This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

Change of ESI file

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: AM3359

Hello,

I want to add an analog input to the ESI file of the Full EtherCAT example.

I've already added a new TxPDO register and his mapping, also added it to the assign register.

According to that i did the changes in the code in tiescappl.h object dictionary (TxPDO entry, TxPDO-map, TxPDO-assign).

So I tried to get access to my AM3359 ICE board through TwinCAT with this new ESI file, but the ERROR LED is blinking which shows me (according to ETG1300) that there is an invalid configuration.

I cannot locate the error....

Does anyone can help me? Have i overlooked something important?

Kind regards

  • Stefan,

    I would recommed to post this in the forums at Ethercat.org. There you may get better help.

    They also offer development workshops. This is out of the scope of TI support usually.

    Anyway you will need to give more details as above description does not allow to help you.

    Regards.

  • Ok thanks!

    However, if someone has experience in this topic, it would be great.

    Regards

  • Hello again,

    I figured out where my error is, but I cannot solve it. I hope you can help me.

    I get the error with the error code 0x1E which shows me (according to AN_ET9300 from Beckhoff) that the expected process data size in the ESI file doesn't match the calculated data size in the function "APPL_GenerateMapping" from your example (tiescappl.c).

    Because the error is located in your file, I hope you can help me.

    I have added another TxPDO input register, which has an entry with 32bit length.

    How do I have to change the function "APPL_GenerateMapping" so that the data sizes match each other?

    I tried to debug the project to see what this function does, but somehow I can't get to the main and into the function...

    I think you should know something about it because you implemented this function on your own, don't you?

    Regards

  • Hi Stefan,

    I don't see anything TI specific in this function. I even think we re-used this from a standard stack example. If this doesn't work for your changes I assume you really have to debug (single step) through this. How should we help here?

    If debugging doesn't work for you then you have another problem. You really should make sure you can do full debug on your systems for development. Any questions on this can be posted in the respective forums.

    Regards,