Permalink
Switch branches/tags
Nothing to show
Find file Copy path
Fetching contributors…
Cannot retrieve contributors at this time
1858 lines (929 sloc) 58.9 KB

emonTx V2 Accuracy Test

Summary

The test detailed below performed on one emontx comes to the following conclusion:

The error below 40W could not be measured reliably and below 100W it was worse than 10%. Above 100W it was better than 10%, above 150W better than 6%, above 250W better than 4% and above 500W better than 2%.

It may be that your emontx will surpass or fail to achieve these accuracy levels depending on:

  1. Calibration - as demonstrated in this test, it may be necessary to apply an additional calibration, the precision of the different components in the circuit means that the voltage calibration can be anywhere between 203.1 – 265.4 while the current sensor calibration can be anywhere between 109.44 – 112.78see CT and AC power adapter installation and calibration theory

  2. Bias position will have a large effect on accuracy at low powers see: https://learn.openenergymonitor.org/electricity-monitoring/ct-sensors/measurement-implications-of-adc-resolution-at-low-current-values

  3. Level of electro-magnetic interference in your environment. Some laptops and switch mode power supplies can be a large source of electro-magnetic interference. Whether your circuit is shielded in any way i.e inside a metal box. A certain level of noise is actually a good thing as it helps overcome the limitations of trying to measure power where the current waveform is close to the ADC level magnitude, by causing the levels to flip higher and lower which after averaging gives a more accurate result.

If you could also repeat this test and post up your results, it would be great to get some comparative data of different emontx's in real world use.

If your also a non-emontx user but have build the emontx circuit on a breadboard, stripboard or arduino shield protoboard it would also be interesting to compare results.

Test setup

The test setup consists of an emontx with the standard Mascot AC-AC voltage adapter for voltage measurement and the standard current sensor, a YHDC sct-013-000 CT. The emonTx is powered via a 5 V USB power supply. The EmonTx sends the realpower values wirelessly to a jeelink that is connected to the computer.

The normal emonTx_CT123_Voltage sketch was used, the measurement rate was increased from once every 5 seconds to twice a second.

The CT is clipped around a modified cable that goes to a fixed load (a 20W and 60W incandescent lightbulb was used in the test). The cable modification was to separate the live and neutral wires and getting enough cable length to wrap around the CT up to 14 times in the case of this test.

A 20W and 60W incandescent lightbulb was used to ensure that the current waveform would be a near-sinusoidal waveform. It is expected that a low energy lightbulb may show higher accuracy at lower powers as its non-linear current draw, a current draw that looks more like a spike at the peak of the mains voltage waveform will utilise more ADC levels, see Measurement implications of ADC resolution at low current values.

Test procedure

The test was performed in two parts: first 1-14 turns with a 20W lightbulb and second 1-14 turns with a 60W lightbulb. Care was taken each time to make sure that the CT was clipped firmly, that the contact between the split cores where good and that there was no observable effect in trying to push the cores closer together - indicating good contact.

The measurements were logged to a text file and opened and graphed in realtime using KST, an open source data viewing program. KST was set to a data range of 20 datapoints and a label was created to show the Min, Max, Mean and Standard deviation (Sigma) of the power data.

20 datapoints at 2 datapoints a second covers a time window of 10 seconds for each Min, Max, Mean and Standard deviation measurement. Care was taken to make sure that the mains voltage did not vary significantly during the sample duration.

Min: the minimum power value in the sample of 20 datapoints.

Max: the maximum power value in the sample of 20 datapoints.

Mean: the mean value of the 20 datapoints.

Standard deviation: the standard deviation of the 20 datapoints

These values where logged alongside the actual power as given by the plug meter multiplied by the number of turns in a spreadsheet.

Uncalibrated ResultsÂ

These are the raw results, its clear that there is a significant calibration error as the error appears to increase in a particular direction linearly:

The plug in meter column on the left shows the number of watts as measured on the plug in meter: 21W relates to the actual power consumption of the 20W incandescent lightbulb, 60W relates to the actual power consumption of the 60W lightbulb.

The number of turn column is the number of turns of the live or neutral wire in the CT. The number of turns multiplied by the plug in meter power gives the power (or actually current) level as seen by the CT.

**plug in meter** **no of turns** **CT power** **Max (A)** **Min (B)** **Mean** **Standard Deviation** **error (A)** **error (B)** **% error (A)** **% error (B)** **MAX % error**
21 1 21 30 10 21.8 5.4 9 11 42.86% 52.38% 52.38%
21 2 42 45 36 39 3 3 6 7.14% 14.29% 14.29%
21 3 63 63 52 60 3.3 0 11 0.00% 17.46% 17.46%
21 4 84 83 71 78 4 -1 13 -1.19% 15.48% 15.48%
21 5 105 99 93 96 1.3 -6 12 -5.71% 11.43% 11.43%
21 6 126 119 108 116 2.8 -7 18 -5.56% 14.29% 14.29%
21 7 147 137 129 131 2 -10 18 -6.80% 12.24% 12.24%
21 8 168 156 151 154 1.3 -12 17 -7.14% 10.12% 10.12%
21 9 189 180 172 177 2.6 -9 17 -4.76% 8.99% 8.99%
21 10 210 194 188 191 1.8 -16 22 -7.62% 10.48% 10.48%
21 11 231 216 211 214 1 -15 20 -6.49% 8.66% 8.66%
21 12 252 240 234 237 1.6 -12 18 -4.76% 7.14% 7.14%
21 13 273 257 250 252 1.55 -16 23 -5.86% 8.42% 8.42%
21 14 294 276 269 272 2 -18 25 -6.12% 8.50% 8.50%
61 1 61 64 57 62.2 2 3 4 4.92% 6.56% 6.56%
61 2 122 121 112 118 2.2 -1 10 -0.82% 8.20% 8.20%
61 3 183 180 173 177 1.8 -3 10 -1.64% 5.46% 5.46%
61 4 244 237 230 234 2.5 -7 14 -2.87% 5.74% 5.74%
61 5 305 294 285 290 2.3 -11 20 -3.61% 6.56% 6.56%
61 6 366 346 340 344 2.3 -20 26 -5.46% 7.10% 7.10%
61 7 427 409 401 404 2.5 -18 26 -4.22% 6.09% 6.09%
61 8 488 466 458 461 1.4 -22 30 -4.51% 6.15% 6.15%
61 9 549 521 512 516 2 -28 37 -5.10% 6.74% 6.74%
61 10 610 576 571 574 1 -34 39 -5.57% 6.39% 6.39%
61 11 671 626 619 622 1.9 -45 52 -6.71% 7.75% 7.75%
61 12 732 696 687 691 1.9 -36 45 -4.92% 6.15% 6.15%
61 13 793 752 743 746 2.2 -41 50 -5.17% 6.31% 6.31%
61 14 854 805 798 801 2.2 -49 56 -5.74% 6.56% 6.56%

Applying a calibration

The calibration factor was calculated by dividing the plug in power 854W by the mean emontx power of 801W.

Calibration factor: 1.066

The next question is whether this error is down to voltage measurement only or is also down to current measurement or some other source. Comparing the voltage measured on the plug meter: 251.2V and the emontx 242.5 it looks like the difference here accounts for just over half the error.Â

Applying the calibration:

**plug in meter** **no of turns** **CT power** **Max** **Min** **Max CAL (A)** **Min CAL (B)** **Mean**

Standard Deviation

**error (A)**

error (B)

**% error (A)** **% error (B)** **MAX % error**
21 1 21 30 10 32 11 21.8 5.4 11.0 10.3 52.31% 49.23% 52.31%
21 2 42 45 36 48 38 39 3 6.0 3.6 14.23% 8.61% 14.23%
61 1 61 64 57 68 61 62.2 2 7.2 0.2 11.86% 0.37% 11.86%
21 3 63 63 52 67 55 60 3.3 4.2 7.6 6.62% 12.00% 12.00%
21 4 84 83 71 88 76 78 4 4.5 8.3 5.35% 9.88% 9.88%
21 5 105 99 93 106 99 96 1.3 0.6 5.8 0.52% 5.57% 5.57%
61 2 122 121 112 129 119 118 2.2 7.0 2.6 5.74% 2.12% 5.74%
21 6 126 119 108 127 115 116 2.8 0.9 10.9 0.69% 8.61% 8.61%
21 7 147 137 129 146 138 131 2 -0.9 9.5 -0.64% 6.44% 6.44%
21 8 168 156 151 166 161 154 1.3 -1.7 7.0 -1.00% 4.17% 4.17%
61 3 183 180 173 192 184 177 1.8 8.9 -1.4 4.87% -0.79% 4.87%
21 9 189 180 172 192 183 177 2.6 2.9 5.6 1.54% 2.97% 2.97%
21 10 210 194 188 207 200 191 1.8 -3.2 9.6 -1.51% 4.55% 4.55%
21 11 231 216 211 230 225 214 1 -0.7 6.0 -0.31% 2.61% 2.61%
61 4 244 237 230 253 245 234 2.5 8.7 -1.2 3.56% -0.50% 3.56%
21 12 252 240 234 256 249 237 1.6 3.9 2.5 1.54% 1.00% 1.54%
21 13 273 257 250 274 267 252 1.55 1.0 6.5 0.37% 2.37% 2.37%
21 14 294 276 269 294 287 272 2 0.3 7.2 0.09% 2.45% 2.45%
61 5 305 294 285 313 304 290 2.3 8.5 1.1 2.77% 0.37% 2.77%
61 6 366 346 340 369 362 344 2.3 2.9 3.5 0.79% 0.96% 0.96%
61 7 427 409 401 436 428 404 2.5 9.1 -0.5 2.12% -0.12% 2.12%
61 8 488 466 458 497 488 461 1.4 8.8 -0.3 1.81% -0.06% 1.81%
61 9 549 521 512 555 546 516 2 6.5 3.1 1.18% 0.57% 1.18%
61 10 610 576 571 614 609 574 1 4.1 1.2 0.67% 0.20% 0.67%
61 11 671 626 619 667 660 622 1.9 -3.6 11.0 -0.53% 1.65% 1.65%
61 12 732 696 687 742 732 691 1.9 10.1 -0.5 1.37% -0.06% 1.37%
61 13 793 752 743 802 792 746 2.2 8.8 0.8 1.10% 0.11% 1.10%
61 14 854 805 798 858 851 801 2.2 4.3 3.2 0.50% 0.37% 0.50%

Plot of Maximum error at power

Removing the first and largest error value so that we can better see the other datapoints:

Update

cagabi has repeated the tests and his results after calibration:

  • For measurements below 50W: error >34%
  • For measurements 50W - 100W: error >5%
  • For measurements 100W - 240 W: 2% < error < 5%
  • For measurements above the 300W: error < 1% (more less)

The results in a graph: