Kingfisher RTUs

Hi. Is there anyone here who has done any work with Action Controls Kingfisher RTUs. In particular the ID prefix for message headers. I am having a hard time getting a grasp of the concept. Regards Alan Case

Kingfisher RTU

Hi, I don't have an answer for you as I was looking for someone who worked with Kingfisher already!
I have specified Allen Bradley (Redundant Controllogix) PLC for process control in a water treatment plant project (total IO is about 200 including 10 PID/ratio control), this PLC has to communicate with three CompactLogix PLCs over Controlnet or Ethernet.
On the other hand, a system integrator (works closely with Client) is willing to use Kingfisher RTU (they are used that in other remote sites for this client), we haven't worked with Kingfisher before so we didn't recommend it, so basically I want to know is there any limitation (hardware/software) in Kingfisher RTU to be used in a process control and redundant configuration?

Many thanks in advance,

I will post some info for you tonight.
Regards Alan

Hi. I just re-read your post. I personally would not use the Kigfisher for what you describe. I rate them very good at getting data between remote sites over a radio link but marginal for process control. They can do the control but it is not as nice or as easy as contrologix. It sounds like all the AB gear is close together and the comms will be by cable. This is what a PLC is made for, not an RTU.
We only use the kingfisher for control on the simplest sites, ie to gather and transmit a tank level back to a pump station.
At the pump station we have a Kingfisher with only the comms card to transmit data to an AB processor via DF1. The AB does all the smarts. The Kingfishers do the transfer better over a radio than AB can as there protocol is masterless. AB radio modem requires a master somewhere in the system. Lose the master and you lose all radio comms.
Kingfisher is ethernet capable but not Ethernet/IP which means you CANNOT speak to an AB processor over ethernet. DF1 is the only option.
If you need anymore info, just ask.
Regards Alan

Alan,

Thanks a lot, I do need more info.
First, we have about 77 SDI (serial DI), 3 SDO, 23 SAI and 5 SAO per each slave PLC connected to the Master (ControlLogix) and you can see total serial IO numbers (77+3+23+5)x3=324 is more than hardwired IO (121DI+31DO+37AI+10AO or 199), so the serial communication is very important in our case.
Second, I didn't find DF-1 port in Kingfisher catalogues, which processor did you use before?
and finally, can you send me a link/document to getting more familiar with serial I/O communication and its requirements (networking, hardware/software)?

Thanks,
Soren

Hi. There is no DF1 port as such, it is a standard port. You load a DF1 driver into the Kingfisher processor and then configure the port in the software as an AB DF1. You se a standard cat 5 lead from the kingfisher to a RJ45 to DB9 converter. (you have to make this converter yourself) Then from the DB9 end of the converter with a standard AB lead (ie a 1747-CP3)
http://www.rtunet.com/

Regards Alan

Alan,

I'd like to repeat my original question after getting these info:
is it doable to use Kingfisher in this situation (process control with 200 I/O and 10 PID loops) communicating with three CompactLogix PLC over AB DF-1 protocol (with 130 serial IO per each PLC)?

Hi.
Anything is do-able.
I am guessing here that the plant will have

3 compactlogix sub controllers each with 130 io controlling part of the plant.
1 main controller with 200 io and 10 PID loops.

The main controller needs to talk to each subcontroller.

Problems.
DF1 can only talk point to point ie to 1 controller (therefore you cant use DF1 in this instance)
Solution. Use modbus but compactlogix does not support native modbus out of it serial port. You can fit a modbus comms card to the compactlogix.

The system begs for another compactlogix as the main controller with everything speaking ethernet to each other. If radio comms are required to a remote site with a Kingfisher then put a Kingfisher onto the main controller serial port and DF1 the data across.

In my opinion you can get a system like you describe with a KF main working BUT it will be very hard to develop, more expensive, VERY hard to fault find, slow on the comms and VERY hard to modify.
Also whoever follows you and has to work on it will disparage you design and curse you forever.

I have done a lot of work with Kingfishers and they are good for their purpose. This project is not one of them.

I am in LA in mid June if you need more info. It will only cost you a cup of coffee.

Regards Alan Case

Alan,

Thanks for your helpful notes. I discussed the design with Client and system integrator and my approach (completed with your comments) is approved.
System integrator was well aware of limitations of KF, so they accepted ControlLogix in Master panel without any discussions! And as you pointed out, I suggested adding a KF (just a processor) connecting to ControlLogix through DF-1 to send the monitoring signals back to remote SCADA via radio modem, so we would keep the uniformity with other plants connected to the existing SCADA.

In summary: we will have three CompactLogix PLC panels (including OIT- AB Panelview-700) talking to the Master panel (redundant ControlLogix) over Controlnet, also there would be an operator workstation (on Controlnet) in the control room. KF and radio modem will be in separate panel and will be connected to ControlLogix through DF-1.



So how is it now?!

I missed one item:
I have redundant ControlLogix in Master, how is it going to be connected to KF over DF-1?