Latest trends in I/O systems - Control Global

SPECIAL REPORT

LATEST TRENDS IN I/O SYSTEMS

sponsored by

TABLE OF CONTENTS

www.controlglobal.com

Latest trends in I/O systems 2

A new fashion in industrial enclosures? 3

ExxonMobil commits to thinking differently with electrical 7

integration, configurable I/O

Machine-mount I/O for harsh environments 10

Use one protocol for everything 13

Advances make I/O easier, but still not as simple 16

as it could be

AD INDEX

Wago 18



Unlike clothing fashions, enclosure styles don’t change a lot from year to year.

A 40-year-old enclosure doesn’t stand out like your dad’s leisure suit. After all,

a big metal box is pretty much a big metal box, even with the added glitz of

ventilation, temperature control or an explosion-proof or safety rating. However, like

a classic, tailor-made suit, enclosure styles are slowly evolving. Driven by the advent of

electronic marshalling, as surely as hemlines get shorter, enclosure boxes are getting

smaller and becoming more standardized.

Dan McGrath, solutions manager at physical infrastructure products and solutions pro-

vider Panduit, explains: “Electronic marshalling provides the ability to more readily

distribute enclosures around facilities, rather than needing as many home runs to central

consolidation marshalling points. The enclosures can be smaller and more efficient with

this technology. Ultimately, we are talking about standardizing with best practice de-

signs rather than ‘one-offs,’ or every designer needing to sweat the details and develop

custom specifications each time.”

So how did this happen? The short answer is a shift in the way marshalling is done. Em-

erson Process Management led the way in 2010 with its “characterization modules,” or

CHARMs. These signal-conditioning modules are available in a number of types. When

the system is installed remotely, each loop’s field wiring is landed on one of the special

A new fashion in industrial enclosures?Will electronic marshalling Mean the end of the ‘bespoke’ enclosure?

By Nancy Bartels



terminal blocks, and the loop signal is

characterized by plugging the appropriate

CHARM into the terminal, and the mar-

shalling is configured electronically, elimi-

nating the spaghetti nest of cross wiring.

To make a change simply remove one

CHARM and install a different one. It is the

equivalent of traditional wired marshalling,

but with far fewer wires.

While Emerson was first out of the gate,

other automation vendors have not been

far behind. Honeywell Process Solutions

is offering its Universal Process I/O for its

Series C I/O. The module reduces or elimi-

nates marshalling and allows immediate

configuration without the need for addi-

tional hardware. Released in May of 2012,

the SIL-3-certified solution uses a single,

universal, optionally redundant, 32-channel

I/O module that can accept DIN, DOU, AIN,

AOU or smoke/heat/gas detector signals.

Joe Bastone, Honeywell’s solution man-

ager for Experion control I/O, describes

it this way: “It’s a funny looking module

with a termination assembly. What plugs

into that is the I/O module. These com-

municate with the controller. It’s totally

software-configurable, and it’s all done

from the engineering console.”

Invensys Foxboro’s I/A Series Intelligent

Marshalling from Invensys, released in

late 2011, also takes a crack at eliminating

much of the marshalling work. Its FBM247

Universal Fieldbus Module for the Fox-

boro I/A Series DCS fits into the standard

I/A series base plate. Base plate-mounted

termination assemblies provide the link

between field wiring and the FBM247

modules.

“This module is a hybrid type,” says Thad

Frost, who oversees Foxboro’s intelligent

marshalling solution. “It bypasses the

marshalling process. It can handle multiple

types of I/O signals. [With this system]

you are able to bypass the marshalling

cabinet and go directly to the control cab-

Electronic marshalling provides the ability to more

readily distribute enclosures around facilities, rather

than needing as many home runs to central

consolidation marshalling points. The enclosures can

be smaller and more efficient with this technology.



inet, and once the cables come into the

control cabinet, they can be adapted with

software to the required signal types.”

Although each of these approaches is

technically different in some respects, the

result is similar: fewer wires, more flexibil-

ity, a much more compact footprint, lower

costs, reduced inventory and an installa-

tion that is much more forgiving of late

changes in engineering plans.

HEADING FOR SIZE 0?Anyone who follows women’s fashions will

tell you that over the past couple of de-

cades, the “ideal size” has shrunk from 6 to

4 to 2 to 0. Is the same thing going to hap-

pen to enclosures? Up to a point, yes.

Charlie Norz, product manager for I/O

systems at component supplier Wago,

says, “We’re seeing users continuing to

downsize. This need has triggered a push

for comprehensive, all-in-one systems for

ever-condensing control footprints and en-

closures. Ultimately, enclosure issues drill

down to I/O size and keeping the control

system’s footprint compact for future ex-

pansion. Thus, the primary focus will con-

tinue to be space-efficient I/O.”

Scott Pries, marketing manager for Emer-

son’s smart wireless systems, points out,

“One of the things that will be going away

is one of the two cabinets you need for

home-run cable. You don’t need one whole

cabinet. Intrinsically safe operation is being

incorporated into electronics. Now a single

card incorporates that and reduces anoth-

er 20% of the cabinet. If you reuse the old

cabinets, you can use the extra space for

more I/O.”

STANDARD ISSUEMore standardization is also in the off-

ing. Erik de Groot, marketing manager at

Honeywell Process Solutions says, “There

are always going to be places where you

have a custom-built cabinet, but one of

the things we’re working at is putting

together a cabinet that will have 64 I/O,

and can be all bundled together with all

the known parts. Customers don’t want to

specify all the individual parts that go into

the cabinet. That’s time-consuming. If you

can stamp out the [required] cabinets and

make them all identical, you don’t have to

do a FAT [factory acceptance test] on ev-

ery one. We’re exploring this with leading-

edge customers.”

Frost says this standardization is appeal-

ing to some of his largest customers. He

tells the story of a large oil producer to

whom he was pointing out the virtues of

his system—the shortened wiring times, the

ability to do remote configuration, the ease

of late changes to the plans, the reduction

of inventory, the lower costs.

The customer told him, “I don’t care about

all that. In a mega-project, those things



amount to petty cash. What I do care

about is the fact that we could take the

cabinets full of intelligent marshalling

modules, ship them to the site and fin-

ish them up there. What you have done is

break the dependency between control

system design and I/O system installation.

This gives me schedule compression and

makes scheduling easier.”

Emerson Process Management offers its

own enclosure options for DeltaV, ver-

sion 11, systems. The “canned” solution is

a factory-tested enclosure which will hold

electronic marshalling equipment. The

company also offers both configure-to-

order and design-to-order enclosures.

A NEW CLASSIC?Software-based marshalling is beginning

to look a lot like a new classic—say a pair

of jeans for the I/O world. It won’t happen

overnight, of course. The process indus-

tries are full of “fast followers,” waiting

for the other guy to try it first. But ARC

Advisory Group points out that the in-

stalled base of systems 20 years or older

is $53 billion. Existing enclosures will have

a much longer useful life, but upgrades, ei-

ther using the old enclosures or new ones,

are definitely on the horizon. As long as a

customer is upgrading anyway, why not at

least consider the new marshalling sys-

tems and their smaller enclosures?

Emerson’s Pries says, “For migration, the

path forward is easier because you have

the option of wireless for field junction

boxes or electronic marshalling.”

As for how this will affect the enclosures

business, it will change too, if only incre-

mentally.

Panduit’s McGrath says, “Enclosure suppli-

ers need to consider product mix as part

of their business strategy. Large marshal-

ling panels will diminish and be replaced

with smaller panels in many cases. Panduit

sees demand for a similar approach with

network zone enclosures, so [we’ll see] a

building-block approach with smaller en-

closures strategically deployed to provide

plant coverage in harsh areas.”

But there are also plenty of opportunities

for new and different enclosures, he adds.

“Custom enclosures will most certainly be

required, as innovation never stops, and

there are new devices, sensors and con-

trollers that will require custom housing.

The exciting part about standardization,

though, is that as the industry advances,

the building blocks will need to evolve and

become smarter, providing advantages for

customers that can adopt new technology

with reduced risks and deployment times.”



ExxonMobil commits to thinking differently with electrical integration, configurable I/OWhat prompted ExxonMobil to start thinking and doing things differently? Sandy Vasser, I&E manager at ExxonMobil, explains the transition.

By Mike Bacidore

Think before you act. Several years ago, ExxonMobil began its journey to act dif-

ferently, trying to find ways to improve success. However, acting differently first

requires the ability to think differently, and that is a significant change.

