IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 61, NO.

7, JULY 2012

1915

Exact Model Order ESPRIT Technique for

Harmonics and Interharmonics Estimation
Sachin K. Jain, Student Member, IEEE, and S. N. Singh, Senior Member, IEEE

AbstractHarmonic, which is becoming more and more important day by day in the emerging power system, is one of the
most critical power quality parameters. In this paper, the estimation of signal parameters via rotational invariance technique
(ESPRIT)-based method is proposed with an accurate model
order (the number of frequency components) estimate for power
system harmonic and interharmonics detection. It is demonstrated
that, even for high noise signal, the proposed algorithm is able to
accurately estimate the number of frequency components present
in the signal. The proposed method is capable of estimating the
accurate values of frequency, amplitude, and phase angle of the
distorted current or voltage signals for a wide range of sampling
frequency and measurement noise. The robustness of the proposed
method has been tested on several simulated synthetic signals and
measured experimental signals for different nonlinear loads.
Index TermsModel order estimation, nonlinear load, parametric method, power quality, reconstruction error (RE), total
harmonics distortion (THD).

I. I NTRODUCTION

HE ADVANCEMENT of high-power semiconductor

devices and their excellent control capabilities have resulted in extensive use of power-electronics-based nonlinear
equipment in domestic, commercial, and industrial sectors for
various applications. These devices inject harmonics and interharmonics into the system, which cause many severe problems
to the system and equipment [1], [2], such as increased losses,
resonance, control malfunction, and interference. Indices such
as total harmonics distortion (THD), harmonics group, and
subgroups have been developed, and guidelines have been
framed in various standards [2][4] to define allowable harmonics limits. Harmonics mitigation devices, e.g., passive and
active filters, are being employed for harmonics mitigation and
control purposes to meet stipulated recommendations. Accurate
estimation and measurement of harmonics/interharmonics is
essential not only for monitoring but also to properly plan and
design suitable solutions for its mitigation and control.
Several techniques [5] have been developed to estimate the
harmonics, and majority of these are based on Fourier transform. IEC standard 61000-4-7 [6] also recommends the fast
Fourier transform (FFT) as a main tool for the measurement

Manuscript received July 19, 2011; revised October 2, 2011; accepted

October 4, 2011. Date of publication February 3, 2012; date of current version
June 8, 2012. The Associate Editor coordinating the review process for this
paper was Dr. Carlo Muscas.
S. K. Jain is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute
of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208016, India (e-mail: skjain@ieee.org).
S. N. Singh is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute
of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208016, India (e-mail: snsingh@iitk.ac.in).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIM.2012.2182709

of harmonics in the power system. Although these techniques

are fast and simple, they suffer from many limitations such
as low spectral resolution, sensitivity to system frequency deviation, requirement of a typical number of samples, picketfence effect, and aliasing. A number of other techniques and
their variants based on parametric and nonparametric methods
and artificial intelligence tools are also proposed in the recent
past for different applications [5], [7][9]. Wavelet transform
(WT) and Hilbert-Huang transform are the main nonparametric
techniques other than FFT that have been applied for harmonics estimation [10][12]. WT provides the spectrum in timefrequency scale with multiresolution; however, additional tools
are needed for the interpretation of the transformed parameters.
Artificial intelligent and recursive harmonics estimation
techniques such as artificial neural networks [13][15], adaptive
linear elements [16], [17], and Kalman filters [18], [19] have
been applied in limited applications due to their shortcomings
such that only a predefined limited number of harmonics can
be estimated. Estimation accuracy is highly deteriorated if
interharmonics or unknown harmonics (one that is not included
in the training data) are present in the measured signal and/or
there is a large variation in the phase angle.
In recent years, model-based parametric techniques have
been applied widely in harmonics estimation, owing to its better
resolution and accuracy without limitation on the number of
samples and the knowledge of fundamental frequency [20]
[26]. The model order (the number of frequency components
in the signal model) selection, which not only affects the estimation accuracy but also influences computational time considerably, is a serious concern for these methods. Model-based
approaches are not dedicated to only harmonics estimation;
rather, harmonics estimation is one of the many applications of
it. Therefore, the techniques and tools developed for model order estimation [27][32] are not efficient and optimal for power
system harmonics estimation. Due to the high computational
burden of the parametric methods, the researchers, working in
the field of harmonics estimation, normally assume a suitable
value of the model order. Therefore, this leads to either more
computational burden and spikes due to overassumption or
reduced accuracy with underassumption.
This paper proposes an algorithm for accurate model order
(the number of frequency components) estimation, which is
used in the estimation of signal parameters via rotational invariance technique (ESPRIT) to provide more reliable and accurate estimates of harmonics and interharmonics. The proposed
method is capable of estimating the frequency, amplitude, and
initial phase angles of the distorted supply. It also avoids the
requirement of very high order fundamental component filter,

