Recent Posts
- Emerson: Watching the ceremony
- Your own home fuel cell plant
- Death of the typewriter (man)
- Living: How green is green enough?
- ISA Expo: Show must go on
- Re-branding a legacy
- Back to the "smart grid"
- Learning to live with change
- Back to $100 oil?
- Economics of not driving to work
Recent Comments
- Sandor Fule, Hungary on I am not a socialist
- Sandor Fule, Hungary on Economics of not driving to work
- Nico on Making gasoline out of coal
- Mark Hoske, Control Engineering on Learning to live with change
- Nancy McIntyre on ExxonMobil helping plug skills gap
Most Commented On
- I am not a socialist (3)
- Chinese pharma plants go un-inspected? (2)
- Making gasoline out of coal (2)
- Economics of not driving to work (1)
- Learning to live with change (1)
Archives
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
Blog
Is Wireless HART the Future?
April 3, 2007
There has been some news lately that the Wireless HART standard is gelling, and the world is beginning to see how it will be implemented. Rather than dwelling on the mechanics, I am wondering if this new transmission technique will stimulate users to use more HART enabled instruments in ways that take full advantage of all their capabilities. I ask the question because I don't understand why more users don't use HART functions now.
Wireless HART is being advanced as a new and easier way to unlock HART data, especially in legacy environments where operators don't want to put in additional cabling. In situations where a 4-20 mA signal is hard wired into a long serving DCS, the system can't handle the HART diagnostic information, so wireless offers a way to bring it into the system without needing new wires or disturbing the existing I/O setup. While all that is true and represents a perfectly logical argument, much of that capability is available today without wireless and yet users aren't taking advantage of it.For example, that same user in a legacy environment could simply go out and buy a loop interface and add it to the system to do the same things the new wireless device will. (Click here to read a recent article about this very topic.) If he or she adds it at the I/O connection, no additional cables will need to run to the instrument, nor will the connection to the instrument or DCS need to be disturbed. All can operate just as it was, and all the HART functions are available through the loop interface. This technology is nothing new, and yet 80+% of HART enabled instruments are not using the capabilities because users don't have provision to extract the data.Will wireless encourage users to do something they aren't doing now? The wireless devices are probably going to be more pricey than current loop interfaces (which aren't very expensive) so cost isn't the issue. The more complicated point is that a user has to have some way to interface and utilize the additional data with a control system. Whether the data comes in via wireless or loop interface, this requirement is the same. That is undoubtedly the more difficult issue, and the greater discouragement. Sadly, wireless is unlikely to help that. It is truly a wasted resource. Is there another side to this story that I'm missing?Posted by Peter Welander on April 3, 2007 | Comments (1)
In response to: Is Wireless HART the Future?
John Rezabek commented:
I worked for a large oil company that put HART AMS in 3 or 4 chemical plants, using HART muxes a la "Elcon" or their kin. Some plants had good success stories to tell (I believe one was "HART Plant of the Year"), but most saw little improvement. I think they kept doing what they always did, which didn''''''''''''''''t involve using all the HART capabilities. I suspect if you gave these plants the same info via wireless the result would be about the same. The legacy plants you refer to have some demographics worth contemplating. I know of few young engineers aching to work on instruments - I can think of maybe ONE we''''''''''''''''ve hired in the past 15 years. These same plants typically populate their instrument craft with operators senior enough to win a "bid" into a light-work day job. I would say the median age is 40-ish or higher. There''''''''''''''''s a lot of inertia to "keep doing what we always did".



