Quite often people ask me about the application of sampled values according to IEC 61850-9-2 (9-2LE). The sampled values require very solid products (publisher, Ethernet Switches, and subscribers). The recent years have shown that the technology has matured to an extend that applications are already available or underway.
Please find useful links:
Click HERE for the paper:
Test and Evaluation of Non Conventional Instrument
Transformers and Sampled Value Process Bus on Powerlink’s
Transmission Network
Click HERE for a related publication:
Australia Leads With Process Bus
Click HERE for the 9-2LE guideline published by the IEC 61850 community.
More and more 9-2LE compliant IEDs are tested and certified.
There are more than 400 IEDs (Server, clients, publisher) that have been certified by the UCAIug:
Source: UCAIug
What’s about subscriber to sampled values?
Click HERE for various protection IEDs implementing the subscriber role for sampled values, e.g., Alstom Distance Protection Relay P446, …
More to come.
Posts
1 comment:
Dear Schwarz,
Thank you for the interesting highlight regarding sampled values. For you information, here in Malaysia we are currently conducting tests for line differential protection using sampled value for the current inputs. For now, the tests are performed in our 61850 laboratory but we are planning to implement a pilot trial somewhere in July 2015. Throughout our research, we found that there are two versions of UCA 9-2LE guideline, which are revision 2.1 and 3.0. The only difference that we have observed is that the smpsynch status for revision 2.1 is 0 (not synched) and 1 (synched) whereas 3.0 is 0 (not synched), 1(local) and 2(global). We have also discovered that there's an interoperability issue where if a 9-2LE IED only supports revision 3.0, it will not be able to subscribe sampled value from a revision 2.1 merging unit IED. Why is there difference in the implementation guideline and why is revision 3.0 guideline is not made public as the earlier revision?
Post a Comment