MARK6COMMTOOVATION

Interfacing with a GE Mark VI

What are the best practices in interfacing with a GE Mark VI?
By john on 13 May, 2012 - 8:02 am
Wearediscussingdesignspecificationsforacombinedcycleplant,andwanttocontroltheoperator
environment,includingbutnotlimitedtoa"highperformance"HMI.
AssumingthatGEstilldeliverstheirHMIlikeHenryForddeliveredthemodelT("youcanhaveany
coloraslongasit'sblack"),thegoalistoputanHMIthatwecancontrolontopofeverythinginthe
facility,includingtheMarkVIshouldGEbepartofplant(decisionnotyetmade.)
IwouldliketoavoidtheclassicinterfacetotheGEHMI.Interfacingdirectlytothecontrolsystem,
liketheGEHMIdoes,ispreferred.Redundancyisalsopreferred.Anysuggestionsoninterfacing?
AlsoIheardlastweekthatGEchargesfor"everyalarm"thatissubscribedfor.Iwouldthinkthatthe
propertermwouldbe"everytag"andnotsimplyjustforalarms.Isthereanytruthtothis?
Finally,anyotherpitfallstoavoid?
Thanks,John

By CSA
on 14 May, 2012 - 11:08 am
Everyonewantsthesamething.NoonewantstousetheOEM'sHMI,preferringinsteadtouseoneof
theirownpreference.Sincethereisno"standard"forcommandsandalarms/eventsitwouldbe
extremelydifficultforGEtodocumenttheirprotocolforcommandsandalarm/eventssuchthatany
HMIsoftwarecouldbeadaptedtoworkwiththeirprotocol.
ImagineyouaresupplyingamultimillionUSDpieceofequipmentandsomeoneconfiguresa
commandimproperlyandtheequipmentisdamagedordestroyedbecauseoneparticularscenario
wasn'tanticipatedortestedwhencommissioningtheplant(Iknow;thesethingsNEVERhappen,but
let'sjustsayitdidforthepurposesofthisanalysis).Who'satfault?IftheCustomerinsistedonthis
HMIanddidn'tinsistonfullandcompletetesting(whichcostsmorethanusingtheOEM'sHMI)and
didn'tparticipateinthetestingandcommissioningbywritingaproperspecificationtoensurefulland
completetestingofeverypossiblescenario(whichwouldalsocostbothpartiesmuchmorefor
planningandtesting),who'satfault?Therearehugemonetaryconsequencesforallofthesedecisions,
andtheyneedtoallbeconsideredwhenmakingthem.
Further,let'ssaythereareproblemswithoperatingtheunitorwiththeinformationappearingonthe
displayoftheCustomerdemandedHMI.TheOEMfieldservicepersontravelstositetoassistwith
theissueandisunfamiliarwithHMIandHMIsoftwareandisunabletoquicklyresolveand
troubleshoottheproblem.Who'satfault?Whohastheresponsibilityforsolvingthisproblemina
timelymanner?
IpresumeyouarereferringtoaMarkVIe,andnotaMarkVI,asthereareveryfewnewMarkVIs
beingshippedthesedays(mostlyonlyolderunitswhichwereinstorageforacoupleofyearsorsoor
werespecialorderunitsbuiltforspecialpricesorbecauseofsomecontractualobligation).
IfyouaretalkingaboutaMarkVIe,I'mtoldthereisaMODBUS(serialorEthernetispossible)
interfacewheretheCustomerisallowedtosendcommandsandobtaindata(fordisplayandarchival)

viaaMODBUSconnectiondirectlytotheMarkVIebypassingtheHMI.Thisisabouttheonly
option,butitdoesn'thelpwithalarms/events.
Matrikon,whomI'msurewillchimeinonthisthread,hasapartialMarkVIOPCinterface(I'mtold
theyhaveyettosolvethealarm/eventriddle).
Inanycase,youaregoingtoneedan'engineeringworkstation'withToolboxSTfortroubleshooting
andmaintenanceactivitiesoftheMarkVIe.
YoucoulduseaMarkVIeforyourDCSandthenyouwouldhaveacommoncontrolplatformforthe
entireplant,simplifyingalotofissues.Spares;training;troubleshooting;interface.
AndGEdoesofferanOPCinterfacethroughtheirHMIandwiththespeedsofPChardwarethese
daysyouwouldusethistocommunicatetoyourHMIofchoice,withtheGEHMIsasabackup.(I've
beentoseveralplantsrecentlywiththisarrangement,andtheoperatorsarewarmingtotheGEHMIs,
insomecaseschoosingtousetheGEHMIsratherthantheotherHMIstheyhadbeenusingforyears.
Operatorscanbedifficulttopredictattimes.)
Thinklongandhardaboutthesedecisionsandtheirimplications.Youcanhavewhateveryouwant,if
you'rewillingtopayforitandtoaccepttheresponsibilityofyourdecision.I'vebeentotoomany
sitestocountoverthecourseofnearlythreedecadeswherepeoplehavetriedtodeviatefromthe
OEM'sHMIofferingandhavehadmany,many,manyissueswhichwouldnothaveoccurred
otherwise.Youcanhavewhateveryouwantifyou'rewillingtopayforit,bothintheupfrontcostsof
planningandtesting,andinthedownstreamcostsoftroubleshootingandmaintenance.
FromwhatI'veseenlately,theofferingsfromothermajorOEMsareprettymuchthesamewhenit
comestotheinterfacestotheirturbinecontrolsystems.Andthesamelogicaboveislikelydriving
theirchoices,aswell.
IwasrecentlyataplantwithoneofthemostrecentversionsofGE'sHMIoffering,WorkstationST.I
canreportthatGEisactuallyworkingatresolvingmanyofthemorecommonproblemswiththeir
earlierHMIimplementations.Addingnewsignalnames/datatodisplaysismuch,MUCHeasierthan
everbefore.TheWorkstationSTAlarmviewer,thoughnotwellintegratedintoCIMPLICITY,has
muchmorefunctionalitythanGEhaseverofferedbefore.OnamultimonitorHMI,theAlarmViewer
canbeusedveryeasily,offeringlotsoffilteringoptions.
ThenewimplementationIwitnessedstillusesCIMPLICITY,buttheinterfacebetweenCIMPLICITY
andtheMarkVIeisGREATLYimproved.AndanyonecanmodifyCIMPLICITYdisplaysorcreate
theirowndisplaysandgraphicsasdesired.
And,I'mtoldGEisnowshippinganewerversionofCIMPLICITY(Ver.8.n,Ibelieve)alongwith
MSWindows7onnewHMIs.
So,thisisnotyourfather'sModelT.

By john on 14 May, 2012 - 10:23 pm

CSAthanksforthereply.Itrustyouareopenforacandidresponse.
Firstoff,wearemanymonthsawayfrompullingthetrigger,soyourrecommendationto"thinklong
andhard"ispreciselywhythisquestionwaspostedhereinthefirstplace.Control.comisappreciated.
Also,assomeonewhohashisfingersinalargefleet(justreplacedaMark1,andhavedozensof
VIe's,andstuffinbetween);basedonyourreply,Ithinkthatyouundervaluethebenefitofcorporate
standards.
Yes,simplygoingwiththeOEMHMIislikepressingtheOfficeMax"easybutton".Norisk,noextra
cost.

