Re: [foxboro] Informix Historian vs AIM*

Alex,
        Thanks for taking the time to explain Foxboro's intentions for
migration.  People, especially including myself, tend to read into
presentations, things that may be incorrect.  Although I am often one of
Foxboro's harshest critics, I do think that they pay a lot of attention to
integrating their products and insuring that they maintain backward
compatability as much as possible.  We have migrated from CP-10's, AP-20's
and WP-20's in 1989 to AW/WP-51D's, CP-60's with 200 series I/O, and now an
AW-XP.  The physical architecture and infrastructure that we installed in
1989 is still valid and has allowed us to expand and convert older control
systems from multiple vendors onto a single sitewide control system using
IA.  Our system is 21 nodes now on a sitewide carrierband.  This has allowed
us to manage, standardize, and optimize a single system and develop a team
of in-house experts that can get the most out of our investment in Fox IA.
        Maintaining backward compatability does come at considerable expense
for Foxboro and the IA users because it often makes it difficult to rapidly
integrate new/emerging technologies into their pre-existing hardware and
software structures.  I am guessing that Archestra came about to try and
make that integration process much faster and easier for products under the
INVENSYS "hood".  Hopefully it will make integration of "third party"
applications and hardware easier also.  
        Let's face it, although "Control" companies want to be the single
source supplier for all of their clients needs, it is unlikely that one
company will have the best applications and hardware for every situation.
In trying to be everything for everyone, companies can become mediocre at
many things without excelling at any.  We have focused on using:
 
Fox IA as the "control" backbone for our systems.
Oil Systems PI is used for Process Information because of it's ability to
effectively integrate control and non-control systems that contain Process
Information.
SAP is used for accounting/purchasing, equipment maintenance and tracking,
HR functions and workflow
Microsoft is the enterprise networking and desktop OS
SQL Servers store and serve much of the data
Web Servers either serve data or point to data stored in the SQL servers

        My point in mentioning all of this, is because one of our most
pressing needs is a common HMI that can effectively display information from
all of these applications on any desktop workstation running any OS.  It is
my observation, along with multitudes of others "World Wide", that Web
Browsers are increasingly used as a common HMI for a host of applications.
Web interfaces are being developed by visionary companies that realize what
is occuring in the "Visualization" realm.  It could seem like developing
this kind of globally accessable interface might cut into your current HMI
market and profitability, but Web Servers running on IA, Triconex,
Esscor/SimSci or other INVENSYS products could manage how many instances,
and how much data could be served from your systems much like your current
DM/Foxview licenses.  
        Although it is in it's infancy, Honeywell's new Experion PKS system
is using a browser as the HMI and runs a Web Server on the control system.
It opens up a host of possibilities for them to access and integrate
information from within the "Control System" network with corporate info
stored externally.  It could also seamlessly allow access to "Control
System" information on the corporate or World-Wide networks.  I realize they
may have developed a custom browser to accomplish their mission and that
would detract a bit from their accomplishment but it is a revolutionary
thought for major DCS vendors to consider.  Food for thought and likely
something that INVENSYS is considering.  It has my vote.

Tom VandeWater
Control Systems Developer/Analyst
Dow Corning Corp.
Carrollton, KY  USA

-----Original Message-----
From: Johnson, Alex (Foxboro) [mailto:ajohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 5:45 PM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [foxboro] Informix Historian vs AIM*



That is a lot of ground to cover in an e-mail.


In a nutshell, FoxView and InTouch are current products. We will build new
products using the ArchestrA framework and tools. One of the new products
will be a new visualization (HMI). This new HMI will be built by Invensys
employees to meet the needs of Invensys customers. 


The new visualization engine will be incorporated in to the various product
lines, e.g., I/A Series, FactorySuite, Eurotherm, Triconex, etc., as
appropriate to the needs of the product line.


One of those needs is the ability to migrate existing displays to the new
visualization engine. This need exists for FactorySuite users and I/A Series
users and the development team is well aware of that requirement.


So, the answer to the question:


Is (AIM*/InSQL; FV/InTouch/DM; IACC/FoxCAE/ICC; CP/InControl/T960. etc.)
going to be the product of the future?


is as it has always been, 

"Of course not. Our customers needs and expectations change and so does
technology. However, we are committed to making the transition from one
generation to the next seamless and painless." 


We want to provide a path forward that does not require you to replace your
system with a bulldozer. We intend to preserve your investment in
intellectual property and physical plant so that you can migrate your both
to our newest offering without requiring major overhauls of your existing
equipment just because we've added new models.


I think we have done a pretty good job in that respect over the last 15
years (CP10->30->40->60->270; WP10/20->30->50->51/70; etc) and I expect that
we will continue to do a good job. We consider it to be a key feature of the
I/A Series to be extensible.


Does this make sense?


Alex Johnson
Invensys Systems, Inc.
10707 Haddington
Houston, TX 77043
713.722.2859 (office)
713.722.2700 (switchboard)
713.932.0222 (fax)
ajohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx
For the latest information on ArchestrA, go to
www.invensys.com/Archestra.html.

 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
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 email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan
service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working
around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan
service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working
around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________
 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
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: