Re: [foxboro] Reduce IFL's for FBM
- From: Gregory A Hurwitt <hurwitg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 14:12:46 -0400
PLB's were occasionally useful back in the CP10 days to offload some of the
processing duty from the CP down to the FBM. You had to ration your CALC
blocks pretty carefully back then.
I haven't used one since we got our first CP30.
Greg Hurwitt
BASF Freeport
|---------+------------------------+---------------------------->
| | |Corey R Clingo |
| | |<clingoc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| | |Sent by: |
| | |foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx|
| | | |
| | | |
| | |05/12/05 09:58 AM |
| | |Please respond to foxboro |
| | | |
|---------+------------------------+---------------------------->
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| To: foxboro
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: Re: [foxboro] Reduce IFL's for FBM
|
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|---------+------------------------+---------------------------->
| | | |
|---------+------------------------+---------------------------->
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
This has been an interesting discussion. I've personally never used PLBs,
because I didn't need the processing speed that they give (in truth, I'm
not sure it's really any faster, but I presume the FBM processes logic at
a somewhat greater rate than the CP), and I try to avoid YAT (Yet Another
Tool) unless the benefit warrants it. But I've never needed PLBs, either;
CALCA/LOGIC blocks, CINs, COUTs, and GDEVs provide all the tools I have
ever needed for discrete interlocks. And locking of appropriate
parameters (via connection to themselves or other blocks) provides
adequate protection from changes (though I still would like to see a
system-wide security mechanism, enforced at the CP level).
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
_______________________________________________________________________
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:
