Hello Wizards, it's been a while since I sought your guidance, but I have always appreciated your assistance. I am currently planning a project that involves integrating a production line into a different line. The secondary tooling for this line has its own PLC, unlike previous equipment which used an IO rack and logic added to the main PLC. The migration to the new setup will involve two secondary machines with their own PLCs (currently standalone). I have experience with produced and consumed bits for tasks involving robotic operations, but I have not worked with producing and consuming string data before. I am considering proposing a sequencing station between the main line and secondary equipment, but this may require additional funding that could be met with disapproval. I strive to find solutions that are cost-effective. What are your thoughts on using produce/consume with an 82-character string? Alternatively, should I stick to messaging the string while utilizing a produce/consume "Ready_For_Data" tag? I have a timeline of 4 months for transitioning the secondary tooling after the main line is emptied, followed by up to 6 months for fine-tuning the main line for production. I have sufficient time to plan and prepare before the implementation phase. My priority is ensuring a smooth transition without compromising efficiency. Additional information: Main Line PLC = 1768-L45 running version 20.19, Feeding Secondary Tooling PLC: 5069-L320ER running version 32.14, Exiting Secondary Tooling PLC: 1769-L33ER running version 28.12. Thank you in advance for your insights and advice. - Gad
Indeed, we consistently generate and utilize a User-Defined Type (UDT) comprising a string and a DINT array to store various values and status indicators.
When using produce and consume functions, it is important to ensure they operate efficiently with strings. If they do not, consider creating a User-Defined Type (UDT) with a string parameter to facilitate smooth processing.
When wondering if an 82-character string will work with produce/consume, Gadelric answered with confidence: "Why wouldn't it? As long as the tag matches perfectly on both ends, you can customize it to your liking, as long as it stays under 500 bytes in size (128 for safety). I suggest enclosing it in a user-defined type (udt) with additional values for potential future use." This approach ensures compatibility and flexibility for the string within the specified limits.
I echo the sentiments expressed by others - using a User-Defined Type (UDT) can enhance efficiency. By incorporating the same UDT in both processors for the tags being produced and consumed, you can streamline data passing. This practice is commonly employed for standard data exchange in industrial automation systems.
Great news - you all have earned the rest of the day off! š Make sure to mention that a generous midwest resident has approved your paid time off. Enjoy your time off!
Hi Gad! Great to see you back here and well-prepared, as always. Judging from the specifications you've provided, going for the Produce/Consume setup with an 82-character string could work well considering your primary goal of a seamless transition and efficiency maintenance. However, it's worth bearing in mind that this approach may need you to allocate more resources for careful debugging and testing since string manipulation requires extra attention. Alternatively, the Messaging method with a "Ready_For_Data" tag can also be a viable option, though in my experience, it might not be as swift due to the required handshaking process. Given your detailed timeline, focusing on thorough testing for either method would be crucial. Since you have considerable time, Iād recommend prototyping both options on a small scale if possible to see which fits better within your environment while also taking account of the available budget for additional sequencing station. Keep us posted on how your project develops!
Hello Gad, While both options can certainly work, deciding on which strategy to utilize largely depends on the PLC's capabilities and the communication demands. Both producing/consuming and messaging have pros and cons. With produce/consume, the data is updated in real time, which can be advantageous for perfect synchronization, but it can also potentially put a high demand on your network. A messaging approach, on the other hand, is often slower, but it places a lighter demand on your bandwidth. If network resources aren't a concern and your secondary machines' PLCs have the capacity to handle the velocity in which the data strings are produced/consumed, I'd suggest moving forward with that method. However, if you're working with limited resources or the PLCs might struggle with high data consumption rates, I'd recommend messaging the string using a "Ready_For_Data" tag. This is slightly slower, but perhaps more manageable and just as reliable if properly programmed. Remember to thoroughly test your setup with either choice to avoid complications. Good luck!
ā Work Order Management
ā Asset Tracking
ā Preventive Maintenance
ā Inspection Report
We have received your information. We will share Schedule Demo details on your Mail Id.
Answer: Answer: Using produce/consume with an 82-character string involves directly transferring the string data between PLCs, while messaging the string with a "Ready_For_Data" tag involves a more structured approach where the data transfer is triggered by the tag's state change. The choice depends on factors like the complexity of data handling and synchronization requirements.
Answer: Answer: To ensure a smooth transition, careful planning and preparation are essential. Consider factors like data communication protocols, synchronization mechanisms, and testing procedures to minimize disruptions and optimize efficiency during the integration process.
Answer: Answer: During the transition phase, factors like sequencing, data integrity, error handling, and performance optimization should be carefully managed. Fine-tuning the main line involves adjusting parameters, settings, and processes to enhance production efficiency and output quality.
Answer: Answer: To address budget constraints, consider alternative solutions or optimizations that may achieve the desired outcome without requiring additional funding. Evaluate the cost-b
Join hundreds of satisfied customers who have transformed their maintenance processes.
Sign up today and start optimizing your workflow.