PLCMentor.com

Yeah Dan - problem is that none of the devices listed here have hermetically sealed contacts. I guess even if they did they may opt for not going for the certification. Did a quick search and couldnt find one. So maybe we are both right...Its possible just not available. Russell

You might want to check the specs on the devices. Zone 2, or C1,D2 would be possible if the device uses hermetically sealed contacts. Russell

Interesting.... I would prefer to see the system rewired to the logix, but I do know my clients... Gotta have it up now! Russell

I would think the 5/80 would be faster also. With that said, have you tried removing the ethernet module to see if that is affecting your scan? I know you removed the cable, but I am talking the whole module. I have added those modules in the past and have not been aware of any big scan changes such as what you have observed, but that seems to be the only change other than the processor. You might want to let your post "marinate" for awhile and see what others have to say, but without any other solid reason, that would be my first troubleshooting step. Russell

Hi and welcome to the forum! I think you will be amazed at the people that visit and the advice offered. I need to make a quick post so let me just hit your last statment on the AO's. You really dont need 2 analog outs just one. You can use logic to decide whether to copy the result from automatic or the manual logic to the output. So if you have the system in manual the manual speed setpoint will be sent to the output. If the system is in auto the result of the automatice speed logic will be sent as a speed setpoint to the output. Russell

Holly, I think you can sum up a lot of the answers you have seen here with what I stress with my engineers - Program for your audience. As stated by Bob, if you are programming for engineers or scientists in a research capacity then C might do well for you. Though Jesper makes some valid points about the benefits of the industrial languages in his post that should make you pause. If these systems are going in an industrial environment and your PLC will be anything other than a 'black box' then I think you seriously need to consider ladder, structured text, or function block implementations of your system. That is what your audience will be familiar with. If it will be a 'black box' implementation (ie, your code will be proprietary and the end user will NEVER be allowed to access or troubleshoot by looking at it), then C might be fine assuming that you go through the appropriate testing. Let me throw another wrench in the works by disagreeing with your premise that the majority of electrical engineers will be more familiar and comfortable with C than with ladder. I dont see it. Ladder is designed around how electrical engineers are trained to think. I deal with electrical engineers on the industrial level. Many would not know what to do with C when they are a few years out of college. Some of the older guys may not even know how to spell C - they learned FORTRAN (and forgot it years ago). I think you are looking at the engineers in your environment (I am assuming design and research) and trying to cast all engineers in that light. Let me add another wrench in the works. Before you select your equipment based on whether or not it will program in C, check with your prospective clients. Do they have standards that will nullify your design? What will it do if you design your system around xyz system and the majority of your clients say, "No, we use Allen Bradley (or Siemens, etc)?" Your may always have a chance of that happening, but if it is a possibility then your standard should be based around what will be requested the most. Keep in mind that in the US AB owns 65-70% of the market. Internationally Siemens is king. Where will your systems go? This may be a moot point in your case, but with many of the OEMs we work with, this can be a very costly decision. To sum it up again - figure out your audience - select and program to that audience. Russell

As Ken says it would be helpful to have more info. First descirbe what the lights are doing on the scanner, and what the numeric display is indicating. Also if there is any indication on the Satorius then lets hear what you see there. What node number is the Satorius set up as? what else is on the device net link. It might be useful to post your device net configuration as well. Russell

Wow! I think I'll write that down too. But of course its working now... Why do we have to change it again?? You will probably still get that, but I would keep pounding. You dont want to be that guy with the Automax (at least you can still buy PLC5 parts) or PLC2 that's "amazing" (translate scary) that it is still running. Russell