“In the old days, we would improve processes incrementally and consistently. It’s a lot more

complicated than that now,” explained Sandy Vasser, I&E manager at ExxonMobil. He spoke

at Schneider Electric’s CONNECT 2016 user group event this week in New Orleans. Vasser

has led a charge to change the way his organization acts by changing the way it thinks.

“We had to challenge our traditional automation practices and technologies,” he said. “We

really had to think completely differently and put the old practices to the side.”

Vasser also stressed the importance of not waiting. “The oil and gas industry is currently

at a low point in terms of number of projects, but this lull won’t last forever,” Vasser said.

Further, all disciplines—not just automation—can make these changes. They translate well to

other disciplines within the organization.

BECAUSE THAT’S HOW WE’VE ALWAYS DONE ITWhat prompted ExxonMobil to start thinking and doing things differently? Historical chal-

lenges were many. “There were numerous dependencies on other disciplines, and this forces



sequential execution,” said Vasser. “Design

input was provided throughout the project

lifecycle, and this forces numerous changes.

The resulting designs are highly engineered,

which makes them very customized and

frequently changing.”

To reduce customization and rely more

on standard solutions, ExxonMobil has

pushed customization to the software,

which allowed it to use standard hard-

ware. This eliminated the need for custom

project specifications and for the infra-

structure to support customized solutions.

By reducing complexity and simplifying

designs, it reduced the component count

and the number of divergent systems,

taking advantage of the capability of the

installed systems. It simplified interfaces;

it automated and sometimes eliminated

processes; and it mitigated the effects of

dependencies. “Intelligent I/O has allowed

us to progress the hardware design without

even knowing how the I/O will be used,”

said Vasser.

ExxonMobil reduced the amount of docu-

mentation or often generated it automati-

cally. It accepted managed risk and com-

promise, as it developed and enabled trust

with suppliers and contractors.

“All of this has resulted in fewer compo-

nents, reduced engineering, fewer drawings,

reduced number of design reviews, elimi-

nation of FATs [factory acceptance tests],

shortened schedules, smaller project teams,

higher quality and lower costs,” explained

Vasser.

“We had to challenge our

traditional automation

practices and technologies.”

ExxonMobil’s Sandy Vasser on the company’s

move to re-examine decades-old project

execution practices.



CONFIGURE THISSmart, configurable I/O in standard field

junction boxes is one of the key enablers

that Vasser cited. Virtualization, not just of

computers, but complete hardware virtual-

ization has allowed the company to validate

control system logic independent of system

hardware.

“When we can test out all of our graphics

and our alarms, that’s a significant improve-

ment,” said Vasser. “Customization has

been pushed from hardware to software.

Cabinets, for example, were all different.

But today all of our cabinets are a standard

solution.”

ExxonMobil also is seamlessly integrating its

automation and electrical systems. “We’ve

combined them, and it’s all included in the

automation systems,” explained Vasser.

Instruments are automatically detected,

interrogated, configured, enabled and docu-

mented (DICED).

“We’ve used smart I/O to replace MCC

[motor control center] wiring, simplified

package PLC [programmable logic con-

troller] interface solutions and increased

use of dc power distribution. The smart

I/O has allowed us to eliminate 60-70%

of cabinet wiring; we’re getting rid of a

lot of hard wiring between the packages

and the MCCs. Electrical control interface

improvements include monitoring of the

electrical system. We’re always looking at

ways to take advantage of smart I/O.”

AGE IN PLACEOne of the important new opportunities,

or challenges, depending on your per-

spective, that updated control systems

bring is the concept of “aging in place,”

where the infrastructure allows for up-

grades as the system ages or technology

changes.

ExxonMobil has embraced this by making

system architectures simpler. “Systems

consist of building blocks that can be eas-

ily upgraded to current technologies,” ex-

plained Vasser. “Upgrades or repairs will

not be intrusive, disruptive or unnecessar-

ily costly, and rip-and-replace will never

be necessary. Control system selection for

a facility is for life.”

As connectivity concerns become more

prevalent, ExxonMobil has adopted cyber-

security by design. “Security can’t be solved

only by rings of protection, such as fire-

walls, or by reactionary measures such as

virus protections,” he said.

“We started with how to deal with change,”

explained Vasser. “There are many opportu-

nities to eliminate or streamline processes.

Think about what you’re trying to achieve,

and think differently about how you’re go-

ing to achieve those things.”



Machine-mount I/O for harsh environmentsReducing the distance between I/O devices and the signals being monitored can eliminate the cost, inconvenience and possible error sources associated with long wire runs.

By Donna Bacidore

New technologies and the inclusion of existing technologies are helping to make

machine-mount I/O an alternative to cabinets, and these devices often can be

used in harsh environments.

Machine-mount I/O can be advantageous and cost-effective in certain circumstances. For

those planning to increase automation, it may be worth looking into.

“Depending on equipment type, cabinet-free automation systems help in minimizing the

planning, cost, start-up and servicing of automation applications,” says Charlie Norz, I/O-

System product manager at Wago.

Reducing the distance between I/O devices and the signals being monitored can be very

beneficial, eliminating the cost, inconvenience and possible error sources associated with

long wire runs, says Earle Foster, senior vice president of marketing at Sealevel Systems.

Machine-mount devices eliminate other wire issues, such as stripping and terminating

wires, testing and debugging, while enabling the ability to add more I/O points for the

future without having to modify the cabinet, says Shishire Rege, marketing manager, net-

working and connectivity, at Balluff. This makes it easier to adapt to changing customer

demands. Rege says that, while engineering changes are required to define which port to



use when plugging cables in the I/O block,

it takes only a few minutes instead of hours

to implement, reducing downtime and

shortening build time.

Among the technologies leading the way in

this shift are various communications proto-

cols and their price points.

“Fieldbuses can now provide communi-

cation between control unit, system and

machine, thereby eliminating the need for

discrete wiring,” says Norz.

Further helping to reduce wiring is IO-Link

vendor-neutral technology, which enables

I/O blocks to multiply the I/O points several

times over. “IO-Link ports on the machine-

mounted I/O opens entirely new possibili-

ties to easily connect smart sensors, also

called measurement sensors,” says Rege.

This will reduce sensor wiring down to a

single standard M12 cable.

In addition to fieldbuses and IO-Link,

stand-alone I/O adapters are available

that use Ethernet or USB to interface to

the host computer, and modules are made

that are suitable for the factory environ-

ment, adds Foster.

Product cost reductions also are helping to

fuel the machine-mount I/O market. These

reductions are achieved through the accep-

tance and expansion of Ethernet into the

industrial market.

“This acceptance is reducing the cost of

the Ethernet components integrated into

machine-mount I/O,” says Jason Halde-

man, product marketing lead specialist—

I/O and Light, I/O and Networks, for

Phoenix Contact USA. “In the past, prod-

uct costs were the biggest hurdle to over-

come. It was hard for people to see past

this initial cost and see the overall cost

savings down the road in labor or installa-

tion time. With labor cost on the rise and

component cost down, machine-mount

I/O looks a lot more attractive to the I/O

market.”

Also useful for machine-mount I/O is induc-

tive coupling to transfer power and data

over an air gap. “Inductive couplers can be

used on robot end-effectors, tool changers,

With labor cost on the rise and component cost

down, machine-mount I/O looks a lot more

attractive to the I/O market.



indexing or turntables and in automotive

assembly automation to supply power and

data to the assembly on pallets,” adds Rege.

Without mating connectors or friction, there

is no wear or tear.

It’s not as much the introduction of new

technology, as much as the proliferation

of proven technology to include a wider

range of products,” says Todd Bissell,

commercial program manager for sens-

ing, safety and connectivity, Rockwell

Automation. “The sealing and connection

techniques found on the devices that have

been out on the machine for ages—sen-

sors, switches, connection components

and I/O—are being added to controllers,

motor control, safety products and even

network switches,” he says.

Factors that once were prohibitive for using

machine-mount devices in harsh environ-

ments are being addressed.

“Environmental factors such as heat, hu-

midity and spray are key when it comes to

designing a panel or machine,” says Andrew

Barco, product manager—network con-

nectivity, Weidmuller North America, who

believes that machine-mount devices allow

designers more flexibility while meeting

harsh environment ratings. “These factors

pose limitations on where the machines can

be placed, and accommodating them can

often add to the cost of the machine. With

that said, the adoption of technology has

recently started to catch up with designers’

imaginations.”

Constructing the housings with more ro-

bust materials also is paving the way for

harsh-environment use. “Stainless steel,

die-cast zinc and IP67-rated plastic are

a few of the main options available from

vendors,” says Kurt Wadowick, I/O sys-

tems specialist at Beckhoff Automation.

“Stainless steel is ideal for the demanding

cleaning procedures common to food and

beverage, packaging and pharmaceutical

machinery. Die-cast zinc I/O boxes offer

increased load resistance and protection

against weld spatter. Rugged IP67-rated

plastic offers moisture and dust resistance

and is the more commonly used option

by machine builders who utilize machine-

mountable I/O.”

Environmental factors such as heat, humidity

and spray are key when it comes to designing

a panel or machine.



Use one protocol for everythingUsing one protocol eliminates the need for gateways and their attendant communication complexities.

By Ian Verhappen

Every digital system needs to integrate with its associated control system, typically

over an Ethernet backhaul network. Though it has lower bandwidth than fiber’s

gigabit capacity, wireless is also an option for this “home stretch” between the field

access point and the host. However, the physical layer and arguably the data link through

transport layers are just one part of getting a message from the field sensor to the central

I/O database(s). In all the discussions about wired versus wireless, the often overlooked and

arguably most important part of the network, for connectivity at least, is the protocol, typi-

cally Layer 7 or Layer 8 of the OSI model.

Figure 1 illustrates why the open system interconnect (OSI) model, which effectively builds

a protocol in layers similar to building each layer of a house from its foundation, is used by

almost all protocols; as shown, the protocols can use wired, wireless or Ethernet packets

with the same command set and functionality at the top layers, regardless of the physi-

cal layer used for transmission simply by defining the interface to the appropriate layer(s)

below it.

Looking at the physical layer, “Field Comms” refers to the normally twisted pair wire for a

fieldbus system, or in the case of wireless, the 802.15.4 communications, for the field sensor

network. Since most fieldbus systems are simple networks with all the devices connected to

a single port, layers 3 through 7 are normally blended into a single message management



system. Shifting to an Ethernet protocol is

therefore as easy as defining the interface

between the user layer and the appropriate

transport layer being used to manage the

network transmissions.

Why, you might ask, is the protocol impor-

tant? The simple reason is that if you have

a single protocol you do not need to use

gateways.

Now that we can change how the mes-

sage is being sent, much like we can all

talk over a telephone, whether it is cellular

(wireless), voice over Internet protocol

(VoIP ‒ Ethernet), or land line, and still

understand each other or at least make

the phone connection, the same can be

done with the information generated by a

protocol’s user layer.

If we substitute the word “language” for

“protocol” and continue with our phone

analogy, two people can communicate

with each other if we share the same

language. However, if we do not speak a

SIMPLIFY COMMUNICATIONSFigure 1: The choice of a single protocol at the physical layer makes for simpler communications all the way up the stack. Credit: Ian Verhappen



common language, we need a translator.

Therefore, since a protocol is like a lan-

guage, then a gateway is a translator. If

any of you are multilingual, or have tried

to translate something from one language

to another, especially simultaneously,

you can appreciate that doing so is not a

trivial task. Yet as automation engineers,

we think nothing of including multiple

gateways in any of our networks, and then

wonder why our system has communica-

tion problems.

The default protocol for any system is

some variant of Modbus. Modbus is great

because it is flexible and ubiquitous, how-

ever, because it is flexible, it also requires

a significant amount of manual interven-

tion to map information from one protocol

to the appropriate memory registers in

the gateway and host system. Manual in-

tervention is another source for potential

errors, so whenever possible, we certainly

want to minimize it.

As a result, a much better option than a

gateway is to stay within the protocol itself

and avoid the gateway all together.

Fortunately, with HART/IP now available, it

is possible for the two major wireless pro-

tocols used for process automation, Wire-

lessHART and ISA100.11, to connect from

end to end without the need for a gateway,

thus making the home stretch less of an

effort than it was in the past, while also pro-

viding access to all the information available

from the protocol by reading the necessary

device configuration file. An additional ad-

vantage of end-to-end connectivity is that

the same configuration tool can be used

for the device and host system, again with

minimal human intervention. Sounds like a

home run to me.

In all the discussions about wired versus wireless,

the overlooked and arguably most important part

of the network for connectivity is the protocol.



