• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 78 subscribers
  • Views 116 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

TIDA-010243:About "Phase V → I" in Energy-Metrology-GUI

daiki.kato
Prodigy 30 points
Part Number: TIDA-010243
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: SYSCONFIG

Tool/software:

I have three questions about the Energy-Metrology-GUI (calibrator.exe) in ADCEnergyMetrologyLibrarySW.

(1)Does the item "Phase V→I" mean how much the current phase is shifted based on the voltage?

Also, what is the difference between "Phase V→I" and "Phase V→I (Reported)"?

(2)In the "Phase correction" of "Manual cal," I entered an adjustment value so that the value of "Phase V→I" was 0.00°.

Then, the result of "Phase V→I" was not as theoretically calculated, but "Phase V→I (Reported)" was found to have changed as theoretically calculated.　

Does this mean that we can adjust "Phase correction" by entering a value so that the value of "Phase V→I (Reported)" becomes 0.00°?

(3)Figures 1 and 2 show the screens adjusted so that the value of "Phase V→I (Reported)" is 0.00°.

In Figure 1, Phase A is -0.17° and Phase B is -0.16° in "Phase V to I (Reported)," so I entered 9.4us for Phase A and 8.9us for Phase B in "Phase correction".

As shown in Figure 2, "Phase V to I (Reported)" of Phases A and B were adjusted to approximately 0°.

On the other hand, "Phase V→I" of Phase A and B repeatedly fluctuated at two values, 0.81°in Figure 2 and -1.15°in Figure 3.

Why is the "Phase V→I" value not the theoretical value? Is it not working correctly?

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Thank you in advance.

  • 0
    TI__Prodigy 60 points

    Hey Daiko,

    I work with this GUI quite often, so allow me to see if I can answer some of these questions for you:

    1. "Phase V -> I" refers to the phase angle between the voltage and current for a given Line being monitored. The "Phase V->I (Reported)" refers to a more instantaneous measurement of the same phase angle. The first of the two values is supposed to represent an averaged value as opposed to the instantaneous value.

    2. When doing the phase calibration, I would focus more on the "Phase V -> I" value rather than the "Phase V -> I (Reported)" value. This relates back to the first value representing the average. I have never done calibration based on the Reported value, so I'd have to see if I get similar results to your case here. 

    3. This seems result you detail seems to go back to the method of calibration here. Another big question I'd have is what board you're evaluating? There have been updated versions of the FW, and I'm also wondering if looking at more recent versions would assist in this. 

  • 0 in reply to Gavin Loera
    Prodigy 30 points

    Hi Gabin.

    Thanks for your answer.

    Regarding 1, I understand that "Phase V -> I" is the average value and "Phase V -> I (Reported)" is the instantaneous value.

    Regarding 2, the calibration is focused on the "Phase V -> I" value. In my case, "Phase V -> I" repeatedly fluctuates between two values, 0.81° and -1.15°, so there may be some bug.Can I adjust "Phase V -> I" to 0° on the board that you are evaluating, Gabin?

    Regarding 3, thank you for your advice. I wrote the latest CCS, SYSCONFIG, and SDK FW to the board I am using and checked the values ​​with Energy-Metrology-GUI, but there was no particular change.

**Attention** This is a public forum