Pierre

VMWare works like a charm. We have been using it for RSV32 apps for years with very little idscernable speed difference. "Whats your views on using VMware as a host for an operator HMI station?"

Sadely, its all RS and Siemens stuff at that plant. No way out of this.

Thanks guys, I have read your info and it confirm most of what I have done and observed. Now for an important follow up. God I wonder how I have not seen this before... 3 years ago, this client had Rockwell personel come in to try and make there system better. They where experiencing some pretty serious communication failures. There usual solution was to reset the whole plant PLC systems. They would turn OFF the power to all there PLC and reboot the plant. So when I arrived, they had purchased 2 RSLinx Gateway licences and RA was reconfiguring all the 5000 tags (topics, well, you know). My arrival was due to a plant upgrade of some processes. We have reprogrammed about 30% of all there ladders in there PLCs but have stood by what RA people have done. So this is where we where seing the packets counts. Out of curiosity I was often using the Driver diagnostic tool and looking at what was going on. I have since notice an increase in the packets between the RSL-Gateway PC and the PLCs. Last Thursday it was at around 350 Pckts/sec. So we have setup a test bench with 4 PC, 3 Laptops running RSView32 with the exact same configurations that what they have at the plant. We added one PC running RSLinx Gateway + 2 PLCs (PLC5-40C15 and SLC5/05) and what we found is so far from what I excpected that I bang my head on the wall for not having logically thought about it before. Here it is: The local RSLinx-Pro was configure with Topics and Alias-Topics and Direct Ethernet drivers in order to fall back to a second or third path IF we where to loose a Gateway. So Gateway1 was first to supply the data... if it failed then Gateway2 was the next in line, eventually the RSView32 application was supplied data from a direct Ethernet driver from its local RSLinx-pro application. Now, in our test bench, wether 1 or our 4 RSView station where using a Gateway we would see a major increase in the quantity of packets being pass between the Gateway and the PLCs. WTF ???? In RSView, we where using as Node, Data Source - OPC Server and as Station or Server - RSLinx OPC Server. This made no sense, OPC should not double the com between the PLCs and the RSLinx Gateway or only very little when we add some stations. We have reconfigure RSView32 with in the Node - Station or Server - RSLinx Remote OPC Server and now if we add stations there is no significant increase in the link between the Gateway and the PLCs. So IF we use the RSLinx OPC Server as a Server what happens is that we are only passing through the Gateway. Its like being in a direct ethernet link on each station but being routed through the RSLinx - Gateway. We add a station, we double the packets, another station, triples... and so on. Its acting like a Gateway... not an OPC Server. When we use the Node - Station or Server - RSLinx Remote OPC Server we have what looks like a true OPC Server link. I have ASSUMED the OPC configuration was OK for it was done by RA. I was wrong, but then again there is more. Using the RSLinx Remote OPC Server does not require the use of RSLinx in the local station, its a direct OPC driver. RSView runs without RSLinx. I have 2 questions. 1. Can we run a true OPC link, passing through our local RSLinx application? The reason is for the fall back feature that seemed only to be configurable through Alias-topics locally inside RSLinx. 2. If Q1 anwers is NO, then is there a way to fall back to another Gateway in RSView32? (We have not found a way to do this for all tags are routed to a OPC named driver which cannot be modify on-the-fly) To me, in the end... ...when RSView32 uses RSLinx Remote OPC Server, it calls the data to the remote OPC Server in the remote RSLinx Gateway ...when RSView32 uses RSLinx OPC Server, it calls the data to the OPC Server in the Local RSLinx Pro running which passes through the remote Gateway. Such a simple setup test made us find this the hard way. It all started when I saw the above 300 packets and questionned it. Y'a know what they say about ASSUME !!! :) Thanks again for your help.

We have about 12 PCs running RSView32 and they connect to a Gateway, polling data from 5 PLCs (3cPLC5, 2xSLC5/05). Since about a year ago I started to notice the packet exchange between the Gateway PC and the PLC5 increase in pkts/second. Nothing significant was added, a register here and there but not much. It was around 150-180 packets/s 2 years ago, now its over 300. Any adeas on where to look? I have a AB router on this setup (Stratix8000). An SQL database reads through the Gateway at 45 Pkts/s. How to troubleshoot this? I will get a wireshark log of the communication when I have a minute. Any hints? Thanks.

Thanks paulengr I read this and printed it. Now I must read again and again to reply correctly. You provide a very detailed answer and I thank you again for it. Loved the way you wrote about Trolls :) I will give a detailed description of what has been going on and what are the next steps. Pierre D.

In fact what we are trying to do is to get away from the Ethernet. There is 45000 tags read from 10 PC (in the plant with RSView) ... IT is now comming in with there superb ideas ... and the system slows down to much. We already have RSLinx Gateway with OPC transfers but this is still slow... I am looking into having a Gateway through ControlNet .. talking to the PLC in the production area ... and another Gateway talking to the PLC through the ENET sidecar which they all have ... the ENET would be reserved for them IT people ... let them mess around and slow down there network ... while we surf fast on the Gateway with 3 controlnet links... Any suggestions ... Thanks

Thinking of setting up a RSLinx Gateway with 4 of those connections to 4 separate Control Net networks. Should be able to serve the data fast to other users through OPC. But can I use 4 x 1784-U2CN on 1 PC? AB sales rep says 'It should, I don't see why not' But then again, they have said many things like this in the past and before I spend 8K ... Any body has done this? PS: Just like James Bond said "There word is not enough" or something like that.

