automase

First off, making a valve data type is a great idea, especially if you've got many valves to program. This will keep them all consistent. But as IO_Rack said it shouldn't really matter where they are addressed. I see what your trying to do in that you want to declare your valve variable in the CIO memory area (It looks like this would be where your physical IO signals are coming in from? Can't remember the exacts but I recall CIO 3000's being for remote devices), BUT this would definitely be considered average practice. What you should do is make your valve data type as you did with just 3 bits. This fits nicely into 1 word of memory with 13 bits spare if you want to expand your datatype to include things like '.Fault', '.Interlocked', '.Auto', '.Manual', etc. So then say you have 100 valves. I'd personally declare my valve variables as something like: Name: Valve_001 (Pad the variable name with zero's as searching through the variable tables will be much easier, so you don't get Valve1, Valve10 & Valve100 appearing next to each other when trying to sort them) Type: Valve Address: W1 (The state of your valve is determined by IO in real time so no need to have the variables in retained memory, I only do when I've got say 500 valves and the W area isn't big enough) Then all the way up to Valve 100. Name: Valve_100 Type: Valve Address: W100 Now what you can do is have a section in the program that is for mapping the IO from the CIO area, to your valve variables, and vise-versa for any Outputs. This should be one of the very first sections of code. If you're not short on memory in you're program there's no need to conserve it. Also the increased cycle time is negligible if you're using this for valves that take perhaps half a second to open anyway.  

SFC Programming please. If it wasn't for the insanely good pricing of NX IO and great local support of the Omron Engineers, the lack of SFC is almost a deal breaker. I know Omrons target isn't particularly process control, but SFC would make Sysmac almost unrivaled.

Does anyone here use this? Control Draw If so how useful do find it? Worth spending the time on learning or better off with another product? If so what? My application is going to be for in-house management and design of control systems for a food manufacturing plant.   Thanks.

Sysmac would have advantages to teach in that there is a much more modern approach with the Instructions, Functions & Function Blocks, gets you thinking in a much more object orientated manner than CX. That said CX is a really simple program to pick up, and at the end of the day it depends what you're trying to teach, which in this case sounds like just grasping ladder logic, inputs & outputs, memory and addressing etc, as opposed to specific user interface/syntax. Probably the fact that you have to manage memory in CX is beneficial in itself in that it will have the students thinking about where and how bits & words are placed in the PLC. I'd say be much easier learning to manage memory, then moving to un-managed memory than the other way around.    

Hi All, Does any one have any good method for keeping a list of all the IO/Tags assigned to a PLC/Plant? We assign Tags by PLC ID >> Equipment Type ID >> Next number available for the PLC-Equipment combination. Outside contractors have traditionally done all the Automation work (we're a food manufacturer) but I'm the first in house Automation position they've ever had and I'm trying to gather all the IO lists and details for each PLC and put them into some kind of database/excel sheet per PLC so that any one in in engineering or a contractor can go and look up whats there, what the next available number is for that equipment type. (I'm sure I'm not the only one who struggles to convey the importance of appropriate tag naming to engineers and contractors that isn't just "Water Addition Pump" (When there is several water addition pumps onsite)). I can build myself a macro-enabled spread sheet for this, but before I head off and spend hours making something thought I'd check if there wasn't already something else out there.

There is a way to achieve this without having to duplicate the Tags. I've done it using Omrons Network Configurator. Don't register the Tag Array as a Net Variable. Give Tag Names to the Memory area you wish to use as the input area. use excel if there's a large amount of Tags. Makes quick work. Open Network configurator, set up your devices, I've just put two masters here for the example, register your tags not by name, but by (as in this example) the memory area you want. See how I entered DO, but network configurator automatically changed it D00000. Register the Tag set. go to connections on your Node and set up the point to point connection and register it. I've just made a duplicate area here from a CJ1W-EIP21 Card. So now this set up would have your input area in the CJ2H showing exactly what is in the same memory area for the PLC with the CJ1W-EIP21 card attached to it. Download network to the nodes and you can now have your comments. But naturally if you want to do anything useful with your array using loops etc then you'll have to put those tags into an array. Attached pics and files EIP Tags No net Variable.zip EXAMPLE_Mod.cxp EXAMPLE_Mod.nvf EXAMPLE_Mod.opt

There's a few problems. Provide a basic diagram of the set up as this program will be problematic as it is. List what the inputs are supposed to be doing also. Also 1 - Do you want at least one pump running all of the time? Or are these a set of dosing pumps into some sort of balance tank or stream, so if the PH is at your set value, they can both be off 2 - Do you want the system to be turned off/on as a whole externally (without just cutting power to the PLC) or be able to enable/disable pumps individually, etc.

I can't quite tell exactly what you're after but..... If you only want the LOCATOR_F bit to be on for the same amount of time as your input, then change the SET instruction to an output coil.  If you want the LOCATOR_F bit to be on for a single scan of the program use the UP instruction before the coil you would have put in as above. If you want it to be on for a certain amount of time (ie 2 seconds) then you should use a timer. I can't recall which pne exactly but the HELP manual should describe each one.   If you want I can post a picture showing what any of the above could look like.   Are you doing this inside a Function Block, or in a normal ladder section of the main program?

Our site currently runs Citect 7.4 SP2. We have a redundant server set up, with about 5 - 6 Clients and growing to 8 clients this year.  I'm new to the industry, been in it for about 3 years but I'm getting the feeling Citect may not be as good of a solution for us as something like Intouch looks to be. We are a Batch Process, Food Manufacturing Site. Citect came about years ago by a local sparky installing it as being used as a stand alone, small, simple, <500 point, HMI and Alarm viewer for a piece of original plant which has now grown to multiple plants (Same site different process areas) and 5000 points, which will need upgrading soon. I haven't used InTouch myself, but most other integrator's I come across are always like "Oh, why do you use Citect?", also almost all local integrator's use InTouch, which looks like it has much better add-on packages, support and graphics. We're not there yet, but we're continually moving to try and become a full S88 plant and I'm just starting to think do we jump ship now? I see Schneider have acquired Invensys, as we have System Platform to use the Historian with our Citect System. Just interested to see what people here, particularly if you're familiar with both, thought about the two? Citect is ok, but InTouch looks like a much better solution.

SFC/Grafcet - CJ2's have this and it's great. NJ and Sysmac are awesome compared with CX. But not having SFC is a pain. 

Hi All, On my control network I have two physically separate layers, one which connects the SCADA systems and HMIs to the PLCs, and one for the Ethernet I/P network that connects the PLC's to their respective devices. I've got my head around the theory of Routing, VLANs and switches (L2 & L3). I actually have L2+ switches on my network, and I want to set up VLANs to separate out the PLC's and their devices more, as well as keeping PC and Printer type devices away from the PLCs completely (With the exception of the two SCADA Servers to poll the PLCs). I need some help with redundancy. I should mention that the control network is contained behind a firewall which leads to the corporate WAN. IT take control for keeping us separated from the outside world. I want to implement VLANs and I'm going to need redundant paths if switches in the network fail. What level of involvement do I need to have to implement STP/MSTP? Can I just 'Enable' it on the switches and they sort it all out between themselves, or is it fairly involved? I don't need seamless transition if there were to be a failure. But network recovery within 30 seconds would be great, 2 - 3 minutes would be acceptable.