c An Analysis of ANSI (Single Phase/Series-Parallel) and IEC ce (True Polyphase) Test Methods for Electricity Meters For several years the question of whether the ANSI test method, used by the electric utility C industry in the U.S. since the beginning, was as good as the IEC test method for testing r polyphase meters. For all practical purposes, the rest of the world had adopted the IEC test method: but so do they typically use European manufactured meters, This paper explains some of the differences between ANSI and IEC testing methods and the calibration equipment that perform the tests. It presents the results of several studies for the reader's Final analysis of whether or not there are any real differences betw2en Single Phase/Series-Paraile! and ‘True Polyphase test methods. Why Two Testing Methods? It begins with the-ahysics of the magnetic circuit. Electromagnetic devices such as transformers and inductors, particularly those that have gaps in thelr magnetic paths, preduce large flux fields that when placed in proximity of other such devices couple to and influence the flux patterns of the neighboring device. In an induction (ferrous) electricity meter, this influence is referred to as Element Interference. This condition exists where two or three measurement electromagnet assemblies exist in close proximity and act to provice driving torque to one electricity meter disk. All Induction polyphase meters designed outside the U.S. (foreign meters) have this problem to varying degrees while U.S. designers have all but eliminated the problem by geometric placement of electromagnet assemblies and magnetic shielding. When element interference errors exist, it can be calibrated out of the electricity meter by | performing the calibration adjustments with all flux fields in their operating crientation and | phase relationships. This is the premise of the IEC test method. Using this test method, one can see that ifthe electricity meter is calibrated with a forward phase rotation and installed | a reversed phase rotation, measurement errors would be experienced. Errors occur because | offsets have been introduced in the calibration process to compensate for tne element interference of the phase rotation used during calibration. Indeed, this can be emoiricaily | demonstrated and usually amounts to a 4 - 12% change in measurement registration of the electricity meter. To perform calibration on foreign meters requires muttiple voltage and current sources that have the same phase relationship and rotation as the service into wh the electricity meter is to be placed. This type of testing equipment is most often referred True Polypnase Test Equipment. Largely because of the element interference probie foraign meter designs are not as linear on their load curves and require testing at several points ranging from very small loads (starting current) to their ciass cating. This requires the test equipment to deliver currents 2s fow as .010 amperes to as high as 200 amperes. Because all U.S. designed induction (ferrous) polyphase electricity meters do not experience this element interference problem to any degree they can be calibrated using oniy one voltage and current source. By connecting all voltage coils in paralie! with the voltage scurce anc all Current coils in series aiding with the current source (hence the method name Single Phase/Series-Parallel), the electricity meter is calibrated using a single phase of voltage and current. In this case, phase rotation does not exist and after the meter is calibrated it can be installed in either phase rotation of the service with very ltte effect on the measurement accuracy. This is the premise cf the ANSI test method. The type of testing equipment Copyright by UTEC, June 1998. All rights reserved, tof? . 19393999999 4990N99999.959999905999499999 | Gesrequired to perform ANSI tests is most often referred to as Single Phase Test Equipment, also referred to as Single Phase/Series-Parailel Test Equipment. Since the element interference problem exists to such a small degree on U.S. designed electricity meters the load curve is flat and predictable. Therefore, the electricity meter can be calibrated using only a few points which are known as TA (test ampere) or Full Load, Power Factor (current lags voltage by 60°) and Light Load which is defined as 10% of TA. The largest TA value is 50 amperes. Class measurements are not required. This then means that the ANSI type testing equipment need only have one voltage and current source and be capable of producing only 50 amperes. All of the above discussion is not relevant when referring to Solid State Meters. These meters, by the nature of their design, do not have element interference problems and their load curves are extremely flat. Therefore, there is no requirement for True Polyphase testing. Since ali ‘multi-function polyphase electricity meters are Solid State (and most are of U.S. design) there Js no need for bulky and expensive True Polyphase Test Equioment when lighter, more versatile, more accurate and less expensive Single Phase/Series Parallel Test Equiament is available. True Polyphase Test Equipment There are several factors that can cause errors in electricity meter calibration when using Tu Polyphase Test Equipment manufactured in the U.S. Since the equipment sources consist of three voltage and current generators, a polyphase reference standard must be used. A N.LS.T. certified three phase standard does not presently exist in the U.S. Therefore, manufactures of True Polyphase Test Equipment in the U.S. use a pseudo reference standard, which is basically a TDM type three-phase measurement transducer. These devices are usually subject to drift and are normally in the + 0.05 to 0.1% accuracy class. Operating ‘temperatures of these references are normally specified at £ 2.5° around room temperature (21° to 25°C), In order to maintain accuracy specified on the pseudo reference standard, itis necessary to frequently check the calibration using an external (sometimes three) N.LS.T. certified reference standard. During the calibration check specific load points are tested, the errors are noted in a look-up table by load point. From then until the next calibration check, these look-up errors are added or subtracted from the computed test resuits of a electri meter test as determined by the current accuracy calibration of the pseudo standard and displayed to the user. If drif of the pseudo standard's calibration exist, the meter calibration resutt is in error by the amount of the drift. Because no direct comparison to a N.L.S.T. certified reference standard exists, the user must depend on the stability of the pseudo standard to assure that the meters being calibrated are maintained at the required calibration accuracy. This seems to be a very dangerous assumption. Review the standard calibration chart in Table 2 to see the accuracy differences between a N.LS.T. certified standard and a typical pseudo standard. Note that the errors of the pseudo standard at power factor are as large as the N.LS.T. overall error. This should be of great concem since most polyphase services cperate at less than unity power factor. It would seem logical that the user would want the power factor calibration to be as accurate as possible to maximize company billing revenues. ‘The True Polyphase Test Equiament control software allows the user to select an infinite number of combinations of voltage, current and phase angle. During the calibration of the pseudo standard, however, only specific load points are tested. Therefore, any user selected test point different from those used to calibrate the pseudo standard will not be provided with a calibration correction error adjustment. This can provide additional uncertainty to the test result. Copyright by UTEC, June 1998. All rights reserved. 2of7 vist Mobianal Inshifile o£ Sfamdan wk Technolgy ) )The testing of electricity meters that do not have a full compliment of elements, such as the form 6, 8, 14 and 16, requires that the phase currents being delivered from the source be exactly balanced. True Polyphase Test Equipment has three independent current sources, These sources are specified to “regulate to within & 1% of the programmed value.” When testing at 30A, 1% is equal to 300mA. Since they are individually regulated, tis very doubtful that the sources are exactly balanced. Unbalances as small as 0.3 amps (300 mA) can cause meter testing errors in the + 1% range. Single Phase/Series-Parallel Test Equipment ‘The problems that exist in True Polyphase Test Equipment do not exist in Single Phase/Series-Paralle! Test Equipment. Since there is only one voltage and current source, the Currents in the electricity meter are exactly balanced and a true N.I.S.T. reference stancarc can be employed. This makes unnecessary the requirement for external calibration of the standard since each electricity meter test is compared directly to the true N.I.S.T. reference standard located inside the test system. Further, no mater which load points are selected, the accuracy of the reference is known, The temperature operating range of the reference standard is from -20° to 70°C (-4° to 158°F) which allows for use of the equipment on widely changing environmental conditions without degrading the test accuracy. Test Method Studies Several studies have been conducted conceming the accuracy of ‘Single Phase/Series- Parallel Testing’ vs. ‘Three Phase Testing’ by IEEE and others. All studies are inclusive to _ show a real difference between the two methods when testing U.S. designed and manufactured meters. Most of the studies reported differences of as much as 0.2% to 0.4% (on some meter tyoes. None cf the studies published the uncertainty of the measurements observed and reported. Except for one study, no analysis was furnished concerning the accuracy and uncertainty of the measuring equipment when used in the ‘Single Phase Testing Mode' vs. the ‘Three Phase Testing Mode’. ‘The results of a study performed by Union Electric Company, St. Louis, and reported in the June 1991 issue of Electric Light and Power, offered the following conclusions, “The results of LaFaver's study show that the effects of polyphase testing vs. single phase testing are for the ‘most part minor. Although some meters showed a dramatic change at lightly loaded conditions, the differences were caused not by the method of testing but from the effects of using polyphase power vs. single-phase power. If meters are installed so that loading is at or above light-oad conditions, then the method of testing will have little effect on revenues. The results of a study performed jointly by Jacksonville Electric Authority and the University Fiorida reported in an IEEE transaction paper (93 WM 002-6 PWRD) published in 1993, offered the following conclusions for ferrous meters. “The results of this study show conclusively a disparity exists in meter registration between polyphase calibration and single phase calibration methods." (Maximum deviation observed 0.4%, average deviation 0.16%) ‘Additionally, a significant number of solid-state energy meters from four manufactures were subjected to the same scrutiny without showing any evidence of possessing the same inherent characteristics as their electro-mechanical counterparts. This, of course, was to be expected. Consequently, there were no discemable differences in testing from a polyphase source and thus these tests are not contained in this study. Copyright by UTEC, June 1998. All rights reserved. 