New Poll! Programming Language of Choice?

[PLCGuy]

I am really surprised to see ladder logic is on the top of the list. I believe and stand-by the stage programming. Expand the I-box idea and AD really has something. My quess the reason ladder is on the top is that either people coming from the old school, or Allen-Bradley, or just are afraid to try it. Switching to Stage eliminated problems in my programs and got rid of the one shots. So much cleaner to trouble shoot with stage and follow. Hope more take the plunge and try stage programming.

[stepheneltze]

I would like to see the IBox idea expanded...
In my humble opinion, it would be great to have user programmable IBoxes (like with structured text/basic), that we can cut and paste elsewhere in the program.
Stage is usually a better bet than ladder, but I have had one or two occasions where it was simpler just to whip up a quick ladder program, or to use a combo...

[mike@dcsamerica.com]

I also have to put my vote in for function block diagrams.  I personally would rather use Structured Text for everything, but my colleagues would rather not even use controllers that don't use function blocks to program with.  While it isn't superior to any method of programming it is less intimidating for people who have a background in pneumatic instrumentation and control but not in programming computers.

A hybrid type programming like is used by Rockwell would be the best so that everyone would be happy.

Thanks,

Mike

[franji1]

A hybrid type programming like is used by Rockwell would be the best so that everyone would be happy.

First, let me thank you for your input!

Yes, that is our goal.  Right now we support 1 language (Ladder Logic).  We definitely want to support N languages (mix and match).  The question then is, how big is N, and which specific languages should we implement, hence the purpose of this poll .

[davidbgtx]

ST, RLL, and FBD

[HRYLKUCHAR1]

Being as technologically challenged as I am, I find many of the Intelligent Boxes a great help.  I do wish that to make it easier for me to troubleshoot, that when I have the status function turned on, that single elements within the I-Box would also be highligted when active.
 

[JGreer597]

The type of programming language depends on the application....  For heat/cool control a function block is better.  For standard applications, basic relay logic is good..  For applications that have sequence of events then sequencing is good...  It just all depends on the specific application...

[scadapro]

FBD & RLL   I do a lot of programming with the other "A*" plcs (my clients choice - not mine!!) and have found that I use the FBD whenever there is a need for analog manipulation or numeric selection etc.  It permits very complicated routines to be constructed very quickly with only a few blocks and makes troubleshooting and following operating logic easy and direct.  Attempting to do the same with RLL - even with an expanded instruction set sometimes is close to impossible.  On the flip side, doing boolean logic in FBD is - well - just plain painfull!! (anybody ever use opto22???)  I wish DS had the FBD functionality - that would permit me to use AD a great deal of the time and cut down on someone elses market share...

[scadapro]

I am really surprised to see ladder logic is on the top of the list. I believe and stand-by the stage programming. Expand the I-box idea and AD really has something. My quess the reason ladder is on the top is that either people coming from the old school, or Allen-Bradley, or just are afraid to try it. Switching to Stage eliminated problems in my programs and got rid of the one shots. So much cleaner to trouble shoot with stage and follow. Hope more take the plunge and try stage programming.

I've tried using the stage programming a couple of times but had less than good results - maybe I'll look for some better tutorial info and try again.  Question that I have - typically what type of programming do you do - continuous process or batch?  I believe that makes a difference as to which language works best.

[davebay]

I don't know what others use as a programming style, but for large projects I use outside resources (in my case Excel) to track the elements, nicknames and the whole memory map.  Then I overlay the logic and import it to DirectSoft.  I would hope that whatever you use will allow me to import and export code in a textual basis.

I troubleshoot using the ladder.

Thanks,

Dave

[dieselvette]

I only have experience with RLL and FBD, but if I could learn a text-based language that allows programming via the keyboard (primarily - rather than all the point-and-click associated with FBD) I would prefer that. 

I find it cumbersome to use the mouse for data entry (point, click, drag, etc.) - which is what I like about DS5, lots of hotkeys & navigation via the keyboard.

RLL or FBD is almost necessary for monitor/troubleshoot operations IMO.

davebay- I can see using Excel for tracking memory designations, etc.  But what do you mean when you say "overlay the logic" - don't you still need to do the RLL/stage/mnemonic programming once you have everything else laid out & organized? 

[PLCGuy]

scadapro, sorry I did not see your question earlier. You asked what do I use for programming. When it comes to AD, I use stage programming and depending on how intense it is, I go with a DL250 or DL260. I love the i-boxes. If the machine simply does sequential things to having to do multitasking I still use stage. It is wonderful how each operation can be in a stage and then use it how every and when ever I want. It eliminates all those one-shot and blocking this and blocking that. Examples of stages are Supervisory, Thermocouples, Faults, HMI messages, Conveyor Motor, Cooling Motor, etc. Makes it easier to find things. If I want to see why the Cooling motor is not going, I just go to the Cooling Motor stage. It does take some discipline and practice, just like anything else. A nice benefit is as the program gets large, the scan rate stays small due to the plc is only reading active stages.

[Controls Guy]

I only have experience with RLL and FBD, but if I could learn a text-based language that allows programming via the keyboard (primarily - rather than all the point-and-click associated with FBD) I would prefer that. 

I find it cumbersome to use the mouse for data entry (point, click, drag, etc.) - which is what I like about DS5, lots of hotkeys & navigation via the keyboard.

But that's a strawman.  There's no reason FBD couldn't be entered from the keyboard.  A text grammar and hot key system would have to be developed, but it's no less natural than ladder, which can be depicted either graphically or in mnemonics.  Now as far as why one would want to use FBD in the first place.....   

Actually, while I never did understand the appeal, there must be something to it because it sure has a lot of ardent defenders.

[franji1]

If you're a EE, FBD looks more like a circuit design
If you're an electrician, ladder looks more like mechanical relay diagrams

Also, if you have LOTs of elements being ANDed ORed ADDed (whatever) together, FBD is much more compact than ladder

[Controls Guy]

Really?  I can't imagine that.  I'm picturing each FB about the size of a ladder contact, then you have to have space in between to route all the connections.  It just doesn't seem possible.  Do you have any screenshots that illustrate what you're saying?

Now I'll admit ladder isn't very efficient at ORing a whole bunch of single or simple conditions (long vertical column on the left that may even go off screen) so what I usually do is AND all the inverses, then put a NOT on the rail before the coil.

Now I'm an ME, so I spend most of my time calculating if the PLC base is strong enough.