SLC to Logix Conversion/1747-AENTR

[The Plc Kid]

I've used the AENTR, and yes, you need a module in Slot 0 of every rack. It will not communicate over the interconnect cable.

Incorrect. It will work over the interconnect cable up to 3 chassis or 30 modules. This is also firmware dependant both on the module and your version of logix.

 

[Adam303]

Thanks for clearing that up Plc Kid, this was described in post #9 as a snaphot from the manual.

 

[brstilson]

Incorrect. It will work over the interconnect cable up to 3 chassis or 30 modules. This is also firmware dependant both on the module and your version of logix.

Good to know. This must have not been available when I implemented it several months ago. Rockwell told me straight up it couldn't be done.

 

[hazey]

1747_aentr

Adam did you go ahead with this project? How did it work out?

I am looking at a similar project to yours, using 3 x 1747-AENTR and ver 20 Logix.

All went OK so far except the 1746-OW16 data type comes out as a SINT[12], thus only allowing 12 outputs, I think I have something wrong but not sure what it could be. I downloaded latest EDS files but still the same?
Any help from the guru's?

thanks
Hazey

 

[hazey]

Guys the 1746-OW16 EDS file fixed one of my issues.

thx

Hazey

 

[Engmyc]

ControlLogix redundant communicating with remote I / O through 1747-AENTR?

hello,

Does anyone know if it works with redundant ControlLogix remote in via SLC500 1747-AENTR? The Rockwell never done this configuration, but theoretically works by being in Ethernet.

I look back, for I am with architecture specified for this project.

thank you very much

 

[Ken Roach]

The 1747-AENTR does not work with ControlLogix Redundancy.

This is clarified by at least two Knowledgebase documents:

471083 1747-AENTR SLC Ethernet Adapter General Information and FAQs


521938 ControlLogix Redundancy does not support 1747-AENTR

I do not understand from your post if you are planning a system using ControlLogix Redundancy or if you are being asked to implement a system that has already been designed.

 

[Engmyc]

I being asked to implement a system that has already been designed.

The suport rockwell talk me test in my company before implement project, because rockwell never test these aplication.

 

[Ken Roach]

I am basing my comments only on publicly available information on the RA Knowledgebase that was current as of early 2013.

I am not going to second-guess your local RA office. There may be current or future changes to the 1747-AENTR that change the information in those links.

You need to sort this out directly with Rockwell Automation.

 

[Engmyc]

The existing architecture today is PLC-5 redundant with remote SLC containing Scanner 1747-ASB. I believe that inserting a 3rd rack RIO card to contrologix would be better option as it will not replace scl remote.
What is your opinion?

 

[Ken Roach]

I have both opinions and experience implementing systems of this type, but I no longer work for Rockwell Automation and it would be a disservice to you if I speculated or provided advice on this architecture.

You need to collaborate with Rockwell Automation to design and implement a supportable ControlLogix Redundancy architecture.

 

[Engmyc]

Ok Friend.

Thank very much for your replies.