Thanks to everyone commenting on my email on this subject. I've been
reading all the replies with great interest.
I want to build on some of the comments. My thoughts follow quotes from
some of the emails (mine prefixed "DCW:").
M. Kohanim >> without the use-cases [...] these messages may change
dramatically depending on the actors.
DCW: Good point, see Gale's last comment below.
Gale Horst >> regulatory and contractual obligations should not be tied
to the messages but should be enabled and supportable by the messages.
DCW: Agreed. The messages should be support the different commercial
agreements.
Gale Horst >> I have a difficulty separating a notification from a
request. If you don't intend to motivate a response, why would you send
a notice?
DCW: The small distinction I tried to communicate is that the ESI needs
to support a building response that differentiates between "I got your
message" and "This is my reaction to your message".
Toby >> What is the interaction to tell [relatively dumb device] the
contract #[must respond] ids in place, so device knows that a mandatory
response is required tomorrow. Worrying about this is what keeps me from
a simple price & notification only model...
DCW: I think to be widely adopted the by commercial buildings, the ESI
should include a schedule-less option. The utility / OpenADR "Program
Notifier" should not expect that the building will be able to schedule
the event.
Bob Old >> Your example could refer to a Direct Load Control command to
a Programmable Communicating Thermostat in a residential application.
Or it could be a curtailment request to a large building.
DCW: To both Bob & Toby's point with dumb devices. Maybe one option is
that the Notifier sends a count down. "Event in T -27 hours"...."Event
in T -8 hours"..."Event now". This allows a dumb device to simply be
configured for the amount of lead time it needs to begin responding.
Gale >> If peer-to-peer is desired, then the DRAS would represent the
end use node and be considered the "peer" that responds to the "order".
DCW: Wow! That was a very helpful statement! I have been struggling
with reconciling the DRAS design and the NIST interface list. I've been
playing "pin the DRAS on the roadmap" without much mental success (NIST
Interface diagram link below). Mostly I was trying to determine how far
the DRAS penetrated the customer domain. I didn't consider that maybe
the entire DRAS is inside the customer domain. Maybe the Grid
Operations to Customer (NIST terms) interface is the Utility to DRAS
interface (OpenADR terms). For example the "Utility Program Notifier
creates and initiates Base Interruptible Program Event" use case shown
in OpenADR figure D12 (see URL below).
NIST Interface diagram
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/energyinterop/document.php?
document_id=34213
OpenADR Base Interruptible Program Use Case Picture (Figure D12)
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/energyinterop/document.php?
document_id=34212
=======
Again, thanks to everyone for the lively discussion! I will attempt to
carry on the Actors / Roles conversation in a separate thread.
Regards,
Dave
Office: +1.651.407.4168
Mobile: +1.612.741.2759
Email: davidcwilson@trane.com
Original Message-----
From: Old, Bob [mailto:bob.old@siemens.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 8:09 AM
To: Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT);
energyinterop@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [energyinterop] Notification vs. Request vs. Order
K.I.S.S. is good, but things can only be so simple. Devices need to be
smart enough to handle the contemplated programs.
Your example could refer to a Direct Load Control command to a
Programmable Communicating Thermostat in a residential application. Or
it could be a curtailment request to a large building.
For a PCT, the command might include a program ID, an event ID, event
type (increase setpoint on AC), a start time and duration, and perhaps a
priority of importance over other possible programs. The PCT needs to
acknowledge, non-repudiably (if that's a word,) that it agrees to
respond as required by the program. Perhaps it already knows that it is
exempt from particular responses and it sends that response (can't turn
off invalid's air conditioning completely.)
Perhaps an hour ahead of the scheduled event the resident decides not to
participate because they're hosting a child's birthday party and are
willing to pay any price to keep the kids happy. They push a button on
the PCT which signals the utility and opts-out of that event.
For a C&I consumer, the command might include a utility/aggregator ID,
program ID, and event ID, event type (request for curtailment,) baseline
below which you must curtail in order to get credit, a start time and
duration, and perhaps a priority of importance over other possible
programs. The ESI acknowledges, non-repudiably, and perhaps includes an
estimate of the amount of demand below the baseline that can be
curtailed. After the event, the utility/aggregator and the ESI both
acquire the meter data relevent to the event. The utility/aggregator
uses it for settlement of the transaction, the ESI uses it to verify the
settlement and perhaps refine it's model of building behavior.
Undoubtably, the contract between the building operator and the
utility/aggregator specifies the terms and conditions for opting out of
an agreemement.
I'm not sure things can be made simple, due to the large scale of the
application. I've always heard that if you want to do Electric
Utilities applications, you have to be able to do at least a million.
Best,
B.O. September 15, 2009
--
Robert Old, System Architecture, bob.old@siemens.com
Siemens Building Technologies, Inc., HVAC Products
1000 Deerfield Pkwy., Buffalo Grove, IL 60089-4513 USA
Phone: +1(847)941-5623, Skype: bobold2
________________________________
From: Considine, Toby (Campus Services IT)
[mailto:Toby.Considine@unc.edu]
Sent: Mon 9/14/2009 7:13 PM
To: 'energyinterop@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject: RE: [energyinterop] Notification vs. Request vs. Order
I'm with Gale
If I have a contract with you that says "I may respond", then you need
to notify me.
If I have a contract that "I must respond" then you need to notify me.
Notification is notification.
But I do have a question. What is the interaction to tell [relatively
dumb device] the contract #[must respond] ids in place, so device knows
that a manadatory response is required tomorrow. Worrying about this is
what keeps me from a simple price & notification only model...
tc
________________________________
"A man should never be ashamed to own that he has been in the wrong,
which is but saying ... that he is wiser today than yesterday." --
Jonathan Swift
________________________________
Toby Considine
Chair, OASIS oBIX TC
Facilities Technology Office
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC
Email: Toby.Considine@ unc.edu