I see your point here as well, talmoortariq, but as another reader pointed out, maybe it's better at the moment to have both human- and automation-controlled systems in terms of safety until software and other technology like this is perfected.
AandY, I tend to agree with you here. While of course I think any efforts to add safety to automation processes should be supported, I think that partial automation is probably the best way to go, at least for now. Perhaps in the future systems can be a bit more foolproof--and humans themselves aren't perfect either. But at the moment I think having a human keep an eye on things is the better option.
You are right Elizabeth, a company will never use an automation solution that is not reliable and safe. overlooking the saftey of systems can cause company a great deal of fortune. Rockwell has certainly taken a great step, it seems like many companies will integerate this software in their systems since it aims to make the saftey of the automated systems more systematic and coordinated.
I have always supported automation in all areas of production except for safety and it will be interesting to see how Rockwell fares with the new systems. In my professional opinion, and given the importance of staying safe at the workplace, I believe that this is an area best served by partial automation systems overseen at every level by humans.
Rockwell has a number of very good accelerator toolkits, but the safety one has been the hardest to use successfully. Rockwell also offers the use of a 3rd party software (Sistema) that is supposed to make calculating the SIL of a system simple but it's got a pretty steep learning curve.
No matter how many bells or whistles an automation system has, it's not worth much if it's not safe. I think Rockwell is on the right track here in its focus on safety and it will go a long way to making more innovation possible.
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.