IEEE P2030 10/2709 brainstorming session
Items related to Power Engineering
Define power system assets will participate in Smart Grid
Define parameters will be monitored per asset
Define data types
Define services, in the SOA sense, that are needed to support the device
Define the taxonomy for the device description (CIM,)
Types of equipment versus data response times (for both control and sense paradigms). GPS dependency for NASPInet. IEEE 1588 substitute
Information exchange needs for equipment
The above guidelines should be for both embedded and enterprise systems, and home and building automation in communication with the Smart Power Grid
Items related to Communications
IPv6: Extent it extends toward the end-points
Security
Cyber, which drives on-board computing power
Physical, since remote distributed assets may provide network access
Virtualized IP for multitude of endpoints
Consideration of Electro Magnetic Compatibility (EMC), both causative and susceptibility (including Denial of Service) and penetration
Physical scope of communication service area should not be a primary consideration. IT systems should be independent of communication implementation
Describe base performance of communication infrastructure for several scenarios, so Task Force 2 is agnostic to issues communication such as error rate, data integrity, redundancy, reliability, latency, sequencing, and percentage of bandwidth
Home Area Network and using Internet and/or meter thruway. Utility propensity, with some justification – maintenance, to want to own and maintain their own infrastructure. Define what is more amenable to public common carrier – also risk analysis component.
Items related to Information Technology
Define processes that the power system equipment participates in
Interoperability needs are gleaned from various existing Smart Grid use cases. Select concrete scenarios that yield application and data examples from those use cases. However, such examples are not limited to those from use cases. Scenarios that think ahead, such as Phasor Measurement Units and the North American Synchro Phasor Initiative network, are addressed, as are even more futuristic work such as faster than real time state estimation solvers.
Some use cases are addressed by the NIST list of standards, the GWAC stack and GWAC interoperability, EPRI IntelliGrid, and UCAIUG
Dealing with legacy and proprietary systems
How to ‘wrap’ existing systems for conformity to current standards
Requirement that they interoperate
How to indicate equipment legacy system capability
Possible aggregation of other upstream and downstream sensors to simulate sensing that a legacy device does not on have on board
Today’s Smart Grid is tomorrow’s legacy; therefore expansion of protocols and preservation of existing protocols needs consideration
Conversely, there are applications needed but not yet made, such as Wide Area Grid Awareness, or Greenness (automated application to provide a stated level of renewable energy delivery). Allowances are needed for competitive advantage to be innovated within the scope of the standards, which leads to the issue of a governance model for future developments.
Security
Trust between domains, such as inter-ISO,
Device self-identification
No SG LAN DHCP on request without certification
X.509 for example
All source code checked for malware, versus libraries of unknown provenance
Must be addressed in first phase of design
Safety is a major concern of security, not just penetration for unauthorized control
EMC and environmental concerns may also interact with security
Security is risk management
Security impacts reliability
Security impacts privacy
Access to domestic consumption information not constrained by utility
Consider the influence of the GWAC stack
Which levels are and are not addressed in TF 2
Testing for interoperability
Define who is the testing agency
Specify the validation scenarios
Define existence of levels of validation
Guidelines for enablement of
Decision support
Analytics
Optimization scenarios
Risks of using for control action
Operator advisory or direct connection to DMS, EMS, OMS
Encapsulation of grid and view overall (evolution of SG implementation).
Caution in degree of automation having unintended consequences initially.
Distributed management is harder to understand
Original ARPAnet hardening thought process
Gaps identified by Task Force II but not addressed in this guideline
Architectures and data flows
Review of GWAC/NIST, UCAIUG
Expand on detail from ‘NIST cloud’ diagrams
Ownership view (privacy, enablement, services/functionality modules)
Principles
Methodologies and representations
UML
TOGAF
DoDAF
c.f. Andreas Tolk
Zachman
Separate function from device
Adaptation from closely related applications
e.g. residential consumption control is not new – see what commercial and industrial electric power customers have had for years as a model
Items to model and/or architect
Information exchanges
Operational nodes
Interconnectivity/communications
System nodes
Data definitions and taxonomies
Task Force II subgroups (to add to above content Wednesday 2nd shift)
Power Engineering Bob Saint and Mike Coddington
Architecture Bob Gerard
Modeling Chris Reed
Security Partha Datta Ray
Communications Bob Grow
Technical writing Sara Biyabani
Task Forces subgroups meet via audio conferencing bridges after this three-day workshop
Monthly call with all TF2 the above subgroup leaders and TF leader
Inter-Task Force issues
Security TF2 (request half-day all TFs at next in-person meeting)
Safety TF1
Diagramming tool Word
Stimulus projects create de facto standards ?
IEEE PES SG group liaison TF1 (Bob Saint TF2 attends this)
JSK1028091700