Re: [foxboro] Measuring Overall System Reliability

We have both new and old type FBM and only new FBI's connected to
CP60's. We have 2 nests (old type mounting structures) that need to be
changed, FBM41 in certain slots go offline without any reason, but other
than that no problems. We did experience interference between FBI10E and
CP, causing the FT CP60 to go single. Renewing the connectors &
isolating the coaxcables and connectors (din rail) & upgrading the CP's
minimised the interference, we have not had com failures ever since. Are
you using fiber between FBI and CP or coax? Fiber eliminates the
interference. Our FBI's are in an MCC room +/- 130Mtrs away from the
CP's.

Rgds,

Dirk Pauwels            Tel:    32 (0)3 570 95 97
DCS coordinator         Fax:    32 (0)3 570 16 09
Eastman Belgium         Mobile:32 (0)497 428 300
E-mail: dpauwels@xxxxxxxxxxx


-----Original Message-----
From: tom.vandewater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:tom.vandewater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]=20
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 7:47 PM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [foxboro] Measuring Overall System Reliability


Hi List,
        I am trying to develop a measure of overall control system
reliability and wonder if anyone out there already has developed a
metric
for this purpose. Our twenty node, carrierband connected system is as
redundant/fault tolerant as we can make it with the current Foxboro
offerings with the exception of redundant I/O.  We use dual carrierband,
dual nodebus and dual fieldbus functionality as well as dual power
sources
with UPS backup and are expected to provide 100% on-line time for our
24x7x365 operation.  We also climate control almost every nest room
where
the FT controllers and non-FT I/O are located.  We have experienced
pretty
good reliability with the exception of individual FBM failures that
control
critical process variables or more recently, fieldbus communication
failures
related to Foxboro's new FCM, DCM, FBI10E's.  Foxboro continues to
search
for the solution to that problem with new EEPROM updates being issued
every
three or four months and we have only experienced one loss of
communication
that resulted in a process downing event, but volumes of intermittent
fieldbus communication errors.
        What I am looking for is a measurement that we can continue to
track
that will indicate when system reliability starts to deteriorate.  Since
2/3rds of our installed base still uses legacy FBM's that will need to
be
replaced sometime in the future, I have started to focus on them.  We
have
recorded failure data on them since our initial 12 node installation in
1989.  We saw an initial infant mortality of those modules in 1989-91
and
then the rate dropped off and continues to track along the bottom of the
bathtub curve at an acceptable electronic module failure rate of less
than
.5%/year.  We have seen an increasing number of those modules that would
run, but failed to successfully burn new EEPROM updates during software
upgrades.  We know that the old FBM's will eventually start failing at a
higher rate and climb up the other side of the bathtub curve but we
don't
know when.  If we had some good prediction of that increase in failure
rate,
it could be used to justify to management the significant budgeting
needs
that will be required to replace all of the legacy FBM's.
        When Invensys acquired TRICONEX I had hope that Foxboro and
TRICONEX
would pool their resources and come up with a Triple-Modular-Redundant,
(TMR), I/O module that could communicate directly to Foxboro or Triconex
controllers but I have seen no visible activity in that area.
        If anyone has any ideas about an effective measure of system
reliability please contact me off-list or share the info with the rest
of
the users on the list.

Thanks in advance,
Tom VandeWater
Control Systems Developer/Analyst
Dow Corning Corp.
Carrollton, KY   USA
=20
=20
_______________________________________________________________________
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
=20
foxboro mailing list:             http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe:         =
mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Djoin
to unsubscribe:      =
mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Dleave
=20
 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
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: