Ti-545, 555, 565 & 575

[tmccormick]

This information, like a lot of things in our careers (much less life) has come from several directions of input. One of which was a fellow that I knew at the time that the TI545 came out; he was on the design staff at Texas Instruments in Johnson City, TN. Secondly, I later on attended a few of their training classes. But not all of the things that I had picked up from my friend were covered as part of the original agenda. Some are from the proverbial school of hard knocks spent with the TI Hotline folks. There is one fellow there that was an unbelievably invaluable resource there in regard to the TI505, unfortunately he was moved up to support the S7-300/400 product line. But there has still been a few times that I ultimately wound up discussing issues with him simply because nobody else had the grasp or understanding of the PLC like him.

In a TI505 loop there are several different possibilities for what you trigger to perform a special calculation on. What this empowers one with is the ability to perform mathematical operations within a loop and timed to the loop.

Tom

 

[tmccormick]

Another cool thing that you can do to move beyond the default bumpless transfer operation, is to control where the loop begins controlling at when you place in automatic.

Consider this -
Based upon my earlier reply regarding the default bumpless transfer replacing your desired setpoint - so now you've got a setup that let's you keep your SP originating from an HMI for example.

One of the characteristics of the 505 loop is that when you place it into automatic, the loop output (LMN) begins controlling at whatever percent on that it was last at. The shortcoming in this is that if you are running along in automatic (let's say at 45% on), switch control to manual (to make some sort of adjustment or response to a problem) and change the amplitude of the control signal to the driven field device (to 40% on). But when you put the loop back into automatic it will begin controlling at 45% on; some processes will have a problem with this. What we do to address this is, when in manual, to write to the loop output (LMN) the value of the manual percent on. This way when you transition from manual to automatic the loop begins at where you are presently controlling and then begins moving the output based on the performance of the loop itself. To achieve this, let's say you have a manual potentiometer connected to an analog input; then in a cyclic SFPGM you could have statement like this:

* If in manual mode
IF C100 = 0
* Write manual pot value to loop output
MATH LMN1 := WX500
ENDIF


Hope this helps.

Tom

 

[ilikbeer]

WOW!!!





Bring on the books!!

 

[dutchman]

One thing I have done is to set up variable limits on outputs when controlling the speed of Cement Kiln Coolers. This was due to a requirement to have a minimum speed setpoint that could be varied. The biggest problem was that it took the loop a long time to come off the bottom limit when the pv moved above the sp.

Minimum output was set by the following.

if LMNx < setpoint
LMNx := setpoint

To rectifiy the response I added some rungs to ladder that threw the loop into manaul, then wrote to the output and then placed the loop back into automatic mode.

 

[ilikbeer]

Next Juvenile Quetion

The PID works very well, in the simulation I have designed, maybe I will try it in the real world one of these days.

Thanks for the help. :site:


My next question probably has the answer buried in the systems manuals, but I have not found it. What is the improvement of the 545 to the 555. I was looking at a 545-1104 compared to a 555-1104 on plccenter.com and the price is signifigantly different!


Thanks again!

 

[Ken M]

The system spec for a 555-1104 compared to a 545-1104 has the 555 with

- loads more memory (1920KB compared to 192KB in the 545);
- much faster scan speed (0.07mS/K vs. 0.33mS/K pure Boolean instructions);
- 8192 I/O any mix, in/out/analog/discrete whatever;

Overall it's a much more competent beast than the 545, which wasn't a weakling anyway.

Regards

Ken.

 

[ilikbeer]

1920k?

Ken M.
Must be something in that name: There is you Ken M., and Ken M. (Moore) and believe it or not, no lie, no bull$crapings, I am Ken M. but most people call me Kenny. I never fit in with the Ken name, sounded to proper for a guy with bloodshot eyes every morning. beerchug

Okay, you said a 555-1104 has 1920KBytes and I have one of those that confirms that. But I am right now logged onto a 555-1105 (I am been also learning Profibus) in my shop and it has:
Total System Memory.........384KBYTES
Configured.................. 70KBYTES
Remaining System Memory.....314KBYTES

I went off-line and set the Total Memory at 1920K and saved it to the disk. When I try to write this into the PLC it reverts back to 384K. What am I doing wrong or is this a correct function of the 1105?

 

[Ken Moore]

Here is a link to Siemens web page: LINK

There is a comparison chart at the bottom of the page,
555-1105 = 384k
555-1106 = 1.8meg

 

[dchartier]

Hello, ilikbeer;
Here is some comparision info from Siemens (USA):
Hope this helps,
Daniel Chartier

 

[ilikbeer]

Yes, it helps a little

Thanks, it happens to be the link Ken Moore posted. But it still does not clear up for me one point.
It looks to me like the 1104 is a bigger workhorse unless you need those Powermath functions and the PIDs. Still does not seem to me to be a justifiable reason for such a price differential.
But I am very new at this still and I am sure they are justifications, otherwise there would not be a market.

Here is another one that I can not find on Siemens web site, not the ad.siemens, the sea.siemens, or the siemens web sites.
I have several (4) packages of what I believe to be firmware chips. They are made by AMD and have a Siemens sticker that reads.
2807887-1 (this goes through 4(4 chips per container))
V52 R2.2
(c) SIEMENS

In the 545-1101 I have also been playing with the chips are:
2800040-2
V53 R2.01
(c) SIEMENS

What would these do for me if I was to install them?
Anything special I have to watch out for?

 

[Terry Woods]

Looking at the Siemens page, the first line in their page says...

SIMATIC 505 - It Doesn't Get Any Easier Than This!

Having used several other PLC wanna-be's that shall remain un-named (Oh, what the hell... AB, GE, Tele-Mechanique, Modicon, Mitsu, Omron, S7's and just enough of the S5's to make me shudder and run.), I totally agree with that statement.

BTW, I haven't used AD, but from Tom's descriptions and what I've read, it's a mathematical-modeling nightmare (primarily BCD-based???).

I don't believe I've seen Siemens shower so much, well-deserved, praise on any of their own so-called "Flagships".

It just kills me that they are treating THEEEE best PLC on the market as they do.

I could almost understand this if they were indeed trying to bring the TI-philosophy into their own PLC's. However, what I see happening is that the S7's are becoming more and more S5-ish... Yikes!

Wouldn't the rest of you TI-Huggin'-Guys just love to be able to throw-in and buy the TI-505 Line from Siemens? I sure would!

However, I'll bet there is no way in hell that Siemens would ever let it go.

Why? I believe that Siemens would rather keep the TI-505 Line and let it die because they know that competition from the TI-505 Line would crush them in the American Market.

Don't you know??? That is why they bought it in the first place! It's that age-old capitalist technique... buyout your most threatening competitor and then let it die... even if it is better, let it die! Loyal users go to hell! But wait... honestly, we have something better!

I ain't seen anything better from those ba$tards yet! It appears it's gonna get a lot worse before it gets better!

To those of you that are S7 and (yuk) S5 users that sing the praises of those lines, and have yet to use the TI-505 Line... those of you that haven't tried TI-505... well, you simply DO NOT KNOW!

I'm sooo pi$$ed at TI for doing this to us! (I wish they called me first... and I wish I could have dissuaded them from selling to Siemens! Damn... if I only had a few serious-bucks in my pocket! DOUBLE-DAMN!)

"Kenny-beer",

Aside from enhanced programming capabilities and/or improvements in communication or management, the usual enhancement associated with the step from -110(X) to -110(X+1) is memory size.

It does no good to call for a larger memory size when that memory size doesn't exist.

BTW, Kenny-beer, you have a $hit-load of memory available to use!
You should be able to add quite a bit more code before you significantly affect the detection of signal transitions.

I don't know the exact nature of your application but you have lots of room to install a mathematical model of your process so that the code can "KNOW" when something is going wrong before it goes too far wrong! That is, "KNOWING" what should be happening at any given time gives the program a chance to handle problem-issues as they are developing!

BTW-2, many programmers look at the RAMP-SOAK routine only as a means to control temperature (typical example in the manuals). It can also be used for many Motion Control issues. It is really, really flexible in terms of the controlled device. You can use it as a primary controller to control the Analog Output to some device.

SIMATIC 505 - It Doesn't Get Any Easier Than This!

