Gerry

I guess you mean 2 doughs in 1 pocket?? In the plants I've worked on, there wouldn't be room for 3 conveyors between the rounder and 1st prover. And I don't think the bucket loader was ever intended to operate at 7000/hr. I'm assuming this is a Baker-Perkins/APV plant, with the buckets indexing with a clutch/brake system. Here they used a capacitive prox to sense the dough piece and trigger the clutch. As the rate increases, PLC scan time, I/O response time, and prox switching time all become issues - not to mention the clutch/brake - due to their innate variations becoming more significant relative to the dough rate. I don't think those loaders ever perform 100%.  

In my experience, the divider drops 4 dough pieces at once onto a conveyor that is mechanically geared to the stroke rate of the divider. Are you trying to change the gaps between each of the 4? or between groups of 4? Again, from my experience, the dough pieces drop off the divider's conveyor onto a slightly faster conveyor feeding the hander/rounder. Don't understand how the gap is critical.

I'm guessing that the film feeding axis is configured as linear and you're using the MRP to avoid ever reaching the maximum length of the axis with repeated moves. If I'm correct, I recommend configuring the axis as rotary, set the unwind to some arbitrary value, delete the MRP, and make the moves with the MAM relative instead of absolute. You say the clamp and seal mechanism moves the film - is that by design? Or is that a mechanical problem? Generally not good practice to try to solve mechanical problems with software.  

If the devices connected to the outputs are electrically isolated from each other, then no problem. What I am pointing out is that if one side of two (or more) outputs are effectively tied together through grounded inputs (like the drive as shown above), then the outputs are no longer isolated. I'll leave it to others to analyse the interaction.

If you tie two isolated circuits to two non-isolated circuits (i.e. grounded), isolation is lost.

If you create a UDT with one member of type BOOL[64], then tags of that data type can be manipulated with COP or FLL. To do any masking with MVM, first copy the tag to an array of SINT's, INT's, or DINT's as you prefer.

There could be problems if you want to connect a second output to a second drive (or other device with single-ended input).

I suggest using the FSC command. expression: array1[x] LEQ array2[FSC_controltag.pos]   use the result to reference the particular value from array2  

First, it is not necessary to have an array as the source for the FLL - just enter 0 as an immediate variable. Second, as Joe E. hints at, the FLL won't work the way you're hoping. The instruction to use is FAL.  

Every motion instruction requires a control tag. So yes, you need a new tag. Simple questions get simple answers. But I sense that you have more questions.

But... beware that the COP instruction executes the copying one byte at a time and can be interrupted by higher priority tasks at any point. If the data being copied originates from I/O or DNet or ENet, etc. or from a periodic task, it is likely that it will change during the copy. If that matters to your application (usually would) use CPS instead of COP.  

BTR/W are implemented using MSG in Logix 5000.

Don't waste your time with an AOI for this simple task. Use bits in a DINT for the alarms and check the DINT for NEQ 0 to set the global output.

If you set up the UDT properly, a simple COPy from the raw input to an instance of the UDT is all that you need. Subroutine / AOI unnecessary.

Inputs IN1 and IN2 and output OUT1 are analogues. IN3 is a binary. When Select is '1' (set) then Select set input is transferred to Output. When Select is '0' (cleared) then Select cleared input is transferred to Output.