Sild Screen Labeling

[PLCGuy]

I think I might have asked this before, but did not get a complete answer.
Are the Do-More modules going to have different silk screen labeling? I asked a co-worker to look and see if X10 was lite on the module and he said, "There is no X10!"  Maybe they are different and I just have been using old stock from our shelves and have not bought any input or output modules for the D0-More.

[BobO]

In the context of the DL205, there are no "Do-more modules" per se, there is a Do-more CPU that works with DL205 modules. DL205 modules will continue to use octal numbering because it makes very little economic sense for Koyo to produce, and ADC to stock, a duplicate set of modules with only silk screen differences.

In the context of the new platform Host is building specifically for Do-more, yes, the numbering is decimal to match Do-more's I/O numbering.

[b_carlton]

I wonder if ADC would consider stick on labels for the modules. Or possibly laser printer compatible lables.

Allen Bradley had them available for their modules depending on the systems they were used with. But theirs use slot-based numbering.

[BobO]

I wonder if ADC would consider stick on labels for the modules. Or possibly laser printer compatible lables.

Allen Bradley had them available for their modules depending on the systems they were used with. But theirs use slot-based numbering.

Seems like a logical approach and shouldn't be that hard. Not sure how strong the demand is though; I think this is the only time I've heard the request.

[PLCGuy]

Thanks for checking it out. Especially when wiring and looking at the 16 point module, keeping the sequence correct after you get pass "7" then in your head remembering what is next.

Yea, that would be a pain to stock different modules for Do-More and the DL series.

Maybe just dump the DL series.

[Controls Guy]

I like the idea but there's no way they're going to do that (dump DL-classic).

[BobO]

I like the idea but there's no way they're going to do that (dump DL-classic).

ADC still sells a surprising amount of DL305. These markets refuse to die.

[Controls Guy]

Truly amazing.  I'd buy a 105 before I'd buy a 305.  Heck, I'd probably buy an Idec before I'd buy a 305 (and they're on my All Time Three Worst PLCs list, along with Delta and the Eagle Signal Micro 190)

So insane.  You can buy a Do-More for the same money and it's a thousand times better.  Maybe ten thousand.  No accounting for taste, I guess.

[Controls Guy]

I just got a customer switched over from using 250's, 260's, SLC's and S7-300s to the current Siemens offering (most often S7-1500's) because I thought THOSE were all antiquated, and 205's are probably a good ten years newer than 305's.  I can barely imagine someone buying a 305 today.

[Mike Nash]

I just got a customer switched over ... to the current Siemens offering...

I guess that explains the mask. 

[Garyhlucas]

With AD offering modern CPUs in the 305 rack, what has really changed in the digital and analog I/O world? This is like a discussion about CNC controls on another forum where they asked why CNCs don't support spline curves and such. Maybe because in the actual machines they still have linear and rotary axis, so all moves wind up as straight lines and arcs? If you have a ton of 305 racks out there to support then staying 305 saves a lot of money.

[Controls Guy]

No, it's throwing good money after bad.

First, I wouldn't really call a 350 a modern CPU.  It lacks some of the instructions of the other newer DL CPU's like the 250/260, the 450, and the 05/06, even though all of those have been greatly, greatly surpassed by the Do-More.  I had a customer where I'd installed several copies of an app written on a 250.  They had one PC-controlled machine that used a 305-classic as I/O, so I thought to load my app by switching out the CPU to a 350.  No dice, had to rewrite it.

In the meantime, all the I/O is old. If you, either proactively or gradually as they die, replace them, now you have all new I/O, but you've spent the money that could have bought you a brand new PLC.  Then, 305 racks have some issue where they die after about 10 years.  I haven't experienced this with any other rack-based PLC I've used or seen.

For equipment you're going to junk in the foreseeable future, I'd agree with you, just replace parts as they fail till you're ready to decommission the machines.  If you don't have a horizon in sight, bite the bullet and put in something that has far more capability and will continue to be available far longer.

I have yet another customer with a piece of equipment running on a 20-year old SLC with Flex I/O.  They recently priced a new CPU (32K 5/05), and it was $7,000!! Just the CPU!  A brand new S7-1500, that's probably 100 times the PLC and will continue to be available for years would cost about half that, INCLUDING the I/O.  A Do-More, probably half of THAT.

[Controls Guy]

I guess that explains the mask. 

Pshaw! I'd have agreed with you about the S7-300/400 (or especially the S5), but the 1200/1500's are a quality product.  Very very fast, can handle lots of Ethernet connections simultaneously, libraries for your own function blocks, Modbus/TCP supported without paying for a software module, overall the feel of programming a real full-sized PLC, even for the $200 1200's (and you can share function blocks you developed for the bigger 1500).  The things will blow the doors off a Control Logix for WAY less money (probably 70% less).

Now, most or all of this can be said for Do-More as well (which is probably why the two of them are my go-to PLC's at the moment), and there are a lot of places where I do use Do-Mores.  Sometimes the choice of a S7 over a Do-More is the technical fit to the project, but sometimes it has to do with customer acceptance.  (Sometimes I even use AB!)

[ealltech]

I wonder if ADC would consider stick on labels for the modules. Or possibly laser printer compatible lables.