Product Model: Yaskawa 6-Pulse Drive Platform (A1000) with MTE Matrix-AP Filter Testing Results

Date: 10/3/2018
Prepared by: Rick Hombsch

Background
This test report outlines testing at MTE Corporation. The goal of this testing was to confirm the harmonic, power
factor and efficiency performance of a Yaskawa A1000 VFD with an MTE Matrix-AP Filter.

Testing Outline

1. General System Overview

Testing was done using a Yokogawa WT1800 6-Channel power quality analyzer with channels 1-3
measuring the system input voltage and currents and 4-6 measuring the system output voltage and
currents. An Agilent oscilloscope was used to take all waveforms.

Matrix-AP Part
System HP Drive Part No. Motors
No.

600HP MAPP0636D CIMR-AU4A0675AAA 2X 450HP

Unit was supplied power from a 480V breaker and its outputs were run to motor-dyne sets. Each dyne set
contains a drive motor that is driven by the drive system and a load motor driven from the line. The load
will be added by increasing the speed differential between the load motor and the drive motor. The
diagram below shows a basic outline of the setup.

Page 1 of 8
 Figure 1 Diagram of Loading Scheme

Measurements recorded at varying loads from 30-96%. The below diagram displays the location of the
input and output measurements. Waveforms were recorded at 30, 50, 75 and 100% load.

Figure 2 Diagram of location of input/output measurements

Page 2 of 8
2. Test Measurements
The measurements recorded include the following:
a. Input Voltage
b. Input Current
c. Input Voltage Distortion
d. Input Current Distortion
e. Output Voltage
f. Output Current
g. Input Power Factor
h. Output Power Factor

Data Result Tables

Input Voltage Input Current

%Load Phase A Phase B Phase C Avg Phase A Phase B Phase C Avg

29% 479.97 479.88 479.38 479.74 179.74 180.37 179.37 179.83
40% 479.10 479.35 478.73 479.06 241.23 242.49 240.86 241.53
47% 478.98 479.32 478.68 478.99 280.01 280.02 279.21 279.75
55% 476.87 477.18 476.49 476.85 323.66 324.64 323.29 323.87
63% 478.99 479.19 478.84 479.01 375.67 375.96 374.93 375.52
67% 479.11 479.25 478.60 478.99 396.13 395.68 394.98 395.60
70% 477.98 478.12 477.63 477.91 418.13 417.84 417.28 417.75
79% 477.53 477.79 477.05 477.46 468.15 467.21 465.87 467.08
82% 476.40 476.80 476.19 476.46 490.65 489.24 488.91 489.60
90% 475.95 476.66 476.07 476.23 534.88 534.47 532.45 533.93
96% 475.80 476.43 475.63 475.95 574.53 573.47 571.66 573.22

Page 3 of 8
 Input Voltage Distortion Input Current Distortion

%Load Phase A Phase B Phase C Avg Phase A Phase B Phase C Avg

29% 1.32 1.288 1.249 1.29 8.827 8.957 9.772 9.19
40% 1.338 1.309 1.277 1.31 7.055 7.08 7.699 7.28
47% 1.291 1.264 1.231 1.26 6.175 6.146 6.771 6.36
55% 0.857 0.803 0.903 0.85 5.076 4.873 5.095 5.01
63% 1.289 1.259 1.259 1.27 4.518 4.661 5.151 4.78
67% 1.247 1.242 1.229 1.24 4.287 4.426 4.827 4.51
70% 1.299 1.291 1.255 1.28 4.213 4.4 4.746 4.45
79% 1.365 1.34 1.295 1.33 3.976 4.081 4.502 4.19
82% 1.352 1.334 1.293 1.33 3.655 3.871 4.158 3.89
90% 1.325 1.316 1.252 1.30 3.425 3.608 3.863 3.63
96% 1.409 1.423 1.343 1.39 3.678 3.679 3.866 3.74

Output Voltage Output Current

%Load Phase A Phase B Phase C Avg Phase A Phase B Phase C Avg

29% 524.83 524.88 525.2 524.97 343.40 * 343.40 343.40
40% 520.28 519.86 520.5 520.21 386.80 * 387.50 387.15
47% 518.23 518.7 517.71 518.21 411.20 * 412.90 412.05
55% 515.37 514.29 514.73 514.80 443.90 * 446.70 445.30
63% 506.71 507.27 507.7 507.23 495.10 * 499.10 497.10
67% 505.73 504.53 505.7 505.32 513.50 * 517.40 515.45
70% 502.97 504.54 503.92 503.81 552.20 * 555.90 554.05
79% 500.51 502.06 501.66 501.41 570.90 * 575.80 573.35
82% 501.68 500.16 501.12 500.99 587.70 * 589.50 588.60
90% 497.04 497.46 495.65 496.72 629.10 * 634.30 631.70
96% 497.29 496.39 495.43 496.37 641.20 * 646.20 643.70

* Output current from Phase B did not record correctly

Page 4 of 8
 Power Factor Measurements

% Load PF(Input) PF(Output) Q(Input)

29% 0.943 0.1801 -4.59E+04

40% 0.9872 0.3854 -2.83E+04
47% 0.9938 0.4621 -1.91E+04
55% 0.9961 0.5248 -7.05E+03
63% 0.9964 0.6461 1.54E+04
67% 0.9955 0.6735 2.35E+04
70% 0.9923 0.7325 4.08E+04
79% 0.9901 0.7461 4.79E+04
82% 0.9882 0.7481 5.32E+04
90% 0.9829 0.7971 7.35E+04
96% 0.9812 0.8025 7.83E+04

Input Current Harmonics at Varying Loads

5.0%
4.4%
4.2%
4.0%

3.0%

2.0%

1.0% 0.7%
0.3% 0.4%

0.0%
2 3 4 5 6 7

30% Load 50% Load 75% Load 100% Load

Page 5 of 8
 Waveforms at 30% Load

Input
Voltage

Input
Current

Output
Voltage

Output
Current

Waveforms at 50% Load

Page 6 of 8
Waveforms at 75% Load

Waveforms at 100% Load

Page 7 of 8
 DC Bus Voltage Waveform at 100% Load

Note: 100% Load was measured as worst case for DC Bus Ripple

Conclusions
The testing confirmed the performance of the system. The THID performance of the system at 30% load was
slightly higher than 8%. This is most likely due to the source impedance being below 1%. The oversized load may
also have played a role in this. At all other load points the THID was below 8% dropping below 5% at 55% load.
In addition, power factor was within normal ranges for this filter.

Page 8 of 8