Bug #459
No mechanism in SCL to indicate if the SCT can define/delete/edit RCBs/ExtRefs
Added by Herbert Falk about 3 years ago.
Updated almost 2 years ago.
Category:
Already captured with TISSUE
TF Unique ID:
16 # IOP_2013
WG10 Proposal:
refer to 1402 TISSUE (related to the 1257)
Discuss in Upcoming Meeting:
No
Short Proposal:
61850 allows ExtRefs to be defined in any logical node. No clarifications needed, but UCA needs to improve conformance testing to fail devices violating this. Possibly clarification in part 6 §9.3.13 to be considered.For RCBs on the other hand it makes sense to have them (like for GoCB ) only on LN0. however this is not a restriction in the standard. This is task for vendor guideline from UCA, not WG10.
Description
There was an ICT/IED combination that only allowed RCBs and ExtRefs to be defined in a certain LD/LN. It did not allow any RCBs/ExtRefs to be defined for any other LD/LN combination. The SCT attempted to define RCBs/ExtRefs in other logical nodes through and SCD. The import of the SCD was refused.
61850 allows ExtRefs/RCBs to be defined in any logical node. However, there is no mechanism in SCL for an ICT to declare where it is legal to do so or what the semantics required for ExtRef are.
- Priority changed from Normal to High
- Subject changed from There was an ICT/IED combination that only allowed RCBs and ExtRefs to be defined in a certain LD/LN. It did not allow any RCBs/ to No mechanism in SCL to indicate if the SCT can define/delete/edit RCBs/ExtRefs
- Category changed from Standard extension required to Already captured with TISSUE
- Short Proposal changed from 61850 allows ExtRefs to be defined in any logical node. No clarifications needed, but UCA needs to improve conformance testing to fail devices violating this. Possibly clarification in part 6 §9.3.13 to be considered.
For RCBs on the other hand it makes sense to have them (like for GoCB ) only on LN0. however this is not a restriction in the standard. This is task for vendor guideline from UCA, not WG10. to 61850 allows ExtRefs to be defined in any logical node. No clarifications needed, but UCA needs to improve conformance testing to fail devices violating this. Possibly clarification in part 6 §9.3.13 to be considered.For RCBs on the other hand it makes sense to have them (like for GoCB ) only on LN0. however this is not a restriction in the standard. This is task for vendor guideline from UCA, not WG10.
- Standard(s) set to IEC 61850-6
- Discuss in Upcoming Meeting set to No
Later Binding and ServiceCapability.noIctBinding was introduced in SCL Ed2.1 to deal with ICTs that do not support definition of ExtRef in any LN.
If an ICT does not support definition of RCB in any LN, then it has to preconfigure the RCB where it wants them to be. According to Part 6 Ed2.1: if no value of ReportSettings is fix, the SCT can delete and add ReportControls up to the defined max value.
- Status changed from New to Closed
Also available in: Atom
PDF