Posted 2 Dec 2022 Hello, There seem to be a lot of different CC-Link IE protocols: CC-Link IE Field Basic CC-Link IE Field CC-Link IE Field Motion CC-Link IE Field Safety CC-Link IE Control CC-Link IE TSN This causes me some confusion. Are there as many variations of Ethernet/IP and PROFINET? Can you point me to a good comparison of the different CC-Link IE protocols? My understanding is that: CC-Link IE Field Basic: 100 Mb/s Non-deterministic? Good for non-time-critical communications (e.g., setting a drive speed) Implemented in software Traffic can co-exist with other TCP/IP traffic Max 64 stations Addressed by IP address Star topology I believe the other protocols are all 1 Gb/s, are deterministic, are addressed by station number, are implemented in hardware and each needs its own isolated network. CC-Link IE Control is used for communications between PLCs and robots. CC-Link IE Field is used for remote I/O and CC-Link IE TSN is used for even faster remote I/O communications. Please let me know if any of this is inaccurate. Thanks, Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 2 Dec 2022 CC-Link in just the branding of the total network. https://eu.cc-link.org/ You can compare CC-Link to profibus DP but you don't need any GSD files. CC-Link IE Field (Gbps) (Motion/Safety) is one network. IE stands for industrial ethernet but It. It is determenistic and uses network numbers and stations numbers. You can compare this to profinet RT or profinet IRT CC-Link IE Field basic (IP adress based) you can compare to profinet IO. CC-Link IE Control is the same but you can only connect controllers together where with CC-Link IE field you can cconnect everything. CC-Link IE TSN is based on IEEE TSN. Which makes makes deterministic network possible on an IP based network. also every message is time stamped and other non TSN protocols can still run over the same backbone like modbus tcp/ip for instance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-Sensitive_Networking The profibus foundation is also working on a profinet TSN version but there are no products available. CC-Link IE TSN is as far as i know the first and only industrial network available and there are some vendors who have products available like Mitsubishi. https://eu.cc-link.org/ there are also a lot of swiches etc for TSN networks as it has been used in audio/visual world for years. Hope this helps Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 2 Dec 2022 Rockwell has been using the same time synchronization technology as TSN for many years--IEEE 1588, also known as Precision Time Protocol. It is a fundamental part of CIP Sync, the TSN-ish extension to EtherNet/IP and related technologies. So, no, CC-Link is not first in this space. They are just using the fancier new buzzword. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 2 Dec 2022 TSN is definitely not exclusive to CC-link, but there are two big advantages comparing to others. First one is called Renesas. Renesas is semiconductor producer and it's shares are owned by Mitsubishi. I saw that Renesas is major chip supplier also for Profinet TSN. Second one is that CC-Link IE TSN implementation for user is extremely simple, both on hardware and software, comparing to others. Disadvantage is that there are not many compliant products, in this moment, but I find that with other TSN solutions even worse. For example there are not many OPC UA FX(OPC UA over TSN) products in this moment. Good thing is that you can implement other CC-link IE solutions within CC-link IE TSN, although if you do that there are some drawbacks. I personally find CC-link on RS485 obsolete, like any other solution not based Ethernet, especially as motion control likes fiber-optics very much, and I think that TSN is definitely way to go (whatever protocol you find suitable for it). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 2 Dec 2022 2 hours ago, pturmel said: Rockwell has been using the same time synchronization technology as TSN for many years--IEEE 1588, also known as Precision Time Protocol. It is a fundamental part of CIP Sync, the TSN-ish extension to EtherNet/IP and related technologies. So, no, CC-Link is not first in this space. They are just using the fancier new buzzword. Interesting.. I will look into this. I did find some differences though: Time Sensitive Networks (TSN)TSN is a timing and synchronization standard built on the Ethernet standard that uses a profile of IEEE-1588 hardware synchronization. TSN requires the same hardware consideration for controllers as 1588 hardware timed sync in that it needs a direct connection from the NIC to the timing source. TSN differs from 1588 hardware in that TSN networks will generate an error if synchronization falls out of expected bounds, unlike 1588 hardware sync, and that TSN timing packets have priority scheduling. Having priority means that TSN timing packets will be sent out from the grandmaster and from TSN enabled switching devices without latency as they will not have to wait for other packets in the buffer to be sent. This guarantees tight synchronization regardless of the amount of network traffic. TSN and 1588 networks are not compatible and would need to be bridged with compliant hardware. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 2 Dec 2022 1 hour ago, Gambit said: TSN timing packets will be sent out from the grandmaster and from TSN enabled switching devices without latency as they will not have to wait for other packets in the buffer to be sent PTP packets can be priority-marked, too. And PTP-compliant switches measure and report latency across the switch itself to maintain accuracy. TSN incompatibilities are simply attempts repurpose existing technologies with vendor lock-in. I'm less than impressed. (Not that it doesn't work, but that there's a bunch of hype.) Logix processors provide detailed information about their active grandmaster clock (via GSV), so the alarming is possible and configurable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 2 Dec 2022 1 hour ago, pturmel said: TSN incompatibilities are simply attempts repurpose existing technologies with vendor lock-in. This statement is interesting to me. I'm against any vendor lock, and I don't understand how it is vendor locked (my bad). See this link: https://www.renesas.com/us/en/blogs/art-networking-series-7-tsn-virtualized-environment It's not related to CC-link IE TSN, but to TSN. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 2 Dec 2022 Interesting link. As a collection of best practices and techniques for determinism, TSN is great. As an implied sole solution for determinism, the way it is marketed and twisted into some commercial products, not so great. Especially as a newcomer whose core is technology has been standard in Rockwell products for many years. Like, more than a decade. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 2 Dec 2022 For me CC-link TSN is excellent way to move away from EtherCAT and other ported to the Ethernet CAN based solutions, which have many benefits but some very big drawbacks. Determinism and speed was my reason why I have opted few times EtherCAT, and it was always PITA. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 8 Dec 2022 Thanks, guys. So both CC-Link IE Field Basic and CC-Link IE TSN traffic can co-exist with TCP/IP traffic, but TSN is deterministic and Field Basic is not? Does TSN require special TSN switches to prioritise TSN traffic? Are CC-Link IE Field and CC-Link IE TSN similar with the main difference being that TSN traffic can co-exist with TCP/IP traffic, whereas IE Field traffic cannot? I presume TCP/IP traffic would be detected and cause errors on CC-Link IE Field, Control and Motion/Safety networks? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
