E
Hello everybody on the list,
The discussion that has been going on with regards to Micro$oft versus Linux in Automation.
The Way an automation or instrumentation & Controls engineer would see his
requirement is
1. The Systems functionality.
2. The systems reliability.
3. The systems cost in comparison with other systems.
Functionality is measured, as availability of PID bock, maths blocks, analog
input linearization blocks, input signal conditioning blocks, totalizer blocks, discrete blocks and several such blocks. Again the success of systems depends on how good an algorithm was used while making the blocks. If the PID block is badly made, then the system will face failures and be driven out of the market.
Reliability. Measures such as MTTR MTBF and others. Redundancy of several types (processor redundancy, redundancy upto I/O level, TMR etc.).
So if a system is able to connect to the chosen field devices and has connectivity to other systems via drivers then the user is happy.
The cost of Instrumentation and Control is approximately less than 5% of plant cost.
The cost of cables and instrumentation is generally 80% of the Instrumentation cost. So in the end the automation or Instrumentation & Control Engineer is
fighting for 1 % on the Control room level.
There was a time when the plant life was supposed to be infinity and investments made accordingly, including the investments in automation. Now the entrepreneur believes that the future predictions are limited to a max of three years from hence or at the most five if the person is lucky. So cost for the day is considered most critical.
If I look around then today M$ or Linux are probably present in less than 5% in terms of quantity and price, in the automation scenario. The software segment is dominated here by proprietary and reliable firmware type platforms of AB, Taylor, Foxboro, ABB, GE, Toshiba, Nishko and others.
The visualization is getting dominated by systems on M$ platform with some
setbacks to the UNIX platforms of yester-years . There is some skepticism about M$ but since M$ figures mostly in visualization stages and not in the critical safety related stages of the plant, people tend to ignore this while selection of a system.
Once Linux spreads to the desktop then people may probably demand some
visualization on Linux. Until the time that Linux is established on the Desktop with good utilities (which are readily available today) and good Support (which is lacking in remote areas where the plants are located), it faces a disadvantage as a choice in the Automation platform. In fact selling on Linux may face certain disadvantages with users, scared and imagining Linux as a tool for the "technology savvy".
A large part of the discussion in the list has been conducted assuming that the user has a Computer professional's or a computer savvy person's skills, whereas the truth is that 90 % of the Automation end users in the world are not "that" computer savvy. They probably still have a procedure for taking a graphic printout written in their plant SOP manual and follow it rigourously and the catridge replacements are still done by the maintenance department
personnel.
The users need a user friendly system, with good support and functionality.
If your system lacks several process blocks, or good trending then the user is unlikely to select your system, be it on any platform. One trip could cause losses in millions and will cover the cost for tens of automation systems and hence price is still a issue related to reliability and the competition.
The price of M$ SCADA systems are less than the prices of DOS based systems. We were paying more for UNIX and DOS based systems in the yester-years than we are paying for M$ systems today. If you calculate the Past values and compare it with M$ costs the ratio could be 0.1 or lower. Linux, I must admit, has the potential to change the Scenario and make things even better.
M$ or Linux.
The winner will be the one who gives the functionality required by the user and the comparative cost factors and most important factor will be "how user friendly is the GUI".
Anand
The discussion that has been going on with regards to Micro$oft versus Linux in Automation.
The Way an automation or instrumentation & Controls engineer would see his
requirement is
1. The Systems functionality.
2. The systems reliability.
3. The systems cost in comparison with other systems.
Functionality is measured, as availability of PID bock, maths blocks, analog
input linearization blocks, input signal conditioning blocks, totalizer blocks, discrete blocks and several such blocks. Again the success of systems depends on how good an algorithm was used while making the blocks. If the PID block is badly made, then the system will face failures and be driven out of the market.
Reliability. Measures such as MTTR MTBF and others. Redundancy of several types (processor redundancy, redundancy upto I/O level, TMR etc.).
So if a system is able to connect to the chosen field devices and has connectivity to other systems via drivers then the user is happy.
The cost of Instrumentation and Control is approximately less than 5% of plant cost.
The cost of cables and instrumentation is generally 80% of the Instrumentation cost. So in the end the automation or Instrumentation & Control Engineer is
fighting for 1 % on the Control room level.
There was a time when the plant life was supposed to be infinity and investments made accordingly, including the investments in automation. Now the entrepreneur believes that the future predictions are limited to a max of three years from hence or at the most five if the person is lucky. So cost for the day is considered most critical.
If I look around then today M$ or Linux are probably present in less than 5% in terms of quantity and price, in the automation scenario. The software segment is dominated here by proprietary and reliable firmware type platforms of AB, Taylor, Foxboro, ABB, GE, Toshiba, Nishko and others.
The visualization is getting dominated by systems on M$ platform with some
setbacks to the UNIX platforms of yester-years . There is some skepticism about M$ but since M$ figures mostly in visualization stages and not in the critical safety related stages of the plant, people tend to ignore this while selection of a system.
Once Linux spreads to the desktop then people may probably demand some
visualization on Linux. Until the time that Linux is established on the Desktop with good utilities (which are readily available today) and good Support (which is lacking in remote areas where the plants are located), it faces a disadvantage as a choice in the Automation platform. In fact selling on Linux may face certain disadvantages with users, scared and imagining Linux as a tool for the "technology savvy".
A large part of the discussion in the list has been conducted assuming that the user has a Computer professional's or a computer savvy person's skills, whereas the truth is that 90 % of the Automation end users in the world are not "that" computer savvy. They probably still have a procedure for taking a graphic printout written in their plant SOP manual and follow it rigourously and the catridge replacements are still done by the maintenance department
personnel.
The users need a user friendly system, with good support and functionality.
If your system lacks several process blocks, or good trending then the user is unlikely to select your system, be it on any platform. One trip could cause losses in millions and will cover the cost for tens of automation systems and hence price is still a issue related to reliability and the competition.
The price of M$ SCADA systems are less than the prices of DOS based systems. We were paying more for UNIX and DOS based systems in the yester-years than we are paying for M$ systems today. If you calculate the Past values and compare it with M$ costs the ratio could be 0.1 or lower. Linux, I must admit, has the potential to change the Scenario and make things even better.
M$ or Linux.
The winner will be the one who gives the functionality required by the user and the comparative cost factors and most important factor will be "how user friendly is the GUI".
Anand