Rockwell Software Stinks

LadderLogic · Dec 30, 2021

busarider29 said:
They like what they know (LD) and they don't like what they don't know (ST).

No, that is not the reason, although that is always a factor. The reason is they think like electricians and easily image electric circuits when creating programs, rather than the way the computer programmers tend to think.

Since the majority of maintenance and troubleshooting staff also tend to think like electricians, here is the demand for ladder. Although I agree this requirement is often unnecessarily too restrictive: mathematical calculations and handling numeric data are better fit for ST.

Phrog30 · Dec 30, 2021

busarider29 said:
It's just the opposite from my experience. I've tried to get some of our polished PLC guys to use ST more, and it's like pulling teeth with them.

Probably because a PLC guy really isn't a programmer.

busarider29 · Dec 30, 2021

LadderLogic said:
The reason is they think like electricians and easily image electric circuits when creating programs, rather than the way the computer programmers tend to think.

I hear that one a lot, and although I don't totally disagree, I think that excuse gets used way too much as a crutch for those that simply don't want to learn something new and/or different (aka...."like what they know and don't like what they don't know)".
I started my career in skilled trades as an electrician, working my way through university. Like many a Controls Engineers, I too came up and was polished using LD. I too thought like an electrician (because I was one). Still do when it's necessary. But then I also later learned how to think like and use the tools of a software engineer. Point is, I'm proof that this stuff can be learned by anyone, including skilled trades and electricians. I mean, it's as if we imply that maintenance guys and electricians are not capable of learning ST (because they think like an electrician), and that's just not true at all. Anyone can learn anything if they want to. So that's what it comes down to - Do you want to learn it or not?

Steve Bailey · Dec 30, 2021

Once again a thread has devolved into ladder logic bashing.
Why is it that practitioners of industrial automation are willing to admit that ladder logic is not always the best tool for the task at hand, but programmers insist that ladder logic is never the best tool for the task at hand?

busarider29 · Dec 30, 2021

Steve Bailey said:
Once again a thread has devolved into ladder logic bashing.
Why is it that practitioners of industrial automation are willing to admit that ladder logic is not always the best tool for the task at hand, but programmers insist that ladder logic is never the best tool for the task at hand?

Maybe because RSLogix's ST implementation sucks(?), sticking somewhat to the topic "Rockwell Software Stinks".

Why is it that practitioners of industrial automation are willing to admit that ladder logic is not always the best tool for the task at hand, but programmers insist that ladder logic is never the best tool for the task at hand?

Really? They admit LD is not always the best tool? By words, yes. By actions....hell no.

jstolaruk · Dec 30, 2021

busarider29 said:
I started my career in skilled trades as an electrician, working my way through university. Like many a Controls Engineers, I too came up and was polished using LD. I too thought like an electrician (because I was one). Still do when it's necessary. But then I also later learned how to think like and use the tools of a software engineer. Point is, I'm proof that this stuff can be learned by anyone, including skilled trades and electricians. I mean, it's as if we imply that maintenance guys and electricians are not capable of learning ST (because they think like an electrician), and that's just not true at all. Anyone can learn anything if they want to. So that's what it comes down to - Do you want to learn it or not?

Congratulations! And to answer your question, the majority of Bubbas say "NO" and the rest say "HELL NO".

Peter Nachtwey · Dec 30, 2021

busarider29 said:
One drawback to that is that one would have to remember or look up every instruction's keyboard inputs to insert it. But nothing's perfect though.
[/code]
Yes, but what I said is that coils and contact are entered or changed with the c key. Blocks are started withe the b key.
There is such thing as intellisense. VSCode has Kite.

Make it J, K, L, and :; keys instead, since these are the natural 'home' keys for the right hand.

Click to expand...

Yes, page up and page down keys are required.
So is a beginning and end of ladder set of keys.
I would prefer [ and ] for beginning and end of ladder
and ; and ' for page up and down. The shift key isn't required.
The Tab key shifts between field in the block. Intellisense or similar helps one enter block names and variables easier.

Yes, there is more to PLC programming than the editing. There is the debugging. PLCs are pretty good if the program only consists of coils and contacts. It is easy to see what is on or off most of the time. However, it is hard to debug things that happens so quickly that the information can't be uploaded to the IDE fast enough to see the changes. This is where PLCs fail. There should be some sort of event log that can capture events in a queue with a time stamp.

programmers are use to putting printf or assert functions in their code to help with debugging. The equivalent can be done in PLCs but it is clumsy making a FIFO for a data type that will store the info you need. Memory is no longer a problem anymore.

Phrog30 · Dec 30, 2021

Steve Bailey said:
Once again a thread has devolved into ladder logic bashing.

Let them. We got a lot of work following behind integrators that thought they knew what was best. I'd hate for them to understand now and us lose the work.

LadderLogic · Dec 30, 2021

busarider29 said:
So that's what it comes down to - Do you want to learn it or not?

‘Would that it were so simple” (c)

It is not that you are incorrect - yes, people should learn and grow professionally. But if you just for a moment put yourself into the shoes of a guy who is responsible for running the machine, maximizing the uptime and OEE and minimizing the downtime and who depends on the crew of technicians for being able to quickly identify and fix problems… you may see why insistence on ladder is not all inertia, sloth and lack of desire to learn.

Boy, do I love new exciting hardware and software toys! But we are running business here, you see. And deal with the real-life issues.

durallymax · Dec 30, 2021

Phrog30 said:
I obviously haven't used all software, but I've used enough to think ladder in RA software is the best I've used. RA software is terrible on many other levels though, I agree with the OP and share the frustration. RA HMI is in my opinion the worst out there.

I primarily use Productivity Suite these days, always assumed a free software for a bargain controller would not be at the top of its game. Then I used stuff from the big boys including RA and realized how impressive it was. Strictly on the ladder environment alone, the only thing nicer in RA is the command line and wrapped rungs (and on occasion drag a drop tags). Some in this thread brag up their branch creations, Psuite is just ctrl and arrows. Draw to your hearts content. Type the abbreviation for whatever element you want and its inserted(common ones have function key shortcuts). Online edits require no double click and ctrl+shift+f, just make the edits and shift+f9.

Now outside of the ladder itself, there's certainly a lot more going on in RA. I miss AOI's, ctrl+t, and the cross reference (even though it doesn't drill down into UDTs). I don't miss the slowness of many aspects and anxiety from trying to remember which direction upload is.

I guess you could add "controllers not supporting ST" to the list of reasons Ladder is still popular. I like ST, but it's tough to use when not supported.

Phrog30 · Dec 31, 2021

durallymax said:
Online edits require no double click and ctrl+shift+f, just make the edits and shift+f9.

I do agree for free Productivity is good software, although it has some shortcomings. Does it allow more than one user to be online and make edits at the same time?

harryting · Dec 31, 2021

Again, it's the same confirmation bias. I came from DCS background and Ladder at first is just... horror!

Over the year I see the wisdom of ladder in some situation, especially where you only have electrician to troubleshoot a program at 2AM. It all really depends the application and the use case.

jstolaruk · Dec 31, 2021

harryting said:
Over the year I see the wisdom of ladder in some situation, especially where you only have electrician to troubleshoot a program at 2AM.

Bingo! Anything (tool, training, incantation, war dance, prayer, etc) to avoid getting that dreaded after-hours phone call from Bubba: "The line is down, we can't get it back up".

busarider29 · Dec 31, 2021

Peter Nachtwey said:
There is such thing as intellisense. VSCode has Kite.

Yeah, of course intellisense.

That is one thing that would certainly be helpful, especially for ST programmers, is intellisense. Obviously it's available in most software engineering tools (VS, VSCode, Python, etc..). Not sure about other PLC platforms, but intellisense is available for TwinCAT developers...

Yes, there is more to PLC programming than the editing. There is the debugging. PLCs are pretty good if the program only consists of coils and contacts. It is easy to see what is on or off most of the time. However, it is hard to debug things that happens so quickly that the information can't be uploaded to the IDE fast enough to see the changes. This is where PLCs fail. There should be some sort of event log that can capture events in a queue with a time stamp.

Again, I can't speak for all platforms, but any worthwhile PLC platform should have some kind of tool for this. As you obviously are aware, in RMC Tools there is exactly that - an event log with timestamp. I use it from time to time when troubleshooting that platform. Works good. However, what's even better in my opinion, is to have a trending or scope tool that can be set to record any (or all) variables on every PLC task cycle, and that record time can be set for whatever time (1 minute, 10 minutes, 10 hours, etc...) you want with the option for ring buffer. Also, have the option to set a trigger to stop the recording on a particular event. What I describe here is the TwinCAT Scope tool. That tool in particular is invaluable and we use it extensively for all sorts of things, not just troubleshooting fast events. One of our Controls Engineers, who is a Rockwell fanboy through and through, recently got a taste of that tool and then said to me afterwards, "I have to admit, that Scope tool is pretty cool. Wish Rockwell had something like that. Woulda saved me a bunch of time and headaches back when I was debugging "X-machine".
No BS, true story.

busarider29 · Dec 31, 2021

LadderLogic said:
Â‘Would that it were so simpleÂ” (c)

It is not that you are incorrect - yes, people should learn and grow professionally. But if you just for a moment put yourself into the shoes of a guy who is responsible for running the machine, maximizing the uptime and OEE and minimizing the downtime and who depends on the crew of technicians for being able to quickly identify and fix problemsÂ… you may see why insistence on ladder is not all inertia, sloth and lack of desire to learn.

Boy, do I love new exciting hardware and software toys! But we are running business here, you see. And deal with the real-life issues.

Valid points for sure!! At the end of the day, its about keeping the machines/lines running with as minimal of downtime as possible. And we do that with however means possible. I agree.

With that said, I still and always will stand firmly that one should not hold the company back technologically simply because we are afraid of a little short term downtime that will be the result of learning a new tech or skill. Short term, yes, there's going to be growing pains and more downtime. When learning something new and bringing everyone up to speed on it, there's simply no way around it. But long term (>= 1 year), manufacturing processes and the company as a whole, will be at a much better place and more profitable (faster production process, less scrap, less downtime, less costly integrations, and the list goes on....). If I were in charge and/or running a company, I would not have it any other way - Take the short term hit so that we can later benefit from the long term gains.

Rockwell Software Stinks

LadderLogic

Member

Phrog30

Member

busarider29

Lifetime Supporting Member

Steve Bailey

Lifetime Supporting Member + Moderator

busarider29

Lifetime Supporting Member

jstolaruk

Lifetime Supporting Member

Peter Nachtwey

Member

Phrog30

Member

LadderLogic

Member

durallymax

Lifetime Supporting Member

Phrog30

Member

harryting

Lifetime Supporting Member

jstolaruk

Lifetime Supporting Member

busarider29

Lifetime Supporting Member

busarider29

Lifetime Supporting Member

Similar Topics