with an impedance/phase gain analyzer. This analyzer has provided the equivalent circuit models. The obtained

Fig. 20. SSPC structural model diagram block. IZQUIERDO ET AL.: PROTECTION DEVICES FOR AIRCRAFT ELECTRICAL POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 1545

reviewed. The main characteristics of common devices such as CBs, ACFBs, RCCBs, and SSPCs have been summarized. Also the fields of interests regarding SSPC inside the onboard system have been introduced, such as applications, operational problems, modeling, implementation, and new capabilities. From this analysis it can be concluded that there is an important trend for using SSPC instead of traditional electromechanical devices. Finally by using a basic virtual test bench based on an SSPC model, the performance of these new protection devices in the PDS with capacitive loads have been analyzed, and some problems and design solutions have been identified. A generic SSPC model has also been validated by means of simulations and experimental results.
Fig. 21. Measured SSPC voltage (50 V/div) and current on SSPC (5 A/div) during ON/OFF with resistive load.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank Data Device Company (DDC) for providing EADS-CASA the SSPCs.
REFERENCES [1] Spitzer, C. R. The all-electric aircraft: A systems view and proposed NASA research programs. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, AES-20, 3 (May 1984), 261266. Howse, M. All electric aircraft. Power Engineer, 17 (2003), 3537. Faleiro, L. F. Trends towards a more electrical aircraft. In Proceedings of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, 2006. Blanding, D. Subsystem design and integration for the more electric aircraft. In Proceedings of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS), 2006. Rosero, J. A., et al. Moving towards a more electric aircraft. IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, 22, 3 (Mar. 2007). Kankam, M. D. A survey of power electronics applications in aerospace technologies. Presented at the 36th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC) cosponsored by the ASME, IEEE, AIChE, ANS, SAE, and AIAA, Savannah, GA, July 29Aug. 2, 2001. Weimer, J. A. Power management and distribution for the more electric aircraft. In Proceedings of the 30th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC), 1995, 273277. Maldonado, M. A., et al. Power management and distribution system for a More electric aircraft (MADMEL)Program status. In Proceedings of the Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC), Aug. 1997, 274279. Doyle, D. D. F-15 secondary power systems topic area: Sub-systems. Aging Aircraft Conference, 2000. JULY 2011

[2]

[3]

[4] Fig. 22. Simulated SSPC voltage and current on SSPC during ON/OFF with resistive load.

circuit models have been introduced in the virtual test bench, and they have been simulated together with specific DDC-SSPC model. The experimental results, Fig. 21, show the real behaviour of SSPC during the connection and disconnection of a resistive load (10 ohms) to the 100 Vdc main bus. Load voltage, SSPC voltage (upper plot), and SSPC current (down plot) are measured. Fig. 22 shows the simulation results for the same circuit that has been previously tested in a real test bench. From Figs. 21 and 22 it can be concluded that the measurements and simulation results are almost equivalent. VII. CONCLUSIONS This paper has presented the onboard PDS trends. These trends show more electrical aircrafts and PDS architectures with higher dc voltage, 270 Vdc , 540 Vdc , and 230 Vac . In addition the electrical protection devices available have been
1546

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 47, NO. 3

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

Framework VI: Integrated projects. More open electrical technologies (MOET). [Reference created on October 18, 2004], web available: http://www.aerosme.com/download/WorkshopFP6Call3/ abstracts/MOET 181004.pdf. Cutts, S. J. A collaborative approach to the more electric aircraft (totally integrated more electric systems (TIMES)). In Proceedings of the International Conference on Power Electronics, Machines and Drives, June 47, 2002, 223228. Bailey, M., et al. Distributed electrical power management architecture (DEPMA). In IEE Colloquium on Electrical Machines and Systems for the More Electric Aircraft, Nov. 9, 1999, 7/17/4 (Ref. no. 1999/180). CleanSky Newsletter Issue 120, Dec. 2007. Web available: http://www.cleansky.eu/index.php? arbo id=83&set language=en. Friend, M. G. and Daggett, D. L. Fuel cell demonstrator airplane. In AIAA/ICAS International Air and Space Symposium and Exposition, Dayton, OH, July 1417, 2003. Lindner, D. K., et al. Subsystem interaction analysis in power distribution systems of next generation airlifters. Presented at the IEEE Power Electronic Specialist Conference (PESC), Sept. 1999. Emadi, K. and Ehsani, M. Aircraft power systems: Technology, state of the art and future trends. IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, 15, 1 (Jan. 2000), 2832. Kojori, H., Konyukhova, S., and Michalko, R. G. Electrical energy management system on a vehicle e.g. a more electric aircraft MEA. Honeywell International Incorporated WO 2006/024006 A1, international application published under the patent cooperation treaty (PCT), Mar. 2, 2006. Michalko, R. G. Electrical starting generation conversion and distribution system architecture for a more electric vehicle. Honeywell International Incorporated US2006/0061213 A1, U.S. patent application publication, Mar. 23, 2006, 20. Cotton, I. and Husband, M. Higher voltage aircraft power systems. IEEE Aerospace and Electronics Systems Magazine, (Feb. 2008). Austrin, L., Torabzadeh-Tari, M., and Engdahl, G. A new high power density generation system. In Proceedings of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS), 2006. Todd, J. R., Hay, J. A., and Brennan, M. E. Integrating fly-by-light systems. In Proceedings of IEEE/AIAA 11th Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 1992, 411416. Todd, J. R. Direct optical control: A lightweight backup consideration. In Proceedings of the IEEE National Aerospace and Electronics Conference, vol. 2, 1992, 456463. Mazumder, S. K. and Sarkar, T. Optically-triggered power transistor (OTPT) for fly-by-light (FBL)/EMI susceptible power electronics. In Proceedings of the IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference (PESC), 2006, 18.

