The PLC Is Dead ? Industrial Digitalization Era

Is PLC Dead ? Industrial Digitalization Era
Instagram: noumanofficialvlogs
There is buzz out there, PLC or programmable logic controller will die soon…. What my view on that today’s video is all about that..
With advancement in industrial IOT , industry 4.0 and Industrial digitization , some people believe it will soon kill PLC, as edge server( Computer PC with high specification RAM and redundancy features,) implementations are on rise.
PLCs are, and will continue to be used heavily in industrial sectors, automation, manufacturing, and public infrastructure (like wastewater treatment, electric utilities, gas utilities, traffic control systems, bridge and railroad controls, etc). PLCs are a popular option because of a few key points
1: PLC Technology is rapidly improving, latest PLC from siemens, Rockwell, GE are other brands like PLC next made cloud connectivity so easy than ever.
2: They are robust to withstand harsh environments commonly found in an industrial setting, such as widely varying temperatures, humidity, electromagnetic interference (EMI) noise, current flows, and shocks and vibration. Most PC based systems would not stand well in this kind of environment.
3: PLCs are dedicated controllers meant to run the specific application code for the machines task and in real time. In a PC based system, there may be a delay from when an input is given, until a desired output is achieved. A PLC is meant to process information in real-time and adjust or react to the process very quickly, usually within milliseconds (mS). In a motion controlled or process controlled environment, missing an input or not actuating an output in time could mean the end of a critical manufacturing process, loss of profits, life, or a major event like a fire, overflow of a tank, or an explosion.
4: PLCs do not freeze up like PCs do. The PLC is meant to just loop through all of the code endlessly and is dedicated to that specific task. PLCs may halt due to a major or minor error, that may stop the processor from executing code (this is usually due to poor programming, such as a math overflow, infinite loop, watchdog scantime error, or buffer overflow). When this halt happens, there is other code that can be programmed to help properly shut down the process in a safe manner.
5: The PLC does the dirty work on the manufacturing floor or an industrial environment, the SCADA server or PC sits in a nice clean Server room/
6: PLCs will continue to remain popular because a large sum on the code is written in ladder logic and is very familiar with most of the technicians and electricians that can read ladder logic and electrical blueprints. It gives them enough of a tool to go online with a processor with at least read access and troubleshoot why a process is not working, such as seeing a sensor is not on or a motor contactor is not starting. It is more cost effective to have a team of technicians rather than full time engineers to open the program every time there is a problem. PLCs support is also heavily invested in by various manufacturers of industrial hardware, such as supporting add on code and instructions and drivers to specific PLCs.
Finally, depending on the model you chose, some PLCs may be very economical and cost effective for controlling a small machine rather than the cost of paying 5-10 times more for a PC based system, that would also require additional hardware to interface with hardwired IO systems.

[@microdesigns2000]

Every, and I mean EVERY time I've seen a PC in an industrial environment, it has always resulted in disaster. Examples include hard drive failures, OS unsupported (DOS, Windows 95/2000, Win XP, Win XP, Win7), plenty of instances of non-embedded operating systems and software titles with memory leaks, dynamic memory usage resulting in out of memory errors, OS corruptions, operators fiddling with the OS, PC software mistakes (which are much harder to fix than PLC logic mistakes) , hardware failures (because motherboards are not robust), compatibility problems and connector issues. The two most important issues that will never (and I don't use that word lightly) be solved are compatibility and restoration after a major problem. 1. As for compatibility, PCs are nearly as bad as cellphones in being able to get a 1-for-1 replacement. Nothing but trouble comes when replacing a PC with different BIOS and hardware specs and OS. Surely there will be something wrong. 2. As for restoration, most plants resort to some kind of hard drive image or backup. Making regular backups of an OS that is having compounding problems is a losing battle. Very very few machine builders who use a PC where a PLC should be used are also smart enough to provide installation media and complete recovery documentation. I have seen this where PCs are used in the medical and pharma industries, regulated by the FDA. I am sick at the thought of my own customers who specified PC's, because I know they are doomed to eventual failure. I provided good documentation. But will they think to look at the owner's manual, or find the DVDs I left in the pocket? And nowadays I work at a factory with around 30 PC's on the floor. I can't tell you exactly how it is, but let's just say, curse the engineer who has the gall to use a PC instead of a PLC. If you are trying to decide, I plead with you. Don't use a PC for control. MAYBE use a Beckhoff, but prefer to use one of their PLC shaped computers and choose an embedded OS. Remember, if you use an OS, it is going to be obsolete next year. Who will pay the price for your mistake? AB, Siemens, Omron, Automation Direct, all provide support for even their oldest operating systems. Who supports the PC OS when it goes obsolete? You do. Or your customer does. I can tell you, you will not remember settings you used to get your system functioning properly unless you document like crazy. But if you use a decent PLC, you only need to know the PLC firmware version used. No, no, PCs suck in the industrial environment, avoid them like the plague.

[@diegoestebandagatti4150]

I'm completly in agreement with you sr. You've said all

[@adamhaney9447]

Keep telling people that so we can take more of the Beckhoff market.

[@MaNemUmar]

Operations and maintenance crews have a hard enough time troubleshooting programs written in ladder (despite the fact that the PLC was literally built and focused with electromechanics and electro technicians in mind). Now imagine phasing that out with systems implemented using modern, more software development-oriented programs. Little to no people will bother interacting with that system. People who make such statements either work in operations that have the privilege of taking on many PLC/systems programmers(architects) or have no idea of your average manufacturing plant's environment, where technical expertise is usually overworked, or unavailable mostly. Long live the PLC!

[@ThiagodMoraes]

Great video, agree with everything you said. Keep it up!!

[@wesmondcheng8618]

I think that engineers of the future will use both Edge Control and PLCs together in varying degrees. Each have their own costs and benefits. Sure Edge Control will take more market share from PLCs, but overall, there will be more IoT devices increasing over time exponentially, be it servers, edge control, PLCs... Automation on the whole is a rising tide

[@ITandAutomationAcademy]

100 % agreed

[@user-tp9cu6hq9k]

i think the PLC's will always remain due to their durability but the Scada needs alot of improvements. Ignition is probably one of the best in terms of flexibility and inovation.

[@VanzRao]

Great video. PLCs are in fact becoming more and more powerful in terms of processing power and memory. Although you cant compare it with modern day computers, their specifications are more than sufficient for their intended purpose. If you need high processing power for data analytics or ML, you will use a seperate system to do so.

[@SHORTGAMING12607]

very informative as always

[@RatedYWalkThrough]

good info sir..keep it up

[@tedsarazin112]

You need to learn about Beckhoff Automation

[@ITandAutomationAcademy]

I know Bechoff, what is the point here

[@diegoestebandagatti4150]

And how about with fast i/o, timers etc..? it's a very important point keep in mind that.

[@GimletBoy]

The death of the PLC has been predicted incorrectly for decades. In 1987 I was working for Allen - Bradley at a local sales office where I would end up working for the next 20 years . I was just a kid working part time at that point. We had an article from Control Engineering tacked to the wall next to our copier. It was titled "The Death of the PLC". The PC would soon make PLCs obsolete. Similar articles have appeared over the years. Each were very short-sighted. None of them ever considered that these products would evolve. PLCs have become even more entrenched and essential then ever. They may die someday, but I wouldn't bank on it anytime soon.

[@ITandAutomationAcademy]

Thanks for sharing your insights

[@ekoaris]

Thanks 🙏🏼👍🏼

[@SimplifyIt02]

Thanks to MQTT & Azure for connecting with Rockwell plc directly. ❤️❤️

[@brandonly27]

The process should always be engineered to be fail safe. Even if the PLC fails, or loses power, then valves should close (air to open or spring close valves, esdv's etc.)

[@maheshsurve3610]

Thanks sir for very informative & knowledgeable video.

[@engrnoumanali8005]

Helpful video 👌🏻

[@ITandAutomationAcademy]

Thanks Nouman

[@__HJK__]

I don't see what the problem: IOT - ONLY for data acquisition, PLC - for control process and data acquisition. If we want send data from old PLC to the cloud for analytics, we can use SCADA functions or local services such as kepserver or datahub or others. In the future we will able to use cloud servers in process control as hi-level control systems which use economical parameters of production. By analogy: server - is brain, PLC is spinal cord

[@jdglenn7214]

In the programmable controller vs. soft controller argument, PLCs still have an edge in durability, scalability, and modularity. When you combine that with the fact that every legacy system out there had some means of communication (modbus, profibus, dde, ect) which can be converted to OPC and then over to whatever SCADA programming or protocol that is being used. The PLC is a long way from seeing it's end. Digital transformation still relies on data at the machine. Any PLC, new or old, offers that data when coupled with the right communication and networking scheme.

[@made2automate]

Very well said💯💯

[@ITandAutomationAcademy]

Thanks so much Rishab

[@nikolaibelyk6648]

Would you trust a raspberry Pi to run your operation or a control logix rack? I know my choice.

[@automacaoindustrial.6221]

Muito bom conteúdo. Mardone Brasil.

[@kalyan5968]

Hello Sir I started my career in drives and automation as a application Engineer ..is there a good future for it ..I work at a leading company in drives and automation Industry.

[@theelectricworld8895]

Bro is it good future in plc automation engineer pls reply i wann to join class of automation pls guide

[@daveal3d]

Allen Bradley from the thumbnail.

[@MrBulukuduk]

I think they have own respective place.. I don't know if PLC able to do Machine learning done by PC. I don't know if PLC able to do "computer vision" "voice recognition" and other artificial intelligent capability for controlling, monitoring also predicting. I don't know if PLC able to compute PID done by embedded system in micro controller. Putting big PC (OS + Middleware + several server engine + application software) for small mission is placing many point of failure on the system. Putting small computation for complex system is impossible.. In fact the PLC is computer too, it has firmware, CPU, Memory, I/O, interface etc..So, PLC, embedded system, PC (personal computer), Industrial Computer (IC), etc...all of them are computer with different size and capability..

[@elcaricaturable]

2:38 "Missing an input and not actuating an output in real-time could mean the end of the manufacturing process" I disagree here. These processes usually have a Safety Instrumented System (SIS) that is independent from the Basic Process Control System (BPCS). A proper SIS is designed taking into account BPCS's reliabilty, so if you use a PC based BPSC that is less reliable than a PLC based BPCS, SIS should compensate for this lack of reliability to ensure safety. PLC's are not going to die (we still have mechanical control loops in home appliances and relay logic in SIS), but we will have new processes that are going to need PC power and versatility to automate. PLC vendors are offering Industrial PCs (IPC) and Programable Automation Controllers (PAC) that have similiarities with PC (powerfull CPUs, operating sytems, etc) but also enhanced robustness and reliability.

[@samuelbaumgartner1651]

My experience in food processing has been that SIS are not usual at all

[@elcaricaturable]

​@@samuelbaumgartner1651 "My experience in food processing has been that SIS are not usual at all" Are you sure? Maybe they are just not called SIS, they can also be called automatic shutdown systems, interlocks ... Have you ever seen a pressure switch? then you are probably looking at a SIS.

[@samuelbaumgartner1651]

@@elcaricaturable Not if the pressure switch goes back to the PLC and the PLC enacts the interlock when the pressure switch is not in target state.

[@elcaricaturable]

​@@samuelbaumgartner1651 "Not if the pressure switch goes back to the PLC and the PLC enacts the interlock when the pressure switch is not in target state." In that case, you are right. My experience comes mainly from the oil&gas industry, I suppose it is not always possible to extrapolate to other industries.

[@awaisali440]

Have a good day sir

[@ITandAutomationAcademy]

GOOD DAY AWAIS LONG TIME,HOPE U R FINE

[@awaisali440]

@@ITandAutomationAcademy yes i am fine. Busy in last Semester. That's why i give less time to other activities and thanks for asking about me. I really like your polite and careful behaviour. Jazakallah🙂

[@ITandAutomationAcademy]

Best of luck Awais

[@masvco]

PC's are not designed to whitstand time, they are very unreliable and get damaged very easily, PLC's on the other hand no matter the brand are excellent to withstand the test of time, imagine running a machine and crashing because a software failure! What can be changed its the name " PLC".

[@davidsaunders1595]

This is an interesting topic of debate I find myself in the center of on my current projects. Here’s my take: PLCs and IEC languages are fundamentally massively limited in terms of programming, testing, 3rd party library availability, flexibility, scalability and version control when compared to what can be done with PCs, there’s simply no comparison. That being said PLCs are very good for their simplicity and time deterministic execution. Achieving these two with a PC can be tricky and can undermine the advantages of having a PC in the first place. For these reasons PLCs still very much have their niche. What’s often talked about is other areas where PCs are being considered the better choice where a PLC may have previously been used.

[@microdesigns2000]

People "consider" PCs "the better choice", until the system becomes obsolete, like in a year or two. PCs are changing all the time, the very reason they are difficult to use in an automation environment. The support options are very limited and you can't hire someone off the street to fix it easily. For all the "power" available from PCs, and all the arrogant beliefs they are "better", I give you this; your operating system and your software will be obsolete, but the PLC will remain solid for at least another fifty years. You see, it is the operating system that must remain serviceable. Linux and Windows are not made for 20-year life. How many languages have become important (Fortran, Basic, C, C++, Java, Mark-up languages, C#, Python and the many front end and back end languages and scripts)? Why? Because they are never good enough, always something new. PLCs are still receiving lots of attention. And they are understood by engineers, developers and maintenance technicians. IEC 61131 languages are called "limited" , but in fact they are strong languages for their intended use. This discussion is similar to the Procedural versus OOP arguments. There are so many reasons that PLCs are better, like online edits, like robustness, like technical support. Ask an IT or software developer, and they won't have a clue. You can put database and server technology on a virtual machine. But you can't put solid PLC performance on a server and definitely not in a virtual machine. You might get paid for a job, but there will always be some hiccup that you won't be able to solve. Some engineers dream about the idea of using PCs as controllers. This seems so easy up front. "All you gotta do is..." are the famous last words. Eventually, you will get burned because you didn't keep PC and PLC in their places. Need a PLC, then get one. Need a PC, then get one. But don't mix them. Put as much logic on the PLC as possible, all of it if you can. Use a PC for databases and special needs software. Beckhoff and B&R have made a living by blending these things. They have an excellent business case, and a lot of fine hardware. But they have their weaknesses too. You have been warned.

[@oscarrangelbanda]

At my work we have 84 PLCs, 51 HMI and 21 industrial PCs; in the last 2 years 6 PCs died vs 2 PLC and 1 HMI

[@ThiagodMoraes]

@@microdesigns2000 Man agree 100% with all you said, each one for specific use, that's how it should be. PC's will not overcome PLC in a sooner or longer period, you nailed the reasons why. Cheers!!

[@chrisfowler7405]

Anyone who considers a PC for control is asking for trouble. If the system is properly engineered based on load and environmental factors, the chance of a PLC failure is slim. I have PLC3, PLC5, S5-115U, and Modicon Quantums in the field still operating after 30 years of service. Of course there is limited I/O with a PLC, but for a system that large should be a DCS.

[@hanschr.pallesen9208]

Try lukning at Beckhoff.con 😋

[@jksalamon]

PLC is not DEAD. Period.

[@joan4031]

Las personas que dicen que los PLCS's han muerto sencillamente no han salido de su taller ni han pisado industria en su vida

[@Scientist9221]

Please stop swinging when you speak.