Compact Logix 1769-L36ERM Ethernet

Quick question if anyone knows:

I see the 1769-L36ERM has two built in Ethernet ports. Can these be configured individually?

My customer requested a separate Ethernet module for plant communications (The machine and plant are both EthernetIP), but if the PLC can have that functionality built in then obviously I won't have to add another module.

Thanks

No, you can only have one IP address.

The 'R' in the part number stands for 'Ring'. The two ports can participate in an Ethernet 'Device Level Ring' architecture, but the port has just one IP address.

If you need more than one IP interface, use the modular ControlLogix platform or install a router.

Hi

You could also use a l4x processor which will also allow you to add a second Ethernet card if you want to stay with compact logix

Donnchadh

Check out Allen-Bradley part# 9600-ENA. Its a NAT device that will let you translate a network address on one network to a device on another isolated network.

Also, not that if you use a L4x processor, you will be unable to use any firmware past version 20. I won't say they aren't supported, but the l4x series is no longer being developed.

Thanks for the replies everyone. I definitely have to look into the ENA module as that seems to be my only option (The L36 is set).

I was surprised to see that I couldn't simply add a communications expansion module to the system.

NAT translation or VLAN's is preferred over seperate NIC's I think. Somewhere out there is a great document by Cisco/RA about Ethernet/IP best practices. I like NAT translation, especially if I were a machine builder. Each machine could use the same addresses (192.168.1.x for example) and then those could be translated to suite a customers factory floor network scheme.

BlueAltezza said:

Thanks for the replies everyone. I definitely have to look into the ENA module as that seems to be my only option (The L36 is set).

I was surprised to see that I couldn't simply add a communications expansion module to the system.

Click to expand...

I dont know if you plan to use a switch in the machine or not, or if it will be a managed switch or not but aswell as the 9300-ENA module there is a NAT version of the 5700 switch that might be interesting if you plan on using a managed switch.

WildeKurt said:

NAT translation or VLAN's is preferred over seperate NIC's I think. Somewhere out there is a great document by Cisco/RA about Ethernet/IP best practices. I like NAT translation, especially if I were a machine builder. Each machine could use the same addresses (192.168.1.x for example) and then those could be translated to suite a customers factory floor network scheme.

Click to expand...

This is a massive advantage not just for the machine builder, imagine the client has a problem with two identical machines. You can tell him to swap pieces from one machine to the other without the need for him to change IP addresses etc. Also it eliminates the chance of an IP address conflict taking the whole network down as the worst that will happen is an IP conflict internal to the machine.

Usireland said:

I dont know if you plan to use a switch in the machine or not, or if it will be a managed switch or not but aswell as the 9300-ENA module there is a NAT version of the 5700 switch that might be interesting if you plan on using a managed switch.

Click to expand...

I have a Stratix-5700 sitting on my desk that was bought just for that reason. When i ordered a 9300-ENA, i set it up and had it working in about 5 minutes. Setup was pretty self explanatory. The Stratix switch on the other hand is a different story.

If you don't need the 5700 stratix switch for other reasons, I personally would not buy it just for the NAT capability.