inexperience with indirect addressing

MicroLogix 1100. N9:10/[N9:20] XIC
Not sure what I should be looking for or what this is trying to tell me. Here is the logic. Any help/information would be appreciated

logic

sorry here's the logic

It tries to "tell" you that the referenced memory address N9:10[x:y/z] is "agile", depending of the value of another memory address value, in your case the N9:20 memory address.
So let's say that at one moment in time (at the end of one PLC scan)N9:20 has a decimal value of 13 stored within; at the next scan the ladder logic will be referencing the N9:10/13 memory address bit state.

Those addresses are performing an indirect address of a Bit sub-element of a Word.

When N9:20 is equal to 0, those two addresses refer to N9:10/0.
When N9:20 is equal to 1, those two addresses refer to N9:10/1.
When N9:20 is equal to 2, those two addresses refer to N9:10/2.

Where else is N9:20 used in the program ? Because it's named "Sequence" it probably plays a major role in the program.

The way this logic works, whenever there are no Major Faults or Minor Faults, N9:0 through N9:6 are set to zero.

When there are no Major or Minor faults and one of the bits in N9:20/xx is true, the value of N9:20 is incremented by 1, and the bit that was set true in N9:10 is set back to false.

Thanks to you both. Here was my problem. N9:20 was set to 0. Thus I was not engaging the output on this rung.

I frequently use 0 as the 'powerup' or 'emergency stopped' phase of a sequencer, so that there is some kind of reset and start process that the machine needs to go through before engaging any outputs. Your system is probably waiting for one of the N9:10/xx bits to go true so that the sequencer gets into steps 1 through 9.

I think the contact is N9:10/[N9:20]

and the OTE is N9:0[N9:20]

I agree Ken. I had to cycle through the process without the cylinder being engaged. We used an eletric driver and I was missing its "Depth" bit until I used it. Must have reset itself on the driver controller.
Thanks for all the help. I think I have got a better understanding of what it was looking for.

Bernie is right, of course, about the bit addresses.

I'm going to blame the fog.