You are not registered yet. Please click here to register!


 
 
plc storereviewsdownloads
This board is for PLC Related Q&A ONLY. Please DON'T use it for advertising, etc.
 
Try our online PLC Simulator- FREE.  Click here now to try it.

New Here? Please read this important info!!!


Go Back   PLCS.net - Interactive Q & A > PLCS.net - Interactive Q & A > LIVE PLC Questions And Answers

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 16th, 2012, 07:18 PM   #1
Adam303
Lifetime Supporting Member
United States

Adam303 is offline
 
Adam303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 587
Damper Position Monitoring

Gents, back again for some help. I’m I using RsLogix 500 Micrologix 1500 CPU. I have a total of 6 dampers each fitted with two proximity switches sensing open, closed position, and referenced to the PLC as a state of the damper.
Dampers 1 and 2 are for intake of either outdoor air or return air.
Dampers 3 and 4 are for discharge air either to interstitial space or production room
Dampers 5 and 6 are used for exhaust either from production room or interstitial space


There is a total of 4 cycles that requires all the dampers to be in different position per cycle.
The cycles are:
Cycle1:Outdoor air to production
Cycle2: Outdoor air to Interstitial Space
Cycle3: Return air to interstitial Space
Cycle 4: Off
I need to monitor the damper position for “dampers in position” prior to start of the exhaust fan and supply blower. All good here.
I created 4 predefined words of data (B11:1 to 4) for damper 1 thru 4 and, another four words of predefined data for the exhaust dampers 5 and 6 (B12:1 thru 4).
Based on what the cycle is (Cycle1) I move the required predefined damper data thru indirect addressing for comparison (EQU) with the actual damper position. Once the dampers are in position I trigger a bit “Dampers In Position” and start the supply blower and exhaust. Once Cycle1 calls for the position of the damper I engage a “Damper Position Delay Timer” if the timers DN bit goes hi I trigger a bit “dampers failed to open.
Finally my question.
Q1) I need to trigger an alarm based on which damper failed to open or close, prior to the start up on the unit, most likely when “Damper Position Delay Timer” DN bit is true.
Q2) Once all the dampers are in their correct position, and the supply blower starts, the exhaust blower starts, I need to monitor the positions of the dampers. Meaning once one of the proximity sensor monitoring the state of the dampers position is not in its required state I need to trigger an alarm that the particular proximity sensor has failed.
I’m having a difficult time creating an alarm based on the above statement. Any help is greatly appreciated.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Data Array 2.pdf (36.6 KB, 19 views)
__________________
You canít control what you canít measure.

Last edited by Adam303; March 16th, 2012 at 07:32 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2012, 07:59 PM   #2
geniusintraining
Lifetime Supporting Member + Moderator
United States

geniusintraining is offline
 
geniusintraining's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SC
Posts: 8,160
Just a thought....

Could you send them to a word (maybe a double) then look at the decimal value of the word, it may end up being to large of a task but I did it on a smaller scale once

b4:0/0 true is damper 1 open (value 0)
b4:0/1 true is damper 1 closed (value 1)
b4:0/2 true is damper 2 open (value 3 or 4 if damper 1 is closed)
etc...

Like I said it was on a much smaller scale, but the value x = alarm of position
__________________
www.PLCCable.com PLC Communication Cables, PLC Trainers, MicroLogix, ControlLogix, Siemens, Allen Bradley and more...OEM and aftermarket supplies... Aftermarket 1784-U2DHP Allen Bradley USB to DH+, new USB to 485 modbus
  Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2012, 08:19 PM   #3
OkiePC
Lifetime Supporting Member
United States

OkiePC is offline
 
OkiePC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ENE of Nowhere Oklahoma
Posts: 11,569
I am not sure why it needs to be too complicated. I would think that you have a position command for each damper so your alarm logic could be a timer for each damper:


Damper 1 Damper 1 Damper 1
Open CMD Open LS Alarm Delay
+---] [-----------]/[-----+---------TON
| | T4:0
|Damper 1 Damper 1 |
|Close CMD Close LS |
+---] [-----------]/[-----+
| |
| PB Alarm |
| T4:0/DN Reset |
+---] [-----------]/[-----+




Set the timebase and preset appropriately and repeat the logic for each damper...

Paul
__________________
You've been taken, but you don't know it yet.
  Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2012, 08:35 PM   #4
Eric Nelson
Lifetime Supporting Member + Moderator
United States

Eric Nelson is offline
 
Eric Nelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 4,346
I assume it's something like this?

Damper 1 OPEN Command B3:10/0
Damper 1 CLOSE Command B3:10/1
Damper 2 OPEN Command B3:10/2
Damper 2 CLOSE Command B3:10/3

So when you ask for open, the command word (B3:10) reads 0101, when you ask for close, it reads 1010

Now for the sensors...

Damper 1 FULLY OPEN B3:11/0
Damper 1 FULLY CLOSED B3:11/1
Damper 2 FULLY OPEN B3:11/2
Damper 2 FULLY CLOSED B3:11/3

So when both dampers are open, the status word (B3:11) reads 0101, when both dampers are closed, the status word reads 1010

Therefore, when everything is ready, both word are equal. When they're not equal for 'x' seconds, an XOR of the bits will tell you which ones don't match. You can use the bit(s) in the destination word to trigger your alarms.



-Eric
  Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2012, 08:37 PM   #5
Adam303
Lifetime Supporting Member
United States

Adam303 is offline
 
Adam303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 587
Paul I would like to monitor both the proximity switches on each damper
So per say if I issue a command DAMPER1 OPEN I want to monitor the closed proximity switch as well.
__________________
You canít control what you canít measure.
  Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2012, 08:37 PM   #6
geniusintraining
Lifetime Supporting Member + Moderator
United States

geniusintraining is offline
 
geniusintraining's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SC
Posts: 8,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by OkiePC View Post
I am not sure why it needs to be too complicated.
Well then anyone would be able to do it... oh wait
__________________
www.PLCCable.com PLC Communication Cables, PLC Trainers, MicroLogix, ControlLogix, Siemens, Allen Bradley and more...OEM and aftermarket supplies... Aftermarket 1784-U2DHP Allen Bradley USB to DH+, new USB to 485 modbus
  Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2012, 08:44 PM   #7
OkiePC
Lifetime Supporting Member
United States

OkiePC is offline
 
OkiePC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ENE of Nowhere Oklahoma
Posts: 11,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam303 View Post
Paul I would like to monitor both the proximity switches on each damper
So per say if I issue a command DAMPER1 OPEN I want to monitor the closed proximity switch as well.
So you can do the same thing, but I would think that if you are commanding the damper to open and the closed LS stays true, you would want to alarm much sooner, so that would call for separate timers with smaller presets.
__________________
You've been taken, but you don't know it yet.
  Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2012, 09:00 PM   #8
Eric Nelson
Lifetime Supporting Member + Moderator
United States

Eric Nelson is offline
 
Eric Nelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 4,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by OkiePC View Post
So you can do the same thing, but I would think that if you are commanding the damper to open and the closed LS stays true, you would want to alarm much sooner, so that would call for separate timers with smaller presets.
Since he's using indirect addressing, I think he wants an 'elegant' solution. That's why I offered the XOR. Personally, on this small of a system, I would just 'brute force' it with standard logic. Makes it much easier for the next guy to figure out. Now if there were 100 dampers and 50 combinations, indirect addressing starts to make sense.



-Eric
  Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2012, 09:12 PM   #9
Adam303
Lifetime Supporting Member
United States

Adam303 is offline
 
Adam303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 587
Excellent solution Eric Thanks For the big help.
On this small of a system indirect addressing should not be that hard to figure out . Again BIG Thanks.
I just thought this would be a good solution to monitor the off state of each prox
__________________
You canít control what you canít measure.
  Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2012, 09:20 PM   #10
Eric Nelson
Lifetime Supporting Member + Moderator
United States

Eric Nelson is offline
 
Eric Nelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 4,346
There are an infinite number of ways to program this. It's all a matter of what you're most comfortable with.

As an example of how people think differently... In my head, this is a sequential system. Each damper moves through a sequence. CLOSE-Closing-Closed and OPEN-Opening-Opened. Sensors tell me when each step has completed. I would just fault when a step takes too long. The step that faults tells me which sensor failed.

Program it however you like, but don't forget the rung comments!...



-Eric
  Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2012, 10:13 PM   #11
OkiePC
Lifetime Supporting Member
United States

OkiePC is offline
 
OkiePC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ENE of Nowhere Oklahoma
Posts: 11,569
I have to agree with Eric about the use of indirection here, not trying to gang up on you Adam, but we all can benefit from constructive criticism, so please don't be offended because of a difference of opinion about style.

Give 100 programmers the same task, and I guarantee that no two would bring back identical solutions. They may all have good and bad qualities too, and probably disagree about which one was best.

Paul
__________________
You've been taken, but you don't know it yet.
  Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2012, 10:30 PM   #12
Eric Nelson
Lifetime Supporting Member + Moderator
United States

Eric Nelson is offline
 
Eric Nelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Randolph, NJ
Posts: 4,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by OkiePC View Post
Give 100 programmers the same task, and I guarantee that no two would bring back identical solutions. They may all have good and bad qualities too, and probably disagree about which one was best.
Why would we disagree?...


Eric Paul



-Eric
  Reply With Quote
Old March 20th, 2012, 02:18 AM   #13
Adam303
Lifetime Supporting Member
United States

Adam303 is offline
 
Adam303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 587
Quote:
I have to agree with Eric about the use of indirection here, not trying to gang up on you Adam, but we all can benefit from constructive criticism, so please don't be offended because of a difference of opinion about style.

Give 100 programmers the same task, and I guarantee that no two would bring back identical solutions. They may all have good and bad qualities too, and probably disagree about which one was best.
Paul I have no means to be offended by you or Peter, to me ďcriticismĒ from someone that has years of experience in the PLC world is more like a BEST advice. So please should I have any more question in this thread or any other fell free to criticize away.
Thanks Again.
__________________
You canít control what you canít measure.
  Reply With Quote
Reply
Jump to Live PLC Question and Answer Forum


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sequencers randy LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 44 January 31st, 2020 05:06 PM
SQO and SQC Problems for RSLogix 500 Loca21 LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 9 February 25th, 2008 09:49 AM
Position tracking using resolver ascot01 LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 4 November 13th, 2007 05:28 PM
Position Feedback with Mitsubishi Servos kpizzolatto LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 1 June 13th, 2007 01:48 PM
PID for damper position control geniusintraining LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 12 December 21st, 2006 03:05 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:26 PM.


.