RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[Freddy Why]

To Mail List,

Regarding item 2)  FoxView , I am not sure if it will
support the message line of the Operator
Message Interface package. The FoxDraw libraries do not have
any of these
Message line elements.

Regards,


Freddy Why

AFH Devers - Engineering Services South Africa
A division of Protea Data Systems

Email Address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
Website: http://www.protea.co.za   

Telephone Number:
(+27) (11) 719-5750 (Direct)


-Original Message-
From:   James Kahlden
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:   Wednesday, March 21, 2001 3:14 PM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade
question

Hello List,

We are looking at updating our version 4.3 system to
version 6.2.1 in order to expand our system to include the new CP60.  We
currently use AW/WP51B's with Display Manager and the Legacy Historian.  Our
CP's are fault tolerant CP40A's.  We have 5 nodes connected via Carrier Band
LAN.  We can not shut down all nodes at once, since this system controls two
600 megawatt coal fired power generators.

Questions?

1. Do all of the nodes need to be converted at one
time to 6.2.1 or can some nodes exist at 4.3  while part of the node is at
6.2.1?

2. Can we continue to use our Display Manager
displays, or do we have to change to the Fox View displays?

3. Can we continue to use the Legacy Historian at
version 6.2.1, or do we have to convert to the AIM historian?

4. Is there a different CP image at version 6.2.1
that requires a reboot of the CP for this upgrade?

Thanks for any guidance that you can give, as we are
looking to see what windows of opportunity we have for doing this type of
upgrade.

Jim Kahlden
[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: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question - Why not FoxView?

[Jaudon, Michael]

We "migrated" from the older display manager to FoxView about 3 years ago.

My opinion is use FoxView if you are starting a system from scratch
(building new displays and controls)

If it is an existing system with existing graphics do not convert old
graphics to FoxView!  There are numerous problems with the graphics after
they are converted.  Problems that won't show up until you make
modifications to the graphic.  You will begin to see messages like
"Unrecognized Attributes Encountered".  I can tell you how to solve these
problems but it would take too long here.

Bo Stear is right about being slower and it is too much for a "B" box.
Graphics are different from site to site so I can't say how slow anybody
else's graphics will be.  Ours typically take about 2 to 5 seconds after
graphics have been called up the first time.  First time graphics may take
30 seconds.  FoxDraw "hangs" up a lot with a "B" box but if you have an "E"
box on the node/network it will not be a problem.

Overall FoxDraw does have some extra functionality that display
builder/configurator does not have and that is well worth going with
FoxView/FoxDraw.  Remember also the FoxSelect will have to be reloaded after
every ICC change that required a block addition.

Regards,

Michael L. Jaudon
Kerr-McGee Chemical LLC
(662)343-8710
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: Stear, Bo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 10:42 AM
To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List'
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question - Why not FoxView?


Since you asked seriously, I'll respond properly.

We that have had Foxboro I/A on our sites for many years had to deal with an
especially slow call up time for displays in the early days, something on
the order of 15 seconds or more.  As time went by, the DM was improved and
the hardware was updated to faster processors and now the DM is a real
zinger as far as speed is concerned.  Early releases of Foxview were an
instant reminder of the slow speed of the DM in its early stages because the
call up time for it was something on the order of 15 seconds or more on the,
then prevalent, WP51 Style 'B' workstations.  Even now, the current Foxview
is 3 to 5 times slower in call up time than the DM on the 'B' style
workstations.  Since we have some 80 style 'B' workstations in house now,
even the very best advantage upgrade to a faster processor would be too
expensive and so is not possible.  If we were to switch to Foxview today, I
expect that our operators would soon hang me from some pipe rack by my
thumbs because they are used to the
speed.

SO, I do not dislike Foxview for any particularly detrimental reason and
others that agree with me probably do so for the same reasons (but they
should speak for themselves).

-Original Message-
From: Anderson, Gary T(Z02256) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 9:33 AM
To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List'
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question - Why not FoxView?



I have to jump in here and ask why the reluctance to use FoxView? What don't
I know?  What should I know?

We are a relatively new IA site and have never used the old Display Manager.
Other than potential processor loading of older hardware and converting the
displays, I can't see any reason not to use FoxView.  The old style look of
the Display Manager was enough incentive to cause us to start with FoxView.


Gary Anderson
Arizona Public Service

-Original Message-----
From: Julie Monsour [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:29 AM
To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
Subject: Re: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


Where's your sense of adventure, Bo?  Foxview is GREAT!

