Protect my code

Runningamuc said:

What works for me is running a COMPARE of the uploaded file to one backed-up. (I do back-ups right regular) Check the box that says just show changes. Decide if it makes sense. Sometimes it does. If not, change it back.

Click to expand...

I have used this a lot over the years. It is very useful in many situations.

I usually start by giving them the Spider-man speech. "[Peter] With great power comes great responsibility.” - Uncle Ben. Then go into the 1.5 million in liability you need for the wife of the guy who inadvertently tested your code and found out it didn’t work. What I found works the best is for them to know the THeory of OPeration. I find that most guys are using the laptop because they don’t fully understand the process. Instead they choose to find the output that “isn’t working” and work backwards where they find the missing green XIC that’s the problem. On another note if you teach them the THOP and how to write alarm logic in the PLC and Panelview you may be further ahead. If my guys take longer than 20 minutes troubleshooting a problem they are required to write the logic that will predict it next time. First off you save the 20 minutes or more in downtime the next time and they are pretty open about what they did because they are quite proud of the changes they make. I might not have every alarm I could get but I do have the ones that happen.

I am so inclined to write a long dissertation on why the last post is just WRONG, but I will not. I will say this though;

Instead they choose to find the output that “isn’t working” and work backwards where they find the missing green XIC that’s the problem.

Click to expand...

With troubleshooting it depends on many thing but going to the SOURCE (voltage etc) first, if that is OK then in many cases you SHOULD work backwards from the non working device to locate the problem, doesnt matter if that is physical or using the ladder (online or offline).

Personally I have never seen a program that addresses all what ifs with alarms etc. You can only expect so much from the Bubbas' of this world...THOP my arse. If they did not understand how machinery worked why have them as maintenance? Fully understanding the electrical or control operation is an all together different thing.

Why do y'all expect Bubba and Cletus to be able to program or fully understand programming...it is not realistic.

It is not necessary to be a programmer to understand how to troubleshoot.

I take this idea of having alarms for every possible situation with a huge pinch of salt. 1. The number of characters for an alarm comment on a panelview, or whatever, isn't enough to give a coherent description of the problem. 2. Will the operator/maintenance guy/gal actually understand what the alarm comment means. 3. Surely a well documented and commented program is cheaper to produce and more valid as a troubleshooting aid.

Passwords?

Can passwords be used on a misubishi plc? Like FX or A1SJ.

It is not necessary to be a programmer to understand how to troubleshoot.

Click to expand...

I will qualify that statement, a programmer should be able to troubleshoot, if not capable then how can they handle the what ifs?

Why do y'all expect Bubba and Cletus to be able to program or fully understand programming...it is not realistic.


I usually agree and respect RSDoran's posts, but I gotta differ on this one. I expect any maintenance electrician to be able to program and troubleshoot via programs. I have only worked in factories, but I can tell you this, it is imperitive that a maint. tech/elect. be able to read, understand, and troubleshoot PLC ladder, and FB is becoming a requirement as well. I have seen lines which are 1000 feet long, with 15 different processes being done on a given product. It would take 1 maint. man 25 years to learn the THOP of all of the given lines in a plant, and by the time he did, process engineering would have changed a lot of the system by then.

However, if said maint. tech knows very little about the process, but an engineer or operator can explain to him, what is not happening as it should, he should be able to backtrack from the faulty device to the source of the problem, via prints and or PLC logic. I will refuse to admit that this is not a requirement of the job in this day and age, and it is realistic.

If Bubba and Cletus are more skilled as maint. mechanics, then no, I wouldn't think that the above would be a requirement. Ideally, a crew would be equal parts mechanics and electricians, so that they can work together and cover all things required. That said, I will now shut up.

I usually agree and respect RSDoran's posts, but I gotta differ on this one. I expect any maintenance electrician to be able to program and troubleshoot via programs.

Click to expand...

WHY? Hasn't he fulfilled his specification just by being an electrician? WHY does he need to be a programmer too?

I have MET electrical engineers that could not program nor troubleshoot using a plc leds or program...WHY should Bubba be expected too?

THIS IS WRONG...just plain wrong.

NOTE: I am BUBBA.

Understanding the process, will allow for faster troubleshooting.
It takes someone willing to explain and someone willing to learn.

Electricians here, are not expected or encouraged to make programming changes. They are expected to use a plc as any other tool, such as a meter, to identify the problem.


The electricians are encouraged to learn to program om the demo that is set up...not on the process

I think a lot of the programmer vs. electrician vs. engineer discussions here is based on a simple issue of perspective. There are hundreds of mills around the world that do not have full blown engineering staffs. For that matter, many do not have any engineers. Now, I'm not trying to start a tiff between engineers and technicians, simply pointing out a truth. There are many other mills where it is not possible to move a trash can without engineering’s approval.



Many of us work in the first situation, many the second, and most somewhere in between.



In the first case, electricians/technicians must take on much of the roll that engineers would normally fill. I for one thrived in that situation. There are others here that did/do as well. Now your personal opinions about the validity of this type of environment will be varied, again depending on the environment in which you work.



There are situations where it would be down right foolish to try to operate in the first situation. Generation plants come to mind. For these situations, technicians should not be allowed to program, but should have every tool available to troubleshoot faults, and keep the operation running. Being able to get online with the processor is a very powerful tool. This ability can save huge amounts of down time.



The theory of operation, and the methods used to put that theory into action almost always very. Therefore understandings of what is suppose to happen and when, are not always enough to solve breakdowns. I have found that many times there are "ghost" devices that are not apparent even with a good understanding of the process. Those devices fail, and can cause grief without seeing the program. This is why I dislike "blackbox" controls. What goes on inside that box is most important. A good technician can find the trouble, but can find it much faster with access to the program. Even with HMI's and fault codes, access to the brains of the operation is a much better tool. Like any other tool one must know how to use it.



Programmers are a different breed by nature. Not all who would like to program can. Any programmer who wishes to hide his/her work completely from the technicians/operators who can make him/her look great, has either an ego problem, or is compensating.



I learned many years ago that it is always best to be inclusive, rather than exclusive in most aspects of every day work. There are exceptions, but that statement rings true.

I also consider the following a fact: If someone can read and understand PLC logic and troubleshoot problems via the PLC, he or she is then also qualified to be a programmer.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I disagree with that. That falls into "a little knowledge is dangerous" category.

As an electrician becomes comfortable with the programming software, and shows knowledge of the process, they can be allowed to make supervised programing changes/improvements.

Any other way is foolish

NON Developmental

I am a Bubba or Cletus. I am the maintenance electrician y'all talk about in many cases. I am the person that is NON Developmental.

I am a certified welder.

I am a NIASE certified Mechanic

I have a degree in Electronics.

I am EPA certified for handling refrigerants...R12, 22 etc.

I have obtained hydraulics/pneumatics training and certification.

I have been an MSCE but it was not worthwhile to maintain the certification.

I am the maintenance guy that spent his own money to get training on PLC's...plcs.net nor anything like it was available in those days.

I AM....

WHY is it that Engineers and/or companies expect electricians or maintenance people to be programmers BUT do not offer training or the income associated with that ability?

There is no doubt us Bubbas' enjoy sitting on our arse's in front of a computer...gee whiz, the option may be shovelin chit.

The main point is that many maintenance personnel spent years developing a special skill...electrical, welding, pneumatics/hydraulics etc. Technically we get into the maintenance field because it is not as demanding as our skill set requires...ie welders may be outdoors in harsh environments. It can be tiring bending conduit all day...the list goes on.

What I am now is most of y'alls worst nightmare, an intelligent Bubba. I do not have the credentials or position y'all have but in most cases I have the "KNOWLEDGE" but it is unrealistic to expect all BUBBA's to have it, especially when in most cases y'all do not provide the training NOR allow anyone to look as good as y'all in the workplace.

I stay here because for many of you I am your conscience, you can not belittle me nor make condescending remarks that will do more than tick me off and make me stay to learn more of what you know.

I have a website, WHY, because I want MANY to have the option of the "KNOWLEDGE" that so many of you have. Do I make money from it..NO. That is my weakness though, where other would profit I would share.

Y'all can call me stupid, non-developmental, or any terms equivalent to that. I have lived my life doing many things...I left out being an AWARD winning chef/cook...I have been around the world 4 times, I have been in every state in the US...I have made love to women most us, including me, can only dream about.

It is kinda funny though, I am 53 and have retired...how many of you can do that? Not bad for a Bubba..heh?

Back on Track

To get this discussion back on track, I am an automation specialist for a medical device company. As such, all of our software that can affect product quality (i.e. everything) has to be validated. The FDA wouldn't have it any other way. I HAVE to be the gatekeeper, and am the only one to go on-line with the PLC's. My laptop is locked up and so is the software.
The key here is a good relationship and open communication with maintenance. I have provided them with hard copies of all the logic on the various machines for a troublehooting "aide". Its not as good and quick as online, but for the PLC savvy it will help. I am part way through networking them all, and giving maintenance quality read-only HMI so they don't have to suffer through "black box" troubleshooting. When a change is made, I let them all know why it was made, and how it affects the theory of operation. Maintenance does not like to be left in the dark. Think of them like a customer, give them what they want (within your limitations), and involve them in the process. It is my job, to make theirs' easier.
Figure out what is being changed and why. Evaluate it once, then fix it and forget it.
So far, here, it's win-win for everyone. Now if I could just find my way out of the IT department??

TSmith said:

As an electrician becomes comfortable with the programming software, and shows knowledge of the process, they can be allowed to make supervised programing changes/improvements.

Any other way is foolish

Click to expand...

I take it you are compensating or is it the ego?



PLC's were designed with Electricians in mind.



PLC's were designed to make changes easier, not impossible.



Ladder logic is the language of electricians. Good ones anyway.



Just who is going to supervise the only person on site that understands Ladder Logic? At 3:00am with the mill down? When the programmer is 3000 miles away and only works 9:00 to 5:00, West Coast time?



Unqualified general statements are foolish.



Not having the ability to work on your own machines is foolish.