A SCADA system usually consists of the following subsystems: A human machine interface or HMI is the apparatus which presents

process data to a human operator, and through this, the human operator monitors and controls the process. A supervisory (computer) system, gathering (acquiring) data on the process a nd sending commands (control) to the process. Remote terminal units (RTUs) connecting to sensors in the process, convertin g sensor signals to digital data and sending digital data to the supervisory sys tem. Programmable logic controller (PLCs) used as field devices because they are more economical, versatile, flexible, and configurable than special-purpose RTUs . Communication infrastructure connecting the supervisory system to the remote terminal units. Various process and analytical instrumentation

No pretendo escrever um longo tratado sobre o que SCADA e DCS (de agora em diante vou usar apenas o termo SCADA, que mais comum), mas gostaria de fazer uma breve introduo para aqueles que ainda no tiveram a oportunidade de conhecer este mundo, to amplo de tecnologias, que eu mesmo ainda estou apenas comeando a aprender. Basicamente, SCADA no um produto, nem um sistema e nem mesmo uma tecnologia por s s. SCADA um termo que define uma arquitetura para estruturar e interligar diverso s sistemas de superviso (monitorao) e controle de ambientes industriais. Em ingls Su pervisory Control and Data Aquisition. Sua funo permitir que os operadores control em processos distribudos geograficamente, como subestaes eltricas ou terminais de co mpresso de gs ao longo de um gasoduto. S para citar alguns exemplos. O DCS possui uma natureza mais local, ou seja, os operadores e o processo (a pla nta ou cho de fbrica) esto prximos um do outro. Em geral, o centro integrado de cont role fica a poucos metros, seno dentro, da planta. Exemplo clssico so as refinarias e qumicas em geral; controle do alto forno e outros.

Com esta simples definio, o mais atendo j percebe que do ponto de vista da segurana de rede, os maiores desafios se encontram no ambiente SCADA. Por que? Devido a d istribuio geogrfica do processo, a operao das redes SCADA so feitas atravs de redes WA , de longo alcance e muitas vezes contratadas de terceiros, ou at mesmo pblicas co mo a Internet. Tambm muito comum a adoo de rdios 802.11, modems (PSTN, 3G etc). Assi m, a borda da rede SCADA muito maior do que num ambiente DCS e quanto maior a bord a de uma rede, maior a probabilidade de existir um ponto vulnervel que permita a um invasor motivado encontrar uma porta de entrada. No estou afirmando que a rede industrial da fbrica no requeira proteo. Ela requer, e muito! Isso porque as redes corporativas (a rede no industrial) da maioria das em presas por mais seguras que voc (ou seu CSO) pense que ela seja na verdade esto ch eias de perigos para a rede industrial. Um desktop corporativo com vrus pode ser mortal para a sua rede de processos! Por hora isso. Pretendo ir melhorando a descrio de cada arquitetura aos poucos, co m diagramas etc. Being in the process automation for some years now.. I have noticed different pe ople (and of course me!) interchage the terms DCS, SCADA and HMI. Correct me if I am wrong but this is what I think is the difference

HMI (human machine interface) - Any type of interface between a "blind" controll er and operator. DCS (distributed control system) - A centralised control for inputs distributed geographically. (is it necessary it has to be a computer controlled?!) SCADA (Supervisory control & Data Acquisition) - More similar to DCS (distribute d geographically) but having some sort of operator interface to bring the data f rom various sections into a more sensible report?! This has to have a centralize d monitoring system like a computer interface?! The goals of DCS and SCADA are quite different. It is possible for a single syst em to be capable of performing both DCS and SCADA functions, but few have been d esigned with this in mind, and therefore they usually fall short somewhere. It h as become common for DCS vendors to think they can do SCADA because the system s pecifications seem so similar, but a few requirements paragraphs about data avai lability and update processing separates a viable SCADA system from one that wou ld work OK if it weren't for the real world getting in the way. DCS is process oriented: it looks at the controlled process (the chemical plant or whatever) as the centre of the universe, and it presents data to operators as part of its job. SCADA is data-gathering oriented: the control centre and opera tors are the centre of its universe. The remote equipment is merely there to col lect the data--though it may also do some very complex process control! A DCS operator station is normally intimately connected with its I/O (through lo cal wiring, FieldBus, networks, etc.). When the DCS operator wants to see inform ation he usually makes a request directly to the field I/O and gets a response. Field events can directly interrupt the system and advise the operator. SCADA must operate reasonably when field communications have failed. The 'qualit y' of the data shown to the operator is an important facet of SCADA system opera tion. SCADA systems often provide special 'event' processing mechanisms to handl e conditions that occur between data acquisition periods. There are many other differences, but they tend to involve a lot of detail. The underlying points are: SCADA needs to get secure data and ommunications medium, and needs to s' for prompt operator display. It ata quality validation. Redundancy control over a potentially slow, unreliable c maintain a database of 'last known good value frequently needs to do event processing and d is usually handled in a distributed manner.

DCS is always connected to its data source, so it does not need to maintain a da tabase of 'current values'. Redundancy is usually handled by parallel equipment, not by diffusion of information around a distributed database. These underlying differences prompt a series of design decisions that require a great deal more complexity in a SCADA system database and data-gathering system than is usually found in DCS. DCS systems typically have correspondingly more co mplexity in their process-control functionality. The company I work for has both DCS and SCADA products. The operator stations fo r each product line can use the same UNIX workstations. The systems share data ( and thus form a composite SCADA/DCS system), but the SCADA database architecture is significantly different from the DCS data architecture, to the extent that t he SCADA master station database looks to the DCS operators very much like some directly-connected DCS I/O. The DCS people are (of course) keen to simplify this to cut costs. However, they do not yet have a viable alternative for the mechan

isms required in SCADA systems to have communications redundancy and data redund ancy to provide the sort of SCADA system reliability that our customers expect. If you look at most customer's system requirements specifications, a careful ana lysis of the data collection and data quality requirements will indicate if SCAD A-style or DCS-style systems are appropriate. In general: the more features a sy stem provides the more it will cost, so if you do not need SCADA-type data gathe ring facilities it will usually be more economical to use a DCS-type system. If you do need these facilities, you will pay for them. The short answer: DCS and SCADA are still different things, it depends what the customer specifies as to which is appropriate for a particular installation. I hope this has clarified more than it has confused. Also, it is my opinion base d on my own experiences with DCS and SCADA. Others may have experience with syst ems that are designed to provide full SCADA and full DCS functionality in the on e system.