Julie Monsour

- Original Message -----
From: "Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:46 AM
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


> It will be a dead heat as to whether you or we are the last to migrate to
FoxView....
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:36 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Jim,
>
> We did an upgrade like yours last year (with a slight difference, we went
> from 6.1 to 6.2.1 -- for all practical purposes, 4.3 and 6.1 are the
same).
> Here are our take on your questions:
>
> 1. No, the nodes can be converted individually. Foxboro recommends that
you
> upgrade the node where CSA resides first. Luckily it works out for us
> without having to move the CSA server to the first node to be converted.
>
> 2. Yes, most definitely. We'll be the last system to be forced to migrate
to
> 

RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[Johnson, Alex]

Re: But while we're on this topic, why aren't the configurator documents on
the CD?  


I don't know. I suspect that it was never converted to HTML. I believe that
a .pdf file does exist, but I'll have to check.



Re: 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)?  


There are no enhancements to the Display Builder or Display Configurator
product in the offing. Basically, FV is the enhanced DM. In fact, certain
internal documents refer to it as the DM.

Bug fixes are corrected and the software is ported to each release. [I
wonder what the last actual correction was. That would be interesting to
know. One would assume that a piece of software that is 15 years old would
not be generating a large number of defect reports (as opposed to
enhancements).]



Re: And what is Foxboro's official position on the longevity of legacy DM?


Official positions come from Marketing, but I have heard high level company
management say in public that we will support all of the I/A Series HW and
SW as long as anyone needs them.

It boils down to we like our customers and we want to keep them happy.



Regards,


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


-Original Message-
From:   Corey R Clingo [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:   Wednesday, March 21, 2001 5:11 PM
To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
    Subject:    RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

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]

---
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]

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: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[Johnson, Alex]

Re: DM documentation is not available on the CD


I'd like to clarify this statement. The K0173TQ-G - FoxDoc for V6.2.1 has
the following in its table of contents:

Display Builder (B0193AQ: Available in hard-copy only.)   
Display Builder for 50 Series Workstations (B0193MP: Available in hard-copy
only.)   
Display Configurator for 20/30 Series Workstations (B0193AR)   
Display Configurator for 50 Series Workstations (B0193NL)   
Display Conventions Configurator (B0193CQ)   
Display Edit Utility (Help File)   
Display Engineering for 50 Series Workstations (B0193MQ)   
Display Engineering (Windows NT Operating System) (B0400MQ)   
Display Engineering Utilities (B0193WU)   
Display Manager Commands (B0193DF)   
Display Reporter and Connection Editor (B0193JN) 


While it is true that the configuration document is not available on the CD,
the majority of these documents are specific to the DM. 



Regards,


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


-Original Message-
From:   Corey R Clingo [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:   Wednesday, March 21, 2001 10:11 AM
To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
Subject:    RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

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

[Stear, Bo]

That is, Foxboro Unconditionally Backs All Releases..

-Original Message-
From: Julie Monsour [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 1:13 PM
To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
Subject: Re: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


hmmm...Well, maybe "adventure" was a poor choice for a word, then.

- Original Message -
From: "Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 10:29 AM
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


> According to Websters:
>
> Adventure (ad-ven'tur), n. an event the issue of which is determined by
chance: v.t. to hazard or risk.
>
> Hmmm, risk, hazard, chance... gimme a break!
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Julie Monsour [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:29 AM
> To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
> Subject: Re: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Where's your sense of adventure, Bo?  Foxview is GREAT!
>
> Julie Monsour
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:46 AM
> Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> > It will be a dead heat as to whether you or we are the last to migrate
to
> FoxView....
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:36 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
> >
> >
> > Jim,
> >
> > We did an upgrade like yours last year (with a slight difference, we
went
> > from 6.1 to 6.2.1 -- for all practical purposes, 4.3 and 6.1 are the
> same).
> > Here are our take on your questions:
> >
> > 1. No, the nodes can be converted individually. Foxboro recommends that
> you
> > upgrade the node where CSA resides first. Luckily it works out for us
> > without having to move the CSA server to the first node to be converted.
> >
> > 2. Yes, most definitely. We'll be the last system to be forced to
migrate
> to
> > FoxView.
> >
> > 3. Again, yes. Legacy historians work fine.
> >
> > 4. We did this as a Day 0 install, so we reboot the CPs anyway. It
didn't
> > make any difference to us if the CP images were new or not.
> >
> > Duc
> >
> > --
> > Duc M. Do
> > Process Control Systems
> > Dow Corning, Carrollton Plant
> > Carrollton, KY, US
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: James Kahlden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:14 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
> >
> >
> > Hello List,
> >
> > We are looking at updating our version 4.3 system to version 6.2.1 in
> order
> > to expand our system to include the new CP60.  We currently use
AW/WP51B's
> > with Display Manager and the Legacy Historian.  Our CP's are fault
> tolerant
> > CP40A's.  We have 5 nodes connected via Carrier Band LAN.  We can not
shut
> > down all nodes at once, since this system controls two 600 megawatt coal
> > fired power generators.
> >
> > Questions?
> >
> > 1. Do all of the nodes need to be converted at one time to 6.2.1 or can
> some
> > nodes exist at 4.3  while part of the node is at 6.2.1?
> >
> > 2. Can we continue to use our Display Manager displays, or do we have to
> > change to the Fox View displays?
> >
> > 3. Can we continue to use the Legacy Historian at version 6.2.1, or do
we
> > have to convert to the AIM historian?
> >
> > 4. Is there a different CP image at version 6.2.1 that requires a reboot
> of
> > the CP for this upgrade?
> >
> > Thanks for any guidance that you can give, as we are looking to see what
> > windows of opportunity we have for doing this type of upgrade.
> >
> > Jim Kahlden
> > [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 rece

RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[Stear, Bo]

Perhaps FUBAR?

-Original Message-
From: Julie Monsour [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 1:13 PM
To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
Subject: Re: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


hmmm...Well, maybe "adventure" was a poor choice for a word, then.

- Original Message -
From: "Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 10:29 AM
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


> According to Websters:
>
> Adventure (ad-ven'tur), n. an event the issue of which is determined by
chance: v.t. to hazard or risk.
>
> Hmmm, risk, hazard, chance... gimme a break!
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Julie Monsour [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:29 AM
> To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
> Subject: Re: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Where's your sense of adventure, Bo?  Foxview is GREAT!
>
> Julie Monsour
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:46 AM
> Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> > It will be a dead heat as to whether you or we are the last to migrate
to
> FoxView....
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:36 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
> >
> >
> > Jim,
> >
> > We did an upgrade like yours last year (with a slight difference, we
went
> > from 6.1 to 6.2.1 -- for all practical purposes, 4.3 and 6.1 are the
> same).
> > Here are our take on your questions:
> >
> > 1. No, the nodes can be converted individually. Foxboro recommends that
> you
> > upgrade the node where CSA resides first. Luckily it works out for us
> > without having to move the CSA server to the first node to be converted.
> >
> > 2. Yes, most definitely. We'll be the last system to be forced to
migrate
> to
> > FoxView.
> >
> > 3. Again, yes. Legacy historians work fine.
> >
> > 4. We did this as a Day 0 install, so we reboot the CPs anyway. It
didn't
> > make any difference to us if the CP images were new or not.
> >
> > Duc
> >
> > --
> > Duc M. Do
> > Process Control Systems
> > Dow Corning, Carrollton Plant
> > Carrollton, KY, US
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: James Kahlden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:14 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
> >
> >
> > Hello List,
> >
> > We are looking at updating our version 4.3 system to version 6.2.1 in
> order
> > to expand our system to include the new CP60.  We currently use
AW/WP51B's
> > with Display Manager and the Legacy Historian.  Our CP's are fault
> tolerant
> > CP40A's.  We have 5 nodes connected via Carrier Band LAN.  We can not
shut
> > down all nodes at once, since this system controls two 600 megawatt coal
> > fired power generators.
> >
> > Questions?
> >
> > 1. Do all of the nodes need to be converted at one time to 6.2.1 or can
> some
> > nodes exist at 4.3  while part of the node is at 6.2.1?
> >
> > 2. Can we continue to use our Display Manager displays, or do we have to
> > change to the Fox View displays?
> >
> > 3. Can we continue to use the Legacy Historian at version 6.2.1, or do
we
> > have to convert to the AIM historian?
> >
> > 4. Is there a different CP image at version 6.2.1 that requires a reboot
> of
> > the CP for this upgrade?
> >
> > Thanks for any guidance that you can give, as we are looking to see what
> > windows of opportunity we have for doing this type of upgrade.
> >
> > Jim Kahlden
> > [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.
> >
> &g

Re: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[Julie Monsour]

hmmm...Well, maybe "adventure" was a poor choice for a word, then.

- Original Message -
From: "Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 10:29 AM
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


> According to Websters:
>
> Adventure (ad-ven'tur), n. an event the issue of which is determined by
chance: v.t. to hazard or risk.
>
> Hmmm, risk, hazard, chance... gimme a break!
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Julie Monsour [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:29 AM
> To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
> Subject: Re: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Where's your sense of adventure, Bo?  Foxview is GREAT!
>
> Julie Monsour
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:46 AM
> Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> > It will be a dead heat as to whether you or we are the last to migrate
to
> FoxView....
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:36 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
> >
> >
> > Jim,
> >
> > We did an upgrade like yours last year (with a slight difference, we
went
> > from 6.1 to 6.2.1 -- for all practical purposes, 4.3 and 6.1 are the
> same).
> > Here are our take on your questions:
> >
> > 1. No, the nodes can be converted individually. Foxboro recommends that
> you
> > upgrade the node where CSA resides first. Luckily it works out for us
> > without having to move the CSA server to the first node to be converted.
> >
> > 2. Yes, most definitely. We'll be the last system to be forced to
migrate
> to
> > FoxView.
> >
> > 3. Again, yes. Legacy historians work fine.
> >
> > 4. We did this as a Day 0 install, so we reboot the CPs anyway. It
didn't
> > make any difference to us if the CP images were new or not.
> >
> > Duc
> >
> > --
> > Duc M. Do
> > Process Control Systems
> > Dow Corning, Carrollton Plant
> > Carrollton, KY, US
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: James Kahlden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:14 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
> >
> >
> > Hello List,
> >
> > We are looking at updating our version 4.3 system to version 6.2.1 in
> order
> > to expand our system to include the new CP60.  We currently use
AW/WP51B's
> > with Display Manager and the Legacy Historian.  Our CP's are fault
> tolerant
> > CP40A's.  We have 5 nodes connected via Carrier Band LAN.  We can not
shut
> > down all nodes at once, since this system controls two 600 megawatt coal
> > fired power generators.
> >
> > Questions?
> >
> > 1. Do all of the nodes need to be converted at one time to 6.2.1 or can
> some
> > nodes exist at 4.3  while part of the node is at 6.2.1?
> >
> > 2. Can we continue to use our Display Manager displays, or do we have to
> > change to the Fox View displays?
> >
> > 3. Can we continue to use the Legacy Historian at version 6.2.1, or do
we
> > have to convert to the AIM historian?
> >
> > 4. Is there a different CP image at version 6.2.1 that requires a reboot
> of
> > the CP for this upgrade?
> >
> > Thanks for any guidance that you can give, as we are looking to see what
> > windows of opportunity we have for doing this type of upgrade.
> >
> > Jim Kahlden
> > [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

RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[Neil Martin]

Some things to think about.  On the plus side FoxDraw has the build and
configuration functions within the same program, it is easier to edit text,
some additional file formats can sometimes be incorporated into a FoxDraw
graphic, you can create some nifty looking graphics, and there might be few
new trend enhancements.  However, there may be more negatives than
positives concerning FoxView/FoxDraw.  These negatives include a reduced
graphic size, a lot higher memory requirements, runs slower on Sun
Stations, often painful use of nested links/objects in graphic library
objects, the increased difficulty or lack of ability to get FoxView to
start up in different Environments based on the dmcfg file, the current
inability of FoxDraw (51 Series) to retain an existing link to another
directory when the graphic file is modified (i.e. if a graphic file exists
in /usr/disp and is linked to /usr/menus/d1, the link will be lost if the
file is saved out of FoxDraw).

We too are still running the old Display Manager on most of our systems,
except for one that has a mixture of both Sun and NT stations.



   
   
Corey R Clingo 
   
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  To: Foxboro DCS Mail List 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: cc:   
   
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]    Subject:     RE: Version 4.3 
to 6.2.1 upgrade question   
oject.org> 
   
   
   
   
   
03/21/01 10:11 AM  
   
Please respond to "Foxboro 
   
DCS Mail List" 
   
   
   
   
   



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 - Why not FoxView?

[Stear, Bo]

Since you asked seriously, I'll respond properly.

We that have had Foxboro I/A on our sites for many years had to deal with an 
especially slow call up time for displays in the early days, something on the order of 
15 seconds or more.  As time went by, the DM was improved and the hardware was updated 
to faster processors and now the DM is a real zinger as far as speed is concerned.  
Early releases of Foxview were an instant reminder of the slow speed of the DM in its 
early stages because the call up time for it was something on the order of 15 seconds 
or more on the, then prevalent, WP51 Style 'B' workstations.  Even now, the current 
Foxview is 3 to 5 times slower in call up time than the DM on the 'B' style 
workstations.  Since we have some 80 style 'B' workstations in house now, even the 
very best advantage upgrade to a faster processor would be too expensive and so is not 
possible.  If we were to switch to Foxview today, I expect that our operators would 
soon hang me from some pipe rack by my thumbs because they are used !
to the
speed.

SO, I do not dislike Foxview for any particularly detrimental reason and others that 
agree with me probably do so for the same reasons (but they should speak for 
themselves).

-Original Message-
From: Anderson, Gary T(Z02256) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 9:33 AM
To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List'
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question - Why not FoxView?



I have to jump in here and ask why the reluctance to use FoxView? What don't
I know?  What should I know?

We are a relatively new IA site and have never used the old Display Manager.
Other than potential processor loading of older hardware and converting the
displays, I can't see any reason not to use FoxView.  The old style look of
the Display Manager was enough incentive to cause us to start with FoxView.


Gary Anderson
Arizona Public Service

-Original Message-
From: Julie Monsour [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:29 AM
To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
Subject: Re: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


Where's your sense of adventure, Bo?  Foxview is GREAT!

Julie Monsour

- Original Message -
From: "Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:46 AM
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


> It will be a dead heat as to whether you or we are the last to migrate to
FoxView
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:36 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Jim,
>
> We did an upgrade like yours last year (with a slight difference, we went
> from 6.1 to 6.2.1 -- for all practical purposes, 4.3 and 6.1 are the
same).
> Here are our take on your questions:
>
> 1. No, the nodes can be converted individually. Foxboro recommends that
you
> upgrade the node where CSA resides first. Luckily it works out for us
> without having to move the CSA server to the first node to be converted.
>
> 2. Yes, most definitely. We'll be the last system to be forced to migrate
to
> FoxView.
>
> 3. Again, yes. Legacy historians work fine.
>
> 4. We did this as a Day 0 install, so we reboot the CPs anyway. It didn't
> make any difference to us if the CP images were new or not.
>
> Duc
>
> --
> Duc M. Do
> Process Control Systems
> Dow Corning, Carrollton Plant
> Carrollton, KY, US
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: James Kahlden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:14 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Hello List,
>
> We are looking at updating our version 4.3 system to version 6.2.1 in
order
> to expand our system to include the new CP60.  We currently use AW/WP51B's
> with Display Manager and the Legacy Historian.  Our CP's are fault
tolerant
> CP40A's.  We have 5 nodes connected via Carrier Band LAN.  We can not shut
> down all nodes at once, since this system controls two 600 megawatt coal
> fired power generators.
>
> Questions?
>
> 1. Do all of the nodes need to be converted at one time to 6.2.1 or can
some
> nodes exist at 4.3  while part of the node is at 6.2.1?
>
> 2. Can we continue to use our Display Manager displays, or do we have to
> change to the Fox View displays?
>
> 3. Can we continue to use the Legacy Historian at version 6.2.1, or do we
> have to convert to the AIM historian?
>
> 4. Is there a different CP image at version 6.2.1 that requires a reboot
of
> the CP for this upgrade?
>
> Thanks for any guidance that you can 

RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[Stear, Bo]

According to Websters:

Adventure (ad-ven'tur), n. an event the issue of which is determined by chance: v.t. 
to hazard or risk.

Hmmm, risk, hazard, chance... gimme a break!


-Original Message-
From: Julie Monsour [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:29 AM
To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
Subject: Re: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


Where's your sense of adventure, Bo?  Foxview is GREAT!

Julie Monsour

- Original Message -
From: "Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:46 AM
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


> It will be a dead heat as to whether you or we are the last to migrate to
FoxView
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:36 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Jim,
>
> We did an upgrade like yours last year (with a slight difference, we went
> from 6.1 to 6.2.1 -- for all practical purposes, 4.3 and 6.1 are the
same).
> Here are our take on your questions:
>
> 1. No, the nodes can be converted individually. Foxboro recommends that
you
> upgrade the node where CSA resides first. Luckily it works out for us
> without having to move the CSA server to the first node to be converted.
>
> 2. Yes, most definitely. We'll be the last system to be forced to migrate
to
> FoxView.
>
> 3. Again, yes. Legacy historians work fine.
>
> 4. We did this as a Day 0 install, so we reboot the CPs anyway. It didn't
> make any difference to us if the CP images were new or not.
>
> Duc
>
> --
> Duc M. Do
> Process Control Systems
> Dow Corning, Carrollton Plant
> Carrollton, KY, US
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: James Kahlden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:14 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Hello List,
>
> We are looking at updating our version 4.3 system to version 6.2.1 in
order
> to expand our system to include the new CP60.  We currently use AW/WP51B's
> with Display Manager and the Legacy Historian.  Our CP's are fault
tolerant
> CP40A's.  We have 5 nodes connected via Carrier Band LAN.  We can not shut
> down all nodes at once, since this system controls two 600 megawatt coal
> fired power generators.
>
> Questions?
>
> 1. Do all of the nodes need to be converted at one time to 6.2.1 or can
some
> nodes exist at 4.3  while part of the node is at 6.2.1?
>
> 2. Can we continue to use our Display Manager displays, or do we have to
> change to the Fox View displays?
>
> 3. Can we continue to use the Legacy Historian at version 6.2.1, or do we
> have to convert to the AIM historian?
>
> 4. Is there a different CP image at version 6.2.1 that requires a reboot
of
> the CP for this upgrade?
>
> Thanks for any guidance that you can give, as we are looking to see what
> windows of opportunity we have for doing this type of upgrade.
>
> Jim Kahlden
> [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 

RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question - Why not FoxView?

[Tom Lorenz]

We have both the old display manager and new FoxView on our system; 4
nodes/1 LAN. FoxView is definitely the way to go. The old display manager
graphics can easily be converted to FoxView. But the FoxView graphics we
started from scratch are better then the converted ones. We did upgrade
some motherboards and add some RAM to help some "B" boxes handle the new
graphics.





"Anderson, Gary T(Z02256)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
@lists.TheCassandraProject.org> on 03/21/2001 09:32:56 AM

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

Sent by:  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


To:   "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject:  RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question - Why not FoxView?



I have to jump in here and ask why the reluctance to use FoxView? What
don't
I know?  What should I know?

We are a relatively new IA site and have never used the old Display
Manager.
Other than potential processor loading of older hardware and converting the
displays, I can't see any reason not to use FoxView.  The old style look of
the Display Manager was enough incentive to cause us to start with FoxView.


Gary Anderson
Arizona Public Service

-Original Message-
From: Julie Monsour [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:29 AM
To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
Subject: Re: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


Where's your sense of adventure, Bo?  Foxview is GREAT!

Julie Monsour

- Original Message -
From: "Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:46 AM
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


> It will be a dead heat as to whether you or we are the last to migrate to
FoxView
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:36 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Jim,
>
> We did an upgrade like yours last year (with a slight difference, we went
> from 6.1 to 6.2.1 -- for all practical purposes, 4.3 and 6.1 are the
same).
> Here are our take on your questions:
>
> 1. No, the nodes can be converted individually. Foxboro recommends that
you
> upgrade the node where CSA resides first. Luckily it works out for us
> without having to move the CSA server to the first node to be converted.
>
> 2. Yes, most definitely. We'll be the last system to be forced to migrate
to
> FoxView.
>
> 3. Again, yes. Legacy historians work fine.
>
> 4. We did this as a Day 0 install, so we reboot the CPs anyway. It didn't
> make any difference to us if the CP images were new or not.
>
> Duc
>
> --
> Duc M. Do
> Process Control Systems
> Dow Corning, Carrollton Plant
> Carrollton, KY, US
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: James Kahlden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:14 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Hello List,
>
> We are looking at updating our version 4.3 system to version 6.2.1 in
order
> to expand our system to include the new CP60.  We currently use
AW/WP51B's
> with Display Manager and the Legacy Historian.  Our CP's are fault
tolerant
> CP40A's.  We have 5 nodes connected via Carrier Band LAN.  We can not
shut
> down all nodes at once, since this system controls two 600 megawatt coal
> fired power generators.
>
> Questions?
>
> 1. Do all of the nodes need to be converted at one time to 6.2.1 or can
some
> nodes exist at 4.3  while part of the node is at 6.2.1?
>
> 2. Can we continue to use our Display Manager displays, or do we have to
> change to the Fox View displays?
>
> 3. Can we continue to use the Legacy Historian at version 6.2.1, or do we
> have to convert to the AIM historian?
>
> 4. Is there a different CP image at version 6.2.1 that requires a reboot
of
> the CP for this upgrade?
>
> Thanks for any guidance that you can give, as we are looking to see what
> windows of opportunity we have for doing this type of upgrade.
>
> Jim Kahlden
> [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

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 - Why not FoxView?

[Anderson, Gary T(Z02256)]

I have to jump in here and ask why the reluctance to use FoxView? What don't
I know?  What should I know?

We are a relatively new IA site and have never used the old Display Manager.
Other than potential processor loading of older hardware and converting the
displays, I can't see any reason not to use FoxView.  The old style look of
the Display Manager was enough incentive to cause us to start with FoxView.


Gary Anderson
Arizona Public Service

-Original Message-
From: Julie Monsour [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:29 AM
To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
Subject: Re: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


Where's your sense of adventure, Bo?  Foxview is GREAT!

