ENERGYCON 2014 May 13-16, 2014 Dubrovnik, Croatia

Comparison of various methods for determining direction of

harmonic distortion by measuring in point of common coupling
Mario Bazina#1, Tomislav Tomia*2,
#
Schneider Electric Croatia
*
Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing Zagreb

Abstract - Various methods dealing with determining of that defines and describes the essential features of the voltage
harmonic distortion direction are summarized in two groups, as at the point of common coupling, at low and medium voltage
multi point and single point measurement. This paper presents network, under normal operating conditions.
comparison of various methods for determining direction of In today's networks, full of nonlinear loads which generate
harmonic distortion by measurements taken in single point of
higher current harmonics, it is important to determine who is
common coupling (PCC). Advance methods require complete
system parameters for its calculation and often unavailable tests the real source of harmonic disturbances. Even if one side has
(harmonic current injection, switching tests) for determining the linear load, due to resonant impedance of its network, it can
values of harmonic impedances. In this paper we are dealing amplify individual current harmonic which are coming from
with methods that require only measurement of current and other side. Still, there is no standard procedure or method with
voltage value in PCC. Some methods are based on utility and which this problem can be easily resolved. In this paper we
customer impedances modeling, some on calculation of harmonic will describe few methods and processed them through simple
reactive power and some only on harmonic current and voltage test measurement.
parameters. In this paper five methods will be described and
processed through measurement on the simple test system. TABLE I
Keywords: Determining Harmonic direction, PCC harmonic VARIOUS METHODS FOR HARMONIC DIRECTION DETERMINATION
measurement. METHOD TYPE OF MEASUREMENT REQURED DATA
Multi-point
Harmonic State estimation
I. INTRODUCTION (HSE) [2]
Multi point synchronous
measurements
For the majority of the disturbances in the power system, Multi-point
responsible are nonlinear loads owned by customers Global Power Quality
Multi point synchronous
(GPQ) [3]
(consumers), although supplier of electricity (grid operator - measurements
Power-Direction Voltage and current
utility) can also contribute to these disturbances. The Single point
Method [4] measurement at PCC
unwritten rule is that responsibility for maintaining the quality Scattered Power Voltage and current
Single point
of voltage is on supplier of electricity, while customer (load) Method [5] measurement at PCC
is responsible for the quality of the current. Supply voltage Method Based on the
Single point
Voltage and current
IEEE std. 14592000 [6] measurement at PCC
harmonics are mainly caused by higher nonlinear load current
harmonics, which are connected to different voltage levels of Harmonic Current Vector
Voltage and current
Single point measurement at PCC
the network. If there is a customer (load) with a negative Method (HVM) [7]
and utility impedance
effect on the network, producing significant amounts of higher
harmonic currents, as result there is appearance of higher Voltage and current
harmonics of the supply voltage at the point where a network RLC Method [8] Single point measurement at PCC
and utility impedance
is connected to the customer (point of common coupling).
Voltage and current
Disturbances in the form of reduced supply voltage quality,
Superposition and measurement at PCC,
due to a significant share of higher voltage harmonics, reflect Projection Method [9]
Single point
utility and customer
to all customers connected to the same connection point. impedance
Higher harmonics currents produced by nonlinear customer
loads will be injected into all other appliances and customers II. METHODS FOR DETERMINING DIRECTION OF HARMONIC
connected to the same connection point. In this case, some DISTORTION
customers may receive electrical energy with reduced quality. Methods for determining the direction of harmonic
Since a supplier of electricity is responsible for the delivery of disturbances are grouped in methods with measurement at
electricity within required quality, the supplier must limit the multiple points and single connection point, listed in Table I.
negative effect of individual customer [1]. To limit the First two multiple point methods, require knowledge of
negative effect, determination of responsibility for such complete system characteristics and require several different
disturbances between customer and utility needs to be measurements such as voltage, current, active and reactive
measured and detected. power at each harmonic frequency. Multi point measurements
Power Quality is defined by the norms and standards that assumes installing number of power analyzers (depend on
define the reference technical parameters and tolerances of metering points) with synchronous measurement preformed in
delivered electrical energy. EN 50160 is a European standard different metering section, so implementation of this method

978-1-4799-2449-3/14/$31.00 2014 IEEE 392

 ENERGYCON 2014 May 13-16, 2014 Dubrovnik, Croatia
can have high costs, and these methods will not be processed
in this paper.
Single point measurement are divided into few groups
depending which system characteristic is sufficient for correct
method calculation. First three single point methods from
Table I. need only measurement of voltage and current in PCC.
Fast fourier transformation of power quality analyzer
calculates data for entire harmonic scope. These
measurements can be easily added into commercial measuring
devices. They are not sufficient for determining share of
responsibility between utility and customer, but they are
giving to engineers valuable data in quick power quality
audits.
Power direction method is most common method for
This method checks the harmonic distortion direction of the
each harmonic order. In connection point (PCC) direction of
power flow is observed. If the sign of active harmonic power
of the observed harmonic is positive, the network is the
dominant source or has a greater contribution to observed
harmonic distortion. If there is a negative sign, then the
predominant responsibility is on customer side. As method
calculation depends only on the difference of the harmonic
voltage and current phase angle, as well as on possible errors
in measurement, the method cannot be considered as 100%
accurate [11], [16]. Because of its simplicity and speed, this
method is most commonly applied.
Formula for the method [1]:
determining power harmonic direction. Although, it has been    (1)
shown that this method in only 50% cases provides accurate If P > 0 , the U side is responsible for h-th harmonic distortion
results [11], it is still most widely used methods and today it is If P < 0 , the C side is responsible for h-th harmonic distortion
implemented in many power quality analyzers. This is the
reason why this method will be processed in this paper as well.
Methods based on Scattered Power [5] and IEEE std. 1459-
2000 [6] are based on calculating non active harmonic powers.
Articles [5] and [6] are showing that these methods in most
cases can give correct results, although they are not 100%
correct. Using these methods it is unable to determine the
share of harmonic distortions of individual harmonic orders. It
is only possible to determine which side has stronger
influence on harmonic distortion in point of common coupling
and this is main disadvantage of these methods.
Harmonic current method [7] and RLC method [8] beside
voltage and current data at PCC, need impedance value of
utility and customer for method calculation. Methods are
 (2)
variation of superposition method with customer impedance
modeled by different equations. As customer impedance
 and  are rms values of voltage and current harmonic
order h at the PCC, and i  are phase angles of voltage
and current harmonic order h in PCC.
B. Scattered Power method
Method is based on measuring of the Scattered power,
defined by Czarnecki [12]. It does not require complicated
calculations and advance data acquisition, and can be even
processed with standard demand meters.
Formula for the method [5]:
admittance of load :

where nth harmonic active ( ) and reactive ( ) powers are
calculated as     and     .
values are usually unknown or require complicated
calculations, load modeling can give us valuable "easy get" Load currents are divided into:
impedance data [15], which are enough for implementation of
these two methods. Utility reference impedance is represented Active:
by short circuit impedance of the system and impedance of

(3)
last transformer before PCC.

Superposition method [9], for its calculation needs actual Reactive:

system values of utility and customer impedance. With this
method it is possible to determine share of harmonic distortion (4)
of every individual current and voltage harmonic order. This Scattered:
method can determine the responsibilities of a utility and its
customer for limiting violations caused by either harmonic  (5)
source changes or harmonic impedance changes.
In case of dispute between two parties, by norm EN 50160, Generated Harmonic Currents:
side that generates harmonic distortion should be penalised.
 (6)
In most cases, by using one of above mentioned methods,
harmonic producing side can be easily determined and results where k represents current harmonic numbers which are not
can be compared with engineering knowledge of existing present in the set of voltage harmonic numbers.
system. Then, preventive measures for harmonic mitigation Power components can be calculated as:
can be applied. If there is still dispute between two parties,
Active Power:
then additional measurement, like synchronised multi point
measurement should be applied. (7)
A. Active Power Method Reactive Power:
The most commonly used method for the detection of (8)
harmonics method is based on flow of active harmonic power.

978-1-4799-2449-3/14/$31.00 2014 IEEE 393

 ENERGYCON 2014 May 13-16, 2014 Dubrovnik, Croatia

Scattered Power: D. Superposition Method

(9) Superposition method was proposed as replace for Active
Power method, [9]. Main idea is to separate harmonic
Generated Harmonic Powers: contribution of both sides, utility and customer. For the
(10) calculation of this method it is necessary to first replace the
utility and customer side with the Norton equivalent, as shown
In reality, usually current and voltage have same harmonic in figure 1. Then principle of superposition is applied to
numbers, so generated harmonics currents and powers will be determine harmonic distortion contribution of each side in
ignored in this paper. point of common coupling (figure 2.).
Basic principle of this method is to compare values of
active, reactive and scattered powers. Result gives negligible
values of scattered power if linear load is supplied by
sinusoidal voltage or non sinusoidal voltage with reasonable
 . For sinusoidal or non sinusoidal supply with nonlinear
load, result of this method is  with considerable value. By
 value, it can concluded weather customer load is producing
harmonic distortion or not.
C. Method based on IEEE std. 1459-2000
The method was first proposed in [13], and improvements Fig. 1. Northon equivalent circuit
are proposed in [6], and is based on calculating reactive
powers defined by standard IEEE 1459-2000. As reactive
power is divided on several different values, every value
contains different harmonic distortion rates. Advantages of
this method is simplicity of required measurement and
insensitivity to voltage unbalance. Main disadvantage is that
results from this method give us only share in distortion of
whole harmonic spectrum, not share from individual harmonic
orders. Fig. 2. Principle of superposition
Formula for this method [6]:
Based on Fig.1. utility and customer current harmonic
Fundamental reactive power: sources can be calculated [9]:
(11)
   (14)

Fictitious reactive power:

  (15)

   (12)


If there is change in impedance, new utility and customer
Fryze's reactive power ( : harmonic sources can be recalculated using:

   (13)  (16)

with    defined in [14].

Goal of this method is to compare values of three reactive  (17)

powers.  contains values only from fundamental harmonic
and has a minimum value, N contains all non-active
Applying the principle of superposition, fig 2., contribution of
components of apparent power and therefore has maximum
each side is:
value, and  contains  but without all non-active
components, and its value is between  and N. If there is  (18)

nonlinear load and nonlinear supply, difference between 
and N will be significant, and  will be closer to N. If there
 (19)
is nonlinear supply and linear load, difference between  and
N will not be significant, with  closer to  . In situation
with non linear supply and non linear load, there will be As values of  and  are in phasor form, for easier
compare, they need to be transfer to scalar values:
difference between  and N, with value of  in middle
between values of  and N. In last case, there is need to  (20)
perform additional measurement to detect share of each side.
 (21)

978-1-4799-2449-3/14/$31.00 2014 IEEE 394

 ENERGYCON 2014 May 13-16, 2014 Dubrovnik, Croatia

where and are phase angles of utility and
customer contribution respectively, and is phase angle of
measured current in PCC.
Using formulas (15) and (18-21) with  as customer
reference impedance harmonic current contribution of each
side can be calculated.
Voltage customer impedance can be calculated (from
thevenin equivalent circuit) from active power P and
Fig. 3. Thevenin equivalent
For voltage harmonic contribution calculation, northon
equivalent circuit is replaced with thevenin equivalent circuit,
figure 3. Circuit is composed of utility and customer voltage
sources and utility and customer series impedances.
After implementing thevenin equivalent circuit, utility and
customer voltage harmonic sources can be calculated:
(22)
(23)
After calculating utility and customer voltage harmonic
sources, same formulas as for superposition and current scalar
values (18 - 21) are applied for calculating share of voltage
harmonic distortion in point of common coupling.
Utility and customer impedance value must be known for
correct method calculation. Network short circuit impedance
and impedance of last transformer before PCC are usually
known values, but customer impedance is usually hard or
sometimes even impossible to get. Various method as current
injection, frequency scan, switching tests can be used for
determining customer impedance, but they are not always
applicable at customer site. This is the main drawback of this
method, and it won't be processed in this paper..
E. Modified Harmonic Current Vector Method (HVM)
Method proposed in [7], is actually improved superposition
method. HVM method uses all formulas and principles as
superposition method, but uses new approach in impedance
modeling. For utility impedance, this method is using sum of
network shot circuit impedance and impedance of last
transformer before PCC.
Current customer impedance can be calculated (from
northon equivalent circuit) from active power P and
fundamental frequency voltage  :
 (24)
fundamental frequency current  :
 (27)
The customer side voltage harmonic source is calculated by:
(28)
(29)
Using equations (18-21) with  as customer reference
impedance, harmonic voltage contribution of each side can be
calculated.
By [7] this method gives results which are close to results
gained by actual customer impedances. Method is relative
easy to implement and it can determine share of distortion on
each side in point on common coupling. Although this method
is not 100% correct, it can easily give valuable insight into
harmonic distortion direction in PCC.
F. RLC method
This method is also an improved version of the
superposition method and it is proposed in [8]. Method has
been given such name because the customer impedance
network is modeled with a parallel connection of resistance,
inductance and capacity, for which calculation is only
necessary to measure voltages and currents at the point of
common coupling.
The process of determining the contribution of each party is
the same as for determining the contribution in superposition
method, with only difference in the calculation of customer
impedance. Reference utility impedance is same as in HVM
method (sum of network shot circuit impedance and
impedance of last transformer before PCC), while the
impedance of the customer can be calculated as [8]:
   

   

   

   

represent phase angle difference between measured

   (34)
fundamental current and voltage in PCC.
The customer side current harmonic source is calculated:

 

 (35)


(25)
is the difference between phase angles of corresponding
voltages and currents.  represents a current source connected
 (26)
to the nonlinear components of the customer network and can
be considered as a harmonic current source,  .

978-1-4799-2449-3/14/$31.00 2014 IEEE 395

 ENERGYCON 2014 May 13-16, 2014 Dubrovnik, Croatia

By [8] this method gives results close to results with actual

impedances. Like HVM method, RLC method is easy to
implement and can give valuable information about share of
harmonic distortion for each side in point of common
coupling.

III. TEST SYSTEM

A. Test system overview
To verify above mention methods, measurement on test
system in fig. 4. is considered. Test system consist of several
well known, standard non linear and linear loads and it is used Fig. 4. Block scheme - test system
as system for harmonic flow measurement and simulation.
Non-linear loads are represented with three phase graetz TABLE II
bridge rectifier, motor powered with single phase VSD, SYNCHRONOUS GENERATOR NAMEPLATE
fluorescent lamps, computer and monitor connected on single Synchonous Generator
phase extension cord. Three phase motor with direct on-line Power 15 kVA
start and light bulbs are representing linear loads. In this paper Voltage 380 V
cos fi 0,86
measurements on only two loads are considered. Test system
Xd" 0,085
is connected to LV network of Faculty of Electrical Xd 0,45
Engineering and computing. Because of the nature of loads
connected to faculty network (computers, rectifiers...), whole IV. SIMULATION STUDY
network has high level of voltage THD, aprox. 3,5% of THDv. Two simple, opposite cases are taken in consideration. PCC
Alternatively, test system is connected to synchronous current and voltages are measured with power analyzer, and
generator, with power of 15 kVA, and it represents relatively snapshots of waveforms are transferred to LabView. Source of
clean network. In this paper only measurements with energy in both cases is synchronous generator, with harmonic
generator as source will be processed, as network is highly load connected on both side of PCC. As generator is used
polluted. For simulation of utility pollution, graetz bridge is instead of network voltage, tests can be processed in known
connected upper from PCC, so harmonic current will conditions.
"artificially" come from utility side.
Incoming feeder from network/generator is connected to A. First case - customer has greater influence
three phase, 80A multi clip bus bar. Bus bar presents customer First case represents linear utility voltage, represented with
network, and all loads are feed from this bus bar. Current synchronous generator and non linear customer load,
transformers are placed in serial with incoming feeder, and represented with graetz bridge rectifier (fig 4.). Generator
they represent a point of common coupling. Current inputs of name plate is given in table II.
power quality analyzer (Schneider Electric ION 7650) are
connected to CT's and voltage inputs to multi clip bus bar.
With ION 7650, voltage and current waveform snapshot are
taken in various conditions. Every snapshot has two periods,
with resolution of 1024 samples/period. Snapshots are
performed by software StructureWare Power Monitoring, and
they are transferred to .txt file. File is then read with LabView,
in which algorithms for methods calculations are designed.
ION 7650 can measure voltage and current harmonics up to
harmonic number 501. To simplify calculations, only first 25
harmonics will be processed in this paper, but same procedure
can be applied to all other harmonic numbers. Fig. 5. First test current waveform
Methods algorithms are design by transferring formulas
for method calculation (1 to 35) into the Labview
programming interface. Every method has identical first part
of the block diagram for accepting and processing the FFT
waveform signal, and different second part for method
calculations. Results are presented in tables, graphs and bar
charts. For every method, real waveform with 1024
samples/period, is presented in waveform graph.

