Multi-Criteria Assessment of Residential Light Bulbs ...€¦ · Multi-Criteria Assessment of Residential Light Bulbs Available on the Australian Market Muhammad Usman This thesis

School of Engineering and Information Technology

Multi-Criteria Assessment of Residential Light Bulbs

Available on the Australian Market

Muhammad Usman

This thesis is presented for the Degree of

Master of Electrical Engineering

of

Murdoch University

December 2017

i

Declaration

I declare that this thesis is my own account of my research and contains as its

main content work, which has not previously been submitted for a degree at any

tertiary education institution.

____________________

Muhammad Usman

December 2017

ii

Abstract

Utilisation of light emitting diodes and compact fluorescent lamps instead of

the traditional incandescent ones in residential applications are strongly recommended

by the Australian Building Codes, as these are very attractive for households because

of their higher energy efficiences. However, they are mostly non-linear loads, injecting

harmonic currents and drawing reactive power, because of the ballast and power

electronic circuits. Although they are attractive because of their higher energy and

luminous efficiencies, the accumulated impact of thousands of them can be adverse on

maintaining power quality and reduction of losses in a grid as it may lead to

maloperation of circuit breakers, aging of transformers, unnecessary operation of

protective relays, and deterioration/failure of capacitors, utilised for power factor

correction, etc. Due to an increase in the emergence of such lamps, a detailed study of

these lamps from different brands and with different ratings is required to identify the

potential adverse effects. Through this research, the currently available residential

lamps on the Australian market are evaluated from utility and consumer-oriented

perspectives. First, they are juxtaposed from consumer-oriented perspectives such as

cost, illumination and lifespan on the basis of data provided on their packaging, as

significant criteria for the consumers when purchasing lamps. Then, using detailed

laboratory measurements, they are compared from utility-oriented or power quality

perspectives such as current harmonics and total harmonic distortion, as well as other

aspects such as their fundamental and non-fundamental components of apparent power

iii

consumption, stabilisation time, deviation of actual power consumption from rated

power and power factor, which are important for the utilities. The captured data is then

analysed in MATLAB® to conduct a multi-criteria assessment of lamps. The

compliance of the studied lamps with the relevant standards is also evaluated where

applicable.

iv

Table of Contents

Declaration ................................................................................................................... i

Abstract .................................................................................................................. ii

Table of Contents ........................................................................................................ iv

List of Figures ............................................................................................................. vi

List of Tables ........................................................................................................ viiviii

List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................. iix

Introduction .............................................................................................. 1

Lighting Loads .................................................................................................... 2

Current Harmonics and THD .............................................................................. 3

Problems Faced by Utilities and Domestic Consumers ...................................... 4

Aims and objectives of the Thesis ...................................................................... 5

Structure of the Thesis ........................................................................................ 6

Literature Review ..................................................................................... 8

Australian Scenario ............................................................................................. 8

International Scenario ......................................................................................... 9

Increase of Energy Saving Lamps in Residential Applications ........................ 12

Characteristics of Different Types of Lamps .................................................... 13

Incandescent/Halogen Lamps ................................................................ 14

LEDs ...................................................................................................... 14

CFLs ....................................................................................................... 16

Utility-oriented Criteria .......................................................................... 19

Methodology and Experimental Setup .............................................................. 19

Considered Utility-oriented Assessment Criteria ............................................. 21

Studies and Analysis Results ............................................................................ 23

Harmonic Injection ................................................................................ 23

Current THD .......................................................................................... 27

v

Power Consumption .............................................................................. 29

Stabilisation Time of Lamps.................................................................. 32

Power Factor .......................................................................................... 34

Observed Relationship between Power Factor and Current THD ......... 35

Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 36

Consumer-oriented Criteria.................................................................... 39

Studies and Analysis Results ............................................................................ 40

Luminous Efficacy ................................................................................ 40

Purchasing Cost ..................................................................................... 44

Lifespan ................................................................................................. 46

Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 50

Multi-criteria Assessment (MCA) ......................................................... 53

Utility-oriented MCA ....................................................................................... 54

Consumer-oriented MCA ................................................................................. 55

MCA of Different Brands of LEDs and CFLs ................................................. 57

Comprehensive MCA ....................................................................................... 57

Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 59

Conclusions and Recommendations ...................................................... 62

Conclusions ...................................................................................................... 62

Recommendations ............................................................................................ 65

Appendix ................................................................................................................ 66

References ................................................................................................................ 69

Publications Arising from this Thesis ........................................................................ 74

vi

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 Share of lighting and non-lighting load of electricity demand. .................. 2

Figure 1.2 Typical (a) incandescent light bulb, (b) CFLs, (c) LED. ............................ 2

Figure 1.3 Active power consumption of sample LED, CFL and halogen lamps. ...... 6

Figure 2.1 Mandatory phaseout of incandescent lighting around the world. ............. 10

Figure 2.2 Power quality problems observed by the American end-users. ................ 11

Figure 2.3 Impacted equipment by power quality issues across various sectors. ...... 12

Figure 2.4 Trend in the number and cost of residential LEDs. .................................. 12

Figure 2.5 Residential sector light bulb purchases. .................................................... 13

Figure 2.6 Share of LEDs versus other types of lamps for residential lighting. ........ 13

Figure 2.7 Schematic of the typical electronic ballast circuit for LEDs. ................... 15

Figure 2.8 Schematic of the typical electronic ballast circuit for CFLs. .................... 17

Figure 2.9 Current drawn by a halogen lamp, (b) Current drawn by a CFL, (c) Current

drawn by an LED, (d) The supply source voltage for (a), (b), and (c). ... 18

Figure 3.1 The experimental setup. ............................................................................ 20

Figure 3.2 Current harmonics injected from the analysed (a and b) halogen lamps and

their percentage of average harmonic levels, (c) LEDs and CFLs. ......... 24

Figure 3.3 Comparison of maximum values of Current harmonics injected from the

analysed LEDs and CFLs. ....................................................................... 25

Figure 3.4 Comparison of minimum values of Current harmonics injected from the

analysed LEDs and CFLs ........................................................................ 26

Figure 3.5 Current THD of (a) all analysed CFLs and LEDs, (b) different brands of

CFLs, (c) different brands of LEDs. ........................................................ 28

Figure 3.6 Ratio of the average consumed power at the fundamental frequency and

other frequencies versus the total apparent power (S1/S and SN/S) in

percentage for the analysed LEDs and CFLs. ......................................... 30

vii

Figure 3.7 Active power consumption deviation of lamps from their rated powers: (a)

different lamp types, (b) Halogen lamps, (c) CFL lamps, (d) LED lamps

................................................................................................................. 31

Figure 3.8 Active power stabilisation time of (a) LEDs, (b) CFLs, (c) different LED

brands, (d) different CFL brands. ............................................................ 33

Figure 3.9 Power factor of (a) LEDs and CFLs, (b) different CFLs brands, (c) different

LED brands. ............................................................................................ 35

Figure 4.1 Comparison of lm/W of different: (a) types of lamps, (b) brands of Halogen

lamps, (c) brands of CFLs, (d) brands of LEDs ...................................... 42

Figure 4.2 Variations of warm white and cool daylight lamps. ................................. 44

Figure 4.3 Comparison of ¢/W of different: (a) types of lamps, (b) brands of halogen

lamps, (c) brands of CFLs, (d) brands of LEDs. ..................................... 47

Figure 4.4 Comparison of lifespan of different: (a) types of lamps, (b) brands of

halogen lamps, (c) brands of CFLs, (d) brands of LEDs. ....................... 49

Figure 5.1 Utility-oriented MCA of all studied (a) LEDs, (b) CFLs, (c) halogen lamps.

................................................................................................................. 55

Figure 5.2 Consumer-oriented MCA of all studied (a) LEDs, (b) CFLs, (c) halogen

lamps. ...................................................................................................... 56

Figure 5.3 MCA of (a) Philips CFLs, (b) Osram CFLs, (c) Philips LEDs and (d) Osram

LEDs ....................................................................................................... 58

Figure 5.4 MCA of all studied (a) LEDs, (b) CFLs, (c) halogen lamps. ................... 59

viii

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Current THD of devices under clean and polluted voltage conditions. ....... 3

Table 3.1 List of available residential lightings lamps on the Australian market

(analysed in this research). ...................................................................... 20

Table 3.2 Maximum harmonic current injection limit for light bulbs, categorised based

on their power consumption ([44-46]). ................................................... 22

Table 3.3 Maximum, Minimum and average values of current THD of analysed LEDs

and CFLs. ................................................................................................ 27

Table 3.4 Deviation of active power consumption from rated power of LEDs, CFLs

and halogen lamps from different perspectives ....................................... 32

Table 3.5 Maximum, Minimum and average values of power factor of analysed LEDs

and CFLs. ................................................................................................ 34

Table 3.6 Comparison of current THD and power factor for lamps with the same rated

power. ...................................................................................................... 38

Table 4.1 lm/W Comparison of LEDs, CFLs and halogen lamps from different

perspectives. ............................................................................................ 43

Table 4.2 ¢/W Comparison of LEDs, CFLs and halogen lamps from different

perspectives. ............................................................................................ 46

Table 4.3 Lifespan Comparison of LEDs, CFLs and halogen lamps from different

perspectives. ............................................................................................ 50

ix

List of Abbreviations

BTU British Thermal Unit

CFL Compact Fluorescent Lamp

LED Light Emitting Diode

MCA Multi-criteria Assessment

PF Power Factor

RoHS Restriction of Hazardous Substances

SN Non-Fundamental Apparent Power

S1 Fundamental Apparent Power

S Total Apparent Power

THD Total Harmonic Distortion

Introduction

Different types of electrical appliances are used in residential premises; among

which lighting loads are the fundamental and unavoidable ones. According to [1], 20%

of the whole electricity demand comprises of lighting load (see Figure 1.1). There are

many kinds of lighting sources available in residential applications. Conventionally,

incandescent light bulbs were the main source of lighting. However, with the

technology advancement, new lighting techniques have emerged such as the compact

fluorescent lamps (CFLs), which are also called as energy saving lamps. On top of

them, nowadays, light emitting diodes (LEDs) are the latest technology used for

lighting, especially in residential applications. It is possible to understand the

importance of this technology when the Nobel Committee for Physics awarded the

Nobel Prize in 1990 to three scientists for their invention of ‘efficient blue LEDs’ [2].

Today, CFLs and LEDs become a very good choice as energy-efficient lamps due to

their better illumination efficiency as compared to the incandescent light bulbs. These

different types of light sources are shown in Figure 1.2.

Chapter 1. Introduction

2

Figure 1.1 Share of lighting and non-lighting load of electricity demand.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 1.2 Typical (a) incandescent light bulb, (b) CFLs, (c) LED.

Lighting Loads

Although LEDs and CFLs bring significant savings in energy efficiency and its

equivalent costs, there are some issues associated with the use of CFLs and LEDs.

They are generally considered as non-linear loads versus incandescent lamps, which

are linear. Other examples of these power electronics-based non-linear loads include

variable speed drives, controlled rectifiers, cyclo-converters, arc furnaces and personal

computers due to the use of switched mode power supplies, etc. These non-linear loads

are being used in many residential, commercial and industrial applications, and hence,

their accumulated adverse impact on the quality of the power system may be

significant. In case of LEDs and CFLs, a compact ac-dc converter supplies a dc current

to LEDs and CFLs, which introduces non-linearity to the system. This implies that the


3

current drawn by these lamps do not have a sinusoidal waveform, even if they are

supplied with a sinusoidal voltage [3-4]. The study in [5] shows that these lamps

produce higher amounts of harmonic currents when the supply voltage is also

distorted. Table 1.1 shows harmonic currents distortions of different household

devices under clean (sinusoidal) and distorted (6%) supply voltage conditions.

Table 1.1 Current THD of devices under clean and polluted voltage conditions.

Device

Total current harmonic distortion with respect to the

total rms current drawn by the device

Under a voltage with a THD

of zero

Under a voltage with a

THD of 6%

TV 48% 55%

Personal Computer 87% 89%

Refrigerator 10% 18%

(CFL 72% 79%

Current Harmonics and THD

Harmonics are defined as the sinusoidal voltages or current that are integer

multiples of fundamental frequency. The deviation of waveform from perfect sinusoid

is usually expressed in terms of Total Harmonic Distortion (THD). For current

harmonics, the THD is defined from

𝑇𝐻𝐷𝑖 = √∑ (𝐼ℎ𝐼1)2ℎ=𝐻

ℎ=2

(1.1)

while for voltage harmonics, the THD is calculated from


4

𝑇𝐻𝐷𝑣 = √∑ (𝑉ℎ𝑉1)2ℎ=𝐻

ℎ=2

(1.2)

According to [5], almost 70% of power quality disturbances are originated at

customers’ premises while 30% is generated in the network side. It is interesting to

mention that, harmonics may not create a problem for own facility. A customer may

be generating harmonics without any adverse effects on their own equipment.

However, harmonics can be transmitted from one facility to another nearby facility

through utility’s equipment especially if they share a common transformer. This means

harmonics generated in one facility can stress utility’s equipment or can cause

problems in some other facility [6].

As reducing THD is very difficult once the system is polluted with higher current

harmonics, it is more economical to install those LEDs and CFLs that have lower

levels of harmonic injection [7]. As an example, [8] reduces the current THD by

modifying the valley-filled circuits of the lamps, which also increases their power

factor significantly (to approximately 0.98). As already mentioned above, the cost of

energy saving lamps is quite higher than the incandescent lamps. To meet the

challenges of manufacturing lamps with low cost and low harmonic emissions, some

solid state-based ballast circuits may also be used [9].

Problems Faced by Utilities and Domestic Consumers

Even though each LED or CFL is a small load of a few Watts, their accumulated

impact may not be negligible on the distribution networks supplying the residential

premises [10]. Thus, problems can stem from the flow of non-active energy caused by

harmonic currents and low power factor [11-12]. According to [13-14], this may lead

to voltage distortions, increased power losses, overloaded neutrals, transformers’


5

heating and aging, unnecessary operation of protective relays, mal-operation of circuit

breakers, and deterioration/failure of power factor correction capacitors. These are

some of the problems faced by utilities.

On the other hand, domestic customers may also face many problems. They may

complain about burning and failing of household appliances like refrigerators, TVs, air

conditioners, etc. As the use of discharge lamps like LEDs and CFLs is increasing day

by day, their adverse impact on the distribution networks needs to be evaluated.

Aims and objectives of the Thesis

The main aims and objectives of this research are:

To analyse the majority of advanced and energy-efficient lighting

techniques used in residential applications (i.e., CFLs, LEDs, and

Halogen lamps) available on the Australian market of different brands

and ratings.

To assess these lamps against utility-oriented criteria.

To assess these lamps against consumer-oriented criteria.

To present a Multi-Criteria Assessment (MCA)

From the utility perspective, the research provides a detailed comparison

between different types of lamps, manufactured by different companies and available

in different ratings, from power quality aspects including injected current harmonics

and THD, as well as the active power consumption and power factor. A comparison

of fundamental apparent power and non-fundamental apparent power for the lamps is

also included.

From the consumer perspective, the lamps are compared against their nominal

luminous efficacy, cost and lifespan. These are very important parameters from


6

customers’ side and provided on their packaging by the manufacturers. Then, through

experimental studies and measurements, it will be determined whether different types

of light sources consume exactly the same active power as mentioned on their

packaging. Different types of lamps take different time to stabilise after turning on.

For example, CFLs take comparatively larger time due to heating of filaments. This is

illustrated in Figure 1.3. Therefore, their stabilisation time is also analysed and

compared.

Figure 1.3 Active power consumption of sample LED, CFL and halogen lamps.

Finally, the results of different utility and consumer-oriented criteria will be

presented in the form of a MCA using a radar chart. Normalised values of different

parameters are used for these MCAs. With the help of these MCAs, it will be very easy

to compare different types of light sources from different perspectives. As these MCA

graphs are very good representation of information, they will also give a comparison

of different brands and ratings of residential light bulbs available in the Australian

market.

Structure of the Thesis

This thesis is organised in six chapters: Chapter 1 gives an introduction about

the research topic and outlines its aim and objective. It also discusses different types


7

of residential lighting available in Australian markets. Chapter 2 presents the

literature review along with the need and the justification for this research. It covers

Australian and international scenario in context of power quality and energy savings.

Characteristics of lighting are also discussed in this chapter. Chapter 3 covers

different aspects of utility-oriented criteria such as injected current harmonics, THD

and power factor. Active power consumption, fundamental, and non-fundamental

apparent power are discussed and analysed in this chapter. The used experimental

methodology and the circuits of CFLs, LEDs and incandescent lamps are discussed to

give an idea about their operational principals. Chapter 4 discusses the consumer-

oriented criteria. The lamps are juxtaposed against different criteria, which are

important from consumer perspective. These criteria include nominal luminous

efficacy, cost and lifespan. Chapter 5 presents an overall analysis and evaluation of

all the studied lamps in the form of a MCA. This analysis is shown in the form of a

radar chart and the values used are normalised values in order to compare all the

studied lamps. Finally, in chapter 6, the main findings drawn from this research are

summarised. In addition, some recommendations for future research are given at the

end.

Literature Review

A comprehensive literature review is carried out before the commencement of

experimental work, which has been summarised below.The purpose of this literature

review is to establish a theoretical framework for the subject area, define key terms

and identify models and case studies.

Australian Scenario

There is a significant increase in the number of residential premises over the last

few years in Australia. According to [15], the Housing Industry of Australia has

reported that 90 to 120 thousand dwellings have been built every year in Australia

since 2010. In some capital cities such as Sydney and Perth, over 30 thousand houses

have been constructed in one year [16-17]. In addition, the average size of a new

Australian house has increased by over 40% from 162.2 to 227.6 square meters

between 1984 and 2003, which becomes almost 10% bigger than that in the United

States of America.

Considering the above factors, the lighting demand illustrates a growing trend in

the Australian residential electricity sector [18-19]. Before 2011, Australian houses

could consume up to 25 Watts electricity per square meter (W/sqm) of their house

floor space [20]. Conventionally, incandescent light bulbs were the main source of

lighting but not very efficient as they have only 16 lumens per Watt (lm/W) on average

Chapter 2. Literature Review

9

and 95% of the consumed energy was wasted as heat [21]. However, with the

development of a new regulation on using energy-efficient lighting systems in

residential premises by the Building Code of Australia [20], this has been reduced to

5 W/sqm for indoors, 4W/sqm for outdoors, and 3W/sqm for garages. This new

Building Code has significantly pushed the new house builders and those renovating

(over 50% of a house) for using energy-efficient lamps which have a minimum of 27

lm/W such as CFLs and LEDs that have an average of 60 and 150 lm/W respectively

[21-23].

To save energy and environment by adapting different energy saving lighting

techniques like CFLs and LEDs instead of incandescent lamps, governments can play

an important role through legislation and other regulations. Ref. [24] provides useful

information regarding energy efficiency and environment conservation.

Based on [25-26], 7% of the total residential electricity demand in Australia

comprises of the lighting demand. As the lighting demand is increasing, the relevant

energy consumption in Australian residential lighting sector is projected to

approximately rise to 25 quadrillion joules of energy by 2020 [27].

International Scenario

In a similar way, many countries in the world have already phased out the use of

incandescent light bulbs (see Figure 2.1 [2]) by adopting regulations on banning their

production, import, and sale for general lighting purposes [28]. As an example,

incandescent light bulbs of 40 W and above are banned across the United States of

America since 2014 by which the nation’s electricity consumption has reduced almost

$10 billion every year (equal to the saving from 30 power plants across the country)

[29]. Following these bans, CFLs and LEDs have gained a large acceptance and


10

interest among the people, even though their costs are slightly higher. These bans are

beneficial to both the state and common people in the form of reduced electricity bills,

reducing the burden over their pockets and adding to their prosperity.

Figure 2.1 Mandatory phaseout of incandescent lighting around the world.

In a similar trend, it is anticipated in [30] that by 2035, LEDs will hold 86% of

lighting installations in the United States of America, compared to 6% in 2015. This

will lead to an annual savings of 1.14 quadrillion joules of energy in 2035 (almost

equal to the total annual energy consumed by 45 million homes today). It is also

projected that the total savings by replacing classic incandescent by LEDs between

2015 and 2035 are equal to $140 billion. According to [31], the International Energy

Agency has estimated that changing traditional incandescent/halogen lamps to CFLs

and LEDs would cut the world’s electricity demand by 18%. Moreover, the increasing

use of LEDs and CFLs can be very helpful not only to save power but also to solve

global problems such as greenhouse gas emissions in developed countries by 25-40%

in 2020 and by 50-85% in 2050 [32]. Hence, from above analysis, it becomes very


11

important to adopt new lighting techniques to not only save power but also save the

environment. It is in the interest of both governments and general public.

As mentioned in [5], different power quality related problems experienced by

American customers were found, as depicted in Figure 2.2. In a power quality survey

conducted across eight European countries, it is discovered that harmonics, reliability,

voltage dip along with the electromagnetic compatibility are respectively the key

problems. In another power quality campaign conducted in Europe, it is presented that

the portion of the impact of power quality-centred issues are because of transients and

surges (29%), voltage dips (23.6%), short and long interruptions (respectively 18.8 and

10.7%) and harmonics (5.4%) while other power quality issues consist only 10.7% [5].

Figure 2.2 Power quality problems observed by the American end-users.

As mentioned in [5], a survey conducted in EU25 countries revealed the devices

affected by PQ related problems are as mentioned in Figure 2.3.


12

Figure 2.3 Impacted equipment by power quality issues across various sectors.

Increase of Energy Saving Lamps in Residential Applications

A lot of research is going on to meet the challenge of cost of the energy saving

lamps. Because of more investment and research in this field, there is a dramatic

increase in the use of LEDs and reduction in their cost, as illustrated in Figure 2.4 [2].

Figure 2.4 Trend in the number and cost of residential LEDs.

With the advancement in technology, and increasing awareness of consumers for using

energy-efficient lamps, on top of ongoing new governmental incentives, regulations


13

and standards, these types of lamps are taking a larger share of the market (see Figure

2.5) [33]. Another similar research [2] illustrates the rising share of latest lighting

technique LED’s as compared to the other available lamp for residential lighting below

in Figure 2.6.

Figure 2.5 Residential sector light bulb purchases.

Figure 2.6 Share of LEDs versus other types of lamps for residential lighting.

Characteristics of Different Types of Lamps

Three main types of residential lighting are used in Australia which are

conventional incandescent/halogen lamps, CFLs and LEDs. They have different


14

characetristics and hence their advantages and disadvantages, which are summarised

below:

Incandescent/Halogen Lamps

Incandescent lamps have a tungsten filament covered by halogen gas in the bulb.

When an ac voltage is applied to the lamp terminals, the filament begins to radiate

light in which its density depends on the level of current passing through it [34].

The main advantage of these lamps is that they are linear loads with no adverse

effect on power quality of their supply system. They turn on instantly and comply with

the Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS), as they do not have toxic mercury.

On the other hand, the main disadvantage of these lamps is that they have very small

efficiency because of large dissipation of energy in the form of heat (i.e., 95% heat)

[29]. They emit a heat of 85 btu/hour, have a life span of only 1,200 hours and emit

4,500 pounds/year of CO2 [35].

LEDs

LEDs are classified as solid-state lamps that have a few to 150 lm/W and their

colour-rendering index is about 65-90 which comparable to natural light [36-37]. Fig.

2.7 depicts a block diagram of typical low wattage LED ballast and illustrates the input

ac voltage, a filter that eliminates the produced switching noise, a rectifier along with

its voltage regulating capacitor, a dc-dc converter operating under PWM modulation

and as a constant current source, as well as an array of LEDs. LEDs are based on diodes

that emit light when a dc voltage is applied; thus, they require a constant current source

from a low dc voltage source. Thereby, they are equipped with a very small-scale dc-

dc converter to regulate the voltage and current fed to the LED. When a dc voltage is

imposed across LEDs, electrons will recombine with electron holes within the device


15

and thereby discharge energy as photons. Various types of converters such as buck,

boost, flyback and resonant converters are normally used in LED circuits [38].

An LED observes a voltage drop at the intended operating current. Thereby,

Ohm and Kirchhoff's circuit laws can be employed to determine the suitable resistance

level to realise the preferred current. This can be calculated by dividing the LED’s

voltage drop by the preferred current. Note that no resistor is required when the input

voltage becomes the same as the LED's voltage drop. The input current can be varied

by the use of a triac-based dimmer circuit to vary the light output. Circuit complexity,

step-down capability and line side converter spectral performance are the main

considerations in designing the ballasts of LEDs [39].

The main advantage of these lamps is that they have energy efficiency of 3 to 4

times more than halogen lamps [29]. They have multicolour features and their light

intensity can be controlled using a dimmer. They can be easily switched on and off at

high frequencies. In addition, they are shock-resistant, having very long lifetime (may

reach up to 50,000 hours) [35]. In addition, they are small in size and also RoHS

compliant, as they do not have toxic mercury. LEDs emit only 451 pounds/year of CO2

and a heat of 3.4 btu/hour [35]. On the other hand, the main disadvantage of these

lamps is that, they have non-linear voltage-current characteristic and low power factor

and inject harmonics.

Figure 2.7 Schematic of the typical electronic ballast circuit for LEDs.


16

CFLs

On the other hand, CFLs have a colour-rendering index of more than 75 [40].

Fig. 2.8 depicts a block diagram of a typical CFL ballast. It includes the ac line input

voltage, a filter for eliminating the produced switching noises, a rectifier along with a

voltage regulating capacitor, a controller board as well as a half bridge dc to ac

converter in addition to an LC resonance circuit for turning on the lamp. The lamp is

resistive, but the electronic ballast connected between ac voltage and the lamp for

controlling the lamp current is a capacitive load [41]. The CFL ballast circuit is a

single-phase capacitor-filtered uncontrolled ac/dc converter [31]. At the pre-ignition

stage, the resonant circuit presents a large Q-factor; however, after ignition its Q-factor

decreases. The resonant converter tends to stabilize lamp current (and light produced)

over a range of input voltages, standard CFLs do not respond well in dimming

applications and will experience a shorter lifespan and sometimes catastrophic failure.

Special electronic ballasts (integrated or separate) are required for dimming service.

For ignition, the CFL requires a large voltage and a current that can preheat the

CFL filaments. Its electronic ballast circuit first converts the ac input voltage to a dc

voltage through a full-wave rectifier, which is then converted to an ac square-wave

voltage, which becomes a sinusoidal current and voltage using a resonant tank circuit

(see Figure 2.8). When the CFL is turned on, the lamp filaments are preheated, voltage

and current increase and frequency decrease. The frequency decreases continuously

until the voltage exceeds the CFL ignition threshold voltage and the lamp turns on.

Once the lamp is turned on, the ac voltage, current, and frequency come to the normal

level [41-42]. The CFL’s non-linear current can be reduced by some compensation

techniques such as the method of [43].

The main advantage of these lamps is that they are energy-efficient lamps having


17

an energy efficiency of 1.75 times more than halogen lamps [29]. Available in soft,

warm and bright white hues, they have a life span of 8,000 hours, emit only 1,051

pounds/year of CO2 and a heat of 30 btu/hour [35]. Their light intensity can be

controlled by a dimmer. On the other hand, the main disadvantage of these lamps is

that they are not RoHS compliant as they contain toxic mercury, have non-linear

voltage-current characteristic and low power factor because of their voltage-current

characteristic. They inject harmonics into the supply system due to the switching

devices involved and take a few moments to heat up and reach full brightness.

Figure 2.8 Schematic of the typical electronic ballast circuit for CFLs.

These lamps, due to their nature, draw currents with different shapes. The current

drawn by a halogen one is pure sinusoidal (see Figure 2.9a) while the current drawn

by CFLs and LEDs are distorted (see Figure 2.9 b-c) in the presence of a sinusoidal

voltage (see Figure 2.9d).

(a)


18

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 2.9 Current drawn by a halogen lamp, (b) Current drawn by a CFL, (c)

Current drawn by an LED, (d) The supply source voltage for (a), (b), and (c).

Utility-oriented Criteria

The residential sector lighting lamps, sold on the Australian market, can be

classified under the main three categories of LEDs, CFLs, and Halogen lamps. In this

research, initially, a detailed list of all residential lightings sold on the Australian

market was prepared from the major distributors and supermarkets (i.e., Bunnings

Warehouse®, as well as Coles® and Woolworths® supermarkets) including their online

stores, and they were purchased. This includes 34 LEDs, 18 CFLs, and 21 halogen

lamps of different brands, with different ratings and light colours (warm white and

cool daylight). Table 3.1 lists the details of these lamps.

Methodology and Experimental Setup

The following equipment and software are used in this research to record the

power, voltage and current harmonic spectra of the purchased lamps:

Fluke 435 series II with firmware version 5 power quality analyser,

Fluke Power Log 430-II software (Version 5.2),

Fluke i5S current clamps, and

A personal computer for data acquisition and analysis

while the experimental setup is shown in Figure 3.1.

Chapter 3. Utility-oriented Criteria

20

Table 3.1 List of available residential lightings lamps on the Australian market

(analysed in this research).

Brand LEDs CFLS Halogen lamps

Brilliant 1 3

Click 3

Coles 1 2 3

Crompton 1

HPM 1

Mirabella 3 3

Nelson 2

Olsent 2 2 2

Osram warm white 7 2 5

cool daylight 6

Philips

warm white 4 5 3

cool daylight 3 6

Classic Design 3

Total 34 18 21

Figure 3.1 The experimental setup.


21

All measurements have been recorded when the power consumption of the lamps

have been stabilised (i.e., 10 minutes after turning on the lamps). The data was

recorded at one-second intervals, and the measurements were taken for a period of ten

minutes for each lamp so that the lamp will be at the stable operation mode. The

captured data is then analysed in MATLAB® based on different perspectives including

harmonic current injection, THD, power factor, active power consumption, and

stabilisation time, fundamental and non-fundamental component of the apparent

power, and then compared against each other to yield a better understanding of their

characteristics. The results are plotted as boxplot which illustrate the maximum,

minimum and average values of measurements.

Considered Utility-oriented Assessment Criteria

The considered utility-oriented aspects are mainly the power quality and non-

active power. Power quality is an important factor in assessing the quality of electricity

supplied to customers as it is directly related to the cause of mal-operation and

malfunction of utility and customers’ equipment. Utilities have reports of domestic

customers complaining about the burning and failing of their household devices such

as refrigerators, TVs, and air conditioners due to the poor quality of their supplied

power. The utilities may also be disadvantaged due to the increased power losses in

lines and distribution transformers. As is evident from Figure 2.9b-c, CFLs and LEDs

draw distorted currents, which can be quantified as harmonic current injection

magnitudes or THD. Current harmonics and THD are classified under power quality

and altogether stand for 22% of the observed power quality problems for American

customers according to [5] (see Figure 2.2). This research aims to assess and quantify

these utility-oriented criteria for the majority of lightings sold on the Australian market


22

nowadays. It also aims to validate the compliance of the power quality criteria with

the limits specified in the standard IEC61000-3-2: Electromagnetic compatibility-

Limits for harmonic current emissions (equipment input current less than 16 ampere

per phase) [44] and its equivalent Australian/New Zealand standard (AS/NZS61000-

3-2) [45] and European standard (EN61000-3-2) [46]. According to these standards,

the harmonic current limits are categorised based on the power consumption of that

equipment (i.e., light bulbs in this research) as given in Table 3.2. Alternatively, based

on [44], the 3rd and 5th harmonic currents should not exceed 86 and 61% of the

fundamental, respectively.

Table 3.2 Maximum harmonic current injection limit for light bulbs, categorised

based on their power consumption ([44-46]).

Harmonic Order Maximum Harmonic

% of the fundamental component mA/W

2 2

3 30 power factor 3.4

5 10 1.9

7 7 1

9 5 0.5

11 3 0.35

Between 13 and 39 3 3.85 harmonic order

Another interesting technical criterion, which is investigated in this research, is

the comparison of the ratio of the fundamental and non-fundamental components of

the apparent power for different kinds of lamps. Assuming, S and S1 respectively as

the total apparent power of the lamp and its fundamental component (at 50 Hz), SN is

the non-fundamental component of the apparent power, expressed as [11].


23

𝑆N = √𝑆2 − 𝑆12 (3.1)

The other interesting assessed technical criterion is the active power

consumption of each light bulb and its deviation from the rated power given on the

packaging. The research also aims to determine the observed true power factor, based

on [11], that these light bulbs impose to their power system, which directly increases

the level of reactive current and harmonics drawn from the residential feeder. The

research later targets to determine and analyse the turning on time of these lamps and

their light stabilisation time (also referred to as light warming time).

Studies and Analysis Results

This section analyses the potential power quality issues, as well as apparent

power and power factor, in addition to the power consumption for the selected lamps.

Harmonic Injection

The experimental results show that halogen lamps have a negligible harmonic

injection, as seen from Figure 3.2a. In this figure, the variations of each harmonic for

the analysed halogen lamps is illustrated using a box plot which illustrates the

maximum, minimum, average and distribution of the measurements for that harmonic

level. In addition, the upper and lower limits of all measurements are further plotted.

Further analysis reveals that these types of lamps have higher components in

harmonics 5, 7 and 9, which consist 71% of all the injected harmonics (see Figure

3.2b).


24

Figure 3.2 Current harmonics injected from the analysed (a and b) halogen lamps

and their percentage of average harmonic levels, (c) LEDs and CFLs.


25

The experimental results also show that LEDs and CFLs have a much larger

current harmonic injection as compared to halogen lamps. Figure 3.2c illustrates the

variations of the measurements of each harmonic component of LEDs and CFLs. From

this figure, it can be seen that the average of each harmonic order injected by LEDs is

larger than that of CFLs; however, this difference does not exceed by 16.35% for any

harmonic order (which is seen for the 13th harmonic). This figure also shows that the

observed minimum harmonic values for LEDs are much lower than those of CFLs (3

LEDs which are 10W Osram, 6W Mirabella and 5W HPM have lower harmonic values

than CFLs).

The experiments validate the current harmonics injected by all analysed LEDs

and CFLs except one (i.e., the 10W Osram LED) are much above or slightly above the

acceptable limits of Table 3.2 (standards of [44-46]). Referring to the alternative

technique given in [44], the 3rd current harmonic generated by all LEDs and CFLs is

less than the 86% limit. The 5th current harmonic generated by almost 40% of LEDs

and 100% of all CFLs is less than the 61% limit.

Figure 3.3 Comparison of maximum values of Current harmonics injected from the

analysed LEDs and CFLs.


26

Figure 3.3 illustrates the maximum values of current harmonics injected from

analysed LEDs and CFLs. From this figure, it can be observed that maximum

harmonic values of LEDs are higher for all orders of Harmonics as compared to CFLs

Similarly, Figure 3.4 illustrates the minimum values of current harmonics

injected from analysed LEDs and CFLs. From this figure, it is shown that minimum

harmonic values of LEDs are lower for all orders of Harmonics as compared to CFLs.

This is true not only for a single LED (Osram 10W) but few more LEDs (HPM 5W

and Mirabella 6W). It suggests that some LEDs manufacturers are using some built-in

filtering techniques to reduce/cancel harmonic emissions.

Figure 3.4 Comparison of minimum values of Current harmonics injected from

the analysed LEDs and CFLs

Therefore, it is obvious that overall harmonic emissions from LEDs are not very

high as compared to CFLs. Furthermore, by using some filtering techniques, harmonic

emissions and ultimately the THD can be controlled very well hence making LEDs a

very good choice for power saving as well as causing less pollution to the power

supply.


27

Current THD

The experimental results show that as the halogen lamps behave as linear loads

and inject very little harmonics into the supply system, their current THD is very

minimal (not more than 1.97% on average for the studied lamps). On the other hand,

CFLs and LEDs, as non-linear loads, injecting a quite large amount of current

harmonics into the supply system, have a considerable current THD. The experimental

results show that the average THD of CFLs and LEDs are respectively 102.61% and

125.7% (see Figure 3.5a). Figure 3.5b-c illustrates a comparative analysis of current

THD of different brands of CFLs and LEDs respectively. The experimental results

show that 81% of CFLs have a current THD below 105% while this figure is only 9%

for different brands of LEDs.

It can be seen from Table 3.3 that the difference of average THD for CFLs and

LEDs is 23.09. Few LEDs such as Osram 10W, Mirabella 6W and HPM 5W have very

low value of THD, which are 13.1, 57.13 and 65.55 respectively. All other THD values

are higher than 112.86%.

Table 3.3 Maximum, Minimum and average values of current THD of analysed

LEDs and CFLs.

THD Average Max Min

LEDs (34) 125.7 153.03

(Osram 4.7W)

13.1

(Osram 10W)

CFLs (18) 102.61 112.01

(Brilliant 20W)

96.76

(Osram 15W)

Difference 23.09


28

Figure 3.5 Current THD of (a) all analysed CFLs and LEDs, (b) different brands of

CFLs, (c) different brands of LEDs.


29

Power Consumption

The experimental results in this Thesis demonstrate that the level of the non-

fundamental component of the apparent power of the studied LEDs and CFLs is higher

than the fundamental component.

This difference is more for LEDs and their average of SN/S is about 77% while

their average of S1/S is almost 62% (see Figure 3.6). For CFLs, the average values of

SN/S and S1/S are about 72% and 69% respectively (see Figure 3.6). From this figure,

it can be seen that the content of the non-fundamental component of the apparent

power of these lamps is more than that of their fundamental component. Higher content

of non-fundamental component of apparent power as compared to fundamental

component signifies higher harmonic content and non-linearity introduced into the

power system. Larger difference between fundamental and non-fundamental

component of apparent power for LEDs as compared to CFLs shows larger amount of

harmonics and non-linearity introduced by LEDs as compared to CFLs. In case of

halogen lamps, as they are largely linear loads, the content of the non-fundamental

component of their apparent power is negligible (less than 3%).

The experimental results also show that on average all analysed lamps consume

more active power than their rated power (given on their packaging). Actual power

consumed is the power consumed at the end of 10-minute period. Figure 3.7a

illustrates a comparative analysis of this difference in the power consumption for

LEDs, CFLs and halogen lamps separately while this difference is demonstrated for

different brands of each lamp in Figure 3.7b-d. It can be seen that on average, the

halogen lamps consume more power (between 2-6% more) than their rated power (see

Figure 3.7b).


30

Figure 3.6 Ratio of the average consumed power at the fundamental frequency and

other frequencies versus the total apparent power (S1/S and SN/S) in percentage for

the analysed LEDs and CFLs.

It will be very interesting to see the comparison of different brands of LEDs,

CFLs and halogen lamps based on maximum and minimum average active power

deviation from rated power. The individual lamps with largest deviation and 0%

deviation are also identified. It is worth mentioning that the analysis reveals that only

22% of CFLs and 15% of LEDs consume exactly the same power given on their

packaging. Then the percentage range of deviation of different types of lamps is also

evaluated and shown in Table 3.4.


31

Figure 3.7 Active power consumption deviation of lamps from their rated powers:

(a) different lamp types, (b) Halogen lamps, (c) CFL lamps, (d) LED lamps


32

Table 3.4 Deviation of active power consumption from rated power of LEDs,

CFLs and halogen lamps from different perspectives

Lamp Type

Average

Minimum

Deviation

(%)

Average

Maximum

Deviation

(%)

Largest Deviation

(%)

Lamps

With No

Deviation

(%)

Range of

Deviation

(%)

LED Mirabella

(-3.79)

Click

(4.067)

Mirabella 6W

(-15) 15 ±5%

CFL Osram

(-4)

Brilliant

(8)

Philips 5W

(14) 22 ±10%

Halogen Nelson

(2.285)

Coles

(5.96)

Philips 42W

(7.2) - 6%

Stabilisation Time of Lamps

The experimental results confirm that in overall, LEDs stabilise much faster than

CFLs after turning on. Figure 3.8a-b demonstrates the stabilisation time of LEDs and

CFLs for time slots of 0-10, 10-100, …, 500-600 seconds. It can be seen from these

figures that almost a quarter of the studied LEDs stabilise in less than 10 seconds,

while none of the available CFLs stabilises in this period. In addition, it can be seen

that almost half of the LEDs stabilise in less than 200 seconds whereas only a quarter

of the available CFLs stabilise in this time. This is a clear advantage of LEDs over

CFLs. The variation range of the stabilisation time is also illustrated for different

brands of LEDs and CFLs as shown respectively in Figure 3.8c-d. It is interesting to

see that LEDs manufactured by Olsent have minimum average stabilisation time

versus other brands while their CFLs have the longest stabilisation time among other

CFL manufacturers. This figure is almost the same for both CFLs and LEDs

manufactured by Philips.


33

Figure 3.8 Active power stabilisation time of (a) LEDs, (b) CFLs, (c) different LED

brands, (d) different CFL brands.


34

Power Factor

The experimental results show that on average, CFLs have a better power factor,

than LEDs but the difference is not quite significant (less than 5% approximately), as

seen in Figure 3.9. It is to be noted that, as expected from halogen lamps, their power

factor is the absolute unity. It can be seen from Table 3.5 that the difference of average

power factor for CFLs and LEDs is 0.05 only.

Table 3.5 Maximum, Minimum and average values of power factor of analysed

LEDs and CFLs.

Power factor Average Max Min

CFLs (18) 0.62 0.64

(Philips 24W)

0.59

(Brilliant 20W)

LEDs (34) 0.57 0.94

(Osram 10W)

0.5

(Click 5W)

Difference 0.05

It can be seen that the difference of power factor for CFLs and LEDs is not

significant. Osram 10W LED has a very good value of power factor (0.94) far better

than closest value of 0.61 of other LEDs. As LEDs have very low power ratings (Class

C equipment P ≤ 25W), therefore, power factor control circuits may or may not be

found in LED ballast circuits. This very good value of power factor (0.94) for Osram

10W LED shows that power factor control circuit is used in this lamp’s circuit.


35

Figure 3.9 Power factor of (a) LEDs and CFLs, (b) different CFLs brands, (c)

different LED brands.

Observed Relationship between Power Factor and Current THD

Table 3.6 illustrates the observed relationship between the power factor and

current THD of LEDs and CFLs with the same rated power. From this table, it can be

seen that LEDs with low THD have high power factor and vice versa. This is true for


36

the majority of the studied LEDs (except 6W Mirabella, Crompton, and Philips).

However, this is not valid for the majority of CFLs. These exceptions are due to the

fact that power factor is influenced not only by harmonic component but also by the

reactive power consumption of each lamp. However, it is worth noting that one of the

CFL lamp (Brilliant 20W) has the highest value of THD (112.01) and the lowest value

of power factor (0.59) out of all 18 CFL lamps. Therefore, it can be concluded that

although relationship between power factor and THD is not very linear in case of CFLs

but still low value of THD improves power factor, which may be due to the use of

some filtering circuit in the circuit of lamps.

Conclusion

From current harmonics perspectives, the studies show that the current

harmonics injected by all analysed LEDs and CFLs except one (i.e., the 10W Osram

LED) are much above or slightly above the acceptable limits of Table 3.2 (standards

of [44-46]). Referring to the alternative technique given in [44], the 3rd current

harmonic generated by all LEDs and CFLs is less than the 86% limit. The 5th current

harmonic generated by almost 40% of LEDs and 100% of all CFLs is less than the

61% limit. From current THD perspectives, 83% of CFLs have a current THD of less

than 105% while this figure is only 9% for LEDs. Another interesting finding was

majority of LEDs with high current THD have low power factors. From power factor

perspectives, on average, CFLs showed better power factors than LEDs. From the

fundamental and non-fundamental apparent power consumption perspectives, it is

found that the level of non-fundamental component of the apparent power of LEDs

and CFLs is higher than their fundamental component. For LEDs,the difference is

higher. The average of SN/S is about 77% and the average of S1/S is almost 62% in case


37

of LEDs. The average values of SN/S and S1/S are about 72% and 69% respectively in

case of CFLs. From Active power consumption perspectives, it is revealed that only

22% of CFLs and 15% of LEDs consume exactly the same active power as given on

their packaging. Through measurements of active power consumption, it is validated

that in overall, LEDs stabilise much faster than CFLs after turning on, which is a clear

advantage for LEDs.


38

Table 3.6 Comparison of current THD and power factor for lamps with the same

rated power.

Lamp Power (W) Brand Current THD (%) Power Factor

LEDs

5

HPM 65.55 0.56

Olsent 123.06 0.52

Click 125.16 0.50

7.5 Philips 112.86 0.61

Osram 129.10 0.60

9

Philips 123.98 0.57

Mirabella 124.94 0.57

Click 129.75 0.55

10 Osram 13.10 0.94

Coles 129.98 0.59

10.5 Osram 125.23 0.61

Philips 144.93 0.54

CFLs

15

Osram 96.76 0.61

Coles 99.65 0.60

Philips

cool daylight 100.12 0.63

warm white 102.35 0.63

20

Osram 99.64 0.61

Philips

cool daylight 103.00 0.63

warm white 103.21 0.63

Olsent 104.34 0.61

Brilliant 112.01 0.59

Consumer-oriented Criteria

The considered consumer-oriented parameters are their luminous efficacy,

purchasing cost and lifespan. Luminous efficacy or the ratio of illumination to power

consumption of lamps is very important and the main factor leading to the

development of energy-efficient light sources like CFLs and LEDs. As much the ratio

of illumination to power consumption is better, more efficient is the light source. So,

based on this parameter, it will be analysed how efficient are the halogen lamps, CFLs,

LEDs and how much are they contributing to electricity and energy saving. The

research and analysis will include the comparison of different light sources like

halogen lamps, CFLs and LEDs and then comparison of different brands and ratings

of lamps of the same type.

Another interesting non-technical criterion and the most important consumer-

oriented criteria is the cost analysis as it is directly related to the budget and buying

power of consumers. For manufacturers, it may be possible to produce cheap lamps

but they may not be good in terms of power quality perspective. Therefore, it is a

challenge to reduce the cost of modern lighting techniques and at the same time

maintaining their current harmonics, THD and power quality issues. Because of

ongoing research, there is a lot of improvement in reducing the cost of CFLs especially

the LEDs as already mentioned in literature review section and Figure 2.4. In addition,

the cost analysis will be carried out to get an overall idea of Australian market by

comparing different types of lamps like halogen lamps, CFLs and LEDs. Then,

Chapter 4. Consumer-oriented Criteria

40

different brands and ratings of lamps of the same type will also be compared.

Another non-technical consumer-oriented criterion considered in this research is

the life span of different types of light sources available in Australian markets. This is

a very important parameter from consumer perspective, as it is a direct compensation

to the budget of consumers. More is the longer life of a lamp; less is the need of

purchasing a new one and hence benefiting the consumer very much. Longer life span

is a very important feature and is therefore the focus of nowadays research so that how

the life of new light sources can be increased? Hence, the life span of halogen lamps,

CFLs and LEDs will be compared with each other from consumer perspective and then

different brands and ratings of lamps of the same type will be compared with each

other.

These consumer-oriented criteria are assessed and quantified for the majority of

lightings sold on the Australian market nowadays as mentioned in Table 3.1.

Studies and Analysis Results

The results of the study from different aspects of consumer-oriented criteria are

presented below.

Luminous Efficacy

The prime reason for development of modern lighting techniques like CFLs and

LEDs as an alternate source to incandescent/halogen lamps is to save power.

Therefore, it is an important analysis on how much power can be saved with different

types of light sources while having same level of illumination. With the advancement

in technology, lm/W of solid state lamps have increased from few to 150 “chip-level”

which is more than all other traditional electrical light sources [36].


41

Figure 4.1 depicts a detailed comparison between the rated illuminations of the

studied lamps against their rated active power consumption. Both rated illumination

and rated active power consumption are obtained from their packaging. This is

calculated as lumens per watt (lm/W) and is illustrated for different types of lamps

separately in separate subfigures a-d. From Figure 4.1a, it can be seen that there is a

considerable difference between the maximum and minimum lm/W of LEDs, CFLs,

and Halogen lamps. The average lm/W of Halogen lamps is 15.24 while this figure for

CFLs and LEDs is 62.37 and 92.72 respectively, which is shown in Figure 4.1b-d. It

is worth noting that even the minimum lm/W of LEDs is larger than the maximum

lm/W of CFLs. The same relationship is true between CFLs and halogen lamps as the

minimum lm/W of CFLs is larger than the maximum lm/W of halogens. Hence, it is

easily observed that the illumination offered by LEDs is much higher than the CFLs

and the illumination offered by CFLs is much higher than conventional incandescent

and halogen lamps showing the important developments in the lighting techniques in

terms of better illumination and power saving. Maximum and minimum illumination

values (lm/W) of Halogen Lamps are far low as compared to LEDs and CFLs showing

how much worst is the ratio of lm/W. Hence, it is justified as why many countries

around the world have banned Halogen Lamps.

Figure 4.1b-d illustrates the variations of lm/W for different brands of the same

lamp type. Among LEDs, it can be seen that on average, the Philips LEDs offer the

maximum lm/W (108.5) whereas the Crompton LEDs offer the minimum lm/W (80).

In case of CFLs, the Coles CFLs offer maximum lm/W (67) whereas the Philips CFLs

offer the minimum lm/W (59). For halogen lamps, the Osram and Coles brand offer

the maximum lm/W (16) while the Philips and Nelson brand offer the minimum lm/W

(14).


42

Figure 4.1 Comparison of lm/W of different: (a) types of lamps, (b) brands of

Halogen lamps, (c) brands of CFLs, (d) brands of LEDs

(WW = warm white, CDL = cool daylight, CD=Classic Design)


43

It will be very interesting to see the comparison of different brands of LEDs,

CFLs and halogen lamps based on maximum and minimum average lm/W. The

individual lamps with largest and minimum lm/W are also identified and shown in

Table 4.1.

Figure 4.2 demonstrates the lm/W variation for two different brands (Philips and

Osram) for two different colours of warm white, and cool daylight for their available

CFLs and LEDs (given in Table 3.1). From this figure, it can be seen that LEDs with

cool daylight colour have better lm/W compared to those with warm white colour. In

case of Philips, the average of 4 LEDs with warm white colour and 3 with cool daylight

colour have been taken. In case of Osram LEDs, the average of 7 LEDs with warm

white colour and 6 with cool daylight colour has been used.

Table 4.1 lm/W Comparison of LEDs, CFLs and halogen lamps from different

perspectives.

Lamp Type

Highest

Illumination Brand

(On Average)

Lm/W

Lowest

Illumination Brand

(On Average)

Lm/W

Maximum

Lm/W

Minimum

Lm/W

LED

Philips

Classic Design

(108.49)

Mirabella

(86.04)

Philips 18W

(111.11)

Osram 4.7W

(74.47)

CFL Coles

(66.92)

Philips

Cool Daylight

(59.19)

Olsent 20W

(67.50)

Philips 5W

(57.00)

Halogen Osram

(16.06)

Philips

(14.06)

Coles 72W

(18.75)

Philips 28W

(12.36)


44

However, CFLs with warm white colour have larger lm/W versus those with

cool daylight colour. This is verified with Philips brand CFLs, the only available brand

with same wattage ratings and both colour types. In this case, the average of 5 Philips

CFLs with warm white colour and 6 Philips CFLs with cool daylight colour have been

used.

Figure 4.2 Variations of warm white and cool daylight lamps.

(WW = warm white, CDL = cool daylight)

The study also shows that for the majority of studied lamps (except those of

Click and Osram), the lm/W increases with an increase in the rated power of the lamps.

It is also interesting to report that this change is less for CFLs than that of LEDs.

Purchasing Cost

Other than power saving, it is very important to keep the cost of modern day

lightings like CFLs and LEDs within reasonable approach of consumers. It is a

challenge for manufacturers to keep the cost low and at the same time maintaining

their current harmonics, THD and power quality. Because of ongoing research, there

are considerable reductions in price as already described and mentioned in previous

sections. Purchasing cost analysis of different types of lamps like halogen lamps, CFLs

and LEDs of different brands and ratings is carried out from Australian market


45

perspective.

Figure 4.3 illustrates a detailed comparison between the costs of the studied

lamps versus their rated active power consumption. The cost is the actual market price

and the rated active power consumption is obtained from their packaging. This is

calculated and presented as Australian cents per watt (¢/W). Similar to Figure 4.1, this

figure illustrates the ¢/W of different types of lamps in separate subfigures a-d. From

Figure 4.3a, it can be seen that there is a considerable price difference between

maximum and minimum ¢/W of halogen lamps, CFLs and LEDs.

Figure 4.3a shows that halogen lamps are the cheapest ones in the market with

an average of 5.63 ¢/W while CFLs and LEDs are more expensive with an average of

respectively 46.4 and 120.04 ¢/W. It is worth noting that average price of LEDs is 2.6

times the average price of CFLs and 21.3 times the average price of halogen lamps.

Similarly, the average price of CFLs is 8.2 times the average price of halogen lamps.

These figures show very clearly that there is a big gap between the average prices of

different types of light sources available in Australian market. Even the cheapest CFL

(24¢/W) is more expensive than the most expensive halogen lamp (9.79¢/W).

It may be interesting to see the comparison of different brands of LEDs, CFLs

and halogen lamps based on maximum and minimum average ¢/W. The individual

lamps with largest and minimum ¢/W are also identified and shown in Table 4.2 below.

Figure 4.3b-d illustrates the variations of ¢/W for different brands of the same

lamp. It is seen that on average, Osram LEDs are the most expensive (140 ¢/W)

whereas Crompton is the cheapest (67 ¢/W). In case of CFLs, Philips has the most

expensive (54 ¢/W) CFLs whereas Osram is the cheapest (25 ¢/W). For halogen lamps,

Philips is the most expensive (8 ¢/W) while Brilliant is the cheapest (3 ¢/W).


46

Table 4.2 ¢/W Comparison of LEDs, CFLs and halogen lamps from different

perspectives.

Lamp Type

Cheapest

Brand

(On Average)

¢/W

Most Expensive

Brand

(On Average)

¢/W

Cheapest

Lamp

¢/W

Most

Expensive

Lamp

¢/W

LED Crompton

(66.67)

Osram

(140.33)

Click 9W

(55.56)

Osram 10W

(199.5)

CFL Osram

(25.00)

Philips

(53.85)

Osram 15W

(24)

Philips 5W

(129.8)

Halogen Brilliant

(3.28)

Philips

(7.95)

Brilliant 70W

(2.46)

Philips 28W

(9.79)

It is important to note that in case of LEDs, Osram is the most expensive brand

whereas in case of CFLs, it is the cheapest brand. Similarly, Philips is the most

expensive brand for both CFLs and halogen lamps.

Lifespan

Other than power saving, luminous efficacy and purchasing cost, a very

important feature of modern lighting techniques like LEDs and CFLs is longer life

span as compared to the traditional incandescent and halogen light bulbs. Based on

this research, the lifespan of LEDs and CFLs is increased very much and may be

considered a very important advantage to the customers as they have to buy a lamps

only once after many years. Therefore, it will be very important to analyse and

compare the lifespan of halogen lamps, CFLs and LEDs from consumer perspective

and then to analyse and compare the lamps of different brands and ratings of the same

type.


47

Figure 4.3 Comparison of ¢/W of different: (a) types of lamps, (b) brands of halogen

lamps, (c) brands of CFLs, (d) brands of LEDs.


48

Figure 4.4 illustrates a detailed analysis of very important aspect of life span of

different types of residential light sources available in the Australian markets like

LEDs, CFLs and Halogen lamps. Lifespan is described in hours and obtained from

their packaging. This is represented in the form of a boxplot. Figure 4.4a illustrates a

comparative analysis of life span of LEDs, CFLs and halogen lamps from 0 hours to a

maximum of 15,000 hours. Figure 4.4b-d illustrates the comparative analysis of

different brands of the same lamp type.

From Figure 4.4a, it can be seen that there is a considerable difference of life

span between LEDs, CFLs and Halogen lamps. All studied LEDs have a lifespan of

15 thousand hours whereas this figure is respectively 6-10 and 1-2 for CFLs and

halogen lamps. It’s worth noting that average lifespan of LEDs is about 2 times the

average lifespan of CFLs and 8 times the average lifespan of halogen lamps. Similarly,

the average lifespan of CFLs is 4.5 times the average lifespan of halogen lamps. From

these figures, it is clear that there is a considerable difference between the lifespans of

different types of light sources. Even the minimum lifespan of 15,000 hours of LEDs

is larger than the maximum lifespan of CFLs of 10,000 hours. The same relationship

is true between CFLs and halogen lamps as the minimum lifespan of 6,000 hours of

CFLs is larger than the maximum lifespan of 2,000 hours of halogen lamps. Hence, it

can be easily found that how much important developments are going on in the lighting

techniques in terms of longer life spans.

