Department of Electrical Engineering
ELEC – 321
Power Systems Analysis
Dr. S M Muyeen
Instructors:
Eng. Sijoy Raphael
LAB # 2
[Abdulhadi Bahder], [202210259]
[Khaled Ahmed], [201904192]
[Abdalla Mohamed], [202104982]
Date Performed: 10/02/2025
Date Submitted: 16/02/2025
AY: 2024/2025 Spring 2025
Qatar University
Electrical Engineering Department
ELEC 321 Power Systems Analysis
Lab 2: Power Factor Correction by Shunt Capacitive Compensation of a Medium Transmission Line
1. Objective
The objectives of this experiment are:
a. To connect an inductive load at the receiving end of the given transmission line.
b. To draw the power triangle for the receiving end.
c. To calculate the shunt capacitance required to make the required pf.
d. To apply shunt capacitive power compensation to the transmission line.
2. Theory
2.1 Power Factor Correction
The process of increasing the pf without altering the voltage or current to the original load is known
as power factor correction. The current supplied by the utility company to the consumer will be smaller as the
pf approaches unity. Hence it is the best interest of power utility company to keep the pf to unity as close as
possible. But most utility companies prefer to keep the pf in the range 0.9-0.95 lagging, because of various
reasons.
Most domestic and industrial loads are inductive in nature and operate at low lagging pf. Installing
capacitors in parallel with the inductive loads will supply the much needed leading pf, which improves the
power factor. The end results of power factor correction are improved efficiency and voltage regulation.
2.2 Power Triangle & Calculation of Capacitance
The power triangle is drawn from the apparent power and power factor as shown below.
The apparent power, S = 3VI
The real power, P = S cos
The reactive power, Q = S sin QC
Required reactive power, Q ' = P tan(cos −1 ' ) S
Q
Required capacitive power, QC = Q − Q ' S’
QC φ Q’
Capacitance, C = φ’
2fV 2
P
The power triangle is drawn for the receiving end of transmission line.
3. Equipment List
Equipment Quantity
MV 1420, three-phase model of a 77 kV, 136 km, OH transmission
1
line (Max. voltage = 220 V and max. current = 5 A)
Three-phase induction motor, 220V, 50 Hz, ½ HP 1
MV 1103, three-phase auto-transformer unit 1
Digital three phase power meter 1
MV 1102, three-phase variable load capacitor (10 F /Phase) 1
4. Schematic Diagram & Procedure
1. Connect the circuit as shown.
2. Using autotransformer, apply 220 V (line-line) at the sending end.
3. When the motor picks up the no-load speed, record VR, IR and cos R in Table 1.
4. Using the recorded data, draw the power triangle and calculate the capacitance required to make the
pf 0.7 lagging.
5. Set the load capacitor to the calculated value and close the switch.
6. Simultaneously adjusting the load capacitor and the autotransformer, make VS = 220 V (line-line) and
cos R = 0.7 (lag ) as close as possible.
7. Record new VR, IR and cos R in Table 1.
8. Comment the results obtained before and after power factor correction.
5. Results & Measurements (10%)
Table 1
Before power factor correction After power factor correction
VR IR Q cos R VR IR Q cos R
230 0.75 292 0.3 237 0.37 125 0.59
6. Calculations (10%)
Real power:
𝑃 = √3𝑉𝐼 cos(𝜃) = √3 × 230 × 0.75 × 0.3 = 89.63 𝑊
Apparent power is:
𝑃 89.63
𝑆= = = 298.79 𝑉𝐴
𝑝𝑓 0.3
Power factor angle is:
𝜃 = cos−1 0.3 = 72.54
To find the capacitance value that is needed to correct the power factor we use:
𝑄𝐶
𝐶=
2𝜋𝑓𝑉𝐿𝐿 2
The value of 𝑄𝐶 is:
𝑄𝐶 = 𝑄𝑏𝑒𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒 − 𝑄𝑎𝑓𝑡𝑒𝑟 = 292 − 125 = 167 𝑉𝐴𝑅
167
𝐶= = 10 𝜇𝐹
2𝜋 × 50 × 2302
7. Discussion (50%)
This experiment explored the power factor correction (PFC) in a medium transmission line using
shunt capacitive compensation. The main goal was to understand how capacitive compensation helps
improve power factor (pf) by reducing reactive power, leading to better system efficiency and voltage
regulation. By applying a shunt capacitor, the power factor was improved, and the impact of this correction
was analyzed through measurements. In addition to the experimental findings, this discussion will also
address why utilities do not correct power factor to unity, the limitations of conventional metering, and the
role of modern technologies in power metering.
Although it is technically possible to correct the power factor to unity, utility companies do not aim
for this ideal due to economic and practical reasons. Maintaining a pf of exactly 1.0 requires continuous
adjustments in capacitance, which can be costly and inefficient. Moreover, in real-world applications, loads
are constantly changing, which means a fixed capacitive compensation system may overcorrect the power
factor at times, leading to a leading power factor. This can cause voltage instability and additional system
losses [1].
Additionally, utility companies prefer to keep the power factor within the range of 0.9 - 0.95 lagging.
This provides a good balance between efficiency and cost-effectiveness. If utilities were to aim for unity
power factor, they would need to install dynamic power factor correction devices, such as real-time
capacitor banks or synchronous condensers, which can be expensive and difficult to manage [2].
Traditional metering systems used by utilities primarily measure real power (kW) consumed by customers
and do not consider reactive power (kVAR). This means that consumers are typically billed based on energy
consumption (kWh) alone, without any direct penalty for having a poor power factor [3]. However,
industries that have large inductive loads (such as motors and transformers) cause utilities to supply more
current due to their low power factor, leading to higher transmission losses and unnecessary strain on the
grid.
The drawbacks of conventional metering include a lack of real-time data, as traditional meters record
power consumption over time without providing instant feedback, making it difficult for users to optimize
energy usage [4]. Additionally, many conventional meters measure only real power, without accounting for
reactive power, which prevents customers from monitoring their power factor and can lead to inefficient
energy usage [5]. Furthermore, conventional meters often require manual readings, resulting in potential
delays and inaccuracies in billing [6]. Due to these drawbacks, industries with poor power factors can
operate inefficiently without direct consequences unless special tariffs or penalties are enforced by the
utility.
To overcome these limitations, modern power metering technologies have been introduced. One of the
key advancements is the smart metering system, which allows utilities and consumers to monitor power
usage in real time. These meters provide accurate measurements of real, reactive, and apparent power,
helping to identify and correct power factor issues efficiently [7].
Modern power metering technologies have significantly enhanced energy monitoring and optimization.
Smart meters are advanced devices that measure voltage, current, and power factors while providing real-
time data to both utilities and consumers, enabling better load management and energy optimization [8].
Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) integrates smart meters with communication networks, offering
automated energy usage monitoring and remote control of loads [9]. Additionally, Energy Management
Systems (EMS) assist industries in tracking and optimizing power usage by analyzing power quality
parameters, including power factor [10]. Furthermore, edge computing for smart grids utilizes AI and data
analytics to predict load variations and apply dynamic power factor correction, thereby improving overall
efficiency [11].
These new technologies help utilities reduce transmission losses, ensure accurate billing, and
encourage consumers to maintain a good power factor, ultimately leading to a more efficient and sustainable
power system.
In conclusion, from the experiment and the broader industry analysis, it is evident that power factor
correction is essential for improving the efficiency of transmission lines. However, correcting power factor
to unity is not practical for utilities due to economic and operational challenges. Traditional metering
systems have significant drawbacks, such as failing to measure reactive power and delays in billing, which
impact both utilities and consumers. The introduction of smart meters, AMI, and EMS has significantly
improved power monitoring and control, making power systems more efficient and cost-effective.
8. References (10%)
[1] J. D. Glover, M. S. Sarma, and T. Overbye, Power System Analysis & Design, 6th ed. Cengage
Learning, 2016.
[2] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control, McGraw-Hill, 1994.
[3] A. E. Emanuel, “Power definitions and the physical interpretation of power components in electrical
systems,” IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 79–88, 1996.
[4] U.S. Department of Energy, “Smart Grid Investment Grant Program: Progress Report,” 2017. [Online].
Available: https://www.energy.gov/
[5] IBM, “What are smart meters?” [Online]. Available: https://www.ibm.com/topics/smart-meter
[6] IEEE Std 519-2014, “IEEE Recommended Practices and Requirements for Harmonic Control in Electric
Power Systems.”
[7] M. H. J. Bollen and I. Gu, Signal Processing of Power Quality Disturbances, Wiley-IEEE Press, 2006.
[8] H. Wan, J. Tang, and G. Chen, "Smart meter deployment in China: Progress and challenges," IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 2132–2138, 2014.
[9] F. Benzi, N. Anglani, E. Bassi, and L. Frosini, “Electricity smart meters interfacing the households,”
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 58, no. 10, pp. 4487–4494, 2011.
[10] A. von Meier, Electric Power Systems: A Conceptual Introduction, Wiley-IEEE Press, 2006.
[11] D. Alahakoon and X. Yu, “Smart electricity meter data intelligence for future energy systems: A
survey,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 425–436, 2016.
[12] A. Beagles, S. Beck, L. Cross, A. Garrard and J. Rowson, "Guidance for Writing Lab Reports,"
University of Sheffield
