Application of Conservative Power Theory to Load

and Line Characterization and Revenue Metering

Helmo K. M. Paredes Fernando P. Marafão Paolo Mattavelli Paolo Tenti
Unesp – Univ Estadual Paulista Unesp – Univ Estadual Paulista CPES – Virginia Tech University of Padova
Sorocaba, Brazil Sorocaba, Brazil Blacksburg (VA), USA Padova, Italy
hmorales@sorocaba.unesp.br fmarafao@sorocaba.unesp.br pmatta@vt.edu paolo.tenti@unipd.it

Abstract –This paper proposes a set of performance factors for (boldface refers to vector quantities, while phase variables
load characterization and revenue metering. They are based on are indicated with subscript “m”). We define:
the Conservative Power Theory, and each of them relates to a
specific load non-ideality (unbalance, reactivity, distortion). The • Unbiased integral of phase voltages
performance factors are capable to characterize the load under û m (t ) = u m ³ (t ) − u m ³ (1)
different operating conditions, considering also the effect of non-
negligible line impedances and supply voltage deterioration. t T
1
where: u m ³ (t ) = u m (τ ) dτ , u m ³ =
³ u (t ) dt
³
I. INTRODUCTION 0
T 0 m³
The advent of smart microgrids, which are characterized • Instantaneous (active) power
by distributed energy sources and pervasive ICT, poses new
requirements for power metering and load characterization. M

In fact, microgrids are often fed by weak supplies, p m = u m im Ÿ p = uDi = ¦ u m im (2)

m =1
especially in case of islanded operation, where the utility is
replaced by backup generators and the distributed energy • Instantaneous reactive energy
sources play a major role in feeding the power required by M
the loads. In such instances the supply voltages may become
asymmetrical and distorted, making the usual approaches to
wm = uˆ m im Ÿ w = uˆ D i = ¦ uˆ m im (3)
m =1
load characterization and revenue metering ineffective [1-3], It was shown [7,8] that instantaneous quantities p and w
with possible over-penalization of blameless users or under- defined by (2) and (3) are conservative for every network,
penalization of guilty loads. irrespective of voltage and current waveforms.
Whatever power metering approach is taken to face such The corresponding average terms are:
situations [4-7] it must be based on power definitions which 1 T
keep their meaning even in case of distorted, asymmetrical Pm = u m , im =
T 0 ³
u m im dt
and weak supply. This is peculiar of the Conservative Power Active power: (4)
1 T
Theory (CPT), which makes use of quantities related to
power flow and energy storage, that keep their meaning for
P = u, i =
T 0 ³
u D i dt

whatever kind of supply and load.

1 T
Moreover, the CPT makes possible to characterize the
loads by various performance indexes, and to properly
Wm = uˆ m , im =
T ³0 uˆ m im dt
Reactive energy: (5)
1 T
³
approach the accountability problem, i.e., assessing the load W = uˆ , i = uˆ D i dt
and supply responsibility on the generation of asymmetry T 0
and distortion of the supply voltages [9-10]. The active power represents the rate of energy flow [11],
while the reactive energy accounts for inductive and
II. CONSERVATIVE POWER THEORY – BASIC CONCEPTS capacitive energy stored in the load circuit [7,8].
AND DEFINITIONS
Based on the above definitions, every phase current i m
The Conservative Power Theory (CPT), detailed in can be decomposed in the following components.
[7,8], provides power and current decomposition in the P
stationary regime, in a way that clearly shows the effects of • Active phase current: iam = m2 u m (6.a)
voltage asymmetry and distortion, load unbalance, reactive Um
power consumption, and non linearities. Wm
Assume a generic poly-phase circuit under periodic • Reactive phase current: irm = uˆ m (6.b)
Uˆ 2m
operation (period T), and let u and i be the voltages and
currents measured at the Point of Common Coupling (PCC) • Void phase current: ivm = im − iam − irm (6.c)

978-1-4673-1541-8/12/$31.00 ©2012 IEEE

where U m and Û m are the rms values of the phase voltage III. LOAD PERFORMANCE INDEXES
and its unbiased integral. In order to characterize the different aspects of load
The active and reactive phase currents are the minimum operation which affect the power factor we refer to various
currents needed to convey the active power and reactive performance indexes, related to the power decomposition.
energy of phase m, respectively, while the void currents are Every index ranges from 0 to 1, and the higher the value, the
the residual terms. All current components are orthogonal. better the load performance is.
Looking at the three-phase behavior, we can further The distortion factor ( λ D ) is defined as:
decompose the active and reactive currents into balanced
D2 P2 + Q2 + N 2
and unbalanced terms. The balanced active and reactive λD = 1 − = (13)
currents are defined as: A2 A2
P W From the physical point of view, this factor accounts for
b
iam = 2 u m , iamr
= 2 uˆ m (7) the presence of distortion power, i.e., current terms which
U Uˆ
do not contribute to active power and reactive energy but
In (7) P and W are total active power and reactive energy cause distribution loss in the supply line. These currents are
absorbed by the load, while U and Û are the collective rms due partially to concurrent voltage and current distortion
values of the phase voltages and their unbiased integrals, (scattered terms), and partially to load-generated harmonics
defined by: [8].
M M The unbalance factor (ߣே ) is defined as:
U = u = ¦ U m2 Uˆ = uˆ = ¦ Uˆ m2 (8)
m =1 m =1 N2 P2 + Q2
λN = 1 − = (14)
The balanced active and reactive currents represent that P2 + Q2 + N 2 P2 + Q2 + N 2
portion of the phase currents which would be absorbed, with
It reflects the presence of load unbalance and voltage
the same voltage supply, by a symmetrical equivalent load
asymmetry at the load terminals.
taking the same total active power and reactive energy of
Finally, the reactivity factor (ߣொ ) is defined as:
the actual load.
The unbalanced active and reactive phase currents are Q2
defined by difference: λQ = 1 − (15)
P2 + Q2
u
iam = iam − iam
b u
, irm = irm − irm
b
(9) It reveals the presence of reactive energy in linear loads
All the above current components are orthogonal to each or phase shifting due to circuit nonlinearity (e.g., thyristor
other, thus: rectifiers).
I 2 = I 2 + I 2 + I 2 = I b + I b + I u + I u + I 2 (10)
2 2 2 2
The power factor can therefore be expressed as:
a r v a 

r a 

r v
I b2 Iu2 λ = λQ λ N λ D (16)
From (10), we may also decompose the apparent power Equation (16) allows a quantitative evaluation of the
in the form: influence of reactive, unbalance and distortion powers in the
A 2 = U 2 I 2 = P 2 + Q 2 + N a2 + N r2 + D 2 (11) power factor, decoupling their effects.
where: If the supply voltages are sinusoidal and symmetrical,
• A Apparent Power the load can be fully characterized by the above
• P = U I ab Active Power performance factors. However, if the supply voltages are
distorted and/or asymmetrical, or the line impedances are
• Q = U I rb Reactive Power; non-negligible, we need to discriminate the influence of the
• Na = U I au Active Unbalance Power source and load effects on the generation of the unwanted
• Nr = U I ru Reactive Unbalance Power power terms (accountability problem).
The following sections discuss load- and supply-side
• D = U Iv Distortion Power
modeling techniques which make possible a simple, even if
Apart from P, all power terms characterize a non-ideal approximated, approach to the accountability problem.
aspect the load performance. The global performance index These techniques are then analyzed by means of different
is the power factor: simulation cases in order to investigate the effectiveness of
P I P the accountability approach and to show the ability of the
λ= = a = (12)
A I P + Q + N 2 + N 2 + D2
2 2 above performance factors to characterize the load, also in
a r
view of a possible application to revenue metering.
which can be calculated for every circuit independently of
waveform distortion and asymmetry, and is affected not IV. LOAD MODELING
only by load unbalance and non-linearity, but also by supply The load modeling approach was fully analyzed in [12]
asymmetry and distortion. The separation of supply and and, for the sake of brevity, is reported here only for three-
load responsibility on the power factor reduction is the goal phase four-wire loads, whose single-phase equivalent circuit
of the following accountability approach. is shown in Fig.1.
 di
e = u + RS i + LS (20)
dt
where, due to supply line symmetry, parameters RS and LS
are the same in all phases. Note that, due to the linearity of
(20), it can be applied separately to the fundamental
positive-sequence voltage and current terms ( e p , i p ) and
the remaining terms ( e n , i n ). Considering that e n represent
Fig. 1. Equivalent circuit for three-phase four-wire loads.
the unwanted terms of the source voltages, which ideally
should be purely fundamental positive-sequence quantities,
We assume that the measuring equipment at the load
RS and LS can be selected so as to minimize terms e n . In
terminals senses the line-to-neutral voltages u m and line
this way, the equivalent circuit of Fig. 2 gives a
currents im and is capable to discriminate their fundamental conservative representation of the voltage supply, in the
( u mf , imf ) and harmonic ( u mh , imh ) components. sense that it minimizes the impact of supply asymmetry and
distortion on the voltage measured at PCC. In order to
The parameters Rm and Lm of the equivalent circuit are ensure source impedance identification, we will assume that
computed to suit the circuit performance at the fundamental line voltage and current at PCC have non-negligible
frequency, thus: distortion or unbalanced components. According to this
uf uˆ f approach, RS and LS are chosen to minimize the function:
imf = m + m (17) M
R m Lm 2
ϕ = en = ¦ emn , emn (21.a)
Their values are easily derived by observing that: m =1
U f2 U f2 where e n is the vector of the unwanted components of the
Pmf = u mf , imf = m Ÿ Rm = mf (18.a)
Rm Pm supply voltages, and includes all terms related to asymmetry
and distortion. Function ϕ can be expressed as:
Uˆ mf 2 Uˆ mf 2
Wmf = uˆ mf , imf = Ÿ Lm = (18.b) 2
Rm Wmf 2 2 din
ϕ= u n
+ RS2 i n
+ L2S +
Finally, the current source j m is defined by difference: dt
(21.b)

