As I work on developing AOIs for servo drives, I encounter variations in assembly sizes and input/output byte configurations between single and multi-axis systems. These differences necessitate the creation of at least 10 unique AOIs, including functions such as jog, move absolute, and move relative. To streamline this process, I am considering whether separate AOIs are necessary for single and multi-axis setups or if a unified approach can be taken. As I aim for user-friendly and intuitive AOIs that minimize confusion, I seek examples to guide my development. By creating AOIs that efficiently handle common data across systems, I strive to enhance ease of use and performance.
While it is possible, there is no guarantee that the process will be completely straightforward. Initially, be prepared to configure them as generic modules within the IO tree.
Do you know which brand and model of servo drives they are using? Are you familiar with how Rockwell Automation's motion control instruction set interacts with their native Motion instruction set, including coordinated axis instructions? Are you employed by the drive manufacturer, an OEM, or a system integrator? Various third-party motion control companies, such as Yaskawa and Wittenstein, have developed AOIs that function similarly, though not identical to, Rockwell's integrated instructions. Creating a library or program that is both user-friendly and efficient should be a top priority, but industrial software development is a complex process that requires expertise and skill.
I'd like to add on to the question regarding the types of drives being used.
Ken Roach inquired about the specific brand and model of servo drives being used. Are you knowledgeable about how Rockwell Automation's motion control instruction set interfaces with their native Motion instruction set, particularly coordinated axis instructions? Are you employed by a drive manufacturer, an OEM, or a system integrator? Numerous third-party motion control companies, such as Yaskawa and Wittenstein, have created AOIs that function similarly to Rockwell's built-in instructions, but not identical. While aiming to create a user-friendly and efficient library of instructions is important, industrial software development requires expertise and dedication. As a drive manufacturer experienced in developing AOIs for motion control, the focus is on multi-axis motion control AOIs. For instance, when dealing with a Quad axis drive, should a Motion Enable AOI be designed as a single AOI or as four separate AOIs for each axis? Both approaches are feasible, but guidance is sought on making the process more user-friendly.
When setting up an AB system, design AOIs for both single-axis and dual-axis configurations with distinct names. Next, develop a UDT for each AOI. I gained expertise in this process while working with a skilled boss in my previous job, James.
It seems like you're trying to balance simplicity with specificity, which can indeed be a challenge. One strategy could be to create a "general" AOI for each function that consolidates all common parameters, and then develop specialized AOIs for single or multi-axis systems that include unique parameters. This way, you're not replicating efforts, and users can choose the AOI that most closely matches their needs. As for examples, Beckhoff's TwinCAT system provides decent AOIs that embody this kind of approach. This should help you streamline your process while retaining the versatility needed for different setups.
It sounds like you’re tackling a complex challenge! While it might be tempting to create separate AOIs for single and multi-axis systems, I think a more unified approach could save you time and reduce redundancy. Consider designing your AOIs to accept parameters or flags that adjust functionality based on the number of axes. This way, you can maintain a clean interface for users while handling variations in input/output configurations behind the scenes. I’ve found that using polymorphism can also streamline how these AOIs interact with different hardware setups, making your overall system more flexible. Good luck with your development!
✅ Work Order Management
✅ Asset Tracking
✅ Preventive Maintenance
✅ Inspection Report
We have received your information. We will share Schedule Demo details on your Mail Id.
Answer: Answer: Single-axis and multi-axis systems typically differ in the number of drives and associated components they control, leading to variations in assembly sizes and input/output byte configurations.
Answer: Answer: At least 10 unique AOIs may be required to cater to the different functions and configurations of servo drives, ensuring comprehensive control and operation capabilities.
Answer: Answer: Considering a unified approach for creating AOIs across single-axis and multi-axis systems can streamline development and maintenance processes while promoting user-friendliness and minimizing confusion.
Answer: Answer: Examples and best practices can be instrumental in guiding the development of AOIs that enhance ease of use, performance, and consistency across various servo drive setups.
Join hundreds of satisfied customers who have transformed their maintenance processes.
Sign up today and start optimizing your workflow.