PVPlus Compact Trend Low

In the past we had a PVPlus doing some trending, and we always checked the data logging feature such that if you left the screen and came back, your trend would still show all the data as if it had been displayed the whole time.

Recently we switched over to the "compact" version. When we enable the data logging feature on that one, the HMI grinds to a crawl and eventually gets insufficent memory errors.

Exact wording is:

Low Memory Warning:
Program memmory is critically low.
Performance may be affected.



Anyone else seeing this same phenomena with the "compact" versions?

I haven't seen the exact same issue, but I'm curious about how to solve it.

The PanelView Plus Compact terminals have the same memory capacity as the PV+400/600; 64 MB of RAM and 64 MB of Flash.

The original PV+ 700-1500 terminals had standard and performance options, for 64, 128, or 256 MB.

The modern PV+ Version 6 terminals have 512 MB of RAM and 512 MB of Flash.

The first question is: What is the memory size of your non-Compact terminals that run this application ?

The Data Model can be tricky to configure correctly. Take a close look at the width of your trends and the time scale they use, and figure out how many pixels per value you're using. If it's less than 1:1, you can reduce the update rate for the Data Model.

At the same time, examine how far into the past you want to display data; take a close look at the Trend object configuration.

Hi Ken,
All great comments and suggestions. I will take a look at these and compare to what we were doing before. In general, it is just a % Hp reading we displaying along with some high and low thresholds and a calibration reference. I remember thinking I had the sample rate as long as it could be before it started to effect the visual response on the screen. I will have to investigate also whether I can just plot static lines across the trend without having them part of the data logging. Out of the 6 pens that I use three of them are really just plotting a fixed value to illustrate where the upper and lower bounds of the process are, so they don't really change while we are in process. That would definitely reduce the volume of data.

Thanks again and I'll let you know how it works out.