Re: [foxboro] Alarm horn/lights, Alarm Manager Application, Alarm Panel and Table Configuration, Alarm Conventions and Strategies on Fox I A
- From: "Johnson, Alex P" <alex.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 19:57:15 -0400
All,
The correct contact for information on WASP is the North American Project
Operation's Power Group. Jim Canty is the person with direct responsibility
for the software, but I'm sure the Power Marketing folks and/or your account
representative can get the information.
With regard to alarm floods, we offer services and software to help with a
alarm management study. Dave Gaertner is the correct contact and I'm sure
that your account representative would be glad to get him in touch with you.
Regards,
Alex Johnson
Invensys Process Systems
Invensys Systems, Inc.
10707 Haddington
Houston, TX 77043
713.722.2859 (voice)
713.722.2700 (switchboard)
713.932.0222 (fax)
alex.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of tom.vandewater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 2:04 PM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [foxboro] Alarm horn/lights, Alarm Manager Application, Alarm
Panel and Table Configuration, Alarm Conventions and Strategies on Fox IA
Alan and Patrick,
Sorry for the delay in responding. I was very interested in
what both of you had to say but haven't had a chance to reply until
today.
Patrick, you said:
"We use the Foxboro WASP package to drive these icons and if I read your
posting correctly this might be the product enhancement you were looking
for!?"
Yes, this sounds almost exactly like what I am looking for. I
tried searching the Foxboro CSC website for more information about
"WASP", (Window Alarm Scanner Package), and found a CAR reference to an
overview of the WASP package, and a User's Guide but was unable to
actually find either document. Can anyone from Foxboro help me locate
this information? Dick Staun, this is a sales opportunity! =20
I suspect that this is one of those, never fully commercialized
applications that seem to be developed and readily available in the
Netherlands or Germany but not so easy to get in the USA. It sounds
like what I want. I am interested in running an instance of WASP on
each of several WP51D's to split the load and segregate process alarm
functions rather than having all my alarm "eggs in one basket". This
global alarm object functionality, in my humble opinion, should be the
direction that Foxboro moves, replacing the Annunciator and FoxPanels
that tie everything to a user interface specific location.
Patrick, the hierarchy you have created with your process
overview graphics populated with "icons" is a great structure. It
enables the operator to recognize the "Current" alarm status for all
processes and equipment and make an informed decision about what process
or piece of equipment is the highest priority. With a single click of
the mouse, (on an icon), the tech can be at the process detail graphic
where corrective action can be initiated.
Patrick said:
"The top 2 screen graphics are fixed (not operator changeable) and
display a sort of annunciator keyboard but in a much more graphical way.
With one blink of the eye, the operator has a complete overview of which
section has current alarms."
As I said before, your graphical process and alarm overview is a
more complete and elegant replacement for the Alarm Manager tabular
listing that was disjointed when used in conjunction with the FV/DM
interface. You have managed to combine the FV/DM/AM functionality on
one "piece of glass" in a display format that can be accessed from
anywhere in your system.=20
Alan Armour said:
"Currently we have a density of over 8000 installed alarms/operator at
best case (all operators in the control room) and over 25000 installed
alarms per operator at worst case (only one operator in the control
room)and still comply with The EEMUA guideline for alarm traffic per
operator. These densities can only be achieved by using advanced alarm
masking techniques, and changing alarm destination for different
situations is one of those techniques to reduce alarm floods."
Alan, it has been my contention with our management that we have
to go through an alarm evaluation for each process in order to determine
which alarms, (of the thousands that exist), give "unique" and helpful
information to the operators so they can begin the troubleshooting the
process. "Unique" is the key word here. The reason "Alarm
Avalanche/Flooding" occurs, is because there are many alarms that are
very closely related to the same condition. When that condition occurs
you will get ALL of those alarms. It helped me to boil this all down by
asking myself the question:
"What is the primary purpose of the control system?
And myself said:
"Controlling the Process!"
The answer, although blatantly obvious, most often gets lost in
the shuffle. We keep adding alarms, never asking ourselves whether or
not this condition already has an alarm that tells us the process is
unable to control. For me, it makes sense to start with the controllers
used to control each process. If I can set all of the set points, and
the controllers always maintain those set points, then we are making
good product. Only when the controllers begin to deviate from set
point, do I need an alarm.
At that point, I need the operator to find out why the
controller can't maintain set point. One deviation alarm should be
enough to get the troubleshooting process started, and additional alarms
related to the same condition will only distract/hamper the operators
from their jobs. I go so far as saying that there is no need to alarm a
pump failure if the pump flow is also controlled by a flow controller,
because the flow controller will have a deviation alarm and when the
operator looks at the graphic, the failed pump will be obvious. If the
flow controller doesn't deviate from set point when the pump fails then
I don't need the pump anyway.
Evaluating your alarms in this way will insure that you minimize
the number of alarms needed. Each alarm added needs to be justified and
a corrective action defined for each condition. We were able to
achieve, both a 70% reduction in configured alarms as well as a 70%
reduction in actuated alarms when we applied this evaluation technique,
and I don't think we cut enough alarms yet. =20
My goal is to:
1. Eliminate all unnecessary or redundant alarms using a structured
evaluation process.
2. Manage the remaining alarms using advanced masking techniques as you
described above.
3. Establish a graphical interface that makes it as easy as possible for
the operators to find, evaluate, and correct operational problems.
Thanks again to Patrick and Alan for their helpful and detailed
response!
Tom VandeWater
Control System Developer/Analyst
Dow Corning Corporation
Carrollton, KY USA
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
_______________________________________________________________________
This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process
Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at
your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html
foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
Other related posts:
- » Re: [foxboro] Alarm horn/lights, Alarm Manager Application, Alarm Panel and Table Configuration, Alarm Conventions and Strategies on Fox I A
