Beth, we build our panels to customer specification. In this case the customer wanted Brand Y (the utterly scrambled LED/Input numbers). My company does a bit more business with Brand X.
To be fair to Brand Y, there IS a pattern to it, but it is such an off-the-wall pattern as to be scrambled.
The result pushes paranoia buttons. It feels like Brand Y is intentionally out to get us.
My preference for networked IO is actually Brand Z. It has the best terminal block, and intuitive LED, terminal, and program numbering. They fail only in that they are not widely accepted by the customers we deal with, not even widely accepted in the USA.
I purely hate it when you can have all the answers right and still fail. There's no justice in this cruel world.
Sounds like a clear cut case of laziness and poor oversight--unfortunately, not at all uncommon in today's grind-it-out-to-market culture. So is your firm back to using the original networked I/O product as a result?
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.