Proceedings of the International Conference on ENERGY and ENVIRONMENT TECHNOLOGIES and EQUIPMENT

ATTILA BUCHMAN, CLAUDIU LUNG, MIRCEA HORGOS, ALIN TISAN, STEFAN ONIGA
Electronic and Computer Engineering Department
North University
Victor Babes str., 62/A, 430083, Baia Mare
ROMANIA
abuchman@ubm.ro http://www.ece.ubm.ro

Abstract: Electronic appliances connected to the low voltage alternating current network draw non sinusoidal current.
Due to the huge number of such consumers, the mains voltage is more or less distorted. In order to protect to the public
network from polluting consumers, a figure of merit to evaluate the harmonic generating behavior of the loads is
needed. Power factor is often used in this purpose but as we will prove in this paper this parameter is not suitable
under non sinusoidal voltage condition. Another parameter, total harmonic distortion of current is applicable but it
includes all harmonics not only those produced by the load under test. A third parameter, load generated harmonic, is
introduced in this paper to accurately evaluate the polluting effect of a certain load.

Key Words: power theory, power factor, active power, apparent power, harmonic distortion, load generated
harmonics.

Increasing use of electronic devices in daily life has
reinforced the stress caused by harmonic currents on
low6voltage alternating6current (LVAC) public networks
[1]. Indeed, most domestic electrical and electronic
equipment needs direct current to operate. All of them
use rectifiers to connect to the LVAC network. Common
rectifiers have bulk capacitors to reduce voltage ripple.
These capacitors charges for a very short period of time
close to the moment when the AC voltage reaches its
maximum value. One can say that all rectifiers
connected to the same phase of the LVAC network
charge their capacitors at the same time.
The LVAC network has finite valued impedance
that varies from location to location and from country to
country [2]. By consequence large current peaks will
produce a clamping of the mains voltage (fig.1).
Fig.1. Voltage applied to and current drawn by a TV set
The shape of the mains voltage, as measured at the
wall outlet is presented in fig.1 along with the current
drawn by a TV set. One can see that not only the load is
harmonic generating [3] but is already fed by non
sinusoidal voltage.
Distorted mains voltage affects power components
such as phase6correction capacitors and electric motors
which experience an increase in temperature and hence a
reduction in lifetime [2]. The conclusion to be drawn is
that mains connected equipment should be subjected to
harmonic emission control. For that purpose harmonic
emission of all LVAC connected loads must be
quantified.
When it comes to harmonic emission two figures of
merit are widely used: power factor (PF) and total
harmonic distortion of current (THDI). Under sinusoidal
voltage condition (which was applicable to LVAC
networks not so long time ago) these figures are closely
related and any of them would be adequate. Power factor
correction was in fact similar to harmonic emission
reduction. But when the voltage itself is already
distorted even a purely resistive load (PF=1) will draw a
non sinusoidal current (THDI > 0). So, the applicability
of theses parameters to harmonic emission evaluation
deserves to be investigated.
Several power theories exist. The first was proposed
by Budeanu [4] and perfected by the so called IEEE
group [5],[6]. In this paper PF and THDI are computed

ISSN: 1790-5095 46 ISBN: 978-960-474-181-6

 Proceedings of the International Conference on ENERGY and ENVIRONMENT TECHNOLOGIES and EQUIPMENT
according to this theory. The newest power theory
proposed by Czarnecki [7],[8], is the first to give
practical means to identify load generated harmonics. In
this paper, load generated harmonic distortions (LGHD)
will be defined according to this theory.
! "
If u(t) and i(t) are the instant values of voltage applied to
and current flowing thru a load then the instant power
(p) is given by equation (1).
If p is periodic having period T then the active power (P)
is given by equation (2).
If u and i are periodic with the period T then the
effective values (U and I respectively) are given by
equations (3) and (4).
Their product is the apparent power (S) as defined by
eq.(5).
Knowing P and S one can compute PF using eq.(6).
As one can see from eq. (1)6(6) computation of PF is
fairly simple and is all done in time domain. More than
that U, I and P can be directly measured so it takes only
one multiplication (eq.5) and one division (eq.6) to
compute PF. That is one more reason for its extended
use.
But regarding harmonic emission PF gives only an
indirect evaluation under non sinusoidal condition. If
PF=1 all the power originating from the source is
absorbed by the load so no harmonic current is
generated by the load itself. But if PF < 1 then there is
also non active power in the system and the load is
susceptible of harmonic emission. As our experimental
ISSN: 1790-5095
results prove it, PF can give erroneous evaluation of
harmonic emission in these situations.
# $ % "
"
In order to compute THDI a frequency domain analysis
is required. In this case dedicated signal processing or
circuit analysis software is required to perform a Fourier
series decomposition of i(t). For THDI computation only
the amplitudes (In) of the harmonic components are
required (eq. 7).
! " $
THDI gives a direct evaluation of harmonic emission. It
equals 0 only for a pure sine. THDI increases as
harmonic pollution increase. But THDI alone would not
tell the source of harmonic pollution. Under non
sinusoidal voltage condition the current will be non
sinusoidal even if the load itself is not harmonic
emitting. One way to overcome this issue is to compute
the total harmonic distortion of the voltage to. The load
is responsible of harmonic pollution only if THDI is
larger than THDU. (It is not about comparing volts with
amps but as eq.(7) implies is about comparing two
dimensionless figures of merit).
& $
'
Based on Czarnecki’s power theory [3],[7],[8], it is
possible to identify not only if the load is harmonics
generating but also the frequency of those harmonics. As
stated in [3] the active power of the nth order harmonic
" " " %&' (" )
equals Pn in eq.(8).
Pn is positive if the power flows from the source to the
load. If Pn is negative the power flows from load to
source. If that is the case, that particular harmonic is
generated by the load itself. Since Un and In are always
positives, Pn is negative if and only if cos(φn) is
negative. Identifying load generated harmonics is thus a
simple task in frequency domain.
In order to define a figure of merit similar to THDI
we would suggest the use of load generated harmonic
distortion (LGHD), defined as in eq. (9).
47 ISBN: 978-960-474-181-6
 Proceedings of the International Conference on ENERGY and ENVIRONMENT TECHNOLOGIES and EQUIPMENT

#
Six loads (monitors, PCs, TVs)
s) were
wer tested. One of them

*+ ! , -
(SMPS1) had no power factor or correction
cor (PFC) at all,
three of them (TV, monitor1, PC)) had passive PFC and
the last two (monitor2, SMPS2) had different type of
active PFC. For each one of them PF, THDI, THDU and
The values of h in eq. (9) are those values of n that LGHD were computed. Table 1 summarizes
sum the results.

./0(" 1 2
satisfy eq. (10).
Obviously THDU is not expected
ected to be altered by one
(10) particular load but its value depe
depends on the location
were the measurement is takenn and the global load of the
According to this definition, strictly the harmonics
LVAC network. SMPS1 and SMPS2 were measured in
contributed by the load will degrade its figure of merit.
the same place, one after the other,
other and that is why the
THDU value is the same forr them
them. The same goes for
monitors 1 and 2. A more compreh
mprehensive representation
& ( of these results appears in fig.3, where the graph of
In order to test the ability of PF, THDI and LGHD to THDI and LGHD versus PF iss presented.
prese
evaluate harmonic emission related performa
rformances some
experimental work was done. The voltagege applied
app to and
the current passing through six different
erent loads was
recorded using the setup in fig.2. Each record
recor contains
20,000 values sampled at a rate off 100kHz,
100 thus
covering a 200ms time window.

Fig.3. Harmonic distortion versus

rsus power
p factor.

