No…
Basically, the 841-1 EtherNet/IP adapter/Scanner (s/M) option was perfect for our needs, until a contractor on this project requested the addition of CIP Safety (in order to avoid hardwiring the safety controls to four different robots cells). This confused the issue for me, since I’ve never used CIP Safety before, and wasn’t familiar with the factory configuration.
The robot came preconfigured with both. What was unclear in the Application Manual for EtherNet/IP 841-1 was that CIP Safety must be combined with 841-1, not 840-1 (EtherNet/IP Field Bus Adapter). This is according to an ABB engineer. If I recall correctly, it’s also not made clear that the pre-configured CIP Safety can be appended to with additional I/O. I had assumed that a ‘Safety’ config shouldn’t be messed with. Initially, I’d assumed the whole CIP-Safety Adapter option was completely separate hardware and software, because its ‘Safety’ stuff.
I had also hoped that a second software EIP adapter could be created in the controller using 841-1, since there are separate, available ports that could be used, BUT that is not permitted in 841-1. (I don’t think that is explicitly stated in any manual, either. If trying to do so, you just hit a dead-end, but don’t get any message that what you are trying to do is not even an option.)
What I needed was both the CIP-Safety comms, and separate, non-safe PLC I/O.
My actual options were (now that I’ve spoken to ABB engineering):
- add 840-1 (EIP FBA) to carry the non-safe PLC I/O separately
- Make the PLC use an adapter, and the robot uses its Scanner side for the PLC I/O
– (CIP-Safety still on the robot adapter side connected to a PLC CIP Safety Scanner)
- add bytes to the adapter definition and append the PLC I/O to that.
– (first 8 in/out bytes carry CIP Safety I/O, and must not be altered or re-mapped.)
Hopefully this clears up the question and helps others going forward.
A little more diagramming and clarity in the Application Manual for EtherNet/IP adapter/Scanner option is really required. I assume that there are different products out there that work with CIP Safety, such as a separate Safety PLC, and a PLC that has both standard I/O and a Safety controller that incorporates a CIP Safety Scanner, and if that is used with a separate master PLC for controls, you might need to separate EIP I/O and CIP Safety I/O on different ports. Adding CIP Safety networking option diagrams would help make it more explicit what the options are. (Or at least a paragraph or two explaining this issue.)
(When different contractors are responsible for different areas, their different expectations might result in a serious issue late in the process. In my case, we’re just supplying the robot and it’s directly-controlled equipment. The cell fencing and safety requirements were handed to a different contractor.)