Re: [foxboro] FCP vs. ZCP? (forked from: network storm)

  • From: "Deathos, Matthew" <matthew.deathos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 14:43:44 -0500

Tom,

The plan has always been to offer both the FCP and ZCP along the same lifecycle 
path.  There is no plan to remove the ZCP from sale any sooner than the FCP.  
Except for the packaging, most of the components are exactly the same in both 
modules.  The ZCP fills a need that the FCP cannot, namely reuse of the 
existing infrastructure as was mentioned and it also provides a larger IO 
capacity through the use of multiple FCM100 pairs.


Corey,

Software differences:
There is no difference in software functionality between the FCP270 and ZCP270 
controllers.  What Alex is alluding to is that there is two different ways to 
install the ZCP270.  1) With one MESH network with ZCPs, FCMs, and workstations 
all on the same MESH, or 2) with two MESH networks, one for the ZCP to 
workstation connection and the other for the ZCP to FCM100 fieldbus connection. 
 This is similar to how the CP60 separates the control network from the 
fieldbus.

The big difference in features is that with option 1, System Manager will 
report on all the switches in the network.  In Option 2, system manager only 
reports on the health of the workstation network as it does not have the access 
to the second network.  

The other difference is that for the optional software packages SOE and 
TDR/TDA, the workstation needs to be able to talk to the FCM directly.  It 
can't do that with option 2.

BTW, TDR/TDA (Transient Data Recorder and Analysis) is an optional post trip 
analysis package.  Think SOE for analog points.  There is a spec sheet on the 
website that describes the package.

Also, if you need 60 FBMs in a controller and are expecting to use more than a 
very little bit of the DCI type FBMs, then I agree with you that the FCP270 is 
probably not the right choice.

Hope this helps,
Matt DeAthos
IPS Portfolio

-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Badura, Tom
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 1:53 PM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [foxboro] FCP vs. ZCP? (forked from: network storm)

Corey,
We also went the route of ZCPs over FCPs when upgrading from CPs / Nodebus 
about 2 years ago.  One reason was to make use of the existing racks and also 
at that time FCPs had limited I/O (FBM) to only 30 on the local base chain.  
Someone can also correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the ZCP 100Mbps 
fieldbus is only between ZCP and FCM.  It is still 2Mbps from FCM to FBMs.  At 
this point we have up to 40 FBMs on a ZCP and do use some DCI (Profibus) and 
intelligent xmitters (Foxcom) and have not had any problems to date (knock on 
wood).

We are currently considering adding ZCP and I am definitely interested in the 
response to your end-of-life question.


Tom Badura
Plastics Engineering Company
920-458-2121 x3366
tbadura@xxxxxxxxxx




-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Corey R Clingo
Subject: [foxboro] FCP vs. ZCP? (forked from: network storm)

"As a rule of thumb, I recommend FCPs over ZCPs in almost all cases."

Interesting comment.  We are evaluating migration options here, and so far 
have been assuming ZCP270s.  Aside from being able to use existing racks 
(which varies in importance from installation to installation, and may be 
superseded by other factors), the ZCP has a 100Mbps fieldbus.  That's 
overkill for sure, but I was worried that the 2Mbps fieldbus of the FCP 
might not be enough for the full 60-FBM complement, especially if using 
many FDSI or DCI FBMs.  The FCP advantages were simplified cabling and 
less installation space (since it mounts in an FBM baseplate or something 
similar).


But your statement below, that the ZCP lacks some software functionality 
that the FCP has, is news to me.  Are there plans to add it to the ZCP 
image?  Is FCP going to be the future direction (and in the process, will 
ZCPs get end-of-life'd faster)?  Are you going to have to keep them more 
environment-controlled than the FBMs (we have already seen by accident 
that the FBMs will not meet their stated ~140°F temperature ratings)?


Also, what is TDR/TDA?  Those are TLAs I haven't heard yet.


Thanks,
Corey Clingo
BASF Corp.
 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
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
 


* Confidentiality Notice:
This e-mail and any associated files are intended solely for the individual or 
entity to whom they are addressed. Please do not copy it or use it for any 
purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Further, this e-mail 
and any associated files may be confidential and further may be legally 
privileged. This email is from the Invensys Process Systems business unit of 
Invensys plc which is a company registered in England and Wales with its 
registered office at Portland House, Bressenden Place, London, SW1E 5BF 
(Registered number 166023).  For a list of European legal entities within the 
Invensys Process Systems business group, please click here 
http://www.invensys.com/legal/default.asp?top_nav_id=77&nav_id=80&prev_id=77.

If you have received this e-mail in error, you are on notice of its status. 
Please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from 
your system. Thank you for your co-operation. You may contact our Helpdesk on 
+44 (0)20 7821 3859 / 2105 or email inet.hqhelpdesk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx This e-mail 
and any attachments thereto may be subject to the terms of any agreements 
between Invensys (and/or its subsidiaries and affiliates) and the recipient 
(and/or its subsidiaries and affiliates).


 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
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:

  1. Home
  2. foxboro
  3. Archive
  4. 02-2009