A First Look at the Low Code Future of PLC Programming

[@inothome]

Wow!!! Really awesome way to program and access PLCs. However, I don't see the major PLC manufacturers going this route, since they generate so much income from the development software and licenses needed to program their systems. But, we can all hope!

[@gabrielxavier2676]

Not mentioning courses/classes/certification they sell

[@HarshadJoshi]

Yes, you are right

[@882952]

coughcoughallenbradleycough...

[@inothome]

@@882952 Hahahaha, exactly!!!

[@henroljeogutierrez1294]

That is why this is a revolutionary moves, salute to weidmuller manufacturers! I hope you gain momentum in this industry. The problem of big brands (from my own opinion) is that they are lacking their clients in for this kind of "applications", where in fact OT has been already outdated in terms of technology, I hope they should embrace the future technology of IT (with minimize cost since a lot of opensource are now made available).

[@nikolaydubina]

+1 super important benefit of this - scaling complexity! not just reducing software and hardware cost, but also building more complex things!

[@flyte9844]

This is not for big industries imo but would be perfect for any small business who wants to control monitor and visualise their operations !! very cool !

[@flyte9844]

companies are getting creative with the high performance chip shortage 😂👍

[@alanjkarmahesh8703]

Great content as always. This is surely going to open the highway for upcoming industry 4.0

[@realpars]

Thank you, Alanjkar!

[@Rafaelguitarplayer]

Reading the comments on this one makes me realise that not everyone is ready for changes. I saw this PLC a few months ago, there's no much material about it on internet since it's still "fresh". (or it's just a bad marketing, idk) thought was a very good concept, modernizing PLC's is something that i have discussed with colleagues over the years. On the last decade a lot of new technologies were introduced to the public and got accepted around the globe, google's material design have changed the way we look to GUI's, it even changed the way we interact with apps and websites. I rather use an minimalist material gauge today to display a range for frequency/speed than those ugly clock objects of HMI's from the past, for example. It's time to PLC's to embrace things like MQTT right out of the box, without having to buy extra modules. Interfaces for programming plc's should be clear and easy to use. Today you can build your own broker, database and scada using free reliable solutions, with a webapp interface you can go full linux without the need to use proprietary softwares on windows to program devices. A few tweaks and you can have a VM/cloud based application running on centOS or other distro. Weidmuller should add in the future ladder, SFC and ST to the toolbox. Nice video, realpars.

[@tommyhuffman7499]

Linux is the future in my opinion. PLCs no longer serve a purpose. Your average laborer is more likely to relate to high-level code than ladder logic.

[@drewbert83]

Wake me up when they have PL-E safety control

[@fltfathin]

@@tommyhuffman7499 PLCs have one purpose left: driving the actual switches

[@tommyhuffman7499]

@@fltfathin PC's do this with IO modules. PLC's are often still reserved for safety devices, though.

[@ericbenjaminjr]

I just got my hands on one, IT IS AMAZING! But it seems you're right, they didn't invest a healthy marketing budget. They were ahead of their time on this but they didn't persevere! It seems they've already abandoned this project and moved on to something different called u-os. But it's just not the same. But it IS an amazing company! You wouldn't believe the level and quality of support, you can even call it customer nurture. I've been advocating for a relaunch of this project, and it has not fallen on deaf ears. And you are so right, if they add ladder, SFC and ST to the toolbox I will ditch CODESYS and never use another PLC.

[@deadeye1982a]

This is interesting for didactic systems. Actually, it's very hard to get a Siemens PLC. The other benefit is that all dev-tools are hosted on the PLC itself. Not to require a software installation, is a giant step forward, specially for schools and education centers. For example, my next task in Munich is to update all Desktop-PCs + installing Tia v17.

[@realpars]

Thanks for sharing that, Andre!

[@HanggliderDelta]

TIA v17 has a new useless programming language called CEM. And now TIA v18 is out. Happy update!

[@deadeye1982a]

@@HanggliderDelta I haven't looked at that yet. I probably never will.

[@reverz3]

@@HanggliderDelta I could imagine CEM being somewhat neat for Safety, but as I currently need JMP instructions for conditional MOVEs, I don't think it'll happen anytime soon.. that's what it must feel like programming PLCs in the 1990s

[@HanggliderDelta]

​@@reverz3 Yes it is very likely the inspiration was a programmable safety PLC. But as I saw on the SIE's promo video their small program was too large for monitoring in 100% view. Even if another large company paid the bill they spent too much effort for nothing. LAD would be enough for Safety or FBD. Yes I know CEM is powerfull when you have to do x from y type logic. I would be very happy if they would improve their SCL.

[@kaviyarasukathiresan5473]

after the frimware update to U-OS in uc20 wl2000 ac i can't login to the controller can you help me with it

[@realpars]

Hi there, To ensure that this issue is addressed promptly and accurately, I kindly suggest reaching out to the vendor or place where you purchased the controller. They are likely to have the expertise and resources to provide you with the necessary assistance to resolve this matter.

[@kaviyarasukathiresan5473]

@@realpars ok

[@yojojo3000]

With Allen-Bradley Studio 5000/RsLogix 5000 PLCs, you already have a very minimalistic setup. All you need is the PLC, any cheap laptop w/ Ethernet Port, and an Ethernet Cable. It also provides impenetrable security from internet-based attacks (since it requires a direct connection to modify anything within the PLC). However, I wouldn’t be opposed to a modernization and/or unification of the programs used for them. The current ones we have are fairly outdated and complicated, and could use a little more automation in some of the processes, as well as some polish. There is value in the complexity of our current PLCs, don’t get me wrong. Understanding why things work the way they do in a PLC is invaluable if you’re aiming to be any sort of electrician, whether it be for a job or as a hobby, and most PLCs follow very similar logic that can make you very versatile as an Electrical Controls Engineer. However, I must stress that the same level of learning can be acquired with a modernized and/or unified version of the programs if you account for it in some way. Custom and/or Premade Simulations, Premade Troubleshooting Guides, etc. all can help to teach the quirks of PLCs and electric work, all while offering an easier medium for beginners to work with and start with. I mean, look at the Arduino community. It practically grew itself! There’s potential here for similar love and support. Someone just needs to do it and work things out with these other companies.

[@Morberis]

You DO know that you can change things over the network right? At my plant we never need to hook directly up to our new Allen Bradley PLC's.

[@eduturk9]

@@Morberis yeah if the machines are connected to a network with internet access, you can access from anywhere in the world and make changes, the only safety would be the key to put the plc in "run mode" and not "program mode"

[@KevinLauscher]

"With Allen-Bradley Studio 5000/RsLogix 5000 PLCs, you already have a very minimalistic setup." and a multi thousand dollar license and the time to install the development tools on your cheap laptop

[@yojojo3000]

@@KevinLauscher Geez, I didn’t realize the license was that expensive. Probably because the company usually pays for that. Thanks for the heads-up. Regardless, that’s a one-time installation. Once you have the program and the license, it is rarely ever an issue again. 2-3K for a standard-level license doesn’t even sound that bad, actually. It’s VERY petty, yes, but jobs these days that require you to work with PLCs typically offer enough pay to pay for the program in around 3-4 paychecks (assuming you aren’t living paycheck-to-paycheck). The rest is profit.

