Rockwell Automation's pursuit of process control

 

 

By Bill Lydon - Editor, February 2011

 

I recently interviewed the two key executives leading Rockwell Automation’s process industry initiative, Som Chakraborti and Steve Pulsifer. Som Chakraborti is the Business Director for the process business within the Architecture and Software segment of Rockwell Automation. Chakraborti is responsible for the profitable growth of the PlantPAx™ Process Automation System and oversees the business unit and technology development. Steve Pulsifer is global Director of Process Marketing Development and is responsible for all commercial programs and developing the sales team worldwide for the process business.

 

 

I asked Pulsifer if the Rockwell distributors are selling PlantPAx.  He responded,” They are and we are trying to drive it more into the fabric.” Pulsifer noted that in markets that have a high concentration of process plants, such as Texas and the northeast, the distributors are already strong. Chakraborti added, “We have made the efforts over the last ten years to combine process automation as a core discipline of integrated architecture but over the last few years, probably five years, a tremendous amount of effort has been put in to all the functions required to support process automation growth as part of our mainstream activity vs. separate standalone groups.” “Just like we are not going to have a separate DCS controller, we are not going to have separate islands of people working on process either…and that includes our channel.” There is a separate certification for PlantPAx systems integrators as part of the Rockwell Automation Solution Provider program.

 

 

 

Rockwell Automation presenters made comments during Automation Fair’s Manufacturing Perspectives media day that Rockwell is taking a position in more projects as a Main Automation Contractor (MAC). Chakraborti commented, "It is not a widespread phenomena yet but it is a part of the strategy." The main issue seems to be limits on the number knowledgeable resources in the organization. Rockwell has been expanding their breadth and depth of talent in various vertical industry segments.

 

 

I posed this question. Rockwell has a history of being a leader and profitable supplier of discrete control and is the dominant discrete supplier in North America. Now that the discrete industries, particularly automotive, are ramping back up and investing in automation again, is Rockwell going to have the resources to properly serve its traditional discrete customers plus the process customers?  Chakraborti answered, “I think the two things are independent.” He went on to explain their strategy is to grow both businesses and that the discrete, particularly automotive, has been a growing part of the business over the last few quarters. Chakraborti noted that process investments are happening concurrently around the world and admitted there are investment constraints based on business tradeoffs. 

 

Rockwell’s process control initiative is built around the PlantPAx product line which is an application of Rockwell’s established Logix hardware and software components. Chakraborti described the evolution of Rockwell’s process industry activities. They originally started with the ProcessLogix system based on Rockwell’s hardware and Honeywell’s Plantscape software - built on a technology sharing agreement in 1996.

 

 

I asked what distinguishes PlantPAx from a DCS? Chakraborti responded, “The way I would like to answer the question is what distinguishes the PlantPAx DCS from other DCS systems?" He noted three things.

 

 

"First, Rockwell is the only company in the automation peer group in terms of core depth that can provide the true value of plant wide control within its architecture, where DCS is the focused element, where DCS has the integrated bus connectivity to the other plant wide disciplines." "Now, yes, there are others perhaps in our peer group who have this aspiration."

 

I suggested that within the context that he described this may be an accurate statement. But when you consider other vendors that provide a wider product offering, including sensors, actuators, analytical instruments and other systems, this is not an accurate statement. Chakraborti responded that the context I described is an “overall devices portfolio.” He noted, “We (Rockwell Automation) are not in a position that we can claim to have the richest device portfolio in the process automation peer group." “But the offerings we continue to leverage are the control disciplines, from front end to logistics and warehouse in a manufacturing facility, such as a classical paper mill. The front end to back end disciplines are best delivered through Integrated Architecture.” 

 

Chakraborti went on to elaborate, "Your point about another competing vendor bundling instrumentation, valves, and analytics along with their DCS offering, sure that is an advantage in certain cases where customers prefer to have that as part of the initial acquisition, but in other cases it is not." "Our Endress+Hauser alliance has been growing a lot of strength in the last 5 years and today, from a sales execution perspective, the E&H selling activities along with Rockwell's PlantPAx are joint activities..." He explained that the Endress+Hauser Preferred Supplier relationship provides Rockwell Automation with a quality portfolio of process instrumentation, as part of PlantPAx. “Probably best in class in the world”, said Chakraborti. He further described how this relationship offers greater value to customers with seamless interoperability.  “…as if the Endress+Hauser instruments were made by Rockwell Automation," said Chakraborti. There are other partners in the standard Rockwell Automation Encompass program that have process instruments and valves that are not as tightly integrated.

 

 

“Second is our value of networks and managing control and power over a common network,” said Chakraborti. “EtherNet/IP, open control network, is now a process control network, including high availability applications." PlantPAx 2.0 release in the first quarter of 2011 supports high availability architectures on EtherNet/IP. "Moving forward, EtherNet/IP can be a unifying network with multiple topologies for core process control,” said Chakraborti. “I would say that is our unique advantage which also helps in other areas of the plant operations, including what we do with CISCO systems for managing upper level IT systems." 

 

 

“Third, is what we do with process OEMs,” said Chakraborti.” “The term that we prefer to use is our DCS is OEM compliant. I want to be clear that our DCS is not the OEM system, but we have introduced this past year specific systems leveraging our small controller product lines for process skids."

 

 

I noted that Rockwell Automation’s promotion of EtherNet/IP for process along with the tight integration with Endress+Hauser is starting to look like a replacement for Foundation Fieldbus, i.e. Electronic Data Sheet integration with the Logix architecture.   Chakraborti explained that this is driven by the Rockwell Automation and Endress+Hauser alliance. Their mutual customers are wondering why process instrumentation can’t be on Ethernet/IP when non-process devices can be on EtherNet/IP.

 

"Let's think about what this really means from an architecture connectivity point of view,” said Chakraborti. “EtherNet/IP is a core control network for our architecture. For our control platform, we talk EtherNet/IP from all the communications modules to the I/O. Our controller understands data traffic on EtherNet/IP and we can propagate data traffic from EtherNet/IP to upper internet layers. So when you have a device such as a process flow meter or transmitter, the protocol on the top side is EtherNet/IP. If the PlantPAx controller views that as another Rockwell Automation device hanging on the network, we have a profile built into the Logix processor and into the PlantPAx Configurator. Then the configuration is as simple as a Rockwell PowerFlex drive or another I/O module or controller that Rockwell makes. The complexity of bridging from another network to EtherNet/IP or ControlNet has completely disappeared. We have eliminated hardware and a data conversion from one protocol to EtherNet/IP. For other protocols we have bridges.”

 

 

We went on to discuss Rockwell Automation’s position on wireless. They are adopting WirelessHART through partners that bring Modbus signals into the controllers. And they are close to bridging WirelessHART to EtherNet/IP within the architecture. I asked about ISA100 support and Chakraborti noted they are agnostic about wireless and will support what customers need. He further explained Rockwell’s position, “The question is more for device vendors rather than automation vendors." "We are always going to have a drive to converge these field level protocols to EtherNet/IP, even through a bridge." 

 

 

My perspective, after attending demonstrations of PlantPAx at Automation Fair (including configuration, historian, high level optimization, and controller programming), is the software still requires working with a number of software components that need to be linked together. I compare this to an integrated DCS environment.

 

Chakraborti responded, "I am going to tell you that it is not at par with what the classical DCS unified software platform looks like, we are somewhere in the middle." "What we feel good about is the progress that we have shown towards a common software framework - we call it System View - that unifies the logic, security, visualization, alarm management, all these functions into one. Where we have made clear progress is in the amount of pre-engineered libraries that come standard with the PlantPAx system." Regarding my perspective, Chakraborti summed up by stating that at a high level he would "not completely refute that." He noted this is one of the top items they are working on as part of their system evolution with subsequent releases. 

 

 

It is clear from this interview and presentations from other company management, including Steve Eisenbrown, Senior Vice President, Architecture & Software and Keith Nosbusch, Chairman/CEO, that Rockwell Automation’s process control strategy starts with a belief that a single unifying architecture based on their Logix architecture and EtherNet/IP meets the needs of all process control and discrete applications in process manufacturing operations. Other sensor and control network protocols can be brought in through bridges and in some cases they will introduce Logix controller modules for direct interface.

 

Potential users of PlantPAx will gain the greatest benefit by making a commitment to Rockwell’s Logix software architecture, Logix controllers, and EtherNet/IP. The Logix architecture was introduced 10 years ago to offer a common networking and development software across the Rockwell Automation products but not all products share the same programming software.   Rockwell Controller Information. 

 

I expect that Rockwell Automation will be broadening their “Preferred Partner” relationships like the one with Endress+Hauser to “embed Rockwell Automation technology in their devices” to make these products easier to use with PlantPAx. Other process device will require configuration through bridges. Rockwell Automation & Endress+Hauser Relationship.

 

Chakraborti was specific about the distinction between PlantPAx and Rockwell’s OEM controls, "I want to be clear that our DCS is not the OEM system but we have introduced this past year specific systems leveraging our small controller product lines for process skids." It is worth noting that Rockwell’s small controller lines use different software for programming and configuration than the Logix family. In a recent round table of automation pharmaceutical industry experts, a major complaint is the incompatibility of controls delivered on skid systems with plant DCS. This was expressed as a general problem without naming any vendors.  More on this in our PAR article series.

 

The fact that PlantPAx is leveraging the Logix architecture for process control is interesting from a systems point of view.   The big question is can Rockwell Automation continue to be responsive to discrete customers and invest to build a new position in process control at the same time? Process applications require different skill sets and knowhow which Rockwell Automation has been adding through acquisition and hiring activities. This is a bold move and if successful could change the paradigm for process control automation.

 

The landscape is changing - Rockwell classifies ControlLogix products as Programmable Automation Controllers (PAC) and DCS vendors have added Programmable Automation Controllers (PAC) to their product lines.

 

Systems that integrate information from sensors to the business enterprise have been introduced and are evolving at Rockwell Automation and major DCS vendors.   Uses are the winners with more choices.

 

There is a network crusade brewing with Rockwell Automation (and other vendors) promoting EtherNet/IP based on the Common Industrial Protocol (CIP) as a single unifying network from sensor to enterprise; and Siemens (and other vendors) promoting PROFINET for Process Control. It should be interesting to watch.

 

The most important question in selecting new plant architecture is will it give your company a competitive advantage? This requires a complex analysis, with a number of considerations, based on production processes, in-house capabilities, in-house information systems, business systems, business analysis and predicting what the future will bring (the most difficult).  I believe that important considerations in this analysis are open architectures, adhering to standards (examples: WEB services, OPC, OPC UA, IEC standards, S88, S95), advanced process control capabilities, and life cycle costs. In addition, the time and cost of integration is significant over the life of a system and should be examined as part of the analysis. I suggest tasking your own control engineer(s) with configuring a few control loops, sensors, screens, and communications – specific to your applications - for each system under consideration. This can be accomplished with a demonstration system provided by vendors, including controller hardware. This investment upfront can save a large amount of money and lost production time over the life of a system.

 

One thing is clear, process users are getting more options to consider. Unfortunately, as is the case with more options, reaching the decision can be more difficult.