All servo motors have lost their position since Alarm 1980. PN: Interruption of the cyclic connection.

Hi,

I am not sure about opening new topic, similar issue happened to me. 

In the system all servo motors losses their posiiton since alarm1980 PN: interruption cyclic connection.

I checked telegram communication is 105 and the system includes unmanaged switches. I will try to change it with managed switch and my question is should I need any changes for device configuration in the plc program after replacing switch?

Thank you,

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Split from S210 Profinet Connection Interrupted.

The link to the split thread has the answer - unmanaged switch.

Are you not able to "daisy-chain" the PN connections between devices?  You know, out of the PLC, into S210, out of S210 on to other drive(s), and so on, and then out of PLC on other PN port to HMI - or unmanaged switch.

For IRT, unmanaged switches are going to present problems - even the best of them.  They have no clue what to do with deterministic PN packets (IRT/ISO) and will mess up the PN packet timing. 

01engineer01

Hi,

I am not sure about opening new topic, similar issue happened to me. 

In the system all servo motors losses their posiiton since alarm1980 PN: interruption cyclic connection.

I checked telegram communication is 105 and the system includes unmanaged switches. I will try to change it with managed switch and my question is should I need any changes for device configuration in the plc program after replacing switch?

Thank you,

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Split from S210 Profinet Connection Interrupted.

 I will make a small correction, the system has S120 drives. 

I totally understand what do you mean but the system has other instruments with profinet connection. So, I am not sure if it is applicable as your defining.

At least I am planning the change switch with managed ones.

0_Einstein

The link to the split thread has the answer - unmanaged switch.

Are you not able to "daisy-chain" the PN connections between devices?  You know, out of the PLC, into S210, out of S210 on to other drive(s), and so on, and then out of PLC on other PN port to HMI - or unmanaged switch.

For IRT, unmanaged switches are going to present problems - even the best of them.  They have no clue what to do with deterministic PN packets (IRT/ISO) and will mess up the PN packet timing. 

01engineer01

Hi,

I am not sure about opening new topic, similar issue happened to me. 

In the system all servo motors losses their posiiton since alarm1980 PN: interruption cyclic connection.

I checked telegram communication is 105 and the system includes unmanaged switches. I will try to change it with managed switch and my question is should I need any changes for device configuration in the plc program after replacing switch?

Thank you,

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Split from S210 Profinet Connection Interrupted.

 

Ok, whatever I said before, twiddle the s210 to s120 and the same applies.

However, unless you are actually using IRT or ISO with your s120 drives, unmanaged switches are usually ok - though still not preferred.

Daisy-chaining of PN devices is common.  That's a major reason for 2 ports - X1 (IN) and X2 (OUT) for field devices.

Just be sure and separately power 24VDC to the CU's - rather than relying on higher voltage (400V+ typically) and PowerModule/MM powering the CU.  That will enable daisy-chaining even when one drive's high voltage is not on.

01engineer01

 I will make a small correction, the system has S120 drives. 

I totally understand what do you mean but the system has other instruments with profinet connection. So, I am not sure if it is applicable as your defining.

At least I am planning the change switch with managed ones.