Comms issue between SLC5/03 and PVP600

I have an existing installation of panelview Plus 600 connected to SLC5/03 that has been working for the past couple of years. Recently the Panelview stopped communicating with the PLC. It gives errors across the top which are too small to read, but I suspect they say something about DF-1.

The Panelview only has a RS232 port, and the 5/03 has RS232 and DH485 (ethernet connector). So they comm between RS232 ports. I was able to get online with the PLC via DH485; I compared online vs. original program that I was given and they matched. I re-download the original program but that didn't help. I tried getting online with the PVP600 but I don't have RSLinx Enterprise so it showed up as a question mark. Another tech has RSLinx Enterprise and he was able to download the FTView program out of it, so I suspect the PVP600 RS232 port works fine.

I wasn't able to get online with the PLC via RS232, at first I suspected because it was configured to talk to the PVP600 on that port. When I looked at the channel config in the original program, both ports were selected DH485. That didn't seem right; seemed like the RS-232 port should be set to DF-1. So I matched what the other tech gave me for comms parameters that he used to get online with the PVP600, as follows:
(parameters for PVP600):
Device: PLC-CH0
Baud Rate: 19200
Parity: None
Stop Bits: 1
Station #: 00
Error Checking: CRC
Protocol: Full Duplex

I setup the PLC RS232 port as follows:
Driver: DF-1 Full Duplex
Baud: 19200
Parity: none
Control Line: no handshaking
Error Detection: CRC
Source ID: 0 (tried 0,1,2,3,4,5,9)
Embedded responses: enabled
timeout: 50
Retries, both: 3

Still would not communicate. I am wondering if I'm making a mistake by assuming that the protocol/parameters which worked between PVP600 and laptop for RSLinx & FTView are the same which should work between PVP600 and SLC5/03. Does the panelview use a different protocol to talk to computers than it does PLCs? Does it sound like I might have a bum port on the SLC5/03? I tried different cables between PLC and PVP600, straight-throughs and crossovers, no luck.

EDIT: to save you some time, I should inform you that I no longer have a working version of Factory Talk View Studio Machine Edition. As I said, I did not have RSLinx Enterprise; when I downloaded and installed Enterprise, it was an incompatible version and will not run, and will not allow FTView to run either. I am blind as to what is in the panelview program now.

I would not despair just yet......Serial DF1 communications between a PV+ and an SLC controller might take up to five minutes to establish!
The fact that you couldn't DF1 connect to the CPU via the Channel 0 port (found as DH485 configured!)is suspicious though...
Try setting the port according the default SLC Ch.0 System Port settings attachment and try to go Online with the CPU; if you cannot, it looks like you will need another CPU or a PV+ with a DH485 comms. module...:angr:
If you could connect to the SLC's Channel 0 via an RSLinx DF1 driver, then you might have a chance...
What is the PV+ terminal and the SLC CPU stations addresses within the FTV ME application Communication Setup interface? The Station Address MUST be 0 for the PV+ and 1 for the SCL CPU!

strantor said:

...the 5/03 has RS232 and DH485 (ethernet connector)

Click to expand...

Just be careful here with terminology. RS-232 is a serial electrical wiring type. DH-485 is a protocol, or driver, that uses RS-485 electrical wiring. Also, the DH-485 port on the SLC 5/03 uses an RJ-45 socket, not an "ethernet connector". But I'm sure you just referred to it this way for clarity as many others do.

strantor said:

...When I looked at the channel config in the original program, both ports were selected DH485. That didn't seem right; seemed like the RS-232 port should be set to DF-1.

Click to expand...

You probably are thinking it should be set DF1 as the message on the PV+ refers to DF1.

As you say, the original program has the SLC 5/03 RS-232 port configured for DH-485. The RS-232 port on the PV+ could also have originally been configured to use DH-485?

