Opto22

A

Thread Starter

Anthony Kerstens

I would like to hear some opinions about Opto-22. I've never worked with it, but I've not heard many good things about it.

Specifically.....
Ease of use.
Flexibility.
Global availability.
Cost.
Fit with "standard" networks.
Fit with large systems, as opposed to single machines.
Common users (for example, Automotive is almost all AB).
Advantages and disadvantages as compared to AB and Modicon.
Any other points.

Anthony Kerstens P.Eng.
 
P
I looked at it two years ago in a previous life. We concluded that the I/O looked good... flexible, easy to mount and use, varied enough... but that the software was too cumbersome for all but small applications. That said, we never
actually used it for a job. It is cheap tho, and for a small project I would be interested in some else's experience.

Paul T
 
C

Charley Schwartz

I have used Opto in low end control systems. Very little problems. You really can not beat the $ 400.00 for the "Factory Floor" development, runtime and HMI package for cost.

Charley Schwartz
 
R

Ralph G. McDonald, P.E.

We have specified or used Opto 22 in about a dozen water and wastewater applications in the last 3 years. The HMI was "Factory Floor" for most of them. We have had mostly good results, and some clients are replacing older AB or Square D PLC systems with them.

I still prefer ladder logic for programming but I can work with Opto's flow chart programming as required. I am looking forward to the ability to use Opto 22 I/O with a Linix PLC.

Ralph McDonald
 
S

Sadhana Verma

i had worked on opto22, it is good, compact and flexible. as the software has to be written in scada so person who knows scada logic blocks very well can use it. it is good for small applications
only.

Sadhana
 
B
I think that Opto 22 makes good products, but their controllers are not very popular because of poor marketing. Also, they do not conform to anyones else's idea of what a control system should look like. They are a very innovative company, their controls are usually ahead of their
time by quite a few years.

I used their Mistic 200 / Cyrano controllers a few years ago to control a plastics extruder. The system was easy to program and very powerful.
The multitasking graphical flowcharts were hard to beat.

I had set up a small chart to measure barrel pressure and motor current every two milliseconds. If either got out of range, I would shut down the drive. The charts for the barrel temperature control were executed in series, one at a time. This way eight charts only shared one timeslice.

Each active chart uses a 500 microsecond time slice. I never had more than four charts active at any time. One chart scheduled many other charts. The other three were time critical and always ran.

I was doing mostly math and analog control and alarming. If I had lots of digital I/O and logic, my results may not have been so good.

A comparable priced PLC system at the time was limited in floating point math, analog I/O, and encoder inputs.

If you have a largely analog process, then I could recommend trying them.

Bill Sturm
 
W
We tried using Opto 22 controllers for a few projects at work, and finally gave up on them. The primary problem is speed. When we attempted to control an automated line with several hundred I/O points, the scan time was too high. It would take up to 1/2 second to respond to events, and the timing would change drastically as various charts would start and stop.

The other problem we had was the Snap Brain controllers. These module require a supply of 5 volts, +/- .1 volts. If the voltage varied more than this, the module would stop communicating, and that block of I/O would go dead. Quite often the only way to recover was to cycle power to the module several times, and download the program again.

At this point we have been pulling the Opto control systems out, and replacing them with the Allen-Bradley Softlogix using Devicenet I/O. Once the devicenet is set up and running, it has been very reliable, unlike the Opto system.

One other problem we had was that no outside integrator was willing to use Opto, no one seemed to have any experience with it. (Both setup and programming.)

Walt Ridge Production Technician
 
W
We tried using Opto 22 controllers for a few projects at work, and finally gave up on them. The primary problem is speed. When we attempted to control an automated line with several hundred I/O points, the scan time was too high. It would take up to 1/2 second to respond to events, and
the timing would change drastically as various charts would start and stop.

The other problem we had was the Snap Brain controllers. These module require a supply of 5 volts, +/- .1 volts. If the voltage varied more
than this, the module would stop communicating, and that block of I/O would go dead. Quite often the only way to recover was to cycle power to
the module several times, and download the program again.

At this point we have been pulling the Opto control systems out, and replacing them with the Allen-Bradley Softlogix using Devicenet I/O. Once
the devicenet is set up and running, it has been very reliable, unlike the Opto system.

One other problem we had was that no outside integrator was willing to use Opto, no one seemed to have any experience with it. (Both setup and programming.)

Walt Ridge Production Technician
 
Z
At this point we have been pulling the Opto control systems out, and replacing them with the Allen-Bradley Softlogix using Devicenet I/O. Once the devicenet is set up and running, it has been very reliable, unlike the Opto system.

One other problem we had was that no outside integrator was willing to use Opto, no one seemed to have any experience with it. (Both setup and programming.)

Walt Ridge Production Technician
 
J
I have used Opto22 hardware and software at a previous job. I found it to be very powerful and flexible. The only problem I had with it was when I was envolved on a large process control project. The person who did the hardware design for the system set up the architecture along the lines of a PLC. He segragated the I/O, i.e. all of the inputs were in a group and all of the outputs were in another. This is a big no-no when using opto22. You cannot take advantage of event-reactions on the local brains (B3000's) that will cut the response time to mS from Sec. Anyway, I have used Opto22 systems for a lot of things. Some examples include: compressor controls (8 to 16 compressors at 100 to 300hp), water pump systems, cooling towers, pilot plants, etc. Basically small, medium and large systems. I had a lot of fun working with the opto22 stuff and would like to again. Anyway, if anyone would like to ask me questions please do so at "[email protected]", mailto:[email protected] - Jon Roberts
 
Top