Project

General

Profile

CIM Issues #6328

Required usage of BusbarSection

Added by Chavdar Ivanov about 1 year ago. Updated 3 months ago.

Status:
New
Priority:
High
Author/Contact Info:
Chavdar Ivanov
Base Release:
CIM17
Solution to be Applied To:
Solution Version:
Solution Applied By:
Completion Date:
CIM Keywords:
Breaking Change:
No
Breaking Change Description:
CIM Impacted Groups:
WG13
Requestor:
Standard(s):

IEC 61970-301, IEC 61970-452, IEC 61070-600

Version:
Clause:
Sub-Clause:
Paragraph:
Table:
Originally Closed in Version:
Origination Date:
05/01/2023
Origination ID:
Originally Assigned To:

Description

Multiple requests received on lack of instructions if BusbarSection is a required class if a ConnectivityNode is a node (just for the connectivity purpose) or a busbar section.

There are multiple options how to solve this gap

- Option 1: state in 301 and/or 452 that "if a ConnectivityNode represents a busbar it is required that there is an instance of BusbarSection which Terminal is associated with this ConnectivityNode."
- Option 2: revisit the need of BusbarSection class. If we can make it a bit easier perhaps doing the following is better approach: 1) add a boolean ConnectivityNode.isBusbarSection, this shoudl be required in 452 2) see if if true we require BusbarSection class instantiated or not; if we want to keep it for compatibility we shoudl write a constraint in 452 to require BusbarSection is the boolean is true and we can validate this.

I will put an issue in the IEC on this, but we need to see what the next steps will be within ENTSO-E. The BusbarSection class is in both v2.4 and v3 and it is a matter to say that the usage of it is required in some cases. In a way this is the main purpose of this class anyway. the point we need to state is that it is important to use it.

Decision

07-Feb-2023 Discussed in weekly meeting:

o New wording proposal needed for the UML (simplify BusbarSection class). Refer to BusSegment as an example.
o While we are add it the description for Junction must be updated as well.
o Strike from the note the last sentence on BusbarSection: “Typically, BusbarSections and Junctions are represented by different symbols on diagrams.”
o Additionally, updates to the 301 to clarify will need to be added (in addition to what is in the UML). Add what Chuck has provided as well. Refer to: CIM Issues #5868: New BusSegment for busbar modeling - WG13 Issues - UCAIug Issue Tracking System as this is on the same topic (as this issue is about document.
o Close both this issue and #5868 when completed.
o Target for review in next week’s meeting for approval before applying to the UML.

Also available in: Atom PDF