Are Dated Design Compromises Affecting Your HMI and History Data Precision?

I got busy in the purported Christmas break and wrote a bunch of blogs.  This blog is a roadmap through several related areas. Read on to

• learn if you are overloading the exception report generation of nodes
• verify under-utilization and improve your console and history data
• automatically detect and report exception report delays

Most systems worry about the above, and most were configured a decade or two ago. Learn if you can get much more out of what you have.

For many INFI 90 systems, the power of the modern NIS21/NPM22 hardware capability will allow you to get much more precise data to consoles and history systems.

If you have DBDOC, you can find out, for every PCU / node that you think is heavily loaded, if it really is. Heavy loading is 50% to 90%, overloading above that.  This is how to do it:

Monitoring Node Communication CPU Load

If you find the communication CPU usage in the 10% range, you are not getting enough out of INFI 90 and are not giving operators, managers and engineers data that is good enough.  You can do better:

Improved Tag and History Data Precision in INFI 90 Systems

There is also a design for you to be able to permanently and validly measure whether you ever get delayed or lost exception reports.  If you find you have nodes in the 50% or greater node communication CPU usage, you should worry about this.

Monitoring Exception Report Performance

Have you tried any of these techniques?  It would be very interesting to hear your experiences.