Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| topics:grid_architecture [2026/03/19 16:00] – ↷ Page moved from topics:grid_architecture to merge_into_other_topics:grid_architecture admin | topics:grid_architecture [2026/04/13 11:39] (current) – o.sachs | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | <WRAP catbadge slate> | ||
| + | |||
| + | ====== Grid architecture ====== | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP meta> | ||
| + | lead-authors: | ||
| + | contributors: | ||
| + | reviewers: | ||
| + | version: 2.0 | ||
| + | updated: 26 March 2026 | ||
| + | sensitivity: | ||
| + | ai-use: Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Anthropic) was used for research synthesis and section drafting; all sources independently verified | ||
| + | status: draft | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP intro> | ||
| + | Grid architecture frameworks provide structured models for mapping the components, layers, and domains of an electricity system, supporting interoperability planning, standards development, | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Why this matters ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | As electricity systems integrate more distributed resources and digital control, coordinating actors, assets, and data across multiple grid levels becomes more complex. Architecture frameworks provide a shared language for this coordination — allowing engineers, regulators, and market designers to map where decisions are made, which interfaces carry which information, | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP callout> | ||
| + | SGIRM, GWAC, and SGAM each decompose the smart grid into layers spanning from physical assets and communications to business processes and regulatory structures, but they differ in emphasis and regional uptake. | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Shared definitions ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | A grid architecture framework is a conceptual model that decomposes an electricity system into defined layers, domains, or zones, specifying how physical, informational, | ||
| + | |||
| + | ^ Term ^ Definition ^ | ||
| + | | **Domain** | In SGAM, a segment of the physical energy conversion chain: generation, transmission, | ||
| + | | **Zone** | In SGAM, a level of the operational hierarchy, from the physical process layer through field, station, operation, enterprise, and market | | ||
| + | | **Interoperability layer** | In SGAM, one of five levels at which components, systems, or organisations must exchange meaningful information: | ||
| + | | **Transactive energy** | A control and coordination approach combining economic signals with physical control to balance supply, demand, and network constraints across distributed grid actors | | ||
| + | | **Integrated architectural perspective (IAP)** | In SGIRM, one of three cross-cutting views of the smart grid: components and functions; information and communications; | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Perspectives ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP perspectives> | ||
| + | ==== Actors and stakeholders ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Architecture frameworks serve different user communities. Standards bodies and equipment manufacturers use them to define interoperability requirements. System operators use them to assess integration challenges when new resource types connect to the grid. Regulators and policymakers use them to identify governance gaps across system layers. The WG7 analytical work on network architecture and governance maps how ownership structures and decision-making authority configure differently depending on whether network architecture, | ||
| + | |||
| + | @@GAP@@ Case examples needed: one case showing how an architecture framework informed a regulatory or standards process; one from outside the EU or North America. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Technologies and infrastructure ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | The **Smart Grid Interoperability Reference Model (SGIRM)**, revised in IEEE 2030.4-2023, | ||
| + | |||
| + | The **GridWise Transactive Energy Framework**, | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP figure> | ||
| + | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Figure 1.** GWAC Stack with transactive energy strata. //Source: GridWise Architecture Council (2019).// | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | The **Smart Grid Architecture Model (SGAM)**, developed by CEN-CENELEC-ETSI and the reference architecture for EU smart grid standardisation, | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP figure> | ||
| + | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Figure 2.** SGAM three-dimensional representation across Domains, Zones, and Interoperability Layers. //Source: CEN-CENELEC-ETSI Smart Grid Coordination Group.// | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | @@GAP@@ Case examples needed: one case showing a specific interoperability challenge diagnosed using one of these frameworks. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== Institutional structures ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Beyond technical architecture, | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP tablecap> | ||
| + | **Table 1.** Network architecture crossed with logical layer — resulting grid coordination types.\\ | ||
| + | //Source: Kubeczko (2017), adapted.// | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ^ Logical layer ^ ^ Network architecture ^ ^ ^ | ||
| + | | ::: | ::: | **Centralised** | **Decentralised** | **Distributed** | | ||
| + | | **Centralised** | ::: | Trusted national TSO | Smart meter national ledger (e.g. Sweden) | Blockchain ledger for direct interaction | | ||
| + | | **Decentralised** | ::: | Markets and market institutions | Markets and market institutions; | ||
| + | | **Distributed** | ::: | Bilateral contract solutions | Bilateral contract solutions | Bilateral contract solutions | | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP tablecap> | ||
| + | **Table 2.** Network architecture crossed with policy layer — resulting ownership and governance types.\\ | ||
| + | //Source: Kubeczko (2017), adapted.// | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ^ Policy layer ^ ^ Network architecture ^ ^ ^ | ||
| + | | ::: | ::: | **Centralised** | **Decentralised** | **Distributed** | | ||
| + | | **Centralised** | ::: | Transmission grid (national monopoly) | Super-grid (global oligopoly) | Publicly owned local grids with local RES feed-in | | ||
| + | | **Decentralised** | ::: | Private monopolies and oligopolies of multinationals | Distribution grid (local monopoly); suppliers on market | Linked mini-grids; local grid with local RES (e.g. cooperative) | | ||
| + | | **Distributed** | ::: | People as shareholder; | ||
| + | |||
| + | @@GAP@@ Case examples needed: one case where SGAM or SGIRM was used in a regulatory process; one from outside the EU. | ||
| + | |||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Distinctions and overlaps ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP distinction> | ||
| + | **Grid architecture vs grid operation**\\ | ||
| + | Architecture frameworks describe the structural composition of the grid — the layers it contains and the interfaces between them. Grid operation covers how that structure performs in real time, including frequency regulation, voltage control, and balancing. Architectural choices constrain and enable operational possibilities; | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP distinction> | ||
| + | **SGAM vs SGIRM**\\ | ||
| + | Both decompose the smart grid into layers and domains, but SGAM is the standard reference in European regulatory and standardisation contexts, developed under EU mandate M/490; SGIRM is the IEEE-based reference used primarily in North American contexts. The frameworks are compatible but not identical in structure. | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP distinction> | ||
| + | **Architecture framework vs interoperability standard**\\ | ||
| + | A framework (GWAC, SGAM) is a conceptual structure for analysing and planning interoperability across system layers. A standard (e.g. IEC 61968, IEC 61970, IEEE 2030) defines specific technical requirements for how components communicate. Frameworks inform which standards are needed and where; standards specify the technical implementation. | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Related topics ===== | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[topics: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ~~DISCUSSION|Discussion — logged-in users only~~ | ||