Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Wireless I wrote last week about the wireless Hart announcement. What I noticed was the exceptional lack of specifics in the announcement. I was in meetings all week and didn't have time to dig into it (still don't, really). But I was amazed at a communication from Dust Networks that Hart was accepting its technology. What's up, I thought. Isn't Hart doing a functional spec--things like requirements, quality of service, ability to pass protocols, battery life, and so on? I'm starting to get some information that makes it appear that Hart has decided to issue a spec that specifies what radio it likes. Could be two now. Could be 10 next year. I've written before, I think these standards groups should write functional specs from the point of view of what works for the user and then let the user pick the radio that meets the minimum requirements. Gotta go write about MES now. Watch for it in the May issue. 8:13:28 PM    comment []

Ethernet Received this note from Schneider's Fred Cohn about my remarks on "standard, unmodified" Ethernet. Normally when we refer to standard, unmodified Ethernet (vs.modified Ethernet), we refer to the ability to buy processor chips, RTOS's (Real Time Operating Systems), Stacks, and connectors from nearly any supplier we wish. This, of course, fosters competition, provides best options for solutions, and minimizes cost.   From our perspective, many suppliers of "Ethernet-based" solutions require the vendor to purchase ASICs from a limited supplier base, specialized stacks, limited choice of operating systems, and even specialized connectors. This Ethernet-based approach limits the options for vendors who do not own the intellectual property. Besides lower volumes (compared to chips used in both commercial and industrial applications), these solutions normally have intellectual property costs included which are not attractive to others. For ODVA and Modbus-IDA, we permit the user to choose from commercially available chips, stacks and RTOS's. Of course, you all know I'm trying to get someone in the ODVA camp to use the "P" word, then I can get a reply from Carl and start a nice discussion. From my point of view (as someone who no longer has to personally worry about making things work), either way works. What works best for you--that's the question. That and the thought that competition makes companies work harder--and that benefits the customer. 8:04:50 PM    comment []

Interphex Up at 4 am to catch a 5:50 flight to LaGuardia today. President Bush is in town. The Midtown tunnel was way backed up when I arrived. The shortage of taxis is greater than usual. Give me Ohio where we don't get dignitaries ;-) I'm at Interphex--the big show of the Pharma industry. Also the one place where all the major process automation systems suppliers gather. I saw many today and have a bunch of appointments tomorrow. Then Thursday I'll be moderating our Packaging Automation Webcast on Robotics in Packaging from the conference room of the President's Club at LaGuardia.  You can register at Automation World. Today's Interphex news: Johnson Controls has expanded its Metasys for Validated Environments building management system to work with standard IT, Web services platform. Siemens showed a migration path for Fisher Provox DCS systems. Invensys showed a migration path for Moore APACS systems. GE Fanuc Automation showed a roadmap to its expanded process automation system. Hoffman enclosures showed a new stainless steel cable tray with a "unique" slope-top design and a modular operator interface enclosure. 7:55:51 PM    comment []