Forces in Allen-Bradley - More Than You Really Wanted To Know - PLCS

This board is for PLC Related Q&A ONLY. Please DON'T use it for advertising, etc.
Try our online PLC Simulator- FREE. Click here now to try it.
---------->>>>>Get FREE PLC Programming Tips
New Here? Please read this important info!!!
PLCS.net - Interactive Q & A > PLCS.net - Interactive Q & A > LIVE PLC
Questions And Answers
Forces in Allen-Bradley more than you really wanted to
know
User Name
Remember Me?
Password
Register FAQ Calendar Downloads PLC Reviews PLCS.net Store Today's Posts Search
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Thread Tools Display Modes
April 25th, 2013, 09:02 PM #1
Ron Beaufort
Lifetime Supporting
Member

Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 4,425
Forces in Allen-Bradley more than you really wanted to know
"forces" sound like such a simple idea just temporarily MAKE something in the PLC
do whatever you want it to do ...
but like most other "simple" things, forces can actually be quite confusing even to
technicians and programmers who have years of experience ...
the screen shot below was taken from a 1756-L55 ControlLogix processor running
RSLogix5000 version 16.03 software ... only one real-world switch and four
real-world lamps were used ... this discussion will focus ONLY on the way that Allen-
Bradley systems implement forces ... other PLC brands use different methods ...
the examples shown below were chosen to demonstrate some of the most confusing
aspects of forces ...
the questions in the rung comments are quite simple but most people have a
difficult time answering them ... other posts in this thread will offer a "nuts-
and-bolts" explanation of how these forces ARE (and are NOT) affecting the
operation of the system ...
.
You are not registered yet. Please click here to register!
Forces in Allen-Bradley more than you really wanted to know - PLCS.net... http://www.plctalk.net/qanda/showthread.php?t=79236
1 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM
Attached Images
forces_intro.jpg (56.4 KB, 448 views)
__________________
2-B ?
Best regards, ----+----] [----+------------( )----
Ron | |
PLC Training Boot Camp | 2-B |
+----]/[----+
I once was lost, but now am found, was blind, but now I see.

April 25th, 2013, 09:13 PM #2
Ron Beaufort
Lifetime Supporting
Member

Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,425
(1) let's start the discussion with a few critical definitions ...
(2) a "BIT" is a "BOX" ... it is a box located in the processor's memory and the box
can hold either a ONE or a ZERO ...
(3) it's also critically important to know what a "bit" is NOT ... specifically, a bit is
NOT an XIC, an XIO, an OTE or any of the other little doodads located in the rungs
of the ladder logic program ...
(4) "INSTRUCTIONS" are the XIC, XIO, OTE and other little doodads which appear in
the rungs of the ladder logic program ...
(5) it's also critically important to know what an instruction is NOT ... specifically,
an instruction should NOT be called a "bit" although many technicians,
programmers, and authors do indeed call it that ... this mistaken terminology is
incredibly confusing especially when it comes time to talk about "forces" ...
(6) if you're looking for the "secret handshake" on forces then here it is:
Quote:
in an Allen-Bradley system you do NOT force "bits" and you do NOT force
"instructions" ...
in an Allen-Bradley system, the forces are applied to the FIELD SIGNALS
coming INTO and going OUT OF the processor ...
(7) that rule explains why only INPUTS and OUTPUTS can be forced with an Allen-
Bradley system ... specifically, "internal" bits/boxes can NOT be forced - simply
because "internal" bits/boxes do not have field signals COMING IN or GOING OUT
of the processor ...
(8) note that in some OTHER brands of PLCs you DO indeed force their bits/boxes
but NOT in an Allen-Bradley system ...
(9) just for completeness, we can also consider tags which are PRODUCED or
CONSUMED as capable of being forced ... the "field device" in this case is something
like another processor but the concepts of INPUT and OUTPUT signals still apply for
the purposes of our discussion ...
(10) just for discussion, I personally do not like the term "internal bit" ... mainly
because ALL bits/boxes are "internal" specifically, ALL bits/boxes are located
internally ("inside") the processor ... but we still need SOME terminology to
differentiate between bits/boxes which DO have field input or field output signals
and other bits/boxes which do NOT have input or output signals ... so let's just stick
with the term "internal bits" for the HAVE NOTs and move on ...
2 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM
(11) the next post will dig into the nuts-and-bolts of Allen-Bradley forces but first
let's set our sights on a few common misconceptions ... and remember that we're
talking ONLY about Allen-Bradley systems here ...
(12) suppose that we hear someone say: "Force that OTE on" - or "Force that OTE
off" ... that's a misconception it's WRONG and it's confusing ...
(13) suppose that we hear someone say: "Force that BIT on" - or "Force that BIT
off" ... that's a misconception it's WRONG and it's confusing ...
(14) suppose that we hear someone say, "Force that XIO on" - or "Force that XIO
off" ... that's a misconception it's WRONG and as you'll see below, this particular
example can be extremely confusing ...
(15) now suppose that we hear someone say, "Force that XIC on" - or "Force that
XIC off" ... technically this is a misconception too it's WRONG ... but ... in this
particular situation, the force will usually have exactly the intended effect so most
people ignore the technicalities and get on with their lives ...
(16) and now a warning ... if you do not intend to accept (and abide by) the
definitions that I've just laid out, then you might as well skip the rest of this thread
... frankly the explanations offered below will not make sense to you and you'll be
wasting your time to read them ...
(17) and keep in mind while reading, that you don't have to take my word for any
of this material ... just hook up some switches and lamps to a PLC and try these
experiments out for yourself ...
.
Attached Images
bits_and_instructions.jpg (36.8 KB, 432 views)
__________________
2-B ?
Best regards, ----+----] [----+------------( )----
Ron | |
+----]/[----+

April 25th, 2013, 09:15 PM #3
Ron Beaufort
Lifetime Supporting
Member

Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,425
(18) the figure below widens our horizons beyond the PLC ladder program and
shows the connections to the field devices that we've been discussing ... I've taken a
few minor liberties with the display such as indicating "FORCE ON" instead of just
"ON" ... this is just to make it easier for our discussion ...
(19) notice the yellow balloon indicating that SWITCH-A is being forced ON ... it is
critical that you notice that the force is being applied to the field signal (the ARROW)
which takes the signal from the input module and carries it into the bit/box inside
the processor ... specifically notice that the force is NOT applied to the bit/box itself
but rather the force "overrides the field signal" going into the bit/box ...
(20) next notice the yellow balloon indicating that LAMP-G is being forced ON ... it
is critical that you notice that the force is being applied to the field signal (the
ARROW) which takes the signal from the bit/box and carries it over to the output
module ... specifically notice that the force is NOT applied to the bit/box itself but
rather the force "overrides the field signal" being sent to the output module ...
3 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM
(21) now let's work through a scan cycle and see what's happening "under the
hood" ...
(22) SWITCH-A is open and there is no current flowing through the input field
circuit ... normally this would result in a status of ZERO in the bit/box for SWITCH-A
... but since we have a "FORCE ON" applied to SWITCH-A, then the bit/box contains
a status of ONE ... this makes perfect sense to most people ...
(23) on rung 0, the XIC instruction tells the processor to "go look for a one" in the
bit/box for SWITCH-A ... the processor DOES find a one so the processor evaluates
the XIC as TRUE ... this results in TRUE logic for the rung ...
(24) don't miss the fact that having SWITCH-A denoted as "FORCED ON" on the
computer screen has NOTHING to do with the TRUE status of the XIC ... specifically,
the "FORCED ON" legend is merely telling us that the field signal from SWITCH-A is
being forced on ... more specifically, the "FORCED ON" legend is NOT telling us that
the XIC is being forced either "on" - or "true" ...
(25) this is hard for most people to accept ... seeing the XIC shown as "green on the
screen" certainly SEEMS to indicate that the XIC instruction is being forced on but
that is NOT what is happening here ... we'll prove this critical concept in the
following rungs ...
(26) but to finish up with rung 0, when the TRUE rung condition reaches the OTE
for LAMP-E, the OTE instruction tells the processor to "go write a one" into the
bit/box for LAMP-E ...
.
Attached Images
force_locations_ac.jpg (54.0 KB, 427 views)
__________________
2-B ?
Best regards, ----+----] [----+------------( )----
Ron | |
+----]/[----+
Last edited by Ron Beaufort; April 25th, 2013 at 10:03 PM.

April 25th, 2013, 09:17 PM #4
Ron Beaufort
Lifetime Supporting
Member

Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,425
(27) on rung 1, the XIO instruction tells the processor to "go look for a zero" in the
bit/box for SWITCH-A ... the processor does NOT find a zero so the processor
evaluates the XIO as FALSE ... this results in FALSE logic for the rung ...
computer screen does NOT have the effect of making the XIO instruction either ON
or TRUE ... specifically, once again, the "FORCED ON" legend is merely telling us
that the field signal from SWITCH-A is being forced on ... more specifically, the
"FORCED ON" legend is NOT telling us that the XIO will be evaluated as "on" or
"true" ...
(29) this is very hard for most people to accept ... a frequent question is: "But if
I've forced it on, why isn't it true?" ... the reason for their confusion is that the
"FORCED ON" legend on the screen does NOT refer to the status of the instruction
(the XIO) that they're pointing to ... specifically, the "FORCED ON" legend on the
screen ONLY tells us that the field signal from SWITCH-A is being forced on ...
4 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM
(30) here's another "secret-handshake" ... whenever you Right-Click on any
instruction to install a "FORCE" you are NOT selecting the instruction (the XIC,
XIO, OTE, etc.) ... instead ALL that you are doing (I repeat ALL that you are doing)
is selecting the ADDRESS associated with the instruction ... by selecting the address
(for example: SWITCH-A) you are telling the RSLogix software which FIELD SIGNAL
you want to force ...
(31) earlier I pointed out that sometimes people will say: "Force that OTE" or "Force
that XIO" ... those statements are misconceptions they are WRONG and they are
confusing ...
(32) to nail this idea home, consider that it makes ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE
whether the instruction that you Right-Click when forcing happens to be an XIC, an
XIO, an OTE, an OTL, or an OTU instruction ... as long as the ADDRESS over the
instruction remains the same, you'll get EXACTLY the same results each and every
time you force ANY of those various types of instructions ...
(33) here's a "weird" demonstration to prove the point ... you can even force an
ONS (One Shot) instruction as long as you give it a valid INPUT or OUTPUT
address ... now the One Shot might not work correctly but the fact that you can
apparently "force" the One Shot is another indication that it's actually the ADDRESS
that's being selected by the Right-Click ... specifically, it is NOT the type of
instruction that determines either HOW - or WHERE - the force will be applied ...
(34) the "take away" from this part of the discussion is that we NEVER force
INSTRUCTIONS ... instead we only force FIELD SIGNALS either incoming field
signals or outgoing field signals but NEVER instructions ...
(35) now to finish up with rung 1, when the FALSE rung condition reaches the OTE
for LAMP-F, the OTE instruction tells the processor to "go write a zero" into the
bit/box for LAMP-F ...
(36) on rung 2, the XIO instruction tells the processor to "go look for a zero" in the
bit/box for SWITCH-A ... the processor does NOT find a zero so the processor
evaluates the XIO as FALSE ... this results in FALSE logic for the rung ...
(37) as on rung 1, having SWITCH-A denoted as "FORCED ON" on the computer
screen does NOT affect whether the XIO instruction will be evaluated as either TRUE
or FALSE ...
(38) continuing right along with rung 2, when the FALSE rung condition reaches the
OTE for LAMP-G, the OTE instruction tells the processor to "go write a zero" into the
bit/box for LAMP-G ...
(39) do not be misled by the "FORCED ON" legend under the OTE for LAMP-G ...
that has NOTHING to do with the fact that the processor will obey its ladder logic
program (NOT the force) and will definitely "go write a zero" into the LAMP-G
bit/box precisely as the ladder logic dictates ...
(40) and if you're a big fan of "green on the screen" indications, you're about to be
sorely disappointed by the display of the OTE for LAMP-G ... notice that even though
the FIELD DEVICE (the actual lamp in the field) is being driven ON, the OTE does
NOT indicate a "green on the screen" condition ... that's simply because the bit/box
contains a status of ZERO - and not a status of ONE ...
(41) this is hard for most people to accept ... a frequent question is: "But if I've
forced the lamp on, why isn't it turning on?" ... here the lamp (the device located in
the field) actually IS being "turned on" ... but "green on the screen" indications can
be misleading because they NEVER relate directly to the status of the field devices
... instead these indications are a result of what status the RSLogix5000 software
"sees" in the bit/boxes ...
(42) since the bit/box in this case contains a status of zero, the software is showing
the OTE without a "green on the screen" highlight ...
(43) another frequent question is: "But if I've forced the OTE on, why doesn't it go
5 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM
write a ONE into the bit/box?" ... the answer is that the OTE was NOT actually forced
in the first place ... instead, the ADDRESS for LAMP-G was selected and so the
force operation was actually applied to the FIELD SIGNAL for LAMP-G ... the field
signal is DOWNSTREAM of the bit/box so the bit/box does NOT change state to
reflect the force ...
(44) on rung 3, the XIC instruction tells the processor to "go look for a one" in the
bit/box for LAMP-G ... the processor does NOT find a one so the processor
evaluates the XIC as FALSE ... this results in FALSE logic for the rung ...
(45) don't miss the fact that having LAMP-G denoted as "FORCED ON" on the
computer screen has NOTHING to do with the TRUE or FALSE status of the XIC ...
specifically, the "FORCED ON" legend is merely telling us that the field signal to
LAMP-G is being forced on ... more specifically, the "FORCED ON" legend is NOT
telling us that the XIC (the instruction) is being forced either "on" - or "true" ...
(46) this is another hard idea for most people to accept ... seeing the XIC marked
"FORCED ON" on the screen SEEMS to indicate that the XIC instruction is being
forced on but that is NOT what is happening here ... this is yet another indication
that the instructions (XIC, XIO, etc.) in the ladder logic are NOT being "forced" ...
(47) and to finish up with rung 3, when the FALSE rung condition reaches the OTE
for LAMP-H, the OTE instruction tells the processor to "go write a zero" into the
bit/box for LAMP-H ...
__________________
2-B ?
Best regards, ----+----] [----+------------( )----
Ron | |
+----]/[----+

April 25th, 2013, 09:18 PM #5
Ron Beaufort
Lifetime Supporting
Member

Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,425
(48) now we've reached the end of the ladder program let's talk about the status
of the field devices and we'll be finished ...
(49) since LAMP-E has a status of ONE in its bit/box, the lamp in the field will be
turned on ... no surprises here ...
(50) since LAMP-F has a status of ZERO in its bit/box, the lamp in the field will be
turned off ... this can be somewhat surprising if you expected the XIO on rung 1 to
be TRUE because of the "FORCED ON" legend ...
(51) LAMP-G has a status of ZERO in its bit/box, which would normally cause the
lamp in the field to be turned off ... but ... since LAMP-G is being "FORCED ON" the
signal leaving the bit/box is being overridden on its way to the output module ... the
"FORCE ON" causes the lamp device in the field to be turned on ...
(52) the important thing to notice here is that the "FORCED ON" condition of
LAMP-G does indeed make the field device come ON (we expected that) ... BUT ...
since a force is always applied to an OUTPUT on the DOWNSTREAM side the bit/box,
then the ONE or ZERO status of the bit/box is NOT affected by the force (and that
frequently surprises people) ...
(53) this is another "take away" concept of our discussion ... as shown by
SWITCH-A, forces DO affect the ONE or ZERO status of the INPUT bit/boxes ... BUT
... as shown by LAMP-G, forces do NOT affect the status of the OUTPUT bit/boxes ...
(54) so when a force is applied to an OUTPUT, the force does not display as "green
6 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM
on the screen" as some people would expect ...
(55) finally, since LAMP-H has a status of ZERO in its bit/box, the lamp in the field
will be turned off ... this off status is very surprising to some people since the XIC
on rung 3 is clearly marked "FORCED ON" and the logic of rung 3 calls for LAMP-H
to be on whenever LAMP-G is on ... LAMP-G is indeed on (lit up) in the field - but not
LAMP-H ...
I hope that this is helpful ...
__________________
2-B ?
Best regards, ----+----] [----+------------( )----
Ron | |
+----]/[----+

April 25th, 2013, 10:42 PM #6
Bullzi
Lifetime Supporting
Member

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 371
Thanks Ron!!
That was a big help. I Think I have a good idea on how things work.

April 26th, 2013, 01:18 PM #7
NetNathan
Lifetime Supporting
Member

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Corona, CA
Posts: 503
Thanks for the explanation.
I always despised the way AB handled forces.
In GE you can force any input, output, AND/OR memory bit.
..
__________________
****Control Freak****
Net is where I be and Nathan is me.

April 26th, 2013, 04:57 PM #8
HJTRBO
Member

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 532
Thanks Ron, I have saved this to my special library. In Omron a force is a force, it
forces the bit box so it is very powerful and dangerous. I liken AB forcing to only
being good for failed I/O devices in the field.

7 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM
clank
Member

Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ontario
Posts: 46
Thanks Ron
May the force be with you!!

April 27th, 2013, 03:17 AM #10
amenyo
Member

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 23
computer screen has NOTHING to do with the TRUE status of the XIC ... specifically,
the "FORCED ON" legend is merely telling us that the field signal from SWITCH-A is
being forced on ... more specifically, the "FORCED ON" legend is NOT telling us that
the XIC is being forced either "on" - or "true" ...
(45) don't miss the fact that having LAMP-G denoted as "FORCED ON" on the
computer screen has NOTHING to do with the TRUE or FALSE status of the XIC ...
specifically, the "FORCED ON" legend is merely telling us that the field signal to
LAMP-G is being forced on ... more specifically, the "FORCED ON" legend is NOT
telling us that the XIC (the instruction) is being forced either "on" - or "true" ...
Thanks Ron.
I know you put a lot of work into this and your efforts are very much appreciated. I
want to make a correction however;
At #24 & #45, "Don't miss........computer screen has NOTHING to do with the
TRUE......" in both paragraphs should have been ANYTHING to do with .........
Thanks again.

April 27th, 2013, 11:30 AM #11
8 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM
Ron Beaufort
Lifetime Supporting
Member

Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,425
greetings amenyo ...
thank you for your comments and rest assured that I am not in any way offended
by your polite suggestions ...
but ...
the statements that you've recommended that I change are totally accurate the way
they are ... making the changes that you've suggested would alter the sense of the
sentences and make them incorrect ...
let me paraphrase the original statement from paragraph 24 to make the point
more clear ...
Quote:
(24) don't miss this fact: having SWITCH-A marked "FORCED ON" has
NOTHING to do with the status of the XIC ...
that was my point and the statement (even as originally written) correctly
expresses the point ... now I'll admit that the point could have been expressed more
clearly but when I read the original sentence aloud in a "conversational tone" the
point DOES come across correctly ...
going further ... if we substitute the word "anything" in place of "nothing" then we'd
get the following (incorrect) statement:
Quote:
(24) don't miss this fact: having SWITCH-A marked "FORCED ON" has
ANYTHING to do with the status of the XIC ...
this statement would not only be "stilted" its point would be technically wrong ...
and it is certainly not what I meant to say ...
now let's also paraphrase the original statement from paragraph 45 again, just to
make the point more clear ...
Quote:
(45) don't miss this fact: having LAMP-G marked "FORCED ON" has
NOTHING to do with the status of the XIC ...
once again, that was my point and the statement (as originally written) is correct
...
in closing let me say that I sincerely appreciate your efforts to correct me even
though I'm convinced that I was right in the first place ... there's a definite trend
today toward letting others just bumble along through life making one error after
another particularly in grammar and in spelling ... I myself have learned (through
experience) that it's far easier just to let people continue on their merry ways
making the same mistakes over and over ...
for example:
many (most?) people nowadays mistakenly use IT'S (a contraction for IT IS) for the
possessive form of the pronoun IT ... the apostrophe in the contraction IT'S indicates
that something has been "left out" specifically the letter I ...
consider the following examples of possessive pronouns:
the man put on HIS hat ... not the man put on HIS' (or HIS'S) hat ...
the hat is HIS ... not the hat is HIS' (or HIS'S) ...
the lady put on HER coat ... not the lady put on HER' (or HER'S coat) ...
the coat is HERS ... not the coat is HER'S (or HERS')
9 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM
the simple point is that pronouns do NOT use apostrophes for their possessive forms
... it's rare to see those types of mistakes when forming the possessive pronouns
HIS and HERS - because HIS and HERS just seem to "look wrong" when they're
misused ...
but when it comes to the possessive pronoun ITS, then things start getting wacky ...
so we often (usually?) see examples like this:
the dog chased IT'S tail ...
which is INCORRECT ... by expanding the contraction, we would (correctly) read that
statement as:
the dog chased IT IS tail ...
and honestly, I get "corrected" about my usage of IT'S and ITS on the average of
once or twice a month even when I've used the words CORRECTLY ... it turns out
that so many people use the words IT'S and ITS incorrectly nowadays that the
INCORRECT usage is now starting to "look normal" ... well-intentioned people tend
to "correct" me whenever I use the words CORRECTLY ...
the only reason that I'm mentioning all of this is to say that I personally don't find
it "challenging" or "annoying" and certainly not "confrontational" when someone
attempts to correct me ... actually I consider it to be a compliment that they think
enough of me to try to steer me straight ...
personally I tend to correct only people that are familiar enough with me to know
that I'm only trying to help ...
so ... when others habitually use:
THEIR - when they mean THERE ... or
YOUR welcome when they mean YOU'RE welcome ... or
AFFECT when they mean EFFECT ... or
ACCEPT when they mean EXCEPT ... or even
IT'S when they mean ITS ...
then I usually just let it go ...
let me close by once again saying thank you for your comments but the original
statements about forces are correct ...
finally (just for completeness) IT'S (with the apostrophe) can also be a contraction
for IT HAS ... an example: IT'S been a pleasure dealing with you ... expanding the
contraction would correctly give us: IT HAS been a pleasure dealing with you ...
__________________
2-B ?
Best regards, ----+----] [----+------------( )----
Ron | |
+----]/[----+
Last edited by Ron Beaufort; April 27th, 2013 at 11:39 AM.

April 27th, 2013, 03:57 PM #12
amenyo
Member
Got it, thanks.
10 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 23

April 27th, 2013, 04:23 PM #13
BobB
Lifetime Supporting
Member

Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 3,643
Excellent explanation Ron.
What a pain - that would drive me nuts! A force should be a force regardless in my
view. Yes, I use Omron and a force is a force. It is also possible to change the SV
and PV of a timer, counter and DMs (registers) in some places without going into
online program mode with Omron.
Dangerous if you are not careful of course but a whole lot less dangerous than those
horrid relays with test buttons!
__________________
The Old Pfhaart

April 28th, 2013, 08:10 AM #14
daba
Lifetime Supporting
Member + Moderator

Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 2,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Beaufort
......
finally (just for completeness) IT'S (with the apostrophe) can also be a
contraction for IT HAS ... an example: IT'S been a pleasure dealing with you
... expanding the contraction would correctly give us: IT HAS been a pleasure
dealing with you ...
Well put, Ron.
Is this another of your web-sites ?
Do they use good grammar in Grammer, Indiana ?
__________________
___________________________
ControlLogix & SLC Training
a-b train ltd.
abtrain@tiscali.co.uk
www.abtrain.co.uk
tel: 07506 73 9999
nil illegitimi carborundem

April 28th, 2013, 09:54 AM #15
Ron Beaufort
Lifetime Supporting
Member

no, never been to that website, daba but this one is a personal favorite:
Common Errors in English Usage
my trickiest situation related to apostrophes occurred years ago when I submitted a
report to my local boss as a Word document ... unbeknownst to me, he "fixed" my
(proper) use of IT'S and ITS before forwarding the report on up the chain of
11 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM

Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,425
command ... the report was to ultimately become part of a job proposal for a very
large customer so I had taken special care to make sure that it was correct before
I submitted it ...
a week later I got a "correction" from another boss much higher up the totem pole
who (not very politely) informed me of "my" improper use of IT'S and ITS ...
I sent him back a copy of my ORIGINAL report proving that the changes must
have come from "somewhere else" ...
it took quite awhile for the dust to settle on that particular fiasco ... somehow my
local boss always seemed to hold me personally responsible for the flak he received
even though HE was the only one who had actually messed up with the
apostrophes ...
I suppose we all know people like that ...
__________________
2-B ?
Best regards, ----+----] [----+------------( )----
Ron | |
+----]/[----+
Last edited by Ron Beaufort; April 28th, 2013 at 10:01 AM.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Jump to Live PLC Question and Answer Forum
Bookmarks
Previous Thread | Next Thread
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump
Similar Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Allen Bradley HMI Chopperman LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 13
June 7th, 2012
07:35 AM
allen bradley Rightsight 42EF-P2SCB-G4 Juan Stephens LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 0
March 8th, 2010
09:40 PM
Learning Allen Bradley mbferrari LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 9
March 11th, 2009
11:25 AM
Downloading Allen Bradley PLC Data to a
Access Database
bigvicfella LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 5
January 25th, 2007
12:31 PM
12 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM
Similar Topics
Allen Bradley PLC addresses for ethernet
communication
ICengineer800 LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 11
August 14th, 2006
04:53 PM
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:24 AM.
Contact Us - PLCS.net - Text - Top
.
13 of 13 9/21/2014 8:16 PM

Forces in Allen-Bradley - More Than You Really Wanted To Know - PLCS

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Forces in Allen-Bradley - More Than You Really Wanted To Know - PLCS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This board is for PLC Related Q&A ONLY. Please DON'T use it for advertising, etc.

You might also like