Doing Edits in an AOI Logix5000

Hi. How would I do online edits in "one" particular AOI without affecting the Main Definition? I am not sure at all of how accurate this is but I have heard that this can also be down without going offline and re-downloading to the processor after the edits. Thank you all.

What you describe isn't possible per se. An AOI by definition has to be the same for all instances.

If you want to try something different with one of those instances, what you'd do is to duplicate the AOI, call it something like "My_AOI_Modified", and make your changes in there. Then, for the instance you're wanting to change, change the data type of the AOI tag from "My_AOI" to "My_AOI_Modified". Of course, all of this must be done offline and downloaded.

One caveat to ASF's response on duplicating and modifying an AOI. You can create your new modified AOI offline, export it (right mouse click on its definition), and then import it into your running processor. You can then create new instances of the new modified AOI and begin to replace the old AOI. Its a much longer tedious process but if the processor can not be shut down, its about the only way.

If I think for a second I may have to edit re-usable code online, I use a UDT and create a subroutine with a general purpose name, place it in the unscheduled folder and use it as a template for whatever instance I need it for.

jstolaruk said:

One caveat to ASF's response on duplicating and modifying an AOI. You can create your new modified AOI offline, export it (right mouse click on its definition), and then import it into your running processor. You can then create new instances of the new modified AOI and begin to replace the old AOI. Its a much longer tedious process but if the processor can not be shut down, its about the only way.

If I think for a second I may have to edit re-usable code online, I use a UDT and create a subroutine with a general purpose name, place it in the unscheduled folder and use it as a template for whatever instance I need it for.

Click to expand...

And yet, many people swear that AB is the perfect PLC system... honestly, I can't understand how people put up with it.

cardosocea said:

And yet, many people swear that AB is the perfect PLC system... honestly, I can't understand how people put up with it.

Click to expand...

They all have strengths and weaknesses.

cardosocea said:

And yet, many people swear that AB is the perfect PLC system... honestly, I can't understand how people put up with it.

Click to expand...

If there were any "Perfect PLC System", then everyone would use only that no matter the cost. AB PLC's are solid, reliable, and functional, even with Rockwell doing everything they can to kill them off.

rdrast said:

If there were any "Perfect PLC System", then everyone would use only that no matter the cost. AB PLC's are solid, reliable, and functional, even with Rockwell doing everything they can to kill them off.

Click to expand...

It's true that they know their stuff... and their products are solid, but in this day and age this seems to be a huge limitation for their systems.

It's basically an half assed attempt to achieve what Siemens had all along... "here guys... you now can have a function in the true sense of the word." Ohh and by the way, if you need to change it you'll have to stop the PLC to implement anything.

They all have strengths and weaknesses, but this one is a hard one to swallow.

The same could be said for changes to the hardware configuration or changes to the safety program in a Siemen's PLC.

cardosocea said:

They all have strengths and weaknesses, but this one is a hard one to swallow.

Click to expand...

Until "Bubba" does an online edit to an AOI without realizing they are changing every instance causing a spectacular failure of some unrelated device.

cardosocea said:

It's true that they know their stuff... and their products are solid, but in this day and age this seems to be a huge limitation for their systems.

It's basically an half assed attempt to achieve what Siemens had all along... "here guys... you now can have a function in the true sense of the word." Ohh and by the way, if you need to change it you'll have to stop the PLC to implement anything.

They all have strengths and weaknesses, but this one is a hard one to swallow.

Click to expand...

If you want that functionality, you use a subroutine and subroutine parameters. Works exactly like a Siemens FC and can be edited online.

I'm a huge fan of AOI's, when used correctly. If you find that you keep on having to do downloads and make changes to your AOI's, you're not using them correctly.

Pretty much all my AOI's are device-based. Over the years I have developed them for DOL motors, VSD motors, weight transmitters, pneumatics and hydraulics, barcode readers, and so on. Once you've got all your features in place, tested and proven, you never need to touch the AOI again. What makes the motor start and stop happens outside the AOI, so that can be changed at any time, but things like auto/manual mode, overload/isolator/starter feedback, and so on, never change.

Sure, every now and then some application or another calls for a new feature that my AOI doesn't have, so I add it to the AOI and up it to v2.0. I've never yet found a feature add that wasn't backward compatible to my previous iterations.

Me personally, I'm not a huge fan of Siemens. Everything just seems way harder than it should be. But I don't for a moment imagine that it's because AB is inherently better than Siemens - it's purely that I'm better at using AB. If I had more practice on Siemens, I'd get used to thinking the way Siemens engineers expect you to think, and I'm sure at the end of the day it'd be just as powerful.