ams-oms integration: from an operations point of view chris darby distribution operation center...
TRANSCRIPT
AMS-OMS Integration:From an Operations Point of View
Chris Darby
Distribution Operation Center
Manager
1
2
• Our 3,800 employees serve approximately 10 million Texans – about one-third of the state of Texas.
• Completed 3.2 million meter deployments in 2012.
• Texas' largest regulated transmission and distribution utility – 6th largest in the U.S.
•More than 118,000 miles of transmission & distribution lines
Oncor: Who We Are
Generators Transmission & Distribution
RegulatedCompetitive
Retail Electric Providers (REP)
Competitive
Generators Transmission & Distribution
RegulatedCompetitive
Retail Electric Providers (REP)
Competitive
3
Advanced Metering System (AMS) Outage Management System (OMS)
Foundation conceptually built to integrate
AMS and OMS Started as Independent Projects
4
Pre-Integration Usage of AMS Information
• Provide distribution Operators single
ping function
• After large storms, use push-reads to
validate power-on
Operations Point of View:
Oncor Point of View:• Develop team to begin integrating AMS and OMS
5
• Single Meter Pings (Pre & Post Integration)– Check meter power status for one meter at a time– Deploy on internal web portal to be used by various
functional groups at Oncor
• Mass Meter Pings (Post Integration)– Check power status for a group of meters, selected by
• Outage event ID• Network device• Manually selected meters
– Deployed within InService OMS to be used by the Operator
– AMS leverages on-demand read function to check power status
Operator-Initiated Outage Verification
6
Basic Integration Design
7
Head End (Command
Center)
Meter Data Management
(MDM)
Outage Management
System
Meter Events
Create Event
Restoration Verification (Automatic)Mass Ping (Manual)
RF Meter
Meter EventsPower Status Check
Power Status Check
Enterprise Service Bus(ESB)
Feeder Level Notification (Automatic)
AMS-OMS Integration Basic Design Concept
2 Meters on a XFMR
1 Meter Power Quality
• Limit notifications from AMS sent to OMS– Send only “Sustained Outages”
(<80% Nominal Voltage for >= 40 seconds)– Filter outage events when a restoration event is received within 165 seconds– Filter ALL AMS notifications on feeder level outage events
• Notify OMS of outages at transformer level or higher only– Inferencing logic– State-based transformer inferencing– Event-based transformer inferencing – AMS to send two endpoints per transformer
• Focus on minimizing false alarms– Do not create outage event on single premise “last gasp”
• Empower OMS operators to “control the pipe”– Provide “Kill Switch” to disable AMS integration as necessary– Automatic (volumetric) system-wide suppression– Manual (system-wide and district) switch initiated by DOC Supervisors
Meter Data Management Intelligent Filtering Logic
8
9
Lights out
Last gasp sent
40 sec 165 sec
Momentary outage filter (MOF); waiting to see if power restore message is received
When 165 sec. MOF expires, if last gasp exists for another meter on same transformer, message is sent to ESB for two meters to OMS
MDM’s Enhanced Outage Management
120 sec
Delay waiting for additional last gasp messages behind same transformer
Message is sent to ESB for two meters if received, or for one meter at the end of 120 sec.
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
Passes Create Call messages to OMS for two meter messages and blocks one meter message
AMS-OMS Integration – Power Outage Timing and Initial Filtering
Total Time
40 secs 205 secs 325 secs Create Event
10
Results
11
• Around-the-clock outage notification– Oncor often responds before customers are aware
of the outage– Levels out work during non-storm periods
• Mass ping functionality reduces potential for nested outages
From an Operations Point of View: Where the Mark was Hit
Interestingly, 25% of the outages were resolved without a customer calling.
AMS Generated Outage Events: Surprising Results!
12
29,683 AMS Generated Outage Events between 4/1/12 - 3/31/13
22368; 75%
7315; 25%
29,683 AMS Generated Outage Eventsbetween 4/1/12 - 3/31/13
AMS & Customer CallAMS & NO Customer Call
13
• Around-the-clock outage notification– Oncor often responds before customers are aware
of the outage– Levels out work during non-storm periods
• Mass ping functionality reduces potential for nested outages
From an Operations Point of View: Where the Mark was Hit
• Outages almost immediately rollup to the correct device
14
85 % were confirmed outages
85% were confirmed outages
Call Distribution without Meter Notifications• IVR – 58.5%• Call Center Agent – 39.0%• Text Message or Web – 2.5%
• 410,197 Calls
Call Distribution with Meter Notifications • IVR – 43.3%• Call Center Agent – 28.9%• Meter Notification – 26.0%• Text Message or Web – 2.5%
• 554,237 Calls and Notifications
Customer Calls
IVR
Call Center Agent
Text Message or Web
Customer Calls and Meter Noti-fications
IVR
Call Center Agent
Meter Notification
Text Message or Web
Customer Calls vs. Meter Notifications6-Month Sample
15
• Around-the-clock outage notification– Oncor often responds before customers are aware
of the outage– Levels out work during non-storm periods
• Mass ping functionality reduces potential for nested outages
From an Operations Point of View: Where the Mark was Hit
• Outages almost immediately rollup to the correct device
• Individual ping on separate customer calls reduces unnecessary truck rolls
16
Operator’s use AMS to Validate Customer Reported Outages & Reduce Unnecessary Truck Rolls
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR2012/13 Blue Sky Days
% of customer outages calls resolved via AMS w/o dispatching a serviceman
17
• Around-the-clock outage notification– Oncor often responds before customers are aware
of the outage– Levels out work during non-storm periods
• Mass ping functionality reduces potential for nested outages
From an Operations Point of View: Where the Mark was Hit
• Outages almost immediately rollup to the correct device
• Individual ping on separate customer calls reduces unnecessary truck rolls
• Identify issues before they become outages
18
7%
59%
34%
Note: Results of 868 premises inspections
Service issues that would soon be interruptions
No Issue identified.
YET!
Tampering
Power Quality Investigations on Single Premise Last Gasp
19
• Around-the-clock outage notification– Oncor often responds before customers are aware
of the outage– Levels out work during non-storm periods
• Mass ping functionality reduces potential for nested outages
From an Operations Point of View: Where the Mark was Hit
• Outages almost immediately rollup to the correct device
• Individual ping on separate customer calls reduces unnecessary truck rolls
• Improved accuracy in outage restoration time
• Identifies issues before they become outages
20
Automatic restoration verification function not yet incorporated into work functions
Projects Still in the Works
Data model must be improved first
Must change work processes, especially with independent contract electricians
Automatic outage notification on single premise outages not enabled
21
• Tuning the system parameters for optimum performance
• Improving and maintaining the connectivity data model
• Training the workforce to effectively identify power quality issues
• Developing higher order analytics to detect issues prior to having customer
impacts
• Modifying the system to enable full usage during major Storms
• Changing processes to enable single premise outage notification
Next Steps in the Performance Evolution
22
• End point voltage monitoring
• Transformer load management
• Distribution planning data
• Unsolicited customer outage notification
Additional Functionality Being Enabled or Investigated
