Re: [foxboro] Alarms priorities
- From: "Ghodhbani, Hafedh" <Hafedh.Ghodhbani@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:02:05 +0100
Hi,
I used this command in the folowing path: /opt/fox/bin/tools.
I received the message: No match
What can be the problem ? Where can I find the data ?
Regards
Hafedh
-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of brad.s.wilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 24 October 2005 16:51
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [foxboro] Alarms priorities
>> getpars -U* -C* -B* -mCMPNM:%12s -mPRTYPE:%6s -mCRIT:%8x <<
This will return the type of alarm that has the highest priority
(PRTYPE) and the priority of that alarm (CRIT)
PRTYPE can have values:
0 = no active alarms
1 = high absolute
2 = low absolute
3 = high-high
4 = low-low
5 = high deviation
6 = low deviation
7 = rate alarm
8 = BAD alarm
9 = state alarm
You may have to interpret which alarm is actually active. For example,
a PID block can alarm the measurement AND the output. So a PRTYPE of 1
or 2 will not tell you whether you have a measurement or an output
alarm.
PRTYPE 3 & 4 only pertain to measurement because there is no high-high &
low-low alarm for output.
A limitation is that it will not show alarms of lesser priorities in the
same block. So, an measurement alarm of priority 1 will "mask" a
deviation alarm of priority 2.
You can get more information with -mALMSTA:%8x ... this contains all the
information about active alarms, including PRTYPE and CRIT.
If you'd like to know which alarms are configured in a block, then look
at -mALMOPT:%8x These packed boolean variables are full of information,
but they require some deciphering to understand. Using boolean masks
can screen out information you don't need.
As has been mentioned before, there is an alarm documentation script on
the cassandra website. I have not used it, but others recommend it.
Brad Wilson
ExxonMobil Chemical Co
Edison Synthetics Plant
732-321-6115
732-321-6177 fax
Brad.S.Wilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________________________________
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: http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the Message Labs
Virus Control Centre.
______________________________________________________________________
BG Energy Holdings Limited
Registered in England & Wales No: 3763515
Registered address:
100 Thames Valley Park Drive
Reading, Berkshire RG6 1PT UK
Telephone: +44 (0)118 935 3222
Website: http://www.BG-Group.com
This e-mail is intended only for the addressee named above. As this
e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information, please
advise us immediately if you are not the named addressee or the person
responsible for delivering the message to the named addressee. The
contents should not be disclosed to any other person nor copies taken.
_______________________________________________________________________
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: http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [foxboro] Alarms priorities
- From: Jeremy Milum
Other related posts:
- » Re: [foxboro] Alarms priorities
- » Re: [foxboro] Alarms priorities
- » Re: [foxboro] Alarms priorities
- » Re: [foxboro] Alarms priorities
- » Re: [foxboro] Alarms priorities
- » Re: [foxboro] Alarms priorities
- » Re: [foxboro] Alarms priorities
- Re: [foxboro] Alarms priorities
- From: Jeremy Milum