lgbnaft

I agree that in simulation the code stops at Step 8, but in the NJ-501 processor I had issues with the program stopping at Step 7 and ST8_SB_Stage1_Pass would not move a 1 during Step 6 The current code only "resets" ST8_SB_Stage1_Pass at Step 1 by moving a zero, sorry, I accidentally omitted this in the sample. I am actually curious if the PLC was bogged down and the memory area for the variable was simply not written to during the sequencer. I had to increase the periodic task to 2ms due to some overhead issues and non management of priorities on my part. Back to my original question: Question:  Is the execution time of an In-line ST faster than using move statements?  (or better said execution time of move statements?)  

I have attached pictures showing where these rungs tie to the bits for the shift register and an additional  picture of the shift register. I also attached a sample portion of the project, as the whole project is over 5mb.     sequencer_shift_ties.bmp sequencer_shift_register.bmp code_sample.smc2

Problem:   In line move statements in a sequencer do not get data moved before getting to next step. The attached picture of code shows the sequence steps in question, and the code would stop at sequence step 7  even though an INT#1 should be in the pass variable when the CAB3_NI_1_04 was equal to 1.   Question:  Is the execution time of an In-line ST faster than using move statements? I figured the Move statement was in the middle of trying to move the INT#1 and the sequencer got past the Move before a completed action.  I wondered if structured text is the answer or am I looking at this wrong.     Move_sample.bmp