PCSD HCD

Dear Friends

in DeltaV Rev 11 & 12, a new PCSD library has been added as HCD. it seems that it's very good and some new facilities have been added too. whereas, i have not used in any project, i'm not sure about this new library in refreshing, any bug, or loading the pages. would you please let me have your experience in HCD, if you have used it before.

Regards

Pouya

22 Replies

  • We have PBL and PCSD libraries running at some of our customers sites.

    The big advantage of PCSD is that it can do everything.

    The big disadvantage of PCSD is that you don't need 90% of the options. Therefor, you get a lot of unnecessary overhead in the controllers. Also modifying the library is very difficult for inexperienced engineers.

    A library custom designed to the customers requirements usually works equally well or even better IMO.

  • In reply to Robert Rijnders:

    I have to agree with Robert, I'm not a project person so I can’t speak to the project cost savings the Emerson sales folks always talk about with PCSD; I work in the day to day maintenance and upkeep of production systems and while PCSD is full of features it is nearly impossible to troubleshoot due to the unused features in each module as well as an extreme over reliance on dynamic references.  

    I do like to keep a copy of the PCSD library around to look at when I’m doing something new in a system; it has a lot of good ideas.  I would recommend looking at it for an idea of how to implement something then creating your own simplified version without the unnecessary overhead.

  • In reply to chessley:

    The caution about overhead has only been an issue with our customers who try to minimize the number of controllers they purchase and pack as many control modules in one as possible. As to the HCD, that's a new acronym to me but then I haven't worked on a v12 system and haven't seen it on any of the v11 systems I've worked on. What does HCD stand for?

  • In reply to Robert Rijnders:

    Thanks for your informative post, Robert. Great to see you engaging in the community again. Please feel free to reach out to me directly with thoughts on how we can improve your user experience, we've got lots of exciting updates in store for the community in the coming months. Cheers!

    Best Regards,

    Rachelle McWright: Business Development Manager, Dynamic Simulation: U.S. Gulf Coast

  • Pouya,

    Are you interfacing with a Honeywell system? I got to thinking that the HCD library might stand for Honeywell Connect that that's why I hadn't run into it.

  • In reply to Bruce Brandt:

    Bruce,

    HCD stands for Human Centered Design.

    Here is a good video explaining HCD concepts for Operator Displays.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8-uoxJtysQ

    Regards,

    Matt

  • Thanks Matt. That would have been my next guess but I was going down the control library path because of the way the original post was worded.
     
    Bruce Brandt, PE
    Principal Engineer
    770.773.3331 office
    281.481.3402 fax
    626.255.2678 cell
    www.mavtechglobal.com
    Maverick logo
    icon-youtubeicon-twittericon-linkedinicon-feedicon-facebookGLDRMurray (3)

    This E-mail message and any attached files are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the addressee(s) named above. This communication may contain material protected by attorney-client, work product, or other privileges. If you are not the intended recipient or person responsible for delivering this confidential communication to the intended recipient, you have received this communication in error, and any review, use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, copying, or other distribution of this E-mail message and any attached files is strictly prohibited. If you have received this confidential communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply E-mail message and permanently delete the
    original message.
     
    From: Matt Stoner [mailto:bounce-MStoner@community.emerson.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 1:35 PM
    To: DeltaV@community.emerson.com
    Subject: RE: [EE365 DeltaV Track] PCSD HCD
     

    Bruce,

    HCD stands for Human Centered Design.

    Here is a good video explaining HCD concepts for Operator Displays.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8-uoxJtysQ

    Regards,

    Matt

  • Although the PCSD library modules may contain features you do not need, many of those features can be removed with no impact.  Examples are the rate of change composite on analog inputs, thresholds composite on analog inputs and PIDs, the modelock composite (although you need to keep the MODELOCKED parameter), interlock/permissive/force setpoint composites (and then uncheck the Permissive and Interlock option from DEVICE_OPTS), etc.  The faceplates, detail displays, etc. are designed to work whether these composites are there or not.  As most of us know, it is easier to remove a feature than to try to figure out how to add it in later so I really appreciate having all of the “heavy lifting” done even if I don’t need a particular feature for a specific project.
     
    Regards,
     
    Gareld
     
     

    Gareld Butler

  • Thanks Gareld! 
    I would like to add that the dynamos are also designed to work flawless, provided you need to choose right options while configuring those on VBA forms.

    Sent from my iPad

    On 15-Jul-2014, at 7:53 pm, "Gareld Butler" <bounce-Gareld_Butler@community.emerson.com> wrote:

    Although the PCSD library modules may contain features you do not need, many of those features can be removed with no impact.  Examples are the rate of change composite on analog inputs, thresholds composite on analog inputs and PIDs, the modelock composite (although you need to keep the MODELOCKED parameter), interlock/permissive/force setpoint composites (and then uncheck the Permissive and Interlock option from DEVICE_OPTS), etc.  The faceplates, detail displays, etc. are designed to work whether these composites are there or not.  As most of us know, it is easier to remove a feature than to try to figure out how to add it in later so I really appreciate having all of the “heavy lifting” done even if I don’t need a particular feature for a specific project.
     
    Regards,
     
    Gareld
     
     
  • At the risk of offending my many Emerson friends, I’d like to strongly support Robert’s view.  I work primarily in the upstream and offshore oil production sector where there is a large premium on robustness and simplicity.  I strongly support the concept of a standard library – but PCSD in my view is far too complex to be effective in offshore and similar applications, where access to technical support may be limited.  Perhaps Emerson should develop a radically simplified variant of PCSD?  Here is what I have done successfully in the past.
     
    Library comprises just six ‘families’:
     
    Analogue indication family:
    • one core logic configuration with minor variants to handle different input types (conventional 4-20 mA, serial, OPC, calculated etc.)
    Digital indication family
    • one core logic configuration with minor variants to handle different input types (conventional hard-wired, serial, OPC, calculated etc.)
    PID controller family:
    • one core logic configuration (single-loop controller) with variants to handle cascade slave, cascade master, constraint control with high/low selector, split-range output etc.
    GAP controller family:
    • one core logic configuration with variants to cover analogue or digital inputs, analogue and/or digital outputs
    Valve device controller family:
    • one core logic configuration with minor variants to handle non-safety isolation valve, shutdown valve, blowdown valve etc.
    Motor and other electrical device controller family:
    • one core logic configuration with variants to handle sustained output, pulse outputs etc.
     
    In all cases, the logic is kept to an absolute minimum to satisfy the vital requirements:
    • control logic as required
    • small amount of additional logic to make ‘bad PV’ alarming more intelligent
    • standardised ‘hooks’ for dynamic alarm strategies (e.g., state-based alarming, group alarming)
    • standardised parameter naming to minimise the number of different faceplates required
    • all logic visible on the module surface (no ‘buried layers’, composites etc.)
     
    Any more complex ‘one-off’ logic can be built round one of these core templates.
     
    Furthermore, although there are some advantages in class-based modules, the software is more complex and hard for those from a more traditional instrument or process background to understand and use.  I simply use templates, with Excel-based bulk edit to create and modify instances.
     
    Although I am of the firm opinion that DeltaV is by far the best of the major vendors’ offerings, I have long been concerned by the tendency to over-complicate and over-differentiate the software, thus – in my view – undermining the virtues of ‘easy DeltaV’.  I’d be most interested in others’ views on this.
     
    Neil Brown
     
    Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 6:47 PM
    Subject: RE: [EE365 DeltaV Track] PCSD HCD
     

    We have PBL and PCSD libraries running at some ot our customers sites.

    The big advantage of PCSD is that it can do everything.

    The big disadvantage of PCSD is that you don't need 90% of the options. Therefor, you get a lot of unnecessary overhead in the controllers. Also modifying the library is very difficult for inexperienced engineers.

    A library custom designed to the customers requirements usually works equally well or even better IMO.

  • In reply to neilrbrown:

    Lots of interesting comments and I agree with most of them.

    Ever since the introduction of IEWT library and later PBL, engineers have been stripping down the typicals. Even Emerson engineers themselves. Most of the time removing features works fine, but takes some engineering effort and time. My experience is that if you cut away too much, problems usually occur in dynamos and detail pictures.

    In any case, it's an interesting reference to study. Some solutions are very clever, others overly complex.

    Another advantage of using PCSD might be that it comes as a complete product with 'off-the-shelve' documentation. Useful for industries like pharma and other that have to comply to FDA CFR11, GMP, GAMP, etc rules and regulations. Using a standardized library can cut down in the qualification and validation effort. Haven't worked on a pharma project yet that used the bare PCSD without modifications. So just import and go.

    Another disadvantage is trouble-shooting. If one of our oil&gas customers calls at 03:00 with an EM problem, I need coffee first before I can dig through the spaghetti that is PCSD. IMO.

    About libraries. My DeltaV motto is 'keep it simple'. Over the years I've developed my own typical library and I believe it could compete with any 'PCSD light' library if Emerson decides to release one. (Probably every DeltaV engineer will have his own library of course.) Like Neil explains all 6 main families and additional like totalizers and timers. For higher layers a standardized frame-work for implementing EM's, phases and optional OP's, UP's and P's.

    Also I prefer class-based software. An estimated >95% of plant software can and should be class instances. Other 5% variations of a standard class and a few 'specials'.

  • In reply to Robert Rijnders:

    Pardon my ignorance, but where can this PCSD library be found?  I look on my 12.3 system but did not see any new library modules.

    Thanks

  • In reply to kdculb:

    Since it took many engineering hours to develop, the PCSD library is a commercial product by Emerson. You'll need to contact EPM sales to acquire a copy, as it's not included in the base system.

  • In reply to Robert Rijnders:

    About HCD. I've always been a fan of HCD, even before I knew it was called HCD :) To be blunt, process operators aren't the brightest people around so they need all the help they can get. This is my (and my colleagues) opinion. Presenting everything in 50 shades of gray will make them fall asleep faster than usual ;)

    Currently, I'm looking into using the new DeltaV themes in my dynamo sets and popup pictures. Looks like it will be based on the 'light blue' theme with some variations. Possibly with an option to change the color-scheme dynamically.

    Also I can see the benefit of the 'alarm help' function. Another feature I'll add to the library when I have time.

  • In reply to Robert Rijnders:

    To be blunt Robert, your comment on operators is out of bounds.  I've met many smart Operators in my 27 years of work with Emerson and the LBP organizations.  You may have your opinion, but statements like that don't belong in this or any other public forum.  Bad form...

    As for PCSD, it is a project productivity tool.  I've heard the statement "it's cheaper to add more controllers than to try and optimize all the control logic to squeeze more loops in fewer controllers."  Over time, the PBL library evolved into the PCSD library and many of the inefficiencies of the earlier code have been addressed.  There certainly is more overhead in the PCSD library to accomplish the many options being requested in a modern BPCS.  Whatever library is used on a system, it is important that there be some training of the maintenance staff on how the library works and how to trouble shoot the logic.  

    Some customers have more demanding libraries than PCSD, others prefer simpler designs.  You have to start somewhere, and if the customer does not have a defined approach and library to work with PCSD offers a proven solutions that should greatly reduce testing.

    Andre Dicaire