Fig. 6 First test voltage waveform

978-1-4799-2449-3/14/$31.00 2014 IEEE 396

 ENERGYCON 2014 May 13-16, 2014 Dubrovnik, Croatia

Test calculation of harmonic distortion direction for each

method is done with full harmonic spectrum, while in this
paper only few highest and most common harmonic orders are
represented in table III.
TABLE IIII
HARMONIC ORDERS OF CURRENT AND VOLTAGE MEASURED IN PCC, FIRST
CASE

Harmonic order 1 3 5 7 11
Ipcc (A) 1,91 0,023 0,380 0,208 0,144
Upcc (V) 235,694 0,242 2,202 2,444 2,158
Cos pcc 0,498 -255,405 -110,536 -122,258 -82,538

Total harmonic distortion THDi in PCC is approximately Fig. 8. Scattered Power Method graph
25% and THDu is 2,2%. As generator power is ten times Method based on IEEE 1459-2000 is similar to scattered
bigger than load power, voltage THD is relatively low. power method. Difference between Q1 and N is significant,
Biggest current harmonics are fifth and seventh harmonic, mainly due to small difference between fundamental current
with third harmonic almost imperceptible. As non linear load and voltage phase angle. Qx is closer to N, and this is showing,
is represented only with 6 pulse rectifier, this situation is by [6], that customer has greater influence on harmonic
expected. With only linear load connected online (three phase distortions. As mentioned, main disadvantage of this method,
motor and lighting bulb) THDu of generator is somewhere and scattered power method too, is that they are not showing
between 0,7 and 0,8%. With rectifier, THDu goes to 2,2%, influence of every harmonic order.
clearly showing that with connection of even small nonlinear
load voltage THD in PCC increases.
First method, Active Power Method, shows that customer
has greater influence in harmonic distortion in PCC for all
harmonic orders, accept eleventh, shown in figure 7. By APM,
harmonic distortion of eleventh order is mainly on utility side,
but in reality, as generator is considered as "clean" source,
eleventh order harmonic distortion should be on customer side.
With some mistakes, generally Active Power Method is
correct showing that customer is source of harmonic distortion.

Fig. 9. IEEE 1459-2000 Method graph

In this paper forth and fifth method are calculated only for
direction of current harmonics. Utility impedance for both
method is taken from generator's nameplate, as reference
utility impedance represented with Subtransient reactance
Xd".
Fig. 7. Direction by Active Power Method Forth method, Harmonic current vector method is showing
full responsibility for current harmonic distortion in PCC on
Second method, Scattered Power Method is also showing customer side. For some harmonic orders, customer current
that customer has greater influence on harmonic distortion in influence is more then 100%, and vice versa, utility influence
PCC. Value of scattered power Ds is low, but reasonable, and for same harmonic order are with negative sign, like -5%. This
it is indicator with which is possible to conclude that customer is showing that utility (generator) is mitigating this harmonic
has greater influence in harmonic distortion. As Total order currents. In table IV results from HVM method are
harmonic distortion of current and voltage is relatively low presented.
(25% and 2% respectively), with RMS current also relatively
TABLE IVV
low, Ds has low value comparing with active power. When PERCENTAGE OF CUSTOMER AND UTILITY INFLUENCE ON CURRENT HARMONIC
load with higher THDi (like computers) is connected, then ORDERS IN PCC BY HVM METHOD, FIRST CASE
difference between active and scattered power is almost
negligible. In figure 8., results from scattered power method Harmonic order 1 3 5 7 11
calculations are shown. Icustomer % 0,007 102,194 101,650 105,083 98,436
Iutility % 99,993 -2,194 -1,650 -5,083 1,564
Results from fifth method, RLC, are very similar as HVM,
in fact almost same. Results are given in table V. Method
calculation process is also almost same, with only difference
in impedance calculation. Same conclusion as for HVM
method is applicable to RLC method.

