Prosoft AN-X4 DH+ to Ethernet Gateway -- setting up HMI

[mechadruid]

Hello. I am trying to use a Prosoft AN-X4 to improve the communications for a new panelview plus 7. This is going from a SLC-500 through DH+ to a panelview 600C terminal currently, and I would like to utilize this prosoft unit to upgrade to a newer HMI with ethernet communication.


I am having trouble setting up the communication path for the AN-X4 in factorytalk view for the runtime application.
Does anyone have any tips on how to do this?

 

[TheWaterboy]

I use a couple of those for eth to dh+ over radio. I know nothing about ftv but the endpoint shows up as path in rslinx like anything else when set up.

 

[RedSoxFan3]

In my experience, FactoryTalk Linx tends to bombard DH+ networks because they are "subscription based" and you have no control over update frequencies. After V12 came out I was excited to try out this new functionality.

During testing, I had a test program running on my laptop and I was using FTView SE with FactoryTalk Linx as my OPC Server. After sending a few commands to the PLC through my test screens in FactoryTalk View SE, the PLC would completely stop responding to commands from both my laptop and the PanelView Plus 7 HMI. The only thing that returned functionality was closing FTView SE.

The solution was to use RSLinx as your OPC server for FTView SE. You can control how many packets is sent at a time and how often to update the tags. Rockwell recommends no more than 10 packets at once for DH+ networks. You can also create multiple topics so some tags are updated quickly and others are not.

The PanelView I installed didn't seem to have too many issues with this problem. The firmware for the PanelView Plus 7 is likely different than what runs on Windows 10. That said my opinion is that a Panel PC w/ FTView SE and RSLinx OEM/Single Node if you are going to leave the 5/04 in place. Otherwise if you want a PanelView Plus 7, then use a 5/05 or migrate the processor to compactlogix.

 

[mechadruid]

Just from testing on my desk with a SLC 5/04 through the prosoft AN-X4 then to the PanelView Plus 7, response time for numeric display was pretty slow.. about 1-3 seconds to update the screen.

I use FactoryTalk View ME. Right now the comms are set up to go to the SLC simulated in factorytalk linx in the runtime application.

 

[RedSoxFan3]

Just from testing on my desk with a SLC 5/04 through the prosoft AN-X4 then to the PanelView Plus 7, response time for numeric display was pretty slow.. about 1-3 seconds to update the screen.

I use FactoryTalk View ME. Right now the comms are set up to go to the SLC simulated in factorytalk linx in the runtime application.

Honestly the old tech (RSLinx, RSView32, PanelView/PV+/PV+6) outperform any migration. You had full control over update times for each tag and you were connected directly to the network.

The new tech you are at the mercy of registry keys in FTLinx, and the firmware of the new HMI and the firmware of the gateways.

It’s better to convert the PLC to an Ethernet based processor for FTView anything.

That said, I’ve still seen good performance with the Prosoft gateway over DH+ networks and great performance over RIO networks, but there are more things that can go wrong and these affects get magnified by lesser firmware you cannot control.

I was lucky and got a really good technician over the phone when I called Tech Connect a couple years back. I would give it a shot, they might have more tips for you.

 

[mechadruid]

Honestly the old tech (RSLinx, RSView32, PanelView/PV+/PV+6) outperform any migration. You had full control over update times for each tag and you were connected directly to the network.

The new tech you are at the mercy of registry keys in FTLinx, and the firmware of the new HMI and the firmware of the gateways.

It’s better to convert the PLC to an Ethernet based processor for FTView anything.

That said, I’ve still seen good performance with the Prosoft gateway over DH+ networks and great performance over RIO networks, but there are more things that can go wrong and these affects get magnified by lesser firmware you cannot control.

I was lucky and got a really good technician over the phone when I called Tech Connect a couple years back. I would give it a shot, they might have more tips for you.

Thanks for the feedback.

I was still going to test out the new PanelView in the field with the prosoft and see how the response times are, but so far it's looking like there won't be much improvement.

I'll give rockwell a call about our intentions to upgrade, and I'll reply back to the thread with what I find out.

 

[RedSoxFan3]

DH+ networks go up to 56k. That's it.

If you want to improve performance, you need to utilize data compression. Old PLC5 programs would group status bits into bit arrays or integer files and then copy all of those into a highly condensed integer array file. This allows you to transfer all HMI data into one packet for inputs and one packet for outputs.

One of the issues with the old PCCC communication is you are calling array files with a first index and a length. The protocol has no provisions for data compression. All data compression must be planned in advance.

For example if you need N20:0 and N20:30, your data server will need to decide if it's going to send 2 requests or one request with length 31. The problem is that you have no control over how it decides how to do it. If your data is spread across dozens of files it requires a separate read request for each one. If everything is condensed into a single integer array with very little unused data space, then you will have much better performance.

 

[TheWaterboy]

DH+ networks go up to 56k. That's it.

Well thats just not true. I have the proof right here

 

[RedSoxFan3]

Well thats just not true. I have the proof right here

View attachment 68895

This is for an SLC 5/04 controller, so yes it is true!

The 1747-SN RIO adapter can be configured for up to 230K, but not the controller.

 

[TheWaterboy]

Ahh, missed that nugget of information. I stand corrected.