Still, is there any method known to smart programmers, which will simplify tracking of any alarm and detect which alarm starts first, second, and so on? Let's suppose you have 5k to 10k I/Os and you want to track them and make sure that they are real alarms and not alarm state after safety shut down. Is there any technique guys? Any general problem solving available?
Emil
Is there any technique guys? Any general problem solving available?
PLC software is pretty ****ty in this regard. You got to do all the work yourself.
But usually this work starts at the mechanical and electrical side. You have to have a sensor for every movement of everything.
If you for instance have a pneumatic cylinder rotating something, you put the sensors on the thing it rotates and not the cylinder itself. That way you can detect both a mechanical problem, a pneumatic problem and an electrical problem.
Every circuit breaker, every contactor, every isolator switch etc needs a feedback signal so you know if it has failed and you can make an alarm for it.
On the HMI you build manual control for everything and show all the sensors that are involved in every function. So if you have a pneumatic cylinder and one sensor show an alarm, you want to be able to run it manually and you want to be able to see on screen the input signal from every sensor including air pressure, 24V power supply etc that is involved in that function.
So if it's a machine you have built alarms for everything and if you have an alarm on something you can run that something manually and see everything from the HMI screen you need to determine what the problem could be.
You also need to identify every sensor and show where it's placed so maintenance can find it quickly.
The cost and complexity of what you are proposing would be enormous. That said, I have worked on some machines that included excellent troubleshooting guides for each fault, and they do indeed cut down on down time. To me, the most important tool for troubleshooting is a well trained tech. I don't remember who uses it as their signature here right off hand, but truer words have never been spoken. "Yes, training is expensive, but ignorance is where the real money is at"
Bubba.
You see a similar thing with cars in the last one or two decades. Cars with lots of electronic monitoring tend to have more defects. In the electronics, "ghost" warning signals while there is actually no defect. Some (mind you, not all) "cheap" lines or brands have proven to be significantly more reliable than upmarket models stuffed with electronics. If it is not in there, then it cannot break.
Bahaha, I love it....a company that decided not to put fuses in a machine ...