Voices: Inside Fieldbus

Anyone watching your assets?

Every system benefits from having properly trained individuals examining diagnostics and error messages, but fieldbus has the power to free those savvy techs from tedious hours watching screens.

By John Rezabek

By John Rezabek, Contributing Editor

Inside FieldbusDoes the dysfunction we tried to accommodate in the early DCS days plague your efforts to get value from you asset management system (AMS)? See if your experience was like mine: Before we installed the first DCS in our site, our instrument department serviced the entire control loop. It worked on the field devices. The instrument techs slapped new controllers in the panel, rebuilding relays, flapper nozzles and so on. The refinery where I worked had the Foxboro H-line, one of the early electronic controllers, and our instrument people serviced them too.

But when we installed our site’s first DCS, there was great consternation about the instrument techs poking around in the DCS, which was seen as a delicate assemblage only the properly ordained and sanctified should ever touch.

Our instrument shop was populated entirely by people who had been operators. Some, but not all, were skilled and motivated individuals. Our work rules and overtime guidelines made picking and choosing who worked where messy, if not entirely forbidden. Even in those days, the reliability of the systems was such that training 15 or 20 people and getting them enough practice to stay proficient was thought impossible. So we drew a line.

The line was the marshalling panel where multi-pair cables from the field split off to the DCS I/O. This would be as far as any ordinary instrument tech or his supervisor would venture. The other side was the hallowed DCS ground, reserved only for chosen initiates and engineers. Hence was born the “dysfunction junction.”

This self-imposed division persists in plants to this day, reinforced by sales people who, for the most part, deal exclusively with either one side (field stuff) or the other (systems). Our organizations—even at the corporate level—reflect this division, and AMS, as most of us are attempting to apply it, is also an appliance that both serves and suffers from this mutation we brought upon ourselves decades ago.

About 10 years ago, a former employer determined that automation and AMS were strategic investments that would put our chemical plants a step ahead of the competition. The vision was endorsed all the way to the senior VP level, and we used this strategy to support the decision to become early adopters of Foundation fieldbus in 1998.

At brownfield sites, where late-generation legacy DCS platforms supported only Modbus and proprietary protocols for digital integration, selected sites undertook a variety of projects to advance the vision and demonstrate the value of AMS, but as the investment at the systems level was substantial and relatively recent, no one thought any wholesale revamp or upgrade of the DCS was justifiable.

Several plants were chosen to implement AMS using their installed base of instruments. Multiplexers brought the instrument diagnostics into a central server for viewing configuration data and diagnostics. But a year or two down the road, most sites were seeing little value from the investment. The AMS server sat in the instrument shop and was used rarely because the work processes remained the same. One site had significant benefits because of an interested, motivated local champion.

This case persists today. End users who are among the most sophisticated, innovative and wealthy practitioners of advanced automation and control say they are unable to justify replacing legacy DCS platforms, even those that were installed in the 80s! The control systems manager from an Illinois refinery once told me the lost margin from having the advanced controls offline for the duration of any upgrade was enough by itself to sink any attempt to justify a revamp.

The same is true of nearly all of today’s AMS offerings. A trained and process-savvy person who cares needs to spend a lot of his or her time looking at it. Users who have tried to impose the old paradigms on Foundation fieldbus (FF) have had similar experiences.

Every system benefits from having properly trained individuals examining diagnostics and error messages, but fieldbus has the power to free those savvy techs from tedious hours watching screens. With FF, the system boundaries extend to the devices at the ends of the wires. Fieldbus integrates the field device’s diagnostics with the control scheme, enhancing process integrity and asset management.

That Illinois refinery noted above has installed a lot of fieldbus since I had that conversation with its manager.


  About the Author

John RezabekJohn Rezabek is a process control specialist for ISP Corp., Lima, Ohio. Email him at jrezabek@ispcorp.com.
 

More from this voice

Title

Anyone watching your assets?

Every system benefits from having properly trained individuals examining diagnostics and error messages, but fieldbus has the power to free those savvy techs from tedious hours watching screens.

