1 / 7

Integrating Acquired Subsystems

Learn about integrating acquired subsystems effectively. Case study of Bob Dalesio from 11/29/98 regarding RFQ vacuum control using Labview, Modicon PLC, and EPICS. Insights on manpower usage and system complexities.

atrice
Download Presentation

Integrating Acquired Subsystems

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Integrating Acquired Subsystems Bob Dalesio 11/29/98

  2. Vacuum Subsystem - RFQ, RFQ Windows • Controls the vacuum system for the RFQ and RFQ windows • Developed at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory • Los Alamos controls involved from the beginning • Livermore developed in Labview and Modicon PLC, Granville Phillips Ion Gauge Controllers - estimated 6 months to learn EPICS • By agreement, the PLC contained all vacuum interlocks and all automatic startup was done in Labview • Los Alamos converted over to EPICS

  3. Vacuum System Manpower Usage • LLNL • 6 months to collect requirements and do project engineering • 3 months to implement the vacuum system • LANL • 5 weeks to develop the Modbus driver • 4 weeks to integrate the GPIB driver from SLAC • 1 week to develop IP drivers and carrier board support - based on K.Kasimer’s work • 3 weeks to develop screens (more extensive set - including interlock displays) • 3 weeks to develop the database • 3 days to test and integrate • new requirements for the RFQ IOC to provide an interlock to HPRF and monitor strain gauges were done in EPICS • Drivers were used for window vacuum, and injector vacuum - no additional work

  4. High Power RF • Developed by Contental • No meetings with LANL controls engineers • Done using Allen-Bradley PLCs with PanelMate displays • Multiple master provided for control channels (PLC/EPICS) • Allen-Bradley driver modifications to support monitoring outputs and asynchronously processing records to read the new values

  5. HPRF - notes • I do not have the time estimates… • The multiple master control of outputs significantly complicated the database design and the driver • Signals were displayed on the Panel Mate in one set of units, were in different units at the variables we were given - again - complication in the database and requirement for save/restore. • Signals in the Panel Mate were used as scratch pad registers between Panel Mate update cycles and EPICS would see these intermediate values. • Complex logic for HPRF control and interlocks were in the PLC - producing a 3 inch listing that was time consuming to take over • Control channels from EPICS did not work initially - they were not implemented in the PLC • Each change to the PLC took at least a week - no support for integration

  6. RFQ cooling • Provided by Allied Signal • Implemented in EPICS • Delivered and tested by Allied • Not yet in the same directory structure • Integration - took the time to transfer some displays over to the operator account • Database implementation took 9 months - estimated 6 of them to train a new user and have him come up to speed • Industry Pac drivers took 3 months - not communicating here.

  7. Subjective Conclusions • Poor project controls make it difficult to get accurate measures of time spent in each activity. • Communication with the provider in the earliest stages to agree on implementation strategy simplifies the entire task and especially the integration time. • It is not always reasonable to ask a vendor to implement in EPICS - the time to come up to speed should not exceed the time saved. • Do not put too much in a PLC - they are difficult to maintain for complex logic. • Require integration as part of the result from the supplier. • Even when selecting common hardware - coordinate the schedule for implementing the driver to avoid duplication of effort (and code to maintain)

More Related