As one can see in fig.3 as PF increases THDI and

Fig.2. Block diagram of thee system
syst LGHD both decrease, but only nly for
fo PF values smaller
than 0.95. If PF gets higherr than that, an increase in
A two channel, 14 bit resolution data acquisiti
cquisition system THDI and LGHD appears. This apparent
ap paradox has a
was used. One channel used a step p down
dow voltage simple explanation if we take into in account the non
transformer to record samples of u(t) the other
oth channel sinusoidal voltage condition. PFC equals
e unity when the
used a current transformer to record samples
mples of i(t). The current has the same shape ass the mains
m voltage. Or, the
results were transferred to a hostt computer
com for mains voltage is already distorted
istorted and has a certain
processing. PF was computed using eq.. (1)6(6).The
(1) fast harmonic content (see column THDU
THD in table 1). So if
Fourier transform was used in orderr to obtain the the current is too much resemblin
embling to mains voltage
amplitudes and phase angles of the first
st 25 harmonics. (PF>0.95) then its shape woulduld be less sinusoidal then
Thus THDI (eq.7) and LGHD (eq.9) were re computed.
com for say PF=0.94. It is now obvious
obviou that PF cannot be
Table 1. used to evaluate the harmonicic emitting
emit behavior of the
! # $) # $ $
load, at least not when PF value
lue approaches
app unity.
!
*+ * no 0.52 0.06 1.34 1.309 Table 2 shows the amplitud plitudes of the first 25
# passive 0.68 0.07 0.98 0.971 harmonics, values related to the amplitude of the
passive 0.73 0.08 0.79 0.776 fundamental. The shaded cells contain the load
passive 0.82 0.09 0.67 0.438 generated harmonics, identified
ied using
us eq. (10). As one
active 0.97 0.08 0.22 0.132
can see if the load has no PFC then
the very powerful low
order (3th, 5th and 7th) harmonics
nics are
ar generated. Passive
*+ * active 0.94 0.06 0.13 0.017
PFC (columns TV, mon1 and PC in tab.2) reduces them
more or less but only active PFC (last two columns in

ISSN: 1790-5095 48 ISBN: 978-960-474-181-6

 Proceedings of the International Conference on ENERGY and ENVIRONMENT TECHNOLOGIES and EQUIPMENT

greater than 21th)

tab.2) eliminates them. Higher order (greater
harmonics are negligible even if no PFC C is present.
p The
input EMI filter that all loads under test
st possessed
poss
be the reason of that.
Table 2.
*+ * #
& 0.944 0.797 0.701 0.423 0.121
0.12 0.040
, 0.716 0.485 0.229 0.291 0.167
0.16 0.050
- 0.508 0.217 0.105 0.351 0.044
0.04 0.006
. necessary mean better harmoniconic ccontent (see last two
0.248 0.086 0.183 0.056 0.022
0.02 0.010
0.114 0.027 0.070 0.180 0.023
0.02 0.010
& 0.146 0.074 0.114 0.090 0.029
0.02 0.010
, 0.136 0.116 0.127 0.085 0.012
0.01 0.002
- 0.121 0.093 0.047 0.090 0.021
0.02 0.008
. PF reaches a value of 0.75 (see
0.119 0.027 0.062 0.041 0.026
0.02 0.013
0.038 0.041 0.047 0.066 0.006
0.00 0.011
& 0.002 0.054 0.010 0.037 0.017
0.01 0.005
, 0.038 0.027 0.036 0.040 0.018
0.01 0.008
Some of the information contained in table t 2 is
graphically presented in figure 4. One ne can
ca see that
SMPS1 (no PFC) generates harmonics greater
greate than 10%
of the fundamental up until the 19th order.
order The best
passive PFC reduces them but still has the 3th, 5th, 7th and
11th harmonics greater than 10%. Only nly active
a PFC
reduces harmonics dramatically. SMPS2 has no
harmonics greater than 5%.
based on Czarnecki’s power theo eory [3]. Their values
were computed for six different
erent harmonic generating
may loads: one with no power factor
ctor correction
co at all, three
with passive PFC and two with
th activ
active PFC.
Based on the experimental results
esults presented in tables 1
and 2 and fig. 3 and 4 several
ral con
conclusions concerning
*+ *
harmonic emission estimation can be
b drawn.
(i) PF can be used to evaluate
eva the harmonic
emission, but only under sinusoida
usoidal voltage conditions.
If the voltage is distorted greater
er PF value does not
rows in tab.1). A good PFC circuit tends to distort the
current in accordance with thee mains
main voltage.
(ii) Both THDI and LGHD accurately
acc evaluates the
harmonic emitting behavior of the load and there is no
significant difference between THDI
TH and LGHD until
ee fig. 3).
(iii) Until the current distortio
istortion due to poor PFC
dominates LHDI almost equals THDI.TH But if effective
PFC reduces current distortions to levels close to that of
voltage distortions, then the difference
differ between THDI
(which includes harmonics dueue to distorted voltage and
harmonics generated by the load as well) and LGHD
(which includes only loadd ge generated harmonics)
becomes sensitive.
(iv) Apparently a PF greaterter than
tha 0.95 is not suitable
because an increase in THDI and LHDI appears (see
fig.2). In fact that is not true.. If all
al loads connected to
the network would have activee power
pow correction than no
significant distortions of mains
ns voltage
volt would occur and
the very same load (SMPS2 inn table 1) would have a PF
closer to 1 without any modifi modification in the PFC
circuitry.
Comparing the best performing ing lo
loads, monitor2 (best
PF) and SMPS2 (best THDI and LHDI) it is obvious
(see table 2) that SMPS2 is by far fa the less harmonic
generating load. If only the PF value
val were known, than
monitor2 would be considered ered as having the best
performance. So PF alone cannot be used as a valid
estimator of the harmonic generatin
nerating behavior of loads.
THDI alone or LHDI alone ne wowould give a correct
evaluation.

Fig.4. Relative amplitude of harmonic currents.

rents.
References:
[1] ***, Harmonic Current Emissio
missions, Guidelines to
the standard EN 61000 3 2, European
Eu Power Supply
/ Manufacturers Association, 2004,
200 pp. 2.
Three possible figures of merit for harmon
armonic emitting [2] Burchall, M., Harmonic Current
urrent Standards 6 The End
load characterization were analyzed in this paper.
p Two of the Line? The Electricity
ity Association,
As EMCTLA
of them, PFC and THDI are well known n and extendedly meeting 19th May 2000.
used, the third, LGHD was introduced in this paper,

ISSN: 1790-5095 49 ISBN: 978-960-474-181-6

 Proceedings of the International Conference on ENERGY and ENVIRONMENT TECHNOLOGIES and EQUIPMENT

[3] Czarnecki, L., S., Currents’ Physical Components

(CPC) concept: a fundamental of Power Theory
Przegląd Elektrotechniczny, R84, No. 6/2008, pp.
28637
[4] Budeanu, C., I., Puissances réactives et fictives ,
Institute Romaine de l’énergie, pub.n° 2, Bucharest,
1927.
[5] ***, IEEE Power engineering society, IEEE Trial
Use Standard Definitions for the Measurement of
Electric Power Qualities Under Sinusoidal, Non
Sinusoidal, Balanced or Unbalanced Conditions ,
USA, June 2000.
[6] ***, IEEE Working Group on Nonsinusoidal
Situations, Practical Definitions for Powers in
Systems with Nonsinusoidal Waveforms and
Unbalanced Loads, IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp.79–101 ,Jan. 1996.
[7]Czarnecki.L.,S, Harmonics and power phenomena,
Weley Enceclopidia of Electrical And Electronics
Engineering, John Wiley and Sons Inc., Supplement
1. pp.1956218,2000.
[8]Czarnecki.L.,S, Currents Physical Components in
Circuits with Nonsinusoidal Voltages and
Currents’’. Part 1: Single Phase Linear Circuits,
Electric Power Quality and Utilisation Journal, vol.
XI, n° 2, pp: 3614, 2005.

ISSN: 1790-5095 50 ISBN: 978-960-474-181-6