Stage Programming Classification?

[PLCRookie]

Does anyone with experience on Automation Direct/Koyo PLCs know what classification that "Stage" programming falls under? I have used these tings for about 10 years now, and I really find it simple to use, but I never really thought about this until recently asked. Is it really just ladder? Or would it be considered function block? STL? Can anyone give me a little more info in terms of whats really going on in the processor?

Much thanks in advance to all PLC people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Tom Jenkins]

In my opinion stage programming as implemented by AutomationDirect is just a way to organize the ladder logic. I don't think it fundamentally differs from ladder logic any more than a program that uses subroutines does.

Their manuals refer to it as RLL Plus (RLL = Relay Ladder Logic).

 

[Terry Woods]

"Stage" programming most closely resembles stepping through a Drum-Switch.

 

[Gerry]

I've never actually used it, but from what I've read it seems to be conceptually similar to SFC (sequential function chart).

 

[PLCRookie]

Thanks for the input guys. Ive not done much of the other types, including grafcet, but I was just curious as to technical aspect. Is it just me , or does AD stuff not get much respect out there int REAL world of PLCs? I have found it very easy to learn and use, compared to the other systems we have, not to mention the MAJOR price difference. But then again, Im not really doing anything complex.

Thanks Again. Great Forum. Kudos PHIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

 

[Terry Woods]

PLCRookie said...
"Is it just me , or does AD stuff not get much respect out there 'in the' REAL world of PLCs?"

Warning!
The following is, to some extent, an opinion. I can have an opinion, can't I?
And, of course, you can rebutt my opinion... I'm open that way.
(Damn, I love pushing emotional buttons just to see what happens!)

AD does get respect... a lot of respect. Their product is SOLID!

Their PLC hardware and software is based on the PLC hardware and software originally developed by TI and GE.

However, because they simply take the position that "we are what we are... take it or leave it", they, AD, don't generate a bogus self-importance like that johnny-come-lately guy (AB). PLC-5 Software? What the Hell was that?

However, marketing being what it is... I can't dispute what johnny-come-lately has done. And, I can't dispute that "johnny" has finally, finally, finally come around to seeing that the TI and GE way of programming was much, much better than their own way of programming.

And since TI software, currently owned by Siemens (scum), has been more or less abandoned for the last few years, in preference to their nutso S-5 type software for the S7-300, -400, "johnny" has been able to surpass the incredible capabilites of Ti-Soft (for the most part) and begin moving into the realm of "C-type" programming. (What's with those idiots at Siemens cooking their Golden Goose?)

Jeez... "C" has been around for how long? Since the early 80's!

I just really wish that Ti-Soft had a chance to move into "C-type" programming. Wow... that would have been the panacea!

I hope that the AD programming developers get the message. I hope they too move into the "C-type" programming and become actively competitive with "johnny-ware". After all, hardware is pretty much established. The game now is software! Actually, it's always been the software game, regardless of the hardware.

"C-type" programming is processor-based... not process-based. Process inputs are nothing more than inputs. The real power comes with processor-control of those inputs.

So, does AD get respect?
From those of us "in the know"... yes it does... in Spades!

BTW... where the hell are you Eric?

(28)

 

[rdrast]

TISOFT, well, actually APT and MAITT.. THAT is what 1131 should have been.

/sigh

 

[Gerry]

another opinion

OK. My experience is almost exclusively A-B.
But I've converted a couple of TI525 systems and am currently converting a GE LM5 system.

I fail to see what's so damn wonderful about them. The LM5 appears to be less capable than a PLC-2. And the TI seems to be very awkward compared to a PLC-5 or SLC.

Probably why I'm being hired to convert them.

Also in my conversion sights: a Siemens S5 and a Mitsubishi FX2.

All moving to ControlLogix.

 

[Peter Nachtwey]

I've never actually used it, but from what I've read it seems to be conceptually similar to SFC (sequential function chart).

Agreed. Stage programming is what SFC would compile down to if the end result was ladder. My first AD program used stage programming. It was logical and straight forward.

Gerry, the TI505 back plane was the best around until the Control Logix. There is a 10+ year technology gap there. I would hope the Control Logix would be better.

TISOFT, well, actually APT and MAITT.. THAT is what 1131 should have been.

What is MAITT? I didn't think APT was that good. APT actually took a SFC like program and converted it to ladder. The quality of convserion was not that good. There were some things APT and SFC are not very good at like polling inputs.

To me AD is just another PLC it has advantages and disadvantages. It does offer value, but it doesn't have the memory, back plane or the communication options of a control logix but that is OK because it doesn't cost as much. What is unforgiveable is the way AD force one to use only octal, BCD, hex or decimal depending on the instruction and keeping it all straight. This is something that Koyo can fix if they want to. A number is a number. 10 octal = 8 hex or 8 decimal. I should be able to enter a number in any format I want and display it in any format I want.

Octal? Give me a break. That went out with the mini computers in the 80s.