updated ieee benchmark year 2014 for 2013 data - h...
TRANSCRIPT
IEEE Benchmark Year 2014Results for 2013 Data
July 29, 2014 General Meeting
Distribution Reliability Working Group
Washington D. C.
2
Background to IEEE DRWG BenchmarkStudy
1. Initiated in 2003, conducted annually
2. Participants are anonymous with key identifier toretain anonymity
3. Participation list is not revealed to anyone
4. Each participant can choose to share their results
5. No inference is made about good or bad reliability
6. Intended to provide information for users to assesstheir performance relative to peers
3
Benchmarking
• Using annual key metrics (SAIDI, SAIFI and CAIDI) to assessperformance of a system may be useful, however, needs to betempered
• DRWG Study attempts to identify various aspects that couldcause a difference in reported metrics
• Data may not be directly comparable, since– Data collection & system differences exist
– Certain exclusion differences can occur
• IEEE 1366-2003/2012• addresses data basis issues by clearly defining the rules.
• It DOES NOT address the data collection issues
• Companies may not report all forms of outages, due to data collection issues orother reasons
4
Northwest: 10Participants
Southwest: 14Participants
Midwest: 17Participants
South: 11Participants Southeast : 2
Participants
Northeast: 11Participants
Mid-Atlantic:24 Participants
Regions represented by the participants…
Spans States or Other:4
5
29Participants
3Participants
11Participants
3Participants
8Participants
9Participants
21Participants
0Participants
6
Classification of Respondents• 85,216,551 customers represented in US,
Canada & Australia• Small, Medium, Large
– Small =< 100,000 customers
– Medium >100,000 and <1,000,000 customers
– Large >= 1M customers
• 2013 Survey– 8 Small
– 53 Medium
– 32 Large
7
Respondents•More than 215 Companies have responded at some time
•2014 Survey
–88 unique entries responded, 93 total entries
–Planned and source quartiles are not shown below
SAIDI ALL SAIDI IEEE SAIFI ALL SAIFI IEEE CAIDI ALL CAIDI IEEE0 MIN 28 25 0.35 0.35 27 271 Q1 122 85 1.01 0.85 111 922 MEDIAN 181 115 1.21 1.08 142 1073 Q3 285 158 1.53 1.36 193 1274 MAX 1854 435 3.51 2.34 831 252
8
Summary Details by Utility Size
Quartile Small 8 SAIDI ALL SAIDI IEEE SAIFI ALL SAIFI IEEE CAIDI ALL CAIDI IEEE
0 MIN 32 25 0.46 0.39 60 60
1 Q1 117 77 1.14 0.96 94 75
2 MEDIAN 179 118 1.58 1.24 122 92
3 Q3 413 194 2.41 1.81 158 110
4 MAX 1854 258 3.51 2.34 831 141
Quartile Medium 53 SAIDI ALL SAIDI IEEE SAIFI ALL SAIFI IEEE CAIDI ALL CAIDI IEEE
0 MIN 28 28 0.35 0.35 56 56
1 Q1 122 88 1.07 0.87 111 93
2 MEDIAN 180 121 1.24 1.10 139 107
3 Q3 245 158 1.56 1.36 180 123
4 MAX 785 383 2.39 2.14 670 194
Quartile Large 32 SAIDI ALL SAIDI IEEE SAIFI ALL SAIFI IEEE CAIDI ALL CAIDI IEEE
0 MIN 47 47 0.63 0.55 27 27
1 Q1 124 87 0.98 0.83 117 94
2 MEDIAN 209 102 1.19 0.96 162 109
3 Q3 325 139 1.43 1.16 251 138
4 MAX 1108 435 2.31 1.96 738 252
9
The following slides…
• Show company performance using the IEEE 2.5 Beta method tosegregate data into:
– Day-to-Day operating Indices vs.
– Performance considering the whole customer experience (All)
– Separate data collected to evaluate impact of transmission(WOF) and both transmission and planned outages (WOP)
– Segregation by transmission (feed), planned and distribution
• To date more than 200 companies have participated in ourbenchmarking at sometime.
10
SAIDI IEEE, across the continent…
11
SAIFI IEEE, across the continent…
12
CAIDI IEEE, across the continent…
13
The following slides…
• Show company performance using the IEEE 2.5 Beta method tosegregate data into:
– Day-to-Day operating Indices vs.
– Performance considering the whole customer experience (All)
– Separate data collected to evaluate impact of transmission(WOF) and both transmission and planned outages (WOP)
– Segregation by transmission (feed), planned and distribution
14
SAIDI, across the continent…
15
SAIFI, across the continent…
16
CAIDI, across the continent…
17
The following slides…
• Show company performance using the IEEE 2.5 Beta method tosegregate data into:
– Day-to-Day operating Indices vs.
– Performance considering the whole customer experience (All)
– Separate data collected to evaluate impact of transmission(WOF) and both transmission and planned outages (WOP)
– Segregation by transmission (feed), planned and distribution
18
The following slides…
• Show company performance using the IEEE 2.5 Beta method tosegregate data into:
– Day-to-Day operating Indices vs.
– Performance considering the whole customer experience (All)
– Separate data collected to evaluate impact of transmission(WOF) and both transmission and planned outages (WOP)
– Segregation by transmission (feed), planned and distribution
19
SAIDI By Area Segment…
20
SAIDI By Area Segment Expanded Scale…
2005-2013 SAIDI Quartiles All Companies
2005-2013 SAIFI Quartiles All Companies
2005-2013 CAIDI Quartiles All Companies
2008-2013 SAIDI Quartiles Large Utilities
2008-2013 SAIFI Quartiles Large Utilities
2008-2013 CAIDI Quartiles Large Utilities
2008-2013 SAIDI Quartiles Medium Utilities
2008-2013 SAIFI Quartiles Medium Utilities
2008-2013 CAIDI Quartiles Medium Utilities
2005-2013 SAIDI Quartiles Small Utilities
2008-2013 SAIFI Quartiles Small Utilities
2008-2013 CAIDI Quartiles Small Utilities
Areas We’ve Discussed & Acted On
Need to capture total number of distribution circuits
Additional details about overhead and underground circuitmileage
• Consider data which helps the industry back into a scorecardfor storm performance
• Daily beta variable calculations for future study
33
Areas To Analyze: Brainstorm
• Benchmark Data Collected:• Now that we have total number of distribution circuits, are there
performance trends we can see?
• Planned and transmission outage impacts and variabilityacross participants…is there a best practice or are we just notgetting equivalent data?
• Major Events• Persistence of major events for each utility
• Daily beta variable calculations
• Consider data which helps the industry back into a scorecardfor storm performance
34
35