OT: Brand new facility and they installed DevNet

VAN

Member
Join Date
Apr 2012
Location
Wa
Posts
509
Am I out of line, I just got sucked into a brand new facility (to help support) and I just found out they installed DevNet. Not even ControlNet, nope DeviceNet.

The main guy on the project for automation was kicked off (still in the company believe it or not) and the project manager(s) automation and overall both left the site.

I need to know why in the world you would use DevNet in 2021, why not just go all the way back and use DH+.

I'm internally ****ed off and shocked, am I out of line?
 
Seems ridiculous for sure, not sure that I'd be that worked up about it though.

Fair, I'm just worked up that it's already having problems (like intermittent issue) and now I've been assigned to help the vendor on the why. (So I'm not really worked up, but more smh. I just hate DevNet.)
 
Fair, I'm just worked up that it's already having problems (like intermittent issue) and now I've been assigned to help the vendor on the why. (So I'm not really worked up, but more smh. I just hate DevNet.)

It is kind of amazing that it came to fruition. In my microcosm, the way I see this happening is that we get handed a corporate spec that is out dated, nobody questions it, we just shrug our shoulders and say, well that's what they wanted.

Edit: I'm not saying that we would so easily go along with it, just imagining out loud.
 
It is kind of amazing that it came to fruition. In my microcosm, the way I see this happening is that we get handed a corporate spec that is out dated, nobody questions it, we just shrug our shoulders and say, well that's what they wanted.

Edit: I'm not saying that we would so easily go along with it, just imagining out loud.

All good, might be just time to kick the can down the road.
 
They probably had Device Net at where ever the old automation guy came from. Never been exposed to ethernet. Went with what he knew.

If installed correctly, Device Net works well. However, I dislike it because we have to shut down entire segments to make changes.
 
Last edited:
DeviceNet is mature, inexpensive, and reliable when installed properly. Any new network where the loose connections or design mistakes haven't been shaken out yet is going to have intermittent problems.

You would, FOR CERTAIN, have a similar number of intermittent problems with a newly-installed Ethernet network of similar scope. They might be able to be ignored for a while because they disconnect and reconnect quickly, but the latent ones would still be there.

Automobiles are still chock-full of microcontrollers with CANBus interfaces, and it's not because car designers are stupid or have never been exposed to Ethernet.

Hopefully you've got the modern 1756-DNB Series C or later interfaces, with good low-level CANbus diagnostics and very easy to use diagnostic tables, and ordinary plug-in-and-drill-down connectivity via USB. I agree that relying on an expensive and scarce 1784-U2DN or 1770-KFD would be a serious pain.
 
I thought I was the only one who was going to defend devnet, but think about a CCM or a line with more than 100 hundred motors. With ethernet you will need at least 2 huges switches and mess of cables, and if they are not part of IO tree same numbers of messages in order to control them.
I installed a big CCM with (3) 1756-DNB with about 120 motors ( vdf, soft starters, etc, different brands), I almost forget about maintenance, as Ken mentioned loose cables exist everywhere.
I got a nice subroutine to find errors and works like a charm.
Devicenet tag generator helps a lot.
 
So I’m not going to defend device net, but I do have problems in some settings with everything hanging on Ethernet, just waiting for a conflicting IP address or some other network failure.

Obviously horses for courses. Call me nuts, but there are cases where I prefer vfds and valves to be hard wired.
 
If you've been in the industry long enough for a facility to call you in when the designers have fled, you probably don't need my advice about how to document your work, communicate extensively, and prevent yourself from taking the blame for the mistakes of others.

So I'll stick to the technical things I would do if I were in your shoes.

Obviously you'll need RSNetworx for DeviceNet. The software took a big leap forward about the same time as Studio 5000 v21, so don't assume any old version will work well on a workstation with modern Studio 5000 and RSLinx. Get v21 at the very least, and ideally the current release of version 28.01.

You'll be able to do most of your work just by bridging through ControlLogix backplanes or via the USB port on a 1756-DNB. But you might want the ability to do updates, downloads, or configurations of devices that are removed from their running networks, so you should look into getting a standalone network interface. The 1784-U2DN is the modern USB device, but a good old 1770-KFD with a decent USB/RS232 interface will work as well. Get a decent 24V bench power supply that you can use to dedicate to DeviceNets, rather than powering the PLC and the I/O with it too.

If you think you're going to be doing very low-level compatibility testing or protocol analysis, get the -U2DN because it's supported by Frontline Test Equipment's NetDecoder.

Like it or not, you're going to have to deal with Electronic Data Sheet files. Make a directory on your project repository and make sure you put copies of any third-party device in the facility's EDS there. Heck, also put any A-B EDS files that you end up having to download or get from Tech Support and weren't in your install of RSLinx Classic.

If you can get your hands on a Molex NetMeter, it's going to be useful principally for determining if the network itself really is the problem. Yes, it's handy for wiggle-testing connections to see if the error counters jump, but in my experience I mostly used it to prove that the network wasn't "failing" or getting "noisy" when devices were malfunctioning, allowing me and the other engineers to properly discover when things were instead being powered own, disconnected, or submerged.

Get some terminating resistors, 120 ohm, 1%. Get some that fit whatever round or flat quick-disconnect media you're using too.

If you use PanelView Plus terminals, take some time to look at the Sample Code website for the DeviceNet diagnostic faceplates. They're not the most aesthetically pleasing GUI ever made, but they're a lot better than asking somebody to stand there looking at the scrolling indicators on the scanner module.
 
If you've been in the industry long enough for a facility to call you in when the designers have fled, you probably don't need my advice about how to document your work, communicate extensively, and prevent yourself from taking the blame for the mistakes of others.

Oh, it gets worse, its on a platform that basically made a bad overlay software to cover RSNetworks. So it isn't even truly Rockwell, they have these devices that convert Rockwell to another system. So I was expecting some modern stuff, and then I saw it was just DevNet with a bad overlay.

Nobody onsite has experience with this new software platform that runs as a badly made scada system. I don't want to say what software but its, its oh so bad. I just got assigned so, I'm tasked to figure out why this happened and in the discovery phase.

I just, I just don't get the management decisions. I feel they got a quick one pulled over on the team by a sales pitch.

I'll look into the DevNet devices to try to do some diagnostic stuff for the future but a lot of the devices are put in environments that can't be easily be setup. (Like, lets put these in explosion areas, because why not, we can throw the money away.)
 
Last edited:

Similar Topics

I'm coming from a background of PLC ladderlogic/rockwell products. I am new to blocks. Can you point me in right right direction? What I would...
Replies
5
Views
1,552
Any of you would recommend a brand for absolute encoder on a drive shaft.
Replies
13
Views
2,499
Hello! My name is Luke and I started training about a month ago at a company to repair and remanufacture PLCs. I've done a lot of training and...
Replies
3
Views
1,622
Considering the incredible time it would take to get a Panelview Plus 7 , I'm going to get the FactoryTalk View ME Station 30 Display Single...
Replies
1
Views
1,131
Hello, I am having some issues with downloading program to brand new PC. I have project in Automation Studio, that I was able to download to an...
Replies
0
Views
616
Back
Top Bottom