Double coil syndrome though sound like a human disease but it
not . This disease is found in PLC programming.
Let us investigate what is this syndrome and how to eradicate
the cause of it.
Before that let
us discuss a logic in ladder Can we use same output coil for two more
than once in our ladder program? Yeah you herder right we can use the
same output coil for more than once in our ladder program lets see
how
Let us take an example. Suppose we have taken two toggles
switches no- x01 and x02. If either x01 turns on or x02 turns on, the output
coil named Q06 turn on which will turn on the motor.
Let’s create a ladder program on this logic
x01 Q06
--| |-----------( )---
x02 Q06
--| |-----------( )---
So, If either toggle switch x01 or x02 turn on, then output
Q06 should turn on which should start the motor. But after compiling/running
the program you will see that it won't generate output as per our demand
.Because of Double Coil Syndrome. Here as Output is taken twice hence it is
called Double. If we will take it thrice then it will be called Triple Coil
Syndrome.
Now let's analyze the logic
by running the program we will see that by turning on
the toggle switch x01 motor won't run. But when we turn on the toggle
switch x02 then motor will run. as motor is running with toggle switch x02 that
means motor is good .Now further checking revels that PLC card is also good and
in working condition. So we have to get back to our program check it from top
to bottom
x01 Q06
--| a |-----------(c )---
x02 Q06
--| b |-----------( d )---
Now take two cases
Case 1
lets take all switches that is a&b are turn off so output
c&d will also be in off condition.
1- when we turn on the switch x01 so a is now on.
2- Since a is ON ,c(Q06) Will turn on.
3- as b is physically off ,so d(Q06) will also be off.
so when PLC will scroll down it will take the last command as
its final command so output Q06 will stay off though we have turned on the x01.
Case 2
Let’s take all switches that is a&b are turn off so
output c&d will also be in off condition.
now
1--a is off so c (Q06) is off.
2--b is on so d (Q06) is will turn on.
We can see here PLC will take the last command as its final
command so output Q06 will stay on irrespective of the toggle switch x01.
This is what we call Double Coil Syndrome
Now let's cure the Disease
Just add an OR ladder to the logic.
As we want the motor to be on when x01 OR x02 turns on.
Here's the situation.
| x01 Q06
|------| |----|-------( )---|
| |
| x02 |
|------| |----|
|
Now, If switch x01 OR x02 turn on then Q06 will turn on
.Double Coil Syndrome has been cured.
PLC/PAC programming twice the same output: NOT acceptable
ReplyDeleteThis question is for engineers/technicians that program PLC/PAC and understand the dangerous consequences of writing to an output, whether a coil, or an analog output, from two different places in a program. This is not a how to question, nor is it a if you can or not question. This is a question as to how to explain to someone that if you do this someone will get hurt, killed, equipment damaged or lost production time will result. Sooner or later. For this reason, in my 3 decades of industrial projects to do such a thing has been considered illegal.
It has always been my understanding that illegal in this context meant:
1. Not written in law or some standards code, but rather the industry (in North America) standard best practices
2. In the case of an accident involving injury, death, damage or lost production, that such programming is INDEFENSIBLE in a court of law or in a claim to an insurance company.
3. There were enough accidents and claims that Rockwell simply excluded the possibility of such dangerous and senseless programming in RS-5000. However I've been told that Simantic-7 for Siemens S7-300 and S7-400 PAC's issues a warning but let's you proceed with writing to the same output ( bit, or register ) at two different locations in a program.
An engineer I worked with would casually uses such a dangerous practice. What documentation, reports, or reasons Rockwell excluded this from RS5000 can be found to explain to this engineer that the Earth really is round and not flat ?
Thank you for your assistance in providing any kind of documentary evidence. IEEE standard? An article in an industrial magazine on best practices in PLC/PAC programming? . . . ?
Regards,
Christian A Martel