Experience Sharing - Challenges and Solutions on IEC 61850 Substation

Commissioning and Supervision in Thailand

Anucha Semjan1, Naibo Ji 2
1
JHM Electric Solutions Co. Ltd, Thailand
2
OMICRON electronics Asia Limited, Hong Kong, (noble.ji@omicronenergy.com)

Abstract - IEC 61850 standards edition 2 has been released interoperability functions among IEDs, in order to achieve
for a few years, and many countries started investigating the high system stability and selectivity.
and implementing IEC 61850. Thailand is one of the leading
countries in IEC 61850 implementation among Asian power II. IEC61850 APPLICATION IN MEA
utilities, especially Metropolitan Electricity Authority
(MEA), who initiated the distribution substation renovation There are several typical IEC 61850 GOOSE
projects with IEC 61850 in Bangkok since 2012 for more
applications adopted in MEA, listed as follows and this
than 100 substations.
JHM Electric Solutions and OMICRON has been deeply section shares the background information about the
involved the MEA’s substations renovation projects for two design and functions:
years as the substation commissioning service provider, for  Coupler Throw Over Scheme (CTO)
more than 60 substations in Bangkok area. This paper is to  Line Throw Over Scheme (LTO)
share our experiences in the commissioning and  Bus Throw Over Scheme (BTO)
maintenance process in MEA’s IEC 61850 systems.
The existing IEC 61850 implementation is focus on
 Circuit Breaker Failure Scheme
Manufacturing Message Specification (MMS) and Generic  Interlocking
Object Oriented System Event (GOOSE) applications.
GOOSE is adopted in the circuit breaker failure (50BF) A. Coupler Throw Over Scheme (CTO)
function, as well as some other interoperability functions
among IEDs, in order to achieve the high system stability This scheme is to ensure continuous power supply to
and selectivity. the transformer when one of the incoming feeders failed.
This paper shares the examples of some identified issues
during the commissioning stages and the corresponding
solutions. We also provide our recommendation on the
commissioning process improvement, which can be
considered as useful input for future implementations in
Thailand and other Asian countries.

Keywords – Client/Server, Commissioning, GOOSE,

IEC 61850, Supervision

I. INTRODUCTION

IEC 61850 standards have been released for a few

years. Many countries started to investigate and
implement IEC 61850. Thailand is one of the leading
countries in Asia in this area. In Thailand, utilities
especially Metropolitan Electricity Authority (MEA)
initiated the distribution substation renovation projects
with IEC 61850 in Bangkok since 2012.
JHM Electric Solutions Co., Ltd. has been deeply
involved in the MEA’s substations renovation projects for
two years as the substation commissioning service
provider, for more than 60 substations in Bangkok area.
This paper is to share our experiences in the
commissioning process in MEA’s IEC 61850 systems
from the service provider’s aspects.
The existing IEC 61850 implementations are focused
on Manufacturing Message Specification (MMS) and
Generic Object Oriented Substation Event (GOOSE)
applications. GOOSE is adopted in the circuit breaker
failure (50BF) function, as well as some other
Fig. 1. Coupler Throw Over Scheme (CTO)
This scheme includes two processes for operation,
namely the transfer process and the re-transfer process:
Step 1: The transfer process will be started when fault
occurs whether in incoming1 feeder or incoming2 feeder,
in this state IED1 or IED2 will send signal “I’m not okay”
via GOOSE1 or GOOSE2 to IED3 for starting the transfer
process by open CB “A” or CB “B” to remove the
problem first. And then close CB “C” for helping. For
example, if incoming1 feeder has a problem, the transfer
process will open breaker “A” first and then close breaker
“C” after breaker “A” is completely opened.
Step 2: The re-transfer process will be started when
incoming1 feeder or incoming2 feeder is recovered. Then
IED1 or IED2 will send signal “I’m okay” via GOOSE1
or GOOSE2 to IED3 for starting the re-transfer process by
closing CB “A” or CB “B” and then open CB “C”. For

Authorized978-1-5386-7434-5/19/$31.00 ©2019 Institute

licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts IEEE of Technology Ladkrabang provided 228
by UniNet. Downloaded on March 06,2024 at 08:30:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE PES GTD Asia

example, from previous process, when re-transfer is
started, the circuit breaker “A” will be closed first and
then open breaker “C” after breaker “A” is completely
closed.
Step 3: There are also GOOSE5, GOOSE6, GOOSE7
from IED4, IED5 and IED6 send to IED3 for blocking the
operation of CTO in case Circuit Breaker Failure operated
or transformer protection operated.
On High Voltage Side: Three GOOSEs are designed
for sending to the other for tripping on each IEDs. We call
GOOSE A, GOOSE B and GOOSE AB. And also on
transformer feeder there is the other GOOSE which is sent
for tripping to the medium side.

B. Line Throw Over Scheme (LTO)

This scheme is also used to ensure continuous power

supply to the transformer when one of the incoming
feeders has a problem. The difference between CTO and
LTO is that there is no coupler bay in LTO.

Fig. 3. Breaker Failure Scheme on High Voltage Side

After 50BF is operated, there is a logic that is used

for checking status of DS before sending GOOSE out. If
this feeder is connected to Bus “A”, GOOSE A will send
out. But if this feeder is connected to Bus “B” then
GOOSE B will send out. The other case is that if the IED
receives GOOSE from the outside and the condition of the
two DSs are closed, then the IED will return GOOSE AB
to the others.

Fig. 2. Line Throw Over Scheme (LTO)

This scheme also includes two processes for

operation, namely the transfer process and the re-transfer
process.
Step 1: The transfer process will be started when fault
occurs either in incoming1 feeder or incoming2 feeder. In
this state IED1 or IED2 will send signal “I’m not okay”
via GOOSE1 or GOOSE2 cross to IED2 or IED1 for
starting the transfer process by opening CB “A” or CB Fig. 4. Breaker Failure Scheme (GOOSE Sending)
“B” to remove the problem first. And then close the other
CB “B” or “A” for helping. For example, if incoming1 When IED receive GOOSE A, GOOSE B or GOOSE
feeder has a problem, the transfer process will open AB from the network, the logic will check the status of
breaker “A” first and then close breaker “B” after breaker DS. If the feeder receives GOOSE A and is connected to
“A” is completely opened. bus “A” then the IED will send trip command out to CB,
Step 2: The re-transfer process will be started when and also the same as GOOSE B. Only when GOOSE AB
incoming1 feeder or incoming2 feeder is recovered from is received then anyone of DS is close the IED will
previous state. IED1 or IED2 will send signal “I’m okay” release trip command.
via GOOSE1 or GOOSE2 crossover for starting the re-
transfer process by closing CB “A” or CB “B” and then
open CB “B” or CB “A”. For example, from previous
process when re-transfer is started, the circuit breaker “A”
will be closed first and then open breaker “B” after
breaker “A” is completely closed.
Step 3: There are also GOOSE3, GOOSE4 from
IED3 and IED4 send to IED1 or IED2 for blocking the
operation of LTO in case Circuit Breaker Failure operated
or transformer protection operated. Fig. 5. Breaker Failure Scheme (GOOSE Receiving)
C. Breaker Failure Protection (50BF) On Medium Voltage Side: On this side there is only
one GOOSE on each IED designed for sending out. The

Authorized licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts Institute of Technology Ladkrabang provided 229
by UniNet. Downloaded on March 06,2024 at 08:30:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE PES GTD Asia

incoming feeder and bus section feeder will receive these  The effect of the operation time in the logic of relays
GOOSEs and make decision to release trip command. also causes and adds the delay time of GOOSE
application
 GOOSE Send and Receive should do mapping by
looking up the name or sequence of the member in
the dataset
 Can we add some signals in the dataset for testing the
worst case of system traffic? The idea is to start
changing a member in all GOOSEs at the same time.
 How important is testing and capturing the GOOSE
during commissioning?
 How to replace the new relay of different model or
different manufacturer? In other words, the
Fig. 6. Breaker Failure Scheme on Medium Voltage Side
procedure what we have to do.
MMS Application for 50BF  Is there a limitation to the number of subscribers for
Report Service one GOOSE?
 To MMI for alarm message, status and analog MMS Application
value  The member in the dataset of report should use the
 To CCU1 for alarm message, status and analog standard logical node, better than use the logic to
value send to SCADA (Main) generate signal GGIO
 To CCU2 for alarm message, status and analog  How to check or verify report application?
value send to SCADA (Backup) Network Topology
 The limitation of IED in one loop of IED on Ethernet
Control Service switch
 Close/Open Circuit Breaker  Communication port of IED should be considered
 Close/Open Disconnecting Switch Others
 On/Off Recloser Function  What if we have the problem to manage the files or
 On/Off Earth Fault Protection lose it?
 Raise/Lower Transformer Tap Position
 On/Off Fan Control A. GOOSE absent: How to monitor these GOOSEs after
the system is put into service?

The difficulty which we (MEA and JHM) have

Fig. 7. MMS Application
III. EXPERIENCE SHARING
Based on our experiences in the past projects related
IEC 61850, we found it is important to conclude the
answers for the questions below:
GOOSE Application
 How to monitor these GOOSEs after the system in
service, and how to find the absent ones?
 Documentations about GOOSE applications versus
Drawing: How do we visualize the source and
destinations of GOOSE?
encountered during the commissioning process for the
first several substations is that we needed to download the
configurations to IEDs repeatedly in order to fix certain
logic issues, change the protection setting parameters, and
configure the LED/Binary Input/Binary Output contacts
to complete the designed scheme. After downloading the
new configurations, the testing need to be repeated to
verify the settings.
We found that proper documentation becomes
essential. Sometimes the system integrator did not keep
all stakeholders involved in the commissioning updated
about the changes. After some discussion, we believe that
it would be good for the commissioning team to have the
verification on the integrity after each update and identify
the issues in advance to the testing.
How to Prevent?
Our recommendation to prevent the above issue is to
appoint a dedicated person who is responsible for
downloading settings to the relays and managing the files
properly.
It will be very beneficial if a certain kind of device
can be installed to monitor GOOSE and IED servers and
investigate whether the system has any missing
components or changes. (different from SCL file)

Authorized licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts Institute of Technology Ladkrabang provided 230
by UniNet. Downloaded on March 06,2024 at 08:30:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE PES GTD Asia
Visualization on IEC 61850 Configurations
Another challenge about GOOSE application is how
to understand which IED sends GOOSE and which IED
receives GOOSE. So, the standard format should be
created for this purpose to understand about GOOSE
‘connection’. Such information of GOOSE sending or
receiving in each IED will be used in the future to verify
when the IED is changed or is under preventive
maintenance. Some examples below illustrate different
approaches on the GOOSE sending and receiving
visualizations.
Fig. 8. Example1 GOOSE sending / receiving
Fig. 9. Example2 GOOSE sending / receiving
Fig. 10. Example hardwire connection for sending / receiving
B. Additional Considerations for the GOOSE Delay Test
Some delay of GOOSE communication is not only
caused by the network switches, but also the operation
Authorized licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts Institute of Technology Ladkrabang provided 231
by UniNet. Downloaded on March 06,2024 at 08:30:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
time in the special logic of relays. It is delayed because
we have added some logic in the IED before sending
GOOSE or after receiving GOOSE. Some relays separate
the operation of logic inside into different categories,
namely fast operation, medium operation and slow
operation. Therefore, when we use the logic together with
GOOSE for special application, we need to check also the
GOOSE delay properly. Fig.11. illustrates an example of
the special logics designed for GOOSE send and receive.
Fig. 11. Example the logic for GOOSE sending / receiving
C. Importance of the DataSet Sequence in GOOSE
During the commissioning process, both MEA and
JHM noticed that when the sequence of the members in
dataset of sending IED is changed, the corresponding
function in the receiving IED will be affected. Below Fig.
12 and 13 illustrate the normal and error situations if the
sequence of the DataSet is changed. It is difficult to
observe or investigate such behavior manually. Therefore,
a certain tool is required for verifying the SCL with the
actual GOOSE running on the network.
Fig. 12. Example the member of dataset of GOOSE for sending /
receiving before modifying (The function is okay)
Fig. 13. Example the member of dataset of GOOSE for sending /
receiving after modifying (The function is in error)
 Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE PES GTD Asia
D. Heavy Traffic Scenario Simulation and Test
It is needed to verify the network performance by
simulating the worst case. Our idea is to simulate and
increase the traffic in the network by GOOSE application.
Such condition can be realized by adding a special
member in all GOOSE for testing, as highlighted in
yellow in Fig. 14.
Fig. 14. The idea using GOOSE to generate the package at the same time
E. Importance of Capturing GOOSE during
Commissioning
In the past, during commissioning, what we needed to
do was to verify that all functions operated and worked
correctly according to the design. The output contact,
binary input were configured to complete the function.
Now, in case the IED is replaced by the new one or under
the preventive maintenance again, we can retest it with
the configured output contact and binary input.
The question is with GOOSE application. There is no
more binary contact and binary input. How can it be
tested? Thus, it would be better to record all the GOOSE
in the testing file and re-test it with the same file.
Fig. 15. Test template for testing GOOSE sending / receiving
Fig. 16. GOOSE configuration which already import the GOOSE from
SCL files
Authorized licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts Institute of Technology Ladkrabang provided 232
by UniNet. Downloaded on March 06,2024 at 08:30:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 17. Testing the GOOSE which send out from IED
Fig. 18. Testing the action of IED when receive GOOSE from outside
F. How to replace a new relay of a different model or
manufacturer?
That what we have to do and what we have to
consider in the procedure has to be considered by the user
when replacing the existing one.
 GOOSE Receiving
 GOOSE Sending
 Report
 Other?
In case the same model of IED and the same firmware
version is used, this is quite easy. We just connect the
wiring the same as before and then download the previous
relay setting and IEC configuration file. After that we can
re-test it with the same file that we use during
commissioning.
However, in case we use a relay of different model or
of a different manufacturer, it is more complicated. The
new GOOSE and new report will be generated to work
together with the existing system. In order to ensure that
all new GOOSE and new report are working correctly,
testing is required. However, in this situation we have to
test it in a larger scale because many IEDs which are
related to this new one should be tested.
G. How to check or verify report service?
The report application in this project will be used for
MMI, and SCADA via CCU1 or CCU2. The process to
verify this service is that we test with the real device and
check the message and status on MMI and SCADA
according to our design.
When we looked at the process of engineering about
the report, the most important thing is the dataset
 Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE PES GTD Asia
preparation because it is right now with the IED interface
software we need to add the signal one by one for each
dataset, and this procedure cannot be simply copied or
pasted, even though we need the same member in the
dataset for all reports. Therefore, many mistakes could be
made in this process and also can be different too. To
verify whether all members in the dataset of each report
are fine, we need to check on both MMI and SCADA via
CCU1, SCADA via CCU2.
Fig. 19. Structure of dataset which prepare for three reports (tree dataset
for three report)
Fig. 20. Structure of dataset which prepare for three reports (two datasets
for three report)
H. Limitation from the Ethernet Switch in the Ring
Topology
It can be noticed from the picture of the network
topology below, we expect that when one side of this loop
is broken, the IEDs should still communicate with the
other one on the other side. What we found is that the
IEDs from 14-20 cannot communicate with the others.
Therefore, in order to solve the problem, we separated
them into two loops.
Fig. 21. The MMI can’t communicate with some IED when connection
is broken one side
Authorized licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts Institute of Technology Ladkrabang provided 233
by UniNet. Downloaded on March 06,2024 at 08:30:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 22. The network topology what we change by using two loops
IV. CONCLUSION
The commissioning on IEC 61850 substation is still
new to the service providers. Thus, the procedure should
be standardized and prepared according to the
requirement in advance. The purpose for such action is to
maintain the consistency throughout the life time of the
substation, including checking and verifying during the
commissioning process, replacing the failed IEDs,
conducting preventive maintenance, and adding new IED
to the existing system.
Moreover, we also need to set up a certain device to
monitor the GOOSE communication online. In case of
errors and changes after the commissioning, this system
can give a warning to the owner that the IEC 61850
system is not the same as the one during commissioning
process.
VI. REFERENCES
[1] G. Ziegler, “Numerical Differential Protection: Principles
and Applications,” Erlangen: Publicis Publishing, 2012.
[2] Siemens, SIPROTEC 7SS52x Manual, Siemens, 2004.
[3] A. Apostolov, B. Bastigkeit, “Testing of Modern Bus
Protection Systems,” CIGRE, Paris, 2008.
[4] Z. Gajic, “Protecting Busbars,” PAC World, no.
December, 2011.
[5] J. L. Alqueres and J. C. Praca, "The Brazilian power
system and the challenge of the Amazon transmission," in
Proc. 1991 IEEE Power Engineering Society
Transmission and Distribution Conf., pp. 315-320.
[6] J. Bowen, “Substation commissioning and turnover
planning”, IEEE Industry Applications Magazine, volume
6, pp. 8-15, (2000).
[7] IEC 60255-151:2009 Measuring relays and protection
equipment - Part 151: Functional requirements for
over/under current protection, p. 30.
[8] F. Steinhauser, “Network Simulation on the PC - New
Options for Protection Testing,” International Protection
Testing Symposium (IPTS) 2004, Amsterdam,
Netherlands.
[9] J.U. Mortensen, B. Bastigkeit, “New possibilities for
testing of line protection relays, Field test report at SEAS-
NVE Denmark,” International Protection Testing
Symposium (IPTS) 2008, Feldkirch, Austria.
[10] B. Bastigkeit, “Testing Teleprotection Schemes by
Transient Network Simulation,” International Protection
Testing Symposium (IPTS) 2009, Vienna, Austria.
 Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE PES GTD Asia

[11] C. Riesch, “Die Zukunft der Zeitsynchronisation im Smart

Grid,” Anwendungsberichte der OMICRON
Anwendertagung 2012, Essen, Germany.
[12] A. Apostolov, D. Tholomier, S. Sambasivan and S.
Richards, “Protection of Double Circuit Transmission
Lines,” Texas A&M Protective Relaying Conference
2007, College Station, USA.
[13] F. Caldero, “Mutual Impedance in Parallel Lines -
Protective Relaying and Fault Location Considerations,”
Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories Technical Paper
2008, Pullman, USA.
[14] S. Kaiser, “Different Representations of the Earth
Impedance Matching in Distance Protection Relays or
What Impedance Does a Digital Distance Protection
Relay Measure?” OMICRON User Meeting 2004,
Friedrichshafen, Germany.
[15] U. Klapper, A. Apostolov, M. Kruger and S. Kaiser,
“Improving Distance Protection Performance Through
Line Impedance Measurements,” APAP 2007, Jeju,
Korea.
[16] R. Luxemburger, W. de Villiers, “Calculation and
Verification of Distance Protection Settings Based on
Line Impedance Measurements,” PAC World Conference
2013, Dublin, Ireland.
[17] R. Luxemburger, W. de Villiers, “Negative K-Factor
Setting for Power Cables Explained via Sequence
Impedance Measurements,” Jicable 2011, Versailles,
France.
[18] N. Ji, and A. Semjan, “New protection testing philosophy
with emphasis on probing tests,” DPSP 2014,
Copenhagen, Denmark.
[19] B. Bastigkeit, C. Pritchard, T. Hensler and N. Ji, “New
Possibilities in Field Testing of Distributed Protection
Systems,” IEEE APPEEC 2013, Hong Kong.

Authorized licensed use limited to: King Mongkuts Institute of Technology Ladkrabang provided 234
by UniNet. Downloaded on March 06,2024 at 08:30:36 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.