AutomationDirect Productivity Suite now allowing User Defined Structures!!!

I think this is great news!
After many years waiting for it, I'm happy we have User Defined Structures for the Productivity PLCs. For those not familiar with the nomenclature, this is the equivalent to the Allen Bradley RSLogix 5000 or Studio 5000 UDTs.

I always said that the missing UDTs was preventing many programmers from replacing CompactLogix processors with the Productivity 2000 or 3000.

I haven't had the chance to try it yet, though.

https://www.automationdirect.com/productivity/software/features

+1 Elcan
You cannot argue about the price.

Elcan said:

I think this is great news!
After many years waiting for it, I'm happy we have User Defined Structures for the Productivity PLCs. For those not familiar with the nomenclature, this is the equivalent to the Allen Bradley RSLogix 5000 or Studio 5000 UDTs.

I always said that the missing UDTs was preventing many programmers from replacing CompactLogix processors with the Productivity 2000 or 3000.

I haven't had the chance to try it yet, though.

Click to expand...

sweet Now they need Function Blocks

I can't imagine a modern PLC without ST support.

For all the good stuff I hear about AD, it's things like this that make me scared to try it. This new feature that was just added is something I take for granted when I'm working on PLCs. I wonder what else is missing that I expect?



Good news regardless, though.

For all the good stuff I hear about AD, it's things like this that make me scared to try it.

Click to expand...

I've never been afraid to use AD products, but I can empathize with your concern. I've frequently found that their implementation of features falls a bit short of my expectations.
An example: A few years ago I used a Sure Servo for the first time. I read the specs and everything the job required was covered. The application required commanding moves from point A to point B as well as to follow a pulse train from another source. When I put it into operation I was disappointed to learn that to switch the axis into follower operation I had to cycle power to the unit.
I had scramble to come up with a work-around for follower mode by connecting the external encoder to the PLC's HSC inputs and command a series of incremental moves. Nowhere near as straightforward as follower operation but I had to be able to switch between modes without losing axis position. A power cycle would have required rehoming the axis.

theColonel26 said:

sweet Now they need Function Blocks

Click to expand...

That would be in another 5 years.

Elcan said:

That would be in another 5 years.

Click to expand...

Yeah Minimum.

I wish they would do a RaspberyPI based controller like they did for the Ardunio. Then provide IO Card drivers for Codesys.

At productivity prices, with codesys.... That would be heavenly.



RPi Codesys License is only 50 euros.

theColonel26 said:

RPi Codesys License is only 50 euros.

Click to expand...

Seems that they had a 20€ increase across the board. That was 30€ last year I believe.

Also, beaglebone black runtime license is now 70€ which makes it a poor deal in my opinion.

cardosocea said:

Seems that they had a 20€ increase across the board. That was 30€ last year I believe.

Also, beaglebone black runtime license is now 70€ which makes it a poor deal in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Yeah the BeagleBone Black is RPi 1 era tech isn't it? I don't thin they ever updated it from the original design.

theColonel26 said:

Yeah Minimum.

I wish they would do a RaspberyPI based controller like they did for the Ardunio.

Click to expand...

Related to this:
https://library.automationdirect.co...&utm_campaign=4-30-20&utm_content=RaspberryPi

Elcan said:

Related to this:
https://library.automationdirect.co...&utm_campaign=4-30-20&utm_content=RaspberryPi

Click to expand...

oooh yeah I have seen that, it's marketing propaganda and means nothing LOL

What I am talking about would be a PLC it would just be running Codeysys instead of bare metal stuff.

I started working with the DoMore before the Productivity had a lot of options.
I will admit that the DoMore does way more than I could ever need, but I've seriously considered trying out a Productivity.

I fell off the AB bandwagon several years ago, and enjoy the tech support, cost, and availability of AD.

I can have nearly anything in 2 days.

Hello Everybody I have just started configuring an AD Productivity 3000 PAC...defined the User Defined Structure for my valves and I'm trying to figure out how to create a user defined instruction where I can pass the corresponding data structure as input/output parameters. Is this possible? I'm not seeing it.

That is not possible...yet. you can create a subroutine and use that