Well, great.
if you post your project I can have a look at it. Can/t tell with the description only. Or at least post a screenshot.
No problem. Let/s hope the project goes smooth from here.
This is good. If the process tolerates it, if you increase the RPI (requested packet interval) this would also easy CPU use, because the EtherNet/IP scanner stack will be executed with less frequency, which should help with the CPU use. Edit: I see, do you mean by "increasing the time" increasing the RPI? if so, your solution is what I am explaining. Good to know you fixed it.
This is good. If the process tolerates it, if you increase the RPI (requested packet interval) this would also easy CPU use, because the EtherNet/IP scanner stack will be executed with less frequency, which should help with the CPU use. EDIt, I see, do you mean by "increasing the time" increasing the RPI? if so, your solution is what I am explaining. Good to know you fixed it.
This is good. If the process tolerates it, if you increase the RPI (requested packet interval) this would also easy CPU use, because the EtherNet/IP scanner stack will be executed with less frequency, which should help with the CPU use.
Brazadio, por favor revisa la captura gráfica anexa. CODESYS te reporta estaus 0x01 y estatus extendido 0x203. Como te muestor en el extracto de la especificación CIP, este estatus extendido siginifica que el adaptador deja de comunicarse con el scanner CODESYS. Yo no creo que esto sea problema de CODESYS. Puedes estar teniendo problemas con el adaptador o con el switch. Tienes que tomar capturas con Wireshark para ver por qué termina la conexión.
Hi: I am using the latest CODESYS SP 19. I added one GSDML Profinet device file without problem. But, when I try to buidl the project, the compilation process ends in error with "The identifier 'min' is not a valid IEC identifier. Please change the device description." I have tested the device description in the Profibus Profinet International's GSDML checker and the check passes without warning. So my conclusion is that the GSDML file is standard. Attached I show the error as well as the GSDML file....