Anda di halaman 1dari 31

THE DETAILED INVESTIGATION OF

THE EFFECTS OF HIGH HARMONICS


AND LOW POWER FACTOR OF LOW
COST ENERGY EFFICIENT LIGHTING
DEVICES IN A TYPICAL RURAL
ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

PROJECT REPORT

Prepared By

INTEGRATED RURAL TECHNOLOGY CENTRE


M U N D U R , P A L A K K A D

Submitted To

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD


Thiruvananthapuram
PROJECT TEAM

Principal Investigator
Dr. M. P. Parameswaran
Fellow, IRTC

Co-investigators

Dr. R. V. G. Menon (Fellow, IRTC)


Mr. K. Bhaskaran (Fellow, IRTC)
Mr. R.Satheesh (Scientist, IRTC)
Mr. B.V. Suresh Babu (Scientist, IRTC)
Mr. Haynes Davis (Scientist, IRTC)
Mr. Bency Zachariah (Scientist, IRTC)
Mr. Vimal Raj ((Scientist, IRTC)
C O N T E N T S

ACKNOWLEDGMENT .................................. 5
1 INTRODUCTION ........................................ 6
2 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT ............ 7
3 METHODOLOGY ........................................ 7

3.1 Laboratory Study .............................. 8

3.2 Real Time Field Study ........................ 8

4 ANALYSIS OF TEST RESULTS ......................... 9

4.1 Laboratory Study .............................. 9

4.2 Real Time Field Study ........................ 10

5 CONCLUSIONS ......................................... 11

6 ECONOMIC SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY .......... 12

6.1 Consumer End ................................. 12

6.2 Provider End ................................... 12

7 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................. 13

ANNEXE 1
LABORATORY AND FIELD DATA ..................... 15

ANNEXE 2
VOLTAGE AND CURRENT WAVEFORMS ............. 26
ANNEXE 1

L A B O R A T O R Y A N D F I E L D D A T A

1. LABORATORY DATA
TABLE 1 CFLs of different brands
TABLE 2 CFLs added in 11 steps in single phase
TABLE 3 CFLs connected in balanced condition
TABLE 4 CFLs connected in unbalanced condition
TABLE 5 Transformer loss and primary & secondary harmonics for CFL and
incandescent lamp circuits
TABLE 6 Transformer temperature for the CFL circuit
TABLE 7 Transformer temperature for the incandescent lamp circuit
TABLE 8 Lumen per watt for different makes of CFLs and incandescent lamps
TABLE 9 Simulation of a domestic consumer's load

2. FIELD DATA
TABLE 10 Data at the consumer test points
TABLE 11 Connected load at test point 1 and 2 as on the dates of measurements
TABLE 12 Data at the transformer end before the replacement
TABLE 13 Data at the transformer end after the replacement
TABLE 14 No. of incandescent lamps replaced

ANNEXE 2

V O L T A G E A N D C U R R E N T W A V E F O R M S

1. LAB STUDY

1.1 Addition of CFLs in 11 steps

2.REAL TIME FIELD STUDY

2.1 Test point 1


2.2 Test point 2
2.3 Transformer point
ACKNOWLEDGMENT

IRTC is very happy to extend its thanks to all who participated for the successful completion
of the project.

We are grateful to all the officials of Kerala State Electricity Board who is supported this
project.

We also remember all the advices given by Dr. Padmanabhan Nambiar, Chairman, Dept. of
Electrical Engineering, AITS, Coimbatore.

The support and co-operation of the all the eminent personalities of various institutions and
the natives of Poriyani, Palakkad where the fieldwork was carried out are remembered with
gratitude.

Thank you.
1. INTRODUCTION

It is well accepted that energy conservation has equal or even more


importance compared with installation of new generating capacities in meeting
the demand for electrical energy. The relevance of Demand Side
Management (DSM), i.e., the energy planning strategy with emphasis on
reducing the energy demand by the use of energy efficient technologies at the
user end, over the Supply Side Management (SSM), has been now
universally recognised.

According to a study done by IRTC, about one third of the total power
consumption of Kerala and three fourth of the peak load, is for lighting
purpose. The study also revealed that the energy consumption could be
reduced significantly if energy-efficient lighting devices like fluorescent tubes
and Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFLs) are used instead of the ordinary
incandescent bulbs.

However CFLs and other fluorescent lamps with electronic chokes if used in
large numbers may cause, it is feared, severe depression in the power factor
on the one hand and induce high levels of harmonics within the system, which
may lead to higher losses and system instabilities.

Because of the huge demand for the CFLs and electronic choke for the
fluorescent tubes, a number of manufacturers have ventured into this
business and flooded the market with cheap and low quality products. Since
the market is very competitive, the manufacturers are compromising on the
quality of the product so as to offer their products at lower prices. Even the
multinationals and the reputed manufacturers are selling low quality products.
A typical high quality CFL with over voltage protection and well-suppressed
harmonics can cost anywhere between Rs. 300 to Rs. 450. As many as 70 to
80 component parts are required to make the chokes of necessary quality.
6
Compared to this cheaper CFLs, without any of the above is being sold at Rs
100 to 120. CFLs that are ridiculously cheap have been dumped with in the
market from China (LEUCI Brand), SreeLanka (Honey Queen), Japan
(MYOTA) and are sold Rs 25 to 30. A large number of consumers may
changeover from incandescent lamps to these CFLs. Electricity Board and
Government may want to encourage this. It has become urgent to the study
the technical performance of these lamps i.e.; impact of harmonics cost
effectiveness etc.

It was suspected that high harmonics and low power factor caused by these
devices might damage the power quality and efficiency of the distribution
system. In this context it was felt necessary that a detailed study on the effect
of substantial induction of low quality compact fluorescent lamps in a rural
distribution system be carried out. This is the context of present study carried
out jointly by IRTC and KSEB.

2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT


1. To conduct a series of laboratory investigations to measure the level of
high harmonics and low power factor of the low quality CFLs.
2. To conduct a real-time field study in a selected transformer in a typical
electrical major section to investigate the impact of high harmonics and
low power factor on the electrical distribution system.
3. To prepare technical recommendations and guidelines for formulating
policies regarding the propagation/popularisation of the energy efficient
lighting devices.

3. METHODOLOGY

The study was conducted in two phases,


1.The laboratory study.
2.The real time field study
The Poriyani 160 kVA transformer under Electrical Major Section, Kongad in
Electrical Division, Palakkad was selected for the investigation after

7
consultations with the Deputy Chief Engineer, Palakkad. A 4kVA transformer
was made available for carrying out a laboratory test by simulating load
conditions

3.1. Laboratory Test

The laboratory test was conducted in the following phases.


1. Loading the test transformer with incandescent lamps, totaling to
wattage of about 3000 W in R, Y & B phases in balanced and
unbalanced conditions in different steps and combinations
2. Loading the transformer with compact fluorescent lamps totaling to a
wattage of 3000 W to R, Y & B phases in balanced and unbalanced
conditions in different steps and combinations
3. Taking different measurements in both cases, of the following
parameters
a. Level of current harmonics and distortion on the transformer
b. Level of voltage harmonics and distortion
c. Effect of heating on the core and winding of the transformer
d. Effect on the power factor of the system
e. Energy loss due to the lighting loads
f. Lumens/Watt
4. The load conditions of an ideal domestic consumer were simulated on
the lab transformer and all the relevant parameters were measured.

3.2. Real Time Field Study


The methodology for the detailed investigation in the field i.e.; on
Poriyani 160kVA transformer was finalised in consultation with experts in a
workshop held on 18-06-2003. In the discussions that followed KSEB
engineers provided the details of the existing consumers connected to the
transformer, which has two low tension distribution feeders. In the field the
study was carried out in the following phases

8
1. Taking all the relevant readings at the transformer mains and
sending end terminals of feeders I & II in the existing load
conditions.
2. Taking all the relevant readings at two selected domestic consumer
premises connected to feeder II in the existing load conditions.
3. Replacing 190 incandescent lamps in 45 domestic premises
connected to feeder II.
4. Taking all the relevant readings at two selected domestic consumer
premises connected to feeder II after replacement of incandescent
lamps by CFLs.
5. Taking all the relevant readings at the transformer mains and
sending end terminals of feeders I & II after replacement of
incandescent lamps.

4. ANALYSIS OF TEST RESULTS

4.1. Laboratory Study


1.The Power factor of individual low cost CFLs is found to be very low in the
order of 0.5 to 0.6. (TABLE 1)
2.The power factor was found to improve as the total number of CFLs in the
circuit increased. (TABLE 2 -4)
3.The total harmonic distortion is high for the individual CFLs. (TABLE 1). But
THD decreased as the number of CFLs in the circuit increased. (TABLES 2
- 4)
4.Harmonics induced at the transformer primary was found to be much lesser
than that at the secondary. (TABLE 5)
5.Transformer loss was found to be higher for the CFLs compared to the
incandescent circuit of equivalent wattage (TABLE 5).
6.Due to the low power factor of the CFLs high current was drawn, higher
than the incandescent lamps for the same wattage. As a result the
temperature increase was greater for the CFL circuit but only three or four
degrees. (TABLES 6 & 7)

9
7.Lumen per watt for the CFLs is much higher than that for the incandescent
lamps. There is no much variation in lumen out put even at system voltage
as low as 130 V, when CFLs are used (TABLE 8)
8.For the same lumen output much lesser power is consumed in the case of
CFLs and hence much lower current is drawn. Therefore the temperature
rise and the transformer loss would be ultimately reduced.
9.Load condition of a typical consumer was simulated in the lab. The load of
CFLs (39 W) is of smaller percentage of the total connected load (732 W
&2080 W with and without pump motor respectively). The power factor
improves considerably with motors and CFLs used concurrently in the
system (TABLE 9)
10. Waveforms distortions were very much higher at the test points due to
other loads such as television as compared to the addition of CFLs.
(TABLE 9)

