Testing performances of IEC 61850 GOOSE messages
One of the frequent requests for relay protection devices is support for the IEC 61850 standard. As part of the standard special messages are also planned for a quick exchange of information between the IEDs – so called GOOSE (Generic Object-Oriented SubStation Event). These are mainly trip, interlocking, breaker failure and similar signals. Time of transfer of these signals is critical, its delay may cause undesirable blackouts or damage to equipment.
In this paper we explore which software architecture is most appropriate to achieve the required performance. Software for sending / receiving GOOSE messages can be located in real time (RT) or user space of the operating system. We will consider the RT and user space implementations of two different microprocessor architecture – ARM9 and PowerPC.
Performance degradation can occur from 2 reasons:
- Protection function has the highest priority. At least 500 μs during each millisecond GOOSE thread will be deprived of CPU time.
- In the case of pure user-space implementation, the operating system will interrupt GOOSE task in a completely nondeterministic way.
User Space Test
To test the performance of GOOSE messages in user space, the environment is developed based on the ARM7 architecture:
- ARM7 with integrated Ethernet for sending, receiving and time-stamping of messages.
- The PC application for setting parameters and collecting the results.
- Figure 1 Test configuration for user space test
The essence of the test is as follows: ARM7 board launches a series of messages and records the time for each outgoing message. ARM9 and PowerPC boards are set up to immediately respond to received GOOSE messages with identical message and with the same serial number.
ARM7 registers the answer and uses the serial number to match with the original message and calculates the elapsed time.
- Figure 2 Analysis time
On the figure above we can see the analysis of time. A and B are negligible. Due to the nature of the test 2C + D can be accurately measured but we can’t know exactly the amounts of C and D are respectively. But ultimately this is not important from the point of standards. Let’s look at test results. ARM7 board launches a series of GOOSE messages with pause of 100ms. Results are measured and displayed in Excel.
To make it more realistic result overcurrent protection was turned on. Y axis shows the time in milliseconds and the X axis shows GOOSE messages.
- Figure 3 ARM9 100ms (X axis – number of messages, the Y axis the time of transfer)
We see that during 20 seconds response time oscillates around 2 milliseconds. The next step was to involve several protection functions. It is expected that the GOOSE performance will drop.
This is actually happening as we see in the following figure:
- Figure 4 ARM9 100ms, 700μs (X axis – number of messages, the Y axis the time of transfer)
The time now oscillates about 7 ms. Although it is expected that the performance will decline, it is still above expectations. 7 milliseconds is still enough for some applications. These are the results from the ARM9 platform. PowerPC platform has proved to be something better, because it has almost 2 times more processing power. On the next 2 images we see the results.
- Figure 5 PowerPC 100ms (X axis – number of messages, the Y axis the time of transfer)
- Figure 6 PowerPC 100ms, 700μs (X axis – number of messages, the Y axis the time of transfer)
In a small load time oscillates around 0.8 ms and at most about 2.5 ms. The measured times are suitable for a solid range of applications. Unfortunately, these times are only valid if the GOOSE task is only active task. In the case of other tasks – for example, disturbance recorder, event recorder, embedded web server, IEC 61850 MMS server and so on … transfer time become unpredictable and can go up to 80ms, which is of course unacceptable.
Real Time Test
- Figure 7 Test configuration for real-time test
Although the real time GOOSE is something more difficult to implement, it offers some significant advantages as we shall see. Test environment for real-time is significantly different. The network analyzer was used. The program is available as a free download from the Internet (1). The essence of the test is as follows: protection relays is configured to receive GOOSE messages from a laptop computer and to immediately respond with the same value in the dataset. When analyzing a series of messages network analyzer will come to the moment when the relay and laptops are sending an identical value.
The time between the moment when the laptop starts broadcasting and the moment the relay begins to broadcast the same value as the laptop is the required time.
In the following figure we can see the results displayed in the network analyzer.
- Figure 8 Ethereal Network Analyzer
- Figure 9 Goose series with a time of receipt of messages, network addresses and protocol label
Message number 42 is from a laptop, a message 43 from relay protection. If you subtract the time of receipt: 3.757 to 3.753 = 4msec. When measurements are repeated result oscillates around 4ms. The reason for this is that the task for sending and receiving is set to be run every 2 milliseconds.
Conclusion
At first glance, real-time and user space implementation operates in a similar timeframe. But there is a substantial difference. GOOSE RT implementation task may share the processor with an arbitrary number of other task such as the disturbance recorder and others. This architecture greatly reduces the ultimate cost of the device and gives the user more functionality. Otherwise the GOOSE software would have to reside on separate hardware.
.
AUTHOR OF ARTICLE:
Veljko Milisavljević | ABS Control Systems, Serbia
.
Related articles
2,691 views
The Best Applications For VFDs
The most commonly used motor in building HVAC applications is the three-phase, induction motor, although some smaller applications may use a single-phase induction motor. VFDs can be applied to both.
While VFD controllers can be used with a range of applications, the ones that will produce the most significant benefits are those that require variable speed operation. For example, the flow rate produced by pumps serving building HVAC systems can be matched to the building load by using a VFD to vary the flow rate. Similarly, in systems that require a constant pressure be maintained regardless of the flow rate, such as in domestic hot and cold water systems, a VFD controlled by a pressure setpoint can maintain the pressure over most demand levels.
The majority of commercial and institutional HVAC systems use variable volume fan systems to distribute conditioned air. Most are controlled by a system of variable inlet vanes in the fan system and variable air volume boxes. As the load on the system decreases, the variable air volume boxes close down, increasing the static pressure in the system. The fan’s controller senses this increase and closes down its inlet vanes. While using this type of control system will reduce system fan energy requirements, it is not as efficient or as accurate as a VFD-based system.
Another candidate for VFD use is a variable refrigerant flow systems. Variable refrigerant flow systems connect one or more compressors to a common refrigerant supply system that feeds multiple evaporators. By piping refrigerant instead of using air ducts, the distribution energy requirements are greatly reduced. Because the load on the compressor is constantly changing based on the demand from the evaporators, a VFD can be used to control the operating speed of the compressor to match the load, reducing energy requirements under part-load conditions.
Additional VFD Applications
While the primary benefit of both of these VFD applications is energy savings, VFDs are well suited for use in other applications where energy conservation is of secondary importance. For example, VFDs can provide precise speed or torque control in some commercial applications.
Some specialized applications use dual fans or pumps. VFDs, with their precise speed control, can ensure that the two units are operated at the desired speed and do not end up fighting each other or having one unit carry more than its design load level.
Advances in technology have increased the number of loads that can be driven by the units. Today, units are available with voltage and current ratings that can match the majority of three-phase induction motors found in buildings. With 500 horsepower units or higher available, facility executives have installed them on large capacity centrifugal chillers where very large energy savings can be achieved.
One of the most significant changes that has taken place recently is that with the widespread acceptance of the units and the recognition of the energy and maintenance benefits, manufacturers are including VFD controls as part of their system in a number of applications. For example, manufacturers of centrifugal chillers offer VFD controls as an option on a number of their units. Similarly, manufacturers of domestic water booster pump systems also offer the controls as part of their system, providing users with better control strategies while reducing energy and maintenance costs.
A Few Cautions
When evaluating the installation of a VFD, facility executives should take into consideration a number of factors related to the specifics of the application. For example, most VFDs emit a series of pulses that are rapidly switched. These pulses can be reflected back from the motor terminals into the cable that connects the VFD to the motor. In applications where there is a long run between the motor and the VFD, these reflected pulses can produce voltages that exceed the line voltage, causing stresses in the cable and motor windings that could lead to insulation failure. While this effect is not very significant in motors that operate at 230 volts or less, it is a concern for those that operate at 480 volts or higher. For those applications, minimize the distance between the VFD and the motor, use cabling specifically designed for use with VFDs, and consider installing a filter specifically designed to reduce the impact of the reflected pulses.
Another factor to consider is the impact the VFD may have on the motor’s bearings. The pulses produced by the VFD can generate a voltage differential between the motor shaft and its casing. If this voltage is high enough, it can generate sparks in the bearings that erode their surfaces. This condition can also be avoided by using a cable designed specifically for use with VFDs.
.
SOURCE: facilitiesnet
.
