panelview plus 1500ce 6.0 to plc5 through prolinx

Has anyone ever used the New PV with 6.0 to communicate with plc-5/60 RIO? I was told we were to use the Prolinx module. So far NO good. Are we using the data files in the Prolinx for the BTR BTW to the plc-5 then communicate through serial from prolinx to the PV1500? Someone explain if possible. Thanks for any input or guidance.

I've not done exactly that, no.

I presume you're using the Prosoft 5601-RIO-DFCM.

Your understanding of the basic functionality of the ProLinx Gateway is correct; you move data into and out of the ProLinx from the PLC-5 using RIO Block Transfer instructions.

From the PanelView Plus / RSLinx Enterprise side, you treat the ProLinx Gateway as though it was the serial port of a PLC-5 controller. You'll probably have to manually configure the Runtime/Target tab in RSLinx Enterprise.

Have you attempted to test the PV+ application on the development computer ? Have you loaded a configuration using Prosoft Configuration Builder ? If so, post some information (preferably the complete project files).

It is a 5601dfcm master/slave unit. Do not have the means to use a communication computer. The unit is com with the plc5 but not the Pv.

Okay, let's sort out the PanelView to ProLinx connection.

The PanelView Plus has a "DCE" type serial port, and the Mini-8 to DB9 cable from Prosoft is wired as a "DTE" type serial port, so the cable between the two should be a straight-through female-to-female DB9 serial cable.

We can go through the RSLinx Enterprise and Prosoft Configuration Builder configurations either by you describing or posting yours, or by Forum members trying to do it from scratch.

I would build a test application that just put a few numeric indicators onscreen with direct references to "N7:0" and "N7:1" and so forth. The data file numbers and data file length are configurable in the ProLinx but I think the defaults are Data File 7 and 100 elements.

If I were building this system I would try to make the data tables numbers and sizes similar to the Rack Numbers and BTR/BTW sizes, but we can do that later.

Since it doesn't sound like you have connected your development computer to the Prolinx, we aren't going to try to use the Development/Local tab in RSLinx Enterprise. Let's just go straight to the Runtime/Remote tab and right-click to add the driver and the PLC-5 controller that the ProLinx is emulating. I'll do that with screenshots when I get a chance and post it here.


If you have any descriptions, screenshots, or maybe an example from A-B or from Prosoft that you can point to, that might help get us further down the road.

To configure a serial driver in RSLinx Enterprise that will only be run on the PanelView Plus (not on the development PC), you right-click and perform "Add driver" and "Add device" operations in the Runtime/Remote tab in the Communications Configuration window in FactoryTalk View Studio.

The attached screenshots should illustrate the basic steps to add a serial driver and configure the port and the target device properly. My screenshot shows a "PLC-5/40C" but you can scroll down and choose whatever PLC-5 you like; it shouldn't matter because the ProLinx doesn't respond to identity requests like a PLC-5 does.

The serial speed and framing as well as the DF1 settings are crucial to get right; the PLC-5 used "BCC" error checking by default, and the ProLinx can use BCC or CRC error checking.

The ProLinx definitely needs to be in DF1 Slave mode with Full Duplex mode selected. The PanelView will be DF1 address 0, and the ProLinx will be DF1 address 1.

Working on it now Ken. Our old pv used btr btw directly from plc to pv. This new obvioulsly requires us to go from pv to prolinkx data register then se btr btw between prolinx and plc5.

May have to re write some logic and re adress the pv...Correct?

Yes, you will have to re-address the PanelView application. The old RIO approach used I/O Aliases, while the serial approach will use ordinary integer file read and writes.

Whether or not you have to reprogram anything depends on functionality. RIO had some different initialization and retention behavior and I'm not sure how that carries through this migration.

Was this architecture suggested by RA or by Prosoft ? I'm just wondering if one of those companies has done some testing or has an application note.

Both RA and PROSOFT point the finger at each other its the others responsibility.