Are you sure?
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
COSTS AND BENEFITS OF HARMONIC CURRENT REDUCTION
FOR SWITCHMODE POWER SUPPLIES IN A COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING
Thomas Key
Power Electronics Applications Center
Knoxville, Tennessee
JihSheng Lai
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge, Tennessee
Abstract—Harmonic currents generated by modern office
equipment cause power system heating and add to user power
bills. By looking at the harmonicrelated losses in a specific
electrical system—representing a commercial building—energy
costs are quantified. The analysis shows that building wiring
losses related to powering nonlinear electronic load equipment
may be more than double the losses for linear load equipment.
Currentrelated power losses such as I
2
R, proximity of
conductors, and transformer winding eddy currents (I
2
h
2
) are
considered. The cost of these losses is compared to the cost of
reducing harmonics in the equipment design. Results show that
an activetype harmonicelimination circuit, built into the
common electronic equipment switchmodepower supply, is
costeffective based on energy loss considerations alone.
I. INTRODUCTION
A common source of harmonic currents in power
systems is electronic equipment that use a rectifier supplying
a dclink with storage or ripplesmoothing capacitors. This
type of electronic power supply is used in everything from
factory adjustablespeed drives to personal computers and
home electronics. Experience has shown that the harmonic
currents do not upset the enduse electronic equipment as
much as they overload neutral conductors and transformers,
and in general cause additional losses and reduced power
factor for the electrical power system components
transporting the real power along with the added harmonic
components.
Overheating of building wiring has been most
prominent in the commercial sector with a high usage of
electronictype equipment and a trend to even higher circuit
loading in kVA per square foot. Office building electrical
circuits that were designed for a relatively light plug load in
the ‘60s and ‘70s may be overloaded by electronic equipment
today. Increased harmonic distortion related to this
equipment is common (see current waveforms in Fig 1).
There are several reasons for this trend. First, there is
growing popularity of electronic equipment. Fax machines,
copiers, printers, computers and other automation devices
save time, reduce labor costs and can provide a significant
increase in office productivity. Second, many of these
electronic equipment are turned on a high percentage of the
time, increasing the overall demand factor and maximum
load as a percent of connected load.
Fig. 1. Harmonic currents in a typical commercial building electrical power system (IEEE Standard 1100).
2 of 8
When all the harmonic currents are taken into account,
these electronic appliances can have a very low power factor
in terms of total watts/voltamp. This means that there is
more current flowing in the power system than is required to
get the job done. The increased current contains harmonics
and leads to higher wiring losses per watt of connected load.
This paper calculates the cost of harmonicrelated building
wiring losses and compares it to the cost of a builtin
harmonic elimination circuit described by the authors in [1].
II. CALCULATING HARMONICRELATED LOSSES
Today’s electronic equipment tends to be distributed in
the building on various branch circuits and receptacles rather
than centralized in one area as in a computer room where
special power provisions are made. Most of the losses
associated with harmonics are in the building wiring. To
evaluate the energy loss impact of harmonic and reactive
current flow, a wiring model was developed for a typical
commercial building. Fig. 1 is the singleline diagram used
for this model. It comes from in the IEEE Emerald Book
[2], depicting actual field experience reported by Zavadil [3],
and shows expected current waveforms at different points.
The building contains both linear and nonlinear loads.
Harmonic distortion is severe at the terminals of the
nonlinear loads, but tends to be diluted when combined with
linear loads at points upstream in the system.
A. Identification of Harmonic Sources
To power most electronic equipment in a commercial
building, a switchmode power supply uses a simple rectifier
to convert ac to pulsating dc and a smoothing capacitor to
reduce ripple in the dc voltage. Fig. 2 shows a circuit
diagram and typical input current at the interface between
the ac source and the switchmode power supply. The output
of the switchmode dctodc converter can be applied to any
dc load. For computer applications, the output typically
contains ±5V and ±12V to supply CPU and logic circuit
power.
In order to maintain a constant dc voltage and to provide
ridethrough capability, the PC power supply requires a large
capacitor C
f
, typically 2 µF/W. A parasitic inductance L
ls
is
also used in this circuit. Not shown is the required πfilter at
the frontend of the rectifier to reduce the electromagnetic
interference (EMI). The capacitor C
f
is charged from the
rectifier circuit only when the peak of the ac voltage is
higher than the capacitor voltage. Because the capacitor is a
lowimpedance device, the charging current presents high
peak value over a short period. This reflects to the ac side as
alternating current pulses and associated harmonics.
The total harmonic distortion, THD, is defined by
THD
I
I
h
h
·
·
∞
∑
2
2
1
(1)
where I
h
is the rms current of the hth harmonic current, and
I
1
is the rms value of the fundamental current. A typical
voltage waveform doesn’t exceed 5% THD. However, the
power supply input current THD could easily exceed 100%.
This highly distorted waveform as shown in Fig. 2(b)
indicates that the input current contains significant harmonic
components as shown in the spectrum. The third harmonic
is the most prominent component (>80%), and the THD in
this case is 110%.
ac input
Switchmode
dctodc
converter
Load
Rectifier
bridge
C
f
Smoothing
capacitor
i
ac
v
ac
V
d
L
ls
(a) Electronic appliance power supply circuit
1 0 0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29
(b) Input current, i
ac
, waveform and spectrum
Fig. 2. Circuit diagram and input current of an ordinary PC switchmode power
supply.
The harmonic current generated by PC power supplies is
only one of many possible harmonic producers. Other
sources of harmonics in the office include 120V equipment
for communications, printing and copying, lighting with
high efficiency electronic ballast, for example. At 480 V
common harmonic producers include adjustablespeed drives
(ASDs) for HVAC, larger computers, uninterruptible power
supplies, and 277V lighting. For electronic appliances that
are retrofitted to save energy, such as lighting or ASDs, an
important question raised by Celio in [4] is how much of the
energy savings may be diminished by added harmonics
losses in the power system.
B. HarmonicRelated Loss Mechanisms in Power Wiring
1) Cables: The only cable power loss component is I
2
R,
where I could be augmented by the harmonic distortion, and
the R value is determined by its dc value plus ac skin and
proximity effects. The rms value including harmonic current,
3 of 8
I, can be obtained from individual harmonic contents, as
expressed in (2).
I I I I I
h
h
· · + + +
·
∞
∑
2
1
1
2
2
2
3
2
K
(2)
Manipulating (1) and (2) yields the total rms current in
I I THD · +
1
2
1
(3)
Equation (3) indicates that without harmonics, the total rms
current is simply the value of the fundamental component.
For the above switching power supply example, with 110
percent THD, the total rms current is nearly 50 percent
higher than the fundamental current.
Taking into account the frequencyrelated effects, a ratio
of ac to dc resistance, k
c
, can be defined as
k
R
R
k k
c
ac
dc
SE PE
· · + + 1
(4)
where k
SE
is the resistance gain due to skin effect, and k
PE
is
the resistance gain due to proximity effect, from Rice in [5].
Equation (5) defines a skin effect parameter, x, as a function
of frequency and dc resistance.
x
f u
R
dc
· 0 027678 .
(5)
Here f is the frequency in Hz, u is the magnetic permeability
of conductor (equal to one for nonmagnetic material), and
R
dc
is the dc resistance in Ω/1000 ft. The resistance gain due
to skin effect, k
SE
, is a nonlinear function of x and can be
obtained from a cable handbook [6]. For computational
purposes, k
SE
was approximated by curvefitting, and the
following fifthorder equation was derived by the authors.
k x
x x x x
x x
x x x x
x x
SE
( )
( . . . .
. . )
( . . .
. . )
·
− + − +
− + ≤
− + − +
− + < ≤
¹
'
¹
¹
¹
¹
¹
−
−
10 104 824 324 1447
02764 00166 2
10 02 6616 83345 500
10619 769 63 2 10
3 5 4 3 2
3 5 4 3 2
for
for
(6)
The resistance gain due to proximity effects is expressed by
k k
k
PE SE
SE
·
+
+

.
`
,
σ σ
2 2
118
0 27
0312
.
.
.
(7)
where σ is the ratio of the conductor diameter and the axial
spacing between conductors.
Consider four different sized cables: 500 kcmil, 4/0
AWG, 1/0 AWG, and 12 AWG, typically used in a building
power distribution system. The conductor spacing is based
on National Electric Code insulation type THHN, which is a
relatively thin heatresistant thermoplastic rated at 90ºC and
often used in building wiring systems. The insulated
conductors are adjacent and separated only by insulation
thickness. This spacing is used to obtain the σ values for the
four types of cables. Their ac/dc resistance ratios at different
frequencies can then be plotted in Fig. 3.
Fig. 4(a) illustrates the differences between proximity
and skin effects at different frequencies for 12 AWG cable.
For such smallsized cables, the proximity effect is more
dominant than the skin effect at all frequencies. In these
formulas, a nonmetallic (nm) sheathed cable is assumed.
Differences in R
ac
/R
dc
for conductors at a different spacing or
in metal conduit or raceway are difficult to predict and
should not result in a worse case. Fig. 4(b) shows the
comparison of proximity and skin effects for the 4/0 AWG
cable. For this size and largersized cable, the proximity
effect may be more dominant in low frequencies but not at
higher frequencies. However, in practical power systems the
level of harmonic currents at these higher frequencies is
quite small. Therefore, proximity effects tend to be the most
significant.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
0 10 20 30 40
Harmonics
R
a
c
/
R
d
c
500 kcmil
4/0 AWG
1/0 AWG
12 AWG
Fig. 3. Cable ac/dc resistance ratios as a function of harmonic frequencies.
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
0.012
0.014
0.016
0 10 20 30 40
Harmonics
P
r
o
x
i
m
i
t
y
a
n
d
S
k
i
n
E
f
f
e
c
t
s
Proximity effect
Skin effect
(a)AWG #12 cable
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
0 10 20 30 40
Harmonics
P
r
o
x
i
m
i
t
y
a
n
d
S
k
i
n
E
f
f
e
c
t
s
Proximity effect
Skin effect
(b) AWG 4/0 cable
Fig. 4. Skin effect (kSE) and proximity effect (kPE) for two different cables.
2) Transformers: Transformer loss components include no
load loss, P
NL
, and loadrelated loss, P
LL
, as shown in (8).
The load loss, as a function of load current, can be divided
by I
2
R loss (P
R
), stray losses. The stray load losses are caused
by eddycurrents that produce stray electromagnetic flux in
4 of 8
the windings, core, core clamps, magnetic shields, tank
walls, and other structural parts. For harmonicrich current,
the eddycurrent loss in the windings may be the most
dominant loss component in the transformer. This
component is singled out and identified as P
EC
. The other
stray losses in the structural parts are defined as P
ST
. as
shown in (9).
PLoss=PNL+PLL (8)
where PLL=PR+PEC+PST (9)
For nonsinusoidal load currents, the total rms current
can be obtained by (2), or the power loss can be obtained by
the sum of the squares of the fundamental and harmonic
currents, as shown in (10).
P I R
R h h
h
h
·
·
∑
2
1
max
(10)
The winding eddy current loss in transformers increases
proportional to the square of the product of harmonic current
and its corresponding frequency. Given the winding eddy
current loss at the fundamental frequency, P
EC1
, the total
eddy current losses including harmonic frequency
components can be calculated by
P P I h
EC EC h
h
h
·
−
·
∑ 1
2 2
1
max
(11)
This relationship has been found to be more accurate for
lower harmonics (3
rd
, 5
th
, 7
th
), and an overestimation of
losses for higher harmonics (9
th
, 11
th
, 13
th
, and so on),
particularly for largediameter windings and largecapacity
transformers.
3) Other equipment in the building: Other equipment that
may be affected by harmonics include motors, capacitors,
reactors, relays, instrumentation and standby or emergency
generators. The major harmonic effects to other equipment
include performance degradation, increased losses and
heating, reduced life, and potential resonance. For motors or
relays, the primary loss mechanism is the harmonic voltage
that is present at the terminals of the equipment. For power
system equipment such as standby generators or series
reactors, the harmonic current is the predominant factor.
III. CASE STUDY OF OFFICE BUILDING HARMONIC LOSSES
Fig. 5 is from the same singleline diagram for a
commercial building described in Fig. 1. The voltage levels,
cable sizes and transformer capacities are based on an actual
system selected to be a typical case. Note that cable segment
lengths and related losses will vary significantly with the
shape of the buildings. For example, a skyscraper is likely to
have longer cable lengths than a school.
The example office building model contains 60 kW of
personal computers, 240 computers on 120 branch circuits,
and other related electronic office equipment. Lighting loads
are conventional magneticballasted fluorescence at 277V.
The office area is fed by a conventional 480V to 120/208V,
112.5kVA stepdown transformer. Loads in this area are
assumed to operate 12 hours per day and 365 days per year.
1000kVA
480V
other loads
other lighting
& misc. loads
277V, 1phase
2x500kcmil
#4/0
#1/0
112.5kVA
Neutral
120V
1phase
office
loads
40
2
3
per phase
#12
l
4
l
3
l
2
T
2
l
1
T
2
Fig. 5. Singleline diagram of a commercial building ac distribution system.
A. Cable Losses
Four segments of the cables are considered, l
1
, l
2
, l
3
, and
l
4
. The lengths will vary depending on the site. Segment
lengths used in this analysis are believed to be reasonable.
Albeit arbitrary, the results can be linearly extrapolated to
other cases. Harmonic levels for each line segment follow
Fig. 1. For example, cables l
1
and l
2
directly serve offices,
which contain mainly PCrelated loads with highly distorted
currents exceeding 100% THD. Cables l
3
and l
4
currents are
expected to be significantly less distorted. Voltage is
assumed to contain a 1~5% level of distortion. For each
segment the harmonic current losses at different THDs are
compared with the losses at an ideal 5% THD. From this
difference in losses, the cost differences are calculated.
1) Cable l
1
losses: The average consumption of each
computer system along with its associated office machines is
assumed to be 250W input with every two computer systems
fed by a single 12 AWG branch circuit. We assume that
there are 240 offices on 120 individual branch circuits. This
results in 40 branch circuits per phase served from one or
more subpanels. In this segment there are individual neutral
wires for each singlephase circuit. The cable loss needs to
be doubled for round trip. Table I shows the calculated cable
losses and energy costs (@10¢ per kWH) for a 200ft length.
TABLE I
CABLE l1 HARMONICRELATED POWER LOSS AND COST PENALTY PER YEAR
Load = 20kW/phase, 120V, 40 branches of #12 cable at 200 feet
THD (%) 5 50 100
Current (pu) 1.00 1.12 1.41
Current (amps) 166.9 186.3 235.7
Line loss per phase = I
2
R (W) 442.2 551.4 882.3
Cost for 3phase/year $581.09 $724.55 $1,059.29
Penalty w.r.t. 5% THD $0.00 $143.46 $578.19
2) Cable l
2
losses: The load currents are combined in this
single line segment. For a 4/0 AWG cable at 166.7 A
(assumes a unity power factor load, which is not the case),
this segment is about 50% loaded. The neutral along this
path is shared and carries only the imbalance portion of the
3phase currents plus the total of all triplen harmonic
currents. The harmonic loss and its cost penalty can be
5 of 8
significant when the cable is long. According to Fig. 4, the
skin and proximity effects need to be considered in a 4/0
cable. Equation (12) is used to calculate line loss, P
l
, and
incorporates effects of harmonics on current and line
resistance harmonic levels. This equation may be applied to
any cable size. However it was not used for cable l
1
because
the losses were insignificant for the 12 AWG cable.
P I R
l h h
h
h
·
·
∑
2
1
max
(12)
The magnitude of R
h
at h frequencies can be obtained
from Fig. 4. The magnitude of I
h
varies with the power
supply design, load condition, and supply voltage. In this
analysis the harmonic components listed in Table II
represent the percentage of the harmonic current at h
frequencies for typical 100% THD singlephase loads.
TABLE II
TYPICAL SINGLEPHASE HARMONIC CONTENT AT 100% THD
Harmonic h 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Current Ih 100 77 46 27 20 18.2 15.1 11.4 8.5 6.0 4.2 5.1 3.2
Assume the threephase currents are balanced. The
triplen harmonics of each phase add in the neutral line. We
can calculate threephase line losses and neutral line loss
separately by considering the harmonic current components.
Table III lists the cable losses and cost estimates at different
THDs. The row “Line loss” indicates the single line power
loss, and the “Neutral loss” row assumes a balanced
condition and considers only triplen harmonics.
TABLE III
CABLE l
2
HARMONICRELATED POWER LOSS AND COST PER YEAR
Load = 60 kW 3phase, 208V, on #4/0 cable at 50 feet
THD (%) 5 50 100
Current (pu) 1.00 1.12 1.41
Current (amps) 166.9 186.4 235.7
Line loss per phase = I
2
R (W) 69.65 90.99 151.82
Neutral loss = I
2
R (W)* 0.01 116.28 465.11
Cost for 4line/year $93.06 $170.49 $403.21
Penalty w.r.t. 5% THD $0.00 $77.43 $310.15
* includes high triplens from all 3 phases, mostly 180 Hz
3) Cable l
3
losses: As compared to the previous line
segments, the current in cable l
3
is
much less distorted
because of triplenharmonic current cancellation in the delta
wye transformer connection A level of 30% THD is
observed in Fig. 1 on the high side and 100% THD on the
low side of the stepdown transformer. To calculate the skin
and proximityrelated line losses for the different frequency
components, the harmonic components listed in Table IV for
a 30% THD was used. Table V shows the calculated losses
for this 150ft, 1/0 AWG cable segment.
4) Cable l
4
losses: The current in this segment is further
smoothed by other linear loads. Field experience backed by
studies such as by Mansoor in [7] show that several factors
including attenuation, diversity and system impedance act to
reduce harmonic currents as they travel farther from their
source. Typical THD in this section may be less than 10
percent. The exception would be where harmonic resonances
occur and amplify the distortion.
TABLE IV
TYPICAL THREEPHASE HARMONIC COMPONENTS AT 30% THD
Harmonic h 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Current Ih 100 1.4 25 15 1 6 4 .3 2 1.5 .1 1.2 1.1
TABLE V
CABLE l3 HARMONICRELATED POWER LOSS AND COST PER YEAR
Load = 60kW 3phase, 480V, on #1/0 cable at 150 ft
THD (%) 0.05 0.20 0.30
Current (pu) 1.00 1.02 1.04
Current (amps) 72.33 73.67 75.42
Line loss per phase = I
2
R (W) 78.47 81.84 86.28
Cost for 3phase/year $103.11 $107.53 $113.38
Penalty w.r.t 5%THD $0.00 $4.42 $10.27
B. Transformer T
1
losses
The transformer core or noload losses depend on
voltage, which is this case is assumed to be constant with
distortion less than 5%. These noload losses are neglected
for a conservative estimate. In contrast, loadrelated losses
are variable with loading and are highly affected by the
harmonic distortion of the load current. In this case the
transformer T
1
is loaded to approximately 55 percent of its
112 kVA rating. Assuming balanced threephase conditions,
each phase is loaded at 20 kW and the I
rms
is 166.7 A, when
the load is fully compensated, (that is, unity power factor and
no harmonics). These conditions define the base case. The
objective here is to calculate the additional losses caused by
harmonics in the load current.
To calculate these harmonicrelated losses transformer
T
1
characteristics must be known. For this case we assume
that the 60Hz I
2
R loss is 2.5% of the kVA loading, and the
eddy current loss factor (P
EC1
) is 5%. Based on the eddy
current loss as a percent of the I
2
R loss under sinusoidal 60
Hz loading conditions, this percentage usually must be
obtained from the manufacturer. Using (10) and (11), the
additional load loss caused by the current harmonics can be
obtained. Table II shows the secondary harmonic current
contents, and Table IV shows the primary harmonic current
contents. Note the filtering action of the deltawye
transformer. Using the perunit copper loss (ΣI
2
R
h
), and the
eddy current loss (ΣI
2
h
2
), the calculated transformer load
losses due to harmonics and their associated cost per year are
listed in Table VI. Energy cost is again based on the
assumption that the load runs 12 hours per day, 365 days per
year.
TABLE VI
TRANSFORMER T1 HARMONICRELATED LOSES AND COST PER YEAR
Load = 60 kW 3phase, on 112 kVA Ploss (W) Cost/Year
Copper loss = ΣIh
2
R 2986 $1,308
Eddy current loss PEC
= Σ Ih
2
h
2
1336 $585
Total load loss PLL
= ΣIh
2
R+PEC 4322 $1,893
Base load loss = 1.05×I
2
R 1575 $690
6 of 8
Penalty = PLL–1.05×I
2
R 2747 $1203
The total load loss for T
1
is more than double the
predicted 60Hz loss because of high harmonic currents. At
100 percent THD, the copper loss doubled, and the eddy
current loss increased by more than 17 times. Consequently,
the 112kVA transformer is overloaded by only 60 kW of
computers.
C. Cost Penalty of HarmonicRelated Losses
The total cost penalty depends on the loading condition,
time of operation, and the cable lengths. In the above case,
most system components are oversized. Even so the losses
are not trivial, particularly in transformer T
1
. Table VII
summarizes expected harmonicrelated losses and costs per
year for this case. Note that harmonicrelated losses on cable
l
4
and transformer T
2
are negligible for office the PC
scenario.
TABLE VII
SUMMARY OF HARMONICRELATED LOSSES AND COSTS PER YEAR
Current
THD
Cable
Length
Harmonic
Loss (W)
Harmonic
Cost/ year
Cable l1: 100% 200 ft 1320 $578
Cable l2: 100% 50 ft 712 $310
Xformer T1: THD: 100% primary,
30% secondary
2747 $1,203
Cable l3: 30% 150 ft 23 $10
Total 4802 $2,101
D. Options for Eliminating HarmonicRelated Losses
The case study illustrates that harmonic losses due to
office equipment are expected to be distributed in the
building wiring serving that equipment. About 50% was in
the cables and 50% in the 480/120208V stepdown
transformer. A number of filtering options for harmonic
mitigation are commercially available and can be evaluated
on a cost/benefit basis. It should be clear that selecting the
right location will be critical to effectiveness.
Fig. 6 shows possible locations, ‘a through f,’ for
harmonic elimination or reactive compensation. Elimination
at the source of harmonics generation, location ‘a’, before
any additional current flows in the power system, will
always be the most complete approach. However, this
leads to many small rather than a few large filtering devices.
The expected economy of a larger scale filter suggests that
the best location is where several distorted currents are
combined, such as a load center. The number and size of the
of harmonic filters will also affect internal losses of the filter
and operating cost. Special wiringrelated conditions such as
neutral conductor overload and cancellation should also be
considered.
Load Equipment
Service
Entrance
Subpanels or
Load Center
W
T
1 l
1
l
3
l
2
l
4
T
2
Secondary Primary
a
d c
b
e f
Main
Panel
SMPS
Fig. 6: Possible locations for harmonic mitigation in office power system
Given the interesting varieties and tradeoffs in
harmonic mitigation methods, more evaluation is need to
compare cost effectiveness of different options and
locations. However, in this paper only one option of the
buildin circuits will be evaluated to determine the potential
economic payback.
E. Compensation Built into Load Equipment
Eliminating harmonics at their source provides the most
effective option from a system point of view. The question is
viability and cost. With incentives like IEC Standard 1000
32 (previously 5552 [8]), which will require some
mitigation of harmonics at equipment terminals, many
manufacturers are looking for costeffective ways to reduce
harmonics inside electronic equipment. Considering the PC
power supply as an example, possibilities of limiting
harmonics to comply with IEC have been analyzed and
tested by the authors. Results are reported in [1] and [9].
Four methods were considered:
1. Filtering by a series inductor added at the input circuit
2. Building in the active boost converter current shaping to
replace the frontend rectifiercapacitor smoothing circuit
3. Filtering by a parallelconnected, series LCresonant
(PCRF)
4. Filtering by a seriesconnected, parallel LCresonant
(SCRF)
Of these methods a simple inductor and the electronic active
boost converter are the most practical for buildin harmonic
mitigation—where space and real estate are very expensive.
