InTouch 10.1: Limited Graphics Capability?

Beginner here ...

The symbol and/or graphics toolbox on this thing looks *really* limited. Am I missing something?

Where are the fancy pipes, valves, and Plant structures? Are those only found in Archestra?

Look for Symbol Factory somewhere. Most vendors bundle a (very limited license version) of it with their HMI development software.

Pretty much hate those graphics anyway, they are more distracting then conducive to operating a piece of equipment.

rdrast said:

Look for Symbol Factory somewhere. Most vendors bundle a (very limited license version) of it with their HMI development software.

Pretty much hate those graphics anyway, they are more distracting then conducive to operating a piece of equipment.

Click to expand...

I have to agree. HMI graphics shouldn't look like a photograph of the equipment being operated. Instead, they should provide an uncluttered symbolic representation of the equipment, with the emphasis placed upon the actual control elements at the operator's disposal.

That's not to say that HMI graphics have to be "ugly" in order to be efficient -- only that function should take precedence over form.

You will see a "Wizards Hat" in one of your development mode ribbons.
Drag and drop the "Hat" on the window and it will give you a selection of graphics available.

rdrast, bit_bucket_07:

Well, you follow the Functional Spec for the graphics most of the time, but to me that depiction is just a starting point. The developer then has a toolbox to make the displays 'come alive' for the user, creating a "WOW" effect. But all too often, I think what happens is the developer has spent so much time making the logic bullet-proof (the most important part), that the displays end up getting short-shrift, and the stick-figure depiction is deemed "good enough".

To me, I think the way it should work is - the higher the level, the less detail; the lower the level, the more detail. So as you "zoom-in", you should use the more sophisticated graphics - as long as it looks good.

But that last part is where the artistic talent comes in, I think. First, you have to *want* to use the more sophisticated graphics (because the stick graphics just don't satisfy your artistic side), and then you also need to have a good eye for what does and does not look good when using the fancier stuff.

NetNathan:

Ohhh. I *did* see that, and clicked on it, but it didn't seem to do much ...

SoftwareJanitor said:

NetNathan:

Ohhh. I *did* see that, and clicked on it, but it didn't seem to do much ...

Click to expand...

After you drop the "Wizards Hat on the window....scroll down in the left pane of the popup box till you see "Symbol Factory". Here will you will find a lot more symbols.

I hardly ever use the symbols that come with a SCADA package. More likely there would be more time spent on modification to existing "pretty" graphics than just building something custom. Sating that we have used some of the concepts applied ton standards graphics in vendor packages.

Depending on what type of SCADA application you were building and how often development must be done base your decision on what the correct way forward is on this.

If these graphics are going to be rolled out continuously over several facilities spend alot more time in R&D to ensure they are scale well (PERFORMANCE WISE) and easy to configure.

If its a once off i would not spend as much time on Development.

Also steer clear of fancy animation/fonts/symbols. They do more harm than good. I would also recommend reading The ASM Consortium books and High Performance HMI. Both have very good fundamentals.

Remember like mentioned before function should be your no.1 Priority when designing a SCADA package.

No it must be someone else, i have done some work with the System Platform Development Team but that wasn't graphic specific, more Beta Testing and product enhancement requests and so on.

A Lot of what is in the ASM Library in the newer System Platform versions was requested through the company i currently do work for . Also some of the features like Navtree controls that we requested found their way into the 2017 version of the product.

We are lucky enough to be part of the Beta testers program for the 2017 release. Which i personally think looks very good.