4.2. Field study


1. Poriyani- II (160 kVA) transformer was selected for the field study. The
transformer is too under loaded (only around 60 kVA at peak hours) and
unbalanced to obtain an objective assessment of the impact of replacing
incandescent lamps with CFL on the transformer performance.
2.The power quality varied extensively from test point to test point due to
system fluctuations.
3.The nature of the waveforms at various test points depended mainly on the
load nature. The connected load at the two test points for different dates of
measurement is given in TABLE 11.
4.At the peak hours the power factor at the transformer was found to be unity
and the harmonics much lesser before the lamps were replaced.
5.As the incandescent lamps were replaced with the CFLs the power factor of
the system decreased only nominally, but the total harmonic distortion
increased noticeably. (TABLE 10 ,12 & 13)

10
5. CONCLUSIONS

1.The field study revealed that the replacement of the existing incandescent
lamps with CFLs resulted in a reduction of load current (by 33 % in the LT
feeder under investigation). Calculation showed that the distribution loss in the
local network could be reduced substantially (about 40 % in the feeder
concerned).
2. The total power consumed by the CFLs to give the equivalent lumen
output will be less than 20 to 25 % of the power consumed by the
incandescent lamps. This reduces the total current in the transformer, thereby
reducing the transformer losses.
3.The effects of low power factor and high harmonics in the system by the
addition of the low quality CFLs were not found predominant in the rural
distribution system under investigation where electrical appliances of
heterogeneous nature such as TV, fridge, pumping motor etc. are connected.
The overall power factor was observed to fall from unity to 0.95 only. This is
not very much significant taking the overall system characteristic into
consideration.
4.Electrical appliances such as TV cause much more harmonic distortions
than by CFLs
5. The present study is adequate to show,
a) For identical end use conditions (same or slightly improved illumination)
total replacement of incandescent lamps by CFLs doesn’t cause
1) Any disturbance to the operation of other equipments like TV, radio,
computer etc.
2) Does provide comparatively more illumination at lower voltages as is
usual in Kerala rural areas.
3) The overall load current and hence line and transformer losses
come down. The actual value depends upon the original share of lighting load
in the system
4) When the transformer are fully loaded in kVA rating the active power
outputs will be lesser because of reduced power factor, but can serve more

11
Incandescent High quality Low quality
lamp (60 W) CFL (10 W) CFL (15 W)
Life 1000 6000 1000
Cost per piece (Rs) 12 350 30
Capital cost (Rs) * 72 350 180
Interest 19 140 47
Energy consumption 360 60 90
Energy cost 900 150 225
Total expenditure 991 640 452
consumers because the power required by each for the same end use
services is reduced.
b) It will be, therefore, reasonable to argue that a total change over to CFLs in
the entire system can be thought of.
c) The next stage of the experiment could be to replace the incandescent
lamps in an overloaded section by CFLs at Electricity Board’s expense and
observe the consequent reduction in load, reduction in the line losses and
work out the real economy of such a program.
It has been found the cheap CFLs are poorer in quality than the
costlier ones, not only in current quality and lumen output per watt, but also
with respect to the overall lifetime. 25 % of the lamps purchased failed before
they reached three hundred hours of total operation. The present estimation
based on the performance of remaining lamps is that average life will not be
more than 1000 hours, as compared to the normally claimed life of 6000
hours for good quality CFLs. A study of the failure mode of these cheap
imported CFLs might reveal some common features, which possibly can be
rectified with out considerable increase in cost. The following simple
calculation compares the economic performance of the cheap and high quality
CFLs for 6000 hours. The 60 W incandescent lamp, 10 W high quality CFL
and 15 W low quality CFL are having comparable lumen output.
Average unit cost of electricity = Rs 2.50
No. of hours of burning = 4 hours per day on an average
Expense for the three options for a period of 6000 hours

12
* (Six replacements are to be made for incandescent lamp and low quality CFL)
For the consumer cheap CFLs work out cheaper, for identical lumen output.
From Electricity Boards point of view
Capital cost per watt delivered at consumer end = Rs 50. Distribution loss is
30% with incandescent lamps and 20 % with CFLs. To deliver 60 W at user
end 87 W has to be generated by the Board.
Savings due to the replacement of a 60 W incandescent bulb by high quality
and low quality CFLs having comparable lumen output

High quality Low quality CFL


CFL (10 W) (15 W)
Wattage to be generated* 12.5 18.75
Savings in wattage 87-12.5 = 74.5 87-18.75 = 68.25
Savings in generation cost
3725 3412.5
@ Rs 50 / W
Amount to be invested (Rs) 350 180
Net savings (Rs) 3375 3232.5

*(@ 20 % distribution loss)


Here the difference in the savings when using the high quality CFLs and the
low quality CFLs is only marginal.

