hardware, SCADA vendor or IO list. Know How protection is a common response for source code requirements.
There are not open standards that go beyond IEC 61131 PLC programming languages.
Many things are kept open like:
- Variable naming.
- I/O Assignation.
- Max Routine length.
- Block Interdependency.
The software developer employs spreadsheets to witch you don’t have access.
Software blocks are made with limitations like a recipe with limited number of elements, once you ask for extension the price is unaceptable.
You can request these things in your specification, but you fear that this will make the code even worse as the supplier will try to comply literally and will charge you additionally.
You just dream in an open software standard made to make life easier to plant operators, not to feed someone else business.
Elimar.com is the effort of a former plant engineer to develop such a solution.
Why aren’t there more open standards for SCADA systems beyond IEC 61131, and how can users push for more transparency in software development?
The text highlights challenges with proprietary software standards in industrial automation. It emphasizes the lack of open standards beyond IEC 61131, leading to limited access and high costs. Developers often rely on restrictive practices, making it difficult for plant operators to optimize systems. Elimar.com aims to provide an open solution to simplify operations. Why can’t the industry adopt more transparent and user-friendly standards?
It’s interesting to see the challenges faced in industrial software development, especially the limitations imposed by vendors. The reliance on spreadsheets and restricted software blocks seems counterproductive and frustrating. The idea of an open software standard for plant operators is long overdue and would definitely simplify processes. However, it’s concerning how suppliers exploit these limitations for profit. The initiative by Elimar.com sounds promising, but I wonder how practical and widely adopted such a solution can be. Do you think this approach can truly disrupt the current vendor-dominated landscape? What’s your experience with these limitations in your field?
Comment:
It’s frustrating how vendors lock down essential tools like source code and spreadsheets. The lack of open standards makes customization costly and limits flexibility. Suppliers charge extra for basic modifications, turning reasonable requests into expenses. An open software standard would truly benefit plant operators rather than just vendors.
Question:
How can the industry push for more open standards without vendors exploiting loopholes?
The challenges with proprietary software and lack of open standards in industrial automation are indeed frustrating. It’s disappointing how vendors often lock users into limited functionalities and charge exorbitant fees for basic extensions. The reliance on spreadsheets and restricted software blocks only adds to the inefficiency. It’s refreshing to see initiatives like Elimar.com aiming to create open solutions for plant operators. However, how can we ensure that such efforts gain traction in an industry dominated by established vendors? Do you think widespread adoption of open standards is possible, or will resistance from big players continue to hinder progress?
It’s frustrating how SCADA vendors and software developers limit access and charge excessively for basic extensions. Open standards beyond IEC 61131 could truly simplify plant operations and reduce costs. The reliance on spreadsheets and restricted software blocks only complicates the process. Elimar.com seems like a promising initiative to address these issues. How can we encourage more companies to adopt open software standards?