Electrical Power and Energy Systems 104 (2019) 933–942

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electrical Power and Energy Systems

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijepes

A new topology for current limiting HVDC circuit breaker☆ T

⁎
Shuai Li , Jiyuan Zhang, Jianzhong Xu, Chengyong Zhao
The State Key Laboratory of Alternate Electrical Power System with Renewable Energy Sources, North China Electric Power University, Beijing, China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: With the high voltage direct current Transmission (HVDC) booming, HVDC grid has received wide attention. As
HVDC circuit breakers an essential component in HVDC grid, high voltage direct current circuit breakers (DCCB) requires urgent and
Current limiters intensive study. A novel topology for current limiting DCCB (CL-DCCB) is proposed in this paper. The topology
Over-voltage protection consists of several units which are divided into two classes: main circuit breaker (MCB) and branch circuit
Stability
breakers (BCBs). The number of inductor branches can be flexibly selected to enhance the current limiting effect.
The CL-DCCB can start current limiting operation when a suspected fault occurs. When the detection circuit
reveals what has happened, it can be determined whether to implement breaking operation or recover to normal
state. This mode allows longer fault detection time and circuit breaker operation delay while guaranteeing the
fault current within the maximum limit of the system. Finally, Simulation model and experiment prototype are
built to study the design criteria for CL-DCCB. It is observed that the maximum detection delay can be extended
to 12 ms. Moreover, the current limiting effect can be enhanced when the number of inductor branches or the
inductance of each branch is increased.

1. Introduction
DC grid is a new type of power transmission system, which is ob-
tained from voltage-source converter (VSC) type HVDC [1,2]. It inter-
connects multiple AC and DC systems with higher reliability due to its
redundant DC lines. DC grid technology is especially suitable for large-
scale wind power or photovoltaic and other new energy integration,
which is the future direction of DC transmission technology [3,4].
China is building a demonstration project named as Zhangbei DC grid.
The project is designed for the collection and transportation of large-
scale wind power, photovoltaic, energy storage, and other energy
forms. The rated voltage of this DC grid is ± 500 kV, with approxi-
mately 648 km overhead transmission lines [5].
Due to the low damping of DC system and no zero crossing point of
the DC current, it is difficult to isolate the DC fault. Especially in large-
scale power grid. Take a scenario of DC grid shown in Fig. 1 as an
example, the DC grid is divided into two parts by a DC-DC converter.
The upper part C1-C4 is a cyclic and radiation mixed connection
structure. The lower part is a point-to-point DC system. Obviously, the
normal operation of the whole network will be hardest hit if the fault
cannot be cleared in time.
One way to solve this problem is to use novel MMC sub-modules
(SMs) with DC fault clearance capability [6,7]. Once short circuit fault
occurs, the fault current discharge path can be blocked by blocking
MMC SMs. Finally, the mechanical switch can be used to interrupt the
fault line, thus, the system fault characteristics can be greatly improved.
However, the novel SMs will inevitably increase the cost and power loss
of MMC. More importantly, all the converter station must be blocked
under fault condition. Thus, the loss of power transmission capacity will
affect the normal and stable operation of the whole grid. Taking Fig. 1
as an example, if a short-circuit fault occurs in the transmission line
among converter station C1-C4, all these converter station should be
blocked, then mechanical switch can be used to isolate faulty lines
when the fault current drops to zero. The outage of those converter
stations means a quick stop of electricity transmission in the whole grid,
which is unacceptable.
The DC-DC converter can also be configured in the grid to isolate
the DC fault, and the high frequency transformer of the DC-DC con-
verter is undoubtedly a good isolating device. Through the control of
the DC-DC, the fault can be isolated quickly. However, the configura-
tion of DC-DC in the grid is limited with the issue of cost and power loss,
thus the protection area of the grid is limited [8,9].
SCFCL is featured with good current limiting effects and fast re-
sponse, but the technology is not yet mature, and expensive [10,11].

☆
This work was supported in part by National Natural Science Foundation of China (51777072) and in part by Fundamental Research Funds for the Central
Universities (2017XS018). The authors are with the State Key Laboratory of Alternate Electrical Power System with Renewable Energy Sources, North China Electric
Power University (NCEPU).
⁎
Corresponding author at: 2 Beinong Road, Huilongguan Town, Changping District, Beijing, China.
E-mail address: lishuaiwork@foxmail.com (S. Li).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2018.07.042
Received 18 April 2018; Received in revised form 5 June 2018; Accepted 19 July 2018
0142-0615/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Li et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 104 (2019) 933–942

~220kV AC The feasibility of future DC grids depends largely on their cap-

~750kV DC abilities to withstand DC faults. In order to overcome the problems
±500kV
B1 C4 G4 mentioned above, a novel DCCB topology with current limiting cap-
±320kV DC B4
AC system AC ability is proposed in this paper. It has modular characteristics.
DC breaker G1 C1 Therefore, the number of branches can be flexibly configured to in-
Leactor
crease the current limiting effect while reducing the current value of
DC MMC
AC converter each branch to adapt large current condition. Because of its flexible
DC DC/DC current limiting ability, it can better cooperate with the ROCOV fault
DC converter
detection method and improve the system’s reliability.
G3 C3 B3 B6 B2 C2 G2 The rest of this paper is organized as follows. The topology and
DC AC working principle are introduced in Section 2. The equivalent circuit
AC DC diagram of the topology and the current limiting mechanism are also
1
DC C5 G5 studied in this Section. The comparative analysis of the typical DCCB
DC
B5 AC solutions is detailed in Section 3. To verify the validity and the feasi-
2
B7 DC
bility of the proposed CL-DCCB, the simulation studies in PSCAD/
EMTDC and experiment validation are presented in Section 4. Finally,
Fig. 1. A typical structure of DC grid.
the conclusions are given in Section 5.

Moreover, it does not have the fault isolation ability. It still relies on
other equipment to cut off the DC fault current.
The DCCB is a relatively safe solution because it can be flexibly
arranged at any point in the grid and can interrupt the fault circuit
without affecting the operation of the converter and the normal DC line
[12]. The hybrid DCCB has been deeply studied by [13]. The design
idea of this type DCCB is to close the mechanical switch under normal
condition to reduce the on-state power loss. The power electronic
branch only works under the condition of fault status. A 320 kV/2kA
hybrid DCCB is manufactured by ABB, Ltd., in 2012, as shown in Fig. 2.
On the fault status, firstly, block all the IGBTs of branch 1 and trigger all
the IGBTs of branch 2, the fault current will be transferred from branch
1 to branch 2; secondly, open the UFD (ultra-fast disconnector) of
branch 1 when the fault current in this branch is attenuated to zero;
thirdly, close the IGBTs of branch 2 when the UFD is fully opened, then
the fault current will be transferred to the MOA and attenuated to zero
quickly.
However, the fault current may rise to the maximum limit of the
IGBTs in hybrid DCCB under the condition of larger capacity trans-
mission occasion. Increasing the current limiting reactance can avoid
this problem but will affect the dynamic characteristics of the system.
Therefore, many fault detection methods are unable to meet the needs
of DC grid protection due to the time delay, which can only be used as
backup protection strategies. A feasible fault protection strategy in DC
grid: the measured ROCOV [14], can meet the needs of rapidity. But in
some cases it may cause misjudgment. In the case of small resistance
short circuit occasion, a local line fault may be mistaken as a remote
line fault, because the local ROCOV value may be lower than the critical
threshold value to discriminate local and remote fault, and the mis-
judgment cannot be amended through communication due to high
delay. At the same time, the fault current rising-rate is still too large. If
the current limiting operation cannot be taken in time, the fault current
will exceed the maximum breaking capacity of DCCB, and further lead
to the outage of the DC grid. Thus, this type of hybrid DCCB cannot fully
meet the need of DC grid.
Branch 1
Ultra Fast load commutation
Disconnector switch
Current Limiting
Reactor
Main breaker(Branch2)
Fig. 2. Generic structure of hybrid DCCB developed by ABB.
2. Topology and working principle
2.1. Derivation of the topology
The proposed CL-DCCB consists of MCB and BCBs, as shown in
Fig. 3(a), where L represents the reactors. The MCB includes three
branches: branch 1 is a low loss branch, branch 2 is a power electronic
branch, branch 3 is an energy absorption circuit, as shown in Fig. 3(b).
where, power electronic branch can break fault current rapidly. The
function of energy absorption circuit is to protect the IGBTs from over-
voltage, which consists of MOA (metal oxide arrestor). It should be
noted that IGBT modules displayed in Fig. 3(b) have been configured
with equalizing circuit to prevent partial overvoltage [15–17]. Con-
sidering that each IGBT is configured with a diode rectifier circuit, the
fault current is converted to the same direction. Therefore, the MCB can
be able to cut bidirectional current on the premise of half the usage
amount of IGBTs.
The topology of BCB is shown in Fig. 3(c), which includes three
branches: branch 1 is a low loss branch, which is composed of UFD and
several IGBTs, branch 2 is composed of capacitor banks, branch 3 is an
energy absorption circuit.
2.2. Working principle
With issue to MCB, when conducting UFD and all the IGBTs in
branch 1 and blocking all the IGBTs in branch 2, the MCB will run
under low power loss mode. As path A in Fig. 4(a). In order to quicken
the breaking speed, fault current path should always be transferred to
branch 2 when a suspect fault occurs. Then breaking operation can be
executed quickly when the fault is determined. The process can be
described in detail as follows: firstly, trigger all the IGBTs in branch 2
and then block all the IGBTs in branch 1; secondly, open the UFD in
branch 1 when the current in this branch drops to zero. The current
path in this working mode is shown as path B. If the fault is confirmed,
the breaking operation can be executed by blocking all the IGBTs in
branch 2. As the current is interrupted by these IGBTs, the overvoltage
will be induced by system inductance, then the fault current will be
transferred to MOA when the over-voltage value exceeds the protection
voltage of the MOA, as current path C in Fig. 4(a).
Due to the function of the diode rectifier bridge, unidirectional ar-
rangement of the IGBTs can meet the requirement of the bidirectional
breaking operation. The forward and reverse current paths are shown in
Fig. 4(b) separately. Considering that the capacity and cost character-
istics of diodes under the same parameters are obviously better than
that of IGBTs, and the halve of IGBTs can also reduce the static and
dynamic voltage balancing circuit, which can effectively reduce the
system cost.
For the BCB, the UFD and IGBTs of branch 1 are conducted under

934
S. Li et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 104 (2019) 933–942

Main L1 Path A MOA1

breaker D1 D2
Path B
branch
breaker 1
UFD
Path C T1 T2
L2

C
branch
breaker 2
MOA2
L3
(a) The current paths of BCB
(a) Structure of CL-DCCB UFD
Open Gap
MOA
Branch 1 D1 D2
Contact
UFD
T1 T2
Branch 2 +
C
(b) The opening process of UFD
Branch 3 Fig. 5. Operation process of the BCB.
MOA1 MOAx
(b) Topology of MCB normal state, and the current path is shown as path A in Fig. 5(a). The
power loss is relatively low as there are only several IGBTs in this
MOA branch. When the current limiting operation is required, block all the
Branch 1 IGBTs in branch 1, After a short delay, open the UFD when the current
D1 D2
of branch A dropped to zero, then fault current path as shown by path
B. The opening process of UFD, as shown in Fig. 5(b), usually takes
about 2 ms. Considering that the capacitor can restrain the overvoltage
UFD
T1 T2 rising-rate, a high voltage capacitor bank is used as the auxiliary
switching device in BCB. The insulation voltage level and the gap dis-
Branch 2 tance of UFD are positively correlated [18]. Therefore, the voltage
C breakdown of UFD can be prevented by an appropriate capacitor. In
Branch 3 this case, the capacitor voltage is always less than the insulation voltage
of UFD during the operation process. After the UFD is extremely open,
MOA the capacitor voltage will gradually achieve the MOA protection value.
(c) Topology of BCB The function of MOA is to ensure that the voltage at both ends of the
capacitor during current limiting operation will not exceed its max-
Fig. 3. Topology of CL-DCCB. imum designed value. Then, fault current will be transferred to path C
and attenuated to zero quickly. Through this control, the branch in-
MOA1 ductors are connected in series, thus the current limiting effect is
Path A Path B Path C achieved.
D1 D2
The working mode of proposed CL-DCCB is as follows: 1) Normal
operation mode. In this mode, inductors of different branches are
UFD
T1 T2 connected in parallel with current split into N branches (N is the
MOA2 MOAx number of reactor branches); 2) Fault current limiting mode. In this
mode, the reactors of each branch are connected in series, with the
system’s inductance increased from L/N to N*L to limit the suspected
fault current rising-rate; 3) Current limiting plus circuit breaking mode.
In this mode, the branches series will be connected with each other to
(a) Current paths under different working mode reduce the current rising-rate before being shut down. Then the CL-
DCCB continues to break or recover according to the feedbacks. This
mode provided extra time for fault detection. However, conventional
DCCB may have an increased risk of misjudging as the time for fault
detection is relatively shorter.
The current directions in different modes are shown in the Fig. 6
(b) Current paths of power electronic branch Where, normal running state is shown in Fig. 6(a), fault current limiting
state is shown in Fig. 6(b), and the rising-rate of fault current under this
Fig. 4. Current paths of MCB. mode is effectively suppressed.
The operational process of mode “3″ is shown in Fig. 7. Its working
process is as follows: Close all the UFDs and IGBTs of branch 1 in the

935
S. Li et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 104 (2019) 933–942

Main L1
breaker + i i1 i2 i3 +
iLimit
branch
breaker 1 u L1 L2 L3 u L1 L2 L3
L2

- -
branch
breaker 2 Fig. 8. Current limiting transformation process.

L3 1 t
⎧ i1 = L1
∫−∞ u (ξ ) dξ
⎪ 1 t
(a) Normal working mode
i2 = L2
∫−∞ u (ξ ) dξ
⎨
⎪i = 1 t
Main L1 3 L3
∫−∞ u (ξ ) dξ (1)
⎩
breaker
where u(ξ) is the transient voltage at both ends of the CL-DCCB.
The DC line current is shown in (2):
branch
breaker 1 i = i1 + i2 + i3

L2
= ( 1
L1
+
1
L2
+
1
L3 )∫t
−∞
u (ξ ) dξ
1 t
= L
∫−∞ u (ξ ) dξ (2)
The total inductance of the breaker is shown in (3):
branch
breaker 2 L1 L2 L3
L=
L2 L3 + L1 L3 + L1 L2 (3)
L3
The current of each branch can also be shown in (4)–(6):
L L 2 L3
(b) Current limiting mode i1 = i= i
L1 L2 L3 + L1 L3 + L1 L2 (4)
Fig. 6. Different current paths under normal mode and current limiting mode.
L L1 L3
i2 = i= i
L2 L2 L3 + L1 L3 + L1 L2 (5)
Yes
Breaking operation
No L L1 L2
i3 = i= i
Normal Permanent
L3 L2 L3 + L1 L3 + L1 L2 (6)
suspected fault
mode Fault
As shown in (4)–(6), when the inductance of these branches are
Yes
Recovering operation
equal, the current value of each branch will be consistent. Thus, the
Current limiting
No current value of each branch is 1/3 of the total system current.
mode
The value of flux linkages under normal state is shown in (7):
Fig. 7. Operational process under fault condition.
ψL (0−) = ψL1 (0−) + ψL2 (0−) + ψL3 (0−)
= L1 iL1 (0−) + L2 iL2 (0−) + L3 iL3 (0−) (7)
two BCBs and the MCB under normal conditions. When a suspected
failure occurs, current limiting mode will be executed: firstly, block all Under the current limiting mode, the reactors of each branch are
the IGBTs in branch 1 of all the BCBs and the MCB, then, open the UFD connected in series. The value of flux linkages is shown in (8).
of BCB when the fault current in branch 1 dropped to zero. In case of
ψL (0+) = ψL1 (0+) + ψL2 (0+) + ψL3 (0+)
permanent fault, all the IGBTs of branch 2 in the MCB should be
switched off to cut the fault current, otherwise, recover to normal op- = (L1 + L2 + L3 ) iLimit (0+) (8)
eration by closing all the UFDs in MCB and BCBs, then turn on the According to the conservation principle of flux linkages, (9) can be
IGBTs in branch 1 of MCB and BCBs. developed:
ψL (0−) = ψL (0+) (9)
2.3. Analysis of current limiting operation Thus, the current of the branches is limited to the value before the
current limiting operation. Therefore, the current limiting mode has a
In this section, the current limiting process under ideal conditions function of depressing fault current to a certain extent.
was analyzed firstly, and then the current limiting process under From the above analysis, the inductance value of the CL-DCCB can
practical conditions was analyzed. be greatly increased by the current limiting control, and then the in-
The proposed CL-DCCB can greatly increase the equivalent in- ductance value of the DC system can be increased to a degree. The
ductance by changing the connection mode of the reactor branches, as increase of inductance can effectively restrain the rising-rate of the
shown in Fig. 8. system fault current, thus the time margin for fault detection and
Before the current limiting operation is executed, each inductor is breaking operation can be enlarged.
connected in parallel. The fault current of each branch can be expressed The current limiting process can be analyzed by the equivalent
in (1): circuit shown in Fig. 9.

936
S. Li et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 104 (2019) 933–942

36 K5000 is chosen in proposed CL-DCCB scheme. Its nominal para-

meter is 5 kV/3.6kA.
On the condition of ± 500 kV project, the peak voltage value of the
+

MCB is 1.5 times of the rated voltage of the DC cables [20]. Considering
the safety allowance and the characteristic of MOA, the two sides of
-

IGBT branches have to tolerate 800 kV, therefore, 270 IGBTs need to be
connected in series. on the condition of bidirectional breaking opera-
tion, the number of IGBTs is 540 in ABB’s scheme. Similarly, GEIRI’s
scheme also needs 540 IGBTs.
With the issue of proposed CL-DCCB, the protection voltage of MOA
in breaking valve should also be set to 800 kV. For a diode rectifier
circuit configured on each IGBT modules, single direction of the IGBTs
can meet the requirements of bidirectional breaking operation.
Therefore, breaking valve only needs 270 IGBTs and 1080 diodes.
(a) Equivalent circuit under normal mode Considering the auxiliary capacitor is configured to achieve the
breaking effect in BCB, only a few of the IGBTs are needed in the low
loss branch. Therefore, the BCB is mainly composed of capacitor banks,
MOAs and UFDs. As the voltage across the capacitor banks or UFD are
+
+

set to 800 kV, the voltage of capacitor of BCB should also be designed to
this voltage value, considering the rated voltage of a DryDCap type
-

capacitor of ABB is 3 kV, 540 capacitors are needed in two BCBs.

The comparison of the devices usage under the three schemes is
shown in the Table 1:
Table 1 shows the usage of IGBTs for proposed scheme is halved,
while the usage of diodes, capacitor banks, and UFDs are increased
largely. Therefore, the cost of proposed scheme is higher than other two
scheme. However, the proposed scheme can effectively slow down the
+

rising-rate of fault currents, thus more time for fault detection and
isolation is permitted.
(b) Equivalent circuit under current limiting mode
Fig. 9. Equivalent circuit of proposed CL-DCCB.
3.2. Performance analysis

