Electric Utility Network Foundation ER Diagram

[anthonyryan-ergon]

The website (https://solutions.arcgis.com/electric/help/electric-utility-network-configuration/use/what-is-the-data-model.htm) I use to see the ER style diagram of the data model is now blank.

Where can this diagram now be sourced to view the existing/new relationships to the Structure & Electric feature classes and the new related tables?

Thanks

[MikeMillerGIS]

That diagram was removed as it only went to the Asset Group level and that provided inaccurate information,

[anthonyryan-ergon]

Mike,

Does anybody know when the new diagram will be released to show the new capabilities?

Thanks

[MikeMillerGIS]

we have discussed it, but without going to the AT level, will be hard and we have not evaluated how to visualize that. We do have a new data dictionary tool that might help.

https://github.com/Esri/solutions-data-dictionary-viewer

I will work with @jalsup for your other questions.

[anthonyryan-ergon]

Mike, Could you please go into more detail relating to the AT level needing to be displayed within the diagram? I trying to understand if I have missed anything when looking at the previous diagram as you have mentioned it was providing inaccurate information.

Thanks

[MikeMillerGIS]

You can set what can be a container or a structure by Asset Type. You can choose to allow a device to connect to another device by Asset Type, You can choose to all a asset to be in a container by Asset Type. I do not see the value in a chart that says all devices can be in all containers, etc. It depicts an inaccurate view of the rules in the network.

[MikeMillerGIS]

For more information on the additional tables, we release some diagrams, you can find the final versions here. http://solutions.arcgis.com/electric/help/electric-utility-network-foundation/design-pattern/electric-diagrams.htm

[anthonyryan-ergon]

Thanks for the explanation. I was only using the AG list in the feature classes (blue boxes) as a guide knowing that configuration around what was a structure/containment

[anthonyryan-ergon]

Mike, Just a ping to see how the new diagram is coming along

[MikeMillerGIS]

There are no current plans to recreate those diagrams.

[anthonyryan-ergon]

Mike, Thanks for the update. If there are no plans to recreate the diagram, could you please point me to some appropriate documentation that explains all the validate relationships between the 5 network domain feature classes and the 3 structure domain feature classes.

I would assume the documentation would include as an example

• Structure Junction contains Structure Junction
• Structure Junction contains Junction
• Structure Junction contains Line
• Structure Junction attaches to Structure Junction
• Line geometrically connects to Line
• Line geometrically connects to Device

Without this diagram, It's extremely difficult to explain to the people within the business what relationships are possible and more importantly what are not possible.

Thanks

[MichaelZeiler]

@anthonyryan-ergon , good news: I had email with @MikeMillerGIS and he said that if I could update that diagram within a reasonably short time frame with accuracy, to go ahead. So here is the first draft of the update.

A few comments:

John Alsup gave me the latest AG/AT definition and I semi-automated the list of asset groups using Excel and Notepad++. So I'm confident the list of asset groups is correct.

Next, I need to review whether the association arrows are correct. They have not yet been updated. @jalsup , I can scan the association rules CSV to update those. Can you send that?

The earlier version of this diagram marked each asset group in the Electric Device, Electric Assembly, Structure Line, Structure Junction, and Structure Boundary as being either a container, structure, or having terminals. @MikeMillerGIS , Would you like me to carry that forward? If so, how I did that earlier was examining the network property page of a UN service. @jalsup, do we have a published service I can look at?

About the Electric Circuit class, the asset group definition is not in your AG/AT Report CSV. Are those asset groups defined by the tier definitions? If so, @jalsup can you supply that?

@MikeMillerGIS , the other domain data models are much smaller than electric and will go more quickly. (I've spent about 2 hours on the electric diagram so far) Would you like me to do those as well?

[anthonyryan-ergon]

@MichaelZeiler Thank you again the draft diagram. I'm happy for this diagram to be simpler. I know the AG/AT listed are based on configuration and was happy if these were left out.

The main parts I was looking for is

• The arrows representing the different associations (eg. attached, contained) between classes
• The arrows representing geometrically connected between classes
• With each feature class, what can have terminals (eg. Device) and to what level in configuration (eg. AG only or AG/AT)
• With each feature class, what can be a structure (eg. Structure Junction) and to what level in configuration (eg. AG only or AG/AT)
• With each feature class, what can be a containment (eg. Structure Junction, Structure Line, Assembly) and to what level in configuration (eg. AG only or AG/AT)
• The amount of self associations and then leading off to other classes (eg. a Structure Junction can be attached to a Structure Junction which is then attached to a Electric Junction). Real world example I'm thinking of is a Line End (Electric Junction) attached to a Crossarm (Structure Junction) which is attached to a Pole (Structure Junction). Each of these features have material associated with them and would be brought across into an ERP/EAM solution as part of their asset register, etc.

Thanks again

Just something I mocked up using your draft diagram above

[MichaelZeiler]

@anthonyryan-ergon , so I think this is what you want. As you suggest, I removed the asset groups.

There is one more thing we need to verify: that the association arrows are complete. Within the past year, the utility network team has relaxed the possible class-class association types and I don't know if the electric model was updated to include these. I see two possibilities: 1) @jalsup inspect these association arrows and see if there are any new ones or 2) more reliable and time consuming, @jalsup sends me the latest association rule CSV and I'll scan it to see if there need to be any new association arrows.

Here is the PDF: ArcGIS_Electric_Network_data_model August 15 2019.pdf

[anthonyryan-ergon]

@MichaelZeiler Perfect. The main part is the now those association arrows as you mentioned to follow up with the UN Team. Also, if there any of the associations aren't allow to be at the AG/AT level (eg. AG Only), can these be labelled as well. At the moment, I'm assuming because the features are modelled to AG/AT level, therefore the association are to this level as well.

I have 2 more questions

• To my previous question above about self associations (eg. structure junction attached to structure junction). Do you have any thoughts on the above scenario and are there any overall restrictions
• Would you be open in changing the title of the diagram? I was talking with a few people in the office and our thought is this diagram is more like a logical diagram. From this logical diagram & configuration of AG/AT will then form a data model

Thanks

[anthonyryan-ergon]

Hi there, Is the template used to create the above diagrams available to download? The company I work for would like to produce a diagram the same as above with the configuration of Asset Group/Asset Type as defined by the model we have chosen. Thanks