<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2651.75">
<TITLE>RE: Integrator 30's vs. AB Stations</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Sorry for being late to the mix and continuing to drag out this
issue. This discussion should be linked to the e-mail flurry about AB Control
Logix and Ethernet connectivity from a month or so ago. (I would assume that
your AB connectivity strategies need to include support for the new AB product
directions.)</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>At General Mills, we are using AW51 Integrators to provide AB gateway
functionality. Yes, the Foxboro software bundling says that it is an AW and it
can act as an all in one machine, but they are being deployed as "dedicated"
Integrators. (Basic premise of distributed control; keep "control"
separate from everything else. We may be a food company, but we're not
stupid.)</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>How come? Seems like overkill doesn't it.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>AB Interchange from Rockwell Software and Ethernet connectivity.
(The AW 70 Integrator cousin uses RSLinx.)</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Why would anybody want AB connectivity that doesn't utilize the
standard communication libraries that are developed and tested by Rockwell
software? Every other major software vendor (Wonderware, Intelluion, MDT, SAP,
etc..) that communicates with AB equipment develops applications that utilize RSLinx
or Interchange. Why should Foxboro be different? Foxboro is no great lover
of PLCs and Allen Bradley/Rockwell in particular. Their products should have a
headstart and take advantage of the connectivity that is provided by Rockwell
themselves.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Why not any of the other AB connectivity products from Foxboro?</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>ABGW or the ABGW30? The serial interfaces are too much of a
bottle neck. The food industry is largely a discrete industry, we need to
communicate a lot of data at Ethernet bandwidth to/from the PLCs. The ABGW and
ABGW30 hardly allows a lot of PLC words to be communicated at high speed. (Don't
have redundant PLCs, don't need a redundant PLC interface.)</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>AB Station? The 1 to 1 coupling of AB stations to PLCs tends to
promote use of "data concentrators" that add complexity to PLC
troubleshooting. The sideport on the PLC provides about 1/2 the throughput that
the integrated Ethernet port on PLC5E. (Ask to your knowledgeable AB rep to
compare Ethernet performance on an integrated PLC5E to an Ethernet sidecar.) The
AB coprocessor is has a Motorola 68030 chip in it. That is it for that product
from AB. They assume everybody utilizing host computers with RSLinx or
Interchange to accomplish the jobs once handled by the co-pro module.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>How 'bout Micro I/A with AB Ethernet? The product is now going
to be a 'late release' item with V6.2.1. Foxboro developed this product by
licensing source code from Rockwell and porting the low-level parts of it to the VRTX
O.S. that runs in Micro I/A. It is now a Foxboro proprietary product.
Also, be aware that Control Logix uses a different network protocol stack than
PLC5s. Foxboro's VRTX port of Interchange was prior to a version that supported
Control Logix. Foxboro is going to have to completely start over with this
product in order to work with CL. (The forthcoming Micro I/A AB Ethernet
interface for PLC5/SLC500 has now been in the works for over 3 years.)</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>AW51 Integrator? It is able to support Control Logix with the
installation/configuration of the proper, underlying version of Interchange
(V6.2) It provides a 1 to many Ethernet interface to PLCs. Sure it has
draw backs, like a hard drive and not being redundant. The Ethernet connectivity
hopefully allows the box to sit in as decent an environment as possible and as the
prevailing chat on the email list would indicate, it is not the stability of the
hardware, but the stability of the software that is afflicting the Foxboro User
community. Redundant hardware can't help there, but deploying the machine as
simply an "Integrator 51" and reducing the functionality of it improves it's
stability greatly.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Oh yea, the price. Well, let me be the first one to tell you
that the price of cereal will be going up. Foxboro marketing needs to be
involved. A full AW station license should not be charged if a 51 series machine
if is going to be utilized as an "Integrator 51". A Gateway software
bundle for the 51 was in the works as part of V6.2, but that was dropped like so many
other things have been. The hardware part of it will forever perplex me.
Why can Foxboro develop/manufacture there own proprietary DIN rail computer and sell
it at a somewhat desirable price, but they have to sell a Sun box at double or more of
the street price.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Anyway sorry for being long winded. I hope this provides some
different perspective on Foxboro/AB integration strategies. Your feedback is
appreciated.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Thanks,</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>John Metsker</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>General Mills, Inc </FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>From: Johnson,Alex [<A
HREF="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2000 10:17 AM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>To: Foxboro DCS Mail List</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Subject: RE: Integrator 30's vs. AB Stations</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Re: PSS </FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Check with your account rep or, you can get if from
www.csc.foxboro.com</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2><<A HREF="http://www.csc.foxboro.com";
TARGET="_blank">http://www.csc.foxboro.com</A>> . I just checked and if you search
for "PSS</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>21H-6C6 B4" on the CSC page it will take you to a list and this
document was</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>the second one on the list.</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Re: Redundancy</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>The Micro I/A solution is not redundant that I am aware of, but you
can</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>always go point to point just like with the DI30 and have only one
PLC per</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Micro I/A.</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Regards,</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Alex Johnson</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>The Foxboro Company</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>10707 Haddington</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Houston, TX 77043</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>713.722.2859 (v)</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>713.722.2700 (sb)</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>713.932.0222 (f)</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <<A
HREF="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>> </FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P> <FONT SIZE=2>-----Original
Message-----</FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>From: Stan
Brown [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]</FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>Sent:
Thursday, May 04, 2000 8:40 AM</FONT>
<BR> <FONT
SIZE=2>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]</FONT>
<BR> <FONT
SIZE=2>Subject: Re: Integrator 30's vs. AB
Stations</FONT>
</P>
<P> <FONT SIZE=2>On Wed May 3 17:20:05
2000 Johnson,Alex wrote...</FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>></FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>>To learn about Micro
I/A check out the following PSSs or contact</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>your</FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>>Account Rep. I really
think that Micro I/A is a good way to go for</FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>>integrating the
devices that it supports.</FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>></FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>>PSS 21H-6C6
B4: Micro-I/A Allen-Bradley PLC5/E Remote
I/O</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Interface</FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>></FONT>
</P>
<P>
<FONT SIZE=2>Alex, I am having a hard time
finding this PSS. Have you got</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>a link, or</FONT>
<BR>
<FONT SIZE=2>something for it?</FONT>
</P>
<P>
<FONT SIZE=2>And a question, if we were to
go with the Micro-IA PLC -></FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Ethernet</FONT>
<BR>
<FONT SIZE=2>solution what redunandcny
could we incorporate?</FONT>
</P>
<P> <FONT SIZE=2>-- </FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>Stan
Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>843-745-3154</FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>Charleston SC.</FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>-- </FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>Windows 98: n.</FONT>
<BR>
<FONT SIZE=2>useless extension to a minor
patch release for 32-bit</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>extensions and</FONT>
<BR>
<FONT SIZE=2>a graphical shell for a 16-bit
patch to an 8-bit operating</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>system</FONT>
<BR>
<FONT SIZE=2>originally coded for a 4-bit
microprocessor, written by a</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>2-bit </FONT>
<BR>
<FONT SIZE=2>company that can't stand for 1
bit of competition.</FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>-</FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>(c) 2000 Stan Brown.
Redistribution via the Microsoft Network is</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>prohibited.</FONT>
</P>
<P>
<BR><FONT
SIZE=2>-----------------------------------------------------------------------</FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>This list is neither
sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>All </FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>postings from this list
are the work of list subscribers and no</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>warranty </FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>is made or implied as to
the accuracy of any information</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>disseminated </FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>through this medium. By
subscribing to this list you agree to hold</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>the </FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>list sponsor(s) blameless
for any and all mishaps which might occur</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>due to </FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>your application of
information received from this mailing list.</FONT>
</P>
<P> <FONT SIZE=2>To be removed from this
list, send mail to </FONT>
<BR> <FONT
SIZE=2>[EMAIL PROTECTED] </FONT>
<BR> <FONT SIZE=2>with "unsubscribe
foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to</FONT>
<BR> <FONT
SIZE=2>[EMAIL PROTECTED]</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT
SIZE=2>-----------------------------------------------------------------------</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company.
All </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no
warranty </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated
</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold
the </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur
due to </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>your application of information received from this mailing
list.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>To be removed from this list, send mail to </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>[EMAIL PROTECTED] </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any
mail to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>[EMAIL PROTECTED]</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML></x-html>
