ACS800 Drive Interfaces

Instead of using the ABB AC800M to communicate to the ABB ACS800 Drive, are there alternate, reliable, proven, fairly straight forward protocols? The manual mentions Controlnet, Profibus, and Ethernet. I would like to control the drives (10 of them in a system) with a Controllogix processor.

There is also DeviceNet and CanOpen. Properly set up they all work rather nicely. And the option cards go under the drive cover so you don't have to add a box or any additional wiring or fiber-optic strands.

If you are using a CLX system and the drive interface card supports EthernetIP then that will be the easiest way to go.

Next choice would be ControlNet if EthernetIP is not a goer.

ACS800 - Ethernet - Controllogix

Has this been done before? Controllogix controller, ethernet communications, and multidrive ACS800 system? In talking with America ABB Drive Systems, they only want to use the AC800M controller. Any actual examples?

OK I found the ASC800 Technical Data Sheet

On page 37 it lists the currently available Feildbus Option cards.

Critically it lists the Ethernet module (K464) as "Ethernet Modbus/TCP" which is NOT the same as the EthernetIP that is native to the ControlLogix system. This is a showstopper for the Ethernet route.

The good news is that the ControlNet (K462) and DeviceNet (K451) options both look perfectly OK. Personally I would go with the ControlNet option all other things being equal. It might also pay to check that the Profile offered on each one supports all the data transfers that you want to achieve.

pcola said:

I would like to control the drives (10 of them in a system) with a Controllogix processor.

Click to expand...

Since you have found no solutions I have one. Our motion controllers can communicate with the control logix using Ethernet/IP and then output a +/- 10 volt signal to the drives.

ACS800 Ethernet

I was wondering if anyone had an ABB drive that is controlled by Controllogix though any of the possible networks. It appears that ABB has provided many options, but as is generally the case some work bette than others. The only reason I do not want an AC800M controller is that it must also communicate to other types of drive (older vintage) and PLCs and DCS systems. The Controllogix communicates to the Foxboro DCS via a Prosoft card, to Automax Racks via a DCSnet Card, Panelviews - Ethernet, I/O RIO and PI via a DH+ interface.


User’s Manual,Ethernet Adapter Module,RETA-01 Page 15


The RETA-01 Adapter module supports the Modbus/TCP and

EtherNet/IP network protocols. This chapter contains a short

description of the above protocols and the RETA-01 Adapter

module, a delivery checklist and warranty information.



EtherNet/IP is based on the Common Industrial Protocol (CIP),

which is also the framework for both the ControlNet and

DeviceNet networks. EtherNet/IP uses standard Ethernet and

TCP/IP technology to transport CIP communication packets. The

module fulfills all requirements for certification as an Ethernet/IP

device.

From my limited (and local) experience, it seems that ABB themselves are most comfortable with profibus. I've done several CLX systems with ACS600 and ACS800 drives on profibus using the SST module. They also seem to be least comfortable with ControlNet. The ethernet/ip option has apparently only been available for less than a year - it would be my preference.

Depending on your application and how much info you want to transfer to/from the drives, devicenet would be a last choice.

pcola, at the risk of offering an "inelegant" solution, if the 10 drives are reasonably close together, why not link them with the ABB DDCS fiber strands and use the internal DDCS networking capability that comes standard with the drives. Whole paper machines and steel strip mills are controlled this way with great success and blazing communication speed.

You could then set up the fieldbus link of your choice on the lead drive and pick up the data you require for your external system without the burden of having to handle the internal system data at the same time. Your whole fieldbus requirement slows down and the volume of data usually drops considerably, as well.

And the neat thing---no rocket science. It's been done repeatedly and is very predictable.

Now, of course, if your drives are 100's of yards apart, none of the above makes any sense.

Just trying to add a little perspective to your project choices.