PLC vs PepperL-Fuchs Laser Sensor

[Outpizza]

Hi experts, I hope you're all having incredible days.

I'd really like to utilize this sensor for a customer application, but the issue is that the sensor comes with a C# DLL library package and the only way to poll the raw data on demand is to call some of the included C# functions over ethernet tcp/ip.

https://www.pepperl-fuchs.com/usa/en/classid_9864.htm?view=productdetails&prodid=107063#product

How can I call C# functions from a PLC? AB preferred, but willing to use B&R if necessary. Is there some kind of processor module with I/O that can slot into a backplane, poll the sensor, run a simple C# script, and pass output to the PLC?

 

[strantor]

The letters "PLC" are not found even once in the manual and I don't see any references to any industrial fieldbus protocols. I think they intended this for one use only: via a computer and custom programming that utilizes their DLL file. You could use a computer to interface with the sensor and then retransmit the data over a normal fieldbus protocol but that seems like an awful lot of work just for the privilege of using a sensor that it seems the manufacturer doesn't even want you to use. I would suggest looking a different sensor solution, not only for ease of use but because something as automation-unfriendly as this might not be offered by PF for the long haul and you might regret standardizing on it.

EDIT:
I've heard about some newer PLCs allowing programming in C (maybe C# and/or C++ too) but I don't think even those would work (and same story for Uc boards like STM32 and Arduino) because while their languages might be C-like, I don't think they have any abilities for using Microsoft's .NET framework as the manual dictates, or importing precompiled binary DLLs like a computer does.

 

[Outpizza]

The letters "PLC" are not found even once in the manual and I don't see any references to any industrial fieldbus protocols. I think they intended this for one use only: via a computer and custom programming that utilizes their DLL file. You could use a computer to interface with the sensor and then retransmit the data over a normal fieldbus protocol but that seems like an awful lot of work just for the privilege of using a sensor that it seems the manufacturer doesn't even want you to use. I would suggest looking a different sensor solution, not only for ease of use but because something as automation-unfriendly as this might not be offered by PF for the long haul and you might regret standardizing on it.

EDIT:
I've heard about some newer PLCs allowing programming in C (maybe C# and/or C++ too) but I don't think even those would work (and same story for Uc boards like STM32 and Arduino) because while their languages might be C-like, I don't think they have any abilities for using Microsoft's .NET framework as the manual dictates, or importing precompiled binary DLLs like a computer does.

Appreciate it, thank you.

 

[robertmee]

The P&F sensor looks to be a copy cat of uepsilons line of 2D laser scanners. I've used them and they communicate via TCP/Modbus. The uepsilon sensors can interface directly to AB Logix PLCs via a Hilscher NT-151-151-re gateway.

https://www.micro-epsilon.com/2d-3d-measurement/laser-profile-scanners/

The P&F sensor also has ethernet, so I wouldn't be surprised if it supported TCP/Modbus also. Best bet call P&F applications.

 

[Puddle]

Looks like the only interface you'll be able to get is the four NC contacts, which probably isn't going to help much. If you already have the laser, it may be worth trying to set it up and ping it read requests over Modbus TCP, but I don't think will work.

We had the Micro Epsilon laser on trial but had a lot of problems with it dropping communication and they wouldn't let us use a Profinet module without a purchase.
We bought a Keyence LJ-X8000 3D laser in the end and it hasn't missed a beat since. Cost more than the total of all the other parts of the control system though!

If you have to use this laser though, there's a technology module for Siemens S7-1500 that allows C or C++ programming.
https://support.industry.siemens.com/cs/attachments/109820481/S71500_tm_mfp_manual_en-US_en-US.pdf

 

[blkfalc4]

We just setup a system with this:

https://lmi3d.com/series/gocator-2500-series/

No remote controller needed. Built in web server and has E/IP along with digital I/O if needed.

 

[robertmee]

Looks like the only interface you'll be able to get is the four NC contacts, which probably isn't going to help much. If you already have the laser, it may be worth trying to set it up and ping it read requests over Modbus TCP, but I don't think will work.

We had the Micro Epsilon laser on trial but had a lot of problems with it dropping communication and they wouldn't let us use a Profinet module without a purchase.
We bought a Keyence LJ-X8000 3D laser in the end and it hasn't missed a beat since. Cost more than the total of all the other parts of the control system though!

