The extremely large telescope (ELT) is a telescope currently under design/construction. With its 39 meter wide segmented primary mirror, once finished, it will be the largest optical telescope built. Once it will start to collect photons it will open new frontiers and extend mankinds knowledge about the universe. It’s a project with collaboration across the globe involving many universities, industries and organizations. It’s a mighty instrument including many fields of engineering such as electrical-, mechanical-, optical- and software engineering. Alright you get it. The ELT is big, cool and everything… but what does that have to do with the TwinCAT automation interface?
Found this information on the TwinCAT LinkedIn-group, but thought it’s good to share it with everyone else. Beckhoff unfortunately don’t provide release notes with updates/bug fixes/features to new releases of TwinCAT. They have however recently added a new RSS-feed so that it’s possible to follow new releases of TwinCAT and the different supplements. Apparently this is going to be added to the Visual Studio start page from TwinCAT 3.1.4024, which hopefully will be released in the not-too -distant future. The address to the feed is http://www.beckhoff.com/english/rss/beckhoff-twincat-rss-feed.xml.
I use a plugin to chrome called RSS Feed Reader which I find really nice. Just install it (you don’t need to register for an account), and add the feed to the plugin. Next to the address bar in chrome you will now automatically see all news from Beckhoff conveniently.
Name a few things that software developers always have strong opinions about and naming conventions on code is one of the things that surely will come up. What lengths for identifiers should we use? Should we use hungarian notation? CamelCase or under_score case? While programming guidelines covering these topics have been existing since the rise of the early programming languages, they are much less common for industrial control.
Initially the only one that I found was Beckhoffs for TwinCAT3. Most of Beckhoffs libraries and example code used this, even though even Beckhoff themselves have not been consistent. More recently PLCopen have released their coding guidelines written specifically for IEC61131-3. Just out of curiosity I decided to compare the two standards and their take on naming conventions, and comparing them to my own personal opinions.
Sharing knowledge with other TwinCAT developers using a blog is not only an easy and good way, but it’s also quite fun. After a long day at work, I often find it enjoying to sit down and write a little bit on a new blog post. Quite recently I launched TcUnit – the TwinCAT unit testing framework and even though there now is tons of documentation and example code on the official website, some people prefer to learn by watching a video. For this reason I’ve created a series of four videos that will introduce TwinCAT software developers to test driven development (TDD) and how to do TDD using TcUnit.
I’m very happy to announce the release of TcUnit – an unit testing framework for TwinCAT3. TcUnit is an xUnit type of framework specifically done for Beckhoffs TwinCAT3 development environment. This is another step in the direction of modernizing the software development practices in the world of automation.
Before dwelling into the details, let me tell the background of this project. In 2016 the development of the CorPower wave energy converter (WEC) was in an intensive phase. Software was being finalized, tested and verified for delivery. In a late phase of the project some critical parts of the software needed to be changed. The changes could be isolated to a few function blocks (FB), so in an initial phase the tests simply consisted of exporting those FBs to a separate project and running them locally on the engineering PC. The FBs were changed and executed in the engineering environment, and then online-changing the inputs and seeing whether the expected outputs were given. After doing this for a couple of hours an important question was raised:
Shouldn’t this be automated?
We are at the final post of this series of continous integration and delivery with TwinCAT. We’ve accomplished setting up & configuring the automation server, created a TwinCAT test library project and wrote a small batch script that will be launched every time a new push has been done to the GIT repository for the library project. Now it’s time for us to write the program that will do the actual static code analysis.
In the previous post we did some installation and configuration of software to support us in the automation of doing static code analysis of TwinCAT software. We have reached a state where a Jenkins job is launched as soon as our TwinCAT library project is pushed to the GIT-repository. Even though we have a Jenkins job defined for static code analysis of TwinCAT software, it’s not doing anything yet. This will be our next step.
I like to have things structured and ordered. This does not only include the obvious stuff as making sure to pair and match all socks after laundry, but it also includes the TwinCAT software I develop, more specifically own developed TwinCAT libraries. “Whaaat??? What does sorting socks have to do with TwinCAT software?” you might wonder. I’m glad you asked.
In the previous post we were introduced to the concept of continous integration and
continous delivery (CI/CD) in the world of PLC software development, more specifically TwinCAT development. The conclusion is that certain processes in the process of creating software can and should be automated. As an example, we set the goal of automating static code analysis of all TwinCAT software. In this part of the series of CI/CD we will look into some practical matters of installing and configuring the necessary software.
The development of PLC software needs to enter the 21st century. With the increased complexity of developed systems, the amount of software that is going to be developed for a given system will continue to increase. PLC development is partially living on an isolated island, and while most other areas of software development have been modernized, the world of PLC software engineering development is going significantly slower. When we develop more software, there is a need for more automation to remove unecessary manual handling and in the end increase the quality of the software we develop. Now I know that you can’t compare developing software for a web shop with developing software for a PLC that can run software that is critical and maybe even be safety-critical and one line of code can be the difference of life and death. However, developing reliable and robust software and adhering to modern software development processes and tools does not mean they do rule each other out. You can pick both.