from the Automation List department...

Comparing PLC and DCS

1 out of 1 members thought this post was helpful...
Posted by Anonymous on 6 May, 2004 - 6:34 pm
I amnew in the field of automation. Could anybody tell me the difference between PLC and DCS other than I/O
handling capacity?
Posted by Randy on 7 May, 2004 - 7:15 pm
Now a days you cannot really tell the difference between a PLC or a DCS. Since the PLC was integrated with
Analog I/O it crosses the boundary of being just digital and crosses to the realmof DCS in handling Analogs,
Bus Systems, Distributed I/O and etc. Also, since the DCS now handles logics of Digital I/O it also crossed the
boundary to the realmof PLC.
As you know PLC as to its name Programmable Logic Controller. Its main purpose is to replace the relay logic
controls which is "On" or "Off". And DCS "Distributed Control Systems" its emphasis is Fast analog handling
because of communications through Bus systems, networking and etc.
Summarizing all these, PLC =DCS......
Hope that I shed light on you.
rtj
Posted by William G. on 14 July, 2010 - 10:51 pm
If taken froma narrow point of view, maybe PLC and DCS are functionally the same. However, a lot of plant
technicians and engineers are not aware of the other side of the debate, namely the engineering effort and the
commercial ramifications. Of course, for huge plants with I/O's ranging from10,000 to 30,000 I/O points, and
beyond, it is silly to even think about PLC. Frommy experience, a DCS is not the same with PLC in the realm
of huge systems such as oil and gas plants, as the following list will show:
1. A PLC is cost-effective up to a certain I/O count, and so is the DCS. But the difference is in their starting
points: the PLC is cost-effective from0 to a few thousand I/O points; the DCS becomes cost-effective
starting froma few thousand points and beyond.
2. A PLC becomes a subsystemof the DCS in rare occasions when the situation calls for it, i.e., purchase of
huge package systems with engineering schedules incompatible with the DCS schedule (I/O lists cannot be
submitted on time before the DCS hardware freeze date). Note that this package systemis a process system
using continuous control, not discrete. Based on this, a PLC can never be larger than a DCS in terms of I/O
count.
3. In large plants the DCS is king because most owners want a single source of hardware support and service,
and this mentality naturally denies the PLC a foothold. Package vendors are no longer required to provide
PLC for their system. Everything is connected to the DCS.
-WAG
Posted by Anonymous on 7 May, 2004 - 7:17 pm
PLC=Programmable Logic Controller
DCS=Distributed Control System
A PLC can be a component of a DCS
A DCS can include Networked PLCs, PCs, or other control equipment sharing or distributing control of a
process or processes. Key word being "distributed".
Posted by David Farris, Bristol Babcock Inc. on 7 May, 2004 - 10:40 pm
As I understand it, the two really don't compare as a PLC is Programmable Logic Controller and DCS is
Distributed Control System. Generally, PLCs are stand alone and performa particular task, where a DSC is a
network of PLCs/RTUs that communicate in some fashion to accomplish a particular task. For example, in a
water filtration plant, there might be a PLC that is used to performa backwash of a particular filter, in that same
water plant a DCS may be communicating with 14 filter PLCs and starting the backwash routine when required.
Posted by Bob Peterson on 13 May, 2004 - 10:49 pm
While a trivial example, it serves as an illustration, although having programmed hundreds of such filters, I
can't ever recall putting a seperate PLC on
each filter. J ust not cost effective. the part about the DCS initiating backwash might be true in some cases but
in many cases it would be inititated on time, dp, or flow locally. In fact, most of the installations I have seen of
such things are indeed standalone and typically only report alarms and status to the DCS and rarely does the
DCS actually do any control at all. But, YMMV.
Bob Peterson
Posted by Sutrisno on 7 May, 2004 - 10:52 pm
The differences between PLC and DCS:
1. PLC only handled sequential process than DCS can handled both Continue process and large loop control.
2. If we see fromsecurity angle, PLC doesn't have dongle so peple can crack the software easy. DCS have a
dongle so it's only license to industry which have it.
Posted by Anonymous on 10 May, 2004 - 3:38 pm
Why this question, may we know?
