V4.3 CP30A latest image
Hi All, Does anyone have a good warm fuzzy feeling about what the latest CP30A image is for v4.3? I have already researched the recommended v4.3 quick fixes, and unless I missed it (always a possibility) there isn't a CP30 image quick fix for v4.3. The reason I'm asking this question because we are currently running v4.3 with QF11659 installed. This quick fix doesn't show up in the quick fix listing on the CSC website anymore. It used to be listed because I have it on my hard drive with documentation. At this moment in time I intend to continue using the QF11659 image unless someone knows of a reason not to. I am obviously confused and in need of enlightenment. Any insight, background, or suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks, == Gaylon Hicks Tennessee Valley Authority, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Mail Stop PEC-2C PO Box 2000 Decatur, AL 35609 Phone: (256) 729-7804 Fax: (256) 729-2047 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] FedEx Address: Shaw Road, Athens, AL 35611 == --- 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: Drop resistor on analog input cards
Corey, We installed Rosemount 3051 and 1151 intelligent transmitters with FBM05s and FBM04s here about 1998. To make the HART communicator function reliably with the Foxboro modules in the loop, you need more than 250 ohms loop impedance. I think we ended up using about 370 ohms installed locally at the transmitter panels, and everything worked fine. We use the HART communicators locally. This is a nice simple sledgehammer approach and has worked for us so far. == Gaylon Hicks Tennessee Valley Authority, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Mail Stop PEC-2C PO Box 2000 Decatur, AL 35609 Phone: (256) 729-7804 Fax: (256) 729-2047 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] FedEx Address: Shaw Road, Athens, AL 35611 == -- From: Corey R Clingo[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 1:24 PM To: Foxboro DCS Mail List Subject: Drop resistor on analog input cards Does anyone know if I/A analog input cards (FBM01/04 in my case) can be had with 250-ohm dropping resistors? My meter tells me the ones we have are 50-ohm, and most HART handhelds we've used require 250-ohm loop resistance to function properly. TIA, Corey Clingo Sr. Engineer BASF Corp. --- 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: Upgrading Foxboro Boxes
You can pick up a refurbished SUN SPARC 5 180 MHz box for about $1000, or a 110 MHz for about $600. This is the faster 51B box, and the 180 MHz should be pretty snappy. We upgraded from 51A to 51B (old 85 MHz boxes) and saw a big improvement. I don't know exactly what else you need, but make sure you get a TurboGX frame buffer card (I know these are Foxboro OEM and will work). Also, load up on memory - 128 MB minimum. I know not the legalities involved, but technically this will work. Gaylon Hicks TVA - Browns Ferry NP -- From: Davis, Robert N.[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 12:02 PM To: Foxboro DCS Mail List Subject: FW: Upgrading Foxboro Boxes This note came to me from our Decatur plant. Any suggestions? We are looking at a problem that is going to be experienced by other plants in the future. We have a Foxboro I/A system here on our Cogen plant. We have AW51s (A series) and V6.1 software. We recently installed the OSI PI system onto one of our AW51s. What was already a slow box has become almost unusable. We have received a lot of complaints from the plant operators - especially about the graphic call up speed. We have talked about upgrading the boxes to the latest AW51s (series D or E) to speed things up. Unfortunately we are being quoted $100,000 by Foxboro. What makes this worse is that we know we can buy the boxes from Sun direct for 30% of the Foxboro price and Foxboro are charging us $50,000 for software licenses. Foxboro are not being very helpful at this time. When we proposed buying the boxes from Sun, Foxboro refused to support these boxes. We are wondering if it is technically possible to buy the new boxes from Sun and try to load the existing software on ourselves. This would mean that we are using the same software licenses but should get a better performance. We have asked Foxboro about this and been told that it is not possible because we need to buy new licenses from Sun. We have asked Sun about this and they have told us that we do not need new licenses but they do not know if this would work. Does anyone have any thoughts/experience in this matter. Is this possible or are we missing something somewhere? All comments gratefully received Bob Davis Process Control Engineer 765-477-5317---Fax 765-474-9036 E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this e-mail in error, and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the TLNA HELPDESK at 800-404-2436 or e-mail [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: FBM03 Drift Characteristics
Phil, The Rev W was referenced in CAR 7375 as the anticipated fixed Rev (drive current upped from 250 microA to 750 microA). I have no idea what our installed rev is. Thanks, Gaylon -- From: Burness, Phil[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 12:05 PM To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List' Subject: RE: FBM03 Drift Characteristics Rev W? my memory must be slipping :-)). Any idea on the date of the CAR? My guess is you have pre Rev W. If you can pull one have a look at the Rev. Phil -Original Message- From: Hicks, Gaylon F. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2001 17:53 To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List' Subject: RE: FBM03 Drift Characteristics I'm not sure what revision, but they are 1995 vintage. I found I/A CAR 7375 which addresses this drift issue, supposedly fixed at revision W. I'm not sure. It looks like I will end up taking a precision decade box up and checking the FBMs. I appreciate the help on this. Thanks, Gaylon -- From: Burness, Phil[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 11:42 AM To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List' Subject: RE: FBM03 Drift Characteristics Any idea what revision of FBM03's you are using? There is a fix in modules (Rev J above I think) that corrects for thermal drift. Phil -Original Message- From: Hicks, Gaylon F. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2001 17:03 To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List' Subject: FBM03 Drift Characteristics I'm conducting an informal survey in lieu of talking to TAC. I would appreciate and pertinent information anyone can share. First, a little background. Browns Ferry uses Feedwater line temperatures as an input to our core thermal power calculation during normal operation (it's basically an enthalpy balance calc), and we operate based on our licensed thermal power limits, so we get whatever electrical MWs output based on this amount of steam, river temperature, etc.. If this number is inaccurate, we can lose electrical output, and we appear to be missing about 9 MW electric at the moment. Our Feedwater line temperature is measured by two four-wire precision 100 ohm platinum RTDs on each of two Feedwater lines with a EXTBLK connection to a CHARC block. We use lab data RTD specific curves for each AIN block (we really, really want this to be accurate), and have these four inputs split between two FBM03s on the same CP. We normally operate with a FW temperature of about 380 degrees F. Over the last year all four RTD measurements have trended downward about 1 degree F, which would account for about 2 MW electrical. I have been tasked with contacting the vendor (Foxboro) to ask if there is any known failure mode or mechanism that would cause these four RTDs on two separate FBM03s to trend downward. I though I would try the list first to solicit opinions. No derogatory comments please. I have already expressed my opinion on this subject, but I don't want to bias anyone. Again, your patience and any input is appreciated. Thanks, == Gaylon Hicks Tennessee Valley Authority, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Mail Stop PEC-2C PO Box 2000 Decatur, AL 35609 Phone: (256) 729-7804 Fax: (256) 729-2047 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] FedEx Address: Shaw Road, Athens, AL 35611 == --- 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
RE: FBM03 Drift Characteristics
Gabriel, We have noted a downward trend in all our Feedwater temperature measurements, including thermocouples, although the other temperatures have trended down only about half the amount the RTDs have. This could be explained if the RTDs have drifted to a slightly lower than actual value, as this would cause us to operate at a slightly lower reactor power, which would result in an actual feedwater temp decrease. We have had this RTD/FBM combination installed about 5 years. The RTDs are in a fairly hot environment (125 deg F) in our steam tunnel, but the FBMs are in our control room. There is a seasonal change in feedwater temperature superimposed on top of the general downward trend due to condenser circulation water (river temp) changes. The seasonal changes are normal and expected - we typically vary +/- 5 MW electric from winter to summer due to condenser backpressure changes. This issue is just a part of an overall MW witch hunt we go through occasionally. Even if we find out we are 2 degrees F lower than actual, this would only translate to about 3 MW electric, but that could be worth a lot of money in California this summer. Based on CAR 7375, my unshakable faith in the accuracy of the FBM03s is starting to crumble. I have been in denial that the four RTDs on two separate FBMs would drift downward together, but . I appreciate the help. Gaylon -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 11:43 AM To: Foxboro DCS Mail List Subject: Re: FBM03 Drift Characteristics Gaylon, I can only offer initial thoughts. How are you determining the drift over one year ? Is it that your MW output has changed relative to a controlled water temperature ? If this is the case are you sure the drift is caused by the temperature measurment end of your controlled system ? i.e. have you verified the drift against another measurment method ? How long are you measuring this temperature with the same RTD/FM combination ? You could be seeing drift due to RTD degradation/time, degradation of wiring connections, or some form of cooking within the FBM circuitry. Is there any change in the drift rate over the year which might suggest seasonal ambient temperature changes not being correctly compensated for ?. Good luck, Gabriel. --- 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: Detection of nodebus-failure
Dan, Our philosophy here has been that no critical control parameters are passed across the node bus. We use parameters passed across the node bus for control enhancements only, with appropriate error propogation, detection, and handling of the parameters involved. For example we have manually initiated runbacks of our Reactor Recirculation MG sets to a level based on a total steam flow signal passed across the node bus from our feedwater control system. We check the passed parameter for a propagated error (which would include the loss of communications - I think the parameter is OOS in this case), and disable the manual runback in the event of an error. All critical parameters between the different CPs/control systems are hard wired. All that said, depending on the control system and parameters involved, if the consequences of a failure are not significant and response time is not significant, I woudn't hesitate to pass parameters across the node bus. As we do not have the LAN bridges, I don't have a feel for how reliable those communications are. Thanks, Gaylon Hicks TVA - Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant -- From: Murphy, 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 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 via FBM's. Anyone else do the same? The same question applies to peer-to-peer communications within a node. Anyone hardwire these connections as well? Dan Murphy BP Amoco Refinery Brisbane Australia --- 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]
