Transition to Siemens

bobwithdana

Member
Join Date
Dec 2003
Location
california
Posts
239
I have spent 35 years troubleshooting and programming every Allen Bradley product available. Have attended RSTech Ed at least every other year. I have only programmed Ladder because of company standards. Now for the first time there purchasing a 22 million dollar Gantry style Layer pick line that it 100% Siemens. how difficult Is the transition from AB to Siemens?

Thanks Bob
 
Hi Bob as a mainly siemens plc tech I wouldn't say is hard if you are coming from AB. I was in the same boat I came from rslogix500. For me it took some time to adjust to STL, but once you get the hang of it everything else is pretty much the same methodology.

What I think people have problem is to get a grasp of block programming and how they can be reusable, but you also have that in AB as AOI and subroutines.

Why do you think you will have problems with, adjusting to the software from siemens or reading the logic?
 
My biggest issue was thinking like a German...

There is an order to which things must happen. You will not deviate from that order. If you deviate from that order, you must start over. You can add to a system once developed, but the addition must be done in a specific order. As you know with A-B you can essentially start in the middle of a project and use tag aliasing, modify tree structures on the fly, things like that. You can get there with Siemens if you are already good, but starting out you will likely be frustrated. It's much better to plan extensively, execute precisely and modify sparingly.

Bottom line, and I know it sounds cliche, "You must follow orders". I've worked for two German companies, Siemens and Klockner Moeller. Very different companies, but that issue was identical.
 
Last edited:
My biggest issue was thinking like a German...

There is an order to which things must happen. You will not deviate from that order. If you deviate from that order, you must start over. You can add to a system once developed, but the addition must be done in a specific order. As you know with A-B you can essentially start in the middle of a project and use tag aliasing, modify tree structures on the fly, things like that. You can get there with Siemens if you are already good, but starting out you will likely be frustrated. It's much better to plan extensively, execute precisely and modify sparingly.

Bottom line, and I know it sounds cliche, "You must follow orders". I've worked for two German companies, Siemens and Klockner Moeller. Very different companies, but that issue was identical.

I could not say it better myself.

If you can program AB, you'll get by on Siemens OK, as long as the program is well documented. But yes, when it comes to making some modifications or throwing in some extra code..."You vill do it ze Siemens vay! No other vays is permitted!"

Think like a German :)
 
Bottom line, and I know it sounds cliche, "You must follow orders". I've worked for two German companies, Siemens and Klockner Moeller. Very different companies, but that issue was identical.

as it was explained to me "Do what you are told, and don't ask too many questions!"
 
I dont think that bobwithdana is going to work for germans. He is going to work with german equipment.
The problem is that germans are not the best in writing easily comprehensible manuals (IMO, no offence intended). The good things is that the desired functionality is probably there, even if it is not obvious at first glance.
 
Thats because in the U.S, whether our project works or not- we still get a trophy

For failed projects it is called a Pink Slip in any world wide professional environment.

Making sure your platform works by channeling development within a narrow strict path is one way to approach business.

Allowing users to apply their creativity and professional skills at development time is another one; ya know the Microsoft, Apple, Google, etc. ways.

Siemens' failure to create anything remotely close to the Logix platform might have something to do with their approach.
 
You can do most things in S7-300/400 with LAD and without resorting to STL.
You can do everything in S7-1500 with LAD and without resorting to STL.

Most of our software engineering is near on the complex side. I am not saying is impossible to write in ladder but it will definitely will not be practical, and could be very time consuming. Besides we have some locked proprietary blocks and it won't make much difference if is written in ladder, STL or SCL.

For simple controls I think some engineers mainly use STL because with step7 you can only do ONE output branch, and so if you are trying to keep all your similar logic together in one network is not possible in step7. This was fixed however in TIA portal where you can now have more than one output branch in one network, well I am not sure if there is a limit. But below is the small test. I am sure there are more reasons why one engineer chooses not to do everything in ladder.

I see all the love for the germans haha. I don't know, I always think there is more than one way to do something step7, not per say one way only as some are suggesting.

Siemens' failure to create anything remotely close to the Logix platform might have something to do with their approach.
As far as the comparison between siemens and logix line, is like comparing linux with windows/mac in my opinion. It might not be pretty at first, but once you start using it and know all the software interface you will be OK. 🍺

networkInStep7.jpg networkInTIA.jpg
 
To want to keep all rungs with outputs together in a single rung. Odd, but each to his own.

Of course there are advantages to all the languages, even STL.
Personally I use a mix of LAD and SCL.
With TIA I have not have had to write a single line of STL.

The point being that bobwithdana dont have to dabble with STL unless he wants to. And since he comes from AB he will be most familiar with Ladder.
 

Similar Topics

Hi Guys, I have been offered a job with a very good multinational company to maintain and troubleshoot their automated equipment. This is a...
Replies
7
Views
3,883
How difficult is the transition from Automation direct Click to Allen Bradley 800 series of plc and CCW software? Also, can you use C-More HMI’s...
Replies
11
Views
2,258
I have gotten help with some issues in the past on this forum, and I'm hoping someone can help me again. My company is an OEM that used the...
Replies
1
Views
944
For nearly 20 years, my employer (an OEM) used the A1SJH in a portable testing machine that required calibration of several sensors. The...
Replies
2
Views
862
Hey All, Presently I am looking for transistion of S7 200 to 1500, I found out some transition manuals from 200 to 1200 which offers to use a...
Replies
2
Views
1,407
Back
Top Bottom