This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal.
Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY
A Survey on Hybrid Circuit-Breaker Topologies
Anshuman Shukla, Member, IEEE, and Georgios D. Demetriades, Member, IEEE
Abstract—The applications of power semiconductors in cir-
cuit-breaker (CB) technology can help achieve considerable
improvement in its performance and possible new capabilities. In
this paper, new trends in power electronics for the applications in
CBs are presented. It also summarizes and reviews the appropriate
hybrid mechanical-static CB topologies. Various conventional and
derived topologies for ac as well as dc applications are described.
Discussions about common and future trends in this technology
development are presented. This study will provide a useful
framework and point of reference for the future development of
hybrid CBs for various different applications.
Index Terms—Current limiting, hybrid circuit breaker (HCB),
mechanical circuit breaker (MCB), power electronics, semiconduc-
tors.
I. INTRODUCTION
A circuit breaker (CB) is required to accomplish the fol-
lowing basic requirements: 1) large current handling ca-
pability without excessive losses; 2) capability of very fast tran-
sition from the conducting to the blocking state in case of a fault,
without damaging itself in the process; and 3) after current inter-
ruption, when it is open, the dielectric strength must be built up
in order to block any current despite the high potentials at termi-
nals [1]–[7]. The classical mechanical circuit breakers (MCBs)
have a very small contact resistance (a few ) in the closed
position, and represent galvanic separation in the open state.
Therefore, they exhibit excellent performance for the first and
third requirements mentioned before. However, it could actually
fail in the second requirement due to the transient conditions of
the switching circuits (primarily inductive), unless sufficient de-
sign tolerances are used [1]–[4]. Furthermore, they have a long
reaction time due to the need for blowing the arc in a chute.
In the modern power systems scenario, the reliability, us-
ability, controllability, loss, cost, maintenance, and fast response
are some of the most important considerations. However, until
very recently, there were very few alternatives to MCBs. Fur-
ther, in electric grids, the handling of the short circuit is an im-
portant issue to increase power quality (PQ). Therefore, there
is a growing need to improve the performance of the CBs and
look into other possible alternatives to MCBs.
Manuscript received August 26, 2013; revised March 26, 2014 and May 14,
2014; accepted June 08, 2014. Paper no. TPWRD-00980-2013.
A. Shukla is with the Department of Electrical Engineering., Indian Institute
of Technology Bombay, Mumbai 400076, India (e-mail: ashukla@ee.iitb.ac.in).
G. D. Demetriades is with ABB Corporate Research, Västerås SE-72178 ,
Sweden (e-mail: georgios.demetriades@se.abb.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPWRD.2014.2331696
0885-8977 © 2014 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1
Recently, considerable progress has also been achieved in
the applications of power semiconductors in CBs [5], [7]–[11].
In one of these applications, an appropriate semiconductor
device is used to function as a CB itself, thereby, replacing the
MCBs. This configuration is called the solid-state CB (SSCB)
[12]–[27]. SSCBs, based on high-power semiconductors, offer
many advantages when compared to conventional solutions,
since a solid-state breaker is able to switch in few microsec-
onds. In an SSCB, due to the absence of moving parts, there
is no arcing, contact erosion, or bounce. SSCBs also result in
increased system intelligence since it can also be used as a
soft starter. SSCB are much faster in minimizing fault duration
(reduced loss of load probability due to votage sag), However,
because of the semiconductor’s small but still finite onstate
resistance resulting in heating and power loss, the SSCBs fail
as far as the first basic requirement of a CB mentioned above is
concerned. Therefore, thermal capability of the semiconductor
wafer is a serious issue in this application. Furthermore, SSCBs
are rather expensive and have relatively large dimensions.
They are also sensitive to overvoltages and overcurrents, which
may break down the junctions of power semiconductors. In
dc applications based on the power-flow direction, and in ac
applications, all possible SSCBs use bidirectional semicon-
ductor switches [14]–[16]. This implies double component
count, considerably high complexity of the system, and lower
reliability compared to MCBs. Therefore, SSCBs are restricted
to applications with a limited rate of increase of fault currents,
where fast switchings are the top priority and incurring losses
are manageable.
It is clear that at very high currents, the MCBs are still a more
feasible solution than the SSCBs. However, recently, significant
interests have developed in combining semiconductor device(s)
with an MCB in a proper way to configure a new family of CBs
called hybrid circuit breakers (HCBs) [7]. The main aim of this
paper is to give a general overview of the research activities and
recent advancements in HCB technology for all voltage/power
ratings. The concepts, principles of operation, main features,
advantages, and possible shortcomings of several HCB topolo-
gies have been described. The important areas in which further
research and development are needed in this field have been
identified.
II. PRINCILES OF HYBRID CBS
As discussed before, the MCBs and SSCBs do not individu-
ally meet all three basic requirements of a CB. Interestingly, an
SSCB (MCB) can still perform admirably for one of these re-
quirements where an MCB (SSCB) fails. Therefore, a parallel
combination of semiconductor(s) and an MCB might well com-
bine the advantages of both, resulting in an HCB. An HCB al-
lows a combination of the MCB’s current-carrying function and
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY
Fig. 1. Example hybrid CB schematic.
SSCB’s high-speed arcless interrupting function. In order to ob-
tain the same benefits in an HCB as in static interruption, a suf-
ficiently fast enough mechanical contacts opening is required.
For example, in an HCB presented in [54], a mechanical switch
opening time of 70 s was achieved.
A classic HCB configuration used in an ac circuit is shown
in Fig. 1, where represents a mechanical switch remaining
closed under normal conditions and, hence, allows the main cur-
rent to flow through it. Therefore, the onstate power loss is kept
limited to the range as in an equivalent MCB. The semicon-
ductor devices connected in parallel to operate after a fault
occurrence and perform the fault circuit interruption. Normally,
the switched-on power-electronic devices provide a much lower
impedance path to the fault current after starts to open. This
causes the current to commutate from to the power-electronics
path. In a dc HCB, some passive elements are essentially re-
quired for forcing the dc fault current to zero. However, these
elements may not be required in an ac network due to the natural
zero crossing. It is to be noted that as the power-electronic de-
vice is turned off to finally clear the fault, the voltage across
it rises due to the stored energy in the line inductance. This
voltage may reach a very high value and destroy the HCB if
no additional components are used for reducing the voltage.
As shown in Fig. 1, an overvoltage protection device (e.g., a
metal–oxide varistor) is connected in parallel to the power-elec-
tronic switches to reduce the peak voltage. Therefore, by lim-
iting the voltage magnitude during turn-off, the varistor protects
the HCB from damage. After this varistor action, subsequently,
the line inductance is demagnetized which results in current re-
duction to zero.
The representative waveforms illustrating the HCB opera-
tion are plotted in Fig. 2. A fault occurs at and after a
sufficient delay starts to open at . The static switch is
also turned-on at . An arc is generated across and if
the arc voltage is sufficient, the fault current will commutate
to the semiconductor path as shown in Fig. 2. In this mode,
the fault current flows through as well as through the semi-
conductor path. After current commutation and arc extinction
at , the fault current flows through the semiconductor as
shown in Fig. 2. In order to avoid arc reignition, the conduction
time should be comparably large. When the semiconductor is
turned off, the stored energy in the line inductance is absorbed
by the overvoltage protection device as shown in Fig. 2.
The HCB in Fig. 1 is for ac and, hence, requires semi-
conductor device(s) having bidirectional current carrying
capability. In Fig. 3, three main bidirectional switch configu-
rations are shown. The selection of such devices depends on
component count, complexity, and reliability, among others.
Fig. 2. Current waveforms during fault.
Fig. 3. Bidirectional switches.
Although the bidirectional switches in Fig. 3 are shown
to be implemented using insulated-gate bipolar transistors
(IGBTs), other controllable devices, such as gate turn-off
thyristors (GTOs), metal–oxide semiconductor field-effect
transistor (MOSFET), metal–oxide semiconductor-controlled
thyristor (MCT), insulated-gate commutated transistor (IGCT),
gate-commutated turnoff thyristor (GCT), etc., may similarly
be used.
In general, the following features characterize an HCB: 1)
In an HCB, the fault current needs a certain time to commutate
from the MB to the semiconductor; on the other hand, SSCB can
quickly interrupt the current depending on the semiconductor’s
capabilities; it implies that the current which the semiconductor
has to interrupt is significantly higher compared with the SSCB;
2) conduction losses are not an issue as the current in normal
operation flows through the mechanical switch; nevertheless,
heat sinks are required because the fault current is commutated
to the semiconductor during faults; and 3) a mechanical switch
is required with sufficient capability to withstand system voltage
and overvoltages. Although an HCB possesses many features,
its design and operation are challenging due to the following
issues:
1) different reaction times (fault detection, interruption times)
required for the two components; for example, the inter-
ruption time of an ac MCB is in the range of
, whereas for a controllable solid-state device,
the range is ; current interruption through
the solid-state device can be in the range of a couple of
’s if the stray inductance of the circuit is very low;
2) different current rating capabilities of the MCB and the
solid-state devices; the conventional MCB can interrupt a
fault current of up to some tens of kiloamperes, whereas
the controllable solid-state devices, for example, IGBTs,
can interrupt currents only up to a few kiloamperes;
3) the separation of the mechanical contacts is dependent on
the fault current magnitude; higher fault current implies a
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
SHUKLA AND DEMETRIADES: SURVEY ON HYBRID CB TOPOLOGIES
Fig. 4. DC HCB using photogated transistors [30].
larger separation of contacts; the arc voltage should be suf-
ficient; otherwise, the current will not be able to commutate
from the mechanical breaker to the semiconductor;
4) arc voltage: in order to commutate the current from
the mechanical breaker to the solid-state device, an arc
voltage, which is sufficiently higher than the solid-state
device voltage drop, is required [88];
5) commutation time: in an HCB, the mechanical and the
solid-state devices form a closed loop that has its own in-
ductance; if this loop inductance is high, then high com-
mutation time is required; high commutation time results
in a further increase in magnitude of the fault current and,
therefore, the solid-state device is forced to interrupt very
high currents;
6) conduction time of the solid-state device depends on the
following factors: 1) high-conduction time is required in
order to completely commutate the current from the me-
chanical to the solid-state switch; 2) high-conduction time
is required when the loop inductance is high; and 3) high-
conduction time is required in order to extinguish the arc
of the mechanical breaker, that is, to establish zero cur-
rent flow through the mechanical breaker; high-conduc-
tion times result in high conduction losses and, as a result,
overheating of the device which can lead to device fail-
ures; therefore, the conduction time should be kept as low
as possible.
Therefore, an HCB for an application should be designed
after considering all of the aforementioned challenges. There
are many different HCB configurations available in the litera-
ture. The following sections define the different classes of HCB
configurations and review the existing technology in this area.
III. CLASSICAL HYBRID CB CONFIGURATIONS
A. DC Applications
Based on the classical HCB circuit shown in Fig. 1, many
different realizations have been proposed in the literature. One
such early application was reported in [30], where phototran-
sistors were used as the semiconductor component of an HCB,
as sketched in Fig. 4 for a dccircuit. Its main contribution was
the development of the largest phototransistor with a breakdown
voltage of 1000 V. The semiconductor devices were assembled
in large series strings to withstand a large blocking voltage. Pho-
togating was used for providing the switching signals to the
transistors. It was concluded that under high-current conditions,
the effectiveness in attracting electrons from the emitter was se-
verely reduced for phototransistors. Therefore, the phototran-
sistor was not found suitable for HCB applications. A similar
HCB configuration was proposed in [31] as well where the semi-
conductor element is switched on through irradiation.
3
Fig. 5. DC HCB using FET [32].
In [32], an HCB for the dc power system on an aircraft was
proposed with the schematic shown in Fig. 5. The making and
breaking using a conventional MCB may be very difficult at
high altitude because of the low mobility of an arc at low pres-
sure. In such applications, the weight and volume are the de-
ciding factors in the breaker design. A semiconductor with very
large current carrying capability may not be feasible because
of its large weight and size. The HCB presented in [32] has
been designed based on these considerations. A power field-ef-
fect transistor (FET) is used as the semiconductor connected in
parallel in this breaker. The normal current flows through the
MCB for low wattage dissipation. The semiconductor would
make or break the circuit since its switching characteristics are
unaffected by the altitude. To keep the semiconductor size lim-
ited, the maximum current that the FET can conduct is chosen
to be less than the maximum fault current magnitude. In case of
a fault, the main contacts are opened, resulting in an arc. For the
fault current magnitude that is less than the semiconductor-rated
current, the FET is turned on immediately after arc occurrence,
resulting in current commutation to the semiconductor element.
For current higher than the FET’s maximum current rating, it is
not turned on and the arc voltage is allowed to increase. In this
process, due to the increasing arc impedance, the fault current
reduces. In this case, the arc mobility should be guaranteed even
at such low pressure (at high altitudes). It is achieved through
the generation of an arc motion enhancement atmosphere by the
interaction of the arc plasma and the plastic wall material. The
current commutation to FET is allowed when the current level
and arc impedance meet appropriate conditions. Finally, the cur-
rent is interrupted by the FET, and the remaining circuit energy
is absorbed by an energy absorbing device. This HCB config-
uration resulted in a compact package that is required for this
application. The designing was targeted for the rating of 1500
A and 270 V dc.
In [33], an IGBT-based multistage dc hybrid switch was pro-
posed with the schematic shown in Fig. 6, for medium power
(10 kW, 200 V/50 A) dc systems. In the normal case, the cur-
rent flows through the main switch when IGBTs are off. During
the circuit breaking process, a multistage switching strategy is
applied. The fault current first commutates to IGBT1 in the
same manner as described before by the arc created by separa-
tion of the main switch contacts. The main switch is turned off
completely when the arc disappears. IGBT2 is then turned on
and IGBT1 is turned off so that the current now flows through
IGBT2 and the power resistor. This causes large energy dissipa-
tion in the resistor and the current reduces. Finally, the current
is interrupted by turning off IGBT2. The MOV then acts as an
overvoltage protection device in the manner described before.
This multistage current interruption results in slower switching
action. An extended multistage dc hybrid topology based on the
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
4 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY
Fig. 6. Multistage dc HCB using IGBTs [33].
Fig. 7. DC HCB configuration using IGCTs [40].
one shown in Fig. 6 was also suggested for higher power-level
applications.
The recent developments in semiconductor technology have
resulted in increased achievable HCB ratings and new applica-
tions of HCB are being explored. Recently, IGCT has been sug-
gested for SSCB and HCB applications because of their large
power-handling capability and the ability to be controlled on
and controlled off. A comparison of IGCT and IGBT for such
applications has been performed in [34]. Some more new semi-
conductors, such as the emitter turnoff thyristor (ETO), self-
power ETO (SPETO), silicon-carbide (SiC) devices, silicon car-
bide-static induction transistor (SiC-SIT), etc., have also been
explored for these applications [35]–[39].
The use of IGCTs for the HCB application was first reported
for a dc circuit in [40] with the configuration sketched in Fig.
7. It requires two IGCTs in addition to four diodes
and a metal-oxide varistor (MOV) element. The
diode bridge configuration allows this circuit to be used for
ac applications as well. Its principle of operation is similar to
that explained before with reference to Fig. 5. The main con-
tact (MC) carries the normal current. In case of a fault, contacts
separation of MC occurs, resulting in an arc and forces the fault
current to the low-impedance semiconductor path with IGCTs
gated on. When the MC contacts attain sufficient recovery of the
dielectric strength, the IGCTs interrupt the fault current upon
receiving a turn-off signal, and the remaining circuit energy is
absorbed by a metal–oxide varistor (MOV).
Reference [40] describes that the mechanical delay for
the conventional MCBs is in the range of 1–10 ms, while
the semiconductor commutation time range is 100 ns–10 s.
Therefore, the semiconductor and network elements are forced
to handle very large fault current until the full current. To
solve this problem, an ultra-fast contact opening mechanism
using an ironless Thomson actuator was proposed in [40]. A
prototype of this HCB circuit was realized with the rating of
4 kA/1.5 kV. The contacts opening time in the rage of 300 s
was achieved using the fast-opening switch. The relationship
between the MOV-installed energy absorption capacity, and
the stored energy in the input or output circuitry and apparatus
were identified as the limiting factors of this technology.
Another application of IGCT in HCB was reported in [41] for
quench protection of superconducting magnets rated for tens
of kiloamperes and several kilovolts dc. In superconducting
Fig. 8. Schematic of a QPC composed of a dc HCB using IGCTs [41].
magnet-based circuits, in case of quench, it is necessarily
required to rapidly remove the energy stored in the super-
conducting magnets by means of quench protection circuits
(QPCs). Normally, a QPC consists of a dc CB which remains
closed in normal operation and, in case of a quench, commutates
the current into a discharge resistor. The schematic of this HCB
circuit is shown in Fig. 8, where BPS stands for bypass switch
(MCB), which carries the normal current. The semiconductor
component consists of series and/or parallel-connected IGCTs
for sustaining the necessary voltage and current. The circuit
also consists of a series-connected pyrobreaker as backup
protection, which interrupts the current in case of the main CB
opening failure. The BPS is given an opening command along
with the turn-on signal to IGCTs when a QPC intervention is
needed. The resulting arc across the BPS contacts forces the
current to IGCTs, which are kept on until the complete current
commutation and the BPS contacts are fully open. Then, current
is then finally transferred to the discharge resistor. This paper
also presented a comparison in terms of power losses between
an HCB and an SSCB based on the same IGCTs. The power
dissipation in normal operation in an SSCB was found to be
about ten times that of an equivalent HCB. The analysis and
test results suggested that this HCB can be adequate to interrupt
tens of kiloamperes with several kilovolts of reapplied voltage.
In [42], the design principles of the circuit in Fig. 8 were pre-
sented for the ratings; 25.7 kA/2.8 kV and 20 kA/5 kV. In [43],
the HCB of Fig. 8, mainly designed for superconducting magnet
protection, was successfully tested for 10-kA current and a re-
covery voltage of 1 kV. The characterization of arc voltage in
different conditions is also presented.
B. AC Applications
In the same line as the HCB of Fig. 5, thyristor-based HCBs
were proposed for various ac applications in [9] and [44]–[46]
with the general schematic shown in Fig. 9. In [44]–[46], it has
been used as a solid-state transfer switch for power-quality (PQ)
improvement. The normal continuous current flows through the
MCB (MC). In case of a fault, the MC is opened , resulting
in an arc which forces the current commutation to one of the
now turned-on thyristors, depending on the direction of current.
The current would then be blocked at its first zero crossing, and
the remaining circuit energy is dissipated using an energy-ab-
sorbing device connected in parallel to MC.
In [47], a similar HCB as in Fig. 9 has been used for low-
frequency currents interruption generated by a wind generator.
Thyristors are high-power rating devices but cannot be con-
trolled turned off, which is a limiting factor. Another one of
these ac HCBs was reported in [48] and [49], where GTOs,
which can be controlled turn on and turned off, were used as the
semiconductor, as sketched in Fig. 10. The mechanical switch
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
SHUKLA AND DEMETRIADES: SURVEY ON HYBRID CB TOPOLOGIES
Fig. 9. AC HCB configuration using thyristors ([9], [44]–[46]).
Fig. 10. GTO-based ac HCB configuration [48].
used in this circuit was a high-speed vacuum circuit breaker
(VCB), where an electromagnetic repulsion force was used to
open the circuit at high speeds. This helps in limiting the fault
current through the GTOs. As soon as a fault is detected using a
high-speed fault detection system, the VCB contacts are opened.
It results in an arc generated between the VCB contacts which
acts as a counter electromotive force for commutating the fault
current to the GTO. The basic operating principles of this circuit
are the same as those described before with reference to Fig. 1.
The overvoltage protection device used in this configuration is
a zinc–oxide (ZnO) element. Two GTOs were used in parallel
to interrupt around 10-kA current with an estimated fault cur-
rent value of 70 kA. An interrupting time of less than 1 ms was
achieved using this configuration. However, this solution was
not found to be adequate to limit very high fault currents be-
cause of the relatively long prearcing time of the VCB.
In [50], a similar HCB configuration as in Fig. 10 has been
suggested with possible fault current-limiting ability.
In [51], the use of microelectromechanical switches (MEMS)
was proposed in an HCB of the form shown in Fig. 11. A diode
and a microswitch form the switching unit and several such units
are connected in series to form a switching string. The series
connection of two such strings (positive and negative switches,
Fig. 11) forms an ac HCB. One string interrupts the positive
while the other negative cycle current. High-voltage (HV) rating
of the breaker is achieved by the series-connected switching
units, and the current rating can also be increased by the parallel
connection of strings. The snubber circuits are used for uniform
voltage distribution. The microswitches carry the current under
normal conditions. In case of a fault, depending on the current
polarity, microswitches in either positive or negative strings are
opened, which transfers the current to the diodes. The diodes
interrupt the current at its first zero crossing, resulting in cur-
rent interruption by the end of the first-half cycle. It also of-
fers small-size and arcless current interruption. Given the mi-
croswitches rating, it was estimated that such an HCB of rating
7.2 kV and 630 A , would require around 300 MEMSs con-
nected in series and 6300 in parallel. The estimated assembly
size was a cube of 300 500 mm.
In [52], an HCB with the schematic shown in Fig. 12 has been
proposed to improve and make uniform the response time of the
MCB even for different fault locations. It consists of a conven-
tional HCB made up of a mechanical switch ; thyristors ,
5
Fig. 11. AC HCB circuit using microelectromechanical switches [51].
Fig. 12. HCB topology with uniform operating performance even for different
fault locations [52].
; and an energy absorbing device. In addition, a fully con-
trollable static switch and a variable resistance is used.
The normal current flows through with all of the semicon-
ductors remaining off. Following a fault occurrence, , , ,
and the energy absorber operate in the manner described before.
The fault current levels depend on the source voltage and the
impedance magnitude between the source and fault locations.
A high fault current results in high electrical forces responsible
for opening the mechanical contacts in an MCB. If the current
is decreased during separation, the contacts will return to the
initial position. Therefore, the MCB contacts can be locked to
the safe position quickly for a large fault current compared to
when the fault current level is less. For each breaker , the cur-
rent threshold is different. To make the fault current level and,
hence, the time required for sufficient contacts separation uni-
form for all possible fault locations, a measurement (MU), and
a control (CU) unit first senses the equivalent impedance be-
tween the fault and breaker locations. If for a farther located
fault the time required for contacts separation is to be reduced,
is turned on to put in parallel the variable resistance with
the equivalent line impedance in the fault case. This results in
the reduction of the overall impedance seen by the source, re-
sulting in an increase in fault current magnitude. The increment
in fault current can be controlled by appropriately choosing .
Once the fault current magnitude rises to the preset value, is
turned off so that is disconnected from the line (Fig. 12). It
makes the fault current drop back to a natural value and results
in an earlier commutation from to the semiconductor device.
In this way, irrespective of the fault locations, the response time
of the HCB can be made uniform. It further helps to reduce the
ratings of an energy absorbing device, semiconductors, mechan-
ical switch, and of the other network elements. It can be applied
in all HCB circuits.
In all of the HCBs discussed in the previous section, the cur-
rent commutation to the semiconductor element is performed
by the arc produced across the contacts of MCB after they start
opening. Despite a very fast acting mechanical switch in an
HCB circuit as used in [53] and [54], even a drastically reduced
fault current results in arc burning. This arcing across the MCB
contacts leads to erosion of the contacts, resulting in contacts
wear, shorter lifetime, generation of strong noise, and need for
more maintenance [12], [54]–[61]. The reliability and life of the
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
6 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY
switch can be optimized by preventing the arc from occurring.
It is also to be noted that the tolerable blocking voltage slew rate
of the medium (e.g., air) surrounding the MCB contacts can be
significantly increased if the arc, which appears during commu-
tation, is prevented [12]. The arc leads to plasma between the
contacts. When the arc is extinguished, the remaining hot gas
initially limits the dielectric recovery of the gap. For a lower
blocking voltage slew rate, it will take a significantly longer
time before the MCB is able to block the full voltage so that the
semiconductor element could be turned off and the circuit in-
ductance is demagnetized. Due to this long delay, the current in-
creases significantly, where the network elements and the semi-
conductor element in the HCB circuit should be able to carry.
Therefore, one solution to reduce this maximum current is to
minimize the delay time, which can be achieved by ensuring ar-
cless breaker operation.
In a dc network, the classical dc MCBs create a high resistive
arc with contacts separation after obtaining the current interrup-
tion command. It results in the development of a reverse voltage
between the contacts, which should increase much faster than
the current rise rate to decrease the fault current in the circuit.
In some strong dc networks , the fault current rise rate increases
and reducing it by using the reverse voltage becomes difficult.
Consequently, the arc becomes difficult to control. Since there
is no natural current zero crossing in a dc network, the con-
trol of fault current and resulting arc is very difficult. The dc
breakers should be able to interrupt and reduce the current to
zero within a certain time. Excessive high voltage should not be
created in the system during the interruption process. In the lit-
erature, there are some HCB configurations dealing with these
problems, which can be broadly distinguished in two categories,
namely: 1) zero voltage switching and 2) zero current switching
[62].
In low-voltage systems, the classical MCBs are normally
able to interrupt and limit the currents. The current limitation
is achieved by enhancing the switching-arc voltage close to
or more than the system voltage, which thereby significantly
reduces the current magnitude [5]. However, the arc voltage
may not be easily raised to medium- or high-voltage ranges.
Therefore, current limitation using the MCBs in higher- and
medium-voltage applications is not easy. In an HCB, even in
a low-voltage system, the arc voltage may not be comparable
to the system voltage [75]. Therefore, the classical HCB con-
figurations, discussed before, will not suffice and some derived
topology for current limitation would be required.
It is clear from before that there may be various specific re-
quirements depending on the target circuits and applications for
designing or selecting an HCB. Therefore, the aforementioned
HCBs using only a semiconductor element for fault current han-
dling after the arc appearance between the MCB contacts may
not be feasible in all such cases. The following sections discuss
the derived HCB circuits available in the literature for several
such target circuits and applications.
IV. CURRENT-LIMITING HYBRID CIRCUIT BREAKERS
The conductive polymers have current-limiting abilities and
can be used in combination with an MCB for fault current lim-
iting and interrupting [63]. A positive temperature coefficient
Fig. 13. Current-limiting HCB using the PTC thermistor ([5]).
(PTC) thermistor, composed of conductive polymer material, is
used to limit the current. The temperature of the thermistor in-
creases with the increase in current leading to an increase in
its resistance. In [5], a PTC thermistor was used to limit the
current through the semiconductor element in an HCB circuit
with the schematic shown in Fig. 13. The contacts represent an
MCB that is used to provide the main current path. After re-
ceiving a trip command, the contacts are separated, resulting in
an arc which forces the current to the parallel path provided by
the now turned-on semiconductor element with a thermistor in
series. The thermistor parameters are so chosen that its resis-
tance is well below the limits for the given current magnitude at
the time of contacts separation. This is needed for smooth cur-
rent commutation from the mechanical contacts to the semicon-
ductor element. As the current continues to increase through the
thermistor after complete commutation, its resistance propor-
tionally increases leading to current limitation. After the circuit
interruption using the arrestor action, it cools down and attains
the conductive state. A snubber circuit is also used to limit the
large inductive voltage spikes during turn-off of the semicon-
ductor element, which could consist of GTOs or thyristors. This
HCB avoids the need for ultra-high-speed fault detection to limit
the current as was the case in the HCB topology discussed be-
fore (Fig. 10) and proposed in [48].
In [64], a current-limiting AC HCB topology was proposed
with the single-phase schematic shown in Fig. 14, where
represents a high-speed mechanical switch carrying the current
under normal conditions. In case of a fault current to be cleared,
the -contacts are opened using electromagnetic repulsion force
at a very fast rate within a period of time such that the fault
current doesn’t exceed the circuit breaker current breaking ca-
pacity. At the same time thyristor (or ) is turned-on). The
subsequent arcing across the -contacts forces the fault current
to be commutated to or . In this state, the fault current is
limited by the current-limiting element connected in series with
the thyristor. After a certain delay, which is required to com-
pletely open , the gate-command signals to are re-
moved. Thus, the limited fault current is interrupted at the next
current zero-crossing within one cycle after the fault occurrence.
The ZnO arrestor is connected in parallel to ensure the protec-
tion of these switches against abnormally high or surge voltage.
The current-limiting element may consist of a current-limiting
reactor (e.g., an air-core reactor), or a saturable reactor, or the
current-limiting fuses, or a current-limiting resistor. It is clear
that the operating principles of this breaker are similar to those
in Fig. 13. However, in this topology, the fault current level may
reach very high before the complete current commutation from
could take place because of the current-limiting element in the
semiconductor element path. This would require higher current
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
SHUKLA AND DEMETRIADES: SURVEY ON HYBRID CB TOPOLOGIES
Fig. 14. A current-limiting HCB ([64]).
Fig. 15. A current-limiting HCB using counter-current injection ([65]).
handling capabilities of the semiconductor devices and circuit
elements.
In [65], to limit the current in a three-phase low-voltage AC
system, an HCB topology working on the counter-current in-
jection principle was proposed with the schematic shown in
Fig. 15. represents an MCB carrying the normal current. Its
contacts can be opened very fast by an electrodynamic drive.
, are diodes and , are thyristors. and are the
passive elements of appropriate sizes and is pre-charged to an
appropriate voltage. To limit and interrupt a current, depending
on the current polarity at the instant of start of HCB opera-
tion, or is gated-on first. With pre-charged , it drives a
counter-current in the opposite direction to the main current and
flowing through in the closed-loop circuit
. This results in reduced current flowing through
and then is opened at a fast rate with limited arcing. The cur-
rent will then commutate to the corresponding semiconductor
elements, which are already turned-on with and in the cur-
rent flowing path. The commutation time would depend on the
initial conditions and impedances of the two parallel paths. The
current can then be finally interrupted in the same manner as
described above with reference to Fig. 13 by using a surge ar-
restor connected in parallel to . The reported circuit design
and test results demonstrated the effective limitation and in-
terruption of short circuit currents in 3-phase 220/380 V AC
system and the fault clearance time of about 1 ms was achieved.
However, the pre-charged capacitor and additional passive ele-
ments increase the complexity, size and cost. In [66], [67], sim-
ilar HCBs with necessary modifications were proposed for DC
systems, in [68] for use in an electric motor vehicle, and in [69]
by using a micro-electro-mechanical system. In the HCB pre-
sented in [70], a similar current limiting action by counter cur-
rent injection in an AC system is performed, where a capac-
itor is connected in series with the main current carrying MCB.
This branch is in parallel with two other branches consisting of
suitably connected resistance, capacitance and static devices for
current limitation.
Based on the same principle as of the HCB topology in Fig.
15, an arcless low-voltage AC/DC current-limiting HCB con-
figuration was proposed in [54], with the schematic shown in
Fig. 16. The commutation circuit consisting of thyristors, ,
, diodes , , and the inductor with a pre-charged capac-
itor has the same current-limiting function and operating prin-
ciples as described above with reference to Fig. 15. In Fig. 16,
7
Fig. 16. A fast acting arcless current-limiting HCB ([54]).
the contacts of are opened by another power electronic circuit
( -drive) consisting of capacitor , inductor and thyristor
. is pre-charged and is zero under normal conditions.
For circuit breaking action, thyristors and (or ) are
turned-on simultaneously. As described above, the commuta-
tion circuit with pre-charged drives an opposing current to
the main current. Simultaneously, pre-charged starts to dis-
charge through , which creates a repulsive force to open the
-contacts at a very fast rate. For arcless operation, the counter
current forces the current through to zero after a delay
and the -contacts are opened at this current zero instant by the
-drive using the repulsive force generated. A proper coordina-
tion of forced current zero and -contacts separation should be
maintained for ideal arcless operation. The voltage suppressor
ZnO may be used in the circuit to limit the voltage during cur-
rent interruption in the manner described above. The test results
showed that the HCB current-limiting circuit of Fig. 16 with
voltage rating of 230 V satisfactorily interrupted 75 kA (rms),
and limited the current let-through value up to 9 kA. The -con-
tacts opening time of less than 70 was achieved. Based on
these figures, this HCB configuration is one of the most effective
presently available low voltage AC/DC current-limiting and in-
terrupting devices. However, the additional elements used make
it complicated, costly and of large size.
In [71], an ultra-fast current-limiting AC/DC HCB was pro-
posed with the schematic shown in Fig. 17(a). Diodes and
, thyristors and , and the inductor with a pre-charged
capacitor perform the current-limiting action in the same
manner as described above with reference to Figs. 15 and 16.
Moreover, in Fig. 17(a) also serves as a repulsion coil for
moving the -contacts at a rapid rate. The opening of -con-
tacts using the repulsion coil and forcing the counter-current
through from the commutation circuit is properly coordi-
nated for arcless operation as described above. In Fig. 17(b), a
modified version of the topology as presented in [71] is shown,
which has an additional diode for free-wheeling action of
the fault current using the forward-biased and when the
fault current reduces. An energy absorbing device might also
be needed as shown for suppressing the voltage after current
interruption. Another configuration as presented in [71] is
shown in Fig. 17(c), which instead uses four diodes and one
thyristor in the commutation circuit. However, its operating
principles and mode of operation remains same as of the circuit
in Fig. 17(b). The HCBs of Fig. 17 may be less bulky than
the one shown in Fig. 16 due to the absence of the -drive.
However, the mechanism of repulsion force generated by coil
needs to be further investigated and analyzed in detail. These
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
8 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY
Fig. 17. Arcless ultra-fast current-limiting HCB configurations ([71]).
Fig. 18. An HCB circuit using PWM for current limitation ([73]).
breakers are particularly suitable as a current limiter in medium
voltage AC or DC circuits. In [67], [72], similar DC HCBs with
necessary modifications were proposed.
Another current-limiting HCB topology with the schematic
shown in Fig. 18 was proposed in [73]. It consists of a fast
mechanical switch carrying the current under normal condi-
tion, and a semiconductor element connected in parallel to for
limiting and clearing the fault currents. The semiconductor el-
ement consists of a diode bridge with diodes , a fully
controllable device (like, an IGBT, or a GTO), a snubber
circuit with a diode and elements, and an MOV
arrestor. During operation of this semiconductor element, the
diode bridge is used to prevent the current to flow in unintended
directions and to provide the paths for current flowing in either
directions through it. In case of a fault current to be limited and
cleared, the -contacts are opened which forces the fault cur-
rent to the semiconductor element path in the same manner as
described above for most of the HCB topologies. is controlled
using a pulse-width modulator (PWM) for limiting the fault cur-
rent within a defined range. The PWM may require input sig-
nals in the form of reference and/or measured voltage, current
and temperature signals for controlling . The snubber circuit
serves as the energy buffer that allows the current magnitude to
be regulated when is controlled using PWM. For clearing the
fault current, is turned-off and the MOV absorbs the resulting
transient overvoltage. may also be operated under linear re-
gion without PWM for limiting current. However, as goes
into high impedance mode dissipating a large amount of power
in this case, the temperature can rise very quickly. Thus, it may
not be a useful current-limiting control option. Even in the PWM
operation, operates at a high frequency depending on the cir-
cuit overall impedance in fault conditions and also on the ref-
erence settings. Therefore, this topology may find only limited
applications.
In [74], a current-limiting HCB using a superconductor was
proposed with the schematic shown in Fig. 19. It is composed
of a superconductor element , a high-speed switch
(an MCB), and a conventional MCB connected in se-
ries for carrying the current under normal conditions. As the
Fig. 19. A current-limiting HCB using superconductor ([74]).
-element with given ratings offers negligible impedance
to the normal currents, the loss remains limited to reasonably
low limits as desired. Further, another branch is connected in
parallel to the series-connected and elements, which
is composed of series connected inductor and a semicon-
ductor element with a bidirectional fully controllable switch
(consisting of and ) connected in parallel to an inductor
. The inductance of is chosen to be larger than that of
. In case of a fault, the fault current is divided into a current
through and , and another through and one of the now
turned-on devices or . With the increase in fault current,
the element quenches within a short time and its resistance
sharply increases to a very high value. It causes most of the fault
current to now flow through . The fault current continues to
increase and beyond a threshold, the electromagnetic repulsive
force generated by magnetization of becomes sufficient
enough to open the contacts of . At this point, since the current
through and is negligible, the opening of -contacts
does not cause arcing and the contacts are completely separated
within a very short time. After sensing the complete separation
of -contacts, a controller immediately turns-off and ,
which forces the fault current to now flow through and
. Thereby, the fault current is limited because of the large
impedance of . Finally, the reduced current is interrupted by
tripping . It is clear that this HCB has a complex structure
and operating sequence, may be large in weight, size and
cost due to additional elements used, and takes longer time
to interrupt the current. Nevertheless, the superconductor use
opens up a new area of research in HCB technology.
Fig. 20 shows a current-limiting HCB topology proposed in
[75] using a PTC resistor. The normal current flows through
path A, which consists of a mechanical ultrafast transfer switch
(FTS) having least impedance in the closed state compared to
paths B and C. Path B consists of a semiconductor element
(SEM) connected in series with a mechanical fast-opening dis-
connector (FDS). SEM consists of a GTO and four diodes for
providing the bidirectional current flow through this path. Path
C consists of series connection of a PTC element and a mechan-
ical load switch (LS) capable to interrupt the current at the first
current zero. When a fault occurs, an appropriate fast fault-de-
tecting system triggers the electrodynamic repulsion drive of
FTS. It causes an arc voltage of approximately 40 V to ap-
pear across the opening double-contact gap, which forces the
current to path B where the corresponding devices are already
turned-on now. After complete current commutation, implying
that has reduced to zero, the GTO is turned-off, forcing
the current to path C. An MOV is connected across the GTO
to limit the voltage rise across it beyond a threshold due to the
large caused by GTO turning-off. FDS is then immedi-
ately opened without arcing. At this instant, the total recovery
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
SHUKLA AND DEMETRIADES: SURVEY ON HYBRID CB TOPOLOGIES
Fig. 20. A current-limiting HCB using PTC element ([75]).
of the dielectric strength of FTS must have achieved. The large
current flowing through PTC resistor leads to large power dis-
sipation in it causing significant increase in its resistivity and
voltage drop across it. The limited current is finally interrupted
at its first zero crossing by opening LS. The laboratory test re-
sults of a prototype HCB as in Fig. 20 of rating 12 kV, 20 kA
verify the feasibility of this concept. However, it needs many ad-
ditional mechanical and semiconductor elements, which makes
it costly bulky. The two-step current limiting and interrupting
process makes it a slow device. Further, specialized mechanical
devices are required in this circuit, which may not be readily
feasible.
In [76], an arc-free HCB topology with the schematic shown
in Fig. 21 was proposed with a semiconductor element in the
main current path. It consists of a fast MCB and a semi-
conductor module (SEM) connected in series to carry the cur-
rent under normal conditions. SEM consists of two anti-par-
allel IGCTs, as they offer low on-state voltage drop compared
to other similar devices of equivalent ratings. An MOV is con-
nected across the IGCTs to limit the voltage across them. A par-
allel branch connected across this main-current carrying branch
consists of two anti-parallel thyristors and a current-limiting el-
ement. When a fault occurs, the IGCTs are tuned-off resulting in
a high clamping voltage appearing across the MOV, which for-
ward biases a thyristor and the current is forced to flow through
it as it is turned-on now. The switch is opened without any
arc as there is no current through it now. The current limiting
element consists of an auxiliary inductance , and an oscil-
lator circuit consisting of inductor , capacitor and a Graetz
bridge. The current flowing through the thyristors is forced to
an early zero crossing by using the resonant circuit with
pre-charged capacitor, and the thyristors are turned-off. After
this current breaking, is discharged through a resistor con-
nected in parallel with it. As the current attains an early zero
crossing, its maximum value is limited by the corresponding
factor. The test results presented in the paper indicated satisfac-
tory results. However, the main limitation of this HCB topology
is the continuous power-loss in the IGCTs, which may limit
its applications. Furthermore, a lot of additional passive and
semiconductor components would make it costly, bulky and
complex.
The AC HCB presented in [77] with the schematic shown in
Fig. 22 uses a tuned- circuit for current limitation. The cur-
rent under normal condition flows through the MCB and se-
ries-connected inductor and capacitor . is the primary
leakage inductance of a transformer whose secondary terminals
remain open in normal condition using a fully controllable static
9
Fig. 21. An arcless HCB with semiconductor in main current path ([76]).
Fig. 22. A current-limiting HCB using tuned elements ([77]).
device . is an inductor that may optionally be connected
in parallel across and . forms a resonant cir-
cuit tuned to the line frequency and offers negligible impedance
at the frequency of resonance. Therefore, the normal conduction
loss remains limited. In case of a fault current to be interrupted,
is triggered to open and the resulting arc forces the current to
one of the now turned-on static devices and . A suitably
designed capacitor is used to limit the voltage across so
that arcing can be minimized. By suitably choosing the passive
element parameters, series combination of with
circuit results in a very high impedance resonant circuit to the
line-frequency fault current flowing through or . This re-
sults in significant current limitation. Another form of current
limitation is achieved by turning on along with or ,
which changes the value of . By suitably choosing the re-
sistance , current limitation can be further strengthened. The
MOV is used to absorb the remaining circuit energy in the same
way as discussed above after and are turned-off to inter-
rupt the current. The breaker performance may be affected with
the system frequency variation and also with change in system
circuit configurations.
In Fig. 23, the schematic of a current-limiting AC HCB pre-
sented in [78] is shown. It consists of three high-speed MCBs
connected in series to carry the current under normal conditions.
For a DC circuit, only one of or would be required along
with . For a fault current interruption, depending on the current
direction, or is opened. The resulting arc across its con-
tacts forces the current to the parallel-connected diode. At the
next current zero-crossing the diode stops conducting, which
forces the current to one of the current-limiting impedances.
These impedances may be in the form of an inductor, or a su-
perconductor or any such element. After total recovery of the
dielectric strength of the corresponding MCB ( or ), the
limited current can be finally interrupted by opening the MCB
. There are several possible configurations of this topology as
discussed in [78]. It is clear that it is simple and easy to operate.
However, diodes make it slower.
V. SPECIALIZED DC HCB CONFIGURATIONS
Mainly because there is no natural current zero crossing in
DC systems, the configuration and requirements of AC and DC
CBs are significantly different. In DC CBs, a large energy stored
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
10
Fig. 23. A current-limiting HCB using diodes for current commutation ([78]).
Fig. 24. A ZCS HCB ([57]).
Fig. 25. A ZCS HCB using a diode [59].
in the line inductances needs to be dissipated. Therefore, they
have to break the short-circuit current very quickly.
The HCBs for arcless operation in DC systems work on
two basic principles namely zero current switching and zero
voltage switching. In Fig. 24, the a zero current HCB schematic
is shown, where is a mechanical switch carrying the current
under normal conditions [57], [79]. To interrupt a current,
thyristor is turned on forcing a counter-current into due to
the precharged capacitor . This results in zero current through
after certain delay and is opened at this instant without any
arc. The varistor action is the same as detailed earlier.
In [59], a zero-current switching (ZCS) HCB topology for DC
circuits was proposed with the schematic shown in Fig. 25. The
normal current is carried by a mechanical switch . A charge
storage diode (CSD) in series with the secondary of a trans-
former is connected across . Upon fault detection, the trans-
former is used to charge the CSD in the forward direction with
a high current pulse. The charging current is stopped after it
reaches its maximum value. The -contacts are opened at this
instant, which forces the fault current through the CSD for suf-
ficiently low commutation impedance offered by the CSD. The
CSD short circuits the current in its reverse direction until the
accumulated charge in the diode is depleted. During reverse
conduction a space charge region builds up at the junction
of the diode and the voltage at its contacts rises. The -contacts
need to be separated far enough to withstand this fast increasing
voltage. A prototype of this hybrid switch using a fast mechan-
ical switch (Thomson drive) has been reported in [59], which
was able to switch off the load currents up to 275 A at voltages
of 1250 V with delay times of less than 80 . The application
of this topology is limited to low power levels due to the re-
quirement of charging of the CSD with a high current and the
additional associated components.
For zero voltage switching in an HCB, the semiconductor el-
ement connected across the mechanical switch ensures that the
voltage across this switch remains sufficiently low to prevent
arcing when the contacts separate. For example, as shown in
Fig. 26(a), this may be realized by placing a conventional
snubber across the mechanical switch [57]. The capacitor size
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY
Fig. 26. Zero voltage switching HCBs ([57]).
can be appropriately estimated for a given fault current magni-
tude and opening time of , so that the voltage across never
exceeds a predetermined value necessary for arcless operation.
Fig. 26(b) shows an improved zero voltage switching circuit
where a fully controllable device (e.g., IGBT) is used to clamp
the voltage across when is opened resulting in current
to be commutated to the IGBT [57]. The IGBT is turned-off
when is fully on and the current gets commutated to the
snubber circuit. The capacitor size can again be estimated for
the maximum allowed voltage across the CB. This improved
circuit results in reduced capacitor size requirement and the
total switch-off time is also decreased compared to those using
the circuit of Fig. 26(a). Further switch-off time reduction can
be realized by using varistor connected in place of the snubber
circuit in Fig. 26(b). Such HCB topologies have already been
discussed above in Section III (Figs. 5–8). In [56], the design
techniques and test results of a 600 V/6 kA bidirectional zero
voltage switching DC HCB using varistor was reported. The
zero voltage switching over the zero current switching has the
advantage that the bulky resonant components and precharging
of capacitor are not required. On the other hand, while the zero
current switching HCB circuit needs a semiconductor with
only controllable turn-on capability (e.g., thyristor), a fully
controllable device is required in a zero voltage switching HCB
circuit [56]. Therefore, depending on the semiconductors and
the current and voltage levels, zero voltage or the zero current
switching may be used in a circuit.
In [12], an improved zero current switching based was pro-
posed with the schematic shown in Fig. 27. It provides arcless
operation by reducing the current commutation delay from the
mechanical switch to the semiconductor element. The normal
current flows through the mechanical switch and the com-
mutation inductor . For a current interruption, one of the
thyristors is turned-on depending on the current direction. With
suitably designed and capacitor , and with needed pre-
charge voltage on , turning-on of the thyristor initiates the
current to commutate from to . The current through re-
mains unchanged until the capacitor voltage polarity is reversed,
which initiates the current commutation from to the semi-
conductor element consisting of GCTs and inductor . The
mechanical switch is opened at zero current after complete
current commutation. Compared to the zero current and zero
voltage HCBs discussed above, this HCB of Fig. 27 needs lower
current rating of the semiconductors as the maximum current
is reduced using the forced commutation. The reduced current
peak results in decreased demagnetization time and hence the
total turn-off time is also reduced. However, it needs additional
thyristors and a capacitor with pre-charged voltage, which add
to its cost, size and complexity.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
SHUKLA AND DEMETRIADES: SURVEY ON HYBRID CB TOPOLOGIES
Fig. 27. A zero current switching HCB using forced commutation ([12]).
Fig. 28. Zero voltage switching HCB [80].
In [12], a zero voltage HCB in line with the HCB of Fig. 26(a)
was proposed with two anti-parallel thyristors in place of a diode
(Fig. 26(a)) connected in series with the capacitor. As described
above, the fault current flowing through the capacitor results in
slow increase in voltage and therefore, can be opened without
arc occurrence. A comparative analysis presented in [12] sug-
gested that this zero voltage HCB topology was a feasible solu-
tion for medium voltage applications.
In [80], another zero voltage HCB was proposed with the
schematic shown in Fig. 28 for interrupting high DC. The
continuous normal current path is provided by the mechanical
switch and an optional series connected mechanical switch
. For a current to be interrupted, thyristor is turned-on first
followed by opening of . It forces the current to commutate
to . is opened after complete current commutation to .
The small forward voltage drop across prevents arc across
mechanical switch contacts when they are opened. Once the
contacts are separated far enough to be able to block the full
voltage, the commutation circuit connected in parallel with
forces the current through to zero by providing a current
pulse equal and opposite to the main current through . At this
current zero, is turned-off automatically. The commutation
circuit consists of a voltage source , which is used to charge
capacitor before the interruption sequence is initiated. A me-
chanical or semiconductor switch is used for disconnecting
from after a predefined charge placement on . To force
a counter current through , is turned on, which causes a
current flow driven by the charge on . When the current in
is reduced to zero, turns off and the excess current through
now flows in the loop , , , and . This oscillating
current through and reaches zero and tries to reverse but
turning off forces it to be blocked. The fault current then
flows through , , and and, therefore, the voltage across
increases with negative polarity. The increasing negative
voltage on decreases the current through it until the current
reaches zero and is turned off. This completes the current
interrupting sequence of the breaker. It is clear that the rating
of needs to be high enough to handle high dc. Furthermore,
it requires big capacity precharging equipment for .
11
Fig. 29. HCB topology for HVDC applications [81].
In [81], an HCB with the schematic shown in Fig. 29 was
proposed for HVDC lines. It comprises two conventional me-
chanical ac breakers and connected in series to carry
the normal line currents. A controllable semiconductor element,
such as an IGBT, with a dedicated control unit is connected
in parallel to . A series-connected suitably sized capacitor
and an inductor are connected in parallel to and .
For a current interruption, and are opened, resulting in
an arc in both. The arc voltage continues to increase and at a
preset value, it triggers the control unit to turn on the semi-
conductor. It causes the current to commutate from to the
semiconductor, and the arc across is extinguished. After the
complete current commutation and once the contacts are sep-
arated far enough to block the full voltage, the semiconductor
is turned off. Following this, the voltage across semiconductor
and grow very rapidly. It causes the current to commutate to
the parallel connected path, and the arc across is ex-
tinguished. The current through and causes a rapid voltage
increase across the breaker. The control unit is equipped with a
voltage arrester that does not allow the voltage across the semi-
conductor to increase beyond a specified value. The remainder
of the total voltage caused by the drop across and appears
across . The current through increases its voltage that acts
as a counter-voltage to the external circuit and causes the current
to decrease. A varistor connected in parallel to and takes
over the current if its knee voltage is reached before the com-
plete ceasing of current. The sizes of and elements are so
chosen that the voltage growth rate does not exceed the breaker
handling capability. This HCB uses conventional ac mechanical
breakers which are inexpensive and reliable. The semiconductor
element is subjected to only a fraction of recovery voltage that
means a simple and smaller semiconductor configuration. The
additional and elements though add to its size, and the total
time required for complete current interruption may be larger.
A recent HCB proposed in [82] is shown in Fig. 30. It is com-
prised of a conventional ac mechanical breaker to carry the
current under normal conditions. A parallel branch connected
across comprises a controllable semiconductor switch (such
as an IGBT), an inductor , and a capacitor . A charging unit is
connected across that keeps its voltage charged to a prespec-
ified value with negative polarity corresponding to the voltage
across . A current interruption process is initiated by opening
, which results in arc formation between its separated contacts
while the current continues to flow through . The switch is
then turned on that brings the parallel branch in the current flow
path. Since is precharged to a negative voltage, the parallel
branch offers lower impedance to the current which then starts
to commutate from to the parallel branch. It results in a reduc-
tion of current through , and the arc is extinguished after this
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
12
Fig. 30. HCB topology for HVDC applications [82].
Fig. 31. HCB topology with the semiconductor in the main current path [83].
current reaches a sufficiently low value so that the contacts
can be safely opened. The rate of current increase through
can be kept under permissible limits by suitably sizing and .
The current through causes its voltage to be charged toward a
positive voltage from its previous negative value. Once the ca-
pacitor voltage turns negative, it opposes the current flow and
causes a reduction in the current increase rate through . Conse-
quently, the capacitor voltage continues to increase and reaches
a value where it is equal to the knee voltage of the parallel-con-
nected varistor device. At this instant, the varistor impedance
is reduced to below those of the other parallel branches. Con-
sequently, the current commutates to the varistor in a period of
time, and a further voltage increment of is ceased. This HCB
targets HVDC applications with a focus on the multiterminal dc
network where it may be used to switch one or more electrical
networks into or out of the circuit. The precharging equipment
requirement for in this topology adds to the cost, size, and
complexity.
For HVDC applications, an HCB topology with the schematic
like the one shown in Fig. 31 has been proposed in [83]. It con-
sists of a semiconductor element with controllable turn-on
and turn-off capabilities in the normal current path connected
in series with a conventional ac breaker . is not expected to
cause a big on-state loss since its rating is low and a varistor is
connected in parallel to it to ensure that the voltage drop does
not exceed a specified value. and are kept turned on to carry
the normal current. A branch having a series connection of in-
ductor and capacitor and another branch consisting of a
varistor are connected in parallel to and . For current in-
terruption, is opened, resulting in an arc across its contacts.
At the same time, a control unit triggers the switching of at
a frequency close to the natural frequency of the – circuit.
It causes the charging of by fault current through and the
fault current starts oscillating. This oscillation amplitude con-
tinues to increase until a zero current crossing is reached by the
fault current through . At this instant, is turned off, resulting
in current interruption through . The rising recovery voltage
across and after current interruption is limited by the third
parallel branch having a varistor. Its limitation is having a semi-
conductor in the normal current path and the associated onstate
loss. Further, should be capable of switching at a high fre-
quency, which might be difficult to achieve for such high cur-
rent-rating devices.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY
Fig. 32. Forced-current zero-crossing HCB topology with a repulsive coil for
a mechanical switch opening [84].
In the previous subsection, some of the HCBs utilizing the
magnetic energy stored in an inductor for opening the MCB con-
tacts were discussed. In [84], a dc HCB was proposed with the
schematic shown in Fig. 32 that operates the mechanical switch
using the same principle. In Fig. 32, represents a dc source
feeding a load and an HCB is connected in between. The normal
load current is carried by the mechanical switch . The capac-
itor is normally kept charged using through the charge re-
sistor and diode with the polarity marked as . Thyristors
and are kept off in normal conditions. For a current in-
terruption, is turned on, resulting in the discharging of by
resonance through the magnetic repulsive coil with the
current loop . The corresponding magnetic
repulsive force generated by starts opening the contacts.
is blocked at the next zero crossing of the resonant cur-
rent, which results in the reversal of the charge polarity of .
The opening of is synchronized with turning on . It drives
a current through in the current loop
in the reverse direction to the main current path, and ultimately
causes the current through to reach zero resulting in the arc
extinction across . After complete arc extinction, the current
from flows through , , and to the load, and it is lim-
ited by the drop across and opposing voltage across . Its
complex operation and additional passive and semiconductors
requirements may be a limitation.
In most of the aforementioned HCBs, the time taken after the
fault occurrence for current commutation from the mechanical
to semiconductor switch depends on the MCB contacts’ sep-
aration speed. The semiconductor and network elements may
be subjected to very high current stress if this speed is not fast
enough. In [85], a solution to this problem was proposed in
terms of the HCB shown in Fig. 33. It is comprised of a high-
speed MCB in series with an auxiliary breaker for carrying the
normal current. This set is connected in parallel to the main
breaker, comprised of one or more semiconductors connected
in series. The auxiliary breaker is chosen to have smaller resis-
tance than the main breaker and it comprises at least one power
semiconductor switch. It is clear that the power dissipation in
this case under normal operation would be more compared to
that in a conventional MCB due to the semiconductor element
in the auxiliary breaker. Nonetheless, the current commutation
to the main breaker would be very fast for the same reason. For
current interruption, first the auxiliary breaker is opened which
results in current commutation to the main breaker. Afterwards,
the mechanical switch is opened and then the main breaker is
opened to commutate the current to the parallel-connected non-
linear resistor in the same manner and for the same reasons as
described before for the other HCBs. Depending on the system
requirements and type (ac or dc), any suitable semiconductor de-
vice may be chosen for use in main and auxiliary breakers. The
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
SHUKLA AND DEMETRIADES: SURVEY ON HYBRID CB TOPOLOGIES
Fig. 33. Zero-current switching HCB topology [85].
high-speed switch is needed to decouple the auxiliary breaker
from the line in order to prevent the full voltage from being
applied to the auxiliary breaker. This topology works on the
zero-current switching principle, as described before, and is tar-
geted mainly for HVDC applications. It offers no arcing across
the mechanical contacts, which reduces the maintenance effort
and increases the reliability and lifetime of the breaker. Further-
more, since the high-speed switch is opened in a no-current and
no-voltage situation, the question of an even voltage distribution
across the series-connected switches is not an issue. Thus, no
parallel-connected capacitors should be needed which reduces
the costs considerably.
VI. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH NEEDS
In this paper, several technical areas were identified and dis-
cussed to improve the HCB technology. Some important areas
are summarized as follows.
• Use of wide bandgap semiconductors as the power elec-
tronics switch in an HCB topology for high-power appli-
cations. These devices can operate at higher temperatures
and do not have many power-management issues. Further-
more, they are well suited for high switching speed appli-
cations compared to the silicon devices and, as a result, a
high-speed fault clearance can be achieved [86], [87].
• The fault-current-limiting ability of an HCB is a require-
ment for many applications. Many FCL elements used in
HCB technology have been discussed, which aim to be se-
lected or designed on the basis of higher efficiency, reduced
cost, components optimization, etc. Further improvements
in terms of practicability, efficiency, reliability, reduced
cost, and suitability for a wide applications range are de-
sired.
• Many HCBs need a fast mechanical switch for the appli-
cations, such as arcless operation, current limiting ability,
etc. Further research needs to be carried out to standardize
the modeling, design, construction, and control of such
switches for high recovery voltage withstand and low on-
state losses. In addition, further research is needed in the
area of high-speed mechanical switches which are suitable
as fast disconnectors, especially for HVDC applications
[62], [85].
• In most HCBs, additional elements, such as capacitors, in-
ductors, charging units, and varistors are required. Since
it may increase the interruption time, size, and cost, these
elements should be suitably optimized to achieve reduced
cost and size without affecting the overall performance of
the HCB.
• Detailed modeling, analysis, and optimization of the
switching arcs in an HCB circuit should be carried out.
13
It will help in combined optimization of the overall HCB
system.
In general, HCBs can enhance the security and reliability
of both ac and dc networks. The number of sensitive loads is
increasing and it will further increase the requirements of the
breakers in terms of speed and current interruption capabilities.
In most cases, the specific application requirements will dictate
the breaker configuration and it is challenging to propose a uni-
versal solution/configuration.
REFERENCES
[1] W. Rieder, “Circuit breakers Physical and engineering problems
I—Fundamentals,” IEEE Spectr., vol. 7, no. 7, pp. 35–43, Jul. 1970.
[2] W. Rieder, “Circuit breakers Physical and engineering problems
II—Design considerations,” IEEE Spectr., vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 90–94,
Aug. 1970.
[3] W. Rieder, “Circuit breakers Physical and engineering problems
III—Arc-medium considerations,” IEEE Spectr., vol. 7, no. 9, pp.
80–84, Sep. 1970.
[4] C. H. Flurscheim, Power Circuit Breaker Theory and Design. Steve-
nage, U.K.: Peregrinus, 1985, pp. 556–557.
