RS Logix 5K Documenting

Guy's

In the past primarily on slc systems I would use rung comments on almost every rung of my program and go into great detail about what the rung did and why. It makes it much easier for the maintenance guys here to troubleshoot things that way.

Today I am trying to put some documentation into a RSL5K program that has nothing. Literally.

In slc when I did a rung comment I would tie it to an address vs. a rung because if rungs were added via online edits or whatever the case may be then you documentation had the tendency to get messed up. I always created dummy bits called document bits and would install them as an OTE with that logic so if rungs were added it would stay together.

I have been looking in logix 5000 all morning and see no way to do this? Am I missing something? Any other techniques or ideas?

Dummy Tags

The documentation in the 5000 is not the same as the 500 as you have seen. I have used several ways to document changes and the one used the most is to create a dummy DINT tag that you can use for your notes.

Sort of the same idea as you had with 500. Put them into your code where needed. You can also create a routine that is dedicated to notes or revisions. This is where you can put the primary description with an OTE. Once that is done you can place references throughout the code and when you do a search it will take you to the routine with the description.

Just one way of documenting changes that has worked for us on projects in the past.

Why do you insist in tieing it to an OTE? Logix5000 keeps comments with the rung they are entered on. Adding/deleting rungs doesn't change the rung the comment is tied to.

Bob

I am basing my thoughts on rs logix 500 in which if you had rung comments and if new rungs were inserted depending on where they were inserted your rung comments could end up on the wrong rung all together.

In logix 500 when you enter a rung comment there is the option to tie it to a rung or address and I would always make a OTE with an internal dummy address labeled document bit and tie the comment to that address and put that OTE with the logic it was intended to document that way the comment would always stay with the logic even if rungs were added in the wrong place.

Are you saying that that does not happen with 5K? If so the I am home free. I don't know as I have not tested it yet. I just assumed it was like logix 500 in that regard. That’s what I get I guess for making assumptions.

Thanks

Insist

Wow, I dont think anyone insisted that you use an ote. This is an option that you can use in 5000 because the documentation falls short in my opinion. By creating an ote in a routine just for documenting changes you can have a place that you can make very descriptive comments that are easily found with a cross reference.

As I stated. This is only one way of doing it and nobody insisted on anything. I won't tie the description to an ote that is actually used in the logic because it may put the description into a location that I dont want to see that description.

No, RSL5000 Handles rung comments very differently then RSL5 or RSL500. They will stay attached to the logic you insert them on.

Strictly speaking, RSL5000 doesn't even actually have rung numbers, those are just a convenience. If you look at the .L5K dump, you will see that rung numbers don't exist anymore. Rung descriptions (and other descriptions, such as in FBD) are attached to the logic itself.

/shrug. Creating artificial bits, in order to tag short descriptions to seems to be an incredible waste of time. You can essentially write a novel in a rung comment if you want.

Then again, I only generally use rung comments where there is some math going on, to better express the actual formula being calculated. Anything else, well... what's the point? If you can't understand the logic anyway, comments won't help.

Large Projects

You see in the world that has incredibly large projects that have 20+ engineers working on the same project at the same time it is kind of, just a little, slightly important to document changes that you may make to the code that would impact anyone else in the project. In this case you can create a location that everyone is aware of and as you make a slight change to a rung out of thousands, you can place a xic (or xio, your choice) into the rung. Now when someone else (or maybe even you after a long period of time) comes along and needs to understand why this slight change was made it can be found very easily and if the tag description wasnt sufficient then the rung with the ote can be as detailed as you want.

I am happy that all that you document is located in one easily understood place and that everything you do is very clearly understood by all that sees your work. You are an encredible engineer and I hope to some day elevate myself to your level.

Well, what location is easier to find? The actual rung with a change? Or some random "DOCUMENTATION_BOOL_92832743" ?

If a change is made to a runtime, we modify the rung comment to include an easily searchable escape sequence (here it's *** _DATE_ *** and the description of the change. Rung comments are fully searchable in RSL5k. What happens if someone toggles one of your documentation contacts? Does it break? yep.

My point is, LOGIC is LOGIC. DOCUMENTATION is DOCUMENTATION. They are separate. Changing LOGIC in any way merely to DOCUMENT something is at the very least a backwards approach. Older generation programming packages forced one to do that, current generation ones don't.

And don't bother concerning yourself with my work. I offer advice, you choose to be snarky, so be it. +ignore

Bob

As always you taught me something new today. Thank you for the info. I was thinking 5000 was like 5,500 in regards to rungs comments but now I understand correctly.

@gscure we do revision info the same way you do with OTE Just to break things up a little and be an easier read.

Bob here I typically get very, very descriptive with each rung because even though I understand what is going on the maintenance techs working on the machine don't and that is the reason for the detailed comments on each rung. I don't put version or change info there because it gets a little too busy for the maintenance guys and causes more confusion than anything.

I put revision info in a routine using the ote tags to break it up by change. I just wanted to lock the logic rung comments to the logic and I was trying to do it like in the slc.

We use FT Asset Center to lock the plcs and logix down so maintenance techs can only view logic not change or force.

Me ,my boss and 1 engineer have change/force privileges and only 1 of use knows halfway what he is doing and will let you guess who that is. The other 2 are clueless but like online editing so that is why I was trying to lock my comments.

Bob and Gscure you have both taught me a few things in this thread that will help a youngster like me a lot.

Thank you both.

Not that it happens much anymore.

Adding code for the sake of documentation can get you in trouble. Back when I had more hair and liver I worked in a Can plant (we made drinking cans). We were extremly careful about adding code due to scan time. Infact when we did alter the code we had to be extremely careful that we did not increase the scan time by much.

While in most cases this is not an issue you might want to be careful anyway. Anything you put in that has to be compiled adds to the scan.

Not really sure what issue you have with attaching code directly to rungs in RS5 or RS500, if it moves while you are editing the code is it really that big a deal to fix it?

As far as 5K goes, Adding code to create documetation seems odd to me also. If you are working in a group wouldn't you have some form of code security. I mean if you have to go to those extremes, how do you prevent one engineer from undoing what the other did? I have worked on very large system ( I/O's in the 1000+) and we used several methods to keep from stepping on each other's toes.

As far as rung coments go you can give to much info. I stick to the tell WHAT the rung does not the HOW. The ladder logic tells the how.

As far as 5,500 yes you can fix these problems when doing edits but many times people don't. When this happens a few times then it can be difficult to find out what the comments were for in the first place.

It does not take long for things to turn into a mess.

I agree comments tied to bools will only confuse people. Latch/Unlatch do you really want the same comment there?

Smoke you would never run into that. The bools oare for documentation only. They reference comments. They serve no logical purpose except connecting logic to comments.

It is the only way to keep things from moving in 5,500

I use them to ref the doc routine that has version and change info.

Latch / Unlatch does not come into the picture when used like this.

I am sure I have been passed by... What the F is 5,500.

So I looked it up. Still 5000? Comments remain to the coil either ote, otl/otu or the rung.