RE: Save All Script

[Corey R Clingo]

Man, you guys are scaring me.  If upload is potentially unreliable, how does one
capture operator changes in the savealls?  I want to be able to automatically
generate savealls at night.  Do I have to do it once without uploads, and again
with uploads, then run that check_db_sync or whatever it's called to make sure
the databases are consistent, and if it fails, restore the one I did without
uploads (to save the work I did that day)?  This issue is getting more
ridiculous by the moment.

I agree with Bo; the other system I have experience with (Honeywell TDC) allows
you to rebuild the configuration database from the controller's memory.
Actually, there is no separate configuration database.  There is a "workfile"
(the IDF) and an ASCII representation of the configuration database (the
exception build file) but these are not essential to the configurator's
operation; they only exist as a temporary storage facility, a means to transfer
configuration between two systems, and as a bulk configuration mechanism.  The
configurator also does not "lock" the entire controller, so you don't have the
issue of CP memory corruption when multiple users try to work in the same CP.

This is not rocket surgery, Invensys.  Help us out a little, eh?

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation





Alan J Schaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/10/2001 12:31:51 PM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   Foxboro DCS Mail List 

Getting OPC data into the I/A

[Corey R Clingo]

Awhile back I inquired about methods of getting OPC data into an I/A system.  I
got several good responses (thanks) and am investigating further.  We would
probably go the Matrikon route, since Foxboro's OPC gateway software apparently
isn't released yet.

So now I'm looking at how exactly I'm going to represent this data in the I/A
system.  I don't want to poke those values into another CP, as that seems a
waste of nodebus bandwidth and processing power on that CP.  I'd like to use our
AW itself as a "virtual CP", if that's possible (this is not critical data).  I
suppose another option is getting a Modbus integrator and hooking it to the OPC
PC, using OPC-to-Modbus-slave gateway software rather than OPC-to-I/A gateway
software, but bandwidth could be limited by the serial link.  Any other options?

If anyone has done this, I'd greatly appreciate some war stories.  IIRC, someone
in Europe had a similar setup using the Matrikon software.  If it's long and
involved, feel free to reply off-list.

TIA,

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation



---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Help! FoxView crashes

[Corey R Clingo]

Just out of curiousity, can't DM/FV lock the display file it is currently
displaying so one can't
copy another version on top of it?  We're looking into automatic synchronization
of displays
across WPs and this OM corruption thing could make it a bit difficult

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation



RE: Help! FoxView crashes



Sascha,

Is the DM/FV dying or is the station rebooting?

If the station is rebooting, the next question is, "Are these displays
optimizable or not, i.e., do they have complete path names or are they
generic?"

A good way to crash a WP/AW is to copy a file to a station while an earlier
version is being displayed on the station. DM/FV write to the OM table in
the file to optimize display call-up. If the file is copied while this write
is occurring, the OM table will be corrupted. Since the data in this table
is used directly by the OM, the OM will crash. If the OM crashes, the
station reboots.


Regards,


Alex Johnson
10707 Haddington
Houston, TX 77043
713.722.2859 (office)
713.722.2700 (switchboard)
713.932.0222 (fax)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 


 -Original Message-
 From: Sascha Wildner [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 6:56 AM
 To:  Foxboro Mailing List
 Subject:  Help! FoxView crashes

 Hello Folks,

 under which circumstances can a display with faceplates crash
FoxView with a segmentation fault?

 I have a set of displays here which do exactly that.  The problem
occurs usually after 7 or so callups of different displays (e.g. jumping in
between displays or calling them from the button row).  Testing revealed
that the faceplates seem to be responsible for it (e.g. if I move the
faceplates directory somewhere else, everything works fine).

 But I could not find any errors there.  Just normal faceplates with
.ALMSTA links for example.  They were created on an AW70 and then
transferred to AW51 with m1g/gm1.

 I have already tried the following:

*dumped all displays and faceplates, removed the originals and
uploaded again
*resized my displays in such a way that no graphics is outside of the
rectangle in foxdraw
*run several incantations of fdf_version on both displays and
faceplates
*downgraded my foxview from 99.2.1 to 99.2

 All to no avail.  I suspect that it is some object manager hiccup.
Is there anything else I overlooked?


 Sascha Wildner
 erpicon Software Development GmbH


---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]








---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Helpfile Viewer

[Corey R Clingo]

Just out of curiousity, how would one do the FoxDoc updates for, say, a web
server running on an AW51
so one can have current local documentation accessible from all the stations?
>From what I've seen, the
updater is a Windoze program.  I could do the updates on a Windoze box and copy
them over, but
this seems inelegant at best.

I presume the updater program logs into Foxboro's web server using some
secret-squirrel ID and password
and downloads the new files.  Given the pertinent info it should be relatively
straightforward to duplicate this
functionality on Unix with scripts and wget or something.  If no one knows how
to do this I guess I will have to
sniff the connection sometime and decipher the handshaking that goes on.

Corey Clingo
BASF Corporation





"Williams, Dave G SUKOP-CME/72/04" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/09/2001
10:55:28 AM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   'Foxboro DCS Mail List' 

RE: Helpfile Viewer

[Corey R Clingo]

Dan-

You might try something like:

su - unprivileged_user_id -c netscape

This is not quite as good as chroot but at least keeps them from overwriting
files.

Of course the real fix is for Foxboro to modify their software so it doesn't
have to run as root.

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation





"Karppi, Dan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/09/2001 11:33:45 AM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   'Foxboro DCS Mail List' 

Drop resistor on analog input cards

[Corey R Clingo]

Does anyone know if I/A analog input cards (FBM01/04 in my case) can be had with
250-ohm dropping resistors?  My meter tells me the ones we have are 50-ohm, and
most HART handhelds we've used require 250-ohm loop resistance to function
properly.

TIA,

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corp.




---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[Corey R Clingo]

Just curious:  Is FoxView that bad, or is it just a pain to migrate?  I'm
relatively new to I/A. and find the legacy Display Builder a cumbersome tool to
build graphics in (although some of the guys in the plant who have done it more
don't complain much).  I'm trying to evaluate whether to make a push to go to
FoxView or not (it would be a gradual change even if we did, as I've heard it is
best to rebuild existing screens in FoxDraw rather than try to import them).

I'm not sure what Foxboro's stance is of supporting products beyond their
"useful life" (i.e., after a newer replacement has come out), but the fact that
DM documentation is not available on the CD looks like writing on the wall to
me.

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation





"Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/21/2001 07:46:29 AM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   'Foxboro DCS Mail List' 

RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[Corey R Clingo]

OK, my bad.  I guess I was referring to the configurator document the most when
I was trying to get up to speed on building DM graphics.

But while we're on this topic, why aren't the configurator documents on the CD?
Is the legacy DM/DBuilder being further enhanced, or is it frozen from a feature
point of view (I assume bug fixes are still being incorporated)?  And what is
Foxboro's official position on the longevity of legacy DM?

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation







"Johnson, Alex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/21/2001 05:00:05 PM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   Foxboro DCS Mail List mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>





---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Failed SaveAll

[Corey R Clingo]

Or, we could design the system in the first place to allow save-alls while the
configurator is running, and maybe prevent a save in the configurator to a
compound that is currently being saved.  Or better yet, do away with all these
different database snapshots (save-alls, checkpoints, ICC workfiles) and replace
them with one checkpoint used to load the controller, from which the
configuration can be completely reconstituted, and which can be saved while
configuration is in progess (this is the case with at least one of Foxboro's
major competitors' systems).

Oh well, guess I'll add this to my list of rants to go over at the GCUG next
week

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation





"Deen, Ron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 04/06/2001 02:44:13 AM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   Foxboro DCS Mail List >> 3.  I have long been an anti-proponent for automated save-alls and even
checkpoints.  Your quandry is one of the best examples I can give to avoid
automating something so important as your control database backups.
<<<

Sorry, but I fail to see what is so great about this example:
The system responded with: Database locked, Override yes/no.

As I believe, answering NO would have prevented this issue from occuring at
all!

I have seen "smart engineers" screw up a control databases in broad
daylight, because they figured the "locked database" message, was a mistake
from the Foxboro system, which is usually not the case, and ALWAYS should be
a warning to the engineer that he/she must investigate.

I would suggest an initialize/load_all. And use the "cassandra provided"
save_all script (that will maintain at least 10 backups) or something
similar from your precious save_alls.

I would also suggest informing your staff about the archiving utilities on
the system and the impact they may have on real life engineering!

