Recently, some have been asking whether CodeSys is a trend. Despite its current popularity, the real question isn't whether CodeSys is a trend but rather how long it will last. CodeSys, formerly known as 3S company, was established in 1992 near Munich, Germany. "3S" stands for Smart Software Solution, and CodeSys was the product name of the 3S company. Due to the widespread popularity of the product, the company later changed its name to CodeSys. Another significant event in the automation industry was the establishment of PLCOpen, also in 1992. Here, I found the early technical history of CodeSys on the official CodeSys website.
The introduction of CodeSys addressed a significant issue: the diversity of Integrated Development Environments (IDEs) among different companies, each with its own real-time technology and libraries. The establishment of PLCOpen set a programming standard. At this point, a unified programming language (IEC611331-3) along with a unified IDE (CodeSys) immediately gained market acceptance. It could be said that CodeSys marked historical milestones for both PLCOpen and Windows.
Although there were other competitors at the same time, such as infoteam and Kw, CodeSys had a significant advantage: a distinguished client, BECKHOFF. BECKHOFF also had its strengths, particularly in motion control and EtherCAT. BECKHOFF Automation was founded in 1980 and had accumulated a lot of experience in motion control by the 1980s. In 1986, it began exploring PC-based solutions, and in 1995, it introduced bus terminals. These initiatives helped BECKHOFF gain prominence in the automation market.
The launch of EtherCAT in 2003 changed the landscape of the entire automation market. A cost-effective, high-speed real-time "Ethernet" solution ignited the global motion control market. BECKHOFF demonstrated remarkable prowess and set examples for future players in the Chinese market.
As a result, CodeSys's position in the market is akin to that of Android phones. However, just as the Android camp hasn't produced a brand capable of competing with the iPhone over the years, in the automation industry, CodeSys alone cannot fulfill a company's aspirations of becoming a giant. Just as Huawei, even without being subject to U.S. sanctions, has embarked on its own path with HarmonyOS because Android cannot fulfill Huawei's dreams.
In the automation industry, too, CodeSys cannot realize the dream of a corporate giant
When Beckhoff planned TwinCAT3, it embarked on a path similar to HarmonyOS, using TwinCAT3 to control more of its own products, such as XTS and XPlanar. The design philosophy behind these drive products is closely tied to EtherCAT. Beckhoff's drive products only support EtherCAT, or rather, can only be used with Beckhoff controllers, which shifted some functionality in the drive domain upwards. This divergence marked one way for giants to part ways with CodeSys.
Another way, even more thorough, could be seen in giants like Huichuan completely abandoning CodeSys. Apart from big companies directly cutting off CodeSys's licensing costs, there's another fundamental issue with CodeSys, namely EtherCAT. Among the three major technologies, ProfiNet, EtherNet/IP, and EtherCAT, EtherCAT took a unique approach. This makes it difficult to establish networks between multiple controllers using EtherCAT, although Beckhoff can achieve this with the use of EtherCAT bridges. This is a significant issue for projects involving multiple controllers. It means that based on EtherCAT, it's not possible to establish a network environment as convenient as Siemens'.
This problem isn't too significant for Beckhoff, as they have internal networking methods like EAP for convenient network setup, and TwinCAT can easily debug Beckhoff's own drives. But what technological path can CodeSys choose to address this problem? This is a question that newcomers to the entire automation industry must answer. Perhaps ABB can answer this with their acquisition of B&R PowerLink, but B&R itself has Automation Studio, which has no relation to CodeSys.
CodeSys is like many social software and apps. Once users become familiar with it, they move on to WeChat for communication, not staying on that software anymore. The crowded market CodeSys faces today is confronted with a question: How to compete with Siemens and Beckhoff upwards, and with Huichuan downwards? Huichuan leaving CodeSys is an inevitable outcome. An ambitious company wouldn't tie its technological ceiling to external forces, nor would it share its competitiveness with outsiders.
As an automation company with a product line longer than Siemens', a larger and more independent software platform is needed. CodeSys will continue to thrive as a software provider, generating substantial revenue from large companies like Beckhoff, Schneider, and Omron every year. But as for becoming a competitive force in the automation market, I personally think it's just a historical ripple.
Currently, CodeSys is advancing in virtualization, cloudification, and application markets, but fundamentally, it still can't answer the above question. Under giants, there's no Android market. Xiaomi began to introduce its own operating system around the time of the su7 release. If we mark a timeframe, we might see the outcome before I retire. When I retire, most engineers who read this article should still be working.
There might be variables, maybe TSN? But will TSN have a benefactor? Will the benefactor of TSN use CodeSys? Of course, it's also uncertain if CodeSys will end up making PLCs themselves. After all, markets like Mitsubishi FX, which are simple applications, constitute the largest market in terms of quantity. And in this market, it seems selling licenses isn't too lucrative of a business.
The above viewpoints are solely personal opinions and are provided for reference only. Comments and discussions are welcome.