28   Definition of APC

This tissue has following status: green

Created: 11 Mar 2005



Clause: 7.6.2


Category: Issue may impact interoperability of implementations of Edition 1

Issue: The APC definition has some inconsistencies: the setMag attribute has fc=SP and MX, which can not be modelled in SCL. The fc=SP (set point) is confusing to fc=SP (Setting Parameter). If a real analog is controlled, then the semantic of the back indication is not setMag, but mag instead.... Observe that APC is no longer a set point - for this purpose 7-4 uses ASG - it is a analog controllable analog process value and should be modelled like all controls.

Proposal: Change the fc of setMag to CO, like for all controllable CDCs (naturally also for origin and operTm). Add the attribute ctlNum(fc=CO)like for other controllable CDCs. Add the attribute mag with fc=MX for the back indication from the process.

Discussion Created Status
Ballot until Editor
set to green after ballot closed 22 May 05 green
Ballot date added 11 May 05 final proposal 17 May 05
Final Proposal:
accepted as proposed by Christoph Brunner 30.03.05
setMag fc=SP is renamed to ctlVal, and the SP attributes get the fc=CO.
setMag fc=MX is renamed to mxVal.
IEC61850-8-1 has to be updated.
01 Apr 05 final proposal
After checking the document, I suggest to rename the atribute setMag to ctlVal and call the new attribute mxVal. The reason for this is, that we have already mag used for other purpose. 31 Mar 05 red
I agree with the comment. In addition, I would move the CDC APC to clause 7.5, change the title of clause 7.5. to "Common data class specification for controls" and delete clause 7.6. 29 Mar 05 red
The CDC APC is up to now only used for YEFN.ColPos. Therefore backward compatibility problems are very unlikely, and this usage will profit from the chagnes. Accept the proposal! 11 Mar 05 red


Privacy | Contact | Disclaimer