Posted by Wieslaw Chodura on 10 May, 2004 - 5:12 pm
Frommy opinion DCS systems are more complex and include HMI. The realtime HMI database is generated
when programming the PLC which is the part of DCS system. When you want communicate with bare PLC the
realtime database must be created "manually". In DCS systems the realtime database is also distibuted so each
operator station has its own RT database. There are also so called Hybrid Systemlike Honeywell PlantScape
where RT database is created automatically during PLC programming but is stored at realtime server so it is not
distributed.
1 out of 1 members thought this post was helpful...
Posted by Ron Beaufort on 11 May, 2004 - 11:44 pm
The following is basically a "cut and paste" fromsomething I posted some time ago on another forum-
specifically to answer a beginner's questions about DCS; SCADA; PLC's; HMI; MMI; etc. It seemed to help
himso maybe there's something in here which will help you too.
Disclaimer to one and all! What follows is a general "beginner level" discussion - there are exceptions to all of
these "rules".
Let's see how simple we can make it - by first building a SCADA system- and then by building a DCS system-
each fromthe ground up.
Suppose that we're building a brand new factory - and suppose that our first piece of equipment is something
like a big industrial oven. This thing will be made up of heaters, and valves, and conveyor motors, and other
assorted machinery - so let's say we get to work and we build us an oven. Now that we've got the mechanical
part of the oven built - we need some type of controller for it - something to accurately control all of those
different parts in order to turn raw material into a sellable final product. So what type of control are we going to
use? How about a PLC - a Programmable Logic Controller?
In very simple language a PLC is a type of computer. But the computers that most people are familiar with use
a keyboard as an input device and a screen for an output device. PLC's don't have a keyboard. So for an input
device, we use an "input module" which is basically a little box with a row of screws on the front of it. We wire
up a bunch of pushbuttons, sensors, switches, etc. to the little screws ... and this will serve as the input device
for our PLC "computer". We do something similar for an output device. Instead of using a screen for an output
device, we use an "output module" which is basically another little box with a row of screws on the front of it.
We wire up a bunch of solenoid valves, indicator lamps, motor starters, etc. to the little screws ... and this will
serve as the output device for our PLC "computer".
So for this first example, let's say that we decide to go with a PLC system. We buy the PLC and install it by
connecting wires between the oven and the PLC. Then we buy a copy of the programming software fromthe
PLC manufacturer - and then we write a programfor the PLC - we'll probably use "ladder logic" programming,
since that's what most PLC's use as their native language. And now the PLC is just about ready to properly
control the system- except that we still need some way for the operator to set and to monitor the temperatures -
and to start and stop the conveyors and so forth.
Now for this small system, some meters and pushbuttons and some thumbwheel switches might do just fine. We
could wire those up and build us an operator's control panel for our oven. But another (better?) way would be to
use an HMI - a Human Machine Interface. (This used to be called an MMI - Man Machine Interface - but
now-a-days we've got to be more politically correct.) So we buy us a nice desktop computer and some type of
HMI software. We'll need to programthe HMI - and usually this is done by dragging and dropping pictures of
meters and knobs and buttons onto our computer screen. In other words, we build a "virtual" control panel for
our operator to use. We link these on-screen controls to the PLC's memory through a communication cable.
And now we're finally ready to go. Great so far - and we start making some money with our factory.
Later on, business is good and we decide that our factory could use two additional ovens. So we get the
mechanical parts built - and now we need to decide how we're going to control these new ovens. Now the
original PLC that we used for oven number one is quite capable of controlling the two additional ovens. We just
might need to add a few additional I/O modules to the chassis - and we'll certainly need to run some more wires
- but basically the same old PLC "brain" has plenty of extra horsepower to handle the new ovens. But - here's
an idea: Suppose that we buy two new PLC's - one for each new oven. Now that's certainly going to cost us
more money, but at least this way each oven could operate - or be shut down - completely separately fromthe
other two systems. That's going to make scheduling maintenance a lot simpler - and generally give us a lot more
flexibility in all of our operations. Plus - by having three controllers - we're not putting "all of our eggs in one
basket" as the old saying goes.
We talk the boss into it - and we buy the new PLC's and install them- and download copies of the original
programinto them- and we're just about ready to go. But how about that operator control piece of the puzzle?
Since we're already using an HMI for our operator's control panel, all we have to do is make two copies of the
screens fromour original oven - and set these new copies up on the operator's HMI computer. Finally, we
extend the communication cable fromthe HMI station over to the two new PLC's - and now we're up and
running.
Next the boss hires a bean-counter - someone whose job involves maximizing our factory's profits. Now this
person requires data - he needs to know how much it costs to operate the ovens - and how much product we
run through them- and how much of that product is "off-spec" and wasted. The best way to get all of this
production data is to ask the PLC's - after all, they're the "brains" that are controlling the system. So let's
upgrade the old HMI that the operator has been using - to something with more features. This will be called a
SCADA system- for "Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition". It will still have control screens with all of
the virtual buttons and meters and other whatnots that the operator needs to control the ovens - but it will also
have some additional features beyond the HMI - features which will allow the SCADA systemto suck the
production data right out of the PLC's - and to store that data in some type of computer database. Later, the
bean-counter can retrieve that production data and analyze it to his little heart's content. All is well.
Quick review so far: The machinery in our factory is being controlled by PLC's. For a little while we used an
HMI (Human/Machine Interface) software package - so that the Human operator could Interface (that is,
monitor and operate) the Machine. Later we moved fromthe HMI up to a more powerful software package - a
SCADA (Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition) system. This new software still allowed our human
operator to Supervise and Control the system- and it also added some features for Data Acquisition for the
bean-counter's benefit.
Now let's start over with a new factory - and this time we'll use a DCS (Distributed Control System).
Suppose that this time we know in advance that the factory we're about to build is going to involve a rather
sophisticated process - one which is going to require many interrelated steps - all of which must be carefully
coordinated in order to produce a sellable final product. We're talking about chemicals - or pharmaceuticals - or
something along those lines. (The term"continuous process" is a familiar buzzword for something like this.)
Now yes, we COULD use PLC's for this type of factory - and yes, we COULD use a SCADA systemto
supervise and control the whole thing. But - many engineers would decide to go with a DCS for something like
this. And that's what we're going to do.
Now suppose that our new factory still needs something along the lines of our previous ovens - how would we
control these? Instead of putting a PLC on each oven - we'll use a separate DCS "controller" for each oven.
Now at first glance, these controllers will each look a lot like an individual "I/O module" or "I/O card" in a PLC
system. They usually slide right into a chassis - and have wires for inputs and outputs connected to the front of
them. So most DCS systems tend to look a lot like a PLC system. The big difference is that each of these DCS
"controller/card" devices will be individually programmed. That's where the term"DISTRIBUTED" comes from
- the control (or "brain-power" if you prefer) is DISTRIBUTED among many individual controllers. Specifically,
in a typical PLC systemwe generally have only one "brain" (or processor) in each chassis - and then several
I/O (input/output) modules in the chassis to handle the signal wires to-and-fromthe machinery. On the other
hand, in a typical DCS systemwe'll have several "brains" (or controllers) in a chassis - and the I/O wiring
associated with each particular "brain's" machinery will be connected directly to the front of that individual
controller.
Now what about the operator control function? Well, one integral part of a DCS systemis a large computer
(usually a quite powerful one) which looks a lot like a SCADA terminal. And it does exactly the same job. First,
it gives the operator a series of control screens with all of the virtual buttons and meters and other whatnots that
he (or she) requires in order to control the machinery. Second, it also has the features required to suck the
production data right out of the individual controllers - and to store that data in some type of computer database.
And in most DCS systems, there is a third function of the DCS terminal: The programming software for the
individual controllers is also usually available on this terminal - so that reprogramming the controllers is possible
right over the existing data communication cables.
Quick review of the DCS approach: The machinery in our factory is being controlled by many individual little
controllers. Our operator uses a DCS terminal (computer) to monitor and operate the machinery. This DCS
terminal also has features to acquire production data and store it in a database for later analysis. Additionally,
the DCS terminal usually has the programming software required for the individual controllers available. And all
of the hardware and all of the software required for our DCS systemis generally provided by just one
manufacturer. Some people think that's a good thing - and other people think that's a bad thing.
So which is the better approach - PLC or DCS? This is usually decided by the engineers who initially design the
factory. And in practice, there are a lot of factories out there who use combinations of the two approaches.
Finally: Please remember that this was intended to be a general "beginner level" discussion - there are
exceptions to all of these "rules" ... but hopefully this will give you a "starting point" fromwhich to build.
