Horizontal comparison of domestic DCS manufacturers!
Thread Content
This post was last edited by liuronghai on 2016-5-11 at 16:36. 1. Hardware: Central control unit JX300XP: CPU with a very low clock speed, capable of half-precision floating-point calculations. The IO is of the card cage type. Hollyland FM801:486, with 16 megabytes of memory. IO is a modular, rail-mounted unit. Any device with a DP communication protocol can be treated as its own module. GE Xinhua’s DPU is the strongest: the P 2-400 model, with IO also being in the form of cards. Hangzhou Youwen UW500: 300 MHz clock speed, 64 MB of storage. IO is a module, with a structure consistent to that of Hollyland. The anti-interference capability of the IO module is superior to that of the other three. However, the stability of the main controller still needs to be verified. 2. Software: For central control, due to the weak CPU, it is necessary to use a host computer to handle range conversion of data; however, the software features a user-friendly interface and high level of integration (the emergence of Siemens’ TIA Portal proves that they are imitating you!) ! ), so its configuration is significantly superior to Allen-Bradley’s Macs V. Jumping directly from Windows 2000 to Windows 7 is really embarrassing! Modifying subroutines (such as adding inputs and outputs) is not as convenient as with Rockwell Automation. HollySys: Please prepare a sweat towel before installing it offline. There is a certain chance that the programs inside the controller will be cleared. Of course, it’s not absolute; in most cases, there’s no problem. GE Xinhua: Too heavily influenced by WestHouse; only FBD remains – perhaps it’s all for the sake of stability. However, Xinhua’s DPU execution environment is a genuine interpretation environment, so its DPU must be fast. Therefore, P2-400 was used, which allows for easy online compilation and downloading. I heard that Xinhua is the only one who dares to write that safety features can be installed offline in their bid documents. However, the Netwin monitoring function built into its XDPS software is extremely poor. This is what’s meant by being useful but not attractive. Hangzhou Youwen UW500: A newly developed software, consistent with Zhejiang University’s Zhongkong environment. The version has changed from 1.0 to 3.0. The earlier version was an OEM of KingView. There are many software bugs, and lower-level local variables do not support offline installation. There are still some issues with the upper-level alarm function. However, the software simulation feature is powerful, enabling simulation of both the lower-level and upper-level systems. 3. Background: HaliTech: The lower-level programming software is an OEM version of CoDeSYS, developed by the German company Smart Software Solution; the underlying support environment is QNX from Canada (a variant of Unix), and the programming language complies with IEC61131-3, reflecting a typical Western style. Center console: In my personal opinion, the center console has a distinct Japanese style; we know that only Japanese products can truly understand our Asian culture. Because the IO of the GCS-200 in the central control system is an OEM product from Fuji, just like the IO of the CS3000 from Yokogawa; both use Fuji’s ProcessIO. The upper-level software includes its own AdvanTrolPro, while the ECS-100 features iFix’s OEM version. GE Xinhua: It must be Westinghouse, the style of the Western world. Hangzhou Youwen UW500: Unclear, but I don’t believe it has no background. 4. Performance: Central control: strongest in the chemical industry. HollySys: Strong in power and chemical industries, and the strongest in rail transit. GE Xinhua: Power Xinhua should be the strongest; the highlight of Xinhua lies in its DEH system. Hangzhou Youwen: It is said that its overall performance ranks it third in the country. Summary: I really like Chronos CFC; it’s extremely user-friendly. It’s particularly convenient for adding inputs and outputs to custom function blocks, and it also facilitates communication with third-party systems. The only downside is that it’s tricky to upload the updated configuration. As for the center control, it’s average – no major flaws can be found. GE Xinhua is too stable; yes, it’s just stable. As for Youwen, its stability is not as good as that of the other three, but the software is very easy to use and straightforward to get started with. The above are my insights from years of using it; I welcome everyone to discuss them together.
I’m not sure about the last two. The control systems you mentioned, namely Central Control and Hilscher, are quite old; I guess they have been discontinued by now
May I ask the moderator, how much do you know about Honeywell?
The ECS700 hardware of the central control system is moving closer to HILTI’s offerings. But many new projects still use the JX300, probably due to customer requests, as it is very stable. The latest version from Hilscher is MACS 6.5.2, which is available in three versions: one for migrating existing projects, one for new projects, and a dedicated version for thermal power projects. Full integration is the trend of the times. The lower-level K-series control core has been redefined as HEROS (self-developed), and the software has been changed from 3S to AutoThink (also self-developed), enabling safer installation without disruptions. The upper layer eliminates the concept of servers; there are master and slave historical stations, and the operator stations communicate directly with the control layer in a point-to-point manner. It is sufficient to add measurement points and directly connect them to the control stations and operator stations (in the past, it was difficult even to modify a range). In any case, it is indeed much more convenient than before. The above is only something I learned about before; I haven’t used it, and its stability still needs to be tested by users.
I’ve never used any domestic DCS systems; Xinhua and GE have separated, right?
First, GE Xinhua is not a domestic product; Shanghai Xinhua (Chint Xinhua, Xinhua Technology) is. Secondly, the products used for horizontal comparison are not their main products; the central control system uses the ECS700, which has a design based on Phoenix OEM components, and neither its hardware nor software can be considered to be similar to that of Hollyland ； Allen-Bradley now has only one product, the DCS-K; its original software and network architecture have been completely discarded and rebuilt from scratch. Even before the introduction of DCS-K, the SM series was the mainstream option; those familiar with this system know how the software used in ABB’s systems originated. Thirdly, the system developed by Youwen Zhejiang University does not rank third nationwide in terms of market scale or manufacturing capabilities. Where does Nanjing Keyuan, which is already listed, and Guodian Zhishen, which develops DCS systems for 600,000 and 1,000,000 unit power plants, rank? Hearing this ranking, Academician Sun will probably be very happy: lol
Firstly, the reason it isn’t referred to as Shanghai Xinhua is mainly because it no longer exists. As for Chint Xinhua and how Xinhua Technology came into being, those are matters that concern them internally. Secondly, the ECS700 from Zhongkong focuses on modular design (bus-based), whereas the JX-300XP emphasizes card-based design (backplane chassis type; although SM also uses a chassis format, each card comes with its own separate rail-mounted terminal blocks). The reason it is said to be similar to LSIT is merely because it seems to have been developed slightly earlier than LSIT, based on my impression. Hollyland’s SM is mainly used in large power plants and large chemical industries, while FM is aimed at small and medium-sized enterprises. So it’s impossible to determine which one is the mainstream; it’s just that they are used in different contexts. Thirdly, in fact, stability and reliability cannot really be said to be outstanding in large-scale projects; it’s just that in recent years, as factory automation has been improved, more and more enterprises have started using systems that offer such stability and reliability, and indeed this field has seen rapid development in recent years. Large enterprises are big but in limited numbers, while small and medium-sized enterprises have a smaller market share but are numerous and cannot be underestimated. For example, the currently popular environmental protection projects related to desulfurization and denitrification. Please point out any mistakes if there are any. By the way, does Nanjing Keyuan support intermediaries?
I agree with you; Xinhua has undergone a complete transformation and is back in the game once again
In the chemical industry, both Zhongkong and LISI are very useful.
Good, I’ve learned a lot from the seniors’ discussions