Determination of Bank Capacitor Size as Power Factor Improvement

in Inductive Loads Using Lab View Interface

Donny Dupang Sitorus, A. Tossin Alamsyah and Asrizal Tatang

Electrical Engineering Department State Polytechnic of Jakarta Jakarta, Indonesia

Keywords: Labview, Capacitor Bank, KHA, MCCB.

Abstract: The development of the housing, hotel, and mall sectors has resulted in an ever-increasing demand for

electrical energy. Therefore, the electrical energy distribution is fast, precise, and accurate. Calculating the

quality of the power factor, conductors, and safety is necessary. This is because it involves the reliability of

the system. The quality of the power factor must be maintained by the standards given by PLN to reduce the

cost of electric power used, increase system capacity, increase voltage, and reduce losses to the system.

Calculating the KHA is also essential to make it easier to determine the cross-sectional area of the cable that

will be used correctly, safely, and by predetermined standards. At the same time, calculating the magnitude

of the breaker capacity is essential for safety and the current breaker when there is a short circuit (short circuit)

or overload (overload), which can cause damage to the electric motor and fire due to sparks. In this study, we

will design and calculate the value of the capacitor bank, the calculation of the value of the cable KHA, and

the capacity of the MCC breaker using the LabVIEW interface so that it can make it easier for the industry to

do calculations quickly just by entering load data.

1 INTRODUCTION

Electrical energy is one of the most vital energy roles

in everyday life. This fact triggers the demand for

electrical energy from year to year to increase with the

development of the housing sector, hotels, malls, and

so on. This increase must be followed by a good and

efficient distribution of electrical energy to obtain

electrical energy with high continuity of supply

(E. Ridwan, M. I. Arsyad, A. Razikin, 2018).

In Indonesia, electric power consumers comprise

various groups ranging from households to businesses

to industries. This load variation causes fluctuations in

the power quality of distribution network buses.

Power quality is determined by the bus's high and low

power factors. The decrease in the value of the PF

power factor (cosϕ) is a problem that must be

minimized. Because with a decrease in PF, consumers

and suppliers of electrical energy will experience

losses(B. S. Fauzan, F. Danang Wijaya,). For

consumers, the disadvantages include decreased

system voltage, and the electric power supply cannot

be maximized. The factor that affects the decrease in

PF is the use of inductive loads. The problem is the

low power quality caused by inductive loads (Lisiani,

A. Razikin, and Syaifurrahman, 2020). The inductive

load is a type of load with a wire wound element. An

increase in inductive load results in an increase in the

use of reactive power, which affects the quality of

electric power, especially the power factor. The

comparison between active power (W) and visible

power (VA) will result in a low PF power factor (cosϕ)

as a result of the use of inductive loads(A. Dani and

M. Hasanuddin,(2014)).

One of the efforts made to reduce reactive power

due to using inductive loads is to compensate for

reactive power,(V.B.Rizqiya,(2019)).The reactive

power compensation will reduce the inductive load's

reactive power(S. T. Listrik,). Bank capacitors are

capacitive loads that can reduce reactive power in

inductive loads A. B. Ar Rahmaan,(2017)). So the use

of capacitor banks as reactive power compensators

can correct poor power factors in the load so that the

use of electrical power to the needs of the load is more

appropriate.

The correct cable selection also needs to be

considered because it functions to see the smooth

distribution of electrical energy from the source to the

load,( S. A. Gunawan(2000)). To ensure the system is

safe, a breaker is also required. Breakers such as

MCCB function as safety and current breaker when

726

Sitorus, D., Alamsyah, A. and Tatang, A.

Determination of Bank Capacitor Size as Power Factor Improvement in Inductive Loads Using Lab View Interface.

DOI: 10.5220/0011875600003575

In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Applied Science and Technology on Engineering Science (iCAST-ES 2022), pages 726-731

ISBN: 978-989-758-619-4; ISSN: 2975-8246

there is a short circuit (short circuit) or overload

(overload), (W. P. Azhari, 2019).

Therefore, the calculation of capacitor banks,

cable calculations, and efficient safety are needed to

maintain the quality of the power produced for

consumers. This research will focus on developing an

interface using LabView for this calculation so that it

will make it easier for developers to perform

calculations for the needs of the power system system.

2 METHODS

2.1 Capacitor Bank

Capacitor banks are used to improve the power factor

in a system by entering reactive power into the system

(

V. B. Rizqiya.2019). The capacity of the capacitor

entered into the system depends on the VAR

requirement. Calculation of the need for

compensation VAR can be calculated using the

formula (P. Kebutuhan and K. Daya, 2006)





=.(tan

(

 −







)

−tan

(

 −







)

(1)

Keterangan:

P = Active power





= initial power factor value





= target power factor value

At this stage, several steps must be taken to

determine the value of the capacitor bank to improve

the PF value. Before looking for the PF value, the first

thing to do is to record or measure the existing PF of

a plan. After knowing the PF value and power,

determine how much new PF you want so that the

system is much better than before. Several inputs

must be known so the system can work automatically

for the desired PF repair. We can see in the LabVIEW

display in Figure 2 below.

Figure 1: Interface image of the stages of determining the

value of the capacitor.

From Figure 1 above, we can understand that several

output options are presented to calculate the value of

the capacitor bank and how many sizes of capacitor

capacity are needed to meet the installed capacitor

bank.

2.2 Determining the Cable Size

In determining the cable type, you must first consider

the current-carrying strength (KHA) that will pass

through the cable. After the KHA value has been

determined, it will be compared with the PUIL 2000

standard to determine the required cross-sectional

area. The following is the calculation of CRC based

on the rules in PUIL 2000:

 = 125% (2)

where:

KHA: Strong Current Conduct

FLA: Full Load Ampere

Moreover, the calculation of the correction factor on

the attached cable is as follows:

 =



()

(3)

 = Load current (A)

K1= Room temperature correction factor

K2=Group reduction correction factor

At this stage, the interface is made for calculating

the cable size in LabView. Input in power and

voltage, power factor, and current. The LabVIEW

program will perform calculations automatically

based on the input so that the value of KHA is

obtained. After obtaining the KHA value, the cable

size selection is based on the datasheet available in

LabView.

Figure 2: Initial Interface Image Determination of Cable

Size.

2.3 Determining MCCB

In determining the capacity of the circuit breaker, it

must first consider the maximum setting of the short

circuit protection device on the circuit breaker. The

calculation is based on the applicable standard, PUIL

2000, where the maximum setting of the short circuit

protection device on the cage motor circuit breaker

does not exceed 250% of the total load current of the

Determination of Bank Capacitor Size as Power Factor Improvement in Inductive Loads Using Lab View Interface

727

motor. The following is the calculation of the

maximum setting of the protective device.

Maximum protective device= 250% x FLA

where:

FLA: Full load ampere

At this stage, the interface is made for calculating

the cable size in the LabView software. The inputs are

load power, source voltage, and cos phi. The

LabVIEW program will automatically calculate the

nominal value and the installed MCCB capacity. By

determining the correct MCCB value, the system is

expected to be able to overcome any sudden

disturbances.

Figure 3: Initial Interface Image Determination of MCCB.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this sub-chapter, we will discuss the results of

the simulation of the operation of the LabVIEW

that has been made to find the KHA value of a

cable, the MCCB value, and the capacitor value

for a better PF change from the existing system of

a plan.

3.1 Identify the Crc Value Search

Process Using the Labview

Interface

In this research, several input and output components

are needed in the initial process series related to each

other. Figure 5 above is a block diagram that will be

run to determine the three values, namely the cable

KHA, the MCCB quantity, and the capacitor value.

The front panel has been arranged as described in

chapter 3.

Each simulation process will be run together.

Before the simulation is run, the block diagram will

check the wire connections between the indicators

and whether they are connected correctly or not. If

there is a wired connection, there is an incorrect block

diagram, the program automatically cannot be run,

and a cross appears on the error section. For the start

or stop button, only one control can start and stop the

calculation of the three components. Figure 5 is an

image of the button for simulating the three

calculations.

Figure 4: Overall block diagram drawing of the simulator.

iCAST-ES 2022 - International Conference on Applied Science and Technology on Engineering Science

728

Figure 5: Image of the running and stop buttons on the

simulator.

The simulation results are in the form of numbers

according to the desired output. The search for the

KHA value is in the form of amperes and has been

carried out several times by trial and error. The

simulation results have been confirmed to be the same

as the results of manual calculations. To prove

whether the simulator can be used, a case study is

taken with the following input values: Power

Capacity, Source Voltage, and Power Factor

The following is a Table of the results of the

calculation of KHA using LabView simulation:

Table 1: The results of the calculation of the CRC value

using the LabVIEW simulator.

Active

Power

(Watt)

Cos

Phi

I (A)

CRC

Labview

(A)

1 25560 0.786 49,4662 61,8328

2 25850 0.793 49,5858 61,9823

3 23590 0.773 46,4215 58,0268

4 24950 0.786 48,2857 60,3571

5 21630 0.786 41,8605 52,3256

From Table 1 above can be seen the results of the

simulation of the first experiment onwards.

To compare the LabVIEW simulation results,

manual calculation data is needed with direct

measurement data in the field. The input data used in

the manual calculations are compared to the case

studies for the simulation. The results of manual

calculations can be seen in Table 2.

Table 2: The results of calculating the CRC value using

manual field measurement.

Active

Power (W)

Cos

Phi

I (A)

CRC

Labview (A)

1 25560 0.786

49,46 61,82

2 25850 0.793 49,57 61,96

3 23590 0.773 46,41 58,01

4 25950 0.786

48,28

60,35

5 21630 0.786

41,85

52,32

Table 2 above shows the results of the calculation of the

first experiment onwards.

Table 3: Comparison of manual field measurement

determining the value of CRC and the LabView simulator.

Trial and error

simulation data

retrieval

LabVIEW

simulation

results

Field

Measurements

1 61,8328 61,82

2 61,9823 61,96

3 58,0268 58,01

4 62,7762 60,35

5 52,3256 52,32

From the results of Table 3 above, it can be seen

the results of the simulation of the first experiment

onwards. There is no significant change in value

between LabVIEW simulation and manual

calculation. The difference in the simulation results

with manual calculations only lies in the value of the

number behind the comma. As we can see in data

retrieval 1, the LabVIEW simulation results are

61,8328, while the field measurements is 61,82. It can

be concluded that there is no difference in the central

values between the simulation results and the manual.

3.2 Identification of the Mccb Value

Search Process Using the Labview

Interface

To change the power factor value that is better than

the existing system. Similarly, after coding the block

diagram for finding the MCCB value is complete, the

simulation can be done by pressing the running button

on the control bar icon. At this stage of finding the

value of the capacitor, many inputs and outputs are

described. The simulation results that have been

carried out several times can be interpreted as the

resulting value following the calculation. In Table 4.4

below are the record results from the final simulation

results using LabVIEW. To prove whether the

simulator can be used, a case study is taken with the

input values for the mccb of a motor as follows:

The following is a Table of the results of the

calculation of MCCB value using LabView

simulation:

Table 4: The results of the calculation of the MCCB value

using the LabVIEW simulator.

Active

Power

(Watt)

Cos Phi

MCCB Value

simulation results

on LabVIEW

1 84720 0,77 209,207

2 88570 0,793 212,37

3 84940 0,773 208,936

4 91660 0,794 219,503

5 87910 0,799 209,205

Determination of Bank Capacitor Size as Power Factor Improvement in Inductive Loads Using Lab View Interface

729

From Table 4. above, the simulation results of the

first experiment onwards can be seen. To compare the

LabVIEW simulation results, manual calculation data

is needed with direct measurement data in the field.

The input data used in the manual calculations are

compared to the case studies for the simulation. The

results of manual calculations can be seen in Table 5.

Table 5: The results of calculating the MCCB value using

field measurement.

Active

Power

(Watt)

Cos

Phi

Field Measurement

of MCCB value

results (A)

1 84720 0,77 209,16

2 88570 0,793 212,31

3 84940 0,773 208,87

4 91660 0,794 219,46

5 87910 0,799 209,16

From table 5. above, the results of the calculation

of the first experiment onwards can be seen.

Table 6: Comparison of calculations to determine the

MCCB value with the LabVIEW simulator and manual

calculations.

Trial and error

simulation data

retrieval

LabVIEW

simulation

results

MCCB value field

measurement (A)

1 209,207 209,16

2 212,37 212,31

3 208,936 208,87

4 219,503 219,46

5 209,205 209,16

From the results of table 6 above, it can be seen the

results of the simulation of the first experiment

onwards. There is no significant change in value

between LabVIEW simulation and manual calculation.

The difference in the simulation results with field

measurement only lies in the value of the number

behind the comma. As we can see in data retrieval 1,

the LabVIEW simulation result is 209,207 A, while the

field measurement is 209,16 A. It can be concluded

that there is no difference in the central values between

the simulation results and field measurement.

3.3 Interface Labview Identify the

Process of Finding the Capacitor

Bank Value for Power Factor

Improvement Using the Labview

Interface

After the coding of the block diagram for finding the

capacitor value has been completed, the simulation

can be done by pressing the running button on the

control bar icon. At this stage of finding the value of

the capacitor, many inputs and outputs are described.

To change the power factor value that is better than

the existing system. The simulation results that have

been carried out several times can be interpreted as

the resulting value by the calculation. In Table 7

below are the recorded results of the final simulation

results using LabView To prove whether the

simulator can be used, a case study is taken with the

following input: Active Power, Cos Phi before PF

repair, and target Cos Phi

The following is a table of the results of the

calculation of Capacitor needed value using LabView

simulation:

Table 7: Capacitor needed value calculation results using

the LabView simulator.

