Beckhoff vs. Allen Bradley... who is better?

[cardosocea]

Without simultaneous online editing it would have literally at least twice the engineering hrs. for commissioning, debug & FAT.

Other brands have figured out that you don't need online editing to change programs... more than one can develop in a Siemens PLC at the same time too.

It's also very precious to be so defensive of online editing in AB when in reality half of any program's functionality can't be edited online or at all without stopping the processor (AOI).

 

[RichardH]

Read What I Wrote

Other brands have figured out that you don't need online editing to change programs... more than one can develop in a Siemens PLC at the same time too.

It's also very precious to be so defensive of online editing in AB when in reality half of any program's functionality can't be edited online or at all without stopping the processor (AOI).

Try reading what I wrote. I never said one needed to online edit to change a program. I said multiple simultaneous online editing capabilities made the debug/commissioning/FAT process far more efficient.


If 1/2 of your programs are AOI's (or FB's yes I know you can edit FB's online in Siemens) you're a lousy programmer. AOI's can be great, but they are way overused. They should contain bullet proof locked down DOCUMENTED code that never needs to be edited. A TON or MOV command is basically an AOI, why would you edit it? & BTW you can edit AOI's in the latest Studio5000

 

[jkerekes]

Which version can you edit an AOI online?

 

[theColonel26]

Other brands have figured out that you don't need online editing to change programs... more than one can develop in a Siemens PLC at the same time too.

It's also very precious to be so defensive of online editing in AB when in reality half of any program's functionality can't be edited online or at all without stopping the processor (AOI).

Try reading what I wrote. I never said one needed to online edit to change a program. I said multiple simultaneous online editing capabilities made the debug/commissioning/FAT process far more efficient.


If 1/2 of your programs are AOI's (or FB's yes I know you can edit FB's online in Siemens) you're a lousy programmer. AOI's can be great, but they are way overused. They should contain bullet proof locked down DOCUMENTED code that never needs to be edited. A TON or MOV command is basically an AOI, why would you edit it?

Ok Boomer

If I have one PLC running 20 Identical Machines I am going to put that machine in an AOI and then I am going to have that AOI split up in to multiple sub AOIs that interact with each other. This is call Object oriented programming and it has been around since the 60's as a concept and since the 80's as a the de facto programming paradigm. This is 2020 bud.

& BTW you can edit AOI's in the latest Studio5000

...online? in V32 you can? not that I have seen. I would love for you to be right.

 

[rupej]

Well he's right, you can edit AOIs. Just not online

 

[matthew1]

Reassignment he means maybe? aoi_My_Oop_1_0_0…woops forgot the stupid xyz. Edit off line To add xyz rev to aoi_My_Oop_1_0_1. Go online Import rev1_0_1 then online edit create new aoi tag as rev change changed data struc copy paste some stuff assemble.......cross fingers and DONE. That seems pretty simple did I miss any steps? Maybe this is online editing, regardless I hope they never allow online editing of AOI’s. Then there will be a large number of them I will have to go put source protection on......ohh not for intellectual right before that rabbit jumps up. Aoi not being editable makes it convenient to create a reusable function that can’t be changed online because you don’t want it to be. (Easily) That’s how I use them to some extent and I don’t have to manage the stupid sk file. Support personally can get in and look but can’t Flip a bit in the AOI or force this etc. Then again maybe im in the Wild West......

 

[JesperMP]

I use FB/IDBs extensively (aka. "object oriented programming" as you call it).
But I do not agree with that such blocks must be locked down. If there is a reason for locking them down - yes, but generally as a rule - no.

 

[cardosocea]

Try reading what I wrote.

I did... look below, emphasis mine.

I never said one needed to online edit to change a program. I said multiple simultaneous online editing capabilities made the debug/commissioning/FAT process far more efficient.

Considering that partial downloads onto the PLC are a fairly new thing in AB and that you can't to the best of my knowledge create tags offline without downloading the whole thing, online editing is very much required for single edits or multiple edits.

My point still stands that multiple online editing isn't a requirement in most brands to do simultaneous development. When talking about Siemens, for example, I'd say a PLC isn't even needed for a large part of what a programmer would use one as their simulator is orders of magnitude better than the competition.

If 1/2 of your programs are AOI's (or FB's yes I know you can edit FB's online in Siemens) you're a lousy programmer. AOI's can be great, but they are way overused. They should contain bullet proof locked down DOCUMENTED code that never needs to be edited. A TON or MOV command is basically an AOI, why would you edit it? & BTW you can edit AOI's in the latest Studio5000

Right... let me ring up Bjarne Stroustrup and tell him his life's work is a waste since someone stuck in the 80's must surely be right. While I'm at it, I'll let Rockwell know that their efforts on PlantPAX are an utter waste of their time and they should drop it.

Oddly though, if only you'd never mentioned FB's, I'd agree with you mostly on the sorely obvious weakness that are AOI's that can't be modified online (without trashing up a project) and the problem is Rockwell's inability to provide that feature or even allow the bare minimum encapsulation in sub routines rather than FB's being a stupid construct.

Still, I see that you are entrenched in your views from the rest of the replies, so good luck in your future. Hopefully you'll change your views or failing that at least learn good manners.

 

[theColonel26]

Considering that partial downloads onto the PLC are a fairly new thing in AB and that you can't to the best of my knowledge create tags online* without downloading the whole thing, offline* editing is very much required for single edits or multiple edits.

Should that read like that? Or did I miss understand what you were saying?

 

[cardosocea]

Should that read like that? Or did I miss understand what you were saying?

I'm comparing with Siemens where I can create a bunch of code offline and download to the PLC the bits that were changed and that includes data and code.

On Rockwell, only recently were you able to do partial downloads, but if you create tags offline and try to go online, Studio 5000 doesn't like it and won't tell you the tags aren't the same between versions, just that the software is different. Because of this online editing has to be good or there wouldn't be anything positive to say of Studio5000 and Rockwell PLC's.

The sad thing is that people get so entrenched in their views that they can't see the benefits of other approaches and start making noise with Rockwell about these features to be added along with the existing ones. It's really mind boggling to me, although the Marketing department in Rockwell must love it.

 

[theColonel26]

I'm comparing with Siemens where I can create a bunch of code offline and download to the PLC the bits that were changed and that includes data and code.

On Rockwell, only recently were you able to do partial downloads, but if you create tags offline and try to go online, Studio 5000 doesn't like it and won't tell you the tags aren't the same between versions, just that the software is different. Because of this online editing has to be good or there wouldn't be anything positive to say of Studio5000 and Rockwell PLC's.

The sad thing is that people get so entrenched in their views that they can't see the benefits of other approaches and start making noise with Rockwell about these features to be added along with the existing ones. It's really mind boggling to me, although the Marketing department in Rockwell must love it.

ooooh cool, im not really that familiar with Siemens.


I'm starting to find that most of the Luddite Rockwell fan boys are Plant Support or were previously Plant Support. Seems to me that Rockwell's Marketing strategy is to get themselves imposed as a standard by High Level people at Manufacturing plants and then the plants force everyone to use AB that builds machines for them. Where as other PLC manufacturers target Machine Builder and OEM engineers with this thing called new features and capabilities to improved experience for engineers... crazy concept right?

Obviously Rockwells is more effective at creating market share... LOL

 

[kamenges]

Originally posted by theColonel26:

Seems to me that Rockwell's Marketing strategy is to get themselves imposed as a standard by High Level people at Manufacturing plants and then the plants force everyone to use AB that builds machines for them.

That just struck you?? I got into this game in 1989 and (from what I am told) it was that way in the US for at least 10 years before that.

In the days when people thought they wanted to take care of their own stuff it actually worked too. It looks to me like the general trend is to lean on OEMs more and more for support, especially now that good remote connection is available (anyone remember the days of 57kB modems). That is going to force Rockwell to start moving off this model.

Keith

 

[theColonel26]

That just struck you?? I got into this game in 1989 and (from what I am told) it was that way in the US for at least 10 years before that.

Well I'm 31, only been in controls about 6 years and I have only been using AB stuff for like 2 years now. So I never really cared because didn't have to deal with Rockwell nonsense. Now I do







In reality only a few customers really want to to support our machines themselves, and the that is just lip service, they usually call us LOL. At this point we are requiring VPN access to our Machine if someone wants to buy one. My boss likes money LOL so he bends on this more than he should, but that is our policy. We sell machines nationally so VPN access is a must.

 

[kamenges]

Originally posted by theColonel26:

In reality only a few customers really want to to support our machines themselves, and the that is just lip service, they usually call us LOL.

I think that is going to become more and more the norm. Paying high priced talent that is basically just insurance is not necessarily financially appealing. The more the general market goes this way the more freedom we as controls engineers will have in system selection because we will be the only ones actually supporting it. But that also means get ready for the 3AM panicked phone calls.

Keith

 

[cardosocea]

I think that is going to become more and more the norm. Paying high priced talent that is basically just insurance is not necessarily financially appealing.

In some instances, I can see that... in others, not really.

The company's automation engineer isn't there to make the machines, he's there to manage the automation controls and their integration with the plant. He's also there to specify what and how it is to be delivered, manage obsolescence and add/tweak the systems to better suit the operations.

For a lot of companies, having said talent to avoid being screwed over by OEM's or systems integrators is worth their salary and more if they're competent in other areas such as electrical distribution, project management and finance (although that's more to an degree'd engineer than a technician).
It's also insurance in the sense that if or when the supporting company goes under, there's someone there that knows how the systems work and has or should have the backups and everything else in place.

What is also happening somewhat is that large multinationals will either have engineering groups composed from experts from other sites or dedicated centralised people to direct and manage automation controls. This happens in the Chemical industry where I'm now and still happens in offshore drilling where I was one of the centralised person too.