Transcript CIM XML Model Exchange Interoperability Tests

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