When C1 and C2 are inserted in the circuit, they will be charged With the increase of the voltage and current in the transmission line
immediately, in which the voltage of C1 is determined by the voltage of of large-scale HVDC grid in future, the short circuit current and its
L1 and L2. While the voltage of C2 is determined by the voltage of L2 and rising-rate will also be increased. Although the rate can be suppressed
L3. The followings can be deduced by increasing the line reactor, the dynamic behavior of the grid will also
be affected. Because of the large reactance, the voltage source converter
di
⎧udc = uc1 + L dt3 + iR will be closed to the current source converter. Therefore, the char-
⎪ di
⎪udc = uc 2 + L dt1 + iR acteristics of the voltage source converter will be counteracted. What’s
⎪ more, at present, many fault detection methods are unable to meet the
⎪udc = uc1 + uc 2−L di2 + iR needs of DC grid protection due to the time delay. Most of them can
dt
⎨i = i1 + i2 + i3 only be used as backup protection strategies except ROCOV, etc.
⎪
⎪uc1 = L ddit1 −L ddit2 When ROCOV method is adopted, the width of the boundary be-
⎪ tween the local and remote faults is limited due to the consideration of
⎪uc 2 = L di3 −L di2 the short circuit through impedance and the bipolar short circuit. So the
⎩ dt dt (10)
ROCOV method is probably to miss what the real state is.
Considering that the voltage of the reactor will drops to zero after A 4-terminal DC grid simulation model, as shown in Fig. 10, is used
entering steady state, C1 and C2 will have a charging and discharging to test the ROCOV data. When line inductor is set to 50mH, the fault
process, and the rising-rate of charging voltage is relatively lower, thus point is at F1, which 10 km away from MMC4. The length of the line1,
the effective opening of the UFD is ensured. For the storage energy of C1 line2, line3, line4 is 227 km, 126 km, 219 km, 66 km, respectively. Other
and C2 are limited, the subsequent discharge process will not cause a parameters are shown in Tables A1 and A2, and the ROCOV data of
sharp increase of the system fault current. point A (local ROCOV) and point B (remote ROCOV) under different
types of faults are shown in Table 2:
3. Comparison of the three solutions It can be seen from Table 2 that, the ROCOV level of local grounding
fault is 290 kV, the same as the remote bipolar short circuit when the
3.1. Economic analysis grounding fault resistance is 50 Ω. At this time, it is easy to misjudge the
local fault as the remote fault. There are two solutions to solve this
This Section will make a comparison between the proposed to-
pology and the existing typical DCCB schemes including the ABB’s Table 1
Parameters of simulated DC grid.
DCCB scheme and the global energy interconnection research institute’s
(GEIRI) DCCB scheme. schemes IGBTs Diodes Capacitors UFDs
IGBT model 5SNA 2000 K450300 is adopted to analyze the schemes.
ABB 540 0 0 1
The nominal parameter of the model is 4.5 kV/2kA [19], the design
GEIRI 540 0 270 1
voltage is 3 kV considering the security margin, and the peak inter- Proposed 270 1080 540 3
rupting current is 9kA when applied to DCCB [13]. Diode model 5SDD

937
S. Li et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 104 (2019) 933–942

Line1 5.0

Branch breaker currents

MMC1 MMC2 4.0 Branch 1
3.0 Branch 2
2.0 Branch 3
1.0

/kA
(a)
0.0
Line4

Line2
-1.0
-2.0
-3.0
B 0.998 1.000 1.002 1.004 1.006 1.008 1.010 1.012 1.014

A t/s
MMC4 Line3 MMC3
10.0

Main breaker currents

F1 8.0
Fig. 10. 4-terminal DC grid simulation model. 6.0
Branch 1
4.0

/kA
(b) Branch 2
Table 2 2.0 Branch 3
Parameters of simulated DC grid.
0.0
Fault type Local ROCOV Remote ROCOV -2.0
0.998 1.000 1.002 1.004 1.006 1.008 1.010 1.012 1.014
Ground fault 0 Ω 350 kV 240 kV
Ground fault 50 Ω 290 kV 200 kV
Ground fault 100 Ω 250 kV 165 V Fig. 11. Currents of MCB and BCB under current limiting operation.
Bipolar short circuit 525 kV 290 kV

fault current is verified. Then the current limiting operation plus

breaking operation are shown in this Section. The current limiting op-
problem. One solution is to compare and analyze the ROCOV data from
eration is performed when suspect fault occurs, then breaking operation
positive and negative DC line reactors to determine the short circuit
is conducted on the fault line when the fault is confirmed. Finally, the
type. If the ROCOV of two reactors are detected simultaneously, the
comparison between the proposed scheme and the ABB’s scheme is
bipolar short circuit can be confirmed. Then, whether the fault is local
shown。
or remote can be determined according to the bipolar fault type. Ob-
viously, the additional communication process will increase time delay.
4.2. Waveforms of proposed CL-DCCB
The other solution is to perform a current limiting operation when a
suspected fault is detected, which can increase the margin for backup
The system is in double-pole short current fault state at 1.0 s. The
protection.
distance between the MMC4 and the fault point F1 is 10 km, with the
The proposed CL-DCCB has many advantages. Firstly, it can present
fault point located on line 3. For the ROCOV algorithm has advantages
relatively low inductance in normal state to ensure the dynamic per-
of small quantity of calculations, and the fault point located not far
formance of the grid during normal state, while high inductance in
from the breaker, the current limiting operation can be performed at
current limiting mode to suppress the fault current. Compared with the
1.00015 s. The ROCOV of the reactor at point A is detected at 1.00015 s,
existing DCCB topology, this topology can start current limiting op-
then current limiting operation is executed, the current limiting valve is
eration when a suspected fault occurs, which can decrease the current
cut off, and the energy of this valve is dissipated in the MOA of this
rising-rate and allow longer fault detect time. When the detection cir-
valve. Fig. 11(a) shows the current waveforms of the three branches of
cuit shows what has happened, it can be determined whether to im-
BCB 1. The current waveforms are the same as the branches of BCB 2.
plement breaking operation or recover to normal state. This mode al-
The fault current is transferred to the capacitor branch when the power
lows longer fault detection time and breaking operation delay while
electronic devices in low loss branch is closed. Then the capacitor will
guaranteeing the fault current under the maximum limit. Secondly, as
be charged, with the capacitor voltage reaching the threshold of the
the current in each branch are reduced, lightweight UFD can be used in
MOA protection voltage value, the fault current is transferred to the
CL-DCCB. This means that the cost of UFD can be reduced as it is easier
MOA. As the capacitor banks are in the circuit all the time, there will be
to be manufactured. In addition, the breaking contact can be ac-
a resonance between the branch inductor and the capacitor banks. With
celerated due to lower inertance, which can free the pull rod from the
the energy dissipation of MOA, the capacitor current will reverse for a
limit of materials and process. Therefore, the lightweight contact can
period of time. Then the system current will have a descending process,
get larger gap within the same period of time, which can alleviate the
as shown in Fig. 11(b) At this time, the current path of MCB has been
demand of multi-break UFD. Moreover, extended MMC block delay is
transferred to branch 2 during the current limiting operation. The UFD
allowed under current limiting mode for the fault rising-rate is reduced
has been fully opened, the power electronic devices have been trig-
to a great extent. The above analysis indicated good potential of this
gered, and thus the breaking operation can be initiated immediately. If
method for further study.
it runs under the current limiting mode, the fault current will rise at a
lower rising-rate.
4. Simulation and experimental results The capacitor voltage waveforms of BCB 1 and BCB 2 are shown as
Fig. 12. The voltage increases to 400 kV within 2 ms, and eventually
4.1. Simulation results admit 800 kV. Considering that the insulation voltage of the UFD will
increase when the gap distance increases with time, the insulation
A four-terminal MMC-based HVDC grid model is built in PSCAD/ voltage of UFD will reach to 800 kV within 2 ms. The insulation
EMTDC to verify the proposed CL-DCCB, and the frequency dependent breakdown will not happen as the actual voltage of the gap is always
overhead line model is adopted. The detailed parameters of this simu- less than the UFD insulation voltage in the whole breaking process.
lation model are shown in the Tables A1 and A2. Assuming that the fault detection time is 11 ms and the current
Simulation of the current limiting operation will be first analyzed in limiting operation is executed at 1.00015 s when a suspected ROCOV
this Section, and the influence of the current limiting operation on the alert occurs, the system will run under the current limiting mode before

938
S. Li et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 104 (2019) 933–942

1.0k 100k
0.8k UC1 80k
Voltage /kV

UC2

Energy/kJ
0.6k 60k
0.4k 40k
0.2k 20k
0.0 0.0
0.980 0.990 1.000 1.010 1.020 1.030 1.040
-0.2k t/s
0.998 0.999 1.000 1.001 1.002 1.003 1.004 1.005 1.006
t/s Fig. 15. Energy absorption value of MCB.

Fig. 12. Capacitor voltage waveforms of BCB 1 and BCB 2.

10.0
10.0 8.0

Current /kA
t1 t2 t3 t4 Branch 1
8.0
6.0
Current /kA

Branch 2
6.0
Branch 3 4.0 Current 1
4.0
2.0 Current 2
2.0
0.0
0.0 0.998 1.000 1.002 1.004 1.006 1.008 1.010 1.012 1.014
-2.0
0.980 0.990 1.000 1.010 1.020 1.030 1.040
Fig. 16. Comparison of current limiting effect, current 1: fault current wave-
t/s form without current limiting function, current 2: fault current waveform under
current limiting mode.
Fig. 13. Currents of MCB.

and breaking operation delay is increased.

the fault is detected by backup protection method. When the fault is
If the maximum reactance of the proposed CL-DCCB is taken as a
confirmed, the breaking operation will be operated at 1.011 s. The fault
reference, the line reactance of the ABB’s scheme is 0.9 mH, and the
current waveforms of MCB are shown in Fig. 13.
fault current is up to 11.5 kA when the breaking operation is executed
The development of fault current includes four stages: firstly, the
at 1.011 s, as shown in Fig. 17. Unlike the proposed CL-DCCB, there is
current started to rise rapidly as the fault occurs, as shown in time
no energy absorption process before the breaking operation in ABB’s
period t1; secondly, the fault current is reduced for the fault energy is
scheme, so the fault current is greater than proposed scheme.
partly absorbed by the capacitor of BCBs when the current limiting
The total energy absorption of the DCCB is 130 mJ, as shown in
operation is implemented, as shown in time period t2; thirdly, the fault
Fig. 18, which is much larger than 106 mJ of proposed CL-DCCB. The
current rises at a lower rate under the current limiting mode, as shown
difference is due to the lower equivalent line reactance of the proposed
in time period t3; fourthly, due to the existence of capacitance, re-
scheme at normal working state. At this time, the energy stored in the
sistance and inductance in the loop, the fault current enters the stage of
reactor is smaller. What's more, the arrester and the capacitor of the
oscillation and attenuation.
BCB has absorbed part of the energy under the current limiting state.
As shown in Fig. 14. the absorbed energy of BCB 1 and 2 is 6.5 mJ,
While the reactance value of ABB’s scheme is larger under normal
respectively. Considering the duration of the DC fault up to 11 ms be-
working state, so there is more energy stored in the line reactor.
fore the breaking operation, the absorbed energy of MCB is 93 mJ, as
Therefore, the proposed scheme is better than ABB’s scheme in terms of
shown in Fig. 15.
fault current limiting effect and arrester requirement.

