ControlView HMI and CLX

Hi Guys,

Need your expert advise.

Is it possible to connect ControlView HMI with ControlLogix over DH+. Any details or example would be of great help.



Background----

The plant is running with ControlView HMI and PLC5 system over DH+. A upgrade is suggested, but we have our concerns over CLX communication with ControlView over DH+



Thanks

Controlview is very old visualize software.
I don't think so it will work with clx

rPraveenkum said:

Controlview is very old visualize software.
I don't think so it will work with clx

Click to expand...

I was wondering, if it works with PLC5 over DH+, we might have chance of it working with CLX over DH+ using a DHRIO module.
Any suggesstion or example would be of great help.

It should work

The comms drivers in ControlView will only be capable of addressing PLC/SLC style addresses.
In the ControlLogix you will need to configure "SLC/PLC Mapping" which is simple enough.

If it were me, I'd upgrade the DOS-based ControlView and not the PLC-5 controller. But that's me.

Classic PLC-5 controllers used an addressing mode called "logical ASCII addressing". SLC-500 and PLC-5 Enhanced/Ethernet/ControlNet controllers use an addressing mode called "logical binary addressing".

I think the ControlLogix will respond to both types of addressing over the 1756-DHRIO module. I don't know which type of addressing ControlView used. Those two factors of uncertainty would make me want to measure, analyze and test before moving forward.

This should be fairly easy to test. Your test ControlLogix only has to have the PLC/SLC Mapping defined for all the data tables in the PLC-5. You wouldn't have to totally translate the application to ControlLogix just to test the HMI communications.

Ken Roach said:

Classic PLC-5 controllers used an addressing mode called "logical ASCII addressing". SLC-500 and PLC-5 Enhanced/Ethernet/ControlNet controllers use an addressing mode called "logical binary addressing".

I think the ControlLogix will respond to both types of addressing over the 1756-DHRIO module. I don't know which type of addressing ControlView used. Those two factors of uncertainty would make me want to measure, analyze and test before moving forward.

Click to expand...

Aha!
I always wondered why the ControlView node setup had options for "PLC-5" and "Enhanced PLC-5"

Ken Roach said:

If it were me, I'd upgrade the DOS-based ControlView and not the PLC-5 controller.

Click to expand...

This should probably be the priority.
From memory, I don't think ControlView will run on a Pentium processor.
Actually, it's probably the underlying Chronos operating system that has the problem.
Migration to RSView 32 is fairly easy and the "look & feel" will be very familiar.

Ken Roach said:

If it were me, I'd upgrade the DOS-based ControlView and not the PLC-5 controller. But that's me.

Click to expand...

I understand upgrading ControlView is the best option, but this will have to wait for another year. For now we are limited to partial migration..... "management call".

Thanks guys for all the help.
Do you have any example document that can help me convince the customer that this phased migration will work

over DH+ using a DHRIO module.

Click to expand...

I don't think so controlview can realise the DHrio card & backplane & clx

The 1756-DHRIO module has a "default slot" setting so that when DH+ messages arrive at the module that do not have a Remote Link ID embedded in them, the -DHRIO routes them automatically to the ControlLogix controller in the default slot.

The default slot is zero, but the 1756-DHRIO can be configured using RSLinx to set the default slot to a different slot.

I can't tell you if the DH+ addressing used by ControlView is also supported by the 1756-DHRIO. ControlView probably won't be supported by RA for this application, since it has been obsolete for 4 generations of Microsoft/Intel platforms and 2 generations of Rockwell platforms.

But you can test it for yourself by hooking up a ControlLogix and 1756-DHRIO to the ControlView system. That's the only way you can be sure.