Internet PLC Forum

I'm having difficulty getting a NANO-10 and Weintek MT8050iE 4.3" HMIl to work together. According to the TRI PLC web site, these devices are supposed to be compatible.   I've used the 4.3" HMI on a project with an FMD88-10 PLC and that was a breeze to get working.  I've tried the default com settings of 38400, n, 8, 1.  on COMM1 (SETBAUD 11, &H06) and COMM3 (SETBAUD 13, &H06).  Changed my cable to match COMM 1 or COMM3.  Every time I boot up these devices I get a "PLC not responding" message on the HMI.

I've gone back to using Weintek's Easy Builder Pro version 5.X (the one with the TRI-PLC drivers written specifically for it.  I've copied/pasted the drivers to new versions of EB Pro, but thought I may have missed something)  I've tried the TRI_PLC driver and the TRI_FX driver.  Neither work for me.

In addition to the touch panel, I also have an Autonics TX4S temperature controller connected to the RS-485 line (MODBUS-RTU).  This device talks to the NANO-10 just fine.  However, I've noticed that when I connect the wires from the HMIl, the NANO-10 and TX4S stop talking.

Please, tell me what I'm overlooking.

Thanks in advance.
Neal Cooper

I agree, I think it's time to break out the scope.
Gary,

I should have attached this video in my initial post.  It shows the elevator movement to "Home", there is a 2 second pause, then the SSR are turned ON (you can see {on the dial indicator} and hear the "jerk" at about the 00:04 second mark).  You may need to turn up the volume on your PC to hear the "jerk".  Sorry for the poor video quality, but when you're limited to a 512KB upload, somethings gotta give.

I'll also disconnect the SSRs one by one and see if one Output is worse than the others.  If the problem is coming from Output Channel 4 (the one right next to Stepper Clock Output), then moving that one channel to Output 7 or 8 might solve the problem.

Any new ideas after seeing the video?

Thanks,
Neal

Can someone please tell me if the FMD88-10 conforms to UL Standard UL 61131-2  OR  UL 60730-2-9 ?   I've designed the FMD88-10 into a vending machine where the PLC controls a cooking device.  The UL representative is telling us that the FMD88-10 MUST comply with one of the above Standards per UL Standard UL-197 (Standard for Commercial Cooking Appliances), or we can't use it.

Thanks,
Neal Cooper

I'm not sure if this is a bug or a feature, but I'll throw it out there for your consideration....

In my FMD88-10 I have a Custom Function that takes an incoming analog voltage, scales it and converts the voltage to a temperature.  The last step in my CF is to convert the temperature from degrees C to degrees F using the commonly known equation:

F = (C * (9/5)) +32

Great, right?  WRONG!  The unnecessary pair of parentheses around the "9/5" causes the TBasic to yield an incorrect answer.
At room temperature (25C), the above equation yields and answer that's 17F degrees low.  At a temperature of 200C, the answer is over 150F too low.

What I know is...

• That the "()" around the "9/5" is unnecessary.  
• That "F = (C * (9/5)) +32" is mathematically identical to "F = (C * 9/5) +32".
• That with or without the "()", the above equations will yield the identical answers when calculated in a spreadsheet, with a hand calculator or using simple pencil and paper.

So, the question is... why does TBasic yield an incorrect answer when unnecessary "()" are there?  Shouldn't it just ignore them?

Gary,

Thanks again for the feedback.  You obviously did not get this wealth of information from reading the Trilogi online documentation.  I'm glad you know this stuff.  You should write a book  ;-)

I have been bitten by the 16/32 bit stuff.  And yes, it is hard to debug.  That's why  I wanted to make sure what size word it is before I shoot myself in the foot, again.

Strangely, today I do not get the "unknown keyword" error when I put the statement "DM[1] = stepcount(1)" in my CF.  I'm positive I was typing it correctly the other day,  so who knows.

On a related topic, I was trying to download software in to a clients PLC in Los Angeles today (I'm in Dallas, TX) and I got the "unknown keyword" error on a relay name that has been in my code almost since day one.  The exact same version of software download to the PLC in my shop yesterday with no problems.  But today, 600 miles away..."Unknown keyword".  I'm going to send them a newly saved file and just chalk this up to sun spots or ebola or that wild & crazy Vlad Putin hacking my computer.  Unless, of course, you have a any suggestions.

Thanks,
Neal Cooper

I've documented a couple of "features” in TL6 (V6.52, build 5) that are somewhat annoying.  I'm surprised that nobody has complained about them before.  The "features” exist in TL7, too.

Both of these "features" show up when printing hard copies of your Ladder Diagram, I/O Tables and Custom Function.

The first problem is that the date printed in the Header on each page is 1 month off.  The day and year are correct, but the  month (shown in the Header and printed) is the previous month.  The problem is NOT originating from the computer.  I’ve installed TL6 on 3 computers with the correct BIOS date and the problem is on all 3 copies of TL6.  If you have  a good monitor and good eye sight you can see the incorrect date in the Print Preview screen.  

The second had me thinking I was losing control of my documentation skills.  I tried typing an explanation but it got so wordy that I decided an example describes the problem best.  But, it’s still somewhat wordy......

First, let’s assume that you save your TL7 files using sequential filenames as you make significant changes to you code (ie Ladder_1.PC6, Ladder_2.PC6, Ladder_3.PC6, etc)  AND you save your files to a thumb drive, network drive or some location that forces TL6 to print the file path in the Header of each printed page.
 
So, you open Ladder_1.PC6 and make some edits.  Next, you save this modified file as Ladder_2.PC6. Now, you decide to print a copy of the project for your co-worker or customer.  You first print the Ladder Diagram and it comes out fine.  The Header says “Page 1  Z:\Ladder_2.PC6”.  Good, the Header matches the filename.  (Of course, the date is still  1 month off.  Aaargh.)

So you go ahead and print the I/O Table and Custom Functions.  But, to your chagrin, the filenames in the Header are WRONG!  The filename in the Header is from the previously opened file (Ladder_1.PC6).  And, the date is a month off.  Double Aargh!  This can really screw up your documentation.

I’ve created 3 small projects with sequential filenames (Ladder_1 thru Ladder_3) and attached them.  I inserted the filename of each project as comments in the Ladder Diagram and in ALL Special Functions.  I also named Relay 3 in each project with the corresponding filename.   I am able to print each project and verify that the data (Ladder diagram, I/O table and CF) that is printed is correct and only the filename in the Header is wrong.  The 3 projects are attached if you want to verify this.  Also, like the incorrect date, the incorrect filenames can be read by clicking on Print Preview.

Neal Cooper

Gary and Lorne,

Thanks again, y'all are great.

Gary, thanks for the description of servo motion operation.  We discussed servo motors during our initial designsessions but I thought it would be more difficult and costly to implement.   I appreciate the link to the low cost servo.  I'm going too buy one so I can get familiar with their operation and control.

Lorne,  thanks for the code.  I've printed it out and at first glance it looks very similar to my code. (I can't seem to upload a *pc6 file).  I hadn't thought about adding a timer to the circuit to prevent changing directions too quickly.  On my HMI I have grayed out some of the buttons to prevent "operator induced accidents".  For instance, on my Manual Control screen, when the door is closed (all the way up) the button labeled "CLOSE" is grayed out so the operator cannot try to close the door more.  Also, in the HMI I have put limits on the numerical inputs so the operator cannot input step values that exceed the maximum step travel of the door..

I'm trying to make operation of this machine "fool proof", but as you know, the fools keep getting more creative and ingenious.

Neal