Re: [foxboro] Control Room Design
- From: Michael Toecker <michael.toecker@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 15:30:39 -0500
I second locating all computers in a separate room, and running
keyboard/video/mouse extenders. This is the way many of the control systems
I've worked on in the past few years have gone. There are a lot of
advantages to the approach; better temperature control, fewer dust issues,
cleaner more reliable power, easier cable runs, better security (especially
removable media like USB drives). You can kiss the weekly vacuuming for
dust bunnies goodbye, and no more whirring fan noise. Putting all the
computers in a single room also makes it easy to identify problems with
hardware. Make sure that there is a local and remote option for the KVM
solution you are using.
Secondly, make an effort to have that dedicated server room, very well
separated from the rest of the activity in the control building. You'll
want to minimize access to the area, and with people coming in and out of
the control room for checks, work releases, logout/tagout, etc, it's
difficult without a dedicated room. Cooling is also easier, and way
cheaper, if you can keep the doors from opening and closing too much.
Generation systems are slowly starting to look more like data centers, and
temperature/humidity control are very important in those environments. Get
a real server room A/C solution (called a CRAC) as well, none of this
cobbled together window ACs, or thermostats with "Don't Touch This!!" signs.
Third, have two or three consoles set aside for maintenance techs,
engineers, etc. These should require a logon to use, and are intended to
keep non-operators away from the operating consoles (which typically don't
have a logon). I'd expect that these could be used for checking levels,
looking at equipment hours, or other activities that the guys would
normally grab an operator's mouse for. These would auto-logout after a
certain amount of inactivity, and would restrict the ability to affect the
process based on user rights. Anything that keeps people from bugging the
operators tends to pay dividends.
Fourth, don't pack your racks with systems. Leave about 25% free space in
each rack for future expansion. You never know what new widget you'll need
(I'm thinking mercury monitoring in power generation, but I'm sure Oil has
it's own stuff too) in the future, and it's cheaper to just slot it in
existing racks than move racks around or install new ones. 2 years down the
road, you'll be glad you did.
Fifth, any breakers for equipment in the plant that come through the admin
building should be in their own room, accessible directly from the outside.
All the in and out from lockout/tagout is just noise that should be removed
from the environment. Don't know if this is an issue for your control room,
in some places it is.
Last, dual displays at minimum, and quad displays are even better.
Remember to keep a few spare extenders on hand for emergencies, they are
significantly cheaper than servers. I seem to remember Invensys charging
extra for extra displays though, so it's probably a budget decision.
POST PICTURES! :)
Mike Toecker
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Terry Doucet <doucet427@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> You need to give some thought on how you will annunciate alarms for each
> (group) of boardmen without driving the other workers crazy. They need to
> have the ability to go to the washroom or Kitchenette yet still know when
> they have alarms. Where will engineers and technicians work when you are
> staring up a unit? They need access to make changes but cannot bump
> Operators.
> Do you enable or prohibit USB key access? If prohibited, how is it
> prevented?
> Do Operators need access to other networks? How is this equipment powered
> and (earthed) grounded to ensure no noise is generated that may interfere
> with your control system?
> Do you have enough level surface for keyboards, and mice and yet still be
> able to write a few notes without pushing system equipment away?
> What is your spare capacity (IO, racks, controllers, screens, air
> conditioning, clean (UPS) power today and what is the expected (best guess)
> for future expansion?
>
> Terry
>
> > From: dbutler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 10:14:05 -0600
> > Subject: [foxboro] Control Room Design
> >
> > Design your dream control room! Well design it and then have Upper
> Management cut your budget in half, but until then at least we can dream!
> >
> >
> > We are in the early stages of a new administration building design and
> I've been asked how big of a control room I would need. Assuming they will
> approve me to move out of the existing building that is......
> >
> >
> >
> > Stats on our current setup:
> >
> > * 53'x31' room with raised floor and drop ceiling
> >
> > * Mesh Switches are in an adjacent room, everything else is in
> the main room
> >
> > * 9 to 15 Boardmen, 24/7
> >
> > * 8 Process areas within the Plant
> >
> > * Utilizing 24 workstations, 78 monitors
> >
> > * Cubicle in the corner, bookshelves and lockers along the walls
> make this room VERY crowded.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thoughts on what you like/do not like about your current control rooms?
> My initial thought is to add 15' in each direction making the control room
> 68'X46' and add a 15' deep climate controlled room along the 46' end that
> would house all workstations and switches. . Then only run
> Keyboard/Monitor/Mouse into the control room. (Restrooms and Kitchenette
> would be separate). In addition to size, any other design ideas would be
> much appreciated. Thanks in advance!
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
>
--
Michael Toecker
Head Dragon Slayer
_______________________________________________________________________
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:
