CIM Issues #4941
Equipment.aggregate on GeneratingUnit only to avoid redundancy
Description
Equipment.aggregate on GeneratingUnit
only to avoid redundant data at SynchronousMachine.
IOP agree to open WG13 discussion on this issue. What may need to be changed is to have change in UML that will forbid having multiple SynchronousMachines associated with one GeneratingUnit.
Proposed Solution
Move the aggregate attribute to ConductingEquipment.
Decision
It was decided not to move aggregated to ConductingEquipment.
Related issue 13_98.
Svein will start on a white paper, Jay and Lars-Ola will contribute.
2013-06-05/LOO
Oslo, 14-Jun-2023:
No change in CIM18. Constraints on profile level will need to restrict the usage of the attribute.
11-Oct-2023:
We don't see the need add the constraint which overrides the Oslo decision above. We have decided to close the ticket and leave as is.
Updated by Chavdar Ivanov about 2 years ago
- Subject changed from Equipment.aggregate on GeneratingUnit only to avoid redunda to Equipment.aggregate on GeneratingUnitonly to avoid redunda
- Status changed from Open to Review
- Decision updated (diff)
WG13 to discuss and agree what we do here. We need to consider potential impact on teh usage of aggregate.
Updated by Todd Viegut over 1 year ago
- Subject changed from Equipment.aggregate on GeneratingUnitonly to avoid redunda to Equipment.aggregate on GeneratingUnit only to avoid redundancy
Updated by Todd Viegut over 1 year ago
We have defined that a constraint needs to be written but the decision isn't specifying where. Should it be constrained to the GeneratingUnit (via inheritance from Equipment) or vice versa on SynchronousMachine and then have the constraint prohibit it on the GeneratingUnit. This needs to be clarified in the Decision notes.