Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Eli

RSLogix 5000 Question

24 posts in this topic

I just ordered RSLogix 5000 and have only used 500 in the past. How different is it from 500? I'll basically be using it to support a machine with a ControlLogix model 1756-L7X processor that will be pre-programmed, but I would like to learn it for future applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eli let me share a metaphor. The Model "T" and The Fusion are both cars from Ford. So RSlogix 500 and RSlogix 5000 are both programming software for PLCs from Rockwell. THe jump from 500 to 5000 won't be as drastic as the jump from "T" to Fusion but there will be changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, by that comparison using it should be much easier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just remember in that thinking, what would someone who drove a model T do if they got into a vette today.... "what are all these buttons and gadgets for.....and where is the hand crank"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
500- The data structure is decided for you 5000- Tag based. You decide the structure. UDT's are extremely useful once you learn how to use them. Logix 5000 is an extremely powerful platform. So powerful that the user can either write a compact, streamlined program in a very short amount of time or the user can write the biggest pile of crap to enter the PLC world (like my first iteration of logix. It worked but it was a piece of crap). The first time I opened logix software I thought it was the worst thing I had ever seen. Prior to that I programmed a lot of S7 plc's, a few S5's, GE's Versamax and RX series, numerous DirectLogic, and numerous TI505. However, once I started down the road of learning the Logix platform I was hooked. Everyone here writes programs for different functions. I work in the gas processing and pipeline operations field (crude oil most recently). I've written 13 programs for pipeline pump station / receipt points this year. Thanks to Logix and it's tag based architecture I can write a program for (2) 80,000 bbl tanks, (2) 500 (or less) HP boosters, and (3) 1500 (or less) HP mainline pumps, complete with motor operated valves on the suction that have to be sequenced on startup and shutdown, and discharge control valves on each pump (PID loop) in about 1/2 a day if the phone doesn't ring. My coworker writes the ClearSCADA HMI in about the same time. We worked together to build a tightly integrated tag structure that mimics a DCS in it's implementation. I can't say enough good about Logix 5000...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
there are basically TWO groups of people who are going to answer your question ... (1) first there are people (such as programmers) who spend quite a bit of time working with the RSLogix5000 software ... the people in this first group generally LOVE the "flexibility" – and the "power" – that the software brings to the game ... (2) then there are other people (such as maintenance technicians) who only work with the software (when they're forced to) on very rare occasions – and in situations such as desperately trying to get the plant's main moneymaking pump back in operation at 3:00 o'clock in the morning ... the people in this second group generally regard all of the software's new "flexibility" and "power" as needless "complications" and "confusion" ... the truth is that the software has certain "quirks" and "foibles" – and those personality traits can vary depending on which specific version you're working with ... so ... (a) some people work with the software enough to get familiar with its idiosyncrasies – and they tend to overlook its warts and blemishes ... but ... (b) other people – well, not so much ... summing up ... the answer to your question: will there be differences? yes, there will be differences ... will you like and appreciate those differences – or will you hate them? ... that really depends (in a large degree) on how much time and effort you can afford to spend getting used to the differences ... my best advice is to have a "spare" working system that you can experiment (read "play") with ... that is absolutely the best way to get a handle on this thing ... going further ... just to show you what I mean by "quirks" - here are just a few of my personal favorites - chosen at random ... please note that these are NOT meant to discourage you – but only to give you an idea of the types of things to look for as you tackle your new "learning curve" ... (1) be careful where you click the mouse ... (sometimes just ONE PIXEL can get you into trouble) ... http://www.plctalk.net/qanda/showthread.php?p=457752&postcount=15 (2) sometimes RSLogix5000 says it's searching for "one thing" – but it's actually searching for "something else" ... (see several posts – starting here) ... http://www.plctalk.net/qanda/showthread.php?p=441852&postcount=11 (3) sometimes the software just "hangs up" for no apparent reason ... (you can't always believe what you're seeing) ... http://www.plctalk.net/qanda/showthread.php?p=451485&postcount=13 in the final analysis – my friendly advice is to dig in and learn this new software ... it is NOT going to "just go away" anytime soon – and being skilled with it is something that I would definitely want to have on my resume ... in other words, "bring it on" ... Edited by Ron Beaufort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well as usual, Ron pretty much sums it all up. I think the Logix platform is fantastic. The tag based structure, UDTs, flexibility in programming languages and other things make it a great system for the programmer. As mentioned by a previous user, a program can be developed in such a way as to make quick implementation easy. Documentation of the program due to UDT's is quicker and easier. Communications are generally much easier to setup and implement. Lots of plusses. If you are familiar with the 500 then the ladder logic should be fairly easy to bridge over to. Much of the other areas of the software are very different and will take a learning curve. In fact the system is powerful enough where I doubt anyone has fully explored all you can really do with it. That all said, with flexibility often comes the ability to make things complicated. As Ron mentioned this can make it tough for the maintenance guys that have to come in and troubleshoot. There are a lot of things that a programmer can do to make it easy on themselves which makes it hard on the maintenance staff when troubleshooting. Just keep this in mind when programming and program for your audience - which generally means simpler is better. Helps you out at 3am when figuring out a problem too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Eli, I would suppose that I would describe myself as being at an intermediate level with 5000. Some of the best things about 5000 compared to 500, in my opinion are; Creating new routines. You can do this online, you don't need to download Integers/Floats running out of them. Before if you had a float say F8 and you only had 10 elements in this you needed to download to increase the size. I suppose it depends on the industry that you work in, but I know that where I work having to put a PLC into pogram to download can cause major disruption/hastle etc. Also, I know it is an extra add-on, but the Function Blocks are very handy as well. Just my view. Please correct me if I am wrong guys. Conor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
just to put in my two cents, one of the best things about the software is the user add-on instructions. This allows to to create a piece of code that you may use again and again, not having to write the same ten or more rungs of code again and again. Say you have ten motors all with the same control hardware and do the same function, the add-on instruction allows you to drag and drop the same code for all ten motor and not have to right code for each one of them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the replies everyone. It should be showing up next week and I'm looking forward to playing with it. Will there be any issues with running it on the same PC that I have 500 on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No you won't have issues. However, you may need to upgrade RSLinx pending firmware version the ControlLogix will be. I'm very surprised that a "Machine" is coming in with a ControlLogix L7 series processor. That is the flagship processor now, really for entire plant control, not necessarily machine control. I would have expected a compact logix (granted, complex motion-control...etc may require it). With that being said, one can only speculate as to what the program is going to look like, I would imagine that this the code itself may dwarf whatever you have seen in a SLC/Micro PLC before. This will be more of a shocker than the 500/5000 comparison. For example, I am leaving a customer site and they have an L6 series, within that processor there are: 10 periodic Tasks, Each task contains 10 - 30 Programs, each program contains 10-15 subroutines. Best guess is that it contains 1500 ish sub-routines, maybe 20,000 rungs of code total? You'll never see that within the Logix 500 realm. This example is of a large-scale plant integration piece, which explains why the program is so complex. Again, surprised to see a L7 controller on a "machine", but if that is what is required, you'll have a lot to learn in general! Edited by Paullys50

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The machine is an automated assembly machine that consists of one cell for assembling four components. It's fairly simple compared to some of the large multi-cell machines that this machine builder typically makes. I'm sure the L7 is their standard controller for all applications, besides pc controlled. I think a SLC would have been more than adequate. I can't wait to look at the program though. The biggest I've worked with so far in 500 consists of 20 subroutines and around 600 rungs. The software showed up today. I was expecting more than just one disc for RSLogix 5000 Standard Edition and RSNetworx. Activation looks to be a little more complex than a floppy disc like 500. Hopefully my purchase request for TechConnect will be approved early next week. I have a feeling that I will need it. That will be nice to have again, I'm still using version 6.0 for RSLogix 500, now I can finally upgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paully then you'd be really surprised to walk into one of my mix process rooms and look at the Logix Rack with 4-L63's, 3-EN2T's, 1-ACNR and 1-DHRIO for controlling a single mix machine setup. And each CPU has about 15 periodic tasks with 20-30 programs each and several subroutiness per program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suppose it depends on how "machine" is defined/interpreted....I think of a "machine" as something that can be broken down, re-located, "self-contained" (skid), minimal cost to do so, "turn-key", HMI & PLC & electrical can be moved with the machine without disconnecting. "System" equipment (my definition) is equipment that is pseudo permanently installed. Sure you can move it, but you would be de-commissioning and re-commissioning, high costs involved in both mechanical and electrical work, and it takes weeks-months to commission. With that said, I would love to see your system regardless of how you define it, especially if you still consider it a "machine" by my thought process. If you can give tours I'd love to see it. Either case, you compliment my point that a functionality comparison between RS500/RS5000 is moot considering how complex the machine/process/system will end up being. The code itself will be drastically advanced (especially when using flagship controllers) then what you would see in RS500.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The machine in question for my application will be arriving on two trucks and will most likely take 2 weeks to set up and qualify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my experience with Controllogix, I have found that it is hard to keep the programmers from using all the cool new bells and whistles, even though they often add no functionality to the machine. I have a simple machine in which the OEM used UDTs for everything...UDTs with one occurrence in the program and that really couldn't stand alone to represent anything else...sorta defeats the purpose, but I am sure the fellows had fun playing with them... By contrast their tag naming strategy appears to be a thought experiment too....I don't like 40+ character tag names...why cause rung wrap when a simple abbreviated tag is fine? Use the tag descriptions (address comments) for their purpose. The argument for turning tag names into sentences is that they can be uploaded even without an offline copy of the program. Really? I have been doing this for almost 20 years, and I have never lost all copies of my backups with comments...I have had to create some from scratch on a few antiques I inherited, maybe twice in my career. Major differences that can bite you: As shown above, just learn to use "cross reference" instead of "find". It is just easier when making the transition. I find myself finding in RSLogix5000, and NOT finding what I wanted, then I remember, "Oh Yeah CTRL+F needs to avoided for use with tags..." right click, Goto Cross Reference is much better in my opinion. Find is great for finding rung comments "tagged" with my initials or things other than tags, but that is about all I use Find for. Be aware of how multi-tasking works. Your ladders can interrupt each other and things can happen in a very surprising order depending on how programs are "scheduled" and prioritized. Be aware of local and globally scoped tags (Controller tags versus Program tags). Understand the I/O update cycle and how it is not necessarily synchronous to the PLC ladder scan. Be prepared to learn FBD (very cool stuff) and other languages if they are used in your machine. Know that you can have multiple CPUs in a system...if yours has only one, great, if it has more than one, then you will want to know which controllers "own" which inputs and outputs and read up on "listen only" connections. Also, there is no Status file you can open up to look around in. There are a few things you can monitor using the software just like RSLogix500 like major fault codes and such, but many things that are populated for you in the RSLogix500 Status file will require logic (GSV) in a Controllogix platform to Get System Values even for simple things like the time and date. Since you are supporting a machine programmed by others, I recommend putting the keyswitch in RUN mode and going online with the machine and poking around in all the code as much as possible before you get that 2 a.m. phone call. You will learn more by monitoring a live running machine than we can talk about here. Edited by OkiePC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks, Okie. CTRL-F is my best friend in 500 (and GX Developer) I will make a note to use cross reference instead. What is a UDT? I've seen it mentioned several times here. I also have an install question. If I understand correctly it can be registred to either the PC NIC card or the HD. Are there any benefits to one over the other? Also, is the activation easily transferable from one PC to another like 500? Thanks again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UDT- User Defined Data Type I put my activation on a dongle. I can use the software on my dual monitor desktop, my laptop, or wherever it's installed as long as I have the dongle. I put my Logix 500 license on the same dongle. I think the dongle is about $200 and it's worth it IMHO I work in an entirely different industry than you do. In my world we routinely have more analog inputs than discrete inputs (that makes your world interesting to me. It's different). That said- I use UDT's quite a bit but its the same UDT's in every program. I may hurt someone's feelings with this, I hope not, but the worst programming I've ever seen is when someone tries to write a CLX program like it's an SLC. They build tags with names like N7, T4, etc. CLX is not an SLC. My first mistake when I started was to make a tag (alias) for everything. It's way too much work and has little value for what I do. I stopped doing that a long time ago. Here's an examp0le of the structure of a couple of my UDT's Motor UDT String1 STRING Tag Read/Write 1 0 String2 STRING Description Read/Write 2 0 SW INT Decimal Status Word Read/Write 3 0 A BOOL Decimal Auto Mode Read/Write 5 0 A_Stop BOOL Decimal Auto Stop Read/Write 6 0 A_Start BOOL Decimal Auto Start Read/Write 7 0 Stop_I BOOL Decimal Stop Input Read/Write 8 0 Start_I BOOL Decimal Start Input Read/Write 9 0 HMIStop BOOL Decimal Stop Control from HMI Read/Write 10 0 HMIStart BOOL Decimal Start Control from HMI Read/Write 11 0 RunStat BOOL Decimal Run Status Read/Write 12 0 Stop BOOL Decimal Motor Stop Read/Write 14 0 Run BOOL Decimal Run Motor Read/Write 15 0 AStop_OS BOOL Decimal Auto Stop One Shot Read/Write 16 0 AStart_OS BOOL Decimal Auto Start One Shot Read/Write 17 0 FStart_OS BOOL Decimal Field Start One Shot Read/Write 18 0 HStart_OS BOOL Decimal HMI Start One Shot Read/Write 19 0 SOS BOOL Decimal Start Counter One Shot Read/Write 20 0 RH DINT Decimal Run Hours Read/Write 21 0 S DINT Decimal Number of Starts Read/Write 22 0 FailTMR TIMER Fail to Start Timer Read/Write 23 0 SDTimer TIMER Low Suction Pressure Shutdown Delay Timer Read/Write 24 0 VSD1Timer TIMER Motor Outboard Bearing Vibration Shutdown Delay Timer Read/Write 25 0 VSD2Timer TIMER Motor Inboard Bearing Vibration Shutdown Delay Timer Read/Write 26 0 VSD3Timer TIMER Pump Inboard Bearing Vibration Shutdown Delay Timer Read/Write 27 0 VSD4Timer TIMER Pump Middle Bearing Vibration Shutdown Delay Timer Read/Write 28 0 VSD5Timer TIMER Pump Outboard Bearing Vibration Shutdown Delay Timer Read/Write 29 0 RMT TIMER Run Minute Timer Read/Write 30 0 RMC COUNTER Run Minute Counter Read/Write 31 0 Here's the corresponding structured text (IOM) that maps the IO to the tag P2050.Stop_I := Local:4:I.Data.9; P2050.Start_I := Local:4:I.Data.10; P2050.RunStat := Local:4:I.Data.11; Local:8:O.Data.3 := P2050.Run; When I build the tag in the tag editor I type in P2050 and give it the type MOTOR (same name as the UDT). I don't put space characters in the tag name because it eats up space and time. So why go to this trouble? Simple... Every motor that I build, whether it has vibration sensors or not, or any of the other functions, has this tag structure. Our start / stop logic looks pretty much the same so I build one bit of ladder logic for P2050 and I use the tags from the P2050 tag in the logic. For P2060 all I have to do is copy / paste the ladder to a new routine then search and replace 2050 with 2060. The dot fields are always the same so in a matter of seconds I build the BASE ladder logic. The shutdown string has to be edited but the basic logic is done. I then go to my IOM structured text file and copy paste the P2050 logic below P2060, change the 50 to a 60, and I'm done. I should also add that if I'm in a pinch and need a timer for a pump and I'm not using one in the array for that pump I go into the tag, edit the docs to reflect what the timer does, and I use it. See attached examples. Since I have so many analog points I have a fairly large UDT for analog / analog alarm and shutdown. I can build the logic for 64 analog input points in about 5 minutes. Documentation of the tag / logic take a lot more time than the actual programming. Document your programs well but keep your Alias tags short and to the point. My tags include things that the HMI needs. The two strings populate a faceplate with tag and service information, The .SW field is an integer that indicates the motor state. A button for HMI start and HMI stop. One shots for start buttons so some yahoo can't pin the start button on (but not for stops so they can). I write my programs as much for the HMI as I do for actual function. P2060.pdf P2050.pdf Edited by Michael Lloyd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OT...I have never seen the MOV or ADD displayed like that....Where does that come from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In "later" versions (after 13, at least as far back as 18), you can go to Tools -> Options -> Ladder Editor -> Display and check the "Show Input Operands on Left; Output Operands on Right" option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joe E. already answered... I couldn't get to a computer until now. I switched to the "new" method of display a few years ago so it probably would have taken me some time to figure out how I did it :o)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michael, I just saw this and I really like how you use the structured text to load up your UDT! Very nice and straightforward. I have always used aliases and left them outside the UDT structure. It has always worked well for me but I like how you handle this and I may have to contemplate a future change... Using the SLC type tag names in the Logix drives me crazy also. The tagnames and UDT's are two of the best things about the logix. Why would anyone not use them? I will add that I split my UDTs into two halves. I have an interface UDT and a behind the scenes UDT. The interface UDT contains everything I need to interface with the SCADA (start/stop pushbuttons, status, etc). The other UDT has all the internal stuff that the SCADA doesnt care about (start/stop timers, alarm timers and other misc bits and words). Also, I would be interested in seeing how you handle your alarming. That is something I am never happy with. One point on the comments about the Logix vs. CompactLogix is that I believe the CompactLogix is underused by many designers. I am amazed when I come into a facility and they have small mini processes or machines with the daddy logix on it. The compact platform is a very capable little machine and can handle a lot of load. Bob, I would be surprised too! Sounds like a cool system and a beast of a process. Sign me up when you put that tour together!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd be happy to send you a working version of one of my pump stations <--- :o) My... like I paid the millions of dollars to build it... funny how a little code can make you feel like an owner :o) Let me know... email works for me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for all the informative replies! It looks like I have a lot to learn yet. I installed the software on Monday, but haven't had a chance to really look at yet. I will look at the included tutorials when I have time. I'm busy with a micrologix 1200 that is now maxed out for I/o on a machine that I had to add an additional pick and place station, offload conveyor, hmi, and vision system. I think I'll be busy for a while.

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0