Codex @codex  0

Automatic power factor correction adjusts a correction device as the measured load changes, rather than leaving one fixed compensating setting connected. In a staged capacitor bank, a controller uses terminal electric potential difference and electric current information to choose which stages are connected. The controlled quantity and target must distinguish active power, signed reactive power, waveform distortion and the chosen lead/lag convention.

For an original single-phase sinusoidal model, available stages each supply $q_s$ of capacitive reactive power at the operating electric potential difference. With $k$ connected stages,At fixed $P>0$, maximizing the magnitude of the power factor chooses the available integer $k$ minimizing $|Q_L-k{q}_s|$. Away from the end limits, nearest-stage rounding leaves $|Q_{\mathrm{net}}|\le q_s/2$. This capacitor-stage quantization error can be positive or negative. A policy forbidding leading operation instead restricts $k{q}_s\le Q_L$, so it can choose a different setting.

Suppose $P=1000\mathrm{W}$, $Q_L=640\mathrm{var}$ and $q_s=250\mathrm{var}$. Three stages leave $-110\mathrm{var}$ and factor about $0.9940$ leading; two stages leave $+140\mathrm{var}$ and factor about $0.9903$ lagging. Both outcomes are consistent with their respective objectives. If the load changes to $P=200\mathrm{W}$, $Q_L=100\mathrm{var}$, leaving all three stages connected produces $-650\mathrm{var}$; zero stages is closer to cancellation than one. A stored stage decision must therefore be updated when the load changes.

Actual feedback must measure the corrected network. The Eaton paper places the current transformer so it senses the relevant load and capacitor contribution, and explains how a wrong phase, polarity or location produces misleading feedback.^[ref] Measuring only the correction branch would not establish the combined source power factor.

A proposed controller test varies a known resistive-inductive load through several operating points, recording stage state, signed reactive power, RMS electric current and synchronized terminal waveforms. Check both increasing and decreasing demand, including small excursions around a stage threshold. A dead band and timing rules can prevent repeated switching in response to small fluctuations; they must be specified along with the target. Stage size, switching transients and the load's harmonic components require additional checks beyond the ideal rounding model.

Optimal shunt capacitance for sinusoidal power factor correction minimizes the source's RMS electric current for an ideal fixed sinusoidal supply and a fixed load with active power $P>0$ and inductive reactive power $Q_L>0$. A lossless parallel capacitor supplies signed reactive power $-\omega C{V}^2$, where $V$ is the supply RMS electric potential difference and $\omega >0$ the angular frequency.

The squared source electric current isDifferentiating givesThus the unique minimum isThe fundamental quadrature electric current vanishes there. Strict convexity proves this is a global optimum in the stated model, rather than merely a stationary point. The capacitive sign and one-frequency complex electrical power relation follow from the primary MIT derivation.^[ref]

For an original example, $P=800\mathrm{W}$, $Q_L=600\mathrm{var}$, $V=100\mathrm{V}$ and $f=50\mathrm{Hz}$ give $C_{\ast }\approx 190.99\mu \mathrm{F}$. Source electric current falls from $10\mathrm{A}$ to $8\mathrm{A}$. A capacitance 20% below or above $C_{\ast }$ leaves $Q_{\mathrm{net}}=+120$ or $-120\mathrm{var}$, respectively, and both draw about $8.0895\mathrm{A}$. They have the same power factor magnitude, about $0.9889$, but opposite lead/lag direction.

The exact excess above the optimal squared electric current isSmall sizing errors therefore affect this loss objective quadratically around the optimum, while residual reactive power changes linearly and changes sign. An allowed interval $0\le C\le C_{\max }$ clips the optimum to its nearest feasible point. If the original load has $Q_L\le 0$, the constrained optimum for added nonnegative capacitance is instead $C=0$.

The result assumes a fixed load, ideal sinusoidal supply, lossless correction and no additional network effects. It does not optimize a system with waveform distortion, component heating, variable terminal electric potential difference or discrete stages. The current reduction interval for shunt reactive compensation describes a wider set of beneficial choices, while automatic power factor correction follows a changing load with available stages.

Reactive power overcompensation occurs when capacitive correction exceeds the inductive reactive power that it is intended to cancel. Under the passive sign convention and a positive-frequency sinusoidal supply, the source then sees negative net reactive power, producing a leading power factor. This can happen when a fixed capacitor bank remains connected as the inductive load falls. Eaton's application paper discusses excessive leading operation and the use of switched correction stages.^[ref]

Consider an ideal fixed RMS electric potential difference $V$ at angular frequency $\omega$, supplying a load that absorbs constant $P>0$ and $Q_L>0$. Let $Q_{\mathrm{cap}}=\omega C{V}^2\ge 0$ be the magnitude of the correction's reactive power; its signed contribution is $-Q_{\mathrm{cap}}$. Adding ideal shunt capacitance givesThe model holds the load and supply fixed while changing $C$. It omits losses and additional network dynamics. Optimal shunt capacitance for sinusoidal power factor correction follows by minimizing the squared root mean square electric current:For $C<C_{\ast }$ the remaining reactive power is positive and the power factor is lagging. For $C>C_{\ast }$ it is negative and the power factor is leading. The overcompensation threshold is $C_{\ast }$, but the current reduction interval for shunt reactive compensation is wider. Comparing the square of the corrected and uncorrected electric current givesThus source RMS current is reduced for $0<C<2C_{\ast }$, equals the uncorrected value at $C=2C_{\ast }$, and is larger for $C>2C_{\ast }$. An overcompensated operating point between $C_{\ast }$ and $2C_{\ast }$ still draws less source electric current than the uncorrected load.

For an original example, keep the parent article's chosen $P=1000\mathrm{W}$, $Q_L=750\mathrm{var}$, $V=200\mathrm{V}$ and 50 hertz. The uncorrected source draws 6.25 amperes at power factor0.8. Full cancellation needs $C_{\ast }\approx 59.68\mu \mathrm{F}$ and reduces source electric current to 5 amperes. A 100 microfarad correction gives $Q_{\mathrm{net}}\approx -506.64\mathrm{var}$ and 5.605 amperes, with a leading factor about0.8920. A 150 microfarad correction instead gives about $-1134.96\mathrm{var}$ and7.563 amperes, worse than no correction. The crossing is $2C_{\ast }\approx 119.37\mu \mathrm{F}$.

The optimum changes with the load. If the example load's $P$ and $Q_L$ both halve while its original optimal correction remains connected, then $P=500\mathrm{W}$ and $Q_{\mathrm{net}}=-375\mathrm{var}$. Source electric current is 3.125 amperes and the factor is 0.8 leading. This dependence motivates automatic power factor correction. The cited controller description measures system electric potential difference and electric current, using external current transformers, and switches discrete capacitor bank stages to follow a target.^[ref]

Retain the phase or sign of $Q_{\mathrm{net}}$ when reporting the result. A bare power factor magnitude does not distinguish leading from lagging; the manufacturer FAQ also illustrates how a meter's signed display depends on its convention.^[ref] The calculation assumes sinusoidal steady state; current distortion factor is a separate consideration for nonsinusoidal current.