DAMN! I LOVE THIS STUFF!

After about 150 edits, many of them MGD-induced... I'm done.

Flame-Shields down... burn on mates, burn on.

 

[Eric Nelson]

BTW, I haven't used AD, but from Tom's descriptions and what I've read, it's a mathematical-modeling nightmare (primarily BCD-based???).

You would probably come to the same conclusion even after trying AD, but since DirectSOFT can program (at least some of) the TI-305/405 series, it may not be all that different?...

Compatible Siemens processors ('cause they're essentially Koyos under the hood):

[attachment]

beerchug

-Eric

 

[borr2k]

My manager is hounding me obout this program called CVU 10,000 that is operating our HMI. We are using it to run our EPOC (metals removal treatment system) Its running really bad right now. Currently our PLC screen is expiriencing (VERY SLOW) some discoloration and it dificult to read some read outs.

We are planning a shutdown on the 27th and are going to clone the system. We have to contractors assisting us on this, but none of them have the sofware program to load onto a stanby computer.

My manager does not want to procede unless we have this program ready on another computer as a stanby incase there are problems bringing the system back online. Does anyone have this (OBSOLETE) program handy anywhere?

I'm not sure if I logged in correctly, but here is my email at work
[email protected]

Thanks

 

[rsdoran]

Sounds like a good time to upgrade.

This outfit does simulation and training for the CVU 10000, maybe they can help obtain the software. http://www.thornti.com/request.html

Maybe another source:
http://www.tirepair.com/TI100.htm

An online source for obsolete part but CALL if very obsolete:
http://www.plccenter.com/

 

[Terry Woods]

borr2k,

Where are you located? I would simply love to look at your CVU system.

When you say "...really bad..." do you mean the display, the speed, or the functionality?

It sounds like the monitor is "smearing" the video info... bad monitor.

I'm thinking of all kinds of possibilities... to many to fully describe.

The proper approach depends on the particular hardware configuration you have.

Are you using one of those, all-in-one (keyboard, monitor, floppy-drive, hard-drive), self-contained, dedicated programming units?

Or, are you using a regular PC with a monitor to talk to the PLC?

Do you know if you are using a hardware "software-key" on the parallel port?

CVU Program Software is VERY EASY to handle and manage. They're just plain ol' DOS Folders and Files.

One option involves using "Pkzip & Pkunzip".

Another option involves using the DOS DiskCopy function (Not all versions of DOS include this function.). This involes adding a new hard-drive, with jumpers = slave, to the old system and simply copying files from one drive to the other, and then removing the new drive and installing it into the new station with jumpers = master. Whether or not this can be done in the all-in-one unit depends on accessibility, available connections on the ribbon cable, and a power-supply connection and the ability of the BIOS to support more than one drive.

In general, these are the folders and files of concern...

C:\AUTOEXEC.BAT
C:\CONFIG.SYS
C:\CVU10\... (include all folders and files)
C:\TI\... (include all folders, sub-folders and files)
C:\...all CVU "Working Directories"... (include all folders, sub-folders and files)

... you can find a list of Working Directories via the CVU Menu.

Hmmm... I seem to recall a DOS routine out there that provides Hard-Drive to Hard-Drive copying via the Serial Port.

The process would involve something like...

"Pkzip" the entire drive into a file... (see Note)
Connect a serial cable between the two PCs (hmmm... I think RX/TX has to be swapped at the receiver... maybe.)
Redirect LPT1 to the Serial Port, then...
Print [zip-file] /B (where /B = print in Binary).

The destination unit has to "Read" the incoming data and save it to a file (I can't remember exactly how to do that... "Open File" and then a few other things... read the DOS Command Help files... then "Close File").

Once the file is loaded, install Pkzip & Pkunzip, and then "Pkunzip" the "zip-file".

NOTE: Whether or not you can do this depends on how much data is in the old drive and how much room is available. Pkzip will continue to "zip" the drive into the zip-file until it finds that there is no more room. If Pkzip runs out of room then only a partial zip-file will exist; it will be invalid. If that happens, delete the zip-file and try again using smaller segments of the drive.

It will be a lot easier to help you once you describe your particular configuration.