PLC5 To Siemens Conversion

Jinto

Member
Join Date
Feb 2010
Location
Peterborough
Posts
20
Hi,

Is it possible to get Allen Bradley PLC5 main rack I/O into a Siemens PLC?

I have previously done PLC5 to ControlLogix conversions where I have tested the conversion by removing the PLC5 PLC module and replacing it with an ASB, I then used a ControlLogic DH+/RIO card to collect the main rack I/O which I mapped into the ControlLogix. This allowed me to test the conversion without changing the I/O rack and gave me a quick fall back position as I could simply put the PLC5 processor back into the main rack at the end of testing.

I was wondering if anything like this was possible for a Siemens processor?

I'm not aware of anything that would be able to read the main rack I/O or any other racks on RIO ?
 
Last edited:
A long time ago, in a land far away, there was rumored to be a S7-400 series IO module that would connect to PLC5 RIO, but I never actually saw one or read anything other than the rumor.....Since the PLC5 has been replaced by newer platforms, I suspect if it was ever in the works, it was dropped.
 
Could you fit an intermidiary device, like an anybus or redlion unit.

Just use the existing rockwell cpu to map the IO to the Siemens CPU, the Siemens CPU processing the logic.
 
We have done a couple of migrations from obsolete to current PLCs.
Reusing the old racks means you will carry along the problem with spare parts in the future, and troubleshooting will be worse as well, so we always chose to completely remove the old racks and install the chosen IO system in its place.


Plan to reuse the existing wiring as much as possible.
If you have it all well-prepared you can rewire a rack in 2-4 hours.
Depending on how many racks, you can be done in a day or a few days.

So no need for complex adapter systems.
 
We have done a couple of migrations from obsolete to current PLCs.
Reusing the old racks means you will carry along the problem with spare parts in the future, and troubleshooting will be worse as well, so we always chose to completely remove the old racks and install the chosen IO system in its place.


Plan to reuse the existing wiring as much as possible.
If you have it all well-prepared you can rewire a rack in 2-4 hours.
Depending on how many racks, you can be done in a day or a few days.

So no need for complex adapter systems.
Hi,

Yes I agree, however this would be a phased migration. The biggest issue is the machine downtime. The plant runs 24/7 and getting any significant downtime is a real problem.
I have migrated a previous machine to controlLogix with absolute minimum downtime by being able to test the conversion in stages and return the machine to production rapidly at the end of each testing phase.
Anything that requires changing I/O cards or wiring would take too long to restore and put far more risk on production. The phased approach would mean that the code was completely tested before the jump to changing the physical I/O was made and would allow testing to be undertaken in any short downtime opportunity.
 
That's interesting, I have used the Rockwell rack conversion kits previously, I wasn't aware that there was a 3rd party version available for the 1771 range.
However I don't think that would be a solution in this case as it would need the full replacement I/O system in place which is not going to be possible. I need to test the conversion using just the new processor first as there will not be enough room in the panel for all of the new hardware until the old equipment is removed.
 
Hi,

Yes I agree, however this would be a phased migration. The biggest issue is the machine downtime. The plant runs 24/7 and getting any significant downtime is a real problem.
I have migrated a previous machine to controlLogix with absolute minimum downtime by being able to test the conversion in stages and return the machine to production rapidly at the end of each testing phase.
Anything that requires changing I/O cards or wiring would take too long to restore and put far more risk on production. The phased approach would mean that the code was completely tested before the jump to changing the physical I/O was made and would allow testing to be undertaken in any short downtime opportunity.

I find it funny when companies have this approach of not having time to guarantee their sustainability. I understand that keeping up production is key, but not giving time to ensure that they have a maintainable platform on their production systems is really short sighted.

I did a replacement of a PLC5 to S7-1500 last year and it went pretty smooth. This being said, we started from a program conversion and although it helped in having little to no issues (bar the PID behaviour), the end result is really poor in readability and I wouldn't advise anyone to do it.
 
I think the Prosoft gateway as the first stage of your conversion is your best bet. We have one for a PLC5 to communicate with a ModbusTCP device and it's been great. The programming was done through the PLC5 which was not ideal but their tech support was very helpful.

I work in a plant where some systems are a 24/7 operation (with the exception of an annual shutdown week), so I understand the need to keep production going, but your end-game should be to completely remove the old PLC5 rack because spare parts will become a problem as Jesper mentioned and a 3rd party wiring adapter just becomes another thing to go wrong in my opinion. Make life easy for Future Jinto
 

Similar Topics

We are currently running a PLC-5 system consisting of 12 PLCs with a lot of I/O per PLC and inter PLC comms and need to upgrade. What would you...
Replies
12
Views
6,033
Hallo friend.. Any body who have siemen PLC5 manual by pdf..?
Replies
2
Views
2,672
I need link a PLC5 (5/25 with DH, DH+ or DF1) with Simatic C7 with Profibus DP port. With the cheapest possible way. I think, PLC5/25 has not...
Replies
2
Views
3,955
I am using the following formula and I am getting error, Invalid Expression - too many closing parenthesis. when i copy the formula to notepad or...
Replies
4
Views
132
Back
Top Bottom