While one of my plants is down for a turnaround, I went ahead and ran a few icc scripts through the system to set the alarm destinations (GRmDVn) in the compounds appropriately. I waited for an outage to do this because I had tried something similar once before and had a trip in one section of the plant -- though, in hindsight, I assumed that TIMINI would be set to 3 on all the CALCish blocks, and it wasn't in most cases, and I think that was the cause of the trip (we all know what happens when you assume :). Because of that experience, I had waited until a turnaround to run these scripts. I am currently under the presumption that modifying a parameter in a compound and reloading the compound definition would cause all the compound's blocks to initialize. However, I watched several blocks while running these scripts and never saw any momentary smurfing. I know that's not a good test, you don't always see the insta-smurf, but I was just wondering if the whole compound reload == block init thing is still true. I'm at IA version 6.5.3 If it is still true, I may consider switching to station alarming. I didn't want to really, as that means the *GP parameter will need to be changed on every block. But we will likely be making further changes to our alarm destinations as we move forward with alarm management, and we only have turnarounds every 4-5 years :) Thanks, Corey Clingo BASF _______________________________________________________________________ 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