RE: What to use? EtherCAT or Ethernet Powerlink with CANopen protocol

Armin, sorry but...
1st.    CNC from the point of view of EtherCAT or Powerlink is a Master
device and so, any special hardware is needed.
2nd.    For Slave devices I could see that with a FPGA from Altera or Xilinx
can be enough.
In any case, the important thing, from my point of view, is to have
(available for my customers of course) as many I/Os modules and Motion
Drivers as possible and I don't know if it would be as my expectation with
Varan-bus. I only see AMK, Keb (?), Kollmorgen , LTi (?) and Sigmatek. That
no seems enough "universal"! Am I wrong?
Thanks and Best,
    Albert


  _____  

De: Steinhoff [mailto:[email protected]] 
Enviado el: sábado, 15 de diciembre de 2012 18:15
Para: Albert Saenz
CC: [email protected]
Asunto: Re: [CANLIST] What to use? EtherCAT or Ethernet Powerlink with
CANopen protocol


Albert Saenz wrote:


Thanks Armin for your clarification (I realize that PLCs have special
"equations" to obtain something that can be seen as deterministic response)
and also suggestion.
I don't doubt of filed buses "pseudo-proprietary" like it seems the
Varan-bus. The problem is "universality", that means that many manufacturer
implement it!


The VARAN bus is open specified and is controlled by the VARAN user group
(VNO) and isn't controlled by a single vendor.
The implemenation is FPGA based and the VHDL code is offered for the member
of the VNO.

None of the members are bound to a vendor specific hardware or firmware ...
this isn't for instance the case with the so called
"universal" field bus systems PROFIBUS, PROFINET or EtherCAT -> you have to
use vendor specific ASICS/controllers.

The VARAN bus is because of its flexible FPGA implemenation not bound to the
transmission speed of 100Mbits/s.

Best Regards

--Armin




Kind regards,
    Albert 
 

 
  _____  

De: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] En nombre de Steinhoff
Enviado el: sábado, 15 de diciembre de 2012 16:10
CC: Albert Saenz; [email protected]
Asunto: Re: [CANLIST] What to use? EtherCAT or Ethernet Powerlink with
CANopen protocol


Albert Saenz wrote:


Hi all,

I want to thanks everybodybut, I'm sorry, I think my question was not

clearly introduce.

1.    Despite any PLC can NOT be deterministic because it depends on the

"branch" it executes the program (Soft Real Time).


It dependes on the type of the "PLC" ... a can be SoftPLC be deterministic
if it 
works eventoriented on top of an RTOS.

For instance: http://dachs.net/DACHSview++_E_fleyer.pdf
[ clip]

>Anyhow, our query was to demand your opinions when we need to control more

>axis and all the I/Os (digital and analog) with a single field bus channel?

>That is because we are thinking in EtherCat or Powerlink (despite that I

>sincerely believe that Ethernet hardware will win to any other solution in

>the CNC market).



You should also have a look to the VARAN bus:
http://www.varan-bus.net/index_en.htm



Best Regards

--Armin



> Hope I have clarify properly

>Best,

>Albert Saenz

>Skype: my_voip



 




Se certificó que el correo entrante no contiene virus.
Comprobada por AVG - www.avg.es
Versión: 9.0.930 / Base de datos de virus: 2634.1.1/5462 - Fecha de la
versión: 12/15/12 12:44:00



Se certificó que el correo entrante no contiene virus.
Comprobada por AVG - www.avg.es
Versión: 9.0.930 / Base de datos de virus: 2634.1.1/5462 - Fecha de la
versión: 12/15/12 12:44:00