1 / 37

ACNET vs EPICS at Fermilab

ACNET vs EPICS at Fermilab. Accelerator Physics and Technology Seminar Sharon Lackey 3/14/2006. Special Thanks to:. Ned Arnold – APS Fritz Bartlett – D0 Dennis Nicklaus – AD/Controls Jim Patrick – AD/Controls Charlie Briegel – AD/Controls Brian Hendricks – AD/Controls. EPICS.

forbes
Télécharger la présentation

ACNET vs EPICS at Fermilab

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ACNET vs EPICS at Fermilab Accelerator Physics and Technology Seminar Sharon Lackey 3/14/2006

  2. Special Thanks to: • Ned Arnold – APS • Fritz Bartlett – D0 • Dennis Nicklaus – AD/Controls • Jim Patrick – AD/Controls • Charlie Briegel – AD/Controls • Brian Hendricks – AD/Controls ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  3. EPICS • What is EPICS • What EPICS is not • Who uses EPICS • Comparison of EPICS and ACNET • Other Solutions • The Future ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  4. EPICS is … • Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System • A toolkit that Allows a Controls System to be built with configuration rather than programming • A set of tools with well defined interfaces • Written and Maintained by a Collaboration of Controls groups • Client/Server based • Distributed, Two Tiered Architecture • Allows Communication between any two points • Limited primarily by Network Bandwidth • Written in C and C++ ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  5. What is EPICS? * • Any tool/program/application that abides by the Channel Access protocol could be described as “EPICS Compliant”. My Special Data Collection Program StripTool MEDM CAC CAC CAC • EPICS can be viewed as a “toolkit” of EPICS compliant programs. One can select the appropriate tool for their need or develop their own. CAS CAS CAC CAS CAC My Accelerator Simulator Code (PVs) iocCore (PVs) LabView (PVs) *Courtesy of N. Arnold ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  6. CA Clients may run on: Unix, Windows, VxWorks or VMS Ethernet TCP/IP & UDP Servers running under: VxWorks, RjTEMS, Solaris, Linux, Windows, VME,VXI, PCI, ISA, or embedded processors ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  7. EPICS Core: Channel Access Client and Server Process Database Scanners Monitors Database Configuration Tools Build Tools Source/Release EPICS Extensions: GUI Builders: EDD/DM (LNAL) MEDM (ANL) EDM (ORNL) DM2K (BESSY) JoiMint (DESY) Alarm Handler Channel Archiver Sequencer (State Machine) BURT (Back up and Restore Tool) Gateway APIs Python LabVIEW TCL/TK Data Display Tools ADT (Array Display Tool) StripTool (Strip Chart Plotting Tool) Yviewer (Data Visualization Tool) Database Configuration/Management Tools DCT (Tcl/Tk – deprecated) GDCT (Graphical – deprecated) JDCT (Java) VDCT (Visual) CapFast (Commercial schematic capture Tool… More we won’t mention… EPICS IS… ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  8. Channel Access DB Load Scanners Database Access IOC Database Record Support Device Support Driver VME Inside a VME IOC * Ethernet LAN Customizing Elements *Courtesy of F. Bartlett ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  9. CA Server CA Client Channel Access in One Slide * “connection request” or “search request” “get” or “caGet” “put” or “caPut” “set a monitor” Who has a PV named “S1A:H1:CurrentAO”? Change its value to 30.5 Notify me when the value changes What is its value? Channel Access Client Channel Access Server I do. 25.5 AMPS OK, it is now 30.5 It is now 20.5 AMPS It is now 10.5 AMPS It is now -0.0023 AMPS Process Variables: “put complete” “post an event” or “post a monitor” S1A:H1:CurrentAO S1:P1:x S1:P1:y S1:G1:vacuum 30.5 is too high. It is now set to the maximum value of 27.5. or You are not authorized to change this value or *Courtesy of N. Arnold ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  10. EPICS is NOT… • A Control System “in a box” • The total solution for all your controls needs • Going to allow you to get rid of the controls dept. & all programming • Object Oriented ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  11. Analog Input (double float) Output Long Input (32 bit integer) Long output Binary Input Out Multi-bit Input (16 bits) Multi-bit Output Multi-bit Input Direct (16 bit integer to char[16] ) Multi-bit Output Direct ( char[16] to 16 bit integer) Archive Calculation Calculation Out Compression CPID and PID fanout and dfanout (data fanout) Event (hardware int. handler) Histogram Permissive (client-server communication) Pulse Counter (counts pulses) Delay (generates pulses) Train (generates pulse trains) Scan (used to scan detectors) Channel Access Records ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  12. Channel Access Records • Select (12 input mux) • Sequence (triggers up to 10 other records and sends values) • State ( ASCII string representing the current state of a state program ) • Stepper Motor • String • Input • Output • Array • Waveform • Sub Array ( reads part of a