Two Keyence Ethercat devices not working at same time

[taxidelt]

I am trying to use two different Keyence measurement devices but it won't let me use both of the ESI files (that are different files). Which every I import first either the TM-X5000 or the LJ-X8002 it will work but when I attempt to bring in the second device I get an error saying "that ESI file already exists" and won't allow it to be used. I've attached the two ESI files I am attempting to use that were downloaded from the Keyence website. 

I am using an NX1P2-9024DT1 controller and running Sysmac Studio ver 1.52 ( I know this is out of date but I cannot connect to the update server due to my works network security). 

Downloads_20240129_232701.zip

*edited to add actual error message code*

 

"- The same slave exists in the installed ESI file.
Please uninstall it and try again.
  Keyence TM-X5k_CB-NEC20E.xml(Installed : Keyence LJ-X8k_CB-NEC20E.xml - Parameter 128Byte)
  Keyence TM-X5k_CB-NEC20E.xml(Installed : Keyence LJ-X8k_CB-NEC20E.xml - Parameter 256Byte)
  Keyence TM-X5k_CB-NEC20E.xml(Installed : Keyence LJ-X8k_CB-NEC20E.xml - Parameter 32Byte)
  Keyence TM-X5k_CB-NEC20E.xml(Installed : Keyence LJ-X8k_CB-NEC20E.xml - Parameter 512Byte)
  Keyence TM-X5k_CB-NEC20E.xml(Installed : Keyence LJ-X8k_CB-NEC20E.xml - Parameter 64Byte)
  Keyence TM-X5k_CB-NEC20E.xml(Installed : Keyence LJ-X8k_CB-NEC20E.xml - Result Data 128Byte)
  Keyence TM-X5k_CB-NEC20E.xml(Installed : Keyence LJ-X8k_CB-NEC20E.xml - Result Data 256Byte)
  Keyence TM-X5k_CB-NEC20E.xml(Installed : Keyence LJ-X8k_CB-NEC20E.xml - Result Data 32Byte)
  Keyence TM-X5k_CB-NEC20E.xml(Installed : Keyence LJ-X8k_CB-NEC20E.xml - Result Data 512Byte)
  Keyence TM-X5k_CB-NEC20E.xml(Installed : Keyence LJ-X8k_CB-NEC20E.xml - Result Data 64Byte)" 

Edited January 29, 2024 by taxidelt

[pturmel]

From a brief look, you won't be able to fix this.  The two files have the same LCID entries with different definitions.  The issue is that the two models are really using the same sidecar communications adapter, but the adapter doesn't present identification based on the base unit to which it is attached.  Ergo, the IDs clash.  You need to file a bug report with Keyence.

{Not LCIDs.  Those are just language codes.  It seems to be clash of Group "CB" + ModuleIdent "0x700", "0x701"... }

[taxidelt]

Thank you @pturmel This is what we thought was happening with the error messages we have. I've filed a ticket with them and our rep will be at my site on Thursday morning to try and work through it.

[taxidelt]

Keyence sent updated ESI files. 

Two things now. 

1. They said "They also mentioned this issue is happening because OMRON doesn’t have official recognition from the EtherCAT organization, so the PLC is struggling to recognize both files at once."

2. Should I be able to edit a PDO file? Currently the edit PDO is greyed out. Is this something that should be set in the ESI file or is there another file I need to import for this? 

 

I should add this is our first time using ethercat items that aren't omron. 

 

[photovoltaic]

10 minutes ago, taxidelt said:

1. They said "They also mentioned this issue is happening because OMRON doesn’t have official recognition from the EtherCAT organization, so the PLC is struggling to recognize both files at once."

2. Should I be able to edit a PDO file? Currently the edit PDO is greyed out. Is this something that should be set in the ESI file or is there another file I need to import for this? 

 

 

 

 

1: I imagine the EtherCAT Technology Group would beg to differ. Omron has 4 registered Vendor IDs with the group, and over 100 mentions in the group's media coverage, and plasters the trademarked logo on all their documentation and marketing material. I imagine there would be a few lawsuits if Omron wasn't compliant with EtherCAT and a registered user.

 

2. PDO is a process data object - you don't edit it. You can read or write to/from it, and being greyed out simply means the Keyence device doesn't let you customize what PDOs you access.

[taxidelt]

6 minutes ago, photovoltaic said:

1: I imagine the EtherCAT Technology Group would beg to differ. Omron has 4 registered Vendor IDs with the group, and over 100 mentions in the group's media coverage, and plasters the trademarked logo on all their documentation and marketing material. I imagine there would be a few lawsuits if Omron wasn't compliant with EtherCAT and a registered user.

 

2. PDO is a process data object - you don't edit it. You can read or write to/from it, and being greyed out simply means the Keyence device doesn't let you customize what PDOs you access.

I see all the bits are registered to locations such as 0x2001:09 StatusBit/READY. How do I reference that to an global variable? I am using an NX1P2-9024DT1 and running sysmac studio lite ver 1.54 if that matters. 

[photovoltaic]

40 minutes ago, taxidelt said:

I see all the bits are registered to locations such as 0x2001:09 StatusBit/READY. How do I reference that to an global variable? I am using an NX1P2-9024DT1 and running sysmac studio lite ver 1.54 if that matters. 

They will show up in your IO map where you can assign a tag of the same datatype

[panic mode]

i am not using those exact product but... i have worked with EtherCat many times and connected multiples of same nodes without issue. each physical node gets its own instance in the controller. you do not access one node to get the values to/from the other, so it does not matter that PDOs are named the same way - they are in a different instance/node.

in terms of troubleshooting first thing is always to see how they are all connected, and is the network topology correct.

lets put it this way: if the hardware side is not setup correctly, there is no hope of stumbling on correct settings in the software. 

in EtherCat network, nodes are daisy chained. branches are possible but there are limitations and this requires hardware that supports this.

so once the hardware side is verified, one can deal with the software.

how did you configure it in your controller? did you scan the network or manually populate it? are you sure that topology in software matches what you have done in hardware?

 

[taxidelt]

32 minutes ago, panic mode said:

i am not using those exact product but... i have worked with EtherCat many times and connected multiples of same nodes without issue. each physical node gets its own instance in the controller. you do not access one node to get the values to/from the other, so it does not matter that PDOs are named the same way - they are in a different instance/node.

in terms of troubleshooting first thing is always to see how they are all connected, and is the network topology correct.

lets put it this way: if the hardware side is not setup correctly, there is no hope of stumbling on correct settings in the software. 

in EtherCat network, nodes are daisy chained. branches are possible but there are limitations and this requires hardware that supports this.

so once the hardware side is verified, one can deal with the software.

how did you configure it in your controller? did you scan the network or manually populate it? are you sure that topology in software matches what you have done in hardware?

 

I auto populated the network and they are all daisy chained on their own straight out of the PLC. Keyence sent us new ESI files where they changed the on all of these rungs from "<Type ModuleIdent="#x0701">Result Data 64Byte</Type>" on both ESI files to  "<Type ModuleIdent="#x0731">Result Data 64Byte</Type>" on one and "<Type ModuleIdent="#x0741">Result Data 64Byte</Type>" on the other. After that everything is able to installed. 

[taxidelt]

48 minutes ago, photovoltaic said:

They will show up in your IO map where you can assign a tag of the same datatype

I see that now. Thank you very much. 

[photovoltaic]

15 minutes ago, taxidelt said:

I auto populated the network and they are all daisy chained on their own straight out of the PLC. Keyence sent us new ESI files where they changed the on all of these rungs from "<Type ModuleIdent="#x0701">Result Data 64Byte</Type>" on both ESI files to  "<Type ModuleIdent="#x0731">Result Data 64Byte</Type>" on one and "<Type ModuleIdent="#x0741">Result Data 64Byte</Type>" on the other. After that everything is able to installed. 

So Keyence used the same module identity on 2 of their ESI files, then claimed Omron was an EtherCAT pirate ?

[taxidelt]

4 minutes ago, photovoltaic said:

So Keyence used the same module identity on 2 of their ESI files, then claimed Omron was an EtherCAT pirate ?

It looks like it. I don't know enough about Ether/CAT to understand the difference but when using win/merge to compare the old files to the new ones that is the only thing that changed. 

[IO_Rack]

In my opinion, Keyence has always struggled with field bus and are usually late to the game. I will also note that Keyence measurement products perform exceptionally well.... just the fieldbus can be a pain.

2 hours ago, panic mode said:

in EtherCat network, nodes are daisy chained. branches are possible but there are limitations and this requires hardware that supports this.

In Sysmac Studio the EtherCat configuration screen shows a diagram of all this very clearly, including the couplers and its branches. This is one of my favorite features in the software. In all of our distribution and configuration with today's technology, Omron makes EtherCat very simple. Getting compliant ESI files has been my only struggle.

[kckku]

I had a weird problem with their EtherCAT expansion card on a XG-X vision controller. It would cut off downstream communications when trying to connect using a daisy chain configuration. The only way we got it to work was to put the XG-X with the EtherCAT card at the end of the chain.

[pturmel]

I have essentially zero ethercat experience, but I've had nothing but good experiences with both Omron and Keyence with EtherNet/IP.