This full text paper was peer-reviewed at the direction of IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Society prior to the

acceptance and publication.

On the Impact of Operating Modes

and Power Supply Conditions
on the Efficiency of Power Electronic Devices
X. Xu (*), A. J. Collin (*), S. Z. Djokic (*), Senior Member IEEE R. Langella (**), Senior Member IEEE, A. Testa (**),
Fellow IEEE, J. Meyer (***), Member, IEEE, F. Möller (***), S. Yanchenko (****)

(*) University of Edinburgh, Scotland, U.K. (s1258267@sms.ed.ac.uk , acollin@staffmail.ed.ac.uk , sasa.djokic@ed.ac.uk)

(**) Second University of Naples, Aversa (CE), Italy (roberto.langella@unina2.it; alfredo.testa@unina2.it)
(***) Technische Universitaet Dresden, Germany (jan.meyer@tu-dresden.de, friedemann.moeller@tu-dresden.de)
(****) Moscow Power Eng. Institute, Russia (yanchenko_sa@mail.ru)

Abstract—A wide range of modern low voltage power electronic
(PE) devices feature sophisticated controls, which aim to
improve device performance and ensure better regulation of
grid-side ac currents. The implementation of these controls is
expected to result in increased device efficiency, improved
controllability, higher operating power factors and reduced
harmonic emissions. The interactions of individual PE devices
and their controls with the supplying network are analyzed in
this paper in terms of the total harmonic distortion and emission
of main low-order harmonics, which are then used to assess
exchanges of powers at fundamental system frequency and non-
fundamental (i.e. harmonic) frequencies between the individual
PE device and the grid. Based on this analysis, the paper
correlates the obtained results for harmonic performance and
efficiencies over the entire range of operating powers of the
considered PE devices, calculated in accordance with the
standard definitions and using some alternative interpretations.
Index Terms—Efficiency, harmonics, operating mode, power-
dependent characteristics, power electronic devices.
I. INTRODUCTION
An increasing number of modern low voltage (LV) power
electronic (PE) devices utilize sophisticated control circuits for
improved performance and better regulation of grid-side ac
currents. The implementation of these controls usually results
in additional costs, which are generally justified by improved
device efficiency and controllability, as well as by achieving
higher power factors and reduced harmonic emissions during
operation. Consequently, it is expected that both passive (i.e.
power-consuming) and active (i.e. power-generating) modern
PE devices will have low harmonic emissions and also operate
with high efficiencies.
The test results from [1], however, demonstrated that some
photovoltaic inverters (PVIs) exhibit distinctive power-
dependent changes of performance, typically characterized by
increased (inter)harmonic emissions in low-power operating
modes (defined in this paper as 10 %-30 % of the rated power,
Prated), which might become particularly pronounced in very
low-power modes (defined as <10 % of Prated). The actual grid
supply conditions, i.e. presence of voltage waveform
distortions, or variations in supply voltage magnitudes, had an
additional impact on the characteristics of the tested PVIs.
This paper considers two other examples of modern PE
devices (switch mode power supplies, SMPS’, and electric
vehicle battery chargers, EVBCs), which are also subjected to a
series of tests over the entire range of their operating powers
and for various power supply conditions. During the tests, it
was observed that a number of PE devices were either
disconnected by the internal protection system, i.e. “tripped”,
or their controls were not able to maintain a stable operating
point, which resulted in continuous variations of their ac supply
currents in low-power and very low-power operating modes. In
these cases, previously developed models of PE devices ([2]-
[5]) are used to complement test results and analyze the device
performance for the whole range of possible operating
conditions.
The measurement results presented investigate a range of
complex interactions of PE devices and their controls with the
grid, in which powers are exchanged not only at the
fundamental system frequency, but also at non-fundamental
(i.e. harmonic) frequencies. These interactions are assessed in
terms of both absolute and relative harmonic distortion indices
and individual harmonics. Based on this analysis, the results
for correlated harmonic-efficiency performance of PE devices
over the entire range of operating powers are presented.
Reference is made to the standard definitions and to some
alternative interpretations. Finally, some recommendations for
updating current procedures for assessing harmonic emission
limits in [6] are provided.

978-1-5090-2373-8/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE

 II. HARMONIC PERFORMANCE FOR DIFFERENT
OPERATING MODES AND POWER SUPPLY CONDITIONS
Calculation of current harmonic content is a common way
to quantify the presence of distortion in instantaneous current
waveforms of PE devices connected to the grid.
It can be presented (e.g. [6]) in two general ways:
h sampling rate per channel of 1 MHz (the used sampling rate
THC = ¦ I i2 , (1)
i =2
h §I ·
2 measuring chain was determined by Monte Carlo simulations
THD I = ¦ ¨¨ i ¸¸ ×100 , (2)
i =2 © I1 ¹
where: THC is the total harmonic current in amps, Ii is the
magnitude of the current harmonic of order i, h is the
maximum harmonic order considered in the analysis THDI is
the total harmonic distortion of current in % of I1, which is
the magnitude of the fundamental component of the
instantaneous current.
For the study of electromagnetic compatibility (EMC)
issues, either THC or TDD, which is the total harmonic
distortion of current in percentage of the device’s rated (or
peak/maximum) current, should be used. This includes
evaluation of the contributions of a number of devices to the
resulting harmonic distortion in the network, or compliance
assessment of an individual device with stipulated limits (e.g.
in [6]). For assessing the harmonic performance of an
individual device, THDI is an appropriate index, as it
indicates how harmonic currents of the device change in
relation to its fundamental current. As the main focus of this
paper is on power-dependent changes of individual PE
devices, most of the results are presented as THD values, or
as individual harmonic magnitudes in percentages of the
In the data acquisition (DAQ) system, voltages were
directly measured by setting the measurement range of the
signal conditioning to ±400ௗV and ±800ௗV for ac and dc
channels, respectively, while current measurements were
performed using flux compensated Hall-element clamps with
a full scale of 150 A. The DAQ board has 2x8 synchronous
analog input channels, with a 16-bit resolution and maximum
was 300 kHz).
In [1], the combined standard uncertainty of the current
starting from the standard uncertainties of the used current
clamps, of the signal conditioning module and of the ADC. It
was concluded that uncertainties lower than 5 %, 2 % and
1 % can be achieved for individual harmonic magnitudes
higher than 50 mA, 100 mA and 200 mA, respectively.
Moreover, an intensive laboratory testing aimed to
directly determine uncertainties of both current and voltage
chains in terms of the amplitudes and phase angles was
conducted using a universal calibrator (Omicron CMC256-
EP). In the ranges of magnitudes and frequencies of interest,
it was verified that the following practical accuracy values
can be considered: i) < 1% for both voltage and current
magnitudes ii) < 1° and < 2° for voltage and current phase
angles, respectively.
B. The Results for PVIs
Three different PVIs are subjected to a series of
comprehensive tests with various voltage supply conditions
and source impedances, Fig. 1.
a) THDI (WF1, Zs~0)
100
PVI-1
75 PVI-2
THDI (%)

PVI-3
corresponding fundamental currents. The paper also provides 50
some results for THC, in order to provide some insight into
the possible impact of PE devices on the grid, and for the 25
completeness of the discussion 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
A. Laboratory Tests and Simulation Results P (%)
A fully automated test-bed described in details in [1] was b) THC (WF1, Zs~0)
used for all presented measurements. It consisted of a 1 MHz 0.5
PVI-1 PVI-2 PVI-3
acquisition system and a controllable three-phase power 0.4
source with three voltage waveforms used in tests: sinusoidal,
THC (A)

0.3
WF1, “flat-top”, WF2, and “pointed-top”, WF3, emulating 0.2
typical “background distortions” in LV grids, [1]. In the tests,
0.1
source impedance was either adjusted to be as low as
possible, Zs0~0, representing impedance of the cable 0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
connecting tested PE device to the power source, or as P (%)
“maximum expected source impedance” (at 90 % LV supply c) THDI for PVI-2 (WF1 with Zs~0, WF2 and WF3 with Zsmax)
points, [7]), Zsmax. 1000
WF1 (PVI-2)
In particular, for PVI testing a PV Emulator was used. Its WF2 (PVI-2)
THDI (%)

main characteristics are: free programmable I/V 100

WF3 (PVI-2)
characteristics, fast response time to load changes, typically
shorter than 100ȝs, voltage accuracy at MPP of ± 2ௗV, current 10
accuracy at MPP of ± 0.25ௗA, Prated = 10 kW.
The Power Amplifier main specifications are: amplitude 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
resolution of 0.01 %, voltage accuracy of <0.1 %; Prated = P (%)
45 kVA. Fig. 1. Laboratory measurements: THDI and THC of three tested PVIs.
 During the transition from one adjusted testing point to total current in low-power mode increases, with a stronger
another, measurements are taken after each PVI reached impact on the 3rd harmonic. The results for harmonic
stable operating conditions. Accordingly, the presented performance of this SMPS are discussed further in Section III.
results generally correspond to steady operating conditions of a) THDI (WF1-WF3, Zs~0)
the tested PVIs, while dynamic changes in their performance, 70 WF1 (Measurement) WF1 (Simulation)
WF2 (Measurement) WF2 (Simulation)
i.e. harmonic emission and efficiency, were considered out of WF3 (Measurement) WF3 (Simulation)
60
the scope of this paper. However, the initial results in [1]

THDI (%)
suggest that dynamic/transient operating conditions of PVIs 50
Unstable Operation
(e.g. due to the fast changes in cloud coverage conditions) below 10% of Prated
40
might have an additional impact on their performance and
that issue is the subject of the ongoing work by the authors. 30
The results in Fig. 1a and 1b show that all tested PVIs
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
exhibit significant changes in their THDI values in low-power P (%)
operating modes. Two of three tested PVIs also show a b) THC (WF1-WF3, Zs~0)
noticeable increase in their THC values (around 25 % of Prated 1.0 WF1 (Measurement) WF1 (Simulation)
for PVI-1 and around 10 % of Prated for PVI-2). For PVI-3, WF2 (Measurement) WF2 (Simulation)
0.8 WF3 (Measurement) WF3 (Simulation)
however, there is no increase of THC values.

THC (A)
The strong impact of distorted voltage waveforms and 0.6
maximum expected source impedance (Zsmax), on PVI-2
0.4
harmonic performance is shown in Fig. 1c (also reported in
[8]). These results clearly indicate that PVI-2 cannot maintain 0.2
(the expected) low harmonic emissions when connected to
0.0
grids with typical background distortion and expected source 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
impedance values. This is discussed further in Section III. P (%)
rd th
c) 3 and 5 current harmonic magnitudes
60
WF1 (Measurement) WF1 (Simulation)
C. The Results for SMPS 50 WF2 (Measurement) WF2 (Simulation)
Test and simulation results for THDI¸ THC and individual WF3 (Measurement) WF3 (Simulation)
Magnitude (%)