Before you go replacing both PLC5's with a single CLX you need to make a determination of why they are currently on separate processors. If it is two independent systems (ie, one could be down and the other still productive) then you will want to stay with two segregated processors. If the two existing processors control two systems that are mutually dependent on each other and you can’t run one without the other then combining the systems on to one processor may make sense. Also with the logix you can purchase multiple ENBT modules if you bottleneck. I agree with Jesper that if you have the chance to make the CLX switch then you should jump on it. Keep in mind that it will take a fair amount of time to convert the program over and commission the new program. There are conversion programs, but I have never seen a conversion program that creates anything you would be happy with. Just using the new tag structure alone will take some thought and if you are going to switch you need to do it in a way that doesn’t ignore the features in the CLX. Take your time and evaluate carefully. Don’t knee jerk this decision, but likewise don’t kneejerk by going and buying 3 obsolete PLC's (solid, still chugging, but let’s face it - obsolete). Short term, I can’t imagine that the PC cards you have cant at least go to 115k. They may be grayed out since they are operating. Keep in mind that your network may not be able to handle 230k due to network cable length issues and installation quality. Also keep in mind if you change it you will need to replace the existing termination resistors at either end of the networks as they are determined by the network speed. Russell

The enet cards will work, but make sure your processors are of the right revision to handle cards. I have found older 5/40s that were so old that they didnt support the enet card. It is a pain to have to move and readdress the i/o in the first slot. I dont remember having to do anything special such as MSG instructions to communicate with my HMI. Just setup the port in the PLC and connect. If you buy the enet cards used be careful about the rev on those also. Russell

Ahh you guys took all the good ones... Only one I could think of in addition is Restore If you are looking for an interesting name for something you might also look into the translations of the words already given into another language. Russell

Paul - thanks for all the pertinant poop. You had some good tidbits on RSLinx and Logix. Waterboy - you mentioned that you dont have the CPU problems with the v16 processor but do with the v17. Possibly an issue with 17? I know there is a fairly recent update to that firmware rev. Might be worth looking into. Also going the other direction, have you considered reving back the 17 to 16 to see if the problem goes away. Might be worth looking into while you're down if the export/import method doesnt fix your problem. Here's an method I have from my rep a while back: "save your v17 file as .L5K format. Open the file in a text editor and change the "major" v17 to v16. Then open the .L5K file with RSLogix 5000. You may encounter an error or two as you have to make a few changes but this does work. Starting in v17 and looking forward (e.g. v18 down to v17) will be supported as an option in the controller properties." Good luck

Wow Ron I love the way you think! I am receiving those same calls and I have a similar message. I seriously doubt any training is going to get you a job. I also doubt a certificate would (even less so). I would kinda worry about working for the guy that cared just about the certificate. However with that said and also being an employer, the fact that you are willing to do that on your own says a lot. Ron has mentioned the economy. It stinks. We are both in some pretty hard hit areas. All this wasted text is here to offer you one suggestion that may actually do better in this economy. There may be companies out there that need an extra tech but just cant afford one the way things are right now. If you can find such a company and convey that you are willinig to use your resources to train up AND couple that with the offer to work cheap, part time - any way that will get in the door and real hands on experience. You then may be able to use the current economy to your advantage. When things get better maybe they offer to increase your hours, pay, etc. If they dont then you walk away with the skills and experience to land the job you want. Think stepping stones... Russell

We are pleased to announce that we are now adding videos on the Red Lion operator interfaces! Videos will be available on configuring HMI, Communications and many other topics. We added our first video today and we will continue to add videos throughout the week.

Working with the SLC at your local community college is a great way to get some hands on "play" time; however, keep in mind that there is a considerable difference between the SLC platform and the Logix platform. Now as for training. Training is a great first step, but understand that training will never make you proficient. Only regular challenges and doing it will ever get you there. You probably already know that. With that said I would suggest that your best option would be to see if you can line up an employer that understands that you are willing to do what it takes (time and money) to trian up on PLC's if they can provide an opportunity. That may sound a little far fetched, but you need to utilize the training to make it worth while. It goes away quick. Ron rightly speaks to the incorrect training methods that are widely used, but another big problem with guys I have worked with and trained is that they dont get to use what they have learned. The use it or lose it phrase really comes into play here. The other issue is the cram factor. There is so much that the brain can handle in a short amount of time and actually retain it. Many of these 2 day courses are just a great way to get a certificate. I dont want to discourage you from going out and getting training, but I dont want to see you invest in yourself and not be able to move forward. I think any interview you will be able to get is going to involve asking you what you have actually done. You have to find a way to get work and use those tools before they rust. Ron or Rockwell? Well I have just viewed Ron's vids and he worked with a friend of mine so I only know of his courses from there. However what I see shows that he knows it and can get it in your head. That is his only business and he is going to be very motivated to see you suceed. Rockwell will provide competent training that will be more of your classic type. I think Ron makes a good case for his training over the status quo. Either way you go I would invite you to view some of our videos at PLCMentor.com. They are all free right now and I think they would be good prep for any class training. Good luck and I hope this helped. Russell

Oh but we will! Just need a purchase order to start...

Here is the Ethernet Planning tool I mentioned: visit http://www.rockwellautomation.com/solution.../resources.html select the "choosing an architecture" tab then download the "EtherNet/IP Capacity Tool. Russell

How about the grounds? Is it possible that you may be getting noise through your ground connection? Are you just having problems with the compacts?? I remember a utiility that is available from Rockwell that allows you to check for issues on an Ethernet I/P system taking into account loading, managed switches, etc. Cant remember the name right now - I will try to get the name of it for you. Russell

David, I would also recommend DotNetNuke. We have tried various systems over the years and it seems to be the easiest we have come across for quick updating. It is open source and free plus very easy to setup. There are modules for sale for many different uses (ie, slide shows, video presentation, ecommerce, forums, etc, etc...). Russell

Right you are Mickey! I have been following Ron and keeping up with his site for a couple years now. I linked to those vids as soon as I saw them available. Most of our content is done in house, but when we find good accurate info on youtube we definately include it. If Ron gets some business from it I'm all for it! Russell

A voltage divider circuit sounds like a good answer to your problem; however, I would assume that the 90VDC is going to be on the output of your windmill therefore of reasonably significant power. With that assumption, you need to make sure your divider resistors are of sufficient resistance compared to your load to adequately limit the current through them. I am curious, what will you do with a 90VDC output? Generally I thought systems such as yours would step down that voltage to a range that would be acceptable to charge a battery. Russell

Just as a matter of information, RSLinx Lite cannot be used with anything except the RSLogix programming software. You have to move up to the classic when using it for SCADA systems. Russell

Im not real big on using indirect addressing unless absolutely necessary. It would not be difficult to troubleshoot in this instance, but it usually gives some field techs a fit. As always, program to your audience. That said, it would be a simple and efficient method given the right support personnel. If you dont have indirect addressing or dont want to use it, you could increment a counter and have an integer assigned to each conveyor that the operator would be able to enter the starting order. This would also allow you to start multiple conveyors simultaneously if required by entering in the same start value in both (if not necessary you would need a way to inhibit that capability). In operation the operator would enter the starting order for each conveyor. As the counter would increment, a simple EQU statement associated with the start logic for each conveyor would compare the count with the conveyors' start order. Both methods would work. As always there are many ways to do this. Deciding which works well for your environment and system is your next task. Russell

Yes and in addition Rockwell tracked down each and every buyer of that software. I think you would do better to stay away from EBay for purchases such as that.

I may be getting into this a little late to help, but I will put my 2 cents in. First I cant stand Device Net. Every facility I have worked with has managed to damage at least one component. It just doesnt stand the industrial test that I expect. Ethernet I/P is easy to teach and works well. My rep recently told me that 70% of all PLC to device communications is Ethernet I/P now. Profibus is not generally considered an AB solution, but it works well. Jumping into the Opto issue, I must say I dont have a lot of experience with it. I would be wary about installing an Opto system in what seems to be a facility that otherwise has all AB systems. That means more software and training for the maintenance guys in facility that has generally standardized on AB. No I am not an AB rep... As for the processor, have you looked at the new L2x series of compact logix? Its basiclly the block version of a compact logix. You can only add two additional modules, but you can address 8 Ethernet I/P drops. Hope this helps. Russell