The bus system already has many applications; why are people still so conservative?

Perhaps because the bus system requires a higher level of technology and more investment, many companies may lack the capabilities and resources in this area. Furthermore, the bus system is involved in communication and data transmission between devices; if not designed carefully, it may experience failures that lead to production interruptions and losses. Therefore, some companies may prefer to be more cautious in order to avoid excessive risks and costs. As for smart factories, an information-based network is indeed a trend, but evaluations and decisions must be made based on specific circumstances, as it may not be suitable for all scenarios. .

A factory is not a laboratory; what matters are safety, reliability, practicality, and cost-effectiveness, rather than pursuing novelty.

Where does the conservative view even come from? Adhering to standards, putting people first, giving top priority to safety – this is not contradictory to cautious approach; isn’t that conservatism? Furthermore, petrochemical enterprises operate on a continuous basis over long periods of time, and it is required that they be safe, efficient, and environmentally friendly. They must use mature and reliable technologies and equipment, as well as proven process conditions – so what does it mean to be conservative in this context?

Please investigate before speaking, rather than reading from a script

The pyrolysis plants at Sike, Gulei, and others have already been equipped with bus systems

This post was last edited by qugd on 2023-4-25 at 15:32. I started working in the field right after graduating in 1986, dealing with the analysis of process instrumentation and equipment. Your statement confirms the famous saying by Jiang Zhuming: the drawings are utterly messy. You should understand the particularities of field communication and control in industry, especially in process industries, and avoid making comparisons with civilian digital communication systems. Bus and wireless communication have advantages as well as certain limitations in the process industry, and it is necessary to understand them in a comprehensive and objective manner. Are the technical managers of those companies, the technical departments of the major petrochemical and chemical groups, and the engineering and technical staff in design firms all conservative? In most petrochemical companies abroad, it is not the case that they all use bus systems and wireless communication in the field. Back then, Sinopec was a pilot project carried out by BP in collaboration with control system suppliers in China; one should go to the sites to understand the actual conditions firsthand – it’s you who should follow the established procedures rather than acting blindly.

It’s not enough to just look at a few case studies of applications; it would be useful to share relevant statistical data, such as the number of enterprises/production lines that use this bus system, the extent of its application, the failure rate, the amount of cost savings achieved, and what the disadvantages are. Only in this way can there be an investigation and data.

Bus technology has lower reliability and security, and cannot replace traditional system communication technologies.