In case of CFLs, the average lifespan is about 8,500 hours. The lamps of Brilliant

brand have minimum lifespan of 6 thousand hours whereas this figure is 10 thousand

for the Osram and Coles CFLs. In case of halogen lamps, the average lifespan is about

1,900 hours. The lamps of Philips brand have minimum life of 1,000 hours whereas

all other brands have a life of 2,000 hours.


49

Figure 4.4 Comparison of lifespan of different: (a) types of lamps, (b) brands of

halogen lamps, (c) brands of CFLs, (d) brands of LEDs.


50

It may be interesting to see the comparison of different brands of LEDs, CFLs

and halogen lamps based on maximum and minimum average lifespan. The individual

lamps with largest and minimum lifespan are also identified and shown in Table 4.3

below:

Table 4.3 Lifespan Comparison of LEDs, CFLs and halogen lamps from different

perspectives.

Lamp Type

Brand with

Minimum

Lifespan

(On Average)

hours

Brand with

Maximum Lifespan

(on average)

hours

Lamp with

Minimum

Lifespan

hours

Lamp with

Maximum

Lifespan

hours

LED All available LED lamps have lifespan of 15,000 hours

CFL Brilliant

(6,000)

Osram, Coles

(10,000)

Brilliant 20W

(6,000)

All Osram and

Coles Lamps

(10,000)

Halogen Philips

(1,000)

All other brands

(2,000)

All Philips

Lamps (1,000)

All other lamps

(2,000)

Conclusion

In this chapter, a detailed analysis and comparison of modern day lightings is

carried out from consumer-oriented perspective. From luminous efficacy perspectives,

it is found that there is considerable difference between maximum, minimum and

average lm/W of LEDs, CFLs and halogen lamps. It is found that minimum lm/W of

LEDs is higher than maximum lm/W of CFLs and minimum lm/W of CFLs is higher

than maximum lm/W of halogen lamps. Average lm/W of LEDs, CFLs and halogen


51

lamps is 92, 62, and 15 respectively clearly showing how efficient are LEDs and CFLs

from illumination perspective and power saving.

From purchasing cost perspectives, it is found that halogen lamps are cheapest

in the market whereas CFLs and LEDs are comparatively expensive. Interestingly it is

found that average price of LEDs is 2.6 times the average price of CFLs and 21.3 times

the average price of halogen lamps. Similarly, the average price of CFLs is 8.2 times

the average price of halogen lamps. It can be easily concluded from these figures that

there is a big gap between the average prices of different types of light sources

available in Australian market.

After analysis of different types of lamps available in Australian market from

lifespan perspectives, it is found that all available LEDs have a lifespan of 15 thousand

hours; CFLs have lifespan of 6 to 10 thousand hours whereas halogen lamps have

lifespan of 1 to 2 thousand hours. Interestingly it was found that that average lifespan

of LEDs is about 2 times the average lifespan of CFLs and 8 times the average lifespan

of halogen lamps. Similarly, the average lifespan of CFLs is 4.5 times the average

lifespan of halogen lamps. From these figures, it can be easily concluded that there is

quite a considerable difference between the lifespans of different types of light sources

with LEDs having the highest lifespan. Even the minimum lifespan of LEDs is larger

than the maximum lifespan of CFLs and minimum lifespan of CFLs is larger than

maximum lifespan of halogen lamps.

Multi-criteria Assessment (MCA)

MCA is a valuable tool that can be applied to situations that are characterised as

a choice among many options and alternatives. It is important to properly structure the

aim and explicitly evaluate multiple criteria. In making the decisions and choosing

among different options, there are not only very complex issues involving multiple

criteria, but there are also multiple parties, who are deeply affected by the

consequences. It has all the characteristics of a useful decision support tool. It help

focus on what is important, logical and consistent from different perspective. At its

core, MCA is useful for dividing the decision into smaller, more understandable parts,

analysing each part, and integrating the parts to produce a meaningful solution.

Structuring complex problems well and considering multiple criteria explicitly

leads to more informed and better decisions. There have been important advances in

this field since the start of the modern multiple-criteria analysis. MCA is a helpful

decision making tool in situations where confusion can arise if a logical, well-

structured decision-making process is not followed. The MCA approach is suitable

when intuitive approach is not appropriate because of a number of different conflicting

technical and non-technical issues.

In this chapter, after a detailed research, analysis and comparison from utility

and consumer-oriented criteria of different types and ratings of lamps like LEDs, CFLs

and halogen lamps available in Australian markets, MCA of all studied lamps is

Chapter 5. Multi-criteria Assessment

54

presented to identify their overall performance. The values used are normalised values

and presented in the form of a radar chart. This MCA will give a single sight

comparison and analysis of all studied lamps from different utility and consumer-

oriented perspectives. The better and worse performance of different brands of the

analysed lamps from different perspective is evident from these charts. In summary,

the main contribution of this work to the research field is evaluating the residential

lamps sold currently on the Australian Market considering both consumer and utility

perspectives using a MCA.

Utility-oriented MCA

In this section, utility-oriented criteria including the technical parameters of

power factor, THD, current harmonics (3rd and 5th), ratios of fundamental and non-

fundamental apparent power (S1/S, SN/S) are used to conduct a MCA for the analyzed

lamps. The results of this assessment for all studied lamps are illustrated in Figure

5.1a-c in the form of a radar chart as normalised values. The radar chart of Figure 5.1a

shows the performance of LEDs. From this figure, it is seen that more than 90% of the

studied LEDs have very similar characteristics and only 3 LEDs (10W Osram, 6W

Mirabella, and 5W HPM) have some sort of distinguished differences from the rest. It

can be seen that the 10W Osram LED has superior technical performance versus the

other studied LEDs. Two other LEDs, 6W Mirabella and 5W HPM show very good

performance. The rest of LEDs exhibit nearly the same performance. In the case of

CFLs, as seen from Figure 5.1b, all of them nearly show the same performance.

However, the radar chart of Figure 5.1c showing utility-oriented parameters of halogen

lamps is quite different from that of LEDs and CFLs. This is because, they are linear

loads and have unity PF and S1/S. Values of other utility parameters are nearly zero.


55

All studied halogen lamps nearly show the same performance.

Figure 5.1 Utility-oriented MCA of all studied (a) LEDs, (b) CFLs, (c) halogen

lamps.

Consumer-oriented MCA

In this section, consumer-oriented multi-criteria including the parameters of

lifespan, cost, and illumination are used to conduct a MCA for the analyzed lamps.

The results of this assessment for all studied lamps are illustrated in Figure 5.2a-c in

the form of a radar chart as normalised values. From Figure 5.2a, it is seen that Osram


56

10W is the most expensive (199.5 ¢/W) whereas Click 9W is the cheapest (55.56 ¢/W)

LED. There is no major difference between LEDs from other parameters perspective

such as life span and lm/W.

From Figure 5.2b, it can be seen that Osram 15W is the cheapest LED (24¢/W)

having maximum lifespan (10,000 hours) whereas Philips 5W CFL is the most

expensive CFL (129.8¢/W) with a lifespan of 8,000 hours. The rest of CFLs exhibit

very similar behavior. Figure 5.2c illustrates that all studied halogen lamps exhibit no

major differences from different consumer oriented parameters.

Figure 5.2 Consumer-oriented MCA of all studied (a) LEDs, (b) CFLs, (c)

halogen lamps.


57

MCA of Different Brands of LEDs and CFLs

From the all the LEDs and CFLs available on Australian market, it was found

that there are two brands with maximum number of LEDs and CFLs. These brands are

Philips and Osram. Therefore, a MCA based on these major brands is conducted for

LEDs and CFLs. The results of this assessment are illustrated in Figure 5.3a-d in the

form of a radar chart as normalised values. The better and worse performance of

different brands of the analyzed lamps from different perspective is evident from these

figures a-d.

It can be seen from Figure 5.3a-b that nearly all studied CFLs have also a very

similar performance regardless of their manufacturer. However, in case of LEDs, as

evident from Figure 5.3d, 10W Osram LED has superior power quality-based

performance versus the other studied LEDs, but it is also more expensive.

Comprehensive MCA

To compare different types of lamps from different brands based on the introduced

utility and consumer-oriented criteria, a MCA is presented here. The considered

utility-oriented parameters are the 3rd and 5th injected current harmonic, current THD,

S1/S and SN/S, power factor while the consumer-oriented parameters are their

illumination and cost in lm/W and ¢/W respectively, as well as the lifespan in hours.

The results of all studied lamps are illustrated in Figure 5.4 in the form of radar charts

based on normalised values. This figure shows that 91% of the studied LEDs have a

very similar utility and consumer-oriented characteritics and only 9% have some sort

of distinguished differences from the rest. These 9% of LEDs comprise of 3 LEDs i.e.,

the 10W Osram, 6W Mirabella, and 5W HPM (see Figure 5.4a). From utility-oriented


58

Figure 5.3 MCA of (a) Philips CFLs, (b) Osram CFLs, (c) Philips LEDs and (d)

Osram LEDs

perspective, it can be seen that the 10W Osram LED has the most superior

performance. But on the other hand, from consumer-oriented perspective, it is also the

most expensive one on the market.

In case of CFLs, nearly all the studied CFLs exhibited the same behaviour in

terms of utility and consumer-oriented criteria. However there is only one CFL lamp

i-e 5W Philips differing form the rest in terms of cost as it seems to be quite expensive.

However, it nearly shows the same performance to the rest of CFLs from the


59

perspective of other considered criteria. All of the studied halogen lamps also show a

very similar behavior on the basis of analysed parameters.

Figure 5.4 MCA of all studied (a) LEDs, (b) CFLs, (c) halogen lamps.

Conclusion

The study reveals that the 18W Philips and the 4.7W Osram LEDs have

respectively the maximum and minimum lm/W (of 111 and 74). In the case of CFLs,

the 20W Olsent and 5W Philips respectively have the maximum and minimum lm/W

(of 67 and 57) while the 72W Coles and 28W Philips halogen lamps have respectively

the maximum and minimum lm/W (of 19 and 12). Also, the 10W Osram and 9W Click


60

LEDs are respectively the most expensive and cheapest ones (with a cost of 200 and

56 ¢/W). In the case of CFLs, the 5W Philips and 15W Osram are respectively the

most expensive and cheapest lamps (with a cost of 130 and 24 ¢/W) while the 28W

Philips and 70W Brilliant are the most expensive and cheapest halogen lamps

respectively (with a cost of 10 and 2 ¢/W).

From the current THD perspective, the 10W Osram, 6W Mirabella, and 5W

HPM LEDs are found to have minimum current THDs (respectively 13, 57, and 65%)

while this figure is above 113% for the other studied LEDs. Such low THDs reveal

that some types of efficient filtering circuits have been used in these LEDs. On the

other hand, the 4.7W Osram LED was found to have the largest current THD (of

153.03%). In the case of CFLs, the 15W Osram and 20W Brilliant have respectively

the least and most current THD (of 97 and 112%, respectively).

From the power factor perceptive, the 10W Osram and 5W Click LEDs have the

maximum and minimum power factors (of respectively 0.94 and 0.5). In the case of

CFLs, the 24W Philips and the 20W Brilliant are found to have the maximum and

minimum power factor (of respectively 0.64 and 0.59).

From the active power consumption perceptive, the maximum deviation of –

15% for the 6W Mirabella LED, +14% for the 5W Philips CFL, and +7% for the 42W

Philips halogen lamp were observed. It is also found that the 4.5W Osram and the 9W

Click LEDs have the shortest and longest stabilisation times (of respectively 0 and 530

seconds). In the case of CFLs, the 5W Philips and the 14W Olsent have respectively

the shortest and longest stabilisation times (of 11 and 572 seconds).

From the S1/S and SN/S perspectives, the 10 and 4.5W Osram LEDs have

respectively the maximum and minimum S1/S (of 99 and 52%). These two lamps have

respectively the smallest and largest SN/S (of 14 and 85%). For CFLs, the 15W Osram


61

and 20W Brilliant have respectively the highest and lowest S1/S (of 72 and 67%) and

thereby the minimum and maximum SN/S (of 70 and 75%).

From the above observations, it can be easily concluded that the 10W Osram has

the best performance from power factor and current THD perspective while it is the

most expensive LED.

Conclusions and Recommendations

This chapter summarises the important findings of this thesis. Based on different

finding and observations, some recommendations are also made for future researchers.

Conclusions

The general conclusions of the thesis are:

(1) From the consumer-oriented criteria, the study shows that the illumination to

power consumption ratio described as lumens per Watt (lm/W) of LEDs is

better than those of CFLs and this figure is far better than those of halogen

lamps. The average lm/W of Halogen lamps is 15 while this figure for CFLs

and LEDs is 62 and 92 respectively. This efficiency has been a strong

motivation for Australian Building Code in developing regulations that

promote CFLs and LEDs and bans energy inefficient lamps such as halogen

ones.

(2) A comparative analysis shows that LEDs of the same power rating with cool

day light colour have better illumination than those with warm white colour.

However, the case is not same for CFLs. In case of CFLs, with same power

rating, CFLs with warm white colour have better illumination than those with

cool day light colour.

(3) Comparing the cost of lamps versus their power consumption, described as

cents per Watt (¢/W), it is found that LEDs are the most expensive lamps while

Chapter 6. Conclusions and Recommendations

63

halogen ones are the cheapest. There is a significant difference between the

average cost of the LEDs, CFLs and halogen lamps, which may result in a

different selection preference amongst consumers depending on their budget.

The average cost of halogen lamps is 5.63 ¢/W while average cost of CFLs and

LEDs is 46.4 and 120.04 ¢/W respectively. The largest difference among

studied CFLs and LEDs is from the cost perspective, which is also linked to

their luminous efficacy difference while the variation of their utility-oriented

parameters is not very significant.

(4) From the perspective of 3rd and 5th current harmonic, and through laboratory-

based measurements, it is seen that all analysed CFLs have an acceptable 3rd

and 5th current harmonic injection i-e less than 86% and 61%. In the case of

LEDs, all of them have an acceptable 3rd harmonic level but only 40% of them

have acceptable 5th current harmonic i-e less than 86% and 61% respectively.

However, they do not comply with the harmonic levels defined in IEC,

European, and Australian standards for electrical loads of smaller than 25W.

(5) After experimental analysis of current THD of studied LEDs and CFLs, it is

found that overall, 83% of CFLs have a current THD of less than 105% while

this figure is only 9% for LEDs.

(6) From power factor perspective, it is found that on average, CFLs showed better

power factors than LEDs.

(7) In a very interesting analysis comparing THD and power factor of different

brands of lamps of the same power rating, it is also found that majority of LEDs

with high current THD have low power factors and vice versa. However, this

is not valid for the majority of CFLs. These exceptions are due to the fact that


64

power factor is influenced not only by harmonic component but also by the

reactive power consumption of each lamp.

(8) The measurements also illustrate that the level of non-fundamental component

of the apparent power (SN) of LEDs and CFLs is higher than their fundamental

component (S1). This difference is higher for LEDs as compared to the CFLs.

For LEDs, this difference is 15% whereas for CFLs, this difference is 3%.

(9) After experimental analysis from active power (W) consumption perspective

of studied lamps, it is observed that most of the lamps consume more power

than their rated power as mentioned on their packaging. It will be interesting to

know that only 22% of CFLs and 15% of LEDs consume exactly the same

active power as given on their packaging.

(10) It is also found that in overall, LEDs stabilise much faster than CFLs after

turning on, which is a clear advantage for LEDs.

(11) A MCA based on both utility and consumer-oriented criteria and Osram and

Philips brands of LEDs and CFLs is conducted considering the utility-oriented

parameters of 3rd and 5th injected current harmonic, current THD, S1/S and SN/S,

power factor while the consumer-oriented parameters are their illumination and

cost in lm/W and ¢/W, as well as the lifespan. It was found that that 91% of

the studied LEDs have a very similar utility and consumer-oriented

characteritics and only 3 LEDs (i.e., the 10W Osram, 6W Mirabella, and 5W

HPM) have some sort of distinguished differences from the rest. It can also be

seen that the 10W Osram LED has the most superior utility-oriented

performance, however, it is also the most expensive one on the market. In case

of CFLs, the 5W Philips seems to be quite expensive while it nearly shows the

same performance to the rest of CFLs from the perspective of other criteria. All


65

of the studied halogen lamps also show a very similar behavior on the basis of

analysed parameters.

(12) Lifespan analysis shows that LEDs have the largest lifespan as compared to

CFLs and halogen lamps whereas CFLs have much larger lifespan than halogen

lamps. This very long lifespan of LEDs and CFLs is also a direct financial

benefit and compensation to the consumers, as they will not have to buy lamps

for a long time.

Recommendations

There are two ways to reduce the harmonic emissions of CFLs and LEDs. The first

method is to use some suitably designed filters in CFLs and LEDs so they do not inject

harmonics. Thereby, the internal filtering circuits of lamps with high current harmonic

generation and current THD needs to be improved so that their ac supply system may

not be polluted. For this purpose, LED and CFL manufacturers should be pushed to

use some proper filtering circuits in their lamps to reduce current harmonics and THD

and improve the power factor. In addition, different vendors use diverse ballast circuits

due to which the cost of LED lamps varies. Hence, research needs to be carried out on

the design and type of ballast circuits used in LED lamps to improve power quality,

power factor, THD, etc. As reducing THD is very difficult task, it is more economical

to install those LEDs and CFLs that have lower levels of harmonic injection and this

goal can be achieved by stricter government regulations and controls.

The second method is using some external filters at customer’s premise, which may

not be as economic and as effective as the first option. Thereby, evaluating these

options and finding the most effective and efficient technique to eliminate the

harmonics of CFLs and LEDs can be a future research topic, aligned with this research.

Appendix

Table A.1. Different parameters and costs of the LEDs

No. Brand Wattage Lumens Price (AUD)

1 Click 4 400 4

2 Click 5 470 3

3 Click 9 806 5

4 Coles 10 806 7

5 Crompton 6 480 4

6 HPM 5 490 6.67

7 Mirabella 6 470 9

8 Mirabella 9 800 11

9 Mirabella 11 1000 13

10 Olsent 5 470 5

11 Olsent 8 800 7

12 Osram 4.5 350 6.95

13 Osram 4.5 380 6.95

14 Osram 4.7 350 6.95

15 Osram 6.8 600 9.5

16 Osram 6.8 660 9.5

17 Osram 7.5 630 10.95

18 Osram 8.5 860 11.5

19 Osram 9 806 8.95

20 Osram 10.5 1055 13.95

21 Osram 10.5 1130 13.95

22 Osram 10 810 19.95

23 Osram 14 1300 16.95

24 Osram 14 1350 16.95

25 Philips 2.3 250 15.95

26 Philips 4.3 470 9.9

Appendix

67

27 Philips 7.5 806 16.95

28 Philips 6 470 6.95

29 Philips 7 600 8.95

30 Philips 9.5 806 9.95

31 Philips 9 806 9.95

32 Philips 10.5 1055 12.95

33 Philips 13 1400 14.95

34 Philips 18 2000 24.5

Table A.2. Different parameters and costs of the CFLs


1 Philips 5 285 6.49

2 Philips 8 475 6.49

3 Philips 8 500 6.49

4 Philips 12 700 6.49

5 Philips 12 740 6.49

6 Philips 15 900 6.49

7 Philips 15 950 6.49

8 Philips 20 1200 5.15

9 Philips 20 1250 5.15

10 Philips 24 1450 6.49

11 Philips 24 1550 6.49

12 Brilliant 20 14.95

13 Osram 15 900 3.6

14 Osram 20 1300 5.2

15 Coles 11 730 5.25

16 Coles 15 1012 5.25

17 Olsent 14 900 5.245

18 Olsent 20 1350 5.245

Appendix

68

Table A.3. Different parameters and costs of the Halogen Lamps


1 Philips 28 346 2.74

2 Philips 42 610 3.69

3 Philips 70 1070 3.69

4 Olsent 42 590 3

5 Olsent 70 1090 3

6 Mirabella 42 600 3.6

7 Mirabella 53 800 3.6

8 Mirabella 72 1150 3.6

9 Coles 42 605 2.5

10 Coles 53 797 2.5

11 Coles 72 1350 2.5

12 Brilliant 42 640 1.725

13 Brilliant 53 790 1.725

14 Brilliant 70 1120 1.725

15 Osram 30 405 2.9

16 Osram 46 700 2.9

17 Osram 57 915 2.9

18 Osram 77 1320 2.9

19 Osram 116 2135 2.9

20 Nelson 42 590

21 Nelson 70 1000

References

[1] S. Uddin, H. Shareef, A. Mohamed and M. A. Hannan, "An analysis of harmonics

from dimmable LED lamps" Power Engineering and Optimization Conference

(PEDCO) Melaka, Malaysia, 2012 Ieee International, Melaka, 2012

[2] J. Kooroshy, A. Ibbotson, B. Lee, D.R. Bingham, and W. Simons, “The low carbon

economy: Equity investor’s guide to a low carbon world 2015-25,” Technical

Report, Goldman Sachs, 2015. Retrieved on 26/05/2017.

http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/pages/new-energy-landscape-

folder/report-the-low-carbon-economy/report.pdf

[3] V. Cuk, J.F.G. Cobben, W.L. Kling, and R.B. Timens, “An analysis of diversity

factors applied to harmonic emission limits for energy saving lamps,” 14th Int.

Conf. on Harmonics and Quality of Power (ICHQP), pp.1-6, Bergamo, 2010.

[4] A. Gil-de-Castro, S.K. Ronnberg, M.H.J. Bollen, and A. Moreno-Munoz, “Study

on harmonic emission of domestic equipment combined with different types of

lighting,” International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol.55,

pp.116-127, 2014.

[5] S. Bhattacharyya, and S. Cobben, “Consequences of poor power quality– An

overview,” in Power Quality, A. Eberhard (Ed.), InTech, 2011.

[6] M. H. Shwehdi, “ Harmonic Effect in Industrial and University Environments,”.

[7] N.R. Watson, T.L. Scott, and S.J.J. Hirsch, “Implications for distribution networks

of high penetration of compact fluorescent lamps,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery,

vol.24, no.3, pp.1521-1528, 2009.

[8] J.C.W. Lam, and P.K. Jain, “A modified valley fill electronic ballast having a

current source resonant inverter with improved line-current total harmonic

distortion (THD), high power factor, and low lamp crest factor,” IEEE Trans.

Industrial Electronics, vol.55, no.3, pp.1147-1159, 2008.

