C-More EA9 not connecting to BRX PLC

I have a C-More EA9-T8CL that I'm trying to connect to a BRX DM1E-M PLC via ethernet. I have the IP addresses set as static 169.254.1.0 (PLC) and 169.254.1.1 (HMI) and the subnets are the same, 255.255.255.0. I have no issues connecting to either with my laptop, its just getting them to see each other 100% of the time that is the issue. Sometimes I can turn on my system and they'll work together flawlessly, but most times upon startup I'm getting a PLC Communication Timeout error on the HMI. I can swap e-net cables (all are known good cables) around between the two and the switch, even direct connecting the PLC and HMI without the switch and it will make no difference in connectivity. But usually after fiddling with the cables for awhile I can get them to connect, though I cant have to do this once the machine is ready to enter production. Any ideas? This is my first time connecting the C-More via ethernet, usually I use the serial port.

Try delaying the application of power to the Cmore.

Automationdirect released an update to the software which contains a firmware update that addresses the issue. I have an EA3 panel that does the same thing. If I power everything up the panel is ready before the PLC (in my case a Micrologix 1400) and it shows PLC timeout even once the PLC is ready. I have to cycle power to the panel and then its ok (after the PLC is up)


Mike

Just a FYI, using APIPA addressing ranges 169.254.x.x can cause issues in some circumstances. We highly recommend putting your equipment on Private addresses. 192.168.x.x, 10.x.x.x, 172.x.x.x, etc.

See Page 13-5 of the BRX User Manual.
https://cdn.automationdirect.com/static/manuals/brxuserm/ch13.pdf

Blue92 said:

I have the IP addresses set as static 169.254.1.0 (PLC) and 169.254.1.1 (HMI) and the subnets are the same, 255.255.255.0.

Click to expand...

Using x.0 isn't recommended either. Maybe not even resolvable. And personally, I avoid x.1, regardless of if there is a gateway or not.

I would jump up to x.10 or greater just for grins. And use a private range like icky recommended.

Alright sounds like a plan. Im gonna head into work for a bit tomorrow and swap IP addresses. It did the same thing with separate panels so I know the panel is good.

To elaborate a bit, with that subnet mask, 169.254.1.0 is the network address, 169.254.1.255 is the broadcast. Those two shouldn't be used.

If you had a mask like 255.255.254.0 the network address would be 169.254.0.0 and 169.254.1.0 would be a valid host address.

The two should communicate fine directly or through a switch regardless of which powers up first. Likely just an address issue as suggested above.

Went to work for a few hours this morning and changed them to 192.168.1.10 and 192.168.1.11 and that solved the issue. Thanks guys!