UCAIug Issue Tracking System: Issueshttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/https://redmine.ucaiug.org/favicon.ico?15861924492021-07-08T21:13:21ZUCAIug Issue Tracking System
Redmine IEC 61850 Certificate - IEC 61850 Certificate #1871 (Approved): SCD5200 [Invensys Operations Mana...https://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/18712021-07-08T21:13:21ZHerbert Falk
<p>This certificate and its information was migrated from a previous database</p> IEC 61850 Certificate - IEC 61850 Certificate #1870 (Approved): TOPAS-SA [LSIS Co., Ltd.]https://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/18702021-07-08T21:13:18ZHerbert Falk
<p>This certificate and its information was migrated from a previous database</p> IEC 61850 Certificate - IEC 61850 Certificate #1869 (Approved): SAMCAS [U2S Co., Ltd]https://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/18692021-07-08T21:13:16ZHerbert Falk
<p>This certificate and its information was migrated from a previous database</p> IEC 61850 Certificate - IEC 61850 Certificate #1868 (Approved): Telvent subCAT [Telvent Energia, ...https://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/18682021-07-08T21:13:14ZHerbert Falk
<p>This certificate and its information was migrated from a previous database</p> IEC 61850 Certificate - IEC 61850 Certificate #1867 (Approved): Siemens SICAM PAS [Siemens AG ]https://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/18672021-07-08T21:13:12ZHerbert Falk
<p>This certificate and its information was migrated from a previous database</p> IEC 61850 Certificate - IEC 61850 Certificate #1866 (Approved): CP-MUP [ABB Switzerland Ltd.]https://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/18662021-07-08T21:11:50ZHerbert Falk
<p>This certificate and its information was migrated from a previous database</p> WG14 Issues - CIM Issues #757 (New): testhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/7572021-07-07T15:38:06ZEric Stephaneric.stephan@pnnl.govWG13 Issues - CIM Issues #749 (Review): There are a variety of issues with advanced RegulatingCon...https://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/7492021-06-30T20:18:24ZHerbert Falk
<p>There are a variety of issues with RegulatingControl. These include the following and must be addressed in CIM18:</p>
<p>There are multiple issues with the CIM control model:</p>
<p>1. Multiple RegulatingControls on the same controlled point as you describe. One reason to use multiple regulating controls is discrete vs continuous control that require different parameter settings. All RegulatingControls on the same power flow bus must then be enabled.</p>
<p>2. With multiple RegulatingControls they may have different target values (targetValue) which force the receiving tool to make a choice. If different tools make different choices then we have a problem. I have seen this in a few IGMs.</p>
<p>3. The control dead band (targetDeadband) is different for different type of devices which makes it difficult to use the same RegulatingControl, e.g. switched and tapped shunts.</p>
<p>4. A RegulatingControl is connected to the controlled power flow bus (TopologicalNode) via a Terminal. In a node breaker model it is common that the Terminal is at a Switch. It may then happen that the RegulatingControl becomes disconnected from the power flow bus as a consequence of switching while the controlling devices (subclasses of RequlatingCondEq) are still actively controlling. This has been observed to happen in several IGMs.</p>
<p>So the CIM voltage/reactive control model is broken and need a complete revision. For backwards compatibility we must keep the current in parallel with the revised.</p> Server - Issues #748 (Resolved): sGos9 use SPS when INS subscribe is not supportedhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/7482021-06-29T15:03:44ZRichard Schimmel
<p>Not all devices support subscribing INS. See PIXIT Gs8. But when INS/ENS is not supported we can't execute sGos9.<br />The proposal is to use SPS in case INS subscribe is not supported. As such the integers in the GOOSE header are still tested</p> Gateway Certificates - OpenFMB Gateway #724 (Approved): OES Gatewayhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/7242021-06-22T18:55:57ZHerbert Falk
<p>Example Certificate Posting</p> Client - Issues #658 (Resolved): Verify Client does process a report before RptEna write respond+https://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/6582021-03-23T14:57:48ZRichard Schimmel
<p>The Ed2.0 standard allows a server to already send a report before the SetxRCBValues(RptEna=T) respond (tissue 1454). Some clients do not accept a report before the respond+; such clients are wrong and should fail the conformance test. We need to add a testcase to verify that clients do process report before the respond+ for both buffered/unbuffered reporting</p> Server - Issues #654 (Rejected): Publish/subscribe minimum length data GOOSEhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/6542021-03-19T08:30:20ZRichard Schimmel
<p>Item 4 from Christophe Camelis list;</p> Server - Issues #653 (Rejected): Subscriber can use maximum number of dataset elementshttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/6532021-03-19T08:29:28ZRichard Schimmel
<p>Item 3 from Christophe Camelis list</p> Server - Issues #651 (Rejected): Verify subscriber can accept maximum size GOOSEhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/6512021-03-19T08:27:34ZRichard Schimmel
<p>Item 1 from TF Christophe Camelis; Shall we add a test case or not?</p> Client - Issues #636 (Resolved): Mandate RCB reservation for Ed2.0 client and Amd1 serverhttps://redmine.ucaiug.org/issues/6362021-02-17T12:30:37ZRichard Schimmel
<p>Amd1 requires Clients to always reserve URCB/BRCB even when the RCB is pre-assigned and servers to refuse configuring/enabling RCBs without prior reservation. To guarantee forward compatibility from Ed2.0 to Amd1; Ed2.0 client shall reserve RCB. In the current test procedures the reservation is optional, because Ed2 servers allow implicit reservation</p>