[@RogerGarrett]

Technology marches on. Many decades ago, when PLCs were still "programmed" by plugging actual hardware logic modules into a physical control panel, I joined a small startup company that wanted to move that type of programming onto IBM PC ATs. The idea was not to develop a new "computer language" for PLC programming but rather to simply replace all the hardware with a PC-based graphical interface that looked just like that existing hardware, logic module, approach, and the logic itself would run directly on the PC, no need for all that physical hardware logic modules. The idea was that so many PLC programmers (the people) knew how to program PLCs via the direct hardware approach, moving them over to a computer-based graphical interface that mirrored their existing knowledge, and that would let the simulate and test out their PLC programs before actually putting them into production, our product would be a huge success. Well, no. I spent the good part of a year developing the drag-and-drop graphical user interface (and this was before graphical user interfaces were common) for the IBM PC AT. Had a lot of it working. Even showed it off at the year's NCC (National Computer Conference, remember those?) to a select group of potential clients/ investors. But the "money man", the fellow whose idea this whole project was, never raised a penny to support the effort. And the hardware guy, whose job was to design a fairly simple circuit board to plug into the IBM PC AT to interface to the PLCs, never got the board working.. So, the whole project never went anywhere. Just fizzled out. The same destination as millions of other startups. And a few years later some companies began developing actual programming languages designed specifically for programming PLCs. So, MAYBE our product would have had a few years of sales but would eventually have been overtaken by the full software approach. [ sigh ]

[@HanggliderDelta]

Sad. But heads up since then they are following the wrong path. :-)

[@realpars]

Hi Roger, Thank you very much for sharing this, very insightful! We would love to get in touch with you, feel free to send us a short email over to [e-mail] mentioning that you come from this comment on KZbin. Thank you again, and happy learning!

[@DjSashaWaksOfficial]

Hi, can you program using ST, SCL for example inside the program?

[@realpars]

For developing real-time applications, you can only use Function Block Diagram and, as you will see in our next video, you can also use Node-RED to develop Industrial IoT applications.

[@ZohaibJahan]

How about the prices? As compared to AB? Siemens? And spares availability in MEA region?

[@realpars]

Hi Zohaib, Thanks for your comment! For price comparison, feel free to check out our MarketPlace marketplace.realpars.com/. You are then also able to see if we ship to your country of residence, as we do ship to a variety of countries in the MEA region.

[@alphab5543]

Wow! Many thanks!!!

[@realpars]

You're welcome!

[@DCuniversalable]

Does it have a separated CPU for web/vizualization and PLC, or if someone tries to DDoS web page it will crash the PLC CPU also? I see it also as a security vulnerability... I don't need licenses...ok i get that...but be real, a lot of income goes also from licensing, and if they make it "free" they just add more profit to the HW, so the customer will pay it anyway. I agree that easy small project can be cheaper with that...but it's not a real "future of PLC programming", it just moved classical FBD programming from single applications to the web browser... :) But i think that it is a really good idea for schools/starters with automatization. The students don't need to install and get licences only for few weeks/months and also even low end PC can run it. :)

[@realpars]

Hi Jakub, Thanks for your comment! Yes - the first CPU is only assigned to the plc-application. Everything else (included the Engineering or “Edit” environment of the plc application) works on the 2nd CPU. In case of problems during the engineering period, the running plc application won’t be affected.

[@WeidmuellerGlobal]

Hi Jakub, u-control web provides 2 cores with clearly separated tasks. The first is assigned to the plc, the 2nd for IoT and EDGE functionality. And to your second question: Nevertheless you will get a PLC with a top price performance ratio and without any sw maintenance fee, afterwards.

[@kiranchoudhari4717]

Thank you team realpar , after trained in Low code programming can I provide online solution to the industries where I can give solution to them.. as per requirement industrial automation

[@johnkost2514]

Is this a 'bumpless' deploy or does it restart the scanning/solving?

[@realpars]

Hi John, Thanks for your question! The controller stops when the real-time application is deployed, so it is not a "bumpless" deploy. Hope this helps!

[@samanmudannayaka9604]

Can you program using ladder logic with this?

[@realpars]

Hi Saman, Thank you for your comment! The controller doesn't support Ladder Diagram. For developing real-time applications, you can only use Function Block Diagram and, as you will see in our next video, you can also use Node-RED to develop Industrial IoT applications. Happy learning

[@samanmudannayaka9604]

@@realpars Sorry to hear that. I think this is an overlook by Weidmuller. You need to include ladder logic for professional PLC guys to take this product on, but I guess you are not targetting that market.

[@jumeldipancaputra87]

does it has such an API to be access by Javascript or Python programming?

[@realpars]

Hi Jumeldi, Thanks for your comment! Not, yet - it’s planned to the next generation end of 2023

[@CaseyJScalf]

Why is everything in industrial automation so expensive? The Starter Kit shown is listed for about $1,400 and in reality you can do basically everything with a modern Arduino board that would cost maybe $150 out the door with all the parts. Is it because of all the certifications? Are there heavy tariffs involved? Or maybe it's space grade plastic or something? Genuinely curious though. These things are great but hard to justify for projects, or learning, with such a steep price tag.

[@reverz3]

most industrial equipment is just built more reliable and to run for years to decades, there's still Siemens controllers from the 90s in factories through Europe and they are already pushing 25 years of 24/7 operation. Plus you do get faster processing, easier programming with superb online debugging, device intercompatibility and standardisation, easy access to HMIs and optional redundancy with the heavy low-level-lifting all done for you already try bending an Arduino to what a modern PLC like a S7-1500 can do and you'll see how that price tag is justified for actual factories, where people's jobs depend on plants running. For playing around.. well you can get slightly older controllers or scavenge eBay for used ones, but the current silicon shortage makes your situation quite dire.

[@realpars]

Hi Casey, This is an excellent and really important question. I don't speak for Weidmueller on this topic, but my understanding of why industrial components are priced the way they are is as follows: First, it is expensive to source the components that go into a PLC. Remember that a manufacturer has to guarantee that these components will be available for a long time for maintenance reasons. You can buy an Arduino today for $100, but could you buy that same Arduino in 15 years to replace a faulty one? Probably not, and that guarantee adds something to the price tag. Second, as you have mentioned, it is expensive to make components suitable for industrial environments and to certify that components are suitable for industrial environments. Most controllers have some level of ingress protection, vibration protection, heat protection, and use well-tested solid-state components. An Arduino might be able to operate in an industrial environment, but no one has done the long-term tests to prove it and no one running a factory would put an untested component into a production environment without being confident that it would work. Finally, there are the sales volumes to consider. An Arduino is cheap because once the R&D is done, they will sell millions of boards to the general population to recoup their cost. With industrial controllers, the sales volumes are lower so the unit price has to be higher to recoup the R&D costs. It's unfortunate that industrial components can be expensive for end users, but the prices are justified by the costs that manufacturers face when developing and producing these components. Thanks, Ken

[@michaelstanley1112]

function block and ladder programming is low code anyway. PLC is made for non-engineer to use easily. PLC programming is a programming method that engineer made so that they are not required to look after the system. But a web-based platform is a good plus, otherwise more features shown in vid already exist is other programs.

[@andrei4311]

Thanks. But i didnt get where here a benefits in compare to the others (Siemens, Beckhoff etc...). Code should be written and maintained. Still you need Operators, Programmers, Electricians...

[@saikrishnajakkinabogina9992]

Please post the videos of Codesys

[@realpars]

Glad to hear your anticipation for our CODESYS course :)!

[@IngDzib]

Many thanks !! 👍

[@realpars]

Our pleasure!

[@MellexLabs]

So to be honest it all looks good I like the product... but I am having a hard time understanding what low code means here... technically the only thing that sets this apart from the likes of Siemens is the fact you can program on a web based system. FBD is still a programming language supported by IEEE standards... technically. So please enlighten me what low code means ... I just haven't seem to get it yet from this video...

[@mVic8]

It seems like low-code programming is inferring more of a GUI drag and drop environment vs more “raw” forms of writing logic. Like Visual Basic or NodeRED is to C++. Maybe “less-code” would be more apt to describe it, albeit harder to market. I’m new to PLC programming and this seems much more approachable than the standard ladder logic I’m used to. Although Realpars didn’t show it, I’m assuming there’s a hidden tab somewhere that shows the “raw” Logic (which allows the program to meet existing IEEE standard). It’s probably just obfuscated from the user, so they only see the the simple parts of the software.

[@John-xeyvfkwieba]

I think the phrase "low code" was meant to underscore the web based "no code" required to buy or install on your local network. I don't actually think it meant, "no code programming".

[@aleksandersuur9475]

Low code means you can't do much with it before it becomes a unmanageable spaghetti mess. Convenient for very simple, but only very simple tasks, at first sight of complexity it breaks. It's an age old reinvented wheel, COBOL was initially written with idea that business managers would write their business logic tasks themselves without needing to convey their requirements to programmers. The same idea gets rehashed again and again and it's always shit. The only place where I have seen "low code" work is safety controllers, restricting you from doing anything remotely complex is the intention and the goal there, you must create the safety logic within very limiting restrictions so that you can't mess it up.

[@MellexLabs]

@@mVic8 If the main objective for low code could be that it represents a graphical drag and drop, then sure this achieves that, however I do believe that it is a misnomer to place purely graphical interfaces into low code, the reason being that I have worked extensively with Labview and it is by far not the easiest nor by any means an example of low code due to it's complexity from start to finish. Good luck on your new adventure with PLCs, you will no doubt have a lot of fun with it, but be prepare for a world of frustration as well.

[@MellexLabs]

@@John-xeyvfkwieba So why not call it, no install instead? "code" does not need to be text like languages such as C/C++ or Python, can also be graphical such as Scratch or Labview, neither of these languages mentioned (including FBD) I would consider a low code approach, they are all very capable languages. If I had to put low code into perspective from my point of view, I think it would have to be something like prepared functional blocks that do specific tasks (like NodeRed) and also can be extended with code if you wanted, but the average user has the chance to "configure" a system from prebuilt blocks, and not actually code it (the code is usually generated for you in the backend). Technologies like Domain Specific Languages and NodeRed really do achieve this I think, whether it is in natural language or graphical that is irrelevant.

[@8ZER08]

Never a browser page will be the same functions of a specific station software

[@jaedson-barbosa]

You are dead wrong.

[@tommays56]

I can see this coming in handy as in my BIG company IT is remote and makes it difficult to install and support PLC software that is relatively rare company wide

[@HanggliderDelta]

After 14 years I think I have to re orient myself. PLC programmers were never considered themselwes as real programmers. Industry wanted easy programming languages and low quality staff because of "rapid" development. So ladder diagrams, function blocks etc has born. New standards and programming languages were develpoed without some good working basic concepts of traditional programming languages. Siemens thrown away variables and worshiped pure memory addresses with tags (it were not much than a name for a specific address). And Siemens is a world leader by the way. Then Siemens was proud to be able to use optimized blocks and variables and tried to convince its "programmers" to not afraid of not knowing the address of a variable. By the way if I am looking into the future of low code will be a very short meaningles time period before solutions based on chat GPT... And that will hit on german industy IT sector as Tesla hit automotive industry with its new idea like giga press.

[@KimForsberg]

Didn't think I'd ever hear anyone call essentially IEC 61131-3 function blocks as "Low Code Future of PLC Programming"... considering its age. It's certainly a nice interface though.

[@manuelweirather3666]

Cant see any application for this - sry. Seems like it is "solving" a problem you just made up: You cant use it for complex machine, but this type has your said problem. You use it for simple stuff and this type wont have this problem that much (at least it shouldnt). Such simple machines are mostly bug-free when shipping and 99% of the time noone ever need to change the code after that. Additionally I ask myself if it is even possible to save a project to transfer them to other machines? Also if you add some things for a new machine version (add 1 more output card for example) can you even use your "old" code to adapt? And since you moved all things into your controller (so you dont need a powerfull pc to program), it it save to assume, you need more powerfull controllers now, so instead of buying a more expensive pc ONE time, i need to buy a more expensive pls controller for EVERY machine?

[@realpars]

Hey, thanks for input Manuel. Maybe this system is not relevant for you or your specific use case, but companies like Boreal Light are getting value from the system. They sell a machine that is getting better over time and since this controller is easy to use with no license fees, they can use local contractors to deploy updates and service the machines. Many OEMs are also experimenting with service contracts that include periodic updates of machine software to provide new value-added features and updates. To answer the second part of your question: yes, you can export code from one controller and import it to another as a starting point for a copy or look-alike project. Hope this answers your question sufficiently.

[@Ariel438]

If I owned a company, I would never entrust my code to another company. It's giving them a lot of power.

[@arbjful]

Rockwell studio 5000 is so expensive, I couldn’t afford it. Siemens is somewhat affordable

[@DP-es7xd]

But if I have to programm in low code I will quite my job. And in the end you will pay more for your hardware becouse you can't change your plc like in codesys.

[@urvhalt]

Low code??? Visual representation of code, is code... regarding the amount of code it seems to be no difference. Would be more interesting if it was config only in the default scope, and had autogenerated or associated visualizations, warnings, alarms, statistics, on the same object. The configurator - not the programmer - should select a start-stop-thingy, not an SR-latch, nether an JK-flip-flop :)

[@giftofhealing6207]

nice

[@realpars]

Thank you!

[@mortenhundevad]

this have very limited usages, and no usage in most automation, very few automations are "simple"

[@estudiomixiluminacao4689]

Show 👍 👍 👍 👍

[@tommyhuffman7499]

Security vulnerabilities. PLC programming languages were invented for a specific reason that has lost relevance in our day. Many PLC platforms (Siemens and Beckhoff) require a certain level of PC programming knowledge. Some PLCs already depend on the developer to make the tools useful for troubleshooting (Step 7). And with companies wanting more and more data tracking, the move to PC based controls is the only sensible solution.

[@realpars]

Hi Tommy, Thanks for sharing your perspective. At RealPars, we have a slightly different opinion which I would like to share with you. PLCs (and their programming languages) exist because most people working in industrial automation are not computer programmers and need an easy programming language to implement control applications with. PLCs are also important because PLC operating systems are more reliable and less vulnerable than PC operating systems. This situation hasn't changed recently and you can argue it has actually gotten worse with mass retirements creating a talent shortage in the manufacturing industry and high-profile cyber attacks creating pressure on companies to take security vulnerabilities more seriously. For these reasons, we think the controller-based applications will remain relevant for the foreseeable future and that the solution to companies wanting more data will be connected controllers which can send data to the cloud via OPC-UA or bespoke cloud connectors. It's also worth noting that the u-mation platform is programmed through a web browser but the actual application runs on a controller like a traditional PLC. Sorry if that wasn't clear from the video.

[@tommyhuffman7499]

@@realpars Interesting perspective. Thanks for the clarification about the code not being housed in the cloud. While I agree that most people can't program advanced applications or databases, I think the only benefit to ladder logic is that it is typically much easier for troubleshooting, due to the colors telling you what's active or not. There's no reason you couldn't implement this on a PC-based controller. It just takes some initial design work from the development team. PLC's do have more stable operating systems, but many industrial controlled machines use Linux or QNX or other operating systems designed to run on PC architecture, yet control automation. This unreliability of PC architecture and operating systems, compared to that of PLC's, would change if the industry created higher demand for industrial PC's. It will take work to train someone to program controllers no matter what system is used. The whole point of PLC programming languages was to give techs a starting point. I think many new techs now, and even more in five or ten years, will find it easier to look at high-level scripting languages (thanks to Minecraft, Scratch, Python, etc that are accessible and interesting to today's kids) than ladder logic diagrams, which are rarely even used by technicians in our day. It may be that PLC's hang around, but it will be due to fear of change, not because they serve a real purpose. As for the current trend: Many machines already use C-based code in industry and PLC makers produce industrial PC's. Companies slowly are trending towards structured text (over LAD or FBD), and Beckhoff PLC code looks more like high-level PC code. There are even companies that program entirely in statement list for Siemens. My point is the market is already divided on ladder logic vs PC-similar languages, and the trend is to move slowly to more and more PC-similar code, in large-part due to the tech revolution of our time. I hope you don't take the difference of opinion as a critique on your video. You produce some of the best training videos for industrial controls out there. I often review them to dive deeper into a new topic or review a familiar topic. You clearly have a skilled team in terms of technical-knowledge and production quality. Thanks for producing them! And thanks for taking the time to review my comment.

[@matthewharrison8531]

Learn C

[@aussiegruber86]

Well Allen Bradley will work out a way to sell this

[@Shredxcam22]

Everyone should just move to C.....

[@tommyhuffman7499]

100% agree that this will be and should be the future.

[@chudchadanstud]

If only it wasn't so unsafe.

[@chudchadanstud]

@@Shredxcam22 As in you can easily, write code with memory leaks, page faults, segmentation faults, etc. There is a reason why there the current PLC languages don't allow you to do recursion and why references are recommended above pointers. The current IEC languages enforce safety. They are also very good at catching memory leaks if you decide to go down the dynamic route. Live updates are also important, C doesn't support this or ensuring safety with C is very difficult. Without OOP (Constructors/Destructors aka FB_init/FB_exit) doing RAII is difficult too. Also why do you think so many are ditching C for Rust and Go?

[@chudchadanstud]

@@Shredxcam22 Nobody is pushing to write the Linux kernel in Fortran. Linux kernel and Embedded system overall are pushing Rust due to its safety. The server space is pushing for Go because of Go routines. Go is very good at concurrency. If you genuinely spent some time with C you'd know it's a bad idea to use it in Industrial Automation.

[@decomoraes]

I'll stay with Rust

[@aleemsafdar2120]

Better in terms of usability but will not be suitable for large scale and complex program development.

[@aleksandersuur9475]

Meh... automating simple tasks isn't the challenge anyway, the problem is how to automate complex tasks, web based ide is a bit optimistic for true software development. Also, need to think a bit about itsec, automation doesn't get updated, systems run for years or even decades as they were, of course they are supremely vulnerable to all sorts of malware if they are ever exposed to it. So the solution is to not expose it, best network connection is no network connection, second best is absolute minimum traffic that must pass through for essential functionality. For a automation controller to be a webserver accessible from all over with wifi devices like phones and tablets.... that's a recipe for disaster.

[@realpars]

Hi Aleksander, Thanks for the comment! The traditional way to ensure that control systems are safe from cyber-attacks is to keep them off of networks. In modern times, there are some drivers that lead manufacturers to want to have more connected control systems. Most manufacturers that we speak to now want their control system connected to a network so that OEMs can provide remote support, the manufacturer can capture data from the control system to drive decision-making, and control systems can leverage modern technology like web-based visualizations on mobile devices. To meet these market demands, innovative companies like Weidmueller are building products that can be connected securely to networks. You are correct that there is a risk involved in connecting industrial control systems to a network, but there is also a cost for manufacturers not connecting their control systems to networks including extended downtimes and lost production due to inefficient operations.

[@joga_bonito_aro]

If anyone is still using LAD or FBD and calls this industry 4.0... you're doing it wrong

[@marcellegtenberg4898]

It's not low-code at all, it's just web-based PLC coding.

[@rockyrivermushrooms529]

Looks like an absolute abomination to me. Im sure it has its uses.

[@leom8605]

Low-code is an old failed outdated idea when programming languages were slow, it's certainly not the future.

[@ericbenjaminjr]

What does that even mean? Low-code environments weren't even possible when programming languages were slow. Because, well ... programming languages were too .. slow. Right?