Julie Monsour

- Original Message -
From: "Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:46 AM
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


> It will be a dead heat as to whether you or we are the last to migrate to
FoxView
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:36 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Jim,
>
> We did an upgrade like yours last year (with a slight difference, we went
> from 6.1 to 6.2.1 -- for all practical purposes, 4.3 and 6.1 are the
same).
> Here are our take on your questions:
>
> 1. No, the nodes can be converted individually. Foxboro recommends that
you
> upgrade the node where CSA resides first. Luckily it works out for us
> without having to move the CSA server to the first node to be converted.
>
> 2. Yes, most definitely. We'll be the last system to be forced to migrate
to
> FoxView.
>
> 3. Again, yes. Legacy historians work fine.
>
> 4. We did this as a Day 0 install, so we reboot the CPs anyway. It didn't
> make any difference to us if the CP images were new or not.
>
> Duc
>
> --
> Duc M. Do
> Process Control Systems
> Dow Corning, Carrollton Plant
> Carrollton, KY, US
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: James Kahlden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:14 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Hello List,
>
> We are looking at updating our version 4.3 system to version 6.2.1 in
order
> to expand our system to include the new CP60.  We currently use AW/WP51B's
> with Display Manager and the Legacy Historian.  Our CP's are fault
tolerant
> CP40A's.  We have 5 nodes connected via Carrier Band LAN.  We can not shut
> down all nodes at once, since this system controls two 600 megawatt coal
> fired power generators.
>
> Questions?
>
> 1. Do all of the nodes need to be converted at one time to 6.2.1 or can
some
> nodes exist at 4.3  while part of the node is at 6.2.1?
>
> 2. Can we continue to use our Display Manager displays, or do we have to
> change to the Fox View displays?
>
> 3. Can we continue to use the Legacy Historian at version 6.2.1, or do we
> have to convert to the AIM historian?
>
> 4. Is there a different CP image at version 6.2.1 that requires a reboot
of
> the CP for this upgrade?
>
> Thanks for any guidance that you can give, as we are looking to see what
> windows of opportunity we have for doing this type of upgrade.
>
> Jim Kahlden
> [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 

Re: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[Julie Monsour]

Where's your sense of adventure, Bo?  Foxview is GREAT!

Julie Monsour

- Original Message -
From: "Stear, Bo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Foxboro DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:46 AM
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


> It will be a dead heat as to whether you or we are the last to migrate to
FoxView
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:36 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Jim,
>
> We did an upgrade like yours last year (with a slight difference, we went
> from 6.1 to 6.2.1 -- for all practical purposes, 4.3 and 6.1 are the
same).
> Here are our take on your questions:
>
> 1. No, the nodes can be converted individually. Foxboro recommends that
you
> upgrade the node where CSA resides first. Luckily it works out for us
> without having to move the CSA server to the first node to be converted.
>
> 2. Yes, most definitely. We'll be the last system to be forced to migrate
to
> FoxView.
>
> 3. Again, yes. Legacy historians work fine.
>
> 4. We did this as a Day 0 install, so we reboot the CPs anyway. It didn't
> make any difference to us if the CP images were new or not.
>
> Duc
>
> --
> Duc M. Do
> Process Control Systems
> Dow Corning, Carrollton Plant
> Carrollton, KY, US
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: James Kahlden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:14 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question
>
>
> Hello List,
>
> We are looking at updating our version 4.3 system to version 6.2.1 in
order
> to expand our system to include the new CP60.  We currently use AW/WP51B's
> with Display Manager and the Legacy Historian.  Our CP's are fault
tolerant
> CP40A's.  We have 5 nodes connected via Carrier Band LAN.  We can not shut
> down all nodes at once, since this system controls two 600 megawatt coal
> fired power generators.
>
> Questions?
>
> 1. Do all of the nodes need to be converted at one time to 6.2.1 or can
some
> nodes exist at 4.3  while part of the node is at 6.2.1?
>
> 2. Can we continue to use our Display Manager displays, or do we have to
> change to the Fox View displays?
>
> 3. Can we continue to use the Legacy Historian at version 6.2.1, or do we
> have to convert to the AIM historian?
>
> 4. Is there a different CP image at version 6.2.1 that requires a reboot
of
> the CP for this upgrade?
>
> Thanks for any guidance that you can give, as we are looking to see what
> windows of opportunity we have for doing this type of upgrade.
>
> Jim Kahlden
> [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: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[Stear, Bo]

It will be a dead heat as to whether you or we are the last to migrate to FoxView

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


Jim,

We did an upgrade like yours last year (with a slight difference, we went
from 6.1 to 6.2.1 -- for all practical purposes, 4.3 and 6.1 are the same).
Here are our take on your questions:

1. No, the nodes can be converted individually. Foxboro recommends that you
upgrade the node where CSA resides first. Luckily it works out for us
without having to move the CSA server to the first node to be converted.