harmonics of an a-PFC-controlled SMPS with Prated of 400 W
(a standard desktop PC supply) with WF1, WF2 and WF3 and
Zs0 are shown in Fig. 2.
In very low power operating mode (<10 % Prated), the
SMPS enters unstable operating conditions, which prevented
further testing. In order to analyze the harmonic performance
of this SMPS for the whole range of operating powers and
different supply conditions, an accurate SMPS model
developed in [3]-[5] was used to complement the available test
results.
Fig. 2a shows that the harmonic performance of the SMPS
starts to change considerably in low-power mode (<20 %-25 %
of Prated), with more pronounced changes observed in very low-
power mode (<10 % of Prated), when the SMPS was unable to
reach a stable operating point in tests (simulations confirmed
that its harmonic currents are almost equal to the corresponding
fundamental currents).
Fig. 2b shows that the operation of the SMPS at reduced
powers does not increase the absolute currents (fundamental
and harmonic) drawn from the supply. This indicates that the
impact of the SMPS on the grid reduces with decreasing
power.
It is possible to observe the impact of supply voltage
distortions with reference to sinusoidal (WF1) supply
conditions: current distortions decrease for “flat-top” (WF2)
and increase for “pointed-top” (WF3) voltage waveform.
Similar conclusions apply for individual harmonics in Fig. 2c,
showing that the contribution of the 3rd and 5th harmonics to the
40
Ih3
30
20
Ih5
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
P (%)
Fig. 2. Laboratory measurements and simulations: THDI, THC, 3rd and 5th
harmonics as % of fundamental current for SMPS.
D. The Results for EVBCs
Test and simulation results of EVBCs are also combined,
in order to cover changes in their characteristics for the whole
range of operating powers. The main reason for that was
transfer from constant-current (CC) to constant-voltage (CV)
charging modes and the very short time of charging in CV
mode, preventing the acquisition of a full set of measurement
results. Available results of testing EVBC-1, EVBC-2 and
EVBC-3, are complemented in Fig. 3 with simulation results
for EVBC-1 using model developed in [2] and [5].
Fig. 3a shows that the THDI values of all EVBCs
noticeably increase below 30 %-40 % of Prated, with EVBC-1
simulation results confirming further increase in very low-
power mode (<10 % of Prated). Some high THDI values are
measured for “stand-by” mode (finished charging, but
EVBCs connected to grid). The THC plots in Fig. 3b indicate
that the absolute harmonic currents of EVBCs steadily
decrease with reduced powers, except for EVBC-3 (which
exhibits an increase in THCfor <40 % of Prated). Fig. 3c shows the grid (G). For PE devices operated in active/inverter mode
that all harmonic currents can be as high as 25 % of the (I), the total efficiency and the fundamental power efficiency
fundamental one in very low-power mode. The harmonic are:
performance of EVBC-1 is further discussed and correlated P P1 + PPEh
ηPE ,I = PE ,out = PE ,out ,out
(3)
with power-dependent efficiency changes in Section III. PPE ,in PPE ,in
a) THDI (WF1, Zs~0) 1
100 PPE ,out
EVBC1 (Measurement) EVBC2 (Measurement) η' PE ,I = (4)
EVBC1 (Simulation) EVBC3 (Measurement) PPE ,in
80
where: ηPE,I – the total efficiency of a PE device operated in
inverter mode, PPE,out – the total output active power, PPE,in –
THDI (%)

60 Disconnecting in CV mode at:

23%, 12% and 24% of Prated the total input active power, P1PE,out – the fundamental output
40 active power, PhPE,out – the harmonic output active power,
η’PE,I – the fundamental power efficiency.
20 For PE devices operated in passive/rectifier mode (R), the
same quantities can be defined as:
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 P P
P (%) ηPE ,R = PE ,out = 1 PE ,outh (5)
b) THC (WF1, Zs~0) PPE ,in PPE ,in + PPE ,out
2.0 PPE ,out
EVBC1 (Measurement) η' PE ,R =1
(6)
EVBC1 (Simulation) PPE ,in
1.5 EVBC2 (Measurement) The corresponding network/system efficiencies are:
EVBC3 (Measurement)
THC (A)

P P
1.0 ηN ,I = N ,out , η' N ,I = N1,out , (7, 8)
PN ,in PN ,in
0.5 PN ,out P1
ηN ,R = , η' N ,R = N ,out . (9, 10)
PN ,in PN ,in
0.0 The symbols in (5)-(6) and (7)-(10) have the same
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 meanings as in (3)-(4), but are written with corresponding
P (%) subscripts for PE device operated in rectifier mode and for
c) 3rd, 5th and 7th current harmonic magnitudes (WF1, Zs~0) the network, respectively.
30
Ih3 (Measurement) Ih3 (Simulation) It is straightforward to demonstrate that the “global
25 Ih5 (Measurement) Ih5 (Simulation)
efficiency” is independent on type of device (active or
passive):
Magnitude (%)

