# Plug and play advice



## Dock (Sep 24, 2014)

I have a project where the customer wants plug and play for the machine back to the control panel. 

This is new to me, usually everything we do is hard piped back to the enclosure from junction boxes or directly from the motors etc., you get the point. 

I'm struggling trying to find some best practices literature for plug and play applications. 

I need some help with guidance on what, if any, industry standards there are relating to plug and play. 

I have seen a few machine cells in the field, mainly robotics, and some of them seem messy. Do the cables usually come in the side of the enclosure or the back?

We have used a few harting connectors on some projects but this is a much larger scale. Are there any other good manufactures for multiwire connectors?

Thoughts? Experience? 

Thanks!


----------



## CADPoint (Jul 5, 2007)

I'd call these guys and or look over their page.

www.digikey.com


----------



## Dock (Sep 24, 2014)

Thanks, I have used digikey for a few specialty items in the past. I'm fairly familiar with the multiwire connectors, I guess mainly I'm looking for how folks are interfacing with the enclosure and just general good practices for this type of configuration.


----------



## don_resqcapt19 (Jul 18, 2010)

Take a look at these. I have not used their multipin connectors but have used their power connectors and like them...they are on the pricey side, but made for industrial use.


----------



## oliquir (Jan 13, 2011)

usually use a/d connectors like this 
http://www.automationdirect.com/adc/Shopping/Catalog/Wiring_Solutions/Multi-Wire_Connectors,_Heavy-Duty_%28ZP-MC_Series%29
with flex cable or liquid tite conduit or teck cable


----------



## bill39 (Sep 4, 2009)

oliquir said:


> usually use a/d connectors like this
> http://www.automationdirect.com/adc...ti-Wire_Connectors,_Heavy-Duty_(ZP-MC_Series)
> with flex cable or liquid tite conduit or teck cable


Both T&B and Phoenix makes similar connectors. A trade name we use is "Harting connectors". I'm not sure where that came from.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Seems to me like an added expense to overall installation, considering low cost of junction boxes, covers, wirenuts, etc. On the other hand, plug and play microinverters for pv systems have proven the beauty of plug and play connections once the maker's of said got on board with the concept of putting them onto their cableing.


----------



## Dock (Sep 24, 2014)

My theory is that it cuts down on labor costs for installs/field work. This is a standard product we are designing for a reseller. If it's plug and play then the grunts can hook it all up, just my theory. I would much prefer NOT to do it this way!


----------



## Dock (Sep 24, 2014)

bill39 said:


> Both T&B and Phoenix makes similar connectors. A trade name we use is "Harting connectors". I'm not sure where that came from.


Harting is a major mfg of these type of connectors.


----------



## just the cowboy (Sep 4, 2013)

*German equipment has them.*

Most of the German equipment we have has something like that on it. We just got in a new US machine that is the same, it saved allot of time on the install and startup. I was told they do it because that way it is hooked up the same as when it was tested. I have not had any problems with them.


----------



## JRaef (Mar 23, 2009)

bill39 said:


> Both T&B and Phoenix makes similar connectors. A trade name we use is "Harting connectors". I'm not sure where that came from.


The guy that invented them in Germany after WWII, Wilhelm Harting... 

http://www.harting-usa.com/index.php?id=12677

All the rest that look like them are essentially knock-offs, but most are still pretty good. I've used a copycat brand from Italy called Ilme, they are 100% interchangeable with Harting. The AutomationDestruct versions are Chinese knock-offs, I've seen them and I'm not impressed with the quality, the locking mechanism is made of material that appears to be half the thickness of the Harting version. 

But really Dock, did your customer DEFINE what he means by Plug and Play? Because I have people who use that to mean that they want their machine to be completely tied into Ethernet with programming sent on ahead of the machine so that when it arrives, you just plug in an Ethernet cable to your plant wide control system and away you go.


----------



## Peewee0413 (Oct 18, 2012)

JRaef said:


> The guy that invented them in Germany after WWII, Wilhelm Harting...
> 
> http://www.harting-usa.com/index.php?id=12677
> 
> ...


You really hate automation direct? I don't mind their drives. They are simple but I put 4 in an enclosure smaller than recommended, no vents in the blazing southern new Mexico heat. 3 years later still working fine. They run 7.5 hp motors pretty much maxed out. What problems have you seen with the company so I know what to steer clear of.


----------



## Dock (Sep 24, 2014)

JRaef said:


> The guy that invented them in Germany after WWII, Wilhelm Harting...
> 
> http://www.harting-usa.com/index.php?id=12677
> 
> ...



Good point, I will clarify. 

There are six assemblies, each one has a motor and the associated I/O. Some assemblies have as much as 25 I/O points, others maybe less than 10. 

All 6 assemblies take up about a 20' x 25' foot print all together. We can use junction boxes on the assemblies to bring all of the I/O to a localized junctionbox but from there we need to use multi conductor cable back to the main control panel. 

The cabling coming from each assembly has to be plug and play at the enclosure. Where I'm struggling is the best practices for making these multiwire connectors interface with the main enclosure in a clean and organized way. I'm pretty OCD with the way a machine cell looks and works, I don't like messy cable runs you see on machines. I also don't want to be in a situation where we have a "wish we would have done it this way" moment after the first one is built.

Sorry for bad grammar and spelling, I'm on my phone.


----------



## JRaef (Mar 23, 2009)

Peewee0413 said:


> You really hate automation direct? I don't mind their drives. They are simple but I put 4 in an enclosure smaller than recommended, no vents in the blazing southern new Mexico heat. 3 years later still working fine. They run 7.5 hp motors pretty much maxed out. What problems have you seen with the company so I know what to steer clear of.


When I was an SI, I had customers who insisted on buying their own parts, usually from AutomationDestruct, and just have me assemble and program them. Invariably, I was required to replace components, often times right out of the box. Yes, they replaced them quickly, but nobody was paying me for the time I spent on the phone or to redo the installation or commissioning. 

In addition, I've only had two drives in my entire 30 year career burn up on me out of the gate. They were a DuraPulse, and a Delta, which by the way are the same thing (Delta makes them, DuraPulse is just AD's brand name for them). Delta makes a LOT of different models of drives in China and Taiwan, more than any other manufacturer that I have seen, and I don't know why. Some are OK, others are cheap crap, it's all over the map both in quality and in price. It's almost like they design one, go into production, and if they find a problem or can't win a large OEM customer on price, they don't fix the issue or stop making it, they just release another product line. One or two of those are what AD brand labels and from what I've seen, it's not the better ones, it's the cheaper ones.


----------



## KennyW (Aug 31, 2013)

Devices into jbs into receptacles to multi conductors to receptacles in the main panel to I/O is not fun. 

We stopped doing that about 10 minutes are ethernet based remote io came into existence.

That reduces the cables to 3 pole cordsets for power and ethernet cables. Requires some setup up front but easier and cheaper overall. 

Just a thought anyways.


----------



## Dock (Sep 24, 2014)

KennyW said:


> Devices into jbs into receptacles to multi conductors to receptacles in the main panel to I/O is not fun.
> 
> We stopped doing that about 10 minutes are ethernet based remote io came into existence.
> 
> ...


This is for sure an option and is being looked at, all of the drives are ethernet controlled so the functionality is there. Care to share which remote I/O manufacturer you are using?


----------



## JRaef (Mar 23, 2009)

What drives are you using? Making it all the same mfr makes it a lot easier to implement too. There are some other advantages to Ethernet connectivity for the end user as well. A couple of suppliers provide what is called Automatic Device Configuration, where the controller or a server that is connected to the same network stores the programming of the devices like drives in it's own memory, so if a drive ever has to be replaced, you just connect it out of the box to Ethernet and the controller reprograms the drive to whatever IT knows is the correct configuration for the task. So replacing a VFD becomes no more than 3 wires in, 3 wires out, Ethernet cable, cycle power, done. People get excited when they see that, because it takes place in less time than it takes to FIND the manual for the drive.


----------



## KennyW (Aug 31, 2013)

Dock said:


> This is for sure an option and is being looked at, all of the drives are ethernet controlled so the functionality is there. Care to share which remote I/O manufacturer you are using?



I very much like the Wago 750 series in cabinet IO. 

Very robust, very compact, very flexible, very large variety of different io modules, fairly cost effective. 

They have bus couplers for most of the major flavors of ethernet - I mostly use the Ethernet IP (rockwell) units. Those ones also talk modbus TCP. You can get Profinet, Ethercat, and others as well. 

