RS5000 support for 1771 single slot configuration??

I just made the whole post, but cant find it online, so now i will try to make it shorter and more comprehensive:

I have a production line controlled by AB 5/40 PLC that I want to change to CtrlLgx and RS5000.
I only have one problem that i am not sure how to handle:
PLC 5/40 is hosted in a 1771 16-slot rack that is configured as a single slot rack.
First question is: Does RS5000 can be configured to scan this RIO (when i take out plc and put in RIO module) as a single slot configured chassis ?
Curently when i test the configuration, the only time when i get steady green light on the ASB module is when i configure it as a double slot. That might be a problem, since i have many 16 input bit cards in the adjecent slots, so it would require one whole group to be 32 input group, which i dont see possible in rs5000 addressing.
The only solution i have to this problem is to move every second card one slot forward, to become first card in every group where next slot is empty. This is viable since i only have 7 slots taken, but it require some rewiring. then i would keep the same addressing as it is now in RS5.
Is there any other way out for solving this problem?
I am sorry if I am not clear enough and i will explain it additionaly if there is any misunderstandings.

Thanks for all the help, I am looking forward sharing my knowledge and becoming part of the community.

Yes you can do it:
Put one 1771ASB to I/O configuration for every full or partial logical rack you have, even you have only one actual ASB.
for 16 slot chassis with 1-slot addressing put ASB twice as full rack
for 12 slot 1 slot addressing add one ASB as a full rack and second for 1/2 rack
for 16 slot chassis with 1/2 slot addressing add ASB 4 times

Ok, i am afraid i didnt get it properly:
This is what I got now:
Rack #0:
PLC
1 - Analog In
2 - 16Bit IN
3 - 16Bit IN
4 - 16Bit IN
5 - 16Bit IN
6 - 8Bit ISO Out
7 - 16Bit IN
8 - 16Bit IN

So I guess i put one phisical ASB module in this rack, and then i add extra asb as rack#something in the I/O tree in RS5000?
But will the program associate that new asb with this rack, since i have never done that kind of configuration where i have more racks under one phisical chassis?
and then i would have every 16 bit card (single slot group) to be treated as a double slot group?

I am trying to recall this config from the memory, since i didnt work on it for over 2 months.
Thanks for fast response.

You have one actual ASB in 16-SLOT chassis.
In ControlLogix 16-Slot represented by two Logical racks

Even you have one physical ASB you have to enter it twice in I/O configuration

thanks, thats what i was thinking. i will try it and play with it and holpfuly resolve the problem. in your example for virtual rack, you used very next rack number, and that is rack#1.
in my configuration rack #1 is already taken, so i hope that would not make the problem, since all other racks and i hope rs5000 will put the virtual asb in the right place; chassis.
i just hope it wont put the virtual rack under some other already full rack/chassis.

in my configuration rack #1 is already taken, so i hope that would not make the problem

Click to expand...

You WILL have problem with rack #1 already taken because if you set ASB for rack #0 it will automatically occupy rack #0 and rack #1 addressing (if set for single slot).

In I/O configuration them must be next to each other.
You have to find another rack number pair for ASB that is not used.
You can use numbers between 00 and 37 (octal)

If you are not sure how CLX works then leave PLC5 in place.

Good Stuff

Contr_Conn said:

You have one actual ASB in 16-SLOT chassis.
In ControlLogix 16-Slot represented by two Logical racks

Even you have one physical ASB you have to enter it twice in I/O configuration

Click to expand...

We will be migrating from 6 ea. PLC-3s with multiple 16-slot racks to CLX. I'd say this is one stumbling block out of the way.
Thanks!

We will be migrating from 6 ea. PLC-3s with multiple 16-slot racks to CLX. I'd say this is one stumbling block out of the way.

Click to expand...

When coming from PLC3 make sure you know that each DHRIO channel can support rack numbers 00-37 or 40-77, but not both.

Doug-P said:

We will be migrating from 6 ea. PLC-3s with multiple 16-slot racks to CLX. I'd say this is one stumbling block out of the way.
Thanks!

Click to expand...

it shouldnt matter if the configuration already in place is double slot. then it goes simply by keeping the same I/O numbers.

as for my problem, i can not guaratee, but i am 80% sure that problematic rack would not let it self configured as anything else then rack #0, because only in that situation i would get steady green (plus double slot addressing config). so if i configure it as a double slot and any other rack# it would refuse to be part of the network. but i need to check that out again.

Like I said - you should leave PLC5 in place if you are not sure
Let me explain again:

- Rack number configured by DIP swtich on your ASB, it can be set to ANY number between 00 and 37
- If ASB rack number is set to #00 and 2-slot addressing used then it will occupy logical space allocated for Rack #0 only.
- If ASB rack number is set to #00 and 1-slot addressing used then it will occupy logical space allocated for Rack #0 AND Rack #1. If you alerady have Rack #1 assigned to another ASB, then you will have conflict - this is exactly what you see.

You have 4 options:
1. Assign another number XX to rack 00 and use new rack pair in your program as Rack XX and Rack XX+1
2. Assign another rack number YY to the excistent rack #1, in this case your Rack 00 will use Rack #1 for slots 8-15 and former rack #1 will use Rack YY number
3. Leave Rack #0 with 2 slot addressing
4. Leave PLC5 in place: you will not gain anything with CLX conversion - RECOMMENDED!!!

What's wrong with PLC5? PLC5 scans RIO faster than CLX.
I understand Doug-P's case PLC3 is not for sale anymore, spare parts are gone.
But PLC5 is active product, why touch it, especially if you are not sure how to do conversion.

trust me, the decision is not mine, so i only do things i am told to do.
i personaly prefer plc5 since that is what i studied.
i understand completly the whole thing now and i will change it to some other rack# & rack#+1. thanks a lot for input.

Contr_Conn said:

When coming from PLC3 make sure you know that each DHRIO channel can support rack numbers 00-37 or 40-77, but not both.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the additional information. I don't have the system in front of me but I don't recall any rack numbers at all in the 40s or beyond. Good stuff to know going in though. And I'll be saving this thread.

There are multiple S4-As per processor so at least the I/O isn't so concentrated, generally six or fewer racks/channel.

The really 'interesting' part is going to be replacing the GA-BASIC and associated RM modules.

It looks like this project will be contracted so we won't have to deal with these issues directly (at first). I have found it's nice to know things like what you've given because even people on contract get stuck now and then and it helps to keep things moving if the right piece of information can be put to the right person.

Seriously consider using ControlNet rather than RIO.

One reason is that the ASB can only handle one MSG (ControlLogix uses MSG for Block Transfers) at a time.

Another reason is that for process control, RIO may be too slow (depends on your process). ControlNet is deterministic. Therefore you can depend on the data.

Note: With proper message manager coding allowing only a single message at a time, a 16 slot chassis full of analog cards would take in the order of 5 seconds to read data from 16 cards.

Doug-P:

I don't know PLC3 so I can't help you, sorry.

Oakley:
Just to add to your comment about one BT per ASB: another limitation is in DHRIO module: it can handle only 5 messages per MODULE (not channel) at the same time, so even if you send one BT per ASB and have more than 5 ASBs, only 5 MSG can be processed by DHRIO.

for large RIO systems take a look at 1757-ABRIO module - it may help you.

Controlnet

Oakley said:

Seriously consider using ControlNet rather than RIO.

Click to expand...

I did mention that to those closer to this than myself. Whether anybody will act on it is another question.

On the plus side there aren't any BT modules - yet. In fact there are only discrete I/O modules (in-floor conveyor system). On the minus side most of the programs are around 3K rungs.

p.s. I didn't mean to hijack the thread