John_R

That's interesting Joe, I never paid attention to SB13, I've always just used a Positive Transition Contact with SB3 when I roll my own timers.... Also, did you do this on the new "wide screen" version? it opens on my older version, but net 3 is clipped off. Something I guess we gotta watch out for as we transition into the wide screen format.... JohnR

This is a repeat of what I posted on Cara's blog last week, just in case some of the community didn't see it there..... Just downloaded this new version, and did a clean install on a stand-alone "sandbox" PC (just a bit of caution on my part, evaluate before I install on my main work station). Thank you for the wide ladder area, I've been grumbling about that empty space for years, that will cut down on the wrap-around rungs. I suppose it would be too much to ask for, but it would be nice if when you open an older project, and the Version Update window opens telling you it's going to update the project to the new version, that it could also remove the wrap-around lines and put the rung in a straight line (or fewer wrap-arounds depending on how long the rung is). The Mobile Remote Operator is also an interesting feature, but there are those of us who have Androids but don't like being tied to Google-world, any chance you could make the APK install file available for download on the Unitronics website for those of us who prefer to do manual installs? regards, JohnR

Hey All, I imagine this has been covered before, but I can't seem to find it........ I'm doing some housekeeping in my file folders, and I see a lot of numbered extensions to my projects. that is, instead of the .vlp extension there will be extensions like .22 , .24 , .27 , .146...... I assume that these are backups of some sort, but do I really need them? Can I safely delete them? JohnR

Just downloaded this new version, and did a clean install on a stand-alone "sandbox" PC (just a bit of caution on my part, evaluate before I install on my main work station). Thank you for the wide ladder area, I've been grumbling about that empty space for years, that will cut down on the wrap-around rungs. I suppose it would be too much to ask for, but it would be nice if when you open an older project, and the Version Update window opens telling you it's going to update the project to the new version, that it could also remove the wrap-around lines and put the rung in a straight line (or fewer wrap-arounds depending on how long the rung is). The Mobile Remote Operator is also an interesting feature, but there are those of us who have Androids but don't like being tied to Google-world, any chance you could make the APK install file available for download on the Unitronics website for those of us who prefer to do manual installs? regards, JohnR

You have to wonder, since the creators put screw bosses on the PLC, why are there no screw holes in the snap I/O module? I run into vibration issues on these and finally made me a little drill template for holes on the snap, then screw it down.... maybe voids the warranty, but it keeps me running....... JohnR

Visco leave your number as an integer (whole number, no decimal) in the logic, apply the decimal point in the display settings...... JohnR

Rog, attached is an example of MODBUS control of an AB Powerflex,..... I cut this portion out of a program I did a year or so ago, parts of the logic may seem gibberish, like anything else , there are many ways to do the speed and/or run logic, but the key to the comms is is sending the right number to the right address, look at the parts where I send/receive with the MODBUS FB's. I added some comments in CAPS, pointing out some things to pay attention to...... also remember, the port on the V570 must be set to 485....... and of course, the baud in the com init, and node settings in the MODBUS FB have to match the VFD....... Hope this helps. Regards, JohnR powerflex VFD example.vlp

BUMP........ Anybody else got an idea? JohnR

Gabriel, thank you for the input, the description of SB111 says "Disable Virtual Keypad On = Virtual Keypad is disabled but Keypad enabled (Vision560)" but, setting SB111 also disabled all my on screen "buttons" with touch properties, and the keypad still didn't work....... does that make sense? JohnR

Hey all.... I have a project that I converted from V280 to V560, I used the convert to color function which worked fairly well. of course there were things I had to clean up afterwords. One thing that has me puzzled are some keypad entry variables, which I wanted to keep as keypad entry, but instead are now touchscreen entry. That is, when I have logic that prompts the user for a keypad entry, the physical keypad does not work, instead you have to touch the variable on screen, then it pops up a onscreen keypad for entry. I'm not seeing anything in the variables properties that indicate it should be a touchscreen entry, or a way to disable touchscreen and enable physical keypad. Attached is a screen shot of the variable properties. Anyone out there have any ideas on this? Regards, JohnR

Hey All, Just an observation........ I just downloaded Remote Operator, first time I've tried it...... Just to get started and see how it works I tried connecting to a V280 that's sitting on my workbench, to which I just downloaded a program via the serial port. The default serial setting in R/O are set the same as my PLC, but it also prompts for a PLC Name, and will not check connection without it. So I went back and added a PLC Name (set by the Power Up Bit), and sure enough, now it works...... Now we all know you must have a PLC Name for I/P connection, but I've never seen this for serial connection (i.e. never needed this from Vision or Remote Access). I was never in the habit of setting the PLC Name on projects that I didn't plan to be on my ethernet network. Something new to remember if I want to keep my projects consistent...... Regards, JohnR

AND....... There is a pair of jumpers under the back cover that changes the port from 232 to 485.... Go to the Tech Library and look up the Install Guide for the V130, it shows the proper jumper settings..... JohnR

Aahh, but you see it is from Illinois, where most things are not what they seem, the state gov. has lots of undocumented features........

Hey Joe, I like the way you started out your post with a pompous 25 cent word.... One of my most recent projects was a retrofit to a machine that was originally built around Schneider products (PLC, HMI, VFD's), We've had this machine about a year, and it spent more time in the shop than on the production floor. We have a high "moisture content" (food plant, gets washed top to bottom every night), I would bring this machine into the shop and dry it out, but every time it went back on the floor we would have issues with it.... and unfortunately I was not afforded the various pieces of Schnieder software needed to properly troubleshoot the issues (and the OEM lost interest in helping). Anyway, the plant manager asked me what we could do to eliminate the problems, I convinced him to let me strip out the Schnieder stuff and replace it with A-B VFD's and Unitronics PLC (V570 up where the old HMI was and connected to an IO-D16A3-TO16 down in the control panel). I did MODBUS control to the six A-B VFD's, and found that I needed to stagger the MODBUS calls else the commands would flounder, and some of the VFD's didn't get their command. I did a sequence routine, based on time, I put a two second pause between each sequence Increment for the startup or stopping of each VFD (which fit right into the OEM's suggested start/stop sequence). I also lessened the MODBUS call burden by storing the previous command to an MI, and compare statements that if the command was not different from the last time, then skip that step..... Lastly, each of the 12 MODBUS calls (6 for start/stop, 6 for speed) each went to it's own subroutine, which returns after the MODBUS FB "Function in Progress" bit clears, or if the FB returns a comms error so it doesn't hang over a lost comm...... so far, working well...... It would be interesting to hear how others use sequenced operations....... JohnR

Yeah, Joe has been my mentor on many things over the past dozen years, he is my Unitronics (as well as other products) vendor. He has seen snippets of my code work and always has advice to offer. I just thought I'd throw this out to the community to see what kind of opinions I get. Actually, I'm sitting at home for a while, just had a long over due hip replacement, so I'm off work for a couple months, I get tired of watching TV and I'm not much on playing solitare, so I find myself thinking about work related stuff, kind of sad isn't it? But I'm able to remote into my PC at work and check things from here. A couple days ago one of the guys from work called me about problems with the afore mentioned A-B system, and looking at the sequencing method used there got me thing about different methods, which got me here seeking knowlege..... JohnR

Hey All, Looking for some insight towards sequence programming, I know some people say that it is the prefered method, although in my years of dealing with PLCs (mostly other peoples work) I rarely see it. I have used sequences from time to time when I want to insure that a bit of code executes in an exact way. I'll use an MI as a sequence "Index", and when the Index equals X then I execute that net. My question is whether the prefered method of advancing the Index is by incrementing or storing a number to the Index. The times that I have done it I have put an Increment at the end of a given net so that when it completes the Index increments up a number, and then the next net starts with an Equal To that number, and so on until the end of the sequence where I end the net with a Reset to the Index MI to bring it back to the start. I have a machine where the OEM has a sequencing program (Allen Bradley, but the same process), and I've noticed that they use a Store (Move) at the end each net (rung) to change the Index number, and at the end of the sequence they Store (Move) the Index number back to the start. The only advantage to the Store method I see is that you can change the Index number by a larger amount (10, 20, 30, etc), and if you later want to insert another step you just give it a "in between" number (15, 25) and you dont have to go back through all the nets and change the Equal To number at the start of each net. Anybody have opinions on this, which method is considered "best practice"? Regards JohnR

Hey All, Just to throw my two cents in along with Joe and Keith...... I work in an industry where we have a multitude of small “single purpose” machines that are placed into a production line, the setup varies from day to day depending on the product being produced. Many of these machines were once old 120V relay control that at one point or another were modernized using some basic "brick” style PLC. As all things become obsolete, I find myself further updating their controls trying to bring them into the 21st century. Most of these machines have just a handful of I/O, and limited logic which could easily be updated using “smart relays”. But, I really like using the Unitronics products (thank you Joe for introducing me to them years back). and find myself using the M91‘s or V120‘s depending on how much processing power I need. Even if I don’t really need an HMI, I find myself incorporating it, if nothing more than a troubleshooting resource for the other technicians. But likewise, I have been frustrated with the lack of 120VAC I/O, making what could have been a simple retrofit a bit more cumbersome, either interfacing between voltage levels or just completely replacing/rewiring everything to 24vdc. While Joe and Keith leaned more towards the Snap I/O and remote modules, I would vote for updating even the smaller OPLC’s to a 120VAC I//O option. AS Keith points out, there are literally millions of control applications that live in the 120VAC world. Regards, JohnR