Historian & Analytics

Confidential

Historian & Analytics ED2 Engineering Justification Paper

ED2-NLR(O)-SPEN-002-SMS-EJP

Issue Date Comments

Issue 2 November 2021 Final Submission

Scheme Name Historian & Analytics

PCFM Cost Type NLR(O)

Activity SMS

Primary Investment Driver

Operational Efficiency

Reference ED2-NLR(O)-SPEN-002-SMS-EJP

Output Type Digitalisation Strategy

Cost £4.85m SPD – £2.76m SPM - £2.09m

Delivery Year 2023-2028

Reporting Table C4

Outputs included in ED1 Yes No

Business Plan Section Maintaining a Safe & Resilient Network

Primary Annex Annex 4A.16: Operational IT and Telecoms Strategy

Spend Apportionment ED1 ED2 ED3

£4.85m

ED2-NLR(O)-SPEN-002-SMS-EJP: Historian/Analytics Project – Issue 2

1

Confidential

Technical Governance Process

Project Scope Development

IP1(S)

To be completed by the Service Provider or Asset Management. The completed form, together with an accompanying report, should be endorsed by the appropriate sponsor and submitted for approval. IP1 – To request project inclusion in the investment plan and to undertake project design work or request a modification to an existing project IP1(S) – Confirms project need case and provides an initial view of the Project Scope IP2 – Technical/Engineering approval for major system projects by the System Review Group (SRG) IP2(C) – a Codicil or Supplement to a related IP2 paper. Commonly used where approval is required at more than one SRG, typically connection projects which require connection works at differing voltage levels and when those differing voltage levels are governed by two separate System Review Groups. IP2(R) – Restricted Technical/Engineering approval for projects such as asset refurbishment or replacement projects which are essentially on a like-for-like basis and not requiring a full IP2 IP3 – Financial Authorisation document (for schemes > £100k prime) IP4 – Application for variation of project due to change in cost or scope PART A – PROJECT INFORMATION

Project Title: Historian and Analytics Project

Project Reference: ED2-NLR(O)-SPEN-002-SMS-EJP

Decision Required: To give concept approval for the project scope for continued support for a data historian, data visualisation and data analytic capability

Summary of Business Need: SPEN currently uses PI historian to record time series analogues from monitors. For historical reasons an in-house developed

solution, PSAlerts, is used to separately store SCADA event data. Both PI and PSAlerts will need a significant refresh or

replacement during ED2. They will also need to increase capacity to store LV and potentially Low Carbon Technology (LCT)

related information. This project will deliver a new historian solution which manages both events and time series data and

provides easier access to the data for analytics activities such as DSO load forecasting. To maximise the use of the data stored

in the historian in the provision of services, such as forecasting, we need to have an analytics environment capable of

manipulating a high volume of data in a short timeframe. The most cost-effective route to do this is leveraging flexible cloud-

based analytics environment. This will allow us to mix in-house and externally developed analytics flexibly. In addition, we

require visualisation of data to end users particularly for LV Management.

Summary of Project Scope, Change in Scope or Change in Timing: The scope of the project is to upgrade our historian functionality and closely integrate it with our analytics environment

Expenditure Forecast (in 2020/21 Prices)

Licen

ce

Area

Reporting

Table Description

Total

(£m)

Incidence (£m)

2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28

SPD C4

Control Centre hardware & software

2.76 1.07 0.59 0.33 0.35 0.41

Sub-Total 2.76 1.07 0.59 0.33 0.35 0.41

SPM C4

Control Centre hardware & software

2.09 0.81 0.45 0.25 0.27 0.31

Sub-Total 2.09 0.81 0.45 0.25 0.27 0.31

SPEN Total 4.85 1.89 1.03 0.59 0.62 0.73

PART B – PROJECT SUBMISSION

Proposed by Fiona Fulton Signature

Date: 30/11/21

Endorsed by John Gray Signature Date: 30/11/21

PART C – PROJECT APPROVAL

Approved by John Gray Signature Date: 30/11/21


2

Confidential

Contents

Technical Governance Process ....................................................................................................................... 1

1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 3

2 Background Information .................................................................................................................................. 4

3 Optioneering ...................................................................................................................................................... 6

4 Detailed Analysis & Costs ............................................................................................................................... 6

5 Deliverability & Risk .......................................................................................................................................... 8

6 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................ 12

7 Appendices ........................................................................................................................................................ 12


3

Confidential

1 Introduction

SPEN anticipate deploying a significant increase in monitoring, particularly in LV, during ED2.

In addition, many monitors at HV can provide more information than is currently collected

would be useful in the longer-term trending and design analysis which is the baseline capability

to enable a DSO. In order to do this, we need to facilitate long term storage of the data.

Based on our ED2 ambition for LV network management with circa 14,100 new LV monitors

and our projections for existing monitoring we estimate that up to 1.8 million data points may

need to be managed by a historian during ED2. Our current historian has capacity for 100k

data points. Even assuming we do not retain all these data points in the longer term this

indicates a significant change in capacity requirements and a need to move to a more efficient

pricing model1.

A key finding from our analysis of our historian use to date is also that whilst the data is used

for some crucial tasks it is not as heavily used as other corporate systems.

A significant reason for this is due to the data being difficult to understand and extract for

non-technical users. Our current historian is running on an outdated version of software with

limited data export and analysis capabilities.

Our vision is that the historian needs to be able to feed multiple analytics platforms and

potentially provide information to third parties, allowing the data to be presented in readily

usable format to end users. Consequently, we will require functional and capacity

enhancements to our current historian systems to achieve this. During the remainder of

ED1 we are assessing the options for achieving this. During ED2 we anticipate deploying the

chosen solution during 2024/25 and having the solution fully embedded by the end of ED2.

This analytics part of this project will focus on providing core in-house data analysis and

visualisation capability, including the extension to the non-SCADA LV Visualisation work

1 Traditional data historians are generally priced by data point


4

Confidential

already underway. This will support the use of Historian and other data sets to support ED2

and DSO models, such as Energy Net Zero (ENZ), SIA partners forecasting and bespoke

analytics. The analytics platform is currently available in SPEN with limited capabilities and this

project will deliver continuous enhancements from the start of ED2 with a fully scalable

platform embedded with our other systems available at the end of ED2.

This EJP covers funding for an analytics platform and 2 core analytics projects per year. It does

not cover funding for the development of all analytics solutions required as these would be

covered by individual business justifications.

2 Background Information

SPEN currently uses PI historian to record time series analogues from monitors. For historical

reasons an in-house solution, PSAlerts, is used to separately store SCADA event data. Both

PI and PSAlerts will need a significant refresh or replacement during ED2 to remain in support

and to be able to scale cost effectively. They will also need to increase capacity to store LV

and potentially LCT related information on the basis that our LV management and planning

strategy will require this information. The scale of data required in this area remains relatively

unclear and hence flexibility is also a key requirement so that stranded investment is avoided.

This project aims to deliver a historian solution which manages both events and time series

data, provides easier access to the data for analytics and moves back into a fully supported

environment. It will also seek to provide the solution deemed to scale in the most cost-

effective manner for a potentially high-volume data environment.

To maximise the use of data we are recording and to provide services, such as forecasting,

we need to have an analytics environment closely linked to our historian and capable of

manipulating a high volume of data in a short timeframe. This will allow us to mix in-house

and externally developed analytics and scale the solution to varying needs. This will also

include capabilities to visualise the results of analysis.

2.1 ED1 Track Record

PI and PS Alerts are established historian solutions which have been maintained in ED1. A

dedicated analytics environment is being established in ED1 but will be fully productised in

ED2.

2.2 Needs Case

The historian and analytics solution upgrade is needed to support key ED2 Digitalisation and

DSO strategy goals, such as:

• Forecasting

• Self-serve connections

• Near-real time capacity/carbon/voltage/fault heatmaps (internal & external use)

• LV (LCT) visualisation & active management

• Predictive maintenance


5

Confidential

These will need accurate measurement data available from the historian and a capability to

analyse and present this information.

Desktop based spreadsheets or manually loaded models will not be suitable in the ED2

timeframe to store, manipulate and understand monitoring data where terabytes of data will

be much more prevalent, particularly at full roll out of smart meters.

As in Section 2, SPEN cannot capitalise on the deployment of enhanced monitoring to achieve

its Digitalisation goals without:

• A Historian - to store high volumes of network data, cost effectively with easy access

• An analytics environment - to analyse this stored data quickly & automatically

• Visualisation – an ability for field and operations staff to view near real time and

historical data in the context of the network, particularly at LV

Currently, our historian is used widely, but not heavily. With a better historian solution linked

with easy to use analytics & visualisation capability historian data can quickly become a default

data set that enables all the key digitalisation goals stated across a broad range of the SPEN

business.

In addition, SPEN require to develop our in-house data management and analytics skills during

ED2 if we wish to leverage data to understand the network. This project is necessary to

provide the platform to allow our staff to fully understand large scale data manipulation and

use.

39

25

25

19

17

14141413

1311

11

11

10

9

9

8

7

6 6

6 5 5

54

4

42

2 1

11

1

1 1

11 1

PI Usage

by Organisational Unit

SP Transmission - Network Operations

Customer Service - Customer Delivery

NP & R - Resourcing

NP & R - Distribution Network

Processes and Technology - EngS -

Network Technical ServicesSP Distribution - Edinburgh + Borders

SP Distribution - Lanarkshire

NP & R - Transmisson Network

SP Manweb - North Wales

Customer Service - Customer + Social

DeliverySP Distribution - Central + Fife


6

Confidential

3 Optioneering

# Options Decision Comment

1 Maintain existing system (Baseline)

Rejected This would be the minimal investment strategy to maintain SPEN’s existing historian functionality with no additional analytics. This would be required to maintain some of our obligations for data sharing. With this solution, SPEN would be unable to maximise the use of the enhanced monitoring it is investing in deploying.

2 Deploy enhanced Historian & Analytics

Adopted This is the chosen option. This option would deploy enhanced historian functionality, that scales cost effectively and is fully embedded with our wider analytics capability.

4 Detailed Analysis & Costs

4.1 Selected Option Summary

PI is a trusted historian, but our current solution is out of date, moving out of support and

use is not maximised. This project would look at providing a solution which supports the

anticipated wider use of data and closely links it to an accessible analytics environment where

it can be readily associated with network models and other data sources to provide system

wide analytics for a broad range of use cases. During 2021, options for enhancing the Historian

and analytics solution are being evaluated, aligned with the global expert groups for data

management. Options include fully upgrading PI, utilisation of other existing solutions and

moving to a Cloud hosted service. This analysis is in preparation for deployment to start as

part of this project during ED2.

After evaluating several different Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) analytics solutions over

the past 3 years a dedicated cloud analytics environment is assessed to give SPEN access to a

cost effect solution which provides a wide range of tools so that even imperfect data can be

exploited to provide insights to network operations. As large-scale use of analytics is still a

relatively new area this provides the most scalable option and lowest risk of stranded/unused

assets. Our ongoing investment in data science skills also requires this environment for this

resource to be fully utilised.

In addition, this analytics base allows us to further enhance dashboards for visualising our LV

network to support our fault management and connections facilitation in this area. SPEN

currently has multiple network visualisation tools with varying functionality and usage levels

(Geofield, Geoview, UMV, ESRI, LView). This part of the project would look both at further

developing the LV visualisation capability put in place during in ED1 but also at how the

multiple visualisation options could be rationalised to support efficient operational processes.

4.2 Alternative Options Summary

1.Maintain Existing System


7

Confidential

This is the minimal investment option. The current historian solution licence is essentially out

of support and we cannot upgrade the current solution to take advantage of new functionality.

Hence, we also cannot scale cost effectively to support the anticipated data volumes as legacy

pricing mechanisms apply. Therefore, maintaining this solution would not be cost efficient as

is demonstrated by the options costing.

In addition, SPEN currently has no dedicated analytics environment and limited use of its

historian data in custom applications. Doing nothing would mean that investment in

monitoring could not be capitalised for longer term forecasting and planning.

4.3 Options Technical Summary table

# Option Technical Summary

1 Maintain existing system

Maintain the existing historian system, no analytics service. This is the “Do minimum” option.

2 Deploy enhanced Historian & Analytics (baseline)

Enhance our historian capability to include analogue and event information and deploy a flexible cloud-based analytics environment to maximise the use of recorded data.

4.4 Options Cost summary tables

# Option Cost Breakdown £m NARMs

Risk Change £/Risk

Maintain existing system

Maintain Historian Hardware/Software

£0.400

1 Licence for data tag capacity £3.097

Historian System support £0.950 Analytics & Visuals (not provided) £0 Total £4.447

2 Deploy Historian & Analytics (baseline)

Enhance Historian Hardware/Software

£1.188

Historian System support £0.395 Analytics Environment £1.150 Analytics Support £0.825 Visualisation Tools Development £0.250 Visualisation Tools Support £0.250 Visualisation Tools Rationalisation £0.750 Total £4.808* Total (Historian only) £1.583*

*The cost comparison shows the total costs for the “Maintain existing system” option with no

analytics service provided. To compare like for like with the chosen option “Deploy Historian & Analytics” a Historian only cost is shown in the table which indicates a new approach to historian

management as more cost effective.

All costs have been reviewed with SPEN IT and infrastructure teams. Hence, these costs are based

on both the best extrapolated estimate from the work carried out to date in these areas and from

current knowledge of technology availability and pricing.


8

Confidential

Historian costs assume we transition to a largely cloud hosted solution by 2026.

5 Deliverability & Risk

5.1 Preferred Options & Output Summary

The baseline option is to evolve the Historian & Analytics solution to fully exploit collected

data and further augment this solution with a dedicated analytics environment. This provides

a more cost-effective historian solution in addition to the analytics and visualisation tools

required to meet our strategic goals in ED2.

These solutions will exist in ED1 and will be extended by procuring additional services during

ED2 i.e. we plan to maintain our existing Historian & analytics environments whilst we extend

or procure additional Software as a Service capabilities in these areas. This will mitigate the

risk of these solutions.

5.2 Cost Benefit Analysis Results

The cost benefit analysis for this area is detailed in ED2-NLR(O)-SPEN-002-SMS-CBA -

Historian Analytics – Issue 1.

Specific benefit values for this area are in the investment in platforms which will support

multiple specific business functions such as DSO, connections, predictive maintenance,

forecasting, etc. in a cost-effective way. Hence, double counting of these benefits needs to be

avoided.

The CBA for this paper is therefore based on savings achievable from a key early analytics

project, Phase ID. The savings in Phase identification are driven by CI/CML reductions due to

more accurate and earlier fault management. This is then extrapolated on basis that 2 projects

per year are delivered during ED2. It is assumed that these benefits justify historian storage,

analytics and visualisation capabilities.

Options considered

Decision Comment

NPVs based on payback periods 10

years 20

years 30

years 45

years Whole

Life NPV

Baseline: Deploy

enhanced Historian & Analytics

Adopted Enhance our historian capability to include analogue and event information and deploy a flexible cloud-based analytics environment to maximise the use of recorded data.

Option 1: Maintain existing system

Rejected Maintain the existing historian system, no analytics service

-1.37 -1.96 -2.31 -2.58 -2.62


9

Confidential

5.3 Expenditure Profile

Note: Expenditure has been moved to table C4, but breakdown of costs remains unchanged.

Area Category

Memo Item

Description Total (£m)

Incidence (£m)

2023/4 2024/5 2025/6 2026/7 2027/8

SPD

Control centre

hardware &

software

Smart Systems Analysis


0.68 0.27 0.27 0.04 0.05 0.05

Historian System support

0.22 0.09 0.07 0.02 0.02 0.02

Analytics Environment

0.65 0.13 0.10 0.11 0.13 0.18

Analytics Support 0.47 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09

Visualisation Tools Development

0.14 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03

Visualisation Tools Support

0.14 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03

Visualisation Tools Rationalisation

0.43 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Pension Contribution

0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

SPD Sub-Total 2.76 1.07 0.59 0.33 0.35 0.41

SPM

Control centre

hardware &

software

Smart Systems Analysis


0.51 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.04 0.04

Historian System support

0.17 0.07 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.02

Analytics Environment

0.50 0.10 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.14

Analytics Support 0.36 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07

Visualisation Tools Development

0.11 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02

Visualisation Tools Support

0.11 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02

Visualisation Tools Rationalisation

0.32 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Pension Contribution

0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

SPM Sub-Total 2.09 0.81 0.45 0.25 0.27 0.31

SPEN Total 4.85 1.89 1.03 0.59 0.62 0.73

All the solutions covered in this paper are considered centralised IT solutions.


10

Confidential

5.4 Risks

There are some significant risks associated with this project given the new areas of

functionality and expertise it intends to cover. However, SPEN believe our preparation work

through innovation and early deployments in ED1 have significantly de-risked these activities.

Risk No. Risk Description H/M/L Mitigation

1 Potential alternative Historian solution contains cost uncertainty and deployment risks

H Cost contingency Flexible Cloud based approach Fallback to existing solution

2 A new analytics environment also contains a high risk for delivery to cost given the uncertainty of a completely new solution.

M Experience gained during final years of ED1 Digitalisation plan accommodates upskilling

3 Data volumes far exceed predictions M Cloud based solutions should scale cost effectively Predictions based on networks expertise

5.5 Outputs Included in RIIO ED1 Plans

There are no outputs expected to be delivered in ED1 that are funded within this proposal.

5.6 Future Pathways – Net Zero

5.6.1 Primary Economic Driver

To reduce the risk of network damage and/or longer network outages due to the complexity

of the network increasing during ED2 we require access to and the ability to exploit high

volumes of monitoring data.

5.6.2 Payback Periods

Consumers will benefit from reduced network risk immediately as the different components

of the project are completed.

5.6.3 Pathways and End Points

The proposed option is consistent with the SPEN’s DSO Strategy, Digitalisation Strategy and

Distribution Future Energy Scenarios.

5.6.4 Asset Stranding Risks & Future Asset Utilisation

The solution is regularly refreshed and updated hence the stranding risk is very low within

the lifetime of the refresh period. The proposed solutions are based on open cloud

technology which avoids lock-in to an obsolete solution.

Hence, it has been assessed that the preferred option is consistent with the future generation

and demand scenarios and that the risk of stranding is very low.


11

Confidential

5.6.5 Losses / Sensitivity to Carbon Prices

Not appropriate to this investment.

5.6.6 Whole Systems Benefits

Not appropriate to this investment.

5.7 Environment and Sustainability

5.7.1 Operational and embodied carbon emissions

The upgrade of our historian functionality and integration with our analytics environment

unlikely to result in embodied carbon from the delivery of interventions required. There is

unlikely to be any impact on SPEN’s Business Carbon Footprint (BCF).

5.7.2 Supply chain sustainability

For us to take full account of the sustainability impacts associated with the upgrade of the

historian functionality and integration with our analytics environment, we need access to

reliable data from our suppliers. The need for carbon and other sustainability credentials to

be provided now forms part of our wider sustainable procurement policy.

5.7.3 Resource use and waste

The historian functionality and integration with our analytics environment is unlikely to result

in the consumption of resources and the generation of waste materials.

Where waste is produced it will be managed in accordance with the waste hierarchy which

ranks waste management options according to what is best for the environment. The waste

hierarchy gives top priority to preventing waste in the first instance, then preparing for re-

use, recycling, recovery, and last of all disposal (e.g. landfill).

5.7.4 Biodiversity/ natural capital

Due to the nature of the proposed interventions, it is unlikely that there will be any impact in

relation to biodiversity and natural capital.

5.7.5 Preventing pollution

Due to the nature of the proposed interventions, it is unlikely that there will be any impact in

relation to pollution.

SPEN will always follow all relevant waste regulations and will make sure that special

(hazardous) waste produced or handled by our business is treated in such a way as to minimise

any effects on the environment.

5.7.6 Visual amenity

Due to the nature of the proposed interventions, it is unlikely that there will be any impacts

in relation to visual amenity.


12

Confidential

5.7.7 Climate change resilience

Due to the nature of the proposed interventions, it is unlikely that there will be any impacts

in relation to future changes in climate.

6 Conclusion

SPEN’s historian & analytics capability is limited, and in the case of the historian reaching end

of life. It is therefore essential to update our capability in preparation for ED2 to support the

use of data in a range of solutions as outline below.

SPEN’s DSO Strategy, Digitalisation Strategy and Distribution Future Energy Scenarios

includes the use of monitoring to assist with LV network management, DSO demand

management and long term LCT management. Without the key storage, analysis and

visualisation capabilities set out in this paper these outcomes will not be achievable.

7 Appendices

None

Documents

Historian & Analytics