energies
Article
Superconducting Surge Current Limiter
Sławomir Kozak






Citation: Kozak, S. Superconducting
Surge Current Limiter. Energies 2021,
14, 6944. https://doi.org/10.3390/
en14216944
Academic Editor: Andrea Mariscotti
Received: 5 August 2021
Accepted: 4 October 2021
Published: 22 October 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the author.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Energies 2021, 14, 6944. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14216944
Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science, Department of Electrical Engineering and Electrotechnology,
Lublin University of Technology, 38A Nadbystrzycka St., 20-618 Lublin, Poland; s.kozak@pollub.pl
Abstract: A superconducting fault current limiter (SFCL) for medium voltage networks cooled by
a cryocooler was designed, built and tested by the current author. For the construction of this
limiter, a high-temperature second generation superconducting tape (HTS 2G)—SF12100—was used.
In this limiter, it is possible to change the working temperature. The possibility of changing the
operating temperature allows for adjusting the parameters of the limiter to the electric power needs.
Adjusting the parameters of the limiter to the power needs is a key problem to solve, resulting
from the ambiguous characteristics of HTS tapes. Cooling with a cryocooler is the only solution
in the case of a limiter for power industry applications. The electric power mechanism does not
tolerate any liquids. After analyzing the experimental results and after analyzing the results from
the numerical models of the limiter, the concepts of using superconductors to limit current in the
power industry were changed: the transition from a superconducting fault current limiter (SFCL) to
a superconducting surge current limiter (SSCL). Transition to the limiter operation system—surge
current limitation—is associated with the reduction in the limiter operation time. The advantages of
the transition from the SFCL to SSCL work system are presented.
Keywords: SFCL; SSCL; HTS tape; short-circuit current
1. Introduction
A superconducting fault current limiter—SFCL—for medium voltage networks cooled
by a cryocooler, financed by the National Fund for Environmental Protection and Water
Management and the National Center for Research and Development, under the project:
GEKON2/O2/267193/13/2015, was designed, built and tested with the participation of
the author [1–3].
This SFCL is built with the use of a second generation high-temperature supercon-
ducting tape (HTS 2G)—SF12100 (SuperPower Inc., 21 Airport Road, Glenville, NY 12302,
USA) Both superconducting windings of the limiter have 28.5 turns of the superconducting
tape SF12100. Each winding has 66 m of the HTS tape wound in opposite directions and
connected in parallel. The terminals of the windings are situated on the internal side of the
windings structure and are connected to the current leads [3]. The currents leads and the
superconducting windings are cooled by cryocooler KDE400SA. The ceramic insulators
of the current leads assure good thermal transfer and electrical insulation. The fiberglass
structure of the superconducting windings is light and nonconductive of electrical current.
The copper plates (76.8 kg) incised into vertical stripes ensure good conductive cooling
of the windings and reduce the eddy currents’ losses [3]. The SFCL winding diameter is
0.736 m and the winding height is 0.44 m. A LakeShore 218 Temperature Monitor with
Cernox sensors is used to measure the temperature of SFCL. Cernox sensors are attached
to the copper plates.
Contrary to the previous limiters for medium voltage networks built and tested by
the author [4–9], in which a cooling system in a liquid nitrogen bath was used, with a
constant operating temperature of the limiter of 77.4 K, there is a possibility of changing
the operating temperature.
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies
Energies 2021, 14, 6944 2 of 17

Table 1 shows the SFCL design parameters according to [3]. In fact, the electrical
parameters of the constructed SFCL are better than the design parameters [3] (Table 1). The
reason for this is described in Chapter 4.

Table 1. Parameters of SFCL windings (2× SF12100 HTS tapes) at 77.4 K [3].

Parameters Description Value

nominal voltage 6 kV
nominal current 140 A
overload current 420 A
critical current 600 A
voltage per 1 m tape length 52.5 V
length of HTS tape per winding 66 m
length of single turn 2.31 m
winding height 0.44 m
winding diameter 0.736 m
number of turns 28.5

As seen in the References, publications [1–17] are used in this article. I included
another ten new publications from 2021 [18–27] (selected out of many publications), which
shows that the topic of SFCL is still relevant and many people around the World are
researching it.
The article [20] presents the idea of the SFCL design, similar to the described limiter,
but the made, small limiter is similar to that constructed by my laboratory in 2013. The
described limiter is to be used in electric propulsion aircrafts. High-voltage limiters are
described in articles [18,23,27]. The articles [22,27] present the limiter operating in the DC
system. Current limiting in a DC system is not a problem. The problem is the disconnection
of the limiter because the limited current does not cross zero, as in the case of an AC system.
The articles [18,19,21,26,27] describe a different design of the limiter winding than in the
case of the SFCL from this article. In articles [24,25], some problems related to the operation
of medium voltage SFCLs were described. In the selected articles, the limiters were not
cooled with the use of a cryocooler. These limiters were cooled mainly with liquid nitrogen.

2. Conclusions after Short-Circuit Tests

The SFCL tested in the Short-Circuit Endurance Testing Laboratory of the Institute
of Electrical Engineering in Warsaw was the third medium voltage limiter built by the
author [1–3] (Figure 1).
Previous limiters (Figure 2) were also tested in this Short-Circuit Endurance Testing
Laboratory. The analysis of the causes of the failure of the two previous limiters allows one
to design a good limiter, which was not damaged after three short-circuit tests. These were
not “laboratory” short-circuit tests. The power of the short-circuit generator was 2.5 GVA.
The short-circuit current, without limiter, was set to 81.24 kA.
Before the short-circuit test, all sensors were disconnected. This was due to the
enormous power generated in the limiter during the limitation of the short-circuit (Figure 3)
and the medium voltage that could damage the measuring instruments. A few minutes
after the sensors had been disconnected, a short-circuit test was carried out. A few minutes
after the short-circuit test, the measuring sensors were turned on and the data were
saved. If the temperature of the limiter was lower than the critical temperature of the HTS
tape, the measuring instruments were disconnected again and another short-circuit test
was performed.
Three short-circuit tests were successfully carried out, starting at T0 = 72 K (Figure 4).
The second short-circuit test started at the limiter temperature T0 = 80 K (Figure 5), and
the third one at the temperature T0 = 86 K (Figure 6). After the third short-circuit test, the
temperature of the limiter rose to a level higher than the critical temperature of the HTS
tape and the short-circuit tests were completed.
 Previous limiters (Figure 2) were also tested in this Short-Circuit Endurance Testing Laboratory. The analysis of
the causes of the failure of the two previous limiters allows one to design a good limiter, which was not damaged3  of  19 
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 
 
after three
Energies short-circuit
2021, 14, 6944 tests. These were not “laboratory” short-circuit tests. The power of the short-circuit 3 of 17

generator was 2.5 GVA. The short-circuit current, without limiter, was set to 81.24 kA.

 
Figure 1. The third medium voltage SFCL tested in the Short‐Circuit Endurance Testing Laboratory 
Figure 1. The third medium voltage SFCL tested in the Short-Circuit Endurance Testing Laboratory
of the Institute of Electrical Engineering in Warsaw. 
of the Institute of Electrical Engineering in Warsaw.
Figure 1. The third medium voltage SFCL tested in the Short-Circuit Endurance Testing Laboratory of the Institute of
Electrical Engineering in Warsaw.

   

Figure 2. The first and second medium voltage SFCL [4,5,6,7,8,9]. 
Figure 2. The first and second medium voltage SFCL [4–9].

 
 Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW  5  of  23 
 
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW  5  of  23 
 
Energies 2021, 14, 6944 4 of 17

Figure 3. Changes of the

Figure power generated
3. Changes in the
of the power HTS tape
generated in theofHTS
the tape
limiter during
of the a during
limiter short-circuit (0 s–0.08
a short-circuit s) for
(0–0.08 s) the
initial temperature of the limiter before short-circuit = 72 K (first short-circuit test–Figure 4).
for the initial temperature of the limiter before short-circuit = 72 K (first short-circuit test—Figure 4).

Figure 3. Changes of the power generated in the HTS tape of the limiter during a short-circuit (0 s–0.08 s) for the
initial temperature of the limiter before short-circuit = 72 K (first short-circuit test–Figure 4).

Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW  6  of  23 

 
Figure 4. The course of the short-circuit current and the measured voltage at the limiter—short-circuit
test No. 1. (T0 = 72 K). I—current, U—voltage.
Figure 4. The course of the short-circuit current and the measured voltage at the limiter—short-circuit test No. 1. (T0
= 72 K). I–current, U–voltage.

Figure 4. The course of the short-circuit current and the measured voltage at the limiter—short-circuit test No. 1. (T0
= 72 K). I–current, U–voltage.

 
Figure 5. The course of the short-circuit current and the measured voltage at the limiter—short-circuit
test No. 2. (T0 = 80 K). I—current, U—voltage.
Figure 5. The course of the short-circuit current and the measured voltage at the limiter—short-circuit test No. 2. (T0
= 80 K). I–current, U–voltage.
 
 Figure
Energies 2021, 14, 6944 5. The course of the short-circuit current and the measured voltage at the limiter—short-circuit
5 of 17 test N
= 80 K). I–current, U–voltage.

Figure 6. The course of the short-circuit current and the measured voltage at the limiter—short-circuit
test No. 3. (T = 86 K). I—current, U—voltage.
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 0
 
Figure 6. The course ofFigure
the short-circuit current current
7 shows short-circuit and thewaveform
measuredinvoltage atsystem
the tested the limiter—short-circuit
without SFCL and test N
= 861,K).
with SFCL (short-circuit test No. T0 =I–current, U–voltage.
72 K, Figure 4).

Figure 7. Short-circuit current waveform in the tested system without SFCL and with SFCL—short-
circuit test No. 1. (T0 = 72 K).

Figure 7. Short-circuit current

Duringwaveform in thetests
the short-circuit tested system
in the withoutEndurance
Short-Circuit SFCL andTesting
with SFCL—short-circuit
Laboratory, only te
(T0 =recorded
the current and voltage at the limiter were 72 K). (Figures 4–7). Therefore, a numerical
analysis of the operation of the limiter was necessary [1,2,7,11,12]. The geometry and
electrical circuit diagram of the numerical model are presented in Figure 8. The geometric
parameters of the areas of the numerical model are shown in Table 2. The numerical model
of the SFCL was developed using the FLUX2D program. The numerical model allows the
analysis of electromagnetic and thermal phenomena occurring in a SFCL located in the
short-circuit circuit.
Energies 2021, 14, 6944 6 of 17

Figure 8. (a) Geometry of the numerical model (proportions are not correct). The sizes are in Table 2. (b) Electrical circuit
diagram of the numerical model.

Table 2. Geometric parameters of the areas of the numerical model.

SC1 SC2 CU1 CU2 IZ1 IZ2 IZ3

material SF12100 SF12100 copper copper insulation insulation insulation
inner radius (m) 0.368 0.368605 0.3665 0.36971 0.3675 0.368105 0.36871
thickness (m) 0.000105 0.000105 0.001 0.001 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005
height (m) 0.4395 0.4395 0.4395 0.4395 0.4395 0.4395 0.4395
number of turns 28.5 28.5 - - - - -

Electromagnetic calculations were carried out in the transient magnetic module cou-
pled with the external circuit and in the transient thermal module. In each calculation
step, the temperature of the HTS windings was calculated and the resistance of these
windings in the external circuit was changed depending on the current and temperature,
taking into account the heat distribution between the areas SC1, SC2 and IZ1, IZ2, IZ3,
CU1, CU2 (Figure 8a). The necessary parameters (1T, 2T, 1TIZ, 2TIZ, 1TCU, 2TCU) used
for the calculation of the heat balance are stored in additional auxiliary electrical circuits
(Figure 8b). Table 3 presents the parameters used in the SFCL numerical model, defined by
existing functions or defined by a user function (User ()). Some parameters have values
assigned to them.
During the first test, at the 72 K initial temperature, the current was limited in the short-
circuit circuit from 81.24 kA (without the limiter) to a maximum of 1.9 kA (Figures 4, 7, 9 and 10).
During the second short-circuit test, which was carried out at the 80 K initial temperature
(Figures 5, 9 and 10), the current was limited from 81.24 kA to 1 kA. The third test was
carried out at the 86 K initial temperature and the maximum limited current was similar to
the current in the second short-circuit test (Figures 6, 9 and 10).
Energies 2021, 14, 6944 7 of 17

Table 3. Parameters of numerical model.

Name Definition
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW  1R Max(0.00000000001, R1) 9 
 
2R Max(0.00000000001, R2)
R_ZW 0.00776
L_ZW 0.00035
T1 U(1T)
1T Max(T0, E1)
2T Max(T0, E2)
T2 U(2T)
1TCU Max(T0, E1CU)
TCU1 U(1TCU)
2TCU Max(T0, E2CU)
1TIZ Max(T0, E1IZ)
TCU2 U(2TCU)
2TIZ Max(T0, E2IZ)
TIZ1 E1
U(1TIZ) User(11, I(1R), T1, U(1R), SK, TCU1, TIZ1, T0)
E2 User(12, I(2R), T2, U(2R), SK, TCU2, TIZ2, T0)
TIZ2 U(2TIZ)
E1CU User(13, 0, TCU1, 0, SK, T1, TIZ1, T0)
E2CU User(14, 0, TCU2, 0, SK, T2, TIZ2, T0)
SK 0.00001
E1IZ
· Valid(TIME, 0, 0.00301) + SK2
User(15, 0, TIZ1, 0, SK, T1, T2, T0)
0.0005
E2IZ · Valid(TIME, 0.00301, User(16,
0.1301)0,+TIZ2,
0.005 · Valid(TIME,
0, SK, T1, T2, T0) 0.1301,
SK2 R1 User(1, I(1R), T1, U(1R), SK, 0, 0, T0)
31)
R2 User(2, I(2R), T2, U(2R), SK, 0, 0, T0)
1A_1–1A_6 1 T0 72, 80, 86
T1 U(1T)
V_SIECI Sqrt(2)
T2 · 3520 · Sin(314.159265 · TIME) U(2T)
TCU1 U(1TCU)
TCU2 U(2TCU)
During the first test, at the 72 KTIZ1
initial temperature, the current was limited in the short-circuit circuit from 81.2
U(1TIZ)
kA (without the limiter) to a maximum
TIZ2 of 1.9 kA (Figures 4,7,9 and 10).U(2TIZ) During the second short-circuit test,
SK 0.00001 · Valid(TIME, 0, 0.00301) + SK2
which was carried out at the 80 K initial temperature (Figures
0.0005 5,9 and
· Valid(TIME, 10), the
0.00301, current
0.1301) was
+ 0.005 limited from 81.24 k
· Valid(TIME,
SK2
to 1 kA. The third test was carried out at the 86 K initial temperature and0.1301, the maximum
31) limited current was sim
1A_1–1A_6 1
to the current in the second short-circuit
V_SIECI test (Figures 6,9 and 10).· 3520 · Sin(314.159265 · TIME)
Sqrt(2)

Figure 9. Currents in the short-circuit circuit with a limiter (SFCL) placed in it, cooled to 72 K,
80 K and 86 K, and in the circuit without the limiter (without_SFCL). Time from 0 s to 0.08 s
Figure 9. Currents in the short-circuit
(numerical analysis).circuit with a limiter (SFCL) placed in it, cooled to 72 K, 80 K and 86
K, an
the circuit without the limiter (without_SFCL). Time from 0 s to 0.08 s (numerical analysis)
Energies 2021, Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 
14, 6944 8 of 17 10  of  23
 

Figure 10. Currents in the short-circuit circuit with a limiter (SFCL) placed in it, cooled to 72 K,
80 K and 86 K, and in the circuit without the limiter (without_SFCL). Time from 0 s to 0.01 s
Figure 10. Currents in the short-circuit
(numerical analysis). circuit with a limiter (SFCL) placed in it, cooled to 72 K, 80 K and 86 K, and
in the circuit
Thewithout the limiter
waveforms (without_SFCL).
of the current during theTime from 0ofsthe
limitation to 0.01 s (numerical
short-circuit analysis)
depend largely
on the initial temperature of the limiter as shown in Figures 4–7, 9 and 10. The lower the
The waveforms of the current
initial duringthe
temperature, thegreater
limitation of the short-circuit
the maximum depend
current. The largely current
maximum on the initial temperature
increases with of
the limiter as shown in Figures
the increase 4–7,critical
in the 9 andcurrent
10. Thewhen
lowerthethetemperature
initial temperature, the 80
is less than greater
K. Forthe maximum current.
temperatures
above 80 K, the maximum short-circuit current remains around 1 kA, regardless of the
The maximum current increases with the increase in the critical current when the temperature is less than 80 K. For
decreasing critical current (Figure 10).
temperatures above 80Changing
K, the maximum short-circuit
the temperature current
changes remains around
the parameters of the 1HTS
kA,tape.
regardless
Figureof11the decreasing
shows the
critical current (Figure 10).
relationship between the critical current of the SF12100 tape and the temperature [1–3,14].
Lowering the temperature from 77.4 K to 72 K increases the critical current of the SF12100
Changing the temperature changes
tape 1.5 times the parameters
(in relation to 77.4of theAtHTS
K). the tape. Figure 11
temperature of shows the multiplicity
80 K, the relationship between
of the the
critical current of the SF12100 tape (in relation to 77.4 K) is 0.7. If we assume that the
critical current of the SF12100 tape and the temperature [1–3,14]. Lowering the temperature from 77.4 K to 72 K
operating temperature of this limiter is 72 K, then after the short-circuit current is reduced,
increases the critical
aftercurrent
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW  of thetemperature
the limiter SF12100 tape 1.5from
rises times72(in
K relation
to 80 K,to 77.4
the K). At
limiter the temperature
parameters 11  of  23 of 80
decrease byK, the
 
multiplicity of the critical
more thancurrent
twice of the SF12100
(1.5/0.7). In thetape
case(in
ofrelation to 77.4
laboratory K)itisis0.7.
tests, If weimportance;
of little assume that in thethe
operating
temperature of this case of using
limiter a limiter
is 72 K, thenin the the
after power industry,current
short-circuit it is crucial.
is reduced, after the limiter temperature rises
from 72 K to 80 K, the limiter parameters decrease by more than twice (1.5/0.7). In the case of laboratory tests, it is
of little importance; in the case of using a limiter in the power industry, it is crucial.

Figure 11. Multiplicity of the critical current with respect to the critical current at the temperature of
77.4 K for the SF12100 tape as a function of temperature.
Figure 11. Multiplicity of the critical current with respect to the critical current at the temperature of 77.4 K for the
SF12100 tape as a function of temperature.
 

3. Analysis of the Operation of the Limiter

Energies 2021, 14, 6944 9 of 17

3. Analysis of the Operation of the Limiter

In the analysis, the 72 K temperature was assumed as the base operating temperature
of the limiter. The tested SFCL limited the short-circuit current over 0.08 s. The limitation
time was determined so that the temperature of the superconducting windings (HTS tapes)
during current limitation did not exceed a certain value. The SF12100 tape temperature
must not exceed 420 K. It is related not only to the construction of the tape, but also to the
material used to solder the tape. After 0.08 s, the limiter was disconnected by a conventional
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 
switch. Figure 12 shows the temperature change of the HTS tape during a short-circuit 12  of  23 
 
lasting 0.08 s (as during the first short-circuit test) and during longer short-circuits lasting
0.1 s and 0.12 s.

Figure 12. Changes in temperature of the limiter HTS tape during short circuit (0–0.08 s) and cooling
(0.08–3 s)—“72 K (0.08 s)” and during short circuit (0–0.1 s) and cooling (0.1–3 s)—“72 K (0.1 s)” and
during short-circuit (0–0.12 s) and cooling (0.12–3 s)—“72 K (0.12 s)” for the initial temperature of the
Figure 12. Changes in temperature of the limiter HTS tape during short circuit (0 s–0.08 s) and cooling (0.08 s–3
limiter before short-circuit = 72 K.
s)—“72 K (0.08 s)” and during short circuit (0 s–0.1 s) and cooling (0.1 s–3 s)—“72 K (0.1 s)” and during
In Table
short-circuit (0 s–0.12 s) and 4, the
cooling values
(0.12 of the maximum
s–3 s)—“72 temperature
K (0.12 s)” Tmax
for the initial and the end
temperature temperature
of the limiter before
T(3s) are given according to Figure 12. The end temperature T(3s) is the temperature after
short-circuit = 72 K.
3 s counted from the beginning of the short-circuit test (not from the end). From the
(design) assumption, the maximum temperature of the HTS limiter cannot exceed 420 K.
In Table 4, the values Additionally,
of the maximum thistemperature
is the case inTmax andcases
three the end temperature current
of short-circuit T(3 s) arelimitation
given according
(Figureto12).
Figure 12. The end temperature T(3 s) is the temperature after 3 s counted from the beginning of the short-circuit
The maximum temperature of the limiter is the temperature of the HTS tape. The end test
temperature T(3s) is understood as the temperature of the entire limiter. The differences in
(not from the end). From the (design) assumption, the maximum temperature of the HTS limiter cannot exceed 420
the final temperatures are small compared to the differences in the maximum temperatures,
K. Additionally, this iswhich
the case
caninbe
three
seencases of short-circuit
in Figure current4. limitation
12 and in Table (Figure
The differences in12). The maximum
the final temperatures
temperature of the limiter
haveisan
theimpact
temperature
on the of the HTSoftape.
operation The endintemperature
the limiter T(3 s) issystem.
the electric power understood as the
temperature of the entire limiter. The differences in the final temperatures are small compared to the differences in
Table 4. Maximum temperature Tmax and end temperature (after 3 s) T(3s) of the limiter acc. Figure 12
the maximum temperatures, whichtime
and cooling cantobe
T0seen in Figure
. T0 —initial 12 and int Table
temperature, 4. The differences in the final
zw —short-circuit duration.
temperatures have an impact on the operation of the limiter in the electric power system.
Short-Circuit T0 tzw T max T (3s) Cooling Time to T 0
72 K (0.08 s) 72 K 0.08 s 290 K 81.7 K 6300 s
Table 4. Maximum 72 K (0.10
temperature Tmaxs)and end temperature0.10
72 K s
(after
3 s) 304 Kof
T
the 83.2 K
limiter
acc. 7320
Figure 12sand cooling
(3 s)
72 K (0.12 s) 72 K 0.12 s 315 K 84.7 K 8400 s
time to T0. T0—initial temperature, tzw—short-circuit duration.

Short-Circuit T0 tzw Tmax T(3 s) Cooling Time to T0

72 K (0.08 s) 72 K 0.08 s 290 K 81.7 K 6300 s

72 K (0.10 s) 72 K 0.10 s 304 K 83.2 K 7320 s
72 K (0.12 s) 72 K 0.12 s 315 K 84.7 K 8400 s
Energies 2021, 14, 6944 10 of 17

Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW  13  of  2

 
3.1. Analysis of the Results (Figures 12 and 13, Tables 4 and 5) in the Laboratory Context
The limiter works satisfactorily. It returns to the superconducting state quickly after
the short-circuit is reduced (Figure 13). Changing the short-circuit current limiting time
limiter. The increase in the time of limiting the current minimally increases the time of the limiter’s recovery from
does not change the (laboratory) parameters of the limiter. The increase in the time of
the resistive state to the superconducting
limiting state.
the current minimally increases the time of the limiter’s recovery from the resistive
state to the superconducting state (Table 5).

Figure 13. Changes of the HTS tape resistance of the limiter during short circuit (0–0.08 s) and cooling
(0.08–3 s)—“72 K (0.08 s)” and during short circuit (0–0.1 s) and cooling (0.1–3 s)—“72 K (0.1 s)” and
Figure 13. Changes of during
the HTS tape resistance
short-circuit (0–0.12 s)ofand
thecooling
limiter(0.12–3
during shortKcircuit
s)—“72 (0.12 s) (0 s–0.08
” for s) and
the initial cooling (0.08
temperature of s–3
s)—“72 K (0.08 s)” and during short circuit (0 s–0.1 s) and cooling (0.1 s–3 s)—“72 K (0.1 s)” and during
the limiter before short-circuit = 72 K.

short-circuit (0 s–0.12 s) and cooling (0.12 s–3 s)—“72 K (0.12 s) ” for the initial temperature of the limiter befor
Table 5. Maximum resistance Rmax of the limiter during short-circuit limitation and time of HTS tape
short-circuit
recovery from the resistive state = 72 K. state tR-N (after the short-circuit ends) acc.
to the superconducting
Figure 13. T0 —initial temperature, tzw —short-circuit duration.

Short-Circuit T0 tzw Rmax tR-N

Table 5. Maximum resistance Rmax of the limiter during short-circuit limitation and time of HTS tape recovery from
72 K (0.08 s) 72 K 0.08 s 10.08 Ω 1.55 s
the resistive state to the
72 superconducting
K (0.10 s) state
72 KtR-N (after the0.10
short-circuit
s ends) acc. Figure1.73
10.59 Ω 13. sT0—initial
72 K (0.12 s) temperature, 0.12 sduration. 10.94 Ω
72 tK —short-circuit 2.00 s
zw

Short-Circuit tzw 12 and 13, TablesR4max

3.2. AnalysisTof0 the Results (Figures tR-N of the Electric
and 5) in the Context
Power System
72 K (0.08 s) The change
72 K of the limiter0.08 s
parameters 10.08 Ωthe short-circuit
after limiting 1.55 s in terms of the
72 K (0.10electric
s) 72 system
power K 0.10 s
is decisive. 10.59 Ω 1.73 s
The relationships between Ic , Ir and Ir max are given by the following formulas:
72 K (0.12 s) 72 K 0.12 s 10.94 Ω 2.00 s
√
Ir max = 2Ir (1)
3.2. Analysis of the Results (Figures 12 and 13, Tables 4 and 5) in the Context of the Electric Power System
and
Ic = 3Ir max (2)
The change of the limiter parameters after limiting the short-circuit in terms of the electric power system is
The number 3 is the assumed value related to the multiplicity of overload currents in
decisive. the power system.
In conventional devices, the sequence of adjustments to the operating parameters of
The relationships between Ic, Ir and
the limiters Ir maxwith
starts are Igiven
r . The by
RMSthevalue
following
of the formulas:
rated current is a property of the system
for which the limiter is designed. The maximum value of the rated current multiplied by
3 (the assumed value) determines the threshold of the short-circuit current limiter.
(1
Ir max = √2Ir
)

and
Energies 2021, 14, 6944 11 of 17

From the point of view of the operation of a superconducting limiter, the parameters
Ir max and Ic are important. In the case of a superconducting limiter, the initial data of the
limiter are its activation threshold—critical current Ic .
The parameters of the limiter connected to the protection system after limiting the
short circuit have changed (Figure 14, Table 6). After a short-circuit lasting 0.08 s, Ic of
the limiter is not much higher than Ir max before the short-circuit. The limiter will work
correctly at the rated current. If the maximum of the rated current is exceeded by 13%
(Ic = 113% Ir max ), the limiter will start to limit the current, and this should only occur
after 300% Ir max . After short-circuits lasting 0.1 s and 0.12 s, the Ic of the limiter is lower
than Ir max before the short-circuit. The limiter will therefore start to limit the current to a
value lower than the rated current. To sum up, the conclusion is as follows: after limiting
the short-circuit, lasting for 0.08 s, 0.1 s and 0.12 s, the limiter can be connected back to
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 
the protection system, after cooling it to the temperature before the short-circuit, in the 15 
 
discussed case—to the temperature = 72 K. The cool-down time is long and is(according to
the data in Table 4) from 6300 s to 8400 s.

Figure 14. Basic parameters of the limiter—Ic and Ir max before short-circuit (0 s) and after short-
circuits lasting: 0.08 s, 0.1 s and 0.12 s, in accordance with Table 6.
Figure 14. Basic parameters of the limiter—Ic and Ir max before short-circuit (0 s) and after short-circuits lasting: 0
Table 6. Ic —critical current of the limiter as a function of temperature T0 . Rated current of the limiter
s, 0.1 s and 0.12 s, in accordance with Table 6.
Ir —rms value, Ir max —the maximum of the rated current.

T0 Ic Ir Ir max
4. Cryocooler in the Power System
72 K 1909 A 450 A 636 A
81.7 K 718 A 169 A 239 A
83.2 K 514 A 121 A 171 A
In HTS 2G tapes (second generation),
84.7 K
due to the412
complex
A
deposition processes
97 A
of thematerial,
137 A
it is difficult to
maintain homogeneous superconducting properties—i.e., the critical current. Figure 15 shows the characteristic
one of the HTS 2G4.tapes (SF12050),
Cryocooler in thewhich
Powerwas used to build the previous current limiters (Figure 3) [4–9]. Th
System
are significant differences in the2Gvalue
In HTS tapesof(second
the critical current measured
generation), due to theevery 5 mdeposition
complex of the tapeprocesses
[7,10,13,14].
of The
the material, it is difficult to maintain homogeneous superconducting properties—i.e., the
minimum value of critical
the critical current for this tape (200 m) is 256 A and the maximum value of the critical curre
current. Figure 15 shows the characteristics of one of the HTS 2G tapes (SF12050),
is ~330 A. For a 200 m spool,
which the nominal
was used critical
to build the current
previous is the
current lowest
limiters critical
(Figure current
3) [4–9]. value
There areout of 40
significant
measurements every differences
5 m of tapein the value of
of spool. the is
This critical currentimportance.
of colossal measured every
If we5 unwind
m of thethetapefirst
[7,10,13,14].
30 m from this
The minimum value of the critical current for this tape (200 m) is 256 A and the maximum
spool, this piece will have
value of athe
critical
criticalcurrent
current=is256
~330A.A.The
Fornext
a 20030mm of tape
spool, the from
nominalthiscritical
spool current
will have a critical
is the
current of ~300 A.

Such a problem appeared in the discussed limiter. After designing the limiter for the set value of the rated curren
an HTS tape with a specific value of the critical current was purchased. However, as shown in Figure 15, it was
Energies 2021, 14, 6944 12 of 17

Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 
lowest critical current value out of 40 measurements every 5 m of tape of spool. This is of
 
colossal importance. If we unwind the first 30 m from this spool, this piece will have a
critical current = 256 A. The next 30 m of tape from this spool will have a critical current
of ~300 A.

Figure 15. Significant differences in the value of the critical current measured every 5 m by the
manufacturer of the HTS 2G tape. Liquid nitrogen temperature, natural field [7,14].

Figure 15. Significant differences in the value

Such a problem of the
appeared in critical current
the discussed measured
limiter. After every 5 mthe
designing bylimiter
the manufacture
for
the set value of the rated current Ir , an HTS tape with a specific value of the critical
HTS 2G tape. Liquid nitrogen temperature, natural field [7,14].
current was purchased. However, as shown in Figure 15, it was the minimum value of the
critical current.
After building the limiter and Afterconducting
building theshort-circuit tests, we obtained
limiter and conducting data
short-circuit that
tests, weallowed
obtainedusdatato that
verify the
allowed us to verify the numerical models. It turned out that the critical current of the
numerical models. It turned out that the critical current of the limiter (the HTS tape used in the limiter) is m
limiter (the HTS tape used in the limiter) is much higher than the current value provided
higher than the currentbyvalue provided byfor
the manufacturer thethemanufacturer for the
entire spool with the HTS
entire spool
tape. From with the HTSpoint
a laboratory tape.ofFrom a
view, this is not a problem and even an advantage. From the power engineering point
laboratory point of view, this is not a problem and even an advantage. From the power engineering point of
of view, such a limiter cannot be installed in the planned place with the adopted rated
such a limiter cannot be installed
current in theit planned
Ir , because place
must operate with
after the adopted
exceeding rated current
the maximum Ir, because
Ir max three times. If itithas
must ope
better parameters, i.e., Ic is much greater than 3 Ir max , some of the short-circuits will not
exceeding the maximum Ir max three times. If it has better parameters, i.e., Ic is much greater than 3 Ir max, som
be limited.
short-circuits will not be limited.
In the case of a bath-cooled limiter, with a constant temperature, this problem cannot
be solved. In the case of contact cooling with the use of a cryocooler, by changing the
temperature, the parameters of the limiter can be easily adjusted to those required in the
In the case of a bath-cooled limiter, with a constant temperature, this problem cannot be solved. In the case
system. Thus, the value of the limiter critical current Ic , which determines the limiter
contact cooling with the use of a can
parameters, cryocooler,
be changed.by changing the temperature, the parameters of the limiter can
By changing the operating temperature of the limiter through a cryocooler, you can
easily adjusted to thosechange
required in the system. Thus, the value of the limiter critical current Ic, which
the parameters of the limiter, which is an advantage. The main disadvantage of
determ
the limiter parameters,contact
can becooling
changed.is the small power of the cryocooler—that is, the long cooling time.
The limiter examined by the author was not only short-circuit tested, but was installed
in the switching station (for a week). This confirmed that cooling with a cryocooler is the
By changing the operating temperature
only solution of the
in the case limiter
of the through
limiter a cryocooler,
for power you can change
industry applications. theforget
One should parameters
limiter, which is an advantage.
about cooling Thewith
main thedisadvantage
use of cryogenic of liquids;
contactthe cooling
electricispower
the small power does
engineering of the notcryocoo
tolerate any liquids. If the limiter were cooled with liquid nitrogen (lH2 ), there would be
is, the long cooling time.

The limiter examined by the author was not only short-circuit tested, but was installed in the switching stati
week). This confirmed that cooling with a cryocooler is the only solution in the case of the limiter for powe
 Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW  17  o
 

water-cooled
Energies (H2O), there would also be no water in the vicinity of the limiter installation, nor would
2021, 14, 6944 13 ofthere
17 be an
approval of the electric power engineers for the installation. The compressor (lHe) in the cryocooler of the instal
limiter was cooled by an electrically driven fan.
no room for a limiter to be installed at the switching station, and there would be no consent
from the power industry. The liquid helium (lHe) in the compressor in the cryocooler
5. Changing the Principlemoves
of Operation
in a closed of theis Limiter
area, isolated from the surroundings and is not a problem in the power
industry. If the compressor (lHe) for the cryocooler was water-cooled (H2 O), there would
also be no water in the vicinity of the limiter installation, nor would there be any approval
After analyzing the experimental results
of the electric power(short-circuit
engineers fortests) and after The
the installation. analyzing the results
compressor (lHe) inof the
the numerical
mod
cryocooler
of the installed limiter was cooled by an electrically driven fan.
of the limiter (models verified by the results of short-circuit tests), I changed the concepts of using superconduct
to limit current in the power industry:
5. Changing thefrom the Superconducting
Principle Fault
of Operation of the Current Limiter (SFCL) to Superconducti
Limiter
Surge Current Limiter (SSCL). After analyzing the experimental results (short-circuit tests) and after analyzing the
results of the numerical models of the limiter (models verified by the results of short-circuit
tests), I changed the concepts of using superconductors to limit current in the power
The superconducting limiter will from
industry: be connected in series with
the Superconducting an Current
Fault electronic switch,
Limiter e.g.,tothyristor.
(SFCL) After limiting t
Superconducting
surge current, the electronic
Surgecircuit
Currentbreaker
Limiterwill disconnect the superconducting limiter, and further limitation of
(SSCL).
The superconducting limiter will be connected in series with an electronic switch, e.g.,
short-circuit current willthyristor.
take place inlimiting
After a conventional
the surgesystem, which
current, the will becircuit
electronic turned on after
breaker will disconnecting
disconnect the the SF
This change will reducesuperconducting
the heating time of theand
limiter, SFCL limiter
further fromof0.08
limitation s to 0.01 s.current
the short-circuit Figurewill 16take
shows a in
place compariso
a conventional system, which will be turned on after disconnecting the SFCL. This change
of the HTS tape temperature waveforms during short-circuits in which the limiter is disconnected after 0.01 s an
will reduce the heating time of the SFCL limiter from 0.08 s to 0.01 s. Figure 16 shows a
after 0.08 s. comparison of the HTS tape temperature waveforms during short-circuits in which the
limiter is disconnected after 0.01 s and after 0.08 s.

Figure 16. Temperature changes of the limiter HTS tape during short-circuit (0–0.08 s) and cooling
(0.08–3 s)—“72 K (0.08 s)” and during short circuit (0–0.01 s) and cooling (0.01–3 s)—“72 K (0.01 s)”
for the initial temperature of the limiter before short-circuit = 72 K.
Figure 16. Temperature changes of the limiter HTS tape during short-circuit (0 s–0.08 s) and cooling (0.08 s–3
In Table 7, the values of the maximum temperature Tmax and end temperature T(3s)
s)—“72 K (0.08 s)” and duringaccording
are given short circuit (0 s–0.01
to Figure 16. Thes)maximum
and cooling (0.01 s–3
short-circuit s)—“72 Kof(0.01
temperature s)” for
72 K (0.01 s) the init
temperature of the
is much lower than the T max limiter before short-circuit = 72 K.
of 72 K short-circuit (0.08 s). The end temperature T (3s)
after a short-circuit of 72 K (0.01 s) is significantly lower than T(3s) after a short-circuit of
72 K (0.08 s).
In Table 7, the values of the maximum temperature Tmax and end temperature T(3 s) are given according to Figure
16. The maximum short-circuit temperature
Table 7. Maximum of 72
and final K (0.01ofs)the
temperature is limiter
much acc.
lower than
Figure 16.the Tmax of 72 K short-circuit (0

s) after a short-circuit
s). The end temperature T(3Short-Circuit T 0 of 72 Ktzw
(0.01 s) is significantly
T max T (3s) lowerCooling
than TTime
(3 s) after
to T 0 a short-cir
of 72 K (0.08 s). 72 K (0.01 s) 72 K 0.01 s 161 K 74.3 K 1500 s
72 K (0.08 s) 72 K 0.08 s 290 K 81.7 K 6300 s

Figure 17 (and Table 8) shows the basic parameters of the limiter—Ic and Ir max before short-circuit (0 s) and aft
short-circuits lasting 0.01 s and 0.08 s. After limiting the short-circuit, the limiter connected to the protection
Energies 2021, 14, 6944
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW  14 of 17 18
 

system changes the parameters

Figure 17 as a result
(and ofshows
Table 8) the limiter temperature
the basic parameters increase. After a short-circuit
of the limiter—I lasting 0.08
c and Ir max before
short-circuit (0 s) and after short-circuits lasting 0.01 s and 0.08 s. After limiting the short-
Ic of the limiter is circuit,
not much higher than Ir max before
the limiter connected
the short-circuit. The limiter will work correctly at the rate
to the protection system changes the parameters as a result
current. The limiter of will start totemperature
the limiter limiting current at 113%
increase. After Iar max , but this should
short-circuit onlys,occur
lasting 0.08 the Icafter
of the300%
limiterIr max. Aft
is not much higher than
short-circuit lasting 0.01 s, the Ic of the limiterI before the short-circuit. The limiter will work correctly
r max is 231% higher than the Ir max before the short-circuit. 231% is le at
the rated current. The limiter will start to limiting current at 113% Ir max , but this should
than the required 300% but this
only occur aftermay
300% cold be. After
Ir max an acceptable valuelasting
a short-circuit compared tothe
0.01 s, 113%
Ic offor
thealimiter
72 K (0.08
is 231%s)
short-circuit. higher than the Ir max before the short-circuit. 231% is less than the required 300% but this
may cold be an acceptable value compared to 113% for a 72 K (0.08 s) short-circuit.

Figure 17. Basic parameters of the limiter—Ic and Ir max before short-circuit (0 s) and after short-
circuits lasting: 0.01 s and 0.08 s, in accordance with Table 8.

Figure 17. Basic parameters of the limiter—I and Ir maxasbefore

Table 8. Ic —critical current of cthe limiter
short-circuit (0 s) and after short-circuits lasting: 0
a function of temperature T0 . Rated current of the limiter
Ir —rms value, Ir max —theand 0.08 s,ofinthe
maximum accordance with Table 8.
rated current.

T0 Ic Ir Ir max

Table727.K Maximum and final

1909 temperature
A of the450 A
limiter 636 A
acc. Figure 16.
74.3 K 1471 A 347 A 490 A
81.7 K 718 A 169 A 239 A
Short-Circuit T0 tzw Tmax T(3 s) Cooling Time to T0

72 K (0.01The
s) second, very
72 significant
K 0.01 s
difference is161 K
presented 74.3 K 181500
in Figure s
and Table 9. The most
important thing is that after a short-circuit of 72 K (0.01 s), the limiter returns from the
72 K (0.08 s) 72 K 0.08 s 290 K 81.7 K 6300 s
resistive state to the superconducting state after less than 1 s, and exactly after = 0.55 s. This
is of fundamental importance from the point of view of power engineering. The power
system, after disconnecting during the fault, is reconnected after less than 1 s. Therefore,
Table 8. Ic—criticalthis
current
72 K of thes)limiter
(0.01 limiter as
cana be
function of temperature
reconnected to the systemT0. after
Rated current
less than 1ofs. the limiter the
Obviously, Ir—rms va
limiter will not work like before when limiting short-circuit. It will start working when the
max—the maximum of the rated current.
current exceeds 1471 A, and it should start working only when the current exceeds 1909 A.
T0 Of course, the overload Ic current (here assumed as Ir 3) is a conventional value. Additionally, it
Ir max
should be established with electric power engineering, whether such a temporary reduction
72 K in the multiplication 1909 factorA 450 A
of the overload current is permissible or not.636 YouAcan increase
the multiplicity of the overload current before the short-circuit (by setting the parameters of
74.3 K 1471 A 347 A 490 A
the limiter) and then, after the short-circuit, the multiplicity will be higher than 231%. After
81.7 K a short-circuit, you need718theA limiter to quickly 169 A to the temperature239
return thatAit was before
the short-circuit. In the discussed case, up to the temperature of 72 K. In the constructed
The second, very limiter, the return
significant to theistemperature
difference presented in= Figure
72 K (from 74.3 Table
18 and K to 729.K)The
takes 1500important
most s (Table 7).thing
If is tha

after a short-circuit of 72 K (0.01 s), the limiter returns from the resistive state to the superconducting state afte
less than 1 s, and exactly after = 0.55 s. This is of fundamental importance from the point of view of power
 the constructed limiter, the return to the temperature = 72 K (from 74.3 K to 72 K) takes 1500 s (Table 7). I
added a second cryocooler to the cooling system, the cooling time would be reduced to 840 s.

The limiter operating in the 72 K (0.08 s) regime cannot be reconnected in the system after less15 than
Energies 2021, 14, 6944 of 17
1 s bec
returns to the superconducting state only after 1.55 s. Connecting a superconducting limiter in a resistive sta
protection system will cause a rapid increase in the temperature of the limiter. The cooling time for the tem
= 72 K (from 81.7 weK to 72 K)
added is 6300cryocooler
a second s. With two cryocoolers,
to the the time
cooling system, (6300 time
the cooling s) reduces
would to
be 3240 s.
reduced
to 840 s.

Figure 18. Changes of the HTS tape resistance of the limiter during short-circuit (0–0.08 s) and cooling
down “72 K (0.08 s)” and during short-circuit (0–0.01 s) and cooling down “72 K (0.1 s)” for the initial
Figure 18. Changes of the HTSoftape
temperature resistance
the limiter before of the limiter
short-circuit = 72during
K. short-circuit (0 s–0.08 s) and cooling
dow
(0.08 s)” and during short-circuit (0 s–0.01 s) and cooling down “72 K (0.1 s)” for the initial temperatur
Table 9. Maximum resistance Rmax of the limiter during short-circuit limitation and time of HTS tape
limiter
recovery from the resistive state before
to the short-circuit
superconducting state=tR-N
72(after
K. the short-circuit ends) acc.
Figure 18. T0 —initial temperature, tzw —short-circuit duration.

Short-Circuit T0 tzw Rmax tR-N

Table 9. Maximum resistance Rmax
72 K (0.01 s)
of the limiter
72 K
during short-circuit
0.01 s
limitation and time of0.55
5.33 Ω
HTS s
tape recove
the resistive state to the
72 K superconducting
(0.08 s) 72 state
K tR-N (after
0.08the
s short-circuit
10.08 Ωends) acc. Figure
1.55 s 18. T0—in
temperature, tzw—short-circuit duration.
The limiter operating in the 72 K (0.08 s) regime cannot be reconnected in the system
Short-Circuit
after less than 1 T
s 0because it returns totzw
the superconducting
Rmaxstate only after 1.55 s. Connect-
tR-N
ing a superconducting limiter in a resistive state to the protection system will cause a rapid
72 K (0.01 s) in the 72
increase K
temperature 0.01 s The cooling
of the limiter. 5.33 Ω for the temperature
time 0.55 s= 72 K
(from 81.7 K to 72 K) is 6300 s. With two cryocoolers, the time (6300 s) reduces to 3240 s.
72 K (0.08 s) 72 K 0.08 s 10.08 Ω 1.55 s
6. SFCL Compared with HTS Transformer
The SFCL is not the only superconducting device capable of limiting short-circuit
current. I was a participant in the projects about HTS transformers. The studies [15–17] are
  3 of 9 articles (with my participation) about HTS transformers.
The HTS transformer with the possibility of limiting short-circuits uses other cables,
not SF types, without copper, but SCS type cables, with copper. Thus, upon transition from
the superconducting to resistive state, the transformer cable has much lower resistivity than
the HTS cable used in SFCL. Thus, the HTS transformer limits the short-circuit current to a
lesser extent. Generally, the HTS transformer for short-circuit limitation is a very effective
(in my opinion). However, it is a different device, constructed differently, that is more
difficult to model numerically. In SFCL, the HTS tape characteristics are assumed to be a
function of current and temperature. In the case of an HTS transformer, the magnetic field
cannot be ignored, so the characteristics of the HTS tape are a function of three variables:
current, magnetic field and temperature. In addition to this problem, there are other big
problems: when switching from a low voltage to medium voltage, the weight of the device
Energies 2021, 14, 6944 16 of 17

(HTS transformer) increases tremendously. Additionally, the costs of the device are also so
high that in small laboratories it is practically impossible to implement the HTS transformer
project for the medium and high voltage networks.
Therefore, compared to the HTS transformer, the SFCL limiter is very light, not
complicated and very cheap (compared to the HTS transformer, of course).

7. Conclusions
• Changing the concept of the limiter’s operation from a superconducting fault current
limiter (SFCL) to a superconducting surge current limiter (SSCL) is appropriate and
has no disadvantages.
• This article describes how to change the SFCL limiter to SSCL by changing the cur-
rent limiting operation time only. The SSCL ends when the limited short-circuit
current passes through zero for the first time, i.e., after 0.01 s for a frequency of 50 Hz.
Therefore, it can be applied to any already constructed SFCL limiter.
• In the case of building a new SSCL limiter, the design of the limiter can be slightly
changed, but it will be described in a new article.
• The SSCL (Figure 17) should start working at 300% of the rated current. After the
first limiting, 300% decreases to 231%. Additionally, now the power engineers can
make the decision, or they agree to 231% and, during operation, the cryocooler will be
restored to 300% after 1500 s, or the limiter is replaced with another limiter and it will
resume operation after 1500 s.
• All the data presented show that this new concept must be adhered to.
• Another decisive piece of information is the use of the cryocooler to cool the limiter.
Contact cooling with the use of a cryocooler is the only possibility of cooling the
limiter in electric power applications.
• The possibility of changing the operating temperature allows for adjusting the param-
eters of the limiter to the electric power system needs.
• If somebody builds a limiter in a laboratory and its parameters do not match the as-
sumption, then by changing the temperature, they can obtain the assumed parameters
of the limiter.
• The manufacturer of many SFCLs (or SSCL) can build one type of limiter, and by chang-
ing the operating temperature, each can be adapted to the needs of the power industry.

Funding: The SFCL (described in this article) was financed by the National Fund for Environmental
Protection and Water Management and the National Center for Research and Development, under
the project: GEKON2/O2/267193/13/2015.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.

References
1. Kozak, S.; Majka, M.; Kozak, J. Analysis of Superconducting Fault Current Limiter 6 kV/0.14 kA. Acta Phys. Pol. A 2020, 138,
752–755. [CrossRef]
2. Kozak, S.; Majka, M.; Kozak, J. Influence of temperature on the operations of the superconducting fault current limiter for
medium voltage networks. Prace IEL 2020, LXVI, 39–47. Available online: https://iel.lukasiewicz.gov.pl/pl/prace-iel-2020.html
(accessed on 5 October 2021).
3. Kozak, J.; Majka, M.; Kozak, S. Design Considerations on a Resistive Superconducting Fault Current Limiter. Acta Phys. Pol. A
2020, 138, 710–714. [CrossRef]
4. Kozak, J.; Majka, M.; Kozak, S. Experimental Results of a 15 kV, 140 A Superconducting Fault Current Limiter. IEEE Trans. Appl.
Supercond. 2017, 27, 5600504. [CrossRef]
5. Majka, M.; Kozak, J.; Kozak, S. HTS Tapes Selection for Superconducting Current Limiters. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2017, 27,
5601405. [CrossRef]
6. Majka, M.; Kozak, J.; Kozak, S.; Wojtasiewicz, G.; Janowski, T. Design and Numerical Analysis of the 15 kV Class Coreless
Inductive Type SFCL. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2015, 25, 5601005. [CrossRef]
7. Kozak, S. Numerical Modeling of Superconducting Fault Current Limiters; Book Publ. IEl: Warsaw, Poland, 2013; pp. 1–126,
ISBN 978-83-61956-07-5.
8. Kozak, J.; Majka, M.; Kozak, S.; Janowski, T. Design and Tests of Coreless Inductive Superconducting Fault Current Limiter. IEEE
Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2012, 22, 5601804. [CrossRef]
Energies 2021, 14, 6944 17 of 17

9. Kozak, J.; Majka, M.; Janowski, T.; Kozak, S. Design and Development of the First Polish Superconducting Fault Current Limiter
for MV Distribution Systems. Phys. Procedia 2012, 36, 845–848. [CrossRef]
10. Majka, M.; Kozak, S. The application of the first and second generation superconducting wires for superconducting fault current
limiter construction. Przeglad ˛ Elektrotechniczny 2009, 85, 183–185.
11. Kozak, S.; Janowski, T.; Wojtasiewicz, G.; Kondratowicz-Kucewicz, B.; Kozak, J. Experimental and Numerical Analysis of Energy
Losses in Resistive SFCL. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2005, 15, 2098–2101. [CrossRef]
12. Kozak, S.; Janowski, T. Physical and Numerical Models of Superconducting Fault Current Limiters. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond.
2003, 13, 2068–2071. [CrossRef]
13. Janowski, T.; Wojtasiewicz, G.; Kondratowicz-Kucewicz, B.; Kozak, S.; Kozak, J.; Majka, M. Superconducting Winding for
Inductive Type SFCL Made of HTS Tape with Increased Resistivity. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2009, 19, 1884–1887. [CrossRef]
14. Data from Superpower Inc. Available online: https://superpower-inc.com (accessed on 5 October 2021).
15. Wojtasiewicz, G.; Janowski, T.; Kozak, S.; Kozak, J.; Majka, M.; Kondratowicz-Kucewicz, B. Tests and Performance Analysis of 2G
HTS Transformer. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2013, 23, 5500505. [CrossRef]
16. Wojtasiewicz, G.; Janowski, T.; Kozak, S.; Kozak, J.; Majka, M.; Kondratowicz-Kucewicz, B. Experimental Investigation of a Model
of a Transformer-Type Superconducting Fault Current Limiter with a Superconducting Coil Made of a 2G HTS Tape. IEEE Trans.
Appl. Supercond. 2014, 24, 5601005. [CrossRef]
17. Wojtasiewicz, G.; Kozak, S. The New Concept of Using the Superconducting Transformers in Low- and Medium-Voltage
Distribution Network. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2018, 28. [CrossRef]
18. Song, M.; Dai, S.; Sheng, C.; Zhong, L.; Duan, X.; Yan, G.; Huang, Y.; Chen, C.; Li, L.; Cai, L.; et al. Design and performance tests
of a 160 kV/1.0 kA DC superconducting fault current limiter. Phys. C Supercond. Appl. 2021, 585, 1353871. [CrossRef]
19. Farokhiyan, M.; Hosseini, M.; Kavousi-Fard, A. Current density distribution in resistive fault current limiters and its effect on
device stability. Phys. C Supercond. Appl. 2021, 580, 1353786. [CrossRef]
20. Song, W.; Pei, X.; Xi, J.; Zeng, X. A Novel Helical Superconducting Fault Current Limiter for Electric Propulsion Aircraft. IEEE
Trans. Transp. Electrif. 2021, 7, 276–286. [CrossRef]
21. Zhu, J.; Zheng, N.; Wei, D.; He, M.; Wang, S.; Chen, P.; Yan, Z. Experimental Tests of Critical Current and AC Loss for a
Self-Triggering High Temperature Superconducting Fault Current Limiter (SFCL) with Magneto-Biased Field. IEEE Trans. Appl.
Supercond. 2021, 31, 5602904. [CrossRef]
22. Xi, J.; Pei, X.; Song, W.; Xiang, B.; Liu, Z.; Zeng, X. Experimental Tests of DC SFCL Under Low Impedance and High Impedance
Fault Conditions. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2021, 31, 5601205. [CrossRef]
23. Moyzykh, M.; Gorbunova, D.; Ustyuzhanin, P.; Sotnikov, D.; Baburin, K.; Maklakov, A.; Magommedov, E.; Shumkov, A.; Telnova,
A.; Shcherbakov, V.; et al. First Russian 220 kV Superconducting Fault Current Limiter (SFCL) for Application in City Grid. IEEE
Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2021, 31, 5601707. [CrossRef]
24. Shin, J.-W.; Kim, J.-C.; Lee, H.; Yoon, K.-H.; Chai, H.-S.; Kim, J.-S. Impact of SFCL According to Voltage Sags Based Reliability.
IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2021, 31, 5600905. [CrossRef]
25. Park, M.-K.; Lim, S.-H. Impedance Compensation Method of Protective Relay for SFCL’s Application in a Power Distribution
System. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2021, 31, 5600606. [CrossRef]
26. Matsushita, N.; Yanai, S.; Angkoolpakdeekul, T.; Shirai, Y.; Shiotsu, M. Recovery Characteristics of GdBCO Series-Connected
Non-Inductive Coil in Pressurized Liquid Nitrogen for a Resistive SFCL. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2021, 31, 5601805. [CrossRef]
27. Song, M.; Dai, S.; Sheng, C.; Zhong, L.; Duan, X.; Luo, P.; Li, L.; Ma, T. Time-Varying Resistance Optimization for the Resistive Type
Superconducting Fault Current Limiter Applied in VSC-HVDC System. J. Supercond. Nov. Magn. 2021, 34, 1047–1057. [CrossRef]