Utility Horizons - Second Quarter 2013 - (Page 65)

Thinking IT Through... with Sparky Flamedrop It can also be fun fighting with the municipality’s consulting engineering firm over change orders and the interpretation of procurement specification wording (i.e., what the words say versus what they were intended to actually mean, now that the consultant has realized that they messed up or forgot something in the specifications). Here’s an example of exactly what I mean… Sparky once knew a salesman for a control system vendor that specialized in bidding on water/wastewater projects. He joked that the best strategy was to show up at the kickoff meeting and start the lawsuit rather than wasting time bringing the engineering staff along. Because of the competitive bidding requirement, a vendor that does a good job has no advantage over one that did a poor job as long as that other vendor is allowed to bid on the next project, so why bother? And don’t get me started on the subject of bonding and bid bonds and payment retention – trust me, it isn’t pretty. Remote Terminal Units vs. Programmable Controllers But I digress. The reason for that prior rambling tirade was to make the point that the technology most often seen used in water and wastewater automation applications has been influenced by those kinds of forces. Years back, SCADA vendors used to design www.UtilityHorizons.com and build their own RTU devices. Many a SCADA vendor went out of business trying to grow and be profitable in the water/ wastewater business. The result was that municipalities often wound up with proprietary RTUs – often from multiple suppliers – with no source of spare parts or support. However, the introduction of inexpensive PLCs with standardized communication protocols, programming tools from any number of thirdparty suppliers, and the backing of major manufacturers that were also supplying PLCs into other markets caused a major shift in spec-writing. Suddenly – seemingly over night – every water/wastewater SCADA project required that PLCs be provided as the RTUs. Today, PLCs are pretty much the standard industry approach for mainstream municipal water/wastewater automation projects. With the introduction of COTS (commercial-off-theshelf) PLC hardware, combined with third-party configuration tools, shrink-wrapped (standardized) SCADA software and commercial PC and network hardware and software, it soon became possible for local system integrators to come into existence and thrive. Because the price/cost factor is usually the most important one if you’re an automation supplier to the water/wastewater market, it can be very difficult for a major automation vendor based in a distant city to compete with a local integrator, if for no other reason than the cost of travel and lodging versus a local integrator. Moreover, PLC manufacturers were early adopters of using local integrators to deliver Q2 - 2013 • UTILITY HORIZONS • 65 http://www.UtilityHorizons.com

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Utility Horizons - Second Quarter 2013

Utility Horizons - Second Quarter 2013
Publisher’s Message
Contents
The Queue
Automation Rising!
Inside Tracks
Focal Point
Automation and Innovation at Epcor Water Services
BLeading Edge: Advanced Technology Perspectives
Consumer Engagement: The Future Goes Mobile
Demand Response: Why the Future Is in the Cloud
Building Paths to Smarter Water Management
Bullet-Proofing Your Scada System Against the Evil-Doers
Education Matters
Standard Bearings
Regulation De Rigueur
On the Horizon
Purviews
Intersections
Eventualities
Thinking It Through With Sparky Flamedrop
Loose Ends

Utility Horizons - Second Quarter 2013

https://www.nxtbookmedia.com