IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED SUPERCONDUCTIVITY, VOL. 20, NO.
4, AUGUST 2010
Superconducting Fault Current Limiter Application
for Reduction of the Transformer Inrush
Current: A Decision Scheme of the
Optimal Insertion Resistance
Hun-Chul Seo, Student Member, IEEE, Chul-Hwan Kim, Senior Member, IEEE,
Sang-Bong Rhee, Member, IEEE, Jae-Chul Kim, Member, IEEE, and Ok-Bae Hyun
Abstract—A conventional superconducting fault current limiter
(SFCL) is usually only connected to a power system for fault
current limitation. The study described in this paper, however,
attempts to use the hybrid SFCL application to reduce the trans-
former inrush current. To accomplish this, this paper first suggests
the concepts to expand the scope of the SFCL application in the
power system. The power system operator should first determine
the proper amount of current-limiting resistance (CLR) of the
hybrid SFCL. Therefore, this paper suggests a decision scheme of
the optimal insertion resistance in an SFCL application to reduce
the transformer inrush current. This scheme and the SFCL model
are implemented using the electromagnetic transient program
(EMTP). We determine the optimal CLR by EMTP simulation,
and this value is applied to model the SFCL by the EMTP.
The simulation results show the validity and effectiveness of the
suggested scheme and the ability of the SFCL to reduce the inrush
current.
Index Terms—Electromagnetic transient program (EMTP), op-
timal insertion resistance, superconducting fault current limiter
(SFCL), transformer inrush current.
I. I NTRODUCTION
T HE TRANSFORMER inrush currents can have large mag-
nitudes and rich harmonics, which can result in power sys-
tem problems such as damage and decreased life expectancy of
the transformer, or malfunction of the protective relay, among
others. Therefore, it is necessary to be able to limit this inrush
current [1], [2].
Manuscript received March 5, 2009; revised June 8, 2009 and October 19,
2009; accepted February 10, 2010. Date of publication June 7, 2010; date of
current version July 30, 2010. This paper was recommended by Associate
Editor M. Noe. This work was supported by a grant from the Center for Applied
Superconductivity Technology of the 21st Century Frontier R&D Program
funded by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Republic of Korea.
H.-C. Seo, C.-H. Kim, and S.-B. Rhee are with the School of Infor-
mation and Communication Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon
440-746, Korea (e-mail: hunchul0119@hanmail.net; hmwkim@hanmail.net;
rrsd@naver.com).
J.-C. Kim is with the School of Electrical Engineering, Soongsil University,
Seoul 156-743, Korea (e-mail: jckim@ssu.ac.kr).
O.-B. Hyun is with the Superconductivity and Application Advanced Group,
Korea Electric Power Research Institute, Daejeon 305-380, Korea (e-mail:
hyun@kepri.re.kr).
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/TASC.2010.2048214
1051-8223/$26.00 © 2010 IEEE
2255
There are several methods for reducing the inrush current.
One method is to switch a transformer with a disconnector
rather than a breaker. Disconnect being a slow device, its
contacts prestrike or flashover close to the voltage peak and
thereby limit the inrush to some extent. However, disconnect
energization can result in voltage stress to insulation due to
switching surges, particularly at high voltage. The preinsertion
of a reactor during energization of the transformer can reduce
the inrush current. However, the decision of instants, which are
switched on/off to connect/disconnect the preinsertion reactors,
is difficult. Another technique for reducing the inrush current is
the segregated point-on-wave closing method. The segregated
point-on-wave closing method requires that the circuit breaker
poles be separately switched at optimal instants to reduce or
eliminate the inrush current [3]. This method, which involves
both controlled opening and controlled closing of the breaker
[4]–[6], has the limitation of decision of optimal instants, which
are separately switched by the circuit breaker pole.
The purpose of the superconducting fault current limiter
(SFCL) connected to the power system is to limit the fault
current. In the steady state, the resistance in the SFCL is
nearly zero. When a fault occurs, the resistance in the SFCL
is increased due to the increasing temperature of the SFCL.
When a fault is cleared, the resistance in the SFCL decreases to
zero due to the decreasing temperature of the SFCL [7]–[12].
Therefore, the SFCL could potentially be used to limit overcur-
rent by the change of the resistance value [13]–[17].
In this paper, we apply the hybrid SFCL to reduce the
inrush current. First, we suggest the concept to expand the
scope of the SFCL application in the power system. The SFCL
in the suggested concept can limit two types of overcurrent,
i.e., the fault current and the inrush current. The change of
current-limiting resistance (CLR) values of the hybrid SFCL to
limit two types of overcurrent is performed by the operation
algorithm of the switch controller in the suggested concept.
The power system operator must be used to decide the optimal
CLR for efficiency; we thus suggest a scheme for deciding the
optimal insertion resistance for the SFCL to reduce the inrush
current. The insertion resistance means the CLR of the hybrid
SFCL modeled in this paper. The scheme only uses the phasor
of the inrush current and the bus voltage when the transformer
inrush current occurs without the SFCL. On one hand, the large
2256
Fig. 1. Block diagram to expand the scope of the SFCL application.
TABLE I
SWITCH CONTROL FOR THE BLOCK SUGGESTED IN FIG. 1
CLR of the SFCL can help reduce the inrush current; on the
other hand, this large CLR causes a significant voltage drop in
the SFCL.
The suggested scheme predicts two relationships. The first
is the relationship between the inrush current and the insertion
resistance, and the second is the relationship between the volt-
age drop by the SFCL and the insertion resistance. Using the
curves representing these dependences, we decide the optimal
insertion resistance of the SFCL to reduce the inrush current.
To demonstrate the effectiveness of the suggested scheme,
we model the suggested scheme and the SFCL using the EMTP
[18]–[20]. In this paper, we first decide the optimal CLR in
the SFCL using the result of EMTP simulation, and then, we
model the SFCL based on the decided CLR by using the EMTP.
Next, we discuss the SFCL application to reduce the inrush
current. The simulation results show that the hybrid SFCL using
the suggested scheme can be applied to effectively reduce the
inrush current.
II. E XPANSION OF THE SFCL A PPLICATION
IN THE P OWER S YSTEM
We propose a block diagram to expand the scope of the SFCL
application in the power system, as shown in Fig. 1. The SFCL
has two functions. The first function is the reduction of the fault
current, which is the original purpose of the SFCL connected to
the power system. The second function is the reduction of the
transformer inrush current, which is a new experiment to apply
the SFCL to another field.
Table I shows the switch control for the concept suggested
in Fig. 1 according to the operation conditions. In normal
operation, sw1 and sw2 in Fig. 1 are closed, and sw3 and sw4
in Fig. 1 are opened, and then, SFCLfault is connected to the
power system [(a) in Fig. 1]. Therefore, when the fault occurs,
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED SUPERCONDUCTIVITY, VOL. 20, NO. 4, AUGUST 2010
Fig. 2. Operation algorithm of the SW controller.
the limitation of the fault current is performed by SFCLfault .
When the transformer is energized by switching on the breaker,
sw1 and sw2 in Fig. 1 are opened, and sw3 and sw4 in Fig. 1 are
closed, and then, SFCLinrush is connected to the power system
[(b) in Fig. 1]. If the transformer inrush current occurs, this
current is reduced by SFCLinrush .
The switch control of Table I is automatically performed by
the switch controller in Fig. 1. The switch controller operates
by the algorithm of Fig. 2. The algorithm is composed of three
parts.
The current of the power system is inputted, and the RMS
value is calculated. If the RMS value is zero, the power system
is in the deenergization state, and the transformer inrush current
will occur by switching on the breaker. Therefore, sw3 and
sw4 are on, and sw1 and sw2 are off. Then, the CLR value
of the SFCL is changed to the CLR value of SFCLinrush by
varistor control (A part in Fig. 2). Therefore, the inrush current
can be reduced by SFCLinrush . After the attenuation of the
inrush current, the power system is operated at steady state. The
CLR value of the SFCL must be changed to the CLR value of
SFCLfault to limit the fault current. The attenuation of the in-
rush current depends on the capacity of the transformer and the
time constants by the design of the transformer. Therefore, the
time when the inrush current is attenuated cannot be specified.
Therefore, we use the second harmonic of the inrush current,
which is a typical characteristic of the inrush current [1], [21]
to estimate the attenuation of the inrush current. The algorithm
calculates the ratio of the second harmonic to the fundamental
component. This value is defined as α, as shown in Fig. 2.
The typical value of α for the inrush current is 30%–50% and
depends on the design of the transformer [21]. If α is less than
SEO et al.: SFCL APPLICATION FOR REDUCTION OF THE TRANSFORMER INRUSH CURRENT 2257

ε, where the setting value of ε is dependent on the application

environments and is almost less than 10% [21], the algorithm
decides the attenuation of the inrush current (C part in Fig. 2).
Then, sw1 and sw2 are on, and sw3 and sw4 are off, and then,
the CLR value of the SFCL is changed to the CLR value of
SFCLfault by varistor control (B part in Fig. 2).
If the RMS value is not zero, the B part in Fig. 2 is activated,
and the CLR value of the SFCL is changed to the CLR value of
SFCLfault by varistor control.
The hybrid SFCL modeled in this paper uses the fixed CLR
values. Therefore, the method to change the CLR value is
actually the parallel connection of the SFCL, as shown in Fig. 1.
The resistance value of the varistor depends on the voltage. The
use of the varistor for the SFCL makes it possible to change the
CLR value. Therefore, varistor control in Fig. 2 means the use
of the varistor instead of the fixed CLR in the SFCL.
The CLR values of SFCLfault and SFCLinrush must be
different because their targets are different. The CLR value of
SFCLfault is determined by considering the fault current of the
power system and short-circuit MVA of the circuit breaker. The
decision scheme for the CLR value of SFCLinrush is suggested
in Section III. Hereinafter, SFCL means SFCLinrush .

III. D ECISION S CHEME OF THE O PTIMAL I NSERTION

R ESISTANCE IN THE SFCL
Fig. 3. Flowchart of the decision scheme of the optimal insertion resistance
Power system operators need a method for selecting the in the SFCL.
proper resistance in the SFCL to increase the performance of
the power system. In this paper, we suggest a decision scheme
for determining the optimal CLR. Fig. 3 shows the decision
scheme of the optimal insertion resistance in the SFCL. We use
two factors: 1) the inrush current, whose reduction is the main
purpose of this application of the SFCL, and 2) the voltage drop
by the SFCL. The more the CLR in the SFCL increases, the
more the inrush current is reduced. However, an increase of the
CLR in the SFCL also causes a greater voltage drop. Therefore, Fig. 4. Power system with the SFCL.
these factors must be balanced when selecting the optimal CLR.
CLR. However, this paper assumes that the hybrid SFCL using
A. Prediction of the Curve of Inrush Current Versus Insertion the CLR is connected to the power system, and hence, the
Resistance and the Curve of Voltage Drop by the harmonics of the inrush current is not considered.
SFCL Versus Insertion Resistance Fig. 4 shows the power system before the connection of
the SFCL. Iinrush is the transformer inrush current, Vinrush
We predict two dependences, i.e., the curve of inrush current is the bus voltage, and Zinrush is the equivalent impedance
versus insertion resistance and that of voltage drop by the of the power system seen from the bus. After extracting the
SFCL versus insertion resistance, using the phasor of the inrush fundamental components of Iinrush and Vinrush , the phasor rep-
current and the bus voltage before the connection of the SFCL. resentations for these components are written in polar form, i.e.,
The transformer inrush current has rich harmonics as a
nonlinear phenomenon [21], [22]. The objective of the SFCL Iinrush = |Iinrush |∠θI _inrush (1)
application in this paper is the reduction of the inrush current.
Therefore, the main interest for deciding the optimal inser- Vinrush = |Vinrush |∠θV _inrush . (2)
tion resistance of the SFCL is the magnitude of the inrush
current, not the nonlinear phenomenon characteristics of the Zinrush and complex power are given by
inrush current. The resistive-type SFCL can only reduce the
fundamental components of the current. On the other hand, Vinrush |Vinrush |
Zinrush = = ∠θV _inrush − θI _inrush (3)
the reactance of the inductive-type SFCL is dependent on the Iinrush |Iinrush |
frequency. If the inductive-type SFCL for reducing the inrush ∗
S = Vinrush Iinrush
current is connected to the power system, the harmonics of
the inrush current must be considered to decide the optimal = |Vinrush ||Iinrush |∠θV _inrush − θI _inrush . (4)
2258 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED SUPERCONDUCTIVITY, VOL. 20, NO. 4, AUGUST 2010

to handle them as the same dimensions. This factor depends

Fig. 5. Power system with the SFCL.
Fig. 5 shows the power system after the connection of the
SFCL. In Fig. 5, the total impedance is
Ztotal = RSFCL + Zinrush
where RSFCL is the CLR of the SFCL. The complex power of
(4) is decided on the load capacity served from the generator
in Fig. 4. When the SFCL is connected to the power system,
the power loss by the CLR of the SFCL is much smaller than
the power consumed by the load. In particular, this is a fact
in the transmission system, as shown in Figs. 4 and 5 [23].
Therefore, assuming that the complex power is constant after
the SFCL is connected to the power system, then the inrush
current is
 −
S 2|Vinrush |
ISFCL =
Ztotal
 Therefore, to ensure the equal weight of RSFCL in (10) and

 |Vinrush ||Iinrush |∠θV _inrush − θI _inrush
= (6)
RSFCL + |V inrush |
|Iinrush | ∠θV _inrush − θI _inrush
where ISFCL is the inrush current in the system, which is
connected the SFCL.
This can be rearranged as (7) and (8), shown at the bottom of
the page. The voltage drop by the SFCL is given by
VSFCL_drop = |ISFCL |RSFCL .
In (7) and (9), we know all the variables, except for RSFCL .
Therefore, we can predict the curve of inrush current versus
insertion resistance and the curve of voltage drop by the SFCL
versus insertion resistance.
on the inrush current and the voltage drop by the SFCL as
the nonunit factor. We can evaluate the inrush current and the
voltage drop by the SFCL as a function of RSFCL by Taylor
expansion.
The Taylor series expansions for (7) and (9), respectively, are
|ISFCL |
= |Iinrush |
|Iinrush | cos(θV _inrush − θI _inrush )|Iinrush |
(5) − RSFCL
2|Vinrush |
+ ··· (10)
VSFCL_drop
= |Iinrush |RSFCL + · · · . (11)
Comparing (10) and (11), in particular, if we were to concen-
trate on the coefficient of RSFCL , the extra term is as follows:
|Iinrush | cos(θV _inrush − θI _inrush )
. (12)
(11), the desired scale factor is
 
 2|Vinrush | 
 
 |Iinrush | cos(θV _inrush − θI _inrush )  . (13)
In the step of decision of the scale factor, RSFCL is not
determined, and it does not mean that the vicinity of RSFCL =
0. After determining the scale factor, RSFCL is determined.
(9)
C. Decision of the Optimal Insertion Resistance
The product of (7) and (13) is written as
 
 2|Vinrush | 
 
 |Iinrush | cos(θV _inrush − θI _inrush )  |ISFCL |. (14)

B. Decision of the Scale Factor

The scale factor between the inrush current and the voltage
drop by the SFCL is necessary to evaluate the optimal CLR
of the SFCL because their dimensions are different. The scale
factor is a method to make an equal weighting factor for RSFCL
Fig. 6 shows the plots of (9) and (14) versus insertion resis-
tance. An acceptable crossing point of the two curves always
exists if the scaling factor is considered in (9) and (14).
The transformer inrush current causes temporary voltage sag
due to the impedance between the sources and the energized


 |Vinrush ||Iinrush |

|ISFCL | =   2  2 (7)

RSFCL + |Vinrush |
|Iinrush | cos(θ V _inrush − θ I _inrush ) + |Vinrush |
|Iinrush | sin(θ V _inrush − θ I _inrush )

 ∠θV _inrush − θI _inrush
∠ISFCL =
 |Vinrush |
(8)
 sin(θV _inrush −θI _inrush )
tan−1 |Iinrush |
|V |
RSFCL + |I inrush| cos(θV _inrush −θI _inrush )
inrush
SEO et al.: SFCL APPLICATION FOR REDUCTION OF THE TRANSFORMER INRUSH CURRENT
Fig. 6. Plots of (9) and (14) versus insertion resistance.
Fig. 7. Equivalent circuit of the system.
transformer. Fig. 7 shows the equivalent circuit of the network
between the sources and the transformer. The voltage drop by
the source impedance is
X
Vx (t) = V (t). (15)
X + Xp + Rp + Zeq
In the steady state, XC is very large so that the voltage
drop by the source impedance is little. However, when the
transformer is switched on, XC is small, and therefore, a
voltage drop in the source impedance can occur [1].
The connection of the SFCL leads to the reduction of the
inrush current, as well as the reduction of the voltage drop in the
source impedance by increasing the denominator in (15). These
are the advantages of the SFCL connection. If the CLR of the
SFCL is increased, these advantages are improved. However,
the increment of the CLR of the SFCL causes the increment
of the voltage drop by the SFCL. This is the disadvantage of
the SFCL connection. At the crossing point, the requirements
of the two factors balance each other. This point satisfies both
the reduction of the inrush current, which is an advantage of the
SFCL connection, and the voltage drop by the SFCL, which is a
disadvantage of the SFCL connection. Therefore, we can regard
the resistance of the crossing point as the optimal insertion
resistance.
The crossing point satisfies
 
 2|Vinrush |  2) a fast-switching module; and 3) a current-limiting module.
 
 |Iinrush | cos(θV _inrush − θI _inrush )  |ISFCL | = VSFCL_drop .
(16)
Finally, the optimal insertion resistance in the SFCL is
obtained by solving (16).
2259
IV. S IMULATION
A. Simulation Model [1]
A set of simulation tests is carried out in the test model of
the JJ power system model in Korea, as shown in Fig. 8. The
inrush current occurs because of the energization of JN main
transformers, which is part of the JJ power system.
Table II shows the test data of the JN Thermal/Plant (T/P)
main transformer. The test frequency is 60 Hz, the low-voltage-
side connection at the rated voltage is 13.1 kV, and the base
rated power is 124 MVA at 31 ◦ C. The percent value of the
supply voltage and the average value Io of the exciting current
are used for modeling of the transformer hysteresis.
For modeling of the transformer hysteresis using the EMTP,
first, we must acquire the current–flux points in the hysteresis
curve using the supply voltage and current in Table II. The
“L nonlinear data function” component among the components
supported in the EMTP can be used for obtaining these data.
After running, we can acquire the current–flux data in the punch
file. Second, these values are inputted to the nonlinear char-
acteristic in the “hysteresis fitter” component. After running,
the parameters for the hysteresis equation and the saturation
equation, which are the hysteresis models available in the
EMTP, are determined. Finally, these parameters are loaded in
the “hysteretic reactor” component [24].
We can estimate the hysteresis curve of Fig. 9 by connecting
the “hysteretic reactor” component to the transformer. The knee
point is (12.31, 31.2095), and this curve passes (0, 8.83496).
Therefore, the maximum remnant flux is 28.3%.
B. Decision of the Optimal Insertion Resistance
Fig. 10 shows EMTP modeling for determining the optimal
CLR of the SFCL in JN T/P. The suggested scheme is blocked
and only connected to phase A. The suggested scheme assumes
that there is only one energized transformer. However, the JN
T/P main transformer is connected in parallel, as shown in
Fig. 10. Therefore, we apply half of the scale factor, as shown
in (13).
Fig. 11 shows the dependence of the scaled ISFCL and
VSFCL_drop displayed on the same axis. In Fig. 11, the unit
on the y-axis is not presented because the unit of scale factor
×ISFCL is not existing. Based on that figure, the crossing point
is 67.94 Ω, and this is regarded as the optimal CLR of the SFCL,
as shown in Fig. 6.
C. Modeling of the SFCL
This paper models the operation characteristics of the hybrid
SFCL developed by the LS industrial system in Korea. Fig. 12
shows a circuit diagram of a hybrid SFCL. The hybrid SFCL
consists of three major modules: 1) a superconducting module;
The superconductor for the hybrid SFCL was designed using
YBCO thin film. The operating temperature is 72–77 K. YBCO
thin modules are in the quenched state at 1.1 ms and can
be recovered from the quenched state within 50 ms. The fast
switch begins to move at 1.1 ms and finishes its operation at
2260 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED SUPERCONDUCTIVITY, VOL. 20, NO. 4, AUGUST 2010

Fig. 8. JJ power system model.

TABLE II
TEST DATA OF THE JN T/P MAIN TRANSFORMER

Fig. 9. Estimated hysteresis curve.

1.8 ms. Then, the current flowing through the superconductor

becomes equal to 0 A, which is the total current flow on the
parallel line [11], [12]. Fig. 10. EMTP model for the optimal CLR of the SFCL in JN T/P.
SEO et al.: SFCL APPLICATION FOR REDUCTION OF THE TRANSFORMER INRUSH CURRENT 2261

Fig. 11. Curve of the scale factor ×ISFCL and VSFCL_drop displayed on the
same axis.

Fig. 13. Operational characteristics of the SFCL.

Fig. 12. Circuit diagram of a hybrid SFCL.

The hybrid SFCL does not need any series connections of

superconductors to meet the required CLR, which was essential
for resistive SFCLs. The superconducting elements were not
to be used for current-limiting action but for fault sensing and
commutation of the fault current to the driving coil. The com-
mutation of the fault current was established by a fast switch co-
operating with superconducting elements. The CLR in Fig. 12
should be inserted after a half-cycle, and its magnitude can
be controlled by the network’s demand. The current-limiting
module, which was denoted by “CLR” in Fig. 12, can be made
either resistive or inductive. These operation characteristics can
be described as (17) and Fig. 13 [11], [12]. The following
equation shows the resistance of the SFCL:
Fig. 14. EMTP modeling of JN T/P, including the SFCL.
⎧
⎪
⎪
0,

  12
t0 > t D. Reduction of the Inrush Current Using the SFCL
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ Rn 1 − exp t−t 0
, t0 ≤ t < t1
TF In this section, we discuss the possibility of applying the
R(t) = a(t − t ) + R , ≤ t < t2 (17)
⎪
⎪ 1 n t1 SFCL to reduce the inrush current by connecting the SFCL to
⎪
⎪ b(t − t2 ) + c, ≤ t < t3
⎪
⎩
t2 the JJ power system and simulating the inrush current.
0, t3 ≤ t. Fig. 14 shows EMTP modeling of JN T/P, including the
SFCL connected to the system. In this step, modeling of Fig. 10
The TF in (17) is a fault inception time. In Fig. 13, the time in is changed to that of Fig. 14.
the X-axis is to see the change of resistance value according To demonstrate the performance of the SFCL based on the
to the time after the occurrence of the overcurrent. suggested scheme, we simulate four cases:
The optimal CLR is denoted by RCLR , as shown in Fig. 13. 1) Case 1: without the SFCL;
The critical current of the SFCL is 1200 A. 2) Case 2: with the SFCL—optimal CLR, 67.94 Ω;
2262 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED SUPERCONDUCTIVITY, VOL. 20, NO. 4, AUGUST 2010
Fig. 15. Instantaneous waveform of the inrush current according to the
connection of the SFCL.
TABLE III
REDUCTION RATIO FOR THE FOUR CASES
Fig. 16. Per-unit value of the JN T/P bus voltage according to the CLR of the
SFCL.
3) Case 3: with the SFCL—smaller than optimal CLR,
40 Ω;
4) Case 4: with the SFCL—larger than optimal CLR,
100 Ω.
Fig. 15 depicts the instantaneous waveform of the inrush cur-
rent in the four cases, the critical current of the SFCL (1200 A),
and the rated current of the transformer (464.8 A). We find that
the inrush currents with the SFCL, i.e., in Cases 2, 3, and 4,
are lower than the inrush current without the SFCL (Case 1).
These results verify that the SFCL can be applied to reduce the
inrush current. The reason why the waveform types and peak-
to-peak values of the inrush currents with the SFCL are changed
is discussed in the Appendix. Table III shows the reduction ratio
for the four cases. The reduction ratio for Case 4 is the largest
among the four cases, followed by Case 2.
Fig. 16 depicts the per-unit value of the JN T/P bus voltage
for the four cases. Table IV shows that the SFCL has the ability
to compensate the voltage drop in the bus due to the inrush
current. The voltage compensation in Case 4 is the largest
among the four cases, followed by Case 2. In Case 4, the power
system exhibits power quality problems, as shown in Fig. 16.
When the SFCL is connected to the system, the bus voltage
exceeds 1 p.u., as shown in Fig. 16. This phenomenon occurs
because of the temporary increase in the bus voltage after the
voltage drop by the SFCL to maintain the feeding complex
TABLE IV
VOLTAGE COMPENSATION BY THE SFCL FOR THE
VOLTAGE DROP DUE TO THE INRUSH CURRENT
power from the main transformer. In Case 2 (the optimal CLR
case), however, the limit of the excess bus voltage is lower
than the setting of the overvoltage relay. Therefore, in Case 2,
this phenomenon does not cause the aforementioned problems
in the power system. In Case 4, however, the magnitudes of
the voltage swell are more severe than those of Case 2, and
the duration time of the voltage swell is longer in Case 4
compared with Case 2. Therefore, in Case 4, the power quality
deteriorates.
The optimal CLR does not only depend on the setting of
the overvoltage relay. When the larger CLR than the optimal
CLR is applied, although the bus voltage is in the range of
the rated voltage level, the magnitude and duration of the bus
voltage swell will be more severe than that of the optimal
CLR. Therefore, we can find the optimal CLR by the suggested
scheme.
E. Discussion
The optimal CLR for the suggested scheme was determined
and applied when this SFCL was connected to the JJ power sys-
tem. The inrush current was reduced by the SFCL application,
and it was possible to compensate for the voltage drop due to
the inrush current. Although the bus voltage exceeded 1 p.u. to
maintain the complex power of the system, we determined that
this behavior did not cause power quality problems.
If the CLR in the SFCL is lower than the optimal CLR, the
inrush current is larger, and the compensation for the voltage
drop is lower than in the optimal CLR case. The temporary
increase of the bus voltage in Case 3 was smaller than that in
Case 2. If the CLR in the SFCL is bigger than the optimal CLR,
the advantages of the SFCL connection, i.e., the reduction of
the inrush current and the compensation for the voltage drop,
are accentuated. The weakness of the SFCL connection, i.e., the
voltage swell for the bus voltage, however, was larger in Case 4
than in the optimal CLR case, resulting in the deterioration of
the power quality in Case 4.
The advantages and weaknesses of the SFCL connection are
balanced at the optimal CLR. We can therefore conclude that
the optimal CLR determined by the suggested scheme is an
appropriate value.
V. C ONCLUSION
Until now, various methods for reducing the inrush current
have been developed. In this paper, the SFCL was used to
reduce this current. To this end, we sought an optimal CLR for
the SFCL connection. A method for determining this solution
was suggested in this paper.
SEO et al.: SFCL APPLICATION FOR REDUCTION OF THE TRANSFORMER INRUSH CURRENT
Fig. 17. Equivalent circuit of a power system during an inrush current.
The suggested scheme was implemented and verified using
the JJ power system in Korea by EMTP simulation. EMTP
simulation determined that the optimal CLR was 67.94 Ω. The
SFCL was modeled using this CLR and was then connected to
the power system. The simulation results show that the SFCL
has the ability to reduce the inrush current and to compensate
for the voltage drop of the bus voltage due to the inrush current.
A PPENDIX A
C HANGE OF WAVEFORM D UE TO THE
C ONNECTION OF THE SFCL
Consider the network of Fig. 17 representing a voltage source
supplying a power system modeled by an equivalent resistance
in series with an inductance [25].
If the voltage source is of the form
V (t) = Vpeak sin(ωt + θ)
the current in the circuit, when the switch is closed, will be
 
ωt
i(t) = Ipeak sin(ωt + θ − θZ ) − sin(θ − θZ ) exp −
X/R
with
θZ = tan−1 (X/R) = tan−1 (ωL/R).
A null dc offset will occur when
θ − θZ = nπ, n = 0, 1, 2, 3, . . .
and the current waveform becomes
i(t) = Ipeak sin(ωt).
A maximum dc offset will occur when
π with dispersed generators,” IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 17, no. 2,
θ − θZ = n , n = 1, 3, 5, . . .
2 [18] C.-H. Kim, M.-H. Lee, R. K. Aggarwal, and A. T. Johns, “Educational
with the current waveform equal to
  
t
i(t) = Ipeak cos(ωt) − exp − . (24)
L/R
When the SFCL is not connected to the power system, the
current waveform is (24). If the resistance value in (24) due
to the hybrid SFCL modeled in this paper is larger, the term
2263
exp(−(t/L/R)) in (24) is smaller. Therefore, as shown in
Fig. 14, the current waveform approaches the waveform of the
sinusoidal type, and the peak-to-peak value is larger.
R EFERENCES
[1] H. C. Seo, C. H. Kim, Y. S. Lyu, and B. S. Cho, “The analysis of power
quality effects from the transformer inrush current: A case study of the
Jeju Power System, Korea,” in Proc. IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Gen. Meet.,
Jul. 20–24, 2008, pp. 1–6.
[2] S.-D. Cho, “Three-phase transformer model and parameter estimation for
ATP,” J. Elect. Eng. Technol., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 302–307, 2006.
[3] M. Nagpal, T. G. Marinich, A. Moshref, K. Morison, and P. Kundur,
“Assessing and limiting impact of transformer inrush current on power
quality,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 890–896, Apr. 2006.
[4] Y. Cui, G. Abdulsalam, S. Chen, and W. Xu, “A sequential phase en-
ergization technique for transformer inrush current reduction—Part I:
Simulation and experimental results,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 20,
no. 2, pp. 943–949, Apr. 2005.
[5] J. H. Brunke and K. J. Fröhlich, “Elimination of transformer inrush cur-
rents by controlled switching—Part I: Theoretical considerations,” IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 276–280, Apr. 2001.
[6] J. H. Brunke and K. J. Fröhlich, “Elimination of transformer inrush
currents by controlled switching—Part II: Application and performance
considerations,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 281–285,
Apr. 2001.
[7] S. W. Yim, H. R. Kim, O. B. Hyun, and J. Sim, “Quench and recovery
characteristics of Au/YBCO thin film type SFCL,” Phys. C, vol. 463–465,
pp. 1172–1175, Oct. 2007.
[8] H.-R. Kim, H.-S. Choi, H.-R. Lim, I.-S. Kim, and O.-B. Hyun, “Resis-
tance of superconducting fault current limiters based on YBa2 Cu3 O7 thin
films after quench completion,” Phys. C, vol. 372–376, pp. 1606–1609,
Aug. 2002.
[9] H.-R. Kim, S.-W. Yim, S.-Y. Oh, and O.-B. Hyun, “Recovery in supercon-
ducting fault current limiter at low applied voltages,” IEEE Trans. Appl.
Supercond., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 656–659, Jun. 2008.
[10] H.-R. Kim, O.-B. Hyun, H.-S. Choi, S.-D. Cha, and J.-M. Oh, “Resistance
development in superconducting fault current limiters prior to quench
(18) completion,” IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 2032–
2035, Jun. 2003.
[11] B. W. Lee, K. B. Park, J. Sim, I. S. Oh, H. G. Lee, H. R. Kim, and
O. B. Hyun, “Design and experiments of novel hybrid type superconduct-
 ing fault current limiters,” IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 18, no. 2,
pp. 624–627, Jun. 2008.
[12] G.-H. Lee, K.-B. Park, J. Sim, Y.-G. Kim, I.-S. Oh, O.-B. Hyun, and
B.-W. Lee, “Hybrid superconducting fault current limiter of the first half
(19) cycle non-limiting type,” IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 19, no. 3,
pp. 1888–1891, Jun. 2009.
[13] L. Kovalsky, X. Yuan, K. Tekletsadik, A. Keri, J. Bock, and F. Breuer,
“Applications of superconducting fault current limiters in electric power
(20) transmission systems,” IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 15, no. 2,
pp. 2130–2133, Jun. 2005.
[14] L. Ye, L. Z. Lin, and K.-P. Juengst, “Application studies of superconduct-
ing fault current limiters in electric power system,” IEEE Trans. Appl.
Supercond., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 900–903, Mar. 2002.
(21) [15] H. Shimizu, K. Mutsuura, Y. Yokomizu, and T. Matsumura, “Inrush-
current-limiting with high Tc superconductor,” IEEE Trans. Appl.
Supercond., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 2071–2073, Jun. 2005.
[16] H. Yamaguchi and T. Kataoka, “Effect of magnetic saturation on the
current limiting characteristics of transformer type superconducting fault
