two cents worth
here with this in mind.
Kevin FitzGerrell
Fairbanks Gold Mining, Inc.
Fairbanks, Alaska
> -Original Message-
> From: Murphy, Daniel J [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 2:54 PM
> To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List'
> Subject:
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 2:54 PM
> To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List'
> Subject: RE: Detection of nodebus-failure
>
> I would be interested to know what the concensus is out there for doing
> regulatory control across the carrier-band LA
DCS Mail List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: (bcc: Kirk D Carver/Beaumont/Mobil-Notes)
Subject: RE: Detection of nodebus-failure
I would be interested to know what the concensus is out there for doing
regulatory control across the carrier-band LAN. For example, one PID block
in one
Our site philosophy is that no critical control functions should be allowed
across the LAN, we pass lots of "information" points around alright but stop
short of one block relying on another over the LAN, this approach was adopted
in our early days when we didnt know how reliable the LAN would b
On Thu Mar 30 20:54:19 2000 Lewis, Stephen wrote...
>
>Stan
>
>The test of a pulse train is only to detect loss of all comms.
>
OK, thnaks.
I beleive that the original poster was looking for a way to determine when he
had
gone non-rdundant, but maybee I misunderstood wha
rphy, Daniel J[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 4:53 PM
> To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List'
> Subject: RE: Detection of nodebus-failure
>
> I would be interested to know what the concensus is out there for doing
> regulatory control across the
Stan
The test of a pulse train is only to detect loss of all comms.
Stephen Lewis
> --
> From: Stan Brown[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Reply To: Foxboro DCS Mail List
> Sent: Friday, 31 March 2000 11:44
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: De
On Thu Mar 30 16:01:10 2000 Lewis, Stephen wrote...
>
>In the burner management system on a power station boiler we use a pulse
>train from one cp to another. When the pulses stop being received we infer
>a node bus failure.
>
Given a redundant nodebus, how can this be determined? Is it
I would be interested to know what the concensus is out there for doing
regulatory control across the carrier-band LAN. For example, one PID block
in one node talking to an AOUT block in another node.
Here we don't trust the CB-LAN to do basic regulatory control. We prefer to
hardwire the signal
In the burner management system on a power station boiler we use a pulse
train from one cp to another. When the pulses stop being received we infer
a node bus failure.
Stephen Lewis
NRG Gladstone Power Station
> --
> From: Stef Smeur[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Reply To: Foxbo
10 matches
Mail list logo
