plantpax vs deltav

8/11/2019 Plantpax vs Deltav

1/23

Copyright 2012 Rockwell Automation, Inc. All rights reserved.

Choosing PlantPAx

vs DeltaVBenefits for end users and integrators

Alan Stanfill

Stone Technologies MES Project Manager

November 2012


2/23


2

Agenda

Wrap Up / Q&A

Project Specifics

Situation / Goals

Customer Information

Introductions


3/23


Introductions

Alan Stanfill MES Project Manager Stone Technologies

Audience How Many

End Users System Integrators Rockwell Automation Distributor Other

Experience with

PlantPAx Various DCS solutions

3


4/23


Customer Information

Make products for food, pharmaceutical, agriculture, and industrial

applications Very competitive Tight profit margins Sound familiar?

Mix various products, prepare for final product format (granulated or

powder) , and send to finished goods bin for packaging

4

Midwest plant (company name and other details withheld at their request) ofa chemical manufacturing company needed to move production from anexisting facility drive was to improve efficiency and reduce costs toproduce product

Had a GREAT functional specification as a starting point!


5/23


Goals

Get the new production facility up and running quickly

Run as efficiently as possible

Have a unified control system

Include mixing tanks and other process related items system stopped

short of packaging in this case

Mix various products, prepare for final product format (granulated orpowder) , and send to finished goods bin for packaging

5


6/23


Customer Focus Areas

SYSTEM As an existing DeltaV user, the plant expected the new solution to

function as a system just like a true DCS

STANDARDS

A conscious decision was made to follow the out of the box PlantPAxstandards very closely

SUPPORTABLE

Both by Rockwell and a wide variety of system integrators

SAVINGS

Initial solution cost as well as ongoing support as always, cost wasa significant concern

6


7/23


What is PlantPAx anyway?

Utilizes standard Rockwell products ControlLogix FactoryTalk View SE

Object and code libraries to create full solutions

Tested and implemented as a SYSTEM

Predictable and repeatable performance Allows an integrator and end user to work on the system rather than

all of the individual components

7


8/23


Approach - boring or effective?

Stick to standard objects as much as possible Customers request Stones preference Allows for greatest advantage from the objects as well as future

proofing of the solution

Hit the ground running

Start with the customers functional specification

Two engineers working concurrently

PLC HMI PlantPAx was a huge advantage when using this approach

Required VERY little extra communications / status

8


9/23


Challenges

Lack of historical trending on standard objects Real-time trending functioned well but historical based trends were

required

No real ad hoc trending functionality built in

Unlike some DCS solutions, ViewSE was somewhat limited in thefunctionality for creating trends on the fly

Small items needed on faceplates that did not exist

Various small items that the customer wanted to see but werent in

the standard objects

9


10/23Copyright 2012 Rockwell Automation, Inc. All rights reserved.

Challenges

PlantPAx alarms (priority 1-4) were not related to FT Alarm and Eventalarms (1-1000)

Needed a manual work around to maintain continuity between both

lists

No global color change settings for various uses Alarms

Warnings

Hold

Still have to manage these across multiple global objects

10



Sample - Navigation

11



Add Ons

Sequential Function Charts in ControlLogix were used for sequencing ofmultiple ladder based phases

Needed a way to view / track the status from the HMI

Built a view of the SFC in the HMI

Used the PlantPAx permissive to drive these steps Made things easy for the operator or maintenance to track the

process without leaving the HMI

Historical and customizable trending

12



Sample SFC Monitoring

13



Results - SYSTEM

The starting point for every functionality decision was the same: Here is what DeltaV does Need to mimic that for ease of operator use and minimal retraining

The customer was very adaptable and wanted to be sure of long term

functionality for the system

Overall decisions were made based on features, functions, and also ease

of implementation and support for future

A considerable amount of weight was given to future upgrades andsupport when looking at additional features

14



Results - STANDARDS

The customers strong preference was to stick to standard objects overcustom code or additions as much as possible

This worked well as it is also Stones standard operating procedure

12 primary PlantPAx objects were utilized to build the solution

PLC code followed the standards as much as possible

Make the standards fit if you can and only add on where required

HMI screens used standard objects with very minimal customizationaround them for critical features

SFC monitoring Historical trending

15



Results - SUPPORTABLE

While the project was successfully implemented by Stone, it is critical tothe customer that they not be reliant on Stone for future support

With standard objects used almost exclusively, Rockwell has been able to

help with some support issues

Stone personnel (even ones new to the system) can support the standard

objects

Should the customer ever need it there are MANY other integrators whocan support the standard PlantPAx implementation

Not stuck with a single provider as they were with the DCS solution

16



Results - SAVINGS

Initial purchase price was significantly lower than the DCS solution

Ongoing support costs (DeltaV support vs TechConnect) are also lower

Implementation costs for the integration were far less

All adds up to a substantial TCO difference

Customer can do their own adds / changes

17



Benefits of PlantPAx - Customer

Support is easier if new people are introduced to the project

Let Rockwell support the underlying objects and layout while the integrator

focuses on the specific application

TIME standard objects shorten implementation time frames significantly

MONEY

Out of the box cost

Ongoing support Integration

18



Benefits of PlantPAx - Integrator

Focus more on the customer and their process

Less of the repetitive work to get PLC / HMI integration working

Support is easier if new people are introduced to the project

Ease of communications between PLC and HMI engineering resources

TIME

MONEY

19



Summary

Goals

Get new production up and running quickly and efficiently Keep the solution cost effective

Approach

Stick to standard objects as much as possible Integrate around those objects as needed for functionality

Results

SYSTEM the PlantPAx solution does operate as a system STANDARDS PlantPAx standard objects were used extensively SUPPORTABLE Rockwell and other integrators can support if ever

needed SAVINGS the system ultimately costs less than the DCS to

implement and maintain20



Stone Technologies Information

Founded in 1996 Of our top 20 clients since

the inception of thecompany in 1996:

Doing business with ALL of

them today Average of 50 projects per

client

Average adding 2 3 new

clients a year

Focused on the F&B,Consumer Products Industry,Fine Chemical, MedicalDevice, Power Generationindustries

Technology Focus andexperience 22 engineers focused on

process and other controlssystems

14 engineers focused onMES and informationsolutions

7 dedicated projectmanagers

The technical staff has anaverage of 22 years oftechnical experience

Our least experiencedemployee has 12 years

of industry experience21



Stone Technologies Expertise

22


23/23

Questions

Alan Stanfill

Stone Technologies MES Project Manager

November 2012

Thank you for your time!

plantpax vs deltav

Documents