rogerkohler
Member
Hi,
I'm having some issues with the READ_VAR instruction.
I want to read 84 registers in my device (PM-5500) starting at register 3000. I Have already been able to communicate with my device when i had 52 registers configured, but i need some more now. Those registers are consecutive in the device. I have a timeout of 2 seconds in Register [2] of the Gest Table ARRAY[0...3]OF INT. I've removed that 2 seconds once and put the register to 0. I know that if this register is at 0 there is no more timeout applied (rather the one physically of the card), but now it's back to 2.
I get a 16#02 Incorrect response on the Operation Report in the Gest [1] most significant byte. I see my Activity bit Gest[0].0 triggering and i already tried to Cancel the transaction by triggering the bit 1 of the Gest[0].1 . But it doesnt want to get back on track
I've already read all of the post here on this site and my concern is that the solution seems to be to restart the PLC, but that is not convenient. There has to be another way to make this READ_VAR back to life.
I'm having some issues with the READ_VAR instruction.
I want to read 84 registers in my device (PM-5500) starting at register 3000. I Have already been able to communicate with my device when i had 52 registers configured, but i need some more now. Those registers are consecutive in the device. I have a timeout of 2 seconds in Register [2] of the Gest Table ARRAY[0...3]OF INT. I've removed that 2 seconds once and put the register to 0. I know that if this register is at 0 there is no more timeout applied (rather the one physically of the card), but now it's back to 2.
I get a 16#02 Incorrect response on the Operation Report in the Gest [1] most significant byte. I see my Activity bit Gest[0].0 triggering and i already tried to Cancel the transaction by triggering the bit 1 of the Gest[0].1 . But it doesnt want to get back on track
I've already read all of the post here on this site and my concern is that the solution seems to be to restart the PLC, but that is not convenient. There has to be another way to make this READ_VAR back to life.