Michael Lloyd

I used some Windows based software from these guys: http://www.fast-soft.com/page.php?21&gclid=CjwKCAjwtuLrBRAlEiwAPVcZBjrqoOEZyeIBfTwEFTRy_OKEoiW9mBQJS9Hpz0oGZp5ts8o-VbOuLBoCOPsQAvD_BwE At the time we were doing a lot of work with the Siemens TI-505 and Siemens S7 PLC's and someone in corporate specified "Siemens PLC" for a water treating package. We used Fast-Soft Softworks for the TI-505. The vendor supplied an S5. It was an interesting little box. The logic was literally a mix of ladder and statement list. They had to use STL commands (that coexisted in the rung structure) because there was no ladder for that function (and sometimes I think they were just showing off :) ) I initially thought that the Fast-Soft software for the S5 would look the same as the TI-505 but that didn't happen lol

Or Siemens S5 (I actually liked those but it's been a while)

I read and replied on my phone so I probably didn't do the best with understanding the scope of the OP's problem. Floppy drives? DOS? Holy vintage computing Batman!

Are you planning to replace all of the PLC 5 hardware (processors and IO cards)? If not, converting the software so that you can open it in Logix 5000 isn’t going to do anything for you (except make a god awful ungainly program that’ll be hard to follow). 

I'm just going to answer both posts here. Yes, yes Don't expect that thing to program anything like RS500 

I love the net-eni's, said nobody that ever put a Micrologix on a half dozen platforms in the GOM and expected a Freewave radio to maintain a good link in the fog at max range. Someone before me installed them and someone after me replaced them all with Micrologix with ethernet ports :)

We used the gateway address in everything. Some devices required it. It was a Class B network with a fairly common subnet. It's probably getting close to requiring a different subnet. Come to think of it, they recently moved controls off of the corporate NW so it's probably already changed. Either way, everything is routed, tunneled, and pummeled so the Russians can't get in, unless they want to.  

Or you could simple roll your own. It's just water... THQH + TC QC = Tfinal(QH + QC) T = Temperature. Doesn't matter what units as long as they are the same. Q = Flow rate. Doesn't matter what units as long as they are the same. I might add a bias value to the AOI to allow me to tweak the output plus or minus x% Or you could spend a bunch of time trying to make a Multivariable Control block do what most modern shower controls do with little to no effort. The MMC is a block used in advanced control applications where inter-controller interactions wreak havoc on the ability to control the process. It's not intended for making hot water... The 667-YD Fisher control valve is tailor made for this application (it's the part about the first drawing that was missing and that was bugging me). product-bulletin-fisher-yd-ys-control-valves-en-125150.pdf

It's better than  than the Micro 850 unless your need something to throw on the fire to keep yourself warm. I think the Micro850 would be better in that case.

This is one that bites fairly often...

It's a good idea. Water is a wonderful thing. It behaves itself. He'll need to know the flow rate of each stream and the temperature of each stream to make it work. Once he knows that then valve position is just a calculation. It's a perfect application for an AOI. My example is not without issues. Hysteresis would be a problem. If demand goes up there will be a lag between desired temperature and actual. In the real world would be a volume tank in the middle and possible hot and cold temperature trim lines tying in downstream <-- not a good use of the first rule.

First rule of PID control - keep it simple. :) Off the top of my head I can't see a way around it. You need a specific temperature of water and a specific flow rate. Something like this might work but something about it bugs me. RO on the bottom line is restriction orifice (to limit the amount of flow. You know the temperature range of the hot supply and the cold side sounded stable. So the cold flow is the wild flow and the hot flow is the controlled flow, classic ratio control...) otherwise you would use two valves, one fail open, one fail closed. High accuracy CAD drawing made with Rapid Scratch and Finger Erase...

It's getting a bit tedious to have to delete a wad of 10 or 15 emails when the wingnuts attack. Surely there's a way to stop the trash from piling up. I could turn my email off but there wouldn't be much use in being a member here if I did that.

That's a bummer. I figured that deleting the offending poster's account would dump his/her/it's "contributions". Nice sig line

I only flagged one last night but if that causes problems I'm fine with deleting the 10 or 12 emails that come in.

Here we go again...

If I get a notification from Mr PLC I’m usually on within 30s or so to mark it. I’m not sure how I’m the target when it’s a post in the AB forum

I subscribe to the Allen Bradley forum so I can see new posts as well anything I put there. If I only subscribe to my posts eventually there won’t be any.

I use boolean arrays all the time. I can think of quite a few programs that 20 different Bool[32] arrays and haven't noticed memory problem. The same programs use 8-ish Bools in a UDT that is often used 100's of times. I need to check the programs and see how much memory they are using up. I originally use (and prefer) DINT but in the aforementioned programs I was accommodating the guy that was doing the HMI work (well after we completed 50+ sites he told me I could have used DINT's ) I use structured text to map IO to tags, GSV's, and for computations in AOI's. One is a couple of hundred lines and it executes fast enough for what I'm doing.

The following is not a useful comment but it will subscribe me to the thread so I can see the comments- A couple of thousand lines is a big structured text file. That said, I'm curious to know what requires the most memory, ladder or ST. It's a great question.

Ditto. 

OH! I wondered. I have one (pretty simple) that I duplicate because it "wouldn't work". Good info. I'll give it a try

Ditto, drag and drop is easy. I can't believe I mixed the two up, but I did :o) I guess it depends on what and how many UDT's we are talking about but I think I like the one at a time method better. I've never had much luck with deleting a UDT once it's in the program. And with that long sentence typed I just realized why. You can't delete it if you're using it :o)

Citect Explorer isn't an Allen Bradley product. It's one of Schneider Electrics products

We have a lot of PLC's that talk to each other (some are 100 plus miles apart) BUT, as pcmccartney1 says... the subnet mask has to be the same.