30f7 D Drains) JIIIIIIIIII oD FIQIIO I9 39 ID IIIA A a - i a The results of a study performed by the Working Group of the Electricity Metering ‘Subcommittee of the Power Systems Instrumentation and Measurement Committee of the IEEE, in co-operation with Hydro Quebec, Jacksonville Electric Authority, Wisconsin Power & Light, National Research Council of Canada and AVO International (Submitted to EEE December 96). This study performed tests on a number of polyphase meters using several brands of test equipment ang in several laboratory locations. This study is the most scientific and comprehensive conducted thus far and resulted in the follow conclusions: + ‘At full load, 3 element meters run faster under polyphase loads than under series- parallel conditions.” (Average error in all tests 0.21%.) + “At full load, 2 element meters tend to run slower under polyphase loads than under series-parallel test conditions.” (Average error in all tesis 0.07%.) "2 4 element meters tend to run slow or fast depending on whether they are connected as ABC or CBA.” (Average error in all tests # 0.11%.) "For 3 element meters at full and power factor loads, the discrepancy between ‘rue polyphase and series-parailel results tends to get worse as element balance gets, worse.” (Maximum error for all full oad tests + 0.15 factor tests + 0.2%.) In this study, a "Round Robin’ between the test laboratories was conducted using @ group of Solid State meters. The control group of meters was tested in both the ABC and CBA rotations using True Polyphase method and then in the Single Phase/Series-Paralle! method and the errors tabulated. "The real purpose (of the ‘Round Robin’) was to compare the cifference in reported registration between series-parallel, true polyphase ABC and true polyphase CBA results among the various laboratories. The results of these tests are given in the Table 1 below. Table 1 - Laboratory ‘Round Robin’ Test Results Of ABC/CBA phase rotation (True Polyphase Testing) to Single Phase testing Weier ] Flan | Fomax | Flere | Pen | PP max Simens | enor| Ener | Range | “ener | emor [3 [008 |-oo8 | o14-| 007 10.10 2% [0.19 | 0.00] 0419-] -0.27 |-o01 [22 tor F007 [098-021 10.17 Ubmin | ibmax | Emor_|_Error_| Range 0.17 10.42 [029 0.17 | 005 {022 0.07 | 0.11 {0.18 The highlighted ...Evror Range columns show the total spread of readings obtained from the test laboratories and the various types of equipment used. These tests were performed using solid state meters, which in this study (and others) have been found to exhibit no difference in test results whether tested using the True Polyphase or Series-Paralle! methods. Given this fact, the only remaining sources of error are the differences in calibration (from absolute} of +! test laboratories and the accuracy of the various types of equipment employed Synopsis Copyright by UTEC, June 1998. All rights reserved. 4of7a 5 a 9 5 a 5 ° ° Oo A fe 5 5 5 5 9D = cy ° 2 ° 5 oS 2 R 2 D So So > > 2 9 9 Dy ‘ \l of the studies have concluded that induction (Ferrous) meters show some differences in calibration between True Polyphase and Single Phase/Series-Paralel (Single-Phase) test methods. All of the studies have concluded that solid state meters show no difference in calibration between True Polyphase and Single Phase/Series-Parallel (Single-Phase) test methods. ‘The IEEE study which was the most scientific and comprehensive of all, demonstrated that the observed differences in the calibration of the test group of induction meters were in the same ranges as the differences observed between the different laboratories and test equipment used for the observations (Table 1). From this observation it can be concluded that there is no discernable difference in calibration between the True Polyphase and Single Phase/Series- Parallel test methods and that the apparent differences are due primanly to calibration ions and repeatability of the equipment used to perform the tests. All the studies indicate that the balance of the elements of the polyphase meter s critical when making these observations. The more out of balance the elements are, the larger the differences in the test results between the True Polyphase and Single Phase/Series-Parallel test methods and the larger the disparity between the ABC and CBA phase rotation tests. The inverse is also true in that the more balanced the elements of the polyphase meter the less the difference in test results between the True Polyphase and Single PhaselSeries-Parallel =: methods. This observation is not a new phenomenon, but goes back to the beginning discussion conceming element interference, All the studies resulted in the largest observed differences being at power factor. Yet the pseudo standards used in True Polyphase test equipment have the pcorest performance and ‘accuracy at the power factor points (Table 2). Could this be the reason for such poor power factor test results in the studies? This 's another goed argument against True Polyphase testing until valid N.I.S.T. certified true three phase reference standards are designed inte tne test equipment. It is this writer's opinion based on the available data from the studies oresented that there e: no discemnaoie difference between the True Polyphase and Single Phase/Series-Paralie ts: methods. Further, itis easily shown that the accuracy of Single PhaselSeriss-Paraile’ test ‘equipment is far superior to the accuracy of True Polyphase test equipment. The logical conclusion must then be that if there is no difference between the test methods, and the Single PhaselSeries-Paralle! test equipment is more accurate and less expensive; the choice of the Single Phase!Series-Paralle! test method and equipment is best. This paper is written by John M, Carr, President of Utility Test Equipment Company (UTEC). it you have questions concerning the two test methods, the test equipment or wish to discu: views presented herein, olease call me at 800-445-8832, 8 AM — 4 PM, MF, EST. References Is single-phase testing for all m ric Light and Power, June 1 2. A Study of Polyonase Watthour Meter Accuracy Comparing Single Phase Series 9 Polyphase Calibration, IEEE publication 93 WM 0026 PWRD, November 3, 1992 3. Series-Parailel Versus True Polvohase Calibration of Electricity Meters, IEE®, Working Group of the Electricity Metering Subcommittee, PSIM Committee, December 1995 Copyright by UTEC, June 1998. All rights reserved. Sof? | |4. Handbook For Electricity lering, 9" Edition, Edison Electric Institute, Washington, a OC:EEI, 1992 Copyright by UTEC, June 1998, All rights reserved, 6 of7 O