Author Topic: How common is it to have a separate micro to handle comms in SCADA sensors?  (Read 2250 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline e100Topic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 635
I'm wrestling with the problem of a slave microcontroller that needs to be constantly listening for messages from a master, but also needs to be able to do other time-critical things that requires interrupts to be temporarily disabled. My choices are either to write 'retry' code to deal with occasional (1 in 200) comms failures, or else use a dedicated micro to handle the comms. Neither seems like an elegant solution.

Mike
 

Offline ebclr

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2332
  • Country: 00
Re: How common is it to have a separate micro to handle comms in SCADA sensors?
« Reply #1 on: September 15, 2016, 10:52:52 am »
One possible solution that will require open mind

https://www.xmos.com/support/boards?product=17441
 

Offline gmb42

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 335
  • Country: gb
Re: How common is it to have a separate micro to handle comms in SCADA sensors?
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2016, 11:05:05 am »
Speaking as a developer on the master side, some of the RTU\PLC's I've used in the past have had a separate communications processor, but newer devices seem to have enough horsepower to not need that.

Master side software is well versed in handling comms errors to slaves, both transmission medium (i.e. radio) and slave  related and dropping 1 in 200 messages won't be a worry as long as no data is lost by the slave after the retry succeeds.

What protocol are you using?
 

Offline e100Topic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 635
Re: How common is it to have a separate micro to handle comms in SCADA sensors?
« Reply #3 on: September 15, 2016, 11:30:33 am »
Speaking as a developer on the master side, some of the RTU\PLC's I've used in the past have had a separate communications processor, but newer devices seem to have enough horsepower to not need that.

Master side software is well versed in handling comms errors to slaves, both transmission medium (i.e. radio) and slave  related and dropping 1 in 200 messages won't be a worry as long as no data is lost by the slave after the retry succeeds.

What protocol are you using?

It's just a serialized struct passing over a half duplex rs485 connection. Master sends a message, slave responds with measurement data.
 

Offline Rerouter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4720
  • Country: au
  • Question Everything... Except This Statement
Re: How common is it to have a separate micro to handle comms in SCADA sensors?
« Reply #4 on: September 15, 2016, 11:42:55 am »
depending on your main hardware, see if your hardware has a dedicated buffer for the serial I/O, if so it would greatly increase the amount of blind time you can deal with, unless your running your micro very slow or your serial very fast, you should be able to come back and read in or prepare the output buffer and let the hardware do the heavy lifting,
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf

 

- - -
-->