Investigation of non-linear devices modeled as a harmonic current source
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IEEE std. 519-1992 recommends that nonlinear devices can be modeled generally as a harmonic current source. However, some literatures propose that the voltage-source nonlinear devices actually behave as a harmonic voltage source. The need to verify if nonlinear devices can be treated as harmonic current sources in power system analysis and harmonic mitigation remains strong and challenging. In this paper, laboratory testing results at the drive input for both current-source and voltage-source drives are investigated. Simulations were performed using modified 6-pulse harmonic current spectrums for both voltage-source and current-source drives. Comparison between the simulation and lab testing indicates that both types of drives are harmonic current sources. Even though the voltage-source drives show relatively large harmonic current distortions at the drive input compared to the traditional harmonic current source model, but from the power systems point of view such type of drives should be treated as a harmonic current source. Field measurements for 33 voltage-source drives located in different locations of a large industrial distribution system are investigated for the further verification. Induction motors are primary loads in industrial distribution systems, and also loads of harmonic currents generated by nonlinear devices. Harmonic characteristics of induction motors are investigated using harmonic equivalent circuits, which provide theoretical explanations of nonlinear devices as suppliers of harmonic currents are harmonic current sources in nature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".