DeviceNet vs EtherNet IP

Sorry for the newbie question but the ovda site is horrible. Wiki and searching via google hasn't gotten me very far.

In maybe a few pro's and con's of each maybe you guys could help me (no need to get into detail). I do know about trunk line lengths with DeviceNet and traffic on huge EtherNet IP networks but that isn't really an issue for me.

Hi,
both great for there purpose.
Devicenet:
Stable transmission and up to 63 devices. Can take some time to set up,
when you have to install EDS and make the config..... And then you still have some time
left for device config and so one. But a great automation network
Ethernet/IP:
If there is heavy traffic on the network you can get some timeouts.
Good for large data transmission. Have only worked whit AB and here it´s the
controller theres sets the limit of devices connected. The config is easy and fast.

Clevername said:

Sorry for the newbie question but the ovda site is horrible. Wiki and searching via google hasn't gotten me very far.

In maybe a few pro's and con's of each maybe you guys could help me (no need to get into detail). I do know about trunk line lengths with DeviceNet and traffic on huge EtherNet IP networks but that isn't really an issue for me.

Click to expand...

Device-Net or CAN needs specific hardware interface for the developer. (PCMCIA to Devicenet- PCMCIA obsolete) (Serial to CAN - serial obsolete) (Serial to DeviceNet - serial obsolete)
Your computer may not have a serial port. Your computer may not have a PCMCIA slot.

Ethernet IP - Up to date, your computer probably has ethernet connectivity. (for now)

I've done a great deal of work with both networks and they both have their place.

DeviceNet is best for very small packets (a single frame can only handle 8 bytes of payload), small microcontrollers (CAN is very popular in automotive applications), and small devices. Motor overload relays, small I/O blocks, photoeyes, valve manifolds; all of these are good applications for DeviceNet.

EtherNet/IP needs a more powerful microcontroller or microprocessor and a much more sophisticated network stack. The speed of an EtherNet/IP connection is almost always limited by the device's computing power, not the wire speed or the switch speed. A single I/O connection can carry 510 bytes without fragmenting. It's excellent for devices that need to do both I/O and messaging, and you can easily mix other application protocols on the same wire. Having devices that support common computer protocols like HTTP, FTP, e-mail, BOOTP/DHCP, etc is a huge benefit.

The convenience of built-in PC connectivity and inexpensive media are terrific for EtherNet/IP. The PC connection isn't that big a deal for DeviceNet; most applications "pass through" the PLC or use a USB/DeviceNet interface (yes, expensive).

In my opinion a properly installed network with either technology is very physically robust. I used to deal with a lot of DeviceNet troubleshooting where users complained that the network was "flaky" or "finicky" but I always found simple or obvious violations of simple wiring rules: no shield, or loose connections (once, a junction box full of wire-nuts and water), or missing termination resistors. Now that EtherNet/IP has a lot of installed base I find just as many damaged Cat5e cables, bad crimps, broken RJ45 tabs and faulty switches.