Confidential Document

Date: September 15, 2020

Phase-One Report

Third-Party Evaluation of the Performance of

Smart Meter VS Electromechanical Meter-
Technical Assessment

PREPARED BY:

GCC Electrical Testing Laboratory “GCCLAB”

 Confidential Document

Document Control

GCCLAB, its affiliates and subsidiaries and their respective officers, employees or agents are,
individually and collectively, referred to in this clause as the ‘GCCLAB assumes no
responsibility and shall not be liable to any person for any loss, damage or expense caused
by reliance on the information or advice in this document or howsoever provided, unless that
person has signed a contract with the relevant GCCLAB entity for the provision of this
information or advice and in that case any responsibility or liability is exclusively on the terms
and conditions set out in that contract.

Except as permitted under current legislation no part of this work may be photocopied, stored
in a retrieval system, published, performed in public, adapted, broadcast, transmitted,
recorded or reproduced in any form or by any means, without prior permission of the copyright
owner.

Page - 2 -/24
Table of Contents
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................... 3
1 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 4
2 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 5
3 Worldwide Observation ................................................................................................................... 5
4 Phase-One Disclaimer .................................................................................................................... 6
5 Samples for Laboratory Testing ...................................................................................................... 6
6 Laboratory Testing Procedure......................................................................................................... 6
7 Testing Results ............................................................................................................................... 8
8 Observations and Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 20
9 Outlook and recommendation ....................................................................................................... 21
9.1 Scope enlargement ............................................................................................................... 21
9.2 Periodical Testing of meter at site ......................................................................................... 21
9.3 Steps for the removal/replacement of old meter ................................................................... 21
10 Appendix 1 ................................................................................................................................ 22
10.1 Electromechanical Meters Inaccuracy: ................................................................................. 22
10.2 Comparison of characteristics of Electromechanical and Smart Meters .............................. 22
11 List of Meter Under Test (MUT) ................................................................................................ 23
12 IEC 62053-11 accuracy limit ..................................................................................................... 24

Page - 3 -/24
 Confidential Document

1 Executive Summary
Few months ago, Saudi Electricity Company (SEC) started to install new Smart Meters to support the
need of modern utilities and smart grid infrastructures and to bring fair transparency in energy billing of
consumers. To qualify accurate performance, SEC assigned GCCLAB to conduct a comparative
technical study and conduct Third-Party assessment study on smart meters and electromechanical
meters’ accuracy against international quality and measurements standards.

Under this assignment, 40 meters (20 Smart Meters and 20 Electromechanical meters) samples were
delivered to GCCLAB for testing and study purpose. This report deals with systematic study and
subsequently presents technical results and observations.

For this purpose, all 40 meters were subjected to same test conditions for fair comparison. Test
procedures and Lab conditions were set in accordance with IEC 62053-21. All tested meters were
tested on “AS FOUND” tests basis (means GCCLAB has not done any kind of calibration/adjustment
on any meter), so that the purpose of comparison remains intact and representative to the actual field
conditions. All Electromechanical meters were removed some time ago from consumer site and
delivered for testing. The Energy Meters Testing Lab used for the study is an extremely high accuracy
testing system, calibrated and traceable to PTB Germany standards (National Metrological Institute of
Germany), refer to Section 7.

Based on testing results, our observations (in summary) are as follows:

- Observation on Smart Meters: All 20 numbers of smart meters performed satisfactorily with high
accuracy (from starting of recording of low energy consumption level till maximum current recording,
i.e. 40mA to 100 Amp) as per IEC 62053-21. Most of the results were accurate within +/- 0.2 %
(better than specified limit). Refer to Figure 7 & 8 that shows all smart meters’ error results.
- Observation on electromechanical meters:
• 3 out of 20 meters were not testable due to mechanical damage in dial and rotor marking.
• Most of the electromechanical meters (12 out of 17) could not either start or record or having
larger inconsistency in measurement for low current loading below 5 Amp, to the lower reading
side.
• Two samples of electromechanical meters were disregarded due to poor performance
o 1 out 17 was recording highly negative of -32% at high current (@ 50Amp and above)
o 1 out 17 was recording high positive.

Based on controlled Lab conditions, this part of this study can conclude that Smart Meters performed
at very high accuracy under all loading conditions within +/- 0.2 % tolerance. Electromechanical meters
demonstrated sound level of accuracy with noticeable low accuracy at low current conditions. It was
noticed that the Electromechanical meters have higher percentage of error. However, errors still within
the permissible limit of class 2 which is 2.5% reference to IEC 62053-11 standard (refer to the appendix
clause 13). Therefore, the errors percentage of both smart meter and electromechanical meter under
the lab test condition were within their permissible limits for class 1 and class 2 respectively. Details
of testing and observations are included in Section 8 & 9.

