As a result the graphical languages are Sequential Function Chart and Function

As a result the graphical languages are sequential

This preview shows page 21 - 23 out of 27 pages.

As a result, the graphical languages are Sequential Function Chart and Function Block. These are graphical representations of processes and have underlying code written in one of the three languages or in an alternate language, such as C++. Finally, the standard defines the abstraction between the IEC model and the PLC/control hardware by using device tags and not addresses. Similar to programming in a high-level language such as Visual Basic, it allows the programmer to define a memory point, not by address, but by using a descriptive name. The standard defines the characters you can use in the description. The outside world is tied into the model based on the hardware used. The desired effect of the standard is to reduce the user's learning curve between vendors, and with work beginning as early as 1978, it was developed to meet that need.
Image of page 21
Ch 1 Introduction 22 What IEC 61131-3 Is Not The published IEC 61131 standard encourages extensibility, meaning any company that writes an IEC 61131-based product can add things to its "standard" product as long as it tells the user what changes and additions have been made relative to the standard. However, IEC 61131 isn't a standard. It is a specification for vendors that want to develop a control software programming environment according to a set of guidelines. PLCopen ( ), the global association supporting IEC 61131, says you can't have a standard without certification. However, no one and no company can claim that its ladder logic editor creates compliant code. There's no way to certify it. And yet, one of Rockwell Automation's web pages for RSLogix 5 makes claims about the "RSLogix family of IEC-1131- compliant ladder logic programming packages." In addition, even if it did create compliant code, Rockwell Automation would just need to say where the extensions are and what effect they have on that compliancy, and then they can claim compliance. To make sure I wasn't being overly biased, I enlisted colleagues on the Automation List at . "The conformance criteria are so general, it is virtually meaningless," says independent consultant Michael Griffin about compliancy. Also, a published PLCopen document states, "The overall requirements of IEC 61131-3 are not easy to fulfill. For that reason, the standard allows partial implementations in various aspects. This covers the number of supported languages, functions and function blocks. This leaves freedom at the supplier side, but a user should be well aware of it during his selection process." This doesn't help us very much. The original intent of the specification or standard was to create a common platform for control software development. When the programmable controls industry emerged in the 1970s, all software was written using dedicated hardware and firmware. With the advent of the personal computer, vendors developed their own development environments. It is no different today. The software programs that have been developed support only the vendor's hardware. There is no common platform here. We are no further along than we were 20 years ago.
Image of page 22
Image of page 23

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 27 pages?

  • Spring '18
  • Professor Obura Oluoch
  • PLC

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

Stuck? We have tutors online 24/7 who can help you get unstuck.
A+ icon
Ask Expert Tutors You can ask You can ask You can ask (will expire )
Answers in as fast as 15 minutes