Common Information Model

Objective(s)  

The objectives of this project are to:

1. Extend the existing Integrated Network Model for 11kV to export data in CIM format;
2. Create a replicable process to combine data for 33kV and 66kV and 132kV networks to identify data quality issues and provide a CIM format output; and
3. Test the benefits that arise from creating a CIM format network model in terms of software adoption, information exchange and system interfaces.

Problem(s)

DNOs typically have asset data residing in several separate systems. The data held supports the function of each system e.g. asset management, geographical representation or network control. The systems will differ in the assets that are included and may not reference the same asset with the same unique reference. Additionally there may be a reliance on manual processes to keep systems aligned. 

This leads to the following problems;

• It is hard to identify and rectify data quality issues;
• A dataset that is rich enough to support complex analysis cannot be exported from any one system; 
• Individual data formats slow the adoption of new software as the custom tailoring of data is expensive and time consuming; and
• Exchanging data with third parties is also time-consuming and may not provide all the data required.

Method(s)

The Common Information Model for electricity is an international standard developed to support exchange of electrical network information and could be used to support the information layer of the smart grid architecture model. Project FALCON successfully combined data for the 11kV network from key systems to create an Integrated Network Model and this project will initially build on that work to create a comprehensive, accurate and portable network model in CIM format. The benefits of having data in this format will then be tested to determine whether there is a business case to convert and maintain data in this format, and a requirement in the future for our software to support CIM format.

• Scope

  The main areas of work within the project are; 

  1. Extending the process of matching data from the various systems to 33kV, 66kV and 132 kV networks;
  
  2. Test the benefits of having a network model in CIM format network in terms of software adoption and integration i.e. test the hypothesis that having a CIM format model greatly simplifies the process of adopting a different planning tool, supporting a suite of niche planning tools, or creating interfaces between systems;
  
  3. Test the benefits of having a network model in CIM format in terms of data exchange with third parties  i.e. data exchange over DNO boundaries, with National Grid or IDNOs, Local Authorities, Academic bodies, etc; and 
  
  4. Test the benefits of having CIM format network models when creating system interfaces. 

  PowerOn is expected to be used as a repository for the CIM format network model and to support testing of import, export and interfacing functions.
  
  The project duration has been extended to cater for a large delay created by the availability of the supporting hardware. Some of the hardware, once specified and subsequently ordered, was recalled by the manufacturer for a considerable duration. This has necessitated a delay to the project, but does not change cost and outputs. The project will finish on 31st August 2018.

• Success criteria

  The success criteria of the project is defined through successful delivery of the following:

  • A specification is written and tested for the network area;
  • A usable CIM format model has been produced to include 33kV, 66KV and 132kV networks;
  • The format model will then be shared with interested 3rd parties; and
  • Feedback Questionnaire provided to third parties and the responses returned are then used to further inform next steps. 
• Potential for new learning

  Expected learning includes: 

  1. The number of data discrepancies in existing systems
  2. The processes required to create CIM format data models
  3. The benefits of CIM format data models
  4. Whether it is worth spending time and money on a CIM, i.e. does it actually deliver something that delivers measurable value to the business?
  5. Does having a standard format actually just lead to excessive customisation?
  6. What is the existing level of data quality? (And how can the business measure quality?)
  7. What is the best way to perform text matching on non- identical items? i.e. same words but not necessarily in the right order?
  8. How can we improve data quality by identifying discrepancies between datasets? ( How do we measure existing vs new) 

  9.  How much simpler is the process of importing data into planning tools using CIM? (improving the options to adopt better planning tools or support multiple planning tools)

  10. What value do third parties put on having CIM data available for their use? Does it simplify data exchange with third parties

  11. Can the use of CIM format data improve the options to support local control algorithms? 

  12. Does the use of CIM format data simplify the creation of interfaces between systems either as point to point interfaces or message based? 

• Documents and links

  Registration form (Superseded)

  Registration form

  Closedown Report

• Monthly updates

  • {{update.title}}

  Show more