Our latest generation of controllers are finally ready for production. The IQAN-MC4x family is the fastest and most capable controller range we have ever done. It comes in three sizes to support any application size, from the entry level task oriented control up to the high I/O configuration for complete machine control.
First out from the production line and available now for deliveries is the performance optimized version of IQAN-MC43. The IQAN-MC41 and IQAN-MC42 will start shipping next month (December 2016).
Work is ongoing with the Functional Safety versions and units capable for implementation of SIL2/PLd safety functions is planned for production Q3 2017.
Find more detailed info at: http://solutions.parker.com/LP=7632
On December 15th, we released the IQAN-MC4xFS series, with safety certification by RISE.
The release means that we now have SIL2/PLd versions on all three sized of the MC4x series:
You can read more about the new product in the press release.
In the press release, we make a reference to the EN 13849-1:2015 update. The EN 13849-1 standard lets machine designers create safety functions either based on electronic components certified by the manufacturer (like the MC4xFS), or design safety functions based on the EN 13849-1 architectures.
With the original 2006 release of the EN 13849-1 standard, there was great emphasis on on calculating hardware reliability, but requirements on safety related embedded software was not as clear as in IEC 61508. Now with the new 2015 update there is a clear limit, implementation of PLr=a and PLr=b functions are accepted on standard controllers, for PLr=c and higher, the use of controllers with safety certification is necessary.
To learn more about this topic and how to design complete safety functions in accordance with EN 13849-1, you can sing up for the IQAN focused training on functional safety.
For documentation of the MC4 product series, see the instruction book.
I recently discovered that the MC4x family does not have a RTC pin and therefore when you go to pull a log on a file, it simply gives you a "start number" and a base line of 12:00:00AM. This is not sufficient for what most of my customers needs are.
Are there any plans to add in an RTC pin to enable us to have actual time available when logging.
In the Documentation for the MC4x family of controllers - it says in many places to use diodes for external coil suppression, for example when driving a relay with the Digital Out HS driver from the MC4x.
A relay that I have specific to my application requires (highly recommends) the use of varistor coil suppression, which is less "harsh" on the relay device during transients. The specification requests a clamping voltage of 3x the coil voltage, i.e. 36Vdc for a 12Vdc relay coil.
Are there any adverse affects of using a varistor instead of a diode for coil suppression?
Perhaps this could be also compatible with the hardware design of the MC4x series of controllers?
(Hint: I already have tested this configuration on my system to many thousands of cycles under load with no discernible affect on system operation or relay operation)
This module supports alot of IO and 5 x CAN. Very simple functions to serve all of the IO and CAN easily burn the available resources and I am wondering if there are any upgrade plans ?
Previously we used MC2 in a project. Now changed master module in the program to MC43.
We have a DIY test board (large resistors with LED for indication) to double check if the machine sends signal to valves etc.
Using COUT channels...so connectors come in pairs. With MC2 if one of the connectors wasn't connected to a load it would display "open load" error when machine would send a signal to a valve that isn' t connected, but connected one would work when output is signal is given. (no open load error when joystick is in neutral)
Now with MC43- both COUT pair connectors have to be connected for it not to display "open load" error..even when joystick is in neutral position.
Is this because MC43 diagnoses itself differently than MC2 or is there something to be changed in the program?
Hi, I have an issue with intermittent MC43 COUT overload errors on one of our machines.
Status is OK and operates well in most conditions, but will randomly report overload (even when that function is not requested).
I have tested the solenoids, plugs, and wiring harnesses within this circuit and all looks ok.
COUT circuit C1:16, 41, 57.
Is there anything else I should check to see what might be going wrong?
We have a machine that has sporadic nuisance open load errors on a function controlled by a unidirectional current output (COUT-G) on an MC43. Since this happens with some frequency, I suspect we are right up against the limit of the open load detection threshold. They test out well in assembly, but any increase in resistance occurring in the field might be setting it over the edge of the error threshold.
How can I calculate at what load resistance, commanded current, and supply voltage an open load error will occur?
This function is controlled with a Parker CCP024H 1/2" super coil with nominal resistance at room temperature of 30.30 ohms. Machine runs on 24V (around 28V when alternator charging). Maximum commanded current is set to 600mA.
Are the current out channels on an MC43 suitable for dishing out a 4-20 ma signal? It would be controlling a VFD.
I know the current out channels are typically used to control valves and used in the hundreds of milliamp range.
We are using a MC43 and using PWM and COUT channels. What we have noticed is when a PWM HS output is shorted to ground, one of our COUT outputs goes into overload. In our case, C2:51 was shorted to ground but C2:67/C2:15 had the overload error.
Customer support service by UserEcho