Re: [foxboro] Reduce IFL's for FBM
- From: Jeremy Milum <jmilum@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 12:02:27 -0500
On 5/11/05, brad.s.wilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <brad.s.wilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wro=
te:
> we're switching to non-ladder FBMs and GDEVs and
> moving interlock processing to IND seq blocks in the CP.=20
That's a bit scary. We have had some problems with interlocks in seq
code. It has to be done with care and is a difficult thing to accomplish
correctly. We are moving away from having interlocks solely in seq
code (they must be duplicated in other cont. blocks and/or a separate
PLC). Be very careful with this.
--=20
Patron saints in general are broadband connections to the Almighty
- Michelle Delio, Wired News
_______________________________________________________________________
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:
