Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'panelview'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Found 53 results

  1. Hi all, While upgrading HMI from PanelBuilder32 to FactoryTalk View I encounter a problem using I/O to interface with a PanelView Plus. The communication is defined in RSLogix 5 program as Rack 3 group 2 Size 3/4, range 32-37. PLC communication with the panel is not changed, but buttons in old PanelView using I:34 and I:35 work, in the new PV+ they don't, all bits remain zero. Block transfers Read and Write are all sending data to rack 3 group 2 module 0. While testing I noticed O:32 is used as status bits by the Block Transfers - maybe inputs I:34 and I:35 are also used for somethings similar by a new PanelView Plus? Thanks!
  2. I am trying to upload from Panel View Plus 600 to my laptop using Factory Talk View ME via Ethernet. The RSLinx Enterprise does see the Panel View but when I hit the upload button I get the following error message: "The source selected is not a valid device. Please select a valid source and try again." Does anyone know what is the issue? I am attaching screen shot to visualize what is happening.
  3. I hope no-one minds that I'm cross posting this from the RA forums, I just wanted to get as much visibility as possible since there doesn't seem to be anything on the net about this. Any issue, let me know, or feel free to delete it. I'm trying to use a startup macro in my manual mode HMI application to copy the current state of my outputs to the inputs so the machine does not move or change state when switching between auto and manual modes. However, when I run the application on my PanelView Plus400 HMI, I'm immediately greeted with errors like "<macro expression>: Unable to read the expression""Read from <tag> failed"Some info: This only occurs for lines that set a tag's value to another's; if I set the tag to just a numeric value (like in the first line of the sample below), its executes just fine.There are two separate HMI applications. One is for normal / automatic operation. This one is to allow the operator to manually activate individual solenoids on the machine to aid with building, setup, and troubleshooting; it is not seen nor used in production.This occurs long after the plc has booted (manual mode is not the startup application) - so running anything on first-scan is not an option - and the HMI has no trouble communicating to these tags during operation.They are RSLinx Enterprise tags, I think - not HMI tags; they only exist in the controller / ladder. I'm able to successfully browse to them online in FTView.The expression editor reports the "tag = tag" syntax is valid.Lastly, I'm using FT View v7, but I'm creating v5.10 runtime applications.Here is an excerpt of the macro: {[Gage]MANUAL.MODE_ON} = 1;{[Gage]MANUAL.STATION_1_ESC_CLAMP_EXT} = {::[Gage]Program:Station_1.STATION_1_ESC_CLAMP_EXT_SOL};{[Gage]MANUAL.STATION_1_MOV_CLAMP_EXT} = {::[Gage]Program:Station_1.STATION_1_MOV_CLAMP_EXT_SOL};{[Gage]MANUAL.STATION_1_PROBE_EXT} = {::[Gage]Program:Station_1.STATION_1_PART_PROBE_EXT_SOL};{[Gage]MANUAL.STATION_1_ROTATE} = {::[Gage]Program:Station_1.STATION_1_ROT_180_SOL};{[Gage]MANUAL.STATION_1_SLIDE_EXT} = {::[Gage]Program:Station_1.STATION_1_SLIDE_EXT_SOL};... and so on...FTView IS able to successfully execute the macro when I test it on the development computer while it is connected to the PV+ over ethernet. If the PV+ is not connected, or the application is running solo on the PV+, no dice / same errors. I have also tried using HMI tags in all combinations in the tag and expression by tying the RSLinx tag to an HMI tag. So far, they've had the same results as above. Absolute worst case, I could edit the ladder to latches or unlatches the inputs off of a one shot from the manual mode on bit, but it would require 7 manual program changes across many in-production machines and would be very time consuming. I've searched everywhere, and the manual's not been any help - maybe I don't know what to look for. Thanks for your time everyone, ~Anthony