978-1-4799-2449-3/14/$31.00 2014 IEEE 397

 ENERGYCON 2014 May 13-16, 2014 Dubrovnik, Croatia

TABLE V TABLE VI
PERCENTAGE OF CUSTOMER AND UTILITY INFLUENCE ON CURRENT HARMONIC HARMONIC ORDERS OF CURRENT AND VOLTAGE MEASURED IN PCC, SECOND
ORDERS IN PCC BY RLC METHOD, FIRST CASE CASE

Harmonic order 1 3 5 7 11 Harmonic 1 3 5 7 11

Icustomer % 0,007 102,167 101,654 105,082 98,448 Ipcc (A) 1,73967 0,00598 0,021712 0,016304 0,017629
Iutility % 99,993 -2,167 -1,654 -5,082 1,552 Upcc (V) 233,762 0,513177 2,49479 2,1637 2,08208
Cos pcc -4,68998 4,53032 -3,48427 -6,5372 -5,79009
B. Second case - utility has greater influence
First method, Active Power Method, shows that
Second case, represents situation where utility has greater responsibility for harmonic distortion of all harmonic orders is
influence in harmonic distortion. This case represents standard on utility side, fig 13. These are correct results, with remark
problems in LV network, where one customer has non linear that APM is not showing amount of responsibility of each side.
loads, which are generating current harmonics and replicating
them to all other customers connected to same connection
point (bus bars).
Source of power for this case is same synchronous
generator used for first case calculation, but with graetz bridge
connected before current transformers at PCC, fig. 10.
Customer load is represented with linear three phase motor of
0,75 kW, connected direct on line. Generator is again
considered as relatively "clean" source, with Graetz bridge
injecting current harmonics to PCC, replicated to customer Fig. 13. Direction by Active Power Method, case 2.
linear load. Tree phase motor is without any typical load on its
shaft, so it is also generating some harmonics, but in far lesser In second method, scattered power method, scattered power
extent than graetz bridge. value Ds is almost negligible, so by [5], that means that utility
has greater influence on overall harmonic distortion in PCC.
Results from method are shown in fig 14.

Fig. 10. Block scheme - second test case Fig. 14. Scattered power method graph, case 2
In third method, IEEE 1459-2000, difference between Q1
and N is small, with Qx closer to N, fig 15. By [6] that means
that utility has greater influence at overall harmonic distortion.

Fig. 11 Second test current waveform

Fig. 15. Scattered power method graph, case 2

Forth and fifth method give almost same results. In both
methods current harmonic distortion in PCC (for monitored
harmonics) is on utility side, with different percentage of
influence. For third harmonic both methods are showing, that
Fig. 12. Second test voltage waveform

978-1-4799-2449-3/14/$31.00 2014 IEEE 398

 ENERGYCON 2014 May 13-16, 2014 Dubrovnik, Croatia
customer load is responsible for more then 36%. This is
probably due to the lack of real load on motor shaft. Also, it is
important to note that percentage of third harmonic is not big,
only 0,34%, so inaccuracy of this measurement can be
noticeable. Result from these two methods are shown in table
VII and VIII.
In difference from first case, current harmonics are not
mitigating on one side of PCC. Both side contribute to
harmonic distortion in PCC. If full harmonic scope is taken
into consideration, it is evident that for almost all third
(neutral) harmonics (3n), customer side is major source of
harmonic distortion. This can be explained with fact, that
graetz bridge is six pulse rectifier and it is mainly producing
fifth and seventh harmonics (direct and inverse harmonic
order).
TABLE VII
PERCENTAGE OF CUSTOMER AND UTILITY INFLUENCE ON CURRENT HARMONIC
ORDERS IN PCC BY HVM METHOD, SECOND CASE
Harmonic order 1 3 5 7
Icustomer % 0,673675 36,5453 14,9358 2,21588
Iutility % 99,3263 63,4547 85,0642 97,7841
TABLE VIII
PERCENTAGE OF CUSTOMER AND UTILITY INFLUENCE ON CURRENT HARMONIC
ORDERS IN PCC BY RLC METHOD, SECOND CASE
Harmonic order 1 3 5 7
Icustomer % 0,003686 36,68 14,8469 2,08024
Iutility % 100,004 63,32 85,1531 97,9198
V. CONCLUSION
In this paper two test cases showed that all proposed
methods can generally determine source of harmonic
distortion, some more accurate then other. Since the test
conditions were regulated (relatively clean source and typical
non linear load), these results were expected. All of proposed
methods are relatively easy to calculate and can gave valuable
information about source of harmonic distortion, but still non
of them can be used for possible penalizing between utility
and customer.
As shown in first case (also in [11], [16]) APM can give
incorrect results and it is not giving information about each
side share in harmonic distortion. Scattered power method and
IEEE method are giving correct results for harmonic direction
determination in both cases, but only for general harmonic
distortion. These three methods can be easily implemented in
today's multimeters and can be used as first indicator of
harmonic distortion direction in certain connection point.
Last two methods in this paper, HVM and RLC, provide
relatively correct result for share of each side in harmonic
distortion without knowing actual customer impedances. Both
978-1-4799-2449-3/14/$31.00 2014 IEEE
methods can be used for comprehensive harmonic source
detection, but full correctness of these methods should be
tested in various network conditions.
REFERENCES
[1] M. Bazina, " Determining the direction of harmonic distortion at the
point of common coupling ", Phd. qualifying exam, Sep. 2012,
[2] D'Antona, G., C. Muscas and S. Sulis, 2009. State estimation for the
localization of harmonic sources in electric distribution systems. IEEE
Trans. Instr. Measur., 58: 1462-1470.
[3] L. Cristaldi, A. Ferrero, S. Silicone, A Distributed System for Electric
Power Quality Measurement, IEEE Trans. on Instrumentation and
Measurement, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 776-781, Aug. 2002.
[4] L. Cristaldi and A. Ferrero, Harmonic power flow analysis for the
measurement of the electric power quality, IEEE Trans. Instrum.
Meas., vol. 44, pp. 683685, June 1995.
[5] M. E. Balci, O. Karacasu, and M. H. Hocaoglu, " A Detection Method
for Harmonic Producing Loads", Electrical and Electronics
Engineering, 2009.
[6] A. Cataliotti, V. Cosentino, "A New Measurement Method for the
Detection of Harmonic Sources in Power Systems Based on the
Approach of the IEEE Std. 14592000", IEEE Transactions on power
11 delivery, vol. 25, no. 1, january 2010
[7] B. Blai , T. Pfajfar, and I. Papi , "Harmonic Contributions Evaluation
12,8528 With the Harmonic Current Vector Method",
87,1472 [8] M. Farhoodnea, Azah Mohamed, H. Shareef, R. A. Jabbar Khan, "An
Improved Method for Determining Contribution of Utility and
Customer Harmonic Distortions In A Power Distribution System",
International Journal on Electrical Engineering and Informatics -
Volume 2, Number 3, 2010 204
[9] W. Xu, Y. Liu, A Method for Determining Customer and Utility
11 Harmonic Contributions at the Point of Common Coupling, IEEE
12,7833 Trans. on Power Delivery, vol. 15, no. 2, p.p. 804---811, Apr. 2000.
87,2167 [10] Islam, K.M.S. and A.H. Samra, 1997. Identification of harmonic
sources in power distribution systems. Proceedings of the IEEE
Southeastcon'97 Engineering new New Century, April 12-14,
Blacksburg, VA , USA., pp: 301-303.
[11] W. Xu, X. Liu, Y. Liu, "An Investigation on the Validity of Power-
Direction Method for Harmonic Source Determination", IEEE
transactions on power delivery, vol. 18, no. 1, Jan. 2003
[12] L.S. Czarnecki, Physical Reasons of Currents RMS Value Increase in
Power Systems with Nonsinusoidal Voltage, IEEE Trans. on Power
Delivery, vol. 8, no. 1, p.p. 437-447, Jan. 1993.
[13] V.Barbado, A. Cataliotti, V. Cosentino,S. Nuccio, " A Novel Approach
Based on Nonactive Power for the Identification of Disturbing Loads
in Power Systems", in IEEE transactions on power delivery, vol. 22,
no. 3, july 2007
[14] IEEE Std 1459---2000, IEEE Trial-Use Standard Definitions for the
Measurement of Electric Power Quantities Under Sinusoidal, Non
Sinusoidal, Balanced or Unbalanced Conditions-----IEEE Standard, June
21 2000. Upgraded to Full Use, IEEE Std. 1459---2000, Sep. 12, 2002.
[15] M.M.M. El Arini, A time domain load modeling technique and
harmonics analysis, in: Proceedings of Eighth International Conference
on Harmonics and Quality of Power, 1998, pp. 930---938.
[16] A. McEachern, "Identifying Harmonic Sources on the Power Grid ---
Some Technical Challenges", IEEE Explore, 2005
399