Problems configuring an EIOC

We are testing out an EIOC and are trying to communicate with an Rockwell E300 starter via Ethernet/IP.  We have the EIOC commissioned and have all of the signals defined.  We are talking using Class 1 messaging and have the input / output assemblies setup correctly.  We have verified communications on the network with the E300 and a laptop.  However, our EIOC shows "No Comms" in diagnostics.  There are not very many settings to configure on the EIOC.  According to the LED's on the E300 starter it is online, but no master is scanning the bus.  Anyone have any experience with the newly released EIOC?

  • "No Comms" is a misleading diagnostic message sometimes. It may not mean the network communication. If you have some parameters misconfigured on the LDT (Logical Device Tag) of EIOC and these parameters are not matched what have been configured on your E300, you will have the "No Comms" message. I am not quite familar with the E300 configuration. But it may be something you need to double check.
  • In reply to Keith_Li:

    Initially we were testing the E300 with a VIM2. For the most part, the LDT's are configured to match what we had in the VIM2. We have split some of them out to read boolean tag versus reading the information in 16 / 32 bit words.
  • In reply to boykindj:

    We were able to resolve the issue by changing the number of Input / Output bytes to match the total available for the starter as opposed to only what we needed. Once We did this, the EIOC began scanning the I/O.
  • In reply to boykindj:

    Thanks for sharing your solution with the community, .

    Best Regards,

    Rachelle McWright: Business Development Manager, Dynamic Simulation: U.S. Gulf Coast

  • boykindj we are in the process of testing the EIOC to AB E300 and Powerflex 700VC and 755 drives. We have the E300s communicating but not the drives. Did you connect to drives also, or just to the E300? What issues did you see? We have checked with AB several times and we feel that the drives are setup correctly and we are using the correction instance assembly numbers and word/byte lengths. Would be interested in hearing from you. Thanks