Re: [foxboro] Can't figure out a way to justify it.

Yep. That's pretty much the way I have it figured.

We have to show something that generates a real return on investment beyond
the issues of hardware obsolescence.



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)
ajohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Ken Heywood
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 7:24 PM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [foxboro] Can't figure out a way to justify it.

Everyone has a lot of great technical reasons that justify chosing I/A
Series over some other brand. Technology is wonderful, but where is the
return? The justification comes when you walk into your boss' office and say
you want to spend $2.3 million to replace the existing control system. The
boss will say "Show me the money." Are you making production targets? Yes?
Will the $2.3 million be paid back in 12 months? Maybe? How much more money
can we make with this upgrade? Dunno? I have lots of customers still running
control systems vastly older than I/A who are still waiting for the
justification to rip it all out.

        -----Original Message----- 
        From: Kevin FitzGerrell [mailto:fitzgerrell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Tue 1/11/2005 8:13 PM 
        To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
        Cc: 
        Subject: Re: [foxboro] Can't figure out a way to justify it.
        
        

        I can share the key points driving upgrades at some of the sites I
work with.
        Outside of upgrading overloaded CPs, the biggest reasons for recent
major
        upgrades have been:
        
        1)  Switched networks allow for 8 segments on nodebus.  For sites
that already
        have 3 segment nodebus, this allows for easy extension of the
existing system to
        new plant areas without a CLAN.
        2)  Modbus/Profibus fbms on CP60 are much more attractive than
Integrator 30
        solutions.
        3)  B/B1 boxes are experiencing increasing incidence of component
failure (ram,
        NVRAM, floppys, HD, CD, Power Supplies) and don't run current
version of FoxView.
        
        Examples:
        
        Site 1
        ---------------------
        Before recent upgrades:  AP51E, WP51Es and WP51Ds.  MG30s and
MG30Bs.  CP30FTs
        and CP40BFT.  Three segment nodebus with FONBEs.  I/A version 6.1.
        
        Previous upgrades:
        Had upgraded with Y2K money from earlier workstations to the 51Es,
and added
        51Ds later as more operator stations were desired.  Had upgraded an
overloaded
        CP30 to a 40B.
        
        Recent upgrades:
        Upgraded to high speed switched network (NCNIs, P92 XP AW, Fiber
switches) --
        driving factor was to add additional Nodebus segments without going
to a CLAN.
        Upgraded overloaded CP30FT to CP60FT -- driving factor was critical
nature of
        overloaded CP and desire to use Modbus FBMs to integrate additional
data from
        Triconex and Modicon PLCs.
        Upgraded from 6.1 to 6.5.1/7.1 -- necessary to support the two items
above.
        
        Single most important reason for upgrade was the ability to have up
to 8 Nodebus
        segments on a network without a CLAN.
        
        Considerations -- plant downtime where significant upgrades can be
done doesn't
        come often.  Desire is to bring system current during that downtime
to allow for
        ongoing addition of current generation equipment when necessary.
        
        
        Site 2
        --------------------
        Before recent upgrades: AP51As, WP51As, WP51Bs, WP51Ds, a couple
WP20s.  CP30s,
        CP40s, CP40Bs.  Three networks, two of them with CLANs.  2 and 3
segment nodebuses.
        
        Previous upgrades:
        Large numbers of CP10s merged into CP40s/40Bs -- driving factors
were
        overloading in CP10s, extra engineering maintaining ring route
(implemented to
        overcome resource limitations of CP10s).
        
        Recent upgrades:
        AP51As upgraded to AW51Es, WP20s eliminated -- driving factors were
poor A box
        perfomance and extra engineering maintaining graphics on WP20s.
Also considered
        increasing component failure on A boxes.
        CP30s and some CP40s merged into CP60s -- driving factors were
overloading due
        to ongoing project work, also considered memory related reboots of
CP30 and CP40
        modules.  Choice of CP60 over CP40B because of support of larger
number of FBMs
        and integration via Profibus/Modbus FBMs.  200 series FBMs seen as
easier to add
        in recovered cabinet space when new I/O is needed.
        CP40s to CP40FTs -- driving factor was reliability.  Used modules
made available
        by mergers above.
        Upgrade to switched network -- driving factor was desire to
eliminate CLANs in
        each network.  CLANs had become overloaded due to increase in
control strategies
        involving multiple previously independent plant areas.
        51B1 to 51F upgrades -- driving factors include poor performance of
the 51B1
        boxes and increasing component failure (ram, NVRAM, floppys, HD, CD,
Power
        Supplies).
        Upgrade in software from 4.3 -> 6.2.1 -- driving factor was CP60s.
        Upgrade in software from 6.2.1 -> 6.5/6.5.1/7.1 -- driving factors
were switched
        network and Modbus FBM support.
        
        Future upgrades:
        Merge seperate networks to single plant network with ATS and V8.1
I/A -- driving
        factor is growth of control strategies across previously independent
plants.
        CPxx -> CP270 -- driving factor is serial and ethernet FBMS --
Critical
        protocols seen as Modbus Slave, DH+, OPC, Control Logix.
        
        
        Site 3
        --------------------
        Currently:  AW51B, WP51B, Micro I/A with 100 series I/O, Single
Ethernet network.
        
        Considered future upgrades:
        51B -> 51F -- driving factor is component failure and repairability
status of B
        boxes.
        Micro I/A -> CP60/CP270 -- driving factor is repairability status of
Micro I/A
        controllers.
        
        
        Site 4
        -------------------
        Currently:  AP51B, WP51Bs, CP30s, CP40s, MG30s, MB+, 3 segment
nodebus with FONBEs
        
        Recent upgrade:
        110mhz AP51B -> 170mhz AP51B, increase in RAM -- short term fix for
AP overloading.
        
        Planned upgrades:
        Upgrade to switched network -- driving factor is increased network
performance
        and reliability.
        AP51B -> AP51F -- driving factor is AP performance and increasing
component
        failure in B boxes.
        I/A 6.2.1 -> I/A 6.5.1/7.1 -- to support above items and allow for
Modbus FBMs.
        
        Considerations -- plant downtime where significant upgrades can be
done doesn't
        come often.  Desire is to bring system current during that downtime
to allow for
        ongoing addition of current generation equipment when necessary.
        --------------------
        
        Please feel free to contact me for more details.
        
        Regards,
        
        Kevin FitzGerrell
        Systems Engineer
        Foxboro New Zealand
        ------------------------------------
        Tel:  +64 (9) 573 7690
        Fax:  +64 (9) 573 7691
        
        
        
        
        
        
        Quoting "Johnson, Alex (Foxboro)" <ajohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
        
        > I wish I had the key to offering something that would drive
        > replacements.
        >
        > So, what would justify an upgrade in the minds of you folks -
short of
        > the
        > "rip it out because we have a new system and won't support our
existing
        > one"
        > that some vendors use.
        >
        >
        > I'd really appreciate your thoughts on what would drive the
brownfield
        > sites
        > to upgrade.
        >
        >
        > 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)
        > ajohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx
        >
        > 
        > 
        > 
        >
______________________________________________________________________
        > _
        > 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 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
        
        

-- No attachments (even text) are allowed --
-- Type: application/ms-tnef
-- File: winmail.dat


 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
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 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
 

Other related posts: