Re: [foxboro] IACC Projects (was: IACC Projects)

  • From: <tzvi_b@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 23:30:34 +0200

Dear Alex,
It's possible today to work with IACC in a project with Foundation
Fieldbus Instruments??

Best Regards,

                        Tzvi Ben Yosef

                         Oper. & Control Manager

                         BacSoft

                         Systems Integration

                         Mobile: 972-52-4269375

                         Phone: 972-8-9989652

                     Fax: 972-8-9989693    

                         http://www.bac-soft.com
<http://www.bac-soft.com/> 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Johnson, Alex (Foxboro)
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 11:08 PM
To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [foxboro] IACC Projects (was: IACC Projects)

 

Here is a list of some of the projects that have or are using the tool.
This

is NOT a complete list. In addition, sales of the tool are brisk -
better

than we hoped actually - which indicates some market acceptance. Most
new

customers use IACC on their projects; more established customers seem
more

resistant.

 

 

There are two main complaints about IACC - and while both are justified,
I

think they are overblown. The weaknesses are:

 

 

 

*     A single IACC database begins to degrade in performance with
12,000

or so objects (think blocks)

*     Only one user is allowed in a given database at any one time.

 

 

 

I'd just like to point out that this is no worse than ICC. ICC supports
on

CP per database (4000 blocks max) and only one user per database at any

given time.

 

 

 

Given that ICC and IACC have similar weak spots - though IACC can hold
more

data - the question then becomes is IACC easier to use than ICC. The
answer

is clearly yes.

 

 

 

My point is, don't fixate on the weaknesses; look at its strengths.

 

 

 

 

 

As for why there aren't more comments from users on this list, it may
well

be that IACC users and Windows users don't join the list. I think we
need to

do something about that.

 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, here's the list that I've compiled in the last hour or so from

internal users. This does not represent any projects done by customers

themselves. Hope this helps.

 

 

 

In North America (US and Canada)

 

   In Houston:

 

      2 refinery projects using V1.1

 

      1 pipeline project using V1.1

 

      1 refinery project using V2.0

 

      1 chemical plant using V2.0

 

      2 large V8 projects using V2.0 (active)

 

      

 

   In FoxMass

 

      1 Refuse Fuel project (complete)

 

      1 Nuclear project (active)

 

      Porting 2 Nuclear jobs to IACC from other tools (active)

 

   

 

   In Canada

 

      1 textile project using V2.0 (FAT)

 

      

 

   

 

In Latin America

 

   In Chile,

 

      4 complete projects using V1.1

 

      1 18,000 project under way using V2.0

 

 

 

   In Argentina,

 

      2 projects using V2.0 (complete)

 

 

 

   

 

In EMEA

 

   In Spain

 

      1 project with V1.1 (complete)

 

      1 project with V2.0 (complete)

 

      

 

   

 

   In Belgium

 

      1 project in SAT on V2.0

 

      

 

   

 

   In Germany 

 

      1 project in SAT on V2.0

 

      1 project on V1.1 (reference site)

 

 

 

   In Austria

 

      1 project on V2.0 (complete)

 

      1 project on V2.0 (5000 pts)

 

   

 

   

 

   In France and Netherlands together 

 

      1 project (60+ FCPs) on V2.0 (in progress)

 

         

 

   In France,

 

      1 project (60+ FCPs) on V2.0 (shipped to site)

 

   

 

 

 

In AP

 

   In Singapore

 

      1 project for delivery to Middle East

 

 

 

   In Australia

 

      1 project using V2.0   

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

Alex Johnson

 

Invensys Process Systems

 

Invensys Systems, Inc.

 

10707 Haddington

 

Houston, TX 77043

 

713.722.2859 (voice)

 

713.722.2700 (switchboard)

 

713.932.0222 (fax)

 

ajohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________

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

 


 
 
_______________________________________________________________________
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: