Jump to content

Ausman

MVP 2017
  • Posts

    1,867
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    115

Ausman last won the day on June 16

Ausman had the most liked content!

3 Followers

About Ausman

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Interests
    Love/Hate waking up with a solution to a problem. Thanks brain....for not sleeping properly!

Recent Profile Visitors

7,562 profile views

Ausman's Achievements

UniGuru

UniGuru (4/4)

226

Reputation

  1. John, different motors need different speed controls. I don't know the term "boxer" (you americanos not talking aussie) but perhaps it means shaded pole? I doubt that it's going to work immediately without something else. It's a bit of a minefield. One of the reasons motors are hard is that the windings and the way they work is essentially an inductive device that generates all sorts of odd things. Couple that with all the different starting methods and caps involved or not and it gets messy. My first phone call is to the maker if possible. Even then, my final hardware backstop for some speed control of motors that supposedly can't be done is multi-tap transformers.....a seemingly long forgotten method that's been replaced by electronics.....except they often generate hum that the tranny doesn't! However, put your clamp meter on the line at full speed, do some measurements and then play, starting at the lowest PWM you can and increase slowly. See what the fan does and whether current draw seems odd for what is being achieved. If it IS a simple motor then it might just work if the draw bears a linear relationship to speed. If you have an infrared temp gun, check the motor body as well for anything odd compared to normal full speed running. Don't forget that fans rely on the inherent flow over the motor to keep things cool. Even though at slower speeds the motor should be using less power, sometimes it isn't enough flow to compensate. A zero-crossing ssr might also help, but you can imagine the conflicts involved if your pwm is not near the line Hz rate. You wanted a simple answer, but sadly not as easy as one might think. cheers, Aus
  2. Not once have I said that. My responses are based on I don't know how much you know, as you are new here. Don't forget I am not paid, I am a volunteer who has put in countless hours on this forum often explaining the same thing again and again to people who can't be bothered to look up help files or delve into the forum. Think how you might react if you were again asked how to turn on a light switch! I have never had this issue myself, but I also only do linearisations on MIs. What happens if you convert your input numbers to MIs? Your needed output will still give the same accuracy on the smaller input range that is available with MIs. Using a counter based on SB13 will let you test this easily with your wanted time of 5 hours. I can't as I don't use 700s. cheers, Aus
  3. Dan, I've always enjoyed finding my "nuder" settings on any of my Jazz. 🙂 cheers, Aus
  4. Pls upload the program you've done for the example above so that others can run it and check. I can't as I don't use 700s. Reading the above makes me think that you don't know a crucial thing that linearisation needs to work properly. It does NOT stop at the Max and Min values you specify. If your program is going to possibly give readings that will overshoot you have to have Max and Min compares going on that store the max or min value if an overshoot has happened. This is done directly after the linearisation in the ladder. This is a confusing thing for first time linearisation users. Pls read this entire topic: As far as I know this hasn't been done yet. One for @Cara Bereck Levy to ask? .....Again. I've always said I don't think it could be too hard, but I do know that the Vision system has limited "space" for mods. cheers, Aus
  5. Look at the Help tab and then open Sample U90 Projects. Look under Flow, totalizing and pump control for some tips The help files have lots of information that you will need in your learning curve.
  6. Why do people constantly focus on timers for a time based need? Maybe it's the name....Timer! I've often harped on the often huge benefits of not using timers, instead using counters based on SB13 & 15. For particular needs the method is far easier to work with and offers way more complex possibilities throughout the run. In this case I think it would make things much simpler with a little bit of maths instead of using the converted timer through the Linz function, and would likely get around your issue which I doubt is a Linearisation error, but rather some other reference being done to your ML which is upsetting things. A quick look at your program and there are glaring errors in that you are conditionally calling your subroutine, that also involves sets and resets of the thing that calls the sub. It is all just way too complex and likely to cause issues. Also, split up your ladder work. Rung 1 in your Step.Run is an example. However, a simple test for you to do to narrow down the error would be to use a vector of MLs to check on each scan whether it has changed each scan, and if it has to record it sequentially in the vector on a FIFO basis. If the output error occurs let the system run a few more scans and then stop the process and look at the stored MLs. Things can happen in scan times that aren't picked up by online monitoring. Kratmel is possibly on the right path as your procedure might fall into the "An intermediate calculation" ruling. But my main thought is that something else is going on that you have missed, like the ML being inadvertently part of a vector etc. Honestly, I'd start again and think of using my counter method instead. If you wrap your head around it properly you'll find it way easier for what you appear to be wanting to do, and will use far less ladderwork that will be much easier to follow. Especially in years to come where you'll be going "what the *&^% have I done here?" cheers, Aus
  7. Cart, there are numerous references all over this forum regarding USB-serial converter hassles and their solutions.
  8. Hi Dan, I assumed it was a 120 given Goldic's paste, so didn't mention the ethernet. But agree if it can be fitted it would be much easier. So who's played with the comms yet?!! C'mon JoeT, this is something I feel sure you've tried at some stage. 🚬 cheers, Aus
  9. I don't use Sambas and may have this wrong, but check your NPN & PNP settings. The manual states "If the digital inputs function as npn, analog option is not available." Also, carefully check your puck specs. Ensure everything's on the correct terminals. Some pucks can be very confusing with what they need to work, compared to another. I'm also assuming that if it is a programmable puck you've done this correctly. cheers, Aus
  10. I'm not paying $9.99 for a component that is possibly used! 🚽
  11. Although this isn't an answer to your question, it is directly linked. I have always been intrigued by this bit of the manuals: PARTICULARLY what is in the Note. I've never actually played lately with comms to find whether it truly means that both the 485 and 232 can happen concurrently. For me to set this up as a test at present is difficult, but I'm hoping that someone else who's tried it can chime in. If it is possible it may solve your issue, gojdic. I have vague memories of trying it years ago without luck, but back then I was beginning at Unitronics stuff and mightn't have known enough. cheers, Aus
  12. check that the adapter is not trying to connect somewhere else.....externally perhaps.....which your router/switch/etc is upset about! cheers, Aus
  13. @Cara Bereck Levy Ebenezer's post here initially seemed to be in the wrong area, but I couldn't then decide a more valid location. I'm wondering if with the introduction of the routers a new forum area needs to be started, dedicated to them. I'm sure more and more questions will arise. cheers, Aus
  14. Have never used that USR-TCP but for what it's worth, many things I have from USR have quirks that don't let things work the way you expect. Their "tests" that are part of the setting up programs work fine and you go "woo-hoo", but when you translate that to your job at hand, sometimes things don't happen without further delving into deeper areas of the adapter. Documentation is sometimes "lacking". One thing I found that sometimes made a difference is to set the unit back to default, and then write your saved version. Don't do the write over the top of mods already done. cheers, Aus
×
×
  • Create New...