4.3. Waveforms of ABB’s scheme

4.4. Experimental results
Fig. 16 showed a comparison between the fault current of proposed
scheme and ABB’s scheme. At this time, the reactance of the ABB’s A prototype is used to verify the proposed CL-DCCB, as shown in
scheme is consistent with the reactance of the proposed scheme under Fig. 19. The parameters of this prototype are given in Table A3.
non-current-limiting conditions. Compared with the non-current-lim- The DC side short circuit fault is triggered by a thyristor. After 1 ms,
iting mode, the fault current under current limiting mode reaches to the fault is detected and the current limiting operation is executed by
9kA after 12 ms, while the non-current-limiting mode only requires blocking IGBTs in BCB. The trigger pulse of thyristor and IGBT are
2 ms to reach the same current value. Thus the time for fault detection
12.0
7.0k 10.0
6.0k Branch breaker1 8.0
Current/kA

5.0k Branch breaker2

6.0
Energy/kJ

4.0k
4.0
3.0k
2.0k 2.0
1.0k 0.0
0.0 -2.0
0.980 0.990 1.000 1.010 1.020 1.030 1.040 0.990 0.995 1.000 1.005 1.010 1.015 1.020 1.025 1.030 1.035 1.040
t/s t/s
Fig. 14. Energy absorption value of BCB. Fig. 17. DC fault current waveform of ABB’s DCCB.

939
S. Li et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 104 (2019) 933–942

140k
120k
100k
80k
Energy/kJ

60k
40k
20k
0.0
0.990 0.995 1.000 1.005 1.010 1.015 1.020 1.025 1.030 1.035 1.040
t/s

Fig. 18. Energy absorption value of ABB’s DCCB. Fig. 21. DC fault current waveform under current limiting mode.

Fig. 22. Capacitor voltage waveform of the BCB.

Fig. 19. Prototype of proposed CL-DCCB.

Fig. 23. DC fault current waveform without current limiting operation.

5. Conclusions

This paper focuses on the study of DCCB, and proposed a CL-DCCB

Fig. 20. Trigger pulses of thyristor and IGBTs.
shown in Fig. 20, and the waveform of DC fault current is shown in
Fig. 21. The rising-rate of the fault current is dramatically reduced after
the current limiting operation. The capacitor voltage waveform of BCB
is shown in Fig. 22. The voltage begins to oscillation attenuate after it is
reached to the maximum value. Fig. 23 is the fault current waveform
under the non-current-limiting state. Compared to Fig. 21, it is obvious
that the rising-rate of the fault current is larger than the current limiting
state. Therefore, the current limiting operation can greatly restrain the
rising-rate of the fault current and win the time for the fault protection.
topology based on the analysis of hybrid DCCB raised by ABB and
GEIRI. The mathematical model of this topology is built and analyzed,
then the simulation model and prototype is studied in this paper.
Finally, follow conclusions are drawn.
Current limiting mode can be activated when a suspected fault oc-
curs. The current value and the current rising-rate can be limited ef-
fectively, thus, longer fault detection time can be allowed and mis-
operation of DCCB can be avoided.
The number of inductor branches can be configured flexibly on the
basis of current grade and costs.
With the function of diode rectifier bridge, the number of IGBTs can
be reduced effectively, but the number of UFDs, MOAs and high voltage
capacitor banks is increased and the total cost of proposed CL-DCCB
also went up. The advantage is a longer fault tolerance time. At this
time, the fault current will exceed the breaking capacity under tradi-
tional DCCB scheme.

940
S. Li et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 104 (2019) 933–942

Appendix

See Tables A1, A2, and A3.

Table A1
Parameters of the current limiting CL-DCCB.

Item Symbol Value

Branch inductance/mH L 100

Branch numbers N 3
Threshold current of IGBT/kA IMAX 5
UFD delay/ms T1 2

Table A2
Parameters of simulated DC grid.

Item station A station B station C station D

Station capacity/MVA 1500 1500 3000 3000

Rated DC-link voltage/kV ± 500 ± 500 ± 500 ± 500
Transformer capacity/MVA 3400 1700 3400 3400
Arm reactor/mH 100 100 100 100
DC reactor /mH 150 150 150 150
Sub-module capacitance/µF 7000 7000 7000 7000

Table A3
Parameters of the Prototype.

Item Symbol Value

Branch inductance/mH L 25
Branch numbers N 3
Threshold current of IGBT/kA IMAX 0.1
DC voltage/kV Udc2 0.1
DC reactor/mH Ldc 20
BCB capacitance/µF Cb 50

References [11] Morishita Y, Ishikawa T, Yamaguchi I, Okabe S. Applications of DC Breakers and

