Here are several compelling reasons to consider Ethernet for your Modbus TCP-HMI-Internet setup. If you require additional input/output (I/O) capabilities, simply integrate an extra module. Regarding the outputs, they utilize relays that effectively close a set of contacts. Additionally, inputs can be configured to either sink or source, providing versatility in your installations.
Certainly! Here’s a rephrased version of the text, optimized for quality, uniqueness, and SEO:
---
For optimal load management with your PLC outputs, it's essential to understand that the coil of the contactor plays a critical role in determining your load requirements. The PLC inputs carry minimal load and can be configured for either sinking or sourcing. We recommend checking the wiring connections in the PLC documentation to ensure proper setup. Additionally, you have the flexibility to expand your system by adding expansion modules. For further details, please refer to the user manual [here](http://literature.rockwellautomation.com/idc/groups/literature/documents/um/2080-um005_-en-e.pdf) and additional resources [here](http://literature.rockwellautomation.com/idc/groups/literature/documents/br/2080-br001_-en-p.pdf).
Best regards,
Garry
---
This revision includes SEO-friendly phrases while maintaining the original message's integrity.
gclshortt commented: Expansion modules are available for integration. Click to view more... Hi Garry, to clarify, the models 820 and 830 are designed exclusively for plug-in modules. If you’re looking for an "Expansion Module," you’ll need to opt for the model 850.
- 18-01-2025
- geniusintraining
Thank you for sharing this valuable information!
I recommend eliminating that complex wiring, as it can be considerably streamlined. Here’s a simplified approach:
**Inputs:**
- Down PB1
- Down PB2
- Up PB1
- Up PB2
**Optional Inputs:**
- Feedback from K1
- Feedback from K2
**Outputs:**
- K1
- K2
To optimize your interlocking mechanisms, handle everything using logic. Regarding sink/source configurations, I suggest implementing sourcing outputs along with interfacing relays or relay outputs.
**Safety Considerations:**
For optimal safety, ensure a complete separation between your safety and control systems. Based on the performance level (PL) required, consider utilizing an Emergency Stop (E-Stop) equipped with a relay to isolate the contractors or even disconnect the power source entirely. Depending on your system architecture, it may also be beneficial to incorporate an input for monitoring the E-Stop or relay status.
This refined structure not only enhances readability but also aligns with best practices in safety and control integration, making your system more efficient and reliable.
Jeev emphasized the importance of simplifying the existing wiring, suggesting a more streamlined approach to inputs and outputs. For the inputs, consider using Down PB1, Down PB2, Up PB1, and Up PB2, along with optional feedback from K1 and K2. For outputs, incorporate K1 and K2. It is advisable to manage all interlocking procedures through logical programming.
When it comes to sink versus source configurations, I recommend utilizing sourcing outputs in tandem with interface relays or relay outputs.
**EDIT**: In terms of safety, it is crucial to completely separate safety circuits from control systems. Depending on the required Performance Level (PL), incorporate an Emergency Stop (E-Stop) with a dedicated relay to disconnect contactors or even cut off the power supply. Additionally, based on your system architecture, you might want to add an input to monitor the status of the E-Stop/relay.
I find this information very beneficial! However, I'm still a bit unclear about the distinction between contactors and relays. Are you suggesting that we should opt for interface relays or output relays over traditional contactors?
MasterBri stated: "I appreciate this type of information! I'm still somewhat unclear about when to use contactors versus relays. Are you recommending an interface relay or an output relay instead of a contactor?"
To elaborate, the choice between relays and contactors largely depends on what you're controlling. If you're simply turning on a light bulb, a relay will suffice. However, for larger loads such as motors or heavy machinery, a contactor is necessary. In this discussion, it seems like the suggestion is to utilize an interposing relay between the PLC (Programmable Logic Controller) and the end device. This approach is quite common since the coil load of a contactor might exceed what a standard PLC can handle, unless you opt for a PLC equipped with relay outputs.
It's worth noting that you can find low burden contactor coils designed specifically for operation via PLC transistor outputs, making them an ideal choice for efficient control.
- 19-01-2025
- tragically1969
tragically1969 stated: No, that’s not accurate. Implementing an interposing relay between a PLC (Programmable Logic Controller) and the final device is quite common. This is due to the possibility that the contactor coil's load may exceed the switching capacity of a standard PLC unless it's equipped with relay outputs. **Important Note:** You can find low-load contactor coils specifically engineered for use with PLC transistor outputs.
To clarify, I’m currently examining a contactor, and in the input data specifications, it indicates a rated actuating current of approximately 12mA. This figure represents the amount of current required for the PLC to activate the contactor, correct?
MasterBri mentioned: "I understand. I'm currently examining a contactor, and the input data specifications indicate a rated actuating current of approximately 12mA. This is likely the amount of current required for the PLC to activate the contactor, correct? While it seems accurate, I can't confirm without reviewing the specifications in detail."
- 19-01-2025
- tragically1969
User tragically1969 commented: "It seems like it could be suitable, but I can't confirm without examining the specifications. Upon further inspection, it's a Phoenix ELR 1-24DC/600AC-50 model, with the identifier 2297170. However, I doubt this will meet my requirements since it features only a single pole. I actually need a double pole unit capable of managing approximately 60A, ideally within a comparable price range."
I recommend considering the following inputs for your project, as they require less power. For seamless online modifications, Ethernet connectivity is highly effective. In my experience, I've utilized the 800 series alongside PLC5, MicroLogix, SLC 500, CompactLogix, and ControlLogix systems. Currently, we are transitioning all operations to the Logix 5000 platform.
Before making any purchases, take the time to outline your inputs, outputs, analog devices, and any other components. It's crucial to design your control system thoroughly, including an additional 30% power capacity to accommodate potential future needs. Once your system design is complete, review it to ensure you haven’t overlooked any items. It’s always better to identify gaps during the design phase than to face the inconvenience of needing to purchase additional components later.
Best regards,
James
MasterBri commented: "I have a Phoenix ELR 1-24DC/600AC-50 - 2297170, but I'm unsure if it meets my requirements since it's a single pole. I'm looking for a dual-pole contractor that can handle approximately 60A, ideally within the same price range. Can you clarify if you specifically need a solid-state contractor? Sorry if you've already mentioned it, but could you explain what devices or systems you're planning to switch using these contactors?"
- 19-01-2025
- tragically1969
The individual who initiated this discussion is asking all the pertinent questions, which deserves recognition. However, it’s crucial that a qualified professional reviews the final decisions for safety's sake. It's alarming that inexperienced individuals are allowed to program complex and potentially hazardous machinery; furthermore, permitting them to design and select wiring for such equipment is concerning and might even be against legal standards. Once again, I commend the original poster for their curiosity, but it’s essential to question whether their supervisors are properly overseeing their work.
tragically1969 commented: "Is a solid-state contactor necessary for your project? If you've already addressed this, I apologize, but could you clarify what you're switching with the contactors? I'm working on controlling two 24V Parker Electrohydraulic Actuators that need to move up and down. They only have two wires: Blue for positive (+) when going up and Green for negative (-). To reverse the motion, the connections switch. Under maximum load, these actuators will draw about 50-60 amps. I’m not entirely convinced I need a solid-state contactor; I just wanted to explore options that align with my requirements. This seemed like the ideal forum to seek advice on related topics since, as mentioned, I'm new to integrating logic into these systems. Unfortunately, as with any online community, the quality of information can vary."
Instead of using solid-state contactors, consider opting for mercury-filled contactors rated at 100 amps and 24 volts. Many businesses face the challenge of frequently replacing contactors—one automobile manufacturer replaced approximately 150 relay contactors each month due to issues with 14 volts DC. By switching to mercury contactors, they significantly reduced these replacements and saved a substantial amount on their monthly expenses. This change highlights the benefits of mercury contactors in enhancing reliability and cost-efficiency. - James
I have some concerns regarding the current draw in this situation. Could you please provide the specifications for the Parker hardware? It seems unusual for anything operating on 24V DC to be drawing between 50-60A. Is this current draw representative of the entire hydraulic power pack?
Jeev commented: "I'm noticing some inconsistencies with the current draw in this setup. Can anyone share the specifications for the Parker hardware? It seems unusual that a 24V DC system would be drawing 50-60A. Is this current draw representative of the entire hydraulic power pack? For more details, you can view the spec sheet here: https://www.parker.com/literature/Cylinder Europe/EHA Instruction Manual 3-11.pdf. Additionally, we have Motor D, which appears to have a performance rating that's roughly half of what’s indicated for Motor B in figure 7, located in the middle of the page."
Wow, that's absolutely crazy! However, the earlier recommendations still hold true.
I haven’t come across this question here before, but in the United States, it's quite common practice to use sinking inputs and sourcing outputs in electrical work. This approach is primarily favored by electricians because it simplifies the process of conceptualizing how inputs receive a positive voltage from the field, while outputs send out a positive voltage. When I undertake a similar project, I follow a methodical process. I start by sitting down with a pencil and paper to create a comprehensive list of all necessary functions. Afterwards, I break down each function on a separate sheet, detailing what is required for their control. Could we possibly obtain a clear image of the nameplate? It appears to contain essential information for proper sizing.
Subject: Understanding Input and Output Cards in Electrical Control Systems
Hello Sparkie,
It's important to clarify that this perspective is not from an electrician's standpoint. When comparing sinking input cards to sourcing output cards, you'll find that sinking cards are generally more accessible, consume less power, and are often more cost-effective. Additionally, many companies design their control systems to utilize this approach.
However, a significant challenge arises in a facility that employs both types of cards. If a sinking card is mistakenly placed where a sourcing card should be, or vice versa, the consequences can be unpredictable. I have not encountered this particular scenario before, so I'm unsure of the outcome.
Best regards,
James
I've taken some time to evaluate my project's requirements, and I plan to return in a few days with a clearer vision for what I need my system to achieve. At this initial phase, my primary goal is to create a straightforward interface featuring four push-button inputs and two outputs, which will manage the up and down functionality of the actuators. I anticipate expanding the system's capabilities later on. I've revisited my actuator setup, as the current version has been reassembled, allowing me to examine the components more closely. Notably, the motors are marked with "23A," which alleviates my concerns about the current requirements. Currently, I’m exploring the integration of the Micro820 controller alongside WEG CWB32-11-30C03 contactors for enhanced performance.
MasterBri shared an update: "I've spent some time calculating and will return in a few days to finalize my system's functionality. At this early stage, my primary goal is to create a straightforward control system with four push-button inputs and two outputs to manage the up/down motion of the actuators. I plan to integrate additional features later on.
Currently, I'm revisiting my actuator setup, as the latest model has come back, and I successfully disassembled it. The motors indicate they're rated at 23A, which alleviates my concerns about current requirements. I am now exploring the integration of the Micro820 PLC alongside the WEG CWB32-11-30C03 contactors.
However, it's important to note that the WEG contactor is not a 24VDC model; it merely has a 24VDC coil. The contacts are rated for AC3 applications, typically used for squirrel cage motors, which doesn’t align with my setup. I might be better off considering a solid-state contactor for my needs."
This version enhances clarity, incorporates commonly searched terms like "control system," "Micro820 PLC," "push-button inputs," and "solid-state contactor," while maintaining the original's meaning.
- 19-01-2025
- tragically1969
MasterBri shared: "I've taken some time to evaluate my options and will return in a few days to finalize the specifications for my system. Initially, my primary goal is to implement a straightforward setup featuring four push-button inputs and two outputs to manage the up/down functionality of the actuators. I do plan to expand on this functionality in the future.
I recently reassessed my actuator situation, as the current model has returned, and I successfully disassembled it. I noticed that the motors are labeled as 23A, which helps clarify the current requirements! Currently, I'm exploring the integration of the Micro820 with WEG CWB32-11-30C03 contactors.
What do you think about this option? [Link to the product] I would appreciate any insights, as I'm not very experienced with 24V DC motors. This particular motor is electromechanical, but from my perspective, if you intend to drive the motor directly from the relay, a solid-state relay might be a more reliable choice. In the past, I've encountered issues running 90V DC conveyor motors directly from a relay, which resulted in the contacts welding shut, preventing the conveyor from turning off."
This rephrased text retains the original meaning while enhancing clarity and incorporating relevant keywords for better SEO optimization.
James McQuade commented: "Sparkie, this isn't merely from an electrician's perspective. Sinking input cards and sourcing output cards are typically more accessible, consume less power, and are often more affordable than their counterparts. Additionally, most companies opt for designs that incorporate this method. The significant concern arises when you have a facility that utilizes both types of cards, and you mistakenly install a sinking card in place of a sourcing card, or vice versa. I’m not sure what the implications would be, as I've never encountered that scenario before."
In summary, it all boils down to the differences between electron flow and conventional flow, based on the choice made by the machine's designer. Personally, I never focused too much on card costs; that wasn't my responsibility. It seems unlikely that there is a huge price discrepancy between NPN and PNP transistors.
I'm not quite sure I understand. Isn't it true that the terms "sourcing" and "sinking" are typically associated with traditional current flow?
Rupej expressed uncertainty: "I'm not sure I fully understand. The terms 'sourcing' and 'sinking' typically relate to standard current flow, right? Click to expand for more insight." These terminologies can indeed be quite perplexing. Moreover, the documentation provided by certain manufacturers, like AB, often lacks consistency, leading to even more confusion. To clarify, consider this analogy: would you prefer to toggle the positive wire or the negative wire?
User dogleg43 commented: Consider this perspective: would you prefer to change the positive wire or the negative wire? Click to expand... I perceive it as providing power rather than switching; however, it's essential to implement what suits your needs. Additionally, AD consistently offers excellent, easy-to-understand diagrams for their PLC systems.
- 19-01-2025
- geniusintraining