MAGNETIC FLUX-COUPLING TYPE SUPERCONDUCTING FAULT CURRENT LIMITER

Abstract

A magnetic flux coupling-type superconducting current limiter is capable of protecting lines more effectively by winding reactors of a primary coil and a secondary coil in series in the structure where the primary coil and the secondary coils are wound in parallel in the conventional magnetic flux-lock type current limiter to increase a linked flux generated from an iron core. An electric conducting current which rapidly increases when a fault occurs is divided into the secondary coil and a superconducting coil to decrease a load on the superconducting element and it is opened more rapidly than the existing superconducting current limiter during a quench time such that it better limits a fault current.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The accompanying drawings, which are included to provide a further understanding of the invention and are incorporated in and constitute a part of this specification, illustrate embodiments of the invention and together with the description serve to explain the principles of the invention.

In the drawings:

FIG. 1 is an equivalent circuit diagram of the conventional magnetic flux-lock type fault current limiter;

FIG. 2A is an equivalent circuit diagram of a magnetic flux-coupling type fault current limiter in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention, FIG. 2B is a circuit configuration diagram for testing it, and FIG. 2C is a cross-sectional view of a magnetic flux coupling type reactor;

FIG. 3 is a circuit diagram for analyzing quench characteristics of a magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting fault current limiter in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 4 shows a ratio of I_q/I_ini to L₁/L₂ of the quench characteristics of a magnetic flux-coupling type fault current limiter in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention;

FIGS. 5A and 5B show waveforms of a voltage and a current at an additive polarity winding in the conventional magnetic flux-lock type fault current limiter;

FIGS. 6A and 6B show waveforms of a voltage and a current at an additive polarity winding of a magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting fault current limiter in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention;

FIGS. 7A and 7B show waveforms of a voltage and a current at a subtractive polarity winding of the conventional magnetic flux-lock type fault current limiter;

FIGS. 8A and 8B are waveforms of a voltage and a current at a subtractive polarity winding of a current limiter in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention; and

FIGS. 9A-9D are graphs showing the change of characteristics as a function of a number of turns at an additive polarity winding of a current limiter in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION

Reference will now be made in detail to the preferred embodiments of the present invention, examples of which are illustrated in the accompanying drawings.

Reference now should be made to the drawings, in which the same reference numerals are used throughout the different drawings to designate the same or similar components in the following description of the present invention, detailed descriptions may be omitted if it is determined that the detailed descriptions of related well-known functions and constructions may make the gist of the invention unclear.

FIG. 2A is an equivalent circuit diagram of a magnetic flux-coupling type fault current limiter in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention, FIG. 2B is a circuit configuration for testing it and FIG. 2C is a cross-sectional view of a reactor.

In one embodiment of the invention, the magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting fault current limiter includes: a magnetic iron core (10), a primary coil (20), a secondary coil (25) and a superconducting element (30), as shown in FIG. 2A. The secondary coil (25) is wound around the primary coil (20), forming a laminated structure.

In this embodiment, the method for winding between the primary coil and the secondary coil at the magnetic iron core and the position where the superconducting element is coupled is shown schematically.

Referring to FIG. 2A, the primary coil (20) and the secondary coil (25) are wound around the magnetic iron core (10) by N1 and N2 turns, respectively to be directly connected to a power line and the superconducting element (30) is connected to the secondary coil (25) in parallel.

It is preferable that the superconducting element (30) is made of YBCO thin film (or the like) be coupled to the secondary coil (25) in parallel and be immersed in a bath of a low temperature. In the present invention, as shown in FIG. 2B, the superconducting element (30) is provided in a bath (35) of a low temperature containing a liquid nitrogen in order to maintain a superconducting state for a long time, by preventing the liquid nitrogen from being evaporated.

It is preferable that the magnetic iron core (10) use a ferromagnetic iron core in general and the primary coil (20) and the secondary coil (25), as shown in FIG. 2C, have the structure of a magnetic flux-coupling reactor.

Referring to FIG. 2C, the primary coil (20) and the secondary coil (25) are wound in a stacked structure in order to be offset by maximizing the connection between magnetic flux generated from the primary coil (20) and the secondary coil (25) at a normal state. In the meantime, it is preferable that the secondary coil (25) have several taps between its ends so that the turns of the secondary coil (25) are changed.

The ferromagnetic iron core may be manufactured in various shapes, as is known in the art, but a ferromagnetic iron core shown in the Table 1 below was used in one embodiment of the present invention.

	TABLE 1
	Iron Core (Silicon Plate)	Size	Units
	External horizontal length (lOX)	235	mm
	External vertical length (lOY)	250	mm
	Internal horizontal length (lIX)	137	mm
	Internal vertical length (lIY)	155	mm
	thickness (d)	66	mm
	Coil 1, 2	Value	Units
	Magnetic Inductance of Coil 1	18.1 (42)	mH
	(number of turns)	48.4 (63)	(Turns)
	Magnetic Inductance of Coil 2	2.93 (21)	mH
	(number of turns)	18.1 (42)	(Turns)
	Magnetic Inductance of Coil 1	48.4 (63)	mH
	(number of turns)	93.8 (84)	(Turns)
	(number of turns)	151.6 (105)	(Turns)

FIG. 3 is a circuit diagram for analyzing the quench characteristics of a magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting current limiter according to one embodiment of the present invention.

In this embodiment, the circuit diagram for analyzing the quench characteristics of a fault current limiter for improving quenches includes: a magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting fault current limiter, a first fault switch (SW₁), a second fault switch (SW₂), a load resistance (R_L) and a power source of the system (V₀).

In the embodiment, an apparatus for analyzing the characteristics of the change of a current in accordance with the operations of a fault switch is schematically shown.

Referring to FIGS. 2A and 3, a magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting fault current limiter is shown in a structural condition that a line current is I_FCL, a primary current is I₁, a secondary current I₂ and a current flowing into a element is I_SC.

In addition, the rated voltage (V₀) of a system is 120/√{square root over (3)}V_rms and a standard input resistance (R_in) are set to 1Ω in order to measure the current flowing in a circuit and a load resistance (R_L) is 50Ω. Furthermore, a power switch (SW₁) for applying a power voltage and a fault switch (SW₂) for raising a fault are provided. After the power switch (SW₁) is closed, an excessive current for simulation of a fault is generated using the fault switch (SW₂).

Referring to FIGS. 2A and 3, the system can be analyzed as follows. A primary winding and a secondary winding are wound around an iron core with the same polarity. However, since the resistance of the superconducting element at the secondary winding is 0 before a fault occurs, there is no change of magnetic flux not to operate the reactors. Therefore, it can be seen that the voltages at both terminals of a coil is close to 0 before a fault. If the voltages induced to the coil 1 and the coil 2 are V₁ and V₂, respectively:

$\begin{array}{cc}{V}_1=N_1\frac{{\phi }_1}{t}& \mathrm{Equation}4\\ V_2=N_2\frac{{\phi }_2}{t}& \mathrm{Equation}5\end{array}$

Therefore, the voltage V_T applied to the reactor is as follows,

$\begin{array}{cc}{V}_T=\left(N_1+N_2\right)·\frac{\phi }{t}& \mathrm{Equation}6\end{array}$

The operation of a superconducting fault current limiter can be classified into operations in a normal state and in the state of a fault. Since the voltages at both terminals of a superconducting element in its normal state are 0, there are no voltages generating from a reactor of each coil. The principle is similar to that of the magnetic flux-lock type. If a fault occurs, and a fault current in excess of a critical current flows in a superconducting element the secondary superconducting element, has a resistance to operate an iron core. The entire fault current is limited rapidly due to the phase transition of a superconducting element.

In FIG. 3, L₁ and L₂ are self-inductances between two coils. M₁₂ is a mutual inductance induced between coils. (M₁₂=k√{square root over (L₁·L₂)}) The resistance of a coil can be ignored if there is no leakage magnetic flux between the coils. The secondary current is I₂, the current flowing into a superconducting element (R_sc) is Isc and the entire line current is I_FCL (=I₁). It is possible to derive the following equations from FIG. 3 at an additive polarity winding:

V ₁ =jωL ₁ ·I ₁ +jωM ₁₂ ·I ₂  Equation 7

V ₂ =jωM ₁₂ ·I ₁ +jωL ₂ ·I ₂ =R _SC ·I _SC  Equation 8

The current relationship equations of a magnetic flux-coupling fault current limiter can be derived from the Equation 8:

$\begin{array}{cc}{I}_{\mathrm{SC}}=\frac{\mathrm{j\omega }L_2+\mathrm{j\omega }M_{12}}{R_{\mathrm{SC}}+\mathrm{j\omega }L_2}·I_1& \mathrm{Equation}9\\ Z_{\mathrm{FCL}}=\frac{\mathrm{j\omega }R_{\mathrm{sc}}\left(L_1+L_2\right)+j2\omega R_{\mathrm{sc}}M_{12}}{R_{\mathrm{sc}}+\mathrm{j\omega }L_2}& \mathrm{Equation}10\end{array}$

When the current flowing in a superconducting element reaches a critical current value (I_q) immediately after a fault occurs in a magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting fault current limiter in the Equation 9, if the initial limiting current is defined as I_ini, and R_SC=0 and Isc=I_q (the current of the quench-starting point is substituted), the following equation can be derived. Here, it is assumed that the coupling coefficient k=1 in the inductance, M₁₂=k√{square root over (L₁·L₂)}

$\begin{array}{cc}1\pm \sqrt{\frac{L_1}{L_2}}=\frac{I_q}{I_{\mathrm{ini}}}& \mathrm{Equation}11\end{array}$

L=√{square root over (L₁)}±√{square root over (L₂)}, and the + or − sign is determined depending on the increase or the decrease of a magnetic flux due to the primary and the secondary coils. The operational principle of such magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting fault current limiter shows differences in generating flux of an iron core when a fault occurs in accordance with a direction of winding coils, but it is determined that the inductance value is controlled by a winding ratio of a coil to control the magnitude of an initial line current (I_ini) through Equation 11.

The current flowing through the coils 1 and 2 has a phase difference of 180° by the operation of a transformer at an additive polarity winding of a magnetic flux-coupling type current limiter and the relationships between the voltage and the current shown in the equations 12 and 13 can be obtained when a fault occurs. Moreover, there is no effect in the direction of the secondary current in accordance with a winding direction and I₂ has a substantially negative sign, in other words, I₂=−I₂′. Therefore, the equations below can be derived.

I _FCL(I₁)=−I₂′+I_sc  Equation 12

V _T =V ₁ +V ₂(=V_sc)  Equation 13

The current generates the phase difference of 180° at a subtractive polarity winding of a magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting limiter. In addition, the current greater than the critical current value flows into a superconducting element simultaneously when a fault occurs, and the increase of a resistance of a superconducting element reduces line current. Therefore, the relationship between voltage and current can be obtained from Equations 14 and 15.

I _FCL(I₁)=−I₂′+I_sc  Equation 14

V _T =V ₁ −V ₂(=V_sc)  Equation 15

As described above, the operational principle can be analyzed based on the driving characteristics, in accordance with an additive polarity winding and a subtractive polarity winding, which shows whether or not a magnetic flux is increased. The relationship formula between electric conducting current Isc flowing to the superconducting element and the entire current in accordance with the winding ratios in the primary and the secondary coils is shown in Equation 16, and the entire voltage is shown in Equation 17.

$\begin{array}{cc}{I}_{\mathrm{SC}}=\left[1+\frac{N_1}{N_2}\right]·I_1& \mathrm{Equation}16\\ V_T=\left[1\pm \frac{N_1}{N_2}\right]·V_1& \mathrm{Equation}17\end{array}$

Equation 11 shows the relationship with respect to I_q/I_ini and L₁/L₂, which are the initial fault current and critical current ratios of the superconducting element, respectively, in accordance with an inductance ratio of the coils 1 and 2, as shown in FIG. 4. These differences occur depending on whether a linked magnetic flux generated from an iron core is increased or decreased in a direction of winding of the primary and the secondary coils of a magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting fault current limiter when a fault occurs.

The operational features of the ferromagnetic substance in accordance with the change of turns of the primary coil and the secondary coil using the above configuration are as follows.

FIGS. 5A and 5B show waveforms of a voltage and a current at an additive polarity winding in the conventional magnetic flux-lock type fault current limiter. FIGS. 6A and 6B show waveforms of a voltage and a current at an additive polarity winding of a magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting fault current limiter in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.

FIGS. 7A and 7B show waveforms of a voltage and a current at a subtractive polarity winding of the conventional magnetic flux-lock type fault current limiter.

FIGS. 8A and 8B are waveforms of a voltage and a current at a subtractive polarity winding of a magnetic flux coupling-type superconducting fault current limiter in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention.

In the conventional magnetic flux-lock type fault current limiter, the magnitude of the initial line current (I_ini) is 15.7 A at 21 turns and 8.2 A at 42 turns at an additive polarity winding. In other words, as the number of turns increases, the magnitude decreases. The magnitude of the initial line current (I_ini) is 32.01 A at 21 turns and is limited to 40.1 A at 42 turns at a subtractive polarity winding. In the magnetic flux-coupling type fault current limiter according to the present invention, the magnitudes of the initial line current (I_ini) are 5.92 A and 9.29 A at 21 turns and 42 turns, respectively at an additive polarity winding and the magnitude of the initial line current (I_ini) is 5.5 A at 21 turns and 12.05 A at 42 turns at a subtractive polarity winding. In other words, as the number of secondary turns decreases, the magnitude of the initial line current (I_ini) decreases.

It is confirmed that the line current, which is initially limited in the magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting fault current limiter, is decreased in comparison with conventional magnetic flux-lock type superconducting current limiter, as shown in the current waveforms shown of FIGS. 6A, 6B, 8A and 8B.

As compared with the quench occurrence time (T_q) in the magnetic flux-coupling type fault current limiter according to the present invention, 0.75 ms is reduced to 0.41 ms in 21 turns and 0.96 ms reduced to 0.58 ms in 42 turns at an additive polarity winding. For subtractive polarity winding, 1.37 ms is reduced to 0.78 ms in 21 turns, and 2.50 ms is reduced to 2.23 ms in 42 turns. That is, the quench time becomes shorter.

The magnetic flux-coupling type fault current limiter according to the present invention showed small values of an initial line current I_FCL, and a small element voltage at an additive polarity winding and a subtractive polarity winding, compared to the conventional magnetic flux-lock type superconducting fault current limiter. In addition, the quench time is shorter than that of a conventional magnetic flux-lock type fault current limiter. Therefore, it was confirmed that it is more efficient in view of reliability and stability for protecting lines.

If the primary coil and the secondary coil are in wound in series, and when a fault occurs, the voltage is distributed into the primary voltage and the secondary voltage. Furthermore, the secondary voltage has the same value as the element voltage (V_SC). As the secondary coil is increased from 21 turns to 42 turns, the element voltage (V_SC) is induced to have the similar magnitude to the primary voltage (V₁).

The characteristics of the present invention namely, the change of each quench characteristics in accordance with the change of turns of the secondary coil now will be described in the concrete embodiments as follows.

FIGS. 9A and 9B are graphs showing the change of characteristics in accordance with the change of the number of turns at an additive polarity winding of a magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting fault current limiter in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention.

FIGS. 9C and 9D are waveforms showing the change of characteristics in accordance with the change of the number of turns at an additive polarity winding of a magnetic flux-lock type superconducting fault current limiter.

FIG. 9A is a waveform showing the ratio of a quench current to an initial current in accordance with an inductance ratio of L₁/L₂, the Equation 10 and the secondary coil is increased into 21, 42, 63 and 84 turns when the primary coil is fixed to 42 and 63 turns, in order to find out the operational characteristics with respect to a winding ratio. It is found out that as the number of turns increases, the current ratio is decreased in FIG. 9A. After a fault occurs, the fault current is represented in

$\left[1-\sqrt{\frac{L_2}{L_1}}\right]·I_q=I_{\mathrm{ini}}$

at an additive polarity winding in a magnetic flux-lock type, and

$\left[\frac{\sqrt{L_1}}{L}\right]·I_{\mathrm{ini}}=I_q$

is true. Therefore, these two equations can be compared L=√{square root over (L₁)}+√{square root over (L₂)}.

This shows that the magnetic flux-lock type has a structure where the increase of an inductance of the primary coil increases the current flowing in Isc. If the inductance ratio is close to 1, the denominator is 0:

$I_q=\frac{I_{\mathrm{ini}}}{0}.$

Therefore, the current flowing into the superconductor increases dramatically. In other words, if the inductance ratio is 1:1, the superconductor might get damaged.

FIG. 9B is a graph showing the change of an initial current and a quench time in as a function of a turns ratio.

Referring to FIG. 9B, the initial line current is differently shown even if the turns ratio is the same like 42:42 and 64:64. If the turns ratio is 42:42, the initial line current is 11.8 A and if the turns is 64:64, the initial line current is 10.9 A. The quench time (Tq) becomes short as the number of turns of the two coils increases as shown in FIG. 9B. The initial limiting current (I_ini) increases in proportion to the turns of the primary coil and the secondary coil. This means that the initial limiting current (I_ini) can be controlled by controlling the change of the turns between the two coils.

FIG. 9C is a graph showing a quench time at an additive polarity winding of a magnetic flux-lock type, an initial current and a quench current ratio in accordance with a turns ratio. Referring to FIG. 9C, it is found out that the flow of the current of the primary coil is increased by adjusting the inductance of the secondary coil. Therefore, the line current I_FCL is decreased. The magnetic flux of the line current is generated when a fault occurs, and the quench operations when the turns ratio is 63:42 is reinforced in comparison with the those at 63:21. It is equivalent to the I_q/I_ini test result as shown in FIG. 9C. However, if the inductance of the primary coil is the same as that of the secondary coil, the current flowing in the YBCO thin film exceeds its allowable current. This is shown in the equation,

$\left[1-\sqrt{\frac{L_2}{L_1}}\right]·I_q=I_{\mathrm{ini}}.$

FIG. 9D is a graph showing the change of a resistance in accordance with each turns ratio. Referring to FIG. 9D, it is found out that as the turns of the secondary coil increase, the resistance (R_SC) is increased. The above-mentioned graphs are shown in Tables 2-4 as follows:

	TABLE 2
	Fixing primary	Inductance	Real current ratio	Quench
	42 turns	ratio	(Initial)	time
	42:21	6.177	3.003	0.53
	42:42	1	2.005	0.68
	42:63	0.374	1.653	0.76
	42:83	0.193	1.512	0.85

	TABLE 3
	Magnetic flux -		Real
	coupling type (Fixing	Inductance	current ratio	Quench
	primary 63 turns)	ratio	(Initial)	time
	63:21	16.518	3.942	0.41
	63:42	2.674	2.498	0.58
	63:63	1	2.007	0.66
	63:84	0.515	1.760	0.75

TABLE 4
Magnetic flux - lock type	Real current	Calculated current
(Fixing primary 63 turns)	ratio	ratio
63:21	1.4936	1.326
63:42	2.9824	2.574

As described above, the magnetic flux-coupling type superconducting current limiter according to the present invention has the effect of limiting a fault current caused by the control of an inductance and decreasing a load on an element by the serial connection between the primary coil and the secondary coil.

Furthermore, it operates during a quench time more rapidly than the conventional superconducting fault current limiter, to protect power lines more effectively by rapidly limiting a fault current.

Having thus described a preferred embodiment, it should be apparent to those skilled in the art that certain advantages of the described method and apparatus have been achieved. It should also be appreciated that various modifications, adaptations, and alternative embodiments thereof may be made within the scope and spirit of the present invention. The invention is further defined by the following claims.

Claims

1. A magnetic flux coupling-type superconducting fault current limiter comprising: a superconducting element of which a primary coil and a secondary coil are wound around a magnetic iron core, respectively in series and connected with the secondary coil in parallel.

2. The limiter of claim 1, wherein the superconducting element is immersed in a bath of liquid nitrogen.

3. The limiter of claim 1, wherein the primary coil and the secondary coil are wound around the ferromagnetic iron core in a laminated structure.

4. The limiter of claim 1, wherein at least one tap is located between the primary coil and the secondary coil to change a number of turns.

5. The limiter of claim 1, wherein the magnetic iron core uses a ferromagnetic iron core.

6. The limiter of claim 1, wherein the primary coil and the secondary coil are wound in an additive polarity manner and a subtractive polarity manner, respectively.

7. A fault current limiter comprising: a superconducting element having magnetic core;a primary coil and a secondary coil wound around the magnetic iron core, respectively in series,wherein the primary coil is connected to the secondary coil in parallel.

8. The limiter of claim 7, wherein the superconducting element is maintained at a temperature of liquid nitrogen or lower.

9. The limiter of claim 7, wherein the secondary coil is wound around the primary coil to form a laminated structure.

10. The limiter of claim 7, wherein at least one tap is located between the primary coil and the secondary coil to change a number of turns.

11. The limiter of claim 7, wherein the magnetic iron core is a ferromagnetic iron core.

12. The limiter of claim 7, wherein the primary coil and the secondary coil are wound in an additive polarity manner and a subtractive polarity manner, respectively.