6. RECOMMENDATIONS
1) Energy-efficient lighting devices like fluorescent tubes and Compact
Fluorescent Lamps (CFLs) have 6tob be promoted by the KSEB instead of
ordinary incandescent lamps.
2) Energy-efficient lighting devices like fluorescent tubes and Compact
Fluorescent Lamps (CFLs) have to be distributed to the consumers at the
board's expense.
3) As the first step towards this and as the continuation of this study a typical
urban section and also a rural section have to be selected and the long term

13
implications has to be studied and also the quantitative analysis of the savings
made has to be made for a period of at least six months .
4) For maintaining the quality of the electric supply the KSEB has to begin
with those electronic equipment such as the television, UPS etc. which
produce larger harmonic current in the electric distribution system
5) The active filters or the static compensators can be installed at the
transformer end or at the substation level to suppress the harmonic current
and also to improve the power factor of the system.
6) Advanced researches are to be promoted in this field.

14
ANNEXE 1

TABLE 1
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS WITH CFLS

Brand V (V) I (mA) W (W) PF THD %-V THD %-I Harmonics


3rd
79.112 9th 18.372 31st
2.237
5th
honey queen 220 73.00 9.40 0.59 3.229 101.983 49.355 11th 16.445 41st
1.5
7th
26.312 21st 4.573 51st
1.824
3rd
60.617 9th 15.334 31st
4.597
5th
myota 220 63.40 7.72 0.56 3.272 78.133 23.584 11th 15.15 41st
3.572
7th
15.035 21st 10.4 51st
2.799
3rd
81.195 9th 14.636 31st
4.988
5th
leuci 220 60.80 7.91 0.59 3.383 107.336 51.622 11th 15.913 41st
3.61
7th
22.84 21st 9.839 51st
2.758

15
TABLE 2
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS WITH CFLS (added in 11 steps in single

STEP V I W PF THD %-V THD %-I Harmonics


3rd 9th 31st
83.596 31.203 1.975
5th 11th 41st
1 222 2.83 339.00 0.54 4.625 119.2 61.742 18.382 0.283
7th 21st 51st
44.854 0.857 0.074
3rd 9th 31st
84.485 20.393 0.635
5th 11th 41st
2 217 5.04 659.00 0.6 5.993 112.1 59.619 10.117 0.338
7th 21st 51st
36.252 1.104 0.162
3rd 9th 31st
80.076 10.027 0.121
5th 11th 41st
3 218 6.83 970.00 0.65 6.597 98.09 49.868 4.425 0.316
7th 21st 51st
24.33 0.937 0.158
3rd 9th 31st
77.506 4.82 0.251
5th 11th 41st
4 210 8.56 1220.00 0.68 7.871 90.92 44.097 4.776 0.189
7th 21st 51st
16.012 0.326 0.288
3rd 9th 31st
75.315 6.546 0.264
5th 11th 41st
5 207 10.10 1460.00 0.7 9.318 86.67 39.937 5.086 0.188
7th 21st 51st
12.732 0.478 0.292
3rd 9th 31st
68.661 7.714 0.431
5th 11th 41st
6 205 11.70 1740.00 0.72 9.571 75.26 28.435 2.578 0.386
7th 21st 51st
7.886 0.723 0.239
3rd 9th 31st
66.555 6.024 0.242
5th 11th 41st
7 191 13.20 1860.00 0.74 9.221 71.79 25.215 0.887 0.106
7th 21st 51st
6.718 0.841 0.201
3rd 9th 31st
65.855 5.304 0.232
5th 11th 41st
8 195 14.60 2160.00 0.76 10.593 70.59 24.174 0.759 0.115
7th 21st 51st
5.176 0.742 0.046
3rd 9th 31st
64.056 5.489 0.171
5th 11th 41st
9 192 16.10 2380.00 0.77 12.173 67.85 21.165 1.431 0.184
7th 21st 51st
3.747 0.524 0.035
3rd 9th 31st
61.621 1.845 0.232
5th 11th 41st
10 195 17.90 2720.00 0.78 13.59 64.54 17.769 1.127 0.176
7th 21st 51st
4.287 0.245 0.06
3rd 9th 31st
55.916 3.363 0.244
5th 11th 41st
11 191 19.70 2990.00 0.8 13.734 57.83 10.913 2.2 0.17
7th 21st 51st
8.518 0.59 0.153
phase)

16
TABLE 3
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS WITH CFLS CONNECTED IN BALANCED
CONDITION

STEP 1
V I W PF THD %-V THD %-I Harmonics
3rd
84.317 9th 7.931 31st
0.61
5th
R 207 2.43 335.00 0.67 7.319 106.1 56.596 11th 3.745 41st
0.523
7th
28.213 21st 1.561 51st
0.404
3rd
85.258 9th 11.24 31st
1.644
5th
Y 204 2.33 312.00 0.66 6.914 109.6 59.233 11th 3.621 41st
0.471
7th
32.203 21st 1.231 51st
0.23
3rd
84.925 9th 9.757 31st
0.743
5th
B 200 2.28 291.00 0.64 6.369 108 58.124 11th 1.845 41st
0.322
7th
30.474 21st 0.72 51st
0.084