u u din
j m = im − mf − mf (19.a) + 2 RS u , i n n
+ 2 LS n
u , LS
Rm Lm dt
From the above definitions, we see that j m only includes Minimization of ϕ gives:
harmonic terms. In fact, substituting (17) in (19.a), we get: ∂ϕ 2
 = 0 Ÿ RS = − u n , i n in (22.a)
uh u h ∂ RS
j m = imh − mf − mf (19.b)
Rm Lm 2
∂ϕ din din
For the validity of the model we should assume that the = 0 Ÿ LS = − u n , (22.b)
∂ LS dt dt
equivalent circuit parameters remain the same within
reasonable variations of the voltage supply, both in terms of Obviously, only positive solutions are acceptable for RS
asymmetry and distortion. This is only approximately true and LS. In case of negative solution, the corresponding
in real networks, but it makes possible an accountability parameter is set to zero. Given RS and LS, we may compute:
approach based on measurement at the load terminals, di p
without requiring a precise knowledge of the load itself. e p = u p + R S i p + LS (23)
dt
V. SUPPLY MODELING which estimates the positive-sequence supply voltages to be
included in the equivalent circuit of Fig. 2.
Fig. 2 shows the single-phase equivalent circuit of the Note that ep, up, ip, are the fundamental positive sequence
voltage supply, which includes voltage source em , line components of the related voltages and currents, while, en,
resistance RS and line inductance LS. Considering three- un, in are calculated by difference to the original voltages
phase quantities we can write: and currents.
VI. ACCOUNTABILITY
From the above relations we may estimate the load and
supply contribution to the various power terms. Thus,
considering that the line impedance is much lower than the
load impedance and using the superposition principle, we
proceed as follows:
Fig. 2. Source equivalent circuit – per phase.
1) Based on the procedure of section IV, from the voltages
and currents measured at PCC we estimate the phase
parameters Rm and Lm and the current source jm of the
equivalent circuit of Fig.1.
2) Based on the procedure of section V, from the voltages
and currents measured at PCC we may estimate the Fig. 5. Equivalent circuit for the unwanted PCC voltage calculus.
supply line parameters RS and LS and the fundamental
positive-sequence supply voltages e p . VII. APPLICATION EXAMPLES
3) Applying now supply voltages e p at the input terminals In order to investigate the load characterization and
of the equivalent circuit of Fig. 2, and considering the revenue metering approach, two different load circuits were
equivalent circuit of Fig. 1, we may determine the simulated, as indicated in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7.
fundamental phase currents i Af absorbed by the load Table I shows the different supply conditions considered
under these supply conditions (Fig. 3) and the for the analysis. The line impedance (ZL) is the same for all
phases (R = 10.9m, L = 38.5H) and corresponds to a
corresponding fundamental phase voltages uAf
voltage drop about 4% at rated load power.
appearing at the PCC terminals (Fig. 4). Currents i Af
and voltages uAf may result asymmetrical due to load
unbalance. This non-ideality must obviously be
ascribed to the load, since the voltage supply and
distribution lines are symmetrical.
4) Finally, applying the harmonic current sources j acting
in the various load phases we determine the harmonic
voltages uAh and currents i Ah occurring at PCC, which
are also accountable to the load. Since the line Fig. 6. Unbalanced linear load.
impedances are much lower that load impedances, we
may express these quantities in the approximate form
(see Fig. 5):
i Ah ≅ j (24.a)
d j
uAh ≅ − RS j − LS (24.b)
dt
5) Let’s now compute the load voltages and currents at
PCC, which are accountable to the load:
uA = uAf + uAh (25.a)
Fig. 7. Unbalanced non-linear load.
i A = i Af + i Ah (25.b)
6) From the definitions of Sect II and III, we may easily TABLE I. Voltage Source Conditions for Cases 1 and 2.
compute all power terms accountable to the load and Case 1 Case 2
the corresponding performance factors. ݁ଵ ൌ ͳʹ͹‘Ͳ Vrms ݁ଵ  ൌ ‫݁ݏܽܥ‬ሺ‫ܫ‬ሻ ൅ σ ‫ܪ‬ଵ Vrms
f
ilm ݁ଶ ൌ ͳʹ͹‘ െ ͳʹͲ Vrms ݁ଶ  ൌ ‫݁ݏܽܥ‬ሺ‫ܫ‬ሻ ൅ σ ‫ܪ‬ଶ Vrms
݁ଷ ൌ ͳʹ͹‘ͳʹͲ Vrms ݁ଷ  ൌ ‫݁ݏܽܥ‬ሺ‫ܫ‬ሻ ൅ σ ‫ܪ‬ଷ Vrms
iRm iLm
+
emp Rm Lm In Case 2, the terms called ΣH represent the harmonic
_ contents of the phase voltages. Each phase voltage includes
2% of 3rd harmonic, 2% of 5th harmonic. The phase angle of
Fig. 3. Equivalent circuit for the fundamental load current calculus. each harmonic term is the phase angle of the fundamental
voltage (as in Case 1) multiplied by the harmonic order.

