1251   All "L" logical nodes shall be in the same LD - except for gateways

Created: 06 May 2014

Status: In Force (green)

Part: Part 7-1 (2011; Edition 2)

Links:

Page: 50

Clause: 6.4.5.1

Paragraph:

Category: Issue for edition 2 of this part

Issue

It is written that: "All “L” logical nodes, except LPHD and LLN0, belonging to an IED shall be in the same logical device (see 8.2)."
There is an exception to this: gateways, where we typically have LDs per device (and possibly child LDs). In such a case, the "L" LNs of the devices behind the GW are in different LDs.

Proposal

Add this exception.

Discussion Created Status
08 Mar 16 In Force (green)
Add also the gateway exception, in particular, the use of the new data Mir in the abstract DomainLN. 19 Jan 16 Ballot Period
Remove the sentence "All “L” logical nodes, except LPHD and LLN0, belonging to an IED shall be in the same logical device (see 8.2).” from clause 6.4.5.1.
Modify clause 8.2 as: “With the exception of LPHD, LLN0 and LCCH, all system logical nodes (Group L) belonging to the same IED shall be defined in the same logical device (e.g. logical device “SYS” in Figure 45).”
15 Jan 16 Ballot Period
I think the quoted sentence about the LD SYS in 7-1 is to restrict. The proposed tissue here shows a good exception. There might be other. So I propose to state that this is an implementation issue. 09 May 14 Discussion (red)
Additionaly, I recommend to moderate from all "L" to the real system issues. 7-1 lists: Time synchrobization, LTMS, LTIM, LGOS, LSVS, LTRK.

As there can be several access points in a device I would include LCCH to the LLN0, LPHD exception;
but as there can not be several time supervision or tracking in the device, I agree the LTMS, LTIM, LGOS, LSVS, and LTRK shall be in the same logical device.
09 May 14 Discussion (red)
This eception is indicated already in Figures 47 and 48 of Part 7-1. Propose to clarify this in the text. 08 May 14 Discussion (red)

 

Privacy | Contact | Disclaimer

Tissue DB v. 21.10.16.1