OEM on this one

Hi, all
Just got a PO on a new machine that I will be design building.
I will be using AB or AD PLC not sure which yet. Its a simple machine with digital I/O but I am thinking of using some sort of remote I/O instead of an umbilical cord. The machine will move along tracks about 40 ft. long and will have at most 8 inputs and 16 outputs on the moving parts and about the same in the main control panel I typically use hard wired I/O for similar stuff
but like the idea of e-net to cut down on on site wiring. Budget is not really an issue here however I don't want a lot of over kill. I typically use the c-more HMI for these apps. and I have about a month to complete this one so time is not that critical baring any long learning curves. Any suggestions on the remote I/O or HMI(10" or a bit smaller) Staying with the AB or AD for the PLC?
I'm not having problems with the design.I would just like to keep up to date on other options.
Thanks, Steve

Steve,

I have used Wago remote I/O successfully with both AB and Siemens.

Its fairly cheap and easy to use.

http://www.wago.com/wagoweb/documentation/navigate/nm3di__e.htm

Mark

If you are going a Rockwell solution, look at the PointIO. It has several communication bus options available.

Oakley said:

If you are going a Rockwell solution, look at the PointIO. It has several communication bus options available.

Click to expand...

I agree with Oakley. With Point I/O your cable would just be power and ethernet.

Costwise the Point I/O is not bad at all.

Point I/O would require Devicenet or Ethernet I/P for the Main PLC, right? So, to use Ethernet I/P Point I/O you need compactlogix or above CPU, and to use DeviceNet, I think you would need a ML1500 or better.

We have some point I/O we just started using and really like it too for being so compact and cost effective. It appears to be built (designed?) more ruggedly than say Flex I/O for example.

If you're going to go with AD stuff, you could make it all AD and use the Terminator I/O stuff too.

bce123 said:

The machine will move along tracks about 40 ft. long and will have at most 8 inputs and 16 outputs on the moving parts

Click to expand...

If 24 I/O is all there will be on the traveling unit, I'm not sure a remote I/O rack is the way to go.

That being said, I'm a huge fan of remote I/O via Ethernet. Like others have said, AB's PointI/O is a good choice and I prefer it over FlexI/O. In this particular case, the only reason I would not opt for remote I/O is troubleshooting.

Wires on a traveling system are eventually going to break. If you have a conventional system, these will be direct signal I/O or power. Just about every semi-competent maintenance guy can find and replace one of those, so downtime is minimized. If, on the other hand, you have a remote I/O system, your broken wire is likely to be inside a communications cable. When this happens, not only does the maintenance guy need to identify it, he also needs to acquire and replace the entire cable and then correctly make up the connectors. This means that the maintenance staff must have access to the necessary tools and cabling and then understand how to correctly make one of these cables.

Unless your customer is already up to speed with troubleshooting Ethernet on the plant floor, I am not sure it would be worth the trouble for a small system like the one you describe.

Just something to consider.

Steve

If 24 I/O is all there will be on the traveling unit, I'm not sure a remote I/O rack is the way to go.

Click to expand...

Steve, the reason I want to go remote I/O is that this machine (due to plant floor space) will have the ability to be removed from the tracks and another machine put in its place. These are two different process depending the current production run.

Point I/O would require Devicenet or Ethernet I/P for the Main PLC, right? So, to use Ethernet I/P Point I/O you need compact logix or above CPU, and to use Device Net, I think you would need a ML1500 or better.

Click to expand...

I too like point I/O I am not sure if the micrologix line is compatible with the point I/O
If I were going Micrologix I would use the 1400 for its e-net to the HMI. I will have to check into remote I/O for these I don't recall that to an option for the micrologix, but I will check.

I have used Wago remote I/O successfully with both AB and Siemens.

Click to expand...

Mark, I have not tried these yet. but will take a look.

Any HMI ideas?
The plant I will be Installing this in has some red-lion HMIs however I don't think They have any techs to work on these or the mitisi or omron plcs in the plant. From what I have seen of this plant the production folks do the maintenance or call for out side help.
I haven't used the red-lion yet so My concern here would be whatever learning curve there is and cost of hardware and software. also after this project I have another machine to build for the same folks and so whatever I go with I would to standardize on for this customer.

I would say that Crimson 3.0 (for Red Lion G3 HMI) is very different, but not at all hard to learn. Once you get your head around some of the differences, you will find it one of the fastest development packages that you'll use.

The Micros can't do ethernet I/P for I/O, only for HMI and other messaging.

Now, I am a bit lost on the "track" and moving equipment thing. Does the station with Remote I/O move along a track during operation? Or this track only for removal and installation of a different station?

If you want one master PLC to be able to control two different stations (only one installed at a time) then I think you may have some hurdles with I/O faults, but it should be possible to set up each station as a different node on the I/O network.

However, if these are just station that sit still once set up and running, I would just cable them together with Han-Kit connectors or something and skip the fancy stuff.

Okie, the setup will be like a train track. Its a simple spray app with a 45" lance. The buggy sets on the track and moves back and forth. it will have a vfd for speed control. with a fast advance and slower return which will be set from the HMI there will have to be power leads to the buggy as well as motor leads. No servo needed and just limits and proxes for travel with a resolver option maybe to adjust the on off position of the spray app. Thus I may need high speed counter on the buggy for this I could use two of the micrologix for this and MSG commands as the speeds would be presets IE: no mid range changes so, com. time is most likely not an issue. There is an existing vacuum machine in place there now That will be moved off the track and the controls for this will remain in place on another P.O. I will modify the field wiring for Han-Kit type connectors for different job types this will just be done once in a blue moon.

Crimson 3.0 (for Red Lion G3 HMI)

Click to expand...

I think I have this (free ver. or is it all free ) downloaded somewhere just been so busy I have not had time to look at it I finally have so spare time only working about 12 hours a day now Ill try and take a look later tonight.
Thanks, Steve

Another vote for the Redlion G3 over the C-More. I have used both and IMO the C-More doesn't measure up.

For remote IO take a look at Beckhoff IO terminals. The Beckhoff IO plays very very nicely with AB ControlLogix systems.

Another vote for the Redlion G3 over the C-More. I have used both and IMO the C-More doesn't measure up.

Click to expand...

where is the best place/price to get one of these?
Maybe Ill add one to my test bench now that i have a little more room. Thanks Okie, for clearing that spot LOL

There are several of us that can get you one of those units. They are great I stock a 8" at my stop Just in case.

What where do you need he HSC at? On the machine or base? If it is on the movable machine then put the 1100 or 1400 on That and use wireless I/O on the rest.
What about wireless I/O I Just did a robot job with 16DI/O 2AI/O on a robot end-effector worked nice. You could also use some Banner wireless I/O. On moving tracks I use at least a 5 conductor cable. (2) for +(2) for - and 1 for gnd. Then put the wireless card on the block and you are done.
I always use robot grade cable. Regular festoon cable is only good for flex not torsion. If you look at the life cycle of a standard flex cable you are only looking at 1.5 ~2 million cycles. The robot grade is 4~5 million the price difference is usually only 28~40% higher. This is usually small compared to the entire project.

where do you need he HSC at? On the machine

Click to expand...

,yes

Regular festoon cable is only good for flex not torsion

Click to expand...

I wll be using an Igus track and cable on this so I dont think this will be a problem see below:
http://www.igus.com/default.asp?c=us&L=en
What about wireless I/O I Just did a robot job with 16DI/O 2AI/O on a robot end-effector worked nice.
Jeff, how long has this system been in place? do you have wireless systems with any longer history?

This last system is 6 months or better. We did a system about 3 years ago with banner 4 in 4 out still running. Super clean.

I quoted 4 different wireless systems today.