20 Ih7 (Measurement) Ih7 (Simulation)

P
ηG = out = ηN ⋅ ηPE = η' N ⋅η' PE (11)
15 Pin
10 For example, for a PE device operated in rectifier mode:
• if Ph is negative (PE device is absorbing at fundamental
5 and injecting at harmonic frequencies), η' < η, (5) and (6),
0
correctly “penalizing” the polluting device, [10];
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 • if Ph is positive (PE device is absorbing at both
P (%) fundamental and harmonic frequencies due to supply
Fig. 3. Laboratory measurements and simulations: THDI, THC and network distortion), η' > η, correctly “rewarding” the
individual harmonics for three EVBCs. device that is suffering from a polluting supply network.
Similar analysis applies for a PE device operated in
III. EVALUATION OF EFFICIENCY AND CORRELATION active/inverter mode, with Ph in the numerator in (3) and (4).
WITH HARMONIC PERFORMANCE Based on the above analysis and using both experimental and
A. Theoretical Background simulation studies, the results presented in further text consider
how the efficiency of the considered modern PE devices (PVIs,
In [9], the concept of efficiency is discussed with SMPS’ and EVBCs) change for different operating powers and
reference to a case study of a building where an increasing supply conditions. As mentioned, the focus of the paper is on
number of PE devices are connected. Reference was made to the performance of individual PE devices, not on the network
the “total” efficiency, η, from the input to the output of the impact, so the results are mostly related to the assessment of
device, and to the “fundamental power” efficiency, η'. The PE device efficiency in terms of the fundamental and non-
same differentiation was made for the supply network, fundamental power flows in/out of the device. Furthermore, the
introducing the total system efficiency, ηS, and the changes in the PE devices’ efficiencies are correlated with the
fundamental power system efficiency, η'S. previously discussed changes in their harmonic performance.
This paper generalizes the above definitions to any device As for the propagation of the uncertainties of voltage and
(D), connected through a PE interface and a network (N) to current measuring chains on the evaluation of the active
powers and efficiencies, uncertainties less than 1.5% and less 100
than 2% for powers and efficiencies, respectively, can be
considered. These values do not affect significantly the 95
96
generality of the considerations reported in the following text.

η, η' (%)
90 92
B. Efficiency Analysis of PV Inverters 88
85
Fig. 4 shows the comparison between fundamental and 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
total efficiencies for different operating powers under 80 η (WF1) η' (WF1)
sinusoidal (WF1) and “pointed-top” (WF3) background η (WF3) η' (WF3)
distortion. 75
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
It is possible to observe that the efficiencies η' and η are P (%)
equal for sinusoidal supply voltage (WF1), while they show Fig. 5. Efficiencies of SMPS for WF1 and WF3 with Zsmax.
significant differences due to the presence of background
voltage distortion (results for WF3). The main reason for the 90
difference between η' and η for WF3 is related to the sign of 80 89
the harmonic power, which is negative for WF3, 70 88
demonstrating that the inverter is behaving like a load
60 87

η, η' (%)
(consuming harmonic powers from the grid). This is 86
50
discussed further in the next section. η' (WF3) approaches 85
30 35 40 45 50

η/η' (WF1) showing that the reduction of η' (WF3) is a 40

consequence of the background distortion. 30 η (WF1) η' (WF1)
η (WF2) η' (WF2)
Moreover, for power values higher than 50 % the 20
η (WF3) η' (WF3)
fundamental efficiency is almost constant and shows virtually 10
no dependency on supply voltage distortion. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
P (%)
94
Fig. 6. Efficiencies of EVBC-1 for WF1, WF2 and WF3 with Zsmax.
92
90
η, η'(%)

88 E. Correlation of Harmonic Powers, THDI Values and

86
84
82
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
P (%)
Fig. 4. Efficiencies of PVI-2 for WF1 and WF3 with Zsmax.
C. Efficiency Analysis of SMPS
Fig. 5 for SMPS is equivalent to Fig. 4 for PVI-2. It is
possible to observe that both fundamental efficiency η' and
total efficiency η do not show any significant difference
among each other, with no evident dependency on the
presence/absence of supply voltage distortion. Very small
differences can be seen in the magnified part of the figure.
These differences can be explained from the harmonic power
analysis in the following section. On the contrary, similar
analyses done on a SMPS without a-APFC showed results
very similar to those of Fig. 4, confirming that the a-APFC
technology reducing the THDI reduces also the flow of
harmonic power.
D. Efficiency Analysis of EVBC
Fig. 6 for EVBC-1 is equivalent to Figs. 4 and 5. The
same conclusions made for the SMPS in Fig. 5 drawn here
apply in this case. It is worthwhile noting that the efficiency
reaches a maximum value at around 45 % of rated power and
then starts decreasing. This happens also for PVI and SMPS
for operating power around 50 % (Fig. 4% (Figs. 4 and 5).
η (WF1) Efficiencies
η' (WF1)
Fig. 7 reports THDI and Ph/P values versus the output
η (WF3)
power of different PE devices: a) PVI-2, b) SMPS, and
η' (WF3) c) EVBC-1, for different supply voltage conditions. The
90 100 results for sinusoidal supply conditions (WF1) are not
presented, as in this case there are no harmonic powers.
Comparing results in Fig. 7 with those from Figs. 4-6, it
isis possible to observe correlation among harmonic powers,
THDI values and efficiencies, confirming the findings and
conclusions from the previous section.
In particular, it can be clearly seen that PVI-2, as an
example of an "active" PE device (which is also with the
highest rated power), absorbs harmonic powers from the
supply in the presence of supply voltage distortion (note
negative sign of Y-axis in Fig. 7a) while injecting power at
the fundamental frequency. In very low power mode, its
harmonic powers are around 10 % of the total power. On the
contrary, harmonic powers of Figs. 7b) and 7c) are so small
that do not impact significantly on the efficiencies.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
The characteristics of modern LV PE devices have
changed significantly in recent decades, with most of them
now featuring complex and sophisticated controls for
improved controllability, increased efficiency, higher power
factors and reduced harmonic emission. The results of both
measurements and simulations presented in this paper,
however, show that most of the considered PE devices will
typically exhibit significant power-dependency of both
harmonic performance and efficiency.
 a) PVI-2 levels. However, penetration levels of “new” PE devices
500 0 increase steadily and, as the results of tests indicate, diversity
-1 between different models/brands is comparatively low.
400 Therefore, a major revision of current procedures for
-2
assessing emission limits is recommended, particularly for PE

Ph/P (%)
300 -3
THDI (%)

devices with Irated ” 16 A. One possible solution could be the

-4
200 THDI (WF2) Ph/P (WF2) introduction of an additional equipment class (Class E) for PE
-5
THDI (WF3) Ph/P (WF3)
devices with a-PFC circuit topologies, due to the similarities
-6 in their characteristics.
100
-7
0 -8 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
P (%) The authors gratefully acknowledge support received
b) SMPS from the German Federal Ministry for the Environment,
70 0.9 Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (project
THDI (WF2) Ph/P (WF2) ElmoNetQ, FKZ: 16EM1052) and from the Italian Campania
60 0.6
THDI (WF3) Ph/P (WF3) region (project POLIGRID). The authors also wish to thank
50 the Swiss consortium VEiN (Distributed Generation in Low
THDI (%)

