【Daily Question 20090228】What are all the full-size intrinsically safe IO station products that you know?
Thread Content
A simple statistic: Which intrinsically safe IO stations are everyone using? It is well known that those manufacturers have introduced fully intrinsically safe IO station products. It can be placed in Area 1 on-site without the need for any safety barriers; in principle, the cabinet doors can be opened for maintenance while it is still powered on.
In a fully intrinsically safe system, isolation barriers are not required. The concept of intrinsical safety is slightly different from that of explosion protection; I believe the main difference is that, unless all of your isolation barriers are of the MTL type, using an intrinsically safe approach means additional costs. From power supplies and modules to cables, as well as sensors, actuators, solenoids, and coils used on-site, everything must also be intrinsically safe.
We haven’t used them; we’re using safety barriers now.
Now most manufacturers have companies like HILI and Zhongkong in China, but as mentioned on the second floor, other components also require intrinsically safe equipment, which makes the costs significantly higher.
Is the moderator *anpanpan from Xi’an? I’m also in Xi’an…… What I mean is: the instruments on site are intrinsically safe type. Use intrinsically safe cables to lead them to the wiring box on site. The junction box is not explosion-proof; all the components inside are intrinsically safe. The power supply, IO modules, communication modules, and relays are all intrinsically safe. In that case, first of all, no safety barrier is anymore required between the instrument and the IO. Next, this box contains all the components that are needed. In principle, maintenance can be carried out while powered on! Open the cabinet door. . . For flameproof types, it’s simply impossible to open the cabinet door, let alone carry out maintenance while the device is powered on. As for costs, it’s actually the opposite...... We calculate the cost of conventional AI + AI safety barriers. By calculating the cost of intrinsically safe AI as well, one can determine which one is more expensive and which one is cheaper. We can simply understand it as an intrinsically safe AI system equipped with a safety barrier. . . For instruments that are to support Hart, intrinsically safe AI is even more practical. The price difference between isolator gates that support Hart and those that do not support Hart is larger. Conventional AI + safety barriers must be placed in a secure environment such as a control room, whereas fully intrinsically safe IO stations can be located directly in Zone 1 on-site.
It seems that people still basically have no concept of this kind of thing. . . Those in the chemical industry should pay more attention to Siemens’ ET200iSP. ABB’s S900. Turck’s EXCOM MTL’s Moast
Is the cost for a fully intrinsically safe version higher? Emerson’s 3095M series allows communication via antenna on-site (without the need for cables); it’s not clear whether the new product is also fully intrinsically safe!
This should have nothing to do with intrinsically safe systems.