Advances make I/O easier, but still not as simple as it could beBut no interoperability between WirelessHART and ISA100 is holding back more universal adoption.

By Ian Verhappen

Continuing with our evolution conversation from last month of how control systems

continue to change, the same transformation is certainly happening with the Input/

Output (I/O) systems used to connect the field sensors to the associated controllers.

Wired systems now offer “configurable I/O” such as Schneider Electric’s “intelligent mar-

shalling” and Honeywell’s “Universal I/O” where the type of signal landed on the terminals is

configured in software. Emerson is offering CHARMS as a solution where you purchase and

install the right type of I/O module in their backplane for each type of signal. If you want to

be a bit more adventurous you can get “similar” functionality with analogous products from

other companies with “smart terminal blocks” and a backplane that also serve as data con-

centrators, However, you then need to use a “third-party tool” different from the one you use

to configure the rest of your system and perhaps a gateway to convert protocols. The other

big change, of course, has been the addition of wireless field sensor networks.

These new technologies are making it easier to access measurements more effortlessly

than ever before. We can not only provide measurements via wire, but now with wireless

systems, it is possible to consider signals from locations previously inaccessible because

location made them prohibitively expensive to connect with a cable or, more importantly,

by removing the cable tether, it is now possible to make devices of a size and form factor

to fit in smaller spaces. Going to a smaller form factor may require losing some functional-

ity, however if the cost is low enough the “signal” can be determined from the pattern of a



number of individual nodes, much like we

sense a smell or taste food.

Bringing this pattern data to a more central

device for processing in a single environ-

ment is also now feasible. With the recent

adoption of ISA100.15 and HART/IP, it is

now possible to have the two major pro-

cess industry wireless networks connect

from sensor to controller without having to

change protocols through a gateway. Again,

this certainly makes system configuration

much easier because it effectively means

that the wireless systems are no longer the

equivalent of “third-party networks.”

Though we no longer have to map data

across gateways, unfortunately, we still have

the two wireless camps of WirelessHART and

ISA100. Until these two groups find a way to

interoperate, adoption of industrial wireless

technology will not be as great as it would be

otherwise. Hopefully this month’s official for-

mation of FieldComm Group as single entity

from which both HART/IP and ISA100.15 were

largely developed as a precursor to at least

developing a common backhaul technology

so we can connect to the wireless field sensor

network from a single common access point.

I was also encouraged while at a recent IEC

meeting in Japan, held in conjunction with the

JEMIMA exhibition to see a demonstration

model of a HART to ISA100.11a access point

node, so the standards and technology sup-

port the potential for a single interface.

Ideally, however, a single interface means the

protocols must be from the same family such

as HART-WirelessHART-HART/IP, ISA100.11a-

ISA100.15, or the CIP protocols (CompoNet,

DeviceNet, ControlNet, Ethernet/IP), to name

a few protocol suites, or as a minimum, they

must “transport” the characteristics of the

protocol so that the device appears as if it is

in its native protocol when it is configured or

accessed for maintenance/operations. Again,

the desired outcome is to make it easy for the

system and, in the end, the person working

on the control system to gather the informa-

tion required with minimum effort.

More signals, more easily is certainly the

trend and with more signals, especially

digital signals that normally support associ-

ated diagnostic information, mean that the

challenge will soon become how to identify

what signals are required by whom, how to

effectively manage all the data, and most

importantly use the resulting information to

operate our facilities better.

Until ISA 100 and WirelessHART find a way to inter-

operate, adoption of industrial wireless technology

will not be as great as it would be otherwise.

NO NODES...LIKE OUR NODES.

The WAGO-I/O-SYSTEMThe System that Started the Modular I/O Revolution• Fieldbus independent – supports 16+ protocols• 500+ digital, analog and special function I/O modules• Compact – up to 16 DI or DO in just one 12 mm wide module• XTR Series for eXTReme temperature, shock and vibration• Add-on instruction library for RSLogix 5000® software

www.wago.us/IOsystem

RSLogix 5000® is a registered trademark of Rockwell Automation – no endorsement or affiliation implied.

No Nodes - Control - Print.indd 1 4/17/18 9:28 AM

http://www.wago.us/solutions/power-and-process-technology/overview/

Latest trends in I/O systems - Control Global

Documents

Transcript of Latest trends in I/O systems - Control Global