The tunedfilter methods, PCRF and SCRF, are more
practical for cord connection, which is a subject for future
analysis.
1) Series inductor filter: A series inductor at the input to a
power supply prevents sudden current changes (di/dt) and
acts as a simple filter component. The rectifier circuit
operates in the same way except the harmonic content and
the peak current are reduced. It is possible to manipulate the
inductor value to suit IEC, but the cost and size increment
could be excessive. For example, a 200W power supply
requires a 10mH series inductor to meet IEC 100032 [8].
2) Boost converter with power factor correction: The boost
converter is also called “stepup converter” which converts
low dc voltage to high dc voltage. Fig. 7 shows a power
7 of 8
supply containing a frontend boost converter. The switch S
controls energy flow. When S turns on, a current builds up
on the inductor L
s
, meanwhile the diode D remains in the
reverse blocking mode because the onstate of S means
a
zero voltage across. When S turns off, the energy stored in
the inductor charges through the diode D to the capacitor C
s
.
The inductor current can be controlled to follow a desired
wave shape. In power factor correction circuit, the inductor
current is normally controlled to follow the rectified voltage,
and the acside current will be in phase with the ac voltage.
Fig. 8 shows experimental input voltage and current of a
PC power supply with a boost converter circuit from [9]. The
current is nearly sinusoidal with almost invisible high
frequency (70 kHz) switching ripples. The size of the boost
converter is significantly less than any passive filters, but the
performance is much better. It is expected that the active
power factor correction will meet any future strict power
quality regulation, such as IEC 100032. Unfortunately, it is
difficult to sell power supplies with active power factor
correction because of expected higher cost and lower
reliability related to additional components.
Harmonic elimination
boost converter
ac input
Rectifier
Switchmode
dctodc
converter
Load
C
f
S
Capacitor
L
s D
s
Fig. 7. Boost converter current shaping circuit inserted between the rectifier
and switchmode dctodc converter circuits.
(a) power system voltage
(b) power factor corrected power supply current
Fig. 8. Experimental input voltage and current waveforms.
IV. ANALYSIS OF HARMONIC ELIMINATION COSTBENEFIT
This costbenefit analysis compares the estimated cost of
adding a harmonicelimination circuit to the electronic
power supply to the potential avoided cost of harmonic
related losses in the power system. The avoided cost is based
on the previous determination of harmonicrelated losses in
commercial building model. This analysis assumes 60 kW of
office electronic load. The cost of energy is $.10/kWH. The
load includes 240 distributed personal computers on 120
branch circuits, and other related electronic office
equipment, which operate 12 hours per day, 365 days per
year.
A. The Benefit of Harmonic Elimination
From the previous analysis it is clear that location of the
harmonic elimination equipment is critical. Fig. 6 shows six
possible locations in a typical commercial building. Of these
the greatest potential for energy savings derived from
harmonic reduction is near the source of the harmonic
current, as illustrated in Table VIII, which shows the
maximum potential energy saving at different locations in
the building wiring based on the case study. The loss
reductions will vary depending on load harmonic content as
well as the power and the location of the compensating
equipment. In this case losses are based on the 60 kW
computer load.
TABLE VIII
ENERGY SAVING POTENTIAL AT DIFFERENT LOCATIONS
Location Options for
Harmonic Mitigation
Equipment
Above
Xformer
Primary
At
Xformer
Secondary
At Load
Center or
Sub Panel
At Load
Equipment
or Builtin
Total losses without
compensation (W)
8148 8148 8148 8148
Total losses with
compensation (W)
8125 5378 4666 3346
% total losses with
compensation / 60 kVA
13.54% 8.96% 7.78% 5.58%
Saving l
1
at 200 ft. (W) 0 0 0 1320
Saving l
2
at 50 ft. (W) 0 0 712 712
Saving T
1
at 112 kVA (W) 0 2747 2747 2747
Saving l
3
at 150 ft.(W) 23 23 23 23
Total saving for 60 kVA
load (W)
23 2770 3482 4802
% saving / 60 kVA 0.04% 4.62% 5.80% 8.00%
$ Saving per year $10 $1213 $1523 $2101
Table VIII also shows that additional losses due to the
harmonic loading are more than 8kW, so that more than
68kW will be required at the service entrance to serve a
60kW office computer load. The harmonicrelated losses
increase the total expected losses in the building wiring by
250%, from 3346 to 8148 watts. Compensation of harmonics
near the service entrance has very little value, perhaps
$10/year, while compensation near the electronic load has a
significant potential effect, saving $2101 per year. This is
the key benefit of a harmonicfree power supply.
Another, perhaps less obvious, benefit of reducing
harmonics at their source is the release of capacity in the
building electrical power system. Insufficient capacity can be
a significant problem in existing building wiring that has
become overloaded due to new office equipment. Upgrading
existing transformers and wiring is often more costly than
the original installation. Table IX compares different load
types with respect to their burden on building wiring and
their kW consumption. In this table the term “linear
equivalent power factor” is a fictitious power factor for
nonlinear loads that identifies the linear load power factor
8 of 8
that would have an equivalent effect on wiring loss. This
concept is getting important as the number of nonlinear
loads are rapidly increasing.
TABLE IX
VALUE OF HARMONIC ELIMINATION FOR WIRING CAPACITY
Office building load
types
Effective load
on building
wiring losses
%
wiring
loss
%Linear
equivalent
power factor
%Lost
wiring
capacity
Resistive load 1.000 5.6% 100% 0
Other office loads 1.4~1.7 7~10% 55~75% 25~45%
PC without harmonic
elimination
2.438 13.6% 41% 59%
PC with harmonic
elimination
1.001 5.6% 99.9% 0.1%
Without harmonic elimination, the wiring loss by the
PC power supply load is 2.4 times that by the pure resistive
load. In other words, the system wiring is 20% overloaded
even with 50% load. With harmonic elimination (5% THD),
the wiring loss by PC loads is significantly reduced and
performs like the pure resistive load. Wiring system losses
due to “other office loads,” such as magnetic lamp ballasts,
vary among different types. The varying range indicated in
Table IX is taken from the calculated results which have a
medium point at 15% THD and 0.9 displacement power
factor.
B. The Cost of Harmonic Elimination
The added cost to install a boost convertertype
harmonic elimination circuit in a switchmode power supply
is estimated at $6 per 250W PC system, $1440 per 60 kW.
This cost is based on prior investigations in [1], and recent
quotes from power supply manufacturers located in Taiwan.
A life of 6 years was chosen for this investment, which is
based on the expected life of the computer system before
reaching obsolescence. Another cost for this investment is
the energy lost in the operation of the boost converter.
Efficiency of the converter elimination circuit is expected to
be 97%, therefore 3% is lost.
Using these added costs and a discount rate of 8%, the
present value of the harmonic losses is $3739 at 60 kW, and
the total lifecycle cost for harmonic elimination is $5179
(1440+3739). The present value of energy savings in reduced
building wiring losses is $10,034 over the 6year period.
From this a payback period is calculated to be 3.1 years.
V. CONCLUSION
Harmonicrelated losses in building wiring can be
calculated using a typical model of building power system
components and harmonic generating load equipment. These
losses may be significant, overheating wiring, increasing
power bills and tying up capacity of the power system.
Reducing harmonics will save energy and release additional
capacity to serve other loads.
There is a variety of methods available for reducing
harmonics in building wiring. Results for an office building
show that the location of harmonic reduction equipment
within the building wiring is crucial to effectiveness. The
greatest potential for loss reduction and released power
system capacity is near the harmonic generating loads, while
installation near the service entrance may be of little value.
A specific harmonic elimination method that maximizes
these values is a harmonic elimination circuit built into non
linear load equipment such as a PC. This boostconverter
circuit, previously investigated by the authors, was shown to
be costeffective, yielding a 3year pay back, based on energy
savings alone. The approach holds great promise for
achieving economy at the small scale required to eliminate
harmonics in individual equipment.
VI. FUTURE WORK
Active or tuned passive filters may be required to solve
existing harmonic problems. Application data on these
filters, particularly their use in both harmonic reduction and
reactive compensation, is not adequate in the literature or in
standards. Further analysis comparing the cost and
effectiveness of the variety of different harmonic mitigation
options is needed. The value of released capacity and the
concept of linear equivalent power factor are significant
issues and need further documentation and development.
This is indeed a good research topic for followup
investigations.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was supported by Pacific Gas and Electric Co.
Research and Development under the direction of Mr. John
Mead and Ms. Linh Tu and by the Electric Power Research
Institute under a project managed by D. Stephen Rector.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Lai, D. Hurst, and T. Key, “Switchmode power
supply power factor improvement via harmonic
elimination methods,” Record of Applied Power
Electronics Conference, Dallas, TX, March 1991.
[2] IEEE Emerald Book, IEEE Recommended Practice for
Powering and Grounding Sensitive Electronic
Equipment, IEEE Std 11001992.
[3] R. Zavadil, et al, “Analysis of harmonic distortion levels
in commercial buildings,” Proceedings: First
International Conference on Power Quality, PQA 1991.
[4] R. C. Celio and P. F. Ribeiro, “Verification of DSM
lighting saving when harmonics are introduced,” in
Electronic Ballast, Apr. 1994, pp. 19–24.
[5] D. E. Rice, “Adjustable speed drive and power rectifier
harmonic—their effect on power systems components,”
IEEE Trans. on Ind. Appl., Vol. IA22, No. 1, Jan./Feb.
1986, pp. 161—177.
9 of 8
[6] Insulated Power Cable Engineers Associated Handbook,
July, 1959.
[7] A. Mansoor, et al, “Predicting the net harmonic currents
produced by large numbers of distributed singlephase
computer loads,” Conference Record: IEEE PES Winter
Power Conference, Jan. 1995, #95 WM 2600 PWRD.
[8] CEI/IEC 100032, 1995 (formerly IEC 5552), Electro
magnetic compatibility (EMC) − Part 3: Limits  Section
2: Limits for harmonic current emissions (equipment
input current ≤ 16 A per).
[9] T. S. Key and J. S. Lai, “Comparison of standards and
power supply design options for limiting harmonic
distortion,” IEEE Trans. on Ind. Appl., Vol. IA29, No.
4, Jul./Aug. 1993, pp. 688—695.
In order to maintain a constant dc voltage and to provide ridethrough capability. 2 shows a circuit diagram and typical input current at the interface between the ac source and the switchmode power supply. Circuit diagram and input current of an ordinary PC switchmode power supply. 2. A parasitic inductance Lls is also used in this circuit. Other sources of harmonics in the office include 120V equipment for communications. The increased current contains harmonics and leads to higher wiring losses per watt of connected load. is defined by THD = where Ih is the rms current of the hth harmonic current. such as lighting or ASDs. B. and the R value is determined by its dc value plus ac skin and proximity effects. larger computers. but tends to be diluted when combined with linear loads at points upstream in the system. these electronic appliances can have a very low power factor in terms of total watts/voltamp. This paper calculates the cost of harmonicrelated building wiring losses and compares it to the cost of a builtin harmonic elimination circuit described by the authors in [1]. Rectifier bridge Lls Vd Load iac Cf vac ac input Smoothing capacitor Switchmode dctodc converter (a) Electronic appliance power supply circuit 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 (b) Input current. for example. iac. A. A typical voltage waveform doesn’t exceed 5% THD. 1 is the singleline diagram used for this model. the PC power supply requires a large capacitor Cf. waveform and spectrum Fig. This means that there is more current flowing in the power system than is required to get the job done. It comes from in the IEEE Emerald Book [2]. THD. depicting actual field experience reported by Zavadil [3]. Fig. Fig. the power supply input current THD could easily exceed 100%. and shows expected current waveforms at different points. This highly distorted waveform as shown in Fig. and the THD in this case is 110%. This reflects to the ac side as alternating current pulses and associated harmonics. a switchmode power supply uses a simple rectifier to convert ac to pulsating dc and a smoothing capacitor to reduce ripple in the dc voltage. Harmonic distortion is severe at the terminals of the nonlinear loads. CALCULATING HARMONICRELATED LOSSES Today’s electronic equipment tends to be distributed in the building on various branch circuits and receptacles rather than centralized in one area as in a computer room where special power provisions are made. For electronic appliances that are retrofitted to save energy. the charging current presents high peak value over a short period. II. Most of the losses associated with harmonics are in the building wiring. Identification of Harmonic Sources To power most electronic equipment in a commercial building. The capacitor Cf is charged from the rectifier circuit only when the peak of the ac voltage is higher than the capacitor voltage. 2(b) indicates that the input current contains significant harmonic components as shown in the spectrum. printing and copying. Not shown is the required πfilter at the frontend of the rectifier to reduce the electromagnetic interference (EMI). the output typically contains ±5V and ±12V to supply CPU and logic circuit power. and I1 is the rms value of the fundamental current. For computer applications. The rms value including harmonic current. HarmonicRelated Loss Mechanisms in Power Wiring 1) Cables: The only cable power loss component is I2R. The output of the switchmode dctodc converter can be applied to any dc load. The third harmonic is the most prominent component (>80%). an important question raised by Celio in [4] is how much of the energy savings may be diminished by added harmonics losses in the power system. lighting with high efficiency electronic ballast. ∑I h= 2 ∞ 2 h (1) I1 . a wiring model was developed for a typical commercial building. At 480 V common harmonic producers include adjustablespeed drives (ASDs) for HVAC. The harmonic current generated by PC power supplies is only one of many possible harmonic producers. typically 2 µF/W. However. The total harmonic distortion. To evaluate the energy loss impact of harmonic and reactive current flow. where I could be augmented by the harmonic distortion.2 of 8 When all the harmonic currents are taken into account. uninterruptible power supplies. The building contains both linear and nonlinear loads. and 277V lighting. Because the capacitor is a lowimpedance device.
0166) for x ≤ 2 k SE ( x ) = −3 5 4 3 2 . Therefore.5 2 1. PNL. I= ∑I h=1 ∞ 2 h = I12 + I 2 2 + I3 2 +K (2) Manipulating (1) and (2) yields the total rms current in I = I1 1 + THD 2 (3) Equation (3) indicates that without harmonics. x.004 0.006 0.01 0.6 0.616 x − 83345x + 500 x −10619 x + 769.5 1 0. 3. Fig. 10 ( −0. a ratio of ac to dc resistance. and kPE is the resistance gain due to proximity effect.016 Proximity and Skin Effects 0. 10−3 ( −104 x 5 + 8. is a nonlinear function of x and can be obtained from a cable handbook [6]. Their ac/dc resistance ratios at different frequencies can then be plotted in Fig. stray losses. The stray load losses are caused by eddycurrents that produce stray electromagnetic flux in . 0. 5 4. 3. which is a relatively thin heatresistant thermoplastic rated at 90ºC and often used in building wiring systems. the total rms current is simply the value of the fundamental component. 4(a) illustrates the differences between proximity and skin effects at different frequencies for 12 AWG cable. PLL. can be defined as R k c = ac = 1 + k SE + k PE Rdc (4) For such smallsized cables. . The insulated conductors are adjacent and separated only by insulation thickness. (6) (a)AWG #12 cable 1.5 3 2. Taking into account the frequencyrelated effects.8 0. −0. Consider four different sized cables: 500 kcmil. In these formulas. as a function of load current.002 0 0 10 20 Harmonics 30 40 Proximity effect Skin effect Here f is the frequency in Hz. kSE was approximated by curvefitting. and 12 AWG. the total rms current is nearly 50 percent higher than the fundamental current. as expressed in (2). typically used in a building power distribution system.027678 fu Rdc Rac/Rdc (5) 10 20 Harmonics 30 40 Fig.24x 4 − 324 x 3 + 1447 x 2 . and loadrelated loss. proximity effects tend to be the most significant. and Rdc is the dc resistance in Ω/1000 ft.5 4 3.2764 x + 0. a nonmetallic (nm) sheathed cable is assumed. The conductor spacing is based on National Electric Code insulation type THHN. Fig.3 of 8 I. can be obtained from individual harmonic contents. with 110 percent THD. kSE. 4/0 AWG.2 1 0. Cable ac/dc resistance ratios as a function of harmonic frequencies. The resistance gain due to skin effect. in practical power systems the level of harmonic currents at these higher frequencies is quite small. kc. For this size and largersized cable. 1/0 AWG.014 0. k PE = k SE σ 2 + 0. Equation (5) defines a skin effect parameter. (b) AWG 4/0 cable Fig.2 x + 6. 4(b) shows the comparison of proximity and skin effects for the 4/0 AWG cable. For the above switching power supply example.63) for 2 < x ≤ 10 .008 0. Skin effect (kSE) and proximity effect (kPE) for two different cables.5 0 0 500 kcmil 4/0 AWG 1/0 AWG 12 AWG where kSE is the resistance gain due to skin effect. The load loss.6 Proximity and Skin Effects 1.2 0 0 10 20 Harmonics 30 40 Proximity effect Skin effect The resistance gain due to proximity effects is expressed by 118 .27 where σ is the ratio of the conductor diameter and the axial spacing between conductors. the proximity effect may be more dominant in low frequencies but not at higher frequencies.4 0. and the following fifthorder equation was derived by the authors. from Rice in [5]. For computational purposes. the proximity effect is more dominant than the skin effect at all frequencies. u is the magnetic permeability of conductor (equal to one for nonmagnetic material). . x = 0. can be divided by I2R loss (PR). However.012 0. This spacing is used to obtain the σ values for the four types of cables. as a function of frequency and dc resistance.312σ 2 (7) k SE + 0. 2) Transformers: Transformer loss components include noload loss. Differences in Rac/Rdc for conductors at a different spacing or in metal conduit or raceway are difficult to predict and should not result in a worse case. 4. as shown in (8).4 1.
cable sizes and transformer capacities are based on an actual system selected to be a typical case. Segment lengths used in this analysis are believed to be reasonable. 5th. capacitors.46 $578. reduced life. For motors or relays. l2.00 1. or the power loss can be obtained by the sum of the squares of the fundamental and harmonic currents. PLoss=PNL+PLL where PLL=PR+PEC+PST (8) (9) The office area is fed by a conventional 480V to 120/208V. 240 computers on 120 branch circuits. The lengths will vary depending on the site. and so on). TABLE I CABLE l1 HARMONICRELATED POWER LOSS AND COST PENALTY PER YEAR Load = 20kW/phase. 7th).09 $724.29 Penalty w. reactors. ∑I h =1 hmax 2 h Rh (10) The winding eddy current loss in transformers increases proportional to the square of the product of harmonic current and its corresponding frequency. the total rms current can be obtained by (2). loads 277V.7 A (assumes a unity power factor load. this segment is about 50% loaded. 5 is from the same singleline diagram for a commercial building described in Fig. instrumentation and standby or emergency generators. The neutral along this path is shared and carries only the imbalance portion of the 3phase currents plus the total of all triplen harmonic currents. 1phase 120V 1phase 2 3 office loads l4 2x500kcmil 1000kVA l1 #12 T2 l3 #1/0 112. and potential resonance. A. and an overestimation of losses for higher harmonics (9th.5kVA l2 #4/0 40 per phase Neutral For nonsinusoidal load currents. For example. Loads in this area are assumed to operate 12 hours per day and 365 days per year.4 of 8 the windings. the total eddy current losses including harmonic frequency components can be calculated by 2 PEC = PEC−1 ∑ I h h 2 h=1 hmax (11) This relationship has been found to be more accurate for lower harmonics (3rd.r. l3. The other stray losses in the structural parts are defined as PST. a skyscraper is likely to have longer cable lengths than a school. Harmonic levels for each line segment follow Fig. 120V. l1. PEC1. Albeit arbitrary.059. increased losses and heating.00 $143. The major harmonic effects to other equipment include performance degradation.9 186. and other related electronic office equipment. From this difference in losses.12 1. Voltage is assumed to contain a 1~5% level of distortion. which is not the case). The harmonic loss and its cost penalty can be . 112. 11th. Cables l3 and l4 currents are expected to be significantly less distorted. the harmonic current is the predominant factor. core. Lighting loads are conventional magneticballasted fluorescence at 277V. In this segment there are individual neutral wires for each singlephase circuit. magnetic shields. 40 branches of #12 cable at 200 feet THD (%) 5 50 100 Current (pu) 1. For power system equipment such as standby generators or series reactors. 1) Cable l1 losses: The average consumption of each computer system along with its associated office machines is assumed to be 250W input with every two computer systems fed by a single 12 AWG branch circuit. 1. 3) Other equipment in the building: Other equipment that may be affected by harmonics include motors. 1. We assume that there are 240 offices on 120 individual branch circuits.5kVA stepdown transformer. relays.3 235. This component is singled out and identified as PEC. which contain mainly PCrelated loads with highly distorted currents exceeding 100% THD. 5. the results can be linearly extrapolated to other cases.4 882. For example. The cable loss needs to be doubled for round trip. For a 4/0 AWG cable at 166. as shown in (9).7 442. Table I shows the calculated cable losses and energy costs (@10¢ per kWH) for a 200ft length. Singleline diagram of a commercial building ac distribution system.2 551. This results in 40 branch circuits per phase served from one or more subpanels.t. III. The example office building model contains 60 kW of personal computers. the primary loss mechanism is the harmonic voltage that is present at the terminals of the equipment. core clamps. T2 480V other loads other lighting & misc. as shown in (10).19 2) Cable l2 losses: The load currents are combined in this single line segment. Given the winding eddy current loss at the fundamental frequency.3 Line loss per phase = I2R (W) Cost for 3phase/year $581. cables l1 and l2 directly serve offices.55 $1. and other structural parts. and l4. For harmonicrich current. the cost differences are calculated. The voltage levels. 5% THD $0. For each segment the harmonic current losses at different THDs are compared with the losses at an ideal 5% THD. 13th.41 Current (amps) 166. CASE STUDY OF OFFICE BUILDING HARMONIC LOSSES Fig. tank walls. particularly for largediameter windings and largecapacity transformers. the eddycurrent loss in the windings may be the most dominant loss component in the transformer. PR = Fig. Note that cable segment lengths and related losses will vary significantly with the shape of the buildings. Cable Losses Four segments of the cables are considered.