If you have to use this laser though, there's a technology module for Siemens S7-1500 that allows C or C++ programming.
https://support.industry.siemens.com/cs/attachments/109820481/S71500_tm_mfp_manual_en-US_en-US.pdf

Bummer on the Micro Epsilon for you. I have several installs in for years with no issues, using both Wago and the Hilscher Gateway to talk TCP/Modbus. Haven't tried Profinet, so can't speak to that. The North American group headquarters is literally down the street from me, so over the last many years, am able to 'borrow' equipment to test.

 

[drbitboy]

The issue is not whether you have C# on the PLC,.

The issue is that the DLL cannot be used directly on the PLC.

The two solutions I can think of are

1. Write an application, for a Windows PC that wraps the DLL calls to the device, and allows the PLC to use some protocol (E/IP, modbus, etc.) to access the data.

2. Reverse engineer the protocol and use the sockets interface on the PLC to connect to the device directly

The former is easier to implement; the latter is less of a Rube Goldberg/Heath-Robinson.

 

[the_msp]

Calling @busarider to see if you can use DLLs on Beckhoff, or because that is a stripped version of Windows it isn't allowed?

 

[Outpizza]

Thank you everyone for these great responses, I appreciate the help.

This confirms my suspicion that, unfortunately, the PF sensor might not be the best for my application. The issue is that most laser scanners that I've seen online don't fit my application well...

My application is that I need to measure an almost-straight-but-not-quite profile roughly 100 inches in length. Scan rate doesn't need to be crazy fast. 2 scans per second absolute minimum rate allowable. See rough schematic below.
https://i.imgur.com/njh9lTL.png

Most scanners I've seen are high-res with a narrow scanning window. I've been looking for low-res wide scan, without much luck. Anyone worked on anything similar to this application before and wanna shed some light on a solution? Thanks

 

[padees]

No offense, but if you posted your pic earlier, you might get different answers.

At a 100" wide swath at the line speed, it's gonna take a chunk of $$$, and I doubt you could do it with one sensor.

LMI, Epsilon, Cognex, Keyence... to name a few, could probably rig something up for you, but it won't be cheap.

You might be able to do optical time of flight sensors to grab a snapshot, but that would be really ugly.

Line scan cameras, laser profile systems... are all going to be expensive.


I don't know your exact situation, but take it for what it's worth.

 

[Outpizza]

No offense, but if you posted your pic earlier, you might get different answers.

At a 100" wide swath at the line speed, it's gonna take a chunk of $$$, and I doubt you could do it with one sensor.

LMI, Epsilon, Cognex, Keyence... to name a few, could probably rig something up for you, but it won't be cheap.

You might be able to do optical time of flight sensors to grab a snapshot, but that would be really ugly.

Line scan cameras, laser profile systems... are all going to be expensive.


I don't know your exact situation, but take it for what it's worth.

Thank you sir. No offense taken

 

[robertmee]

No offense, but if you posted your pic earlier, you might get different answers.

At a 100" wide swath at the line speed, it's gonna take a chunk of $$$, and I doubt you could do it with one sensor.

LMI, Epsilon, Cognex, Keyence... to name a few, could probably rig something up for you, but it won't be cheap.

You might be able to do optical time of flight sensors to grab a snapshot, but that would be really ugly.

Line scan cameras, laser profile systems... are all going to be expensive.


I don't know your exact situation, but take it for what it's worth.

We do apx 70 inch wide web at 800 FPM with multiple micro-epsilons. Not sure the OP's actual need, but we don't need the full 70 inch stitched together. Just strategic samples across the width. Coverage of the 70" is probably 50". About 15K worth of hardware, not including an existing CLX.

 

[L33er]

Compactlogix 5480! window 10 IOT Enterpise.

Windows 10 IoT Enterprise is a version of Windows 10 that is designed for use on Internet of Things (IoT) devices. It is compatible with the .NET Framework, and you can use it to develop and run .NET applications

 

[padees]

Compactlogix 5480! window 10 IOT Enterpise.

Windows 10 IoT Enterprise is a version of Windows 10 that is designed for use on Internet of Things (IoT) devices. It is compatible with the .NET Framework, and you can use it to develop and run .NET applications

I've never used one of those. I was waiting for gunia pigs to work the bugs out. LOL

I am not sure how this would work with other systems having their own controllers for the process, and specifics to implement, but it is an option.

I don't really rely on Rockwell releasing items when they say. It's usually years later.