isrjournals
User Sign in    Editor Sign in

inter-control center communication protocol (iccp)

K.RAJA,P.KAYALVIZHI

Published in International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science Engineering and Information Technology

ISSN: 2321-3337          Impact Factor:1.521         Volume:3         Issue:1         Year: 26 June,2014         Pages:375-379

International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science Engineering and Information Technology

Abstract

The deployment of synchrophasor measurements in power systems is rapidly expanding. Applications of these measurements are less widespread. Synchrophasors currently are routed to large data concentrators in central locations. This data may then be routed back to Independent System Operators (ISOs) and Transmission Owners (TOs) via existing networks such as those based on the Inter-Control Center Communication Protocol (ICCP). Systems configured in this way have considerable communication overhead, and data storage at the central data concentrator is a difficult problem, especially as the number of PMUs increases.

Kewords

Transmission.Connection.

Reference

[1] J. Zuo, R. Carroll, P. Trachian, J. Dong, S. Affare, B. Rogers, L. Beard, and Y. Liu, “Development of TVA SuperPDC: Phasor applications, tools, and event replay,” in Proc. 2008 IEEE Power and Energy Soc. General Meeting— Server Generating DB Indexing Binary Tree Construction T ab Data Conversion and Delivery of Electrical Energy in the 21st Century, Jul. 2008, pp. 1–8. [2] D. Shi, D. Tylavsky, N. Logic, and K. Koellner, Identification of Short Transmission- Line Parameters From Synchrophasor Measurements Sep. 2008, pp. 1–8. [3] L. Vanfretti, J. Chow, S. Sarawgi, D. Ellis, and B. Fardanesh, A Framework for Estimation of Power Systems Based on Synchronized Phasor Measurement Data Jul. 2009, pp. 1–6. [4] L. J. Guibas and R. Sedgewick, “A dichromatic framework for balanced trees,” in Proc. 19th Annu. Symp. Found. Comput. Sci., Oct. 1978, pp. 8–21. ARMENIA AND CHOW: FLEXIBLE PHASOR DATA CONCENTRATOR DESIGN 81 [5] K. Fall and S. Floyd, “Simulation-based comparisons of Tahoe, Reno, and SACK TCP,” Comput. Commun. Rev., vol. 26, pp. 5–21, 1996.