EZ-PLC - Whatta ya think?

Its one thing for someone that spends 1000's of dollars a month to "borrow" components from time to time.

patchn.com at one time was a computer hardware info site. Custom built systems and components could be purchased there. It was part of a link of sites that did all kinds of things like overclocking etc. We even determined how to make the original Celerons not be Celerons so they could be used on a dual or quad motherboard.

My point is once you accept components for review etc they expect something in return...usually advertising links. You end up with links and pop ups everywhere and it gets annoying.

The AVG stuff seems to be inexpensive but I am not sure. I am not seeing a significant difference in plc price vs AD. I am familiar with AD and how they operate.

I too would like to see the manual(s) available online for pre-viewing. I have never had contact with the company so am not familiar with their tech support but they arent offering anything online. It looks like the manuals are on a CD and have to be purchased.

I personally dont have a "specific" brand per se, there are some that I am not fond of dealing with though. The only major brand that I havent used and dont have software for is Omron...to my regret.

I will be watching to see if one is bought and what is said about it.

Just a few thoughts...

How to develop an objective test... one that is immune to bias...

I think that it is very important that tests are objective. The tests need to indicate Truth regardless (not "irregardless", as in the case for the lesser educated) of any bias that might exist.

This is not an easy task.

Since PLCs are so sensitive to scan-time, I should think that one (or more) of the primary tests should include the execution of one, or more, particularly difficult concepts.

The results of any test(s) would, of course, indicate the programming ability of the particular participant as well as the capabilities of the particular system.

However, if "Programmer-A" can't develop a particular concept with the given instruction set, that doesn't mean that it can't be done. That only means that "Programmer-A" can't develop the necessary code.

If, on the other hand, "Programmer-B" or "Programmer-C" is able to develop the code to meet the concept then it simply becomes a matter of how long it takes for the result to develop.

The fact that it might take more steps to accomplish the concept doesn't really matter. What really matters is how long it takes to develop the result. Programmers are responsible for taking whatever steps are necessary to meet the objective... the concept.

The name of the game in Automation is TIME!

The TIME issue applies to programming efforts as well as execution.

With respect to "programming efforts", assuming first that the particular programmer is up to the task (has a sense of system), that is really dependent upon the particular programmer and their "feel" for the interface program. A difficult interface program can prolong development time. An easy interface program can enhance development time. To a large extent, this depends on the "intuitive nature" of the interface program.

With respect to "execution", that too depends on the programmer as well as the speed of the processor.

With respect to the programmer, it depends on how efficiently the programmer uses the available tools.

It is only once the code is developed that the particular aspect depends on processor speed.

Of course, the main factor here is the efficiency of the particular code developed by the particular programmer.

This ends up being as much a programmer competition as a processor competition.

In terms of evaluating the particular system, the processor needs to be subjected to the most efficient code for a particular concept.

Only when the most efficient code, for the given instruction set, is applied can the result can then be compared to the "other guys". The deciding factor, at that point, is the TIMING of their particular reults.

I should think that the "basic battery of tests" should NOT include such things as Immediate Read/Write or Interrupts.

There should, however, be a "battery of tests" that does include such things as Immediate Read/Write or Interrupts.

I simply do not have time to test this system, although I would love to...

However, I would be interested in helping to develop the tests.

I think the nature of the testing applied far out-weighs the test results.

The test results can be "solid" ONLY if the tests are "solid".

The name of the game may be time, for automation, but that isn't the only issue. As I was taught in Tax class...it depends.

Programming style can either be an advantage or disadvantage. What one programmer does in 5 rungs may take another 8 rungs, for the same controller by a different programmer. Much will depend on the programmers understanding of the controller they are using and the instruction set they have to work with. We have a very basic instruction set with very few "special functions" However, when you are familiar with the software, you learn how to program. It may take extra rungs, but you are not beholden to the way a manufacturer sets up their special instruction set. The more you use the software, the more you develop your own short cuts and library of routines. The more companies install special routines, diminishes ones learning and understanding of ladder logic as a whole.

There are other ways to improve "time". Not through the PLC, but through the supplier, how and what they do for their customers. What an OEM is looking to do is different from an end user or systems integrator. An OEM may not do as much programming as an end user or systems integrator, due to repetitiveness of application. So the time issue is different, depending on what you do.

Programming is one aspect of the application where time is expended. Other areas include installation, wiring and testing.

Many of the products on the market today require additional components due to minimal ratings, specifically on outputs. This not only adds time but cost and panel space as well.

Specifically, speaking about EZ Automation and other similar products, such as Unitronics and TCP's GLC product where the I/O is attached directly to the operator interface, typically, mounted on the front of the panel, we responded in one of our news letters - http://www.entertron.com/einl/1-6.htm by stating:


For those of you who are considering an "all in one" packaged PLC (both operator interface and PLC), here are a few things for you to consider, prior to purchasing:

All wiring terminates to the door of your enclosure, unlike the separate PLC and operator interface products that have two connections: one for the serial port and one for the power cable. There will be a huge wiring harness going to the door of your panel.

The output rating will be less than the traditional PLCs and far less than Entertron's controllers due to board size and component ratings constraints.

Possible replacement will be challenging in that you will have to remove the entire controller / operator interface

One processor for both the operator interface and PLC greatly reduces the scan rate of your application.

With two separate products, you may have additional cost, but you have the power of multiple processors. We used that approach when developing the Elite-2000 analog board. It has its own process, operates at lightening speed without weighing down the main PLC processor.

For some, they will love the idea. Will they have to add additional components, it will depend on their application.

Ron,

Of course the AVG products look inexpensive, compared to AD or other similar products. AVG learned quite well how to use similiar marketing techniques that AD has been using for years. What they don't address, are:

The additional components you have to use.

The cost, or I should say loss of their replacements parts business.

With regards to a "Consumer Reports" type of program for controllers, I would not be adverse to doing something like that. The initial obsticles I see first hand are:

1. Product bias or lack of understanding

2. Understanding the company's products.

3. Comparison. In many cases, you will have many apple and orange type products, that don't compare directly.

I am not certain how you would go about establishing a criteria that will ultimately benefit the consumer. As stated before, the needs of end users, OEMs and Systems Integrators are different. I would strongly recommend including other areas of the evaluation, not just product evaluation. Other areas might include customer support, warranty, accessibility, company focus, to name a few. Possibly a rating system for manufacturers based on these other areas.

Another area to consider, might be learning curve. How long does it take to learn a manufacturers programming, how good / or bad is the manual when it comes to providing the information you require to program.

I know of a few people in this forum that have either purchased our product, or we have given it to them. So, I don't know how that would affect bias.

I will stop my ramble for now. It will be interesting to the insight of others here.

And just incase anyone was wondering, I did not cast a vote.

God Bless,

Re: PLC users Reports...

elevmike said:

Ive got another problem...Bias. There's only one brand that's worthwhile and all others exist only as distractions and for thoes who dont know better... I might not make a good reviewer.

Click to expand...

Come on Mike, your not any more biased towards that one company than I am ... I'll be interested to see how AD reacts (if they react at all) to such an obvious rip off of their marketing technique... Should make for an interesting year.

I couldn't help myself.

I guess I will see first hand how the EZPLC stacks up against AD and the others. I ordered one last week so hopefully it will be here Tuesday or Wednesday.

RDay

Very Good!

Looks like you'll be the first kid on the block with one.

We look forward to your report.

Please advise sometime what you normally use, and how they compare.

regards.....casey

I am seeing alot of posts regarding having to buy EZ-Automation manuals....

Here is a link to the EZ Automation manual set download.

http://www.ezautomation.net/downloads/docs/docs.php

Quality

I've had a good look @ these low cost Modules. If you're running this in any type of low temp application or in an industrial application, be aware that the PLC is designed as a "cheap" solution. The photos from the website and the ‘in hand’ reaction is quite different. We ordered one for our internal evaluation and have decided that the EZplc will not be a device we will promote. Their touch screens are OK, but not the plc. The software package is rather adept when comparing it to other low cost PLC packages, but that's the only positive aspect I can note on. If you plan on using this in an application that does not require rugged durability, then the EZplc would probably be fine. We have not tested this PLC in a live application, but we have tested it on our desks. All the I/O card seem to function fine, but we did have some concerns with the 4-20mA input card. They claim a high A/D bit resolution, which is true, but the stability of the converter has a lot to be desired. We use a loop simulator (about as solid a signal can be) and the value was bouncing around to the point of illegibility.

When I saw the pictures, I thought that they be a bit light duty.

Not many people report using them so far.

Time will tell, maybe!

regards.....casey

I would not base my opinion on pictures.
The price is cheap even suspicious.
Most of automation systems are very expensive systems.
Is that risk is worth? I think it depend on your market ,if price is the your factor go for it.you can find even cheaper.Take in consideration you may pay for that in precious time.then throw it a way.
I would go with something proven in this field and let others to test it.