CNET Panelview 1000

I currently have 2 cnet panelview 1000's and a controllogix controller
with a cnbd module connected together.I am using unscheduled tags between the panelviews and the controller.Is this an acceptable way or is there a more efficient way of communicating ? I have read the help files in panelbuilder 32 (3.80), and I am confused about using scheduled tags and the panelview not supporting scheduled messaging.
Has anyone used scheduled tags and messaging to program the panelview ? Thanks in advance for any help.

Hi. I have exactly the same configuration running. From memory you can set up to 32 words of scheduled data between the panelview and whatever is hanging off the other end of the controlnet. Quite easy to do, when you make a tag in PB32 just click on the scheduled option and fill in the holes. Make sure the tag exists as controller scoped in the processor.

If you have any more problems just post back here. Regards Alan

It's perfectly acceptable to just use unscheduled communications between PanelView and ControlLogix over ControlNet. It works just like any other unscheduled network like Ethernet or DH+, where you put in a Tag name and "Node" in PanelBuilder, then define the target address and path for that "Node" in the PanelBuilder comms setup.

Standard PanelView 1000 terminals also support scheduled I/O on ControlNet. In the PanelView, this looks like an I/O table and the files are addressed as "SIO:1/1" or "SO0":1.1" (That's "si" for Schedule Input" and "zero" for "Data File Zero"). Funny nomenclature but that's the way it is.

In RSLogix 5000 the PanelView is just another scheduled I/O Connection with tags like "PanelView:I[10]" and "PanelView:O[10]".

The scheduled connection can be selected to be 8 or 32 sixteen-bit Words long.

The scheduled connection is nice because it gives you good responsiveness on keypresses for pushbutton objects, which allows you to cut down the unscheduled data update rate.

I programmed my panelviews to support a scheduled connection with no problems. Thanks again to Alan and Ken for your help.