AMI Implementation in Energa Operator

Transcription

1 AMI Implementation in Energa Operator Real Deployment Facts Adam Olszewski EUW 2015, Vienna,

2 Agenda 1. Energa Operator company introduction 2. LV network topology in Poland and PLC communication impact 3. PRIME interoperability tests in ENERGA-Operator 4. Acquisition architecture in AMI system 5. Mass roll-out: stage 1&2 KPIs comparison 6. Problems analysis and conclusions 2

3 ENERGA Group characteristics Generation Distribution Sales Renewable Energy Sources (RES) Water: Wind: 46 hydroelectric plants (201 MW) pumped storage power plant (160 MW) 3 wind farms (165 MW) System power plant Ostrołęka (647 MW) CHP plants (124 MW, 747 MWt) Regulated natural monopoly Customers 2.95 M Generation (RAB) 10 bln PLN Area: 77k km2 (25% of Poland) 20,4 TWh of energy distribution 16% share in Polish power distribution 15.6% Distribution RES connected to grid 2.0 GW CAPEX 1.4 bln PLN 70.2% Customers 2.9 M Energy sales 31 TWh Retail sales 19 TWh A retail network with 9 modern Customer Service Centres Sales to customers across entire Poland EBITDA: 0.22 bln PLN Group's EBITDA: 11% EBITDA: 1.56 bln PLN Group's EBITDA: 79% EBITDA: 0.21 bln PLN Group's EBITDA: 10% 3

4 Stages of AMI Project Stage I Stage II Stage III meters, 1500 data concentrator, 3 divisions (Gdańsk, Kalisz, Koszalin) stage completed ( ) PLC S-FSK (ADD proprietary solution), 15-minutes profile data concentrators & meters from the same supplier: ADD Grup meters, 3100 dataconcentrators, all 6 ENERGA Operator divisions full roll-out completed ( ) PLC PRIME, 1-hour profile data concentrators from Current/Ormazabal, meters from ADD Grup meters, 5300 data concentrators, all 6 ENERGA Operator divisions mass roll-out just started ( ) PLC PRIME, 1-hour profile data concentrators and meters from the same supplier: Sagemcom 4 4

5 LV network topology in Poland cable boxes enabling switching LV segments between MV/LV secondary substations commonly used TN-C earthing system: combined PEN conductor fulfils the functions of both a PE and an N conductor 5

6 LV network topology in Poland cont ST 55 L L ST 56 L L PEN PEN PEN!! As the consequence of common PEN cable (any) PLC signal can be easily propagated ( cross-talks ) between different MV/LV stations 6

7 LV network topology - consequences segments of LV network are often switched between transformer stations due to maintenance works changes are not recorded in network assets inventory systems (only normal state is reflected: assignments of meters to the transformer stations) real topology differs from normal state, that causes problems: energy balancing calculation (some statistical and heuristic methods are used in algorithms) cross-talks in PLC communication (common PEN conductor) cannot be supported by black lists / white lists mechanisms in DCUs 7

8 PRIME interoperability tests - aims many aspects of interoperability verification comparison of communication quality between different vendors independent tests in laboratories and on the field know-how and experiences collection transparency and honest reporting to the market (strong bad marketing from competitors: PRIME doesn t work in Poland ) 8

9 PRIME interoperability tests - scope 11 partners (including independent scientific and research body: Energy Institute in Gdańsk) Six meters vendors and two DCU suppliers: ZIV & Current Vendor 1-phase meters 3-phase meters DCU Sagemcom APATOR Sogecam ZIV ZPA ADD CURRENT Total tests duration:

10 PRIME interoperability tests field tests Station Gdynia Derdowskiego nr 4138 Gdynia city LV/MV station Number of customers Station Jasna nr Station Witawa nr 2787* Station Wiczlino nr * 510 Station Wiczlino Wybudowanie nr Station Sucha Bojano III nr Station Pionierów nr Station Stawna nr Total * 4-transformer station

11 PRIME interoperability tests - scenarios 38 test scenarios and more than 1500 test runs in laboratories 11

12 PRIME interoperability tests field results differences in PRIME implementation are not the most important factor in data acquisition as available time for collecting read-outs is much longer then minimum necessary periods (result of high raw data bandwidth in PRIME) the only PRIME sensitive mechanism having real impact is network topology and hierarchy creation process in DCUs the most important factors located outside PRIME communication: DLMS/COSEM protocol implementation in the meters (DLMS association timeouts, timestamps data interpretation, selective access data processing to profile buffers, unicast/broadcast implementation, security) DLMS/COSEM protocol implementation in DCUs (DLMS association establishing and releasing / keeping, timestamps data interpretation, unicast/broadcast implementation, security) DCUs data forward data collection and caching strategies effectiveness of application protocol between DCUs and central application (ENERGA-Operator choice: DCSAP protocol defining and implementation) DCUs hardware and software stability 12

13 PRIME interoperability tests conclusions PRIME offers real interoperability between devices offered by different vendors, even PRIME implementation details differences exist openness of PRIME enables access to many software and hardware tools that offers real protocol tests and verification ENERGA-Operator changes the purchase strategy from buying a set meters and DCUs in single tender into independent tenders for each devices current and reliable network assets inventory records are crucial for better results and easier diagnosis & analysis the most sensitive component of the whole AMI system is DCU, so requirements and specifications have to be improved and much more detailed, also quality and stability expectations of delivered devices should be deeply verified 13

14 AMI Project acquisition KPIs definition KPIx% = number of collected read-outs per (n-x) day / number of expected readouts per (n-x) day. 100% KPIx% acquisition factor for day (n x) n current day (whole 24h) KPI1% factor defines the meters percentage with complete set of data for previous 24h day (n-1) KPI1% Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu (day n-7) (day n-6) (day n-5) (day n-4) (day n-3) (day n-2) (day n-1) (day n) 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 6:00 0:00 KPI7% defines the meters percentage with complet set of data for day week ago (n-7) KPI7% 14

15 KPI1% achieved in stage I (S-FSK) 15 billing data (2 readouts per day: A+T1 & A+T2)

16 KPI7% achieved in stage I (S-FSK) 16 billing data (2 readouts per day: A+T1 & A+T2)

17 KPI1% achieved in stage II (PRIME) 17 billing data (2 readouts per day: A+T1 & A+T2)

18 KPI7% achieved in stage II (PRIME) 18 billing data (2 readouts per day: A+T1 & A+T2)

19 AMI Project stage I & II conclusions results in stage I (even S-FSK limited bandwidth up to 2,4 kbps) for billing and 15-minutes profile data are much better than in stage II (with PRIME high bandwidth 21,4-128,6 kbps and 1h profile), but: results for S-FSK were achieved after 1,5 year of hard and sometimes difficult cooperation directly with manufacturer R&D team, some special tricks to improve efficiency has to be introduced (6h block reading limited to 4 times per day) deep analysis for PRIME discovered that problems are located not communication technology but in Data Concentrator 19

20 AMI Project stage II conclusions cont. despite having PRIME highway to transport goods in trucks (data in frames) but we introduced highway gates (each time the sequence: association establishing data Get request association release) and finally we allow to drive only single truck on this highway and the next one is allowed to drive only when the previous one is getting back (sequential requests, proceed to the next request after completing the previous one or after the expiry of the time-out) 20

21 AMI Project stage II conclusions cont. problems of stage II are not PRIME related (but is creating a bad picture of this technology) remedial actions: testing other vendor DCUs for potential replacement (under progress: purchase of 20 pcs from other vendor, time limited installations in different localisations to test different cases) analysis of creating alternative software for existing installed DCU: positive result, there is no legal or technical barriers to replace the software on purchased hardware decision was made to prepare new software for DCU first prototypes already installed, results quite promising (better than results in stage I) 21

22 AMI Project in ENERGA-operator - summary software source code access and rights great opportunity but also responsibility usage of standards and open specifications key for independent and safe development in case of missing parts creating open and standard-based solutions best fitting to the existing circumstances: DCSAP protocol definition sometimes critical, brave and non-standard decisions have to be taken: own DCU software implementation continuous development of technical specification and requirements as the warranty of good quality and equivalent products: very detailed meter and DCU data model description based on newest COSEM specification and many more 22

23 Thank you for your attention