Transcript AMS-OMS Integration:

AMS-OMS Integration:
From an Operations Point of View
Chris Darby
Distribution Operation Center
Manager
1
Oncor: Who We Are
• 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
Competitive
Regulated
Competitive
Generators
Transmission &
Distribution
Retail Electric
Providers (REP)
2
AMS and OMS Started as Independent Projects
Advanced Metering System (AMS)
Outage Management System (OMS)
Foundation conceptually
built to integrate
3
Pre-Integration Usage of AMS Information
Operations Point of View:
• Provide distribution Operators single
ping function
• After large storms, use push-reads to
validate power-on
Oncor Point of View:
• Develop team to begin
integrating AMS and OMS
4
Operator-Initiated Outage Verification
•
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
5
Basic Integration Design
6
AMS-OMS Integration Basic Design Concept
Enterprise Service Bus
(ESB)
1 Meter
2 Meters on a XFMR
RF Meter
Meter
Events
Power
Status
Check
Head End
(Command
Center)
Meter
Events
Power
Status
Check
Power
Quality
Create Event
Meter Data
Outage
Management
Management
(MDM)
System
Restoration Verification (Automatic)
Mass Ping (Manual)
Feeder Level Notification (Automatic)
7
Meter Data Management Intelligent Filtering Logic
• 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
8
AMS-OMS Integration –
Power Outage Timing and Initial Filtering
40 secs
205 secs
325 secs
Create Event
Total Time
MDM’s Enhanced Outage Management
40 sec
Lights
out
165 sec
120 sec
Momentary outage filter
(MOF); waiting to see if power
Last gasp restore message is received
sent
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
Enterprise Service
Bus (ESB)
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.
Passes
Create Call
messages
to OMS for
two meter
messages
and blocks
one meter
message
9
Results
10
From an Operations Point of View:
Where the Mark was Hit
• 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
11
AMS Generated Outage Events: Surprising Results!
29,683 AMS Generated Outage Events
between 4/1/12 - 3/31/13
Interestingly, 25% of
the outages were
resolved without a
customer calling.
7,315 , 25%
22,368 , 75%
AMS & Customer Call
AMS & NO Customer Call
12
From an Operations Point of View:
Where the Mark was Hit
• 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
• Outages almost immediately rollup to the
correct device
13
Customer Calls vs. Meter Notifications
6-Month Sample
Customer Calls
IVR
Call Center Agent
Text Message or
Web
Call Distribution without Meter Notifications
• IVR – 58.5%
• Call Center Agent – 39.0%
• Text Message or Web – 2.5%
• 410,197 Calls
Customer Calls and Meter
Notifications
Call Distribution with Meter Notifications
85% were
• IVR – 43.3%
85 % were
confirmed
outages
• Call Center Agent – 28.9%
confirmed outages
• Meter Notification – 26.0%
• Text Message or Web – 2.5%
• 554,237 Calls and Notifications
IVR
Call Center Agent
Meter Notification
Text Message or
Web
14
From an Operations Point of View:
Where the Mark was Hit
• 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
• Outages almost immediately rollup to the
correct device
• Individual ping on separate customer calls
reduces unnecessary truck rolls
15
Operator’s use AMS to Validate Customer
Reported Outages & Reduce Unnecessary Truck
Rolls
% of customer outages calls resolved via AMS w/o dispatching a serviceman
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR
2012/13 Blue Sky Days
16
From an Operations Point of View:
Where the Mark was Hit
• 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
• Outages almost immediately rollup to the
correct device
• Individual ping on separate customer calls
reduces unnecessary truck rolls
• Identify issues before they become outages
17
Power Quality Investigations on Single
Premise Last Gasp
Note: Results of
868
premises inspections
Tampering
Service issues
that would
soon be
interruptions
7%
No Issue
identified.
YET!
34%
59%
18
From an Operations Point of View:
Where the Mark was Hit
• 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
• Outages almost immediately rollup to the
correct device
• Individual ping on separate customer calls
reduces unnecessary truck rolls
• Identifies issues before they become outages
• Improved accuracy in outage restoration time
19
Projects Still in the Works
Automatic restoration verification function
not yet incorporated into work functions
Automatic outage notification on single
premise outages not enabled
Data model
must be
improved first
Must change work
processes,
especially with
independent contract
electricians
20
Next Steps in the Performance Evolution
•
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
21
Additional Functionality Being Enabled or
Investigated
•
End point voltage monitoring
•
Transformer load management
•
Distribution planning data
•
Unsolicited customer outage notification
22
Questions?
Chris Darby
[email protected]
23