From Friday, April 19th (11:00 PM CDT) through Saturday, April 20th (2:00 PM CDT), 2024, ni.com will undergo system upgrades that may result in temporary service interruption.

We appreciate your patience as we improve our online experience.

Real-Time Measurement and Control

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

cRIO system no longer works with new NI-9514

Solved!
Go to solution
Dear NI,
 
For a while now, I have been running a Compact RIO system with a NI-9022 controller and a NI-9116 chassis with 7 NI-9514 motion modules. In order to overcome the limit of 4 motion modules, I was advised to use a workaround whereby the system would operate in "hybrid mode", but all of the motion modules would actually operate in scan engine.
 
In order to do this the first time, I had to run a blank VI on the FPGA, run this, switch scan engine to active mode, and then deploy all of the axis. On subsequent occasions, I could just run a VI which references and dereferences the FPGA and then switches scan engine to active mode programatically (this VI is attached). This would then enable all of the axis and allow me to use SoftMotion to control all 7 axes.
 
Recently, I have added another axis and another NI-9514 module, and have repeated the above setup. When I run the blank VI on the FPGA and then manually switch scan engine to active mode, all of the modules are enabled and I can run motion programs. However, If I use the VI to do this programatically, the "Switch scan engine mode" VI returns and error:
 
Code: -77072
 
Possible reason(s):
NI SoftMotion: Communication to the hardware device exceeds the timeout limit.
 
It is worth noting that, even with the new axis fitted in the chassis, as long as I don't add it to the project, I can still run my project as normal.
 
Are you able to advise on how I can solve this problem?
 
All the best,
 
James Polyblank
PhD Student
0 Kudos
Message 1 of 2
(5,424 Views)
Solution
Accepted by topic author JamesPoly

Hello all,

 

I managed to resolve the problem - The "FPGA Open Reference" VI was pointing to an out-of-date bitfile, so recompiling was making no difference.

 

All the best,

0 Kudos
Message 2 of 2
(5,397 Views)