Circuit Breaker - Subnetwork Controller vs Non-Subnetwork Controller

[gis_KIWI4]

Hi, 

Just thought I'd check how some other have approached these scenario. 
In our network we have 2 distinct roles for circuit breakers - start of a feeder and in-line protection device in the network. 

If it's the start of a feeder/circuit, then we set it up as a subnetwork controller. Being a subnetwork controller it has directional terminals. 
https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/help/data/utility-network/about-terminal-management.htm#:~:....

When it is out in the substation but not the start of the feeder/circuit then we can't use the same device as above as it has directional terminals. We got around this by creating an a discrete asset type Circuit Breaker (non-subnetwork controller). We set this up with bidirectional terminals. 

This has worked great but we are reviewing our Utility Network and just wanted to see how other might have gotten past this. 

[RobertKrisher · Accepted solution]

You'll see this pattern in the latest foundation model for electric. Because partitioned networks require directional terminal configurations, asset types that can act as controllers will have a directional terminal configuration. But the non-controller versions of these devices have a different asset type that has a bi-directional terminal configuration (circuit breaker, HV Load Break switches/fuses, reclosers).

[DamienPyne]

When we developed our model we had a deep conversation with our Esri rep about this.  We also have a very granular Low Voltage model in our network , adding additional asset types to this scenario.  Based on this we created a virtual object called "Feeder Start Point".  Outside of a distribution transformer, these are our only subnetwork controllers.  This allowed and overcame the issue or directional and non-directional/bi-directional breakers, etc.