Making important tasks in the system (like backing up control databases)
"low thresshold functions", because they automated, should be considered a
to big value just to cancel all of this because someone has made a mistake.


Regards

Ron Deen
Foxboro Nederland N.V.
Baarnschedijk 10
3741 LS Baarn
The Netherlands
Phone:  +31(0)35-5484174
Fax:+31(0)35-5484175
Web:www.foxboro.com
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]







---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: AW70 Installation problems

[Corey R Clingo]

This is correct, except that it is used for all NetBIOS name resolution; i.e.,
NetBIOS layered over TCP/IP or IPX as well as the "raw" NetBEUI.  It is used for
things like mapping drives to other NT boxes if you don't have a WINS server
(and depending on the NetBIOS node type of the machine, etc., etc.)

I would assume that the I/A software doesn't use NetBIOS or lmhosts.  We don't
have any 70s here, so I can't say for certain.

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation





"Jones, Charles R. (Chuck)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 04/24/2001 10:53:58 AM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   'Foxboro DCS Mail List' 

Re: Foxboro (Sun) Xterminals

[Corey R Clingo]

If your x-terminal is using BOOTP or DHCP to acquire its IP address, the router
that connects your subnets must be configured to pass BOOTP packets.  I can't
say I know a lot about x-terminals, but this is the most common problem I've
seen with PCs getting IP addresses across subnets.

Also, the program code is typically downloaded using tftp I believe, so if the
router is set up in a restrictive fashion, you may have to enable tftp packet
forwarding on it as well.

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation





"Dykes, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 04/27/2001 10:31:15 AM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   'Foxboro DCS Mail List' 

Open-loop detection on analog output cards

[Corey R Clingo]

Pardon me for being ignorant, but how does one implement open-loop detection on
analog outputs?  I have tried setting BAO to 1, but opening the loop still does
not generate an alarm.

TIA,

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation




---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Open-loop detection on analog output cards

[Corey R Clingo]

To answer Kevin Fitzgerrell's question, I am opening the loop at the FBM.
Neither the detail display nor system management shows anything awry.  The
output is therefore not initialized and can be manipulated.

My experience agrees with what Rick Rys said.  I was hoping that the FBM could
be coerced into reading back its loop output current and comparing it with what
was being asked for by the FBM, and alarm if these were different.  The other
system I have experience with (Honeywell) does this and generates an alarm and
initializes upstream blocks if the commanded output current and the actual loop
current do not agree.  It is a handy troubleshooting tool and I miss it :-(

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corp.



---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: NodeBus versus Ethernet

[Corey R Clingo]

The DNBI/DNBT, among other things, handles the switching between the redundant
nodebus segments.  Your DNBI/DNBT actually connects to the AW/WP via an ethernet
card (the DNBI also uses a serial port, I presume for the switching and other
types of data; the DNBT does it all "in-band" over the ethernet connection).
The packets going out le0/hme0 on the AW/WP, through the DNBI/DNBT, and out on
the nodebus, probably conform to 802.3.

Actually, 802.3 is an old standard in itself.  It is not used any more on modern
networks, because IIRC, it doesn't allow multiple protocols (e.g., IP and IPX)
to traverse the wire simultaneously.  This is not an issue with the nodebus,
obviously.

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation


Hi All,

In all Foxboro documentation, there is a differentiation between Ethernet and
NodeBus. However, Foxboro states clearly that NodeBus is according to IEEE 802.3
standard. This implies that you can connect AW or WP directly through an
Ethernet card. so, why using DNBI . the only difference between old Ethernet
and IEEE 802.3 standard I know is in the "type" field in the frame structure and
all new Ethernet cards are according to IEEE 802.3 Standard. So, what is realy
the difference??.

Regards
Ashraf Tantawy






---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Open-loop detection on analog output cards

[Corey R Clingo]

Yes, but it would be much cleaner if it were just part of the AO FBM's onboard
diagnostics.  I would even settle for a single A/D for all output channels,
multiplexed between them on a 5 or 10 second cycle, if circuitry or PC board
space is an issue.

Thanks to all who responded.

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation




Would it be possible to loop the 4-20 ma output  through a 4-20 ma input and
alarm it in the ain  block? Another way might be to add a low value resistor
in the loop and monitor a voltage drop across it with an FBM 02.This would
take an extra input for each loop. I do not know what type of isolation
problem, if any, you might run into. I would wire it to a different FBM. If
this would work it would save you from
having to install a position transmitter on the valve.

Loyd Greer





---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: ACM Module

[Corey R Clingo]

Yeah, maybe twice, because I think he was looking for Triconex interface info,
not Allen-Bradley ;-)

Corey





"Johnson, Alex (Foxboro)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 05/16/2001 11:57:21 AM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   Foxboro DCS Mail List mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


 -Original Message-
 From: Johnson, Alex (Foxboro) [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 11:52 AM
 To:  Foxboro DCS Mail List
 Subject:  RE: ACM Module

 The document B0193MK Rev D has sizing information. I'll send Chad a
copy.
 The version of the document on my FoxDoc CD is Revision D and it
lacks
 sizing information.

 Basically, it is about as fast as a CP-10 and can hold more blocks.

 The Rev D document says that it can handle only 300 outgoing points.
I
 believe that this is a typographical error and that the number
should be
 3000, but I'm checking on it.



 The AB interface options are:


 *Micro-I/A
 *over Ethernet
 *over AB-DH
 *DI-30 (FT or non-FT) over AB-DH
 *AW-I over Ethernet
 *AB Station (Co-Processor board installed in the PLC/5)



 For points per dollar, you should look at Micro-I/A. It is faster
than the
 DI for data transfer and has more RAM.


 For a small and inexpensive total solution, the AW-I is appropriate.


 For a system with redundancy requirements, use the DI.


 There are lots of other points to ponder, but this is a summary.









---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

OPC client for I/A?

[Corey R Clingo]

Hello all,

I'm looking for a way(s) to get data from 3rd-party OPC servers into points on
an I/A system.  I'd rather not buy an AW70, as we don't have any now and are
looking to do this as cheaply as possible, but I don't have a problem with
something running on a generic PC and talking to a 51-series box.

I've seen 3rd-party OPC servers for the I/A, but no clients.  The only client
I've come across is the one from Foxboro, but that requires an AW70, as far as I
can tell.

The data is monitor-only and extreme robustness of the system is not required
(if it were, I wouldn't be using OPC in the first place ;-).

Any pointers or, better yet, actual application experience in this area would be
most helpful.

TIA,

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation



---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: HLBL REF.

[Corey R Clingo]

OK, you've gone and confused me now (don't get the big head; it's not that hard
to do ;-).

I am kind of new to I/A, and this whole checkpoint/workfile/CP's memory thing
has me asking a lot of questions, to say the least.  I had thought that the
checkpoint at least was a direct copy of the CP's memory, but from what you say
below this is not the case.  (Emotional state on discovering this deleted...)

Sois there anything else supplied by Foxvensys that can make changes to the
CP's memory that cannot be duplicated on-disk?

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation







Ken,

As others have stated, extreme caution should be taken when using setpars.

Anytime setpars is used for bulk changes it should be followed by an upload
and then a checkpoint (if you want the changes to be there in the event of
a reboot), because setpars makes active changes in the CP only, not in the
workfile or checkpoint file.
 setpars -- makes active change in CP
 upload -- updates settable parameters in CP to station workfile
 checkpoint -- builds new checkpoint file based on station workfile
One of the big dangers in using setpars is that it can change non-settable
parameters.  These changes can not be updated in the station workfile with
an upload, resulting in a mismatch between checkpoint file, station
workfile, and CP.  Wildcards can be used in the filter specifications in
setpars which can lead to unforseen changes due to unexpected matches.
Making a small mistake when updating a setpars script can cause extensive
damage to control logic.

If you are making changes to settable parameters in an operating plant and
need to do them from a UNIX script, consider using omset or omsetimp.

Kevin FitzGerrell







---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Modbus gateways discontinued?

[Corey R Clingo]

When did this get announced?  Is this the Integrator line?  What about the
Allen-Bradley ones?  What is Invensys' proposed replacement?

We don't have Modbus but have 3 A-B Integrator 30s.  Some other plants at our
site do use MB Integrators though.

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation





"Schouten, Frits JF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07/18/2001 11:13:17
PM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   "Foxboro DCS Mail List (E-mail)" 

RE: Portable PC

[Corey R Clingo]

I tried VNC awhile back on an AW51E.  It worked pretty well, but I ran it in
daemon mode, and it had a tendency to die unexpectedly when no one was
connected.  I plan to do more experimentation on it when I get some time.

As a side note, I frequently use the Solaris VNC client to take control of my
desktop PC so I can read e-mail, look at FoxDoc (since its updater doesn't run
on Solaris -- grrr), etc. while "in the hole" doing configuration...

Corey





Fitzgerrell Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07/28/2001 05:18:21 AM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   Foxboro DCS Mail List 

RE: Solaris 2.6

[Corey R Clingo]

No.  The _source_ code is generally compatible, but binaries are not generally
compatible across platforms for any OS.  You have to compile it on each
platform.

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation





"Bruley, Peter T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 12/11/2000 09:57:08 AM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   Foxboro
cc:
Subject:  RE: Solaris 2.6



LINUX is free and runs on SPARC.

The bonus is that it also runs on INTEL, MAC and others.

I don't have the resources but.. if I had a binary compiled to run on
SPARC/LINUX would the same binary run on INTEL/LINUX ?

Peter

 --
 From:  Stan Brown
 Sent:  Thursday, December 07, 2000 8:52 PM
 To:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject:  Re: Solaris 2.6

 On Mon Dec  4 14:04:02 2000 David Johnson wrote...
 >
 >Yeah,
 >
 >The rest of the world is running Solaris 8, but Foxboro isn't sure
if 2.6
 >is stable yet.  After a couple more years of intensive testing I
expect
 >Solaris 2.6 to be included with I/A.
 >
 >
  I strongly sispect that this is a mone$ issue. My geuss is
that Foxboro has an
  unlimited binry re-distribution license for Solaris 2.6, and
Sun won'ts $$ to
  allow them to redistribute newer versions.

  Interestingly enough the HP-UX licenseing position is,
ownership of a mcahine
  implies the right to run base OS binaries. How you get them
(media) is another
  issue. So I would think an OEM using HP-UX would not have
the problem. Anyone
  with ABB systems care to comment on this?


 --
 Stan Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
843-745-3154
 Charleston SC.
 --
 Windows 98: n.
  useless extension to a minor patch release for 32-bit
extensions and
  a graphical shell for a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating
system
  originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor, written by a
2-bit
  company that can't stand for 1 bit of competition.
 -
 (c) 2000 Stan Brown.  Redistribution via the Microsoft Network is
prohibited.


---
 This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company.
All
 postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no
warranty
 is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information
disseminated
 through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold
the
 list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur
due to
 your application of information received from this mailing list.

 To be removed from this list, send mail to
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]








---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: FBM1, HART 275 and Rosemont 3051 Transmitter

[Corey R Clingo]

We have had this problem as well.  As Chad said, it exists because the dropping
resistor on Foxboro FBMs is 50 ohms, which does not give enough loop resistance
for the HART handheld to read the superimposed digital signal.

I do not believe Foxboro offers a 250-ohm dropping resistor option (I asked
once) on the "classic" (100-series) FBMs.  I hope they do on the 200-series.

Every other system I've runn across (Allen-Bradley, Triconex, Honeywell) use
250-ohm resistors.

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation





"Airhart, Chad M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/30/2001 11:00:01 AM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   'Foxboro DCS Mail List'  -Original Message-
> From:   Loupe, Rory (RJ) [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent:   Thursday, August 30, 2001 10:52 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: FBM1, HART 275 and Rosemont 3051 Transmitter
>
> Our instrument guys are having trouble communicating with a HART 275
> communicator to a Rosemont 3051 level transmitter while connected to the
> Foxboro I/A FBM1 input point.  The instrument is being loop powered by the
> FBM1 (P and P+).  The only way we can get it to communicate is to put a
> 250
> ohm resistor across the pair of wires (parallel).  This allows us to
> communicate with the transmitter but we will not want to do this will the
> instrument is in service.  I have tried this with several different HART
> 275s, FBM1s and 3051 level transmitters.  If we disconnect the loop from
> I/A
> and use an Altec to power the loop, everything works as it should.  This
> eliminates our cabling as a problem, in my humble opinion.
>
> Has anyone else experienced this problem?  Is there a solution to allow
> the
> communicator to work without a resistor across the pair of wires?
>
>Rory Loupe
> The Dow Chemical Company
> LHC-3
> P.O. Box 150, Building 6801 21255 highway 1,
> Building 6801
> Plaquemine, LA 70765-0150 USA  Plaquemine, LA  70764  USA
> Phone: 225.353-6409  Fax: 225.353.6968
>   E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> ---
> This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All
> postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty
> is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated
> through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the
> list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to
>
> your application of information received from this mailing list.
>
> To be removed from this list, send mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]

---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]








---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: vi Editor

[Corey R Clingo]

<>

Nice Freudian slip ;-)  Seriously, free ones are not bad, either: check out
http://www.cygwin.com/ for a complete GNU toolkit on Windoze 95/NT/2K, including
vim, a vi clone.

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation



---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: PLC Question

[Corey R Clingo]

We second that emotion (I'll be 70 before I buy a '70 :-)

We are currently in a similar situation trying to integrate some devices via an
OPC server, and looking at the 3rd-party approach as well.  I like the
"super-integrator" (CP60 with Ethernet comms) idea as well, although one of
those will probably never work for OPC.

We had I/O scan overruns on all 3 of our AB Integrator 30s.  I backed off the
scanning of most ABSCAN blocks on them to 2 secs or slower, which fixed the
problem on 2 of them, but not on the third.  I tried phasing out the points on
the third, but changing the phase caused the ABSCAN blocks to smurf, so we had
to punt on that (we sent a saveall to TAC and they were able to change phases
with no problem...sigh).  I can't understand the nature of the scan overruns, as
we are not scanning that many points.

It's too bad, really, because I like the transparency the Integrator provides.
The points appear to the operator just like a CP, so you don't have any training
issues - as you might, say,  with an all-HPM Honeywell TDC system with a PLC
Gateway.  But our crusty old PLC Gateways can scan hundreds of points per second
- to the bandwidth limit on the A-B DH+ - without problems.  Alas, I cannot say
that about Integrator 30s.

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation





"Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/14/2001 09:21:38 AM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   'Foxboro DCS Mail List' 

RE: PLC Question

[Corey R Clingo]

Is it just me, or is this ridiculous?  Does their documentation say "writes
don't work well", "this is a read-only device", "good write performance is
option # xxx-yyy, call your account manager for details", or something?  Was
your product a beta version, and did you get a concomitant discount (preferably
free)?

This is about the third time I've heard or dealt with a Foxboro product that
wasn't ready for prime time.  One of these flaws (CP40B) have taken over a year
to fix.  Does Foxboro test anything before it goes out?  I've only been dealing
with I/A for about 10 months, and I like a lot of what it has to offer, but this
kind of thing makes me nervous, not only about my system, but about the company
in general.  And now they want to migrate everything to a new Micro$oft-based
marketecture - one which has been in development for 3 years and is still,
apparently, vapor.  (Oh, Microsoft - there's another outfit with a stellar
reputation for quality control).

I will say this: if I were bidding a system on a grass-roots plant, Invensys
wouldn't even get a call.  It's no wonder they are entertaining buyout offers...

Corey Clingo
Sr. Engineer
BASF Corporation



After some serious heart-to-heart w/ Foxboro tech personnel, they
admitted that the writes never worked properly for them either and
they had no fixes for it.

I do not know if the problem has been fixed since then.

Mike Adams
[EMAIL PROTECTED]







---
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All 
postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty 
is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated 
through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the 
list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to 
your application of information received from this mailing list.

To be removed from this list, send mail to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: PLC Question

[Corey R Clingo]

One interesting thing is, that with at least two of the vendors you mentioned
(Emerson/Fisher-Rosemount and, at some point in the near future I believe,
Honeywell), their Windoze-based systems aren't just for small/medium size
applications.  They claim scalability from a one-rack SCADA setup to controlling
an entire large plant.  Whether they can stand behind these claims is a topic
for another discussion, but they do have a head start.

I think Invensys will probably want to similarly unify their product lines, to
save money if nothing else.  At least Wonderware has a good amount of Windoze
development experience, but their applications have been mostly smaller-scale,
low-cost stuff.  Unfortunately, I think Invensys is not going to tell us this
untill the last minute, in order to avoid alienating their Solaris I/A installed
base.  I also fear that we will be paying for development, in more ways than
one.  And you are right; if their migration story is akin to the one for
Spectrum->I/A, we will probably be talking to other vendors as well.

Corey





John Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/17/2001 01:55:06 PM

Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:   'Foxboro DCS Mail List'