You are on page 1of 32

Testing Ethernet Networks for

GOOSE Tripping
James Ariza - Megger
Rene Aguilar – Megger
Dhanabal Mani - Megger
Daniel Espinosa - CFE
Jorge Mendoza - RuggedCom

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Introduction

• As GOOSE messages are taking more critical roles


in the protection and control task of the substation, it
is important for the protection engineer to develop
new test methods to evaluate the performance of
the Ethernet switches and IT network topologies

• Ethernet switches and IT network topologies are as


important to understand as protective relays in order
to achieve substation goals

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Environmental Standards

IEC 61850-3 (2002) IEEE 1613 (2003)


“Communications networks and systems “Standard Environmental and Testing Requirements
in substations” for Communications Networking Devices in Electric
Power Substations”
5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Environmental Standards

• IEC 61850- 3

– Specifies type test to simulate EMI phenomena


• Inductive load switching
• Lightening strikes
• Electrostatic discharge
• Radio frequency interference

• IEEE 1613

– It goes one step further by defining “class 2” operation that required :

• No communication errors
• No delays or interruptions during the application of the type test

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
What about FAT, Commissioning and
maintenance test?
– How do you test a switch that needs to replace on
that has failed in the field?

– Do you need to do a complete system test and


have a shutdown or can the switch be tested like
a relay and focus on specific “elements”

– Ethernet Switches are IEDs just like protection


relays and require configuration and monitoring.

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
IEEE- PSRC Subcommittee
H - Relaying Communications

• H6 Working Group – Ethernet LANs in


Substation Protection and Control
– Special Report 2005
„Application Considerations of IEC 61850/UCA 2 for
Substation Ethernet Local Area Network Communication for
Protection and Control‟

• H12 – Configuring Ethernet LAN Infrastructure

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Utilities References
• GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR SUBSTATION
AUTOMATION SYSTEMS BASED ON IEC61850
STANDARD, REVISION 3 – 2010 - MEXICO

• GROUP OF SPANISH ELECTRICITY COMPANIES ON


IEC 61850 MINIMUM COMMON SPECIFICATION FOR
SAS EQUIPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE IEC
61850 STANDARD – 2010 SPAIN

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Ethernet network architecture for protection trips
using GOOSE Messages – CFE Mexico
RSTP

Ethernet Switch

Dual Link Redundancy


5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
MES : Modulo de Entradas y Salidas (I/O Module)

MES

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
MES

Fiber Optic

Fiber Optic

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Ethernet Network Design Criteria
CFE

• LAN switches must use RSTP defined by IEEE


802.1D-2004, to allow communication recovery on
network events such as LAN switch or link failure

• The network configuration must be as simple as


possible. In most cases, a simple network ring is
recommended

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Ethernet Switch Fails

• There are two types of failures on this ring


configuration that can produce time delays on
GOOSE message transmission

– Case 1. Cabinet’s Ethernet switch fails.

– Case 2. Any other Ethernet switch in the ring


fails.

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Case 1. Cabinet’s Ethernet switch fails.

SW Fault
IED checks the
missing link and
GOOSE TRIP switches over to
the back up link

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Case 2. Any other Ethernet switch in the ring fails

SW Fault
Local Traffic

GOOSE TRIP

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Case 2. Any other Ethernet switch in the ring fails

CONSIDERATIONS :

• Local traffic in the LAN switch must continue and no time


delay must be admitted when a RSTP reconfiguration is in
progress.

• RSTP will affect traffic from one device to others located in a


different switch on the network.

• Breaker failure is one example of protection scheme that


requires the transmission of GOOSE messages from one
cabinet to another (inter bay trips)
5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
TESTING
Measuring the Operation Time of the Protection Relay – GOOSE Trip

Item Relay Operation (ms)

Relay Test Set


1 13,30

2 13,19
Ethernet Switch
3 14,10

4 14,39

5 13,50
TRIP -GOOSE
6 13,70
V&I
7 13,80

8 13,80

TRIP -GOOSE
9 13,29

Relay

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
TESTING
Measuring the Operation Time of the Protection Relay – GOOSE Trip

Test Relay Operation (ms)

Considerations: 1 13,30

-GOOSE publication by Z1 trip 2 13,19

3 14,10
-Fault Simulated at 50% of the line length
4 14,39

-Sub- cycle algorithm enable 5 13,50

6 13,70
-No background traffic
7 13,80

-Relay test set and relay connected to the same SW 8 13,80

9 13,29
Average time : 13.63 ms

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Test connection to Switch 1 Power Supply
Relay Test Set Root Switch
OUT1
LAN Switch

115 V

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Determining Root Switch Fault Instance

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Test Results - SW1 fault instance
Item Relay Operation (ms) SW1 power source disconnection (ms)

1 13,30 193,00

2 12,90 193,00

3 14,10 194,00

4 15,20 194,00

5 13,50 194,00

6 13,70 195,00

7 13,80 195,00

8 13,80 196,00

9 13,29 196,00

9 timeout 198,00

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Testing Process

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Determining Time Delay in network due to RSTP
• Test 1 Local Communication on Ring Fault
Test Relay Operation (ms)

1 13,30

2 12,90

3 14,10

4 15,20

5 13,50

6 13,70

7 13,80

8 13,80

9 13,29

No time delay was added !!


5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Determining Time Delay in network due to RSTP
• Test 1 Local Communication on Ring Fault

No time delay was added !!


5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Determining Time Delay in network due to RSTP
• Test 2 Transmission delay on Ring Fault
Test Relay Operation
(ms)

1 46,40

2 12,90

3 13,50

4 15,10

5 14,20

6 13,70

7 45,00

8 45,20

9 46,40

Time delay was added !!

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Determining Time Delay in network due to RSTP
• Test 2 Transmission delay on Ring Fault

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Conclusions

• Circuit breaker tripping using GOOSE messages


can be an option for Utilities. Network topology and
switch constraints must be considered in order to
achieve optimum performance of the S/E LAN

• Consider to use hardwired if network performance,


including switches transmission capabilities and
devices fail over, don’t meet your requirements

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Conclusions

• When LAN tripping is used for busbar differential


and breaker failure protection schemes, time delays
due to RSTP process could be a big issue, even
when the probability of a network and power
system's fault take place at the same time is very
low
• For large network topologies, with more switches,
time delay due to ring reconfiguration, must be
considered

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Conclusions

• A fail over test must be performed in the relay and


MES in order to know its performance when the
primary link to the main LAN switch is lost

• If time delay due to RSTP is a issue, consider using


seamless system such as PRP (Parallel
Redundancy Protocol) or HSR ( High availability
seamless redundancy) specified in part 3 of IEC
62439

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Conclusions

• Ethernet switches and IT network topologies are as


important to understand as protective relays

• Test methods and guidelines to evaluate the


performance of the Ethernet switches and IT
network topologies are needed

• At minimum, SAS should include monitoring of


alarms generated by switches so that preventive
maintenance can avoid major events.
5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Make your own path in life !!
5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
Accept that the road it
is sometimes difficult !!

5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010
5th International Conference, Power System Protection and Automation, New Delhi, India, December 2010