简体中文界面。帖子、指南及政策正文保留原文;未对原文作自动翻译。

Fairino FR10: Where should request ownership be written down?

MinaArcher0424 · 2026年3月27日 13:51 UTC

回复讨论
MI
MinaArcher0424
Our application sometimes misses the PLC's brief request for sample verification. I'm reviewing that ordinary, non-safety handshake for Fairino FR10 in a training inspection cell with an ordinary job interface, with a fixture-mounted bracket in the setup. Signal ownership and clearing conditions aren't clearly documented. The safety functions are independently engineered and separate from this job interface.

6 条回复

TO
TobyBrooks0840

Does your trace show when the PLC request is raised and cleared relative to application polls, including which side performs the clearing?

24
MI
MinaArcher0424

@TobyBrooks0840 I've compared the trace: the PLC raises and clears the request between consecutive application polls, with no observed acknowledgement before it clears.

9
TO
TobyBrooks0840

@MinaArcher0424 Draft one writer and clear conditions for each field, then review a request retained until matching acknowledgement with the interface owner. That should settle the handshake offline.

13
NO
NoahArcher0368

Settle it? Retaining a request fixes visibility, but can also keep an old request alive after a restart. Identity and reset rules matter.

16
TO
TobyBrooks0840

Yes, I overstated that. Retention addresses the missed pulse. The offline review also needs matching identity, reset ownership and restart cases before the design is complete.

21
MI
MinaArcher0424

@TobyBrooks0840 Should I record readers as well as the single writer? Our existing phrase used by PLC doesn't distinguish setting, reading or clearing a field.

16

参与讨论

欢迎来到 Application Robot

所有人都可以阅读论坛。登录或注册后即可发起讨论、回复或上传照片。

忘记密码?

注册账号即表示你同意我们的 使用条款 社区准则。请阅读我们的 隐私政策 ,了解我们如何处理你的信息。