A. Unbalanced Linear Load

1) Case A.1 – Sinusoidal source voltages
In this case, we assume an unbalanced linear load fed by
a sinusoidal source voltage. Figure 8 depicts the three-phase
Fig. 4. Equivalent circuit for the fundamental PCC voltage calculus. voltages and currents at the PCC.
 Table II shows the resulting power and performance However, in this case the distortion power (D) is not
factors, computed by considering the actual voltages and completely zero, since the inductive load modifies the
currents measured at PCC (columns labeled “PCC”) and current harmonic content if compared to the harmonic
also according to the proposed accountability approach. The content of PCC voltages (see Fig. 9), what is interpreted as a
label “load” indicates the terms strictly accountable to the non linear characteristic between PCC currents and voltages
load. Note that the proposed performance factors waveforms. Nevertheless, this practically does not impact
characterize the unbalanced linear load in terms of reactivity on the distortion factor.
and unbalance factors only. In fact, the distortion factor is
unitary. TABLE II - Power terms measured at PCC and accountable to the load
According to the proposed method, the power factor is (unbalanced linear load).
affected not only by the load reactivity, but also by its Case A.1 Case A.2
impedance imbalance. Moreover, the “load” power terms PCC Load PCC Load
and performance factors are calculated considering the A [KVA] 95.522 98.722 95.263 96.571
influence of the line impedance on the PCC voltages and P [KW] 65.224 67.862 65.231 65.089
currents. Q [KVA] 67.698 69.813 67.729 69.597
ua ub uc N [KVA] 15.158 16.334 15.163 15.582
200
D [KVA] 0.017 0.074 1.627 1.649
100
λ 0.6828 0.6874 0.6847 0.6740
λQ 0.6938 0.6970 0.6937 0.6831
0
λN 0.9872 0.9862 0.9872 0.9869
-100
λD 1.0000 0.9999 0.9999 0.9999
-200

ia ib ic
B. Unbalanced Non Linear Load
400

200 1) Case B.1 – Sinusoidal source voltages

0 In this case, we consider an unbalanced non linear load
-200 supplied by sinusoidal source voltage. Figure 10 shows the
-400 three-phase voltages and currents at the PCC. Note that the
0.45 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.49 0.5 load currents are highly distorted and significantly affects
Tim e (s) the PCC voltages.
Fig. 8. PCC voltages and currents - Case A.1.
Table III shows the resulting power and performance
factors. Note that in this case, the performance factors
2) Case A.2 – Non sinusoidal source voltages characterize the unbalanced non linear load in terms of its
Considering the same load as in Fig. 6, we now assume reactivity, unbalance and distortion factors, which means
distorted source voltage (as indicated in Table I). Figure 9 that the power factor is affect by these three indexes.
depicts the three-phase voltages and currents at the PCC. At this point, it would be interesting to observe the
The resulting power and performance factors are active power and power factor from Case A.1. One could
indicated in Table II. Again, one can notice that the conclude that these similar power rated loads present similar
performance factors correctly characterize the balanced electrical behavior and impact on the PCC. However, Table
linear load in terms of its reactivity and unbalance behavior. III indicates that the behavior of the unbalanced non linear
ua ub uc load is quite different in terms of reactive, unbalance and
200 distortion power and their respective performance factors.
ua ub uc
100
200
0
100
-100
0
-200
-100

