Re: [foxboro] ICC on the MESH
- From: "Bruley, Peter T" <Peter.T.Bruley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 07:36:28 -0600
Hi Mike
Okay I will weigh in on this topic.
I have extensive experience with ICC, FoxCAE, IACC & IEE.
ICC (ICCdriver, FoxCAE & FoxRAY)
ICC is quick/fast(no sooner do you click done and the change is in the
CP), no software bugs & does what it is designed to do flawlessly but has an
ugly front end gui multi user on UNIX however only single user on WINDOZE (v8+
you have to host on WIN O/S). ICC was designed with true DCS standards so each
CP has it's own unique database.ICC comes c/w the ICCdriver task for script
writing and bulk changes. The ICCdriver task works on WIN O/S so you could the
multi user look & feel by using FoxCAE or even better Foxray (
http://www.limewarecompany.com )and still keep your ICC. FoxCAE gives you basic
visual loop drawings. (I understand that FoxRAY is better for the visual
part?). You can't do PLB ladder with FoxCAE (FoxRAY ?) You get the nice saveall
function so you can run your upload/check Pt/Saveall scripts nightly. With ICC
you can spread you CP databases across many different AW's (not locked into 1
database like IACC or IEE Galaxy). CSA database runs separately to monitor for
and stop creation of duplicate compound/block names.
IACC (ICCdriver)
IACC is a frontend for the ICC driver task similar to FoxCAE (not
necessarily better than FoxCAE) however you can not keep ICC if you choose this
route. Each CP still has it's own working database however IACC introduces
another database above the AW's called the IACC database. You should only have
1 IACC database if you want peer to peer communications between all your CP's.
You are allowed to choose the type of config tool on a per CP bases i.e. either
ICC or IACC. You can still make savealls using scripts however these won't help
you get the info back into the IACC database. The savealls will still work in
the CP and can be used in an emergency or to move back to ICC. In order to make
backups you need to export the IACC database. IACC is slow to
create/delete/edit blocks in the CP as the program builds an ICCdriver task
script then sends the script to the AW that is hosting the CP. IACC is not as
bullet proof as ICC. Still utilizes the legacy CSA database service.
IEE
Completely new ground up concept. No more working files. No more
ICCdriver task. No more Savealls. Uses 1 proprietary database called the Galaxy
Database to hold the Compound/Block/parameter stuff. Uses a Microsoft SQL
database for all the visual "strategy" (visio) stuff and introduces new layer
of naming called "contained name". Really sucks for strategy to strategy
communications as you have to build "off page"/"on page" flags (not just for
peer to peer points but even for points in the same compound). Can communicate
directly to the CP's. Still utilizes the legacy CSA database service. Still
uses legacy checkpoint files on the host AW. All changes must go through this
system of programs/databases called "IEE" (Infusion Engineering Environment).
Way better graphic frontend than IACC or FoxCAE. Very slow to deploy changes
out to CP's. There is a "xml" scripting language called "DAscript" (Direct
Access?)however this won't make any drawings for you. Has remote client
capability on Win O/S however these remote clients are slower than just working
on the real galaxy server as they copy the database from the galaxy to the
client box where you manipulate CP objects. When you deploy the client sends
all changes back to the galaxy and the galaxy forwards changes to the CP's. It
works better than IACC it is still in the development stage as there are bugs
but can only get better. Can show live data in the visual strategies. You can
get TSCals for your galaxy server (the O/S is Win 2003 Server Standard then add
Terminal Services) and have multiple remote desktops running IEE on the Galaxy
however each IEE session is licensed and so you can only run as many as your
license permits.
SUMMARY
In short:
- Don't go with IACC as it is a dead product.
- Decide on either ICC/(FoxCAE/FoxRAY) or IEE. For migrating sites
ICC/FoxCAE/FoxRAY will probably be easier. For new systems IEE is probably a
better choice.
Peter Bruley
Plant Process Computer Analyst
Xcel Energy - Sherco Generating Plant
13999 Industrial Boulevard
Becker, MN, 55308
(763) 261-3821
Peter.T.Bruley at XcelEnergy.com
-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of mike kessler
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 11:07 AM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [foxboro] ICC on the MESH
I know this topic has come up before, so I'm wondering how people are coping. I
am in the process of moving 6 nodebus CP40's to FCP270's on the mesh hosted by
an AW70 - P92. I am not looking forward to having only single box access to the
plant control database. Has anyone found an effective way to get around this
limitation?
.....Notice how I didn't mention the word "Unix"..... Oops!
mk
_______________________________________________________________________
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:
