Archive for the ‘Motor Cycle Law’ Category
Teens To Fight Motorcycle Law After Death
After a Bay State teen died on his motorcycles, classmates are questioning the law.
Duration : 0:1:27
Introduction to Plc and Scada
Introduction to PLC’s
Programmable Logic Controllers
Bedford Associates, founded by Richard Morley introduced the first Programmable Logic Controller in 1968. This PLC was known as the Modular Digital Controller from which the MODICON company derived its name. The History of the PLC as told to Howard Hendricks by Dick Morley provides an interesting insight into the early development of the PLC.
Schnieder Quantum PLC
Programmable Logic Controllers were developed to provide a replacement for large relay based control panels. These systems were inflexible requiring major rewiring or replacement whenever the control sequence was to be changed.
The development of the micro processor from the mid 1970’s have allowed Programmable Logic Controllers to take on more complex tasks and larger functions as the speed of the processor increased.
Ladder Logic
PLC had to be maintainable by technicians and electrical personnel. To support this the programming language of Ladder Logic was developed. Ladder Logic is based on the relay and contact symbols technicians were used to through wiring diagrams of electrical control panels.
Until recently there has been no formal programming standard for PLC’s. The introduction of the IEC 61131 Standard in 1998 provides a more formal approach to coding. PLC Manufacturers have so far been slow on the uptake of the standard with partial implementation. The SearchEng articleIEC 61131-3, a Standard for PLC Software by R.W. Lewis provides an introduction to the standard.
The documentation for early PLC Programs was either non existent or very poor, just providing simple addressing and basic comments, making large programs difficult to follow. This has been greatly improved with the development of PLC Programming Packages.
SCADA and HMI
The early programmable logic controllers interfaced with the operator in much the same way as the relay control panel, via push-buttons and switches for control and lamps for indication.
The introduction of the Personal Computer (PC) in the 1980’s allowed for the development of a computer based interface to the operator, these where initially via simple Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems and more recently via Dedicated Operator Control Panels, known as Human Machine Interfaces (HMI).
The History of the PLC
as told to Howard Hendricks by Dick Morley
The following are some fables associated with the first ten years of the programmable controller business. These Fables may or may not have a basis of truth, but in general, they are the best that my Alzheimer-plagued memory can do at the moment. As has been often in other articles and reports, the startup of Modicon and the programmable controller industry as a whole is well documented. The programmable controller was detailed on New Year’s Day, 1968, and from hence till now, a slow steady growth has allowed the manufacturing and process control industries to take advantage of applications-oriented software.
The early days however, were not as straightforward nor as simple. We had some real problems in the early days of convincing people that a box of software, albeit cased in cast iron, could do the same thing as 50 feet of cabinets, associated relays and wiring. The process was indeed difficult, and deserves some of the stories that I hope the reader will be regaled with as he proceeds onward through the tortuous swamp of my mind.
One of my earliest recommendations was that the programmable controller, according to my own system architecture specification, did not need to go fast because I felt as though speed was not a criteria because it would go as fast as we needed it to. The initial machine, which was never delivered, only had 125 words of memory, and speed was not a criteria as mentioned earlier. You can imagine what happened! First, we immediately ran out of memory, and second, the machine was much too slow to perform any function anywhere near the relay response time. Relay response times exist on the order of 1/60th of a second, and the topology formed by many cabinets full of relays transformed to code is significantly more than 125 words. We expanded the memory to 1K and thence to 4K. At 4K, it stood the test of time for quite a while. Initially, marketing and memory sizes were sold in 1K, 2K, 3K, (?) and 4K. the 3K was obviously the 4K version with constrained address so that field expansion to 4K could easily be done.
The question of speed, in part, was part of the early designs. No interrupts were necessary because the external signal conditions were directly written onto memory without any supervisory requirements or “operating system of the conventional type. This allowed the processor to pay attention to solving logic rather than housekeeping the I/O. As a result, of course, the processor had to have significantly more processing power than normally associated with this size computer; and secondly, the system had to be made to run fast.
We increased the memory size, as mentioned above, but to get it to run fast, we had to break up the machine into three distinct components. Initially, the programmable controller was conceived of a processor board and a memory, and that the algorithmic and logical manipulation would be done in software. This approach was painfully slow, both on the generic “store bought computers, and other items.
We did, however, manage to substantially speed up the machine by making a third major component. This was called the logic solver. A logic solver board solved the dominant algorithms associated with solving ladder logic without the intervention and classical software approach of general-purpose processing. This meant that we ended up with three boards; memory, logic solver and processor. This single step allowed us to get the speed we needed in this application-specific computer to solve the perceptually simple problem of several cabinets full of relay wiring.
We had also assumed a modular approach to the programmable controller. In act, the name Modicon means MOdular DIgital CONtroller. The modularity, however, was soon abandoned because, as everyone knows, open architectures are no good. We instead had the marketing premise that a large footprint would contain within it the sets of problems we wished to solve. This meant that a buyer of programmable controllers could buy large numbers of the same units, and the software and hardware would be identical across a broad spectrum of applications in his factory. Service, maintenance and total life cost would be substantially lower than the perceived lower cost of an open architecture and modular expansion. Although at first, a supporter of the open architecture modular expansion, I soon became convinced by the marketplace, but this was folly.
We took one of our early units which was aimed at the machine tool industry because of my Bedford Associates consulting background, up to one of the early requesters of this equipment. This particular early requester was Byrant Chuck and Grinder in Springfield, Vermont. We took the machine up there, and it was heavy. This was the 084. The 084 was in the trunk of my old Pontiac, and since we needed help carrying it in, requested some of the people at Bryant to help us. We went out and opened the hood, and the first comment made by an outside viewer of the programmable controller said, “Thank God it,s not another pastel colored piece of sheet metal.
We can hypothesize from this particular comment that the ruggedness of the visual design was pleasing to him, and being human (as opposed to Martian), assumed that this same attitude went deep inside the construction of the machine in both the hardware and software. Indeed, this was the case, and the machine as a result, was built rugged, had no ON/OFF switch, had no fans, did not make any noise and had no wear out system.
To reminisce for a moment—in selecting the cores for the first memories, which in itself was a revolutionary step, we selected these cores and we applied Shannon,s Law. Shannon,s Law assumes that the signal-to-noise ratio is what makes signals good or bad. There are several ways to get the power from the signal-to-noise ratio; one is to code heavily, be triply redundant, and use lots and lots of error checking. There is another way, which is perfectly compatible with theory, which is to use lots of signal power in another domain. A nice switch, a car battery and a D-rated light bulb will work fairly well over a long time period.
Therefore, what we did was rather than going error checking, triply redundant and stuff, we got, and searched for and found high energy, large ferrite core memories that had lots on energy per bit. We still make the same assumption today. The energy per bit is extremely important—as Shannon,s theory said in his most famous 1948 paper, that the signal noise to power noise is what gives you transmission. the way we got signal power was to increase the energy per bit. This we felt was far more important than getting the energy per bit increased by means of doubly transmitting it. But I digress. Bryant Chuck and Grinder put it in, and liked the equipment so much that they never bought one. They in turn thought it was a good idea, and as many did at that time, tried to evolve their own.
One of our first major customers, however, was Landis in Landis, PA. We flew the equipment down in a private aircraft, and with apprehension because we were late (as usual), brought the equipment into Landis. In doing so, we tripped over the threshold. The equipment went KA-RASH onto the floor! Without much chagrin, we picked the equipment up, trundled it in. hooked it up, and low and behold, it worked quite well.
Now, Landis was pleased and surprised. They were pleased because it worked, but they were most pleasantly surprised—not because the equipment worked—but because the guys from Modicon fully expected the equipment to work in spite of it being dropped. In other words, the people from Modicon weren,t nervous about the fact that it fell on the floor over the threshold.
Landis subsequently took and wrapped welding coils of wire around the machine to induce electro-magnetic noise to see if they could make it fail. We had them there! We used to test the programmable controllers with a Teslar coil that struck a quarter inch to half-inch arch anywhere on the system, and the programmable controller still had to continue to run. There was significant strangeness with respect to the programmable controller. For example, it had no ON/OFF switch. It had no means to load software. It had no fans. It ran cool. It could survive bad, physical and thermal environments. It was not computer industry standard. There were many things that were most difficult in the acceptance of the programmable controller, and early acceptance was most difficult indeed.
Our sales in the first four years were abysmal. Early innovators such as Landers and General Motors were, of course, heroes to our eyes, but they would buy small numbers of units and then test them in the field before they committed themselves later on. We had one customer in the utilities business that took them approximately six to seven years to make a decision to but the first one.
We never really sold any programmable controllers into the intended market which was machine tool control such as lathes, grinders and stuff, but we did, as luck would have it, stumble across the transfer line market which was and still is the mainstay, long-term market for the application of programmable controllers. Discreet parts manufacturing in an automatic environment, i.e., mass production, continues to be, and probably will be for the future, the mainstay of the programmable controller industry.
Some of the more interesting stories center around the personalities and experiences as opposed to the programmable controller. Modicon,s third president (or fourth, if you count my two-week stint) was Don Kramer. When Don Kramer was chosen as president, we decided to go out and celebrate at the Lanum Club in Andover. At the time, we felt we should celebrate over both martinis and food. As we were leaving the shop for the Lanum Club, Don made the aside comment that “the place is dingy and needs a paint job. As we were leaving, I mentioned to Don that as president you have to change what you say, and not be very open—you have to be a little careful about what you say because employees, customers, and boards of directors tend to take what you say as truth. Rather than listen to the meaning, they listen to the literal statements, and one must be careful. We went over to the Lanum Club and had a nice glowing two hours of discussion, food, and drink. Coming back, as we entered the Modicon lobby, we noticed that there was scaffolding about and people were painting. We went over and asked Lou as to why these people are painting since, at the time, we don,t have any money. Who ordered this paint job? And Lou looked Don Kramer straight in the eye, and said, “Why you did, Mr. Kramer. Nuff said.
As has been mentioned many times, your author, that,s me—Dick Morley—is supposed to be the inventor of the programmable controller. This is at best, partially true. The thing that made the Modicon company and the programmable controller really take off was not the 084, but the 184. The 184 was done in design cycle by Michael Greenberg, one of the best engineers I have ever met. He, and Lee Rousseau, president and marketeer, came up with a specification and a design that revolutionized the automation business. they built the 184 over the objections of yours truly. I was a purist and felt that all those bells and whistles and stuff weren,t “pure, and somehow they were contaminating my “glorious design, Dead wrong again, Morley! they were specifically right on! the 184 was a walloping success, and it—not the 084, not the invention of the programmable controller—but a product designed to meet the needs of the marketplace and the customer, called the 184, took off and made Modicon and the programmable controller the company and industry it is today. My compliments to the two chefs—Lee Rousseau and Mike Greenberg.
The issue of quality in programmable controllers is a story that is normally taken for granted. The gentle reader must remember that our engineering people came from the computer industry where reliability in those days was a phantom—a phantom of design, a phantom of cost. People felt that reliability was something other people did, and that if we only could deliver faster computers, even if they didn,t work, everything would be fine.
When the programmable controller was designed, it was designed in to be reliable. We used lots of energy per information bit by utilizing D-rated components, large memory ferrite cores, relatively stable and large etchings on printed circuit boards, totally enclosed systems and conductive cooling. No fans were used, and outside air was not allowed to enter the system for fear of contamination and corrosion. Mentally, we had imagined the programmable controller being underneath a truck, in the open, and being driven around—driven around in Texas, driven around in Alaska. Under those circumstances, we anted it to survive. The other requirement was that it stood on a pole helping run an utility or a microwave station which was not climate controlled, and not serviced at all. Under those circumstances, would it work for the years that it was intended to be? Could it be walled in? Could it be bolted in a system that was expected to last 20 years?
The humorous side of this is though we did all those designs and very carefully tried to make this system as intrinsically reliable as we could, not by redundancy, but by building well. In other words, it was designed to be built, it was designed to be designed, and it was designed to be reliable. We, however, as engineers, didn,t understand the accountants and manufacturing. those two have their grail, shipments by the end of the month. As far as we could ascertain at the time, shipments were made independent of quality and independent of whether or not the system ran.
In the early days of the programmable controller and Modicon, even though I wasn,t a direct employee and an owner, I would give out my home phone number to many of our critical customers so that if they had a problem, they could call me directly. Several calls indicated that when we shipped near the end of the month, let’s say October 34th, that the equipment would not run; and secondly, when they opened the box and took the machine apart, cards were missing, bolts were on the bottom of the cabinetry, and some of the cards were not fully inserted. In other words, to make the end of the month was much more important than to deliver equipment that ran. to put it mildly, we were pissed! How do we as engineers maintain quality without continual surveillance which is most difficult for the design and entrepreneurial mind set. What we did was specify and design “blue boxes. These were cabinetries that the system had to operate in and run continuously for a minimum of 24 hours, under load, and under varying conditions. The box was built out of plywood, but its primary intention was to heat cycle the programmable controller under various input/output loads. We also ran, as a specification, that a Tesla coil was to be used on the programmable controller, and that vibration and thumping with a hammer (rubber) would be part of the specification.
This may seem unscientific to many of you, but let us assume that you try to get your equipment to run while somebody purposely tries to destroy it with a rubber hammer or spark coil that he can put anywhere on the system. Remember, your intention is to make the processor stop. That combination significantly depressed those monthly shipments during the first period. As a result of that, however, the message got through. Not only did we build ovens and tests, and pay attention to heat and spark and RF emissions, we would run the system continuously even in the shipping crate to get the maximum number of pre-custom hours we could. It was important to us that we found the mistakes and not the customer and his secondary customer.
The language itself, ladder lister, bears some discussion. This particular language was not the invention of Modicon. We hypothesize that the language is very old, and originated in Germany to describe relay circuitry. If one looks at ladder lister, it has been our technical community for so long, we somehow think those little symboligies actually look like relays. In fact, it,s a mnemonic form of rule-based language, very modern and very high level, but designed in a Darwinian fashion over a period of many decades.
The ladder logic construct, “If… Then… is a very powerful construct used today in expert systems and other rule-based languages. The symbology, allowing normally open and normally closed situations as well as parallel and serial representation, was used for many decades before the invention of the programmable controller. I have worked on machines where the number of C-size and D-size prints were hung in special racks, and would be up to three feet thick worth of documentation on those drawing sets.
The name ladder comes from the fact that on the right-hand of the drawing is one power rail and the left-hand side is the other power rail; and in between in a horizontal fashion, is the statement or sequential connection of logical elements which we call relays or relay logic. The initial 084 had only logic in its functionality, and as a result, was marginal. In other words, all we did was replace relays rather than enhance the functionality by a factor of ten which is the entrepreneurial rule. Immediately, of course, based on customer response and our own frustrations, we put thing in the ladder listing language such as addition, multiplication, subtraction, and other functionalities that went far beyond relay capability and entered the realm of mathematics and set theory. This was still not sufficient, however, and we needed some way to make a “call to a “subroutine using ladder lister symbology and representation.
A software engineer, Chuck Schelberg, and myself were in the conference room one day trying to ascertain how we could make a generic call to functionalities that far exceeded the relay symbology and representation, and came up with the “DX function. This function was a block function that would be an element on the ladder logic representation that could perform many functionalities including arrays, motor drive functions, servo functions, extended mathematical functions, PID loops, ad nauseam. We felt there would be an occasional representation and use of these functionalities, and that not much had to be done to the programmable controller other than to modify the software. Wrong again!
The first customer that took delivery of a programmable controller utilizing the DX function, had a capability to be predictable and operate in real time. The RUN light went out, and the time to execute a scan or complete transformation of the ladder logic went far beyond the time allowable. Every single line had a DX function on it. Again we learned that when you enhance functionality, people use it all. I have never designed a computer that had too much memory. I,ve only designed computers that have too little memory. The same thing applies to any other functionality. Conventional wisdom seems to think that price/performance depends on only one thing—price—when, in fact, my experience has been that the customer cares little about price.
This price/performance tirade being over, one of the lessons we learned is that the customer wants functionality over the entire life cycle cost installation of the job. the customer also wants ease of installation, to have some fun, and to be proud of the work he does. After he,s finished, he never wants to come back.. The equipment should work as installed and as based. At one time, the programmable controller meantime before failure in the field was 50,000 hours. This is far in excess of almost any other type of electronic or control equipment.
The concept of languages and high-level languages is important. The programmable controller, as it evolved, began to request more and more power, and more and more memory. The memories continually went up as well as power. It is estimated that at one time, in the mid-1970s, that the programmable controller had the equivalent of two MIPS processor and 128 kilobytes of memory, which at that time was a significantly powered minicomputer capability. Why? High-level languages require power to run them. If we take the equivalent of the ladder lister statement “If… Then…, the high-level language as represented here, requires a substantial amount of interpretive compiler, if you will, generation of underlying code. In other words, this statement spawns significant underlying code that must be run quickly, reliably, and contain within it, all aspects of resource allocation and operations resource. The higher level the language, the more powerful the processor apparently has to be in order to run the language. Ladder lister is a high-level rule-based language which, until now, we haven,t talked much about in these terms. Our customers treated the programmable controller as a box of relays, and well they should. Language theory is neither necessary not desirable for most of the customers to know. The customers, instead, understand their problem, and are indeed much smarter than the design engineers because the dimensions of their problem far exceed the relatively simple problem of designing a computer software system and language. Ladder lister requires high performance which is one of the reasons it has difficulty running on the personal computer even of today
INTRODUCTION TO SCADA
SCADA is the abbreviation for Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition. It generally refers to an industrial control system: a computer system monitoring and controlling a process. The process can be industrial, infrastructure or facility based as described below:
Industrial processes include those of manufacturing, production, power generation, fabrication, and refining, and may run in continuous, batch, repetitive, or discrete modes.
Infrastructure processes may be public or private, and include water treatment and distribution, wastewater collection and treatment, oil and gas pipelines, electrical power transmission and distribution, and large communication systems.
Facility processes occur both in public facilities and private ones, including buildings, airports, ships, and space stations. They monitor and control HVAC, access, and energy consumption.
A SCADA System usually consists of the following subsystems:
A Human-Machine Interface or HMI is the apparatus which presents process data to a human operator, and through which the human operator monitors and controls the process.
A supervisory (computer) system, gathering (acquiring) data on the process and sending commands (control) to the process
Remote Terminal Units (RTUs) connecting to sensors in the process, converting sensor signals to digital data and sending digital data to the supervisory system.
Communication infrastructure connecting the supervisory system to the Remote Terminals Units
There is, in several industries, considerable confusion over the differences between SCADA systems and Distributed control systems (DCS). Generally speaking, a SCADA system usually refers to a system that coordinates, but does not control processes in real time. The discussion on real-time control is muddied somewhat by newer telecommunications technology, enabling reliable, low latency, high speed communications over wide areas. Most differences between SCADA and Distributed control system DCS are culturally determined and can usually be ignored. As communication infrastructures with higher capacity become available, the difference between SCADA and DCS will fade.
Systems concepts
The term SCADA usually refers to centralized systems which monitor and control entire sites, or complexes of systems spread out over large areas (anything between an industrial plant and a country). Most control actions are performed automatically by remote terminals units (”RTUs”) or by programmable logic controllers (”PLCs”). Host control functions are usually restricted to basic overriding or supervisory level intervention. For example, a PLC may control the flow of cooling water through part of an industrial process, but the SCADA system may allow operators to change the set points for the flow, and enable alarm conditions, such as loss of flow and high temperature, to be displayed and recorded. The feedback control loop passes through the RTU or PLC, while the SCADA system monitors the overall performance of the loop.
Data acquistion begins at the RTU or PLC level and includes meter readings and equipment status reports that are communicated to SCADA as required. Data is then compiled and formatted in such a way that a control room operator using the HMI can make supervisory decisions to adjust or override normal RTU (PLC) controls. Data may also be fed to a Historian, often built on a commodity Database Management System, to allow trending and other analytical auditing.
SCADA systems typically implement a distributed database, commonly referred to as a tag database, which contains data elements called tags or points. A point represents a single input or output value monitored or controlled by the system. Points can be either “hard” or “soft”. A hard point represents an actual input or output within the system, while a soft point results from logic and math operations applied to other points. (Most implementations conceptually remove the distinction by making every property a “soft” point expression, which may, in the simplest case, equal a single hard point.) Points are normally stored as value-timestamp pairs: a value, and the timestamp when it was recorded or calculated. A series of value-timestamp pairs gives the history of that point. It’s also common to store additional metadata with tags, such as the path to a field device or PLC register, design time comments, and alarm information.
Human Machine Interface
A Human-Machine Interface or HMI is the apparatus which presents process data to a human operator, and through which the human operator controls the process.
An HMI is usually linked to the SCADA system’s databases and software programs, to provide trending, diagnostic data, and management information such as scheduled maintenance procedures, logistic information, detailed schematics for a particular sensor or machine, and expert-system troubleshooting guides.
The HMI system usually presents the information to the operating personnel graphically, in the form of a mimic diagram. This means that the operator can see a schematic representation of the plant being controlled. For example, a picture of a pump connected to a pipe can show the operator that the pump is running and how much fluid it is pumping through the pipe at the moment. The operator can then switch the pump off. The HMI software will show the flow rate of the fluid in the pipe decrease in real time. Mimic diagrams may consist of line graphics and schematic symbols to represent process elements, or may consist of digital photographs of the process equipment overlain with animated symbols.
The HMI package for the SCADA system typically includes a drawing program that the operators or system maintenance personnel use to change the way these points are represented in the interface. These representations can be as simple as an on-screen traffic light, which represents the state of an actual traffic light in the field, or as complex as a multi-projector display representing the position of all of the elevators in a skyscraper or all of the trains on a railway.
An important part of most SCADA implementations are alarms. An alarm is a digital status point that has either the value NORMAL or ALARM. Alarms can be created in such a way that when their requirements are met, they are activated. An example of an alarm is the “fuel tank empty” light in a car. The SCADA operator’s attention is drawn to the part of the system requiring attention by the alarm. Emails and text messages are often sent along with an alarm activation alerting managers along with the SCADA operator.
Hardware solutions
SCADA solutions often have Distributed Control System (DCS) components. Use of “smart” RTUs or PLCs, which are capable of autonomously executing simple logic processes without involving the master computer, is increasing. A functional block programming language, IEC 61131-3, is frequently used to create programs which run on these RTUs and PLCs. Unlike a procedural language such as the C programming language or FORTRAN, IEC 61131-3 has minimal training requirements by virtue of resembling historic physical control arrays. This allows SCADA system engineers to perform both the design and implementation of a program to be executed on an RTU or PLC. Since about 1998, virtually all major PLC manufacturers have offered integrated HMI/SCADA systems, many of them using open and non-proprietary communications protocols. Numerous specialized third-party HMI/SCADA packages, offering built-in compatibility with most major PLCs, have also entered the market, allowing mechanical engineers, electrical engineers and technicians to configure HMIs themselves, without the need for a custom-made program written by a software developer.
Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)
The RTU connects to physical equipment. Typically, an RTU converts the electrical signals from the equipment to digital values such as the open/closed status from a switch or a valve, or measurements such as pressure, flow, voltage or current. By converting digital setpoints to electrical signals and sending these electrical signals out to equipment the RTU can control equipment, such as opening or closing a switch or a valve, or setting the speed of a pump.
Quality SCADA RTUs have these characteristics:
Data Networking capability
Data Reliability
Data Security.
Supervisory Station
The term “Supervisory Station” refers to the servers and software responsible for communicating with the field equipment (RTUs, PLCs, etc), and then to the HMI software running on workstations in the control room, or elsewhere. In smaller SCADA systems, the master station may be composed of a single PC. In larger SCADA systems, the master station may include multiple servers, distributed software applications, and disaster recovery sites. To increase the integrity of the system the multiple servers will often be configured in a dual-redundant or hot-standby formation providing continuous control and monitoring in the event of a server failure.
Initially, more “open” platforms such as Linux were not as widely used due to the highly dynamic development environment and because a SCADA customer that was able to afford the field hardware and devices to be controlled could usually also purchase UNIX or OpenVMS licenses. Today, all major operating systems are used for both master station servers and HMI workstations.
Operational philosophy
For some installations, the costs that would result from the control system failing is extremely high. Possibly even lives could be lost. Hardware for some SCADA systems is ruggedized to withstand temperature, vibration, and voltage extremes, but in most critical installations reliability is enhanced by having redundant hardware and communications channels, up to the point of having multiple fully equipped control centres. A failing part can be quickly identified and its functionality automatically taken over by backup hardware. A failed part can often be replaced without interrupting the process. The reliability of such systems can be calculated statistically and is stated as the mean time to failure, which is a variant of mean time between failures. The calculated mean time to failure of such high reliability systems can be on the order of centuries.
Communication infrastructure and methods
SCADA systems have traditionally used combinations of radio and direct serial or modem connections to meet communication requirements, although Ethernet and IP over SONET / SDH is also frequently used at large sites such as railways and power stations. The remote management or monitoring function of a SCADA system is often referred to as telemetry.
This has also come under threat with some customers wanting SCADA data to travel over their pre-established corporate networks or to share the network with other applications. The legacy of the early low-bandwidth protocols remains, though. SCADA protocols are designed to be very compact and many are designed to send information to the master station only when the master station polls the RTU. Typical legacy SCADA protocols include Modbus RTU, RP-570, Profibus and Conitel. These communication protocols are all SCADA-vendor specific but are widely adopted and used. Standard protocols are IEC 60870-5-101 or 104, IEC 61850 and DNP3. These communication protocols are standardized and recognized by all major SCADA vendors. Many of these protocols now contain extensions to operate over TCP/IP. It is good security engineering practice to avoid connecting SCADA systems to the Internet so the attack surface is reduced.
RTUs and other automatic controller devices were being developed before the advent of industry wide standards for interoperability. The result is that developers and their management created a multitude of control protocols. Among the larger vendors, there was also the incentive to create their own protocol to “lock in” their customer base. A list of automation protocols is being compiled here.
Recently, OLE for Process Control (OPC) has become a widely accepted solution for intercommunicating different hardware and software, allowing communication even between devices originally not intended to be part of an industrial network.
Trends in SCADA
There is a trend for PLC and HMI/SCADA software to be more “mix-and-match”. In the mid 1990s, the typical DAQ I/O manufacturer supplied equipment that communicated using proprietary protocols over a suitable-distance carrier like RS-485. End users who invested in a particular vendor’s hardware solution often found themselves restricted to a limited choice of equipment when requirements changed (e.g. system expansions or performance improvement). To mitigate such problems, open communication protocols such as IEC870-5-101/104 and DNP 3.0 (serial and over IP) became increasingly popular among SCADA equipment manufacturers and solution providers alike. Open architecture SCADA systems enabled users to mix-and-match products from different vendors to develop solutions that were better than those that could be achieved when restricted to a single vendor’s product offering.
Towards the late 1990s, the shift towards open communications continued with individual I/O manufacturers as well, who adopted open message structures such as Modbus RTU and Modbus ASCII (originally both developed by Modicon) over RS-485. By 2000, most I/O makers offered completely open interfacing such as Modbus TCP over Ethernet and IP.
SCADA systems are coming in line with standard networking technologies. Ethernet and TCP/IP based protocols are replacing the older proprietary standards. Although certain characteristics of frame-based network communication technology (determinism, synchronization, protocol selection, environment suitability) have restricted the adoption of Ethernet in a few specialized applications, the vast majority of markets have accepted Ethernet networks for HMI/SCADA.
“Next generation” protocols such as OPC-UA, Wonderware’s SuiteLink, GE Fanuc’s Proficy and Rockwell Automation’s FactoryTalk, take advantage of XML, web services and other modern web technologies, making them more easily IT supportable.
With the emergence of software as a service in the broader software industry, a few vendors have begun offering application specific SCADA systems hosted on remote platforms over the Internet, for example, PumpView by MultiTrode. This removes the need to install and commission systems at the end-user’s facility and takes advantage of security features already available in Internet technology, VPNs and SSL. Some concerns include security, Internet connection reliability, and latency.
SCADA systems are becoming increasingly ubiquitous. Thin clients, web portals, and web based products are gaining popularity with most major vendors. The increased convenience of end users viewing their processes remotely introduces security considerations.
Security issues
The move from proprietary technologies to more standardized and open solutions together with the increased number of connections between SCADA systems and office networks and the Internet has made them more vulnerable to attacks. Consequently, the security of SCADA-based systems has come into question as they are increasingly seen as extremely vulnerable to cyberwarfare/cyberterrorism attacks.
In particular, security researchers are concerned about:
the lack of concern about security and authentication in the design, deployment and operation of existing SCADA networks
the mistaken belief that SCADA systems have the benefit of security through obscurity through the use of specialized protocols and proprietary interfaces
the mistaken belief that SCADA networks are secure because they are purportedly physically secured
the mistaken belief that SCADA networks are secure because they are supposedly disconnected from the Internet
Because of the mission-critical nature of a large number of SCADA systems, such attacks could, in a worst case scenario, cause massive financial losses through loss of data or actual physical destruction, misuse or theft, even loss of life, either directly or indirectly. Whether such concerns will cause a move away from the use of existing SCADA systems for mission-critical applications towards more secure architectures and configurations remains to be seen, given that at least some influential people in corporate and governmental circles believe that the benefits and lower initial costs of SCADA based systems still outweigh potential costs and risks] Recently, multiple security vendors, such as Byres Security, Inc., Industrial Defender Inc., Check Point and Innominate, and N-Dimension Solutions have begun to address these risks by developing lines of specialized industrial firewall and VPN solutions for TCP/IP-based SCADA networks. The problem according to Eric Byres, CEO of Byres Security, is that “while many infrastructure organizations are doing good work, others are falling behind. When you have this diversity of effort, you are only as effective as your weakest link.
Also, the ISA Security Compliance Institute (ISCI) is emerging to formalize SCADA security testing starting as soon as 2009. ISCI is conceptually similar to private testing and certification that has been performed by vendors since 2007, such as the Achilles certification program from Wurldtech Security Technologies, Inc. and MUSIC certification from Mu Security, Inc. Eventually, standards being defined by ISA SP99 WG4 will supersede these initial industry consortia efforts, but probably not before 2011.
N.Sankari
http://www.articlesbase.com/electronics-articles/introduction-to-plc-and-scada-679975.html
Introduction to Plc and Scada
Introduction to PLC’s
Programmable Logic Controllers
Bedford Associates, founded by Richard Morley introduced the first Programmable Logic Controller in 1968. This PLC was known as the Modular Digital Controller from which the MODICON company derived its name. The History of the PLC as told to Howard Hendricks by Dick Morley provides an interesting insight into the early development of the PLC.
Schnieder Quantum PLC
Programmable Logic Controllers were developed to provide a replacement for large relay based control panels. These systems were inflexible requiring major rewiring or replacement whenever the control sequence was to be changed.
The development of the micro processor from the mid 1970’s have allowed Programmable Logic Controllers to take on more complex tasks and larger functions as the speed of the processor increased.
Ladder Logic
PLC had to be maintainable by technicians and electrical personnel. To support this the programming language of Ladder Logic was developed. Ladder Logic is based on the relay and contact symbols technicians were used to through wiring diagrams of electrical control panels.
Until recently there has been no formal programming standard for PLC’s. The introduction of the IEC 61131 Standard in 1998 provides a more formal approach to coding. PLC Manufacturers have so far been slow on the uptake of the standard with partial implementation. The SearchEng articleIEC 61131-3, a Standard for PLC Software by R.W. Lewis provides an introduction to the standard.
The documentation for early PLC Programs was either non existent or very poor, just providing simple addressing and basic comments, making large programs difficult to follow. This has been greatly improved with the development of PLC Programming Packages.
SCADA and HMI
The early programmable logic controllers interfaced with the operator in much the same way as the relay control panel, via push-buttons and switches for control and lamps for indication.
The introduction of the Personal Computer (PC) in the 1980’s allowed for the development of a computer based interface to the operator, these where initially via simple Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems and more recently via Dedicated Operator Control Panels, known as Human Machine Interfaces (HMI).
The History of the PLC
as told to Howard Hendricks by Dick Morley
The following are some fables associated with the first ten years of the programmable controller business. These Fables may or may not have a basis of truth, but in general, they are the best that my Alzheimer-plagued memory can do at the moment. As has been often in other articles and reports, the startup of Modicon and the programmable controller industry as a whole is well documented. The programmable controller was detailed on New Year’s Day, 1968, and from hence till now, a slow steady growth has allowed the manufacturing and process control industries to take advantage of applications-oriented software.
The early days however, were not as straightforward nor as simple. We had some real problems in the early days of convincing people that a box of software, albeit cased in cast iron, could do the same thing as 50 feet of cabinets, associated relays and wiring. The process was indeed difficult, and deserves some of the stories that I hope the reader will be regaled with as he proceeds onward through the tortuous swamp of my mind.
One of my earliest recommendations was that the programmable controller, according to my own system architecture specification, did not need to go fast because I felt as though speed was not a criteria because it would go as fast as we needed it to. The initial machine, which was never delivered, only had 125 words of memory, and speed was not a criteria as mentioned earlier. You can imagine what happened! First, we immediately ran out of memory, and second, the machine was much too slow to perform any function anywhere near the relay response time. Relay response times exist on the order of 1/60th of a second, and the topology formed by many cabinets full of relays transformed to code is significantly more than 125 words. We expanded the memory to 1K and thence to 4K. At 4K, it stood the test of time for quite a while. Initially, marketing and memory sizes were sold in 1K, 2K, 3K, (?) and 4K. the 3K was obviously the 4K version with constrained address so that field expansion to 4K could easily be done.
The question of speed, in part, was part of the early designs. No interrupts were necessary because the external signal conditions were directly written onto memory without any supervisory requirements or “operating system of the conventional type. This allowed the processor to pay attention to solving logic rather than housekeeping the I/O. As a result, of course, the processor had to have significantly more processing power than normally associated with this size computer; and secondly, the system had to be made to run fast.
We increased the memory size, as mentioned above, but to get it to run fast, we had to break up the machine into three distinct components. Initially, the programmable controller was conceived of a processor board and a memory, and that the algorithmic and logical manipulation would be done in software. This approach was painfully slow, both on the generic “store bought computers, and other items.
We did, however, manage to substantially speed up the machine by making a third major component. This was called the logic solver. A logic solver board solved the dominant algorithms associated with solving ladder logic without the intervention and classical software approach of general-purpose processing. This meant that we ended up with three boards; memory, logic solver and processor. This single step allowed us to get the speed we needed in this application-specific computer to solve the perceptually simple problem of several cabinets full of relay wiring.
We had also assumed a modular approach to the programmable controller. In act, the name Modicon means MOdular DIgital CONtroller. The modularity, however, was soon abandoned because, as everyone knows, open architectures are no good. We instead had the marketing premise that a large footprint would contain within it the sets of problems we wished to solve. This meant that a buyer of programmable controllers could buy large numbers of the same units, and the software and hardware would be identical across a broad spectrum of applications in his factory. Service, maintenance and total life cost would be substantially lower than the perceived lower cost of an open architecture and modular expansion. Although at first, a supporter of the open architecture modular expansion, I soon became convinced by the marketplace, but this was folly.
We took one of our early units which was aimed at the machine tool industry because of my Bedford Associates consulting background, up to one of the early requesters of this equipment. This particular early requester was Byrant Chuck and Grinder in Springfield, Vermont. We took the machine up there, and it was heavy. This was the 084. The 084 was in the trunk of my old Pontiac, and since we needed help carrying it in, requested some of the people at Bryant to help us. We went out and opened the hood, and the first comment made by an outside viewer of the programmable controller said, “Thank God it,s not another pastel colored piece of sheet metal.
We can hypothesize from this particular comment that the ruggedness of the visual design was pleasing to him, and being human (as opposed to Martian), assumed that this same attitude went deep inside the construction of the machine in both the hardware and software. Indeed, this was the case, and the machine as a result, was built rugged, had no ON/OFF switch, had no fans, did not make any noise and had no wear out system.
To reminisce for a moment—in selecting the cores for the first memories, which in itself was a revolutionary step, we selected these cores and we applied Shannon,s Law. Shannon,s Law assumes that the signal-to-noise ratio is what makes signals good or bad. There are several ways to get the power from the signal-to-noise ratio; one is to code heavily, be triply redundant, and use lots and lots of error checking. There is another way, which is perfectly compatible with theory, which is to use lots of signal power in another domain. A nice switch, a car battery and a D-rated light bulb will work fairly well over a long time period.
Therefore, what we did was rather than going error checking, triply redundant and stuff, we got, and searched for and found high energy, large ferrite core memories that had lots on energy per bit. We still make the same assumption today. The energy per bit is extremely important—as Shannon,s theory said in his most famous 1948 paper, that the signal noise to power noise is what gives you transmission. the way we got signal power was to increase the energy per bit. This we felt was far more important than getting the energy per bit increased by means of doubly transmitting it. But I digress. Bryant Chuck and Grinder put it in, and liked the equipment so much that they never bought one. They in turn thought it was a good idea, and as many did at that time, tried to evolve their own.
One of our first major customers, however, was Landis in Landis, PA. We flew the equipment down in a private aircraft, and with apprehension because we were late (as usual), brought the equipment into Landis. In doing so, we tripped over the threshold. The equipment went KA-RASH onto the floor! Without much chagrin, we picked the equipment up, trundled it in. hooked it up, and low and behold, it worked quite well.
Now, Landis was pleased and surprised. They were pleased because it worked, but they were most pleasantly surprised—not because the equipment worked—but because the guys from Modicon fully expected the equipment to work in spite of it being dropped. In other words, the people from Modicon weren,t nervous about the fact that it fell on the floor over the threshold.
Landis subsequently took and wrapped welding coils of wire around the machine to induce electro-magnetic noise to see if they could make it fail. We had them there! We used to test the programmable controllers with a Teslar coil that struck a quarter inch to half-inch arch anywhere on the system, and the programmable controller still had to continue to run. There was significant strangeness with respect to the programmable controller. For example, it had no ON/OFF switch. It had no means to load software. It had no fans. It ran cool. It could survive bad, physical and thermal environments. It was not computer industry standard. There were many things that were most difficult in the acceptance of the programmable controller, and early acceptance was most difficult indeed.
Our sales in the first four years were abysmal. Early innovators such as Landers and General Motors were, of course, heroes to our eyes, but they would buy small numbers of units and then test them in the field before they committed themselves later on. We had one customer in the utilities business that took them approximately six to seven years to make a decision to but the first one.
We never really sold any programmable controllers into the intended market which was machine tool control such as lathes, grinders and stuff, but we did, as luck would have it, stumble across the transfer line market which was and still is the mainstay, long-term market for the application of programmable controllers. Discreet parts manufacturing in an automatic environment, i.e., mass production, continues to be, and probably will be for the future, the mainstay of the programmable controller industry.
Some of the more interesting stories center around the personalities and experiences as opposed to the programmable controller. Modicon,s third president (or fourth, if you count my two-week stint) was Don Kramer. When Don Kramer was chosen as president, we decided to go out and celebrate at the Lanum Club in Andover. At the time, we felt we should celebrate over both martinis and food. As we were leaving the shop for the Lanum Club, Don made the aside comment that “the place is dingy and needs a paint job. As we were leaving, I mentioned to Don that as president you have to change what you say, and not be very open—you have to be a little careful about what you say because employees, customers, and boards of directors tend to take what you say as truth. Rather than listen to the meaning, they listen to the literal statements, and one must be careful. We went over to the Lanum Club and had a nice glowing two hours of discussion, food, and drink. Coming back, as we entered the Modicon lobby, we noticed that there was scaffolding about and people were painting. We went over and asked Lou as to why these people are painting since, at the time, we don,t have any money. Who ordered this paint job? And Lou looked Don Kramer straight in the eye, and said, “Why you did, Mr. Kramer. Nuff said.
As has been mentioned many times, your author, that,s me—Dick Morley—is supposed to be the inventor of the programmable controller. This is at best, partially true. The thing that made the Modicon company and the programmable controller really take off was not the 084, but the 184. The 184 was done in design cycle by Michael Greenberg, one of the best engineers I have ever met. He, and Lee Rousseau, president and marketeer, came up with a specification and a design that revolutionized the automation business. they built the 184 over the objections of yours truly. I was a purist and felt that all those bells and whistles and stuff weren,t “pure, and somehow they were contaminating my “glorious design, Dead wrong again, Morley! they were specifically right on! the 184 was a walloping success, and it—not the 084, not the invention of the programmable controller—but a product designed to meet the needs of the marketplace and the customer, called the 184, took off and made Modicon and the programmable controller the company and industry it is today. My compliments to the two chefs—Lee Rousseau and Mike Greenberg.
The issue of quality in programmable controllers is a story that is normally taken for granted. The gentle reader must remember that our engineering people came from the computer industry where reliability in those days was a phantom—a phantom of design, a phantom of cost. People felt that reliability was something other people did, and that if we only could deliver faster computers, even if they didn,t work, everything would be fine.
When the programmable controller was designed, it was designed in to be reliable. We used lots of energy per information bit by utilizing D-rated components, large memory ferrite cores, relatively stable and large etchings on printed circuit boards, totally enclosed systems and conductive cooling. No fans were used, and outside air was not allowed to enter the system for fear of contamination and corrosion. Mentally, we had imagined the programmable controller being underneath a truck, in the open, and being driven around—driven around in Texas, driven around in Alaska. Under those circumstances, we anted it to survive. The other requirement was that it stood on a pole helping run an utility or a microwave station which was not climate controlled, and not serviced at all. Under those circumstances, would it work for the years that it was intended to be? Could it be walled in? Could it be bolted in a system that was expected to last 20 years?
The humorous side of this is though we did all those designs and very carefully tried to make this system as intrinsically reliable as we could, not by redundancy, but by building well. In other words, it was designed to be built, it was designed to be designed, and it was designed to be reliable. We, however, as engineers, didn,t understand the accountants and manufacturing. those two have their grail, shipments by the end of the month. As far as we could ascertain at the time, shipments were made independent of quality and independent of whether or not the system ran.
In the early days of the programmable controller and Modicon, even though I wasn,t a direct employee and an owner, I would give out my home phone number to many of our critical customers so that if they had a problem, they could call me directly. Several calls indicated that when we shipped near the end of the month, let’s say October 34th, that the equipment would not run; and secondly, when they opened the box and took the machine apart, cards were missing, bolts were on the bottom of the cabinetry, and some of the cards were not fully inserted. In other words, to make the end of the month was much more important than to deliver equipment that ran. to put it mildly, we were pissed! How do we as engineers maintain quality without continual surveillance which is most difficult for the design and entrepreneurial mind set. What we did was specify and design “blue boxes. These were cabinetries that the system had to operate in and run continuously for a minimum of 24 hours, under load, and under varying conditions. The box was built out of plywood, but its primary intention was to heat cycle the programmable controller under various input/output loads. We also ran, as a specification, that a Tesla coil was to be used on the programmable controller, and that vibration and thumping with a hammer (rubber) would be part of the specification.
This may seem unscientific to many of you, but let us assume that you try to get your equipment to run while somebody purposely tries to destroy it with a rubber hammer or spark coil that he can put anywhere on the system. Remember, your intention is to make the processor stop. That combination significantly depressed those monthly shipments during the first period. As a result of that, however, the message got through. Not only did we build ovens and tests, and pay attention to heat and spark and RF emissions, we would run the system continuously even in the shipping crate to get the maximum number of pre-custom hours we could. It was important to us that we found the mistakes and not the customer and his secondary customer.
The language itself, ladder lister, bears some discussion. This particular language was not the invention of Modicon. We hypothesize that the language is very old, and originated in Germany to describe relay circuitry. If one looks at ladder lister, it has been our technical community for so long, we somehow think those little symboligies actually look like relays. In fact, it,s a mnemonic form of rule-based language, very modern and very high level, but designed in a Darwinian fashion over a period of many decades.
The ladder logic construct, “If… Then… is a very powerful construct used today in expert systems and other rule-based languages. The symbology, allowing normally open and normally closed situations as well as parallel and serial representation, was used for many decades before the invention of the programmable controller. I have worked on machines where the number of C-size and D-size prints were hung in special racks, and would be up to three feet thick worth of documentation on those drawing sets.
The name ladder comes from the fact that on the right-hand of the drawing is one power rail and the left-hand side is the other power rail; and in between in a horizontal fashion, is the statement or sequential connection of logical elements which we call relays or relay logic. The initial 084 had only logic in its functionality, and as a result, was marginal. In other words, all we did was replace relays rather than enhance the functionality by a factor of ten which is the entrepreneurial rule. Immediately, of course, based on customer response and our own frustrations, we put thing in the ladder listing language such as addition, multiplication, subtraction, and other functionalities that went far beyond relay capability and entered the realm of mathematics and set theory. This was still not sufficient, however, and we needed some way to make a “call to a “subroutine using ladder lister symbology and representation.
A software engineer, Chuck Schelberg, and myself were in the conference room one day trying to ascertain how we could make a generic call to functionalities that far exceeded the relay symbology and representation, and came up with the “DX function. This function was a block function that would be an element on the ladder logic representation that could perform many functionalities including arrays, motor drive functions, servo functions, extended mathematical functions, PID loops, ad nauseam. We felt there would be an occasional representation and use of these functionalities, and that not much had to be done to the programmable controller other than to modify the software. Wrong again!
The first customer that took delivery of a programmable controller utilizing the DX function, had a capability to be predictable and operate in real time. The RUN light went out, and the time to execute a scan or complete transformation of the ladder logic went far beyond the time allowable. Every single line had a DX function on it. Again we learned that when you enhance functionality, people use it all. I have never designed a computer that had too much memory. I,ve only designed computers that have too little memory. The same thing applies to any other functionality. Conventional wisdom seems to think that price/performance depends on only one thing—price—when, in fact, my experience has been that the customer cares little about price.
This price/performance tirade being over, one of the lessons we learned is that the customer wants functionality over the entire life cycle cost installation of the job. the customer also wants ease of installation, to have some fun, and to be proud of the work he does. After he,s finished, he never wants to come back.. The equipment should work as installed and as based. At one time, the programmable controller meantime before failure in the field was 50,000 hours. This is far in excess of almost any other type of electronic or control equipment.
The concept of languages and high-level languages is important. The programmable controller, as it evolved, began to request more and more power, and more and more memory. The memories continually went up as well as power. It is estimated that at one time, in the mid-1970s, that the programmable controller had the equivalent of two MIPS processor and 128 kilobytes of memory, which at that time was a significantly powered minicomputer capability. Why? High-level languages require power to run them. If we take the equivalent of the ladder lister statement “If… Then…, the high-level language as represented here, requires a substantial amount of interpretive compiler, if you will, generation of underlying code. In other words, this statement spawns significant underlying code that must be run quickly, reliably, and contain within it, all aspects of resource allocation and operations resource. The higher level the language, the more powerful the processor apparently has to be in order to run the language. Ladder lister is a high-level rule-based language which, until now, we haven,t talked much about in these terms. Our customers treated the programmable controller as a box of relays, and well they should. Language theory is neither necessary not desirable for most of the customers to know. The customers, instead, understand their problem, and are indeed much smarter than the design engineers because the dimensions of their problem far exceed the relatively simple problem of designing a computer software system and language. Ladder lister requires high performance which is one of the reasons it has difficulty running on the personal computer even of today
INTRODUCTION TO SCADA
SCADA is the abbreviation for Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition. It generally refers to an industrial control system: a computer system monitoring and controlling a process. The process can be industrial, infrastructure or facility based as described below:
Industrial processes include those of manufacturing, production, power generation, fabrication, and refining, and may run in continuous, batch, repetitive, or discrete modes.
Infrastructure processes may be public or private, and include water treatment and distribution, wastewater collection and treatment, oil and gas pipelines, electrical power transmission and distribution, and large communication systems.
Facility processes occur both in public facilities and private ones, including buildings, airports, ships, and space stations. They monitor and control HVAC, access, and energy consumption.
A SCADA System usually consists of the following subsystems:
A Human-Machine Interface or HMI is the apparatus which presents process data to a human operator, and through which the human operator monitors and controls the process.
A supervisory (computer) system, gathering (acquiring) data on the process and sending commands (control) to the process
Remote Terminal Units (RTUs) connecting to sensors in the process, converting sensor signals to digital data and sending digital data to the supervisory system.
Communication infrastructure connecting the supervisory system to the Remote Terminals Units
There is, in several industries, considerable confusion over the differences between SCADA systems and Distributed control systems (DCS). Generally speaking, a SCADA system usually refers to a system that coordinates, but does not control processes in real time. The discussion on real-time control is muddied somewhat by newer telecommunications technology, enabling reliable, low latency, high speed communications over wide areas. Most differences between SCADA and Distributed control system DCS are culturally determined and can usually be ignored. As communication infrastructures with higher capacity become available, the difference between SCADA and DCS will fade.
Systems concepts
The term SCADA usually refers to centralized systems which monitor and control entire sites, or complexes of systems spread out over large areas (anything between an industrial plant and a country). Most control actions are performed automatically by remote terminals units (”RTUs”) or by programmable logic controllers (”PLCs”). Host control functions are usually restricted to basic overriding or supervisory level intervention. For example, a PLC may control the flow of cooling water through part of an industrial process, but the SCADA system may allow operators to change the set points for the flow, and enable alarm conditions, such as loss of flow and high temperature, to be displayed and recorded. The feedback control loop passes through the RTU or PLC, while the SCADA system monitors the overall performance of the loop.
Data acquistion begins at the RTU or PLC level and includes meter readings and equipment status reports that are communicated to SCADA as required. Data is then compiled and formatted in such a way that a control room operator using the HMI can make supervisory decisions to adjust or override normal RTU (PLC) controls. Data may also be fed to a Historian, often built on a commodity Database Management System, to allow trending and other analytical auditing.
SCADA systems typically implement a distributed database, commonly referred to as a tag database, which contains data elements called tags or points. A point represents a single input or output value monitored or controlled by the system. Points can be either “hard” or “soft”. A hard point represents an actual input or output within the system, while a soft point results from logic and math operations applied to other points. (Most implementations conceptually remove the distinction by making every property a “soft” point expression, which may, in the simplest case, equal a single hard point.) Points are normally stored as value-timestamp pairs: a value, and the timestamp when it was recorded or calculated. A series of value-timestamp pairs gives the history of that point. It’s also common to store additional metadata with tags, such as the path to a field device or PLC register, design time comments, and alarm information.
Human Machine Interface
A Human-Machine Interface or HMI is the apparatus which presents process data to a human operator, and through which the human operator controls the process.
An HMI is usually linked to the SCADA system’s databases and software programs, to provide trending, diagnostic data, and management information such as scheduled maintenance procedures, logistic information, detailed schematics for a particular sensor or machine, and expert-system troubleshooting guides.
The HMI system usually presents the information to the operating personnel graphically, in the form of a mimic diagram. This means that the operator can see a schematic representation of the plant being controlled. For example, a picture of a pump connected to a pipe can show the operator that the pump is running and how much fluid it is pumping through the pipe at the moment. The operator can then switch the pump off. The HMI software will show the flow rate of the fluid in the pipe decrease in real time. Mimic diagrams may consist of line graphics and schematic symbols to represent process elements, or may consist of digital photographs of the process equipment overlain with animated symbols.
The HMI package for the SCADA system typically includes a drawing program that the operators or system maintenance personnel use to change the way these points are represented in the interface. These representations can be as simple as an on-screen traffic light, which represents the state of an actual traffic light in the field, or as complex as a multi-projector display representing the position of all of the elevators in a skyscraper or all of the trains on a railway.
An important part of most SCADA implementations are alarms. An alarm is a digital status point that has either the value NORMAL or ALARM. Alarms can be created in such a way that when their requirements are met, they are activated. An example of an alarm is the “fuel tank empty” light in a car. The SCADA operator’s attention is drawn to the part of the system requiring attention by the alarm. Emails and text messages are often sent along with an alarm activation alerting managers along with the SCADA operator.
Hardware solutions
SCADA solutions often have Distributed Control System (DCS) components. Use of “smart” RTUs or PLCs, which are capable of autonomously executing simple logic processes without involving the master computer, is increasing. A functional block programming language, IEC 61131-3, is frequently used to create programs which run on these RTUs and PLCs. Unlike a procedural language such as the C programming language or FORTRAN, IEC 61131-3 has minimal training requirements by virtue of resembling historic physical control arrays. This allows SCADA system engineers to perform both the design and implementation of a program to be executed on an RTU or PLC. Since about 1998, virtually all major PLC manufacturers have offered integrated HMI/SCADA systems, many of them using open and non-proprietary communications protocols. Numerous specialized third-party HMI/SCADA packages, offering built-in compatibility with most major PLCs, have also entered the market, allowing mechanical engineers, electrical engineers and technicians to configure HMIs themselves, without the need for a custom-made program written by a software developer.
Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)
The RTU connects to physical equipment. Typically, an RTU converts the electrical signals from the equipment to digital values such as the open/closed status from a switch or a valve, or measurements such as pressure, flow, voltage or current. By converting digital setpoints to electrical signals and sending these electrical signals out to equipment the RTU can control equipment, such as opening or closing a switch or a valve, or setting the speed of a pump.
Quality SCADA RTUs have these characteristics:
Data Networking capability
Data Reliability
Data Security.
Supervisory Station
The term “Supervisory Station” refers to the servers and software responsible for communicating with the field equipment (RTUs, PLCs, etc), and then to the HMI software running on workstations in the control room, or elsewhere. In smaller SCADA systems, the master station may be composed of a single PC. In larger SCADA systems, the master station may include multiple servers, distributed software applications, and disaster recovery sites. To increase the integrity of the system the multiple servers will often be configured in a dual-redundant or hot-standby formation providing continuous control and monitoring in the event of a server failure.
Initially, more “open” platforms such as Linux were not as widely used due to the highly dynamic development environment and because a SCADA customer that was able to afford the field hardware and devices to be controlled could usually also purchase UNIX or OpenVMS licenses. Today, all major operating systems are used for both master station servers and HMI workstations.
Operational philosophy
For some installations, the costs that would result from the control system failing is extremely high. Possibly even lives could be lost. Hardware for some SCADA systems is ruggedized to withstand temperature, vibration, and voltage extremes, but in most critical installations reliability is enhanced by having redundant hardware and communications channels, up to the point of having multiple fully equipped control centres. A failing part can be quickly identified and its functionality automatically taken over by backup hardware. A failed part can often be replaced without interrupting the process. The reliability of such systems can be calculated statistically and is stated as the mean time to failure, which is a variant of mean time between failures. The calculated mean time to failure of such high reliability systems can be on the order of centuries.
Communication infrastructure and methods
SCADA systems have traditionally used combinations of radio and direct serial or modem connections to meet communication requirements, although Ethernet and IP over SONET / SDH is also frequently used at large sites such as railways and power stations. The remote management or monitoring function of a SCADA system is often referred to as telemetry.
This has also come under threat with some customers wanting SCADA data to travel over their pre-established corporate networks or to share the network with other applications. The legacy of the early low-bandwidth protocols remains, though. SCADA protocols are designed to be very compact and many are designed to send information to the master station only when the master station polls the RTU. Typical legacy SCADA protocols include Modbus RTU, RP-570, Profibus and Conitel. These communication protocols are all SCADA-vendor specific but are widely adopted and used. Standard protocols are IEC 60870-5-101 or 104, IEC 61850 and DNP3. These communication protocols are standardized and recognized by all major SCADA vendors. Many of these protocols now contain extensions to operate over TCP/IP. It is good security engineering practice to avoid connecting SCADA systems to the Internet so the attack surface is reduced.
RTUs and other automatic controller devices were being developed before the advent of industry wide standards for interoperability. The result is that developers and their management created a multitude of control protocols. Among the larger vendors, there was also the incentive to create their own protocol to “lock in” their customer base. A list of automation protocols is being compiled here.
Recently, OLE for Process Control (OPC) has become a widely accepted solution for intercommunicating different hardware and software, allowing communication even between devices originally not intended to be part of an industrial network.
Trends in SCADA
There is a trend for PLC and HMI/SCADA software to be more “mix-and-match”. In the mid 1990s, the typical DAQ I/O manufacturer supplied equipment that communicated using proprietary protocols over a suitable-distance carrier like RS-485. End users who invested in a particular vendor’s hardware solution often found themselves restricted to a limited choice of equipment when requirements changed (e.g. system expansions or performance improvement). To mitigate such problems, open communication protocols such as IEC870-5-101/104 and DNP 3.0 (serial and over IP) became increasingly popular among SCADA equipment manufacturers and solution providers alike. Open architecture SCADA systems enabled users to mix-and-match products from different vendors to develop solutions that were better than those that could be achieved when restricted to a single vendor’s product offering.
Towards the late 1990s, the shift towards open communications continued with individual I/O manufacturers as well, who adopted open message structures such as Modbus RTU and Modbus ASCII (originally both developed by Modicon) over RS-485. By 2000, most I/O makers offered completely open interfacing such as Modbus TCP over Ethernet and IP.
SCADA systems are coming in line with standard networking technologies. Ethernet and TCP/IP based protocols are replacing the older proprietary standards. Although certain characteristics of frame-based network communication technology (determinism, synchronization, protocol selection, environment suitability) have restricted the adoption of Ethernet in a few specialized applications, the vast majority of markets have accepted Ethernet networks for HMI/SCADA.
“Next generation” protocols such as OPC-UA, Wonderware’s SuiteLink, GE Fanuc’s Proficy and Rockwell Automation’s FactoryTalk, take advantage of XML, web services and other modern web technologies, making them more easily IT supportable.
With the emergence of software as a service in the broader software industry, a few vendors have begun offering application specific SCADA systems hosted on remote platforms over the Internet, for example, PumpView by MultiTrode. This removes the need to install and commission systems at the end-user’s facility and takes advantage of security features already available in Internet technology, VPNs and SSL. Some concerns include security, Internet connection reliability, and latency.
SCADA systems are becoming increasingly ubiquitous. Thin clients, web portals, and web based products are gaining popularity with most major vendors. The increased convenience of end users viewing their processes remotely introduces security considerations.
Security issues
The move from proprietary technologies to more standardized and open solutions together with the increased number of connections between SCADA systems and office networks and the Internet has made them more vulnerable to attacks. Consequently, the security of SCADA-based systems has come into question as they are increasingly seen as extremely vulnerable to cyberwarfare/cyberterrorism attacks.
In particular, security researchers are concerned about:
the lack of concern about security and authentication in the design, deployment and operation of existing SCADA networks
the mistaken belief that SCADA systems have the benefit of security through obscurity through the use of specialized protocols and proprietary interfaces
the mistaken belief that SCADA networks are secure because they are purportedly physically secured
the mistaken belief that SCADA networks are secure because they are supposedly disconnected from the Internet
Because of the mission-critical nature of a large number of SCADA systems, such attacks could, in a worst case scenario, cause massive financial losses through loss of data or actual physical destruction, misuse or theft, even loss of life, either directly or indirectly. Whether such concerns will cause a move away from the use of existing SCADA systems for mission-critical applications towards more secure architectures and configurations remains to be seen, given that at least some influential people in corporate and governmental circles believe that the benefits and lower initial costs of SCADA based systems still outweigh potential costs and risks] Recently, multiple security vendors, such as Byres Security, Inc., Industrial Defender Inc., Check Point and Innominate, and N-Dimension Solutions have begun to address these risks by developing lines of specialized industrial firewall and VPN solutions for TCP/IP-based SCADA networks. The problem according to Eric Byres, CEO of Byres Security, is that “while many infrastructure organizations are doing good work, others are falling behind. When you have this diversity of effort, you are only as effective as your weakest link.
Also, the ISA Security Compliance Institute (ISCI) is emerging to formalize SCADA security testing starting as soon as 2009. ISCI is conceptually similar to private testing and certification that has been performed by vendors since 2007, such as the Achilles certification program from Wurldtech Security Technologies, Inc. and MUSIC certification from Mu Security, Inc. Eventually, standards being defined by ISA SP99 WG4 will supersede these initial industry consortia efforts, but probably not before 2011.
N.Sankari
http://www.articlesbase.com/electronics-articles/introduction-to-plc-and-scada-679975.html
In the state of Illinois is it a law that you have to wear a helmet when you ride a motor cycle?
no..eye protection only is required either by eyeglasses or windscreen
Finks MCC Ferret on Unconstitutional Anti-Association Laws NPC-Pt. 1
Nation Press Club address, August 4, 2009. Finks Motor Cycle Club Ferret speaks out on the anti-association laws which are set to further erode our already compromised rights as Australian men and women. Wake up and learn your common law rights Australia! Demand your inalienable right to JURY TRIAL and lawfully reject bad laws. “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”.
Duration : 0:6:37
Techical Performance of Traction Machine Design
Rotating magnetic field as a sum of magnetic vectors from 3 phase coils.
An electric motor converts electrical energy into kinetic energy. The reverse task, that of converting kinetic energy into electrical energy, is accomplished by a generator or dynamo. In many cases the two devices differ only in their application and minor construction details, and some applications use a single device to fill both roles. For example, traction motors used on locomotives often perform both tasks if the locomotive is equipped with dynamic brakes.
Operation
Most electric motors work by electromagnetism, but motors based on other electromechanical phenomena, such as electrostatic forces and the piezoelectric effect, also exist. The fundamental principle upon which electromagnetic motors are based is that there is a mechanical force on any current-carrying wire contained within a magnetic field. The force is described by the Lorentz force law and is perpendicular to both the wire and the magnetic field. Most magnetic motors are rotary, but linear motors also exist. In a rotary motor, the rotating part (usually on the inside) is called the rotor, and the stationary part is called the stator. The rotor rotates because the wires and magnetic field are arranged so that a torque is developed about the rotor’s axis. The motor contains electromagnets that are wound on a frame. Though this frame is often called the armature, that term is often erroneously applied. Correctly, the armature is that part of the motor across which the input voltage is supplied. Depending upon the design of the machine, either the rotor or the stator can serve as the armature.
DC motors
Electric motors of various sizes.
One of the first electromagnetic rotary motors was invented by Michael Faraday in 1821 and consisted of a free-hanging wire dipping into a pool of mercury. A permanent magnet was placed in the middle of the pool of mercury. When a current was passed through the wire, the wire rotated around the magnet, showing that the current gave rise to a circular magnetic field around the wire. This motor is often demonstrated in school physics classes, but brine(salt water) is sometimes used in place of the toxic mercury. This is the simplest form of a class of electric motors called homopolar motors. A later refinement is the Barlow’s Wheel.
Another early electric motor design used a reciprocating plunger inside a switched solenoid; conceptually it could be viewed as an electromagnetic version of a two stroke internal combustion engine.
The modern DC motor was invented by accident in 1873, when Zénobe Gramme connected a spinning dynamo to a second similar unit, driving it as a motor.
The classic DC motor has a rotating armature in the form of an electromagnet. A rotary switch called a commutator reverses the direction of the electric current twice every cycle, to flow through the armature so that the poles of the electromagnet push and pull against the permanent magnets on the outside of the motor. As the poles of the armature electromagnet pass the poles of the permanent magnets, the commutator reverses the polarity of the armature electromagnet. During that instant of switching polarity, inertia keeps the classical motor going in the proper direction. (See the diagrams below.)
A simple DC electric motor. When the coil is powered, a magnetic field is generated around the armature. The left side of the armature is pushed away from the left magnet and drawn toward the right, causing rotation.
The armature continues to rotate.
When the armature becomes horizontally aligned, the commutator reverses the direction of current through the coil, reversing the magnetic field. The process then repeats.
Wound field DC motor
The permanent magnets on the outside (stator) of a DC motor may be replaced by electromagnets. By varying the field current it is possible to alter the speed/torque ratio of the motor. Typically the field winding will be placed in series (series wound) with the armature winding to get a high torque low speed motor, in parallel (shunt wound) with the armature to get a high speed low torque motor, or to have a winding partly in parallel, and partly in series (compound wound) for a balance that gives steady speed over a range of loads. Further reductions in field current are possible to gain even higher speed but correspondingly lower torque, called “weak field” operation.
Theory
If the shaft of a DC motor is turned by an external force, the motor will act like a generator and produce an electric motive force (EMF). This voltage is also generated during normal motor operation. The spinning of the motor produces a voltage known as the back EMF because it opposes the applied voltage on the motor. Therefore the voltage drop across a motor consists of the voltage drop due to this back EMF and the parasitic voltage drop resulting from the internal resistance of the apperature’s windings. The current through a motor is given by the following equation:
I = (Vapplied ? Vbackemf) / Rapperature-
The mechanical power produced by the motor is given by:
P = I * Vbackemf-
Since the back EMF is proportional to motor speed, when an electric motor is first started or is completely stalled, there is zero back EMF. Therefore the current through the apperature is much higher. This high current will produce a strong electric field which will start the motor spinning. As the motor spins, the back EMF increases until it is equal to the applied voltage minus the parasitic voltage drop. At this point there will be a smaller current flowing through the motor. Basically the following three equations can be used to find the speed, current, and back EMF of a motor under a load:
Load = Vbackemf * I-
Vapplied = I * Rapperature ? Vbackemf-
Vbackemf = speed * Fluxapperature-
Speed control
Generally, the rotational speed of a DC motor is proportional to the voltage applied to it, and the torque is proportional to the current. Speed control can be achieved by variable battery tappings, variable supply voltage, resistors or electronic controls. The direction of a wound field DC motor can be changed by reversing either the field or armature connections but not both. This is commonly done with a special set of contactors (direction contactors).
The effective voltage can be varied by inserting a series resistor or by an electronically controlled switching device made of thyristors, transistors, or, formerly, mercury arc rectifiers. In a circuit known as a chopper, the average voltage applied to the motor is varied by switching the supply voltage very rapidly. As the “on” to “off” ratio (duty cycle) is varied to alter the average applied voltage, the speed of the motor varies. The percentage “on” time multiplied by the supply voltage gives the average voltage applied to the motor. Therefore, with a 100 V supply and a 25% “on” time the average voltage at the motor will be 25 V. During the “off” time, current in the motor flows through a diode called a “flywheel diode”. At this point in the cycle the supply current will be zero, and therefore the average motor current will always be higher than the supply current unless the percentage “on” time is 100%. At 100% “on” time the supply and motor current are equal. The rapid switching wastes less energy than series resistors. Output filters smooth the average voltage applied to the motor and reduce motor noise. This method is also called pulse width modulation, or PWM, and is often controlled by a microprocessor.
Since the series-wound DC motor develops its highest torque at low speed, it is often used in traction applications such as electric locomotives, and trams. Another application is starter motors for petrol and small diesel engines. Series motors must never be used in applications where the drive can fail (such as belt drives). As the motor accelerates, the armature (and hence field) current reduces. The reduction in field causes the motor to speed up (see ‘weak field’ in the last section) until it destroys itself. This can also be a problem with railway motors in the event of a loss of adhesion since, unless quickly brought under control, the motors can reach speeds far higher than they would do under normal circumstances. This can not only cause problems for the motors themselves and the gears, but due to the differential speed between the rails and the wheels it can also cause serious damage to the rails and wheel treads as they heat and cool rapidly. Field weakening is used in some electronic controls to increase the top speed of an electric vehicle. The simplest form uses a contactor and field weakening resistor, the electronic control monitors the motor current and switches the field weakening resistor in circuit when the motor current reduces below a preset value (this will be when the motor is at its full design speed). Once the resistor is in circuit the motor will increase speed above its normal speed at its rated voltage. When motor current increases the control will disconnect the resistor and low speed torque is made available.
One interesting method of speed control of a DC motor is the Ward Leonard control. It is a method of controlling a DC motor (usually a shunt or compound wound) and was developed as a method of providing a speed-controlled motor from an AC supply, though it is not without its advantages in DC schemes. The AC supply is used to drive an AC motor, usually an induction motor that drives a DC generator or dynamo. The DC output from the armature is directly connected to the armature of the DC motor (usually of identical construction). The shunt field windings of both DC machines are excited through a variable resistor from the generator’s armature. This variable resistor provides extremely good speed control from standstill to full speed, and consistent torque. This method of control was the de facto method from its development until it was superseded by solid state thyristor systems. It found service in almost any environment where good speed control was required, from passenger lifts through to large mine pit head winding gear and even industrial process machinery and electric cranes. Its principal disadvantage was that three machines were required to implement a scheme (five in very large installations, as the DC machines were often duplicated and controlled by a tandem variable resistor). In many applications, the motor-generator set was often left permanently running to avoid the delays that would otherwise be caused by starting it up as required. There are numerous legacy Ward-Leonard installations still in service.
Universal motors
A variant of the wound field DC motor is the universal motor. The name derives from the fact that it may use AC or DC supply current, although in practice they are nearly always used with AC supplies. The principle is that in a wound field DC motor the current in both the field and the armature (and hence the resultant magnetic fields) will alternate (reverse polarity) at the same time, and hence the mechanical force generated is always in the same direction. In practice the motor must be specially designed to cope with the AC current (impedance must be taken into account as must the pulsating force), and the resultant motor is generally less efficient than an equivalent pure DC motor. Operating at normal power line frequencies, the maximum output of universal motors is limited and motors exceeding one kilowatt are rare. But universal motors also form the basis of the traditional railway traction motor. In this application, to keep their electrical efficiency high, they were operated from very low frequency AC supplies with 25 Hz and 16 2/3 hertz operation being common. Because they are universal motors, locomotives using this design were also commonly capable of operating from a third rail powered by DC.
The advantage of the universal motor is that AC supplies may be used on motors which have the typical characteristics of DC motors, specifically high starting torque and very compact design if high running speeds are used. The negative aspect is the maintenance and short life problems caused by the commutator. As a result such motors are usually used in AC devices such as food mixers and power tools which are only used intermittently. Continuous speed control of a universal motor running on AC is very easily accomplished using a thyristor circuit while stepped speed control can be accomplished using multiple taps on the field coil. Household blenders that advertise many speeds frequently combine a field coil with several taps and a diode that can be inserted in series with the motor (causing the motor to run on half-wave DC with half the RMS voltage of the AC power line).
Unlike AC motors, universal motors can easily exceed one revolution per cycle of the mains current. This makes them useful for appliances such as blenders, vacuum cleaners, and hair dryers where high-speed operation is desired. Many vacuum cleaner and weed trimmer motors will exceed 10,000 RPM, Dremel and other similar miniature grinders will often exceed 30,000 RPM. A theoretical universal motor allowed to operate with no mechanical load will overspeed, which may damage it. In real life, though, various bearing frictions, armature “windage”, and the load of any integrated cooling fan all act to prevent overspeed.
With the very low cost of semiconductor rectifiers, some applications that would have previously used a universal motor now use a pure DC motor, usually with a permanent magnet field. This is especially true if the semiconductor circuit is also used for variable-speed control.
The advantages of the universal motor and alternating-current distribution made installation of a low-frequency traction current distribution system economical for some railway installations. At low enough frequencies, the motor performance is approximately the same as if the motor were operating on DC. Frequencies as low as 162/3 hertz were employed.
AC motors
In 1882, Nikola Tesla identified the rotating magnetic field principle, and pioneered the use of a rotary field of force to operate machines. He exploited the principle to design a unique two-phase induction motor in 1883. In 1885, Galileo Ferraris independently researched the concept. In 1888, Ferraris published his research in a paper to the Royal Academy of Sciences in Turin.
Introduction of Tesla’s motor from 1888 onwards initiated what is known as the Second Industrial Revolution, making possible the efficient generation and long distance distribution of electrical energy using the alternating current transmission system, also of Tesla’s invention (1888) [1]. Before the invention of the rotating magnetic field, motors operated by continually passing a conductor through a stationary magnetic field (as in homopolar motors).
Tesla had suggested that the commutators from a machine could be removed and the device could operate on a rotary field of force. Professor Poeschel, his teacher, stated that would be akin to building a perpetual motion machine. [2] Tesla would later attain U.S. Patent 0416194, Electric Motor (December 1889), which resembles the motor seen in many of Tesla’s photos. This classic alternating current electro-magnetic motor was an
induction motor.
Stator energy
Rotor energy
Total energy supplied
Power developed
10
90
90
900
50
50
100
2500
In the induction motor, the field and armature were ideally of equal field strengths and the field and armature cores were of equal sizes. The total energy supplied to operate the device equaled the sum of the energy expended in the armature and field coils.[3] The power developed in operation of the device equaled the product of the energy expended in the armature and field coils. [4]
Michail Osipovich Dolivo-Dobrovolsky later invented a three-phase “cage-rotor” in 1890. A successful commercial polyphase system of generation and long-distance transmission was designed by Almerian Decker at Mill Creek No. 1 [5] in Redlands California.[6]
Components and types
A typical AC motor consists of two parts:
1. An outside stationary stator having coils supplied with AC current to produce a rotating magnetic field, and;
2. An inside rotor attached to the output shaft that is given a torque by the rotating field.
There are two fundamental types of AC motor depending on the type of rotor used:
- The synchronous motor, which rotates exactly at the supply frequency or a submultiple of the supply frequency, and;
- The induction motor, which turns slightly slower, and typically (though not necessarily always) takes the form of the squirrel cage motor.
Three-phase AC induction motors
Three phase AC induction motors rated 1 Hp (746 W) and 25 W with small motors from CD player, toy and CD/DVD drive reader head traverse
Where a polyphase electrical supply is available, the three-phase (or polyphase) AC induction motor is commonly used, especially for higher-powered motors. The phase differences between the three phases of the polyphase electrical supply create a rotating electromagnetic field in the motor.
Through electromagnetic induction, the rotating magnetic field induces a current in the conductors in the rotor, which in turn sets up a counterbalancing magnetic field that causes the rotor to turn in the direction the field is rotating. The rotor must always rotate slower than the rotating magnetic field produced by the polyphase electrical supply; otherwise, no counterbalancing field will be produced in the rotor.
Induction motors are the workhorses of industry and motors up to about 500 kW (670 horsepower) in output are produced in highly standardized frame sizes, making them nearly completely interchangeable between manufacturers (although European and North American standard dimensions are different). Very large synchronous motors are capable of tens of thousands of kW in output, for pipeline compressors and wind-tunnel drives. There are two types of rotors used in induction motors.
Squirrel Cage rotors: Most common AC motors use the squirrel cage rotor, which will be found in virtually all domestic and light industrial alternating current motors. The squirrel cage takes its name from its shape – a ring at either end of the rotor, with bars connecting the rings running the length of the rotor. It is typically cast aluminum or copper poured between the iron laminates of the rotor, and usually only the end rings will be visible. The vast majority of the rotor currents will flow through the bars rather than the higher-resistance and usually varnished laminates. Very low voltages at very high currents are typical in the bars and end rings; high efficiency motors will often use cast copper in order to reduce the resistance in the rotor.
In operation, the squirrel cage motor may be viewed as a transformer with a rotating secondary – when the rotor is not rotating in sync with the magnetic field, large rotor currents are induced; the large rotor currents magnetize the rotor and interact with the stator’s magnetic fields to bring the rotor into synchronization with the stator’s field. An unloaded squirrel cage motor at synchronous speed will only consume electrical power to maintain rotor speed against friction and resistance losses; as the mechanical load increases, so will the electrical load – the electrical load is inherently related to the mechanical load. This is similar to a transformer, where the primary’s electrical load is related to the secondary’s electrical load.
This is why, as an example, a squirrel cage blower motor may cause the lights in a home to dim as it starts, but doesn’t dim the lights when its fanbelt (and therefore mechanical load) is removed. Furthermore, a stalled squirrel cage motor (overloaded or with a jammed shaft) will consume current limited only by circuit resistance as it attempts to start. Unless something else limits the current (or cuts it off completely) overheating and destruction of the winding insulation is the likely outcome.
Virtually every washing machine, dishwasher, standalone fan, record player, etc. uses some variant of a squirrel cage motor.
Wound Rotor: An alternate design, called the wound rotor, is used when variable speed is required. In this case, the rotor has the same number of poles as the stator and the windings are made of wire, connected to slip rings on the shaft. Carbon brushes connect the slip rings to an external controller such as a variable resistor that allows changing the motor’s slip rate. In certain high-power variable speed wound-rotor drives, the slip-frequency energy is captured, rectified and returned to the power supply through an inverter.
Compared to squirrel cage rotors, wound rotor motors are expensive and require maintenance of the slip rings and brushes, but they were the standard form for variable speed control before the advent of compact power electronic devices. Transistorized inverters with variable frequency drive can now be used for speed control and wound rotor motors are becoming less common. (Transistorized inverter drives also allow the more-efficient three-phase motors to be used when only single-phase mains current is available, but this is never used in house hold appliances, because it can cause electrical interference and because of high power requirements.)
Several methods of starting a polyphase motor are used. Where the large inrush current and high starting torque can be permitted, the motor can be started across the line, by applying full line voltage to the terminals. Where it is necessary to limit the starting inrush current (where the motor is large compared with the short-circuit capacity of the supply), reduced voltage starting using either series inductors, an autotransformer, thyristors, or other devices are used. A technique sometimes used is star-delta starting, where the motor coils are initially connected in wye for acceleration of the load, then switched to delta when the load is up to speed. This technique is more common in Europe than in North America. Transistorized drives can directly vary the applied voltage as required by the starting characteristics of the motor and load.
This type of motor is becoming more common in traction applications such as locomotives, where it is known as the asynchronous traction motor.
The speed of the AC motor is determined primarily by the frequency of the AC supply and the number of poles in the stator winding, according to the relation:
Ns = 120F / p
where
Ns = Synchronous speed, in revolutions per minute
F = AC power frequency
p = Number of poles per phase winding
Actual RPM for an induction motor will be less than this calculated synchronous speed by an amount known as slip that increases with the torque produced. With no load the speed will be very close to synchronous. When loaded, standard motors have between 2-3% slip, special motors may have up to 7% slip, and a class of motors known as torque motors are rated to operate at 100% slip (0 RPM/full stall).
The slip of the AC motor is calculated by:
S = (Ns ? Nr) / Ns
where
Nr = Rotational speed, in revolutions per minute.
S = Normalised Slip, 0 to 1.
As an example, a typical four-pole motor running on 60 Hz might have a nameplate rating of 1725 RPM at full load, while its calculated speed is 1800.
The speed in this type of motor has traditionally been altered by having additional sets of coils or poles in the motor that can be switched on and off to change the speed of magnetic field rotation. However, developments in power electronics mean that the frequency of the power supply can also now be varied to provide a smoother control of the motor speed.
Three-phase AC synchronous motors
If connections to the rotor coils of a three-phase motor are taken out on slip-rings and fed a separate field current to create a continuous magnetic field (or if the rotor consists of a permanent magnet), the result is called a synchronous motor because the rotor will rotate in synchronism with the rotating magnetic field produced by the polyphase electrical supply.
The synchronous motor can also be used as an alternator.
Nowadays, synchronous motors are frequently driven by transistorized variable frequency drives. This greatly eases the problem of starting the massive rotor of a large synchronous motor. They may also be started as induction motors using a squirrel-cage winding that shares the common rotor: once the motor reaches synchronous speed, no current is induced in the squirrel-cage winding so it has little effect on the synchronous operation of the motor, aside from stabilizing the motor speed on load changes.
Synchronous motors are occasionally used as traction motors; the TGV may be the best-known example of such use.
Two-phase AC servo motors
A typical two-phase AC servo motor has a squirrel-cage rotor and a field consisting of two windings: 1) a constant-voltage (AC) main winding, and 2) a control-voltage (AC) winding in quadrature with the main winding so as to produce a rotating magnetic field. The electrical resistance of the rotor is made high intentionally so that the speed-torque curve is fairly linear. Two-phase servo motors are inherently high-speed, low-torque devices, heavily geared down to drive the load.
Single-phase AC induction motors
Three-phase motors inherently produce a rotating magnetic field. However, when only single-phase power is available, the rotating magnetic field must be produced using other means. Several methods are commonly used.
A common single-phase motor is the shaded-pole motor, which is used in devices requiring low torque, such as electric fans or other small household appliances. In this motor, small single-turn copper “shading coils” create the moving magnetic field. Part of each pole is encircled by a copper coil or strap; the induced current in the strap opposes the change of flux through the coil (Lenz’s Law), so that the maximum field intensity moves across the pole face on each cycle, thus producing the required rotating magnetic field.
Another common single-phase AC motor is the split-phase induction motor, commonly used in major appliances such as washing machines and clothes dryers. Compared to the shaded pole motor, these motors can generally provide much greater starting torque by using a special startup winding in conjunction with a centrifugal switch.
In the split-phase motor, the startup winding is designed with a higher resistance than the running winding. This creates an LR circuit which slightly shifts the phase of the current in the startup winding. When the motor is starting, the startup winding is connected to the power source via a set of spring-loaded contacts pressed upon by the not-yet-rotating centrifugal switch. The starting winding is wound with fewer turns of smaller wire than the main winding, so it has a lower inductance (L) and higher resistance (R). The lower L/R ratio creates a small phase shift, not more than about 30 degrees, between the flux due to the main winding and the flux of the starting winding. The starting direction of rotation may be reversed simply by exchanging the connections of the startup winding relative to the running winding.
The phase of the magnetic field in this startup winding is shifted from the phase of the mains power, allowing the creation of a moving magnetic field which starts the motor. Once the motor reaches near design operating speed, the centrifugal switch activates, opening the contacts and disconnecting the startup winding from the power source. The motor then operates solely on the running winding. The starting winding must be disconnected since it would increase the losses in the motor.
In a capacitor start motor, a starting capacitor is inserted in series with the startup winding, creating an LC circuit which is capable of a much greater phase shift (and so, a much greater starting torque). The capacitor naturally adds expense to such motors.
Another variation is the Permanent Split-Capacitor (PSC) motor (also known as a capacitor start and run motor). This motor operates similarly to the capacitor-start motor described above, but there is no centrifugal starting switch and the second winding is permanently connected to the power source. PSC motors are frequently used in air handlers, fans, and blowers and other cases where a variable speed is desired. By changing taps on the running winding but keeping the load constant, the motor can be made to run at different speeds. Also provided all 6 winding connections are available separately, a 3 phase motor can be converted to a capacitor start and run motor by commoning two of the windings and connecting the third via a capacitor to act as a start winding.
Repulsion motors are wound-rotor single-phase AC motors that are similar to universal motors. In a repulsion motor, the armature brushes are shorted together rather than connected in series with the field. Several types of repulsion motors have been manufactured, but the repulsion-start induction-run (RS-IR) motor has been used most frequently. The RS-IR motor has a centrifugal switch that shorts all segments of the commutator so that the motor operates as an induction motor once it has been accelerated to full speed. RS-IR motors have been used to provide high starting torque per ampere under conditions of cold operating temperatures and poor source voltage regulation. Few repulsion motors of any type are sold as of 2006.
Single-phase AC synchronous motors
Small single-phase AC motors can also be designed with magnetized rotors (or several variations on that idea). The rotors in these motors do not require any induced current so they do not slip backward against the mains frequency. Instead, they rotate synchronously with the mains frequency. Because of their highly accurate speed, such motors are usually used to power mechanical clocks, audio turntables, and tape drives; formerly they were also much used in accurate timing instruments such as strip-chart recorders or telescope drive mechanisms. The shaded-pole synchronous motor is one version.
Because inertia makes it difficult to instantly accelerate the rotor from stopped to synchronous speed, these motors normally require some sort of special feature to get started. Various designs use a small induction motor (which may share the same field coils and rotor as the synchronous motor) or a very light rotor with a one-way mechanism (to ensure that the rotor starts in the “forward” direction).
Torque motors
A torque motor is a specialized form of induction motor which is capable of operating indefinitely at stall (with the rotor blocked from turning) without damage. In this mode, the motor will apply a steady torque to the load (hence the name). A common application of a torque motor would be the supply- and take-up reel motors in a tape drive. In this application, driven from a low voltage, the characteristics of these motors allow a relatively-constant light tension to be applied to the tape whether or not the capstan is feeding tape past the tape heads. Driven from a higher voltage, (and so delivering a higher torque), the torque motors can also achieve fast-forward and rewind operation without requiring any additional mechanics such as gears or clutches.
Stepper motors
Closely related in design to three-phase AC synchronous motors are stepper motors, where an internal rotor containing permanent magnets or a large iron core with salient poles is controlled by a set of external magnets that are switched electronically. A stepper motor may also be thought of as a cross between a DC electric motor and a solenoid. As each coil is energized in turn, the rotor aligns itself with the magnetic field produced by the energized field winding. Unlike a synchronous motor, in its application, the motor may not rotate continuously; instead, it “steps” from one position to the next as field windings are energized and deenergized in sequence. Depending on the sequence, the rotor may turn forwards or backwards.
Simple stepper motor drivers entirely energize or entirely deenergize the field windings, leading the rotor to “cog” to a limited number of positions; more sophisticated drivers can proportionally control the power to the field windings allowing the rotors to position “between” the “cog” points and thereby rotate extremely smoothly. Computer controlled stepper motors are one of the most versatile forms of positioning systems, particularly when part of a digital servo-controlled system.
Stepper motors can be rotated to a specific angle with ease, and hence stepper motors are used in computer disk drives, where the high precision they offer is necessary for the correct functioning of, for example, a hard disk drive or CD drive.
Permanent magnet motor
A permanent magnet motor is the same as the conventional dc machine except the fact that the field winding is replaced by permanent magnets. By doing this, the machine would act like a constant excitation dc machine (separately excited dc machine).
These motors usually have a small rating, ranging up to a few horsepower. They are used in small appliances, battery operated vehicles, for medical purposes, in other medical equipment such as x-ray machines. These motors are also used toys, in automobiles as auxiliary motors for the purposes of seat adjustment, power windows, mirror adjustment and the like.
Brushless DC motors
Many of the limitations of the classic commutator DC motor are due to the need for brushes to press against the commutator. This creates friction. At higher speeds, brushes have increasing difficulty in maintaining contact. Brushes may bounce off the irregularities in the commutator surface, creating sparks. This limits the maximum speed of the machine. The current density per unit area of the brushes limits the output of the motor. The imperfect electric contact also causes electrical noise. Brushes eventually wear out and require replacement, and the commutator itself is subject to wear and maintenance. The commutator assembly on a large machine is a costly element, requiring precision assembly of many parts.
These problems are eliminated in the brushless motor. In this motor, the mechanical “rotating switch” or commutator/brushgear assembly is replaced by an external electronic switch synchronised to the motor’s position. Brushless motors are typically 85-90% efficient whereas DC motors with brushgear are typically 75-80% efficient.
Midway between ordinary DC motors and stepper motors lies the realm of the brushless DC motor. Built in a fashion very similar to stepper motors, these often use a permanent magnet external rotor, three phases of driving coils, one or more Hall effect devices to sense the position of the rotor, and the associated drive electronics. The coils are activated, one phase after the other, by the drive electronics as cued by the signals from the Hall effect sensors. In effect, they act as three-phase synchronous motors containing their own variable frequency drive electronics. A specialized class of brushless DC motor controllers utilize EMF feedback through the main phase connections instead of Hall effect sensors to determine position and velocity. These motors are used extensively in electric radio-controlled vehicles.
Brushless DC motors are commonly used where precise speed control is necessary, computer disk drives or in video cassette recorders the spindles within CD, CD-ROM (etc.) drives, and mechanisms within office products such as fans, laser printers and photocopiers. They have several advantages over conventional motors:
- Compared to AC fans using shaded-pole motors, they are very efficient, running much cooler than the equivalent AC motors. This cool operation leads to much-improved life of the fan’s bearings.
- Without a commutator to wear out, the life of a DC brushless motor can be significantly longer compared to a DC motor using brushes and a commutator. Commutation also tends to cause a great deal of electrical and RF noise; without a commutator or brushes, a brushless motor may be used in electrically sensitive devices like audio equipment or computers.
- The same Hall effect devices that provide the commutation can also provide a convenient tachometer signal for closed-loop control (servo-controlled) applications. In fans, the tachometer signal can be used to derive a
- fan okay” signal.
- The motor can be easily synchronized to an internal or external clock, leading to precise speed control.
- Brushed motors cannot be used in the vacuum of space because they will weld themselves into an immovable position.
Modern DC brushless motors range in power from a fraction of a watt to many kilowatts. Larger brushless motors up to about 100 kW rating are used in electric vehicles. They also find significant use in high-performance electric model aircraft.
Coreless DC motors
Nothing in the design of any of the motors described above requires that the iron (steel) portions of the rotor actually rotate; torque is only exerted on the windings of the electromagnets. Taking advantage of this fact is the coreless DC motor, a specialized form of a brush DC motor. Optimized for rapid acceleration, these motors have a rotor that is constructed without any iron core. The rotor can take the form of a winding-filled cylinder inside the stator magnets, a basket surrounding the stator magnets, or a flat pancake (possibly formed on a printed wiring board) running between upper and lower stator magnets. The windings are typically stabilized by being impregnated with epoxy resins.
Because the rotor is much lighter in weight (mass) than a conventional rotor formed from copper windings on steel laminations, the rotor can accelerate much more rapidly, often achieving a mechanical time constant under 1 ms. This is especially true if the windings use aluminum rather than the heavier copper. But because there is no metal mass in the rotor to act as a heat sink, even small coreless motors must often be cooled by forced air.
These motors were commonly used to drive the capstan(s) of magnetic tape drives and are still widely used in high-performance servo-controlled systems.
Linear motors
A linear motor is essentially an electric motor that has been “unrolled” so that instead of producing a torque (rotation), it produces a linear force along its length by setting up a traveling electromagnetic field.
Linear motors are most commonly induction motors or stepper motors. You can find a linear motor in a maglev (Transrapid) train, where the train “flies” over the ground.
Nano motor
Nanomotor constructed at UC Berkeley. The motor is about 500nm across: 300 times smaller than the diameter of a human hair
Researchers at University of California, Berkeley, have developed rotational bearings based upon multiwall carbon nanotubes. By attaching a gold plate (with dimensions of order 100nm) to the outer shell of a suspended multiwall carbon nanotube (like nested
carbon cylinders), they are able to electrostatically rotate the outer shell relative to the inner core. These bearings are very robust; Devices have been oscillated thousands of times with no indication of wear. The work was done in situ in an SEM. These nanoelectromechanical systems (NEMS) are the next step in miniaturization that may find their way into commercial aspects in the future.
Notice: The thin vertical string seen in the middle, is the nanotube to which the rotor is attached. When the outer tube is sheared, the rotor is able to spin freely on the nanotube bearing.
s.sankar
http://www.articlesbase.com/technology-articles/techical-performance-of-traction-machine-design-685733.html
How the Body Works : The Menstrual Cycle
How the Body Works The Menstrual Cycle
Controlled by hormones, the average menstrual cycle is twenty-eight days. From about day 5 pituitary follicle-stimulating hormone, or FSH, promotes the growth of a follicle in the ovary. Follicular cells produce estrogen, which builds up the endometrium, the uterine lining, in readiness for implantation of the fertilized egg. In midcycle, a surge of pituitary luteinizing hormone, or LH, causes ovulation. The corpus luteum secretes progesterone, which reinforces estrogen and builds up the endometrium to its maximum thickness. If the egg is not fertilized, the corpus luteum degenerates in the last few days of the cycle and the lining is shed during menstruation, which marks the start of a new cycle. If fertilization occurs, about day 14 the fertilized egg secretes human chorionic gonadotrophin, or HCG. This maintains the corpus luteum and its output of progesterone and estrogen so that the endometrium is maintained during pregnancy and menstruation does not occur. The endometrium then nourishes the fertilized egg.
Duration : 0:1:19
Know Your Ovulation Cycle If You Want To Get Pregnant
Ovulation plays a critical role in making sure you get pregnant. Surprisingly then, very few women, and even less men, know the woman’s ovulation cycle and exactly when the best time is to implant your sperm if you wish to ensure that pregnancy occurs.
Natural indications of when you ovulation cycle is are difficult to judge and know. Consequently, as with most technical matters, more and more, we turn to science to provide this information to us.
One method used to gage our ovulation cycle is the pelvic ultrasound. However, as ultrasound is not a safe conception during periods when we wish to get pregnant, we need to try and utilize this method of knowing the ovulation cycle some time prior to actually trying to conceive.
Home use test kits that measure the LH surge prior to ovulation have also proven to be very useful tools in knowing when out ovulation cycle is and when the best time to implant the sperm is in order to maximize the chances of conceiving. Home use LH measuring kits are, however, a little hit and miss and should not be relied upon exclusively. What is important with home use ovulation kits is that the LH surge prior to ovulation be logged and noted.
Know when you ovulate is one thing. Knowing when to have intercourse during your ovulation period is another although. Scientific research, however, seems to indicate that intercourse during the period 6 days prior to, and the actual day of, ovulation will result in your becoming pregnant. Moreover, as intercourse the day after you have ovulated is unlikely to cause you to become pregnant, all tests as to when your exact ovulation time is are for the benefit not so much of knowing when you ovulate, but more knowing when to have intercourse with your loved one prior to the ovulation itself, as if you have intercourse any time outside of the 6 days prior to ovulation itself you’ll not likely become pregnant. Not unsurprisingly here, the percentage chance that you will conceive and become pregnant increases the closer you get to your actual time of ovulation, with the peak opportune time being on the actual day of ovulation itself.
Once you have established your ovulation cycle and given the system a good try then next thing you need to establish is whether or not you are actually pregnant. Here you have to usually wait 15-16 days following your ovulation day, as this would be the day of your next scheduled period. If you do not have your period on time following the loving making session 15-16 days earlier, you should rush out and buy a home pregnancy test to have a look and see if you have hit the jackpot! Remember, however, that any home pregnancy test, positive or negative, should be double-checked with your local doctor who can do relevant blood tests to confirm your happy news that you have beaten natures odds and happily conceived the child of your dreams.
Melvin Ng
http://www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/know-your-ovulation-cycle-if-you-want-to-get-pregnant-64977.html
Periods farther apart your most fertile time is later in your ovulation cycle?
Is it true that if your periods are farther apart that your most fertile time is at the end of your ovulation cycle? My periods are always 31 days apart and my last period was the 16th. Does anyone know if it’s true about the ovulation and does anyone know when about I would have been the most fertile?
The luteal phase (ovulation to period) stays the same – the follicular phase (period to ovulation) can change. Most women’s luteal phase is 14 days (about 80% of women) which means you would ovulate on CD17. However, a luteal phase can be between 12 and 16 days meaning you could ovulate between CD15 and CD19. You can get pregnant 3 days before that day and 1 day after. I used OPKs (ovulation prediction kits) and they worked really well to tell me when I was ovulating.