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

Izquierdo, D., et al. Protection devices for aircraft electrical power distribution systems: A survey. Presented at the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society Conference (IECON 2008), Orlando, FL, Nov. 1113, 2008. SAE AS33201, Circuit breaker-aircraft, trip-free, push pull, 1/2 thru 20 amps, type 1 55 thru +121 C. SAE The engineering Society for Advancing Mobility Land Sea Air and Space International, Rev. 31AUG-99, web available: http//www.sae.org. Furse, C. Finding fault: Locating hidden hazards on aircraft wiring. College of Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Feb. 2004. Spyker, R., Schweickart, D. L., and Horwath, J. C. An evaluation of diagnostic techniques relevant to arcing fault current interrupters for direct current power systems in future aircraft. In Proceedings Electrical Insulation Conference and Electrical Manufacturing Expo, Oct. 2005, 146150. SAE AS5692, Arc fault circuit breaker (AFCB), aircraft, trip-free single phase 115 V ac, 400 Hzconstant frequency. SAE The Engineering Society for Advancing Mobility Land Sea Air and Space International. Potter, T. E. Arc fault interruption requirements for aircraft applications. Texas Instruments, Nov. 2003, 21. Remote Controlled Circuit Breaker (RCCB) Eaton, Cleveland, OH, web available: http://www.aerospace.eaton.com/. E-T-A. Remote Control Circuit Breaker (RCCB) 493001-5. Web available: http://www.e-ta.com/. Kinoshita, R. Y. Solid State DC Power Switch. U.S. Patent 4709160, Rockwell International Corporation, Nov. 24, 1987. Liu, W. and Huang, A. Q. A novel high current solid state power controller. Presented at the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society Conference (IECON 2005), Nov. 2005. Potter, F. J. and Furmanski, D. Retrofitting solid state power distribution into existing aircraft. Presented at the 9th Joint FAA/DoD/NASA Aging Aircraft Conference 2006. Maxwell, J. M., Blumer, J. H., and Burden, B. A configurable solid state power management and distribution system. Presented at the SAE Power Systems Conference, Oct. 2002. Secure Power with Next-Generation PDSUs Avionics Magazine, 29, 6 (June 2005), technical Report, ISSN-1085-9284, web available: http://www.avionicsmagazine.com. Theisen, P., Krstic, S., and Chen, C. 270-V dc hybrid switch. IEEE Transactions on Components, Hybrids, and Manufacturing Technology, 9, 1 (Mar. 1986), 97100. Kwa-Sur T., Lifeng Y., and Dravid, N. Modeling the protection system components of the Space Station electric power system. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 30, 3 (July 1994), 800808. 1547

IZQUIERDO ET AL.: PROTECTION DEVICES FOR AIRCRAFT ELECTRICAL POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

McGollum, P. Universal Solid State Power Controller. Rockwell International Corporation WO 88/01077, international application published under the patent cooperation treaty (PCT), Feb. 11, 1988, 22. Friedman, S. N. Solid-state power controller for the next generation. IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, 7, 9 (Sept. 1992), 2429. Simon, J. J. State of the art in solid state power controller for aeronautical application. The European Power Electronics Association, Sept. 1993, 121126. Label, K. A., et al. Implications of single event effect characterization of hybrid dc-dc converters and a solid state power controller. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 42, 6, Part 1 (Dec. 1995), 19571963. Hart, D. S., et al. A solid state power controller module for the International Space Station EXPRESS rack. In Proceedings of the Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC-97), vol. 1, July 27Aug.1, 1997, 280285. Darty, M. A. Modular solid state power controller with microcontroller. U.S. Patent 5752047, McDonnell Douglas Corporation, May 12, 1998. Nguyen, T. System and method utilizing a solid state power controller (SSPC) for controlling an electrical load of a variable frequency three-phase power source. Honeywell International Inc., Us 2005/0052808 A1, U.S. patent application publication, Mar. 10, 2005. Henderson, E. A. Power control interrupt management. US2006/0044721 A1, U.S. patent application publication, Mar. 2, 2006. Stavnes, M. W. and Hammoud, A. N. Assessment of safety in space power wiring systems. IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, 9, 1 (Jan. 1994) 2127. Dan, M., et al. EO-1 anomaly resolution report for ACE anomaly of 9-14-01. NASAs Goddard Space Flight Center, 2001, web available: http://eo1.gsfc.nasa.gov/new/validationReport/ Technology/. Panov, Y. V. and Lee, F. C. Modeling and stability analysis of a dc power system with solid state power controllers. In Proceedings of the Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC96), vol. 2, Mar. 37, 1996, 685691.

[50]

[51]

[52]

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

[59] [60]

Barrado, A., et al. SSPC model with variable reset time, environmental temperature compensation and thermal memory effect. In Proceedings of the Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC 08), Feb. 2428, 2008, 17161721. Feng, X. and Radun, A. SiC based solid state power controller. In Proceedings of the Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC 08), Feb. 2428, 2008, 18551860. Garuda, V. R., et al. High temperature performance characterization of buck converter using SiC and Si devices. In Proceedings of IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference (PESC98), vol. 2, May 1722, 1998, 15611567. Shenai, K. Silicon carbide power converters for next generation aerospace electronics applications. In NAECON 2000, Oct. 1012, 2000, 516523. Chante, J. P., et al. Silicon carbide power devices. In Proceedings of International Semiconductor Conference (CAS98), vol. 1, Oct. 610, 1998, 125134. Mussmacher, K. A. and Froeb, W. L. SSPCs handle heavy loads with fold-back current limiting. National Hybrid Inc., Ronkonkoma, NY, Jan. 2003. Komatsu, M., Ide, N., and Yanabu, S. A solid-state current limiting switch for application of large-scale space power systems. In Proceedings of IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference (PESC07), June 1721, 2007, 14711476. Beneditz, B. D. and Donald, G. K. Power interruption system for electronic circuit breaker. US2006/0044723 A1, U.S. patent application publication, Mar. 2, 2006. Lazarovich, D. Arc fault detection for SSPC based on electrical power distribution systems. Honeywell International Inc., WO2004/073131 A1, international application published under the patent cooperation treaty (PCT), Aug. 26, 2004. MIL-STD-704 Aircraft Electric Power Characteristics. DDC Data Device Corporation Multi-channel power controller capabilities 28VDC 270VDC 115 VAC. 1 to 25 amps/channel.

1548

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 47, NO. 3

JULY 2011

Daniel Izquierdo was born in Madrid, Spain in 1975. He received the M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the Carlos III University of Madrid, Spain in 2001 and 2011, respectively. Since 2001 he has worked at EADS Company in the Electrical, Control, and Monitoring System Department where he is actively involved in R&D projects. Since 2005, he has been a part-time professor at the Carlos III University of Madrid, Spain. His research interests include electrical power distribution systems, electrical onboard protection devices, and more electric aircraft.

s Barrado was born in Badajoz, Spain in 1968. He received the M.Sc. Andre degree in electrical engineering from the Polytechnic University of Madrid, Spain in 1994 and the Ph.D. degree from the Carlos III University of Madrid, Spain in 2000. Since 1994 he has been an associate professor at the Carlos III University of Madrid, and since 2004 has been Head of the Power Electronics Systems Group (GSEP). His research interests are switching-mode power supply, inverters, behavioural modelling of converters and systems, solar and fuel cell conditioning, and power distribution systems for aircraft.

Carmen Raga was born in Madrid, Spain in 1976. She received the M.Sc. degree in 2005 in electrical engineering from the Carlos III University of Madrid, Spain, where she is a Ph.D. student. Her research interests are switching-mode power supplies, modelling and control of switching converters, fuel cell conditioning, and power distribution systems for hybrid electrical vehicles and aircrafts.
IZQUIERDO ET AL.: PROTECTION DEVICES FOR AIRCRAFT ELECTRICAL POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS 1549

Marina Sanz was born in Burgos, Spain in 1973. She received the M.Sc. and cnica de Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the Universidad Polite Madrid, Spain in 1997 and 2004, respectively. Since 2001 she has been an assistant professor at the Electronic Department, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain. Her main research interests include switching-mode power supplies, modeling, and design of piezoelectric transformers and engineering education.

zaro was born in Madrid, Spain in 1968. He received the M.Sc. in Antonio La cnica de Madrid, Spain in 1995. electrical engineering from the Universidad Polite He received the Ph.D. in electronic engineering from the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid in 2003. He has been an assistant professor of the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid since 1995. He has been involved in power electronics since 1994, participating in more than 30 R&D projects for industry. His research interests are switched-mode power supplies, power factor correction circuits, inverters (ups and grid connected applications), modelling and control of switching converters, and digital control techniques. zaro holds three patents and he has published nearly 100 papers in Dr. La IEEE journals and conferences.
1550 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. 47, NO. 3 JULY 2011