Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Preferential Subject 2 Specification and Evaluation of Substation Automation Systems Session Summary Steven A. Kunsman (USA) Special Reporter Calgary, Canada (15-Sept-2005)

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Session Summary Preferential Subject 2 addresses Substation Automation (SA) Systems specification and bid evaluation process Fourteen questions related to five main categories:  Process and experience of SA Systems Specifications  Privatization impacts on infrastructure and specifications  First experiences with IEC based specifications  Applications and test methods of SA Systems  Trends in SA Systems (functional consolidation)

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Process and experience of SA Systems Specifications Question 2-1: The specification process depends on input from many users of the SA System. How does the specification team value this user input and rank prioritization of the requirements? How should lower priority requirements be stated in the specification since these requirements may easily be fulfilled by the technical solution at minimal cost?  Identification of essential requirements  Functionality, architecture, performance and given constraints  Definition of functional requirements to identify basic requirements (“what” and not “how”)  Hard requirements for Factory Acceptance Test (FAT)  Use of internal knowledge and experience to set priorities  Mentorship of human knowledge  Common sense to keep simple  Decomposition of existing “how” to develop new “what”  Develop weighting factors to divergent requirements  Recommendation that weighting factors should be pre-defined in specification

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Process and experience of SA Systems Specifications Question 2-2: As mentioned earlier, the bid tender evaluation process recommendations have been made in the B5-201 paper and guideline. What are the experiences in the utilities with the tender evaluation process? Are structured and formalized processes used?  Tender evaluation structured  Some utilities process regulated (EU directive, Official Journal)  Prequalification of vendors  Examination of the proposal for  Technical content to requirements, supplier service capability  Post-tender clarification essential to resolve uncertainties  Comparison done by valuing the solution/cost for each proposal  Examination of bid for optional requirement fulfilment to make comparison  Penalty for requirement exclusions/exceptions  Homologation of IEDs to simple the evaluation process  Evaluation of vendor solutions may be difficult since multiple technical solutions can fulfil requirements – tool automation of process possible

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Process and experience of SA Systems Specifications Question 2-3: Along with the capability of new technologies, specification and engineering of substation automation systems will also be influenced by new standards like IEC How does the introduction of IEC logical nodes and devices impact the specification and engineering process? Will utilities allow for the free allocation of functional elements in different logical devices to maximize component costs savings?  No impact on functionality and constraints (NCC connection)  Impacts from IEC based  Free allocation of function (could require utility philosophy change)  Use of self-description and Substation Config. Language  Process interface (“hard”wire to “soft”wire)  Reliability and availability instead of system architecture  Specification remaining on a functional level permits high level of freedom in the technical solution  IEC functions and architecture can be transparent to users  Use of the self description required by the standard can permit automatic evaluation of solutions

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Privatization impacts on infrastructure and specifications Question 2-4: The demand on the communication infrastructure will continue to increase as the accessibility ease and additional valued information from the modern SA System is consumed by the various utility departments demand. How should future communication infrastructure utilization/expansion be included in the SA System specifications? How can these additional costs justified?  Choice of Ethernet for SA LANs provides a high degree of flexibility and saleability  Ethernet technology already at 1 GB  Switches preserve infrastructure via backward compatibility  Enables additional cost when additional capabilities are requested  WAN scalability more difficult and investment decisions should be based on life cycle and future demands of the physical infrastructure  Possible separation of data users (operations, engineering, and SCADA)  Requires physical separation of the communication infrastructure and cost are accepted to assure reliability and security

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Privatization impacts on infrastructure and specifications Question 2-5: One of the recommendations in the DE paper is the use of commercial software for an open tool and especially web browser to review and change IED parameters. Utility security is a major issue for systems as well as tools. As soon as systems are connected the corporate Intranet or network, the security vulnerability and threat potential increases. How should the security aspects of the SCS and SA Systems be specified to provide the flexibility in use of commercial software (e.g. web browsers)?  Commercial software can provide easy to use interface  Security aspects of such software utilization need to be considered  For example, Banking application are easy to use but major infrastructure and costs to assure security are transparent to users  Security aspects are being addressed  IEC TC57 working on guidelines for web services applications  Communication network topology must account for different access levels of the various users  IEC TC57 WG 15 work ongoing for security measures in all TC57  TASE.2, IEC 61850, etc  Web browser very prone to viruses unless not connected to “www’

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 First experiences with IEC based specifications Question 2-6: The CH paper states the key point for SA System Specification is the requested functionality of the substation application and the utility operational philosophies. This implies that the IEC “standard” does not mean a single or standard solution is required to meet different utility requirements and operation philosophies. How do the first IEC based technical solutions differ from utility to utility?  First IEC system are upgrades of existing stations  Same functionality with new station bus (IEC )  Turnkey systems controls the interoperability risk  Only scratching the surface of the IEC capabilities  Utility philosophy drives the differences like:  Interlocking over “hard”wire or “soft”wire (peer-to-peer communications)  Station level or device level redundancy  System architect (utility or integrator)  IEC does not define standardized solution but only means to fulfil a set of functional requirements

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 First experiences with IEC based specifications Question 2-7: One of the IEC goals is vendor interoperability. The key point referenced in Question 2-6 makes a strong statement that the standard’s goal on interoperability means different vendor devices can be used to satisfy a utility’s philosophy or solution. It does not imply that the possibility to interchange different vendor devices into an already engineered solution. How do the first experiences reflect on the interoperability goal? What are the key factors required in the SA System specification to assure interoperability without losing post-engineered SA system possibility to change vendor A to vendor B?  Minimal system re-engineering possible if:  Data available to support all SA applications  Continued standardization of object model extensions  Like functionality in device A and B  Only IED re-engineering required and system level okay  Use of smart tools using SCL files to automate process  Application performance is also important criteria  Preservation of the SCD (station SCL file) defining SAS functionality  IEC in 1 st year – extensions and clarifications are being made but released parts are stable

