WG13 61970A Family of CIM Standards based on CIM/XML (61970-

552)

- Static Network Model Exchange (61970-452)- Dynamic Model Exchange

- Unbalanced Models- Short Circuit

- Solved State Exchange (61970-456)- Schematic Layout Exchange (61970-453)

- …

Jay BrittonAlstom Grid

jay.britton@alstom.com

The Basic Model Exchange Business Problem

• The members of an interconnection share a mutual necessity to achieve: Accurate assessment of grid reliability. Appropriate, timely response to insecure conditions.

• A pre-requisite to the above are: Accurate, up-to-date network models. Consistent network models (at each responsible site).

• In an interconnection, this requires: Exchange of models. Exchange of solved analytical results.

• 2008 NERC Real-Time Best Practices Report:– “Although defining the elements represented in internal network models is relatively

straightforward, the task force finds that defining the elements to be represented in external models is much more complex.”

– “Issue #5: External Modeling and Data Exchange Practices Should be Improved by Explicit Reference to the Definition of the Wide-Area-View Boundary. A consistent, uniform set of modeling and data exchange practices, procedures, and standards are needed to support creation and maintenance of accurate external models…”

• These requirements apply in operations and planning contexts.

There is high-level consensus about the right approach.

• Basic Modeling:– Each TSO is the authority for data about its own territory.

• Each TSO exports its internal model to its neighbors and/or regional authority, and keeps it up to date.

– Regional authorities assemble internal regional models from member TSO internal models.

– All parties assemble external models from the internal models of other sites.

• These requirements apply to both operations and planning.– Operations focus is on as-built and near future changes.– Exchange of solutions between operations and planning

is a key objective.– When operations and planning share the same modeling:

• Operations defines the current state.• Planning defines the future plans.

Contributing Use Cases

• Exchange of network models. – EMS A and B are neighbors in an interconnection and therefore each needs

to represent the other as part of its external model. – Requires exchange of internal models.– Scope is limited to network data and measurement placements. – Exchange of schematics with models is desirable.

• Common Modeling Source between planning and operations. – One modeling application for the enterprise.– An EMS requires a model that covers any point in time.– Other targets require data for a specific “case”.

• Exchange of solved cases. Several variations…– Real-time exchange among different applications. – Real-time cases to study or planning. – Exchange of study or planning cases between different tools. – Import of study cases to EMS.

• ENTSO-E – DACF cases are generated for the next day by each TSO representing the

expected state of their internal network. – Planning cases are generated from contributions from each TSO.

A Generic Model Exchange Business Process(ENTSO-E, ERCOT, WECC, …)

Preview – We are working toward defining model partitioning into non-overlapping XML submodels that satisfy all of the use cases.

Global Model Objects

Regional EMS Static Model

Bndry

Regional EMS Static Model

Regional EMS Static Model

Bndry

Partition by Object Instance using Model Authority SetsP

artit

ion

by C

IM S

chem

a E

lem

ents

Common Objects

Display Layout

Equip Model

Display Layout

Equip Model

Display Layout

Equip Model

Solution

Measurements

Meas

State Variables

Topology

Measurements

Meas

Measurements

Meas

The initial CIM model exchange (61970-452) standard focused only on transfer of complete models:

CIM Exchange (full, partial, incremental update)

A Internal Model

A’s model of B

BA

CIM import / export

System A Local Vendor Model

System A Import Model

B’s Model of A

B Internal Model

System B Local Vendor Model

System B Import Model

CIM import / export

System A EMS System B EMS

Proprietary / Homegrown Extract/Merge Tools

Proprietary / Homegrown Extract/Merge Tools

A More Desirable ProcessCIM Modeler

FullInterconnectionModel

CIM ModelerFullInterconnectionModel

EMS at Site BEMS at Site A

System A Source

System B Import

boundary

System B Source

System A Import

boundary

My A Region(reduced & renamed)

My B Region(reduced & renamed)

CIM Translator A

EMS AProprietary Model Format

CIM Translator B

EMS BProprietary Model Format

CIM/XMLModel Exchange

Interface

a b

Site A makes a change:

1. A changes its ModelAuthoritySet using its CIM modeller.

2. A imports the change into its EMS.

3. A exports the change to B.

4. B receives the change (full or incremental), updating A’s ModelAuthoritySet within its CIM modeller.

5. B renames any new elements and repeats any reduction of A’s ModelAuthoritySet.

6. B imports the new model into its EMS.

Merge/Extract with Model Authority Sets• Each object is in one and

only one set.– Simple labeling technique for

assigning responsibility.– Associations connect some

objects that are in different sets.

• Currently directional from n to 1 (“foreign key” convention) – under discussion.

• Regional Sets:– No associations with other

regional sets.– External associations to

boundary sets only.• Boundary Sets:

– External associations from regional sets.

– External associations with other boundary sets.

• A regional set may be referentially validated independent of other regional sets.

– Modeling processes can proceed independently in each region.

• Goal: – Maximize independence.– Design boundary sets to

achieve:• Minimum data• Infrequent change

Model Authority SetB

Model Authority SetA

Model Authority SetC

A-B boundaryMAS

B-C

bou

ndar

yM

AS

A-C

bou

ndar

yM

AS

Typical North American Operations Boundary

Model Authority Set C

A-C Boundary

Set

CN

Model Authority SetA

TT LS

A Region Transmission Line

C Region Substation

m

Tie Line Metering Point

T

T

CB

CN

T

T

CB

T

T

CB

T

BB

ST

GEO=’C’

LN

GEO=’A’

Typical ENTSO-E Operations Boundary

Model Authority Set CA-C Boundary

Set

CN

Model Authority SetA

T

T

CB

CN

Tie Line

C Region Substation

m

T

T

CB

T

T

CB

Tie Line Mid-point

A Region Substation

CN

T

BB

TLST

T

T

CB

CN

T

T

CB

T

T

CB

T

BB

TLSTCN

STST

GEO=’C’GEO=’A’

LN=’X-Y’

ST=’X’ ST=’Y’

The Naming Problem

PRIMARY Interconnection

Model

Interconnection Model

TO 1 External Model

Assembly of full primary model

Creation of derived target models

TO 1

TO 2

TO n

Regional Authority

TO 1 Internal Model

TO 2External Model

TO 2 Internal Model

TO n External Model

TO n Internal Model

Interconnection Object Registry

Name translation point

Primary registration point

Bus-Branch vs Node-Breaker Modeling

Bus-Branch vs Node-Breaker Modeling

Bus-Branch vs Node-Breaker Modeling

61970 Profile Modularity

Dependency Relationships are Expressed

in Headers

Equipment Model

TopologyState

VariablesCommon Objects

C1 S1T1E1

E1.1

T1.1

T1.2

T1.3

S10

S9

S8

S7

S6

S5

S4

S3

S2

S12

S11

Combining profiles into a

complete solution

description.

State Variables

TSO Topology

TSO Equipment Model

ACLineSegment

ControlArea

CurrentLimit

CurveData

EnergyConsumer

FossilFuel

GeneratingUnit

GeographicalRegion

HydroGeneratingUnit

HydroPump

MutualCoupling

NuclearGeneratingUnit

OperationalLimitSet

PhaseTapChanger

PowerTransformer

RatioTapChanger

ReactiveCapabilityCurve

RegulatingControl

SeriesCompensator

ShuntCompensator

SubGeographicalRegion

Substation

SvPowerFlow SvShuntCompensatorSections SvTapStepSvVoltage

Switch

SynchronousMachine

Terminal

Terminal (about)

ThermalGeneratingUnit

TieFlow

TopologicalIsland

TopologicalNode

TransformerWinding

VoltageLevel

VoltageLimit

WindGeneratingUnit

UCTE Common Objects BaseVoltage OperationalLimitType

ControlAreaGeneratingUnit

LoadResponseCharacteristic

Partitioning into Files by TSO

Complete View of Partitioning Into Files

GlobalMA

Regional Solved Case

Equipment Model

Topology

State Variables

Xnode

RegionalSolved Case

Equipment Model

Topology

State Variables

RegionalSolved Case

Equipment Model

Topology

State Variables

Xnode

Partition by Object Instance using Model Authority SetsP

artit

ion

by C

IM S

che

ma

Ele

men

ts

Common Objects

ENTSO-E Interconnection Solution

GlobalMA

Regional Model

Equipment Model

Topology

Xnode

Regional Model

Equipment Model

Topology

Regional Model

Equipment Model

Topology

Xnode

Partition by Object Instance using Model Authority SetsP

artit

ion

by C

IM S

chem

a E

lem

ents

Common Objects

Global SolutionState

Variables

Partitioning of EMS Static Model

Global Model Objects

Regional EMS Static Model

Bndry

Regional EMS Static Model

Regional EMS Static Model

Bndry

Partition by Object Instance using Model Authority SetsP

artit

ion

by C

IM S

chem

a E

lem

ents

Common Objects

Display Layout

Equip Model

Display Layout

Equip Model

Display Layout

Equip Model

Partitioning of EMS Solved Cases

Global Model Objects

Regional EMS Static Model

Bndry

Regional EMS Static Model

Regional EMS Static Model

Bndry

Partition by Object Instance using Model Authority SetsP

artit

ion

by C

IM S

chem

a E

lem

ents

Common Objects

Display Layout

Equip Model

Display Layout

Equip Model

Display Layout

Equip Model

Solution

Measurements

Meas

State Variables

Topology

Measurements

Meas

Measurements

Meas

61970-453 Display Layout Exchange

• Purpose:– To exchange schematic display layouts accompanying model or solution exchanges.– Corresponds to the part of display maintenance work that normally goes with

model maintenance.• Defines graphic objects used in the sender’s displays:

– Usually linked to a model object, but can also be background.– One or more location coordinates. (Optional glue points.)– Graphic style reference.– Does not define Interpretation of graphic style references.

• Usage– Sender describes diagram.

• Senders disclose the way their system uses graphic styles.• Object placements describe sender’s diagram as is.

– Receiver must decide how to render the diagram in its system.• Create interpretation of sender’s styles. • Receivers are not expected to duplicate functionality.• Receivers may break apart complex styles or combine simpler styles.

– Receiver provides the graphic style interpretation models for their display management software.

• Result:– Layouts and names of things should be familiar.– Exact replication graphically is likely only when sender and receiver applications are

the same.– Exact replication functionally is likely only when sender and receiver applications

are the same.

Display Layout UML Proposal

ENTSO-E Case – Display Layout Exchange