OT: Descriptive Tag Names

janner_10 said:

From a customer of ours in the states, just why?

Click to expand...

Whats wrong with that??

fgdfsg = Forget Gosh Darn Fast Sensor Good

FKSDFJGHKSD = Fast Knot Sensor Detector Fumbling Just Good High Known Sensor Dead

gfbhgfhgfh = Good Fast Bubble High Good Fast High Good Fast High (this is a aray)

H = hell (short for "oh hell")

"Once Bitten, Twice Shy"?

geniusintraining said:

Whats wrong with that??

fgdfsg = Forget Gosh Darn Fast Sensor Good

FKSDFJGHKSD = Fast Knot Sensor Detector Fumbling Just Good High Known Sensor Dead

gfbhgfhgfh = Good Fast Bubble High Good Fast High Good Fast High (this is a aray)

H = hell (short for "oh hell")

Click to expand...

I have a different take on some of the "f"s

Ok, so I can understand a converted RSLogix500 program retaining the old names, but I have had the fortune to work on a program written from scratch in RSLogix5000 where the programmer chose to name all the tags just like in 500 instead of using descriptive names.

jgreenewv said:

YES! Four years in and I'm still cleaning up converted programs left by my predecessor. I can't fathom why he didn't spend a little time creating proper tag names. Then again, his code on two identical machines was often completely different, so...

Click to expand...

OK, I'll admit to putting all of the original code into a single array on a PLC-2 to ControlLogix conversion two years ago. The tag was mapped for PLC-2 messages because the CLX had to support the existing computer until the last stage of the project. Every used word and bit had the description filled in with the original description, the PLC-2 octal address and the I/O wire number.

HawkME said:

Ok, so I can understand a converted RSLogix500 program retaining the old names, but I have had the fortune to work on a program written from scratch in RSLogix5000 where the programmer chose to name all the tags just like in 500 instead of using descriptive names.

Click to expand...

Once again communications drove the tag naming, in this case a Delta V DCS using a Mynah Ethernet card with the A-B driver loaded. On the first project the driver only supported PLC/SLC messaging, so I named the array tags to match the mapped file numbers. On the next project I had already done the same before the Delta V programmer confirmed that the new driver would support Logix tags.

just wait till you see the younger generation start coding with tags as follows


Lol
ROFL
Like
IMO
IMHO
and other text speak.

ASF said:

I have a different take on some of the "f"s

Click to expand...

Originally I had it like that but.... you know its a family show

Mike Lamond said:

OK, I'll admit to putting all of the original code into a single array on a PLC-2 to ControlLogix conversion two years ago. The tag was mapped for PLC-2 messages because the CLX had to support the existing computer until the last stage of the project. Every used word and bit had the description filled in with the original description, the PLC-2 octal address and the I/O wire number.

Click to expand...

Backwards compatibility is a different story. We still have a couple of small CompactLogix machines that are full of arrays mapped to N and B files because the external devices can't be modified to pull tags from a Logix. It's the standalone stuff that was run through the converter and then left as-is that I don't understand.

Yeah, that's just a nightmare.


A client of mine ordered two CIP systems from a company. They were built brand new with a compact logix but the entire tag database is just arrays of N7[255] and B3[255]. And no comments. They provided an excel spreadsheet to cross reference the tags.


They also used a 4" black and white non-touch HMI, and were nothing short of amazed at my ability to make their PLC talk to the line central control PLC. I can't help but wonder if nobody has told them it's not 1995 any more.

seth350 said:

Rockwell was actually going to do this for us for a program in a modernization project. Went through explaining how the program would be converted and tested by their engineers and how great it would be.
Me: “Are you going to rename the tags to descriptive names?”
Rockwell: “No...”
Me: “So what service are you offering again? I thought we were modernizing?”

Click to expand...

I'm glad my company isn't the only one they pulled that trick on. I wish I would've had that reply though!
Yeah, one of my part-time projects is rewriting those tags into something that makes sense.