[1] Flourentzou N, Agelidis VG, Demetriades GD. VSC-based HVDC power transmission
systems: an overview. IEEE Trans Power Electron Mar. 2009;24(3):592–602.
[2] Egea-Alvarez A, Bianchi F, Junyent-Ferre A, Gross G, GomisBellmunt O. Voltage
control of multiterminal VSC-HVDC transmission systems for offshore wind power
plants: Design and implementation in a scaled platform. IEEE Trans Ind Electron
Jun. 2013;60(6):2381–91.
[3] FPSG (Friends of the Supergrid) WG2. Roadmap to the super grid technologies[R].
http://www.stopthecrime.net/smartmeters.
[4] Farhadi M, Mohammed OA. Event-based protection scheme for a multiterminal
hybrid dc power system. IEEE Trans Smart Grid Jul. 2015;6(4):1658–69.
[5] T. An, G. Tang, and W. Wang, “Research and application on multi-terminal and DC
grids based on VSC-HVDC technology in China,” High Voltage, vol. 2, no. 1, pp.
1–10, 2017.9.
[6] Yu X, Wei Y, Jiang Q, Xie X, Liu Y, Wang K. A novel hybridarm bipolar MMC
topology with dc fault ride-through capability. IEEE Trans Power Del May
2017;32(3):1404–13.
[7] Zeng R, Xu L, Yao L, Morrow DJ. Precharging and DC fault ride-through of hybrid
MMC-based HVDC systems. IEEE Trans Power Del Jun. 2015;30(3):1298–306.
[8] Shi Y, Li H. Isolated Modular Multilevel DC-DC Converter With DC Fault Current
Control Capability Based on Current-Fed Dual Active Bridge for MVDC Application’.
IEEE Trans Power Electron 2018;33(3):2145–61.
[9] Rojas CA, Kouro S, Perez MA, Echeverria J. Dc-dc mmc for hvdc grid interface of
utility-scale photovoltaic conversion systems. IEEE Trans Ind Electron
2018;65(1):352–62.
[10] Huang HY, Xu Z, X. L,. Improving performance of multi-infeed HVDC systems using
grid dynamic segmentation technique based on fault current limiters. IEEE Trans
Power Syst Mar 2012;17(3):1664–72.
Concepts for Superconducting Fault-Current Limiter for a DC Distribution Network.
IEEE Trans Appl Supercond 2009;19(4):3658–64.
[12] Majumder R, Auddy S, Berggren B, Velotto G, Barupati P, Jonsson TU. An alter-
native method to build DC switchyard with hybrid DC breaker for DC grids. IEEE
Trans Power Del Apr. 2017;32(2):713–22.
[13] Hassanpoor A, Hafner J, Jacobson B. Technical assessment of load commutation
switch in hybrid HVDC breaker. IEEE Trans Power Electron Oct.
2015;30(10):5393–400.
[14] Sneath J, Rajapakse AD. Fault detection and interruption in an earthed HVDC grid
using ROCOV and hybrid DC breakers. IEEE Trans Power Del Jun.
2016;31(3):973–81.
[15] Chokhawala RS, Sobhani S. Switching voltage transient protection schemes for
high-current IGBT modules. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 1997;33:1601–10.
[16] Withanage R, Shammas N. Series connection of insulated gate bipolar transistors
(IGBTs). IEEE Trans Power Electron Apr. 2012;27(4):2204–12.
[17] Shiqi J, Ting L, Zhengming Z, Hualong Y, Liqiang Y. Seriesconnected HV-IGBTs
using active voltage balancing control with status feedback circuit. IEEE Trans
Power Electron Aug. 2015;30(8):4165–74.
[18] Wen T, Zhang Q, Ma J, et al. Discharge characteristics of long SF6 gas gap with and
without insulator in GIS under VFTO and LI[J]. CSEE J Power Energy Syst
2015;1(3):16–22.
[19] ABB Switzerland Ltd. Datasheet IGBT 5SNA 2000K450300 [EB/OL]. [2014-07-19].
http://new.abb.com/products/semiconductors.
[20] Davidson C, Whitehouse R, Barker C, Dupraz J, Grieshaber W. A new ultra-fast hvdc
circuit breaker for meshed dc networks. In: Proc. IET ACDC, Birmingham, U.K., Feb.
10–12 2015, p. 7.
Shuai Li was born in Henan, China. He received the B.S. and M.S. degrees from Nanyang
Institute of Technology and Taiyuan University of Technology in 2011 and 2014

941
S. Li et al.
respectively. Currently he is a Ph.D. student at NCEPU. His research interests include
MMC based dc grid protection and control.
Jiyuan Zhang was born in Zhejiang, China in 1995. He received his B.Sc. degree in
Hangzhou Dianzi University, Hangzhou, China in 2017. Currently he is pursuing his
Master degree at NCEPU, his research interests include MMC-HVDC and dc grid.
Jianzhong Xu (M’14) was born in Shanxi, China. He received the B.S. and Ph.D. degrees
from North China Electric Power University (NCEPU) in 2009 and 2014 respectively.
Currently, he is an associate professor of the State Key Laboratory of Alternate Electrical
Power System with Renewable Energy Sources, NCEPU. From 2012 to 2013 and 2016 to
942
Electrical Power and Energy Systems 104 (2019) 933–942
2017, he was respectively a visiting Ph.D. student and Post-Doctoral Fellow (PDF) at the
University of Manitoba. He is now working on the high-speed electromagnetic transient
(EMT) modeling and control & protection of MMC-HVdc and dc grid.
Chengyong Zhao (M’05-SM’15) was born in Zhejiang, China. He received the B.S., M.S.
and Ph.D. degrees in power system and its automation from NCEPU in 1988, 1993 and
2001, respectively. He was a visiting professor at the University of Manitoba from Jan.
2013 to Apr. 2013 and Sep. 2016 to Oct. 2016. Currently, he is a professor at the School of
Electrical and Electronic Engineering, NCEPU. His research interests include HVdc system
and dc grid.