Re: [foxboro] IEE Strategy Naming Conventions
- From: "SLADE Jason -NANTICOKE" <jason.slade@xxxxxxx>
- To: <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 09:15:43 -0500
Our experience with IACC probably also applies to IEE/FCS ...
Last year we added our first CP270 with IACC as its configurator. Not having
any experience with IACC at that time we did not know what to ask for in the
way of formatting - and got two different configuration philosophies - neither
of which work for us (two designers = two different programming styles).
We recently attended IACC training and learned that blocks can only be added to
a CSD, not compounds (unlike ICC). As such, for anyone using SAMA drawings
that list CP/compound/block on the drawings - now should also include the CSD
information. No small feat considering the number of drawings that need to
have this information added - once we come up with a philosophy that works long
term. Many thanks to those who have shared their formatting preferences.
Seems the bottom line for anyone looking at starting with or moving to one of
the newer configurators (anything since ICC) is that you need to develop a
structure / philosophy *before* the project gets their hands on it. If you
don't, you'll spend the next few years fixing it and the drawings (wishing
you'd invested the time up front).
For what it's worth,
Jason Slade
Control Technologist
Protection & Control Systems Support
Nanticoke G.S.
-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Neil Martin
Sent: December 6, 2011 7:18 PM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [foxboro] IEE Strategy Naming Conventions
I have not been involved in the conversion process to IEE, but we do have an
older version of IEE (1.2.2) running with our V8.4.2 I/A system. My guess is
that they will name the IEE strategy based on what you have in the LOOPID. My
recommendation is keep the name strategy name simple (like
FIC10 or FI10), and regardless of how many interconnections there are with
other blocks, I recommend that you consider putting only blocks that share the
same numbering (i.e. FI10, FIC10, FY10, etc.) in the strategy. If you mix
different tags within the same strategy, it is can be very difficult to know
which strategy to open unless you use a search routine to find the block you
are interested in. IEE will not list the blocks that are in a COMPOUND like
ICC does - you can't see the blocks until you open the strategy. I also do
not recommend configuring Strategy declaration flags (connections in and out of
strategies), unless you want take a lot of extra time to configure them when
you build new blocks and strategies, and want to have connection text show that
is not C:B.P.
We considered just making a whole COMPOUND as the strategy, but it is too hard
to find the block you want within the small IEE strategy window (have to pan
around and enlarge the view) - and with our IEE version deploys
would be very slow. Since strategies have no meaning and don't exist
within the I/A system (i.e. controllers), we would very much rather not use
them because they only slow down our work.
Besides other IEE issues, you might want to know that IEE also does not
currently have print routines that will print block parameters in the same
order as the show in ICC, it only prints them in alphabetical order which mixes
them up instead of grouping by function. IEE will print the parameters for all
the blocks in a strategy and I believe they are separated by block, but they
print in alphabetical order.
Neil Martin, P.E.
Huntsman Performance Chemicals
Conroe & Dayton , TX.
Conroe ph) 936-760-6205
Dayton ph) 936-257-4212
pager) 936-522-0052
"Horlacher, Don" <DHorlacher@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent by: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
12/06/2011 03:26 PM
Please respond to
foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To
"foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
[foxboro] IEE Strategy Naming Conventions
List,
My company will be upgrading from an old UNIX version (4.3) of I/A to
version 8.6 on the mesh, using Foxview/Foxdraw, Wonderware Historian, and
the IEE (now Foxboro Control Software 3.0) configurator. Invensys will be
performing the conversion of systems, except for the screens, which I will
re-create on the Foxdraw. I found out at the recent OpsManage conference
in Nashville that the conversion into IEE is made much easier if the
LOOPID parameter in the blocks is filled in. All of our existing blocks
have blanks in the LOOPID parameter.
My plan is to fill in the LOOPID parameters before Invensys starts the
conversion. I'm thinking of using the main control block tagname (eg. The
PIDA control block) for each loop, maybe appending the CP and compound
name onto it. However, for cascade loops, I am unsure of what to do. I am
thinking of just naming each loop within a cascade and let the strategies
then point or connect to each other. I am not up to speed yet on IEE. My
question is, what are solid naming conventions for strategies and LOOPID
parameters, and how are more complex relationships handled?
Regards,
Don Horlacher
Electrical/Control Engineer
ASARCO Hayden
520-356-3500
Email: DHorlacher@xxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________________________________
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
-----------------------------------------
THIS MESSAGE IS ONLY INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INTENDED
RECIPIENT(S) AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED,
PROPRIETARY AND/OR CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission,
dissemination, distribution, copying, conversion to hard copy or
other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are
not the intended recipient and have received this message in error,
please notify me by return e-mail and delete this message from your
system. Ontario Power Generation Inc.
_______________________________________________________________________
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:
