What is the future for safety networking?

Safety networking is on the rise, especially in Asia, but not as fast as total networking on a global level.

02/10/2012


Industrial networking protocols have had an excellent year. The tail-end of the recovery from the 2009 global recession resulted in the installed base of networking nodes (including both fieldbus and Ethernet) growing by over 14% from 2010 to 2011, an extra 31 million new nodes. 

Increasingly over the past few years, the major protocol associations have been developing protocols to tackle specific problems, safety being prominent among them. It has now reached the point where almost every available protocol seems to have a safety sub-protocol or an alternative; some specialist safety companies are also releasing their own. Are these protocols being adopted as fast as they are being developed? 

For new factories, there are several advantages to installing a safety network instead of the more traditional hardwired systems:

  1. Cost – Fewer cables and fewer components like safety relays are required; with some automation networks, the same network infrastructure can be used for all automation and safety functions.
  2. Easy Maintenance – Rather than having to check and replace multiple safety-monitoring relays, many problems can be flagged electronically and logic systems can be put in place to allow continued running if the problem is not critical to safe operation.
  3. Monitoring – Most safety networks can automatically keep track of the number of times a safety function has been triggered and give active readouts of the condition of individual components and the likelihood of failure. This allows pre-emptive rather than reactive maintenance.
  4. Flexibility – With component auto-detection software on some protocols, components can be switched out with minimal programming. Networking also allows for relatively simple expansion of the facility simply by adding further branches to the backbone.

Graph showing the world market for industrial safety networking from 2010-2015 and the projections. Courtesy: IMS Research

It seems surprising, therefore, that in a recent IMS Research user survey, fewer than half of respondents had any intention of adopting a safety network within the next 3 years. This survey was carried out only in EMEA and the Americas, but I believe that this percentage would have been lower if Asia Pacific had been included. So why the lack of interest?

A large part of the problem, especially in EMEA, is that very few new factories are being built. Upgrading legacy systems can be expensive and this cost is hard to justify if current safety systems comply with the legislation and are working correctly. The staff trained to maintain and use these systems do not necessarily have experience with networking; and training or hiring simply adds to the cost. One of my peers recently described manufacturers as having an “inherent conservatism," a little harsh perhaps, but I think the fact remains that any new technology trying to enter the industrial market does have a barrier of trust to overcome before it is widely adopted. With an application as critical as safety, potential users are going to want to see proof that these networks are effective, reliable and work in real-world situations before they start replacing hardwired systems they know and trust.

In much of Asia, it is a different story. While a large proportion of the global greenfield sites are in this region, industrial safety is not treated with as high a priority in many countries. While this is slowly changing with the adoption of safety legislation by China and India (amongst others) these guidelines are not always policed effectively; without enforcement, legislation cannot be effective.

These factors go some way to explaining why a recent study from IMS Research found that hardwired systems had a much larger installed base of connections than any safety protocol and that this was expected to remain the case until at least 2015. Figure 1 shows forecasts of installed nodes. Of the safety networking protocols the three most widely adopted are CIP Safety, PROFISAFE and AS-Interface Safety At Work; they are also some of the longest established and most widely promoted by their respective protocol associations.

Profile photo of Graham Brown, an analyst for IMS Research. Courtesy: IMS ResearchOverall, safety networking is growing, although not as fast as total networking on a global level. I believe that once the barriers of trust, the perceived cost-benefit ratio, limited experience, and lightly enforced safety legislation are overcome, safety networks will ultimately become firmly rooted in factory automation. The safety networking market is still young and depends heavily on legislation; when legislation is enacted and enforced is difficult to predict. I believe that safety networks will not be generally accepted before 2017, and perhaps much later; but this opinion is open to debate.



No comments
Consulting-Specifying Engineer's Product of the Year (POY) contest is the premier award for new products in the HVAC, fire, electrical, and...
Consulting-Specifying Engineer magazine is dedicated to encouraging and recognizing the most talented young individuals...
The MEP Giants program lists the top mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and fire protection engineering firms in the United States.
2014 Product of the Year finalists: Vote now; Boiler systems; Indirect cooling; Integrating lighting, HVAC
High-performance buildings; Building envelope and integration; Electrical, HVAC system integration; Smoke control systems; Using BAS for M&V
Pressure piping systems: Designing with ASME; Lab ventilation; Lighting controls; Reduce energy use with VFDs
Case Study Database

Case Study Database

Get more exposure for your case study by uploading it to the Consulting-Specifying Engineer case study database, where end-users can identify relevant solutions and explore what the experts are doing to effectively implement a variety of technology and productivity related projects.

These case studies provide examples of how knowledgeable solution providers have used technology, processes and people to create effective and successful implementations in real-world situations. Case studies can be completed by filling out a simple online form where you can outline the project title, abstract, and full story in 1500 words or less; upload photos, videos and a logo.

Click here to visit the Case Study Database and upload your case study.

Protecting standby generators for mission critical facilities; Selecting energy-efficient transformers; Integrating power monitoring systems; Mitigating harmonics in electrical systems
Commissioning electrical systems in mission critical facilities; Anticipating the Smart Grid; Mitigating arc flash hazards in medium-voltage switchgear; Comparing generator sizing software
Integrating BAS, electrical systems; Electrical system flexibility; Hospital electrical distribution; Electrical system grounding
As brand protection manager for Eaton’s Electrical Sector, Tom Grace oversees counterfeit awareness...
Amara Rozgus is chief editor and content manager of Consulting-Specifier Engineer magazine.
IEEE power industry experts bring their combined experience in the electrical power industry...
Michael Heinsdorf, P.E., LEED AP, CDT is an Engineering Specification Writer at ARCOM MasterSpec.