1873 Setting Group chapter differs between amendment and consolidated
- Created
- 07 Jun 2023
- Status
- In Force (Editorial)Closed: the editorial correction is part of the standard. No further comments are taken. Show the workflow
- Batch
- 57/2673/INFThis tissue went out with this batch, which was closed on 01 Apr 2024.
- Part
- Part 8-1 (2020; Edition 2.1)
- Links
- None
- Page
- 88
- Clause
- 16.1
- Paragraph
- 1
Issue
Amendment to 61850-8-1:2011 did not specify any changes to SGCB clause but it differs. Specifically, the text that NumOfSG "shall be maintained in a non-volatile fashion" does not appear in Ed2.1 consolidated version.
Other changes from 2.0 to 2.1 include 16.2.3 where the requirement that "A value that has been successfully written shall be non-volatile ..." has disappeared in Ed2.1
Proposal
Option 1: Replace Ed2.1 test the Ed2.0 text
Option 2: Revise the amendment to indicate the change
| Discussion | Created |
|---|---|
| In Force (Editorial) Batch '57/2673/INF' (2) closed | 01 Apr 24 |
| Editorial Approved Editorial | 12 Dec 23 |
|
Approval (Editorial)
No behavioral change of the device, as per Ed2 tissue 1043 - in force green.
Proposed following editorial change of IEC 61850-8-1:2010/AMD1:2020 16.2.3 Remove last sentence from the paragraph. |
11 Jul 23 |
|
Triage
The issue remains that the International Standard (Amd1) does NOT have any changes shown in clause 16. A user not purchasing the "convenience" consolidated version (which is not the standard) will have no idea that a change has been made. In other words, any changes to clause 16 are NOT part of the standard.
I propose to mark this as editorial and include the material in Amd2 of part 8-1 if one is created. In other words, Amd2 should reference Tissue 1043. |
08 Jun 23 |
|
Triage
The removal of the sentence "A value that has been successfully written shall be non volatile as part of the setting group set" from clause 16.2.3 was driven by Tissue 1043.
The tissue indicates that a definition in 8-1 is not necessary, as the non-volatile property is already defined in 7-2, and not overwritten in 8-1. Therefore, no behavioral change has occured with the removal of the sentence from 8-1, and it does not need to be explicitely indicated in the AMD. I propose to set this tissue to N/A. |
08 Jun 23 |