Re: [foxboro] Recommended practices for assigning Alarm Priorities
- From: Corey R Clingo <corey.clingo@xxxxxxxx>
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:14:27 -0600
I guess I should add that criticality is in the eye of the person doing
the configuration; i.e., we have no formal process (yet) to determine
that.
Corey
Corey R Clingo <corey.clingo@xxxxxxxx>
Sent by: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
03/15/2006 12:11 PM
Please respond to
foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To
foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject
Re: [foxboro] Recommended practices for assigning Alarm Priorities
I'm interested in this too, as I see it becoming an issue (read, assigned
to me to make better :) in the near future. Personal philosophy here
(based more on gut feel than anything) is:
Pri 5:
Historian/logging/emailing only
Pri 4:
Not used
Pri 3:
"Run-of-the-mill" alarms
Pri 2:
More critical alarms, including those that interlock or shut down
equipment
Pri 1:
Most critical alarms, shutdowns of major parts of the plant, some signals
relayed from the SIS, things that also go to a SCAM
Each level has its own sound (we use the annunciator keyboard
synthesizers). IOBAD is given the same priority as the highest priority
of the other alarms.
Also, I'm interested in what works best in AM configuration: sorting by
time or priority, filtering, noises, etc.
I guess I'll try to obtain the EEMUA document.
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
Other related posts:
