Re: [foxboro] Informix Historian vs AIM*---Matrikon OPC versusFoxboro
- From: "Chris Gabriel" <CGabriel@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <tom.vandewater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 15:37:54 -0700
Tom,
I could not help but take note when reading this email that you did not
want to go with the AIM* suite to gain access to the OPC component
because of the cost. I recently purchased Matrikon's OPC server for
Foxboro I/A and installed it on our system with great success. I came
to find out later that Matrikon actually writes the OPC component found
in AIM* for Foxboro (this is a dirty little secret that will save
thousands of dollars). The installation documentation and look and feel
are virtually identical to each other. The main difference is that
Foxboro tweaks the software drivers so that all I/A components on the
node will be automatically detected, and with Matrikon you have to
manually configure the tag lists and server (this is absolutely no big
deal and well worth the small inconvenience for all the money you save).
We read/write point tag data between two APACS nodes and one Foxboro
node. I hope this helps,
Chris Gabriel
Agrium US
Kenai, Alaska
>>> tom.vandewater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 03/28/03 10:41AM >>>
Richard,
We, like you, have been using the legacy historian since AP-20
days.
We had a lot of money invested in licensing for all of them. Typically
we
had one per node to avoid pulling historical data across the
carrierband.
We wanted to be able to use this data throughout our corporation but
found
it too difficult to export from IA. As a result we initially developed
a
complex but effective way of passing OM data through INI-10's to an
application built inhouse to provide process data from multiple control
and
lab systems to desktops throughout the corporation.
We used the Foxboro legacy/informix historians only for short
term
historical trending on the IA system. This is still effective for
tracking
daily events and for tuning while on the IA system. We later adopted
OSI PI
as our global historical repository for data. OSI PI has worked with
almost
every vendor to establish interfaces that allow it to access data from
most
systems and their "specific" focus is Process Information. The
"Process
Book" desktop client interface allows users to create their own
graphics,
trends, and spreadsheets, and it is trasparent to the user from which
system
the info is coming from, (IA, LIMS, brand H, or brand R)! We first
used
Foxboro's AIS, now API, to pass the Fox IA data out the 2nd enet ports
of
AW's to PI nodes on our corporate WAN. Based on what Alex says it
sounds
like we could now use AIM* OPC capability to pass the data, and that
might
be more efficient, but we tried to broker an Advantage Upgrade from
legacy
to AIM* with no success and couldn't justify the significant expense
just to
get data out of our IA system. One has to wonder if AIM* will soon
evolve
into something different because of the ARCHESTRA initiative. Will
this
obsolete AIM* and require still another license?? From a DCS
perspective,
passing the data to PI and the IT realm eliminates our need to
display,
reduce, and archive Process INFORMATION on control systems, and lets
us
focus on our real objective, Process CONTROL.
What we have found is that it is more economical to spend money
on
global solutions for capturing, displaying, and analyzing process data
rather than spending money on several different vendor specific
solutions,
no matter how good they may be. Having said that, if you are a
smaller
operation and Foxboro is already your single source provider for all
things
Process related, AIM* sounds like it would beat the pants off of the
legacy
historian. If you have other process information needs outside of IA,
the
money spent on AIM* might be more effectively spent on a more global
solution.
Tom VandeWater
Dow Corning Corp.
Carrollton, KY
-----Original Message-----
From: Bakke, Richard A [mailto:rabakke@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 4:35 PM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [foxboro] Informix Historian vs AIM*
Asking for opinions concerning Informix vs AIM* Historian on
50-series:
Having AP20's through 51D's, we have always been using the
Informix
Historian. We use it for trending (legacy Display Manager) and for
reporting (via reduction groups). Since this Informix Historian is
also
available at ver. 7 for the AW-51F we are planning to buy, is there a
really good reason to switch to the AIM* Historian? The cost to us
would be learning new software and having the custom report package
interface re-written. The only advantage to us that I know of would
be
that AIM allows changes while still running.
Thanks,
Rich Bakke
Longview Fibre Co.
_______________________________________________________________________
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 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: //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:
