Re: [foxboro] IACC Projects (was: IACC Projects)
- From: tom.vandewater@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 17:25:31 -0500
Alex,
Thanks for letting us know that there are projects being engineered
using IACC. This is the first official confirmation that it is being used
by Foxboro internally on projects. Nobody ever said that in the last survey
in August 2004.
I think the list has been waiting for someone that has used IACC to
answer questions about it. Greg Hurwitt asked specific questions about
IACC, many of which can only be answered by someone that has actually used
it. I am including those questions again below. If the only knowledgeable
users of IACC are Invensys employees then I expect that they don't feel
comfortable answering questions on this list, and I can understand that they
probably have good reasons not to respond lest it be interpreted as an
official reply.
Alex, you have never been afraid to respond and that has given you
credibility with the list users. I know there are a lot of Invensys
employees that subscribe and read but may feel uncomfortable responding. I
have posted a few notes to the list from anonymous folks both users and
Invensys employees in the past and am willing to continue doing it. The
list is used for many reasons, but it thrives when people can openly and
honestly, (sometimes heatedly), share their observations and opinions.
Maybe responses to Greg's questions from Invensys employees that have
expeience with IACC can be filtered through you, to the list.
In your note below you wrote:
"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."
The answer to you may be "clearly yes" but I'm pretty sure that it
isn't that clear to all of us on the list. That is why we continue to ask
specific questions about it. Questions that nobody seems to be willing or
able to answer. Unless you can get some users to respond we may never know
how good or bad it is. This list is certainly not limited to UNIX IA users
but they are definitely the ones that are the most vocal. Come forth ye
hordes of IACC users and sing the praises and/or curses of your newly chosen
platform.
Cheers,
Tom VandeWater
1. How many folks are using IACC on a regular basis at this point?
2. Do you consider it robust?
3. Is it capable of handling a project of around 3000-4000 I/O points?
4. How easy (or difficult) is it to backup/restore your IACC database?
5. Does IACC have bulk configuration import capability of either Excel- or
text-formatted information?
6. Does IACC replace System Definition, or any other configurators, or
just ICC?
7. Does a system configured with IACC still have a CSA database?
8. Any other general opinions/comments?
-----Original Message-----
From: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Johnson, Alex
(Foxboro)
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 4:08 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:
