Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
EPRI CIM Interoperability Test Status Report CIM User’s Group October 24, 2007 Margaret Goodrich Project Consultants, LLC Author Affiliation Topics • Interoperability (IOP) Test 10 – – – – – – Objectives of IOP 10 IOP 10 Participants & Products IOP 10 Test Witnesses IOP 10 Contents IOP 10 Highlights General Issues & Solutions • IOP for CIM Planning Initiative – Status – Issues • Additional Information © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 2 Objectives of IOP 10 • Test Interoperability of CIM XML files produced by various vendors. • Ensure the CPSM Profile and the CIM Updates proposed by WG13 for Data Exchange can be implemented as specified • Verify the applications developed using the IEC standards can interoperate • Provide an opportunity for the industry to identify any deficiencies in the standard or the use cases under test © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 3 IOP 10 Participants • • • • • • • ABB – Sweden (ABBS) ABB – Houston (ABBR) Areva T&D (Areva) GE Energy (GE) SNC Lavalin (SNC) Siemens PTI (SPTI) Siemens EMA (SPTD) © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 4 IOP 10 Participant Products • • • • • • • ABBS – DE400 ABBR – CIM DE Toolkit Areva - e-terrasource GE – Enterprise Gateway (EG) SNC – GEN4 CIM SPTI - PSS/Odms SPTD – IMM © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 5 IOP 10 Test Witnesses • • • • • • Lee King – EPRI Curtis Crews – ERCOT Paul Gerber – First Energy David Bogen - Oncor Randy Curtis – WAPA Margaret Goodrich – Project Consultants © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 6 IOP 10 Contents • CIM XML CPSM Exchange tests including: – – – – Full Model Exchange Incremental Model Generation Incremental Model Exchange Power Flow Solutions © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 7 IOP 10 Highlights • Full Model Exchange test between ABBS, ABBR, Areva, GE, SNC, SPTI, and SPTD • ABBS, GE, SNC and SPTI executed Power Flow on the imported CPSM model files, solved the power flow and exported the model • GE, SNC, ABBS, Areva and SPTD generated Incremental files that were used successfully by each other. • GE, SNC, Areva, and SPTD imported multiple Incremental Files and merged these into the full model © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 8 IOP 10 Highlights • Models included: – – – – A 262 bus model from WAPA (GE EMS) A 60 bus model from Areva A 40 bus model from ABBS A 96 bus model from SNC • The WAPA 262 Bus model is a continuation of an attempt to use a model created by an industry entity specifically for use as a real-world model. This activity was in direct response to the industry call for use of realworld models in the IOP tests. More work needs to be done in this area. © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 9 IOP 10 Highlights • All participants completed Interoperation exchange tests, proving that each participant was able to import a model that had been previously exported by another participant. • The Test Witnesses provided input for the following areas: – – – – improvements to the recording process used in the tests use cases for realistic interoperation Testing order and process for witnesses Testing content - types of incremental files, add Pre-Condition testing, ICCP testing, changes to impact PF, etc. © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 10 General Issues & Solutions • 39 Issues were reported and reviewed by the group. • Generated a CIM Issue - multiple equipment regulating the same node must be the same setpoint. • Transformers between substations. To handle this, the vendor created two new lines, Voltage Levels, Terminals, and Connectivity Nodes to accommodate the transformer. This is an application issue and should be noted but is not an error. • Many vendors either created or dropped devices or other elements based on the application processing methods. It was decided that this would be noted in the report but would not be considered an error. © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 11 General Issues & Solutions • Any dropped or added devices that do not affect Power Flow will not be errors unless otherwise noted. This will be addressed for the next IOP • The RDF ID and the IdentifiedObject.name was modified during the exchange • Model has equipment that is referenced to a substation rather than a voltage level. CIM issue - make the base voltage reference to the equipment mandatory • The Primary winding is always the high voltage winding, the secondary is always the low voltage, the tertiary could be higher or lower than the secondary. Since it does make a difference to the model, this anomaly is an error. We probably need to add these definitions and rules to the CIM or CPSM so this is handled correctly. Generate a CIM issue for this and provide a note (vs. error) in the report. © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 12 General Issues & Solutions • CIM time points that are less than an hour interval are allowed and there is no convention that limits this to an hourly interval; therefore, an interval less than an hour should be allowed and an interval instance that is less than an hour should not be listed as a duplicate. Based on a discussion, the interval should not be limited but the importer would be allowed to interpolate/aggregate them as long as they are not listed as duplicates in the export. CPSM document change • 433 analogs in original model and 150 in the exported file. The other analogs were dropped because they did not have a cooresponding MeasurementValueSource of ICCP or SCADA. The importer only kept the Analogs that had a relationship to MeasurementValueSource and the source was ICCP or SCADA in the original file. This is a CIM issue that will be sent to WG13 for discussion and a change to the CPSM needs to be made as well to ensure the Analogs are kept. © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 13 IOP - CIM Planning Status • Planning Profile has been generated using the Data Requirements defined by the group. • Profile will be used to generate RDF Schema files to be used by the test participants. • Test Participants tentatively include Siemens PTI (Planning & EMS), GE Energy (Planning & EMS), Areva (Planning and EMS) • Tests may include Full and Incremental Data Exchange for: – Planning to Planning – Operations to Planning – Planning to Operations • Tests are currently planned for later this year. • The Planning Profile and the UML will be submitted to the Standards bodies for the January meetings. © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 14 IOP - CIM Planning Issues • Need to validate the Planning Profile • Need test models: – GE and Siemens PTI will provide the PSS/E and PSLF demo models for use in the tests. – ERCOT and possible other planning models may be available for use in the tests • Need RDF Schema file • Must develop independent validation tools for the models used in the test © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 15 Additional Information • IOP Test 10 Report is available from EPRI – EPRI email – [email protected] • Participation in IOP Tests: – Dave Becker at ERPI – [email protected] – Margaret Goodrich email – [email protected] – Margaret Goodrich Cell – 1-903-477-7176 © 2007 Project Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. Page 16