2014 Software Global Client Conference

Transcription

1

2 Simulationbased Controls Checkout Janet Parker, Schneider Electric James Hooker, Schneider Electric Heather Stelly, Schneider Electric Ganesh Venkataramanan, Schneider Electric

3 Mobile App: Please take a moment Check into Session by: Select Detailed Schedule Select the specific session Click on Check in Take Session Survey by: Select Detailed Schedule Select the specific session Scroll Down to Survey and Provide Feedback

4 Overview Simulation-based Controls Checkout Context Mission statement Defining the solution Execution Results Lessons Learned

5 Major Southwestern Refinery Large Refinery with crude capacity of 600,000 barrels per day Transports gasoline, diesel, kerosene and jet fuel to the East Coast, Midwest, Central Texas and the Southeast Texas area. Now capable of handling even the lowest grades of crudes

6 Context Corporate Standards and Industry best practices SIS logic (in Triconex) needs to be tested During FATs During turnarounds (Proof testing) Company policy requires Tests are conducted from the input sensor, through the logic solver, and terminate through the final elements Tests to be done from the Operator s perspective Test results need to be document and audited Site has over 70 Triconex systems

7 Context Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT) Conducted by using a test bed consisting of Honeywell hardware and a Tricoby test bed (During FAT) Proof Testing Conducted during TAR by forcing input sensors to bad/good Upon logic execution, observe trip valve positions in the field and on DCS HMI

8 Context Testing is tedious and mistake-prone Proof testing during TAR is often the last task before startup (critical path) Delays in testing delay startup and result in potential revenue losses To accelerate TAR testing, additional (and expensive) manpower is used Each version of Triconex requires a different set of hardware for testing Can Simulation help complete the testing outside of a TAR? Can a Simulation test bed relieve the tedious nature of the work? Can Simulation reduce the hardware footprint?

9 Defining the Solution Ability to test Triconex (older and new versions), GE Mark VI and Allen Bradley controls thru an Experion /TDC HMI

10 The Solution Excel-based testing script Dynsim/Trisim interface used by tester to force logic inputs Triconex solution emulated in Trisim Honeywell TDC controls emulated using Proconex LCNSIM and TDCSIM Honeywell GUS TDC HMI to view effects of logic changes Honeywell Experion HMI Experion HMI

11 Tester Interface

12 Logic Validator Solution Automated solution available as an option

13 Test Summary for Documentation

14 Pros/Cons of Automated Testing Pros Testing can be done on a frequent basis as user interaction is minimal Provides documentation for audits Even minor changes can fully tested Tests can be run across systems (e.g. both Triconex and Honeywell) Cons Tests logic only; not behavior of DCS HMI If the test fails, someone must determine why if the test harness is difficult to understand, testing stops

15 Execution Modbus question Simulation solution uses internal connections using CORBA For validity of communications checkout, is CORBA sufficient? To Modbus or not to Modbus that is the question Tristation versions For TriStation 4.9 onwards, TRISIM supports Modbus What about older pre-4.9 versions of TriStation?

16 Execution Modbus is important to validate communications and alias mapping Modbus capability added on to TDCSIM solution Tristation versions prior to 4.9 (such as 4.3) migrated to 4.9 without updating libraries Allows use of old libraries with a new emulator

17 Results Simulation Test bed deployed successfully at site in August Units currently on Simulation Test bed Testing of delivered units can be done outside of TAR!!! Additional units will be added onto Test bed in the future Test bed part of Management of Change (MOC) process; not just logic testing Reduced hardware footprint

18 Acknowledgement: We d like to acknowledge the vision of Bernard Lescure and Don Hite (Schneider Electric) and their efforts to make their project a reality 2014 Schneider Electric. All Rights Reserved. All trademarks are owned by Schneider Electric Industries SAS or its affiliated companies or their respective owners. 18