Temperature, Level, Pressure, Flow

Transcription

1 Temperature, Level, Pressure, Flow March 2018 Market Intelligence Report

2 Temperature, Level, Pressure, Flow March 2018 Market Intelligence Report Executive Summary A web-based n electronic survey was conducted in March, 2018, to identify usage and application trends of temperature, level, pressure and flow instrumentation among the process automation professionals who comprise Control s readership. Detailed survey results are presented on the pages that follow, with key findings summarized below: When asked how important various factors were in their choice of field instruments, respondents indicated stability/repeatability, accuracy and ease of maintenance as most important. After that came support issues: ease of installation and commissioning, ease of calibration, and precision. Interestingly, price was not most respondents most important. A plurality of respondents (34%) indicated they buy or specify more than 50 field instruments a year while 15% buy or specify less than 10 a year. 20% indicated they don t buy them regularly. When designing a field instrument application, 47% of respondents use a standard device they ve chosen for that application. 19% seek application information from the web or literature, and 11% work up the application from first principles. A further 11% ask fellow professionals for advice. 77% of respondents field instruments connect to standard analog (4-20 ma) transmitters, 66% connect to HART transmitters. 52% of respondents connect directly to a controller (PLC or PAC I/O), 29% Foundation Fieldbus and 22% Profibus. The vast majority of respondents (39%) indicated less than 1% of their field instruments have Ethernet communication, while 4% indicated more than 50% of their field instruments have Ethernet communication. 40% of respondents indicated they expected to buy and install wireless field instruments/transmitters in the next months, while 26% did not. 34% were undecided. When asked which wireless field sensor protocol respondents were most likely to select for field instruments/transmitters, the largest number of respondents (45%) choose WirelessHART (IEC 62591), 17% ISA100.11a, 17% WiFi, 18% A proprietary protocol and 2% Zigbee.

3 When asked which flowmeter technologies they use, Coriolis flowmeters were at the top of the list, followed by differential pressure and electromagnetic. Orifice plate and vortex shedding have significant followings, while ultrasonic transit time, venturi tube, ultrasonic Doppler and turbine are not uncommon. (See results for full data.) When asked which level measurement they preferred, differential pressure and guided wave radar are most common, followed by ultrasonic, float or other mechanical technologies and openair radar. RF admittance or capacitance, hydrostatic and laser are also popular. (See results for full data.) 42% of respondents do not use or plan to add an independent overfill protection system. 43% currently use an overfill protection system and 15% plan to add one.

4 1. On a scale of 1-5 where 5 is hig hest, how important are the following in a field instrument: Accuracy Row % 3.1% 1.6% 7.8% 32.8% 54.7% Precision Row % 1.6% 1.6% 16.1% 39.5% 41.1% Stability/repeatability Row % 3.2% 1.6% 1.6% 26.2% 67.5% Self-diagnostics Row % 2.4% 7.1% 36.5% 38.9% 15.1% Communications Row % 0.8% 6.4% 34.4% 33.6% 24.8% Ethernet Row % 5.7% 18.9% 37.7% 29.5% 8.2% Onboard data processing/intelligence Row % 0.8% 14.8% 37.7% 35.2% 11.5% Ease of installation/commissioning Row % 1.6% 5.6% 10.3% 41.3% 41.3% Ease of calibration Row % 2.4% 2.4% 11.8% 39.4% 44.1% Ease of maintenance Row % 2.4% 2.4% 8.1% 42.3% 44.7% Price Row % 4.0% 8.0% 42.4% 22.4% 23.2% 2

5 2. How many field instruments do you buy or specify every year? 9% % Less than 10 34% More than 50 20% I don t do it regularly 22% Value Percent More than % % I don t do it regularly 20.0% Less than % % 1

6 3. When you desig n a field instrument application, do you most often: 11% Ask fellow professionals for advice 11% Work up the application from first principles 12% Contact a favorite vendor 47% Use a standard device you ve chosen for that application 19% Seek application information from the web or literature Value Percent Use a standard device you ve chosen for that application 47.3% Seek application information from the web or literature 19.4% Contact a favorite vendor 11.6% Work up the application from first principles 10.9% Ask fellow professionals for advice 10.9% 3

7 4. Do your field instruments connect to: (Please select all that apply) Percent Standard analog (4-20 ma) transmitters HART transmitters Directly to a controller (PLC or PAC I/O) Foundation Fieldbus transmitters Profibus transmitters Value Percent Standard analog (4-20 ma) transmitters 76.7% HART transmitters 65.9% Directly to a controller (PLC or PAC I/O) 51.9% Foundation Fieldbus transmitters 28.7% Profibus transmitters 21.7% 4

8 5. What percentag e of your field instruments have Ethernet communications? 4% More than 50% 12% 20 to 50% 12% 10 to 20% 39% Less than 1% 13% 5 to 10% 20% 1 to 5% Value Percent Less than 1% 39.4% 1 to 5% 19.7% 5 to 10% 13.4% 10 to 20% 11.8% 20 to 50% 11.8% More than 50% 3.9% 5

9 6. In the next months, do you expect to buy and install wireless field instruments/transmitters? 26% No 40% Yes 34% Undecided Value Percent Yes 40.3% Undecided 34.1% No 25.6% 6

10 7. Which wireless field sensor protocol are you most likely to select for field instruments/transmitters? 17% WiFi 2% Zigbee 45% WirelessHART (IEC 62591) 17% ISA100.11a 18% A proprietary protocol Value Percent WirelessHART (IEC 62591) 45.2% A proprietary protocol 18.3% ISA100.11a 17.4% WiFi 17.4% Zigbee 1.7% 7

11 8. Given the choice, what flow measurement technolog ies do you prefer to use? (Please select all that apply) 75 Percent Coriolis flowmeter Differential pressure Electromagnetic Orifice plate Vortex shedding Ultrasonic transit time Turbine meter Venturi tube Ultrasonic multipath transit time Ultrasonic Doppler Thermal dispersion flowmeter Insertion flowmeter Positive displacement meter Open channel Multiport pitot tube Propeller meter Paddlewheel meter Swirlmeter 8

12 Value Percent Coriolis flowmeter 72.0% Differential pressure 66.4% Electromagnetic 52.8% Orifice plate 46.4% Vortex shedding 29.6% Ultrasonic transit time 24.0% T urbine meter 24.0% Venturi tube 24.0% Ultrasonic multipath transit time 23.2% Ultrasonic Doppler 22.4% T hermal dispersion flowmeter 19.2% Insertion flowmeter 13.6% Positive displacement meter 12.8% Open channel 9.6% Multiport pitot tube 9.6% Propeller meter 2.4% Paddlewheel meter 2.4% Swirlmeter 2.4% 9

13 9. Given the choice, what level measurement technolog ies do you prefer to use? (Please select all that apply) 75 Differential PressurePercent Guided wave radar Ultrasonic Float or other mechanical Open air radar RF admittance or capacitance Hydrostatic Laser Magnetostrictive Weighing Systems Value Percent Differential Pressure 56.7% Guided wave radar 55.1% Ultrasonic 48.8% Float or other mechanical 31.5% Open air radar 30.7% RF admittance or capacitance 22.8% Hydrostatic 20.5% Laser 17.3% Magnetostrictive 16.5% Weighing Systems 15.0% 10

14 10. Do you currently use or plan to add independent overfill protection systems? 15% Plan to add overfill protection systems 43% Currently use overfill protection system 42% Do not currently use nor plan to add Value Percent Currently use overfill protection system 43.3% Do not currently use nor plan to add 41.7% Plan to add overfill protection systems 15.0% 11