Abstract classes in EQ-profile

[vaag1988]

There are a lot of abstract classes in the EQ-profile such as Bay, VoltageLevel, Line, ConformLoad etc. Are these required classes or optional? I´m a bit sceptic since these classes are not actually equipment like ACLineSegment, Fuse, Substation etc.

What about network information systems that don´t have this abstract hierarchy. Could it be a possibility to make the EQ-profile a bit leaner and include these abstract classes in another subprofile?

[Sveino]

To make a bit correction on the term used:

• abstract class are classes that is part of the hierarchy but not instantiated in the instance file, e.g. Equipment
• Container classes that is primary used in regards to power flow is navigation and allocation of ConnectivtyNode, e.g. Substation, VoltageLevel, Bay etc This has been a lot of discussion if we can create a pure EQ-profile for power flow. There is a very strong need for this as we are in a transition where all tool model the grid with what they need without having a modelling tool. A power flow tool should only need to read a EQ. It is noting that state that you can generate a EQ-profile based instance file that does not confirm to EQ. The file will fail some of the EQ validation, but this should still not prevent it from being imported to a given tool. It is difficult to come with an agreement on a simplified standard, since different tools has different requirement. It therefore often becomes the supper set that is agreed on.