Project

General

Profile

Bug #439

How to add utility process name to DOs

Added by Herbert Falk almost 4 years ago. Updated about 1 year ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
High
Assignee:
-
Category:
Standard clarification required
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:
ID:
2
Source:
Vattenfall
TF Unique ID:
2 # Vattenfall
WG10 Proposal:

19-01-23: Camille to distribute proposal for review (if accepted, will be implemented in next Revision/Ed)

Estimated Completion:
Ed 3
Discuss in Upcoming Meeting:
No
To discuss in WG10:
No
Short Proposal:

To use nsdoc files as holders of DO,DA standard descriptions (7-4, 7-3)If DO descriptions are to be changed, that should be done in SCL.

Standard(s):

IEC 61850-6

Needs More Information:
Yes
Assigned TF:

Description

Currently SCL has poor support for handling gateway/RTU-funktions where signal names are translated for remote communication. The specified sigal has a utility process name independent of used protcol. E.g. "start of distance protection". This needs to be associated with its IEC 61850 implementation (xxPDIS1.Str.general, xxPDIS2.Str.general etc.). The 80-1 part describes how 104 addresses can be added to SCL but also other utility fields are important to be able to include in SCL for specification and documentation purposes. Desired solution by Vattenfall is to have vendors use DA description to add utility process name.


Files

Vattenfall-Issue2-proposal_v3.docx Vattenfall-Issue2-proposal_v3.docx 15.8 KB Camille Bloch, 11/07/2023 08:33 AM

Related issues

Copied to IEC TC57 WG10 Future Work - WG10 Future Work #6579: How to add utility process name to DOsNew11/07/2023

Actions
#1

Updated by Herbert Falk almost 4 years ago

  • Priority changed from Normal to High
#2

Updated by Carlos Rodriguez del Castillo almost 4 years ago

  • Subject changed from Currently SCL has poor support for handling gateway/RTU-funktions where signal names are translated for remote communication. Th to How to add utility process name to DOs
  • Status changed from New to In Progress
  • Short Proposal changed from To use nsdoc files as holders of DO,DA standard descriptions (7-4, 7-3) If DO descriptions are to be changed, that should be done in SCL. to To use nsdoc files as holders of DO,DA standard descriptions (7-4, 7-3)If DO descriptions are to be changed, that should be done in SCL.
  • Standard(s) set to IEC 61850-6
  • Discuss in Upcoming Meeting set to No

Checking done.

#3

Updated by Vladan Cvejic about 1 year ago

  • Discuss in Upcoming Meeting changed from No to Yes
  • To discuss in WG10 set to No
  • Needs More Information set to Yes
#4

Updated by Camille Bloch about 1 year ago

Original proposal done in 2017 attached

#5

Updated by Vladan Cvejic about 1 year ago

#6

Updated by Vladan Cvejic about 1 year ago

  • Discuss in Upcoming Meeting changed from Yes to No
#7

Updated by Vladan Cvejic about 1 year ago

  • Status changed from In Progress to Resolved

Transferred to Future Work (shall be discussed in WG10 next meeting). It is resolved from UFTF perspective.

Also available in: Atom PDF