[BUG] Modbus RTU Master: input of adresses in HEXADECIMAL is buggy

Topics about the Software of Revolution Pi
Post Reply
User avatar
RR4711
Posts: 228
Joined: 22 Feb 2018, 13:28
Answers: 0

[BUG] Modbus RTU Master: input of adresses in HEXADECIMAL is buggy

Post by RR4711 »

Hi, I cost me half a workday to figure out that in the web configurator (Pictory) it is not a good idea to use hexadecimal numbers to map some modbus addresses to the process image. Its perfectly accepted by the GUI but not interpreted correctly:

if i write 87 the mapping works, if i write 0x57 it fails silently.
Please either throw an error message when entering HEX numbers or (preferably) fix it. I have a JUMO PID Controller and the Address Map is in HEX. It's weird enough to need to add one for the address to be correct. Real Programmers[TM] always count from 0.

Regards,

Markus
User avatar
volker
Posts: 1046
Joined: 09 Nov 2016, 15:41
Answers: 1

Re: [BUG] Modbus RTU Master: input of adresses in HEXADECIMAL is buggy

Post by volker »

Sorry Markus but the register address field is the only one our programmer has forgotten to include any check. You could even enter "Markus" and the system would except that. until now no one has recognized that , so thanks for telling us. We will fix it with the new release. There will be no quick way to allow hex numbers for that field but we do recognize that this would be additional value so it is set to the list for new features and will be realized in the near future.

As for the Modbus register counting I would kindly ask you to refer to the original Modbus documentation handbook. You may be astonished as a "real programmer" but counting from 1 is not a KUNBUS invention nor a KUNBUS TM but is the way Modbus is defined. So those who use the Modbus register numbers in the same way the Modbus telegram sends the numbers (i.e. starting from 0) are not in accordance to the original Modbus documentation. yes, I know thta is kind of a culture clash but when automation standards meeting embedded programming such clash is the typical result. I've so often heard embedded programmers yelling "why the f... are they sending the same values over and over instead of just sending them once the change?"... well - there are reasons for cyclical data exchange which are historical to field busses and in times of Ethernet seem to be obsolete. But we will need to tolerate these things if we successfully want to bring together cultures of automation, embedded and IT. All we as KUNBUS can do is to try to explain and "translate" the different point of views.
Unser RevPi Motto: Don't just claim it - make it!
User avatar
RR4711
Posts: 228
Joined: 22 Feb 2018, 13:28
Answers: 0

Re: [BUG] Modbus RTU Master: input of adresses in HEXADECIMAL is buggy

Post by RR4711 »

Thanks for the feedback. I get the part with the original spec, I can live with the offset of 1. If I have to convert everything to decimal I will patiently do that, even though I don't see any reason what would be so complicated on displaying it in either HEX or decimal.

Maybe just add a global checkbox "display in HEX" to the dialogue.

Otherwise I really like the concept and the ecosystem.

Markus
User avatar
RR4711
Posts: 228
Joined: 22 Feb 2018, 13:28
Answers: 0

Re: [BUG] Modbus RTU Master: input of adresses in HEXADECIMAL is buggy

Post by RR4711 »

Is there any notification when there is a new / bugfixed version available?
Like a mailinglist or do I just have to regularly do my

Code: Select all

apt-get update && apt-get upgrade
and hope for the best?
User avatar
pi_admin
Administrator
Posts: 105
Joined: 26 Aug 2016, 15:38
Answers: 1

Re: [BUG] Modbus RTU Master: input of adresses in HEXADECIMAL is buggy

Post by pi_admin »

Updates and Releases are always announced in our News & Announcements forum ( viewforum.php?f=17 ). Just subscribe to this forum and you will receive email notification when something new is posted.
User avatar
RR4711
Posts: 228
Joined: 22 Feb 2018, 13:28
Answers: 0

Re: [BUG] Modbus RTU Master: input of adresses in HEXADECIMAL is buggy

Post by RR4711 »

Thanks!
Post Reply