Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Guest Thierry

Mitsubishi FX2NC

8 posts in this topic

I have a project where the FX2NC looks like the ideal solution. However, I need to connect the a pc (for programming) and a touchscreen at the same time. What are my options to provide an extra programming port? I've looked into using the FX2NC-232 ADP or the FX-BOX-ET-10T (ethernet interface) but I am not sure if it would work. Anyone knows? Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simple solution, use a Beijers E-Terminal supplied by Mitsubishi. These come with two ports, one RS232 and one RS422. Use the RS422 port to connect to the FX2N and you can use the RS232 port to connect your computer to the E-Terminal, a feature called "transparent mode" will allow you to program the PLC via the terminal. E-100 terminals and above support this feature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find it's best to use the 232-BD board. It's very low cost. I use it even with E-terminals. I got tired of having problems with the pass-through mode on the terminals and find the BD board to be a very good solution. I connect the terminal to the programming port and the PC to the BD board using a standard cable. This also means less wear and tear on my sc09 cable since it stays in storage. I just noticed that you are referring to the 'C' version so the above will not help you. I don't think the fx2nc can use the BD. That being the case, I guess I second the idea of using an E-term and the pass-through mode. Edited by JimRowell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can use a F930GOT or F940GOT MMI, they have a RS232C port that you can programming the PLC FX2nc and the F9XXGOT as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is an FX0N-232ADP adapter that connects on the left hand side of the processor to give you an extra RS232 port. There is also an FX0N-485ADP that will give an RS485 connection. The E-terminals and the F-GOT operatro interfaces both support pass-thru and I've never had a problem with either. Use the CAB5 cable to go PC to E-terminal and the CAB19 to go E-terminal to PLC and it works fine. Or use the FX-232CAB to go PC to F-GOT and the FX-50DU-CAB0 to go F-GOT to PLC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chris, The problem I have with pass-through mode on the E terminals only rears its head if I do longish comms between a pc and the plc through the terminal. For instance in a recent project, I have a pc program running on the customers pc which allows him to send and receive complex recipes to the plc. The recipe features in the E-terminal are not used. If I connect the pc to the hmi, I can do minor pass-thru such as monitoring points in the plc from the pc. On the other hand, a recipe transfer will sometimes lock it up and requires a power cycle to restore the hmi. I've had the same thing happen on program transfers from Medoc too. It seems to be a matter of how long the comm lasts. If I connect both the hmi and the pc direct to the plc, there are no problems. Jim Rowell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't say as though I've seen that problem yet. I've downloaded a PLC program from GX-Developer, been online monitoring and editing it for three hours, and never had a comm problem. This was going through a v6 E200 to an FX2N. Maybe it was the older firmware in the E-terminals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chris, Well, it wouldn't matter how long you were monitoring or editing. Those actual comms are only short bursts. It's only things like transfering a medium size program (I suppose at least a couple thousand steps) or dwr values or doing my own custom block transfers. And it's not every time. The worst case was the most recent and it was maybe 1 out of every half a dozen transfers. But your comment about the firmware date turns on a light bulb. The times I've seen this were all on older terminals. The one I mentioned was a recent installation of an E200 but it was one that had been sitting in my office for 2 or 3 years (still in the box)! So perhaps I should do a serious test with new firmware. Thanks for pointing that out.

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