0018-9456/$31.00 2012 IEEE

1916

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 61, NO. 7, JULY 2012

as suggested in [33], and associated drawbacks. The simulation

results show the capability of the proposed method in accurate
estimation of harmonics in the presence of noise and frequency
deviation. The proposed method requires reduced computational time. The robustness of the method is tested on simulated
and experimental signals.
Fig. 1.

II. P ROPOSED M ODEL O RDER E STIMATION AND

ESPRIT-BASED H ARMONICS /I NTERHARMONICS
D ETECTION
The distorted power supply signals can be modeled as a
sinusoidal model with additive white Gaussian noise. At the nth
sample with sampling interval Ts , the measured signal x(n) can
be expressed as
x(n) =

K


ak cos(2fk nTs + k ) + w(n)

(1)

k=1

where K is the model order (the number of frequency components in the signal), ak is the amplitude, k is the initial
phase angle, fk is the kth frequency component, and w(n) is
the white Gaussian noise with zero mean. Alternatively, in the
form of a complex exponential model, the same signal can be
expressed as
x(n) =

2K


Ak e(j2fk nTs ) + w(n)

(2)

k=1

where Ak is the complex amplitude, which is related to the

amplitude ak of the sinusoidal model as
ak jk
e .
(3)
Ak =
2
In order to estimate unknown frequencies fk , amplitude ak ,
and initial phase angles k from the sampled data sequence, the
knowledge of model order K is the primary requirement. The
model order is, however, time varying and usually not known in
advance. In the next section, an accurate model order estimation
algorithm based on relative difference index (RDI) is proposed.
A. Model Order Estimation
The basic concept of the proposed method is the fact that the
power spectral density curve is almost flat for the white noise
and it is equal to the noise power. Since eigenvalues/singular
values of autocorrelation matrix (Rx ) significantly represent
the power spectral density of the measured signal, there will
be significant change at the junction point of the signal and
noise subspace. This change, however, cannot be identified
directly because no threshold can be defined for varying signal
and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). The relative difference (RD)
of consecutive eigenvalues is able to accentuate the boundary
between signal and noise subspace, which is defined as

RD =

i i1
i1

i = 2, 3, . . . , M

(4)

Model order estimation using the RD plot.

where i is the ith eigenvalue such that i i1 , and M

is the total dimension of the autocorrelation matrix Rx . The
index i of vector RD is termed as the RDI, and the plot of
RD versus RDI, which provides the possible boundary in the
form of peaks, as shown in Fig. 1, is termed as the RD plot. The
values at odd positions in the RD plot are close to zero because
two consecutive eigenvalues are almost equal for particular
complex frequency component pairs. To get the model order,
five largest peaks on the RD plot are selected. Usually, the first
or second peak corresponds to the boundary between signal and
noise subspace; however, five peaks are considered for better
reliability, particularly in cases where magnitudes of different
harmonic components have very large variation. The highest
value of RDI out of the five biggest peaks (the highest position
occupied by any of the top five peaks on the RD plot) is
considered as the preliminary estimate of the model order. The
selected preliminary estimate is subjected to a validation test
(5) to ensure that the spectral component corresponding to the
selected RDI belongs to the signal subspace. The validation
condition is defined as


