Re: [foxboro] Reduce IFL's for FBM

Oops.. OK, so 5ms.  Sill, an FBM with an expander running PLB is a nice piece 
of work but often misapplied.
> 
> From: "Johnson, Alex (Foxboro)" <ajohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 2005/05/12 Thu PM 02:38:09 CDT
> To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [foxboro] Reduce IFL's for FBM
> 
> 
> The resources are all shared. Like I said, use of multiple PLB blocks per
> FBM will drive you crazy.
> 
> 
> By the way, the cycle time on the LL in an FBM is 5ms for all 100 rungs. It
> is very fast if somewhat small.
> 
> Regards,
>  
> Alex Johnson
> Invensys Process Systems
> Invensys Systems, Inc.
> 10707 Haddington
> Houston, TX 77043
> 713.722.2859 (voice)
> 713.722.2700 (switchboard)
> 713.932.0222 (fax)
> ajohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Heath, Graham
> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:52 AM
> To: 'foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: Re: [foxboro] Reduce IFL's for FBM
> 
> Warning This neads more investigation looking at B0193aw the following
> appears
> When configuring PLBs for different segments of a single ladder diagram,
> avoid assigning an
> external input flag to more than one block. If two PLBs were to update the
> same input flag, the
> flag value received from the first block would be overwritten when the other
> block was processed.
> 
> Looking at the example quoted it definitely shows OFL_1 connected to one plb
> and OFL_2 to another. I think I remember that all Technical identifiers are
> common to all PLBs in an FBM.
> 
> 
> Regds
> Graham Heath
> Senior Systems Engineer
>  INVENSYS UK 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:       foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  On Behalf Of "Dirk Pauwels"
> > <dirkpauwels_1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent:       12 May 2005 16:28
> > To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject:    Re: [foxboro] Reduce IFL's for FBM
> > 
> > That's interesting, I've never tried it either, the number of cout's is
> > still restricted to the FBM, but more ifl's offer more possible
> > interlocks.
> > 
> > Rgds,
> > 
> > Dirk
> > 
> > >From: brad.s.wilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >Reply-To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >Subject: Re: [foxboro] Reduce IFL's for FBM
> > >Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 10:21:37 -0500
> > >
> > > >>> Martin Theobald wrote <<<
> > >Reading the documentation (Volume 3 of B0193AX - Rev N) suggests that
> > each
> > >FBM can support up to eight PLB blocks.  This is not a feature I have
> > tried
> > >or seen used.
> > >
> > >Yes, we have a couple of FBMs with multiple PLBs, although I remember
> > that
> > >there is a limit to the TOTAL number of lines in all PLBs running in an
> > >FBM.  I seem to recall that the number of lines allowed in an FBM is the
> > >constant, regardless of the number of PLBs.  But this would certainly
> > allow
> > >for more IFLs & OFLs.
> > >
> > >Brad Wilson
> > >ExxonMobil Chemical Co
> > >Edison Synthetics Plant
> > >732-321-6115
> > >732-321-6177 fax
> > >Brad.S.Wilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________________________________
> > >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 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
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> -- No attachments (even text) are allowed --
> -- Type: application/ms-tnef
> 
> 
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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 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 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: