Proceedings of 2020 IEEE International Conference on ID20331

Applied Superconductivity and Electromagnetic Devices

Tianjin, China, October 16-18, 2020

Implementation of Capacitive Bridge-Type

Superconducting Fault Current Limiter to Improve
the FRT Capability of DFIG Based Wind Generator
Jakir Hasan, Md. Rashidul Islam Md. Rabiul Islam Abbas Z. Kouzani, M A Parvez
Department of EEE School of Electrical, Computer and Mahmud
Rajshahi University of Engg. & Tech. Telecommunications Engineering School of Engineering
Rajshahi 6204, Bangladesh University of Wollongong Deakin University
jh.hasan@outlook.com NSW 2522, Australia Geelong, VIC 3216, Australia
rashidul@eee.ruet.ac.bd mrislam@uow.edu.au abbas.kouzani@deakin.edu.au
m.a.mahmud@deakin.edu.au

Abstract—A capacitive bridge-type superconducting fault current
limiter (CB-SFCL) is proposed in this paper for the improvement
of fault ride through (FRT) capability of DFIG based wind power
generation system (WPGS). The CB-SFCL incorporates a power
capacitor in series with a high temperature superconductor coil
(HTSC). Performance of the CB-SFCL is evaluated by
comparing it with the conventional bridge-type superconducting
fault current limiter (BSFCL). Simulation results show that the
CB-SFCL is superior to the BSFCL in enhancing the stability of
maintains a constant DC-link voltage [4]. Here, the study
system has a 6 MVA DFIG supplying power to a double
circuit transmission line through the point of common
coupling (PCC). A 0.69/66 KV transformer steps up the
terminal voltage of the DFIG before connecting it to the PCC.
The CB-SFCL is placed between the double circuit
transmission line and the PCC, as represented in Fig. 1.
Wind
Turbine
DFIG
CB R+jX CB

the WPGS incorporated with DFIG. 0.69/66 KV

CB-SFCL F
Gear
box CB R+jX CB GRID
PCC
Keywords-capacitive bridge-type superconducting fault current RSC
Edc
GSC

limiter (CB-SFCL); DFIG; FRT; superconductor Figure 1. Study system model.

I. INTRODUCTION
Doubly fed induction generators (DFIGs) are very prone to
transmission line faults since the grid is directly interfaced
with their stator winding. Fault current limiters (FCLs) are
auxiliary devices that are very effective to minimize the
causality of the faults to the DFIGs. However, compared to
other FCLs, superconducting fault current limiters (SFCLs)
are more efficient due to their self-healing characteristics [1].
Bridge-type SFCL (BSFCL) is excellent in improving the
transient stability of DFIG based wind power generation
system (WPGS) [2], [3]. Traditional BSFCL incorporates a
superconducting coil inside the bridge circuit. The single
superconducting coil arrangement is only effective to some
degree as they do not match the demand of reactive power of
the WPGS. Based on this limitation, this paper proposes a
capacitive bridge-type SFCL (CB-SFCL) to improve the fault
ride through (FRT) capability of DFIG based WPGS. The CB-
SFCL fulfills the reactive power demand of the WPGS.
III. CAPACITIVE BRIDGE-TYPE SUPERCONDUCTING FAULT
CURRENT LIMITER (CB-SFCL)
A. CB-SFCL Configuration
The configuration of the CB-SFCL is shown in Fig. 2(a). It
consists of a bridge of four diodes (D1-D4), a high temperature
superconductor coil (HTSC) and a power capacitor (C) in
parallel with an IGBT switch. The HTSC could be a YBCO
thin film and its simulation consideration is discussed in [5].
The SFCLs possess a unique characteristic that they offer
variable resistance to the system based on the operating
condition. The normal operation of the SFCL has absolute zero
resistance, whereas during fault, it switches to a variable
resistance that is capable of suppressing the fault current [1].
Here, the normal state resistance of the HTSC during fault is
considered 5 Ω (Rsc). The value of C is calculated based on the
design procedure discussed in [6]. Considering our system, C =
55 μF provided the best result.

II. SYSTEM MODEL D1

Rsc HTSC
D2
D1 D2
Rsc HTSC
The variable speed operation of the DFIG is provided with D3
IGBT
C D4
D3 D4
a back-to-back configuration of a rotor side converter (RSC)
and a grid side converter (GSC). The RSC is capable of (a) CB-SFCL (b) BSFCL
regulating the terminal voltage, as well as controlling the
active and reactive power of the DFIG, whereas the GSC Figure 2. Configuration of the (a) CB-SFCL and (b) BSFCL.

978-1-7281-5215-8/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE 1

Authorized licensed use limited to: BOURNEMOUTH UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 19,2021 at 14:45:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1.2
B. Operation and Control of CB-SFCL 1
Without FCL

PCC Voltage (pu)

During normal operating condition, the diode bridge along 0.8

0.6
BSFCL
CB-SFCL

with the HTSC carries the line current. During normal period, 0.4

the IGBT gets a HIGH signal and the HTSC is in 0.2

superconducting mode. Hence, the HTSC offers no resistance

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Time (s)

and does not hamper the sound operation of the system. During
Figure 3. Profile of voltage at the PCC.
the event of a fault, the temperature of the HTSC rises and due
to quenching, Rsc increases. Moreover, the IGBT turns off as it 1.5

gets a LOW state signal. Hence, during fault, the HTSC and the

DFIG Active Power (pu)

1
Without FCL
capacitor (C) are in series and the combined impedance of Rsc 0.5 BSFCL
CB-SFCL

and C limits the fault current and maintains the stability of the 0

system. -0.5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Time (s)

The gate pulse of the IGBT is controlled by monitoring the Figure 4. Profile of active power for DFIG.
PCC voltage. The dq component of the PCC voltage, Vdq,φ is
compared with a threshold voltage level, Vth. During normal 2.5
Without FCL

period, the Vdq,φ is always greater than the Vth. Hence, the 2 BSFCL

Stator Current (pu)

CB-SFCL
1.5

IGBT gets a HIGH signal from the control circuit. So, the 1

IGBT is in conduction during the normal period and the 0.5

capacitor is not inserted in the circuit. During fault, Vdq,φ 0

0 0.2 0.4
Time (s)
0.6 0.8 1

decreases and when it goes below the Vth, the control circuit
sends a LOW signal to the IGBT gate and turns it off. Then
the capacitor comes in conduction with the HTSC and
suppresses the fault current.
IV. BRIDGE-TYPE SUPERCONDUCTING FAULT CURRENT
LIMITER (BSFCL)
The basic architecture of the BSFCL is shown in Fig. 2(b).
It consists of a diode bridge and a HTSC inside the bridge.
During normal condition, the HTSC element inserts zero
resistance to the system maintaining seamless power flow.
During fault, the HTSC is in normal state and the increased
resistance suppresses the fault current [2]. To make a fair
comparison, the same simulation consideration of HTSC is
used for BSFCL as the CB-SFCL.
Figure 5. Profile of stator current for DFIG
VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a CB-SFCL is proposed for the FRT
capability augmentation of a DFIG based WPGS. A graphical
performance comparison between the CB-SFCL and the
conventional BSFCL is carried out to vindicate the superiority
of the CB-SFCL. The CB-SFCL is able to aid the profile of
PCC voltage by providing the capacitive compensation during
and after the fault. Simulation results showed that the CB-
SFCL provided more improved PCC voltage response, assured
comparatively better active power and stator current profiles
of the DFIG, compared to the conventional BSFCL.
REFERENCES

V. SIMULATION RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The simulation results for the CB-SFCL are shown in Figs.
3– 5. The performance of the CB-SFCL is also compared with
that of the BSFCL. System responses without any auxiliary
FCL is also taken into consideration. All the comparisons are
carried out considering a three line-to-ground (3LG) fault that
is initiated at 0.1 s and applied for 100 ms. The circuit
breakers of the faulty line are opened at 0.2 s and then
reclosed at 1.2 s. The PCC voltage response goes to zero in the
absence of any auxiliary FCL, which improves slightly after
implementing BSFCL. However, the CB-SFCL provides the
best performance in improving the voltage as depicted in Fig.
3. The DFIG active power response has the largest dip for no
FCL as shown in Fig. 4. The BSFCL has improved the
response up to a certain level, but the CB-SFCL clearly
assures better active power profile, which is prominent from
Fig. 4. The stator current response has significant amount of
oscillations when no auxiliary FCL is used. The BSFCL does
a fine job minimizing the fault current to some extent.
However, the CB-SFCL is unarguably the best choice as it
keeps the stator current smoother, which is shown in Fig. 5.
[1] H. J. Boenig, and D. A. Paice, “Fault current limiter using a
superconducting coil,” IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 19, no. 3,
pp. 1051–1053, May 1983.
[2] Y. Salami, and M. Firouzi, “Dynamic performance of wind farms with
bridge-type superconducting fault current limiter in distribution grid,” in
Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Electric Power and
Energy Conversion Systems (EPECS), pp. 1-6, Sharjah, UAE, Nov. 15-
17, 2011.
[3] Hu You, and Jianxun Jin, “Characteristic analysis of a fully controlled
bridge type superconducting fault current limiter,” IEEE Transactions on
Applied Superconductivity, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 1-6, Oct. 2016, Art no.
5603706.
[4] M. R. Islam, M. N. Huda, J. Hasan, M. A. H. Sadi, A. AbuHussein, T.
K. Roy, and M. A. Mahmud, “Fault ride through capability improvement
of dfig based wind farm using nonlinear controller based bridge-type
flux coupling non-superconducting fault current limiter,” Energies, vol.
13, no. 7, Apr. 2020.
[5] L. Chen, C. Deng, F. Zheng, S. Li, Y. Liu, and Y. Liao, “Fault ride-
through capability enhancement of DFIG-based wind turbine with a
fluxcoupling-type SFCL employed at different locations,” IEEE
Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 1-5, Jun.
2015, Art no. 5201505.
[6] M. Firouzi, and G. B. Gharehpetian, “LVRT performance enhancement
of DFIG-based wind farms by capacitive bridge-type fault current
limiter,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 9, no. 3, pp.
1118-1125, Jul. 2018.

Authorized licensed use limited to: BOURNEMOUTH UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 19,2021 at 14:45:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.