Controlled Switching and Circuit Breaker
Monitoring
Marc Lacroix Eng, M. Eng.
Senior Member IEEE
VIZIMAX Inc.
Longueuil, Canada
Abstract— Power systems require modifications to the
network’s topology or isolation of major electrical
equipment. These switching operations generate inrush
currents and voltage disturbances on the electrical
network that may affect the network stability, produce
stresses on the power apparatus and accelerate the
circuit breaker (CB) wearing.
These transients and their negative consequences can be
mitigated by control switching (CS). Furthermore, real-
time circuit breaker monitoring allows power utilities to
anticipate to an event and evaluate equipment
performance.
Keywords— control switching; circuit breaker;
monitoring; transients; inrush
I. INTRODUCTION
Operations can cause inrush current or restrike inside
the breaker and often generate important disturbances
on the electric network. These transients can cause
electrical and mechanical stresses on the power
equipment and decrease its life expectancy.
Moreover, the energy quality and the grid stability
can be affected.
Utilities have used CS as an effective inrush current
mitigation technique for the high-voltage (HV) power
systems. New technological advances have led to the
development of affordable controlled switching
device (CSD) for medium voltage applications.
Twenty five years on the field have demonstrated
several benefits that can be expected by transmission,
distribution and generation utilities, as a CSD:
Andrea Gutierrez Eng, M. Eng.
VIZIMAX Inc.
Longueuil, Canada
x Improves the system’s power quality and
grid stability;
x Decreases electrical and mechanical stress
on electrical apparatus;
x Decreases equipment failures;
x Avoids undesired protection trips;
x Lowers maintenance costs;
x Extends the lifespan of existing assets;
During several years, utilities have used this evolving
technology to switch shunt reactors, shunt capacitor
banks and unloaded power transformers.
This paper describes how circuit breaker switching
can generate transients and how controlled switching
mitigates them. It illustrates benefits of this approach
and includes a description of Hydro-Québec’s
experience using controlled switching for over twenty
years.
II. SWITCHING TRANSIENTS
Inrush current and voltage transients are direct results
of energizing reactive loads at the wrong moment.
Moreover, restrikes can occur when de-energizing
shunt reactors with insufficient arcing time, thereby
threatening the physical integrity of the apparatus.
The following sections describe transients phenomena
during switching of capacitors banks, reactors or
power transformers.
A. Capacitor bank energization
Mechanically Switched Capacitors (MSC) or
Mechanically Switched Capacitors with Damping
Network (MSCDN) are widely deployed by power
utilities for reactive power compensation, voltage
control and power factor improvement.
Random switching of capacitors banks may generate
transients caused by the voltage level difference
between the capacitor and the power system.
Fig. 1. Disturbances caused by the energization of a capacitor bank
Figure 1 shows a capacitive load’s uncontrolled
energization causing inrush current on the network.
High-frequency oscillations may develop as well.
These inrush currents and voltage disturbances
accelerate the wearing of the circuit breakers and the
capacitors banks.
B. Shunt reactor de-energization
Mechanically Switched Reactors (MSR) systems are
used to regulate the reactive power balance and to
control voltage level on power lines. In the case of
shunt reactor switching, its inductive characteristics
cause an opposition to the sudden
current change.
Figure 2 illustrates a shunt reactor uncontrolled de-
energization. The contacts separation inside the
breaker is not optimal when the breaker opens. As a
consequences CB restrike occurs, load current is
decreased and excessive energy is dissipated causing
premature CB wear.
Fig. 2. Opening a shunt inductance breaker with reignition event
2
C. Transformer Energization
Uncontrolled power transformer energization may
cause significant inrush current, voltages disturbances
and stress on the equipment.
This inrush current formation is caused by residual
flux inside the transformer. The sum of the voltage
component caused by residual flux, plus the level of
voltage in the transformer’s input produce
overvoltage.
Figure 3 shows field results of a 31.5 MVA power
transformer uncontrolled energization.
Fig. 3. Inrush current when random closing of a transformer’s
circuit breaker
III. CONTROLLED SWITCHING APPROACH
Mitigation techniques must be used more and more
often. Circuit Breaker Controlled Switching (CBCS)
is a powerful solution that allows precise control of
the CB opening and/or closing to minimize
disturbances. Taking the voltage or current as a
reference, the CSD is used to open and/or close the
CB at an optimum electrical switching target. This
target is selected according to the load type, the CB
characteristics and operating conditions such as
ambient temperature, the CB’s control voltage level,
the idle time since the last operation and drive
mechanism pressure, if applicable. It also takes into
consideration past operations history (adaptive
control). This way, the CSD can predict the CB's
timing behavior and adjust the CB’s timing variation
caused by electrical and mechanical wear.
Figure 4 shows an example of a controlled switching
device (CSD) implementation.
 C/B control coils
For power The arc duration must be long enough for the
dielectric strength recovery to exceed the overvoltage
SW CT SW transformers only
Source/
Bus CB Load

PT PT or Bushing across the CB contacts. To achieve this target, the

CVPT

Open
V 52a/b I VL CSD ensures that the CB contact gap occurs soon
Close
Discrete Inputs
Open cmd after the zero current crossing, thereby providing
Close cmd
Station Power
Mode sufficient dielectric strength to sustain the
battery
Annunciator/ Alarms
Ethernet
communication overvoltage.
RTU
4-20mA USB or
Ethernet
C/B Compensation
Sensors (temperature,
pressure)
Local
maintenance Figure 6 illustrates an example of shunt reactor de-
Fig. 4. Typical CSD implementation energization using controlled switching

This paper considers major switching cases such as

capacitor bank, shunt reactor and power transformer.

A. Capacitor Bank energization

Establish the electrical conduction at the precise
moment when the network’s voltage is equal to the
capacitor’s bank voltage, is the optimal moment to
eliminate inrush currents when energizing the
capacitor bank. In order to control partially
discharged capacitors banks energization, the CSD
must adapt to the discharging curve of the capacitor Fig. 6. De-energization of a shunt reactor using controlled
bank. switching

Figure 5 illustrates a capacitor banks controlled C. Transformer energization

energization. It can be noticed that the inrush current
is mitigated. In this case, CS mitigate the inrush current and
network overvoltage that are mainly related to the
CB’s closing time and to the remaining residual flux
in the transformer’s core after its previous de-
energization. The optimal closing target is different
for each operation and depends on the residual flux.

Even if the power transformer de-energization was

uncontrolled, the re-energization must be controlled
and take into account its residual flux.

During many years, this evolving technology was

reserved to independent pole operated (IPO) CB.
Now, it is also successfully applied to reduce inrush
current when using simultaneous pole operated CB
(gang operated: GO).
Fig. 5. Capacitor banks controlled energization
Figure 7 shows field result of a 31.5 MVA power
B. Shunt reactor de-energization transformer controlled energization using a gang-
operated CB. It can be noted that the inrush current is
The primary purpose of the CSD is to decrease the mitigated.
probability of CB restrike and re-ignition, thereby
avoiding fast overvoltage transients on the reactor
insulation. In this case, the best strategy is to pick the
optimal moment to open the breaker in order to
eliminate restrike events.

3

Fig. 7. Inrush current when controlled closing of a transformer’s
circuit breaker
Figure 8 shows the average inrush current during
eighteen transformer energization using three
different strategies. The operations fifteen to eighteen
were done with the most effective inrush current
mitigation technique that uses a CSD that takes
residual flux into account.
Fig. 8. Comparison of inrush currents (PU)
IV. CB AND CSD MONITORING
The CSD acquires real-time monitoring of substation
equipment, evaluates their performance and provides
direction regarding future maintenance and repairs.
This information can be manage through a secure
operation interface or may be integrated to a SCADA.
It provides access to collected and stored operating
data to schedule predictive maintenance and avoiding
costly system downtimes.
The CSD generates events and alarms related to all
switching operations. Alarms and events indicate CB
degradation of performances and
mechanical/electrical problems.
Figure 9 illustrates the CSD waveform recorder.
4
Fig. 9. Residual flux of transformer’s phase while C/B opening
V. CONTROLLED SWITCHING BENEFITS
In 2004, CIGRÉ WG A3.07 produced a technical
brochure about the CS benefits & economic aspects
[4] and the following benefits were concluded on this
study.
By mitigating transients, CS:
x Increases of equipment life expectancy.
x Reduces maintenance cost.
x Reduces stress on power equipment.
x Reduces failure risk.
x Increases the power quality and reliability.
x Has a positive impact on capital investment.
Since the equipment’s lifespan is increased,
its replacement can be delayed for many
years.
VI. HYDRO-QUÉBEC EXPERIENCE
Hydro-Québec was one of the first major users of
controlled switching devices. For over twenty years,
Hydro-Québec has been using CS for the attenuation
and elimination of switching transients.
During all these years, CSD has proved their positive
impact on maintenance strategies, extension of the
useful life of the existing CB and prevention of its
costly replacement.
Initially used for shunt reactors, then for shunt
capacitor banks, this proven technology is now often
applied to the energization of unloaded power
transformers, as well.
These systems have been commissioned in Hydro-
Québec’s transmission network on more than 245
CBs from a variety of manufacturers and technologies
at various voltage levels from 120 kV to 735 kV, and
under extreme environmental conditions on the CBs,
ranging from -40 °C to +40 °C.
Hydro-Québec’s long-term experience has proved
that these systems are reliable and stable over the
long term. It also confirms that precise control of
bulky and heavy circuit breakers is not only feasible,
but can also extend the life of existing equipment. In
fact, controlled switching has proven to be the
optimal solution, provided that diligent CSD
commissioning, ongoing system monitoring and CB
maintenance are performed.
VII. CONCLUSION
With more dynamic electrical network management,
transients produced during an ever increasing number
of CB operations are a threat to the energy reliability,
availability and quality.
CS has proved to be a reliable and cost effective
alternative to minimize negative impacts of transients
on the power system. Moreover, it provides extensive
monitoring and auto-diagnosis of the system that
allow event anticipation. CS has become a smart
system that can detect timing problems and adverse
operating conditions which could eventually lead to
catastrophic failures.
switching. CIGRÉ session #13/14/36-01, 2000.
[3] CIGRÉ WG 36.05/CIRED 2 CC02. Capacitor
switching and its impact on power quality.
ELECTRA No. 195, April 2001, pages 27-37.
[4] CIGRÉ Working Group A3.07. Controlled
switching of HVAC circuit breakers: Benefits &
economic aspects. CIGRÉ TB 262, 2004.
[5] CIGRÉ Working Group A3.07. Controlled
switching of HVAC circuit breakers: Guidance
for further applications including unloaded
transformer switching, load and fault
interruption and circuit-breaker uprating.
CIGRÉ TB 263, 2004.
[6] CIGRÉ Working Group A3.07. Controlled
switching of HVAC circuit breakers: Planning,
specification and testing of controlled switching
systems. CIGRÉ TB 264, 2004.
[7] R.J. Rajotte, et al. Controlled switching of 735-
kV reactor circuit breakers at Hydro-Québec.
CIGRÉ session #13-201, 1996.
[8] A. Mercier, Y. Filion, E. Portales, A. Salibi.
Transformer controlled switching taking into
account the core residual flux: A real case study.
CIGRÉ session #13-201, 2002.

This approach has a positive impact on capital

expenditures since equipment`s life expectancy is
increased and its replacement can be delayed for
many years.

During the last thirty years, several utilities have

experienced real benefits on HV systems by using
CS. Thanks to recent technological advances, MV
systems can now benefit from the advantages of this
technology that was previously reserved for HV
systems.

REFERENCES
[1] R. Smeets, et al. Switching in Electrical
Transmission and Distribution Systems. Wiley,
2015.
[2] M. Stanek, A.C. Carvalho, et al. Experience
with improving power quality by controlled