safety-compliance-workshop Technology Handbooks Canadian ElectronicsDPN MagazineSoftware Directory
Ian Verhappen, P.Eng.

Ian Verhappen, P.Eng.

Ian Verhappen, P.Eng. is an ISA Fellow, ISA Certified Automation Professional, and a recognized authority on Foundation Fieldbus and industrial communications technologies. Verhappen leads global consultancy Industrial Automation Networks Inc., specializing in field level industrial communications, process analytics and heavy oil / oil sands automation.

Monday, 24 November 2014
Nov. 24, 2014 - With all of the continuous improvements being made in process control and automation through more effective alarm management systems, better HMIs and improved control theory and algorithms, we often forget that a control system is only as good as the field measurements and final control elements used to monitor and control the process. Fortunately, the new HMI standards take this into consideration by providing suggestions on how equipment health can be incorporated into tag display information. Similarly, field device manufacturers have agreed on methods to communicate device status for both analog- and fieldbus-based systems.
Friday, 24 October 2014
Oct. 24, 2014 - The Fieldbus Foundation (FF) celebrated a significant milestone earlier this year — its 20th anniversary. In honour of this occasion, this month’s column will focus on how FF has evolved over the last two decades, and what’s in store for the future.
Monday, 29 September 2014
Sept. 29, 2014 - Every signal and network is going to have some noise, but good design practices can help minimize some of that “sound.”
Wednesday, 18 June 2014
Every industrial network has more than a single protocol within it. A simple analogy for a protocol is to think of it as a language. So if we are changing from one protocol to another, we are effectively translating between languages. And because of the complexity of today’s networks, you can almost guarantee that it will be necessary to translate protocols between different networks.
Thursday, 22 May 2014
One of the reasons often cited for not using wireless networks, especially in an industrial setting, are the concerns related to security — or, more accurately, cybersecurity. Though it is true that a wireless signal propagates in many directions, this does not mean it is freely available to be compromised.
Wednesday, 12 February 2014

The present version of the IEC 61158 standard includes 19 different protocols. However, while at an ISA meeting recently, I was approached by a Japanese organization about the addition of another, so I believe we will soon be up to 21 protocols in a single standard — and this is only for industrial processes.

Tuesday, 19 November 2013

One important part of machine safety is the associated electrical approval for installation in operating environments. A new standard from IEC — IEC 61010-2-201, “Safety requirements for electrical equipment for measurement, control and laboratory use” — will impact the way these approvals are made and, therefore, is something that is likely to affect the way you specify and purchase control equipment.

Thursday, 17 October 2013

Is “Configurable I/O” making fieldbus technology obsolete/redundant? My definition of Configurable I/O is a termination assembly that has sufficient flexibility so that the individual signal termination (typically the pair of wires connected to the field device) is independent of the I/O card residing in the backplane.

Tuesday, 17 September 2013

I am still waiting to see the ‘killer application’ for wireless sensors, though some of the work being done in the areas of RFID and passive wireless sensors is likely to drive this breakthrough. Many of today’s applications are simply using wireless networks to replace wires, without thinking, “what else can I do without my tether?” The presenters and participants at the third annual Passive Wireless Sensor Workshop sponsored by the ISA Communications Division in May 2013 are working on that question.

Thursday, 13 June 2013

Though only mentioned in my last column, the Field Device Initiative (FDI) is continuing to move forward. The reason this is important is because I estimate that 95 per cent of the field devices used in the process industry are based on DD technology.

HART, Profibus and Foundation Fieldbus are all based on DD technology and these groups are working with FDT and OPC to have the resulting documents out for IEC ballot as Committee Draft for Vote with the expectation for publication early next year, with products released at approximately the same time. As always, one challenge of releasing products is coordinating the timing of field devices and host systems to support the new capabilities. It is this factor that will drive the timing for use of FDI in the plant environment. Let’s have a look at what has led to the development of EDDL and just how FDI will change the way we interact with our field devices.

As a declarative language, EDDL describes the capabilities of the field device, leaving it to the host system to determine how to access all data and properties of all devices. As a result, EDDL tends to be used for device configuration with limited graphical support conducive to maintenance activities. Hence, the FDT organization developed DTMs. FDT is independent from any communication protocol and the software environment of the host system.

A device DTM can be used to access device parameters, configure and operate the device and diagnose problems. A second DTM, called a Gateway or Communications
DTM, is used to connect to the device DTM and handle protocol transformation.

A key group in the development of FDT and recent additions to EDDL technology is the NAMUR organization of end user manufacturers. The recommendations in its document NE105, “Specifications for integrating fieldbus devices in engineering tools for field devices,” was one of the guiding documents identifying the requirements for FDI.

So what is FDI, beyond another acronym to learn? The core of FDI technology is the scalable FDI package containing up to four different elements. The FDI package is a collection of files: The Electronic Device Description (EDD), based on
Electronic Device Description Language (EDDL, IEC 61804-3), includes the device definition (Def) that serves as the information model of the device and describes the device data and type; business logic (BL) outlines the rules for accessing the device data and any dependencies and is used to define if and how the data may be viewed when interpreted by the server; and user interface description (UID). The optional user interface plugin (UIP) offers the advantages of freely programmable user interfaces based on Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) used by FDT as software components that define special device functions/application information and user interfaces to run on the client.

Attachments are also optional and include things like product manuals, images and electronic certifications. To prevent inadvertent errors, a number of safeguards are built into the protocol so that if there are EDD constructs (including built-in functions) that are not known to the FDI Server, the execution of the business logic shall be cancelled and if the FDI client’s UID Interpreter is not able to interpret and/or visualize a part of the UID, the user shall be informed that the resulting information is likely invalid.

The device manufacturers define via the FDI Device Package which data, functions and user interfaces are stored on the FDI Server. This makes version management of FDI packages much easier as they are managed centrally within the FDI Server.

Device packages created by device manufacturers will be certified and registered by their respective technology foundation, so it will still be best to verify the device package you are using on the relevant technology foundation approved lists on their website.

Because the EDD, DTM and new FDI Package exist only on the computer, not in the device, it is possible to migrate from DTM or EDD to FDI without changing the devices, thus protecting the existing investment of your field devices. However, one of the requirements of FDI is that the major revision of all clients, servers and packages in a given system shall be the same. FDI servers support all FDI packages following the same version or lower.

FDI clients can typically be connected to FDI servers that are implemented following the same FDI technology version or higher.

An FDI client may access multiple devices, while User Interface Descriptions and User Interface Plug-ins may only access a single device. FDI clients can communicate with the FDI server through proprietary protocols; however, if the FDI server supports third-party FDI clients, it shall support OPC UA as well so that generic OPC UA clients with no knowledge of FDI can connect to the FDI server.

The comprehensive set of services provided by OPC UA enables the “how” of system integration while the basic building blocks of the “what” of system integration are defined by OPC UA’s an extensible object model. OPC UA services act on an object model, which is managed by the server and discoverable by a client. Information is conveyed using standard and vendor-defined data types, and servers define object models that clients can dynamically discover.

Though an FDI communication server can be embedded within a communication device or can be provided via a separate server, the FDI server is usually distinct from the servers that provide run-time data to the operator, engineering and maintenance stations.

Though it appears that FDI will be more complicated than the EDDL we are using now, a lot of effort is being made to hide this complexity from the end user by providing an integrated graphical environment in which it will no longer be necessary to become protocol experts to keep your devices working and THAT is always a good thing—and a definite upgrade from today.

This article originally appeared in the June 2013 issue of Manufacturing AUTOMATION.

Page 1 of 3