We've added open connectivity to our machines via an Ethernet port on our industrial PC. Now, some of our customers are inquiring about wireless connectivity to pull some operating data from places that would be cost-prohibitive with a wired solution. There are many "standards" on the wireless side. What's analogous to wired Ethernet in terms of widespread industrial acceptance?  read more »

The ISA100 Standards Committee on Wireless Systems for Automation has approved industry standard, ISA100.11a, Wireless Systems for Industrial Automation: Process Control and Related Applications. The approval, by 81% of the voting members of the committee including 23 of the 24 end-user members, follows two rounds of balloting and refinements to the document to reflect the excellent suggestions received from many interested parties.  read more »

Our industry has been hearing for years that wireless I/O and sensors are the next big thing, but adoption has been slow for two reasons.

One is the natural caution that engineers rightly feel when considering any new technical solution. This inertia should be overcome in time as the technology advances and improves.

The second reason is money. Wireless won’t enter the mainstream of widespread use in machine automation applications unless the technology can offer significant savings.  read more »

As we've monitored the progress that wireless technology had made in discrete automation applications---and there hasn't been a lot of it---it appears that the discrete crowd is reluctant to get very far into it until the wireless standards mess that's been accummulating in process automation begins to sort itself out.

Well, ISA would like to bring you into the discusssion a bit sooner regarding wireless apps at the sensor and actuator level:  read more »

If you visit our white paper library you know we try to hold high standards regarding what we let in there, particularly when it comes to vendor-authored stuff. I estimate we actually reject two-thirds to three-quarters of the papers that get subitted for consideration, because they're either a waste of time or a badly disguised product plug.
Much to the chagrin of the sales reps, from time to time we reject papers for the "sponsored" channel that, for a fee, lists them at the top of the queue. They have to pass the same quality standards, or they don't get posted either.

Occasionally, we get one that raises more questions and interest about its practicality than it does about its technological merit.

I just finished reviewing a paper that discusses how multi-axis motion control will be accomplished over a wireless network. I'm pretty sure an informal poll would reveal a clear, if not imposing, majority that believes using wireless networking to do honest-to-goodness motion control is a bad idea, can't be trusted, and would be subject to noise and security problems. "Let wireless do its thing for undemanding data acquistion, and keep away from my motion control apps," might be an expected comment.

Maybe not. John Guite, who's division engineering manager for the electromechanical automation group at Parker Hannifin, has been prototyping a patent-pending approach to wireless motion control, which he expects will be a commercial product in a year or so. He explains the premise in the paper.

I normally don't pump up vendor white papers, but this one is worth a read. Then come on back here and use the "comments" link to tell us what you think. Are you ready to buy in? Still unconvinced?

Here's the link:
wireless motion control