I'm trying to force the ControlWord for an EtherCAT drive as part of a troubleshooting strategy. However, I can't get control of the ControlWord. The value I set is overridden. I'm trying to place the value in several ways, however the values remain "0" in all these instances, and no change is detected in the status word: For this first one. I've already forced the number "6". I retyped 6 into "prepared" for the sake of the photo. As you can see even though "6" has been forced it reads "0". Also...
No errors in the : PLC Log EtherCAT Master Log Device Log If I'm understanding correctly, the quick stop Bit5 is a Normally Closed bit, so "1" would correspond to "Quick Stop off".
I've tried both. The one that comes with Codesys which has the softmotion device attached. Also the one from uploading the ESI file on Nidac's website and using a generic CiA402 axis. Both result in the same behavior. In the pictures on the OP above I'm using the driver with the softmotion axis attached.
I'm trying to troubleshoot a Nidac/ControlTechniques drive with softmotion interoperability issue where the MC_Power block isn't responding properly to the status of the drive. The MC_Power looks like this: However the status word from CANOpen is correct for the "Operation Enable" state: Does anyone have further information of the binding between the PLC Open compliant MC_Power block and the CiA402 spec? I'm having a lot weird softmotion behavior, so I think this is the starting point to understanding....
I'm trying to troubleshoot a Nidac/ControlTechniques drive with softmotion interoperability issue where the MC_Power block isn't responding properly to the status of the drive. The MC_Power looks like this: However the status word from CANOpen is correct for "Operation Enable" state: Does anyone have further information of the binding between the PLC Open complient MC_Power block and the CiA402 spec? I'm having a lot weird softmotion behavior, so I think this is the starting point to understing the...
Hi @gseidel, I've looked in the PLC log. There is an error there. This is what I'm seeing: Any idea how to reconcile this error? I've tested the same code with virtual axes and do not get the error.
@gseidl I tested the theory that MC_Phasing creates a 1:1 gearing and sure enough that's what it does. With that my understanding corrected on this, I was able to get phasing working. Thanks.
Hi @gseidl, Thank you for the reply. I have a few follow up questions "Your idea with the virtual axis is good, however, as mentioned here [0], please use the virtual axis as the slave of MC_Phasing and the master of MC_GearIn." Is this not how I have it configured above? I want to double check because as far as I'm seeing the picture above is doing this. Am I missing something? How is it that the Virtual Axis follows the Master if not GearedIn. Is MC_Phasing by itself supposed to create a 1:1 positional...