NEWS | BY KIVNON
The evolution of personal computers and programmable logic controllers has narrowed the gap between them
One of the most critical decisions in the initial design phase of a machine is the selection of the control system. Traditionally, PLCs (programmable logic controllers) have been used for the automation of industrial processes and the control of machinery
PCs have been used for operations related to non-critical processes that require handling large volumes of data and fast communication between devices, without the need to address criticality issues such as latency.
In recent years, advances in PC and PLC (Programmable Logic Controller) technology have narrowed the gap between them; however, there are still significant differences when it comes to in-process automation and the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT).
Navistar, for example, chose Kivnon’s automation solutions for its new manufacturing plant in Texas. As part of its growth strategy, the U.S. truck and bus manufacturer built a new 900,000-square-foot manufacturing facility in the San Antonio area with the capacity to produce Class 6–8 vehicles. Adapting their new assembly lines to Industry 4.0 standards means that all machines and devices are connected and monitored through an industrial Internet of Things network.
Key factors and considerations for programmable logic controllers and PCs
When comparing control systems, we must evaluate their performance based on various criteria. When analyzing system operations, the focus should be on how the system operates and how instructions and tasks are processed. The standard PLC (Programmable Logic Controller) features a built-in real-time operating system with a dedicated processor that ensures a high degree of control system reliability.
Since the PLC (Programmable Logic Controller) is designed solely to manage automation and/or a process, it does not need to run other utilities such as antivirus programs or system updates.
However, the evolution of PCs—and especially industrial PCs (IPCs)—has made them much more reliable devices. PLCs (programmable logic controllers) are still much more robust in terms of electromagnetic interference, software performance stability, and fail-safe hardware.
Another factor to consider is the ease and cost of maintenance, including repair and replacement costs over the controller's lifespan. For a PLC (Programmable Logic Controller), external devices can be replaced easily while the system is running.
Although both PLCs and PCs offer a wide range of fieldbus options, PLCs (Programmable Logic Controllers) have many of these options built in, whereas PCs would require additional cards and drivers to provide comparable functionality. If additional devices or sensors are needed in an AGV/AMR (Automated Mobile Robot) system, it is easier to integrate them into a PLC architecture.
A PLC (Programmable Logic Controller) may be the best solution for deterministic industrial protocols and field buses (including fail-safe requirements) for the sensors and actuators of an AGV/AMR (Automated Mobile Robot).
Integration
Whenever an AGV/AMR (Automated Mobile Robot) needs to communicate with other industrial devices such as robots, production lines, or logistics systems, a PLC (Programmable Logic Controller) is an excellent solution.
PLCs come with built-in solutions for integration into industrial environments, requiring less effort than PCs, which typically need gateways or additional hardware and software libraries for this purpose.
Security
PLCs are less vulnerable to unauthorized access from the outside world. The cybersecurity risk associated with PLCs (Programmable Logic Controllers) is negligible compared to that of PCs. If a cybersecurity issue occurs in an AGV/AMR (Automated Mobile Robot) controlled by a PC, it could result in fatal accidents for users.
Safety
When humans interact with a potentially dangerous machine, factory safety standards are crucial for the machine's approval. Safety functions specified in standards such as ISO 3691-4 (Industrial trucks – Safety requirements) can be implemented in a PLC-based system. This is not possible with a PC.
Not all AGV/AMR (Automated Mobile Robot) vendors use PLCs for control and safety purposes, which is worth considering. An IPC used as a complementary device for data acquisition and processing provides gateway functionality for IT protocols.
Both PCs and PLCs have their own advantages and do not have to be mutually exclusive solutions. For control-critical and safety-related processes, PLCs are the best choice, but PCs—and especially IPCs—offer interesting complementary features.
Original post from IOT News