KenE

I've experienced some very strange behavior in Structured Text programs and was wondering if anyone else has seen similar? I'm using GX Works2 Version 1.64S. Here is the strange-ness: If I check [just] En/Eno in the function block properties some of my function blocks did not write back Data that was passed in as "Input/Output" type. In my example I was just assigning some values and making one simple calculation from within the ST function block. If I check off "En/Eno", MacroCode, and MCR checkboxes some function blocks work and others seem like they run code internally *EVEN WHEN NOT ENABLED*. So far it seems that checking MacroCode and En/Eno *ONLY* [i.e. all options except MCR] is the secret sauce to getting a function block that does what you think it would do. I don't think this problem is unique to GX Works 2 but is manifesting itself on a machine I'm working on that was created in GX IEC Developer 7 and had the "Compile as IEC Developer 6.0" option checked. Since GX Works doesn't have this option I think that this is what had caused my problems to emerge when using GX Works 2. I've asked one of our factory guys through email and I hope they will look into it, but I wanted to hear from other users here as well. Needless to say its dang scary when crap executes that is not supposed to. I'm not a newbie to ST or structured ladder, I've been using IEC developer for years. Ken

I'm also in the USA. I just edited my profile to reflect that. I'll check out the website.

Thanks for the tip. Do the factory guys have these libraries, or can I get them on the web somewhere? Thanks, Ken

I am aware of the Set/Res issue but that isn't what is causing the odd behavior. Why someone would want a function block ENO to be stuck on when EN is off is too bizarre to contemplate, but that is another matter. I can literally go in and uncheck "Macrocode" from the function block properties and the function bock no longer runs properly. Check it back on and everything is fine. I changed all our FBs to macrocode (without MCR) and they are now working fine. I could post an example project to the forum if there is a place to post files. This isn't the first time we've run into these kinds of problems, just that this was the first time I went to this extent to test all of the different options. Thanks, Ken

Hello, We are in the process of trying to convert from IEC developer 7 to the new IQ Works software suite. My company purchased the software and I started installing but so far only the GT designer3 works. I get error messages on GXWorks2 and MT Works2 software saying it isn't compatable with 64bit windows. I found some other postings on here dated back to 2010 saying that summer 2011 they will inroduce software support for the 64 bit OS. Apparrently they are behind on this or I didn't receive the correct software. Any ideas? I'm a bit frustrated because I mentioned that we planned on buying it with the specific reason of running on Windows 7. I don't think I mentioned 64 bit, but 64 bit is becoming fairly mainstream these days. Thanks, Ken

My shipped CDs had an older version of GX Works2 and I've gotten updates from our distributor. I also have work on MT Developer and Navigator 64 bit. They are scheduled for Jan 2012. See the link below: http://www.meau.com/...ftware_Versions Thanks all for your help. Ken

Is that one of those deals where it is "released in japan" but not in europe or USA?

We were hoping not to have to resort to a virtual XP machine since we use this software alot. My fallback plan is to return the software and use virtual XP until they release a new version of software which we will then purchase. I'm not sure how USB will work in the virtual environment but supposedly it does work.

OK, hopefully they will have a better idea at the distributor when I talk to them.

Thanks. Does this apply to the motion software, "MT Works2" as well? We need support for HMI, PLC, and motion. I'll be talking to our contact today and will mention this fact.

Has anyone here had problems with monitoring projects converted from IEC developer? I had used an early version of GXWorks2 for one project that had been converted and the monitor was not displaying any status. If I started a new project the monitor worked well. I'm hesitant to buy the new versions until this is sorted out since I need it to run.

In IEC developer you could search for unused variables which were [for me] usually declared local variables that I had forgotten to delete. Since "structured programmng" in GX works is essentially IEC developer it would be nice to have the feature.

While I don't think that anyone can argue that some of the features of structured ladder are hard to use (as you mentioned the select/line mode thing is a bit annoying) you have to admit that it is a different way of doing things so you probably won't like it if you do programs the same way you did it in GX Developer and expect the same results. For the Structured editor, which is based on IEC Developer, you *should* be programming differently. You want to encapsulate most of your code into re-usable function blocks. If most of your code is encapsulated you don't need to be a high performance editor jockey because your programs are shorter and cleaner looking. In the end everyone wins. One thing that also should be said is that the structured ladder editor allows you to arrange your rungs the way you want. If you use a wide screen display you can have more instructions per rung than you might want if you had a 10" netbook for instance, its your choice. The GX Developer editor forces you to use fixed spacing whether or not you use that space or not. If you want you can have a long run that zig zags on your screen, although I try to minimize this. Finally, IEC editor lets you mix inputs and outputs in a rung instead of the classic "Put inputs on the left, outputs on the right". This is both dangerous and powerful. I prefer to have the choice because I know how ladder scans and when it can cause problems (99% of the time...). For me using IEC developer and Structured ladder I find I spend more time thinking about the application than editing. I think there is something to be said for that. I would seriously evaluate your coding style and see what you can re-arrange to put into function blocks. Like I said, the IEC based editor does deserve some simple improvements. The default routing behaviour of the lines in auto mode is a bit gross looking, I usually turn this off and manually route the wires. ~Ken