waveform) • Subroutine (calls a C routine with up to 12 input links) • Timer ( drives an output to latch data) • Wait – obsolete, replaced by calc out ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  13. Who Uses EPICS ? (an incomplete list) • SNS & ORNL • JLAB • APS & ANL • LBL • LANL • DESY • BESSY • CosyLab • Kinetic Systems • Intuit • FNAL (D0 & SMTF) ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  14. ACNET 3 Tiers Central Services Client/Server Uses UDP Uses Multicasts Multiple protocols Snapshot FTP Data acquisition (RetDat/SetDat) Network (Acnet) Single Site More Control Less help Lots of Specialized User Applications Limited to Six Character Names FTDs EPICS 2 Tiers Distributed Services Client/Server Uses TCP/IP Uses Broadcasts Single protocol Data Acquisition (Channel Access) Collaboration More Help Less Control One GUI Application can be used to create many displays Names can be very long Data scan rate set in database Comparison of EPICS and ACNET ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  15. ACNET Control System Overview * Console Applications Java Applications Web Applications Application CentralServices Servlets Open Access Clients Database Central ethernet MOOC Front-Ends Labview Front-Ends IRM Front-Ends Front-End field bus: VME, SLD, Arcnet, ethernet, … Field Hardware CAMAC, VME, PMC, IP, Multibus, CIA, GPIB, … *Courtesy of J. Patrick ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  16. EPICS Use at Fermilab • D0 slow controls • Using EPICS since beginning of Run 2 • Extended EPICS by: • Adding support for new device types • Added Global Event reporting system • Added a Central Database • Added support for MIL/STD1553B bus • Detector configuration tool • Proton Driver • Plans to use EPICs • Meson Test Facility • Using EPICS, DOOCs and ACNET ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  17. ACNET on One Slide Read M:OUTTMP Read C:LUMIN Console Application 1 Application 2 Already getting this data? No Data Pool Manager I’ll get the info and calculate the value What is its value? SQL Client RetDat/SetDat Client Console OAC Central Services Local Applications SQL Server Methods Database Entries MOOC Retdat/Setdat Server Retdat/Setdat Client Front Ends Retdat/Setdat Client Retdat/Setdat Server Retdat/Setdat Client Retdat/Setdat Server MOOC MOOC Methods Methods Local Applications Local Applications ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  18. Meson Test Facility • EPICS used for Cryogenics Controls interface to Siemens-Moore PLCs • Implemented in Software IOCs on the PCs that run the APACS+ software • Communicate with the PLCs via OPC (OLE for Process Control ) • EPICs driver for DESY’s SimCon 3.1 LLRF board • Edm used as the GUI builder • Using extensions: Plan to use: Alarm handler BURT StripTool for plots Channel Archiver ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  19. Brown Refrigerator GUI Display in edm ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  20. Alarm Handler for Meson Test Facility Cryo ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  21. Strip Tool Plotter ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  22. ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  23. Why Use EPICS @ Meson & ILC Test Facility? • Test Facility will be used by many visitors from various labs • EPICs is used at more labs than other controls systems • Argonne personnel have expertise • D0 personnel have expertise • EPICs or its successor may be considered for the ILC • FNAL needs to develop expertise in EPICS in order to fully evaluate it ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  24. Why not use EPICS Now at Fermilab? • ACNET is a stable, full featured controls system • Operators are familiar with ACNET • Huge investment in existing code • Users can easily write applications for ACNET • ACNET is now ported to Linux • We can modify ACNET without the approval of a collaboration • Switching controls systems would be a monumental task • We would lose functionality ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  25. Why Should We Switch to EPICS at Fermilab? • We can benefit from the collaboration of laboratories • We can influence the characteristics of Version 4.0 • EPICS or its successor may be the choice for the ILC • Professional development of staff ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  26. What Does ACNET have that EPICS doesn’t? • The Parameter Page • Ability to add a data channel on the fly • Data has associated error status on each return • Redirection • Consolidation of requests to front ends • Wild card devices • Snapshot plots • Automatic downloads of settings on reboot • Automatic logging of settings • SDA • Consolidated Error reports • An integrated Console environment ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  27. ACNET Parameter Page ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  28. ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  29. What Does EPICS have that ACNET Doesn’t? • Longer More Descriptive names • Distributed database • Wide user base and on-line Tech-Talk help • Front ends can be “programmed” by configuring database records with minimal real programming ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  30. Some Other Control Systems • Tango (Collaboration of Light Sources) • LHC (new system using Java, CORBA & C++) • DOOCS (DESY Object Oriented Controls System) • ALMA Common Software (Large Array Telescope) ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  31. The FUTURE: Version 4.0 • Provide online add/delete of I/O to support continuous operation. • Provide redundant control of remote I/O to support improved reliability. • Provide name introspection and domain control in support of seamless integration of large control systems • Provide triggers, filters, and rate limits to improve resource use of network and client side processing • Provide hierarchical devices to support higher level view of application in the front-end processors. ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  32. Version 4.0 cont. • Provide automatic backup and restore to support bump-less reboot and synchronization of redundant controllers. • Provide atomic read, write, and write with read-back to multiple channels to support synchronized access of arbitrary sets of channels. • Support international users with uni-code and time. • Remove limitations on string lengths, device states, number of input links to support arbitrary sizes. • Internationalize Time Stamps ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  33. Version 4.0 cont. • Allow definition and access to complex devices and multi-dimensional arrays • Name hierarchy in Channel Access • <arbitrary string>.structure. Element[n] • e.g. Arc3PwrSupply.readback.status, ArcPwrSupply.readback.value • Device description in database • Support arbitrary number of inputs to calculations and subroutines. • Support multi-state devices of an arbitrary number of states ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  34. Version 4.0 cont. • Allow wildcard searches • Allow request to send all names supported in the IOC • Support redundancy by allowing connections to specify that they are not active • Support multiple name servers by allowing connections to specify how close to the source they are. • Support Name aliases ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  35. Another Initiative • EPICs Office • Led by Matthias Clausen of DESY • Initiative to provide an Integrated Development Environment for EPICs • Provide a common look and feel across EPICs applications ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  36. Status of Version 4.0 as of Feb 3, 2006 Ned Arnold (for the APS Team) wrote in TechTalk: Upon review of last year's efforts and accomplishments, we have realized that EPICS Version 4 is too large of a development to successfully undertake with the part-time resources that can be leveraged from operating facilities. In addition, the ambitious redesign of major portions of EPICS core (database, communications API, device support interface) would be a significant impediment for operating facilities to migrate to Version 4.Therefore, under the current EPICS collaborative structure (and funding model), we have made a decision to focus on small incremental evolutionary steps (3.15, 3.16, etc) rather than revolutionary leaps. We will evaluate the desired features of V4 and develop a roadmap for incorporating some of these features into Version 3. More significant changes/features will have to wait until new opportunities present themselves to fund substantial developments (there are a few ideas on the table, however). ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

  37. Andrew Johnson has taken over responsibility of "keeper of the source". His primary emphases will be reliability, maintainability and establishing a well-defined forward migration path for existing applications as new features are added. Some features already identified for possible incorporation into 3.x include enhancement of the build system; unbundling BASE into Core, Channel Access, and IOC; variable length strings; etc. Because of our limited resources, we will be looking for significant assistance in developing these features (i.e. the timeline for delivery is directly proportional to available resources).Some V4 research and development will continue, but not led or coordinated by Argonne. One effort will include investigation of hierarchical records, "devices", and emerging protocols. An initial implementation of some of these ideas will be in a Java IOC (Marty Kraimer is working on this development). Another emerging development effort is the Control System Studio (a.k.a EPICS Office) and IOC redundancy driven by DESY. Any successes in these areas will be considered for integration somewhere in the future. Contact Bob Dalesio or Matthias Clausen if you are interested in these activities. ACNET vs EPICs at Fermilab

More Related