Project

General

Profile

Feature #5083

Clarifications on the local/remote concept 3/8

Added by Carlos Rodriguez del Castillo over 3 years ago. Updated over 1 year ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Tom Berry
Category:
Standard clarification required
Start date:
09/20/2021
Due date:
03/20/2022 (over 2 years late)
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:
ID:
7
Source:
MH
TF Unique ID:
7 # MH
WG10 Proposal:
Estimated Completion:
Discuss in Upcoming Meeting:
No
To discuss in WG10:
No
Short Proposal:

Include a statement

Standard(s):

IEC 61850-7-1 Ed2.1,7-5

Needs More Information:
No
Assigned TF:

Description

Add a statement about the use of XCBR.Loc (and similar LN classes). Assume XCBR.Loc="true". Will protection trips and switchgear controls by GAPC be rejected?

Proposal descriptions

Not affected by Loc DO:
- Protection trips are not affected by Loc data object.
- GAPC.Op (will go through) --> PTRC.Tr (to trip) --> XCBR

Otherwise, they are affected by Loc DO (control model)
- GAPC SPC/DPC/APC controllable objects will be affected by Loc data object.

The proposal is to include a statement about this behaviour in 7-1. There is a section about local/remote in 7-1, maybe it is the good place for that.

Related issues

Related to IEC 61850 User Feedback Task Force - Feature #5081: Clarifications on the local/remote concept 1/8ResolvedTom Berry09/20/2021

Actions
Copied to 61850-7-5 and 61850-7-500 - IEC61850-7-5 #6389: Clarifications on the local/remote concept 3/8In Progress09/20/202103/20/2022

Actions
#1

Updated by Carlos Rodriguez del Castillo about 3 years ago

  • Due date set to 03/20/2022
  • To discuss in WG10 changed from Yes to No
#2

Updated by Carlos Rodriguez del Castillo almost 3 years ago

  • Discuss in Upcoming Meeting changed from No to Yes
  • Proposal descriptions updated (diff)
  • Short Proposal set to Include a statement
#3

Updated by Carlos Rodriguez del Castillo almost 3 years ago

  • Status changed from New to In Progress
#4

Updated by Vladan Cvejic almost 3 years ago

  • Related to Feature #5084: Clarifications on the local/remote concept 4/8 added
#5

Updated by Vladan Cvejic almost 3 years ago

  • Related to deleted (Feature #5084: Clarifications on the local/remote concept 4/8)
#6

Updated by Vladan Cvejic almost 3 years ago

  • Related to Feature #5081: Clarifications on the local/remote concept 1/8 added
#7

Updated by Vladan Cvejic almost 3 years ago

  • Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
  • Discuss in Upcoming Meeting changed from Yes to No
#8

Updated by Tom Berry almost 3 years ago

Proposed clarification

Trip signals e.g. communicated by GOOSE are not affected by Loc.
This includes trip signals direct from protection logical nodes or PTRC.
A GAPC.Op status routed as an input to PTRC will not be affected by Loc.

When GAPC or any other logical node uses control services to activate SPC/DPC/INC/ENC/APC controllable objects in a destination logical node, then these commands may be affected by the local/remote status of the destination logical node and containing logical device(s).

See Feature #5082

#9

Updated by Carlos Rodriguez del Castillo almost 3 years ago

  • Assignee set to Tom Berry
#10

Updated by Tom Berry almost 3 years ago

  • Standard(s) changed from IEC 61850-7-1 Ed2.1 to IEC 61850-7-1 Ed2.1,7-5
#11

Updated by Carlos Rodriguez del Castillo over 1 year ago

  • Needs More Information set to No
#12

Updated by Carlos Rodriguez del Castillo over 1 year ago

  • Discuss in Upcoming Meeting changed from No to Yes
#13

Updated by Carlos Rodriguez del Castillo over 1 year ago

  • Discuss in Upcoming Meeting changed from Yes to No
#14

Updated by Vladan Cvejic over 1 year ago

Also available in: Atom PDF