Re: [foxboro] Triconix & Foxboro Questions
- From: Gregory A Hurwitt <gregory.hurwitt@xxxxxxxx>
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 14:59:45 -0500
Alex Johnson wrote on 08/09/2007 02:04:15 PM:
> If you have a V8.x system, you would use xCP270-FT and a redundant FDSI
> FBM (FBM233 I think).
The redundant FDSI FBM for Triconex connection is an FBM 231.
We have been using a number of these quite successfully for about 8 months
now. As with any such system, there is a little learning curve for all the
configuration details, but we've been very pleased with the performance.
Our existing loading requirements are fairly modest, about 40 analog and 80
discrete points with scan rates of 0.5 or 1.0 seconds each. We're factory
testing a new one right now with significantly discrete points on it and
haven't yet seen any problems. I'm not sure what the specified loading
limits are.
By the way, it's "Triconex" with an "e" near the end.
Greg Hurwitt
BASF Freeport
_______________________________________________________________________
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:
