Host Engineering Forum
General Category => Do-more CPUs and Do-more Designer Software => Topic started by: jwbaker3 on February 04, 2021, 12:38:55 PM
-
Are there plans to add the Client for Ethernet/IP implicit I/O messaging to the Do More BRX?
JW
-
Are there plans to add the Client for Ethernet/IP implicit I/O messaging to the Do More BRX?
JW
Scanner will be added next release.
-
Any update on this?
-
Any update on this?
Still planned for next release.
-
Any idea when that may be?
-
Any idea when that may be?
Part shortages have complicated our world, greatly, but the plan is end of the year.
-
Hi Bob..any update on the Implicit Scanner release for Do-More?
-
Hi Bob..any update on the Implicit Scanner release for Do-More?
Still a development priority, but basic survival is overriding much of our development right now.
-
Hi Bob...any progress on the development of the implicit I/O Scanner?
-
Or any work on Sparkplug B or OPC?
-
I know about the supply chain issues but is the Implicit scanner on the near horizon for the BRX? I just completed 4 Fanuc robot cells with the DoMore BRX using explicit messaging to the robots and drives. I am scheduled to for 8 more by the end of the year. I may have to use the productivity or AB compactlogix PLC with implicit messaging because of the heartbeat with the robots. Not to push but I will need to make a decision soon so I can order the hardware and have any chance of getting it to build the panels and meet the contract goals. I can always update the firmware with the scanner after the hardware is here if I know it is coming.
Thanks,
JW
-
It remains a priority and will get done this year. Supply chain issues remain an existential threat, so they tend to get priority. We're hoping/believing that is going to being easing shortly, and it will be easier to focus on new development.
-
Thanks Bob, that's good news I'll order the BRX.
Thanks,
JW
-
Not to beat a dead horse,,, but any update? projected timeline?
Thanks!
JW
-
Not to beat a dead horse,,, but any update? projected timeline?
Thanks!
JW
Planned for 2.10 later this year. #1 priority feature.
-
Thanks!
-
Is this still planned for this year?
-
I know we keep asking but is there an update for the Implicit messaging for the BRX. I have hardware here for a project and I will have to use something else if not soon. My problem not yours, but just look for a little light in the tunnel. (and not a train...I hope) If it's going to be by the end of the year I can let the customer know, and I wont have to buy AB hardware out of my pocket.
Thanks,
JW
-
I have the customer looking at Compactlogix I can keep their plant on BRX if I can tell them the Implicit messaging will be here soon. I know I am 1 fish in the pond but can we please get an update?
Thanks,
JW
-
It is now delayed until after the new year, 1Q2024. Sorry about that.
-
Thanks.
Is that time frame - in stone, in ink, in pencil, we'll give it our best or maybe by Q1 2024? I ask because I have been telling my customer it was coming by the end of this year like you guy's said and now they are starting to wonder about the information I am giving them. I don't want to be pushy but I really need a for sure time frame, if possible.
Thanks,
JW
-
Thanks.
Is that time frame - in stone, in ink, in pencil, we'll give it our best or maybe by Q1 2024? I ask because I have been telling my customer it was coming by the end of this year like you guy's said and now they are starting to wonder about the information I am giving them. I don't want to be pushy but I really need a for sure time frame, if possible.
Thanks,
JW
#1 priority. It'll happen.
-
Thanks! I will try to keep the BRX in the plant. They are expanding the production line and with this customer and another we will use +35 more BRX, power supplies, sensors etc. I have been able to get it to work on everything except some of the Fanuc robot comm's but I have a "working" work around and the Keyence MDX2500 laser which I could not get to work completely, tonnage adjustment and radar sensors.
Thanks!
JW
-
Is Q1-2024 still the plan for this feature addition?
-
Is Q1-2024 still the plan for this feature addition?
The scanner is running. Working on EDS support now. We don't have a launch date yet, but I would expect it to be early Q2.
-
We had to go with AB 5069 compactlogix on the new project but we are using BRX as remote I/O thanks to the EDS generator you built into the BRX. We could not wait for the Implicit messaging. But there is always another project coming (hopefully) where the BRX with Implicit messaging will be the right fit.
JW
-
We had to go with AB 5069 compactlogix on the new project but we are using BRX as remote I/O thanks to the EDS generator you built into the BRX. We could not wait for the Implicit messaging. But there is always another project coming (hopefully) where the BRX with Implicit messaging will be the right fit.
JW
I'm sorry. It's coming along very nicely. Scanner is solid and EDS support is progressing better than I expected, but it is a big job.
-
Thanks BobO!
I am planning to use a Teknic ClearLink (CL) Step-and-Direction Controller on a PNP Robotics Project. The CL is a an Implicit and Explicit EIP Messaging Adapter. I used Explicit messaging with the CL and a BRX PLC on a previous project and it worked, but it was very challenging to learn and program. And that was for a very slow and intermittent XY Table... Slow Move. Stop. Rest for long periods (hours). Repeat. I don't think I have the programming skill or time to make Explicit Messaging work for this higher speed, continuously moving and constant position changing PNP Robot.
All that to say, that I am really looking forward to this new function in the BRX PLC's! However, I have one question...
The Teknic CL already has an EDS File available for the Automation Direct Productivity Series of PLC. Is there any way to know if this same EDS File will work for the BRX PLC when y'all release the new firmware for the BRX?
Thanks for any reply. And let me know, if there is anything that I can do to help.
Happy Resurrection Day and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
-
Thanks BobO!
I am planning to use a Teknic ClearLink (CL) Step-and-Direction Controller on a PNP Robotics Project. The CL is a an Implicit and Explicit EIP Messaging Adapter. I used Explicit messaging with the CL and a BRX PLC on a previous project and it worked, but it was very challenging to learn and program. And that was for a very slow and intermittent XY Table... Slow Move. Stop. Rest for long periods (hours). Repeat. I don't think I have the programming skill or time to make Explicit Messaging work for this higher speed, continuously moving and constant position changing PNP Robot.
All that to say, that I am really looking forward to this new function in the BRX PLC's! However, I have one question...
The Teknic CL already has an EDS File available for the Automation Direct Productivity Series of PLC. Is there any way to know if this same EDS File will work for the BRX PLC when y'all release the new firmware for the BRX?
Thanks for any reply. And let me know, if there is anything that I can do to help.
Happy Resurrection Day and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
If you want to link the EDS or attach to a post, I'm happy to check it when I'm back in the office. Don't know any reason it wouldn't work.
-
Thanks BobO!! BTW, I love your Pinky and The Brain Icon!! :)
Please see attached EDS File. I was able to open it with NotePad. My understanding is that it can be opened with any text editor.
Here are a couple of links to the Teknic downloads page:
https://teknic.com/files/downloads/clearlink_ethernet-ip_object_reference.pdf
https://teknic.com/files/downloads/clearlink_examples.zip
If the EDS attachment doesn't work, the EDS File is in the zip file. Thanks again! (Edit: I had to change the file type from .eds to .txt so that it would upload.)
Happy Resurrection Day and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
-
Thanks BobO!! BTW, I love your Pinky and The Brain Icon!! :)
Please see attached EDS File. I was able to open it with NotePad. My understanding is that it can be opened with any text editor.
Here are a couple of links to the Teknic downloads page:
https://teknic.com/files/downloads/clearlink_ethernet-ip_object_reference.pdf
https://teknic.com/files/downloads/clearlink_examples.zip
If the EDS attachment doesn't work, the EDS File is in the zip file. Thanks again! (Edit: I had to change the file type from .eds to .txt so that it would upload.)
Happy Resurrection Day and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
This looks great, actually. Will be good for testing config form. Thanks!
He is risen!
-
Thanks again Bob! Makes my day to hear this!
Amen! He is Risen Indeed!
SOWEGATS
-
Thanks again Bob! Makes my day to hear this!
Amen! He is Risen Indeed!
SOWEGATS
Sneak peak...
-
Excellent Bob!
Not exactly sure what I am looking at (I've never used Implicit Messaging before, but I'll learn!), but it looks impressive. Glad to know that the ClearLink EDS File is helping.
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the final product capabilities, but I see the cnt/sec is set at 100. For my application, I am using the "Standard Resolution" SDSK Motor, which is 800 cnts/rev and running at a Motor Speed of 21.2 rev/sec ===> 16,960 cnts/sec.
Any idea on release date yet? I'm getting ready to order the hardware for our project.
Thanks again and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
-
Hi Bob!
Any update on project release date, yet? Looking forward to it!
Many Thanks and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
-
We're doing a formal launch with ADC on this one. I haven't heard the official date from them yet. It will be in Q2.
-
We're doing a formal launch with ADC on this one. I haven't heard the official date from them yet. It will be in Q2.
Thank you!
Best Regards and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
-
We're doing a formal launch with ADC on this one. I haven't heard the official date from them yet. It will be in Q2.
Hi Bob!
Any update on release date, yet?
Also, I talked with someone at Teknic, yesterday, about the ClearLink EDS. They said that the EDS for the BRX Do-More may need to be a collaborative effort, and I encouraged them to get in touch with you. Hope this helps!
Many Thanks and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
-
Hi Bob!
Any update on release date, yet?
Also, I talked with someone at Teknic, yesterday, about the ClearLink EDS. They said that the EDS for the BRX Do-More may need to be a collaborative effort, and I encouraged them to get in touch with you. Hope this helps!
Many Thanks and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
We are a couple of weeks away from full functionality. Heavy lifting is done, and we we're down to the creature comforts and cleanup. We might be able to do a beta, but I still haven't heard what ADC's release schedule is.
I didn't see any issue with the EDS you gave me, so I'm not sure what would need to be done (if anything) specific to BRX.
-
We are a couple of weeks away from full functionality. Heavy lifting is done, and we we're down to the creature comforts and cleanup. We might be able to do a beta, but I still haven't heard what ADC's release schedule is.
I didn't see any issue with the EDS you gave me, so I'm not sure what would need to be done (if anything) specific to BRX.
I have never used an EDS, before. This will be my first time. Previously, I used EXPLICIT Messaging (EIPMSG?) in the BRX, which does not use the EDS.
Thank you for the reply and update!
Have a great weekend and God bless!
SOWEGATS
-
Hi BobO!!
Are we getting any closer to release of the new software with Implicit Messaging? Is it still scheduled for Q2 - by the end of this month, June 2024?
Many Thanks and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
-
Hi BobO!!
Are we getting any closer to release of the new software with Implicit Messaging? Is it still scheduled for Q2 - by the end of this month, June 2024?
Many Thanks and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
Because of the importance of the feature, ADC elected to do a full software launch rather than us just rolling out the release as we generally do. That process takes a bit longer, but it has allowed us to do a few things we weren't planning for this release. The scheduled release date is July 10th. As with any "official" release date, it's subject to change if we run into unexpected issues...but...it's all pretty solid right now and ADC is pretty darn good at hitting launches, so I don't expect that.
-
Thank you! I really don't want to change platforms to the Productivity Series to get the Implicit Messaging. And I already have a lot of BRX/DoMore Code that I can use/reuse for my project.
Take Care and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
-
Hi BobO!!
Just saw the following on the Automation Direct Website!! WooHoo!!
"With support for MQTT / MQTTS, HTTP / HTTPS, FTP (Client), EtherNet/IP: Explicit (Client, Server), Implicit (Client, Server), Modbus RTU Master/Slave, Modbus TCP, SMTP (Email), SNTP (Time Server), TCP/IP, DHCP, Ethernet remote I/O, K-sequence Slave, the BRX PLC family provides supreme communications versatility for any application."
I received my BRX PLC (BX-DM1E-M) yesterday, but I have not downloaded the new software, yet. Any tips or advise?
Also, a couple of questions:
1) Will I be able to use that same EDS File that I sent/linked to you for my Tecknic Step and Direction Servo System? That file was originally set up for the AD Productivity Series.
2) Are there any tutorials, yet, for the new Implicit Messaging feature(s) for the BRX?
Many Thanks and God Bless!!
SOWEGATS
-
Hi BobO!!
Just saw the following on the Automation Direct Website!! WooHoo!!
"With support for MQTT / MQTTS, HTTP / HTTPS, FTP (Client), EtherNet/IP: Explicit (Client, Server), Implicit (Client, Server), Modbus RTU Master/Slave, Modbus TCP, SMTP (Email), SNTP (Time Server), TCP/IP, DHCP, Ethernet remote I/O, K-sequence Slave, the BRX PLC family provides supreme communications versatility for any application."
I received my BRX PLC (BX-DM1E-M) yesterday, but I have not downloaded the new software, yet. Any tips or advise?
Also, a couple of questions:
1) Will I be able to use that same EDS File that I sent/linked to you for my Tecknic Step and Direction Servo System? That file was originally set up for the AD Productivity Series.
2) Are there any tutorials, yet, for the new Implicit Messaging feature(s) for the BRX?
Many Thanks and God Bless!!
SOWEGATS
Yes, finally released.
Yes, your EDS should work.
No tutorials that I'm aware of, but obviously that needs to happen.
You'll need to update your PLC's firmware first.
The help covers this, but this should get you started.
Add an adapter:
1. In the System Configuration, goto EtherNet/IP Scanner page under I/O configuration and enable with checkbox at the top.
2. Click "Find Adapters".
3. If your adapter's IP config is compatible with the PLC, it should show up in the list.
4. Click "Import EDS" to move your EDS into the repository.
5. Pick your adapter in the adapter list, then select your EDS file from the EDS list, then select "Add Adapter with EDS...".
Configure an adapter (added with EDS):
1. Give it a better device name, IP address should already be set.
2. Click "Add" to add an implicit message.
3. Specify a local PLC address for source/destination data.
a) Selecting the "+" button will allow you to create new data blocks, which can be arrays or structures.
b) If the EDS file details T2O or O2T assemblies, DmD allows you to create a structure that matches the assembly.
c) The PLC cannot support unaligned data or multi-bit bitfields directly, but optionally provides emulation to copy to/from the implicit frame.
From the Debug menu, the EtherNet/IP Scanner Monitor will open a useful monitoring tool.
-
Thanks BobO!! I really appreciate all the help!!
Many Thanks and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
-
First I want to say thanks for getting this update through. I've been looking forward to it for some time. Now that I've got it I thought I'd begin by trying to integrate a Keyence X100W barcode scanner into a new fixture that I just started. I've used this scanner before in a project and was able to get it to function using the explicit ethernet I/O capability only. The Keyence user manual is pretty detailed in how to communicate with the scanner and they also provide an .eds file so I though that this would be a good place to start.
After selecting Class 1 for my first I/O message, the first issue that I ran into was in trying to create a Assembly Specific UDT structure. I was told that the maximum UDT length is 256 bytes but the Assembly is 1400. I thought that this was a bit strange since the number shown in the Count field (T->O) was set to 172 although it did also show that it could be set from 40 - 1400 bytes. I ended up modifying the .eds file to limit the size of the Result Data parameter to 128 bytes. This parameter is the last one in the structure and is used to store the actual barcode value scanned. I'm never going to be reading a barcode larger than 30 bytes so this should give me some buffer to work with.
So now I was able to begin creating my UDT structure by filling in the UDT field names for all of the parameters. One of the things that threw me off was when I hit the OK button before completing all of the fields of the table. This brought me back into the Create Connection Point Data window. If you hit the + key again to get back to the Create Assembly Specific UDT you are presented with a box where everything is blank again and I thought that I lost all of the data that I had just entered. At this point I believe that you are creating a new UDT structure but you need to cancel out of that box and then press the OK button to complete the connection point even though you are not finished yet. Once I did this, I was able to go back and edit the structure by hitting the button with the 3 dots. Is that behavior a bug in the program?
The next issue I had was when I finished filling out all of UDT field names in my structure. I realized then that there was no parameter listed for the Result Data field?!? It wasn't in the list imported by the software. What the...?
So after some experimentation I found out that if I made the size of Result Data parameter (Parameter 1440 in the eds file) 32 or less, I could get that field to show up in the Create Assembly Specific UDT box table. This is puzzling because it is showing up as size xx bytes <Multi-Bit> in the table but I'm setting the value in the eds file based on bits. Of course this isn't going to help me as I need at least 1024 bits (128 bytes) of storage area for the scanned data.
So my question would be, why is this field not showing up in the list of parameters if the size is greater than 32 bits (as defined in the eds file)?
-
So now I was able to begin creating my UDT structure by filling in the UDT field names for all of the parameters. One of the things that threw me off was when I hit the OK button before completing all of the fields of the table. This brought me back into the Create Connection Point Data window. If you hit the + key again to get back to the Create Assembly Specific UDT you are presented with a box where everything is blank again and I thought that I lost all of the data that I had just entered. At this point I believe that you are creating a new UDT structure but you need to cancel out of that box and then press the OK button to complete the connection point even though you are not finished yet. Once I did this, I was able to go back and edit the structure by hitting the button with the 3 dots. Is that behavior a bug in the program?
It isn't a bug, but I can understand why it might be confusing and/or frustrating. Nothing below the + or ... is part of the adapter config, it is memory config. Rather than make you leave the adapter configuration to do your memory operations, we allow you to access it where more convenient. Anything with a + is about creating a new memory item, and all of those operations must be atomic before using them in the adapter config. Realizing that users may want to edit the UDT after the fact, we debated the best way to do that. The two possible answers were to do so through the UDT facility or to re-enter through the adapter config. We chose the latter, but chose to use the ... to differentiate from the initial creation, since at that point you are modifying a type that could have wide ranging implications. You can also access existing ASUDTs from the Manage Assembly Specific UDTs button on the Scanner config page.
The next issue I had was when I finished filling out all of UDT field names in my structure. I realized then that there was no parameter listed for the Result Data field?!? It wasn't in the list imported by the software. What the...?
So after some experimentation I found out that if I made the size of Result Data parameter (Parameter 1440 in the eds file) 32 or less, I could get that field to show up in the Create Assembly Specific UDT box table. This is puzzling because it is showing up as size xx bytes <Multi-Bit> in the table but I'm setting the value in the eds file based on bits. Of course this isn't going to help me as I need at least 1024 bits (128 bytes) of storage area for the scanned data.
So my question would be, why is this field not showing up in the list of parameters if the size is greater than 32 bits (as defined in the eds file)?
At the present, Do-more doesn't have the capability to embed an array into a structure. We have ideas of how to get there, but isn't trivial. We knew that there would be limitations in the ASUDT system, but the alternative was to not create it at all. I felt that it was preferable to provide a good answer for the 70-80% of cases that it could be used, rather than scrap the idea because we couldn't render embedded arrays. Our provision for multi-bit fields and unaligned WORD/DWORD fields was actually also a workaround, but embedded arrays was simply not possible at the present.
For your application, a simple buffer...the only option in many other products...is probably the best bet. Sorry that we were not able to do a better job for you.
-
At the present, Do-more doesn't have the capability to embed an array into a structure. We have ideas of how to get there, but isn't trivial. We knew that there would be limitations in the ASUDT system, but the alternative was to not create it at all. I felt that it was preferable to provide a good answer for the 70-80% of cases that it could be used, rather than scrap the idea because we couldn't render embedded arrays. Our provision for multi-bit fields and unaligned WORD/DWORD fields was actually also a workaround, but embedded arrays was simply not possible at the present.
For your application, a simple buffer...the only option in many other products...is probably the best bet. Sorry that we were not able to do a better job for you.
Thanks for your candid answer. No apologies needed.
I've gone through and tried importing the eds files from four other devices and have found that on all of those I'm not even given the choice to try to create a single structure. The option is greyed out. There must be something in those files that you guys don't like. Can you provide any insight to that?
And lastly, is it possible for those situations that I create my own UDT structure independently and just reference the heap item that I created for that UDT structure in the Local Addr: field in the T->O or O->T sections?
-
I've gone through and tried importing the eds files from four other devices and have found that on all of those I'm not even given the choice to try to create a single structure. The option is greyed out. There must be something in those files that you guys don't like. Can you provide any insight to that?
You can post them here and I can take a look. Most likely they are using some variant of array type memory, which we can't handle.
This stuff is always tradeoffs. We have made the mistake in the past of not offering a function because there were exceptions we couldn't handle. We eventually learned that something was better than nothing, even if it wasn't everything. The structure support is less complete than we'd like, but it works quite well for enough applications that we wanted to include it.
And lastly, is it possible for those situations that I create my own UDT structure independently and just reference the heap item that I created for that UDT structure in the Local Addr: field in the T->O or O->T sections?
Absolutely. It's just memory at the adapter level. ASUDTs are special and have magic driver code for unaligned and multi-bit, but everything else is treated a simple buffer.
-
Just want to confirm, is there no chance this will ever be made to work on H2-DM1E CPUs?
Thanks!
-
Just want to confirm, is there no chance this will ever be made to work on H2-DM1E CPUs?
Thanks!
I wouldn't say no chance, but it isn't a high priority. We're out of storage space for the OS in both Terminator and H2, so we're having to be very selective about what we add. There are likely ways around that, but it isn't trivial.
-
Just want to confirm, is there no chance this will ever be made to work on H2-DM1E CPUs?
Thanks!
Not that I have any say in any of this anymore, but from a business development perspective there isn't any value add for this feature in those old systems other than backwards compatibility. If it were me making this decision and it's not, I wouldn't waste precious development resources. I would look to the future and work on something more powerful than BRX.
Just my two pesos.
-
Absolutely agree, rlp122
-
We're getting serious about the DM2 now. Spec-ing parts as we speak. Initially on BRX hardware, but expanding to a bigger brother soon after.
-
A H2-DM2 would be awesome!
I do like the BRX, but I prefer the DL205 form factor.
Cheers!
-Will
-
A H2-DM2 would be awesome!
I do like the BRX, but I prefer the DL205 form factor.
Cheers!
-Will
The bigger brother to BRX I referenced will be rack based. The 205 backplane isn't going away anytime soon, but we'd like to have a higher performance and more modern alternative.
-
Hi BobO!
Which command uses less network bandwith when reading/writing data to the input/output assemblies: Publish & Subscribe or Copy?
Also, Regarding the Teknic EDS File:
1) The Configuration Assembly imported and "formatted" just fine. I.E. It made a UDT(?) with labels on its own, correctly with the proper labels for each memory location;
2) The Output and input assemblies were both too big for automatic or manual setup of UDTs, because they are both bigger than 256 Bytes. Also, I could not modify the EDS, because it would have changed the index #s of the registers, and Teknic strongly advised against that. Howerver;
3) I was able to set up custom Memory Blocks (332 Bytes for the Output Assembly [named ROUTB] and 280 Bytes for the Input Assembly [named RINB]) and they are correctly indexed to the actual Tecknic Output and Input Assemblies, with no offset! :) E.G. For the Output Assembly, Teknic Documention shows Bytes 24-27 as the Move Distance Registers/Bytes... This corresponds EXACTLY to ROUTB24-ROUTB27, and I Publish or Copy values into those Registers as a Signed DWord.
4) Only real problem I have is that the Enable bit for the motor is dropping out randomly, but re-establishing so quickly that I cannot catch with the PLC (faster than the BRX Scan Time, but slow enough to shutdown the motor). Is there a network buffer that is causing this? Or a network speed (200 packets/sec) - vs - PLC Scan Time issue?
Thanks and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
-
Hi BobO!!
Please see my post above, from yesterday.
Many Thanks and God Bless!!
SOWEGATS
-
Hi BobO!!
Please see my post above, from yesterday.
Many Thanks and God Bless!!
SOWEGATS
I've been out this entire week with COVID. I'll see if I can get someone else to answer your questions.
-
Hi BobO!!
Please see my post above, from yesterday.
Many Thanks and God Bless!!
SOWEGATS
I've been out this entire week with COVID. I'll see if I can get someone else to answer your questions.
DUDE!! Sorry to hear that! Hope you get better soon. I'll add you to my prayer list!
Thanks and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
-
Which command uses less network bandwith when reading/writing data to the input/output assemblies: Publish & Subscribe or Copy?
Well, I assume you are speaking of the instructions, PUBLISH/SUBSCRIBE and COPY, which you are using to as pre- or post-processing of your T>O and O>T data. The EtherNet/IP comms happen during the Comm Cycle of the PLC scan, while those instructions happen during the Execute Program portion of the PLC scan. So, in that respect, those instructions do not have a "bandwidth" per se. But, technically, PUBLISH & SUBSCRIBE are memory operations and native instructions to the BRX CPU, and as such, happen extremely fast. The COPY "instruction" is not a native instruction, but more of a macro. So, depending on what you are having the COPY instruction do, it could easily take more execution time (which still won't be much of anything) than the PUBLISH or SUBSCRIBE instructions.
4) Only real problem I have is that the Enable bit for the motor is dropping out randomly, but re-establishing so quickly that I cannot catch with the PLC (faster than the BRX Scan Time, but slow enough to shutdown the motor). Is there a network buffer that is causing this? Or a network speed (200 packets/sec) - vs - PLC Scan Time issue?
It would seem to me if "the Enable bit for the motor is dropping out randomly," that it is actually being written OFF randomly. But in your Adapter settings, what are your RPI values VS your PLC's scan time? Also, the EtherNet/IP Scanner Monitor might show something telling. Have you looked at that? (see Debug --> EtherNet/IP Scanner Monitor)
-
I've been out this entire week with COVID. I'll see if I can get someone else to answer your questions.
Oh no! Hope it's not hitting too hard and you're on the mend already.
-
The bigger brother to BRX I referenced will be rack based. The 205 backplane isn't going away anytime soon, but we'd like to have a higher performance and more modern alternative.
Cool! By bigger I assume some combination of taller/deeper (maybe 405/SLC-ish size?), higher max point count per module, bigger memory, maybe faster CPU (although the current one is pretty fast already)?
-
Oh no! Hope it's not hitting too hard and you're on the mend already.
Wasn't fun. Should be back to work Monday, but now wife has it. Dandy.
-
Cool! By bigger I assume some combination of taller/deeper (maybe 405/SLC-ish size?), higher max point count per module, bigger memory, maybe faster CPU (although the current one is pretty fast already)?
Yes on the form factor.
DM2 CPU will be a dramatic upgrade in some ways, while maintaining what has made us good.
-
Hi BobO and Greg,
I changed my RPI from 10ms (200pkts/sec) to 100ms (20pkts/sec) and my dropped Enable bit problem went away. My simulation has been running now for about 5 hrs without a hiccup. That's about 6100 total cycles = about 1500 cases (PNP Case Packing Y-Z Robot). My PLC Scan Times are about 452microsec Min, 470microsec Avg and 2.5ms Max.
Still not sure what the problem actually was, but seems like, maybe, I was overloading the network? Any thoughts?
Take Care and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
-
Hi BobO and Greg,
I changed my RPI from 10ms (200pkts/sec) to 100ms (20pkts/sec) and my dropped Enable bit problem went away. My simulation has been running now for about 5 hrs without a hiccup. That's about 6100 total cycles = about 1500 cases (PNP Case Packing Y-Z Robot). My PLC Scan Times are about 452microsec Min, 470microsec Avg and 2.5ms Max.
Still not sure what the problem actually was, but seems like, maybe, I was overloading the network? Any thoughts?
Take Care and God Bless!
SOWEGATS
There are a lot of moving parts. When you shorten the RPI, you are also shortening the timeout, which is a multiple of the RPI. Of course you are also increasing the amount of traffic, but the PLC can handle that easily. It's really hard to know without a Wireshark network trace.
-
Forgive my ignorance, but how does one go about assigning addresses if the EDS file doesn't populate the configuration data field? It does populate the messages field where i'm able to select listen/input etc.
I'm attempting to control a IAI robo cylinder with a pcon/cb controller via Implicit messaging. Simple three position movement.
Regards
-
Create or specify a data block in the 'Local Addr:' field of the T->O (Input) section that will be used to store the data coming from the PCON/CB controller (Target-to-Originator).
Create or specify a data block in the 'Local Addr:' field of the O->T (Output) section that will be used to transmit data to the PCON/CB controller (Originator-to-Target).
If the EDS file for the PCON/CB controller does not include Configuration Data, then configuration of the PCON/CB controller is not performed through the establishment of the IO messaging connection.
I have attached an image to help illustrate the setup.
-
This is all a little above me, but i'm getting there.
Can i simply use copy and move to get the data back and forth?
-
One approach could be...
- Find the structures for both the T->O (Input) Data and O->T (Output) Data of the target device in the vendor documentation.
- Create a User Data Type (UDT) that includes the structure elements of the T->O (Input) Data and O->T (Output) Data.
- Create an Instance of this User Data Type (UDT), either as a Heap Item or a Memory Block.
- Use the COPY instructions to move the data in to and out of the array elements and UDT structure members.
-
I apologize for not responding sooner, but i shelved this project for a while.
I came back to it I feel I have a decent grasp on the udt/heap items. My controller is showing that communication between it and the plc isn't established. I'm able to query adapters and find it without any issue.
My ip addresses and gateways all match up, is there any other settings i should be looking for, I've been going over this for a few days trying to get it on my own but to no avail.