[5] C. W. Brice, R. A. Dougal, and J. L. Hudgins, “Review of technolo-
gies for current-limiting low-voltage circuit breakers,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl., vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 1005–1010, Sep./Oct. 1996.
[6] R. G. Hoerauf and D. D. Shipp, “Characteristics and applications of
various arc interrupting methods,” in Proc. Rec. IEEE Paper Pulp Ind.
Technol. Conf., Jun. 1991, pp. 151–163.
[7] A. M. S. Atmadji and J. G. J. Sloot, “Hybrid switching: A review of
current literature,” in Proc. Rec. IEEE EMPD Conf., Mar. 3–5, 1998,
vol. 2, pp. 683–688.
[8] N. Y. A. Shammas, “The role of semiconductor devices in high power
circuit breaker applications,” in Proc. Rec. Pow. Syst. Electromagn.
Compat. WSEAS, Aug. 23–25, 2005, pp. 257–262.
[9] N. Y. A. Shammas, “Combined conventional and solid-state device
breakers,” in Proc. Rec. IET Power Sem. Devices Conf., Dec. 14, 1994,
pp. 1–5.
[10] C. Ovren, H. Lendenmann, S. Linder, and B. Bijlenga, “Electronics
with power: Focus on transmission and distribution,” ABB Rev., 2000.
[11] E. I. Carroll, “Power electronics for very high power applications,”
Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng. Power Eng. J., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 81–87, Apr.
1999.
[12] C. Meyer, M. Kowal, and R. W. De Doncker, “Circuit breaker concepts
for future high-power DC-applications,” in Proc. Rec. IEEE IAS Conf.,
Oct. 2–6, 2005, vol. 2, pp. 860–866.
[13] R. R. Boudreaux and R. M. Nelms, “A comparison of MOSFETs,
IGBTs, and MCTs for solid state circuit breakers,” in Proc. Rec. IEEE.
APEC, Mar. 3–7, 1996, vol. 1, pp. 227–233.
[14] C. Meyer, S. Schroder, and R. W. De Doncker, “Solid-state circuit
breakers and current limiters for medium-voltage systems having dis-
tributed power systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 19, no. 5,
pp. 1333–1340, Sep. 2004.
[15] R. K. Smith, P. G. Slade, M. Sarkozi, E. J. Stacey, J. J. Bonk, and
H. Mehta, “Solid-state distribution current limiter and circuit breaker:
Application requirements and control strategies,” IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 1155–1164, Jul. 1993.
[16] L. Palav and A. M. Gole, “On using the solid state breaker in distri-
bution systems,” in Proc. Rec. IEEE Elect. Comput. Eng. Conf., May
24–28, 1998, vol. 2, pp. 693–696.
[17] A. Kazem, “Solid state circuit breaker,” U.S. Patent 6 104 106, Feb.
12, 1974.
[18] C. Meyer and R. W. De Doncker, “Solid-state circuit breaker based on
active thyristor topologies,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 21, no.
2, pp. 450–458, Mar. 2006.
[19] M. Jian-guo, W. Li, and H. Jie, “Research on main circuit topology
for a novel DC solid-state circuit breaker,” in Proc. Rec. IEEE ICIEA
Conf., Jun. 15–17, 2010, pp. 926–930.
[20] D. F. Partridge, “Solid State Circuit Breaker,” U.S. Patent 6 104 106,
Aug. 12, 2000.
[21] Q. Huang, X. Zhou, and Z. Xu, “Solid state DC circuit breaker,” U.S.
Patent 6952335B2, Oct. 4, 2005.
[22] D. F. Partridge, “Solid state circuit breaker,” PCT WO 94/22157, Sep.
29, 1994.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
14
[23] X. Zhenxue, B. Zhang, S. Sirisukprasert, X. Zhou, and A. Q. Huang,
“The emitter turn-off thyristor-based DC circuit breaker,” in Proc. Rec.
IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Conf., 2002, vol. 1, pp. 288–293.
[24] M. M. R. Ahmed, G. Putrus, L. Ran, and R. Penlington, “Development
of a prototype solid-state fault-current limiting and interrupting device
for low-voltage distribution networks,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol.
21, no. 4, pp. 1997–2005, Oct. 2006.
[25] T. F. Podlesak, J. A. McMurray, and J. L. Carter, “An all solid state
fault interrupter using gtos,” in Proc. Rec. IEEE Pulsed Power Conf.,
1989, pp. 344–347.
[26] T. Jinzenji and T. Kudoa, “GTO DC circuit breaker based on a single-
chip microcomputer,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. IE-33, no. 2, pp.
183–143, May 1986.
[27] T. Jinzenji and T. Kudoa, “A GTO DC circuit breaker controlled by
a single-chip microcomputer,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. IE-32,
no. 3, pp. 204–209, Mar. 1985.
[28] G. Mauthe, L. Niemeyer, F. Pinnekamp, and N. Wiegart, “Circuit
breaker,” U.S. Patent 4 764 836, Aug. 16, 1988.
[29] E. K. Howell, “Solid state current limiting circuit interrupter,” U.S.
Patent 4 700 256, Oct. 13, 1987.
[30] F. W. Holroyd and V. A. K. Temple, “Power semiconductor devices
for hybrid breakers,” IEEE Trans. Power Eng. Rev., vol. PER-2, no. 7,
pp. 48–49, Jul. 1982.
[31] J. Isberg, H. Bernhoff, P. Skytt, and P. Min, “Electric switching device
and a method for performing electric disconnection of a load,” U.S.
Patent 6 239 514, May 29, 2001.
[32] P. J. Theisen, S. Krstic, and C. G. Chen, “270-V DC hybrid switch,”
IEEE Trans. Comp., Hybrids, Manuf. Technol., vol. CHMT-9, no. 1,
pp. 97–100, Mar. 1986.
[33] Y. Tang, J. L. Duarte, R. P. P. Smeets, T. E. Motoasca, and E. A.
Lomonova, “Multi-stage DC hybrid switch with slow switching,” in
Proc. 37th IEEE Annu. Conf. Ind. Electron. Soc., 2011, pp. 1462–1467.
[34] R. F. Schmerda, S. Krstic, E. L. Wellner, and A. R. Bendre, “IGCTs
vs. IGBTs for circuit breakers in advanced ship electrical systems,” in
Proc. IEEE Elect. Ship Technol. Symp., 2009, pp. 400–405, IEEE.
[35] Q. Chen, K. Tan, and A. Q. Huang, “Self-power emitter turn-off
thyristor (SPETO) based circuit breaker for power distribution
system,” in Proc. IEEE Energy Convers. Congr. Expo., 2012, pp.
2017–2021.
[36] S. Juvekar, B. Compton, and S. Bhattacharya, “A fast acting DC solid
state fault isolation device (FID) with Si and SiC devices for MVDC
distribution system,” in Proc. IEEE Energy Convers. Congr. Expo.,
2012, pp. 2005–2010.
[37] K. P. Bhat, Y. B. Guo, Y. Xu, T. Baltis, D. R. Hazelmyer, and D. C.
Hopkins, “Results for an Al/AlN composite 350 SiC solid-state cir-
cuit breaker module,” in Proc. IEEE 27th Annu. Appl. Power Electron.
Conf. Expo., 2012, pp. 2492–2498.
[38] S. Abe, S. Yang, M. Shoyama, T. Ninomiya, A. Matsumoto, and A.
Fukui, “Operating mechanism of SiC-SIT DC circuit breaker in 400
V-DC power supply system for data center—In case of grounding
fault,” in Proc. IEEE 27th Annu. Appl. Power Electron. Conf. Expo.,
2012, pp. 2189–2194.
[39] A. Huang, Y. Liu, Q. Chen, J. Li, and W. Song, “Emitter turn-off (ETO)
thyristor, ETO light converter and their grid applications,” in Proc.
Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meeting, 2009, pp. 1–8.
[40] J. M. Meyer and A. Rufer, “ADC hybrid circuit breaker with ultra-fast
contact opening and integrated gate-commutated thyristors (IGCTs),”
IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 646–651, Apr. 2006.
[41] L. Novello, E. Gaio, and R. Piovan, “Feasibility study of a hybrid me-
chanical-static dc circuit breaker for superconducting magnet protec-
tion,” IEEE Trans. Appl. Superconduct., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 76–83, Apr.
2009.
[42] E. Gaio, L. Novello, R. Piovan, K. Shimada, T. Terakado, K. Kurihara,
and M. Matsukawa, “Conceptual design of the quench protection cir-
cuits for the JT-60SA superconducting magnets,” Fusion Eng. Design,
vol. 84, pp. 804–809, 2009.
[43] L. Novello, F. Baldo, A. Ferro, A. Maistrello, and E. Gaio, “Devel-
opment and testing of a 10-kA hybrid mechanical-static dc circuit
breaker,” IEEE Trans. Appl. Superconduct., vol. 21, no. 6, pp.
3621–3627, Dec. 2011.
[44] M. Takeda, H. Yamamoto, Y. Hosokawa, and I. Kamiyama, “A low
loss solid-state transfer switch using hybrid switch devices,” in Power
3rd Int. Electron. Motion Control Conf., 2000, vol. 1, pp. 235–240.
[45] C. Alvarez, J. Alamar, R. B.-Gimenez, and A. Montenegro, “Solid state
devices for protection in distribution systems. A new proposal for solid
state transfer switch (SSTS),” in Proc. 9th Int. Conf. Harmonics Qual.
Power, 2000, vol. 2, pp. 456–461.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER DELIVERY
[46] Y. Kishida, K. Koyama, H. Sasao, N. Maruyama, and H. Yamamoto,
“Development of the high speed switch and its application,” in Proc.
IEEE 33rd Ind. Appl. Conf., 1998, vol. 3, pp. 2321–2328.
[47] H. Komatsu, J. Nomura, and M. Souda, “Low frequency circuit
breaker,” U.S. Patent Appl. 13/328,321, Dec. 16, 2011.
[48] T. Genji, O. Nakamura, M. Isozaki, M. Yamada, T. Morita, and M.
Kaneda, “400 V class high-speed current limiting circuit breaker for
electric power system,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 9, no. 3, pp.
1428–1435, Jul. 1994.
[49] H. Kurioka, T. Genji, M. Isozaki, H. Iwai, and M. Yamada, “Develop-
ment of a high-speed current limiter for a 6 kV distribution system and
evaluation of its effectiveness,” Elect. Eng. Jpn., vol. 125, no. 3, pp.
11–20, 1998.
[50] H. Arita and J. Kida, “Current limiting circuit breaker,” U.S. Patent 5
726 843, Mar. 10, 1998.
[51] G. G. Karady and G. T. Heydt, “Novel concept for medium voltage
circuit breakers using microswitches,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol.
21, no. 1, pp. 536–537, Jan. 2006.
[52] G. Demetriades and A. Shukla, “Hybrid circuit breaker,” U.S. Patent
20 130 021 708, Jan. 24, 2013.
[53] B. Roodenburg, M. A. M. Kaanders, and T. Huijser, “First results from
an electro-magnetic (EM) drive high acceleration of a circuit breaker
contact for a hybrid switch,” in Proc. IEEE Eur. Conf. Power Electron.
Appl., 2005, pp. 1–10.
[54] J. Zyborski, T. Lipski, J. Czucha, and S. Hasan, “Hybrid arcless
low-voltage AC/DC current limiting interrupting device,” IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 1182–1187, Oct. 2000.
[55] A. Atmadji, Direct Current Hybrid Breakers a Design and Realisa-
tion. Eindhoven, the Netherlands: Eindhoven University, May 2000.
[56] H. Polman, J. A. Ferreira, M. Kaanders, B. H. Evenblij, and P. Van
Gelder, “Design of a bi-directional 600 V/6 kA ZVS hybrid DC switch
using IGBTs,” in Proc. IEEE 36th Ind. Appl. Conf., 2001, vol. 2, pp.
1052–1059.
[57] P. Van Gelder and J. A. Ferreira, “Zero volt switching hybrid DC circuit
breakers,” in Proc. IEEE Ind. Appl. Conf., 2000, vol. 5, pp. 2923–2927.
[58] T. Senda, T. Tamagawa, K. Higuchi, T. Horiuchi, and S. Yanabu,
“Development of HVDC circuit breaker based on hybrid interruption
scheme,” IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-103, no. 3, pp.
545–552, Mar. 1984.
[59] R. Jungblut and R. Sittig, “Hybrid high-speed DC circuit breaker using
charge-storage diode,” in Proc. IEEE Ind. Comm. Power Syst. Tech.
Conf., 1998, pp. 95–99.
[60] M. Steurer, “Ein hybrides Schaltsystem für Mittelspannungzur
strombegrenzenden Kurzschlussunterbrechung,” Ph.D. dissertation,
Technische Wissenschaften, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland, 2001,
No. 14059.
[61] M. Grader, “Dimensioning of switches made up of a series and parallel
connection of numerous low-current contacts,” presented at the 23rd
Int. Conf. Elect. Contacts, Sendai, Japan, 2006.
[62] C. M. Frank, “HVDC circuit breakers: A review identifying future re-
search needs,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 998–1007,
Apr. 2011.
[63] T. Hansson and P. O. Karlstrom, “PTC element,” U.S. Patent 5 382
938, Jan. 17, 1995.
[64] H. Yamamoto, “Curcuit breaker and circuit breaking apparatus,” U.S.
Patent 5 650 901, Jul. 22, 1997.
[65] J. Czucha, T. Lipski, and J. Zyborski, “Hybrid current limiting inter-
rupting device for 3-phase 400 V AC applications,” in Proc. IET Int.
Conf. Trends Distrib. Switchgear, 1998, pp. 161–166.
[66] B. Bolanowski and F. Wojcik, “A fast DC hybrid circuit breaker,”
in Proc. IEEE Coll. Electron.-Aided Current-Limiting Circuit Breaker
Develop. Appl., 1989, pp. 1–8.
[67] T. Shirouzu, M. Morita, and S. Mizuno, “DC circuit breaker and
method of commutation thereof,” U.S. Patent 4 805 062, Feb. 14,
1989.
[68] M. Hasegawa, T. Tsuboi, H. Akiyama, T. Kamada, and T. Uchii, “DC
vacuum circuit breaker for an electric motor vehicle,” U.S. Patent 5
214 557, May 25, 1993.
[69] J. I. Wright, K. Subramanian, W. J. Premerlani, and J. N. Park, “Micro-
electromechanical system based arc-less switching with circuitry for
absorbing electrical energy during a fault condition,” U.S. Patent 7 876
538, Jan. 25, 2011.
[70] N. G. Hingorani, “AC fault current limiting circuit,” U.S. Patent 4 164
772, Aug. 14, 1979.
[71] H. Bonhomme, “Semiconductor-assisted ultra-fast contact breaker,”
U.S. Patent 4 920 448, Apr. 24, 1990.
 This article has been accepted for inclusion in a future issue of this journal. Content is final as presented, with the exception of pagination.
SHUKLA AND DEMETRIADES: SURVEY ON HYBRID CB TOPOLOGIES
[72] G. Defosse, H. Bonhomme, and R. Lesceux, “Very high speed circuit
breaker assisted by semiconductors,” U.S. Patent 4 956 738, Sep. 11,
1990.
[73] A. Maitra, M. McGranaghan, J. S. Lai, T. Short, and F. Goodman,
“Multifunction hybrid solid-state switchgear,” U.S. Patent 7 405 910,
Jul. 29, 2008.
[74] B. W. Lee, “Complex superconducting fault current limiter,” U.S.
Patent Appl. 11/616,458, Dec. 27, 2006.
[75] M. Steurer, K. Frohlich, W. Holaus, and K. Kaltenegger, “A novel hy-
brid current-limiting circuit breaker for medium voltage: Principle and
test results,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 460–467, Apr.
2003.
[76] M. Francis, J. P. Dupraz, R. Besrest, and J. M. Armata, “New topology
of hybrid circuit breaker/current limiter for MV AES networks,” in
Proc. All Electric Ship Int. Conf., 2005, pp. 13–14.
[77] G. Demetriades and A. Shukla, “Hybrid circuit breaker,” U.S. Patent
20 120 218 676, Aug. 30, 2012.
[78] S. Yamaguchi, “Circuit breaker,” U.S. Patent Appl. 12/187,030, Aug.
6, 2008.
[79] S. Yamaguchi, H. Sasao, H. Hasegawa, K. Ikeda, and T. Tukamoto,
“Mechanical arcless dc circuit breaker by current zero operation,” Rev.
Scientif. Instrum., vol. 63, no. 8, pp. 3993–3999, 1992.
[80] J. H. Rockot, H. E. Mikesell, and K. N. Jha, “Hybrid high direct current
circuit interrupter,” U.S. Patent 5 793 586, Aug. 11, 1998.
[81] G. Asplund, V. Lescale, and C. E. Solver, “Direct-current breaker for
high power for connection into a direct-current carrying high-voltage
line,” U.S. Patent 5 517 378, May 14, 1996.
[82] C. Oates, D. Murray, E. K. Chukaluri, and W. R. Crookes, “Circuit
breaker apparatus,” WIPO Patent 2012100831, Aug. 3, 2012.
[83] P. Skarby, “A high voltage dc breaker apparatus,” WIPO Patent
2011141055, Nov. 18, 2011.
[84] T. Shirouzu, M. Morita, and S. Mizuno, “DC circuit breaker and
method of commutation thereof,” U.S. Patent 4 805 062, Feb. 14,
1989.
[85] J. Häfner and B. Jacobson, “Device and method to break the current of
a power transmission or distribution line and current limiting arrange-
ment,” U.S. Patent 20 120 299 393, Nov. 29, 2012.
[86] L. M. Tolbert, B. Ozpineci, S. K. Islam, and M. S. Chinthavali, “Wide
bandgap semiconductors for utility applications,” Semic, vol. 1, no.
2003, p. 3.
[87] B. Ozpineci, L. M. Tolbert, S. K. Islam, and M. Chinthavali, “Compar-
ison of wide bandgap semiconductors for power applications,” in Proc.
Eur. Conf. Power Electron. Appl., 2003, pp. 2–4.
15
[88] B. Roodenburg, A. Taffone, E. Gilardi, S. M. Tenconi, B. H. Evenblij,
and M. A. M. Kaanders, “Combined ZVS-ZCS topology for high-cur-
rent direct current hybrid switches: Design aspects and first measure-
ments,” Proc. IET Elect. Power Appl., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 183–192, Mar.
2007.
Anshuman Shukla (S’04–M’08) received the
M.Tech. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering
from the Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur,
Kanpur, India, in 2003 and 2008, respectively.
From 2008 to 2011, he was a Scientist with ABB
Corporate Research Center, Västerås, Sweden. In
2008, he was a Research Associate in the Depart-
ment of Electrical Engineering, University of South
Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA. In 2011, he joined the
Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai,
India, in 2011, where he is currently an Assistant
Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering. His research interests
include modulation and control of power-electronic converters, hybrid and
solid-state circuit breakers, and applications of power electronics in power
systems and electric drives.
Dr. Shukla is a recipient of the Young Engineer Award (2011) conferred by
the Institution of Engineers, India.
Georgios D. Demetriades (M’06) was born in Fam-
agusta, Cyprus. He received the M.Sc. degree in elec-
trical engineering from the Democritus University of
Thrace, Xanthi, Greece, in 1992 and the Tech. Li-
centiate and Ph.D. degrees in power electronics from
the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm,
Sweden, in 2001 and 2005, respectively.
Before joining ALSTOM Power Environmental
Systems, Växjö, Sweden, in 1995, he worked in
Cyprus for two years. In 2000, he joined ABB
Corporate Research Center, Vasteras, Sweden,
where he is currently a Research and Development Manager. His research
interests include HVDC converters, flexible ac transmission systems devices,
high-frequency dc–dc power-resonant converters, hybrid and solid-state circuit
breakers, and high-frequency electromagnetic modeling.