Our FR10 sample-check request is a short PLC pulse and the app sometimes misses it (ordinary job signals, separate safety system), so who should keep it around until somebody actually acknowledges it?
our request has gone before the inspection app looks
NathanBarnes0547 · 2025年6月19日 02:33 UTC
主帖中文翻译暂不可用，以下显示英文原文；回复保留原文。 查看英文原文
9 条回复
Who sets and clears it now? I'd write that down first. Making the pulse longer may hide the missed-read case without answering what either side should do after a disconnect.
22分PLC sets it and a timer clears it, app doesn't acknowledge receipt at all, which looked fine in the demo because we were watching continuously
13分Ours looked fine until the display restarted. Then nobody knew whether the request was old or new. Put request identity into the discussion as well as the bits.
19分I'd have the PLC and application owners agree a retained request and an acknowledgement tied to that request. Include who clears each state, timeout behaviour and what survives restart. Don't just add a sticky bit and stop there.
19分Does acknowledgement mean the inspection finished, or only that the app accepted the request?
13分In that proposal, accepted, not finished. Completion needs its own meaning and association with the request. The names on your interface should make that distinction obvious to whoever supports it.
0分We called both things done on different screens. A very small vocabulary created quite a long meeting.
20分Right, receipt and result separately, thanks; the controls lead is drawing the sequence with restart cases before we change the interface
7分Ask what happens when the app accepted the request but the PLC never saw that acknowledgement. That is the awkward case a clean sequence diagram tends to leave politely outside.
16分讨论已关闭
此讨论已连续六个月没有活动，现已关闭新回复。 最后活动： .