Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A humble request(s) for Do-More God's

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts


  • #46
    Originally posted by ControlsGuy View Post

    Yeah, I tend to feel the same way (note that AB added the God Mode button to the ControlLogix so many must feel the same), and I definitely wasn't advocating that as the best solution. Was just mentioning ways other PLC companies have addressed this, so people can talk about what they like, what they don't, and the Powers That Be can steal any good ideas, compromise, combine, etc.
    I understand why A-B has that function, as they don't know whether the PLC will be operating a packaging machine or an amusement park ride. I also note that RSLogix/Studio5000 has done away with having to compile the program before save.
    Why worry? If you've done the best you can, worrying won't make it any better

    - Walt Disney

    Comment



    • #47
      Originally posted by Todd Dice View Post
      I understand why A-B has that function, as they don't know whether the PLC will be operating a packaging machine or an amusement park ride. I also note that RSLogix/Studio5000 has done away with having to compile the program before save.
      I don't see the connection between more steps (other than at least one confirmation) and applications of unknown safety implications. AB's not checking your logic to see if it's going to be hazardous. Do you mean because it gives the programmer a couple more iterations so he can consider the implications of his change? Or maybe because if the change IS bad, it's quicker to Untest and back it out, especially under extreme stress as people tumble off the ride, than if AB didn't keep track of what was just changed?

      Comment



      • #48
        Originally posted by Todd Dice View Post
        I understand why A-B has that function, as they don't know whether the PLC will be operating a packaging machine or an amusement park ride. I also note that RSLogix/Studio5000 has done away with having to compile the program before save.
        Also, how do you feel that AB's market plays into this discussion about Do-More? I'm assuming they are deployed in all the same applications, so I wouldn't think it should matter.

        Comment



        • #49
          Originally posted by ControlsGuy View Post

          I don't see the connection between more steps (other than at least one confirmation) and applications of unknown safety implications. AB's not checking your logic to see if it's going to be hazardous. Do you mean because it gives the programmer a couple more iterations so he can consider the implications of his change? Or maybe because if the change IS bad, it's quicker to Untest and back it out, especially under extreme stress as people tumble off the ride, than if AB didn't keep track of what was just changed?
          This is my thinking.
          Why worry? If you've done the best you can, worrying won't make it any better

          - Walt Disney

          Comment



          • #50
            Originally posted by MikeN View Post

            Perhaps it is not necessarily the number of clicks involved, but the amount of words on each dialog box and the wording of things, or perhaps even the number of options that makes it seem like there is a lot more that needs to be done or that it is more confusing? I work with both Do-More BRX's and Productivity PLCs from AD. I cant really put my finger on it exactly, but something about Do-More just makes it feel like there is a lot more I have to go through or read or buttons to click to save projects or write to PLCs than I do with Productivity. Ill try and figure out more concisely what it is about Do-More that makes me feel this way.

            I know thats not the most helpful thing. A lot of "maybe this, or that, or possibly that thing over there?" It would be more helpful if we could describe exactly the issue. It seems there are a lot of people with this sort of feeling. But as you said, number of clicks are already reduced quite a bit. So if it isnt that, what causes this feeling among the users? It is probably pretty frustrating for you. In the end it will probably just be some little tweak you do and all of us go "wow, its so amazing now. Just perfect." when all it turned out to be way changing one word. haha

            I think MikeN just explained very eloquently what my previous diatribes failed to accomplish. Excessive key clicks are very frustrating when doing online edits.

            An example,
            One Rung with a simple Mathbox instruction.

            Click #1. Accept
            Click #2. Program Check dialog if warnings are present. Requiring Click #3 and a 4th Click , if I don’t want this message to be shown again for this session
            Click #4. The are you sure Dialog.
            Click #5. Writes to PLC

            10 Seconds later, I want to try out a different expression. Another 3 clicks. Then for the next edit, one after that, etc. This gets very tiresome. I just simply want to send what I changed with just one click. Not asking for existing functionality to be taken out but having a check box option that I can click on (Yup. Asking for another key click) in the ladder editor option dialog, where it will place a “No Questions Ask Send” button on the tool bar. And make it so a user has to enable it per session. This was the “The GOD MODE” button the “ControlsGuy” was referring to in the AB world.

            I believe Intel was instrumental in getting AB to add the “GOD” mode button. Intel exclusively uses AB PLC’s in their manufacturing plants around the world. All PLC program changes, additions, and upgrades are done online, after the logic has been proven on a test bed at intel’'s control facilities. A factory PLC is never taken out of RUN mode. Each PLC CPU has a redundant cousin, so when firmware needs to be upgraded, A third PLC is setup and burned in, before it is introduced in to the production line. Worked there for 5 years when they were switching from PLC-5 Platform over to the Controllogix platform. Not a single PLC was put in to offline mode. Factory did not experience a single production hick-up. So yes, with the God Mode button, comes a great deal of responsibility.

            Going back to Key clicks,

            To insert a NEW rung…

            Step #1. Right Click
            Step #2. Move The mouse over to the Insert Option
            Step #3. Slide it over to the Rung Option
            Step #4 Then slide over and click Below or above option.

            Why not after the right click just have an insert Rung and place the rung at the row where the cursor is?

            Unless I missed it, I didn’t find a keyboard Shortcut to insert a rung in the help file. Pressing insert from the keyboard invokes another dialog with 5 options and a text box. Now I have to leave the keyboard and grab the mouse for a few clicks, which is how most people intuitively work and interact with windows dialogs. Or, I can use the Tab key to select what I want. But, Row, column, and “After cursor” options are not tab stops. For those, I have to use the control key along with the associated hot key. Lots of steps to insert a rung. I find myself spending lot of time to enter few lines of logic when using the editor.
            Last edited by skyfox; 04-16-2019, 06:15 PM.

            Comment



            • #51
              Originally posted by MikeN View Post

              Perhaps it is not necessarily the number of clicks involved, but the amount of words on each dialog box and the wording of things, or perhaps even the number of options that makes it seem like there is a lot more that needs to be done or that it is more confusing? I work with both Do-More BRX's and Productivity PLCs from AD. I cant really put my finger on it exactly, but something about Do-More just makes it feel like there is a lot more I have to go through or read or buttons to click to save projects or write to PLCs than I do with Productivity. Ill try and figure out more concisely what it is about Do-More that makes me feel this way.

              I know thats not the most helpful thing. A lot of "maybe this, or that, or possibly that thing over there?" It would be more helpful if we could describe exactly the issue. It seems there are a lot of people with this sort of feeling. But as you said, number of clicks are already reduced quite a bit. So if it isnt that, what causes this feeling among the users? It is probably pretty frustrating for you. In the end it will probably just be some little tweak you do and all of us go "wow, its so amazing now. Just perfect." when all it turned out to be way changing one word. haha
              We have historically had the attitude that we needed to throw information at users so they could make good decisions. We are increasingly of the opinion that is wrong and will be moving away from that. At 54, I find walls of text to be hard to comprehend, and I agree that less is more. It is a culture change though, so it is a process.

              Comment



              • #52
                Originally posted by skyfox View Post
                An example,
                One Rung with a simple Mathbox instruction.

                Click #1. Accept
                Click #2. Program Check dialog if warnings are present. Requiring Click #3 and a 4th Click , if I don’t want this message to be shown again for this session
                Click #4. The are you sure Dialog.
                Click #5. Writes to PLC
                Program checks are there for your benefit. You can disable any of them globally, or within the project, module, or rung. If they slow you down more than they help...turn...them...off.

                Originally posted by skyfox View Post
                10 Seconds later, I want to try out a different expression. Another 3 clicks. Then for the next edit, one after that, etc. This gets very tiresome. I just simply want to send what I changed with just one click. Not asking for existing functionality to be taken out but having a check box option that I can click on (Yup. Asking for another key click) in the ladder editor option dialog, where it will place a “No Questions Ask Send” button on the tool bar. And make it so a user has to enable it per session. This was the “The GOD MODE” button the “ControlsGuy” was referring to in the AB world.
                I'm seeing a Quick Write Function that works vaguely like Search and Search Again. The first time you hit it, it will prompt you to tell it how heavy handed to be. Subsequent times it just does it.


                Originally posted by skyfox View Post
                Going back to Key clicks,

                To insert a NEW rung…

                Step #1. Right Click
                Step #2. Move The mouse over to the Insert Option
                Step #3. Slide it over to the Rung Option
                Step #4 Then slide over and click Below or above option.

                Why not after the right click just have an insert Rung and place the rung at the row where the cursor is?

                Unless I missed it, I didn’t find a keyboard Shortcut to insert a rung in the help file. Pressing insert from the keyboard invokes another dialog with 5 options and a text box. Now I have to leave the keyboard and grab the mouse for a few clicks, which is how most people intuitively work and interact with windows dialogs. Or, I can use the Tab key to select what I want. But, Row, column, and “After cursor” options are not tab stops. For those, I have to use the control key along with the associated hot key. Lots of steps to insert a rung. I find myself spending lot of time to enter few lines of logic when using the editor.
                The Insert dialog's default is exactly what you asked for. Insert and Enter. Done. No need to touch the mouse or tab or arrows. The right click mouse thing is actually harder.

                The only time I ever use Insert is if I need to insert a column. I normally just hit the Enter key to get a new line and start editing the rung. The only piece you are missing is the Wire to Out, which is Ctrl-W. You can enter a bunch of rungs within a single edit matrix. When you hit F8 it will sort it all out and renumber.

                I don't use the mouse much while editing. Keyboard is far faster.

                Comment



                • #53
                  We've talked through the Quick Write function. That will happen next release. First time you invoke it within a session it will present a dialog with all of the possibilities, which will retain the previous selections. We will pull out all of the stops, making everything optional, even up to writing without confirmation. If the download criteria can't be met (e.g. disallow quick write if SysConfig has changed and it has) it'll bring up the existing Write to PLC with a one line warning that let's you know the quick write couldn't be done. For the most likely scenario that only logic has changed, it'll look exactly like God mode after the initial invocation, and since the setup will retain previous settings, even that should be painless.

                  Do-more could also very easily support the quick revert function that AB has. Y'all sound mixed on it, but it is almost free to add if you think there is any value.

                  Comment



                  • #54
                    Originally posted by BobO View Post
                    Do-more could also very easily support the quick revert function that AB has. Y'all sound mixed on it, but it is almost free to add if you think there is any value.
                    Sounds like it could be useful, make it an option?

                    I'm generally in favor of adding features as options. If that means there are five screens of check boxes so I can configure the program how I want it, great! Just document the options well, and copy them over when I upgrade the software.

                    Comment



                    • #55
                      Originally posted by TheGreatMarklar View Post

                      Sounds like it could be useful, make it an option?

                      I'm generally in favor of adding features as options. If that means there are five screens of check boxes so I can configure the program how I want it, great! Just document the options well, and copy them over when I upgrade the software.
                      I misspoke, it wouldn't be a test edit function like AB. The concept would be really simple. Following a run mode edit, both copies of the program are still present in RAM. Switching back to the previous program is very quick. The only wrinkle would be updating the flash again, but that's easy. No need for it to be an option per se, you would just use it or not. We could probably add to the confirmation dialog the option of refreshing the DmD with the old PLC version.

                      It's easy, but I'm only interested in doing it if y'all think it would be useful.

                      Comment



                      • #56
                        Originally posted by BobO View Post
                        We've talked through the Quick Write function. That will happen next release. First time you invoke it within a session it will present a dialog with all of the possibilities, which will retain the previous selections. We will pull out all of the stops, making everything optional, even up to writing without confirmation. If the download criteria can't be met (e.g. disallow quick write if SysConfig has changed and it has) it'll bring up the existing Write to PLC with a one line warning that let's you know the quick write couldn't be done. For the most likely scenario that only logic has changed, it'll look exactly like God mode after the initial invocation, and since the setup will retain previous settings, even that should be painless.
                        Sweet! When you posted about it before, I wanted to ask how persistent the override would be. Session is perfect IMO.

                        Comment



                        • #57
                          Originally posted by BobO View Post

                          I misspoke, it wouldn't be a test edit function like AB. The concept would be really simple. Following a run mode edit, both copies of the program are still present in RAM. Switching back to the previous program is very quick. The only wrinkle would be updating the flash again, but that's easy. No need for it to be an option per se, you would just use it or not. We could probably add to the confirmation dialog the option of refreshing the DmD with the old PLC version.

                          It's easy, but I'm only interested in doing it if y'all think it would be useful.
                          I actually don't like Test Mode, because the 97% case takes more UI interaction that it would without it. I don't tend to make a million edits and commit them all at once, so it's easy for me to remember what I just did and reverse it using normal editing. But....I can't judge all integrators or the scenarios in which they work by myself. Todd Dice made a good point about who might find easy reversion valuable and when. I think it would be useful...to some people, occasionally. So my vote is that if it's free to add, go ahead and do it, only so long as it doesn't add additional UI interaction for my 97% case, which is exactly what you're describing.

                          Comment



                          • #58
                            Originally posted by BobO View Post

                            Without any form of ack from the user? I'm not comfortable with that, at least in run mode. Less of a problem in program mode I guess.
                            I am wrong on this in P-suite.

                            When you click "Transfer project to CPU" while online to the PLC, you are asked in a pop-up if you wish to do a "run time transfer" or a "stop mode transfer." Sorry for my flaky memory.
                            Why worry? If you've done the best you can, worrying won't make it any better

                            - Walt Disney

                            Comment



                            • #59
                              Another thing that always annoys me about Do-More software is the instruction toolbox. Maybe there is a way to already change this but I have looked in Options a couple times and read the help file for the instruction toolbox and couldnt find anything. In productivity I can have multiple sections of instructions open at once so that I can access any instruction I need to easily. In Do-More Designer, I seem to be limited to one group of instructions unless I want to put everything I ever need into favorites. The software wastes a TON of space for no reason and I have to move my mouse all over the place to change to a different instruction group. This should be changed so that more than one group can be open at a time.


                              From this:

                              Click image for larger version

Name:	InstructionToolbox.jpg
Views:	129
Size:	101.7 KB
ID:	122172




                              To this:

                              Click image for larger version

Name:	ProductivityInstructionToolbox.jpg
Views:	109
Size:	94.3 KB
ID:	122173

                              Comment



                              • #60
                                Originally posted by MikeN View Post
                                Another thing that always annoys me about Do-More software is the instruction toolbox. Maybe there is a way to already change this but I have looked in Options a couple times and read the help file for the instruction toolbox and couldnt find anything. In productivity I can have multiple sections of instructions open at once so that I can access any instruction I need to easily. In Do-More Designer, I seem to be limited to one group of instructions unless I want to put everything I ever need into favorites. The software wastes a TON of space for no reason and I have to move my mouse all over the place to change to a different instruction group. This should be changed so that more than one group can be open at a time.
                                The toolbox control is from a 3rd party toolkit we use. Not sure what the capabilities of it are, beyond what we are using. We'll look into it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X