+ $+2 + + M
$ $+1
M $


(5)

where $ is the preliminary estimate of the model order, which

is equal to the highest RDI out of the selected peaks; $ is
the corresponding eigenvalue; and is the sensitivity factor
(ranging between 25), which determines the sensitivity of
the estimation in the presence of high level of noise. Lower
value of corresponds to higher sensitivity and may lead
to overestimation, but even very small magnitude harmonic
components will be detected. On the other hand, with a higher
value of , there are chances that very small magnitude components may be missed out and will result in underestimation
of the model order. This, however, does not affect the signal
reconstruction much because of lower magnitudes of the missed
out components. If the validation test fails, the next lower value
of RDI out of the remaining peaks is considered as the estimate,
and the validation test is repeated. Fig. 2 presents the flow chart
of the model order estimation algorithm.
Let us consider the typical RD plot shown in Fig. 1 for better
illustration of the algorithm. The five largest peaks are identified
and marked as Peak-1 to Peak-5, which are located at RDI
values of 2, 14, 4, (M 2), and 6, respectively. The highest
value of RDI is (M 2), which is the preliminary estimate, but
it fails in the validation test because, with the flat power spectral
density curve, any eigenvalue in the noise space cannot exceed
more than two to five times of the average of the remaining

JAIN AND SINGH: EMO ESPRIT FOR HARMONICS AND INTERHARMONICS ESTIMATION

1917

6) Use selection matrices S 1 and S 2 to find out two shifted

submatrices 1 and 2 from the signal subspace xs
using (9) for i = 1, 2, i.e.,
S 1 = [I Ns

0ds ]

(8a)

S 2 = [0ds

I Ns ]

(8b)

i = S i xs

(9)

where I N s is an identity matrix of size Ns Ns , Ns =

(M ds ), and ds is the distance between two submatrices, which is usually kept equal to 1.
7) Applying shift invariance property, R1 and R2 can be
related using a matrix , whose eigenvalues represent the
exponential terms of (3) as
2 = 1

Fig. 2.

which can be solved using a least squares (LS) estimation

or total LS. The LS estimate used in this paper can be
expressed as

Flow chart of the proposed model order estimation algorithm.

eigenvalues. The next lower value of RDI is 14 corresponding

to Peak-2, which satisfies the validation condition. The number
of complex frequencies in the considered signal, therefore, will
be equal to 14; hence, the number of frequency components or
the model order will be equal to half of the RDI, i.e., 7.

1 H

1 2 .
= H
1 1

B. EMO ESPRIT Method

ESPRIT [34] is an eigenvalue decomposition-based batchprocessing technique that exploits the rotational invariance
property of signal subspace to determine the frequency components present in the signal. The exact model order (EMO)
ESPRIT algorithm can be implemented using nine steps.
1) Form the Hankel matrix X of the order of M from the
total N data samples of the signal x(n) as

X=

x(0)
x(1)
..
.

x(1)
x(2)
..
.

x(N M ) x(N M + 1)

..
.
...

1
X H .X
(N M )

Im(loge k )
2

k = 1, 2, . . . , 2K.

(12)

The positive values denote actual frequency components.

The negative values are mirror image of the actual frequency components.
9) The complex amplitudes are obtained by solving 2K
simultaneous equations for 2K different values of n in
(3). In matrix form, it can be expressed as
A = (V H V )1 V H x

(13)

x(M 1)
x(M )
.
..

.
x(N 1)
(6)

where V is the Vandermondes matrix that is defined as

1
1
1
1
j2f
j2f
j2f
1
2
2K

e
e

j22f1
j22f2
j22f2K
.

e
e

e
V=

..
..
..
..

.
.
.
.
j(M 1)2f1
j(M 1)2f2
j(M 1)2f2K
e
e
e
(14)

(7)

Using these steps (19), the harmonics analysis from the

sequence of measurements of the signals is performed, and
the simulation and experimental results are given in the next
section. The selection of dimension M of the autocorrelation
matrix is crucial. The higher values of M not only lead to
increased computational burden but may also deteriorate the
estimation performance. There are upper and lower limits,
as discussed in [35], which are a function of the number of
samples N and the number of frequency components K. A
higher value of M should be chosen for a larger data sample or
when too many frequency components are present in the signal.

