Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

P1K To C-More

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts


  • #16
    Make sure your tags are loaded in the HMI after you save the PxK program. The database in the C-More must be in sync with the PLC program or you'll get a 499/0002 error. Many times I delete a tag in the program that I forgot that I was referencing in the C-More or change a tag name and it bites me in the ass.

    Comment



    • #17
      Originally posted by Brandon_ View Post
      Make sure your tags are loaded in the HMI after you save the PxK program. The database in the C-More must be in sync with the PLC program or you'll get a 499/0002 error. Many times I delete a tag in the program that I forgot that I was referencing in the C-More or change a tag name and it bites me in the ass.
      I try to NEVER delete tags. I rename them to something similar to the original SYSTEM ID.
      Eg. If were to need to remove bool tag "START_BTN" C-000001, I would rename it to C_000001.
      PAC provides no native way to recycle 'deleted' tags.
      There was some statement years ago that 'ALL DATABASES DO IT THIS WAY.' (delete the SYSTEM ID of a 'deleted' tag. I remain unconvinced that this practice is necessary.
      To delete a KNOWN address from a CPU address_space seems wrong.
      Excel can help you recover accidentally (or purposefully) deleted SYSTEM ADDRESSES back to your tag database. Export, edit export file (add deleted SYSTEM_ID(s) back. import...

      Comment



      • #18
        Why do you worry about "recycling" System ID's? I suspect the hardware can address WAY more tags than would be practical for use in a program on a single CPU. I don't suspect you could actually have (or the hardware could address) 999,999 "C" tags. Though if it addresses in 32 bit, then it actually could. Even if it was addressing in a simple 16 bit format, that's still 65,536 tags and even if it can only address to C-0065536, if you delete 1000 tags out of a project, that still leaves you with 64,000+ tags. I don't see it as a concern.

        I personally don't worry about System ID's at all. Delete the tag, save the program, update the C-More database using "overwrite existing tags", done. When I'm done writing a program I actually go in to every tag type (exception of System tags) and delete any that are not used in the project. Maybe I'm overly anal about it, but I hate having tags in a project that I created that aren't being used.

        Comment



        • #19
          Originally posted by Brandon_ View Post
          Why do you worry about "recycling" System ID's? I suspect the hardware can address WAY more tags than would be practical for use in a program on a single CPU. I don't suspect you could actually have (or the hardware could address) 999,999 "C" tags. Though if it addresses in 32 bit, then it actually could. Even if it was addressing in a simple 16 bit format, that's still 65,536 tags and even if it can only address to C-0065536, if you delete 1000 tags out of a project, that still leaves you with 64,000+ tags. I don't see it as a concern.

          I personally don't worry about System ID's at all. Delete the tag, save the program, update the C-More database using "overwrite existing tags", done. When I'm done writing a program I actually go in to every tag type (exception of System tags) and delete any that are not used in the project. Maybe I'm overly anal about it, but I hate having tags in a project that I created that aren't being used.
          I don't 'like' gaps in my SYSTEM ID table. it is personal. I also have empirical evidence that with some PAC Software versions, gaps in SYSTEM ID table slowed some software functions - load/save/upload/download.

          Comment



          • #20
            Originally posted by Brandon_ View Post
            Your setup looks correct. I've never used the EA7's with a P2K/P1K, so I can't say for sure if it infact does only support the P3K or not. I would be shocked if that was the case, but I suppose it's possible.
            I can assure you that the C-more driver works for all Productivity Series CPUs
            - J. Payne
            "Controls make the world go round"

            Comment



            • #21
              Originally posted by a agnone View Post
              Am I missing something, your CPU is listed a 92.168.xxx.xxx, the other HMI is 192.168.xxx.xxx. How is that going to work?
              Two things:
              1. His IP addr is 192.168. xxx.xxx. This is a display problem with certain monitor resolutions. It is already fixed and in a soon to be released version ...
              2. pbw per the picture, you have the IP address defined by the "Use the following", which is part of the project and changes the IP address when you download the project to the CPU. However, depending on whether you have actually downloaded the project or how you connected to the CPU, it doesn't necessarily reflect the current IP address. You can verify this by clicking the 'Choose CPU' icon on the main screen tool bar, or look on the CPU display.
              - J. Payne
              "Controls make the world go round"

              Comment



              • #22
                Originally posted by pbw View Post
                Haven't tried EA9 but the EA7 that I have on Select-protocol-dropdown menu it only lists support for a Productivity 3000 CPU and I can't get it to respond.
                FYI: EA7 is a retired product line and will not be updated, but know that the P3000 driver will work.
                EA9 driver drop down selection lists:
                - AutomationDirect Productivity Series Serial
                - AutomationDirect Productivity Series Ethernet
                Those drivers work with all CPUs.
                - J. Payne
                "Controls make the world go round"

                Comment



                • #23
                  Originally posted by PLC_PM View Post

                  I can assure you that the C-more driver works for all Productivity Series CPUs
                  Good to know. My assumption was that was how it was. I assumed when the EA7 software was created, the P2K (and certainly the P1K) simply didn't exist and as such the comm driver was listed only as the P3K.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X