Active

Power

(KW)

Q1 Q2

Capacitor

needed

value (Qc)

simulation

results

(KVar) on

LabView

1 542,08 0,786 0.99 349,13

2 531,38 0,793 0.99 332,515

3 482,48 0.773 0.98 298,003

4 495,22 0,786 0.99 318,949

5 512,62 0.786 0.99 330,156

Table 7 above shows the simulation results of the

first experiment onwards.

To compare the LabVIEW simulation results,

manual calculation data is needed with direct

measurement data in the field. The input data used in

the manual calculations are compared to the case

studies for the simulation. The results of manual

calculations can be seen in table 8.

Table 8: The results of calculating the value of the capacitor

needed using manual field measurement.

Power Active

(KW)

Q1 Q2

Qc (KVAR)

measurement

1 542,08 0,786 0.99 349,13

2 531,38 0,793 0.99 332,52

3 482,48 0.773 0.99 298,00

4 495,22 0,786 0.99 318,95

5 512,62 0.786 0.99 330,16

Table 8 above shows the results of the calculation

of the first experiment onwards.

iCAST-ES 2022 - International Conference on Applied Science and Technology on Engineering Science

730

Table 9: Comparison of manual field measurement

capacitor needed values and LabVIEW simulator.

Trial and error

simulation

data retrieval

Capacitor

needed

simulation

results (KVar)

with LabView

Capacitor

needed

manual field

measurement

results (KVar)

1 349,13 349,13

2 332,515 332,52

3 298,003 298,00

4 318,949 318,95

5 330,156 330,16

From the results of table 9 above, it can be seen

that the changes in the simulation result from the first

experiment onwards. There is no significant change

in value between LabVIEW simulation and manual

field measurement. As we can see in the data retrieval

of Labview simulation results, it is 349,13 KVar, and

the results of manual field measurements are also

349,13 KVar. The LabView simulation results and

the manual field measurement are the same.

4 CONCLUSION

Ensure that the conclusion is related to the paper's title,

purpose, and contribution. The Labview application

can calculate the VALUE of KHA, the value of

capacitors of banks, and the value of MCCB as

appropriate to automatically protect the working

system of electricity flow.

REFERENCES

E. Ridwan, M. I. Arsyad, A. Razikin, ) Program, S. T.

Elektro, and J. T. Elektro, “Analisis Perencanaan

Pembagian Beban Dan Instalasi Listrik Pada Hotel

Golden Tulip Di Kota Pontianak,” pp. 1–8, 2018.

B. S. Fauzan, F. Danang Wijaya, “Studi Perbaikan Faktor

Daya Beban Induktif Dengan Kompensator Reaktif

Seri Menggunakan Sakelar Pemulih Energi Magnetik,”

Tek. Elektro FT UGM, pp. 125–147.

Lisiani, A. Razikin, and Syaifurrahman, “Identifikasi dan

Analisis Jenis Beban Listrik Rumah Tangga Terhadap

Faktor Daya ( Cos Phi ),” J. Untan, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 1–

9, 2020.

A. Dani and M. Hasanuddin, “Perbaikan Faktor Daya

Sebagai Kompensator Daya Reaktif ( Studi Kasus STT

Sinar Husni ),” Semin. Nas. R., vol. 998, no. September,

pp. 673–678, 2018.

V. B. Rizqiya, Analisis Perencanaan Perbaikan Faktor

Daya Sebagai Upaya Optimasi Daya Listrik Di Gedung

E5 Fakultas Teknik Universitas Negeri Semarang.

2019.

S. T. Listrik, “Simulasi biaya penyaluran daya listrik

dengan metode,” Univ. Stuttgart, pp. 1–9.

A. B. Ar Rahmaan, “Optimalisasi Penempatan Kapasitor

Bank Untuk Memperbaiki Kualitas Daya Pada Sistem

Kelistrikan Pt. Semen Indonesia Aceh Menggunakan

Metode Genetic Algorithm (Ga),” J. Tek. ITS, vol. 5,

no. 2, 2016.

S. A. Gunawan, “Analisis Penghantar dan Pengaman Pada

Gedung Admisi Universitas Muhammadiyah

Yogyakarta ( Analysis of Conductor and Protection on

Admission Building Universitas Muhammadiyah

Yogyakarta ),” 2000.

W. P. Azhari, “Tugas akhir evaluasi perencanaan

kebutuhan daya pada instalasi listrik kantor pimpinan

daerah muhammadiyah kota medan,” Tek. Elektro,

2019.

P. Kebutuhan and K. Daya, “Keywords: capasitor bank,”

pp. 63–72, 2006.

Determination of Bank Capacitor Size as Power Factor Improvement in Inductive Loads Using Lab View Interface

731