Enhancement of Multi-machine Power System
Performance Using Resistive Superconducting
Fault Current Limiter
Dr. M. M. A. Mohamed 1, a and Eng. M. A. Gaafar 1, b
1
Electrical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, South Valley University, Aswan, Egypt
a
email: mmam72@yahoo.com and bemail: m.a.gafaar@gmail.com
Abstract- One of the worst types of fault that a power system
should be designed to withstand is a short circuit. Within the
various types of fault current limiters, the superconducting fault
current limiter (SCFCL) has an extremely fast current limitation.
The rapid switching action and the self-sensing nature of the
superconductor make SCFCLs particularly attractive in fault
protection. This very fast time response is potentially shorter
than those of the classical current limiters. This paper presents a
study to the impact of installing resistive type superconducting
fault current limiter (RSCFCL) in multi-machine power system
during a large disturbance. The system performance without and
with RSCFCL is studied. Mainly, three features for RSCFCL
are discussed, current limiting capability, voltage drop
suppression, and transient stability enhancement. A simple 9-bus
3-machine system is used to explain these features. MATLAB,
SIMULINK, and SIMPOWERSYSTEMS software are applied
to investigate these features.
Index Terms- Fault current limiter, superconductor, and
power system stability.
I. INTRODUCTION
Increasing power demands are leading to power
transmission systems which cover large distances and carry
high power. This expansion in power system capacities led to
development of large scale generating units and
interconnection between networks. Therefore, a fault on the
power system may abnormally induce large fault current and
cause over-stress problems on generators, transformers, circuit
breakers (CBs), and transmission lines etc. On the other hand,
the power systems are exploited to the limits of stability
maintained by the generators. So the protection of electric
power systems during short circuit conditions has become
increasingly important. The most promising candidate to
suppress this current is a fault current limiter (FCL) with high
temperature superconductor (HTS) [1, 2].
SCFCLs can be classified into R-types (Resistive) and L-
types (Inductive) by current limiting impedance. The L-type
SCFCLs limit the fault current by inductance and have
advantages of being able to limit the AC component of the
fault current and to suppress the voltage drop at the faults. On
the other hand, the R-type SCFCLs limit the fault current by
resistance and have advantage of being able to consume the
excessive energy at the faults. This feature may contribute to
the power system stability improvement [3].
During the fault period, all the energy released is dissipated
in the superconducting (SC) film. Because of this energy, the
film temperature (Tsc) can reach high values within few
milliseconds. One way of reducing this energy, and thereby
limit the rise in Tsc, is to limit the fault current even further, for
instance by increasing film resistance (Rsc). This can be
achieved by increasing the film length (  sc ). However,
increasing  sc increases the volume of the FCL and the
losses under non-fault conditions. An alternative way of
reducing this energy is to reduce the current through the SC
film, isc during the fault period by connecting shunt impedance
across the SC film [4 – 8]. In this concept, during normal
operation, the resistance of the SC film is essentially zero and
steady-state current flows through it. However, during a fault,
the resistance of the SC film increases to high value, so most
of the fault current is diverted through the shunt impedance.
Once the fault is cleared, the steady-state current can continue
to flow without excessive heating in the the SC film. In this
concept, the SC film is essentially a switch that commutates
the fault current to the shunt impedance.
For high power ratings, RSCFCL is made of parallel and
series samples to meet current and voltage requirements. All
samples are assumed to be homogeneous during the fault
period.
In this paper, MATLAB, SIMULINK, and
SIMPOWERSYSTEMS software are applied to examine three
features for RSCFCL, current limiting capability, voltage drop
suppression, and transient stability enhancement in simple 9-
bus 3-machine system.
II. MODELING OF RSCFCL
A. Structure of RSCFCL
The superconductor in RSCFCL consists of YBCO film
samples built in a meander structure and deposited on YSZ
substrate. The total number of the samples is dependent on the
applied voltage and the required limiting current. The samples 2
R sc i lim
are connected in series and parallel with each other in which ∆T = ∆t (6)
each joint resistance must be kept very small to avoid local Csc A sc
destruction of the material near the joint. A shunt resistor (Rsh)
of aluminum is used to reduce the energy dissipated in the SC TABLE I
SPECIFICATIONS OF SC FILM
film. The aluminum resistance variation with temperature is Material of SC film YBCO
taken into account. To achieve fasting recovery, two parallel Critical current density (Jc) at self field A/cm2 at 77K 106×3
SC films are used and a CB connects only one of them Critical temperature, Tc K 90
interchangeably after every fault. Fig. 1 shows the RSCFCL Sample cross-sectional area cm2 10-6×4
unit structure. Three units are connected for three-phase Cooling liquid LN2
networks. The specifications of the SC film used in this work
are shown in Table I.

B. Fundamental properties of HTS

In superconducting materials, there are three parameters:
critical temperature (Tc), critical magnetic field (Bc), and
critical current density (Jc) form a parameter space within
Fig. 1. Structure of RSCFCL unit
which the material remains in the superconducting state, as
shown in Fig. 2 and becomes a normal conductor everywhere
outside [9]. In this work, no externally magnetic field was
applied. The effect of the self-magnetic flux from the current
in the SC film was neglected, because it is too small to have
any effect on Jc [10]. Also, Jc in Table I is measured at self-
flux.

C. Design of RSCFCL model

RSCFCL unit is modeled in SIMULINK as a controlled
voltage source (CVS), its value depends on the total resistance
of the SC film and Rsh and on the current value. The limiting
resistance of the SC film (Rsc) is determined by (2)
sc
R sc = ρ sc (2)
Fig. 2. Limiting region of the superconducting state
A sc
where ∆ T and C are the increment in the superconducting
where ρ sc,  sc , and Asc are the resistivity, the length, and the
temperature after an increment of time during the limiting
cross-sectional area of the SC film, respectively. For YBCO
period ∆ t and the specific heat capacity in J/m3.K of the
film, ρ sc varies over a three operating regions, these regions superconducting material, respectively. The specific heat
are expressed as in (3), (4), and (5) [11] capacity for YBCO material is not constant and varies with the
material temperature during the limiting period and it is given
ρ sc ≅ 0 For T < Tc and J < Jc
in [14].
(3)
The heat dissipated to liquid nitrogen (LN2) is taken into
account [15]. it is represented in the developed routine for
 ( T − T )  J c
ρsc = ρ k 1 − c

 SIMULINK model as points in a “Look up table” block. Also,
For T < Tc and J >

 Tc − 77  J 
 the heat transfer between the SC film and substrate is taken
into account where the substrate is taken to consist of m
Jc (4) layers. It is assumed that the temperature of the substrate face
adjacent to the SC film is equal to the film temperature (T sc)
ρ sc = (10-6 + 10-8 (T-Tc)) For T > Tc
and that adjacent to the liquid nitrogen is equal to the liquid
(5)
nitrogen temperature (77 K). The stored energy within each
where ρ k is the maximum resistivity of the SC film just layer is given by (7)
before Tc, ρ k is taken to be 10-7Ω .m [12]. The temperature Stored energy = input energy – losses energy
rise in the SC film during the fault period can be calculated by (7)
(6) [13]
 The heat which flows along a layer is defined by Fourier's the fault period can be calculated by (6).The SIMULINK
law for one-dimensional heat flow [16] as given by (8). The model of RSCFCL is shown in Fig. 3.
rate of temperature rise for the substrate layers is given by (9)
[8] III. MULTI-MACHINE POWER SYSTEM MODEL
∂T
qs = λA A one-line diagram for the nine-bus three-machine system is
∂x
shown in Fig. 4. The system is documented in [17]. It includes
(8)
three generators and three large equivalent loads. The system
∂T
CV =q has been built in SIMPOWERSYSTEMS where the generator
∂t model used is termed as “Model Order 6”, in which the
(9) electromagnetic dynamics and the electromechanical
where qs is the energy transfer between two later ends, q is the dynamics are represented by six first order differential
energy stored within a layer, λ is the thermal conductivity of equations [18].
the substrate material, A is the contact area, ∂T is the In the worst case, RSCFCL model for each generator is
difference in temperatures, ∂x is the separation thickness, C is needed. Each model is designed by assuming a three phase
the specific heat capacity in J/m3.K, and V is the volume of the fault to occur at the high voltage side of each transformer, the
material. From (8) and (9), the energy transfer to the first fault duration is taken to be 9 cycles. The critical current is
layer, qs1 is given in (10) and the temperature distribution taken to be 1.5 of the peak rated current. Because all
within each layer is given in (11) – (14) refrigeration systems are able in principle to operate at
temperatures from about 2 K up to 300 K [19], the maximum
T − T1 permissible temperature for the SC film is taken to be 300 K.
q s1 = λA
d2
TABLE II
(10) SPECIFICATIONS OF YSZ SUBSTRATE
∂T1 q s1 λA T1 - T2 (Thermal conductivity (W/m.K 1.4
= − (Specific heat capacity (J/m3.K × 106 2.5
∂t C 2 V2 C 2 V2 d2 (Substrate thickness (mm 1
(Number of assumed layers (m 10
(11)
∂T2 λA
= ( T1 − 2T 2 + T3 )
∂t C 2 V2 d 2
(12) IV. SIMULATION RESULTS AND DISCUSION
∂Tm -1 λA
= ( Tm -2 − 2T m-1 + Tm ) Table III shows the events sequence of the simulation.
∂t C 2 V2 d 2
A. Current limiting capability
(13) Figs. 5 and 6 show the current from generator 2 (Gen2)
∂Tm without and with RSCFCLs, respectively. Fig. 7 gives the
=0 values for the first and last peak of generator 2 current,
∂t expressed in per unit from the peak rated current, for different
(14)
values of Rsh.
where d2, C2 and V2 are the substrate layer thickness, specific Without RSCFCL, the first peak and the last peak of the
heat capacity in J/m3.K and volume, respectively, λ and A are fault current are reached to nearly nine times and eight times,
the thermal conductivity of the substrate and the contact area respectively, of the rated current. When RSCFCL is
between the SC film and substrate, respectively. These connected, the first peak and the last peak decrease
equations can be represented in the developed routine for significantly as the value of Rsh increases. This clarifies the
SIMULINK model by a “State space” block. The function of fault current limitation.
specifications of the substrate are given in Table II.
TABLE III
For the shunt resistance, its value varies with temperature as SEQUANCE OF SIMULATION EVENTS
in (15) Step 1 Steady state operating conditions
RT = R0 [1 + α ( T − T0 ) ] Step 2
0.05 Second later, three-phase to ground fault near bus 7
between power-transmission lines 5-7.
(15) 0.2 Second later, the grounded fault is cleared by opening
Step 3
line 5-7
where RT and Ro are the values of the resistance at temperature Step 4 0.6 Second later, restoration by reclosing.
T and To, respectively, and α is the temperature coefficient of
resistivity. The temperature rise in the shunt resistance during
 1 0
L a s t p e
F i r s t p e
8

c u r re n t (p u )
F irs t a n d la s t p e a k o f fa u lt
4

0
w i t 1h 0 o u t 3 0 5 0 8 0
S h u n t r e s i s t a n c e (
Fig. 7. First and last peak of generator 2 current

Fig. 3. SIMULINK model of RSCFCL

B. Voltage drop limitation capability
The limitation in the fault current is clearly shown in the
voltage waveforms. Figs. 8 and 9 show, respectively, the
phase voltage waveform across generator 2 terminals without
RSCFCL, and with RSCFCL having different values Rsh.
Without RSCFCL the terminal voltage is dropped to very low
values due to the large fault current. However, inserting an
RSCFCL helps to keep the terminal voltage within the rated
values as the shunt resistance increases. This is another benefit
of limiting the fault current.

C. Transient stability improvement

During the fault, the electrical power from generator 2 drops
to zero. Therefore, the generator is accelerated due to the
excessive mechanical input power. As a result, the power
angle of the generator increased. The change of the internal
Fig. 4. Nine-bus three-machine system angle will go to infinity with no RSCFCL used. This means
8 0
F a u lt d u r a t io n
that the generator starts to accelerate uncontrollably and the
6 0 system becomes unstable as shown from Fig. 10. During an
4 0
out-of-step condition, there are large cyclic variations in
C u rren t fo r o n e p h as e
o f g en e rato r 2 (K A )

currents and voltages with the frequency being a function of

2 0
the rate of slip of its poles which in turns causes high
0 frequency oscillations in the output power as shown in Fig. 11.
-2 0
However, with RSCFCL, the electrical power increases. So
0 .0 5 0 .1 0 .1 5 0 .2
the RSCFCL could reduce the excess power of the generator
T im e ( s e c ) and damp the power swing to bring the system back to
Fig. 5. Generator 2 phase current without RSCFCL stability. Fig. 12 shows the load angle for both generators 2
and 3 with respect to generator 1 with RSCFCL having Rsh of
8 0
F a u lt d u r a t io n
10 ohm and 80 ohm. The output power from generator 2 with
6 0 RSCFCL having Rsh of 10 ohm is shown in Fig. 13.
R s h u n t = 8 0 o h m
4 0
C u rr e n t fo r o n e p h a s e
o f g e n e ra to r 2 (K A )

2 0

-2 0

0 .0 5 0 .1 0 .1 5 0 .2
T im e ( s e c )

Fig. 6. Generator 2 phase current with RSCFCL

 4 0 3

F a u lt d u r a t io n 2

O utput pow er of generator 2 (pu)

2 0 1
g e n e r a to r 2 (K V )
P h a s e v o lta g e o f

0
0
-1

-2
-2 0
-3
0 .0 5 0 .1 0 .1 5 0 .2 0 0 .5 1 1 .5 2 2 .5 3 3 .5 4 4 .5 5

T im e ( s ) T im e ( s )

Fig. 8. Generator 2 bus voltage without RSCFCL Fig. 11. Output power of generators 2 without RSCFCL
150
4 0 g e n e ra to r 2
R shunt =10 ohm g e n e ra to r 3
F a u lt d u r a t io n

w ith respect to generator 1 (degree)

Load angles of generators 2 and 3
100
R s h u n t = 1 0 o h m
2 0
50
g e n e r a to r 2 ( k v )
P h a s e v o lta g e o f

0
0

-2 0
-5 0
0 0 .5 1 1 .5 2 2 .5 3 3 .5 4 4 .5 5
0 .0 5 0 .1 0 .1 5 0 .2
T im e ( s e c )
T im e ( s e c )
100
g e n e ra to r 2
4 0
80 g e n e ra to r 3
F a u lt d u r a t io n R shunt = 80 ohm

w ith respect to generator 1 (degree)

Load angles of generators 2 and 3
60
R s h u n t = 3 0 o h m
2 0
40
g e n e r a to r 2 ( k v )
P h a s e v o lta g e o f

20
0
0

-2 0
-2 0
-4 0
0 0 .5 1 1 .5 2 2 .5 3 3 .5 4 4 .5 5
0 .0 5 0 .1 0 .1 5 0 .2 T im e ( s e c )
T im e ( s e c )
Fig. 12. Load angle of generators 2 and 3 with RSCFCL
4 0
F a u lt d u r a t io n 3

R s h u n t = 8 0 o h m
2 0 2
O utput P ow er of generator 2 (pu)

R shunt = 10 ohm
g e n e r a to r 2 (K V )
P h a s e v o lta g e o f

1
0
0

-2 0 -1

0 .0 5 0 .1 0 .1 5 0 .2 -2
0 0 .5 1 1 .5 2 2 .5 3 3 .5 4 4 .5 5
T im e ( s e c )
T im e ( s )

Fig. 9. Generator bus voltage with RSCFCL Fig. 13. Output power of generator 2 with RSCFCL
500
g e n e ra to r 2

400
g e n e ra to r 3 V. CONCLOSION
w ith respect to generator 1 (degree)
Load angles of generators 2 and 3

300 This paper discussed the feasibility of resistive

200
superconducting fault current limiter (RSCFCL) to improve
the power system performance during fault conditions. The
100
fault current can be limited to a value comparable with the
0 rated current by appropriate design of RSCFCL. Also the
0 0 .5 1 1 .5 2 2 .5 3 3 .5 4 4 .5 5

T im e ( s e c )
terminal voltage can be improved. It was shown that the
system stability can be enhanced by the introduction of
Fig. 10. Load angle of generators 2 and 3 without RSCFCL
RSCFCL in the system due to its function of consuming the
excessive power. The effect of the shunt resistance with
RSCFCL is also shown. As the value of the shunt resistance
increases a better performance is obtained. However, as the
value of the shunt resistance increases, the cost of the limiter
is increased.
 REFERENCES

[1] E. Leung, “Surge protection for power grids”, IEEE spectrum,

pp.26-30, 1997.
[2] W. Paul and M Chen, “Superconducting Control for Surge
Currents”, IEEE spectrum, pp.49-54, 1998.
[3] Y. Shirai, K. Furushiba, Y. Shouno, M. Shiotsu, T.
Nitta, “Improvement of Power System Stability by Use of
Superconducting Fault Current Limiter With ZnO Device
and Resistor in Parallel”, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. Vol. 18,
No. 2, pp.680-683, 2008.
[4] K. E. Gray and D. E. Fowler, “A superconducting fault-current
limiter”, J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 2546-2550, 1978.
[5] P. Tixador, “Superconducting Current Limiters-Some
Comparisons and Influential Parameters’, IEEE Trans. Appl.
Supercond., Vol. 4, No. 4, pp.190-198, 1994.
[6] M. Steurer, H. Brechna and K. Frohlich, “A Nitrogen Gas Cooled,
Hybrid, High Temperature Superconducting Fault Current Limiter”,
IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 840-844, 2000.
[7] J. Noudem, J. M. Barbut, O. Belmont et al, “Current limitation at
1080 A under 1100 V with Bulk Bi-2223”, IEEE Trans. Appl.
Supercond., Vol.9, No.2, pp.664-667, 1999.
[8] R.F. Giese, M. Runde, “Assessment Study Of Superconducting
Fault-Current Limiters Operating At 77K”, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery,
Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 1138-1147, 1993.
[9] I. M. Firth, “Superconductivity”, Publisher: London : Mills and
Boon, 1972.
[10] S. Matsuno, T. Umemura, F. Uchikawa et al,
“Yba2CuOx Thin Films with Yttria Stabilised Zirconia Buffer Layer on
Metal Substrate by Liquid Source Chemical Vapour Deposition Using
Tetrahydrofuran Solution of β -Diketonates”, Jpn. J. Appli. Phys. Vol.
34, pp. 2293-2299, 1995.
[11] M. Lindmayer and M. Schubert, “Resistive Fault
Current Limiters with HTSC – Measurements and Simulation”, IEEE
Trans. Appl. Supercond., Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 884-888, 1993.
[12] M. Lindmayer and M. Schubert, “Quenching of High Tc
– Superconductors and Current Limitation – Numerical Simulations and
Experiments”, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., Vol. 7, No. 2, pp.1029-
1032, 1997.
[13] N. E. Reimann, R. Cherkaoui, B. Dutoit et al,
“Simulation of the Transient Response of a High-Tc Superconducting
Current Limiter Inserted in an Electrical Distribution System”, IEEE
Trans. Appl. Supercond., Vol.7, No.2, pp.836-839, 1997.
[14] S. Y. Seol and J. R. Hull, “Transient analysis and
burnout of high temperature superconducting current leads”, Cryogenics,
Vol. 33, No. 10, pp. 966-975, 1993.
[15] E. W. Collings, “Design considerations for high Tc
ceramic superconductors”, Cryogenics, Vol. 28, pp. 724-733, 1988.
[16] J. P. Holman, “Heat Transfer”, Publisher: New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1976.
[17] Anderson, P.M. and A.A. Fouad, “Power System
Control and Stability”, IEEE Press, 2nd Ed., USA, 2003.
[18] Clifton Ellis, Hassan Nouri, Rade Ciric and Bogdan
Miedzinsky, “Overview of The Development, Simplification
and Nnmerical Analysis of Synchronous Machine Models
for Stability Studies”, UPEC 2007.
[19] RAY RADEBAUGH, “Refrigeration for
Superconductors”, IEEE, Vol. 92, No. 10, October 2004.