Skip to Content

Register Login

Industry Online Support

Technical Forum

Navigation

Is this OLM Topology Valid?

Created by: gfair at: 12/11/2008 7:56 AM (5 Replies)

Rating (0)

Thanks 1

6 Entries

12/11/2008 7:56 AM	Rate (0)
gfair Posts: 37 Rating: (0)	Greetings. Can anyone advise if the attached OLM Topology is valid? It is one half of a redundant pair but i have only shown one network for clarity. Thanks in advance. Attachment OLM Topology.pdf (223 Downloads)
gfair Posts: 37 Rating: (0)
Suggestion To thank Quote Answer

12/11/2008 3:57 PM	Rate (0)
J_Bell Posts: 5822 Rating: (412)	Dear gfair, I hope you are aware of the fact that single fiber optical rings are not release for the OLM G or P series anymore. If you want to have redundancy you need to use either OLM P12 or G12 and you use a redundant ring with two fibers for each interconnection between OLM’s. Please refer to the chapter 3.3 (Page 12 / 18 of 61)of the manual: SIMATIC NET PROFIBUS Optical Link Module OLM / P11 V4.0 OLM / P12 V4.0 OLM / G11 V4.0 OLM / G12 V4.0 OLM / G12-EEC V4.0 OLM / G11-1300 V4.0 OLM / G12-1300 V4.0 Operation manual Best regards J_Bell
J_Bell Posts: 5822 Rating: (412)
Suggestion To thank Quote Answer

12/12/2008 3:04 AM	Rate (0)
gfair Posts: 37 Rating: (0)	Thanks J_Bell I wasn't sure if single fibre was allowed. I had read the Manual for OLM but couldn't find what I was looking for. I have a new Topology which i think will meet our requirements. Attachment Stage C OLM Topology 2.pdf (191 Downloads)
gfair Posts: 37 Rating: (0)	Last edited by: gfair at: 12/12/2008 3:43 AM
Suggestion To thank Quote Answer

12/12/2008 11:50 AM	Rate (0)
J_Bell Posts: 5822 Rating: (412)	Dear gfair, I agree with you, this topology looksgood to me. I am convinced this system will work this way. Best regards J_Bell
J_Bell Posts: 5822 Rating: (412)
Suggestion To thank Quote Answer
This contribution was helpful to 1 thankful Users gfair

4/11/2010 1:39 PM	Rate (0)
rezajan55 Posts: 45 Rating: (1)	Dear J_bell and Gfair You mean that 2 OLMs needed per ET200M node (due to redundant IMs). Is that right? I have another question: In manuals we see that a maximum of 11 OLMs can be set up in a redundant FO ring. If the slaves exceed 11 in a ring what would be the best solution? (Spliting the ring into 2 rings is not allowed).
rezajan55 Posts: 45 Rating: (1)	Last edited by: rezajan55 at: 4/11/2010 1:41 PM
Suggestion To thank Quote Answer

4/12/2010 2:37 AM	Rate (0)
gfair Posts: 37 Rating: (0)	rezajan55 Dear J_bell and Gfair You mean that 2 OLMs needed per ET200M node (due to redundant IMs). Is that right? I have another question: In manuals we see that a maximum of 11 OLMs can be set up in a redundant FO ring. If the slaves exceed 11 in a ring what would be the best solution? (Spliting the ring into 2 rings is not allowed). Hi, if you had a remote cubicle with, as an example, 4 Redundant ET200M Racks then you would only need an OLM pair. If you had another remote cubicle with only one Redundant ET200M rack you would need an OLM pair here as well etc. If you are thinking you need an OLM pair for each ET200M rack and you have 10 remote single ET200M racks then, yes, 11 pairs is quite small. If it's 11 for each system (and you have say 20+ racks) in the way I described it's a fairly large network and I would certainly think of putting another network in. If you cannot put another network in I'm not really sure at the moment but will have a wee think but would probably re-engineer so that more racks were attached to an OLM pair. Over to you J_Bell.
gfair Posts: 37 Rating: (0)
Suggestion To thank Quote Answer

|

Share this page:

Share this page on...

Follow us on