Hope this helps ... best regards,
Ron
Posted by Matthew Hyatt on 27 May, 2004 - 4:22 pm
Ron,
In both cases the PLC or controller is sperately programmed and if programmed correctly can operate
completely on its on and even share required data with other devices (PLCs, PCs, controllers...) and in each
case the controllres or PLCs or PCs could send data to a host computer which provides overall operator
interface, alarming, historical trending and such... you could even have local HMIs where you need them.
In fact if you had twenty PLCs each programmed to performa plant function and only send data to a HMI or
SCADA computer would this not be a DCS system- the control operations are indeed distributed among the
various PLCs, the PLCs do indeed function on their own and are not dependent upon a host computer to tell
themwha to do or when to do it. Is this not the basis of a DCS scheme? Also, the PLCs could share data with
the other PLCs so they could act upon the information obtained to adjust their given function.
I don't know about the PLCs you use, but the one's I use can completely operate a 25+MGD water plant with
little or no operator interaction, except a little monitoring and house keeping via a host SCADA computer.
Fromyour two rather long explainations, I was not able to see a real big difference. Any more the two are so
intergal and integrated that it is hard to draw clear defining differences. Besides, I could use one PLC with
plenty of I/O expansion capability to handle all of the filters in a water plant and even the rest of the plant's
operations, vs buying seperate controllers to do the same thing - to the bean counters I know this is a real
money saver when put into the context of operational cost over the life the plant vs the cost of the equipment.
Though many will argue that there are significant differences and cost advantages, blah, blah, blah... I stand on
the platformthat supports both are very similar and each can performthe functions of the other and can be
integrated to provide solutions to a wide range of plant automation schemes.
MJ H
Posted by Rhyan on 1 June, 2014 - 10:12 am
Ron,
thanks a ton for your response. What a breath of fresh air. I manage a dcs systembut I have also been a
systemintegrator for years. The differences are almost negligible and to be honest, my systemcosts so
much that adding automation to the systemis a major deal. As a side note, most of my processes are run by
plc controllers in the field and then connected to the dcs to give operators access fromthe HMI. This is done
through modbus to the dcs controllers ...
As for the explanation you were responding too. In both cases the gentlemen has explained either system.
Having multiple controllers in one location to "distribute" the local control is a massive expense and
complicates things. I have some drops with 3 redundant controllers (that's 6 total) doing the work that one
controller could be doing. That's 25000 a controller for a total of 150000 in controllers with less io than I've
seen on a controllogix processor run a whole plant. The specs on the processors are also less in almost all
cases. Quite funny actually.
Anyway. The two have caught up to each other. And please everyone, look at the specs on PLC's PAC's
and DCS's. Taking the stance that the dcs can handle more io is just ludicrous. Processors and memory
dictate that, not the category you decide to put your product in. And as far as communications go, they all
use very similar ways to talk and in most cases I've seen PAC's do it much better.
Great post Ron.
Posted by akash on 31 March, 2010 - 5:12 am
thanx sir ron..u are such a good professor..i have seen all ur bootcamp videos..waiting for some more lectures
Posted by Pete Ng on 1 April, 2010 - 4:49 pm
I love this discussion. There is not really wrong or right answere here as one could consider this like comparing
oranges versus apples while others would say not.
To Ron: You must be one of the good ol' controls engineers who's at least been through the 80's, 90's, and the
2000's. Love your sense of humor.
Regards
Posted by jeff fraley on 3 August, 2012 - 1:06 am
In my quest years ago to obtain my Master Electricians license, I was fortunate enough to have taken a class
under an instructor who could relate... or knew how to teach fromthe ground up, covering so many things in
ways that most of us take for granted when teaching.
Ron B. is one of those people and the rest of us are fortunate for that. Thanks for all your posts and videos. I
have relearned much of RsLogix 500... moving into Tags and 5000 now... Life is Learning
jeff f
Posted by Jonas Berge on 13 May, 2004 - 10:44 pm
PLC was developed as a replacement for many relays. DCS was developed as a replacement for many PID
controllers.
