Why did the master say that if DCS works, everything else will work as well? Share your understanding
Thread Content
When I first graduated, my mentor said that if you can handle DCS, then you can handle everything else as well I didn’t understand it at the time; what was being used back then were Honeywell systems. Since it wasn’t done properly, another one was tried. It’s still not clear whether it works or not. Colleagues, share your understanding of this sentence. What does “through” mean?
The principle is the same; the differences lie only in the details.
What the master meant was to understand the principles, so that it becomes possible to draw analogies.
It’s true; in fact, the hardware and wiring are the same, with only slight differences in the software
With DCS in place, the operation of process instruments – many aspects are interconnected
I have an idea for the programming approach. For other DCS systems, it is sufficient to become familiar with the software operations and usage. Therefore, one must become proficient in a DCS system.
That’s the theory, but it’s quite complex. In my opinion, if one is proficient in DCS, first of all they need to have a thorough understanding of the entire production process as well as the basic theories and knowledge related to DCS control. However, it’s difficult to master the more advanced aspects of DCS (after all, DCS systems are quite specialized).
The principle is basically the same; it’s just that the operation habits and interface differ. The other is the controller for the main computer, with a different CPU allocation scheme.
What does principle refer to? How are various signals processed? The principle of the wiring circuit? Is it still the principle of process control?