Voices: Rezabek

Forays into Fieldbus Technology Pay Off

Plenty of Training Resources Available to Get Team On Board

By John Rezabek

Back around the time smart transmitters were becoming mainstream — 1989 — Keystone beer introduced an ad campaign touting its, well, relative lack of flavor. The beer delivered refreshment guaranteed to minimally challenge one's palate. In the ad, a quaff of “bitter” beer sent its subject into facial contortions, revolting to all who witnessed them. Better flee to an insipid, corn-adjunct-diluted brew.

There are those who've taken a sip of fieldbus technology, experienced an episode of “bitter beer face,” and remain unwilling to go near it since. Unforeseen struggles with a supplier, service provider or technology can be enough to quash any inclination to get another six-pack.

But what if you want to escape the bland world of 4-20 mA? If you have a thirst for an all-digital, 21st-century process control infrastructure, you'll encounter many who consider forays into new technology—for example, digitally integrated field devices using an open standard—a gamble with too much chance of potentially bitter consequences. How do you convince these folks to try a sip of your proposed brew?

Training: Training junkets aren't just about learning technology. They're also for learning about each other, and gaining an appreciation of your end users' fears and challenges. If it's a class with attendees from other locations, you both have a great opportunity to learn things from them and share war stories. It can be a great comfort for your plant's guys and gals to see they're not the first pioneers on the prairie, and often you—and they—will learn as much or more from your peers as you do from the course material. Sessions should not be restricted only to specialized training focused on fieldbus. They should include training from systems suppliers (once they're chosen), asset management system providers and possibly device suppliers as well.

Device Replacement: Device replacement has been distasteful for a lot of end users, especially when they need to call an engineer when a device or fieldbus segment needs downloading. In Foundation fieldbus (FF), by design, devices come out of the box as blank slates with minimal configuration. The idea is that a centrally stored database in the DCS is a more desirable repository to preserve a consistent device configuration. But complications arise when instrument technicians are neither trained nor permitted to perform any operations on the DCS. Other complications ensue if the device checked out of the storehouse is a later revision than the one originally installed. If they don't match, the system configuration requires sediting, and sometimes new device descriptors (DDs) have to be downloaded. This is particularly onerous for remote sites with dicey Internet access. Bitter beer face!

The Fieldbus Foundation is addressing this issue today, beginning with a specification called compatibility_rev. Devices and host systems employing this parameter will allow a new device to be commissioned as an earlier revision—all the way back to the revision specified by compatibility_rev. It works like this: If your project installs Revision 3 of a transmitter, when the storehouse restocks with the latest revision, this new device can still be commissioned as Revision 3 without installing a new DD or changing the system configuration. A number of systems and device suppliers have begun creating tools and wizards that exploit this feature. It's been an optional feature since ITK5 devices, but consideration is being given to making it mandatory before the next major update.

When taking your first sip of fieldbus “beer,” you don't need to brace yourself for a bitter experience. There are plenty of training resources to get your team on board, and the Fieldbus Foundation's focus on H1 usability aims to make FF as simple as old 4-20 mA. Once you've trained your palate, you'll wonder how you ever put up with the bland brews of yesteryear.

More from this voice

Title

Tolerate less redundancy

Today, with Foundation fieldbus, the old redundancy paradigm no longer applies. Chances are, though, it isn’t free. So where should you apply it to achieve the fault tolerance you need?

12/05/2006

One bus for all?

When it comes to applications that allow our basic controls to function, system lock-ups are intolerable, so it pays to examine the heritage of fieldbus and carefully analyze the market that shaped it.

05/06/2007

Justifying Fieldbus, Part I

Asset management and wiring saving cost were common justifications for installing Foundation fieldbus in refineries 10 years ago. Today, the cost to replace DCS with electronic field devices must be justified.

07/13/2007

Lipstick on Modbus

There are people who would rather take a flogging than maintain an OPC installation.

08/31/2007

Portable Diagnostic Tools – Who’s the Best?

So what do I grab when heading out the door to troubleshoot a suspect segment? More often than not, it’s the FBT-6.

09/27/2007

Load ’Em Up!

If we know the element will respond in a second at best, why compute a new output four times a second?

11/06/2007

Yikes! Look out for that Chasm!

The best practice by far is to choose a main instrument vendor who is accountable for the integration of all field devices.

12/03/2007

Right Message, Right Person, Right Time

Data Doesn’t Always Equal Information. Why Can’t We Get Alarm Information to Our Operators in a More Meaningful Way?

01/03/2008

Paving the Way for Bus Technology

I’ve Had Great Success on Projects, Especially Upgrades and Retrofits, Where I Was Able to Get an Experienced Board Person and/or Front-Line Supervisor Assigned to the Job

02/04/2008

Instrinsic Safety Obsolete Yet?

Like Most End Users, I Truly Value the Credibility and Security That Organizations Such as Factory Mutual, the Canadian Standards Association, CENELEC and Their Ilk Bring to the Devices We Use in Hazardous Environments. But Perhaps One Practice is Ready to Be Relegated to the ISA Museum of How We Used to Do Things. Here’s Why.

03/07/2008

And the Cheapest Bus Is . . .

Bus ‘XYP’ Uses Cheaper Devices. Users Will Find It Cheaper Than Foundation Fieldbus

04/01/2008

Playing the Field

If Most of Loops Are Distributed to Field-Solved PID, What Are the Chances You Could “Hot Swap” Your Host Just Like a Field Device?

05/04/2008

Fieldbus for Safety Instrumented Functions

FF-SIF Transcends the Limitations of Conventional Safety System Design by Introducing New and Innovative Ways of Thinking About Safety

06/12/2008

Ready for Control in the Field?

When The Loop’s Valve Positioner Loses Power, the Loop Will Experience an Upset No Matter Where the PID Is Solved

07/01/2008

Bus = Remote I/O?

Consider “Bussing” a Network of 8- to 12-Point Analog and Discrete I/O and Locating It Strategically Close to the Field Sensors

08/07/2008

Will Wireless Replace Fieldbus?

Hardwired Instruments Are Going to Be Around Until a Generation of Plant Operators Retires

09/05/2008

Using Fieldbus in your HMI

Digitally Integrated Field Device Information Is Useful to Your Operator

10/06/2008

Patches the Bad Dog

Why Can’t Patches the Dog Sit at the Firewall and Bite the Hand Off the Bad Guys Whenever He Spots One?

10/28/2008

Bubba and the Bus

The Rule of 20: If You Select a Tech at Random from a Group of 20, Can He or She Fix the Problem in 20 Minutes?

12/12/2008

Fieldbus on a Shoestring

Use the Wire You Have. Unless You’re Really Challenging the Limits of the Physical Layer, Ordinary Twisted/Shielded Pair Will Work Reliably

01/12/2009