Page - 4 -/24
2 Introduction
GCCLAB was requested to perform a technical assessment to the performance of newly
installed smart meters in Saudi Electricity Company distribution systems. The scope of this
assessment includes the following:

• Phase-One: Lab Testing - Perform a laboratory testing to assess the performance of given
samples of smart meters and electromechanical meters. Addressing all findings and
comparison between the performance of both types of meters at the same given testing
parameters in a Lab environment.
• Phase-Two: Onsite Testing - Perform onsite testing at the consumer side for both types
of meters and address the differences and findings.
• Phase-Three: Technical Assessment - Gather all inputs and findings from Phase-One
and Phase-Two and provide comprehensive view of the findings. The Phase-Three report
will be the final report incorporating all findings.

3 Worldwide Observation
In most of utilities that moved towards smart meters installations, it has been observed and
claimed the changes in the cost profiles of the consumers. Although the difference in readings
is considered to be low and cannot explain the big claims, Smart Meters’ reading proved to
provide much more accurate energy readings for almost all loading and operating conditions
(further details are given in Section 11). Such dialogue between service providers and customers
is common in the initial stage of any Smart Meters replacement program, but smart meters will,
certainly, be more beneficial for both consumers and utilities due to the high accuracy and
transparency of the measurement as well as energy consumption awareness. As an example,
when two electric utilities in Delhi started rollout of new electronic meter in 2002-2007, they
approached independent testing labs to conduct detailed studies and to establish a systematic
procedure to address the consumers’ grievances on timely and quality manners. This exercise
led to major revisions of Indian Electricity Act in 2002-3 and 2007.

Page - 5 -/24
 Confidential Document

For that purpose, power utilities were recommended to thoroughly assess the performance of
newly installed meters vs the electromechanical meters to ensure that slight changes observed
in the consumption profile recording is only due to the attainable improvement in the accuracy
of the digital measurement and not due to other technical or performance issues of individual
devices.

4 Phase-One Disclaimer
Phase-One of the studies is based on testing representative samples of smart and
electromechanical meters under controlled Lab conditions. The GCCLAB received a total of 40
meters for lab testing which consists of 20 old electromechanical meters, brought directly from
the field, and another 20 smart meters. Smart meters’ samples are supposed to cover all type
of new meters introduced to the distribution systems. However, all 20 smart meters samples
represent only one type of smart meters; manufactured by “HOLLEY TECHNOLOGY LTD”.
Therefore, the assessment that was carried out in this study is limited to comparing the
performance of one brand of smart meters with respect to different electromechanical samples.
GCCLAB have no information about where those meters were installed or used. Also, during the
inventory stage of the given samples, GCCLAB found three malfunctional electromechanical
meters due to damaged dial (bend dial) and the marker on the dial is not visible to the sensor.
For that, GCCLAB did not include those 3 meters in the testing. The purpose of this assessment
is to perform a comparison between both types of meters and not for the purpose of addressing
pass or fail of any meter. Finally, the type approval and/or accuracy class certification of Meter
Under Test (MUT) was not the objective of this assessment studies. Hence observation/findings
should not be linked or viewed from that point view.

5 Samples for Laboratory Testing

The following meter samples submitted to GCCLAB for testing purpose.

Table 1:Meter Samples List

Country of
Manufacturer PULSE Type / Model Rating QTY
Origin
Holley Technology 1000 KWh/
CHINA DIGITAL ( DTSD545) 10(100)A , 60Hz 20
LTD 1000kvarh
MEMF KSA 37.5 revs/kWh ELECTROMECHANICAL EM-3W 20 (100) A 60 Hz 12
ELECTROMECHANICAL
Landis+Gyr GREECE 37.5/kWh 20 (100) A 60 Hz 2
MM2500f3
Holley Technology
CHINA 40 REV/kWh ELECTROMECHANICAL DT58 20 (100) A 60 Hz 3
LTD
Arabian Metering
KSA 48 REV/kWh ELECTROMECHANICAL C 114N 20 (100) A 60 Hz 2
Company
Middle East Electric ELECTROMECHANICAL
KSA 37.5 revs/ kWh 20 (100)A 60 Hz 1
Meter Factory T371E2

6 Laboratory Testing Procedure

The objective of this test procedure is to carry out systematic investigation by using technical testing for
comparing the measurement performance of electromechanical and smart meters. So that the impact
on consumer billing can be analyzed to ensure fair and exact invoicing.

Herein after Electromechanical (old Meter) will be known as EM, Smart Meter will be known as SM, and
for general purpose both will be known as Meter Under Test (MUT).

Page - 6 -/24
High Precision Meter Test Equipment (Accuracy Class of Reference Standard is 0.01% which is 100
times better than SM and 200 times better than EM) were used for this assessment. The Reference
Standard is having traceability with PTB Germany (National Metrological Institute of Germany). Further,
GCCLAB is maintaining all necessary reference test conditions as necessary and recommended in IEC
Standard Applicable for Energy Meters.

