Kowal, who describes himself as an automation marketer and a long-time advocate of open architecture, founded SERCOS North America, has edited a book on IEC 61131-3 based control software, and is active in the OMAC Packaging Workgroup. In his letter, he references a few of the five teams that make up the OMAC Packaging Workgroup: PackLearn (education), PackConnect (architecture and connectivity), PackSoft (programming languages), PackAdvantage (benefits and results), and PackML (Packaging Machine Language).
Your survey article demonstrates why it’s in everyone’s interest to become involved in the OMAC Packaging Workgroup. My take-aways: • The verbatims captured the essence of controls issues in packaging. • With regard to the high cost of engineering, especially custom features, people should look to control software that eliminates the need for discrete electronic add-ons, such as programmable limit switches and temperature controllers. • Customer requirements that add cost for everyone should give way to OMAC Packaging Workgroup requirements. The sooner end users and machine builders get on the OMAC bandwagon, the sooner this problem can be solved. • PackML could play a potentially important role with its tags and states in developing commonality in remote monitoring and diagnostics. • The comment about high- and low-cost networking options and lack of standardized networking is clearly being addressed by the PackConnect Team. The adoption of SERCOS is extremely encouraging compared to just a few years ago. And DeviceNet, along with Profibus, are cost-effective for a large number of nonmotion-intensive applications. • The trends are the most important. If half the installations in the past year did not network packaging lines, but 66% of customers want their OEMs to provide networking expertise, that is a sea change, and those respondents should join PackLearn and help put the curricula together.