Butforthosethatdealwithalargefleet,includingplantsthathavenoGEequipmentweseegreat
benefittoasinglesolution.
"Everyonewantsthesamething."Hello!Icouldnothavesaiditbetterthanmyself.
IftheOEMs,GEincluded,wouldask"why"fivetimesinarow,theymightinfactgettothepoint
wherethoseofusreside.Wearetheoneswho5,10,15yearsdowntheroadneedtokeepthisstuff
working,andworkingwell.
Movingtostandards,itistechnicallycorrecttosaythatthereisno"single"standard.Butthereoptions
arenotinfiniteeither.Again,talkingfromanenduserperspective,wetiesystemstogetherallofthe
time,usingavarietyofthevariousstandards.However,theGEsystemsare,basedonmyexperience
andobservation,handsdownthemostdifficult.Why?
Whethermyactions,inpartorwhole,playaroleinthedestructiona$500Mboilerora$500M
turbinegeneratorisirrelevant.
Iunderstandtherisksinvolved,includingwarrantyimplications.ThatiswhyI'mlimitingtheinquiry
totheHMIlevel.I'mnotproposinganopenDCSinsteadofaMarkVIe,forexample.OK,insidemy
headIam,butIrealizetheuphillbattlethatwouldbe.
MythoughtsaroundHMIqualitycontrolwouldbethatwecommissionthesystemontheDCSHMI,
withanOEMHMIintheshadows,andwithbothDCSandturbineOEMfieldserviceengineers.
Certainlyeveryonewillbegettingpaidandactasprofessionals,correct?Howoftenisthecustomer
rightalways?
Willthiscostmoreupfront?Absolutely.Iwouldthinkthat"everyonewantsit"and"manyaredoing
it"asampleproofthattheneedisreal.Howoftenissomeonewillingtopaymoreupfrontandtake
moreshorttermriskforlongtermbenefits?
Asa"gearhead"engineer,Ioftenlamentabout"themanagement"thatcan'tthinkpasttheendoftheir
quarter.IcategoricallydumpthedecisiontosimplygowiththeOEMinacasesuchasthisintothat
bucket.Mynaturecompelsmetoinquire.
ItisgoodtohearthattheMarkVIemaybeopeningupabittomodernways,suchasModbus.Oops,
Modbuscameoutin1971.Strikethatmoderncomment.
GEopeninguptheirHMItouseOPCnowthatismodern.OPCfirstpublishedin~1996IIRC.
Onasidenote,regardingMatrikon,Itoothinkthatitisgettingabitoldthateverypostthathasthe
keywords"Modbus","Ethernet","OPC",etc.seemstotriggerasalespitch.
UsingtheMarkVIefortheDCSwouldprobablycutitifIwerelimitedtoonesite.Butthatdoesnot
fitafleetbaseduserlikeme.WhenGEdemonstratesalifecyclepolicylongerthan15yearsand
migrationpaththatisnotbasedonaripandreplace(R&R)mentalitywecantalk.IfGEisinterested
ingettingintothiscrazyDCSbusiness,theyareover20yearstoolate.Manyofusdohavethe
commoncontrolplatformyoumention,withallofthebenefits,insystemsprovidedbycompanies
otherthanGE.HenceourdesiretousetheHMIfromourcommonplatformontopofaMarkVIe
system.
Soinclosing,Iagreethatifwechosetothinkoutsideofthebox,weneedtocountthecost.Butyou
wouldthinkthatbecausesomanywanttoandactuallydoso,GEmightthinkabouthowtomakeit
easiertodoit.Wouldn'tthatberefreshing?Wouldithurtifweactuallylookedforwardtodealing
withGE?
BeforeIforget,indeedwehavemovedfromtheModelT,throughthe1971(Modbus)MotorTrend
caroftheyear.....ChevroletVega(ugh)anduptoa1996(OPC)caroftheyearDodgeCaravan.John

By CSA

on 15 May, 2012 - 12:35 am

John,
I'vebeenonthecommissioningsideofthisandIcantellyou:It'snotfunforanyone.There'ssomuch
fingerpointingandgenerallythefieldpeople(theonesitalwaysfallsontomakethis"idea"work)
don'thavetheknowledgeoftheinternalsandgutlevelworkingsofthesystemstomakeitgo
smoothly.
IbelieveGEstillofferstheirGSMoption(GEDriveSystemsStandardMessagingprotocol)which
runsoverEthernet,butitdoesrequireanHMIinbetweentheSpeedtronicandtheCustomer'sHMI.
HopefullyMr.JohnEmeryofGEwhoseemstomonitorthissitewillseeyourpostandaddittothe
VoiceoftheCustomerinputtoGE.
Again,I'mnotpromotingGE.I'mjustprovidingafieldengineer'sperspectivefromhavingsuffered
throughtoomanyofthese"ideas"whichonthesurfaceshouldbeeasy.
AreyousayingthatotherOEMsarebetterthanthisthanGE?Canyouprovidemoredetails?Again,I
thinkMr.JohnEmerywouldappreciatedetails.Thisisthekindofthinghecanpointtotogetnew
productandtechnologyfundingtobeabletocompetebetter.
IcantellyoufrommyMarkVexperiencewithGE,whereIwentfrombeinganovicePCuserto
gettingalltofamiliarwithBIOSsettingsandinterruptsandbatchfiles,tryingtoqualifyeveryPCwas
anightmare."Plugandplay"wasajoke.EveryCustomerwantedtoaPCthatwassupportedbytheir
ITdepartment,butIDOSandTCIdidn'trunoneveryPC.
GEhasareputationasaconservativecompanywithreliableequipment.OpeninguptheUDH(Unit
DataHighwaywhichishowHMIscommunicatewiththeMarkVIe)toanycontrolsystemisvery
scarytothem,andrightfullyso.TheHMIinbetweentheCustomer'sDCSHMIandtheSpeedtronicis
afirewallforthem.
I'mnotmakingexcusesforthem(theycandothatwellenough!),but,againjustspeakingfromafield
engineer'sperspectivehavinghadtoworkwithDCSvendorstomakethisseeminglyeasyideawork.
Idon'tdisagreethatGEHMIsareneedlesslycomplicatedandpoorlydocumented(anyonewhoreads
mypostswillknowthat).Andmaintainingthemiscertainlynoeasytask.
Havingdonemany"ripandreplace"retrofits,Icansaywithsomeauthoritythatthewholesystem
needsrethinking.Designinganewcontrolsystemwithoutregardforhowitcanbeeasilyretrofitted
needstochange.Butthat'snotjustlimitedtoGE;mostoftheOEMshaveasimilarproblemwhenit
comestoretrofittingtheircontrolsystems.
Iempathizewithyourandothers'needsandsituations.But,therealityistheimplementationisnot
assimpleasitseems.I'vebeenonsiteswithothermajorOEMsandtheyseemtostrugglewiththe
sameissueswhenitcomestotryingtobecontrolledandmonitoredviaathirdpartyDCSHMI.
Again,hopefullyyourpleasand"suggestions"willnotfallondeafears.
And,it'sStaples'"EasyButton."

By Demigrog on 25 May, 2012 - 3:32 pm

IfyouwanttointegrateMarkVIeintoanonGEHMI,itreallyisn'tverydifficult.You'llneedGE's
WorkstationSTrunningononeormore(dependingonscale)PCs.Peoplefrequentlyequate
WorkstationSTwiththeHMI,butthatisn'tthecase;theWorkstationsoftwareistotallyindependent
anddoesnotdependonCIMPLICITY.InasystemwithoutCIMPLICITY,WorkstationSTwould
provideOPCDAfordataandOPCAEforalarms,plusatonofothercommonprotocols.
Ifyoudon'tuseCIMPLICITY,you'llgiveupsomeoftheintegrationimprovementsGEhasmade,like
beingabletodraglogicblockslikeMOVsfromToolboxSTtoanHMIscreenandhavethecorrect
graphicautomaticallyinsertedandconnectedtotherightvariables.

I'vealsoneverheardofGElicensingbynumberofalarms,orpointsingeneral.Theyareactually
somewhatuniqueinthatregardmostDCSsystemssellbypointcount.

By CSA
Demigrog,

on 26 May, 2012 - 8:41 am

Everythingyousaidistrue.Buttheoriginatorofthepostdoesn'twanttocommunicatewithMarkVIe
controlpanelsthroughanyHMIorintermediatePC.He,andmanyothers,wantto
communicateDIRECTLYwiththeSpeedtronic(MarkV,MarkVI,orMarkVIe).
That'swhateveryoneissearchingfor:AwaytocommunicatedirectlywithSpeedtroniccontrolpanels
fordisplayandcommandsandalarmsandevents.Theydon'twanttohavemultipleHMIsrunning
multipledifferentHMIapplicationsintheirplant.TheywantacommonHMIapplicationrunningon
multiplePCscommunicatingdirectlywitheverycontrolpanel/systemintheplanttheturbinecontrol
panel,theDCS,thewatertreatmentPLC,theburnermanagementsystem,thegascompressorPLC,
etc.
However,theunseencostofcreatingallofthedisplaysandtestingalloftheinterfaces/protocolsis
neverfullyfactoredintothisdesire.And,worse,theeffortthat'srequiredduringcommissioningto
makeallofthisworkisneverfullyfactoredintothisdesire.
Onthepapercontract,itshouldbeeasy.Thesalespeopleallagree.But,untilthere'sawaytohavea
commonprotocolthateveryoneacceptsandunderstands(andOPCisNOTthatprotocol;MODBUS
wasn't/isn't,either)thenthisisgoingtobeaverycostlyandfrustratingexperienceforeveryonebut
thosewhowantittohappen,wroteitinthecontract,agreedtoit,andthinktheypaidforthisto
happen.
IliketothinkofGEHMIsasseparatefromtheSpeedtroniccontrolpanels.I'mreferringtothe
CIMPLICITYimplementationonthePCsusedforprogramming,troubleshooting,maintenance,and
operation(theoperationdoneviaCIMPLICITYdisplays).NoonecangetawayfromhavingaPC
runningthenecessarysoftwareforprogramming,maintainingandtroubleshootingaSpeedtronic
controlpanel(beitToolbox,orToolboxST,ortheMarkVconfiguration/programmingtools).An
"engineeringworkstation"iswhatthatcanbecalled.(That'snotexactlytruebecauseCSE
Engineering'sITCcantotallyreplaceaGEengineeringworkstationandoperatorinterfaceforMark
Vs.)
Butforoperatingtheturbineandmonitoringoperationandsendingcommandsandviewingalarms
andeventseveryonewantstouseadifferentapplicationthanCIMPLICITY.Insteadofusing
CIMPLICITYfortheentireplant,theywanttouseanotherapplication.
ButnoonewantstogothroughaPC,runninganOPCserver,tooperate,monitororsendcommands
toaSpeedtronic.Theywanttodoitdirectlyto/withtheSpeedtronicusingsomeapplicationotherthan
CIMPLICITY.
(GEEnergyshoulddoabetterjobofsellingCIMPLICITYasatotalplantcontrolpackageinsteadof
"pushing"itastheturbinecontroloperatingcontrolpackage.)

By Peter Clout on 19 May, 2012 - 10:56 pm

John,
IhavejustseenyourpostwehaveaGEMkVIinterfacetoour
HMI/Historian.Ifyouareinterested,pleasecontactme
.....Peter


PeterClout
VistaControlSystems,Inc.
2101TrinityDrive,SuiteQ
LosAlamos,NM875444103
(505)6622484
FAX(505)6623956
Cell(505)4507810
clout@vistacontrol.com
http://www.vistacontrol.com

By CSA
PeterClout,

on 21 May, 2012 - 2:26 pm

ItwouldseemyouhavesomeexperiencewithGEEGD(EthernetGlobalDatabase)communications
basedonyourmillexperience.
IthinkthequestionweareallinterestedinknowingtheanswertowithyourGEMarkVI
HMI/Historian:Canitdisplayalarmsandeventswiththecontrollertimetag?
WehavesomeOPCvendorswhocan'tseemtodothat(alarm/eventwithtimetag)verywell.That
seemstobethepartoftheHMIthatcausesthemostdifficulty.
I'vehadalookofthewebsite,andI'mcurious,butIneedtoknowaboutthealarm/eventwithtimetag
function.Ididn'treallyseeanypartofthesitethatdealtmorespecificallywiththeMarkVIinterface.
Thanks!

By CSA
PeterClout,

on 23 May, 2012 - 12:03 pm

Ididfindonereferencetoa"scanner"applicationthatseemstoworkviaGEGSMwhichmustbe
runningonaGEMarkVIHMI.ThatseemstoimplythatVistadoesn'tcommunicatedirectlywith
MarkVIcontrolpanelsovertheUDHusingEGD.
Canyouconfirmhowyoursystemcommunicates(viaanHMIrunningGSM,ordirectlytotheMark
VIprocessorsviatheUDHandEGD),andifit'scapableofhandlingalarms/eventswithcontroller
timestamps?
Thanks!

By Bob Larsen on 7 December, 2013 - 10:30 am

WeareinstallingaMarkVIeandwilluseEPMDCStointerface,buildingourowngraphicsand
controlsheetsdrivenbycombinationofhardI/Oanddatalinkedpoints.GETraininghasbeenslowto
repsond.DoyouknowofathirdpartythatcantrainITsataleveltoperformmappingfromDCS
(Ovation)toGE(Cimplicity)?

By CSA
on 7 December, 2013 - 6:45 pm
IwasawarethattheMarkVIecouldbeequippedwiththeabilitytocommunicateviaMODBUS
withouttheneedtointerfacethroughaGEHMIfordatavaluesandcommands,butalarmsandevents
werenotyetpossibleviaMODBUS.Hasthatchanged?TheproblemwithMODBUSisthatthereare
notimestamps....
Or,willyoubeinterfacingwiththeMarkVIethroughaGEHMIrunningWorkstationSTinorderto
getalarms(Process&Diagnostic)anddataandsendcommands?IbelieveWorkstationSTconverts
data,commands,alarmsandeventstoOPCformatforotherdevicestoaccess/use.Timestamping,
thoughisnotusuallydoneattheactualtime,butratheratthetimethedataismadeavailablevia
the.MarkVIetoWorkstationST.
Perhapsifyoucouldbemorespecificabouttheinterfacewecanhelpyouidentifyaresourcetohelp.
Also,bestofluckwithyourefforts.Ihavetoseveralsiteswhichhavetriedthis,andallhavehadhigh
expectationsbuteventually"settled"formuchlessthantheythoughttheyweregoingtoget.Muchto
thelawyers'enrichment.

By MIKEVI
Bob,

on 7 December, 2013 - 7:59 pm

mostpowerplantsiteIhaveseenthatareusingGEgasturbinesandanOvationDCSareusingtheGE
"GSM"datatocommunicate.OvationcontrollerscantalkdirectlytoanyGEHMIconfiguredtorun
GSMdata.IhavenotpersonallysetupaMKVI"E",buthaveworkedwithseveralsitesusingstandard
MKVIcontrollers,GEHMI'srunningCimplicity5.5and6.1.ThenewertoolboxSTsitesuse
Cimplicity8.2?Ithink.
ButIthinkthattheHMIcanstillbesetuptotalkGSMandshouldbeabletotalkdirectlytothe
Ovationsystemwithoutany"mapping".
TheotheroptionwouldbetotalktotheHMIordirectlytooneoftheMKVIEcontrollersusing
modbusTCP.Ihaveseenbothoftheseusedwiththe"E"system.
Thereareseveralcompaniesouttherethatcouldassistyouifneeded.Icanprovidesomesuggestions
ifyoulike.

By Svitlana Palona
John,

on 8 October, 2014 - 1:14 pm

IfyouarestilllookingforaproductthatinterfaceswithGEMarkVI,pleasecontactCSEEngineering
(CSE)atsupport@cseenginc.comorcallusat9256866733.
Our<IBECS>/<ITC>solutiondirectlyinterfaceswithMkIV,V,VIandnumerouscontrollers,
includingAllenBradley,Foxboro,DeltaV,Ovation,Modiconandothers.Oursystemoffersdata
serverredundancy,accesstocontrolconstantsoutsideofMkVIprogrammingenvironment,canactas

anOPCserverandoffershistoricaldatalogging.Moreinformationcanbefoundatwww.cseeng
inc.com
Pleasecontactusandwewillbehappytoofferyouacontrolsolutionthatwillfityourneeds.