I appear to be encountering a challenge that I haven't fully addressed yet. To simplify things, I'll start from the beginning. I am working with two different Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) and I'm trying to establish communication between them using Produced and Consumed bits over a network. The first PLC is an L61, which utilizes a 1756-ENBT module for network communication with a switch. The second PLC is an L30ER equipped with two network ports. One port connects to a switch that then leads to a PV+700 display, while the second port connects back to my original switch linked to the 1756-ENBT. Currently, the L30ER is running firmware version 20.12, while the L61 is on version 19.11. Since I could not achieve communication between the two, I decided to upgrade the L61's firmware to version 20.11. In previous version 19.11, I could easily set up Produced and Consumed bits as long as both PLCs used matching firmware. This was done by creating a tag offline and designating it as Produced with the type `interlock_data` on one end, and as Consumed on the other. However, upon upgrading to firmware 20.11, I've noticed that the data type `interlock_data` is no longer available, making it incredibly challenging to facilitate communication between the two PLCs. I conducted a network discovery on the L30ER, which successfully identified the 1756-ENBT and I configured it accordingly. I presume that I also need to add the processor, so I proceeded with that step. I've managed to create a tag on the L30ER that appears to be operational, but I’m having trouble making the bit visible on the L61. I also performed network discovery on the L61, and it recognized the L30ER. I suspect that the communication issue may stem from the L30ER's connection via the ENBT module. Could someone provide a comprehensive 'How-To' guide for setting this up on both ends? I feel like I'm going in circles and cannot identify the core issue. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated!
I understand now. I wasn't matching the consumer with the appropriate producer. Thank you for taking the time to read this!
I'm pleased to hear you've resolved the issue! When it comes to Produced/Consumed tags, there are two primary concerns to keep in mind: 1. Firmware versions do not need to be identical. Many people mistakenly assume this is a common problem, but my experience and feedback from RA Engineering indicate that there are no compatibility issues related to different firmware revisions for Produced/Consumed tags. 2. The data types for both Produced and Consumed Tags must match exactly. If there is any discrepancy—whether it's in the element name, data type, or sequence, even a single character or byte—the connection will fail. To ensure compatibility, it's advisable to copy the data type definition directly from one controller to another. By addressing these points, you can effectively troubleshoot and optimize your Produced/Consumed tags for seamless operation.
I completely understand your perspective about not needing to upgrade the firmware. However, as I was attempting to integrate an L30ER into my program based on the 19.11 revision, I noticed that it wasn’t included in the controller options—only the L32ER was listed. Additionally, I’m working on establishing a connection between produced and consumed tags for both the outdated 19.11 version and an L71 controller, but unfortunately, the L71 was also missing from the controller list, whereas the L72 was available. I have gathered every available EDS file, including some from international sources, so I'm confident that EDS compatibility isn’t the issue. I am aware that the L71's EDS is derived from the L72, which might have been a potential solution. Nevertheless, I faced persistent challenges getting the L30ER to establish communication, and I have since upgraded the firmware without success. Moreover, the customer prefers that their multimillion-dollar equipment accurately displays an L71 instead of showing an L72, which complicates matters further. It seems like I was stuck in a frustrating cycle, trying to find a way out without success. I truly appreciate your advice—thank you for your insights!
**Brian10369 - I hope to contribute to this discussion without steering it off course... but I find myself facing a very similar issue, specifically regarding processor configurations. I recently had to upgrade the firmware on the L61 controller since it was incompatible with the L30er model. After updating to version 20.11, the L30er was successfully recognized. I integrated the L30er into the L61 processor hierarchy, and communication is established. On the L30er controller, I created a produced tag with the data type 'dint,' and the program accepted it without any issues. However, when I attempt to add a corresponding consumed tag of the same data type on the L61 side, a warning triangle appears next to the L30er controller in the tree view. The connections tab displays an error message: 16#0117 connection request error due to an invalid connection point. Since I’m not experienced in setting up produced and consumed tags between controllers, I suspect I might be missing a crucial step. My main query is: Do I need to add the L61 controller to the program tree of the L30er controller?**
✅ Work Order Management
✅ Asset Tracking
✅ Preventive Maintenance
✅ Inspection Report
We have received your information. We will share Schedule Demo details on your Mail Id.
Join hundreds of satisfied customers who have transformed their maintenance processes.
Sign up today and start optimizing your workflow.