Re: [foxboro] Unified HMI
- From: "tjvandew@xxxxxxxxx" <tjvandew@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 20:57:25 -0500
Very well said Ales. Good to hear from you again on this subject. You
are right in saying that the HMI issue is but a part of the total issue.
Archestra is still receiving talk but it isn't obvious if it is really
being applied/used/developed. If it is, it appears only in the
Wonderware segment of Invensys. I don't see any new products or
applications from Foxboro, Triconex, or Esscor-SimSci that are being
built on it. I really expected that it was always a Wonderware vision
but it still hasn't produced any visible value, even for a WW to Fox
IA/Triconex HMI solution. It would be nice to see an update on progress
to this end or at the very least a more comprehensive vision statement
with an updated timetable. Is there anyone from Invensys that can do
that for us? Thanks for any info.
Cheers,
Tom VandeWater
Ales Vaupotic wrote:
> Hi, list!
> I haven't been very active here lately but I am thorougly reading the digest
> every day. And topic on integrating all Invensys HMI's caught my attention.
> Pattly it was hot in Oct 2004 when Tom started a thread about <a href='
> //www.freelists.org/archives/foxboro/10-2004/msg00093.html'>Browser-based
> HMI</a> and we developed a quite usable demand sheet.
> I don't know of anybody else beside our company who has opened it's I/A to
> the worldwide public. With a login and credentials and ..., of course.
> Basically it uses DataLink to transfer data from I/A to a SQL database and
> from there on it is a job for IT specialists to take over. One simply
> installs a web server (IIS 5.1 will do just fine) and put up some PNGs to
> represent the FoxView screen. Then every second or so you refresh the data
> from remote computer. I've put up such a system in 2004 which is today known
> as AJAX (or Atlas in Microsoft terms). Simply put, you don't refresh whole
> screen with graphics, instead just numbers and statuses are sent to the
> client. It already knows where on the screen to put them and that's it. The
> most known example of the technology is gmail service. Others are adopting
> it massively.
>
> I must emphasize that this is a read-only application. There are many
> security reasons for it but most of them are quite practical. First, you
> don't want someone who has just got out of bed (and may have all the
> credentials) to take over the control of your plant without knowing what was
> going on during the last shift. Also, his actions could interfere with
> actions of those on-site. He or she also can't undo any actions if link
> suddenly becomes unavailable. But all this refers to Internet connected
> operators. Including the risk of attacks.
> What about Intranet? Here we are talking about secure network layer,
> operators are aware of the situation, undoing or emergency stopping is not
> an issue here. Plant is not connected to the outside world, at least not on
> that level, so security is also not an issue. Risk of attack is the same
> with FoxView screen if you let unauthorized personnel on-site take control
> of it. In such situation NOT going to Browser based HMI (or some other
> unified and higly standardized HMI), IMHO, is digging yourself a hole. And
> you know what you can do with it after you finish!
>
> In Oct 2003 Invensys announced they formed a strategic alliance with
> Microsoft and invested $50 million to put ArchecstrA atop of Microsoft.NET,
> if I understood it right. It was making sense to me than as this could
> really lead to some kind of unified HMI across all Invensys products. If you
> take a look at things today we are still lightyears away from it. And all
> the invested $$$ have disappeared. There better be some result from it soon,
> otherwise customers (and investors) will start turning their heads for a new
> oportunity as this company obviuolsy is not interested in making progress.
>
> Why am I sounding so frustrated? Because I have customers which expect some
> progress and we are not able to deliver it. At least not with "original"
> Invensys products and support. We do our best but many times it is not
> enough. And HMI is just one simple problem. What about reporting,
> integrating DCS and PLCs, historian problems, don't remind of not having
> permanent storage in the processor. One other example: I am trying to get my
> hands on a dev version of Wonderware SCADA to present it to a potential
> customer. How long do you think I am waiting for it? Over a month now and it
> looks like I am not going to get it but will have to buy it from a local
> reseller. And it might not even develop to a done deal! Then I will have one
> license sitting in my drawer and no new customer. Is that where Invensys
> gets its revenue from?
>
> Don't get me wrong: we make our living from selling and supporting I/A. But
> this doesn't mean that we should take the blame for all the problems or that
> there is no room for improvement. If one waits two years for a response on a
> CAR, there is plenty of it. That is also one of the reasons why I chose this
> way to express myself. I am trying (so are my colleagues) to show some
> problems to responsible people here in Europe but no-one seems to care.
> Better said they do care but very, very, very slowly.
>
> This leads me to an advice to every customer out there: don't blame your
> local engineer or even an Invensys person for all the problems which arise.
> The company has simply grown to large to be able to effectively respond to
> our demands. And demands are not bringing the revenue to them, just work. At
> least that is how they (Invensys) see it. On the long rung, I am convinced,
> listening to your customers is the best business policy one could have.
>
> Best regards,
> Ales Vaupotic
> AMI Slovenija
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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:
- » Re: [foxboro] Unified HMI
