Re: [foxboro] Hypothetical alarming question
- From: brad.s.wilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 17:54:06 -0600
I'll toss in my 2-cents, hopefully without belaboring this issue. If all 5
priority levels are being used for something in the AM, then I can't see
any way to have an analog "alarm" be a non-alarm trigger with out using the
inhibit function in some way. (State inputs, CIN, obviously can turn off
the SAO and still function without alarming.) There are some rather
round-about methods, such as using a CALC block or a DGAP block. Could you
create an AM that isn't linked to any workstations and send the "alarms"
there?
Brad Wilson
Process Control Engineer
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
- References:
- Re: [foxboro] Hypothetical alarming question
- From: Corey R Clingo
Other related posts:
- » Re: [foxboro] Hypothetical alarming question
- » Re: [foxboro] Hypothetical alarming question
- » Re: [foxboro] Hypothetical alarming question
- » Re: [foxboro] Hypothetical alarming question
- » Re: [foxboro] Hypothetical alarming question
- » Re: [foxboro] Hypothetical alarming question
- » Re: [foxboro] Hypothetical alarming question
- » Re: [foxboro] Hypothetical alarming question
- » Re: [foxboro] Hypothetical alarming question
- Re: [foxboro] Hypothetical alarming question
- From: Corey R Clingo