Bug #442
Maping LNode (substation section) to LN (IED section)
Added by Herbert Falk about 3 years ago.
Updated 5 months ago.
Category:
Standard clarification required
TF Unique ID:
5 # Vattenfall
WG10 Proposal:
to be adressed to the 61850-6-100 (need a realistic date)If a System Integrator delivers an SCD with Substation section, this documents the System “as built”. So if he uses a GGIO instead of an CALH, than he has to replace the CALH of the specification by a GGIO and then let the GGIO point to the implementation in the IED. However this completely breaks the relation to the original SSD file. The Customer has a hard time to validate the delivered SCD against the specification.6-100 helps in this situation. In addition to the attributes linking the LNode to the LN we now have a set of “Specification Attributes” that maintain the original specified values of the LNode. So, if the Utility specifies a CALH and the System Integrator provides a GGIO, both Logical Node classes are available in the Substation Section of the returned “as built” SCD.
Estimated Completion:
End of 2023
Discuss in Upcoming Meeting:
No
Short Proposal:
Discussed with TF SCL function modelling.
Needs More Information:
No
Assigned TF:
61850-6-100 (Function modeling)
Description
A specified signal in substaion section uses a LNode that is mapped to a Logical Node in the IED section. Is it permitted to have LNodes like CALH, CCGR, ISAF, SIML, STMP in substation section mapped to other Logical Node classes (e.g. GGIO) in the IED section? (In a 70/20 kV Smart Grid pilot a major vendor used 15 LN classes, delivering 171 out of 397 signals to dispatch center as GGIO, despite utilities detailed modelling using 35 LN classes and requiring only 8 GGIO for 162 specified signals.)
- Priority changed from Normal to High
- Subject changed from A specified signal in substaion section uses a LNode that is mapped to a Logical Node in the IED section. Is it permitted to hav to Maping LNode (substation section) to LN (IED section)
- Status changed from New to In Progress
- Standard(s) set to IEC 61850-6-100
- WG10 Proposal changed from to be adressed to the 61850-6-100 (need a realistic date)
If a System Integrator delivers an SCD with Substation section, this documents the System “as built”. So if he uses a GGIO instead of an CALH, than he has to replace the CALH of the specification by a GGIO and then let the GGIO point to the implementation in the IED. However this completely breaks the relation to the original SSD file. The Customer has a hard time to validate the delivered SCD against the specification.
6-100 helps in this situation. In addition to the attributes linking the LNode to the LN we now have a set of “Specification Attributes” that maintain the original specified values of the LNode. So, if the Utility specifies a CALH and the System Integrator provides a GGIO, both Logical Node classes are available in the Substation Section of the returned “as built” SCD. to to be adressed to the 61850-6-100 (need a realistic date)If a System Integrator delivers an SCD with Substation section, this documents the System “as built”. So if he uses a GGIO instead of an CALH, than he has to replace the CALH of the specification by a GGIO and then let the GGIO point to the implementation in the IED. However this completely breaks the relation to the original SSD file. The Customer has a hard time to validate the delivered SCD against the specification.6-100 helps in this situation. In addition to the attributes linking the LNode to the LN we now have a set of “Specification Attributes” that maintain the original specified values of the LNode. So, if the Utility specifies a CALH and the System Integrator provides a GGIO, both Logical Node classes are available in the Substation Section of the returned “as built” SCD.
- Estimated Completion changed from Ed 3 to IEC 61850-6-100 Ed.1
- Discuss in Upcoming Meeting set to Yes
- Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
- To discuss in WG10 set to No
Q: Is it permitted to have LNodes like CALH, CCGR, ISAF, SIML, STMP in substation section mapped to other Logical Node classes (e.g. GGIO) in the IED section?
A: It will be permitted for devices with not-flexible data model (in 6-100).
Additional work to be done in 6-100 TF.
- Discuss in Upcoming Meeting changed from Yes to No
We confirm 6-100 Ed.1 is covering this issue. Last draft to be under comments shortly. Next step will be DTS. By the end of year we will have the final document.
- Estimated Completion changed from IEC 61850-6-100 Ed.1 to End of 2023
- Standard(s) changed from IEC 61850-6-100 to IEC 61850-90-30
- Needs More Information set to No
- Discuss in Upcoming Meeting changed from No to Yes
- Related to Improvement #441: Limitations of one to one mapping between LNode and LN added
- Status changed from Resolved to Closed
- Discuss in Upcoming Meeting changed from Yes to No
- Assigned TF 61850-6-100 (Function modeling) added
Solution is incorporated in the 90-30. Mapping is done on DO level (not LN level) which increase flexibility.
Also available in: Atom
PDF