I got rid of all existing temp Vars in FC (following the advice). Hovewer, there have been nothing changed in terms of situation improvement.

#dp

 I imagine however that Msorich is using global resources (specifically a timer) in the FC.

How do I see whether it is used Global resources ( it's used couple of IEC-timers in FC) or not?

And if it's the point of the problem. Which way will I be able to replace (Global resource usage) with something other?

My humble guess: Do I have to implement hardware (S7) timers or whatever?

Msorich

See the attached picture showing the cross reference of all objects inside an FC. Your situation and mine is not the same: you do not want any objects in the FC that has a global scope.

If you want timers inside the FC, then you can only use S5Timers if you use indirect addressing. IEC-Timers is possible if it is passed on by reference. Far best solution is to use FB with IEC-Timer instance.

#dp

If you want timers inside the FC, then you can only use S5Timers if you use indirect addressing. IEC-Timers is possible if it is passed on by reference.

To get rid of 'globalization' I replaced all IEC-timers with S7-timers. However 'globalization' is still there.

While tags defining TIA offers either to be a 'Global Timer' or 'Local In'. I'm speaking about S7-timers (Legacy).

To me it's something new to see a Timer in role of 'Local in'.

Also look at attached pic.

Msorich

Msorich

#dp

If you want timers inside the FC, then you can only use S5Timers if you use indirect addressing. IEC-Timers is possible if it is passed on by reference.

To get rid of 'globalization' I replaced all IEC-timers with S7-timers. However 'globalization' is still there.

While tags defining TIA offers either to be a 'Global Timer' or 'Local In'. I'm speaking about S7-timers (Legacy).

To me it's something new to see a Timer in role of 'Local in'.

Also look at attached pic.

Msorich

Showing you the proper way of addressing an Simatic Timer to your FC is beyond the scope of my answer.

Make life real easy for yourself. Change back to the FB and use an IEC-Timer that has an instance inside that FB. This timer is local to the FB. This way also you do not even have to ensure getting unique Simatic Timers for each of the block calls.

Wizard

Hello,

(Before you use a Temp variable, you should write a value to it. Because otherwise you will not know it's value)

Best regards,

Wizard

" Temporary tags are undefined when called in non-optimized blocks. In
optimized blocks, the values are always preset with the default value (S7-1500
and S7-1200 firmware V4 and higher). Thus, the resulting behavior is not
accidental but reproducible behavior."

From Programming guidelines

Of course the use of temp tags in general is dependant on the purpose and objective but I take the above statement to be accurate. I do initialize temp variables in SCL out of habit but I never do in Ladder.

Hi there,

I was able to build a couple of working variants. However, there's one more question left.

Which one takes less work memory?

Btw, How do I see supposed size of common FC or particual FB? Are there any variants to see that?

@#dp, S5Timers implementation wasn't a proper way to achive a goal.  Moreover (e.g. S5T#3s) format turned out to be quite awkward for me, because I would have needed to build additional converters or whatever, for example in C,  to transfer params via Profinet. Now I'm just sendin' Int values.

So guys, who is interested in optimization, that can find respective document in attachment.

Hope this helps.

Msorich