Where do we go from here?

In reply to William Sturm: I've been using SVG in the web browser for HMI, and it seems to work quite nicely. If you are interested in how I did it, I have documented it (including SVG snippets) on my project web site: "http://mblogic.sourceforge.net/mbtools/hmiserver/hmiserverintro-en.html"

That shows examples of how I did push buttons, pilot lights, gauges, strip charts, etc. The nice thing about using SVG is that you aren't limited to whatever "controls" someone provided you. You can make your own custom shapes and animate them the same way. For example, I've used the same technique to animate a tank as I've used to animate a column gauge. Someone sent me a screen shot where they adapted it for a variety of different tanks and hoppers in a dairy (and they were a lot more artistic than my efforts).

> XML is kind of fat, but it very common and open, so it is really best at this point (IMHO). <

JSON is also pretty common for AJAX communications, and it's a lot easier to use and a lot less wordy. It also maps pretty closely to native data structures in Javascript and other languages such as Python, so it doesn't take much effort to parse. Web browsers are starting to support it directly, and there are libraries available for most common languages (it's part of the standard library for some languages).

> I don't think people will used hosted applications for mission critical systems, not yet anyways. <

I was thinking that the vendors might find it attractive for the development software because they would have lots of options for billing you in dozens of different ways. Even if all the technical problems were solved though, I'm pretty sure that I don't like the idea that the vendor could turn off the tap whenever they felt like it.

That's a completely different thing from a web based HMI though. A web based HMI doesn't tie you to a vendor like a hosted app does.
 
C
> Which patent are you specifically referring to? <

Late breaking news: I must apologize for naming AB/RA as the one claiming to own the PLC data on a browser idea. I dug around some and it was Schneider. My memory of discussions 8 years ago was faulty. The chilling effect to the industry is the same.

Regards
cww
 
If it is Ken's patent, then I may have to take back what I said in my
earlier post...maybe Schneider hasn't learned from the Solaia mess.

Walt
 
C
That may very well be, but the effect is the same. Even though GS/Modicon has acted as a good citizen with Modbus.org for which they need to be commended, lawyers and investors of money or sweat balk at "They can, but they won't". Even promises like MS made recently not to use their patent portfolio against OSS are not as enforceable as a patent held by an entity with all the money in the world. And the recent Tom Tom and FAT actions bear this out. And once the ugly snarl has been woven, it's not apparent how to make it go away. It may get to the point that, if you have anything at all to lose, you avoid writing new software. I'm OK, they can have my 98 Neon and assorted computer junk. But losing a million dollar idea would hurt even an OSS fan. OSS could be a defense if you are operating in the public interest, but I bet money would win.

Regards
cww
 
D

David Ferguson

OK Curt.........................

At what point do we or should I say do YOU draw the line at OPEN. Is it at Operating Systems, is it at Control systems, or is it at Controls Engineering. Why do you not program for FREE. It is because you are a Capitalist, only your argument is at being a Capitalist up until you want to be a Socialist.

Lets all stop writing control code for pay and start doing it for free. We will join and meet at the commune and start farming and bartering as a form of money.

The center of Capitalist and democracy is Intellectual Property rights. No property rights, no democracy..............it is hypocrisy to draw the line at Operating systems and the "evil Empire" that Rockwell, Microsoft, etc. are. They have Millions of dollars invested in development and have every right to protect it.

When you buy a new TV from Samsung, I now feel that it is my right to watch YOUR TV. I would not have to buy a new TV if you would share yours. It is unfair that I should have to PAY for a new TV when you have one. For that matter, I want to make one. I feel that I have every right to the chips for free and the LCD technology that it is made from. If they GAVE me that technology for free, I could build a better TV for myself and it would not cost me a trip to Best Buy.

I have no issue with the thought of Open Sourcing, I have no issue with Capitalism and making money and protecting rights, I have no issue with making money for your work. I do have an issue with drawing lines in the sand that suit my opinion and tossing the other thoughts out. What you assume should be open and available technology to everyone. At one time was unheard of and was INVENTED by someone through their either own sweat and tears or working for an Employer. Either way, they have every right to protect it and not GIVE it away if they do not want to.

Dave Ferguson
Control Systems Engineer (And damn proud that I get PAID to be one)
 
C

Curt Wuollet

That's easy. I write software for free when I can and when it's mine to give. I write software when I get paid to write it and then the decision whether it should be free or not is up to the owner. I think both are worthwhile. Your argument would be that it's right for the bottled water people to be able to shut off and even outlaw the taps. I think public utilities are not a communist plot. They are the best way to get people what they need. They can still buy water if they wish.

If I want a free OS, and I can contribute I do. The whole Linux arena is a really good thing for me and everyone else. There was a time when I could not write software because it was so expensive that you had to work for someone that could afford it to have the tools. Obviously Linux is much better because I or anyone else can own the tools. It's probably not all that great for the monopolists, but why should they have to exclusive right to control what I do with my computer? Or if I can write software? A lot of people think there is something wrong with that. That only people who should be able to publish software are those who fleece their customers and break antitrust laws. That's very strange. Nothing else works that way.

It's a straw argument anyways, At least 99% of the software written to date is so specific that it wouldn't be of any use to the public and it's not published, free or closed. That's the test, perhaps. Obviously, if I buy a computer, there is no rational reason that I and everyone else should have to pay MS and only MS to use it. If I want to automate things, there is no reason that I should have to do it in a way that pleases you or enriches a select few companies that pay no attention to what I need to be able to do. I just outlined for a list member how to do something that they need to do with free tools and commodity hardware and software I can write and they are free to write. Is that wrong because it doesn't profit any of the big companies in automation? If it's easier and cheaper to do with commercial stuff, so be it. What's better for the customer?

Regards
cww
 
I just took a look on the Internet to see what other people are doing with web HMI systems, and I turned up a few interesting links.

1) "http://www.control.com/thread/1026215289". This one is interesting because apparently I had a discussion with someone here in 2005 that I had forgotten all about. This is interesting in that it shows this is not a new subject here.

2) "http://www.svgopen.org/2004/papers/SVGforSCADA/". A Phd candidate at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne wrote paper titled "SVG for SCADA Applications A practical approach". The paper may be useful background for someone interested in the subject, but it won't tell you how to implement anything. Despite calling it "a practical approach", he apparently didn't create an actual application and so has missed a lot of practical problems and solutions.

3) "http://www.svgopen.org/2008/papers/...n_SVG_a_use_case_in_Machining_Technology_HMI/"
This is an interesting paper written in 2008 by some engineers at Mikron (a machine tool vendor). They describe their new web based HMI using SVG which they developed as an HMI system for their machining centres. The paper describes the overall architecture and design of the system.

I find the fact that they've done this very interesting, as it is exactly the sort of application which I expected to be the early adopter of this technique.

However, I'm not keen on their actual software design. I won't provide a detailed criticism of it unless someone is interested, but I think their server design is based on the wrong components, making it far more complex than it needs to be. Their artwork is very limited (artistically) because of the way they generate it. I also think they also made a mistake in limiting themselves to SVG instead of combining it with HTML.

Overall though, it is a good example of what can be done with a modern web based HMI, and worth reading.
 
D

Dave Ferguson

If the bottled water companies invented and own the taps, then it is their right to shut them off or not if they have protected them.

As far as Monopolistic goes, you should find out a little bit more about the motives behind the MS anti-trust lawsuits and the EU etc. You assume that because they were ruled against on some fronts, that that ruling was not motivated by some other motives.

If you dig in deeper you find that there were other motives behind such things. I will not bore everyone with this old triage here. Just like if you read history, Thomas Edison was a genius (great PR) but when you dig deeper, you find that he, Westinghouse and Tesla were stabbing each other in the back at every turn and twist.....including using the Electric Chair to rally against AC power. Sometimes there is more to the story than you see before you or in the press. Dig into the MS issue more, and you find other entities trying to protect their interests just as hard as MS.

The answer to your question is yes. If Dell wants to sell computers that the masses want with the OS that the masses are familiar with and tend to like. Then in order to get that OS at a commodity price, they sign deals to package it on their computers. If the masses wanted something else (in large numbers)(re-read last part) then Dell would quickly turn that route.

I have written a control program that writes control programs. Sort of a "I want 3 valves with 2 limits, and 8 motors with 2 PIDS", fill in the blanks and it writes the control code, builds HMI screens and generates CAD drawings. Should I have to give this away for free, because when I bid a job I have an advantage over someone else bidding, just because they will not take the time to write this program themselves ???

We are now in like our 11th year of arguing this issue. And now we could ad Google and its monopoly into the debate. They are bundling and tying in everything............a new target.

Dave Ferguson
Proprietary Control Systems Engineer PCSE ;)P
 
C

Curt Wuollet

Hi Dave

Yes, it has been a while. But don't ever dismiss our pleasant debate as pointless. When we started, Open wasn't even in the automation vocabulary. Now, folks understand that there is a difference, and more important, have begun to imagine how much easier things could be without the artificial barriers to doing perfectly rational things due to proprietary zeal.

See Below:

> If the bottled water companies invented and own the taps, then it is their right to shut them off or not if they have protected them. ,

Yes, but they want to patent the idea of water, ignoring how basic it is.

> As far as Monopolistic goes, you should find out a little bit more about the motives behind the MS anti-trust lawsuits and the EU etc. You assume that because they were ruled against on some fronts, that that ruling was not motivated by some other motives. <

Oh, absolutely. When you stomp out competition, assimilate and destroy companies that have better ideas, and generally use market dominance to eliminate any choice for consumers, you do tend to make a few enemies. If none of the worlds companies have any chance of penetrating the US or even their own markets due to exclusive agreements, it does tend to piss them off. But unlike MS, I'm sure that all would still allow MS to be one of the choices on a level playing field. Well, most of them anyway.

> If you dig in deeper you find that there were other motives behind such things. I will not bore everyone with this old triage here. Just like if you read history, Thomas Edison was a genius (great PR) but when you dig deeper, you find that he, Westinghouse and Tesla were stabbing each other in the back at every turn and twist.....including using the Electric Chair to rally against AC power. Sometimes there is more to the story than you see before you or in the press. Dig into the MS issue more, and you find other entities trying to protect their interests just as hard as MS. <

And there is nothing wrong with that in a capitalistic system, up to a point. We will, hopefully, soon be past the days of Robber Barons and "anything goes". Certain entities can still ignore the rule of law. And while some of the laws are. overtly or covertly, intended to limit "foreign" competition, most are reaction to real wrongdoing in the past. There have to be limits to have fair competition. It's like physical property; I can forbid neighbors from my property and call the law in if they trespass. But, in most places, I can't lay land mines or shoot them.

> The answer to your question is yes. If Dell wants to sell computers that the masses want with the OS that the masses are familiar with and tend to like. Then in order to get that OS at a commodity price, they sign deals to package it on their computers. If the masses wanted something else (in large numbers)(re-read last part) then Dell would quickly turn that route. <

That's kinda where we differ. I don't have any problem with MS being one of the choices when I buy a PC. But MS was actually trying to make it illegal to buy a PC with no operating system. And they effectively have achieved the same goal with abuse of their monopoly power. And that clearly sustains an illegal monopoly. Fair or not, I think a dominant vendor should be prohibited from making exclusive agreements that prevent any competition. PC sellers may choose not to support alternatives, or MS, for that matter. But then, no OS should be an option and MS shouldn't be allowed to starve them out. This is getting very close to the line, because you should be able to give deals to your friends. But, not to the extent that you can kill agnostics or prevent competition. I think the EU browser proposal is probably a good compromise, but MS only agreed because FireFox is making the point moot and they can't repeat their past dirty tricks to stop it. I think something similar should apply to operating systems, only with no default.

> I have written a control program that writes control programs. Sort of a "I want 3 valves with 2 limits, and 8 motors with 2 PIDS", fill in the blanks and it writes the control code, builds HMI screens and generates CAD drawings. Should I have to give this away for free, because when I bid a job I have an advantage over someone else bidding, just because they will not take the time to write this program themselves ??? <

No, I have never attempted to tell you what to do with what you write. But, if I do the same with free tools and underbid you, you should do the same. Because, you _have_ the choice to do the same. That doesn't limit profit but it does lower costs. After all, we are not selling the tools, we are selling the IP. Now, it you were granted a patent on the PID concept.

> We are now in like our 11th year of arguing this issue. And now we could ad Google and its monopoly into the debate. They are bundling and tying in everything............a new target. <

I don't necessarily disagree with you on that. But at least you don't _have_ to use Google. They are treading on both sides of a fine line.

This is a new area of enterprise and there are many issues yet to be solved.

> Dave Ferguson
> Proprietary Control Systems Engineer PCSE ;)P

cww Paying for my principles, I guess :^)
 
First off, Hello all. Secondly I apologize for not reading the entire thread. I found this site while trying to find open source host based automation software for Linux. I found MatPLC and looking forward to trying it out.

My point to this thread:
I totally understand the safety concerns of using foss in a factory setting. However, there are many people out there like me who are trying to do small-mid sized projects and trying to find our way. Would it not make sense to release portions of what you have to the community? Keep what you need to keep to preserve your jobs, and give a little boost to projects out there like Arduino [www.arduino.cc] or Orocos [www.orocos.org].

I don't need to run an assembly line in my garage, but I would like to automate my home brew setup with a linux pc and a pic micro.

A little background on me:
I am a hobbyist. I did a 2year assoc program back in 95 and have no professional experience with automation control. I became interested in Microchip programmable ics and have been tinkering around with them and the arduino (atmel based).

Cheers
Alex
 
In reply to pvb: Do you find it easier to use a drawing program like Inkscape, or to just write the XML for SVG directly?

 
B

Bruce Durdle

Hi Alex,
You might be interested in something I have just finished - a FORTH for the PIC18F2525/4525 family.

Contact me of-line for details - b m durdle (at) xtra (dot) co (dot) nz
(ignore the spaces ...)

Cheers,
Bruce.
 
In reply to Alex B:

Standard PLCs, SCADA, and HMI systems are not normally used for safety purposes. That is usually done with dedicated and certified safety hardware. Safety hardware is usually a small part of a normal control system.

What matters for the software that is used to control a process is that it is reliable, flexible, and that it performs the desired functions. The safety system is normally able override the machine control system whenever necessary.

As for why people release software as open source / free software, well, having a piece of software is not the same thing as having a software business. Advertising, marketing, sales, promotion, billing, service, etc. can all be a lot more important to the "business" side of things than the quality of the actual software is. So, for anyone whose idea of a software business is setting up a distribution network and persuading people to part with a few thousand dollars/euros per license, they are probably in for a disappointment.

And to be realistic about things, a lot of software components are becoming a commodity just like a lot of computer hardware has. There's no money to be made in selling web server software. All the best ones are free. There's no money to be made in selling low end databases for the same reason. Programming languages have almost completely gone the same way, and operating systems are heading that way as well. None the less, IBM, HP, Red Hat, Intel, Fujitsu, etc. all seem to manage to find a way to make money out of free software.

I think that the automation industry will sooner or later go the same way. Soft logic, HMI, SCADA, data logging, and other similar systems can all be easily become commodities. Any companies who want to operate in that market will need to figure out how to fit their business into that reality, just like other software companies have had to do in markets that have already gone through that process.
 
> You might be interested in something I have just finished - a FORTH for the PIC18F2525/4525 family. <

> Contact me of-line for details - bmdurdle (at) xtra (dot) co (dot) nz
(ignore the spaces ...) <

I get an error on that email address. So what is a FORTH?
 
In reply to M Griffin:
> Do you find it easier to use a drawing program like Inkscape, or to just write the XML for SVG directly? <

I think Inkscape is a good solution, because it has an integrated XML-editor.

Thus you can do both,
- design graphically
- write XML
within the same application.
 
In reply to M Griffin:

Our http://pvbrowser.org is free software. I think we would have no chance competing with the major vendors, because we do not have the marketing capacity.

We do not want to reinvent the wheel. Thus by using Open Source components we can build a solution that is eventually more capable as closed source solutions can be.

For the GUI part we use http://www.qtsoftware.com/
We also use data acquisition/communication libraries from other projects.

By building a framework like http://pvbrowser.org we can build HMI/SCADA solutions for our customers without paying license fees at all. Our income is from building solutions for our customers. This can be compared to building web pages for customers. We earn money by building HMI/SCADA solutions for our customers and NOT by selling software licenses.
 
B

Bruce Durdle

FORTH is an operating system/programming method/self-defining language designed for embedded systems. It uses "words" not instructions and allows you to build up a solution to your needs with re-usable components in a very compact format ideal for use with microcontrollers.

My version uses the serial interface capability of the MPU to accept programming instructions from any PC running hyperterminal or similar TTY interface. The core program is approximately 8k of Flash memory.

The email address I sent was incorrect - try:
bruce (dot) durdle (at) xtra (dot) co (dot) nz
 
Top