0.3

Ph/P (%)
40 Voltage Networks) for supporting this work by providing
0.0 harmonic measurements of a PV installation.
30
-0.3
20 REFERENCES
10 -0.6 [1] R. Langella, A. Testa, J. Meyer, F. Möller, R. Stiegler, S. Z. Djokic,
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 “Experimental Based Evaluation of PV Inverters Harmonic and
P (%) Interharmonic Distortion Due to Different Operating Conditions,” IEEE
c) EVBC-1 Trans. on Instrumentation and Measurement, Vol. PP, Iss. 99, pp. 1-13,
1.2 2016 (available online).
50 [2] X. Xu, M. He, P. Kourtza, A. Collin, G. Harrison S. Z. Djokic, J.
THDI (WF2) Ph/P (WF2)
45 1.0 Meyer, S. Müller and F. Möller, “Component-Based Modelling of EV
THDI (WF3) Ph/P (WF3)
40 Battery Chargers”, in Proc. IEEE PowerTech Conference, Eindhoven,
0.8
35 Netherland, Jun. - Jul. 2015.
Ph/P (%)
THDI (%)

30 0.6 [3] S. Yanchenko, J. Meyer “Harmonic Emission of Household Devices in

25
20
15
10
5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
P (%)
Fig. 7. THDI and Ph/P values versus the output power of different PE
devices: a) PVI-2; b), SMPS c) EVBC-1, for different supply voltage
conditions.
The problem of selecting the most appropriate
(conversion) efficiency for the analysis of PE devices is
discussed in the paper, concluding that in the case of PVI, a
“fairer” approach should refer to the definition of the
efficiency based on the fundamental power. This definition is
recommended as it takes into account, in a more appropriate
way, harmonic emissions and interactions between the grid
and the device (i.e. “polluting responsibilities”).
The presented results and analysis also raise an important
question about the adequacy of current recommendations and
procedures for the assessment of harmonic emission limits
and EMC (e.g. in [6]). Most of the related standards, which
were developed several decades ago, require only tests with
ideally sinusoidal voltages and without source impedance.
Moreover, [6] allocates almost all “new” equipment to
Class A, expecting higher diversity between different
equipment and their implementation at lower penetration
Presence of Typical Voltage Distortions”, in Proc. IEEE PowerTech
0.4 Conference, Eindhoven, Netherland, Jun. - Jul. 2015.
0.2 [4] A. M. Blanco, S. Yanchenko, J. Meyer, P. Schegner “The Impact of
Supply Voltage Distortion on the Harmonic Current Emission of Non-
0.0 linear Loads”, DYNA, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Issue 192,
100 August 2015.
[5] X. Xu, A. J. Collin, S. Z. Djokic, S. Yanchenko, F. Möller, J. Meyer, R.
Langella, A. Testa, “Analysis and Modelling of Power-Dependent
Harmonic Characteristics of Modern PE Devices in LV Networks”,
IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, Spec. Issue on Contemp. Issues in
Power Quality, Vol. PP, Iss. 99, pp. 1-9, 2016 (available online).
[6] Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) - Part 3-2: Limits - Limits for
harmonic current emissions (equipment with input current ” 16 A per
phase. IEC Standard IEC 61000-3-2, 2006.
[7] Consideration of Reference Impedances and Public Supply of Network
Impedance for Use in Determining Disturbance Characteristics of
Electrical Equipment Having a Rated Current Less Than 75A Per
Phase, IEC, Standard, IEC 60725, 2005.
[8] S. Müller, J. Meyer, P. Schegner: “Characterization of Small
Photovoltaic Inverters for Harmonic Modeling”, ICHQP, June 2014,
Bucharest, Romania.
[9] R. Langella, A. Testa, “Switching Power Supplies: Analysis of
Waveform Distortion and Absorbed Powers”, 9th Int. Conf. on
Electrical Power Quality and Utilization Oct. 2007, Barcelona, Spain.
(also invited Panel Presentation at IEEE PES GM 2014, Washington
DC, USA, July 2014).
[10] L. S. Czarnecki, “Comments on Active Power Flow and Energy
Accounts in Electrical Systems with Nonsinusoidal Waveforms and
Asymmetry”, IEEE Trans. on Power Deliv., Vol. 11, Iss. 3, Jul. 1996.