2) Obtain autocorrelation matrix Rx using

Rx =

(11)

8) The frequency components are obtained from the eigenvalues of the matrix as follows:
fk =

(10)

where ()H denotes the Hermitian transpose of the matrix.

3) Perform eigenvalue decomposition on the autocorrelation
matrix Rx , and arrange eigenvalues in nonincreasing
order.
4) Use the model order estimation algorithm, as proposed in
Section II-A, to obtain the EMO of the system.
5) Separate the signal subspace xs and the noise subspace
xn from the autocorrelation matrix x .

1918

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 61, NO. 7, JULY 2012

III. S IMULATION AND E XPERIMENTAL R ESULTS

The accuracy and robustness of the proposed method is
established by demonstrating it to a wide variety of simulated
and experimental signals. At first, the model order estimation
algorithm is validated with different patterns of simulated signals in the MATLAB platform for a wide range of sampling
frequency (2.4100 kHz) and noise (up to 20-dB SNR); subsequently, the performance of EMO ESPRIT-based harmonics
estimation technique is demonstrated with synthetic and experimental signals. The laboratory setup for acquiring the actual
experimental signal is developed as shown in Fig. 3. It consists
of a specially fabricated distribution board for supplying power
to a variety of small-size nonlinear loads (e.g., laptop charging,
mobile charging, compact florescent lamps (CFLs), desktop
personal computers (PCs), light-emitting diode (LED) lamps,
voltage dimmers/regulators, etc.) facilitated for easy measurement of voltage and current, a PC with National Instruments
(NI) make data acquisition card PCI-6221, a NI BNC-2120
interfacing connector block, and the differential (HZ115) and
current (HZ050) probes. The harmonics estimation algorithms
are implemented on a desktop PC with Intel Core2 Duo
2.93-GHz central processing unit and 2-GB random access
memory. Since the exact harmonic contents of the experimental
signals are not known, a reconstruction error (RE)-based performance evaluation scheme, as illustrated in Fig. 4, is adopted.
The estimated parameters are used to reconstruct the signal
by employing the considered sinusoidal model (1), and the
reconstructed signal is compared with the actual signal at each
sample point to get the RE. The RE r , which is equal to the
mean square relative error, is defined as


N


1
r = 
[xr (n) x(n)]2
(15)
N x2rms n=1
where xr is the reconstructed signal, and xrms is the rms value
of the actual measured signal. Residual e is the difference of the
actual and reconstructed signals at each sample point. For the
synthetic signals, relative error as defined in
relative error =

|estimated value true value|

true value

(16)

is used for performance comparison because true values of the

signals are known.
A. Model Order Estimation: Synthetic Signal
Several simulation studies are carried out with a variety of
signals covering most of the possible spectrums of the power
supply signals at different sampling frequencies and noise
levels. The value of sensitivity factor is kept constant as 4
for all test signals. Some of the signals with its spectrum and
RD plots are shown in Figs. 58. Signals used in these figures
are named as Sig-1, Sig-2, Sig-3, and Sig-4, respectively, which
are generated as per (1). The parameter values for these signals
are presented in Table I. Sig-1 represents the typical singlephase distorted power supply signal with gradually decreasing harmonics. The signal with interharmonics and adjacently

Fig. 3.

Laboratory setup.

Fig. 4.

Block diagram of the performance evaluation scheme.

close frequency components is represented by Sig-2. The modern power-electronics-based devices with sophisticated control
have very low magnitude harmonics content. One of such signals is considered as Sig-3, and the signal with a large number
of harmonics of low to very high order is taken up in Sig-4.
The RD plots of the aforementioned signals and the obtained
model order estimates, as presented in Table II, clearly indicate
the better accuracy and robustness of the proposed model order
estimation algorithm. The computational time is observed to
be in the range of 36 ms with a mean of approximately 4 ms.
The quantities in Table II are the RDI, which is twice the
number of frequency components in the signal (2K) and the
peak number (P). Peak number 1 indicates that the resulted
model order is obtained at the highest peak, peak number 2
indicates that the resulted model order is obtained at the second
highest peak, and so on. In case of Sig-3, the only incorrect
estimate is because of the insignificantly low magnitude harmonic components; however, another pair of low-magnitude
harmonics is distinguished by the proposed algorithm. There
is only a single instance of overestimation that is also at a
very high noise level. With white noise, there are rare chances
of such errors, and it can be controlled by suitably adjusting
the sensitivity factor. The values for Sig-4 corresponding to
2.4-kHz sampling frequency in Table II are blank because the
minimum sampling frequency for Sig-4 is 5.1 kHz due to the
presence of the highest frequency component of 2550 Hz in
the signal.
B. Harmonics Estimation: Synthetic Signal
A synthetic signal used in [33] is considered as the first
example for easy comparison of the methods. A fundamental
frequency component of sufficiently high magnitude is also
included in the original signal. This establishes the effectiveness of the proposed method without using a high pass filter as

JAIN AND SINGH: EMO ESPRIT FOR HARMONICS AND INTERHARMONICS ESTIMATION

Fig. 5.

Test signal Sig-1 with sampling frequency fs = 2400 Hz.

Fig. 7. Test signal Sig-3 with sampling frequency fs = 32 000 Hz.

Fig. 6.

Test signal Sig-2 with sampling frequency fs = 10 000 Hz.

Fig. 8. Test signal Sig-4 with sampling frequency fs = 64 000 Hz.

suggested in [33]. A total of 200 test signals of 200-ms duration

were generated at 2400-Hz sampling rate with random phase
angles in the range of [ ] having a total of eight frequency
components including fundamental and two interharmonics
according to

ak cos(2nkf1 Ts + k )
x(n) =
k=1,2,3,4,5,7

al cos(2nfl Ts + l ) + w(n).

(17)

l=1,2

A white Gaussian noise of 26 dB is added to each of

the aforementioned signals before processing it with different
analysis techniques. The total dimension of the autocorrelation
matrix M was chosen as 100 for eigenvalue-decompositionbased methods.

TABLE I
DETAILED SIGNAL PARAMETERS OF SYNTHETIC SIGNALS
USED IN CASE-A

1919

1920

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 61, NO. 7, JULY 2012

TABLE II
MODEL ORDER ESTIMATION AT DIFFERENT SAMPLING FREQUENCIES AND NOISE LEVELS

TABLE III
ESTIMATION RESULTS FOR A TYPICAL SIGNAL OF CASE B

TABLE IV
MAXIMUM AND MEAN RE AND COMPUTATIONAL TIME FOR CASE B

method are very low in magnitude. The phase angles of the

second-, third-, and fourth-order harmonics were taken as 0.1
for the purpose of evaluating the relative error. The high value
of relative errors in case of some amplitude and phase angles is
because of very small true values.

C. Harmonics Estimation: Measured Voltage Signal

Table III summarizes the estimation results obtained by

different techniques for one of the 200 test data sets, whereas
Tables IV and V present the maximum and mean values of
RE, computational time, and relative errors along with standard deviation for a complete set of test signals. Although
the FFT-based IEC subgrouping method is the fastest, its low
frequency resolution is causing very high RE. The slidingESPRIT method loses its advantage by having the high-order
high-pass filter that is evident from the results. Although the
phase shift provided by the filter can be suitably compensated;
the inaccuracies in the components close to the filter cutoff
frequency are inevitable. The relative errors of the proposed

The utility supply voltage signal at the premises of a laboratory of an academic institution equipped with thousands of
computers, large-rating uninterrupted power supply units, dc
supply stations in the laboratories, and many other electronics
equipment is acquired at 32-kHz sampling rate using the data
acquisition experimental setup, as shown in Fig. 3. The sampled data of approximately 1.2 s duration were analyzed with
200-ms (6400 samples) window length and 40-ms (1280 samples) overlap using the proposed method and some of the existing techniques. The dimension of the autocorrelation matrix
is taken as 100, and sensitivity factor is equal to 2. Table VI
presents the mean and maximum REs and the computational
time over 25 blocks of data, along with standard deviations.
The proposed method has the lowest computational time among

JAIN AND SINGH: EMO ESPRIT FOR HARMONICS AND INTERHARMONICS ESTIMATION

1921

TABLE V
MAXIMUM AND MEAN RELATIVE ERRORS FOR CASE B

Fig. 9. Voltage supply signal sampled at 32 000 Hz.

TABLE VI
MAXIMUM AND MEAN RE AND COMPUTATIONAL TIME FOR CASE C

Fig. 10. Harmonics spectrum of the supply voltage.

parametric methods with relatively small standard deviation.

The best mean RE is achieved by Prony-based method; however, the proposed method not only has comparable mean RE
but is also more consistent unlike the Prony-based method,
which has large standard deviation. Fig. 9 shows the original
signal, the reconstructed signal, and the residual, as obtained
from the proposed method. The harmonics spectrum of the
original signal, as shown in Fig. 10, indicates that the proposed
method is clearly able to distinguish even small-magnitude harmonic components without filtering out the large fundamental
component.
D. Harmonics Estimation: Measured Current Signals
The current signals of Philips-made CFL, PC, and miscellaneous nonlinear loads (consisting of laptop charging, mobile
charging, LED lamp, CFL, and dimmer) are acquired in the
laboratory at 3.2-kHz sampling rate using the same setup as
shown in Fig. 3. A total of 640 samples corresponding to
approximately 200-ms window length from each of the acquired signals are taken up one by one and analyzed using
the proposed method. Figs. 1113 show the original current
waveform, reconstructed waveform, and the residuals of current
signals. It can be observed that the reconstructed signals are

almost replicas of the original signal with low amount of

residuals, indicating good estimation of model parameters. The
obtained dominant harmonic estimates, along with the results
of recent similar techniques, are presented in Table VII for
comparison. Since there is no interharmonic or fundamental
frequency deviation in signals 1 and 3, the IEC subgrouping
method gives the best performance, but among high-resolution
parametric methods, the proposed method has the minimum
RE and computational time. In case of the desktop PC current
signal, there is small deviation in the fundamental frequency.
As a result, the performance of the IEC subgrouping method
is degraded, and the proposed method outperforms all other
techniques.
IV. D ISCUSSION
If there are adjacent frequency components in the signal,
the large dimension of the autocorrelation matrix is necessary
to ensure estimation accuracy. The exact knowledge of model
order helps in selecting the optimal value of M , depending on
the number of samples and the closeness of the frequencies
present in the signal.
In most of the cases, the highest peak on the RD plot
corresponds to the correct model order; however, signals with
high noise and low-magnitude harmonics components or a large
value of fundamental component may have correct model order
located at the second-, third-, or even higher order of the peak.
This is dealt with in the proposed algorithm by searching for

1922

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT, VOL. 61, NO. 7, JULY 2012

Fig. 11. Compact fluorescent lamp current signal (A) sampled at 3200 Hz.

Fig. 12. Desktop computer current signal (A) sampled at 3200 Hz.

Fig. 13. Current signal (A) of mixed nonlinear loads sampled at 3200 Hz.
TABLE VII
ESTIMATION RESULT AND RECONSTRUCTION ERROR FOR CASE D

other than the highest peak on the higher side of the RD plot,
along with the validation test. A couple of peaks may appear
at the end of the RD plot, and it is well taken care of by
the validation test. However, these can be separated out to
guarantee better performance.
The IEC subgrouping method overcomes the leakage effect
to some extent and partially represents the interharmonics, but
there are no means to estimate the phase angles. Its computational advantage gives some edge over others; however, when
it comes to frequency resolution, the proposed method offers
best optimal solution. The proposed method performs equally
well at high and low sampling frequencies, as far as estimation
accuracy is considered; however, computational time increases
to considerably high values, restricting its applications at high

sampling rates. The downsampling technique proposed in [25]

can be adopted for low computational burden in case of a high
sampling rate.
V. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, an EMO ESPRIT technique has been presented
for the estimation of power system harmonics and interharmonics. The proposed method first estimates the number of
frequency components present in the signal using the RD plot
and then accurately estimates the frequency, amplitude, and
phase angles. It has been demonstrated using simulation studies
that the effect of noise on model order estimation accuracy is
negligible. The simulation and experimental results presented

