UDF error while download on IMMFP12
Dear all,
Today i install a new IMMFP12 on the replacement of IMMFP02. I am not using redundancy. 1st step is to initialize it as per manual special operation. 2nd step is to download UDF on the controller successfully and 3rd step is to download program successfully but when i execute it it give me error 1,4,6 LED on which means UDF function block can't read program files. I don't know what can i do next??
Today i install a new IMMFP12 on the replacement of IMMFP02. I am not using redundancy. 1st step is to initialize it as per manual special operation. 2nd step is to download UDF on the controller successfully and 3rd step is to download program successfully but when i execute it it give me error 1,4,6 LED on which means UDF function block can't read program files. I don't know what can i do next??
Asked 10 months ago
Answers
0
Hi,
Error code 1,4,6 can occur when a controller with a UDF declaration is put into execute and the module has not been formatted for Batch / UDF. Formatting the module for Batch / UDF but not downloading the UDF file puts the controller into error (the later firmware revisions at least) rather than redlighting the controller. There may be other reasons for the error code than not having the module formatted with the BDM controller utilities but I am not aware of them.
Maybe try again and after downloading the UDF file use the BDM Controller Utilities>Batch/UDF Files tab to perform a listing of the files in the Batch/UDF file system. Check the "Show inactive files" box and click the build button. You should see your UDF file, file number, file ID and filename as well as the inactive file entries created when the module was formatted. The number of inactive files should equal the Number of batch files created in the format less the number of UDF files installed.
Regards,
Alan
Error code 1,4,6 can occur when a controller with a UDF declaration is put into execute and the module has not been formatted for Batch / UDF. Formatting the module for Batch / UDF but not downloading the UDF file puts the controller into error (the later firmware revisions at least) rather than redlighting the controller. There may be other reasons for the error code than not having the module formatted with the BDM controller utilities but I am not aware of them.
Maybe try again and after downloading the UDF file use the BDM Controller Utilities>Batch/UDF Files tab to perform a listing of the files in the Batch/UDF file system. Check the "Show inactive files" box and click the build button. You should see your UDF file, file number, file ID and filename as well as the inactive file entries created when the module was formatted. The number of inactive files should equal the Number of batch files created in the format less the number of UDF files installed.
Regards,
Alan
Answered 10 months ago
0
Hi, AllanMy inactive file number is greater so i delete last 4 inactive files?
Answered 10 months ago
0
Hi,
Ok, so you have 3 UDF downloaded with IDs 10, 3 and 8 in the controller. Don't worry about the inactive files too much. The format defaults to 10 files, and you have 3 files used and 7 inactive, so that all adds up. In theory this should work once you download the function block configuration and put the controller to execute. Other things to look at include...
What versions are the UDF software and the firmware for the MFP02 and MFP12?
There are possible compatibility issues between the BDM version and MFP12 firmware. There is a batch version setting in the UDF editor settings dialogue to specify a version for MFP compatibility purposes. The UDF would need to be recompiled and downloaded if the batch version is changed. For an MFP12 at revision G? the batch version is 7 and requires a BDM software version of at least 4.0. If the Batch version is changed for the MFP12 this could present an issue if the updated UDF are used in other controllers with older firmware as the newly compiled UDF might no longer be compatible with the older MFP firmware. The only way to tell would be to compare the compiler .OBJ and .SYM files from compiling with the different batch versions to see if the compiler created .OBJ and .SYM files with different content. Comparing UDF files is difficult as the compiler puts a date/time stamp in the .OBJ and .SYM files which causes a binary file compare to fail when files are compared between the 2 compilations. An alternative might be to make new copies of the UDF files and change the version in the new copies and give them new program IDs so that you have 2 versions of the UDF, 1 for the old MFP02 and 1 for the MFP12. This would require changing S1 in the MFP12 UDF declarations to match the new program ID.
Also, an MFP12 may not work properly in a node with NPM firmware earlier than E0. There were changes to the MFP firmware in revision F that triggered a mandatory upgrade of NPM firmware to at least revision E0.
Best Regards,
Alan
Ok, so you have 3 UDF downloaded with IDs 10, 3 and 8 in the controller. Don't worry about the inactive files too much. The format defaults to 10 files, and you have 3 files used and 7 inactive, so that all adds up. In theory this should work once you download the function block configuration and put the controller to execute. Other things to look at include...
- You could compare the Batch /UDF File NVRAM allocation for function codes with the NVRAM figure from the function code compiler output.
- The UDF .LST files give the memory requirements for the UDF instances. You could check to see if these numbers are still valid for the UDF function codes.
- Have you tried to put the controller into execute since confirming that the UDF files are in the controller? What happened?
What versions are the UDF software and the firmware for the MFP02 and MFP12?
There are possible compatibility issues between the BDM version and MFP12 firmware. There is a batch version setting in the UDF editor settings dialogue to specify a version for MFP compatibility purposes. The UDF would need to be recompiled and downloaded if the batch version is changed. For an MFP12 at revision G? the batch version is 7 and requires a BDM software version of at least 4.0. If the Batch version is changed for the MFP12 this could present an issue if the updated UDF are used in other controllers with older firmware as the newly compiled UDF might no longer be compatible with the older MFP firmware. The only way to tell would be to compare the compiler .OBJ and .SYM files from compiling with the different batch versions to see if the compiler created .OBJ and .SYM files with different content. Comparing UDF files is difficult as the compiler puts a date/time stamp in the .OBJ and .SYM files which causes a binary file compare to fail when files are compared between the 2 compilations. An alternative might be to make new copies of the UDF files and change the version in the new copies and give them new program IDs so that you have 2 versions of the UDF, 1 for the old MFP02 and 1 for the MFP12. This would require changing S1 in the MFP12 UDF declarations to match the new program ID.
Also, an MFP12 may not work properly in a node with NPM firmware earlier than E0. There were changes to the MFP firmware in revision F that triggered a mandatory upgrade of NPM firmware to at least revision E0.
Best Regards,
Alan
Answered 10 months ago
Add new comment