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

On one hand:

- You are using the wrong platform for this discussion; I think this is 
called CANLIST.

On the other hand:

- I like the discussion: it demonstrates the changes in the market 
since the last ten years.

The issues we talk about in this CANLIST are technical issues. How to 
implement such and so? Or I did it this way, why is it not working? etc.

When the discussion is about ethernet protocols, it is no longer about 
real technical issues; it is about which protocol has the best 
opportunities or even which protocol is going to survive.

In the Netherlands we have at the end of the year the top 2000 of hits 
of all times. Not very interesting because Queens Bohemian Rapsody is 
allways no. 1. Maybe we should organise the top 50 of Industrial 
Ethernet protocols on this forum. To stay with music: I suggest on 
number one : White Rabbit.

As people from my age will remember one of the Woodstock great 
successes of Jefferson Airplane, but also the deterministic ethernet 
protocol, introduced by Cern. Not a manufacturer of Control Systems, but 
an end user of equipment. Probably they know better what they need, than 
all the equipment suppliers together.

CAN was also designed with the application area (the car) in mind. 
Ethernet was designed with "office systems" in mind, so maybe it is a 
platform we should not use in industrial control anyway ???

Kees Zagers



Albert Saenz schreef op 15.12.2012 19:30:
> 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
>
> -------------------------
>  Steinhoff [mailto:[email protected]]
>  sábado, 15 de diciembre de 2012 18:15
>  Albert Saenz
>  [email protected]
>  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
>>
>> -------------------------
>> [] Steinhoff
>> sábado, 15 de diciembre de 2012 16:10
>> Albert Saenz;
>> 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:
>> [ 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 -
>> 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

--
Archives and useful links: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CANbus
Subscribe and unsubscribe at www.vector.com/canlist/
Report any problems to <[email protected]>