2 ms·
Lets take my example and say you had a recloser that is stuck, but could be fixed by sending a command that would perform a manual close. Or maybe, you wanted t
by jshowa3 7y ago
Lets take my example and say you had a recloser that is stuck, but could be fixed by sending a command that would perform a manual close. Or maybe, you wanted to set the time threshold for the closing.
a) Would you send a lineman out to the recloser and have them manually configure it, spending probably hours doing so?
b) Or would you have some operator press a button in a piece of software to engage the recloser (thus, ultimately, writing whatever register in the device to perform the closing)?
Now multiply that scenario to the potentially hundreds/thousands of reclosers in the field.
Companies are going to choose b) every time.
- toomuchtodo 7y agoYes, I agree, which is why regulation is crucial to ensure a balance is struck between operational efficiency and security. If you want to interrogate recloser behavior remotely (real time and for historical logging), entirely reasonable. If you want to reclose manually or update trip and reclose thresholds, your commands or setting updates must be authenticated, logged, and cryptographically signed. If the ACR encounters lockout, you roll a truck (which you're probably going to do regardless, as lockout indicates a non-transient fault).
- jshowa3 7y agoAlright, your response is a lot clearer now. However, this is how it currently is with NERC CIP, so I fail to see how having legislation that facilitates more manual devices really solves anything.