Re: [foxboro] Triconex & Foxboro Questions
- From: "Pablo Lioi" <plioi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:36:36 +0200
George,
We have 5 Triconex/Foxboro systems in our plants.
In 3 of them, communication is accomplished via redundant ACM modules, an
older system is communicating via redundant GW30 processors and a new one
with a FCP/FDSI combination.
My advise: stay away from the ACM - It will make your life miserable, no
matter what Foxboro says, specially if you go to the redundant solution. The
GW30 solution is not so clean as the ACM, but it works, as long as you keep
your database size within certain limits. The best solution should be the
FCP/FDSI combination, but we are starting this system now, so I don't have
much experience yet.
And make sure you buy some spare Triconex modules. It is my experience that
they have a higher failure rate than any other PLC I know (don't worry -
yourplant will keep running and you will be able to replace the module with
ahealthy one using the spare slot, as long as the module is a TMR one).
Regards
Pablo Lioi
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar MSN Toolbar[1] Get it now!
--- Links ---
1 http://g.msn.com/8HMBEN/2755??PS=47575
_______________________________________________________________________
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:
