Re: [foxboro] FBM224-multiple slaves on one port
- From: Corey R Clingo <corey.clingo@xxxxxxxx>
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 18:06:29 -0500
I haven't looked at the docs yet to see what information is available from
the starters. But regardless, I doubt I'll be able to talk anyone into
reversing the breaker-starter order; the breaker is used to deenergize
the bucket itself (and never mind the possible NEC implications). I'm
probably making more out of this than is there; the bucket will remain
energized if the motor is hooked up in the field regardless, to keep the
dryers/heaters activated. If the motor is disconnected, say for repair,
we would probably just offline (you heard it verbed here first, folks) the
device in system management, which I presume would prevent it from being
polled.
We are hooking up a non-critical daisy-chain setup in my other plant soon,
so I'll probably test some of these theories on that string.
Best Regards,
Corey Clingo
BASF Corporation
"Kevin Fitzgerrell" <fitzgerrell@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
07/06/2007 05:33 PM
Please respond to
foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To
foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject
Re: [foxboro] FBM224-multiple slaves on one port
Corey,
Last time I looked at a similar project I didn't get specs until too
late, but it looked like the best solution would leave the starters
online with the breaker downstream. Ours had several parameters that
would have been convenient to monitor even while racked out.
Regards,
Kevin FitzGerrell
_______________________________________________________________________
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:
