Re: [foxboro] FCP's vs. ZCP selection on new projects
- From: "Johnson, Alex P \(IPS\)" <alex.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 00:11:38 -0400
I'll give it a try.
Re: I guess the FCP's were initially developed as a lower cost
alternative.
True. They were also expected to serve as a way to enter new markets
once they are self-hosting.
Re: It is my understanding that the the FCP's have the same
horsepower with the exception that they don't have fast =
Ethernet fieldbus communication. =
True enough, but a lot of the I/O performance of the ZCP comes from a
strong co-processor in the box plus the parallelism of the FCMs.
Re: Adding that capability would make the FCP's a lot more flexible and
would make it easier for them to communicate with multiple
distributed
segments of I/O in the same way as the ZCP's
The original plan was to offer three CP270s:
1) Field mounted (FCP) for use in situations where the controller would
be
Field mounted.
2) Z-module (ZCP) form factor to allow the reuse of the cabinets and =
power supplies owned by our installed base.
3) Rack mounted (RCP) which was to be - basically - ZCP in a DIN rail
mounted tin can.
We built the first two. I suppose one could argue about the product mix,
but we felt the ZCP was important to the installed base.
Clearly as we look forward to new CP hardware, the mix may change.
Re: PSSs
The specification sheets are correct.
Re: Does Foxboro have plans to release a CP in the FCP form factor that
uses
a Fast Ethernet Fieldbus?
Not in the near term.
Re: Has Foxboro considered increasing the number of FBM's that a ZCP can
communicate with?
It has been stressed test well beyond 128, but we don't see a compelling
reason to increase the published limit on the ZCP. =
Most new jobs find the FCP to offer a better $ per I/O point ratio.
Moreover, even in the installed base, a large number locations are
interested in using the FCP to free space in their rack room. An FCM
takes the same space as an FCP so unless there is a truly compelling
reason, most folks don't use the ZCP. They remove the old racks and use
the FCP.
Given the above, we've worked to improve the $ per I/O point ratio of
the FCP as being the best short-term approach for our clients.
Regards,
Alex Johnson
Invensys Systems, Inc.
10900 Equity Drive
Houston, TX 77041
713.329.8472 (voice)
713.329.1700 (fax)
713.329.1600 (switchboard)
alex.johnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of tom.vandewater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 9:26 AM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [foxboro] FCP's vs. ZCP selection on new projects
Alex,
Here are some questions. The answers may be interesting to all
of the list members. Like Adam, we also had a preference for the FCP's
because they had a compact form factor and could be mounted on
baseplates along with the rest of the 200 series I/O we were installing
to replace 100 series FBM's. I guess the FCP's were initially developed
as a lower cost alternative.
It is my understanding that the the FCP's have the same
horsepower with the exception that they don't have fast Ethernet
fieldbus communication. Adding that capability would make the FCP's a
lot more flexible and would make it easier for them to communicate with
multiple distributed segments of I/O in the same way as the ZCP's
PSS 21H-1B9 B3 found on Foxboro's website lists this as the current
communication capability of the FCP270.
Supports up to 32 of the 200 Series FBMs
Supports up to 64 of the 200 Series FBMs with a Fieldbus Expansion
Module 100 (FEM100)
Supports up to 64 of the 100 Series Fieldbus Modules
PSS 21H-1B10 B3 found on Foxboro's website lists this as the current
communication capability of the ZCP270.
Supports up to 128 of the 200 Series Fieldbus Modules (FBMs) when using
the FCM100Et Fieldbus Communications Module
Supports up to 128 of the 200 Series FBMs, 100 Series FBMs, or a
combination 100 Series and 200 Series FBMs when using the FCM100E
Fieldbus Communications Module
Questions follow:
Does Foxboro have plans to release a CP in the FCP form factor that uses
a Fast Ethernet Fieldbus?
Has Foxboro considered increasing the number of FBM's that a ZCP can
communicate with?
Additional background information that may be helpful in understanding
the reason for asking the questions above:
Because of the timing for our projects and the FCP's initial
limitations of communicating with only 32 200 series FBM's per CP we
went the route of ZCP270's. They work fine but they take up a lot of
space in our racks because of the depth of the ZCP modules and the bulky
form factor of the old 1x8's needed to mount them. We now have six sets
of Fault Tolerant ZCP's.
Many of our processes initially used about 10 CP10's to control
a single process. From our experience we could expect the CP-10's to
handle about 10 FBM's before they became loaded. CP-30's made it
possible to handle about 30 FBM's. CP-40's about 60 FBM's and we now
operate some of our CP-60's with 120 plus FBM's. =3D20
We always try to maintain our CP's "Total Control Cycle" usage
at or below 70% as seen from the CP Station block parameters. Now that
we have six pairs of Fault Tolerant ZCP's in operation controlling six
of our processes, (used to require about 60 CP-10's), it is obvious that
the ZCP270's could easily handle more than 128 FBM's in our application
environment.
Thanks for any response,
Tom VandeWater
Control Systems Developer/Analyst
Dow Corning Corporation
Carrollton, KY USA
-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Adam.Pemberton@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 1:38 AM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [foxboro] FCP's talking 100 and 200 series simultaneously?
All knowing list:
=3D20
I'm planning to do an upgrade from remote Fieldbus (from CP40A's and
B's) and Cluster to FCP270's talking to the cluster. I want to be able
to move to 200 series FBM's in the future for new I/O and also
eventually replace the cluster.
=3D20
My question is do the FCP270's support talking to both 100 series and
200 series FBM's simultaneously and if not will it in the future? I know
that ZCP's do but I have a strong preference for FCP's.
=3D20
Assuming the answer to one of the questions is yes, will we be able to
use the existing FCP baseplates or will need new ones?
=3D20
Regards
Adam Pemberton
-Site Electrical & Control Systems Engineer
-20MW Geothermal Project Manager (Temporary)
Lihir Gold Limited
Ph: +675 9865 655
Fax: +675 9865 666
Trunk: 314 (or 9865200 pause 314)
Mob: Nogat
Postal:
Australia: GPO Box 905, Brisbane, QLD 4001
PNG: PO Box 789, Port Moresby, NCD
=3D20
=3D20
=3D20
_______________________________________________________________________
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
=3D20
foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
to subscribe: =3D
mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3D3Djoin
to unsubscribe: =3D
mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3D3Dleave
=3D20
=
=
_______________________________________________________________________
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=3Djoin
to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=3Dleave
=
Confidentiality Notice:
The information contained in this electronic message and any attachment(s) =
to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the recipient(s) and =
may contain confidential, privileged or proprietary information. If you are=
not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, delete a=
ll copies of this message and any attachment(s). Any other use of the E-Mai=
l by you is prohibited.
_______________________________________________________________________
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:
