PackML

[BITS N BYTES]

PackML is being touted as the latest and greatest method of structuring machine control software in an organized a repeatable fashion. To my knowledge Yaskawa, Rockwell and Schdeider are currently offering this approach in their control packages. Would be interested to open a discussion on this forum to exchange opinions and experiences [good/bad/indifferent] from users who have implemented PackML. Look forward to lively and informative posts. Thanks - Bits-N-Bytes Edited July 8, 2015 by BITS N BYTES

[Arlen Jacobs]

From an end-user perspective (or systems integrator), I love the "idea". As an OEM, I have mixed opinions. What I like is that it gives some common ground between different machines on a line. If they say "the whole line was built with PackML" right away it gives me a picture of what to expect. Basically, it saves time trying to learn how the machine works through its states. I don't remember seeing an end-user with 100% of their machines from the same vendor; which means each spaghetti coded machine is a different invention to figure out. For OEMs, I've seen it help where they had: to create ANY standard of programming for the first time (small # of engineers)no chance of agreeing on their own standard (large # of engineers)to sell their machines as better than competitors' (ex. this helps you end-user)But it doesn't mean that PackML is the best for that particular OEM. So they still change, add, delete guidelines as it suites them. I have seen very few machines using/claiming PackML (out of 1,000's). Unless more end-users demand PackML it will stay in limited use with machine builders. It's an end-user benefit, from my experience. Maybe others have seen different in the field?