The only downside to it that it's "3rd party"- in rockwell land the adapter hangs as a "generic ethernet adapter" and I get a big array of data in, so I have to keep track of that. I map all IO into user data types or other more meaningful tags structures anyways though, so its not a huge deal. 

That said Jraef has a point, if there is a flavor of remote io that is made by the same vendor as your plc, that has the functionality you require, the integration is probably easier. 

In the rockwell world selection in terms of the variety of modules made is somewhat limited and I have done the work up front for the wago so I use it whenever I can.


----------



## Dock (Sep 24, 2014)

Kenny thank you for the info on the wago line. I have seen them in the field but I have never used them.


----------



## Dock (Sep 24, 2014)

JRaef said:


> What drives are you using? Making it all the same mfr makes it a lot easier to implement too. There are some other advantages to Ethernet connectivity for the end user as well. A couple of suppliers provide what is called Automatic Device Configuration, where the controller or a server that is connected to the same network stores the programming of the devices like drives in it's own memory, so if a drive ever has to be replaced, you just connect it out of the box to Ethernet and the controller reprograms the drive to whatever IT knows is the correct configuration for the task. So replacing a VFD becomes no more than 3 wires in, 3 wires out, Ethernet cable, cycle power, done. People get excited when they see that, because it takes place in less time than it takes to FIND the manual for the drive.


There are 5 powerflex 525's and one powerflex 755. I'm not sure exactly what topology yet but most likely DLR. I have no experience with the auto config but I have read the brochure on it. This will most likely be implemented as well.


----------



## JRaef (Mar 23, 2009)

So if you use AB Point I/O or Flex I/O then you can have that same DLR ring looking at both the drives and the I/O blocks. 

Consider this however. If there is only a little bit of I/O and it's mostly drives, you can add I/O cards to the 755 drive and bring your field I/O into the drive, even if the drive doesn't directly use it. But once it's in the drive and the drive is connected to Ethernet, the I/O is connected to Ethernet too. I do that all the time. You can even do the same with the I/O that's built-in to the 525s, it's just not expandable so you're limited to what's already there that the drive is not using.

Side note about DLR and ADC: they don't always play nice together. The thing that makes DLR work makes it difficult to use ADC, because the ability for the Managed Switch to implement ADC is tied to _ONE _IP address, and the thing that makes DLR work is that everything has _TWO _IP addresses. It can be "tricked" into working, but you have to do things differently. If your customer wants both functions, engage your AB rep and ask for network topology assistance, explaining that you need to make DLR and ADC work. They have people available to guide you through what it takes to do that.


----------



## KennyW (Aug 31, 2013)

The only awkward thing about DLR (or any ring topology) with these various "sections" in a work cell is they all need power, so at the end of the day that part of the cabling is effectively star connected. So, it's often cleanest to run the power and ethernet cables together, rather than home run power cables back to the main panel and then daisy chain the network. Also since the comms cable runs along the same path as the power, chances are if the comms cable gets nuked the power cable probably will too, in which case that section is down anyways media redundancy or not. 

To me, it is suited better to cases where multiple ethernet devices are either in the same panel, bus connected, or fed from a PDC or whatever. Just depends on the layout of the machinery I guess. 

If the IO is simple discretes and analogs and you have rockwell drives and a rockwell controller, Point I/O is probably a good bet.


----------



## JRaef (Mar 23, 2009)

KennyW said:


> The only awkward thing about DLR (or any ring topology) with these various "sections" in a work cell is they all need power, so at the end of the day that part of the cabling is effectively star connected. So, it's often cleanest to run the power and ethernet cables together, rather than home run power cables back to the main panel and then daisy chain the network. Also since the comms cable runs along the same path as the power, chances are if the comms cable gets nuked the power cable probably will too, in which case that section is down anyways media redundancy or not.


I've made that same argument, but because I'm not the official "bit twiddler" in my office, my opinions don't count for much in that regard. The network folks like to think of their networks as existing almost in a vacuum, meaning without the reality of how things are done in the world we live in. I always tell people implementing DLR that if you are going to bother with that expense, take the extra step of completely separating your power and comm cabling, as in not even going into the same side of the cabinet, and then think about redundancy of your power feed as well. What I usually get as a compromise on that last point is a 24VDC UPS used as the power supply feeding the managed switches, so at least if the power feed gets cut or a breaker trips, the network immediately knows why it isn't talking to anything in that cell.


----------