My initial suspicion here is that the original communication setup used between the SLC and PV+ was DH-485. Because the tech appears to have successfully connected to the PV+ using DF1, it looks like your terminal has reverted to using its default communications setup of DF1, instead of the original setup of DH-485.

strantor said:

...It gives errors across the top which are too small to read, but I suspect they say something about DF-1.

Click to expand...

The reason you're getting that message is again possibly because the terminal is now trying to communicate using DF1 to the DH-485 configured RS-232 port on the SLC 5/03.

To check/change the communication settings on the terminal:

In Configuration mode go to 'Terminal Settings > Networks and Communications > RSLinx Communications'. If it's configured for DF1, try changing it to DH-485 and use the same settings as the SLC 5/03 port that you found configured for DH-485. Save and reboot the terminal. Then see does it communicate with the SLC.

G.

Geospark said:

To check/change the communication settings on the terminal:

In Configuration mode go to 'Terminal Settings > Networks and Communications > RSLinx Communications'. If it's configured for DF1, try changing it to DH-485 and use the same settings as the SLC 5/03 port that you found configured for DH-485. Save and reboot the terminal. Then see does it communicate with the SLC.

G.

Click to expand...

I would love to do that, but whoever programmed the panel view did not create a button to access config mode. Also, I can't check this via FTView because my software was corrupted by a bad update. If we believe that the panelview has reverted to factory defaults, and there is no way to change it back to DH485 given the lack of software and config mode, is there a configuration that will work in the slc5/03 to allow it to communicate with the panelview, on the panelview's terms?

Dmargineau, I am going to try your settings. Thank you for the information.

Any idea why they would have set this up for DH485 instead of DF-1? Is there an advantage to that?

Is the PVP a touch screen version?

If it is power the screen down, and when it is powering up you will see a small white square in the bottom left corner.

Pressing this will take you into the configuration mode.

Cheers

Mark

No sir, not a touch screen.

See this thread.

http://www.plctalk.net/qanda/showthread.php?t=48497

Cheers

Mark

Thanks for the help everybody. Turns out it was a bum port on the CPU. This is on a bottle filling line worth >$5k/hr when running, so I didn't have time to fuss around. They have been running it in manually the past few days without feedback from the HMI, just eyeballing speeds and stuff. I suspected the bad CPU port and so I had them hot shot another in, just in case. As soon as they went down for product changeover, I tried the default DF-1 parameters provided by Dmargineau, no dice. Swapped out CPU, downloaded with original DH485 parameters, no dice. Input the DF1 defaults, bingo! In and out in 10 minutes. Got a couple cases of soda for my efforts (on top of exorbitant fees, of course). If any of you were local, I'd split the spoils (soda, not exorbitant fees).

I have bookmarked the thread about tips & tricks for getting into panelviews; I'm sure I'll need that in the future. Thankfully the DF1 defaults worked and I didn't need it today, or else hings would have been much more stressful.

Thanks again guys, I hope to be as much help as you in the future.

Good work strantor.

You did ask one question earlier that we didn't answer.

strantor said:

Any idea why they would have set this up for DH485 instead of DF-1? Is there an advantage to that?

Click to expand...

There is no major advantage to either protocol from a data transmission point of view. DF-1 is a serial point-to-point protocol which simply connects two devices together using RS-232 wiring, and so is limited to 50feet.

DH-485 is a network based protocol which may have up to 31 nodes connected together using RS-485 wiring, and so can be run far greater lengths than RS-232.

For a simple point-to-point connection, such as your controller to PanelView, the DF-1 option would probably be most widely used.

The only reasons someone might use DH-485 instead is if the PV+ was greater than 50feet away from the controller, or there was another device, such as a second PV, requiring a networked setup, or the installer just always uses DH-485.

You didn't mention what the connection distance and cabling between the two ports was? If a relatively short distance, then a 2711-NC13(5mtr) or 14(10mtr) cable was probably used.

Either way, glad to hear you're sorted!

G.