HVDC Circuit Breakers: A Comprehensive Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High voltage direct current (HVDC) systems are now well integrated into AC systems in many jurisdictions. The integration of renewable energy sources (RESs) is a major focus and the role of HVDC systems is expanding. However, the protection of HVDC systems against DC faults is a challenging issue that can have negative impacts on the reliable and safe operation of power systems. Practical solutions to protect HVDC grids against DC faults without a widespread power outage include: 1) using DC circuit breakers (CBs) to isolate the faulty DC-link, 2) using a proper converter topology to interrupt the DC fault current, and/or 3) using high-power DC transformers and DC hubs at strategic points within DC grids. The application of HVDC CBs is identified as the best approach that satisfies both DC grids and connected AC grids’ requirements. This article reports a comprehensive review of HVDC CBs technologies, including recent significant attempts in the development of modern HVDC CBs. The functional analysis of each technology is presented. Additionally, different technologies based on information obtained from literature are compared. Finally, recommendations for the improvement of CBs are presented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".