STEP 2
3rd 9th 31st
77.522 5.4 0.437
5th 11th 41st
R 217 4.41 679.00 0.71 9.72 91.68 45.098 5.455 0.336
7th 21st 51st
17.188 1.145 0.326
3rd 9th 31st
79.981 6.022 0.524
5th 11th 41st
Y 216 4.07 617.00 0.7 8.683 96.39 48.871 5.839 0.428
7th 21st 51st
20.198 1.264 0.253
3rd 9th 31st
79.861 6.094 0.672
5th 11th 41st
B 214 4.15 614.00 0.69 8.123 95.14 47.034 6.221 0.446
7th 21st 51st
18.818 1.136 0.207
STEP 3
3rd 9th 31st
70.51 5.174 0.337
5th 11th 41st
R 209 5.99 960.00 0.77 11.194 77.11 30.233 2.505 0.152
7th 21st 51st
3.557 0.59 0.022
3rd 9th 31st
71.752 5.702 0.345
5th 11th 41st
Y 205 5.68 876.00 0.75 10.045 79.39 32.69 3.75 0.236
7th 21st 51st
5.218 0.712 0.15
3rd 9th 31st
70.746 5.254 0.468
5th 11th 41st
B 204 5.67 858.00 0.74 9.572 77.83 31.499 2.578 0.585
7th 21st 51st
3.986 0.417 0.036

17
TABLE 4
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS WITH CFLS CONNECTED IN UNBALANCED
CONDITION

STEP 1

V I W PF THD %-V THD %-I Harmonics


3rd 9th 31st
68.629 6.049 0.28
5th 11th 41st
R 212 5.90 956.00 0.76 12.375 74.61 28.012 2.847 0.264
7th 21st 51st
4.057 0.602 0.155
3rd 9th 31st
71.877 6.4 0.376
5th 11th 41st
Y 208 5.67 888.00 0.75 10.047 79.52 32.544 3.774 0.15
7th 21st 51st
5.744 0.593 0.141
3rd 9th 31st
83.668 6.987 0.507
5th 11th 41st
B 219 2.55 323.00 0.63 5.324 105 56.095 3.508 0.77
7th 21st 51st
27.774 1.16 0.446
STEP 2
3rd 9th 31st
68.755 5.512 0.467
5th 11th 41st
R 212 6.09 976.00 0.76 11.293 74.65 28.004 3.036 0.389
7th 21st 51st
2.245 0.609 0.289
3rd 9th 31st
72.459 4.954 0.592
5th 11th 41st
Y 203 5.65 847.00 0.74 10.156 80.69 34.111 3.518 0.182
7th 21st 51st
6.804 0.952 0.059
3rd 9th 31st
77.25 2.108 0.345
5th 11th 41st
B 210 4.10 597.00 0.69 7.805 89.8 43.162 4.597 0.165
7th 21st 51st
13.747 0.78 0.223
STEP 3
3rd 9th 31st
70.51 5.174 0.337
5th 11th 41st
R 209 5.99 960.00 0.77 11.194 77.11 30.233 2.505 0.152
7th 21st 51st
3.557 0.59 0.022
3rd 9th 31st
71.752 5.702 0.345
5th 11th 41st
Y 205 5.68 876.00 0.75 10.045 79.39 32.69 3.75 0.236
7th 21st 51st
5.218 0.712 0.15
3rd 9th 31st
70.746 5.254 0.468
5th 11th 41st
B 204 5.67 858.00 0.74 9.572 77.83 31.499 2.578 0.585
7th 21st 51st
3.986 0.417 0.036

18
TABLE 5
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS WITH CFLS AND INCANDESCENT LAMPS
Transformer loss and primary & secondary harmonics

WITH CFL ALONE (33 NUMBERS)


PERCE
TOTAL TOTAL NTAGE
PRIMARY INPUT SECONDARY OUTPUT LOSS
R Y B R Y B
VOLTAGE 229 229 224 235 236 232
CURRENT 2.09 2 2.02 2.58 2.39 2.42
WATT 380.974 366.4 362.44 1109.81 373.481 345.19 332.934 1051.607 5.24
PF 0.796 0.8 0.801 0.616 0.612 0.593
THD % V 2.184 2.095 2.859 5.789 5.834 4.466
ITHD % I 64.148 72.883 63.676 107.92 108.61 111.539

WITH INCANDESCENT LAMP ALONE


R Y B R Y B
VOLTAGE 224 207 213 231 231 229
CURRENT 1.69 1.68 1.6 1.58672 1.5039 1.49342
WATT 378.56 347.76 340.8 1067.12 366.532 347.4 341.993 1055.922 1.04
PF 1 1 1 1 1 1
THD % V 2.805 2.204 4.312 2.24 2.843 2.885
THD % I 2.599 2.363 3.292 2.203 2.885 2.308