These days the difference between these two architectures is not very big. Both have a CPU card (controller
module) and an I/O subsystemwith I/O modules. In the past a PLC was purely logic and the DCS purely
continuous controller. The PLC was programmed in ladder and the DCS in function blocks. Today both handle
all kinds of I/O and can be programmed in multiple languages. In the past a DCS included servers and
workstations software whereas for the PLC the HMI software was purchased separately. I.e. with a
DCS you got an integrated systemwhereas with PLC you did systemintegration. In the past a DCS used only
proprietary networking whereas a PLC used open networking making it possible to connect third party
hardware. In the past only the DCS applications were proprietary whereas the PLC was an open system. I.e.
with the DCS all applications were tailored for the native hardware minimizing configuration work but making
impossible or
unfeasible to add hardware and software fromthird parties. The PLC can freely use third party hardware and
software, required lots of configuration work, but at least it was possible. Today PLC use OPC to make data
available to software as a single integrated database with little of no duplicate work. At the same time, DCS also
implement OPC as a gateway that makes access to some data possible although it is still impossible to choose
the
workstation software and you still cannot connect third party devices to the DCS networking. These days most
PLC manufactures have either bought or aligned themselves with HMI software companies supplying a total
solution. Other differences in that past included far better diagnostics and redundancy in the DCS, but this gap
has been closed. Today, many PLCs are sold as and used in applications where in the past only DCS could be
used. Historically a DCS was also far more expensive, but the competition fromPLC and new architectures
have driven the initial price of DCS down although the long termcost may be higher since with a DCS you are
pretty much locked to a single supplier.
Since a couple of years ago a technology called FOUNDATION(tm) Fieldbus introduced a new system
architecture based on standard networking providing a leap similar to that fromDDC to DCS/PLC. The new
systemarchitecture is explained in chapter 1 of the book "Fieldbuses for Process Control: Engineering,
Operation, and Maintenance" (buy online in hardcopy or download
immediately in softcopy):
http://www.isa.org/fieldbuses
If you can't buy the book now, you can download chapter 1 (overview) for free in softcopy form. It's free, but
you must register an account. If your email does not support this hyperlink feature correctly, please copy the
entire link and paste it into your Internet browser. Mind the line wrap, make sure to get the complete path all the
way to the 4585:
http://www.isa.org/Template.cfm?Section=Shop_ISA&template=/Ecom
merce/ProductDisplay.cfm&ProductID=4585
J onas Berge
SMAR
===========
jberge@smar.com.sg
www.smar.com
Learn fieldbus at your own pace: www.isa.org/fieldbuses
Posted by FEMI ADULEYE on 14 July, 2005 - 12:49 pm
I have greatly benefited fromthis discussion.
However, I amof the opinion that there's no functional difference between a PLC and a DCS today. Both can
comprise intelligent devices networked over a data highway for control of sophisticated processes.
With PLC units manning process areas and then communicating with a supervisory controller(strictly
supervising, not controlling); one could without any controversy call that a DCS.
In essence, PLC =DCS, today!!!
Posted by Tom on 20 March, 2006 - 7:55 pm
Thanks for contribution of everybody. I think I should contribute, too.
I think PLCs are parts of a either DCS or SCADA system, so that the question should be DCS Vs. SCADA
rather than DCS Vs. PLC.
As the previous writer said, DCS stresses on processing (PID) control variables, while SCADA stresses on
supervisory (watching). Today, either systemis capable of doing both jobs. However, due to limited
capabilities of the CPU and budget availability, one have to choose which one (SCADA or DCS) is more
appropriate for a particular application, i.e 40% SCADA and 60% DCS or vice versa. Choosing the ratio is
implicited in choosing among several vendor/ sofware on the market.
I could be wrong, though.
Tom
Posted by Paresh on 17 June, 2014 - 3:06 am
The difference between PLC and DCS has narrowed but not completely wiped out. I mean we are using DCS
of Toshiba, Yokogawa in plants in very harsh conditions, but hardly found the failure of cards. But we are also
using PLC of Rockwell, GE, Siemens and found the failure of cards start after 3-4 years. So, the biggest
difference between PLC and DCS is ruggedness and reliability. In DCS the biggest problemis the failure of
the Process HMI, where the Hard disk is difficult to get. But, with use of PC as HMI this problemhas solved.
Another big difference in PLC and DCS is the ease of programming in DCS.
Posted by Rani on 19 July, 2014 - 4:00 am
Hey Paresh,
I amdoing a research project on PLC & DCS comparison. I have few doubts. Can I get your contact
number.
Posted by p.k.kundu on 7 April, 2007 - 1:23 am
Today both can serve the purpose of othersto some extent. But a DCS conceptual development is
basic/advance control and other higher level control/advance fn. Where as PLC is build basically for logic
control including safety logic upto SIL4 level but can accept analogue input preferred in 2oo3 configuration.
Posted by Manoj Joshi on 19 May, 2007 - 3:04 pm
Main differences between TRUE DCS & PLC are:
1) Control
2) Communication
3) No. of I/Os that can be connected
4) Scanning time
5) History
6) MMI
Posted by Usman Alvi on 26 September, 2007 - 10:38 pm
Dear Mr. J oshi,
Please little illustrate the points of differences that you mentioned here. In this case it will be more clear.
Posted by EPK on 25 October, 2007 - 11:23 pm
The biggest difference between DCS and PLCs is that DCS systems provide:
Level of intergration between the controller, HMI and historical database (Common database,
Faceplates/Function blocks interlinked.
Control algorithms for advanced control strategies highly evolved and proven (Boiler Master, Distillation
towers, Kiln control).
Complete turnkey control solution fromone vendor fromP&ID development throught to startup.
Huge number of I/O can be controlled 100K+points.
In my over 25 years of experience in industrial control no expert in their right mind would ever consider
using anything but a DCS systemfor control of a large plant that has a mixture of analog and digital loops.
DCS vendors have the experience and resources to make it happen. With PLC/HMI you need to rely on
systems integrators to make it all work. You get what you pay for.
Posted by STEVEN MATSEBA on 15 June, 2007 - 12:12 am
The difference between the PLC and the DCS is the database, i.e. when using the DCS the engineering work
that you do is in one environment, for example mimics, programming, trends, reports, programcreation, etc.
Whereas in a PLC environment you need two databases to do engineering, i.e. in a PLC environment you can
do programming, I/O configuration, etc. To develop mimics you need SCADA where you can build your trends,
alarmwindows, etc. so you can see that you need 2 databases to develop your engineering work on the PLC.
Posted by Jasir Sabri on 14 December, 2007 - 1:02 am
The discussion here was very useful. Thank you all.
Posted by cheers73 on 20 May, 2011 - 4:02 am
The basic difference is DCS and PLC lies in application. We generally use PLC for start up and shut down
activities because of faster response of PLC and DCS for continuous control because the cost of implementing
continuous control in PLC will be very high and secondly the response time of PLC will increase to great extent.
Evolution wise also, PLC is successor of hardwired relay logic and DCS is successor of SLPC's (Single Loop
Process Controllers).
Operation wise HMI is an integral part of DCS, while for PLC we did no have any such HMI to start with. For
data presentation we had to do serial communication between DCS and PLC to present all the tags of PLC in
DCS. But with the advant of scada this difference does not hold any meaning any more.
Alarmand SOE wise, we can get the SOE with 1 msec resolution in PLC and in DCS resolution generally
depends upon the scan time of DCS.
All said and done, we can implement logic in DCS also if the logic part is small and control part is bigger and
also we can implement continuous control in PLC if Control part is small and DCS part is bigger.
0 out of 1 members thought this post was helpful...
Posted by eng / karim on 13 July, 2011 - 10:51 am
the plc deals mainly the the digital i/p and o/p (1 or 0) for an ex. it gives a permission for a valve to totally open
or totally close...but dcs deals with analog i/p and o/p it can gives the valve a permission to open 50% or 30% as
the controller wants.
Posted by dinesh on 16 January, 2012 - 10:27 am
Dear friends i have a doubt please help me out in this "The systemhave at least 16 or more control loops"
using PLC can i able to make out this or i need to go for DCS please give me in detail explanation.
Thanks & Regards,
Dinesh
Posted by bob peterson on 16 January, 2012 - 12:29 pm
PLCs can have as many loops as you need.
If one CPU cannot handle themall, you can always add another one.
--
Bob
Posted by Nasser on 8 February, 2012 - 4:48 am
Hi,
What is the difference between central and distributed control systemapplied to electrical network and
industrial plants.
Also i need some notes on DCS and SCADA system, ptt slides will be fine or any website link.
Thanks
Nasser
Posted by AHK on 19 July, 2012 - 4:37 am
>Also i need some notes on DCS and SCADA system, ptt slides will be fine or any website link.
http://www.automation.siemens.com/mcms/process-control-systems/Site
CollectionDocuments/efiles/pcs7/support/marktstudien/PLC_or_DCS.pdf
you will thank me for this
0 out of 1 members thought this post was helpful...
Posted by Matthew Hyatt on 24 September, 2012 - 3:58 am
Hi,
If interviewers ask me what is difference between PLC and DCS? How I have to explain?
Thanks
asfani
Posted by Roy Matson on 24 September, 2012 - 2:32 pm
One thing they differ on is speed, the PLC will handle I/O lightning fast while DCSs used to be real slugs. I have
seen as long as 1 second scan time. While 1 second is fast enough for most control loops it would be pretty
useless for a fast moving machine for example a CNC lathe.
Now I know modern DCSs can probably handle high speed with the help of special routines.
Roy
Posted by Ramamoorthy on 21 February, 2013 - 8:16 pm
At present stage, there is no big difference between PLC and DCS. Both are same doing all jobs.
One and only major big difference between themis SCANNING TIME. PLC is much faster than DCS.
Thats the reason in many Oil & Gas Industry, Refinery, Chemical industries they are using PLC. Because less
than seconds it will do Cause & Effects for Safety Systems and Process Systems.
Posted by Jared Bryan on 24 February, 2013 - 12:01 am
My impression (not having worked on what I think would be called a DCS) is that DCS is kind of a marking
termused to differentiate fromPLC based control without making direct reference to computer based control -
which I think for many people has some negative connotation.
Also I think DCS is meant to imply large and integrated which it seems to me is more often the approach taken
in certain types of process industries due to the nature of the systems involved.
While PLC's are often networked and interact in an integrated fashion, I think when someone says DCS they
are implying computer based control which brings with it additional capabilities and complexity and other issues.
I don't think it is correct to imply that PLC's are not up to the task of analog control, but clearly a full computer
will have greater processing power and resources in general.
0 out of 1 members thought this post was helpful...
Posted by annapurna on 29 January, 2014 - 2:12 am
Plc requires an communication interface and DCS has inbuilt communication protocol.
Posted by James Ingraham on 29 January, 2014 - 10:53 pm
annapurna stated: "Plc [sic] requires an communication interface and DCS has inbuilt communication
protocol."
No. Not even close. True, any DCS will have some native "inbuilt" communication protocol. But then so will
any PLC, many of which these days are Ethernet based but even 20 years ago had SOMETHING, e.g.
Modbus, DF1, etc., etc., etc. Meanwhile, DCS vendors will happily sell you expensive commcards.
Why anyone is answering a 10 year old question that has plenty of good (and bad) answers, I'mnot sure.
Especially since that answer is WRONG.
-J ames Ingraham
0 out of 1 members thought this post was helpful...
Posted by Iqbal Raza on 27 March, 2014 - 1:54 pm
People are still giving answers because many users still don't know the differences between a PLC and
DCS.
In early stage PLC was used to replace relay base systemand hence PLC deals only with digital IOs and
DCS used for both digital and analog inputs and out puts special it eplace single loop controller. But with the
passage of time plc modified to handle analogue inputs and outputs and hence now plc is considered a sister
controlling systemof DCS. But there is still you can find some differences in DCS & PLC.
1- Redundancy of Input cards are available only in DCS but not in PLC.
2- Termination unit card which used to condition the input signal.
3- Quality and reliability of all cards such as IOs card, CPU, CP and Power supply . specially input/output
card. For example in Siemens S7-400 plc, if a two wire type analogue input wire get ground all input of this
analogue card get badly effected and shows false maximuminput values. There is no chance of this problem
in any true DCS.
4- In DCS it is easy to install ignition barriers for those outputs which are going to use in Hazardous Area.
5- A DCS software has builtin HMI but PLC can be used with or without HMI software.
6- For less no of IOs PLC is more suitable price wise.
Posted by Cathy on 19 July, 2014 - 4:14 am
Dear Raza,
Can you provide some Input on cost comparison of PLC & DCS.
Your use of this site is subject to the terms and conditions set forth under Legal Notices and the Privacy Policy.
Please read those terms and conditions carefully. Subject to the rights expressly reserved to others under Legal
Notices, the content of this site and the compilation thereof is 1999-2014 Nerds in Control, LLC. All rights
reserved.
Users of this site are benefiting fromopen source technologies, including PHP, MySQL and Apache. Be happy.
Fortune
Help! I'mtrapped in a PDP 11/70!