On 06/25/2011 02:02 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jason Roysdon" <nanog.20110...@jason.roysdon.net> > >> That's what they're doing here, opting to skip "patching" the time >> error. They're not ignoring frequency altogether, but rather only >> minding that aspects that have to do with grid stability, not your alarm >> clock. This is for the better anyway, and NTP/GPS/WWV/WWVH is the way >> to go to keep clocks accurate and hopefully will be the outcome of any >> consumer complaints. >> >> I've seen conversation in various forums and lists I read that they are >> going to ignore or not care about the 60Hz standard. This is incorrect. >> They just aren't going to purposely deviate from the scheduled >> frequency to perform manual TEC. >> >> Mind you, that they still care about why the frequency is off, and when >> things are not able to quickly compensate, they want to know and be able >> to pinpoint it and fix it: >> http://www.nerc.com/filez/standards/Frequency_Response.html >> >> Specifically, read this PDF: >> http://www.nerc.com/docs/oc/rfwg/NERC%20Balancing%20and%20Frequency%20Control%20July%205%202009.pdf > > Thank you, Jason. I did some searching before I posted that, to see if > I could locate better information, but clearly, I didn't search hard enough. > > Cheers, > -- jr 'my google-fu requires 60.01Hz :-)' a
NERC's site is very hard to find info on if you don't know where to look. Even when you've found something before, it can be hard to find again. I run into that nearly monthly and have a document just to help me navigate to certain areas. http://www.nerc.com/page.php?cid=6|386 http://www.nerc.com/page.php?cid=6|386|391 http://www.nerc.com/files/NERC_TEC_Field_Trial_Webinar_061411.pdf http://www.nerc.com/filez/Webinars/tec_webinar_061411/index.htm <webinar Jason Roysdon
