Anybody Using Studio 5k V24?

Just a wondering if anyone is using RSL 5K V24 out there? If so what do you think of it and is there really any advantage to using it?

I have been using V21 for the last year or so just wondering if there is any reason to upgrade.

Thanks!!

Not yet but with addition of CIP safety for some Kinetix drives that support it I could see my customers dictating it. I've only recently been allowed to use v21 for one customer, all the rest only allow v20.

Get it right Bullzi! It's Logix Designer now, not RSLogix 5000!

I'm using it for a couple of months now. Lot's of small changes, too many to list?

Some main additions...

Support for Windows "Hate".
Support for Kinetix 5500 drives - CIP motion and CIP Safety across the one connection.
The Logical Organiser - It tailors your projects view to whatever your focus is, like Equipment Phases, or Motion, etc.
Ability to reference hardware modules from inside AOIs is useful for further enhancing generic AOIs.
Program parameters - you can now pass tag data from one program to another without having to go through the Controller Scope.
1000 tasks per program.

Some small enhancements to existing features, like partial import now has the abilty to import tag data as well as the tag itself.
Wild cards added to Find/Replace, and so on.

Many corrected anomalies, but also some outstanding ones.

Click on the PDF icon and then Custom Release Note...

http://compatibility.rockwellautoma...mb=112&refSoft=1&toggleState=&versions=54107#

...and boil a pot of coffee!

Regards
George

Barf/Puke whatever

Thanks for the info Geospark!!

Let me know when they figure out how to allow online edits of AOIs.

Hi

Online edits for Aoi not sure if we will ever see that " but never is a long time"
The new way of using tags and passing them is like using a aoi you can edit.
You can create routines and pass values much like using a jsr with parameters but better.
I am just starting my first real project with it not just using the code we always use. This project we are going to try to use the new items in ver 24 .
But I do like the online search and replace, the merge function is very good I beleive. I have not used it myself but someone working with me has and he said it was very very good

Donnchadh

One of the Rockwell Engineers i spoke to at a recent sales pitch highly suggested skipping v21 and moving to v23 or v24 solely because of the incapable minor revision numbers in v21.

Not sure what you mean? Are you talking about the XX.3 stuff??

I think that's probably what Helliana meant. This has already bitten one of my customer's in the backside twice, and so now they have a blanket rule - no version 20 or 21 on any machine

I have had a very brief play with v24 last week on a compact logix, I didn't get in deep enough to try out any of the new toys, but I didn't come across anything concerning

24 Isn't a whole lot different on the surface from any previous version.
I'm using it now to do a project with CPX and the 5500 servo drives, and it seems stable.

One thing I can say, is it was the first install of a Rockwell product in years that just installed and worked (well, I did have to reboot once). They probably fired someone over making the installer actually function smoothly.

Also, I'm going to need it to handle the updated FTAE alarming, since I am migrating all of our (horrible, evil, nasty) FTView installations to Version 8.

At the risk of taking my own thread off topic, would you recommend using v24 and FTVME 8 on a brand new application? I am starting a new project from scratch and don't have any restrictions on the version of software I use. I was planning on using Studio v21 and FTVME 7. Should I take this opportunity to jump up to the latest? Or is that "bleeding edge" thing too much of a risk?

What do you guys say?

I'd say that is fine... FTView 8, while still trash, is much more stable then 7 was.

smakdown61 said:

Let me know when they figure out how to allow online edits of AOIs.

Click to expand...

We see this gripe quite a bit, don't we?

Here's how I look at it...

The point, and versatility, of an AOI (Add-On Instruction) is to allow you to add your own tailored "Instruction" to the processor's Instruction Set. Its very name implies as much. Being an "Instruction", like any other "Instruction", it is not designed to be edited on-the-fly, online, or even often. You design it, you test it, and you add it.

While you cannot edit a normal "Instruction", whether online or offline, you can "add" a normal "Instruction" to the executing logic while online editing. Likewise, since RSLogix 5000 v17, you can add an AOI while online, using Partial Import Online (POI). This ,again, is adding an "Instruction" to the processor's Instruction Set, but a predefined "Instruction" none the less. Once added, you can then online edit the logic to use the new AOI, as intended, as predefined.

The fact that you happen to have access to the core parameters and executing logic of the "Instruction", so as to predefine its intended use, does not mean you should automatically have the ability to edit them while online. Editing an "Instruction", while online and running, is, in my view, looked upon as the same as editing a processor's Instruction Set, while the process is running.

Now that's just a view I have as to why they don't allow it. I do, however, agree that certain minor edits, while online, would be beneficial, especially where a process cannot be stopped for a download. But, it would appear that the powers that be have erred, thus far, on the "safer" side of not allowing it, perhaps for reasons I've outlined, or, perhaps for reasons of their own?

But depending on what you want to achieve, you may not always want an AOI? Or an AOI may not always be the best solution; the "go to" method for all and everything. You may, in some to most cases, have another possible option...

This is a good reference as to when to use a Subroutine v Add-On Instruction...

50182 - Subroutines vs. Add-on Instructions
Access Level: TechConnect

With the addition of "Program Parameters" in Logix Designer v24, the power of the Subroutine, and its reusability, has increased significantly against the AOI option.

Regards,
George

Anybody get the new search and replace working with wildcards? Tried using them last November, and the search and replace would only find the program names that matched the wildcards, NOT the tag names. Tech support verified this at the time. I'll have to look if there's a new minor version out.

Thumbs up to GeoSpark for his thoughts on AOI's and editing.
I am in full agreement here, AOI's should not be monkeyed with online; there is way too much potential for damage.
Especially as many have features that can be turned on or off with a parameter if you like.. What happens if you use one of my routines like that, and some calls need the extra functionality, but some don't. You go looking online at a few that don't use it, and go delete it. Now 30 other calls fail in rather interesting ways, but without any programmatic warning, just faulty machine operation.

You can edit parameterized subroutines online, but I really don't like that idea either, for the same reason. It is almost impossible to grasp the ultimate effects on a running system.