Hi,

I need more help. My company has decided to replace 4 Panels Speedtronic Mark 5 by Mark 6 and I do not see the global reasons to do this.

I need help please. I want some arguments to convince them that it is not necessary because for me the Mark is robust very hard and no problems.

May be I do not have all the datas because I am sure there is not. How to finds reasons economically and technically about this operation.

Thanks for any help

I do not know when upgrade is necessary and when to replace is necessary.

 

Your management is probably responding to the end-of-life letter that GE has sent out about the Mark V. The availability of spare cards and parts from GE is about to come to an end. And a lot of companies will not do business with third-party card providers for a variety of reasons regardless of the conditions or sensibility.

I believe that GE Oil & Gas (also known as 'Nuovo Pignone') is still selling some Mark VI panels, but be aware that the GE division that produces Speedtronic turbine control panels is no longer selling Mark VI systems; they are selling components for replacement, but not complete systems. So, whatever Mark VI systems GE O&G are selling is essentially "new, old stock", which is still pretty new.

The Mark V is a fine system, and later versions were very robust. But, it is poorly documented and the support for the system is waning as it gets older. You probably have a lot of experience with it, but what if something should happen to you; what would your company do then? As you know, it takes a lot of study and "reading between the lines" to learn about, troubleshoot and maintain a Mark V. Especially Mark Vs used on aero-derivative gas turbines, as there is very little written about them and the Mark V LM is not very much like the Mark V, except in looks.

Yes; you will have to learn a new control system, but that can be a good thing as well as a bad thing. One thing it will do for you is to add another control system to your CV, which is never a bad thing!

The programming, configuration and trending tools that come with the Mark VIe (ToolboxST) are really excellent compared to the Mark V. Essentially, you do all your work in one application; you don't have a bunch of ASCII text files and downloadable Intel hex format files and directories. And, the Trender for troubleshooting is excellent.

They still use CIMPLICITY HMIs. I won't say anything about that one way or the other.

So, unless you own a lot of stock in your company and this purchase will reduce your dividend or the stock price, you should just accept it and embrace it because almost everyone I know that has upgraded their control system from Mark V to Mark VI or Mark VIe has been very satisfied, overall. There are exceptions to everything, but, in my personal opinion I would jump at the chance to go from a Mark V to a Mark VIe, no questions asked.

As far as when to do an upgrade, that depends on a lot of things, and most of them are intangibles. Some companies upgrade because they just plain don't like a particular control system, or to get features in the new control system they don't have or can't get in the new control system. It's kind of like deciding when to get a new computer, or a new television, or a new car. Do you wait until the old one just dies, in which case there will be some time you don't have the functionality until you purchase and obtain a new item, or do you just want to stop spending money on repairs which are steadily increasing? Or, do you just want a faster, sportier model with more bells and whistles? Sure, you can keep the old stuff working, but at some point the effort and cost can't be justified and you could have bought a new system for what you've spent trying to keep the old one repaired and running.

The good news for you is that GE doesn't change the way the turbine and the auxiliaries operate when they replace a control system. Yes, they do modify some sequencing to fix known reliability or safety issues but, in general, the turbine and auxiliaries are going to operate just as they did with the Mark Vs. So, your knowledge and experience about the turbine and auxiliary operation is still going to be valid and useful. This is not like going from MS-Windows to MS Vista, if you've done that or read about it. It's more like going from command-line DOS to MS-WinXP. Yes, it has a steep learning curve, but once you get on and up the curve, it's pretty smooth sailing and almost enjoyable (as much as any job can be enjoyable).

Good luck, and don't sweat the change. The biggest thing you need to do to help this change go smoothly is to insist that an experienced and knowledgeable commissioning person be assigned to the job prior to the start of the outage so that person can get familiar with your site, the old and new control systems, and prepare a plan for how to accomplish the work--rather than waiting for anyone to show up on the day the work is supposed to begin and having to learn everything and do the work all at the same time. Many companies are now demanding to see CVs for field people and even rejecting some (not always for the proper reasons) to try to improve the outages (this is true for both mechanical and controls works).

Again, best of luck! And let us know how it goes.

The best news is that your Company did not decide to use a PLC-based control system to replace the Mark V! That can be a very steep learning curve, with a lot of problems and a lot of trial and error on both the installation and the learning. So, if you're going to get a new control system, better a Speedtronic than most of the alternatives!

 

Mark V is OLD now, back from 1998. MarkVI came out in 2003, and in 2007 it was MarkVIe. Spares for an old system like that are going to become scarce (if its not already like that), and so is support. Skills for Mark-V are going to deplete (although not a lot of those skills are needed on a smooth running machine anyway).

Of course DON'T go "markVI" because it is not being manufactured anymore! If someone is trying to sell you an old kit that was lying around in their warehouse, say no! If anything, upgrade to MarkVIe, that system is at the beginning of its lifecycle.

Mark-V is robust but so is Mark-VI, and MarkVIe, going forward. So I don't think you should be worried about that.

What are your apprehensions that make you inclined to find ways to not upgrading your speedtronic people?

 

More information required! First, I assume this is a gas turbine application rather than a steam turbine application or combined cycle, with both types of turbines. If the ONLY change is upgrading the Mark V to Mark VI, then it will be hard to justify economically. However, if you are also upgrading the combustion system to the current version of DLN, it may be necessary to also upgrade the Speedtronic to Mark VI. There are possibly other upgrades that would require the control change.
What type of operator interface do you have - IDOS monitor or HMI? You can upgrade the operator interface to HMI without upgrading the control to Mark VI.

Also, you should seek other opinions - I am a GE retiree and still own GE stock, so my opinions may not be unbiased.

 

Dear Otised,

We are appreciating your open command.

 

Thanks for all,

Yes, this upgrade is for a gas turbine application, a Nuovo Pignone PGT25 (GG LM2500 SAC). and starting operating since 1995.

Not combined cycle.

Yes the upgrade is ONLY change the Mark V to the new one (Mark VIe).

That I am looking is how to justify economically to do or not to do this upgrade.

No upgrading the combustion system to the current version.

No DLN,

The type of operator interface is IDOS monitor. TEXAS MICRO computer. and is very strong.

I agree with you for upgrade the operator interface to HMI ONLY.

Good retirement so your opinions are helpful for me.
Thanks more and my email is dameneamar [at] yahoo.fr

 

You say that Mark V is OLD now but if you know that we get in the past Mark II and running for more 25 years very strong.

For my company we started to use Mark V since 1995 for 4 GT PGT25 and until today is ok.

I do not find the reasons to do an upgrade for all the panels ( yes for the operators the upgrade is necessary).

The first problem for us and for my company is when we need a spares we must to buy it abroad and it takes times.

I know that today there is only MarkVIe. no Mark 6 but I am not obliged to follow the politics of the constructor of the control systems.

Some of our management want just to change for changment only this. but for me as a control manager I have to find the ways to convince them that is not necessary for today.

 

Thanks for CSA for this help.

I am the only reader of the end-of-life letter that GE has sent out about the Mark V.

But I think that we can not compare our private life where we like to change permanently all thing with the equipment of industry I see.

For me I have my proper reasons to change some things for me (with my money) but for the plant I am sure I have to consider many and more parameters ( Money of the people)

Thanks more CSA

 

We are still operating MARK-II along with MARK-V on two gas turbines. Both systems are operating fine. No need to upgarde MARK-V which is stable operating system, unless there is some valid reason, such as non availability of spares or shortage of skilled manpower.

Regards
RAM

 

Greetings Sir,

There are many other 3rd party vendors that may be able to offer you an alternative solution to just another GE Mark series control system. Third party vendors, including ourselves, (www.tarco.com) can offer a GE based PAC system that although not specifically a Mark V or VI(e), accomplishes the control you need, with as good or better speeds, with GE products as the main processor.

GE, and other OEMS for that matter, are in fact using PAC controllers (RX3i) on their own packages, (see Ge10-1 gas turbine spec sheet) and although I'm not sure why they like to compete with themselves in this market, they obviously realize the benefit of using such a system.

We would be pleased to offer you an alternative to the Mark Series control system and can offer experience, responsiveness and proven systems.

Regards, Thomas (thomas.bauer [at] tarco.com)

 

Thomas,

You have posted here before and I, and I'm sure others, have visited your Company's website. There is some information I didn't find there that would be useful in helping to compare your system against a Speedtronic, or any other system being proposed for replacement of a GE Speedtronic turbine control system.

How does your Company drive the bi-polar electrohydraulic servo-valves used on GE-design heavy duty gas turbines? Most PLCs cannot drive +/- 10 mA devices directly, as they only have 0-20 mA, 4-20 mA, or 0-200 mA outputs. The servo-valves used on GE-design heavy duty gas turbines require +/- 10 mA drives, so most third-party suppliers provide an interface module--which is another point of failure and another spare which has to be sourced and warehoused, and in some cases requires calibration.

How does your Company interface the control system you configure to with the Geiger-Mueller type flame detectors used on GE-design heavy duty gas turbines? The typical flame detectors (manufactured by Honeywell) require 335 VDC power and that 335 VDC is "switched" in proportion to flame intensity. So, what is the source and the "monitor" used for these flame detectors? How does your flame detector "monitor" provide flame detector intensity information to the operators and technicians?

How does your Company interface the control system you configure to interface with the LVDTs used on GE-design heavy duty gas turbines? These devices require a source of around 3 KHz at approximately 7.0 VAC RMS. And the "monitors" must be able to read a differential feedback. Most third-party control system suppliers use some kind of interface for the supply and feedback, and convert the LVDT feedback to 4-20 mA for the PLC. This is another spare part which must be sourced and warehoused, and which requires calibration, and which is another point of failure.

How does your Company accomplish electrical overspeed protection with the control system you provide? Is it done at the PLC scan rate, and if so, what is the scan rate?

What does your Company provide when the Customer wants to eliminate a mechanical overspeed bolt? How does your Company provide an independent electrical overspeed sensing system that can trip the turbine in the event of an electrical overspeed? What is the update rate of this independent electrical overspeed detection/trip system?

None of these details are available on your Company's website. These are things that must be considered when choosing a PLC-based control system for use as a turbine control system. This is not a comprehensive list, but a list of some of the more critical hardware items to consider when choosing a turbine control system.

I've been to troubleshoot, and there have been other references on control.com, to poor transitions between droop speed control and CPD-biased exhaust temperature control in PLC-based control systems. Does your Company's system use some kind of "minimum select" function for fuel control to allow smooth transition from droop speed control to exhaust temperature control, and still allow for maximum output based on ambient and machine conditions? If not, how does the control system configured by your Company accomplish the transition between speed control and temperature control? Or, does your Company's control system use another scheme, and if so, what is it?

As for the reference to the RX3i-based system, I believe that is being used for the auxiliary systems, the basic "sequencing" of pumps and motors and fans and such. The "core control" of fuel and protection is still being accomplished in a Mark-based control system. GE has been doing this for some time on their aero-derivative units, and the jury is out on the implementation. These PLC portions of the control system don't have to interface with the servo-valves and the flame detectors and the LVDTs; they are just primarily discrete inputs and -outputs, and some generic analog I/O (4-20 mA; T/C; RTDs; etc.).

Some Customers like it, others dislike having to have to different interfaces to the control system. There is still one HMI, but the core fuel control and protection must be accessed using Toolbox or ToolboxST and the basic auxiliary sequencing must be accessed using Proficy or LogicMaster (or whatever they call it these days; I hear some people still use LogicMaster and prefer it to anything newer).

Let's have some details of the control system your Company would configure to replace a Speedtronic turbine control system. Tell us how it would interface with these devices, and what makes it better than a Speedtronic. It would help us to evaluate one system against another. Apples to apples, with concrete examples. We all know what the Speedtronic does and how it does it. We want to know how these PLC-based control systems will accomplish the same functions.

The Speedtronic isn't perfect, but it is a dedicated turbine control system, not something that is adapted to turbine control. It's not well documented; it has a lot of quirks and idiosyncracies. Service isn't always the greatest. Spare parts are expensive. But, it does what it's intended to do without adapters and converters and interfaces.

And most people will tell you that it's pretty darned reliable. One of the biggest comments I encounter nearly everywhere I go and have been is that people all say, "We had training on this a couple of years ago, but it's been so reliable that we forgot everything we learned," or, "We had training on this several years ago, but the people who were in the training have left the company or moved on to other jobs." Now, that's kind of a compliment of sorts: That the Speedtronic has worked so well for so long.

But, the sites which have the best luck with <b><i>any</b></i> control system, are the sites where the technicians (and operators) take the time to learn and understand the control system when it's working, so that when it's not working they have the best shot at troubleshooting. The personnel at most sites don't look at a control system until there's a problem with it, and then it's an emergency. A turbine and it's auxiliaries and devices/instruments is not a simple system, though when it's working well it can seem like it (again, a testament to the control system--whatever variety).

Most people choose to upgrade a turbine control system because they one they have is older and they don't have people or parts to support it, and /or they can't get people or parts to support it. There is evidence on control.com of many sites which still use Mark I and Mark II and even Fuel Regulators, because they have knowledgeable and competent people to troubleshoot and maintain the turbine control system.

Most people choose a retrofit turbine control system based on personal feelings and cost. Some people just don't want to deal with GE or the supplier of the Speedtronic because they don't like the prices for parts or service, or they don't like the service. Many people say, "A PLC can do the same thing!" without considering the types of devices the PLC has to interface with, and the control schemes that have to be implemented to ensure smooth operation with maximum possible power output while still protecting the turbine, auxiliaries, and personnel. Yes, a PLC can be programmed to do anything, but it's also the quality of the programming.

And it's not just the PLC programming; it's all the devices and instruments the PLC has to interface with when being programmed to run a GE-design heavy duty gas turbine. And personal feelings should be quantified when choosing a turbine control system, so that, as much as possible, the decision is reduced to dollars and cents that buys reliability and availability.

 

Hi,

My company is looking to purchase OEM parts for GE Nuovo Pignone frame 5 to keep as spare part stock. Can you help me to source a good & reliable dealer with a competitive price?

 

It's presumed since you posted in a Mark V-related thread that you are looking for Mark V Speedtronic OEM parts.

We recommend patronizing advertisers here on control.com, and Gas Turbine Controls (www.gasturbinecontrols.com) advertises they have Speedtronic parts and are now offering control system services, as well.

The advertisers make posting here for help or assistance possible, so supporting them will help to keep this site available.

 

dear all,
our company is also looking for some OEM speedtronic mark v parts. and since there is a end-of-life letter from GE about spare cards and parts it means that GE doesn't produce those card anymore and we have to buy cards from third party. Can anyone please send me a copy of end-of-life letter from GE? Because we have not received that letter.

thank you.
hartanto.k[at]gmail.com

 

Dear DAMENE:

You are correct to state that the Mk V is robust and your apprehensions to upgrade are justified. The GE Mk V is a sound and robust turbine control unit and GE knows this. They built a product that is out living their sales cycle and they are trying force the Mk V into obsolescence.

Are you using <I> or HMI for your operator interface?

CSE Engineering offers <ITC>, a Windows based turbine control human/machine interface, as a low cost, direct replacement for the GE SpeedTronic Mk V <I> or HMI operator interface.

The primary issue with the Mk V is the GE proprietary ARCNet cards in the HMI allowing the Mk V to communicate over Stagelink to Cimplicity through TCI.

The <ITC> system utilizes state-of-the-art, off-the-shelf hardware/software technology to communicate directly to the Mk V. The <ITC> system supports Stagelink communications utilizing a non-OEM proprietary ARCnet card and does not rely on, or use, DOS, IDos, Cimplicity, TCI, or CimBridge.

The <ITC> system capabilities include: Full monitoring and control, Complete Mk V Tools (Control Constant Modification, AutoCal, EEProm Utility, Logic Forcing, View Tools, Pre-Vote Display, Quick Sheet Display & Dynamic Real Time Rung Display), Unit-Specific data synchronization (no more sneaker net), Real-time and historical data trending, Automated reports, and More.

The <ITC> system also provides native protocol gateway communications via Modbus (Serial/TCPIP), Allen-Bradley CIP and DF1, GE FANUC Series 90, DDE, NetDDE, DirectNet, OSI PI, OPC (Server and Client), and many more.

For further details on <ITC> visit http://info-itc.us or email [email protected].

 

Makes me wonder what a turbine virus would sound like.

Regards
cww

 

Dear

ITC HMIs for GE turbines seem to be very efficient but we should understand the fact that we just do not need the HMI upgrade only. Upgrading MarkV from both hardware and software point of view is essential. GE has stopped its support for the spares of MarkV control system. ITC people no doubt are proposing a good replacement for <I> interface but will that solve our problem?

Our problem is this that both hardware and software of GE Mark V are getting obsoleted (in fact they have).

So i would appreciate that if anyone suggests any alternative so please explain it from both hardware and software point of view.

Best Regards
SB

 

There are, literally, hundreds of GE-design heavy duty gas turbines <b>in operation</b> around the world with Mark II control systems; there was a pretty large number of GE-design heavy duty gas turbines sold with Mark II control systems. There is currently no support from GE for Mark II systems.

Not as many GE-design heavy duty gas turbines were sold with Mark IV control systems, but there are still, literally, hundreds of them <b>in operation</b> around the world with Mark IV control systems. And, there is virtually no support from GE for Mark IV systems, either.

How can these turbines remain in service for so many years without support from the control system manufacturer? Because those sites generally have experienced people who are, one, knowledgeable about the turbine operation, and, two, knowledgeable about how the control system operates the turbine, and, three, have access to spare parts inventories, either internal or from third-party suppliers.

Relying on the control system manufacturer for support to keep your turbine running is just asking for trouble, regardless of the manufacturer. There are lots of similar product examples in various businesses and industries of companies who are able to keep their aging equipment and control systems in operation because they have competent people and access to spare parts.

Is working with these older control systems easy, or is there a lot of troubleshooting information and operational data retrievable from them? No. But, competent personnel with experience and support and spare parts can keep these systems reliable and available for years.

There were quite a large number of GE-design heavy duty gas turbines sold with Mark V control systems, and, yes, the manufacturer is ending their support for this system. But, does that mean that the system needs to be immediately replaced? (The manufacturer certainly wants everyone to believe so, and so do their shareholders, which for the sake of disclosure, I am one (but I hold shares of a lot of other companies, also)).

So, if you are relying on the manufacturer for support for the Mark V, then you might think about upgrading sooner rather than later. There are advantages to upgrading, but the complexity of the system (particularly the HMIs) increases greatly, as well. And, the retrofit can require significant down time (lost production), and require a significant investment in new spare parts, as well as training and familiarization for the operators and technicians.

So, having a third-party option for an HMI which can be integrated with other plant control systems (which the GE Mark V HMIs can't do so easily, at least with their support--there are control system integrators who would do this with CIMPLICITY) can be very cost-effective.

So, look at the <b>entire</b> picture, and consider all of the options and costs, and don't just shudder and cringe when the OEM says they're not going to support their equipment any longer. At least in the Speedtronic category, there are thousands of examples of systems still in use around the world today that no longer have manufacturer support.

And when you ask, "Will <b><i>that</b></i> solve our problem?" What is the problem to be solved? You have assumed the problem is support for the control system, and if the Mark V has an <I>, good luck getting support from GE. They will just tell you to upgrade to a GE Mark V HMI, even though they still "support" the Mark V. Yes, there are still people in GE and their associates who are familiar with <I>s, but they are getting fewer and harder to get to sites when there are serious troubles, and some hardware is just no longer available so some troubles can't be overcome.

There can be more than one "problem" to be solved. And a third-party operator interface can be the answer to more than one "problem". The key is, what is the problem to be solved?

 

Dear SB,

This thread was started by DAMENE and I was responding to him. Do you work for the same company, because you state, "but we should understand the fact that we just do not need the HMI upgrade only." And, "but will that solve our problem?"

GE would love for you to replace these 4 panels with Mk VI's for a tremendous amount of money. An entire cottage industry of third party ex-GE engineers that know the Mk V inside and out has developed viable and cost-effective ways to prolonging the life of the Mk V for many years to come and to modernize the technology to today's standards.

Regards,
Ron

 

dear damene,
could you please send me a copy of end-of-life letter for mark v?

thank you

hartanto.k [at] gmail.com