loadrelated losses are variable with loading and are highly affected by the harmonic distortion of the load current. the current in cable l3 is much less distorted because of triplenharmonic current cancellation in the deltawye transformer connection A level of 30% THD is observed in Fig. which is this case is assumed to be constant with distortion less than 5%.5 .1 11. Pl. In contrast.49 $403.33 73. on #1/0 cable at 150 ft THD (%) 0.02 Current (amps) 72. each phase is loaded at 20 kW and the Irms is 166. unity power factor and no harmonics). TABLE VI TRANSFORMER T1 HARMONICRELATED LOSES AND COST PER YEAR Load = 60 kW 3phase. and Table IV shows the primary harmonic current contents. on 112 kVA Copper loss = ΣIh2R Eddy current loss PEC = Σ Ih2h2 Total load loss PLL = ΣIh2R+PEC Base load loss = 1.1 Current Ih TABLE V CABLE l3 HARMONICRELATED POWER LOSS AND COST PER YEAR (12) The magnitude of Rh at h frequencies can be obtained from Fig. TABLE IV TYPICAL THREEPHASE HARMONIC COMPONENTS AT 30% THD 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 Harmonic h 100 1. the skin and proximity effects need to be considered in a 4/0 cable. 480V.7 69. and the eddy current loss (ΣI2h2). Table V shows the calculated losses for this 150ft.27 Assume the threephase currents are balanced.28 465.5% of the kVA loading.00 $4. According to Fig. when the load is fully compensated.5 6. and the eddy current loss factor (PEC1) is 5%. For this case we assume that the 60Hz I2R loss is 2.30 1.82 Line loss per phase = I2R (W) 0. The objective here is to calculate the additional losses caused by harmonics in the load current. However it was not used for cable l1 because the losses were insignificant for the 12 AWG cable.15 * includes high triplens from all 3 phases.5 of 8 significant when the cable is long.r.3 2 1.0 4. TABLE III CABLE l2 HARMONICRELATED POWER LOSS AND COST PER YEAR Load = 60 kW 3phase.00 1.67 78. 4.2 Load = 60kW 3phase. and the “Neutral loss” row assumes a balanced condition and considers only triplen harmonics. the additional load loss caused by the current harmonics can be obtained. Table III lists the cable losses and cost estimates at different THDs.65 90. the harmonic components listed in Table IV for a 30% THD was used. The magnitude of Ih varies with the power supply design. To calculate the skinand proximityrelated line losses for the different frequency components. Equation (12) is used to calculate line loss.7 A. These conditions define the base case.53 Penalty w. load condition. In this analysis the harmonic components listed in Table II represent the percentage of the harmonic current at h frequencies for typical 100% THD singlephase loads.11 Neutral loss = I2R (W)* Cost for 4line/year $93.4 8.43 $310. These noload losses are neglected for a conservative estimate.2 5. 1 on the high side and 100% THD on the low side of the stepdown transformer. TABLE II TYPICAL SINGLEPHASE HARMONIC CONTENT AT 100% THD 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 Harmonic h 1 Current Ih 100 77 46 27 20 18.2 1. This equation may be applied to any cable size.12 1. Field experience backed by studies such as by Mansoor in [7] show that several factors including attenuation. on #4/0 cable at 50 feet THD (%) 5 50 100 Current (pu) 1. diversity and system impedance act to reduce harmonic currents as they travel farther from their B. 1/0 AWG cable segment.28 $113. and supply voltage. the calculated transformer load losses due to harmonics and their associated cost per year are listed in Table VI.1 1. 365 days per year.01 116. The row “Line loss” indicates the single line power loss.00 1.11 $107. 208V.00 $77.99 151.t 5%THD $0.2 15.893 $690 .20 Current (pu) 1.r.41 Current (amps) 166. mostly 180 Hz 3) Cable l3 losses: As compared to the previous line segments.05×I2R Ploss (W) 2986 1336 4322 1575 Cost/Year $1.9 186.42 0.4 25 15 1 6 4 . 4. Transformer T1 losses The transformer core or noload losses depend on voltage. this percentage usually must be obtained from the manufacturer. Using (10) and (11). Assuming balanced threephase conditions.1 3. Energy cost is again based on the assumption that the load runs 12 hours per day. In this case the transformer T1 is loaded to approximately 55 percent of its 112 kVA rating.06 $170. Table II shows the secondary harmonic current contents. 5% THD $0.84 Line loss per phase = I2R (W) Cost for 3phase/year $103.47 81. Note the filtering action of the deltawye transformer. The triplen harmonics of each phase add in the neutral line.21 Penalty w. 4) Cable l4 losses: The current in this segment is further smoothed by other linear loads. Using the perunit copper loss (ΣI2Rh).308 $585 $1.t. and incorporates effects of harmonics on current and line resistance harmonic levels.4 235.04 75. To calculate these harmonicrelated losses transformer T1 characteristics must be known. The exception would be where harmonic resonances occur and amplify the distortion. Pl = ∑ I h Rh 2 h =1 hmax source.38 $10.05 0. Typical THD in this section may be less than 10 percent. We can calculate threephase line losses and neutral line loss separately by considering the harmonic current components. (that is.42 86. Based on the eddy current loss as a percent of the I2R loss under sinusoidal 60Hz loading conditions.
and the cable lengths. 2) Boost converter with power factor correction: The boost converter is also called “stepup converter” which converts low dc voltage to high dc voltage.05×I2R 2747 $1203 T2 Service Entrance f Main Panel e The total load loss for T1 is more than double the predicted 60Hz loss because of high harmonic currents.101 D. Filtering by a parallelconnected. Compensation Built into Load Equipment Eliminating harmonics at their source provides the most effective option from a system point of view. 7 shows a power Cable l1: Cable l2: Xformer T1: Cable l3: Total Current Cable THD Length 100% 200 ft 100% 50 ft THD: 100% primary. The expected economy of a larger scale filter suggests that the best location is where several distorted currents are combined. parallel LCresonant (SCRF) Of these methods a simple inductor and the electronic active boost converter are the most practical for buildin harmonic mitigation—where space and real estate are very expensive. but the cost and size increment could be excessive. 1) Series inductor filter: A series inductor at the input to a power supply prevents sudden current changes (di/dt) and acts as a simple filter component. The number and size of the of harmonic filters will also affect internal losses of the filter and operating cost. such as a load center. At 100 percent THD. C. The question is viability and cost. Building in the active boost converter current shaping to replace the frontend rectifiercapacitor smoothing circuit 3. Even so the losses are not trivial. Fig. The rectifier circuit operates in the same way except the harmonic content and the peak current are reduced. more evaluation is need to compare cost. A number of filtering options for harmonic mitigation are commercially available and can be evaluated on a cost/benefit basis. this leads to many small rather than a few large filtering devices. Table VII summarizes expected harmonicrelated losses and costs per year for this case. Filtering by a seriesconnected. possibilities of limiting harmonics to comply with IEC have been analyzed and tested by the authors. TABLE VII SUMMARY OF HARMONICRELATED LOSSES AND COSTS PER YEAR W l4 Subpanels or Load Center Load Equipment T1 b l1 a SMPS l3 d c l2 Primary Secondary Fig.’ for harmonic elimination or reactive compensation. E. About 50% was in the cables and 50% in the 480/120208V stepdown transformer. Filtering by a series inductor added at the input circuit 2. Special wiringrelated conditions such as neutral conductor overload and cancellation should also be considered. are more practical for cord connection. It is possible to manipulate the inductor value to suit IEC. in this paper only one option of the buildin circuits will be evaluated to determine the potential economic payback. which is a subject for future analysis. before any additional current flows in the power system. location ‘a’. series LCresonant (PCRF) 4. and the eddy current loss increased by more than 17 times. However. With incentives like IEC Standard 100032 (previously 5552 [8]). which will require some mitigation of harmonics at equipment terminals. ‘a through f. most system components are oversized. Results are reported in [1] and [9]. Note that harmonicrelated losses on cable l4 and transformer T2 are negligible for office the PC scenario. the 112kVA transformer is overloaded by only 60 kW of computers. .6 of 8 Penalty = PLL–1. 6: Possible locations for harmonic mitigation in office power system Given the interesting varieties and tradeoffs in harmonic mitigation methods.203 $10 $2. time of operation. 30% secondary 30% 150 ft Harmonic Loss (W) 1320 712 2747 23 4802 Harmonic Cost/ year $578 $310 $1. particularly in transformer T1. Fig. For example. Options for Eliminating HarmonicRelated Losses The case study illustrates that harmonic losses due to office equipment are expected to be distributed in the building wiring serving that equipment. Cost Penalty of HarmonicRelated Losses The total cost penalty depends on the loading condition. the copper loss doubled. In the above case. many manufacturers are looking for costeffective ways to reduce harmonics inside electronic equipment. 6 shows possible locations. will always be the most complete approach. a 200W power supply requires a 10mH series inductor to meet IEC 100032 [8]. Elimination at the source of harmonics generation. Four methods were considered: 1. Considering the PC power supply as an example. Consequently. The tunedfilter methods.effectiveness of different options and locations. PCRF and SCRF. It should be clear that selecting the right location will be critical to effectiveness. However.
04% $10 0 2747 23 2770 4. 7. Fig. from 3346 to 8148 watts. (W) Saving T1 at 112 kVA (W) Saving l3 at 150 ft. This analysis assumes 60 kW of office electronic load. 8. such as IEC 100032. Compensation of harmonics near the service entrance has very little value.58% compensation / 60 kVA 0 0 0 1320 Saving l1 at 200 ft.7 of 8 supply containing a frontend boost converter. while compensation near the electronic load has a significant potential effect. perhaps less obvious. which shows the maximum potential energy saving at different locations in the building wiring based on the case study.10/kWH. Fig. so that more than 68kW will be required at the service entrance to serve a 60kW office computer load. The switch S controls energy flow. Experimental input voltage and current waveforms. (a) power system voltage (b) power factor corrected power supply current Fig. The harmonicrelated losses increase the total expected losses in the building wiring by 250%. The load includes 240 distributed personal computers on 120 Table VIII also shows that additional losses due to the harmonic loading are more than 8kW. 365 days per year. In this case losses are based on the 60 kW computer load.00% $2101 ac input S Fig. The cost of energy is $. When S turns off. A. Of these the greatest potential for energy savings derived from harmonic reduction is near the source of the harmonic current. Harmonic elimination boost converter Rectifier Ls Ds Capacitor Load Cf Switchmode dctodc converter branch circuits. Table IX compares different load types with respect to their burden on building wiring and their kW consumption. TABLE VIII ENERGY SAVING POTENTIAL AT DIFFERENT LOCATIONS Location Options for Above At At Load At Load Harmonic Mitigation Xformer Xformer Center or Equipment Equipment Primary Secondary Sub Panel or Builtin Total losses without 8148 8148 8148 8148 compensation (W) Total losses with 8125 5378 4666 3346 compensation (W) % total losses with 13. saving $2101 per year. The size of the boost converter is significantly less than any passive filters. The inductor current can be controlled to follow a desired wave shape. Boost converter current shaping circuit inserted between the rectifier and switchmode dctodc converter circuits.96% 7. Insufficient capacity can be a significant problem in existing building wiring that has become overloaded due to new office equipment.62% $1213 712 2747 23 3482 5. IV.(W) Total saving for 60 kVA load (W) % saving / 60 kVA $ Saving per year 0 0 23 23 0. and the acside current will be in phase with the ac voltage. a current builds up on the inductor Ls. It is expected that the active power factor correction will meet any future strict power quality regulation. perhaps $10/year. the energy stored in the inductor charges through the diode D to the capacitor Cs. but the performance is much better. Upgrading existing transformers and wiring is often more costly than the original installation. 6 shows six possible locations in a typical commercial building.54% 8. This is the key benefit of a harmonicfree power supply. benefit of reducing harmonics at their source is the release of capacity in the building electrical power system. and other related electronic office equipment. Another. ANALYSIS OF HARMONIC ELIMINATION COSTBENEFIT This costbenefit analysis compares the estimated cost of adding a harmonicelimination circuit to the electronic power supply to the potential avoided cost of harmonicrelated losses in the power system.78% 5. The loss reductions will vary depending on load harmonic content as well as the power and the location of the compensating equipment. In this table the term “linear equivalent power factor” is a fictitious power factor for nonlinear loads that identifies the linear load power factor . Unfortunately. it is difficult to sell power supplies with active power factor correction because of expected higher cost and lower reliability related to additional components. which operate 12 hours per day. as illustrated in Table VIII. (W) Saving l2 at 50 ft. meanwhile the diode D remains in the reverse blocking mode because the onstate of S means a zero voltage across.80% $1523 712 2747 23 4802 8. The avoided cost is based on the previous determination of harmonicrelated losses in commercial building model. the inductor current is normally controlled to follow the rectified voltage. When S turns on. The current is nearly sinusoidal with almost invisible highfrequency (70 kHz) switching ripples. The Benefit of Harmonic Elimination From the previous analysis it is clear that location of the harmonic elimination equipment is critical. 8 shows experimental input voltage and current of a PC power supply with a boost converter circuit from [9]. In power factor correction circuit.
et al. Research and Development under the direction of Mr. 19–24. Jan.438 elimination PC with harmonic 1. Dallas. yielding a 3year pay back. CONCLUSION Harmonicrelated losses in building wiring can be calculated using a typical model of building power system components and harmonic generating load equipment. 1986. REFERENCES [1] J. IA22.034 over the 6year period. and recent quotes from power supply manufacturers located in Taiwan. Apr.6% 41% 59% 5. Zavadil. and T. “Switchmode power supply power factor improvement via harmonic elimination methods. the present value of the harmonic losses is $3739 at 60 kW. With harmonic elimination (5% THD). Another cost for this investment is the energy lost in the operation of the boost converter. Lai. $1440 per 60 kW. pp. In other words. This boostconverter circuit. 1. increasing power bills and tying up capacity of the power system. The value of released capacity and the concept of linear equivalent power factor are significant issues and need further documentation and development. which is based on the expected life of the computer system before reaching obsolescence.” Record of Applied Power Electronics Conference. March 1991. . Linh Tu and by the Electric Power Research Institute under a project managed by D. on Ind. therefore 3% is lost. No. overheating wiring.” IEEE Trans.6% 99. PQA 1991. [2] IEEE Emerald Book. TABLE IX VALUE OF HARMONIC ELIMINATION FOR WIRING CAPACITY Office building load Effective load on building types wiring losses Resistive load 1. was shown to be costeffective.8 of 8 that would have an equivalent effect on wiring loss.000 Other office loads 1. Rice. Efficiency of the converter elimination circuit is expected to be 97%. From this a payback period is calculated to be 3. This concept is getting important as the number of nonlinear loads are rapidly increasing. Stephen Rector./Feb. while installation near the service entrance may be of little value. A specific harmonic elimination method that maximizes these values is a harmonic elimination circuit built into nonlinear load equipment such as a PC. D. and the total lifecycle cost for harmonic elimination is $5179 (1440+3739). based on energy savings alone. is not adequate in the literature or in standards. The present value of energy savings in reduced building wiring losses is $10.4~1. Hurst. previously investigated by the authors. IEEE Std 11001992. Vol. A life of 6 years was chosen for this investment. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work was supported by Pacific Gas and Electric Co. Results for an office building show that the location of harmonic reduction equipment within the building wiring is crucial to effectiveness. Application data on these filters. Further analysis comparing the cost and effectiveness of the variety of different harmonic mitigation options is needed. This cost is based on prior investigations in [1]. [3] R. IEEE Recommended Practice for Powering and Grounding Sensitive Electronic Equipment. The varying range indicated in Table IX is taken from the calculated results which have a medium point at 15% THD and 0. C.4 times that by the pure resistive load.6% 100% 0 7~10% 55~75% 25~45% 13. “Analysis of harmonic distortion levels in commercial buildings. These losses may be significant.. Wiring system losses due to “other office loads. The approach holds great promise for achieving economy at the small scale required to eliminate harmonics in individual equipment. 1994. Reducing harmonics will save energy and release additional capacity to serve other loads. 161—177. Key. The greatest potential for loss reduction and released power system capacity is near the harmonic generating loads. particularly their use in both harmonic reduction and reactive compensation. E. [4] R. John Mead and Ms. This is indeed a good research topic for followup investigations. F. Celio and P. vary among different types. B.001 elimination % %Linear %Lost wiring equivalent wiring loss power factor capacity 5. “Verification of DSM lighting saving when harmonics are introduced. Ribeiro. VI. Appl.1% Without harmonic elimination.1 years. FUTURE WORK Active or tuned passive filters may be required to solve existing harmonic problems.” such as magnetic lamp ballasts. the wiring loss by PC loads is significantly reduced and performs like the pure resistive load.9 displacement power factor.” in Electronic Ballast. There is a variety of methods available for reducing harmonics in building wiring.9% 0. The Cost of Harmonic Elimination The added cost to install a boost convertertype harmonic elimination circuit in a switchmode power supply is estimated at $6 per 250W PC system. the system wiring is 20% overloaded even with 50% load. pp. V.7 PC without harmonic 2. Using these added costs and a discount rate of 8%. TX. the wiring loss by the PC power supply load is 2. [5] D.” Proceedings: First International Conference on Power Quality. “Adjustable speed drive and power rectifier harmonic—their effect on power systems components.
Mansoor. Key and J. “Predicting the net harmonic currents produced by large numbers of distributed singlephase computer loads. 1995 (formerly IEC 5552). Jan. No.” IEEE Trans.” Conference Record: IEEE PES Winter Power Conference. 688—695.. Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) − Part 3: Limits . #95 WM 2600 PWRD. [9] T. “Comparison of standards and power supply design options for limiting harmonic distortion. pp. Lai. et al. 1995. 1993. July. 1959. Jul. on Ind. S. [7] A. S.9 of 8 [6] Insulated Power Cable Engineers Associated Handbook. Appl. IA29. Vol. [8] CEI/IEC 100032. 4. .Section 2: Limits for harmonic current emissions (equipment input current ≤ 16 A per)./Aug.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Use one of your book credits to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.