The testing was conducted based on IEC standards (IEC 62053-11 & IEC 62053-21). However real-
life load and some comparison points also considered for assessment purpose.

The following testing sequences were performed:

- Warmup (voltage only to record energy register) for 15-20 min.
- Warmup the meter for Basic Current and Nominal voltage for 1 Hr.
- Starting current test. (Means at what current level energy meter will start recording)
o Apply the 0.004Ib, Nominal voltage, PF 1 (Test Duration 6956 sec)
o See which meter start recording. Note down/store the result
o Next apply the 0.008Ib Nominal voltage PF=1, (Test Duration 3478 sec) and see
whether EM started to move
o Next apply the 0.01Ib Nominal voltage PF=1 (Test Duration 2782 sec) and see
whether EM started to move
- Accuracy Test
o All 40 meters were subjected to testing as found basis without any
calibration/adjustment at GCC
o All 40 meters (MUT) were connected in series and tested simultaneously on same
test bench. Applied test current is for comparison purpose hence given in absolute
terms
o Method based on pulse/revolution sensed by scanner
o Test duration for both meters was same. Test duration calculated based on the meter
which is having lowest meter constant i.e. 37.5)
o Load point will be as follows (all at Un)
Table 2: Accuracy Test Points
Test Duration in second for
Test Current in Amp PF
each point
0.1 1 8763
0.5 1, 0.866 Ind, 0.5 Ind, 1758, 2022,3509
1 1, 0.866 Ind, 0.5 Ind, 876, 1011,1751
5 1, 0.866 Ind, 0.5 Ind, 360, 416, 720
10 1, 0.866 Ind, 0.5 Ind, 360, 416, 720
50 1, 0.866 Ind, 0.5 Ind, 180, 208, 360
100 1, 0.866 Ind, 0.5 Ind, 90 , 104 ,180

- Dial Test/Register Test (Load points are as follows)

Table 3: Register Test Point
Test Current in Amp PF Amount of Energy
30 0.866 10kWh

Page - 7 -/24
 Confidential Document

7 Testing Results

Starting Current Test Results

Figure 1: Starting current tests for Smart Meters

Figure 1 shows the results of starting current recording tests at (40mA, 80mA and 100mA).
All smart meters measured the three values currents and denoted by “OK”.

Figure 2 Starting current tests for Smart Meters

Figure 2 shows the results of starting current recording tests at (40mA, 80mA and 100mA).
Most of the electromechanical meters measured the three values currents and denoted by “OK”.
However, 4 out of 17 did not read at 40mA and were denoted by “Error”

Page - 8 -/24
Accuracy Test Results

Accuracy Test Result of Smart Mater at UPF

% Error of Smart Meter at UPF

1.50
IEC Upper limit

1.00

0.50

0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

-0.50

-1.00

IEC Lower limit

-1.50
Meter Test Position

230V 0.1A UPF 230V 0.5A UPF 230V 1.0A UPF

230V 5.0A UPF 230V 10A UPF 230V 50 A UPF
230V 100.0A UPF
Figure 3 Accuracy Test Result of Smart Mater at UPF

Figure 3.1 same chart but with higher error axis resolution

The above charts (Figure 3 & 3.1) represent the accuracy test result of smart meter at Unit Power
Factor. As explained that reference to IEC 62053-11 for smart meter (refer to Section 13 in the
appendix), the allowable range of error in accuracy for smart meter is within 1.5% for class 1 which is
the smart meter sample class given. In Figure 3, the 20 smart meters had been tested with different
current value under unit power factor. Each color in the graph represent different current value. It is
noticed that the error percentage in all scenarios (different current value at unit power factor) is very
close to each other and within the IEC class 1 limits that described by the dot lines.
Page - 9 -/24
 Confidential Document

Accuracy Test Result of Smart Mater at 0.5 Lag

% Error of Smart Meter at 0.5 Lag

1.50
IEC Upper Limit

1.00

0.50

0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

-0.50

-1.00

IEC Lower Limit

-1.50
Meter Test Position

230V 0.5A 0.5 Lag 230V 1A 0.5 Lag 230V 5A 0.5 Lag
230V 10A 0.5 Lag 230V 50 A 0.5 Lag 230V 100A 0.5 Lag

Figure 4 Accuracy Test Result of Smart Mater at 0.5 Lag

Figure 4.1 same chart but with higher error axis resolution

Figures 4 & 4.1 represent the accuracy test result of smart meter at 0.5 Lagging. The same exercise
performed to the smart meter and using the same scenarios (current values) but with 0.5 lagging.
All smart meters within the IEC class 1 limits.

Page - 10 -/24
 Accuracy Test Result of Smart Mater at 0.866 Lag
1.50
% Error of Smart Meter at 0.866 Lag

IEC Upper Limit

1.00

0.50

0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
-0.50

-1.00
IEC Lower Limit
-1.50
Meter Test Position

230V 0.5A 0.866 Lag 230V 1A 0.866 Lag 230V 5A 0.866 Lag
230V 10A 0.866 Lag 230V 50 A 0.866 Lag 230V 100A 0.866 Lag

Figure 5 Accuracy Test Result of Smart Mater at 0.866 Lag

Figure 5.1 same chart but with higher error axis resolution

The charts above (Figures 5 & 5.1) represents the accuracy test result of smart meter at 0.866 Lagging.

The above three charts for UPF, 0.5 lagging and 0.866 Lagging (Figures 3, 4 & 5) for smart meters
indicate that accuracy tolerance of all 20 smart meters at any given test point did not exceed +/-0.2%
(well below the permissible limit as per IEC).

Therefore, smart meter accuracy tests perform perfectly (within IEC 62053-11) at the lab condition
environment.

Page - 11 -/24
 Confidential Document

Accuracy Test Result of EM Mater at UPF

200.00

150.00
% Error of EM Meters at UPF

100.00

50.00

0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

-50.00
Meter Test position start 21

230V 0.1A UPF 230V 0.5A UPF 230V 1.0A UPF 230V 5.0A UPF
230V 10A UPF 230V 50 A UPF 230V 100.0A UPF

Figure 6 Accuracy Test Result of EM Mater at UPF

Figures 6 & 6.1 represent the accuracy test result of electromechanical meter at unit power factor. It
was noticed that some meters at low current value were not able to record consistently. Please refer to
the results in Sections 8.3 & 8.4 where the term (#NUM!) used in the table. (#NUM) means test could
not completed within stipulated/extended time. Below snapshot from the results described in Section
8.3 & 8.4.

Figure 6.1 detailed results of measured errors during accuracy tests at UPF

In Figure 6.1, it was observed that the electromechanical meters cannot be read accurately below 5.0A
at unit power factor. Considering that the provided electromechanical meters designed to operate
between 20Amp to 100Amp (as per the nameplate). After 5.0Amp, most of the reading satisfactory
(within 2.5% error) which is the permissible limit as per class 2 requirement in IEC 62053-11.

Page - 12 -/24
 Accuracy Test Result of EM Mater at 0.5 Lag
300.00

250.00
% Error of EM Meters at 0.5 Lag

200.00

150.00

100.00

50.00

0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

-50.00
Meter Test position start 21
230V 0.5A 0.5 Lag 230V 1A 0.5 Lag 230V 5A 0.5 Lag
230V 10A 0.5 Lag 230V 50 A 0.5 Lag 230V 100A 0.5 Lag

Figure 4 Accuracy Test Result of EM Mater at 0.5 Lag

Above chart (figure 7) and below Figure 7.1, represent the accuracy test result of electromechanical
meter at 0.5 lagging. T It was also noticed that some meters at the low current value not able to record
consistently. Please refer to the results in Sections 8.3 & 8.4 where the term (#NUM!) used in the table.
(#NUM) means test could not completed within stipulated/extended time. Below snapshot from the
results described in Section 8.3 & 8.4.

Figure 7.1 detailed results of measured errors during accuracy tests at 0.5 Lag.

In Figure 7.1, it was observed also that the electromechanical meters cannot read accurately below
5.0A at 0.5 Lagging. Considering that the provided electromechanical meters designed to operate
between 20Amp to 100Amp (as per the nameplate). After 5.0Amp, most of the reading satisfactory
(within 2.5% error) which is the permissible limit as per class 2 requirement in IEC 62053-11.

Page - 13 -/24
 Confidential Document

Accuracy Test Result of EM Mater at 0.866 Lag

300.00

250.00
% Error of EM Meters at 0.866 Lag

200.00

150.00

100.00

50.00

0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

-50.00
Meter Test position start 21

230V 0.5A 0.866 Lag 230V 1A 0.866 Lag 230V 5A 0.866 Lag
230V 10A 0.866 Lag 230V 50 A 0.866 Lag 230V 100A 0.866 Lag

Figure 85 Accuracy Test Result of EM Mater at 0.866 Lag

Figures 8 & 8.1 represent the accuracy test result of electromechanical meter at 0.866 lagging. It was
also noticed that some meters at the low current value were not able to record consistently especially
at 0.5A. Please refer to the results in Section 8.3 & 8.4 where the term (#NUM!) used in the table.
(#NUM) means test could not completed within stipulated/extended time. Below snapshot from the
results described the results at 0.866 lagging from Section 8.3 & 8.4.

Figure 8.1 detailed results of measured errors during accuracy tests at 0.866 Lag.

In Figure 8.1, measured errors behave consistently onward to 100Amp. Considering the range of
current (20-100) Amp as per the nameplate, most of the considerable reading are within the limit of
2.5% after 5Amp.

Page - 14 -/24
Register Test Results

Figure 9: Register Test Results-Smart Meters

Figure 9 shows that Smart Meters results in register tests, the measured error is 0%. Therefore, all
meters’ behavior is satisfactory.

In Figure 10 shows electromechanical meters results in register tests, the percentage of error in all
meters were -3% which is an acceptable tolerance.

Therefore, the results are within the limits and satisfactory.

Below snapshot from the results:

Figure 10 Register Test Results-Electromechanical Meters

Page - 15 -/24
 Meter Under Test Information

7.1
Test Position 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Sma rt Sma rt Meter Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt
Meter Name Meter Meer Meer Meer Meer Meer Meer Meer Meer
MeterType DTSD545 DTSD546 DTSD546 DTSD547 DTSD548 DTSD549 DTSD550 DTSD551 DTSD552 DTSD553
Manufacturer Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey
Manufacturer no. *12955 *13065 *13064 *13063 *13061 *13062 *13052 *13054 *13053 *13055
Manufacturing year 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020
Note * in serial nr is common prefix nr HLY20208004
Starting of energy recording
Starting Current Test @ 40mA ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
Starting Current Test @ 80mA ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
Starting Current Test @ 100 mA ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
Accuracy Test Results are in %
230V 0.1A UPF 0.09 0.07 0.05 0.09 0.04 0.03 0.09 0.13 0.10 0.09
230V 0.5A UPF 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.12 0.05 0.06 0.11 0.14 0.09 0.09
230V 0.5A 0.866 Lag 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.14 0.09 0.06 0.11 0.15 0.10 0.12
230V 0.5A 0.5 Lag 0.16 0.14 0.15 0.18 0.17 0.07 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.16
230V 1.0A UPF 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.12 0.06 0.06 0.11 0.14 0.09 0.10
230V 1A 0.866 Lag
230V 1A 0.5 Lag 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.18 0.18 0.08 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.16
230V 5.0A UPF 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.12 0.05 0.06 0.10 0.14 0.09 0.09
230V 5A 0.866 Lag 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.13 0.08 0.06 0.10 0.12 0.09 0.10
230V 5A 0.5 Lag 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.13
230V 10A UPF 0.09 0.08 0.06 0.11 0.05 0.06 0.10 0.13 0.08 0.09

Figure 11: Smart Meter Results 1 – 10

230V 10A 0.866 Lag 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.11 0.07 0.05 0.09 0.11 0.08 0.09
230V 10A 0.5 Lag 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.11 0.12 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.09
230V 50 A UPF 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.10 0.13 0.08 0.09
Meter Test Position 1 to 10 Detailed Test Results-(Smart Meters)

230V 50 A 0.866 Lag 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.08 0.05 0.01 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.06
230V 50 A 0.5 Lag -0.02 -0.04 -0.04 0.03 0.05 -0.07 -0.01 -0.03 -0.03 0.02
230V 100.0A UPF 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.11 0.05 0.06 0.10 0.14 0.09 0.09
230V 100A 0.866 Lag 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.08 0.04 0.00 0.05 0.08 0.04 0.06
230V 100A 0.5 Lag -0.04 -0.04 -0.06 0.02 0.03 -0.10 -0.05 -0.04 -0.04 0.00
Register Test
Initial Reading 39 35 35 35 31 32 32 32 32 34
Final Reading 69 65 65 65 61 62 62 62 62 64
Energy Recorded by MUT 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

Page - 16 -/24
% Error Recorded by MUT 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Confidential Document
 Meter Under Test Information

7.2
Test Position 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt Sma rt Smart Meer
Meter Name Meer Meer Meer Meer Meer Meer Meer Meer Meer
MeterType DTSD554 DTSD555 DTSD556 DTSD557 DTSD558 DTSD559 DTSD560 DTSD561 DTSD562 DTSD563
Manufacturer Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey Hol l ey
Manufacturer no. *13051 *12966 *12967 *12968 *12969 *12970 *12953 *12954 *12951 *12952
Manufacturing year 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020
Note * in serial nr is common prefix nr HLY20208004
Starting of energy recording
Starting Current Test @ 40mA ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
Starting Current Test @ 80mA ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
Starting Current Test @ 100 mA ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
Accuracy Test
230V 0.1A UPF 0.15 0.14 0.12 0.13 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.12 0.10 0.10
230V 0.5A UPF 0.16 0.16 0.14 0.13 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.11
230V 0.5A 0.866 Lag 0.14 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.11
230V 0.5A 0.5 Lag 0.09 0.16 0.15 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.06 0.11
230V 1.0A UPF 0.16 0.16 0.14 0.13 0.10 0.08 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12
230V 1A 0.866 Lag
230V 1A 0.5 Lag 0.09 0.16 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.06 0.10
230V 5.0A UPF 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.11
230V 5A 0.866 Lag 0.12 0.14 0.13 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09
230V 5A 0.5 Lag 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.06 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.02 0.05
230V 10A UPF 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.09 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.11

Figure 12: Smart Meter Results 11 – 20

230V 10A 0.866 Lag 0.11 0.13 0.12 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.08
230V 10A 0.5 Lag 0.02 0.09 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.06 0.05 0.07 0.00 0.02
230V 50 A UPF 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.11 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.11
Meter Test Position 11 to 20 Detailed Test Results-(Smart Meters)

230V 50 A 0.866 Lag 0.08 0.10 0.09 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.05
230V 50 A 0.5 Lag -0.05 0.01 0.00 -0.04 -0.09 -0.01 -0.04 -0.01 -0.09 -0.06
230V 100.0A UPF 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.12 0.09 0.07 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.11
230V 100A 0.866 Lag 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.05
230V 100A 0.5 Lag -0.06 -0.01 -0.01 -0.07 -0.10 -0.04 -0.06 -0.02 -0.11 -0.08
Register Test
Initial Reading 35 34 34 35 35 56 34 34 34 34
Final Reading 65 64 64 65 65 86 64 64 64 64
Energy Recorded by MUT 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
% Error Recorded by MUT 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Page - 17 -/24
 Meter Under Test Information

7.3
Test Position 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Mecha ni ca Mecha ni ca Mecha ni ca Mecha ni ca Mecha ni ca Mecha ni ca Mecha ni ca Mecha ni ca Mecha ni ca Mecha ni ca
Meter Name l l l l l l l l l l
MeterType EM-3W EM-3W MM2500f3 EM-3W EM-3W EM-3W EM-3W DT58 EM-3W EM-3W
Manufacturer MEMF MEMF l a ndi s +Gys MEMF MEMF MEMF MEMF Hol l ey MEMF MEMF
Manufacturer no. 5050706 5043108 2006465 2920575 2969334 5155083 2969296 500083 3023960 2969298
Manufacturing year 2016 2016 2013 2013 2014 2017 2014 2015 2015 2014
Note * in serial nr is common prefix nr HLY20208004
Starting of energy recording
Starting Current Test @ 40mA Error ok ok Error ok Error Error ok ok ok
Starting Current Test @ 80mA ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
Starting Current Test @ 100 mA ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
Accuracy Test #NUM! Means test could not completed with in stipulated/extended time
230V 0.1A UPF 25.25 169.07 12.64 #NUM! 31.53 28.43 10.16 20.52 169.00 35.68
230V 0.5A UPF #NUM! 114.50 1.89 #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! 111.39 #NUM!
230V 0.5A 0.866 Lag 10.36 133.45 4.65 #NUM! 11.50 12.25 4.17 7.23 130.08 14.45
230V 0.5A 0.5 Lag 4.72 117.29 1.60 #NUM! 5.21 5.71 1.23 3.91 115.12 6.60
230V 1.0A UPF 0.41 104.79 0.05 4.04 0.63 0.74 -0.87 1.27 103.00 0.71
230V 1A 0.866 Lag 3.83 115.34 #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! 4.89 #NUM! 2.90 114.13 #NUM!
230V 1A 0.5 Lag 0.96 106.65 -0.11 4.40 1.34 1.42 -0.37 1.47 105.15 1.75
230V 5.0A UPF -1.20 -0.71 -1.46 0.26 -1.44 -1.59 -1.54 -0.10 -1.45 -1.53
230V 5A 0.866 Lag -1.27 -0.63 -1.47 0.54 -1.46 -1.66 -1.52 -0.16 -1.25 -1.35
230V 5A 0.5 Lag -1.28 -0.11 -1.36 1.69 -1.16 -1.52 -1.33 -0.30 -0.38 -0.67
230V 10A UPF -1.05 -0.57 -1.91 0.08 -1.22 -1.38 -1.20 -0.09 -1.36 -1.36

Figure 13: Mechanical Meter Results 21 - 30

230V 10A 0.866 Lag -1.30 -0.68 -2.39 0.09 -1.44 -1.67 -1.40 -0.21 -1.34 -1.43
230V 10A 0.5 Lag -1.72 -0.78 -2.40 0.39 -1.79 -2.11 -1.74 -0.49 -1.14 -1.33
230V 50 A UPF -0.51 -0.10 -0.22 0.29 -0.49 -0.60 -0.64 0.68 -0.96 -0.91
230V 50 A 0.866 Lag -0.90 -0.41 -0.52 0.07 -0.89 -0.97 -0.98 0.44 86.32 -1.13
Meter Test Position 21-30 Detailed Results-(Electromechanical Meters)

230V 50 A 0.5 Lag -1.56 -0.90 -0.95 -0.22 -1.59 -1.54 -1.70 -0.09 96.38 -1.53
230V 100.0A UPF -1.43 -1.05 -0.60 -0.63 -1.21 -1.32 -1.70 0.01 176.13 -1.89
230V 100A 0.866 Lag -1.46 -0.99 -0.83 -0.53 -1.23 -1.31 -1.71 -0.21 245.62 -1.74
230V 100A 0.5 Lag -1.42 -0.81 -1.30 -0.24 -1.26 -1.14 -1.96 -0.66 266.03 -1.63
Register Test
Initial Reading 64902 47211 33388 95876 10650 16972 85010 29616 907 40451
Final Reading 64932 47240 33417 95906 10680 17002 85039 29645 936 40480

Page - 18 -/24
Confidential Document

Energy Recorded by MUT 30 29 29 30 30 30 29 29 29 29

% Error Recorded by MUT 0% -3% -3% 0% 0% 0% -3% -3% -3% -3%
Resolution of EM's dial is 1kWh, hence this impact on 30kWh recording is 3%
 Meter Under Test Information

7.4
Test Position 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
Me cha ni ca Me cha ni ca Me cha ni ca Me cha ni ca Me cha ni ca Me cha ni ca Me cha ni ca
Meter Name l l l l l l l
MeterType EM-3W EM-3W MM2500f3 EM-3W C 114N T371E2 EM-3W
Manufacturer MEMF MEMF l a ndi s +Gys MEMF I tron MEMF MEMF
Manufacturer no. 2969332 2920571 2006468 2920570 16179245 836715 2993514
Manufacturing year 2014 2013 2013 2013 2015 2005 2014
Note * in serial nr is common prefix nr HLY20208004
Starting of energy recording
Starting Current Test @ 40mA ok Error Error Error Error ok ok
Starting Current Test @ 80mA ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
Starting Current Test @ 100 mA ok ok ok ok ok ok ok
Accuracy Test
230V 0.1A UPF 64.71 #NUM! 20.55 67.39 -3.07 60.68 45.22
230V 0.5A UPF #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM!
230V 0.5A 0.866 Lag 26.92 33.65 9.79 28.42 0.79 23.89 18.57
230V 0.5A 0.5 Lag 14.40 17.89 4.71 15.44 0.24 12.75 9.66
230V 1.0A UPF 4.72 5.92 0.52 5.54 -0.82 4.36 2.75
230V 1A 0.866 Lag #NUM! 16.43 3.88 13.74 -0.09 11.50 8.23
230V 1A 0.5 Lag 6.36 7.86 1.27 6.99 -0.70 5.59 3.67
230V 5.0A UPF -0.23 -0.25 -1.36 0.14 -1.14 0.06 -0.64
230V 5A 0.866 Lag 0.23 0.34 -1.29 0.34 -1.29 0.35 -0.60
230V 5A 0.5 Lag 1.72 2.44 -1.01 1.51 -1.45 1.54 0.01
230V 10A UPF -0.47 -0.54 -1.25 -0.11 -0.78 -0.03 -0.57
230V 10A 0.866 Lag -0.28 -0.23 -1.22 -0.20 -0.99 0.07 -0.75
230V 10A 0.5 Lag 0.39 0.78 -1.23 0.01 -1.32 0.56 -0.87

Figure 14: Mechanical Meter Results 31 - 37

230V 50 A UPF -0.16 -0.35 -28.49 -0.01 0.15 -0.09 -0.17
230V 50 A 0.866 Lag -0.25 -0.24 -32.76 -0.33 -0.10 0.00 -0.44
230V 50 A 0.5 Lag -0.32 0.32 -0.44 -0.76 -0.61 0.39 -0.87
230V 100.0A UPF -0.94 -1.27 -32.81 -0.96 -1.16 -1.08 -1.04
230V 100A 0.866 Lag -0.68 -0.80 -32.76 -0.92 -1.32 -0.57 -0.95
Meter Test Position 31-37 Detailed Results-(Electromechanical Meters)

230V 100A 0.5 Lag -0.15 0.30 -32.72 -0.84 -1.71 0.51 -0.72
Register Test
Initial Reading 41066 223420 46638 74747 265 29697 7861
Final Reading 41096 223449 46667 74776 294 29726 7890
Energy Recorded by MUT 30 29 29 29 29 29 29
% Error Recorded by MUT 0% -3% -3% -3% -3% -3% -3%

Page - 19 -/24
 Confidential Document

8 Observations and Conclusions

Table 4: Samples Performance Observation and Conclusions
Parameter of
S.no performance Smart Meters Electromechanical Meters
comparison
1. General 20 meters submitted for 20 meters submitted for
testing and all meters testing, 3 meters could not be
subjected for testing tested due to damaged dial
and marking on disk also worn
out so could not be sensed.
Rest 17 meters were tested
2. Starting of energy MUT started to record at 40 MUT started to record from 80
recording (Starting mA current mA onwards. High
Current Test) inconsistency observed despite
the long test duration
3. Accuracy Test Minimum Error of entire 20 Not appropriate to calculate
(General comments) meters was -0.11% minimum and maximum
Maximum Error of entire 20 because some error point
meters was 0.18% could not be conducted at all
3.1 Accuracy Test from 0.1 A % Error of all 20 meters All 17 meter has nonrepeatable
to < 5 Amp were well below the or inconsistent errors, means
permissible limit as per IEC some time started some time
not
1 meter did not start up to
1Amp
17 meter had high error at
0.1Amp
3.2 Accuracy Test from 5 A The % Error of all 20 One meter had high negative
and above up to 100 A meters were well below the recording error
permissible limit as per IEC One meter had high positive
recording error
Rest 15 meters were
satisfactory with in permissible
limit of class 2
4. Dial Test Performed satisfactorily Due to poor dial resolution it
required longer time.
12/17 had -3% error which
could be seen as contribution
due to resolution

Page - 20 -/24
9 Outlook and recommendation
Based on our experience and knowledge of the domain, we recommend the following systematic steps
for SEC consideration.

9.1 Scope enlargement

The present and quick form of testing was limited for small sample size; and is recommended to include
deeper testing and study of behavior of EM meters under harmonics and other influence quantity/quality
testing and wider range of operating conditions

Both aspects (means increasing the sample size and operating conditions test) can be covered in the
Phase-Two of this study.

9.2 Periodical Testing of meter at site

Such testing is recommended to take place periodically to gather metrological life-data of energy meters
and to support decision making relative to asset management, calibration intervals and impact of
weather and operating conditions. This exercise becomes more required to address the following:
- Testing based on consumer complains.
- Testing based on billing irregularities (high/low).
- Testing based on tamper messages (if any).
- Testing for Energy Conservation Behavioral Assessments.
- Onsite Testing should include other checks like wiring checks, sealing, or any damages

9.3 Steps for the removal/replacement of old meter

To address the consumer grievances, it is highly recommended to adopt following steps:

- Testing at Site before removal of meters. Testing should also include wiring mistakes, collecting
evidence of reading variances/any damages.
- Testing at site new meters after installation, recording of seal, wiring check and pictures as
evidence

Page - 21 -/24
 Confidential Document

10 Appendix 1
10.1 Electromechanical Meters Inaccuracy:

Mostly electromechanical meters installed at normal consumer in KSA are 3-phase, 230/400 V, 20-100
Amp (means 20 Amp basic and 100 Amp maximum current capacity).

The following factors are expected to impact the EM readings:

• Impact of Power Factor: Accuracy class 2 meters implies that new meter will have recording
error range of 2% if load (amp) is between 1 Amp to 100 Amp at power factor =1, and will
have a range of 2.5% error at other power factor as per IEC 62053-11
• Impact of Field Conditions: Some field conditions can cause additional errors, such as
voltage fluctuations, unbalance, phase sequence, frequency, harmonic distortion, magnetic
field etc.
• Low Current Reading: Electromechanical meter will start recording at 0.05 Amp. Below
that, the meter may or may not start recording depending on the torque requirement of the
Electromechanical desk. Although such load reflects low energy, such reading will be
hardly noticed by the most of consumers/service providers.
• Mechanical Condition of the Electromechanical moving parts: Due to mechanical
movement inside the meter (friction in rotor, gear, counter, and bearings) are prone to slow,
thus recording may be less and inaccurate.
• Prone to tamper: Easily prone to tamper the meter, means it can be slow down intentionally
as well, even without notice of utility.

10.2 Comparison of characteristics of Electromechanical and Smart Meters

Table 5: Samples Specifications Comparison
S.No Parameters Electromechanical Meters Smart Meters

1 Basic rating 3x 230V, 20-100 Amp 3x 230V, 10-100 Amp

2 Accuracy class Class 2 Class 1

Poor accuracy in most real-life Means it will record more
consumption range accurately
3 Starting current 0.05 Amp 0.04 Amp
Means it will detect and record
small load 9.2-Watt LED Lamp
4 Other field influences like Higher error, often slow down Less error and overall impact is
voltage, unbalance, balancing, so smart meter record
frequency, distortion, more accurately even during field
phase sequence and condition
magnetic field
5 Temperature coefficient 0.1 to 0.15% error per °C 0.05 to 0.07% error per °C
Means 20°C temp rise from ambient of Means 20°C temp rise from
23°C can cause additional 2 to 3% error ambient of 23°C can cause
additional 1 to 1.5% error
6 Effect of load distortion Electromechanical meters are prone to Less impact on recording by
have great impact due to harmonic smart meter
distortion caused by LED and SMPS
power supply
7 Prone to tamper Yes Difficult, less likely
8 Wrong wiring detection Not possible and this will cause also It is very much possible to detect
slowness it

Page - 22 -/24
11 List of Meter Under Test (MUT)

Figure 15: Samples Full Information

Page - 23 -/24
 Confidential Document

12 IEC 62053-11 accuracy limit

Figure 16 IEC 62053-11 accuracy limit

Page - 24 -/24