AD stage programming

I'm just starting to learn AD stage programming. (newbbie-ish) Fanuc ladder programming mainly.

While I see MAJOR advantages with using stage, I find the examples in the user manual to be 'faulty'.

Chapter 7, page 4 (toggle switch) has the button trigger on the 'release'. I'm sorry, but when I press the button, I expect the action to occur THEN, not upon release. (on mouse-button-down in VB)

Take JOG for instance - press button and hold down until in-position. Not press then release for action to begin! Non intuitive. Press the power-on button on a Fanuc control for instance.

I'm gonna order a DL06 (my 3rd) to play with - the first two are helping Austin,TX have cleaner water.

PS: I just lost a contract because of my ignorance about 'SPECIAL RELAYS'. I shall rectify THAT also!!

PPS: I'll rewrite the toggle function in stage and post that for the 'student' question - that will spin their disks

You guys are SO helpful - I shall repay if I can.

Rod (The CNC dude)

I'm glad to see you're learning it- I don't even know what it is yet! Or maybe I do, but don't recognize the term "Stage programming"

'Stage Programming' is AD's version of a 'step transition' style of programming laid on top of standard ladder logic. I find it incredibly useful as it helps to lay out a sequence based program in a truly logical order. You can access their manual for any of their families - though the 06 seems to be growing in huge popularity - at ther web site. It has a section, which I find to be an adequate introduction, to the Stage Programming. Though your imagination could take you much farther.

Here is a guide to Stage Programming, that tries to go a bit farther than the manual. It is geared more toward beginners and tries to make distinctions on when Stage should be used and when it should not. (Sorry Bernie and testsubject, I know you just love it, but there are times that it should not be used.)

icky812 said:

[It is geared more toward beginners and tries to make distinctions on when Stage should be used and when it should not. (Sorry Bernie and testsubject, I know you just love it, but there are times that it should not be used.)

Click to expand...

Icky,

I once was on the phone with one of your support techs. In the converstation he advised me that stage programming might not be the way to go for my application.

I've played with it some, but never really applied it because my basic code is already done and changes little from project to project.

Just my comments... Mike

Don't get me wrong, Stage is great for certain applications and can save a ton of programming if properly applied.

I would never use it for an application that was a straight linear process that never had any portion that repeated. It is just not well suited for it.

However, an application that required certain events to happen over and over in different portions of the program with the event being the same and the enabler (trigger) being different is just the sort of application that cries out to be done in Stage. You only have to write the event once, and then you write single rungs that enable said event. Walla! You have condensed many lines of repetitive code down to a small section that only gets enabled when needed. If it is not enabled, it doesn't get processed and scan time goes down accordingly.

icky,

Thanks for the site-vector. I'm beyond that, but can see clearly that RLL+ isn't a panacea. I just need to put more knowledge in my 'tool-kit'

<sigh> You can get PIC devices that are progammable in VB, C, C+, ETC. Wouldn't life be easy if PLCs would be the same.

OH WAIT! Then AnyBody could do it! - What am I saying!!!!!


Rod (The CNC dude)

This sounds a lot like a SUBROUTINE~ or have I missed the point?

Subroutines are generally for sections of code which can be called from multiple places in a main program. Though I use them (in AB) to define major sections of the machine. Stage programming would not help in a continous process. But let me give an example with one of our machines.

It conveys flat corrugated cases to different stations in a machine to set up and seal one end closed. Operations can occur along the way from station to station. Other operations happen to each case at each station.

The opeations at each station are of the "do this' until 'this happens' then do 'this', continuing until the operations at that station are complete. Each station has a set of its own operations.

When a supervisory stage notes that all stations are in their 'station complete' stage then it begins a transfer and starts multiple parallel stages each looking for conditions (in this case encoder counts) at which to perform an operation to the case(s). When the transfer reaches its end, the beginning stages of each station are enabled.

Each stage typically includes error checking and can provide a unique error signal.

Once the machine's actions were analysed and the I/O's assigned, the program nearly wrote itself in stage logic. Troubleshooting is very easy. For our particular type machines I think it makes my job easier. No it's not a cure all, just another tool. But a welcome one.

Very useful tool

I agree with bernie. Using stage and blocks with the DirectSoft32 programming environment is extremely useful if you grasp the concept. Take time to study it, it did not come to me right away , but when it did it hit me like a ton of bricks.

I understand that there are cases where it would not be needed, but I love the concept so much that I use stage programming in every project, whether neccesary or not.

The thing I love most about it is that you can design a flow chart of what the machine needs to do. Whether you draw this flowchart on paper with a pencil or with software is irrelevant. Once you have this flowchart designed the program almost writes itself using stages and block.

Don't give up on it right away if you don't understand it. It is powerful enough that it deserves several tries.

Does anyone use the Stage View in DirectSoft when programming or debugging?

Andy

Re: Very useful tool

zmanvortex said:

I agree with bernie. Using stage and blocks with the DirectSoft32 programming environment is extremely useful if you grasp the concept. Take time to study it, it did not come to me right away , but when it did it hit me like a ton of bricks.

I understand that there are cases where it would not be needed, but I love the concept so much that I use stage programming in every project, whether neccesary or not.

The thing I love most about it is that you can design a flow chart of what the machine needs to do. Whether you draw this flowchart on paper with a pencil or with software is irrelevant. Once you have this flowchart designed the program almost writes itself using stages and block.

Don't give up on it right away if you don't understand it. It is powerful enough that it deserves several tries.

Click to expand...

amen ... amen ... amen ...

I tried using it when first starting but gave it up as not being very helpful. It tries to make a two dimensional representation of what has to be written in a sequence. Most often its representation, for me, does not show anything clearly about the program structure. I generally just stay with the standard listing.

It would be great if we could lay out the structure (that is do the high level stage structure) in the stage view (using its generic 'condition', 'output', 'set' and 'jump' symbols) then pop to the ladder view to fill in each stage's details.

I agree

Once again I agree with bernie. I have tried using the stage view and did not find it helpful at all.

I continue to do my stage programming and debugging using the ladder view so I can see the states of individual bits. I just did not like switching back and forth between ladder and stage views.

As I am programming the stages based on my flowchart I will write the stage number on the flowchart. This helps tremendously when debugging because you can just look at the flowchart and find the stage number where the problem is occuring and do a simple search in ladder view to go to that stage.

Re: I agree

zmanvortex said:

I continue to do my stage programming and debugging using the ladder view so I can see the states of individual bits. I just did not like switching back and forth between ladder and stage views.

Click to expand...

I agree I can't stand the stage view, but use the heck out of stages. All my software is broken down in to stages... I've got individual stages to monitor for different fault and alarm conditions, if I enter a mode of operation where I shouldn't be monitoring for a particular fault all I have to do is reset that stage... Very cool stuff.