JAIN AND SINGH: EMO ESPRIT FOR HARMONICS AND INTERHARMONICS ESTIMATION

in this paper show that the problem of line splitting and false
spikes are contained. The comparative results with similar
techniques suggest that the proposed method can be applied
to monitoring and instrumentation devices, compensation, and
mitigation purposes. Although the proposed method reduces
computational burden considerably, it is still higher compared
with the FFT-based techniques. Future study, therefore, will be
focused on the further reduction of the computational time.

R EFERENCES
[1] J. Arrillaga and N. R. Watson, Power System Harmonics. Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley, 2003.
[2] IEEE Recommended Practices and Requirements for Harmonic Control
in Electrical Power Systems, IEEE Std. 519-1992, 1993.
[3] Limits for Harmonic Current Emissions (Equipment Input Current Less
than 16 A Per Phase), IEC Std. 61000-3-2, 2005.
[4] Limitation of Emission of Harmonic Currents in Low-Voltage Power Supply Systems for Equipment with Rated Current Greater Than 16 A, IEC
Std. 61000-3-4, 1998.
[5] H. J. Math and I. Y.-H. Gu, Signal Processing of Power Quality Disturbances. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2006.
[6] Testing and Measurement Techniques-General Guide on Harmonics and
Interharmonics Measurements and Instrumentation, for Power Supply
Systems and Equipment Connected Thereto, IEC Std. 61000-4-7, 2002.
[7] T. Tarasiuk, Comparative study of various methods of DFT calculation
in the wake of IEC Standard 61000-4-7, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas.,
vol. 58, no. 10, pp. 36663677, Oct. 2009.
[8] M. A. Platas-Garza and J. A. de la O Serna, Dynamic harmonic analysis
through TaylorFourier transform, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 60,
no. 3, pp. 804813, Mar. 2011.
[9] S. K. Jain and S. N. Singh, Harmonics estimation in emerging power
system: Key issues and challenges, Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 81, no. 9,
pp. 17541766, Nov. 2011.
[10] L. Eren, M. Unal, and M. J. Devaney, Harmonic analysis via wavelet
packet decomposition using special elliptic half-band filters, IEEE Trans.
Instrum. Meas., vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 22892293, Dec. 2007.
[11] J. Barros and R. I. Diego, Analysis of harmonics in power systems using
the wavelet-packet transform, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 57, no. 1,
pp. 6369, Jan. 2008.
[12] S. Zhang, Q. Wang, and R. Liu, Power system harmonic analysis
based on improved Hilbert-Huang transform, in Proc. 9th ICEMI, 2009,
pp. 4-3434-347.
[13] H. C. Lin, Intelligent neural network-based fast power system harmonic detection, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 4352,
Feb. 2007.
[14] G. W. Chang, C.-I. Chen, and Y.-F. Teng, Radial-basis-function-based
neural network for harmonic detection, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 57, no. 6, pp. 21712179, Jun. 2010.
[15] S. K. Jain, D. Saxena, and S. N. Singh, Adaptive wavelet neural network
based harmonics estimation of single-phase systems, in Proc. 2nd AITPEA ICUE Power Energy Syst., 2011.
[16] G. W. Chang, C.-I. Chen, and Q.-W. Liang, A two-stage ADALINE for
harmonics and interharmonics measurement, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 22202228, Jun. 2009.
[17] A. Sarkar, S. R. Choudhury, and S. Sengupta, A self-synchronized ADALINE network for on-line tracking of power system harmonics, Measurement, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 784790, May 2011.
[18] C. I. Chen, G. W. Chang, R. C. Hong, and H. M. Li, Extended real model
of Kalman filter for time-varying harmonics estimation, IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 1726, Jan. 2010.
[19] N. Kse, . Salor, and K. Leblebicioglu, Interharmonics analysis of
power signals with fundamental frequency deviation using Kalman filtering, Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 80, no. 9, pp. 11451153, Sep. 2010.
[20] T. Lobos, Z. Leonowicz, J. Rezmer, and P. Schegner, High-resolution
spectrum-estimation methods for signal analysis in power systems, IEEE
Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 219225, Feb. 2006.
[21] A. Bracale, P. Caramia, and G. Carpinelli, Optimal evaluation of waveform distortion indices with Prony and root music methods, Int. J. Power
Energy Syst., vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 360370, 2007.
[22] A. Bracale, P. Caramia, and G. Carpinelli, Adaptive Prony method for
waveform distortion detection in power systems, Int. J. Elect. Power
Energy Syst., vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 371379, Jun. 2007.

