UEGCL · Meter Commissioning Review
| Date | Min Mvar | Max Mvar | Avg Mvar | Day Range | Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-14 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-15 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-16 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-17 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-18 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-19 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-20 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-21 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-22 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-23 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-24 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-25 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-26 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-27 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-28 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.02 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-29 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-09-30 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-10-01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-10-02 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.02 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-10-03 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-10-04 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
| 2026-10-05 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | ✓ Stable — normal variation |
The Mvar profile is consistent throughout the recording period with no step-changes.
The meter recorded 11 zero-load interval(s) before the generator came online. The kWh register showed 44.74 kWh at the first loaded interval.
Confirm all CT/VT ratio parameters were finalised before the generator was synchronised, and that no parameters were changed after load came on.
The hourly kWh change differs from the instantaneous MW by more than 2% in at least one interval. Possible causes: CT/VT ratio change mid-record, clock error, or register overflow.
L1 = 0.0000 kA, L2 = 0.0000 kA, L3 = 0.0000 kA. Within normal limits.
Frequency 49.77–50.52 Hz (within ±0.5 Hz tolerance). Export energy stayed essentially constant throughout — no reverse-power flow events. Status register held a consistent code from first load interval onward.
| Parameter | Meter Reading | Cross-check | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| System voltage (L-N) | 20.02 kV avg | 33 kV ÷ √3 = 19053 V ✓ | Verify VT mode |
| Phase current (avg) | L1=0.0000 L2=0.0000 L3=0.0000 kA | Expected ~0.0009 kA at 0.1 MW ✓ | Consistent |
| kWh Δ vs MW | Δ kWh/h ≈ MW×1000 ±2% | Verified across all 524 rows | DISCREPANCY ✗ |
| Power factor range | 0.5000 – 1.0000 | Expected >0.99 for large hydro | Normal |
| Current imbalance | 0.00% | Limit 5%, ideal <1% | OK |
Use these to narrow down what "not reading what we expect" means before drawing conclusions.
Compare the VT nameplate ratio against the programmed value in OBIS 1-4:32.5.0. Confirm L-N or L-L convention. This single check resolves the most common "wrong voltage" complaint.
A ratio error points to a CT or VT scale factor problem. An offset points to metering boundary or auxiliary load. A ratio within ±1% confirms the meter is correctly scaled.
Confirms whether Mvar step-changes are deliberate (normal) or unintended. Either outcome closes the reactive power finding.