Kinetix 5100 Gantry Synchronized Move

[KonstantinKolev]

Hi,

I have a project where one of the modules is a gantry type structure with 2 servo motor, one from each side of the gantry. The transmission is achieved via leadscrew.

The controller is Compact Logix L33ER.

The task is to synchronize both servo in order to move the gantry smoothly.

I was thinking to use Add-On Instructions like MAM and MAG but as I did some experiments the gantry does not move smoothly.

Another rumour I heard is that Kinetix 5100 cannot be used for Motion Control and in order to achieve this type of motion I would need a Motion Controller.

How would you approach this task?

Best Regards
Konstantin Kolev

 

[jstolaruk]

I haven't used the 5100 but it does have a feature called E-Cam. You may be able to set up a virtual axis and then have the 5100s follow the virtual axis using this feature; a virtual master axis with 2 follower axis.

see document ID QA47146 in the Knowledgebase.

 

[alan_505]

How are you controlling the K5100, my understanding is that they are a replacement for the U3000 which are a standalone servo axis, although they could be controlled by a Compact or ControlLogix with motion commands.
You may be able to run one K5100 as the master and have the other one follow it.

 

[arpus4KM]

Hi,

I have a project where one of the modules is a gantry type structure with 2 servo motor, one from each side of the gantry. The transmission is achieved via leadscrew.

The controller is Compact Logix L33ER.

The task is to synchronize both servo in order to move the gantry smoothly.

I was thinking to use Add-On Instructions like MAM and MAG but as I did some experiments the gantry does not move smoothly.

Another rumour I heard is that Kinetix 5100 cannot be used for Motion Control and in order to achieve this type of motion I would need a Motion Controller.

How would you approach this task?

Best Regards
Konstantin Kolev

33erM does integrated motion.... which I believe just means CIP or Ethernet motion... so you could still use the 5100 with the 33ER if you program the 5100 without MAM instructions. I've only dealt with one before and the customer called off the project before we could even get started unfortunately.

as for the 5100, that should be a standalone unit, it can be programmed without any PLC present at all using the KNX5100C application and a Mini USB on the front of it. they also have multiple encoder ports on the front for different uses. best to read the manual and try to see if it will do what you want specifically.

 

[arpus4KM]

As for your other question

Another rumour I heard is that Kinetix 5100 cannot be used for Motion Control and in order to achieve this type of motion I would need a Motion Controller.

from the manual itself

You can use the Kinetix 5100 drive with a Logix 5000™ controller and Studio5000 software to deliver a simplified programming experience by using a Class1 Ethernet/IP connection (AOP) and supported Add-On-Instructions to program and control the drive. In this architecture, the drive is configured by using the KNX5100C software with a USB connection. It is important to note that this implementation seems like Integrated Motion on Ethernet/IP (CIP) motion. This connection is NOT CIP motion but does provide simple control for your small motion application. More information on the AOP is found in Chapter8 and the Add-On Instruction library is found in AppendixC. Figure 6 - Kinetix 5100 Drive System with PAC Controller and EtherNet/IP Network Control IMPORTANTThe Kinetix 5100 drive does not support PTP or Integrated Motion on EtherNet/IP (CIP) motion. The Kinetix 5100 drive is a Class 1 EtherNet/IP device and uses a Requested Packet Interval (RPI) to exchange data between the PAC and drive

Basically, you add it into the tree over ethernet, and with the AOP you gain access to the logic needed to control it. But it's not the same as another drive that is done through a motion controller.



Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but that's what it looked like to me when I was researching it.

 

[Ken Roach]

This is just coming from my reading about the drive, and my past experience with similar drives, not from direct experience.

Kinetix 5100 might have been the wrong choice for a gantry that has two separate actuators that need to "gear" and synchronize their position and speed, especially if that motion needs to be coordinated with one or more other axis. But there may be a way to get it to work in this application, depending on the performance that is needed.

The Kinetix 5100 is intended to be a successor to A-B's simple single-axis "indexing" type drives, from the Electrocraft BRU to the Ultra 3000i to the Kinetix 300. There are even explicit migration guides from those older platforms.

As described in the manual that was cited above, while it can run standalone or EtherNet/IP to connect to a controller, it goes in the I/O tree and gets its configuration and commands from the I/O image.

It does not go in an Axis group and participate in CIP Motion or use any of the native CIP Motion commands.

Jstolaruk pointed out the "E-CAM" feature of the drive, is meant to really run a position cam from an external encoder input. Despite that Quick Start document linked to in the Knowledgebase, E-Cam does not look easy to use.

https://www.rockwellautomation.com/...ndalone-control-servo-drives.html#kinetix5100

The user manual also describes the "E-Gear" function, which might be closer to what Konstantin needs. One of the actuators would run like an ordinary position indexer, and the other one would be "Geared" to it with actual encoder pulses wired between the two drives.

Konstantin also mentioned using the "Add-On" instructions for the drive. RA provides a set of Add-On instructiosn that have names very similar to the native CIP Motion instructions: there is an AOI called "raC_Opr_K5100_MAM ", for example, that performs a function similar to the CIP Motion "MAM" instruction.

I don't know if running two "MAM" style positioning instructions on the two actuators simultaneously will give Konstantin the performance he needs for smooth operation. Maybe they're too rigidly bound together to allow for the variations in speed between the drives as they encounter different loads or slightly different start and stop times.

If it were my system I would start by trying to de-couple the actuators from one another and see if I could get the ordinary "MAM" style point-to-point functions working smoothly.

 

[Ken Roach]

I took a closer look at the documentation for the E-Gear feature and the AOI that emulates "MAG".

From what I can tell, it's just a way to configure the E-Gear feature, which uses a real physical quadrature encoder signal.

It does not gear the "Kinetix 5100 Axis" object to a real CIP motion axis or a virtual Axis.

So if this system is going to work, it's probably going to involve a physical connection between the buffered encoder output signal on a "Master" drive to the auxiliary encoder input channel on a "Slave" drive.

 

[arpus4KM]

I took a closer look at the documentation for the E-Gear feature and the AOI that emulates "MAG".

From what I can tell, it's just a way to configure the E-Gear feature, which uses a real physical quadrature encoder signal.

It does not gear the "Kinetix 5100 Axis" object to a real CIP motion axis or a virtual Axis.

So if this system is going to work, it's probably going to involve a physical connection between the buffered encoder output signal on a "Master" drive to the auxiliary encoder input channel on a "Slave" drive.

or possibly adding a 2198-ABQE encoder output emulator, run both gantry with a virtual axis that the emulator gives both a signal to run with. then use motion commands in the program for the virtual axis and both 5100 can be "geared" using Gear Mode to follow the emulated outputs.


Maybe that is worth investigating more, but it seems feasible.

 

[Ken Roach]

Using an ABQE is a weird workaround for a drive that also connects directly to EtherNet/IP, but it's a pretty clever idea.

I would have to look closer at the ABQE's and whether they would require a CIP Motion capable controller. I don't think they are counted as an "Axis" when you count up the axes supported by a 1769-L33ERM (for example) but because they're definitely participating in CIP Motion on Ethernet, they might require a CIP Motion capable controller.

Availability of the -ABQE might be a problem, too, if this machine is already at the commissioning stage.