Does operations understand that they could get a significant process bump with such behavior? I'd be reluctant to implement such a facility across the board. Regards, Alex Johnson Invensys 10707 Haddington Houston, TX 77063 713.722.2859 (office) 713.722.2700 (switchboard) 713.932.0222 (fax) ajohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ajohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx> Come to the Invensys Showcase: http://www.invensysshowcase.com/ <http://www.invensysshowcase.com/> -----Original Message----- From: Mike Pauley [SMTP:pauleym@xxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 7:44 AM To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [foxboro] SPT / RSP tracking Hi list Operations asked to have the original setpoint come up after return from remote . Is there a parameter in one of the PID* blocks that would keep the setpoint from tracking the remote setpoint. If not is there a standard way of using a calc block to accomplish this. Regerds Mike _______________________________________________________________________ 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
