11 posts in this topic

I'm being asked to come up with ways to upgrade an old 5/05 rack. A few years ago I thought I remembered Allen Bradley having a special rack that would allow a new processor control various old IO types. Does anyone remember the name of that system? and has anyone used it?

We will probably replace with an Automation Direct PLC (per their request) but, want to offer an Allen Bradley solution as well

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can use a CompactLogix and a 1717-AENTR to replace the SLC processor, as long as you do not have any fancy comms modules in the rack (ie DeviceNet/RIO etc).

 

Alan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate the response. It's a real simple rack I bet that will work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A-B does not have a one-size fits all PLC-5 replacement rack.  One must go through the existing PLC-5 rack design, drawings and PLC program to verify you understand the scope of what the rack and program are doing.  Do you need PNP or NPN I/O modules (i.e., high-side or low-side I/O switching)?  How many discrete inputs needed?  How many discrete outputs needed?  How many analog inputs needed?  

Depending on your customer and their situation, making a PLC-5 rack go away is only reducing the potential for catastrophic failure.  Migrating from a PLC-5 to a Compact or ControlLogix processor will most likely not let the customer make more product or better quality product.

Option A - Keep the PLC-5 rack for the I/O modules, add a remote module in place of the PLC processor, add a CompactLogix processor to communicate with the PLC-5 remote I/O rack.  Pursue Option A and you get to keep all of the PLC-5 (with the exception of the processor).  Few wiring changes needed.

Option B - Replace the PLC-5 rack with a CompactLogix rack.  This will require panel wiring changes.

There are millions of racks of PLC-5 available in the world.  Yes, it is old technology, but it works and there are tons to be found.  Option A may not be sexy, but it works and is the lowest risk option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info. Their main goal is to upgrade their PLC's to something that is supported.  At the moment I'm just trying to decide what options to look in to. Looks like your Option A and B will suffice for the Rockwell options. I'll look into it further.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would prefer replacing the whole SLC 5/05 chassis with a CompactLogix if you already have the software to program it (it's not the same software as the SLC 500 series). We had a machine that had been converted from a PLC-5 to a ControlLogix using an ASB module in place of the PLC5 processor and a DH+/RIO module in the ControlLogix chassis to control it. If you go with the option of replacing the 5/05 processor with an AENTR module, be sure you clearly document the I/O addressing and tape it to the inside of the cabinet door so anyone can come along in 5 years and figure out what you did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did one a couple of years ago.  AENTR to an L43, we added motion to the L43 and a couple of Ultras on Sercos.

Just had to pay attention to IO mapping and verify the program references were correct.

Just a question of money and time.  As Joe says, if you can support the newer Compact or ControlLogix platforms with software, you will probably have less headaches in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it were my call, I think I'd prefer to replace the whole rack as well. In this case, it wouldn't be a real big job. This would be their first newer Allen Bradley. These guys won't like RSLogix5000(or Studio) after being on version 6 of RSLogix500 for the last 15-20 years but, oh well

Thanks for the tips on the IO mapping. I'll keep that in mind

As much as I hate to say it, it looks like we may be stuck with Automation Direct. Everyone trying to save a buck 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DL or Productivity 3000?  Because the 3000 Suite is almost Logix5000 like.  Unless they are already comfortable with AD products and software, seems like they would be better off in the Rockwell world.  Don't get me wrong, the AD stuff is lower cost and majority of software is free and easy to use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The transition from 500 to 5000 really isn't that big a deal. Biggest points:

1) Price. Ouch.

2) Tag based instead of address based. Actually gives you a lot more flexibility once you get used to it.

3) I miss the CDM feature from 500. The closest 5000 has is the quick watch window but it's nowhere near as good.

4) I miss having the cross-reference links in the code window.

 

If they're seriously considering Automation Direct, you have probably lost the battle already, unfortunately. My experience with DL is very negative but I've never used Productivity 3000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be Productivity 3000 most likely. I've done some DL.. it's painful. 

They have good contractor remote support for AD with other production lines so they feel more confident with it. They don't have a real PLC tech on site. 

I agree 500 to 5000 isn't that big a deal but... it is to old maintenance guys that don't like change.. and I'm with ya on the cross reference links in 500! I remember when I discovered that     

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