1923

[23] A. S. Yilmaz, A. Alkan, and M. H. Asyali, Applications of parametric

spectral estimation methods on detection of power system harmonics,
Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 78, no. 4, pp. 683693, Apr. 2008.
[24] A. Bracale, G. Carpinelli, Z. Leonowicz, T. Lobos, and J. Rezmer, Measurement of IEC groups and subgroups using advanced spectrum estimation methods, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 672681,
Apr. 2008.
[25] G. W. Chang and C.-I. Chen, An accurate time-domain procedure for harmonics and interharmonics detection, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 25,
no. 3, pp. 17871795, Jul. 2010.
[26] C. Tao, D. Shanxu, R. Ting, and L. Fangrui, A robust parametric method
for power harmonic estimation based on M-estimators, Measurement,
vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 6777, Jan. 2010.
[27] Z. Leonowicz, J. Karbanen, T. Tanaka, and J. Rezmer, Model order selection criteria: Comparative study and applications, in Proc. Int. Workshop
Comput. Problems Elect. Eng., Zakopane, Poland, 2004.
[28] P. Stoica and R. Moses, Spectral Analysis of Signals. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Prentice-Hall, 2005.
[29] J.-J. Fuchs, Estimating the number of sinusoids in additive white noise,
IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech, Signal, vol. 36, no. 12, pp. 18461853,
Dec. 1988.
[30] J.-M. Papy, L. De Lathauwer, and S. Van Huffel, A shift invariance-based
order-selection technique for exponential data modelling, IEEE Signal
Process. Lett., vol. 14, no. 7, pp. 473476, Jul. 2007.
[31] M. G. Christensen, A. Jakobsson, and S. H. Jensen, Sinusoidal order
estimation using angles between subspaces, EURASIP J. Adv. Signal
Process., vol. 2009, pp. 111, Jan. 2009.
[32] B. Nadler and A. Kontorovich, Model selection for sinusoids in noise:
Statistical analysis and a new penalty term, IEEE Trans. Signal Process.,
vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 13331345, Apr. 2011.
[33] I. Y.-H. Gu and M. H. J. Bollen, Estimating interharmonics by using
sliding-window ESPRIT, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 13
23, Jan. 2008.
[34] R. Roy and T. Kailath, ESPRIT-estimation of signal parameters via
rotational invariance techniques, IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech, Signal,
vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 984995, Jul. 1989.
[35] O. J. Micka and A. J. Weiss, Estimating frequencies of exponentials in
noise using joint diagonalization, IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 47,
no. 2, pp. 341348, Feb. 1999.

Sachin K. Jain (S10) received the M.Tech. degree

in electrical engineering from Indian Institute of
Technology, Roorkee, India. He is currently working
toward the Ph.D. degree in the Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology,
Kanpur, India.
He is currently with PDPM Indian Institute of
Information Technology, Design and Manufacturing,
Jabalpur, India. His research interests include power
quality, FACTS, and power electronics applications
to power systems.
Mr. Jain is an Associate Member of the Institution of Engineers (India).

S. N. Singh (SM02) received the Ph.D. degree in

electrical engineering from Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur, India, in 1995.
He is currently a Professor with the Department
of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur. His research interest includes power
quality, power system restructuring, flexible ac transmission systems, and power system planning.
Dr. Singh is a Fellow of The Institution of Engineering and Technology, the Institution of Electronics and Telecommunication Engineers (India),
and the Institution of Engineers (India).