06/04/2007

Users driving the bus

Contributing Editor John Rezabek provides commentary on end-user participation in councils and committees, formulating directions and priorities as a valuable service to the supplier community.

04/05/2007

Not jazzed about fieldbus? Try it

Columnist John Rezabek notes that most systems now have excellent engineering tools and allow easy integration of fieldbus devices, so there are ever-fewer excuses not to try some truly distributed control.

03/01/2007

Still pondering whither fieldbus?

In this month's installment of On the Bus, Contributing Editor John Rezabek predicts HART devices will work so well that your career may be over before you can justify the cost to replace them with fieldbus.

02/01/2007

Physical layer diagnostics: Part II

In this month’s installment of On the Bus, process control specialist John Rezabek summarizes the current and soon-to-be-released offerings of four of the leading suppliers of physical-layer hardware.

01/05/2007

Physical layer diagnostics: Who needs them?

In this month’s installment of On the Bus, process control specialist John Rezabek explains the difficulties of getting a quality installation of physical-layer hardware for fieldbus diagnostics.

12/11/2006

New maintenance strategy: Don’t break it!

CONTROL contributing editor and pioneering Foundation fieldbus user John Rezabek provides analysis and commentary on the ultimate preventive, predictive, proactive and preemptive maintenance strategy.

11/01/2006

Data validation: Jewel in the fieldbus crown?

Many users and most suppliers to the industry see process availability as the big payout benefit of Foundation Fieldbus (FF) diagnostics—a good portion of it realized through data validation.

10/10/2006

Wean process off the redundancy pacifier

With Foundation fieldbus, the old redundancy paradigm no longer applies, so where should we apply it to achieve the fault tolerance we need? Contributing Editor John Rezabek provides analysis and commentary.

09/08/2006

Why users need one twisted-pair bus

We have a new contributing editor, John Rezabek, taking over the On the Bus column on ControlGlobal.com. Rezabek is a well-known fieldbus expert and process control specialist at ISP Corp. in Lima, Ohio.

08/07/2006

The FAT is the problem

End users need to revisit their expectations of the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) and accept that not every loop needs to be tested in order to implement a successful fieldbus project.

07/14/2006

Fieldbus in biopharma applications, Part 1

This article highlights issues associated with the installation of a multiple-fieldbus control system at a pharma processing facility and talks about its implications for handling an entire manufacturing suite.

07/14/2006

Take the Foundation Fieldbus Lifecycle Benefits Survey 2006

The purpose of this survey is to ascertain a more accurate view of the operational, maintenance, and engineering benefits related to Foundation fieldbus and how they relate to a business value proposition for end users.

07/05/2006

Show me the installations

End users are beginning to realize that it’s the maintenance and diagnostic information capabilities of devices that will provide the life cycle savings and justification for installing new fieldbus technologies.

06/07/2006

Fieldbus technology's next biggest hurdle

If you’re a skid or modular assembly manufacturer and want to differentiate yourself from the crowd, offering digital communications and fieldbus technology could be the ticket.

05/05/2006

Unified theory of everthing

The big problem is that control systems don’t all support OPC the same way or to the same degree, so there’s often no consistent way to capture and transmit even simple items like the status bit of a transmitter.

04/07/2006

Networking data not for dummies

By using process variable (PV) and Status information only, you can effectively take a small sip from the fire hose of information available with today’s smart transmitters. Be careful you don’t get soaked!

03/14/2006

Is FDT good for fieldbus and device networks?

CONTROL’s Ian Verhappen, Chair of the Fieldbus Foundation User Group, looks at the latest battleground in the Fieldbus Wars. Is this Fieldbus Wars II or can FDT/DTM and EDDL work together?

02/10/2006

The house that function blocks built

Ian Verhappen, Chair of the Foundation Fieldbus User Group and Vice President of Standards for ISA, offers his perspective and experience on what’s happening in the world of industrial fieldbus.

12/20/2005

Intrinsically safe fieldbus applications

This article takes a look at ways companies get around limited power and other hazardous environment barriers to connect more fieldbus devices using a technology that goes beyond FISCO.

11/22/2005