Frankfurt (Germany), 6-9 June 2011 Paper-ID: 0755 Harmonic Summation Effects of Modern Lamp...
-
Upload
raegan-beachem -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of Frankfurt (Germany), 6-9 June 2011 Paper-ID: 0755 Harmonic Summation Effects of Modern Lamp...
Frankfurt (Germany), 6-9 June 2011
Paper-ID: 0755
Harmonic Summation Effects of Modern Lamp Technologies and Small Electronic Household Equipment
Meyer, Jan Schegner, Peter Technische Universitaet Dresden
Heidenreich, Kurt Vattenfall Europe Distribution Hamburg GmbH
2Meyer, Jan – GERMANY – Session 2 – Paper 0755
Institute of Electrical Power Systems and High Voltage Engineering
Harmonic emission of mass-equipment
• Main source in public LV grids: Power electronic converters of mass equipment• Level and frequency spectrum
of emission depends on circuit topology
• Manufacturer interest: Cost-effective production• Used circuit topology
(especially for mass equipment) depends on limits/standards that apply(e.g. IEC 61000-3-2)
Popular circuit topologies:
Costs
THDi no PFC
passive PFC
active PFC
effective control by
standards
interest of manufacturers
3Meyer, Jan – GERMANY – Session 2 – Paper 0755
Institute of Electrical Power Systems and High Voltage Engineering
Situation in public LV grids
• No or „relaxed“ limitsfor illumination up to 25Welectronic equipment up to 75W
• Tighter limits forillumination above 25Welectronic equipment above 75W
• Public LV grids: Mixture of mass-equipment with different circuit topologies and consequently different harmonic emission
passive PFC
active PFC
no PFC
Probably preferred circuit technology:
Actual status quo of harmonic cancellation in LV grids ?Influence of technology changes or shifts in equipment mixture ?
Survey of individual emission of mass equipment and analysis of cancellation effects for 3rd and 5th harmonic
Small eq.
large eq.
4Meyer, Jan – GERMANY – Session 2 – Paper 0755
Institute of Electrical Power Systems and High Voltage Engineering
EE120%
EE212%
EE39%
Lamps59%
Overview of measured equipment (1)
• Total number of equipment:151 pieces
• Lamps:74x CFL (P 25W)5x CFL (P > 25W)11x SSL (P 25W)
• Electronic equipment:EE1 – 30x Office small (P 75W)EE2 – 18x Office large (P > 75W)EE3 – 13x Household small (P < 75W)
• Large household equipment not yet considered
• Scenario with dominating share of modern lamps -> analyse CFL impact
CFL – Compact flourescent lampsSSL – Solid state lamps (LED)EE - (Other) electronic equipment
5Meyer, Jan – GERMANY – Session 2 – Paper 0755
Institute of Electrical Power Systems and High Voltage Engineering
Overview of measured equipment (2)
• Different circuit topologies -> different waveforms and THDi values
• Clear identification of different groups possible
LampsOffice smallHousehold smallOffice large
0 30 60 90 120 150 180-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
i(t)
/ m
A
Angle / °
Waveforms Total harmonic distortion
0 50 100 1500
50
100
150
200
250
TH
Di /
%
P / W
Type (c)
Type (a)
Type (d)
Type (e)
Type (b)
6Meyer, Jan – GERMANY – Session 2 – Paper 0755
Institute of Electrical Power Systems and High Voltage Engineering
No power factor correction (nPFC) – Type (c)
• Small, high current peaks -> high harmonic content• Preferential phase angle of3rd harmonic: 195
5th harmonic: 30
-300 -150 0 150 300-300
-150
0
150
300
Ireal / mA
I imag /
mA
= 5n = 31k
p = 0.98
= 1.01
0 30 60 90 120 150 180-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
i(t)
/ mA
Angle / °
Waveform 5th harmonic current
Office smallHousehold small
7Meyer, Jan – GERMANY – Session 2 – Paper 0755
Institute of Electrical Power Systems and High Voltage Engineering
Cancellation effect of measured equipment
• Better phase angle diversity for 5th compared to 3rd harmonic
• Different levels of cancellation effect for analysed equipment/lamp mixture at 3rd and 5th harmonic
-400 -200 0 200 400-400
