Cloud computing is a hot topic. As people become increasingly reliant on accessing important information through the Internet, the idea of storing or displaying vital real-time data in the cloud has become more commonplace. With tech giants like Apple, Microsoft, and Google pushing forward the cloud computing concept, it seems to be more than just a passing trend.  read more »

As an end user, can you imagine using an HMI where the help screens were removed just for the benefit of a simpler design? How about if the indicators for required fields on complex forms were removed? What if all the word-based labeling from buttons were replaced with confusing iconography? How would this impact your job?

When it comes to streamlining or simplifying interfaces, less is not necessarily more. Industrial designers advise their peers to take the time to think through design changes, test the interface and research what you can or should not take out of the design. Whatever changes you decide on should not affect the interface's usability or functionality.  read more »

E-CAD seems like a perfect application for the concept of "software as a service." There's tons of data to be stored, the data needs to be accessed by multiple users, there has to be tight version control, and nothing has to happen in real time. The software itself is very complex and requires frequent updates, so this also seems to fit the software-as-a-service model. Does anyone have experiences they can share about E-CAD software as a service?

Visualization software that's integrated with the control software allows Kays Engineering to customize the operator interface without worrying about the software elements functioning together. How important is a custom OI?

Smarter software is now able to differentiate between dissimilar parts, regardless of size or orientation. Which sorts of applications are you using vision for, and how limited are you in setting your shape parameters by the software's ability?

Well, maybe not Python, but how do you define a higher-level language? Is it based on how much the programmer is isolated from the actual code? Is it about a more-powerful control capability? There's little consensus on what a higher-level language is for more complex applications for discrete/machine control. Is it C#, C++ and scripting? Are there others in serious play? What can they do that 61131 languages, for example, can't? Does most automation supplier programming software use higher-level languages for some purposes?  read more »

Data acquisition can serve many purposes. From machine diagnostics to exporting to an ERP system, the use of data is varied. What are your customers using it for?

Read our story Machine Data Acquisition Capabilities Grow.

I have written about IEC for 4 issues. I would like to share a thread from the Automation Control List as an exclamation point to my columns!!

The user is programming in Step 7 (Siemens) . The names have been removed. Be sure to read the very last line. I have always said that IEC 61131 is a great concept, but I don't try to sell it as a silver bullet for automation programming.

I am trying to export a POU but Export function is grayed out. I have tried to right-click on my MAIN (%OB1) block and select Export, but it is grayed out and I cannot figure out what i am doing wrong. I am trying to do this in IEC-1131 mode. Thanks!
Reply to this post...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IMPORT and EXPORT only work in SIMATIC Mode, Why do you want to use it?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was hoping to port the logic over to another IEC program editor and reuse the code. It would be a lot easier than retyping the code from scratch.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can export the logic over as a text file in stl code and then maybe you can import that into your other application.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IEC is a standard, but it's not that standard. :(
The export only exports in a proprietary format anyway.

We recently posted a case history written by Paolo Catterina of EUROelectronics (Die Is Cast for FPGA Control), an Italian company that delved into using FPGA-based controller technology to handle a particularly demanding control app for position and speed of an hydraulic cylinder on a diecasting machine.

I liked this article because it's an example of a company that realized its tried-and-true, and overall quite satisfactory, PLC control scheme just couldn't cut it for the speed and precision they needed, so it had to think very differently.

I won't regurgitate the whole story line, but the decision to use FPGA technology revolved largely on the relationship they'd established over the years with National Instruments in Italy.

That's all well and good when you indeed have a good relationship with a vendor and can genuinely explore whether that vendor's flagship product really is right for you.

I wondered out loud if that's the only way to get a group of basically conservative machine control professionals to put on pioneer hats and charge out ahead on their own.

Recall that a favorite machine builder definition of "pioneer" is "those guys out there on the prairie, lying face up with arrows in their chests."

So, lacking that tight relationship that EUROelectronics has, what would it take for you to head out in the unknown to try a new technology that you think might give you a competitive advantage?

Read our April 2008 articles, "Die Is Cast for FPGA Control" by Paolo Caterina and "FPGA Can Speed Development."
Do you use FPGA-based controllers? Take our Web poll.

Well, another successful event - good job guys. Man, the lunch line moves fast, eh!!

In a nutshell, my impressions were positive as a user. As always, the booths were well manned, questions answered, and a there was a good collection of third-party people from whom you could find out about stuff that Rockwell doesn't do - like load cell interfacing and the like.

Not to bore you with details, it is obvious that the Logix platform is their focus - in hardware AND software. Be sure to get your migration path in order.

Their service of migrating other vendors users (Modicon, Siemens, etc) to the Logix platform is very cool. I ran into old friend Joe Vidmar (not that you're old, Joe:)) who explained the service to me. Users might like it - vendors wont!!

Factory Talk--and this is my own observation--is the enterprise platform for RA. ALL software components will conform to FT. ALL users conform as well.

RSLogix 7.3 is the last Everlock run-time-protected version (diskette stuff) - version 8.0 will use FT activation, which uses the web. You MUST have a certain level of FT installed as well..

What this does for the complete software suite is to 'Microsoft' it. Many customer dollars will be spent on licensing and getting current - because you will have to.

Better talk to your guys about this - the budget surprise could be huge!!

I talked to an industrial electrician friend of mine who was there for the first time, and he was intimidated by the newest technology. One has to wonder why. I consider him to be one of the brightest light bulbs on the ceiling.

Once FT becomes entrenched, it may look very different that what it is right now.. but I suspect not. RA changed the support structure a few years back, and now will go after the FT upgrade path.

Again only my observations. What were your thoughts on the fair? Any tech sesions that were good? And make no mistake - we will pay the money to stay with Rockwell. In many eyes, it is the best solution out there. There were almost as many registred attendees to the AF than there was at the ISA show in Houston. wow eh!!