5 Substation Automation
5 Substation Automation
5 Substation Automation
1. Introduction
eThekwini Electricity has embarked on substation automation projects since the early introduction of substation specific communications standards and is presently in the process of implementing substation automation projects based on the IEC61850 standard at eight new substations. This paper describes actual substation projects to illustrate the evolution of the introduction of substation automation in terms of objectives, applicable standards and specification methodology. Positive and negative outcomes of the various evolutionary phases are highlighted. The positive and negative outcomes of the use of substation automation solutions for the various projects are discussed and compared with the initial objectives. The paper concludes with the envisaged adoption of the full IEC61850 model for substation automation.
2. History
Prior to 2000, eThekwini Electricity substations were designed with the protection and control arrangement shown in Figure 1. All signals were transmitted between the primary plant and the protection and control system by means of hard-wired secondary cabling. Protection and control panels located in control rooms were equipped with protection relays, panel mimics and control switches. The primary plant and protection and control panels were hard-wired to a supervisory remote terminal unit (RTU) via a supervisory junction board. The RTU was networked to eThekwini Electricitys supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system. After the introduction of microprocessor based protection relays with communications facilities, simple multidrop networks were included to permit remote protection setting and engineering. The protection and control system was normally included with one of the primary plant contracts and the secondary cabling and testing carried out by the applicable primary plant contractor. While this arrangement provided most of the protection, control and monitoring functionality required of the more modern substation automation systems, it suffered from several disadvantages. The arrangement is not easily factory tested and is susceptible to on site wiring errors resulting in longer commissioning times. The secondary cabling is time consuming and costly to install. The provision of protection and control systems via a primary plant supplier often led to problems due to the indirect relationship with the system supplier. During the 1990s bay controllers and protection relays with inherent bay control functionality became available. These products could provide SCADA functionality by being networked with an RTU master, which could act as a data concentrating SCADA RTU. The main drawback of these systems was that they predominantly used proprietary communications protocols that were limited to the master/slave topography. Each manufacturers system was unique with the result that utilities would either be locked into the use of one manufacturers product or would need to have the resources to maintain many unique solutions, each of which could only be extended by that particular manufacturers products.
Figure 1.
61
While eThekwini Electricity recognized the potential benefits offered by the use of communication networks to replace hardwired secondary cabling, the problems associated with the use of proprietary protocols resulted in the decision to maintain the status quo. During the late 1990s products that made use of a standard communication protocol (UCA2.0) over a standard physical layer (Ethernet) became available. Work on the IEC61850 standard had commenced but was far from complete. Based on the assumption that much of the UCA2.0 protocol would find its way into the IEC61850 protocol and that the IP transport layer and Ethernet physical layer would definitely be used for IEC61850, two pilot projects using communication networks between protection relays for substation automation were embarked upon.
4. Pilot Project 2 :
4.1 Plangweni 132/11KV Substation
In 2002, tenders were advertised for a 132/11kV substation consisting of two 132kV bays, two 132/11kV 30MVA transformers and an eighteen panel indoor 11kV switchboard. A Protection tender was advertised separately from the primary plant tenders for the first time in order that a first-hand relationship could be established with the Protection supplier and to ensure that the overall responsibility for the substation automation system remained with a single party. Protection relays were free issued to the 11kV switchgear supplier for installation in the 11kV switchboard. A new Protection And Control specification was drawn up from scratch for this project. An arrangement similar to that shown in Figure 2 was specified. The specification called for a Human Machine Interface (HMI) computer to provide substation control of primary plant and a SCADA Gateway to facilitate remote control. The HMI and the SCADA Gateway were required to communicate with protection relays over an Ethernet physical layer. As the IEC61850 standard had not yet been published, the HMI was specified to make use of the UCA2.0 protocol and the SCADA Gateway was specified to make use of the DNP3.0 protocol. The protection relays were required to handle these protocols simultaneously over Ethernet. UCA2.0 was also specified to provide peer-to-peer messaging (UCA GOOSE or GSSE) for interlocking and indication. Peer-to-peer messaging was not used for protection tripping due to the lessons learnt in Pilot Project 1. Protection setting and engineering were required to be carried out over the Ethernet physical layer. Due to the dramatic reduction in secondary cabling, the Transformer Protection and Tap Change Control schemes were specified to be accommodated in one physical panel. In an attempt to reduce the cost of protection relays and the communications network, the use of one protection relay to provide protection and control for more than one 11kV feeder was allowed. A multi-feeder system comprising one relay for three 11 kV feeders was offered and accepted.
