Open Source vs PLC. Can We Have BOTH? NOT Arduino and Raspberry Pi

Traditional PLC languages are ladder logic, function blocks, and structured text but what if you want to do more than these languages offer?
Helping you become a better technician so you will always be in demand
Get the full details of this lesson at courses.twcontrols.com/
Items used in this video:
PLC Trainer twcontrols.com/plc-trainers
The above links make these videos possible. Please use them!
Subscribe to our Main channel for How To's kzbin.info...
Subscribe to our 2nd Channel for Quick Tips www.youtube.com/@TimWilborne2...
Support these videos while you advance your skills courses.twcontrols.com/

[@roastedpeanuts77]

PLC + IIOT is the future! It still seems like there is a steep learning curve though. And there are also 100 different ways to solve the same problem. Open source may be the solution

[@TimWilborne]

Maybe but I think that is a lot of people's objection. There are 100s of different languages you can write in on an open source PLC and then 100s of different ways to code it. It makes keeping the machine running much more difficult.

[@isharp32]

​@@TimWilborne For sure there are different options. This is not uncommon in the software world. And, I realize this is not the software world and we are talking OT. Keep in mind, many of the high-level language blocks and Open Source packages will not need to be accessed from a tech. These are defined operations, similar to a block you would use in Studio5000. You don't see how the sausage is made, but you know what you put in and you see what you get out.

[@TimWilborne]

Yes but you're putting the long-term reliability of a machine operating on the faith that the sausage programmer did a good job. The technicians have to be able to understand it from one end to the other

[@lawrencesawicki2292]

Good luck trying to get that same COTS/hobbyist hardware and the same version software some 10 years from now. For IOT it may cut it for the application. For a factory floor...I would not use it. How many E&I peeps know how to get around in a Linux box running CodeSys? Open source also means support for older hardware may go out the window, and how will you manage that "upgrade"? Who do you call for help when you have a problem with that stuff too?

[@TimWilborne]

Very good points Lawrence.

[@isharp32]

This is a very very good point!! I would contend that PLCnext is not hobbyist hardware, but for sure there is the Raspberry Pi and associated devices that 100% fall into this camp. Will they be around and be backward compatible in 10 years... who knows. But, This is actually the reason I look at Open PLC as the decoupling of the hardware from the software. This way, in the future, you could run the PLC Runtime (and associated processes if needed) on different hardware. Yes, it may not be 1:1 in Hardware, but it would be way more accessible to buy a new controller that is "blank" to use an OLD PLC runtime vs trying to find a discontinued traditional PLC from years ago. Now, this open topic does not come with its own challenges. Yes, you would need to find hardware that already has the Open PLC Runtime installed or DIY. And, yes, many techs may not have this ability. But, this could be completed by a system admin or programmer which then would make it easier to get that processor to get the system up and running. Once its up and running, then the tech could maintain the system. I see it as trading one problem for another. They are both challenge in different ways. If you can find the PLC hardware, 100% this is the fastest road to getting a machine up and running. But if you cant, this could be a solution. This combined with other new advancements such as 3D printing in facilities for replacement parts, DIY machine maintenance could be a growing trend for the future. But, I think Tim would have a better handle on this than my self :)

[@lewsut]

Isn't the Arduino Portenta range industrial rated?

[@TimWilborne]

I think they have to do more than simply making an industrial rated version to get manufacturing to adopt it but I'm definitely one of the people on the fence.

[@lewsut]

@@TimWilborne it's a pretty secure hardcore unit, I'm an infrastructure automation engineer and use full fat PLCs, but if I were machine building still I'd look at micros.

[@-iIIiiiiiIiiiiIIIiiIi-]

And their PLC IDE is NOT open source.

[@sosayweall1952]

Open plc is great for learning the basics. Perfect for those of us who can't dump a few hundred dollars on a real plc and software. The virtual hmi is nice too as you can openly adjust stuff live without the need to re upload the program to the hmi.

[@TimWilborne]

That is a very valid point. My only concern is that if you learn on it, then you are more than likely to use it in an industrial environment where it doesn't have the additional hardness needed to be reliable.

[@isharp32]

@@TimWilborne With this type of Platform, you get the PLC and an Open Linux device. On the PLC side, you can still use standard programming methods including Ladder Diagrams, Structured Text, Function Block, etc. The other side of Openness is the ability to exchange the runtime and leverage the Hardware. IMO this is the key to the Open Automation topic, separating the Hardware and Software. This way you can leverage the platform that works best for you/ your system. But, not be accountable to the supply chain and/or limited hardware set of an OEM.

[@JoeWaZoo1_Geeks_Rule]

How many people find Linux to be so easy that Grandma can run it? Ubuntu is close, but still not the same as Gates little OS. I once taught someone how to use CoDeSys on Vendor A products. Customer then went and bought some cheap RasperryPI devices to run it on those, and had the guts to call me for help on his CoDeSys on the Pi. For $35 for the cost of the Pi, how long could one afford to support that. This stuff is great for the home hobbyist, but I would sure be weary of running my manufacturing plant on some open source device. Hey, have this Product Marketing Manager do a short video on the device on how to take an digital Input and fire an Output in Ladder and Structured text. Make him do the whole demo, no one else... This should prove the ease, or not.... I teach 100% by doing!

[@TimWilborne]

Zach is pretty sharp. He will probably take us up on it.

[@isharp32]

Zach is sharp and I am sure he would do it. But you bring up a VERY GOOD POINT about what does support looks like in an open world. And, we may need to find our footing here a bit. Look, calling you for support for CoDeSys running on an RPi is kinda crazy, but it clearly happened. I think in the OT space we just need to get more comfortable with the topic and where the boundaries are. Similar to the IT space, there are lines of where things can be supported and can't. Yep, you installed CoDeSys and it booted up. But, it's not working within your application... Everything needs to be evaluated, not just the code. This is no different than running Adoby Photoshop on a Dell computer and having compatibility issues IT would need to solve. Please don't take this comment the wrong way. I realize the application of a PLC and Photoshop are different. I am only pointing out that Hardware and Software, when decoupled provide great power but it also introduces other support vectors. This just needs to be considered in the future.

[@handdancin]

"Ardrino" 😂

[@sferrari81]

They just keep saying it.

[@emilgasimov3636]

Why bring plc to cloud ;)🤦🏻‍♂️

[@lalchandra4590]

I think I will never see a openDCS . 🤣🤣🤣

[@TimWilborne]

Never say never 😆

[@isharp32]

LOL, You know, I thought the same thing. But, there is actually a project from the Open Group called "Open Process Automation Forum", OPAF for short. This is focused on an Open Source DCS using standard hardware and decoupled software for DCS operations. The thought here is because DCS is so wide in scope, they are also very slow to adopt new tech and there is massive vendor lock within these systems. So, looking at this in a different way future systems may be able to leverage an open platform. There are several test beds with this running including ExxonMobil, BASF, Georgia Pacific, and others. Interesting times, that's for sure.

[@TimWilborne]

@@isharp32 Interesting, I'll have to check it out.

[@davebrown6915]

Yet to be convinced by Open PLC systems. While I am all for improvements in both hardware and software systems it would seem that the OT CyberSecurity risk can only increase with ever more open systems and the desire, whether needed or not, to connect everything with everything.

[@TimWilborne]

This would make for a very good discussion and Ira Sharp has some great insights into this subject

[@isharp32]

Hey Dave, This is a very valid point... Security is a top priority. Now, I would contend that any system regardless if it uses "Open PLCs" or traditional PLCs needs to have the same attention to Security. An OT system's most common security vulnerabilities are weak credentials, unintended internal "human vulnerabilities," and unpatched software. While the Open PLC system with multiple software deployments could cause some concern, there is a much larger topic to consider. I am not gonna lie, this is a tuff topic that is a moving target. But, this is why personally, I look at the blend of IT and OT with an ownership stake with someone "in the middle" that understands the needs of IT policy but also the demands of the OT system. This is because the answer to this security topic will evolve and will be someplace in between the IT and OT requirements and demands. My 2 cents... but, truly great point Dave!

[@mw3blackopsglitches]

What's the cost of plc and software I think that's all we care about haha.

[@TimWilborne]

Good grief no, at least not if you want to keep the people who have to keep it running happy.

[@RadDadisRad]

Googles Android vs Apple iOS.

[@TimWilborne]

Android all the way 🤣