boov

Did anybody ever come up with anything on this? Is anybody else seeing it?

I'm using only structured ladder.

Update: Tech support finally worked with me and we found something. I had "Create cross reference information after completion compile" option set in the Basic settings in the options. With this set I can't make any changes under the "condition setting" tab to turn on the feature to show the read and write information. When I turn it off, cross reference gives me the read and write information, but each cross reference take a LOT longer. I think this actually makes me slower than opening up every instance in the cross reference to find the coil. This is horrible, why can't this work like version 1.31H???

I was running GX Wroks2 version 1.31H, and in structured ladder any time I did a cross reference it would populate the "instruction" column with "read" or "write" for that cross reference location. This was extremely helpful for finding the cause of problems, especially for cases where a tag was used in many places. Now, in version 1.48A, this column is blank. So, if I want to find the coil that controls a tag, I have to go down the list opening every instance in the cross reference until I find it. Between my co-worker and I we have six calls in to tech support now, and the answers we have gotten are: "that has never worked in the old versions" or "I have to load the new software yet, so I'll get back to you". We are in the middle of startup on a big project so this is making us look really bad when it takes longer to chase down problems. Is there a work around, or a patch for this? I am running Win7 32-bit My co-worker has the same problem with XP-Pro Thanks.

This may be more of a recommendation for improvement than anything else. What I was actually looking for was something between local and global, both for tags and for programs. I would love to have the ability to create a group of POUs and assign a table of labels for that group.

Yes and No. At the moment the biggest struggle is the scope of labels. It looks like they can either be local to one specific program or global to absolutely all programs. Is that a true statement?

My company has a standard for structuring programs a certain way for the sake of consistancy. This structure was partially based on the functionality and features of our most common programming software, which isn't Mitsubishi. In the past, on Mitsubishi PLC projects, we have used GX Developer, and we just set our standard structure aside. This caused programs to get more messy and cluttered than we like, and harder to follow because it wasn't what we were used to seeing. Now that we are using GX Works2 I think we need to re-visit our standard structure and see how closely we can make GX Works2 look like it. Here is a pictoral view of what our structure looks like: If you have any opinions on how to make a GX Works2 project look similar to this, I would appreciate it.