JSIS Meeting Minutes September 22-24, 201515
1. Welcome, Call to Order, Introductions
Dmitry Kosterev, Joint Synchronized Information Subcommittee (JSIS) Chair, called the meeting to order at 12:30 p.m. on September 22, 2015. A quorum was present for the conducting of business. Attendees were asked to introduce themselves. A list of attendees is attached as Exhibit A.
2. Antitrust Policy
Donald Davies read aloud the WECC Antitrust Policy statement. A link to the posted Policy was provided in the meeting agenda.
3. NASPI Update
Alison Silverstein gave an update on NASPI. She reviewed the categories of benefits: Reliability, Cost Savings, Grid efficiency and Environmental items.
Ms. Silverstein reviewed the synchrophasor technology outreach and the starter kit. The purpose of this is to collect key information and resources on synchrophasor system design and for implementation to be in a single place. She discussed the roll-out is planned for the October 2015 NASPI meeting.
Ms. Silverstein reviewed the topical content for the Synchrophasor Starter Kit. It was noted that another office at the Department of Energy can do the data parsing for on-line applications and cluster computers. Currently there are some efforts heading in this direction but it is outside of the NASPI 2.0 efforts.
Ms. Silverstein provided an update on the Phasor Applications Requirements Task Force. She noted the NASPI Task Force is set up to address impacts of PMU data and data quality on applications. PNNL and NIST have contributed experts to a focused project to develop standard metrics and methodology for how to measure and assess this. A progress update will be shared with the PARTF member via a teleconference on October 9, 2015. The ultimate goal is to have a long-term and consistent set of methods and metrics for each vendor to use.
- NASPI.net 2.0
Ms. Silverstein reviewed the purpose of NASPI: to identify basic architectures and use cases for current and future synchrophaser systems.
NASPI is funded by DOE; work provided by PNNL technical staff; Expert technical review committee will advise on content and scope.
Ms. Silverstein expects work to be ready for review by the public in spring of 2016.
The next meetings will be:
· NASPI Work Group – Chicago, Westin-October 14-15, 2015
· International Synchrophasor Symposium-Atlanta, March 2016
The presentation can be found on the WECC website.
4. NERC Synchronized Measurements Subcommittee – Ryan Quint, NERC
Ryan Quint gave an update from the NERC Synchronized Measurements Subcommittee.
· NERC SMS was approved by PC in December 2012. It sat dormant until recently. NERC staff decided to form the subcommittee on July 2, 2015.
· The first meeting was held in Golden, Colorado September 2-3, 2015.
Mr. Quint reviewed the 8 tasks the Subcommittee chose to work on:
· PMU Placement Guidelines
· SW Outage Recommendation 27: Angular Separation
· Utilizing PMUs for NERC Reliability Standards – Quint is writing a report on how people are using PMUs (focused and visionary look)
· Model Verification Using PMUs
· Technical Workshop on PMU Utilization
· PMUs for Cascading Outages
· Monitoring IEEE C37.118 Certification Process
· Monitor Operator Training Practices
Mr. Quint noted that data quality is improving rapidly and drop-out rates are declining.
The group discussed whether the SMS should reside under the PC or the OC Committees. They believe the SMS will remain with the PC for now.
If anyone is interested in participating, please contact Ryan Quint
The presentation can be found on the WECC website.
5. PMUs for NERC Reliability Standards – Ryan Quint, NERC
Ryan Quint gave an update from NERC about the PMUs as they relate to NERC Reliability Standards.
Mr. Quint reviewed the Compliance Guidance material – The NASPI Starter Kit, NASPI Tutorial, SMS. The goal of this material is to illustrate the application of synchrophasor technology as it relates to NERC Reliability Standards.
Mr. Quint reviewed the FAC-001-2 and the utilities that have requirements for PMUs: PJM, Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), Alberta Electric System Operator’s (AESO), Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT).
Mr. Quint discussed the applicability and processes regarding the IRO-003-2 – Reliability Coordination – Wide-Area View; MOD 026-1 & MOD-027-1 – Verification of Models and Data; MOD-033-1: Steady-State and Dynamic System Model Validation;PRC-002-2: Disturbance Monitoring and Reporting Requirements.
The presentation can be found on the WECC website.
6. WISP 2.0 Update – Dan Brancaccio, BRIDGE Energy Group
Dan Brancaccio gave an update on the WISP 2.0 Project plan, schedule and deliverables.
Marianna Vaiman gave an update on the V&R portion of the project.
Mr. Brancaccio reviewed various elements of the plan:
· Data Management
· Control room Solutions: Open Source the PI Based BPA MAS Solution; Wide Area View (WAV), Synchrophasor data delivered to members via ICCP, T&DCE (Montana Tech) Mode and Oscillation detection engine
· Voltage Stability: V&R Energy will provide LSE prototype deliverables
· PRSP will work with the NASPInet 2.0 and Phasor Gateway
· Grid Control and Monitoring
· Investigate Methods for Efficient Data Delivery
· Interconnection Baseline Correlation: Model Validation and Historical archive – self-serve
· BPA Synchrophasor Project
Mr. Brancaccio reviewed the anticipated learning or advances at the end of the project in addition to the timeline of the project.
The presentation can be found on the WECC website.
7. Open Platform for Engineering and Control Room Applications – Dmitry Kosterev, BPA; Pavel Etingov, PNNL; Dan Trudnowski, Montana Tech; Ritchie Carol,
Dmitry Kosterev, Pavel Etingov, Dan Trudnowski and Ritchie Carol presented on an Open Platform for Engineering and Control Room Applications.
Mr. Kosterev discussed vendor-related and open platform solutions and the advantages and challenges.
Ritchie Carol discussed the Open Platform project between the Department of Energy, BPA, PEAK, Grid Protection Alliance, T&D Consulting Engineers, NorthWestern Energy, Dominion, OGE and Southwest PowerPool. Carol discussed the components available to provide an environment for an ongoing development of synchrophasor data.
The presentation is posted to the WECC Website.
8. Data Delivery and Availability – Dan Brancaccio, BRIDGE Energy Group
Dan Brancaccio updated the group on the status of the PMU Registry that will be rolled out in November 2015.
Mr. Brancaccio provided an update on data availability statistics at Peak RC and summarized the missing samples technique.
There may be some incorrect settings in the PDQ that need to be reviewed to prevent the inaccurate data from appearing in data that is sent from PEAK RC. There is a new support email address: .
The presentation can be found on the WECC website.
9. Data Cleansing Approaches for Engineering Applications (skipped)
Panel discussion on Data Cleansing Approaches for Engineering Applications
1. Dmitry Kosterev will present on Data issues observed.
2. Frank Tuffner, Dan Trudnowski, Ken Martin and Joe Chow will present a data cleansing roundtable.
10. Data Formats for Engineering Applications
Updates were given on Data Formats for Engineering Applications:
· Pavel Etingov will present on PI Data Reader
· Dmitry Kosterev will present on CSV file tools
· Eric Allen will present on COMTRADE data reader.
· Dan Trudnowski will present on MATLAB data structures.
11. DOE Phasor Simulator for Operator Training (PSOT) Project – Prashant Palayam
Prashant Palayam gave an update on the DOE Phasor Simulator for the Operator Training (PSOT) project.
PSOT is a phasor-based training simulator to train power system operators on the use of synchrophasor technology.
Mr. Palayam indicated that the POST Event Library is installed at ERCOT and SCE. He also indicated that future work includes qualifying PSOT Training for NERC CEH and Integration of Real-Time PSOT with ERCOT OTS (Operator Training Simulator).
The presentation can be found on the WECC website.
September 23, 2015
Engineering Analysis
12. Review of System Events Engineering Analysis – Armando Salazar, Southern California Edison
Armando Salazar provided an overview of several system events including the Chief Joseph brake during April, June and September 2015.
The presentation can be found on the WECC website.
13. Chief Joseph Brake Applications Engineering Analysis – Dmitry Kosterev
Dmitry Kosterev gave an analysis of the Chief Joseph brake applications.
The next step in this project is to develop a baseline and how this affects other oscillations. The group is going to do a study to see what occurs when they extrapolate the system’s stress and load the path to the operating limits and see how the properties change.
A controller can have a bigger impact on the load than a flow in the system. It’s going to be difficult to do this on measurements. Model studies may provide more data on the relative properties of the movement.
The presentation can be found on the WECC website.
14. Terminology Used to Describe Oscillations and Oscillation Analysis Applications – Dan Trudnowski, Montana Tech
Dan Trudnowski summarized the terminology used to describe oscillations and analysis applications.
Action Item: Request an update to the report that WECC published. Write a separate paper to share at the next JSIS meeting.
15. Operational Solutions for Oscillation Detection – Dmitry Kosterev, Bonneville Power Administration
Dmitry Kosterev presented BPA framework for oscillation detection and analysis.
Mr. Kosterev reviewed different types of oscillations.
· Electro-mechanical – Can be modeled and studied, conditions at risk can be identified by system planning studies
· Forced – Equipment related generators or “rough” oscillations of hydro-power plants
Mr. Kosterev reviewed the Central Oregon Plant Oscillation on February 20, 2014 and the Portland Area Plant Oscillation on March 10, 2015.
BPA conducted two dispatcher training sessions specific on Oscillation Detection application and one session on synchrophasor technology.
Hongming Zhang presented Peak‘s framework for enabling online oscillation detection and automated analysis in the control room.
Mr. Zhang reviewed lessons learned from the previous projects, goals, projects and tasks associated with this:
· Peak previously deployed new technology/applicaton software in Control rooms yet found some of them could not meet business practices after much effort made due to fundamental tool performance issues and immature technology, cybersecurity vulnerability and integration and environment complexity, and excessive maintenance burdens.
· Maturity Levels – Level 3 and 4 involves higher hardware cost and more resources to execute these levels. Level 4 is in production.
· Provide a production equivalent mimic system to evaluate new Synchrophasor and other advanced technology or software in terms of benefits, maturity and risk analysis. PI servers hold up to 3 months of historical data (PME and EMS).
· Zhang discussed that forced oscillations in the WECC system occurred. They were characterized by very low damping, high energy and unknown modes and a clear peak in power spectral density
· Peak worked with WSU through DOE-CERT project for forced oscillation detection and source finding
· The goal is to finalize and implement a permanent data sharing mechanism.
· Key deliverables include finalizing and implementing a permanent data sharing mechanism; Position Peak as the repository of key data for reliability purposes and develop process for PEAK, BAs and TOPs to verify accuracy of data inputs.
· Dan Trudnowski reviewed the System Response Types: Ambient, Transient and Forced Oscillation.
· Dmitry Kosterev presented on Mode Meter baselining.
· Trudnowski provided an overview of a Mode Meter Analytic. This is used to track a specific System mode. Mode metering is trying to estimate the natural mode of the system.
· Ran Xu presented on the work done at PEAK on PhasorPoint/MAS-Mode Meter Benchmark Testing and Grid Stability Assessment Implementation.
· Xu shared some of the highlights of the 2015 improvements, specifically the PhasorPoint Modal Analysis Software (MAS).
· Mr. Xu reviewed Mode Meter Results from the April 2015 PDCI Trip Event (Peak vs. BPA).
· Mr. Xu updated the group that the GSA Testing and Validation in DEMS is in progress.
· Mr. Xu reviewed the enhancements to be made to the MAS tool.
· Dmitry Kosterev gave an analysis of Frequency Response in the Western Interconnection.
The group held a discussion regarding setting some parameters around whether performance is good or good enough. Performance is measured on a library of data from several events and building confidence. It is more of an adoption of the practices than the technical improvement.
The presentation can be found on the WECC website.
16. System Model Validation Studies Engineering Analysis – Donald Davies, WECC
Donald Davies covered the analysis and results of the Brake tests that he, Slaven Kincic, and Brian Thomas have been working on. Davies updated the group on the tests from June 17, 2015; Montana line switching on May 28, 2015; and Montana faults on August 4, 2015, April 28, 2015, September 1, 2015 and September 15, 2015 events.
Analysis has involved taking events on the system and seeing what traces exist and comparing them to the simulations that have been run. The objective of this analysis is to develop and demonstrate a process that links WSM to WECC dynamic tools.
The process of developing power flow cases from the EMS system has been standardized and event cases are posted on peakrc.org. Davies reviewed the process of how to find the cases on peakrc.org along with results of the analysis.
PSLFV19 was released on November 3, 2014 which supports node-breaker model. Davies noted there is no additional licensing cost for WECC PSLF users to use node-breaker package in PSLF.
The Mapping Automation Tool created by GE assists the mapping automation tool to update the mapping file each month.
A discussion was held regarding the ability to move this analysis to the planning model. Efforts are being made and it should be available in upcoming months.
Armando Perez commended Donald Davies, Slaven Kincic and Brian Thomas for their excellent work on the analysis studies.
17. Frequency Response Model Validation Engineering Analysis – Aftab Alam, CISO
Aftab Alam updated the group on the California ISO studies of frequency response model validation.
Mr. Alam reviewed the no-fault simulation quality Issues and shared that the MW outputs of generators/pumps in the SE solution could be outside the Mwcap or MVAbase of generator dynamic models.
Some possible solutions might include changing the MVA base or Mwcap; Using artificial injections at generator buses to make sure unit output is below Pmax.
The presentation can be found on the WECC website.