Has anyone had problems transferring a decent sized project from IEC to GX Works? I have converted one of my machines to GX Works 1.08J and it compiles and runs (after some minor tweaking of the project) but I can't monitor the code while its running. I made a second project from scratch and it monitors fine, so its not likely the way I installed it or the way I'm using it, but the fact that I converted an IEC project. Should I upgrade to the latest version? I don't want to buy it before I know if it will work for us since we have several IEC developer based projects. One quick note: I am using shared libraries between projects, which is a great feature but I wonder if this could be causing a problem. Thanks, ~Ken

Does anyone have any issues monitoring a converted IEC Developer project in GX works 2? I converted a project as a test and have it running on a machine, but I am unable to monitor the project. It acts like it is monitoring, but nothing is highlighted, even though I know these bits are turning on and off. I can't turn bits on or off either. Thank you in advance.

Its supposed to have been released in the US. I have not gotten it quoted yet.

I've heard from our mitsubishi vendor that GX Works 2 is being released soon. I saw a screenshot and it looks an aweful lot like GX developer, not the converged release of IEC developer. Maybe they offer you a choice of ladder editor, who knows. Any info on this would be appreciated. I don't quite understand the name change of the software and wonder if its a strange US only version or what. Any ideas?

I had heard from a Mitsu source that the products weren't really being combined. I know they are Beta testing some things now. When I first heard of this I was hopeful that IEC was being merged with GX-Dev since I am using and have come to depend of IEC developer. It is frustrating dealing with the lack of IEC support (Although I don't usually need the support, it puts you out on a ledge by yourself a bit). I'm kind of quietly hoping my source at Mitsu was mistaken. Having two softwares in Europe and Asia/America is really confusing to deal with.

Does anyone know of a Canopen card for the Q series? I have seen canopen listed for the FX, but nothing for the Q rack. Do they have anything in Europe or Japan?

Yes, but how can you program servo drives. I was told that CanOpen has a special protocol for servo drives, and I can't see how a gateway could handle this. I'd be glad to find out that a gateway works seamlessly, but I am doubtful.

I use the "EQ" (equal) operator and a step number to sequence things. This makes sequencing very robust and logical. EQ (stp, 1) --------------------(logic)------------------------------ INC (stp) EQ (stp, 2) --------------------(logic)------------------------------ INC (stp) EQ (stp, 3) --------------------(logic)------------------------------ INC (stp) You could potentially set the step number to some invalid number (0 in this case) and save the current step number as a means of pausing and getting back. There might be some down sides to this, such as pulses and things would get messed up upon resume operation. As the person before mentioned, you can use the task pool to essentially disable the scan of a POU using a variable assigned to the Event in the task parameters to disable a task (which essentially compiles as a jump around that POU when that variable is inactive).

The fastest auto update using GX-Config is 10ms, which is too slow for this application. What I ended up doing was using a Melsec IL pou with a bollean LD instruction trigger and the Z.MBRW instruction following it. I will do all of the other high level stuff in another POU or FB and trigger the read with the bit. It seems hokey, but hopefully future versions of IEC will have this instruction in the library.

Hello, I'm using GX IEC Developer 6.0 with a Q series ModbusTCP card (QJ71MT91). GX IEC Developer doesn't seem to have the Z.MBRW instruction available. It seems I can write Melsec IL with this instruction, but has anyone got a better way?

I recommend compiling and then using the view of Melsec code for the function block with both macrocode and for non macro code. For small and medium sized FBs the code is actually smaller for macro implementations, so it should execute faster with less code.

I am needing to read one register from two different Cognex cameras. I need the update to be as fast as possible, so waiting for a periodic update might be a problem unless it could update every scan (< 1ms) or something like that. I thought I saw reference in the manual to how to have soem register areas updated in the "end processing" of the PLC, but I didn't see further reference to it (I'm in the process of reading up on it further). Any ideas? Thanks.