Issues #6633

sRp15, sBr15 test description contains doName="MMXU...", while MMXU is lnClass, not doName

Added by Ursula Kramarczyk 4 months ago. Updated about 2 months ago.

Due date:
Discuss in Upcoming Meeting:
Clause Reference:
IEC 61850-6 AMD1: Table 22 - Attributes of the FCDA element
61850 Standard:
Triggering Tissue:
Final Decision:
Updated Test Document:
Test Case ID:
Closed Reason:
--Not Set---
Triggering Tissue 2:
Triggering Tissue 3:


The test case sRp15 and sBr15 description gives in point 1 the SCL examples of following FCDA elements of a dataset:
- doName=”MMXU.PhV”
- doName=”MMXU.A” daName=”phsA”
- doName=”MMXU.A” daName=”phsB.cVal”
- doName=”MMXU.A” daName=”phsC.cVal.mag”
- doName=”MMXU.A” daName=”neut.cVal.mag.f“

But in SCL, in the the dataset elements, a Logical Node (and MMXU is a Logical Node) are defined by lnClass and lnInst, not in doName, e.g.:
<DataSet name="dataMX">
<FCDA ldInst="ON" lnClass="MMXU" lnInst="1" doName="PhV" fc="MX" />
<FCDA ldInst="ON" lnClass="MMXU" lnInst="1" doName="A" fc="MX" />

And, complex Data Objects like PhV and A (class WYE) have sub-elements (e.g. phsA) which are Data Object, not Attributes - of class CMV. The FC is defined by DA elements of CMV, not by elements of WYE. Is then daName=”phsA” wrong as "phsA" belongs into doName?


Solution to redmine 6633 sRp15.docx Solution to redmine 6633 sRp15.docx 23.2 KB Richard Schimmel, 12/19/2023 06:18 AM

Updated by IEC 61850 TPWG 4 months ago

  • Due date set to 01/09/2024
  • Assignee set to Richard Schimmel

Editorial change accepted.


Updated by IEC 61850 TPWG 4 months ago

  • Status changed from New to In Progress

Updated by IEC 61850 TPWG 3 months ago

  • Status changed from In Progress to Resolved

LN instance and lDevice are missing. This is example text, and those are required and will be caught in schema test-> accepted for clarity.


Updated by Richard Schimmel about 2 months ago

  • Status changed from Resolved to Closed
  • Updated Test Document set to TP1.3

Also available in: Atom PDF