(22) current limiter,” IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 691–
694, Jun. 2006.
[17] T. Sato, M. Yamaguchi, T. Terashima, S. Fukui, J. Ogawa, H. Shimizu,
and T. Sato, “Study on the effect of fault current limiter in power system
(23) pp. 2331–2334, Jun. 2007.
use of EMTP MODELS for the study of a distance relaying algorithm for
protecting transmission lines,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, no. 1,
pp. 9–15, Feb. 2000.
[19] C.-H. Kim, J.-Y. Heo, and R. K. Aggarwal, “An enhanced zone 3 algo-
rithm of a distance relay using transients components and state diagram,”
IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 39–46, Jan. 2005.
[20] S.-P. Ahn, C.-H. Kim, N.-O. Park, H.-J. Ju, and E.-B. Shim, “The ade-
quacy analysis for installation of high speed grounding switches on the
Korean 765 kV single transmission line,” J. Elect. Eng. Technol., vol. 1,
no. 4, pp. 427–434, 2006.
2264 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED SUPERCONDUCTIVITY, VOL. 20, NO. 4, AUGUST 2010
[21] E. Acha and M. Madrigal, Power System Harmonics. New York: Wiley,
2001, pp. 228–230.
[22] Y. Wang, S. G. Abdulsalam, and W. Xu, “Analytical formula to estimate
the maximum inrush current,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 23, no. 2,
pp. 1266–1268, Apr. 2008.
[23] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1994, pp. 727–728.
[24] S. Dennetière, J. Mahseredjian, M. Martinez, M. Rioual, and A. Xémard,
“On the implementation of a hysteretic reactor model in EMTP,” in Proc.
Int. Conf. Power Syst. Transients, 2003.
[25] G. Benmouyal, “Removal of DC-offset in current waveforms using digital
mimic filtering,” IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 621–630,
Apr. 1995.
Hun-Chul Seo (S’08) was born in Korea in 1982. He received the B.S. and M.S.
degrees from Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Korea, in 2004 and 2006,
respectively. He is currently working toward the D.S. degree.
His research interests include power system transients, protection, and
stability.
Chul-Hwan Kim (M’90–SM’04) was born in Korea in 1961. He received the
B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from Sungkyunkwan
University, Suwon, Korea, in 1982, 1984, and 1990, respectively.
In 1990, he joined Cheju National University, Cheju, Korea, as a Full-
time Lecturer. In 1996, 1998, and 1999, he was a Visiting Academic at the
University of Bath, Bath, U.K. Since March 1992, he has been a Professor in
the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University,
where he is also currently the Director of the Center for Power IT. His research
interests include power system protection, artificial intelligence applications for
protection and control, modeling/protection of underground cables, and EMTP
software.
Sang-Bong Rhee (M’99) was born in Korea on February 22, 1968. He received
the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees from Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea, in
1994, 1999, and 2004, respectively.
He is currently a Research Professor in the School of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Korea. His research interests
include distribution system control and operation, and artificial intelligence
applications to power system protection.
Jae-Chul Kim (S’87–M’88) received the B.S.E.E. degree from Soongsil
University, Seoul, Korea, in 1979, and the M.S.E.E. and Ph.D. degrees from
Seoul National University, Seoul, in 1983 and 1987, respectively.
Since 1988, he has been with the School of Electrical Engineering, Soongsil
University, where he is currently a Professor. His research interests include
power quality, power system reliability, demand response, dispersed generation,
distribution automation systems, asset management, power system diagnosis,
electric railway systems, and superconducting fault current limiters.
Ok-Bae Hyun received the Ph.D. degree in solid-state physics from Iowa State
University, Ames, in 1987.
He worked with material processing and physical properties of high-
temperature superconductors (HTS) at Ames Laboratory until 1991. Between
1991 and 1995, he continued the research, particularly on flux dynamics of HTS
at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, Boulder, CO, and the
International Superconductivity Technology Center. He joined the HTS power
application team of the Korea Electric Power Research Institute, Daejeon,
Korea, a research institution of Korea Electric Power Corporation, as a Principal
Member of the Technical Staff. He currently concentrates on the development
and application of an SFCL.