You are not registered yet. Please click here to register!


 
 
plc storereviewsdownloads
This board is for PLC Related Q&A ONLY. Please DON'T use it for advertising, etc.
 
Try our online PLC Simulator- FREE.  Click here now to try it.

New Here? Please read this important info!!!


Go Back   PLCS.net - Interactive Q & A > PLCS.net - Interactive Q & A > LIVE PLC Questions And Answers

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old July 9th, 2021, 01:09 PM   #16
AustralIan
Member
Germany

AustralIan is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 1,256
Can someone zip and post the eds files for all of the components? Adapter, Io modules, maybe the backplane if this is a separate eds..
In theory this should completely describe the available connections, but sometimes it can be a bit opaque. And it's raining today, so...
  Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2021, 04:49 PM   #17
BachPhi
Member
United States

BachPhi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Los Alamos
Posts: 528
Thanks for popping back in after disappearing without any feedback.

There is nothing to view in Ken's zip file. It's an empty program. Below is the screenshot of IO that Ron setup:




Attached are eds files:
Attached Files
File Type: zip EDS 1746.zip (26.4 KB, 1 views)
File Type: zip EDS_Files_for_1747-AENTR.zip (56.9 KB, 1 views)

Last edited by BachPhi; July 9th, 2021 at 04:53 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old July 9th, 2021, 06:15 PM   #18
Firejo
Member
United States

Firejo is offline
 
Firejo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 1,484
Just out of curiosity, why not leave the SLC5/05 in place and use it as a data concentrator?
__________________
Go Hawks!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2021, 10:22 AM   #19
TreyB
Member
United States

TreyB is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Sioux Falls
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by BachPhi View Post
Thanks for popping back in after disappearing without any feedback.
Umm.. okay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BachPhi View Post
Attached are eds files:
I was more interested in the EDS for the AENTR. But, I don't think I understand what it's showing me. The assembly information is interesting, but it doesn't tell me what instance is used, that I can tell. Or how to decipher the data that may be in these "chunks". Again, new to this so maybe there's something I'm not seeing.
  Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2021, 10:25 AM   #20
TreyB
Member
United States

TreyB is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Sioux Falls
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firejo View Post
Just out of curiosity, why not leave the SLC5/05 in place and use it as a data concentrator?
Would that give us the ability to write to the IO though? We want to bring control under the DCS.
  Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2021, 03:22 PM   #21
Firejo
Member
United States

Firejo is offline
 
Firejo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 1,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreyB View Post
Would that give us the ability to write to the IO though? We want to bring control under the DCS.
I donít see why not. All you would need to do is write from the DCS to the appropriate data files in the SLC. Having said that, I donít know anything about messaging to and from a DCS but if it supports PCCC messaging then it should be able to send data to and from the SLC via Ethernet/IP TCP. You might need to move the I/O data in/out of data files in the SLC but creating some ďMOVĒ ladder logic sounds a lot easier then trying to reverse engineer a generic CIP connection (at least for me). It would also give you the ability to create some level of ďintelligenceĒ at the I/O level if needed. For example, if there is an alarm condition that occurs, you could program the PLC to deal with it (I.E. shut a process down?) rather than waiting for the DSC to do so. The advantage in that scenario would be that even if communications between the DCS and the SLC fails, the SLC could maintain a certain level of control and safety.
On a related note, it is worth mentioning that AB has put the 1747-AENTR and 1747-L55 (SLC5/05) on Active Mature status. There is no date set yet and it could be years but itís worth keeping in mind.
__________________
Go Hawks!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2021, 03:41 PM   #22
Ken Roach
Lifetime Supporting Member + Moderator
United States

Ken Roach is offline
 
Ken Roach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 15,977
If it were my system, I would very strongly recommend leaving an SLC-5/05 controller in place and allowing it to control the I/O, and to use ordinary well-understood, easy-to-diagnose, easy-to-configure Data Table Read and Data Table Write commands to communicate with the DCS.

I will try not to sound too sour, but will say that when a customer has a bad experience with third-party integration, that helps sell native Emerson I/O. This creates a perverse incentive on Emerson's part to make third-party integration projects go badly.
  Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2021, 05:00 PM   #23
TreyB
Member
United States

TreyB is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Sioux Falls
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firejo View Post
I donít see why not. All you would need to do is write from the DCS to the appropriate data files in the SLC. Having said that, I donít know anything about messaging to and from a DCS but if it supports PCCC messaging then it should be able to send data to and from the SLC via Ethernet/IP TCP. You might need to move the I/O data in/out of data files in the SLC but creating some ďMOVĒ ladder logic sounds a lot easier then trying to reverse engineer a generic CIP connection (at least for me). It would also give you the ability to create some level of ďintelligenceĒ at the I/O level if needed. For example, if there is an alarm condition that occurs, you could program the PLC to deal with it (I.E. shut a process down?) rather than waiting for the DSC to do so. The advantage in that scenario would be that even if communications between the DCS and the SLC fails, the SLC could maintain a certain level of control and safety.
On a related note, it is worth mentioning that AB has put the 1747-AENTR and 1747-L55 (SLC5/05) on Active Mature status. There is no date set yet and it could be years but itís worth keeping in mind.
Yeah, so we'd have to keep a program running on the SLC.. which is what we want to avoid. Our engineer who services the fleet's PLCs has to constantly reload program files whether due to strange faults or power loss. We obviously want the DCS to control the process, so taking the automation to the DCS but leaving the program in place (albeit in a different form) is still a half measure. But, yes, what you mention would work.
  Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2021, 05:06 PM   #24
Ken Roach
Lifetime Supporting Member + Moderator
United States

Ken Roach is offline
 
Ken Roach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 15,977
Quote:
>Our engineer who services the fleet's PLCs has to constantly reload program files whether due to strange faults or power loss.
If that's true, then nothing you are going to install from any vendor is going to work any better.

If it's your goal to have all DCS-controlled processes, plan and budget to replace your I/O with the native DCS vendor platform, with whatever they charge you to maintain it.

Leave the Rockwell support guys, and the obsolete 1746 I/O system, out of it.
  Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2021, 05:06 PM   #25
TreyB
Member
United States

TreyB is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Sioux Falls
Posts: 15
We are trying to phase out the PLCs altogether. It doesn't make sense for us to have a DCS to automate the entire plant, but still have these little "black boxes" everywhere. The plants love when we convert a PLC. There's transparency for operators that is consistent with how they control... nevermind, I won't justify the reasons. That's not important here.

So, the number one priority is moving from PLC control, but commissioning down time and electrical rework would be drastically reduced if we kept the existing IO.
  Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2021, 05:10 PM   #26
TreyB
Member
United States

TreyB is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Sioux Falls
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Roach View Post
If that's true, then nothing you are going to install from any vendor is going to work any better.

If it's your goal to have all DCS-controlled processes, plan and budget to replace your I/O with the native DCS vendor platform, with whatever they charge you to maintain it.

Leave the Rockwell support guys, and the obsolete 1746 I/O system, out of it.
This is what we typically do. Mind you... i don't create the budget and the projects are more attractive when we tell the plants that they will have reduced downtime. And eliminating electrical contractors is a plus..
  Reply With Quote
Old July 12th, 2021, 08:10 PM   #27
Firejo
Member
United States

Firejo is offline
 
Firejo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 1,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreyB View Post
We are trying to phase out the PLCs altogether. It doesn't make sense for us to have a DCS to automate the entire plant, but still have these little "black boxes" everywhere. The plants love when we convert a PLC. There's transparency for operators that is consistent with how they control... nevermind, I won't justify the reasons. That's not important here.

So, the number one priority is moving from PLC control, but commissioning down time and electrical rework would be drastically reduced if we kept the existing IO.
Keeping in mind that I completely understand the position you are in (so this isnít a comment on you) but from what you just explained, a phrase I learned a long time ago and something Iíve experienced many times (in both Automation and Automotive repair) comes to mind. ďCheap comes out expensiveĒ. That said, thatís not the reason you reached out so Iíll leave it at that. At least you do have a couple of options if you arenít able to reach the ultimate goal. Good luck with it.
__________________
Go Hawks!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old July 15th, 2021, 01:32 PM   #28
Firejo
Member
United States

Firejo is offline
 
Firejo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 1,484
P.S. Let us know what you wind up working out. I’m curious as to how you resolve it.
__________________
Go Hawks!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old July 20th, 2021, 09:36 AM   #29
TreyB
Member
United States

TreyB is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Sioux Falls
Posts: 15
Success!!
I have found the class object that holds the IO data. It is 30Bh. Each instance represents a slot in the chassis. So far I have read and wrote to DI, DO, AI and AO modules. The inputs use Attribute 9 and the outputs use Attribute 8 for the data. From there it was pretty easy hookup a test setup to figure out what the bytes in the data were doing.

I did all the communications so far in the Molex EIP tool software. I am yet to actually get it talking to the DeltaV controller, but that uses explicit messaging the same as the EIP tool. So, that will be a challenge, but most likely just a process.

What I did was wrote a Perfect Keyboard macro to type in hex 1-xxxx. I figured out what the range for valid class objects was and used Instance 0 as my class level instance. Then let the macro run, put the counter high enough and came back to check the log file for any hits. Did the same for Instances for each Class I got a hit... then followed course with the Attributes. Without the macros it would have taken me weeks of manual typing! I would have given up.

Hope someone finds this useful!

I did run into a problem with the potential to use the AENTR card.. it lost its IP address when it lost power... that's going to be a deal breaker if I can't resolve it... maybe I'll be back with a separate post.

Thanks everyone for the help.
  Reply With Quote
Old July 20th, 2021, 06:14 PM   #30
ASF
Lifetime Supporting Member
Australia

ASF is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,363
Great approach and great solution!

Quote:
Originally Posted by TreyB View Post
I did run into a problem with the potential to use the AENTR card.. it lost its IP address when it lost power... that's going to be a deal breaker if I can't resolve it... maybe I'll be back with a separate post.
This is almost certainly a very simple fix. Check that after you assign it an IP address you have disabled BOOTP/DHCP in the module.

I can't be sure on the 1747-AENTR specifically, but on a lot of other AENTR modules there are also specific combinations you can set the addressing switches to, which will do various things on a power cycle (like factory reset). Check the position of those switches as well, assuming they exist on this particular module.
  Reply With Quote
Reply
Jump to Live PLC Question and Answer Forum

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Comm path for SLC Typed Read MSG godfrey LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 6 May 9th, 2016 10:26 PM
Loss of Comm between SlC 503 and Compact Denton LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 1 February 28th, 2016 12:45 PM
DH 485 Comm (SLC 5/05-1761 AIC-PV 550-PC) Microbictomb LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 7 July 28th, 2015 02:46 PM
Controlling A SLC 5/05 Rack From A CompactLogix As Remote IO OneShot LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 4 July 14th, 2015 06:09 PM
slc 5/04 serial comm problem with panel view plus 600 simmo231 LIVE PLC Questions And Answers 8 March 17th, 2011 05:06 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:49 PM.


.