Re: [foxboro] ZCP-FBM connection options

A twist on Corey's approach that we have successfully implemented is to
segment your switches with VLANs so that each ZCP fieldbus network is
isolated from all others.  This gives the advantages of the segmentation
and retains the ability to monitor the field bus network.

That said, my personal opinion is that on any critical process FCPs are
the preferred and more reliable architecture.  There are some
circumstances that may force you to the ZCP option, but I personally
would have to be forced.

That's my free advice, and as Alex J. is fond of saying, worth every
penny.

Gaylon Hicks
TVA - Browns Ferry



-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Corey R Clingo
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 10:03 AM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [foxboro] ZCP-FBM connection options

You can connect the ZCPs to the FCMs using a dedicated, private network
I 
believe.  Yes, you are still using switches if you want to go to more
than 
one set of FCMs, but they are not carrying mesh traffic and should not 
have to have both fieldbus networks be cross-connected as with Mesh.

What you give up in doing that is the ability for System Management to 
monitor  those switches.   But this may or may not be a problem; you can

use other network-management tools.  In spite of that, this is how I
would 
hook these up as well, because like you I don't like the 
all-eggs-in-one-basket concept of everything on the Mesh.


Corey Clingo
BASF Corp.





Fink Nottle <fnottle@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
Sent by: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
07/22/2009 05:15 PM
Please respond to
foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


To
<foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
[foxboro] ZCP-FBM connection options






All,

 

With the FCP270, the documented options to interface with FBM100s/200s
appear to be the following:


[AW]<-->[Mesh Control 
Network]<-->[FCP270]<-->[FBI-100]<-->[FBM-100]<-->[Process]
&
[AW]<-->[Mesh Control Network ]<-->[FCP270]<-->[FBM-200]<-->[Process]

 

The primary benefit of the above approaches, in my mind, is that the
interface between the FCPs and the FBMs is closed, proprietary,
point-to-point & unmanaged.

 

With the ZCP, however, the documented interfaces between the CP and the 
FBMs always
appear to be through some type of  Mesh network (either a combined Mesh
Control+Fieldbus network, or standalone Mesh Fieldbus Network).


The drawback, in my mind, is that there are TCP/IP based managed "open" 
network devices between the Controller and I/O. The impact of 
planned/unplanned outages of this mesh-control/fieldbus-network when
using 
conventional 4-20A based field-devices (as opposed to FF) is essentially

loss of Level 1 control. 

 

Is there a supported option to connect a ZCP to
FBM 200/100s without using the mesh-network (as possible with the FCPs)?

 

Thanks,
Daniel

 



 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
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: