As wireless systems begin their inevitable march onto the factory floors and process operations facilities of the world wage a gargantuan battle, the ongoing war between “operations” and “IT” is set to unfold. This battle has been fought numerous times in the past with networking technology, real-time enterprise information systems, and other technologies that require information from the plant floor.

Like all wars, the combatants eventually grow weary of the fight and agree to “split up” territory. In the process industries sophisticated nomenclature has developed to define various levels of networking infrastructure as shown in the drawing below:

Figure 1: Pre-Wireless Networking Layers

In this diagram, five distinct network levels are evident. The field device network (blue, red, black), the control network (yellow), the process control network (orange), the office network (light blue), and the internet. Standards bodies have actually developed reasonable definitions of each of these layers. As the IT and operations teams conduct their battles, victors lay claim to specific layers. And often, company-by-company, plant-by-plant, the boundaries are different and occasionally gray.

Sometimes a determinant of the IT/Operations boundary is the place where Internet Protocol (IP) architectures end and the plethora of fieldbus protocols begins. Not surprisingly, the IT folks like to stick within the IP domain where a few large players own the market.

Although the operations team clearly understands the benefits of IP, security issues, firewalls, viruses, and all the “heavy” software required to manage such a complex infrastructure is a bit scary. In these conservative industries, it’s a lot easier to stick with what you know, even if it involves supporting a handful of non-interoperable protocols. Additionally, they know all the pros and cons of the large traditional automation suppliers.

Clearly wireless data technology represents a great place to renew the battle. Not only is wireless relatively new technology, relatively fragmented market-wise, and controlled by an equally fragmented body of global standards organization; but since the transport media is the “air” opportunities to jump across previously well defined battle “boundaries” and claim new turf abound.

Wireless is already widely deployed in industry. Complex IP-based enterprise and industrial Wi-Fi products are in use today. But, virtually all of these networks are used to move large amounts of data between the highest levels of networks shown in Figure 1. Similarly proprietary long-haul point to point wireless is often used in remote SCADA applications, again for large amounts of data flow. IP is making in-roads in this area courtesy of Wi-Max.

Numerous wireless global standards activities are underway that address the lower network layers … specifically field device networks and control bus networks. The two most prevalent are WirelessHART and ISA100. Although there are considerable differences between these two standards, there are also many similarities.

In the context of war between IT and Operations, the last row of the table is the most important. Neither ISA100 or WirelessHART are internet protocol based standards. So an obvious question is will the few large IT players participate in this market, and if so how?

As an IP-centric company addressing the industrial space with an IT-centric viewpoint from the top-down, one large player has already begun to make some in-roads. By releasing their first industrial hardened Wi-Fi access point, they are participating in the ISA100 working groups at the top layers of the architecture. They have also made several small investments in IP focused low-power wireless companies. Clearly the long-term goal is to move IP down into devices on the factory floor.

This is a noble objective, and the IP zealots of the world, believe it to be inevitable. But on the other side of the battlefield is a very conservative group of factory and process operations executives, that as previously mentioned are justifiably a bit concerned about the risk and safety concerns associated with a hacker cracking into the IP-based wireless instrumentation network in the municipal water purification facility.

For now, look for large IT providers to play in the higher end of the network layers, partner with large process automation companies and invest in small companies that mesh with their IP focused agenda. In 5-10 years when the next generation of wireless standards for automation works their way through a peer vetting process, IP may be deemed secure enough and lightweight enough to deploy plant-wide down to the instruments. But not today. For this first generation of industrial wireless field device networks the battle is over before the ink is even dry on the standards …. And the operations side has won.

-Paul Sereiko

Recently there has been a flurry of information coming from the analyst sector analyzing wireless proliferation rates and boundaries of end user adoption. While everyone can expound upon the myriad reasons for implementing wireless solutions – from reduced cost, accessibility issues, and ease of implementation – these reports validate what we vendors have known all along: end users are apprehensive about the reliability and security of transmissions in critical applications.

However, demand is growing in this typically conservative industry due to needs for plant efficiency and remaining competitive, and with the WirelessHART and ISA100 standards coming closer to fruition, end user concerns will abate and adoption rates are expected to intensify. Growth is being driven by monitoring and measuring applications as well as the prospect of seamless integration with existing devices and networks. This year, vendors will be shipping instrumentation developed around the WirelessHART standard with the ISA100 standard to follow soon afterwards.

Three analyst groups, VDC, Global Foresight Group and Frost & Sullivan, have all recently released studies on the industrial wireless marketplace.

Based on the recently released User Trends in Wireless Transmitters study by The Global Foresight Group, respondents indicated a strong interest in having wireless installations at their location but stressed their concerns about the importance for interoperability, security, long battery life, and standards. While the standards will address most of the concerns, the general “lack of standards” was listed as a major obstacle to widespread wireless adoption. The perceived value of wireless instruments was high in the study, outweighing many other in-plant options.

VDC’s recent brief Industrial Ethernet Technologies Gain Traction, Drive Profits for All found that demand was increasing faster than they had expected and sited reasons such as remaining competitive through improved operational productivity and visibility and doing it while reducing costs. VDC also anticipates that the market will not develop uniformly but in a fragmented market segments with defined projects.

Frost & Sullivan also recently released a brief that focuses on wireless adoption rates in European Process Industries entitled An Overview of Wireless Device Adoption in the European Process Industry. It appears that the European market has the same concerns [reliability, security, robustness, battery life] as their North American counterparts, and they too are eagerly awaiting common standardization. Frost & Sullivan predicts that adoption rates will be slow until end users concerns are addressed.

Significant progress has been made and will continue to be made with the WirelessHART and ISA100 standards and we foresee fantastic opportunity for improved performance, operational efficiency, plant utilization, and productivity with wireless instrumentation.

Paul Sereiko