juergen.b.schmidt
My feedback
-
255 votes8 comments · PI Vision » Manual Data Entry / PI Manual Logger · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
We are aware of the interest in this integration, but at this time we do not have plans to integrate PI Manual Logger with PI Vision. I have updated the status of this item to reflect this.
juergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
395 votes
We are aware of the interest in this functionality but at this time it is not in our short-term plans to implement.
juergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
201 votes
This functionality to create asset-based calculations in PI Vision is currently in development for the PI Vision 2021 release.
juergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment -
2 votes
-
10 votesjuergen.b.schmidt
shared this idea
·
-
4 votesjuergen.b.schmidt
shared this idea
·
-
9 votesjuergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
6 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment juergen.b.schmidt
commented
I also just had a request from one of our users to have a Eventframe Compare X-Y Plot. Users would like to compare X-Y Plots of pressure over temperature within different batches with same or even different product. They would like to have to possibility to assign selected colors in Eventframe Comparisson as well.
juergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
48 votesjuergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesjuergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
16 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment juergen.b.schmidt
commented
In response to Stephen Kwan, "Is your PI Point configured with "Step" ..."
Yes it is.juergen.b.schmidt
shared this idea
·
-
27 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment juergen.b.schmidt
commented
In response to Stephen Kwan, "Is this a digital tag? If it is not a d..."
In our case right now, it is about the setpoint of a controller. So no digital tag but a tag with Step=1.
However we are also thinking about creating an analysis how often the direction of the controler output changed - here it is not about the number of changes but about how often did the output of a controler change from closing a valve to opening a valve and vice versa.
A foreach loop to access the data would be nice: ForEach(val[i], Array,Function)An error occurred while saving the comment juergen.b.schmidt
commented
In response to Stephen Kwan, "Ok, so you really need to count only if ..."
Our Controller Monitoring by now is based on a daily report (created once a day at midnight) in a third party application. We are thinking about changing this to a reporting of the last 24h either when a user requests data or calculated every hour (if possible) but would be happy already, if we could manage to implement the one time per day report in AF.
So we need to create a retrospective counting either for timerange begin of day(yesterday) to begin of day(today) or now to now-1d.An error occurred while saving the comment juergen.b.schmidt
commented
In response to Stephen Kwan, "I think there are simpler way to accompl..."
That is what I tried but array.length is only correct if there are only distinct values in the array. But if I got the recorded values of a day, chances are high to have the same value with different timestamps. For example due to compmax of 8 hours. If I only want to know how many changes in value have been that day, array.length will result in 3 (12 am, 8am, 4pm) although there have been 0.An error occurred while saving the comment juergen.b.schmidt
commented
I would need a possibility to count distinct values. My Usecase: I tried to implement some sort of Controller Performance Monitoring in AF.
Part of this monitoring is the calculation of Output and Setpoint Changes as well as a service factor of the controller.
For us it is relevant if plant operators use controllers in manual mode or if it is operating in automatic as it should be. Therefore we want to monitor how often the output was changed when operated in manual and how often the setpoint changed when in automatic mode.
As a first shot I created some event-triggered calculation counting the output and setpoint changes dependent on the controller mode. But as we had some performance issues with analysis service running on event-triggered calculations, this is not what I want to rollout for 20.000 controllers.
So I tried to do the same, using Arrays of the recorded values of one day and managed to filter the interesting values (FilterData(Setpointvalues,TagVal('Mode',TimeStamp($val))="AUTO").
But now I can't proceed any further as I will receive a dynamic length array with an unknown amount of same or different values ([T1:V1,T2:V1,T3:V1,T4:V2] - Timestamp and Value). There is no way for me to find out how many different (distinct) values there are.juergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
19 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment juergen.b.schmidt
commented
Hello Hans-Otto, thank you for this post. This is indeed a good idea we could benefit from.
For a classical PIMS usage we could also think about an AF data reference so that there is no need of copying data again and again.juergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
218 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment juergen.b.schmidt
commented
This feature is heavily needed.
When building up central servers like AF you are facing questions about how you can guarantee that some random changes from one user does not affect the work of another user. For AF itself this can be done by the usage of different AF Databases. But for Analysis we don't have this possibility right now.
A single user could kill the analysis service by the rollout of thousand calculations done eventtriggered (default) instead of periodically. This is quite some risk, different user are not willing to take. Therefore we need to maintain a seperate AF and SQL Server for these users increasing our cost and maintenance efforts unnecessarily.An error occurred while saving the comment juergen.b.schmidt
commented
I completely agree with Wilson. Bringing a first of our 40 plants on our AF Server we already fought a lot of performance issues with PI Analysis. I have no good feeling about setting 39 more customers up on the same AF Server. Also for such a Setup - with just one analytics Service, performance issues of one customer will have Impact on calculations of other plants and managebility gets worse with every new plant. How are you supposed to know which calculations may cause errors when 80 different people create calculations in different AF databases.
juergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
336 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment juergen.b.schmidt
commented
We have the same request from one of our customers. They are monitoring their filling line and want to Dashboard which line is currently busy with which order and how much already has been filled.
With additional attributes in the Event Table, they could easily show that with just one query.juergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesjuergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
18 votesjuergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
17 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment juergen.b.schmidt
commented
that is a good Idea and just what I am looking for at the moment. Currently we create some batch reports in event frames, stating the runtime, the product quantity and the educt quantity. Now I would like to sum up the educts and product amount over every batch finished on a day for reporting those values back to SAP. Unfortunately I need to create some new analysis doing those calculations for me at the moment
juergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
4 votes
The recently introduced PI Server integrated setup kit resolves this issue with various options and warnings.
juergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesjuergen.b.schmidt
supported this idea
·
yes, this is what we actually hoped for when we read the 2020 release nodes. Besides we would have liked a more intuitive way of creating calculations. I really don't say that very often - but in this case you could have a look at the calculation integration of AspenTechs ProcessExplorer. There you can just configure a calculation in the Tagname field instead of the creation of a dedicated calculation object.