can someone give me a feedback for using CS1000 or other small system for a critical application requiring complete redundancy and having no single point of failure. 1500 I/OS. Appreciate if you can give me feedback for expandibility to 5000 points.
Use ABB AC-800 M DCS system with true redundancy
at all level.
If you can indicate if it is batch process or
Hi, We have sold and commssioned many CS1000 DCS systems in various industries, including dual redundant systems on critical applications. Please send me detailed queries, or look at the CS1000 specs on www.yokogawa.com. e-mail email@example.com
I have worked on foxboro, bailey, siemens and others. For reliability, ease of configuration and user interface, I would recommend yokagawa.
just out of curiosity.. why do you recommend yokogawa?? how is their system better than the other systems you mentioned?? in particular bailey.. i am using bailey infi-90 for my combined cycle plant control.. so far understanding the system is rather
easy.. but i have no experience in other dcs yet.. so your feedback will be helpful for me in case i am considering to purchase other dcs..
Just my 2 cents. I mainly work with the Bailey Infi-90 system here and it is very easy to understand and make code for. But compared to ABB Advant,and Metso Damatic it is too simple. These more mature systems from ABB and Metso have a lot more smart blocks that do the function that 50 blocks in Infi-90 CAD logic do.
A simple motor stop start with feedbacks and interlocks with good alarm suppression is a major undertaking in Infi90 blocks, newer systems have a lot more of this built into single blocks.
Also I find that sequences in the Advant system much easier to design than the block sequence code that you have in the Infi90.
Just my opinion. Also I'm not sure how much longer ABB will be supporting the old Inif90 stuff.
Chris Jennings Ph +61(0)351360417
Elect/Control Engineer Fax +61(0)351360540
Australian Paper Maryvale Mob +61(0)407320113
the worst part of dcs is in high tempt. i.e. ac failure yokogawa works in more then 42 degrees & about abb infi90 (symphony) we are fed with its human interface software operate-it. its server goes down. i would like to know more about infi90. can u discuss with me mail me plz?
If you send me your contact details, I can send you more info/ contact in your country.
I have worked on various DCS systems and the ease of configuration Bailey (now ABB) provides is far to superior to Yokogawa Centum.
Invensys - Foxboro I/A2 (A Squared) will provide all the requirements listed with a flat network architecture, fault-tolerance, redundancy as well as the ability plug-in TMR (Invensys-Triconex) for SIS applications to SIL3.
I am basically in consultancy field & procured recently 2 DCS system.
one system is commissioned & other is under execution.
I could be helpful to you as I am located in INDIA. I select DCS only on process point view.
what i could conceive from your question is that you are looking for a system(dcs)which must be a redundant one. But couldnt understand what kind of redundancy are you looking for is it at the controller level if so then i would suggest that go for a honeywell plantscape r500 system its the best option for all kinds of redundancy and easy to use options. Moreover it has compatibility to almost all brands including plc and udc controllers. I have commissioned a redundant sytem both controllers and servers with 3000 I/O and the results were immaculate in all respects all kinds of programming and hmi options have helped me alot to commission critical process chemical plant. i think my suggestion would be helpful for you. You can get more information from www.iac.honeywell.com
Bailey Infi90 is proven and most of the Power Plants are presently running on the same system. Its easy to configure, more flexible for expansion, redundant at Processor (Multifunction processor) and Redunadant at Plant Loop(Infi90 NIS/NPM)
There are wide variety of the Operator Interfaces were availble, if it is really critical go for two separate standalone servers with Conductor NT for Hot standby Condition.
In this situation you have 100 % redundancy in all aspects like networking, processor, OIS sides.
I can say ABB Bailey is Economcal and reliable for continuous process industries with the above said 100 % redundancy, and i am confident on the above , as i am working on the same system.
The considerations for acquire a DCS is not only a technical issue, you must get a global point of view. For example, any vendor will say you that her DCS is the best in the world!! (I'm exaggerating a litle!!) but what would you think if the vendor, two years after says "Hey we recomend you migrate your DCS for this one" it's not funy, dont you? (this is the case for Honeywell's Plantscape because they wants migrate to Experion System)
If you asking me, i will recomend you Delta V, it's all you need.
Thank you Anonymous for your well considered point of view! Just a small amount of research would have led you to the factual conclusion that the Honeywell Experion system is not a "new" product but rather a new release of the plantscape system. It's complete name is Experion PKS ( PKS == Process Knowledge system ) and is the amalgamation of Honeywell's DCS, SCADA, plantscape and business performance software (uniformance) platforms.
Experion PKS is not a system you need to migrate to, it is like all other historical honeywell product releases and offers full and complete integration with past platforms.
Besides, any investment in a technical solution that meets the requirements of a business in today's business environment is more about the benefits of sound and practical business relationship rather than "Just a set of product".
On this honeywell delivers.
Your requirements of "complete redundancy" and "no single point of failure" must be looked at closely. Single, non-redundant controller I/O represent single points of failure. The typical DCS controllers can come with redundant power supplies and processors but seldom, if at all, come with truly redundant I/O. Also, you must look into the design of the redundant processors since the switch mechanism that switches the processors can represent a single point of failure. The power distribution in the DCS controller should also be looked into to make sure that there is not a single point of failure. Another issue is field instruments. Are they redundant? How will you achieve your single point of failure requirement with field instruments? Many people seem to concentrate on the reliability of the controller that sits in a nice air conditioned room while ignoring the field instruments which represent the vast majority of the failures.
William(Bill) L. Mostia, Jr. P.E.
Worldwide Excellence in Dependable Automation
firstname.lastname@example.org (b) email@example.com (h)
These opinions are my own and are offered on the basis of Caveat Emptor.