2. Yes, most definitely. We'll be the last system to be forced to migrate to
FoxView.

3. Again, yes. Legacy historians work fine.

4. We did this as a Day 0 install, so we reboot the CPs anyway. It didn't
make any difference to us if the CP images were new or not.

Duc

-- 
Duc M. Do
Process Control Systems
Dow Corning, Carrollton Plant
Carrollton, KY, US


-Original Message-
From: James Kahlden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:14 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


Hello List,

We are looking at updating our version 4.3 system to version 6.2.1 in order
to expand our system to include the new CP60.  We currently use AW/WP51B's
with Display Manager and the Legacy Historian.  Our CP's are fault tolerant
CP40A's.  We have 5 nodes connected via Carrier Band LAN.  We can not shut
down all nodes at once, since this system controls two 600 megawatt coal
fired power generators.

Questions?

1. Do all of the nodes need to be converted at one time to 6.2.1 or can some
nodes exist at 4.3  while part of the node is at 6.2.1?

2. Can we continue to use our Display Manager displays, or do we have to
change to the Fox View displays?

3. Can we continue to use the Legacy Historian at version 6.2.1, or do we
have to convert to the AIM historian?

4. Is there a different CP image at version 6.2.1 that requires a reboot of
the CP for this upgrade?

Thanks for any guidance that you can give, as we are looking to see what
windows of opportunity we have for doing this type of upgrade.

Jim Kahlden
[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: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[duc . do]

Jim,

We did an upgrade like yours last year (with a slight difference, we went
from 6.1 to 6.2.1 -- for all practical purposes, 4.3 and 6.1 are the same).
Here are our take on your questions:

1. No, the nodes can be converted individually. Foxboro recommends that you
upgrade the node where CSA resides first. Luckily it works out for us
without having to move the CSA server to the first node to be converted.

2. Yes, most definitely. We'll be the last system to be forced to migrate to
FoxView.

3. Again, yes. Legacy historians work fine.

4. We did this as a Day 0 install, so we reboot the CPs anyway. It didn't
make any difference to us if the CP images were new or not.

Duc

-- 
Duc M. Do
Process Control Systems
Dow Corning, Carrollton Plant
Carrollton, KY, US


-Original Message-
From: James Kahlden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:14 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


Hello List,

We are looking at updating our version 4.3 system to version 6.2.1 in order
to expand our system to include the new CP60.  We currently use AW/WP51B's
with Display Manager and the Legacy Historian.  Our CP's are fault tolerant
CP40A's.  We have 5 nodes connected via Carrier Band LAN.  We can not shut
down all nodes at once, since this system controls two 600 megawatt coal
fired power generators.

Questions?

1. Do all of the nodes need to be converted at one time to 6.2.1 or can some
nodes exist at 4.3  while part of the node is at 6.2.1?

2. Can we continue to use our Display Manager displays, or do we have to
change to the Fox View displays?

3. Can we continue to use the Legacy Historian at version 6.2.1, or do we
have to convert to the AIM historian?

4. Is there a different CP image at version 6.2.1 that requires a reboot of
the CP for this upgrade?

Thanks for any guidance that you can give, as we are looking to see what
windows of opportunity we have for doing this type of upgrade.

Jim Kahlden
[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: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question

[Stear, Bo]

-Original Message-
From: James Kahlden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 7:14 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Version 4.3 to 6.2.1 upgrade question


Hello List,

We are looking at updating our version 4.3 system to version 6.2.1 in order to expand 
our system to include the new CP60.  We currently use AW/WP51B's with Display Manager 
and the Legacy Historian.  Our CP's are fault tolerant CP40A's.  We have 5 nodes 
connected via Carrier Band LAN.  We can not shut down all nodes at once, since this 
system controls two 600 megawatt coal fired power generators.

Questions?
These are the answers as I know them, someone from Foxboro will probably give a more 
detailed answer:

1. Do all of the nodes need to be converted at one time to 6.2.1 or can some nodes 
exist at 4.3  while part of the node is at 6.2.1?
No, but you will have to do some special tricky stuff with the Device Manager.

2. Can we continue to use our Display Manager displays, or do we have to change to the 
Fox View displays?
Yes, you can still use the DM

3. Can we continue to use the Legacy Historian at version 6.2.1, or do we have to 
convert to the AIM historian?
Yes, you can still use the Legacy Historian

4. Is there a different CP image at version 6.2.1 that requires a reboot of the CP for 
this upgrade?
Yes, this is a Day 0 upgrade and requires a CP reboot.

Thanks for any guidance that you can give, as we are looking to see what windows of 
opportunity we have for doing this type of upgrade.

Jim Kahlden
[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]