Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
-
Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
AB pico or siemens logo
- Thread starter misak1
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #3
- Thread starter
- #5
Same device - is it? I know the Pico is offered by Moeller with a different badge and different firmware. I had always thought the Logo! was a different product. The Logo! range has been around a lot longer than the Pico which is only a year or two old.
----------------------------------
Sometimes I wake up Grumpy.
Other times I just let her sleep!
----------------------------------
Sometimes I wake up Grumpy.
Other times I just let her sleep!
Going to get firmware picky are we?
Then check out the
Which is the TECO version. Idec version.
There ARE likely SW differences. So one may be better in that regard.
Keith Cress
Flamin Systems, Inc.-
Then check out the
Which is the TECO version. Idec version.
There ARE likely SW differences. So one may be better in that regard.
Keith Cress
Flamin Systems, Inc.-
A while back we received a piece of machinery which used a Pico, and I ended up changing it to a LOGO!
Don't know if it still true, but the Pico programming software printed out timer setpoints well to the left of the corresponding ladder logic, and it was nearly impossible to understand the resulting documentation. This factor, and that and we already had a dozen or so LOGO! units vs. none of the Picos influenced my decision.
Hardware wise they seemed pretty much the same, and I was able to use the LOGO! programming cable on both of them.
Older LOGO! hardware versions had more limited front panel capability, but newer ones (starting at rev level 4?) have messaging (which I use extensively), and softkeys (which I haven't used yet).
Don't know if it still true, but the Pico programming software printed out timer setpoints well to the left of the corresponding ladder logic, and it was nearly impossible to understand the resulting documentation. This factor, and that and we already had a dozen or so LOGO! units vs. none of the Picos influenced my decision.
Hardware wise they seemed pretty much the same, and I was able to use the LOGO! programming cable on both of them.
Older LOGO! hardware versions had more limited front panel capability, but newer ones (starting at rev level 4?) have messaging (which I use extensively), and softkeys (which I haven't used yet).
- Thread starter
- #9
I'm using LOGO since version 3, i admit that many things have changed since then but i don't like the cursor keys the massaging and that there is no separate desplay module for the front panel in the other hand pico have more friendly operation to the machine operator .
but the question remains !!!!
but the question remains !!!!
The question huh.. You should be getting an understanding of the answer by now. They are all similar enough to be hard to distinguish at any distance. The difference only matters on secondary aspects; Availability, price, programming support/method.
At this point it really will be a personal preference not "X" is better.
Keith Cress
Flamin Systems, Inc.-
At this point it really will be a personal preference not "X" is better.
Keith Cress
Flamin Systems, Inc.-
- Thread starter
- #11
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
