• Advertisement

The reason reinvent the wheel?

Пластиковые и деревянные окна, входные и межкомнатные двери

The reason reinvent the wheel?

Сообщение chehsengyuan » Чт май 16, 2019 8:09 pm

As well, if a programmer isn't familiar with industrial automation, I certainly would advise to keep within a PLC development tool considering that the tools are much more oriented towards the industrial environment.

You mention which the program comprises a 21-step sequence. Excellent decomposing done below. For this, I would likely use sequential function chart (SFC) to map that directly and easily to be able to SFC steps, including this transitions between these actions, and then use any of your other known languages to specify the different actions at the steps blocks. This gives an outstanding overview and a fast track towards your application program. I do not think that VB can provide you with a result here that will quickly.

[url=#]https://www.omc-stepperonline.com[url]

So, I would propose to use PLC programming since, especially because of your decomposition, it really helps to create your program more speedily with less errors adequate a better lifecycle assistance, regarding future updates.

The reason reinvent the wheel?
Donald Labriola P. AT THE.,President, QuickSilver Controls: A big question between the PLC along with the PC, at least to me, is how long is configuration going to become maintained, and does this company have multiple programmers to take care of it? The code with the PLC can more easily be handled through the next PLC programmer. Particular Visual Basic or C# or maybe C++, unless there can be of discipline to squeeze time into documentation, are much more difficult to pass on the next person, especially when the original programmer is don't available. Mature software groups have the methods in place to succeed in passing on information; ad hoc will lead to troubles.

Another issue is exactly how hard of real-time is required. Does the PC os support real-time? The PLCs normally employ a lighter overhead and may specify the update rate according to how many rungs being processed.

There is also more of the issue of maintaining the product line in the face of changing PCs. Sometimes that actually good price was for the reason that manufacturer was closing out that production. Significant effort may be necessary to re-qualify the new PC more frequently than wished-for, especially if there is definitely much regulatory compliance concerned. Much of this is usually hidden from the customer by PLC manufacturer. If you decide to go for an business PC, be sure to determine how long they can make that particular configuration on the market.

Be aware of whether the operating system will be going by means of regular updates and just how this affects any testing that will be needed when the revise happens. This problem typically is less of an issue with the PLC.

The PC route could possibly be justified where the sophiisticatedness and interfaces are just not available in an affordable PLC, but make sure you be careful of your pitfalls. Getting all of the interface protocols up just isn't always as easy united would guess, and you will need to get closer for the operating system than you should prefer. If you don��t need to reinvent the wheel, try to avoid it.

Don��t roll your own personal
John Kowal, director, small business development, B&R Industrial Automation: I'm more concerned which the programmer in question provides no automation experience. Industrial controls suppliers spend great sums of dollars inside their software development environments to provide IEC 61131-3 compliance, certification and useful functionalities, enable best practices and promote structured, modular code. ��Rolling your own" puts that responsibility within the inexperienced programmer and will want to result in a machine since your other programmers will come across difficult to troubleshoot or modify sometime soon.

This doesn't mean which the PLC code has to be limited to ladder. It may be a combination of IEC step ladder diagram (LD), function obstructions (FBs) containing code prepared in ST, and/or FBD and also SFC. The purpose of encoding in IEC 61131-3 languages does not always mean that the end users should be encouraged to modify that source code. Rather, I'd personally suggest a state-of-the-art growth environment where your code is compiled to guard the integrity of your current software, with configuration tools, a software "sandbox" when the user can apply familiar ladder logic to do tasks such as handshaking or adding timers and receptors, without touching your signal, and using the ISA TR. 88. 00. 02 (PackML) and also OPC-UA standards.
chehsengyuan
 
Сообщения: 86
Зарегистрирован: Пн янв 29, 2018 11:00 am


  • Advertisement

Вернуться в Окна и двери

Кто сейчас на конференции

Сейчас этот форум просматривают: нет зарегистрированных пользователей и гости: 1

Rambler's Top100