Remote I/O and fieldbus go where - Database & Sql Blog Articles
When it comes to fieldbus adoption, people can generally be categorized into four groups based on their attitude: A - users; B - strong supporters; C - thorough opponents; and D - those who haven't made up their minds yet. In the realm of factory automation, particularly within the automotive industry, more than 50% fall into category A, and about 90% are in category B. The benefits of using a fieldbus are already well recognized here, so the question of whether to use it is almost irrelevant. However, in the field of process automation, such as in the chemical industry, the situation is quite different. Here, the proportion of category A individuals is small, while category B is gradually growing. Category C makes up over 20%, and category D still dominates.
In these two distinct industrial sectors, the practical application of fieldbuses also shows significant differences. In the automotive industry, the focus is on selecting the right bus type—whether to go with PROFIBUS, INTERBUS, or DEVICENET—and whether to use copper cables, fiber optics, or a combination. The choice of connection method, like "plug and play" or terminal blocks, is also important. With a wide range of fieldbus products and solutions available, user needs are well met.
On the other hand, in process automation, despite having many supporters, only a few fieldbus systems like PROFIBUS PA and FOUNDATION FIELDBUS have seen limited test installations. Large-scale implementation still seems far off. While 50% of people believe that using a fieldbus can reduce costs and increase flexibility, there are still major challenges in implementing a fieldbus system. Industries like chemicals, petrochemicals, and pharmaceuticals must consider economic and commercial factors, which make the decision to adopt fieldbus more complex.
One key issue in the chemical industry involves two main production processes: batch and continuous. Both require uninterrupted operation, as an unexpected shutdown can lead to significant losses due to the time needed to clean reactors and pipelines. This makes "fault safety" a critical design consideration. Traditional control systems allow failures at one point without affecting the entire system, but this contradicts the fieldbus concept of connecting multiple devices on a single bus. Redundancy is often required, which can reduce cost savings. Additionally, each field device would need dual bus interfaces or a ring structure, making it expensive and impractical.
Another challenge is on-site explosion protection. Conventional methods like intrinsic safety (EXi), flameproof (EXd), and encapsulation (EXm) are incompatible with fieldbus principles. For example, using intrinsic safety limits the number of devices per bus branch, while EXd or EXm requires power to be turned off during maintenance, conflicting with the need for hot plugging in fieldbus systems.
A potential solution is the use of remote I/O. This approach allows traditional installation methods for field devices, uses a single power module to supply power to multiple devices, and enables hot-plugging during repairs. Economically, remote I/O offers better value compared to current fieldbus solutions. It doesn't replace the fieldbus but connects to PLCs or DCS via it. The main advantage is solving the uniform bus interface requirement between field devices and the bus, as not every device needs a built-in bus interface. Remote I/O also helps with explosion protection by allowing safe and easy access to field devices in hazardous areas.
In conclusion, a remote I/O system that can be installed directly in hazardous zones (Zone 1) is likely to become one of the most needed technologies in the coming years.
Men's Automatic Watch,Men's Mechanical Wristwatch,Men's Mechanical Movement Watch ,Men's automatic wrist watch Dongguan Yingxin Technology Co., Ltd. , https://www.dgyingxintech.com