## 3 Results and Discussion  
Figure 1 shows the harmonic spectrum, waveform and phasor diagram for the L3 LED lamp and the C7 CFL as an example of the results obtained for the individual lamps. Harmonic spectra are represented up to the 50 th harmonic. In the examples shown in Figure 1 it can be seen that the current distortion rate (THDi) measured is 127% for the LED lamp and 108% for the CFL (Figure 1a,d). Both values are very high, which implies that the distortions that are generated in the network are very significant. It can also be seen that for the higher harmonics, the values gradually decrease until they become negligible. Figure 1b,e shows the voltage and current waveform for L3 and C7. In both cases, an absolutely distorted current waveform is obtained. Finally, Figure 1c,f shows the phasor diagrams of the two lamps shown as an example. In both cases, it can be seen how the load shows a capacitive character. The measured currents present 32\({}^{\circ}\) and 27\({}^{\circ}\) (for L3 and C7, respectively) ahead of the voltage. The behavior presented in Figure 1 for two of the lamps analyzed is extensible for the rest of the lamps evaluated. Table 3 shows the values obtained in the measurements for the twelve lamps. The experimentally obtained values for THDi, active power (P), reactive power (Q), distortion power (D) and apparent power (S) are summarized. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Key** & **Type** & **Gour** & **Lamps** \\ \hline G-L & Only LED & 4 LED & L1, L2, L4, L5 \\ G-C & Only CFL & 4 CFL & C2, C3, C4, C5 \\ G-M-1 & Mixed & 2 LED+2 CFL & L1, L5, C2, C3 \\ G-M-2 & Mixed & 2 LED+6 CFL & L1, L5, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Evaluated lamp associations. To calculate the powers and the distortion rate according to Equations (2)-(5) highlighted in the Materials and Methods section, the values from the third to the ninth harmonic have been taken, which are the ones that have been shown to be most important within the spectrum. Table 4 shows the value of the fundamental current and each of these harmonics for the twelve lamps, and Table 5 shows the values of THDi P, Q, D, S and \(\varepsilon\) calculated according to the mentioned expressions. Comparing the values shown in Table 3 (measured) and Table 5 (calculated), it can be seen how they are very similar. The differences may be mainly due to the fact that for the calculations according to the theories defined by [24; 25; 26; 27] only the first harmonic currents have been taken, while the Fluke analyzer uses the entire spectrum up to the 50 th harmonic. Figure 1: Measurements obtained for individual lamps: Harmonic spectrum (**a**), waveform (**b**) and phasor diagram (**c**) of the L3 lamp. Harmonic spectrum (**d**), waveform (**e**) and phasor diagram (**f**) of the C7 lamp. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Lamp** & **THDi (\%)** & **P (W)** & **Q (Var)** & **D (VAd)** & **S (VA)** \\ \hline L1 & 104.54 & 12.2 & \(-\)3 & 15.6 & 21.4 \\ L2 & 149.06 & 9.5 & \(-\)3 & 15 & 18 \\ L3 & 126.65 & 5.8 & \(-\)3.6 & 8.6 & 11 \\ L4 & 124.04 & 6.1 & \(-\)4.1 & 9.2 & 11.7 \\ L5 & 137.96 & 10.7 & \(-\)4 & 15.9 & 19.6 \\ C1 & 112.32 & 21.2 & \(-\)8.9 & 27.1 & 35.1 \\ C2 & 120.85 & 21.8 & \(-\)10 & 29.2 & 37.8 \\ C3 & 107.86 & 14.8 & \(-\)7.5 & 17.9 & 24.4 \\ C4 & 119.82 & 13.4 & \(-\)6.4 & 17.9 & 23.3 \\ C5 & 106.05 & 15.3 & \(-\)8 & 18.4 & 25.2 \\ C6 & 105.35 & 10.8 & \(-\)5.6 & 12.9 & 17.7 \\ C7 & 106.01 & 8.9 & \(-\)4.6 & 10.7 & 14.7 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Values measured with the Fluke analyzer on the twelve lamps. Evaluating the efficacy determined for each receiver (Table 5), it can be observed how the highest efficiency is presented for the C6 lamp (CFL), and the worst for the L3 and L4 (both LEDs).