The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
Subject: Re: Avoiding PLCs
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 00:18:31 GMT
Organization: MediaCom High Speed Internet
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 00:18:31 GMT
Either you have to absorb the cost of supporting multiple PLCs or you client
has to absorb the cost of supporting multiple PLCs. You're going to spend
money on training or he is going to spend money on training. I would pick a
major PLC vendor as your primary and charge a change order to modify it.
What if you pick C-code and your customer wants Pascal, Fortran, or Visual
Basic? I would worry about the long term support of PC hardware and
"Francis" wrote in message
> The reasons users want you to use 'the make of controller already in use
> them' are sensible - they want to reduce their training and maintenance
> costs. Using another type of controller will not help those users.
> I suggest that you produce a detailed but system independent functional
> specification that can then be implemented on any suitable PLC. It is good
> practise anyway, and you can use an IEC-61131 type approach for this
> functional specification so that it can be easily implemented on an
> IEC-61131 type PLC.
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup