11-27-2020 01:09 PM
Hello Everybody,
I have a cRIO-9057 with NI9860 Module. With MAX I can read values from the ECU (Bus Monitor).
When i execute the VI. I have this error in MC DAQ Initialize
Parameters (CRO, DTO,Seedkey ) are not defined in the data base. my question is :
These parameters are mandatory for communication with the ECU (I want just read some channels)??.
I added the parameters (CRO and DTO chosen ramdomly) in the code but I still have the some error.
Are these parameters defined by the Constructor?
Thanks
Solved! Go to Solution.
11-28-2020 01:17 AM
I forget the screen error
11-28-2020 08:07 AM
Hi RchB,
This indicates that NI ECU MC Toolkit is not able to parse your A2L file. You can extract these communication parameters manually use Notepad++. Taking shipping CCPECU.a2l as an example:
For CCP, search for keyword /begin TP_BLOB
Definition of each parameter is provided at the top of the A2L file.
DISCLAIMER: The attached Code is provided As Is. It has not been tested or validated as a product, for use in a deployed application or system, or for use in hazardous environments. You assume all risks for use of the Code and use of the Code is subject to the Sample Code License Terms which can be found at: http://ni.com/samplecodelicense
11-30-2020 02:21 AM
Hello ZY_Ong,
Thank you for the answer.
I use Nodepad++ to extract data but I don't find these information.
I thinks the A2L is not complete ( missing parameters)
12-02-2020 09:22 AM
Hello Zy_ong,
Now l have an A2L (on XCP) when I extract these parameters manually using Notepad++ I have ( DTO = 9F79E001, CRo= 9F79E000). when I use A2L Viewer I have (DTO = 1F79E001, CRO= 1F79E000) and in VI Labview (Using ECU MC Toolkit) I have 3F79E000.
Have you any explications ??
Thanks
12-02-2020 11:05 AM
The extended CAN ID range is 29 bits, no ID can be a value that requires more than 29 bits to hold it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN_bus
Since this number has to be held in a U32 sometimes bits at the end can signify flags like if it is an extended ID or not instead of having a separate boolean. Here is the older NI-CAN which would OR 0x20000000 to any ID that was extended.
In your case an ID of 0x9F79 E001 is 0b1001 1111 0111 1001 1110 0000 0000 0001. If we truncate this at 29 bits we get 0b11111011110011110000000000001 which is 0x1F79E001. This likely is the real ID you would see on the bus, but extended of course, because it uses more bits than the standard ID can.
Unofficial Forum Rules and Guidelines
Get going with G! - LabVIEW Wiki.
17 Part Blog on Automotive CAN bus. - Hooovahh - LabVIEW Overlord
12-03-2020 05:41 AM
Hello,
When I try to connect to the ECU I get a timeout error :
I set manually (CRO,DTO, BaudRate)
SeedKey Dll is mandatory for communication or not?
12-03-2020 08:31 AM
Either the ECU didn't respond after a request for some action, or it responded but some setting in the API is wrong, so it missed it. You can look at the bus and see if there was a response of some kind. I don't use XCP often but I don't believe the Seed/Key DLL is required for basic communication.
Unofficial Forum Rules and Guidelines
Get going with G! - LabVIEW Wiki.
17 Part Blog on Automotive CAN bus. - Hooovahh - LabVIEW Overlord
12-06-2020 05:50 PM
Error -301096 at MC DAQ Initialize VI indicates that slave ECU didn't response to CONNECT command.
Error -301075: Access locked will be reported if we don't provide the Seedkey DLL.
If you are running the application on Windows, you can run XCP and CCP Trace to capture the trace.
You may refer to the troubleshoot guide attached to Troubleshooting XCP or CCP Master Custom Device in VeriStand to understand how to analyze the trace log.
DISCLAIMER: The attached Code is provided As Is. It has not been tested or validated as a product, for use in a deployed application or system, or for use in hazardous environments. You assume all risks for use of the Code and use of the Code is subject to the Sample Code License Terms which can be found at: http://ni.com/samplecodelicense
12-07-2020 10:57 AM
Not fully aware of XCP, but is the Slave Address really the CRO_ID or is it the Station Address as would normally be seen in the older A2L files? That might explain the response.