ia ib ic -200

400
ia ib ic
200
500
0

-200 0

-400
-500
0.45 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.49 0.5
Tim e (s)
0.45 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.49 0.5
Tim e (s)
Fig. 9. PCC voltages and currents - Case A.2.
Fig. 10. PCC voltages and currents - Case B.1.
 This simple comparison could justify the need of Under the assumption of unbalanced or distorted
additional information in terms of revenue metering in conditions, the proposed approach allows the separation of
modern power grids and the authors believe that the load and supply responsibility for the generation of active,
proposed performance factors would bring important reactive, unbalance and distortion power. Such approach is
information. essentially founded on a load and supply modeling by
means of the PCC voltage and current measurements.
2) Case B.2 – Non sinusoidal source voltages Moreover, a set of performance factors has also been
Figure 11 depicts the three-phase voltages and currents proposed to characterize the load in terms of imbalance,
in case of unbalanced non linear load fed by non sinusoidal reactivity and distortion .
voltages. In terms of revenue metering, the comparison among the
power terms measured at PCC and those accounted to the
In this case, it would be interesting to compare the load shows the effect of the line impedance and calls for
power terms and performance factors to Case B.1. Note that additional analyses to properly face the case of weak grids,
in such case, the active power is lower than in case of where the line impedance can affect dramatically the power
sinusoidal voltages. On the other hand, the power factor is measurement. In any case, the CPT definitions and the
increased. This would reflect the ability of the proposed proposed performance factors give a way to characterize the
methodology to estimate the interactions between source loads and to approach the accountability problem in the
voltage deterioration and voltage drop distortion caused by generality of distribution grids.
the non linear load behavior.
ua ub uc
REFERENCES
200
[1] A. Ferrero, L. Peretto and R. Sasdelli, "Revenue metering in the
100 presence of distortion and unbalance: myths and reality", in Proc.
0
1998 IEEE International Conference on Harmonics and Quality of
Power, pp. 42-47.
-100
[2] D.P. Manjure and E.B. Makram, “Effect of Nonlinearity and
-200 Unbalance on Power Factor,” in Proc. 2000 IEEE Power Engineering
Society Summer Meeting, pp. 956-962.
ia ib ic
[3] J. L. Willems, “Reflections on Power Theories for Poly-Phase
500
Nonsinusoidal Voltages and Currents”, Przegld Elektrotechniczny
no. 6, pp. 11-21, 2010.
0 [4] M. Depenbrock, “The FBD-Method, a Generally Applicable Tool for
Analyzing Power Relations”, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, vol. 8,
-500
no 2, pp. 381-387, May 1993.
[5] L. Cristaldi, A. Ferrero, “Mathematical foundations of the
0.45 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.49 0.5 instantaneous power concept: an algebraic approach”, European
Tim e (s) Trans. on Electrical Power, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 305-309, Sept./Oct.
Fig. 11. PCC voltages and currents - Case B.2. 1996.
[6] L. S. Czarnecki, “Currents’ Physical Components (CPC) Concept: a
Fundamental of Power Theory”, Przegld Elektrotechniczny no. 6,
TABLE III. Power terms measured at PCC and accountable to the load pp. 28-37, 2008.
(unbalanced non linear load).
[7] P. Tenti, P. Mattavelli, H. K. Morales P, “Conservative Power
Case B.1 Case B.2 Theory, Sequence Components and Accountability in Smart Grids”
PCC Load PCC Load Przeglad Elektrotechniczny, Vol. 6, pp. 30-37, 2010.
A [KVA] 93.267 94.007 89.494 91.207 [8] P. Tenti, H. K. Morales P, P. Mattavelli, “Conservative Power
P [KW] 63.909 63.334 62.738 62.763 Theory, a Framework to Approach Control and Accountability Issues
in Smart Microgrids”, IEEE Trans. on Power Electronics, vol. 26, no
Q [KVA] 33.274 35.376 33.599 36.159
3, pp. 664 - 673, March 2011.
N [KVA] 20.873 21.143 20.619 21.296
[9] A. Pavas, V. Staudt, H. Torres-Sánchez, “Discussion on existing
D [KVA] 55.421 55.916 50.190 51.171 methodologies for the resposabilities assigment problem”,
λ 0.6852 0.6737 0.7010 0.6881 International School on Nonsinusoidal Currents andCompensation.
λQ 0.8870 0.8730 0.8815 0.8665 Lagow, Poland, June 2008.
λN 0.9605 0.9601 0.9605 0.9594 [10] P. Tenti, H. K. M. Paredes, F. P. Marafao, P. Mattavelli,
“Accountability and Revenue Metering in Smart Micro-Grids”
λD 0.8043 0.8039 0.8279 0.8278 International Workshop of Applied Measurements for Power Systems
(AMPS), Sept 22-24, 2010, Achen.
[11] S. Fryze, “Wirk-, Blind-,Scheinleistung in Elektrische Stromkreisen
VIII. CONCLUSIONS mit nichtsinusformingen Verlauf von Strom und Spannung”, ETZ,
Bd. 53, pp. 596-599, 625-627, 700-702, 1932.
In this paper the Conservative Power Theory (CPT) is [12] P. Tenti, H. K. M. Paredes, F. P. Marafao, P. Mattavelli,
applied to the problem of load characterization and revenue “Accountability in Smart Microgrids Based on Conservative Power
metering. Theory”, IEEE Trans. on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 60,
no 9, pp. 3058 - 3069, September 2011.