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 First experiences with IEC based specifications Question 2-8: It is clear that the long desired benefits of an IEC SA System are staring to be realized. For greenfield (new) substations, the specification based on IEC has and will demonstrate value. Reality is that the majority of the infrastructure upgrades and expansions may involve operating a legacy SAS and a modern SAS in the same substation for some transition period. As the AU paper points out, the operation in co-existence is difficult and has additional costs. How shall the “hybrid” or substation expansion project be specified to take advantage of the benefits of the IEC while preserving the installed SAS functionality?  Possible to extend the legacy SAS or upgrade to new SAS  Hybrid system connected through proxy or protocol converter  Issues with “soft”wire interlocking (reaction time of conversion)  Legacy devices can be represented as virtual IEC device  Migration projects upgraded bay by bay to keep station operational  Migration of IEC based system in future shall be easier since being based on a standard that was developed for future migration  Hybrid substations must consider operational issues & additional costs of operating the mixed system

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 First experiences with IEC based specifications Question 2-9: On similar thoughts, how can those utilities that will wait for proven experience in IEC based system take advantage of the IEC concepts in SAS specification as well as make sure their legacy system can be migrated to an IEC in the future?  RTE specification does not require IEC but welcome this technical solution  Requirement defined on the functional level  Responsibility of the turnkey supplier to assure compliance to the specification which addresses medium and long term maintenance and future migration  Japanese market will wait until technology is proven before any migration  Functional specification can be presented as an SCL file  Represent legacy device in SCL files to future usage  IED selection made carefully to assure the device supports the legacy protocol as well as ethernet based protocols  Migration of protocol in IED

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Applications and test methods of SA Systems Question 2-10: In some of the papers, migration to functional specification and the advancements in technology lead to complexity in the system making it very difficult to test. The utility stated that they need to trust and will rely on the vendor to assure functionality compliance in the devices and systems. It is also fact that IEC conformance does not include application or system level testing. How can the features (e.g. Substation Configuration Language) be utilized to assure the maximum test coverage and the SA Systems compliance to the functional specification?  Use of SCL is only a start to assuring maximum test coverage  IEC defines the requirements for device conformance  Use of SCL in the engineering process minimizes risk  Application to Application testing is required  Automated Test Systems (ATS)  System Verification Centers (SVC)  IEEE C can be utilized to assure maximum test coverage  Use of scenario test scripts and transaction sequences  SCL, ATS, SVC and IEEE C make it A-A OK!

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Applications and test methods of SA Systems Question 2-11: Can the application test scenarios defined in C be used to assure maximum test coverage and provide validation of the SA System to the SAS specification? If the SAS specification has different application requirements from those defined in the C standard, how can the standard be used to accommodate application variations?  Any approach requires a comprehensive description of  Components (or functions) under test  Test drivers and stimulus mechanisms  Operational scenarios  C recommends the following procedure for each test scenario  A power system control and protection functional description and evaluation criteria  An object model of the participating IEDs  Transaction sequence representing operational situations  Issue: How to map to specific protocols – DNP, IEC 61850, etc. Source: Holstein

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Trends in SA Systems (functional consolidation) Question 2-12: In many of the papers, the existing substation equipment is based on a collage of technologies from discrete devices (electromechanical) and control systems to proprietary SAS. How does one assure that SAS specification developed in 2005 allows for future solutions taking advantage of the continued SAS evolution and functional consolidation?  RTE  Policy to upgrade complete station or single voltage level  Supplier’s choice in SAS architecture and interfaces  Introduction of IEC may facilitate this process  Expect vendors to maintain system for > 15 years  Hard to assure future advantage with 2005 specification  Changes in specification required as technology advances are realizable (hardwire to cable-less substation)  Utility specify what level of technology (station bus, process bus, soft protection and control) is accepted an in what time  Highly dependant on utility philosophy and risk adverseness

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Trends in SA Systems (functional consolidation) Question 2-13: How does the free allocation of functions according to IEC change the physical configuration of the SAS and its components? Question 2-14: How does the continued trend in functional consolidation influence the SA system engineering or re-engineering?  Continued technology advances will allow greater performance with less hardware components  IEC free allocation of functions supports the advances in technology like Soft Protection and Control  Economical factors will drive when such solution have manageable risk versus reward  Issue with centralized system is the clear demarcation of the functionality to provide isolation between the different utility entities  Communication barriers removal will promote further consolidation  Introduction of the process bus IEC will be an enabler  Steps towards global view are compatibility of IEC data models and IEC 61968/1970 CIM model

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Key Factors/Summary  Research and investigate the SA System requirements and understand what is trying to be solved. Specify the “what” and not the “how”.  Define requirements on functional level and try not specify technical solutions. Technical solution can be compared and evaluated during bid evaluation process.  Evaluation criteria needed for comparing different solutions satisfying the same functional specification  IEC is a new standard for SA Communication Architectures but also provides significant value in the SA System project specification, design and validation phases  Use experiences provided by both utilities and vendors as reference for future specification activities

Steven A. Kunsman (USA) CIGRE Study Committee B5 Thank you and Congratulations for making it through 1 st Day of Sessions