Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Colin Carpenter

My first Q project

15 posts in this topic

Well, after many years with all sorts of Mitsubishi's, the time has come for my first "new build" project using the Q series, but the question is, what do you think I should use? I have three or four systems using Q2AS-S1 CPUs, each of which has the maximum number of three extension racks, so they're reasonable size projects. The maximum number of steps is around 22,000 out of the 64k allowed, so they're easily big enough. Tend to use 32 way digital input cards, 16 way relay output cards, 8 way analogue input cards (both voltage and current) and 8 way analogue output cards. Comms is generally through the RS422 CPU ports and generally in transparent mode from Beijers HMIs. They all work fine and maximum scan time is in the region of 50 ms, which would be nice if it was a little quicker, but it's not really a problem. Would be good if floating point calculations were quicker as these seem to slow the QnAs down fairly rapidly. So please could you tell me which CPUs you tend to go for given that I'd like to at least emulate the old faithful Q2A-S1 breed that I'm very familiar with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Q02CPU will fit. See document L(NA)-08043ENG-B (A/QnA to Q-series transition handbook) and the other documents connected with such transition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought they were discontinuing the Q02 CPU? At least that's what I heard here in the states. The Q02U (the iQ version of the Q02) only has 20K steps instead of the 28K steps that the Q02 had. In that case I'd go up to the Q03U CPU which has 30K steps. Another note would be that if you plan on using the programming port for your HMI, the Q series is 232 instead of 422, so your HMI needs to do 232 communication or you have to convert it. Edited by Duffanator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, do not use the "old" Q02 CPU. Use the new universal series (Q03U) or above.... In addition, if you select the Q03UDE CPU (same price as Q03UD) you also have a built-in ethernet port on the CPU which is excellent!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like the sound of the ethernet CPU port, especially at the same price as one without. Thanks to all for their contributions, it's most useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A word of warning about the Q03UDE, the built in Ethernet port is nice but you trade the serial programming port for the Ethernet port. If you were planning on using the programming port for HMI communication you won't be able to with the Q03UDE, you will need to get a separate serial communication card (I've been there so I know how much that sucks when you first realize that ) Also, the built in Ethernet port does not have all of the functionality that the QJ71E71 module has, so you may want to review the specifications for the built in Ethernet port (if you just want to use it for remote programming and monitoring then it's great, but things like the MES-IT modules can't use it yet).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn't go less than Q03UDECPU. I don't use the old Q processors anymore, only the new Universal ones. Only use the part numbers with the U in them, like Q02U, Q04UDEH, etc. NEVER USE a Q2AS ON A NEW PROJECT! QnA and Q programming is quite similar. And the QnAS is actually still considered an A Series PLC. It will be obsolete soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Found out today that you can use the ethernet port on the Q03UDE to talk to a Beijers E1100 via ethernet. You have to have the latest driver for the Qnn E71 comms (v4.08) and you have to set up a port in IEC Developer (or GX) in the ethernet port tab of the PLC. Set it to MC protocol and give it a hex number of 0401 (decimal 1025) and the E110 will happily talk to the Q03UDE. Am now trying to get a second E1100 to talk via ethernet to the Q03UDE as a second controller (using a second port) and trying to use data exchange to grab registers from the Q03, but am having a little trouble with that at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Should be no problem, post if you get stuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't seem to get the comms going at the moment, but tech support reckon that the data exchange comms needs to be initiated by a bit in the PLC as they don't seem to think that the "time option" in the E_Designer data exchange set up box seems to work correctly. I'd left the comms error coming up last night and the screen must have thrown a wobbly during the night as I got a call to site. Turns out that a bit in the PLC (which can only be turned on by a momentary E1100 function button) had become SET in the PLC. As it was a screen GO button, this made life a bit scary during the night. Can only conclude that the screen didn't like the comms errors that were showing in the data exchange problem and sent a SET or TOGGLE command instead of a MOMENTARY command. Not sure whether to persevere with this function or do the data exchange using BDTP between the screens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would not go for BDTP. If the "master" HMI goes down, then the other HMI will also go down. Just set up two connections in the QCPU (under parameter settings), and select one connection for each HMI. Then both HMIs can talk to the CPU at the same time with no worries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have done all that but we can't get the second port to talk to either HMI. We've set up two connections in the Q03 (Using IEC) with port numbers 0401 and 0402 (hex) which equate to 1025 and 1026 decimal, but we can't get either HMI to talk on port 1026, but either will happily talk on port 1025. Bit confused at the moment as we can quite happily ping all the IP addresses from either end of the network, though we did have to install a switch halfway down the line as we hit the 100 meter length limit without one. Tech support is a little baffled at the moment as it appears that we're one of the first to try talking to a Q03 with two HMIs at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You could try using the same port for both HMI's. I have 4 Mitsubishi touch screens using the same UDP port on one Q02U processor with no problems (you can't change the port parameters in the Mitsubishi HMI's) Two different IP addresses using the same port is acceptable. Maybe that would solve the problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What was the resolution to your problem Colin? Did you end up using 4 different ports using TCP or did you use 1 port with UDP? I am also now in a situation where I have 4 E1101 HMI's connected to a Q03UDE CPU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In the end I scrapped the idea and used a BDTP slave / master configuration to use the 2 HMIs to exchange data between the 2 PLCs. It seems like I missed a major point that the Q03 PLC must be powered down and then powered back up to make it see the new channel that has been configured, then apparently the comms will work. I think that 4 channels is the way to go, but remember to cycle the power on the PLC. In the end, the data exchange side was worrying me as there were odd random things happening and bits being switched on that should never have come on, so I abandoned the idea. Even now, we believe that we have found a weakness in the BDTP protocol, as whenever the effluent plant programmer goes on line with IEC through the ethernet to talk to the Q03, then any of the 4 screens that are plugged into the network will come up with an obscure error message saying something like "max no. of clients greater than max no. allowed." and the screen then requires a reboot.. This only ever happens when the programmer is on site and communicating with the Q03, and it happens to one screen or another at about 20 minute intervals. Oh the joys of comms .... it's still a black art ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0