Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Stuartjl

GX IEC tips

30 posts in this topic

Hi, shortly i'm going to start using Mitsubishin GX IEC. I'm looking for some advice, tips etc on how to get the most out of using GX IEC. I've used Beckhoff Twincat IEC using structured text language for about a year, but i'll be using ladder logic instead of structured text for GX IEC. Is there any good examples, tutorials to speed up my learning of this?? Stu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a bit hard to "guess" what you want to know since IEC is pretty big. You can start here and ask more specific questions after reading and testing a little: http://www.beijer.no/web/web_no_be_no.nsf/docsbycodename/filearchive?OpenDocument&mylink=/web/BExFilePileAut.nsf/fm.be.searchframe?Openform&Lang=NO&DocID=2CC60C7D2700D6B6C125728E005C01F4 In addition I would point out that GX IEC Developer is now replaced by GX Works2 and is no longer maintained. GX Works2 also has all the IEC functionality with structured ladder so you should really upgrade your software to GW2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was about to say the same thing... learning GX IEC Developer now is like learning DOS... Why bother. You want to learn GX Works2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're not right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not right in the head? I already knew that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Constructive feedback....!??? Why not right? Do you have anything to add? What's your point? When you comment you should always say why you don't agree and also prove why you are right. What is the point of commenting like this? What information do the topic starter get and how can others learn from this? The whole point with a forum is that the topic starter gets his answers, AND that people in the future can search posts, and not double post. So please inform us what the topic starter and other people in the forum (like me) have learned from your statement!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you yourself such

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GX Works 2 doesn't have "Show MELSEC Code of Networks" option. Very useful to me because I am used to Melsec IL language and in some cases. For instance (in GX IEC Developer) the GE_E function generates diferent code compared with AND_GE_M. The GE_E function uses 2 inline comparation (AND_GE_M) and SET RST functions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are right! I searched that function as well and couldn't find it so far. But for a newbie GXWorks2 is much better, imho. I guess IEC functionality is something, that in Japan nobody really cares about . And I fear, this will cause sooner or later the end of IEC and function block. Our Japanes customers prefer ladder programming on GX Developer. I delivered in the past PLCs programmed with GX IEC Dev. and the Japanese kept asking what software I used for programming, since they don't know GX IEC Dev. at all. I told them to consult Mitsu, since they more or less forced me in the past to use it. No doubt, hardware of Mitsu is great, but software

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mitsu has always had problems with the software.GX Works has a colorful interface and functionality has not changed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, that's what comes out if you let Japanese program software...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Select a ladder block or multiple, go to View menu, select Display Compile Result. That's your instruction list. I disagree that GX Works2 is as bad as GX Developer... It's greatly improved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with several people here, yes the SW could be better but then it has indeed improved. I agree with all of you, but I'm tired of everyone throwing out bad comments without explaining what is the problem. If you're not satisfied have you tried explaining the issue on the forum? This is like politics, you cannot complain something if you don't vote.... So basically: Write WHAT the problem is, don't just throw out comments without explaining what you don't like (or like). I do agree that Japan isn't the best in SW, but I do hope they will listen to their customers, maybe we're lucky and someone reads this forum and are able to improve the software.... You never know. But my point is as previously mentioned: What's the point of complaining without writing the reason and trying to make an effort for the better of us all....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great! I'm a beginner in GX Works and Q so I will bother with some basic questions. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Crossbow: Thank you for your tip. @kaare_t: I don't get your point? WKLa asked of a software function what is not available or he can't find it in GXW2. I missed it as well for FDB. Imho your reply is useless here...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that my reply has nothing to do with this issue, however my reply is simply a response to "some other people" that started to discuss the software itself, and had nothing to do with the topic. So if you want to be correct you should really address those people that started this.... Have you read the entire post? If so, why are you arguing me? You can clearly see that this is something that started several posts ago, by completely other people than me!! So stop shooting the messenger!!!!! In addition, I forgot to point this out, but GX Works2 questions/answers/problems/feedback belongs in the sticky thread found in the startpage of Mitsu forums!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
- the curve of the implementation of the PROFIBUS -No normal support QnPH, QnPRH -no filtering of unused global & local variables - configurators devices virtually the same. - adding new functionality with the full upgrade software.Why? -access to global variables from other parts of the IQ Works awful. Why not take the experience in Siemens Step7. GX DEVELOPER poor excuse of software from Allen Bradley. I've been working with Mitsubishi and spit all the time. They do not have normal approach like Siemens or Schneider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KAZAH perhaps you are a few versions behind. Profibus is added once you install GX Configurator-DP. It adds the Profibus module to the intelligent module list in GX Works2. QnPH and QnPRH are added now. There have been many changes to the label functions, I think this is an option now. No idea what you mean with your fourth bullet. Lost on the 5th bullet too. The integration between packages got better with iQ Works 1.34, but does still need improvement. I don't know why you seem to hate Mitsubishi so much. I can't recall more than one or two posts from you in which you liked anything. You need to understand that not all companies are the same. And all companies were writing their own software at the same time. So making it more like theirs is not always possible. The underlying process is different in different PLC brands. You don't expect every single car on the road to lay out the dashboard exactly the same. You don't see the same exact keyboard on every single laptop. So why would you expect 100% consistency between vendors on PLCs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Version of the program I have 1.34 . GX CONFIGURATOR DP stands.You worked with this configurator. QnPH QnPRH for simple projects.Members must give their views.I've been working with Mitsubishi and have a right to say so.Software does not include innovation, is a cosmetic change and attempt to unite previously disparate software.You can argue for a long time.To Crossbow : This forum allows for insults

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This should have been discussed in the GX Works2 forum, imo. But it's an interesting discussion nonetheless. The problem with GX Works2 is that it is software written in Japan and tailored to the Japanese (asian) market. It's a well known fact that in Japan, they prefer to program with simple ladder (straight ladder "hardcore" address programming). There is not much interest in structured programming at all (labels, function, function blocks, structured datatypes, structured text, project documentation,...). In fact, if it wasn't for Mitsubishi Europe, there wouldn't have been IEC at all. There probably wouldn't have been Profibus either (GX Configurator DP). And this is the core problem. Siemens for example is tailored to the European market and structured programming has been at the core of Step 7 all a long and it shows. Anything structured in GX Works2 (label programming, functions, function blocks,...) has been "added on customer demand" along the way. As such, GX Works2 is in essence/at the core just simple ladder with a lot of functionalities bolted on. And it shows. Once you try anything more advanced than simple ladder, the software falls apart in so many ways that in the end, it becomes unusable at best. The same problem goes for bus communication. Since it's tailored for the asian market, CC Link (IE) is the preferred bus system for Mitsubishi. And it shows in how tightly CC Link is integrated in GX Works2 (just as profibus/profinet is tightly integrated into Step 7). For european countries though who want to use profibus (profinet), it have been frustrating times. As for Profinet, Mitsubishi Japan has no interest at present to provide solutions. As such, again we have to look at Mitsubishi Europe and hope for a solution. However, i have less issues with the way Mitsubishi Japan has treated profibus/profinet than i have with how they deal with structured programming. Because in the end, the solutions that Mitsubishi Europe has provided for profibus are good and work well. In short, it's a cultural thing. The software isn't suited to the European (and American i presume) style of (structured) programming because their base market isn't interested in that sort of thing. Which is a shame really because simple ladder programming using device addresses isn't something i expect to use as a programmer in 2012. Once you unlock and realise the power of structured programming with other brands of plc's (e.g. Siemens), sadly, very few reasons are left to choose Mitsubishi. In fact, with Step 7 v11 (which basically takes away a lot of the negative points from v5), the gap is getting very big indeed. I'm not hopeful for the future either. Until Japan is fully ready to embrace more "modern" programming techniques, nothing much will change. In my opinion, there is only one solution: start from scratch and integrate proper structured programming from the start. In that sense, GX Works2 feels like a dissapointment. With the inclusion of IEC, this was the ideal opportunity to build a modern programming platform. Instead, they took GX Developer, improved it, and banged in the IEC virtually unaltered. It's two completey different worlds living within the same software. As a last note, there is a huge language barrier to overcome when dealing with any Japanese company. In fact, any sort of communication has to go through dealer -> Mitsubishi Europe -> Mitsubishi Japan. There is no official world wide forum/website/... Compare this to Siemens for example who has a huge online community support system with tons of Q&A, docs,... This helps the users but i'm sure it also helps Siemens in learning and understanding what customers want from their products. As a conclusion, i'd say that the fact that the software is developed in Japan and tailored for the Japanese (or asian) market, has a huge influence in how the software is. It also explains why non-asian countries and users aren't that impressed with it. We have a different vision on what programming is all about. Edited by Mitsu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with You.Profinet is, but the price .....I was hoping to work on the bugs but..... ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kazah, I never said you could not make negative comments, I just stated it seems that's all you make when it comes to Mitsubishi. You are free to state your opinions, good or bad, about any product. I've never tried to stop it. I agree completely with what you and Mitsu have said. Mitsubishi holds the majority market share in Japan, and that is their primary market. The same can be said about Siemens in Europe and Allen Bradley in the US. Each has their own preferred way of doing things, and that tends to be the only way their customers feel is right. I personally have worked with many brands of PLCs, and there are some I feel just plain make it difficult on purpose. Now I work with tons of Mitsubishi customers in the US, and what I have found is that over 90% of them are still using the legacy ladder programming language, in hundreds of cases still on the A Series PLC. I will continue to write ladder and not as much structured programming because that is what they understand how to support. I had one guy show me a structured text program and say 'what the ... is that and how do I convert it to ladder?' so obviously he would not want to use IEC programs and features in GX Works2. But then, if I learned on Siemens and not on Omron, then I would most likely be more interested in structured programming methods. Point being, I learned one way, and that way works for me. I have embraced new features and functions, but if I need to get something done quickly, I still revert to standard Mitsubishi ladder logic. It's what I have the most experience on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@Mitsu & Kazah: I do agree with you on all points regarding Mitsubishi and the European (and possibly the U.S.??) market and structured programming, and I'm very happy that we now can discuss this matter in a more constructive way. As said, I do agree with you, but I don't feel that the sw is as bad as you guys indicate. If you guys feel that the software is indeed that bad why do you even program Mitsubishi PLC's? I know we all have to adjust to the end-customers and deliver what they want, but still if I had that kind of frustration over anything in life I would stop using/doing it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, well, then I tell ... And will speak more widely than just about the software ... Being manufacturing an enough qualitative hardware, Mitsubishi is not concerned about its market absolutely. This is a fact. The normal documentation (not to say about adapted), the complete software, including SCADA, the education for consumers by really qualified specialists are not provided. While Mitsubishi looks to the future, the response to the real needs of the market and pleas of system integrators are delayed by 10 years approximately, and thus losing its value for customers.. For Crossbow: Since the beginning of this century the Siemens has the main profit from sales of SPS in Russia. It is also a fact. The Schneider follow him. While Mitsubishi at best collect here the crumbs off from the table. This is logical, because 'what goes around, comes around'. Russian market they lost already. If they continue to behave, then most likely they lose a worldwide. In the best case for the Mitsubishi will remain only solutions for the machine tool (servos and positioning), ie something with which they started, and we will write memoirs. Giving more than dozen years of working with Mitsubishi products, even now I appreciate these years as discarded in the garbage can. Edited by Inntele

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