An effective control algorithm for hybrid
superconducting magnetic/battery energy storage
systems employed in DC microgrids
Pavlos G. Papageorgiou Konstantinos O. Oureilidis
Dept. of Electrical & Computer Dept. of Electrical & Computer
Engineering Engineering
University of Western Macedonia University of Western Macedonia
Kozani, Greece Kozani, Greece
p.papageorgiou@uowm.gr koureilidis@uowm.gr
Abstract—DC microgrids are exposed to diverse
disturbances that can cause DC bus voltage instability and
power quality issues. Renewable volatility and fault occurrence
on the power lines are considered as high-impact variations,
which jeopardize the resilience of the microgrid. Therefore, the
deployment of a battery storage system can improve the robust
operation of the microgrid. However, the frequent cyclic activity
and the rapid power variations have detrimental effects on
battery’s lifespan. This study proposes an effective control
scheme for a hybrid superconducting magnetic energy storage
(SMES)/battery system to protect the battery from rapid
lifetime fading and to improve the DC bus voltage stability.
Under the proposed method, SMES is the prior-responsive
device, while battery’s mode of operation (i.e., idling, charging,
discharging) depends on SMES current value. Specifically,
battery is kept idle as long as SMES current is within a user-
defined dead band and is triggered as soon as SMES current
2023 IEEE Belgrade PowerTech | 978-1-6654-8778-8/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/POWERTECH55446.2023.10202687
deviates from that. In such cases, battery enters smoothly either
the discharging or the charging mode following a different
droop curve for each mode of operation. Initially, a comparative
analysis between the proposed scheme and a battery-only
system under two different scenarios is presented, namely PV
fluctuation and DC fault. Afterwards, the presented method is
compared with a hybrid SMES/battery system controlled with a
preceding residual SMES energy-based technique, under a
fluctuating PV generation. The simulation results demonstrate
the superiority of the novel strategy.
Keywords—DC fault, SMES, battery lifespan improvement,
DC power system
I. INTRODUCTION
The rapid proliferation of DC power sources such as the
photovoltaic (PV) plants, and the appearance of contemporary
DC loads assist the expeditious growth of DC microgrids [1].
This is further amplified by their immanent advantages
compared with the AC systems, as for example: zero reactive
power flows and absence of harmonics and phase unbalances.
However, their protection against faults remains a
considerable challenge, since the extinguishment of the DC
arc is very difficult [2].
DC faults can be categorized into: (i) pole to ground (PtG)
and (ii) pole to pole (PtP) faults. PtP faults are more serious
but less common than PtG faults and may lead to system
collapse [3]. Apart from the faults, the robust operation of DC
microgrids is endangered by the renewables’ intermittency,
We acknowledge support of this work by the project “Development of
New Innovative Low-Carbon Energy Technologies to Enhance excellence in
the Region of Western Macedonia” (MIS 5047197) under the Action
“Reinforcement of the Research and Innovation Infrastructure”, funded by
the Operational Programme "Competitiveness, Entrepreneurship and
Innovation" (NSRF 2014-2020) and co-financed by Greece and the
European Union (European Regional Development Fund).
XXX-X-XXXX-XXXX-X/XX/$XX.00 ©20XX IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Western Macedonia. Downloaded on October 02,2023 at 18:50:30 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Georgios C. Christoforidis
Dept. of Electrical & Computer
Engineering
University of Western Macedonia
Kozani, Greece
gchristoforidis@uowm.gr
unscheduled disconnections from the AC grid and arbitrary
changes in the load demand. Thus, an appropriately controlled
storage system is indispensable for a resilient microgrid.
According to [4], batteries are the most widespread storage
solution for microgrid architectures as a result of their mature
state, high-energy density and high efficiency. However,
when the energy-type batteries are exposed to inconsistent
charging or discharging patterns, such as the short-term
activity and high working rates, their lifetime is remarkably
reduced [5,6]. Additionally, their power density is inadequate
for power-type applications, which means that batteries
cannot effectively compensate for the high-frequency power
demands. Conversely, power-type superconducting magnetic
energy storage (SMES) has no lifetime attenuation under the
previous circumstances and can respond immediately to the
power requirements due to its high-power density.
Nevertheless, SMES energy density is lower and its
acquisition cost is greater than those of the batteries [4]. Thus,
the SMES/battery hybrid energy storage systems (HESSs)
have been utilized for various applications lately.
SMES/battery HESSs consists of compatible storage
types, have both high-energy and high-power density and
prolong the lifespan of the battery system under suitable
control strategy. In [5], the power allocation between SMES
and battery is realized through a filtration-based algorithm in
an islanded microgrid. This scheme introduces a filter to
resolve the net power into slow and fast-varying terms that are
assigned to battery and SMES, respectively. However, this is
not efficient when successive variations occur, since battery
has to compensate for the slow-varying term whenever a
variation occurs. A benchmark microgrid is employed in [7],
where the battery operates as an energy backup for the SMES
and slowly charges or discharges according to the current
remaining in the SMES. A similar algorithm is presented in
[8,9]. These methods, though, lead to severe short-term
activity for the battery if SMES current is near its rated value.
The approach presented in [10] for electric vehicles cannot
effectively extend battery service life, as battery is active from
the very beginning of every variation, responding
instantaneously. A droop-based power allocation strategy is
introduced in [11] for an isolated microgrid. Two droop curves
with different slopes are considered here to prioritize SMES
over battery, but this method introduces steady-state deviation
for the bus voltage.
In the light of the above discussion, this paper presents an
efficient control strategy for a hybrid SMES/battery system
deployed in a DC microgrid. Under the novel strategy, the
battery is inactive as long as the SMES current is inside a dead
band, to reduce its charging/discharging cycles. In cases
where SMES current leaves the idling band, the battery is
activated to charge or discharge following a droop curve
according to SMES current measurement, to ensure low
working rates. Therefore, battery’s stress levels are reduced.
Additionally, the DC bus voltage is stiffly controlled inside a
hysteresis zone. The remainder of this paper is structured as
follows: in Section II, the examined microgrid topology is
presented and in Section III, the novel SMES/battery HESS
control method is analyzed. Finally, the simulation results are
discussed in Section IV.
II. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
The schematic diagram of the under-study islanded DC
microgrid is depicted in Fig. 1. It consists of a solar PV
system, two resistive loads that operate at different voltage
levels and a SMES/battery HESS to increase the voltage
stability for the DC bus and protect the battery from quick
lifetime degradation during generation-consumption
mismatches. The bus load is directly coupled to the bus, while
the other load is fed through a DC cable and a buck converter.
This converter stabilizes the terminal voltage of the load to a
constant value, whilst a boost converter is employed for the
PV system to maximize its output power. The SMES is
connected to the main bus through a bidirectional chopper and
the battery through a bidirectional half-bridge converter. Both
loads are controllable and their power demand may vary. All
specifications regarding the examined microgrid are
summarized in Table I.
III. CONTROL TECHNIQUES
A. The control approach for the PV and the load
The output power and the terminal voltage of a PV module
change accordingly when either sun irradiation or ambient
temperature vary. Therefore, to extract the maximum possible
power from the PV panel, a maximum power point tracking
(MPPT) algorithm should be employed to generate the
reference terminal voltage for the PV [12]. In this paper, the
PV system is coupled to the main bus via a boost converter
that regulates its terminal voltage for maximum power
extraction. The control techniques for the PV and load
converters can be found in [13].
B. The proposed control method for the SMES/battery
HESS
1) Battery
Fig. 2 outlines the control approach proposed for the
battery in the hybrid system. The mode of operation for the
battery depends on SMES current. As long as SMES current
is within the band defined by ISMES zone, lower limit and ISMES
zone, upper limit, the energy remaining in the SMES is
considered sufficient enough. Therefore, the battery remains
inactive, as its reference current is zero (idling zone) and the
power disturbances are dealt only by the SMES. In this way,
the short-term operation for the battery is reduced.
Once SMES current exceeds ISMES zone, upper limit,
battery is triggered and follows the charging droop (charging
zone), operating like an energy backup for SMES, as
illustrated in Fig. 2. Once SMES current becomes smaller than
ISMES zone, lower limit, battery works in the discharging zone
of Fig. 2. In other words, power disturbances are compensated
by both SMES and battery outside the idling zone. In this
paper, battery will charge or discharge at its maximum current
as soon as SMES current becomes equal to its critical value or
as soon as SMES energy is depleted, respectively (Fig. 2).
However, due to the inductive characteristics of SMES coil,
its current cannot change rapidly. Hence, the proposed
algorithm ensures low charging/discharging rates (i.e., low
di/dt) for the battery.

Discharging Idling Charging

IBat, ref
Fig. 1. The under-study DC microgrid topology.
IBat, max
TABLE I. DC MICROGRID SPECIFICATIONS charging
PV system ISMES zone,
Rated power 78,480 W Rated voltage 656.4 V upper limit

Rated current 119.6 A

ISMES
0
ISMES zone, ISMES, crit
Voltage levels lower limit
Bus load
750 V Load voltage 120 V
voltage
IBat, max
DC cable
discharging
Resistance 10 Ω
Battery pack
Current
Chemistry Li-ion ±120 A Fig. 2. The conceptualization of the novel control scheme for the hybrid
constraints
system.
Nominal Typical
360 V 135 Ah
voltage capacity
SMES
2) SMES
Inductance 0.4 H Critical current 700 A
In this paper, the DC bus voltage of the microgrid is
regulated within a hysteresis zone, employing a hysteresis
comparator for the SMES system. Once the bus voltage

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Western Macedonia. Downloaded on October 02,2023 at 18:50:30 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
exceeds the upper voltage limit denoted as Vbus zone, upper discharges according to the energy remaining in the SMES, is
limit in Fig. 3, SMES enters the charging mode by turning on presented in [8].
both IGBTs. Once the bus voltage becomes smaller than the
lower voltage limit denoted as Vbus zone, lower limit in Fig. 3, IV. SIMULATION RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
SMES enters the discharging mode by turning off both IGBTs. Initially, the proposed hybrid SMES/battery system is
If the hysteresis zone is too narrow, the bus voltage fluctuation compared with a BOS under two different case studies,
is small but SMES current changes at a very high frequency namely PV fluctuation and DC fault and an evaluation is
due to mode transitions, causing significant AC losses and conducted for each particular case. Thereafter, the novel
temperature rise in the coil. Therefore, a trade-off between bus control system is assessed against the preceding control
voltage fluctuation and SMES losses is necessary [14]. In this method for the hybrid SMES/battery system, under a
study, the ripple of the bus voltage is equal to 1.33%. fluctuating PV generation. The simulations are carried out
Conclusively, the novel SMES/battery HESS control using the PSIM software.
algorithm can stiffly regulate the DC bus voltage and reduce A. Comparison with a BOS
the stress levels for the battery. The implementation of the
proposed method is demonstrated in Fig. 3 and the control 1) Case I: PV fluctuation
parameters are listed in Table II. A volatile PV generation is considered in this case and the
time period of the disturbances ranges from 0.5 s up to 2 s
[15], as shown in Fig. 4. The load fed through the DC cable
and the buck converter remains disconnected from the system
throughout the simulation, while the bus load is fixed at about
63 kW. The initial SMES current is 260 A.
The hybrid scheme prevails against the BOS with regard
to microgrid DC bus voltage regulation, as shown in Fig. 5.
When the proposed system is employed, the bus voltage is
controlled within the hysteresis zone without any deviation.
Contrariwise, when the BOS is deployed, the bus voltage
suffers by large overshoots and undershoots, since battery
cannot respond instantaneously. Indicatively, the maximum
overshoot and undershoot are about 85 V at 2.04 s and 126 V
at 3.04 s, respectively.
Apart from the noticeable improvement of the microgrid
bus voltage profile, the proposed method reduces the stress
levels of the battery by smoothing its working rates and
eliminating its short-term cyclic operation. Fig. 6a and 6b
depict the SMES current variations and its output power under
the proposed scheme, respectively. SMES current remains
within the idling zone up to 3.72 s and therefore all variations
are handled solely by the SMES, as battery current and power
are zero until then (Fig. 7a and 7b). The power-type SMES is
able to switch instantly from the charging to the discharging
mode and vice versa, satisfying the power mismatch. As soon
as SMES current leaves the idling zone (at 3.72 s) due to the
large step change in the PV output (at 3 s), battery is triggered
to discharge with a rate of about 163 A/s to support SMES
current. Hence, SMES output power progressively decreases
Fig. 3. The proposed control approach for the hybrid SMES/battery until it becomes zero (Fig. 6b). Instead, when the BOS is
system. deployed, the battery is directly exposed to the disturbances
and operates with very high charging and discharging rates.
TABLE II. CONTROL PARAMETERS Indicatively, when the above-mentioned large step change in
the PV output takes place, battery’s rate is about 991 A/s, that
Vbus zone, lower Vbus zone, upper
limit
745 V
limit
755 V poses considerable challenges for the battery manufacturer
ISMES zone, ISMES zone, upper and its lifetime. Additionally, under the hybrid scheme,
200 A 500 A battery discharges only once to support SMES current at 3.72
lower limit limit
Capacitor @
6 mF
Switching frequency
10 kHz s, as illustrated in Fig. 7a and 7b, while in case of the BOS,
DC bus for the battery battery charges from 0.5 s up to 1.5 s, discharges from 1.5 s
up to 2 s, charges from 2 s up to 3 s and discharges from 3 s
C. Previously reported control methods that will be used up to 5 s (Fig. 7a, 7b). This short-term cyclic activity causes
greater lifetime degradation for the battery compared to that
for comparison
of the hybrid scheme.
The control scheme utilized in the battery-only system
(BOS) for the battery storage can be found in [13].
The preceding control strategy for the hybrid
SMES/battery system under which the battery charges or

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Western Macedonia. Downloaded on October 02,2023 at 18:50:30 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 2) Case II: DC fault
A DC PtP fault with zero fault resistance is performed in
this case. The fault occurs right after the DC cable, in the high-
voltage side of the load buck converter (Fig. 1). The PV output
is fixed at about 71 kW, while the total power demand of both
loads is 55kW. The initial SMES current is 360 A. The fault
occurs at 0.7 s and the simulation results are shown up to 1 s.
The fault clearing is beyond the scope of this paper.
When the PtP fault occurs, the terminals of the DC cable
resistance (Rc) are directly connected to the DC bus capacitor
Fig. 4. The PV output fluctuation–Case I. terminals. Thus, this resistance constitutes a big load for the
microgrid. In case of the BOS, the DC bus voltage drops
abruptly at 0.7 s, since battery is not as rapid-responsive as
SMES is. Therefore, the bus voltage drops to about 623 V at
0.734 s (Fig. 8). Contrariwise, when the hybrid system is
Bus Voltage (V)

deployed, the bus voltage is stiffly regulated inside the

hysteresis zone, as depicted in Fig. 8.
Fig. 9a and 9b illustrate the SMES current variations and
its output power under the hybrid scheme, respectively. SMES
current remains within the idling zone throughout the
simulation and therefore, battery is inactive, as shown in Fig.
10a and 10b. Prior to the fault, SMES consumes about 9.3kW
Fig. 5. The DC bus voltage of the microgrid–Case I.
and switches instantly from charging to discharging when the
fault occurs. After the fault, it generates about 35 kW to
stabilize the bus voltage, as depicted in Fig. 9b. Instead, when
the BOS is deployed, the battery switches from charging to
discharging with a potentially catastrophic rate of about 1,052
A/s when the fault occurs to regulate the voltage. Moreover,
battery power prior to the fault, as well as its steady state value
after the fault in the BOS, are equal to those of SMES in the
hybrid scheme, respectively (Fig. 9b and 10b). This is
(a) explained by the fact that battery is idle in the hybrid method.
SMES Power (W)

Bus Voltage (V)

(b)

Fig. 6. The variations of (a) SMES current and (b) SMES power–Case I. Fig. 8. The DC bus voltage of the microgrid–Case II.
Battery storage current (A)

(a)

(a)
Battery storage power (W)

SMES Power (W)

(b)
(b)

Fig. 7. The variations of (a) Battery storage current and (b) Battery
storage power–Case I. Fig. 9. The variations of (a) SMES current and (b) SMES power–Case
II.

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Western Macedonia. Downloaded on October 02,2023 at 18:50:30 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Battery storage current (A)

(a)
Battery storage power (W)

Fig. 11. The power of PV.

(a)

SMES Current (A)

(b)

Fig. 10. The variations of (a) Battery storage current and (b) Battery
storage power–Case II.

SMES Power (W)

B. Comparison with the preceding control method for the
hybrid SMES/battery system
Here, the novel control method is compared with the
preceding residual SMES energy-based control method, in
which the battery works like an energy backup for the SMES, (b)
considering a volatile PV generation. Fig. 11 illustrates the PV
power. The load fed through the DC cable and the buck
converter remains disconnected throughout the simulation, Fig. 12. The variations of (a) SMES current and (b) SMES power.
whilst the bus load is maintained at 60 kW. The initial SMES
current is 250 A. The rated SMES current is set equal to 350
A in the case of the preceding control scheme.
Battery storage current (A)

(a)

Fig. 12a and 12b depict the SMES current variations and
its output power under the proposed scheme, respectively.
SMES current remains within the idling zone at full length of
the simulation and therefore all variations are handled solely
by the SMES, as battery current and power are zero (Fig. 13a
and 13b). The rapid-responsive SMES is able to switch
instantly from charging to discharging mode and vice versa,
Battery storage power (W)

satisfying the power demands. On the contrary, in case of the

preceding control method, the battery helps the SMES to
maintain its rated current/energy. Therefore, when SMES
current is lower than its rated value, the battery discharges,
and when it is higher than its rated value, the battery charges
(Fig. 12a and 13a,b). Specifically, the battery charges from
0.43 s up to 0.595 s, 1.66 s up to 3.45 s, 3.55 s up to 4.8 s and
discharges in the remaining time intervals. Consequently,
SMES current slightly deviates from its rated value (Fig. 12a)
and it is not optimally exploited. Indicatively, the largest
SMES current deviations for the preceding control method
and the proposed method are 81 A and 108 A, respectively.
Ultimately, the proposed control method outperforms the
preceding scheme, since it exploits a portion of the SMES
capacity to suppress the amount of the short-term cycles of the
battery.
(b)
Fig. 13. The variations of (a) Battery storage current and (b) Battery
storage power.
V. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
An effective control strategy for a SMES/battery HESS is
presented in this paper for DC microgrid applications. As long
as SMES current is inside a user-defined band, the battery is
idle. In this way, its frequent cyclic activity is suppressed. As
soon as SMES current leaves the idling band, the battery is
activated following a charging or discharging droop curve
according to SMES current, to ensure low working rates. The
proposed system is firstly evaluated against a BOS and then
against a hybrid SMES/battery system controlled with a
preceding residual SMES energy-based control technique.

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Western Macedonia. Downloaded on October 02,2023 at 18:50:30 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
The presented method not only reduces the stress levels for the
battery but also stiffly controls the DC bus voltage employing
a hysteresis comparator.
The optimal selection of SMES size and idling zone
limits can be considered as a future improvement of this work,
since SMES is still an expensive system.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Sun, W. Lin, M. Hong, and K. A. Loparo, “Voltage Regulation of
DC-Microgrid with PV and Battery,” IEEE Transactions on Smart
Grid, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 4662–4675, 2020.
[2] T. Dragicevic, X. Lu, J. C. Vasquez, and J. M. Guerrero, “DC
Microgrids—Part II: A Review of Power Architectures, Applications,
and Standardization Issues,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics,
vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 3528–3549, 2016.
[3] Y. Zhou, C. Ji, Z. Dong, and S. Zhang, “Cooperative Control of SFCL
and SMES-Battery HESS for Mitigating Effect of Ground Faults in DC
Microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, vol.
31, no. 8, pp. 1–5, 2021.
[4] C. K. Das, O. Bass, G. Kothapalli, T. S. Mahmoud, and D. Habibi,
“Overview of energy storage systems in distribution networks:
Placement, sizing, operation, and power quality,” Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 91, pp. 1205–1230, 2018.
[5] J. Li, A. M. Gee, M. Zhang, and W. Yuan, “Analysis of battery lifetime
extension in a SMES-battery hybrid energy storage system using a
novel battery lifetime model,” Energy, vol. 86, pp. 175–185, 2015.
[6] Q. Zhang and R. E. White, “Capacity fade analysis of a lithium ion
cell,” Journal of Power Sources, vol. 179, no. 2, pp. 793–798, 2008.
[7] J. Li, R. Xiong, H. Mu, B. Cornélusse, P. Vanderbemden, D. Ernst, and
W. Yuan, “Design and real-time test of a hybrid energy storage system
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Western Macedonia. Downloaded on October 02,2023 at 18:50:30 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
in the microgrid with the benefit of improving the battery lifetime,”
Applied Energy, vol. 218, pp. 470–478, 2018.
[8] Q. Sun, D. Xing, H. Alafnan, X. Pei, M. Zhang, and W. Yuan, “Design
and test of a new two-stage control scheme for SMES-battery hybrid
energy storage systems for microgrid applications,” Applied Energy,
vol. 253, p. 113529, 2019.
[9] P. G. Papageorgiou, K. O. Oureilidis, and G. C. Christoforidis,
“Enhancing Stability of DC Microgrids Employing SMES-Battery
Hybrid Energy Storage System,” 2022 Workshop on Blockchain for
Renewables Integration (BLORIN), 2022.
[10] B. Yang, et al., “Design and implementation of Battery/SMES hybrid
energy storage systems used in electric vehicles: A nonlinear robust
fractional-order control approach,” Energy, vol. 191, p. 116510, 2020.
[11] J. Li, Q. Yang, F. Robinson, F. Liang, M. Zhang, and W. Yuan, “Design
and test of a new droop control algorithm for a SMES/battery hybrid
energy storage system,” Energy, vol. 118, pp. 1110–1122, 2017.
[12] P. G. Papageorgiou, A. M. Tsakiri, and G. C. Christoforidis,
“Performance assessment of supercapacitor energy storage integration
into a renewable DC microgrid,” 2022 2nd International Conference on
Energy Transition in the Mediterranean Area (SyNERGY MED), 2022.
[13] P. Papageorgiou, K. Oureilidis, A. Tsakiri, and G. Christoforidis, “A
Modified Decentralized Droop Control Method to Eliminate Battery
Short-Term Operation in a Hybrid Supercapacitor/Battery Energy
Storage System,” Energies, vol. 16, no. 6, p. 2858, 2023.
[14] Z. Zhang, et al., “Characteristics of Compensation for Fluctuating
Output Power of a Solar Power Generator in a Hybrid Energy Storage
System Using a Bi2223 SMES Coil Cooled by Thermosiphon With
Liquid Hydrogen,” IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity,
vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1–5, 2016.
[15] F. Ni, Z. Zheng, Q. Xie, X. Xiao, Y. Zong, and C. Huang, “Enhancing
resilience of DC microgrids with model predictive control based hybrid
energy storage system,” International Journal of Electrical Power and
Energy Systems, vol. 128, p. 106738, 2021.