This is a simple case. The owner of the intellectual property has locked it to prevent copying it. And that's all. Go and tell your client that he has to pay YOU to erase the program and re-write it for him. This way he will be the owner of the code and will do as he wants with it. Meanwhile you get pay for your work. We live in a society based on laws. When one thinks the laws are not good there is a lot of options he can use to change or adapt them. Cheating is not an acceptable way and being instrumental in this cheat is like holding the hand that's holding the smoking gun. For you own intellectual advancement you can try to crack the barriers but making a living out of it is a different story. That is why you get this kind of answer. My 2 cents.

This is what Wireshark gives me as statistics:

The PC which don't connect to the PLC can browse the web page inside the ENET module but RSLinx just wont connect. Here are the 3 file morrored before the big failure. PLC 1 = 192.168.5.5 PLC 2 = 192.168.5.6 PLC 2 = 192.168.5.7 Wireshark_3_PLC.zip

Thanks a lot. I print this answer and will read it again a few times so not to miss anything.

I was hired to revamp one section of this plant. This section is mostly controlled by PLC No.2. As I was working on it I saw that the rest of the plant was having big problems with slow Ethernet communication. Imagine this: They where controlling the position of one piece of equipment by the touch of a button on one RSView screen. When the com started to slow down (after they loaded there trending software with tons of data) they could hardly click at the good moment... So they had a recommendation from Rockwell to upgrade there systems to CNet15 and also 100MB on the sidecars. Of course I only got to upgrade one PLC to but we included the sidecar upgrades. Now the IT guru tells me the network is 17% loaded only... so it should not here be an issue. The setup is like this: 2 x PLC-5/40C (each around 14 ACN FlexI/O nodes) 2 x ENET 100MB module 1 x PLC-5/40C15 1 x ENET 100MB module 4 Main control room PC with dual screens (RSView + RSTrend) 1 Secondairy control room PC with dual screens (RSView + RSTrend) 3 Manager PC (RSView + RSTrend) 1 DEV PC (RSView + RSTrend + RSLogix5) 1 Data PC ( (RSView + RSTrend)) 2 Gateway Server PC (RSLinx Gateway #1 & #2) After I left the MrPLC site, I went to the PLC No.1 and connected to the dumb hub (10MB) that is there. I saw that the PLC was having com errors (with Wireshark) so I went to the main control room and called there IT Guru. Through his dedicated link he connected to the routers and had the PLC No.1 port mirrored to one that I connected my laptop. Saw again the same errors (BAD TCP to 192.168.5.109) All the errors where to that same machine (PC) We did the same thing to the other two PLC and saw some errors, and some where toward that same machine but only a few. We checked what was that machine and it was the one carrying the TREND data. Smart has he is he said "Why don't you disconnect the TREND machine... we won't need it for tonight." Smart has I am I did. We completely lost communication to and between all PLCs! The plant was running blind. I could not connect to the PLC No.1 and I had to power it down. Took us 90 minutes to start the plant back up. Some day your the windsheild, some day you the bug. After this the secondairy control room PC could not connect to PLCs No.2 and 3. And this is where we stand. I will add more details after a good hot shower. I need it.

Wow, that was fast :) Thanks. First I must add that last summer we upgraded PLC no.2 system to Cnet 1.5 AND we upgraded the other two to 100MB sidecars. Now we have 3 PLCs at 100MB and one is at Cnet15. The work of upgrade was done by Rockwell people. We replaced the ACNs (22 nodes). Last Friday, PLC no.1 was disappearing from the network... to a point where we could no longer access it. We needed to use the serial link with AIS software to re-configure it and download its program. When it was not communicating, it snooped the Ethernet with Wireshark and kept the file. We had to power down the no1 PLC and lower the com speed to 10 MB. Now it is working but at 10MB only. PLC1 and 3 only have 2 MSG blocks. Reading files from the other 2 PLCs. PLC 2 has 8 of those. 2 to read the 2 other PLCs and 6 to read/write to a SLC5/03 over DH+. (all of these give no errors) A will go and record the actual network and get back.

I have 3 PLCs. No.1, 2 and 3. I am having some errors between No.2 and the two others. Using the MSG block to READ from the other 2, they all do the same thing... BUT... I always have errors when a READ is tried from 1 to 2 AND also from 3 to 2. All other MSG functions are OK. So 1 reads 3, 2 reads 3, 2 reads 1 and 3 read 1. The error code I get from the message element is Hex 18 - connection was broken. The connections are through the ENET module. I am now experiencing this for the last 36 hours. Sometimes, the problem goes away for up to 10 days. But now its back. I monitor the seconds register in all 3 PLC from the RSView Tag function and I never miss a second... even when I get these errors. Cables have been tested. There is 2 cables at each PLC and the give us same results. Cisco switch has been tested and replaced... just in case. Rockwell support people have spent a full week here with no results. They suggest using one network specialist... from there team. It is starting to be VERY expansive and we are trying to search for the problem a little further before we have them come in again... This proble has happened in the past, once every few months. Now its there since 2 days ago. Any ideas?

We have an application with 3 PLC5 with about 4000 tags in each of the 9 PC with RSView32. They com over Ethernet to the 3 PLC (PLC5/40C + Enet module) and exchange messages between each other. Whe we have all 9 PC online, they pass throuhg a RSLinx Gateway equiped PC to have data from the 3 PLC. When more than 5 PC are online... the comunication is VERY slow... Tag need more then 10 seconds to update. Is there a way to make this better... is it normal now like it is?. Is there a formula to figure what speed we should be getting out of such loaded system...