3. Pilot Project 1 :
3.1 Quarry 132kV Switchyard
In 2000, a tender was advertised for a 132 kV switchyard consisting of eight 132kV feeder bays. The protection and control aspect of the specification was based on a non-networked, hardwired (legacy) system and legacy wiring schematics were used to indicate the requirements. Tenderers were requested to offer a UCA2.0 based solution and to rationalise the legacy arrangement accordingly. The solution provided made use of a combination of the UCA2.0 and DNP3.0 protocols. UCA2.0 was used to implement peer-topeer messaging (UCA GOOSE or GSSE) for interlocking and tripping purposes. The Ethernet physical layer for UCA2.0 was also used for protection setting and engineering. A DNP3.0 master/slave network over RS485 was used for SCADA purposes. The solution did not make use of a human machine interface (HMI) computer. A traditional mimic and control switches were provided as part of the protection panels. While the solution provided the required functions perfectly, several important lessons were learned from this pilot project: The use of legacy protection and control specifications and drawings resulted in requirements being misinterpreted and philosophy decisions needing to be made by the system integrator. The SCADA RTU selected for this project was provided by the existing SCADA Master Station supplier and did not have a means of communicating with the protection relays using TCP/IP over Ethernet. Although the relays were capable of communicating using UCA2.0 or DNP3.0 over Ethernet, the final solution used DNP3.0 over RS485. There were products from other manufacturers available that could have used DNP3.0 over Ethernet and so minimized wiring. GOOSE messaging was used for trip and breaker-fail signals between the Busbar Protection scheme and feeder bays. This required a dual redundant Ethernet network for reliability purposes with associated additional costs. The use of GOOSE messaging resulted in there being no simple means of isolating Busbar Protection and associated Breaker Fail tripping which is normally required when testing on a live system. The reliability and speed of GOOSE messaging was, however, proven. The objective of minimizing on-site secondary cabling was achieved in this project.
Figure 2.
62
The supplier provided a system compliant with the specification and, for the first time, all communication within a substation (other than time synchronisation) was provided by one physical network. The main objective of minimizing hardwired secondary cabling had been achieved. The number of panels to be accommodated in the control room was vastly reduced allowing the physical size of the control room to be reduced. The lessons learned from this pilot project were: The HMI hardware failed shortly after commissioning apparently due to over-heating. This was despite the specification calling for an industrial grade PC. The hardware was replaced but concerns remain over its expected lifespan in comparison with the remainder of the equipment supplied. A conventional office/home operating system or a UNIX based operating system were specified as options for the HMI. The conventional home/office operating system was offered and accepted. This operating system has proved unreliable. The HMI software used an unproven third-party UCA2.0 driver arrangement which has been unreliable. On many occasions when the system has been left unattended for a number of weeks it has been found in a crashed state by operators. The arrangement of one protection relay providing protection and control for more than one 11kV feeder was found to be limiting in terms of the allocation of electricity customers and distributor substations to feeder circuits. Customers and distributor substations were required to be fed on circuits which did not share a protection relay to avoid protracted loss of supply for a common source of failure.
Wiring schematics were used to indicate all hard-wired connections between the protection and control schemes and the primary plant. These included analogue inputs such as CTs and VTs, digital inputs such as switchgear auxiliary switches and alarm contacts and contact outputs for closing and tripping switchgear. These wiring schematics were also used for the primary plant specifications. Logic schematics showed how inputs and protection functions were to be marshalled through logic gates, latches and timers to operate virtual and contact outputs. These schematics also indicated which logical nodes need to be linked to the HMI and the SCADA Gateway and which were to be available for peer-to-peer links (GOOSE messages). Issuing logic schematics with the specification proved to be invaluable when addressing queries and approving protection designs.
7. Communications Arrangement
The specification called for an arrangement similar to that for Pilot Project 2, shown in Figure 2. The HMI computer and SCADA Gateway were to communicate with protection relays by means of the IEC61850 protocol over the Ethernet physical layer. Peerto-peer (GOOSE) messaging was to be carried out according to IEC61850. Protection setting and engineering were required to be carried out over the Ethernet physical layer and could make use of an alternative standard protocol. All Ethernet links to protection relays were to be by means of optic-fibre (100baseF). The Ethernet switches were required to be suitable for use in a substation environment. They were to have no moving parts such as fans and be powered from the substation battery. Time synchronisation was to be achieved using a separate IRIG-B time synchronisation network. Other options are available that achieve this using the Ethernet network.
6. Scheme Drawings
Traditionally, tender drawings showed proposed wiring schematics with discrete functional devices to convey protection and control philosophy. These drawings were used by suppliers to develop protection and control schemes using their products. With the introduction of microprocessor based relays, much of the protection scheme functionality was programmed into the relays instead of being implemented with discrete wired components. With modern substation automation systems virtually all of the scheme functionality is programmed into the relays and only inputs and output contacts are physically wired. Scheme drawings were thus split into wiring schematics and logic schematics.
63
Some HMI systems are able to provide both HMI and SCADA RTU functionality in one device. eThekwini Electricitys philosophy is that both points of remote control (HMI and SCADA) for the entire substation should not be disabled for a single device failure. Separate devices were thus specified for the HMI and SCADA Gateway. The same device was offered for both applications, the only difference being the provision of a touch screen and keyboard with the HMI device. The benefit arising from this is that the HMI and SCADA Gateway have a common configuration, have common spares and can perform each others functions allowing both functions to be available after a single device failure. It is envisioned that vastly improved reliability will be achieved with the HMI offered over that supplied for Pilot Project 2.
64
integration method is thus for the relevant contact outputs from the non-compliant relay to be hardwired to digital inputs of the compliant relay. These inputs are assigned to logical nodes within the compliant relay that are then available for inclusion in the substation automation system. This method was specified, offered and accepted.
65
Add-In Items 11 kV Bus-Zone Scheme with bay processing for bus-sections and coupler SCADA Gateway HMI Communications Network TOTAL R 55 000
The savings are thus Take-Out Items Add-In Items SAVING R (1 230 000) R 430 000 R 800 000
66
18. Envisaged Adoption of the Full IEC61850 Model for Substation Automation
It is envisaged that the development of the IEC61850 process bus will revolutionise substation communication with links between primary plant such as outdoor circuit breakers and instrument transformers and IEDs being provided by communication networks with traditional secondary cabling being eliminated completely. It is hoped that in the near future our specification will be developed further to incorporate a process bus. The envisaged substation arrangement is shown in Figure 3.
19. Conclusion
The substation automation pilot projects and the subsequent contract for eight substation currently underway have allowed eThekwini Electricitys philosophies and specifications to evolve from systems that used relatively low technology solutions to ones using the latest communication technologies. The legacy systems were heavily dependant on on-site hardwired secondary cabling with associated disadvantages. The new systems allow for factory tested components to be delivered and connected together via communication networks with only a minimum of on-site secondary cabling. The reduction in secondary cabling and the rationalization of functionality in relays made possible by substation automation has enabled significant cost savings to be achieved. The adoption of the IEC61850 standard has allowed utilities to avoid being locked into proprietary communications standards by allowing the interoperability of devices from different manufacturers. This has contributed to a more competitive environment for suppliers resulting in savings to utilities. It is envisaged that future protection and control relays and products will be provided with IEC61850 compliance as standard with no price premium for this functionality. The IEC61850 standard which has predominantly been driven by suppliers will be increasingly influenced by feedback from utilities and system integrators as more projects are implemented.
0920-v5
67