[9] J. Meyer, A.M. Blanco, M. Domagk, and P. Schegner, “Assessment of prevailing

http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/pages/new-energy-landscape-folder/report-the-low-carbon-economy/report.pdf

http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/pages/new-energy-landscape-folder/report-the-low-carbon-economy/report.pdf

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/search/searchresult.jsp?searchWithin=%22Authors%22:.QT.W.L.%20Kling.QT.&newsearch=true

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/search/searchresult.jsp?searchWithin=%22Authors%22:.QT.R.B.%20Timens.QT.&newsearch=true

References

70

harmonic current emission in public low-voltage networks,” IEEE Trans. Power

Delivery, vol.32, no.2, pp.962-970, 2017.

[10] J. Molina, J.J. Mesas, L. Sainz, “Parameter estimation procedure for the

equivalent circuit model of compact fluorescent lamps,” Electric Power Systems

Research, vol.116, pp.128-135, 2014.

[11] Definitions for the measurement of electric quantities under sinusoidal, non-

sinusoidal, balanced or un-balanced conditions, IEEE Standard, IEEE Std-

1459-2010, 2010.

[12] X. Liang, “Emerging power quality challenges due to integration of renewable

energy sources,” IEEE Trans. Industry Applications, vol.53, no.2, pp.855-866,

2017.

[13] E.F. Fuchs, and M.A.S. Masoum, Power Quality in Power Systems and Electrical

Machines, Academic Press, 2008.

[14] A. Arefi, J. Olamaei, A. Yavartalab, H. Keshtkar, “Loss reduction experiences in

electric power distribution companies of Iran,” Energy Procedia, vol.14,

pp.1392-1397, 2012.

[15] Window into Housing 2015 (Facts about the housing and construction industry in

Australia), Housing Industry in Australia, Fact Sheet, 2015.

https://hia.com.au/~/media/hia%20website/files/industrybusiness/economic/fac

t%20sheet/3494_hia2015_industryfactsheet_161115.ashx

[16] A. Hennessey, “Building approvals for new WA homes hits record high for

second year,” Website, Published on 5/2/2015, Retrieved on 30/03/2017.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/building-approvals-for-

new-wa-homes-hits-record-high-for-second-year/news-

story/5be9365b09a0140d0773989ec0ceaf6c

[17] J. Duke, “Record number of new homes built in Sydney in 16 years,” Website,

Published on 4/10/2016, Retrieved on 30/03/2017.

https://www.domain.com.au/news/biggest-surge-in-new-homes-in-16-years-

data-shows-20161003-grtlrf/

[18] E. Sorensen, “Why are our houses getting bigger?” Website, Published on

10/12/2013, Retrieved on 30/03/2017.

http://www.realestate.com.au/advice/is-bigger-better/

[19] S. Johanson, “Australian homes still the world's biggest,” The Sydney Morning

Herald, Published on 22/08/2011, Retrieved on 30/03/2017.

https://hia.com.au/~/media/HIA%20Website/Files/IndustryBusiness/Economic/fact%20sheet/3494_HIA2015_IndustryFactSheet_161115.ashx

https://hia.com.au/~/media/HIA%20Website/Files/IndustryBusiness/Economic/fact%20sheet/3494_HIA2015_IndustryFactSheet_161115.ashx

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/building-approvals-for-new-wa-homes-hits-record-high-for-second-year/news-story/5be9365b09a0140d0773989ec0ceaf6c



https://www.domain.com.au/news/biggest-surge-in-new-homes-in-16-years-data-shows-20161003-grtlrf/

https://www.domain.com.au/news/biggest-surge-in-new-homes-in-16-years-data-shows-20161003-grtlrf/

http://www.realestate.com.au/advice/is-bigger-better/

References

71

http://www.smh.com.au/business/property/australian-homes-still-the-worlds-

biggest-20110821-1j5ev.html

[20] BCA lighting restrictions, Website, Retrieved on 30/03/2017.

http://www.build.com.au/bca-lighting-restrictions

[21] Q. Wells, Smart Grid Home, Cengage Learning, 2013.

[22] “Energy efficient lighting in houses, townhouses and units: For new dwellings

and home renovations,” Queensland Government, Department of Housing and

Public Works, Information Sheet, 2013, Retrieved on 30/03/2017.

http://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/sitecollectiondocuments/energyefficientlighting.pd

f

[23] Lighting Catalog: Lamp Specification Guide, Philips, 2013. Retrieved on

30/03/2017.

http://www.aainy.com/pdf/phillips_lamp_specification_catalog.pdf

[24] Energy Efficiency, Australian Government Website, Retrieved on 21/04/2018.

https://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services/environment/energy-

efficiency

[25] “How much electricity is used for lighting in the United States?” US Department

of Energy market studies on lighting, Published on 09/06/2016, Retrieved on

30/03/2017.

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=99&t=3

[26] “Household energy efficiency Fact Sheet,” Australian Clean Energy Council,

Retrieved on 30/03/2017.

http://diamondenergy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/cec-household-

energy-efficiency-fact-sheet.pdf

[27] “Energy use in the Australian residential sector 1986-2020,” Australian

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 2008, Retrieved

on 30/03/2017.

https://industry.gov.au/Energy/Energy-

information/Documents/energyuseaustralianresidentialsector19862020part1.pd

f

[28] D. Matvoz, and M. Maksic, “Impact of compact fluorescent lamps on the electric

power network,” 13th Int. Conf. on Harmonics and Quality of Power (ICHQP),

pp.1-6, Australia, 2008.

[29] R.J. Bravo, and N.Y. Abed, “Experimental evaluation of the harmonic behaviour

http://www.smh.com.au/business/property/australian-homes-still-the-worlds-biggest-20110821-1j5ev.html

http://www.smh.com.au/business/property/australian-homes-still-the-worlds-biggest-20110821-1j5ev.html

http://www.build.com.au/bca-lighting-restrictions

http://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/EnergyEfficientLighting.pdf

http://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/EnergyEfficientLighting.pdf

http://www.aainy.com/pdf/phillips_lamp_specification_catalog.pdf

https://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services/environment/energy-efficiency

https://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services/environment/energy-efficiency

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=99&t=3

http://diamondenergy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/CEC-Household-Energy-Efficiency-Fact-Sheet.pdf

http://diamondenergy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/CEC-Household-Energy-Efficiency-Fact-Sheet.pdf

https://industry.gov.au/Energy/Energy-information/Documents/energyuseaustralianresidentialsector19862020part1.pdf



References

72

of LED light bulb,” IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting,

Vancouver, pp.1-4, 2013.

[30] Energy savings forecast of solid-state lighting in general illumination

applications, Office of energy efficiency and renewable energy, US Department

of Energy, 2016. Retrieved on 30/03/2017.

https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/10/f33/energysavingsforecast16_0.pdf

[31] J. Yong, L. Chen, A.B. Nassif, and W. Xu, “A Frequency-domain harmonic model

for compact fluorescent lamps,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol.25, no.2,

pp.1182-1189, 2010.

[32] M. Bessho, and K. Shimizu, “Latest trends in LED lighting,” Electronics and

Communications in Japan, vol.95, no.1, pp.1-7, 2012.

[33] LEDs to account for quarter of lighting market by 2016, Website, Published on

19/04/2013, Retrieved on 04/05/2017.

http://www.semiconductor-

today.com/news_items/2013/apr/displaysearch_190413.html

[34] The Halogen Lamp, Edison Tech Center Website, Retrieved on 21/02/2017.

http://www.edisontechcenter.org/halogen.html

[35] Comparison chart: LED lights vs. incandescent light bulbs vs. CFLs, Website,

Retrieved on 13/03/2017.

http://www.usailighting.com/stuff/contentmgr/files/1/92ffeb328de0f487825

7999e7d46d6e4/misc/lighting_comparison_chart.pdf

[36] M. Cole, H. Clayton, and K. Martin, “Solid-state lighting: The new normal in

lighting” IEEE Trans. Industry Applications, vol.51, no.1, pp.109-119, 2015.

[37] R. Loiselle, J. Butler, G. Brady, et al. “LED lighting for oil and gas facilities,”

IEEE Trans. Industry Applications, vol.51, no.2, pp.1369-1374, 2015.

[38] A.A.M. Oliveira, T.B. Marchesan, R.N. Prado, and A. Campos, “Distributed

emergency lighting system LEDs driven by two integrated flyback converters,”

IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting, pp.1141-1146, New

Orleans, 2007.

[39] F. Sichirollo, J.M. Alonso, and G. Spiazzi, “A novel double integrated buck

offline power supply for solid-state lighting applications,” IEEE Trans. Industry

Applications, vol.51, no.2, pp.1268-1276, 2015.

[40] Compact fluorescent lamp, Website, Retrieved 04/05/2017.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/compact_fluorescent_lamp

https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/10/f33/energysavingsforecast16_0.pdf

http://www.semiconductor-today.com/news_items/2013/apr/displaysearch_190413.html

http://www.semiconductor-today.com/news_items/2013/apr/displaysearch_190413.html

http://www.edisontechcenter.org/halogen.html

http://www.usailighting.com/stuff/contentmgr/files/1/92ffeb328de0f4878257999e7d46d6e4/misc/lighting_comparison_chart.pdf

http://www.usailighting.com/stuff/contentmgr/files/1/92ffeb328de0f4878257999e7d46d6e4/misc/lighting_comparison_chart.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp

References

73

[41] “How compact fluorescent lamps work and how to dim them,” Website, Published

on 3/9/2009, Retrieved on 30/03/2017.

http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1272528

[42] J. Cunill, L. Sainz, and J.J. Mesas, “Neutral conductor current in three-phase

networks with compact fluorescent lamps,” Electric Power Systems Research,

vol.103, pp.70-77, 2013.

[43] T. Aizawa, “Reduction of neutral conductor current in a three-phase four-wire

low-voltage distribution line,” Electrical Engineering in Japan, vol.171, no.4,

pp.19-27, 2010.

[44] Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC), Part 3-2: Limits- Limits for harmonic

current emissions (equipment input current ≤16 A per phase), IEC Standard IEC

61000-3-2:2009.

[45] Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC), Part 3.2: Limits- Limits for harmonic

current emissions (equipment input current less than or equal to 16 A per phase),

Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 61000.3.2:2003.

[46] Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC), Part 3-2: Limits for harmonic current

emissions (equipment input current ≤ 16A per phase), European Standard EN

61000-3-2:2006.

Every reasonable effort has been made to acknowledge the owners of copyright

materials. I would be pleased to hear from any copyright owner who has been omitted

or incorrectly acknowledged.

http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1272528

74

Publications Arising from this Thesis

Journal article

1) M. Usman, F. Shahnia, GM Shafiullah, and A. Arefi, “Utility and consumer-

oriented multi-criteria assessment of residential light bulbs available on the

Australian market,” Under review in the Australian Journal of Electrical and

Electronics, EATJ-D-18-00255, Submitted on 01-02-2018.

Conference papers

2) M. Usman, F. Shahnia, GM Shafiullah, and A. Arefi, “Technical comparison of

the domestic LEDs and CFLs available on the Australian market,” IEEE 49th

North American Power Symposium (NAPS), Morgan Town, USA, Sept. 2017.

3) M. Usman, F. Shahnia, A. Arefi, GM Shafiullah, and D. Zhang, “Technical and

Non-Technical Juxtaposition of Domestic Lighting Bulbs of the Australian

Market,” 27th Australian Universities Power Engineering Conference (AUPEC),

Melbourne, Australia, Nov. 2017.