Re: [foxboro] Follow-up ACCUM reset and Question
- From: Corey R Clingo <corey.clingo@xxxxxxxx>
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:10:00 -0600
I've seen that same thing. These parameters don't seem to get updated in
a very timely manner when they change (several second jitter as you have
seen).
What I do instead for stuff like this is to use the TIM command in the
CALC clock (seconds since midnight). This is a lot "tighter" number, at
least in my experience.
Corey Clingo
BASF Corporation
"BrianLong" <blong@xxxxxxx>
Sent by: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
02/19/2009 12:25 PM
Please respond to
foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To
"Foxboro" <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
[foxboro] Follow-up ACCUM reset and Question
The original problem was trying to get an ACCUM block in two different
CP's
to reset at the same time. In our case setting the ACCUM blocks as the
first block in the compund in each CP and using the same calc block for
the
reset seemed to take care if it. There is about a 1 second difference
now.
New question, we're using a CALC block to reset the ACCUM blocks using
xxCPxx_STA:STATION.HOUR and .MINUTE parameters. The reset is set to occur
at 23:58, looking a values in the historian the reset will occur anywhere
between 23:58:08 and 23:58:16. This is not an issue but I was curious why
it takes that long to process?
Thanks,
Brian Long
Arkansas Kraft
_______________________________________________________________________
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:
