OASIS Energy Interoperation TC

  • 1.  Load predictions in EI

    Posted 04-12-2011 18:37
    EI folks,   The 201P use cases and current 201P model includes the idea of feedback across the ESI that communicates load estimates as well as generation and storage status. This might be in the context of a microgrid where we are using EI to talk to some storage system, and we need some representation of storage status, or of load shed availability (here is what I, Building 110 EMS, expect as load for the next 6 hours given a price curve) or of generation predictions.  This could also be in the context of an offsite aggregator/DSO utility. So, is load/storage/gen status information now fully represented in EMIX? And how do we move that information in EI? EiFeedback is currently associated with an event, but that wouldn’t be the case here for load estimates, yet EiFeedback seems the best fit. Maybe we define a part of Feedback that is independent of Events to allow a request for feedback and response? The response would have an EMIX object with load or generation estimates in a schedule.   What do you think? David   From: Holmberg, David Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 3:24 PM To: Holmberg, David; 'Chandrashekhar Appanna' Cc: 'Jerald.P.Martocci@jci.com'; 'Gowri, Krishnan'; Wallace, Evan K.; 'daken.abigail@epa.gov'; 'gmd14@psu.edu'; 'chantipal.sourignavong@honeywell.com'; 'mikeg@echelon.com'; 'bill.swan@honeywell.com'; 'Daken.Abigail@epamail.epa.gov'; 'Jacob Yackenovich'; 'William Cox'; 'John Nunneley (john@sunspec.org)'; 'Gregory Dobbs'; 'Matthew Laherty (mlaherty)'; 'Ted.Humpal@jci.com'; 'Winkler, Eric'; 'Rich A Morgan'; 'John.Ruiz@jci.com'; Bushby, Steven T. Subject: RE: SPC201 - Joint EM/Loads Discussion (Today, April 5)   Just following up on this Duty Window thread after an email exchange with Ed Koch. What we have in Energy Interop is the detailed schedule for an event. Sub-intervals for compliance purposes (ala Duty Window in the LCO) are defined as sub-intervals of the event schedule. This is the way of communicating that this program will be looking at your meter to check for compliance over this interval. Which is different from the Feedback service in EI. EiFeedback provides information about the state of the Resource as it responds to an Event signal, so it is self-reporting. It is currently undefined as to what that feedback is. It could be "actual present demand" or it could be "where I expect to end up for this shed" (both a bit difficult to define), or something else. There is an associated "reporting interval" attribute in the EiEvent class that I think is the frequency of feedback (Bill?)      


  • 2.  RE: Load predictions in EI

    Posted 04-12-2011 19:12
    David,   There is an EIUsage service in EI.  I always assumed that your use case is precisely what that service was used for.     Thanks,   -ed koch     From: Holmberg, David [mailto: david.holmberg@nist.gov ] Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 11:36 AM To: energyinterop@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [energyinterop] Load predictions in EI   EI folks,   The 201P use cases and current 201P model includes the idea of feedback across the ESI that communicates load estimates as well as generation and storage status. This might be in the context of a microgrid where we are using EI to talk to some storage system, and we need some representation of storage status, or of load shed availability (here is what I, Building 110 EMS, expect as load for the next 6 hours given a price curve) or of generation predictions.  This could also be in the context of an offsite aggregator/DSO utility. So, is load/storage/gen status information now fully represented in EMIX? And how do we move that information in EI? EiFeedback is currently associated with an event, but that wouldn’t be the case here for load estimates, yet EiFeedback seems the best fit. Maybe we define a part of Feedback that is independent of Events to allow a request for feedback and response? The response would have an EMIX object with load or generation estimates in a schedule.   What do you think? David   From: Holmberg, David Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 3:24 PM To: Holmberg, David; 'Chandrashekhar Appanna' Cc: 'Jerald.P.Martocci@jci.com'; 'Gowri, Krishnan'; Wallace, Evan K.; 'daken.abigail@epa.gov'; 'gmd14@psu.edu'; 'chantipal.sourignavong@honeywell.com'; 'mikeg@echelon.com'; ' bill .swan@honeywell.com'; 'Daken.Abigail@epamail.epa.gov'; 'Jacob Yackenovich'; ' William Cox '; 'John Nunneley (john@sunspec.org)'; 'Gregory Dobbs'; 'Matthew Laherty (mlaherty)'; 'Ted.Humpal@jci.com'; 'Winkler, Eric'; 'Rich A Morgan'; 'John.Ruiz@jci.com'; Bushby, Steven T. Subject: RE: SPC201 - Joint EM/Loads Discussion (Today, April 5)   Just following up on this Duty Window thread after an email exchange with Ed Koch. What we have in Energy Interop is the detailed schedule for an event. Sub-intervals for compliance purposes (ala Duty Window in the LCO) are defined as sub-intervals of the event schedule. This is the way of communicating that this program will be looking at your meter to check for compliance over this interval. Which is different from the Feedback service in EI. EiFeedback provides information about the state of the Resource as it responds to an Event signal, so it is self-reporting. It is currently undefined as to what that feedback is. It could be "actual present demand" or it could be "where I expect to end up for this shed" (both a bit difficult to define), or something else. There is an associated "reporting interval" attribute in the EiEvent class that I think is the frequency of feedback (Bill?)      
    Original Message


Related Content