[foxboro] Unified HMI
- From: "Ales Vaupotic" <ales.vaupotic@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Foxboro FreeList" <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 08:56:33 +0000
Hi, list!
I haven't been very active here lately but I am thorougly reading the digest
every day. And topic on integrating all Invensys HMI's caught my attention.
Pattly it was hot in Oct 2004 when Tom started a thread about <a href='
//www.freelists.org/archives/foxboro/10-2004/msg00093.html'>Browser-based
HMI</a> and we developed a quite usable demand sheet.
I don't know of anybody else beside our company who has opened it's I/A to
the worldwide public. With a login and credentials and ..., of course.
Basically it uses DataLink to transfer data from I/A to a SQL database and
from there on it is a job for IT specialists to take over. One simply
installs a web server (IIS 5.1 will do just fine) and put up some PNGs to
represent the FoxView screen. Then every second or so you refresh the data
from remote computer. I've put up such a system in 2004 which is today known
as AJAX (or Atlas in Microsoft terms). Simply put, you don't refresh whole
screen with graphics, instead just numbers and statuses are sent to the
client. It already knows where on the screen to put them and that's it. The
most known example of the technology is gmail service. Others are adopting
it massively.
I must emphasize that this is a read-only application. There are many
security reasons for it but most of them are quite practical. First, you
don't want someone who has just got out of bed (and may have all the
credentials) to take over the control of your plant without knowing what was
going on during the last shift. Also, his actions could interfere with
actions of those on-site. He or she also can't undo any actions if link
suddenly becomes unavailable. But all this refers to Internet connected
operators. Including the risk of attacks.
What about Intranet? Here we are talking about secure network layer,
operators are aware of the situation, undoing or emergency stopping is not
an issue here. Plant is not connected to the outside world, at least not on
that level, so security is also not an issue. Risk of attack is the same
with FoxView screen if you let unauthorized personnel on-site take control
of it. In such situation NOT going to Browser based HMI (or some other
unified and higly standardized HMI), IMHO, is digging yourself a hole. And
you know what you can do with it after you finish!
In Oct 2003 Invensys announced they formed a strategic alliance with
Microsoft and invested $50 million to put ArchecstrA atop of Microsoft.NET,
if I understood it right. It was making sense to me than as this could
really lead to some kind of unified HMI across all Invensys products. If you
take a look at things today we are still lightyears away from it. And all
the invested $$$ have disappeared. There better be some result from it soon,
otherwise customers (and investors) will start turning their heads for a new
oportunity as this company obviuolsy is not interested in making progress.
Why am I sounding so frustrated? Because I have customers which expect some
progress and we are not able to deliver it. At least not with "original"
Invensys products and support. We do our best but many times it is not
enough. And HMI is just one simple problem. What about reporting,
integrating DCS and PLCs, historian problems, don't remind of not having
permanent storage in the processor. One other example: I am trying to get my
hands on a dev version of Wonderware SCADA to present it to a potential
customer. How long do you think I am waiting for it? Over a month now and it
looks like I am not going to get it but will have to buy it from a local
reseller. And it might not even develop to a done deal! Then I will have one
license sitting in my drawer and no new customer. Is that where Invensys
gets its revenue from?
Don't get me wrong: we make our living from selling and supporting I/A. But
this doesn't mean that we should take the blame for all the problems or that
there is no room for improvement. If one waits two years for a response on a
CAR, there is plenty of it. That is also one of the reasons why I chose this
way to express myself. I am trying (so are my colleagues) to show some
problems to responsible people here in Europe but no-one seems to care.
Better said they do care but very, very, very slowly.
This leads me to an advice to every customer out there: don't blame your
local engineer or even an Invensys person for all the problems which arise.
The company has simply grown to large to be able to effectively respond to
our demands. And demands are not bringing the revenue to them, just work. At
least that is how they (Invensys) see it. On the long rung, I am convinced,
listening to your customers is the best business policy one could have.
Best regards,
Ales Vaupotic
AMI Slovenija
_______________________________________________________________________
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:
