CIM Issues #4112
ACLineSegment base voltage IOP suggest adding explanations
Description
ACLineSegment base voltage
IOP suggest adding explanations in the description of the ACLineSegment and Line.
This resolution of this issue should also guide that "Equivalent" classes should be used for modelling equivalent elements, e.g. EquivalentBranch.
BOUNDARY AND BASEVOLTAGE - WG13 ISSUES CALL 7 NOV 2012
- At Chavdar's request we started with a discussion of the ENTSO-E issue that has been circulated via email about how to handle ACLineSegments at two different BaseVoltages connecting at the same node.
- In the email discussions Kendall had explained that there is no real problem for power flow, but that a check for voltage level differences of no more than say 10% is a reasonable way to handle this.
- The 10% mentioned is not something that is mentioned in any WG 13 document or the CIM UML.
- The use of a percentage for checking the differences is really an implementation or business agreement issue. This is similar to having agreed minimum value for impedances in a data exchange.
- Discussed adding text to 61970-301 and 452 to explain that ACLineSegments with different BaseVoltages is an expected and allowed situation.
- Agreed to add text to 301 explaining that the situation is expected and allowed.
Proposed Solution
Proposed text ACLineSegment:
The BaseVoltage at the two ends of ACLineSegments in a Line shall have the same BaseVoltage.nominalVoltage. However, boundary lines may have slightly different BaseVoltage.nominalVoltages and variation is allowed. Larger voltage difference in general requires use of an equivalent branch.
Decision
Updated 2013-06-05/LOO
No data to display