-200
0
200
400
Ireal / mA
I imag /
mA
= 3n = 151k
p = 0.54
= 1.16
-300 -150 0 150 300-300
-150
0
150
300
Ireal / mA I im
ag /
mA
= 5n = 151k
p = 0.17
= 1.75
3rd harmonic current 5th harmonic current
LampsOffice small
Household smallOffice large
8Meyer, Jan – GERMANY – Session 2 – Paper 0755
Institute of Electrical Power Systems and High Voltage Engineering
-350 -175 0 175 350-350
-175
0
175
350
I real / mA
I imag /
mA
CFL
Impact of changing technologies
• Best cancellation effect for CFL combined with passive PFC equipment
• Virtually no contribution to cancellation effect of 5th harmonic by active PFC equipment
5th harmonic current
No PFC (past)Passive PFC (today)Active PFC (future)
Cancellation effect
0 5 10 15 20 25
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
number CFL
kp(5)
9Meyer, Jan – GERMANY – Session 2 – Paper 0755
Institute of Electrical Power Systems and High Voltage Engineering
Experiment at single family house
• Expected changes of harmonic vectors for CFL switched ON/OFF• ON/OFF comparison for 5th harmonic: Similar magnitudes (210mA),
different phase angles (-40° -> 148°) -> Influence of CFL only identifiable by phase angle evaluation for this case !
-300 -150 0 150 300-300
-150
0
150
300
Ireal / mA I im
ag /
mA
o – OFF¡ - ON
ISLCFL
Preferential phase angle for CFL
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
Ireal
/ mA
I imag
/ m
A
o – OFF¡ - ON
ISLCFL
Preferential phase angle for CFL
3rd harmonic current 5th harmonic current
10Meyer, Jan – GERMANY – Session 2 – Paper 0755
Institute of Electrical Power Systems and High Voltage Engineering
Historical development in one specific public LV grid
• Measurement on Saturdays in 1999 and 2010 for 2 load states: No changes in consumer or network topology Decrease of 5th harmonic, but increase of 3rd harmonic current Phase angle shift: Indication for increased number of passive PFC
equipment (technology change stipulated by 61000-3-2)
3rd harmonic current 5th harmonic current
-20 -10 0 10 20-20
-10
0
10
20
Ireal / A
I imag /
A
o - 1999¡ - 2010MorningEvening
passive PFC
no PFC
CFL
-10 -5 0 5 10-10
-5
0
5
10
Ireal / A I im
ag /
A
o - 1999¡ - 2010MorningEvening
passive PFC
no
PFCCFL
11Meyer, Jan – GERMANY – Session 2 – Paper 0755
Institute of Electrical Power Systems and High Voltage Engineering
Conclusions• Efficiency of cancellation effect differs for different harmonics.
-> overall optimization
• Future changes or adaptions of standards should always ensure a good effectiveness of cancellation effects-> force phase angle diversity
• First grid measurement doesn‘t show dominating influence of modern lamps today (general conclusions not yet possible !).-> further development, installations with single type of equipment
Next steps:
• Long-term monitoring of low order harmonic currents (magnitude and phase angle) in different consumer structures -> identify possible changes in effectiveness of cancellation effect
• Development of web-based database for exchange of measurement data with other research institutions-> improve efficiency of research in this field
Frankfurt (Germany), 6-9 June 2011
Thank you for your attention !
Contact details:Jan MeyerTechnische Universität DresdenInstitute of Electrical Power Systems and High Voltage Engenieering01062 Dresden
tel. +49-351-463 35102fax. +49-351-463 37036
email: [email protected]
13Meyer, Jan – GERMANY – Session 2 – Paper 0755
Institute of Electrical Power Systems and High Voltage Engineering
Preferential phase angles of measured equipment
3rd harmonic current 5th harmonic current
CFLNo PFCPassive PFCActive PFC
-100
100
100
I imag
/ m
A
200-200 0
200
-100
-200
0
Ireal / mA
-200
200
200
I imag
/ m
A
400-400 0
400
-200
-400
0
Ireal / mA
• Good cancellation between no PFC and passive PFC equipment; favorable phase angle of CFL
• Cancellation effect more effective for 5th harmonic