19
TABLE 6
LABORATORY TEST
TRANSFORMER TEMPERATURE WITH CFL ALONE: Total wattage = 1052
(Power parameters given in TABLE 5)

o o
TIME CORE TEMP ( C) WINDING TEMP ( C)
0:00 28 28
0:10 29 30
0:20 30 32
0:30 31 33
0:40 32 34
0:50 33 36
1:00 34 37
1:10 34 37
1:20 35 38
1:30 36 39
1:40 36 39
1:50 37 40
2:00 37 40
2:10 38 41
2:20 38 41
2:30 39 42
2:40 40 42
2:50 40 42
3:00 40 42

TEMPERATURE VERSUS TIME PLOT FOR CFL CIRCUIT

50
40
CORE
30 TEMP
20 WINDING
TEMP
10
0
00

30

00

30

00

30

00
0:

0:

1:

1:

2:

2:

3:

20
TABLE 7
LABORATORY TEST
TRANSFORMER TEMPERATURE WITH INCANDESCENT LAMP ALONE:
Total wattage = 1056
(Power parameters given in TABLE 5)

TIME CORE TEMP (oC) WINDING TEMP (oC)


0:00 28 28
0:10 30 31
0:20 31 31
0:30 31 32
0:40 32 33
0:50 33 33
1:00 34 34
1:10 34 35
1:20 35 35
1:30 35 36
1:40 36 36
1:50 36 37
2:00 37 37
2:10 37 37
2:20 37 37
2:30 37 37
2:40 37 37
2:50 37 37
3:00 37 37

TEMPERATURE VERSUS TIME PLOT FOR INCANDESCENT LAMP CIRCUIT

40

30 CORE
TEMP
20
WINDING
10 TEMP

0
00

30

00

30

00

30

00
0:

0:

1:

1:

2:

2:

3:

21
TABLE 8
MEASUREMENT OF LUMEN PER WATT WITH DIFFERENT MAKES OF CFLS AND
INCANDESCENT LAMPS

LUMEN PER WATT at

230 V 210 V 190 V 170 V 150 V 130 V

HONEY QUEEN 4.6 4.7 4.66 4.57 4.52 4.36

LOW COST MYOTA 3.71 3.48 3.38 3.15 2.9 2.32

LEUCI 4.61 4.57 4.38 4.27 4.31 4.1

13 W (PARISHAD) 6.26 6.27 6.15 6.02 5.71 5.11


HIGH COST
11 W (PARISHAD) 5.53 5.46 5.33 5.08 4.53 4.19

100 W 1.16 0.98 0.82 0.65 0.52 0.43

INCANDESCENT 60 W 0.91 0.76 0.63 0.51 0.39 0.29

40 W 1.05 0.89 0.7 0.61 0.43 0.35

TABLE 9
SIMULATION OF A DOMESTIC CONSUMERS LOAD AT THE LABORATORY USING CFLS
AND INCANDESCENT LAMPS ALONG WITH DIFFERENT ELECTRICAL APPLIANCES

FRIDGE+2 FRIDGE
FRIDGE +
300 W FRIDGE+ FAN+TV+3 +2
FRIDG 2FAN+TV
2 FAN TV INC 4 CFLS MOTOR 2FAN+TV+ 00W INC FAN+TV+4
E +300W
LAMP 4CFLS LAMP+ CFLS+
INC LAMP
MOTOR MOTOR

V (V) 209 209 220 219 225 216 222 222 209 213
I (A) 1.17 0.67 0.4 1.334 0.23 6.73 3.36 2.3 9.9325 8.7375
W (W) 173.372 139.89 67.32 292.146 38.502 1452.23 731.747 486.091 2079.95 1753.9
pf 0.709 0.999 0.765 1 0.744 0.999 0.981 0.952 0.998 0.994
Funda
mental
1.168 0.674 0.309 1.332 0.197 6.719 3.342 2.277 9.926 8.718
current
(A)
THD
3.053 4.775 4.382 2.053 1.753 1.538 1.885 2.741 2.048 2.018
%V
THD %
4.24 6.312 78.049 2.084 60.493 3.477 9.117 14.355 2.643 3.114
I

22
TABLE 10
FIELD TEST READINGS - BEFORE REPLACEMENT OF INCANDESCENT LAMPS WITH
CFLS
Test Point No.1
THD %- THD %-
Date V I W PF Harmonics
V I
3rd 9th 31st
10.649 2.975 0.74
5th 11th 41st
5-Mar-04 202 1.56 307.00 0.98 1.985 15.42 7.685 1.776 0.396
7th 21st 51st
6.582 0.989 0.261
3rd 9th 31st
12.658 2.71 0.313
5th 11th 41st
6-Mar-04 201 1.35 259.00 0.96 2.245 19.071 10.434 0.933 0.532
7th 21st 51st
8.194 0.864 0.365
3rd 9th 31st
10.419 2.567 0.29
5th 11th 41st
7-Mar-04 200 1.99 389.00 0.98 2.326 15.287 7.959 1.033 0.313
7th 21st 51st
6.607 0.558 0.232
Test Point No.2
Date V I W PF Thd.V% Thd.I% Harmonics
3rd9th 31st
1.879 0.303 0.102
5th 11th 41st
5-Mar-04 218 1.99 432.00 1 3.215 2.961 2.143 0.026 0.107
7th
0.352 21st 0.114 51st 0.008
3rd
0.688 9th 0.28 31st 0.023
6-Mar-04 201 2.25 452.00 1 2.685 2.431 5th 2.185 11th 0.166 41st 0.031
7th
0.489 21st 0.155 51st 0.043
3rd
0.452 9st 0.302 31st 0.047
5th
7-Mar-04 203 0.89 179.00 0.99 2.433 2.059 1.797 11th 0.07 41st 0.029
7th
0.624 21st 0.043 51st 0.032
FIELD TEST READINGS -AFTER REPLACEMENT OF INCANDESCENT LAMPS WITH CFLS
Test Point No.1
THD %- THD %-
Date V I W PF Harmonics
V I
3rd 9st 31st
24.729 4.117 0.685
5th 11th 41st
8-Mar-04 199 2.90 497.00 0.86 2.86 31.39 13.259 2.383 1.042
7th 21st 51st
11.656 0.812 0.935
3rd 9st 31st
20.643 4.493 0.633
5th 11th 41st
9-Mar-04 202 2.15 351.00 0.85 2.637 26.188 10.095 0.854 0.875
7th 21st 51st
10.266 0.291 0.68
3rd 9st 31st
14.274 4.882 0.382
5th 11th 41st
10-Mar-04 201 1.56 301.00 0.96 2.157 18.985 6.051 0.217 0.733
7th 21st 51st
9.063 0.256 0.717
Test Point No.2
Date V I W PF Thd.V% Thd.I% Harmonics
3rd
10.146 9st 8.22 31st
0.48
5th
8-Mar-04 212 0.72 146.00 0.96 3.595 20.348 9.872 11th 5.347 41st
1.008
7th
9.551 21st 1.321 51st
0.533
3rd
12.17 9st 7.482 31st
0.532
5th
9-Mar-04 198 0.80 269.00 0.98 3.596 20.755 10.282 11th 5.32 41st
0.411
7th
7.742 21st 2.069 51st
0.347
3rd
12.999 9st 9.131 31st
0.45
5th
10-Mar-04 213 0.64 130.00 0.95 3.262 23.806 10.912 11th 6.106 41st
0.588
7th
10.595 21st 1.993 51st
0.769

23
TABLE 11
FIELD TEST
Connected load in the premises of test point 1 and 2 as on dates of measurements

5/3/04 6/3/04 7/3/04 8/3/04 9/3/04 10/3/04


FAN X 2 FAN X 2 FAN X 1 FAN X 2 FAN X 3 FAN X 2
TEST 40 W IL X 1 40 W IL X 1 60 W IL X 2 CFL X 3 CFL X 5 CFL X 2
POINT 1 60 W IL X 3 60 W IL X 3
100 W IL X 1 100 W IL X 1
FRIDGE FRIDGE FRIDGE FRIDGE FRIDGE FRIDGE
FAN X 1 FAN X 1 FAN X 2 FAN X 3 FAN X 2 FAN X 2
TEST TV TV TV TV TV TV
POINT 2
FLUORESCE FLUORESCE FLUORESCE FLUORESCE FLUORESCE
NT LAMP X 1 NT LAMP X 1 NT LAMP X 1 NT LAMP X 2 NT LAMP X 1 CFL X 3
60 W IL X 1 60 W IL X 1 CFL X 5 CFL X 4
TABLE 12
FIELD TEST READINGS AT THE TRANSFORMER END BEFORE THE REPLACEMENT
Date Phase V I W PF Thd.V% Thd.I% Harmonics
3rd
2.273 9st 0.146 31st
0.051
5th
R 223 26.50 5900.00 1 2.372 3.264 2.263 11th 0.084 41st
0.025
7th
0.309 21st 0.146 51st
0.033
3rd
5.306 9st 2.712 31st
0.203
5th
5-Mar-04 Y 217 10.40 2190.00 0.97 2.241 6.711 0.501 11th 1.735 41st
0.05
7th
1.985 21st 0.032 51st
0.331
3rd
5.758 9st 1.408 31st
0.188
5th
B 217 12.20 2620.00 0.99 2.411 6.638 1.826 11th 0.682 41st
0.085
7th
1.977 21st 0.343 51st
0.15
Date Phase V I W PF Thd.V% Thd.I% Harmonics
3rd
4.072 9st 0.952 31st
0.055
5th
R 214 31.40 6690.00 1 2.533 5.264 1.999 11th 0.389 41st
0.053
7th
1.955 21st 0.228 51st
0.057
3rd
4.739 9st 2.635 31st
0.184
5th
6-Mar-04 Y 210 1.10 2320.00 1 2.375 7.243 3.807 11th 1.799 41st
0.061
7th
1.95 21st 0.351 51st
0.035
3rd
3.886 9st 1.46 31st
0.27
5th
B 210 16.50 3440.00 1 2.265 5.021 1.747 11th 0.704 41st
0.128
7th
1.604 21st 0.381 51st
0.129
Date Phase V I W PF Thd.V% Thd.I% Harmonics
3rd
2.962 9st 0.086 31st
0.008
5th
R 209 33.20 6920.00 1 2.389 3.314 1.235 11th 0.234 41st
0.011
7th
0.584 21st 0.09 51st
0.074
3rd 9st 31st
1.318 1.105 0.076
5th 11th 41st
7-Mar-04 Y 206 13.60 2790.00 1 2.1 2.841 1.3 1.412 0.017
7th 21st 51st
0.505 0.036 0.118
3rd
3.099 9st 1.204 31st
0.092
5th
B 206 17.10 3510.00 1 2.139 4.239 1.683 11th 0.668 41st
0.064
7th
1.658 21st 0.12 51st
0.051

24
TABLE 13
FIELD TEST READINGS AT THE TRANSFORMER END AFTER THE REPLACEMENT
Date Phase V I W PF Thd.V% Thd.I% Harmonics
3rd
17.94 9st 3.521 31st 0.106
R 209 17.70 3560.00 0.96 2.298 21.87 5th 10.57 11th 0.905 41st 0.12
7th
5.405 21st 0.233 51st 0.014
3rd
7.347 9st 1.971 31st 0.073
5th
8-Mar-04 Y 205 9.26 1840.00 0.97 2.176 9.792 5.436 11th 0.356 41st 0.101
7th
2.57 21st 0.247 51st 0.037
3rd
21.31 9st 9.301 31st 0.105
5th
B 205 9.78 1940.00 0.97 2.226 25.75 3.138 11th 4.369 41st 0.133
7th 21st 51st
9 0.681 0.118
Date Phase V I W PF Thd.V% Thd.I% Harmonics
3rd
21.58 9st 4.069 1.542 0.173
5th
R 213 16.80 3410.00 0.95 2.167 26.45 12.35 11th 1.542 41st 0.094
7th
7.667 21st 0.044 51st 0.14
3rd
8.335 9st 4.048 31st 0.224
5th
9-Mar-04 Y 207 9.15 1870.00 0.99 2.236 11.71 3.595 11th 2.309 41st 0.703
7th
5.109 21st 0.195 51st 0.252
3rd
22.5 9st 8.728 31st 0.166
5th
B 208 10.90 2200.00 0.97 2.185 26.05 3.491 11th 4.662 41st 0.335
7th
7.055 21st 0.677 51st 0.1
Date Phase V I W PF Thd.V% Thd.I% Harmonics
3rd 9st 31st
18.44 4.173 0.147
5th 11th
R 209 17.50 3480.00 0.97 2.318 22.36 9.976 1.388 41st 0.224
7th
6.181 21st 0.285 51st 0.165
3rd
10.97 9st 3.538 31st 0.147
5th
10-Mar-04 Y 204 8.34 1650.00 0.97 2130 14.16 5.282 11th 860 41st 0.466
7th
5.469 21st 0.605 51st 0.764
3rd
23.84 9st 8.845 31st 0.188
5th
B 205 9.94 1960.00 0.96 2.267 27.74 2.005 11th 3.319 41st 0.658
7th
9.454 21st 0.229 51st 0.314

TABLE 14
FIELD TEST – NO. OF INCANDESCENT LAMPS REPLACED IN FEEDER 2 OF PORIYANI
160 KVA TRANSFORMER
FEEDER 1
40 W 60 W 100 W
63 109 18
NO. OF LAMPS REPLACED
190
2520 6540 1800
TOTAL W
10860

Number of CFLs placed = 190


Total watts = 1900

25
ANEXE 2
VOLTAGE AND CURRENT WAVEFORMS
(Channel 1shows the voltage waveform and channel two shows the current
waveform)

1. LAB STUDY

1.1. ADITION OF CFLS IN 11 STEPS (REFERENCE TABLE 1)

STEP 1

STEP 4

26
STEP 7

STEP 11

27
2. FIELD STUDY

2.1. TEST POINT 1(REFERENCE TABLE 10)


BEFORE REPLACEMENT OF INCANDESCENT LAMPS

AFTER REPLACEMENT

28
2.2. TEST POINT 2 (REFERENCE TABLE 10)
BEFORE REPLACEMENT

AFTER REPLACEMENT

29
2.3. TRANSFORMER POINT (REFERENCE TABLE 12)
BEFORE REPLACEMENT
R PHASE

Y PHASE

B PHASE

30
AFTER REPLACEMENT
R PHASE

Y PHASE

B PHASE

31