JackDempsey8420

PLANT CONTROLS UPGRADE

5 posts in this topic

OK, I will post this to the group for some feedback and thanks in advance.  So in my plant we currently have several different AB SLC's that interface with WonderWare on the HMI side.  There is pretty much every network communication protocol that AB made in this plant.  ControlNet, DeviceNet, RIO, Flex/EX, ....  Along with that all of the old 1336 drives will be going to PowerFlex, along with alot of other 3rd party legacy equipment that all needs upgraded as well.  Point of this project is to go from SLC's to a ControLogix platform and all ethernet/IP, along with upgrading all of our 3rd party hardware, i.e. scales, outside comm's , etc.  I might point out that no PLC code will be added, only the transition from SLC to CLX.   My thought process as you can see is to stay with AB on the PLC side and stay with WonderWare on the HMI side.  If you think I should go a different direction please I am all ears.  I have roughly a year to perform this upgrade and more then enough capital set aside as well.  Thanks again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the business justification for this upgrade project?  

I have been in your shoes before.  On one hand, upgrading to the latest technology is a lot of fun, but the path will be difficult and the end result is you are taking a running, mature process and giving it a brain transplant.  

You might find CompactLogix processors to be a better fit than ControlLogix (and more cost effective); I suggest breaking down every system separately and pulling together data on what you have today (gather I/O count, I/O type, motor specifications, motor drive part number, PLC communication protocols).

You noted "no PLC code will be added".  When migrating from I/O-based processors like the SLCs to tag-based processors like the ControlLogix, all of the code will not be a load and go process.  Anticipate problems and be ready to respond.  

An option to consider...just replacing the processors but keeping some/all of the I/O and racks.  If you have ample spare parts, keeping the I/O and turning into remote I/O and adding new remote processors may afford your project many of your objectives.  It is possible to keep a SLC rack, add a remote RIO module, add a new ControlLogix processor, and port the code over.  Keeping your rack I/O leads to very little panel/wiring changes.  Pull out a SLC rack and put in a ControlLogix rack, there is going to be alot of panel wiring changes.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kaiser_will

Thanks for the reply, main justification is two fold.  One is that the SLC's and all of the 3rd party hardware are all legacy items that are no longer supported.  Two is that our 'main' batching PLC is a 5/05 and is maxed out as far as memory goes so we are not able to add anything to this system and with the growth of our business that just isnt good enough, i have to be able to have the ability to add new code, sub-systems, etc. to this batch PLC.  I considered your option, but problem is all of the 3rd party hardware connected to that batch PLC are now legacy products, i.e. Parker 24/36/48 slot solenoid valve banks on DeviceNet.  Parker won't support any of these products and our attempts to replace the Parker banks on DeviceNet with offerings like Turck, Murr, etc. have been unsuccessful and very expensive.  Money isn't the issue here and i have reached out to some local controls groups for assistance, but i always like to hear what the rest of the controls community has to say on this.  Plan now is to complete a engineering study with an outside controls group and move forward based off of those findings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack,

The manifolds you are looking to hook up, are they using EIP, Control Net, Device net? And are you trying to use the same valves? We use Parker valves and just completed a project using EIP as our connection using the H-Series valves with a PSSCENA as the field bus connection. With Allen Bradley all we had to do was install the EDS file then set the chassis size and we were done. The Micro Series of manifolds can be daisy chained together as well if you need to really get the valve count up. I have the PDF's for 4 of the connections they use with that series. I'm not sure what the max size is but i'm pretty sure its at least 3/4 NPT.

E103P-R3 - ISYSNET CONTROLNET ADAPTER INSTRUCTION SHEET.pdf

E104P-R3 - ISYSNET ETHERNET IP ADAPTER INSTRUCTION SHEET.pdf

E101P-R3 - ISYSNET DEVICENET ADAPTER INSTRUCTION SHEET.pdf

E102P-R4 - ISYSNET PROFIBUS ADAPTER INSTRUCTION SHEET.pdf

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

    There are more headaches to this transition than you might imagine.  One thing to remember is the asynchronous I/O update on ControlLogix.  But I do recommend trashing all the legacy fieldbus equipment and implementing E/IP the at the same time you change a systems processor if possible.

    I'm 10% through migrating 40 PLC5 processors and a couple hundred racks of RIO and PanelViews, maintaining the RIO after a processor change and then switching to E/IP on a per-rack basis.  It's a total headache, and I'm praying I can finish in a year.

    And I'd migrate anything that was !@#$ DeviceNet even if the vendor still supported it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now