I/A & NT
Hi list, i have few questions about I/A on NT systems 1) how is possible to redirect Operator Action Journal logs to a file ? (The only chose is to redirect these logs to a printer) 2) In the AIM Historian Archive is it possible to save only 10 files at once Is it correct or is it a bug (we can change this number ?) 3) Still about AIM*AT is it possible to manage the archived files with other software instrument or we can only use them with AIM*AT ( I know the AIM Data Link way but i want to know if it's the only way) Thanks very much to everybody --- This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to your application of information received from this mailing list. To be removed from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AW51 crash dump files
Michael, you may delete them and there's the "crash" utility (see "man crash") to have a look at them. But this utililty seems to be only for the initiated. There have been whole books written on the art of crash dump analyzation and debugging. Have fun, Sascha - Original Message - From: "Michael B. Mueller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, September 08, 2000 3:28 PM Subject: Re: AW51 crash dump files > Hi to all - > > When the AW51 spontaneously crashes, 2 files are created in the directory > /opt/crash/ - unix.n and vmcore.n where n is a number from 0 on up > . > > 1. Will these files tell me what caused the AW to crash? How do I view that > information? > > 2. After backing these files to tape, may I delete them? The "System > Administration Guide" points me to the files, but does not > specifically direct me to remove them. > > 3. How often, if at all, can these crashes be expected? > > Thanks in advance for any insight. > > Regards, > Mike Mueller > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 317-926-7287 > > > --- > This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All > postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty > is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated > through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the > list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to > your application of information received from this mailing list. > > To be removed from this list, send mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --- This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to your application of information received from this mailing list. To be removed from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AW51 crash dump files
Hi to all - When the AW51 spontaneously crashes, 2 files are created in the directory /opt/crash/ - unix.n and vmcore.n where n is a number from 0 on up . 1. Will these files tell me what caused the AW to crash?How do I view that information? 2. After backing these files to tape, may I delete them? The "System Administration Guide" points me to the files, but does not specifically direct me to remove them. 3. How often, if at all, can these crashes be expected? Thanks in advance for any insight. Regards, Mike Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] 317-926-7287 --- This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to your application of information received from this mailing list. To be removed from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Launching programs that open a window (AW70)
Hello ev'rybody, has anyone succeeded in launching a program that opens a window on startup of the I/A System (after FOXAPI has started)? I tried it with the go_* scripts in /usr/fox/bin and, after creating my own script and adding it to fox_apps.dat, the process was launched (as could be seen in the Task Manager) but not the window! I know there is a structure (its name escapes me at the moment) that is being passed to WinMain() in an application. This struct somehow defines the window's characteristics (such as minimized, etc.) on startup. Is this structure somehow modified by the system for applications that are being launched from fox_apps.dat? What other ways are there to launch applications on AW70 after the last go_* script has been processed? I'm rather reluctant to use the Startup folder because in many AW70 systems the 'Start NT Shell at Boot" has been deactivated and I don't know whether Startup programs are being processed at all with a deactivated shell. Also using a delay there is not very maintainable in case someone adds more programs to fox_apps.dat. One last thing: The /etc/fox/user_apps.dat doesn't seem to work at all on AW70. I have not been successful in getting things to be started from there. Regards, Sascha Wildnererpicon Software Development GmbH
RE: AB KF2 at 19.2 Kbaud?
Alan Yes we looked into this but it was not feasible. As we are connecting to a AB SLC504 we needed the KF2 module. During our first attempt, our Foxboro rep. sold us on the idea of using FoxBlocks on the AW to tie directly to the PLC. This was a new feature that had been done successfully with Modicon PLC's and we were told the AB drivers had just been released. To make a long story short, it turned out Foxboro Development had not released the drivers, where Marketing thought they had (Go figure). A bouquet to our local reps as when they found out about the mistake, they made it right by giving us the equipment to make it work (old method but it works). About 4 months ago I was informed that the FoxBlocks for the AB series are now released. It would have been a better and cheaper solution, but we are committed to our present course. You may want to check it out. Regards John > -Original Message- > From: Alan J Schaff [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: September 8, 2000 6:49 AM > To: Foxboro DCS Mail List > Subject: RE: AB KF2 at 19.2 Kbaud? > > John, > We are looking at using the radio modem for a remote PLC. We are going to > try > to connect the modem directly to a comm port on the AI30. Have you tried > this > option? I like it because it eliminates the need for a KF2 box. Anyone > else > have experience using radio modems for Allen Bradly??? > > Thanks > Alan Schaff > > > > > > > > Campbell John C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2000 10:31:51 AM > > Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List' cc: > Subject: RE: AB KF2 at 19.2 Kbaud? > > > > Very interesting Kirk, we also are using KF2 modules at 9600 baud, but > with > a small twist. We are connecting to a SLC504 via a radio modem. By the > way, this may be a stupid question, but what is a GP? > > Regards > > John Campbell > > > -Original Message- > > From: Kirk D Carver [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: September 6, 2000 2:04 PM > > To: Foxboro DCS Mail List > > Subject: Re: AB KF2 at 19.2 Kbaud? > > > > > > > > From our in house AB guru: > > > > " I do not know of a situation in which it wouldn't work at 19.2K, but > > the > > bandwidth requirement is small: the bottleneck is the GP, not the DF1 > > line. If > > he's actually getting real empirical results back showing a huge ==x2 > > improvement when moving the DF1 connection from 9600 to 19.2K, then I'd > be > > both > > surprised and suspecting his ABSCAN and compound configuration. " > > > > > > and from our local rep: > > > > > > " First, let's clear up any potential confusion. > > > > 1770-KF2 - Stand alone box w/ 120VAC power (from outlet) that converts > DH+ > > messages to RS-232C DF1 messages for communicating with the Foxboro. > > > > 1785-KE - PLC "slide-in" module that does the exact same thing. (It > fits > > in > > a 1771 I/O chassis). > > > > The 1770-KF2 does NOT have an option for communicating at 19.2K > > The 1785-KE DOES let you go 19.2K. > > Other than that, they are the same beast. > > > > The only (potential) draw back to going to 19.2K baud on a 1785-KE > module > > is > > the baud rate is less noise resistant. > > It does work, though, and I have little or no problems with it handling > > that > > (blazing?!?!) speed! You shouldn't see any problems in your > > installations, > > since you guy's typically use well shielded cable for your serial > > interfaces. > > > > Kirk, I know you have a lot of "KE" modules out there, but I do think > you > > are using some KF2 modules also, although I don't know where. The > > Foxboro, > > or any DCS, can not tell the difference between the two, since they're > are > > basically the same thing, only in a different housing." > > > > > > > > Kirk Carver > > ExxonMobil Chemical > > Beaumont Polyethylene Plant > > PO Box 2295 > > Beaumont, Texas 77704 > > Phone: 409-860-1314 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - > > > > > > > > > > David Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/06/2000 09:32:08 AM > > > > Please respond to "Foxboro DCS Mail List" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > cc:(bcc: Kirk D Carver/Beaumont/Mobil-Notes) > > Subject: AB KF2 at 19.2 Kbaud? > > > > > > > > > > > > I have noticed that most of the Allen-Bradley KF2 modules I come across > in > > the field are running at 9600 baud. I also know of some instances where > a > > Foxboro Integrator 30 is communicating with AB KF2s at 19.2 Kbaud. Is > > there any reason not to run the baud rate at 19.2K? You sure get a lot > > more > > I/O throughput that way. > > > > Regards, > > David > > > > > > --- > > This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All > > postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty > > is made or implied as to the accuracy of any informa
RE: AB KF2 at 19.2 Kbaud?
John, We are looking at using the radio modem for a remote PLC. We are going to try to connect the modem directly to a comm port on the AI30. Have you tried this option? I like it because it eliminates the need for a KF2 box. Anyone else have experience using radio modems for Allen Bradly??? Thanks Alan Schaff Campbell John C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/07/2000 10:31:51 AM Please respond to Foxboro DCS Mail List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List' -Original Message- > From: Kirk D Carver [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: September 6, 2000 2:04 PM > To: Foxboro DCS Mail List > Subject: Re: AB KF2 at 19.2 Kbaud? > > > > From our in house AB guru: > > " I do not know of a situation in which it wouldn't work at 19.2K, but > the > bandwidth requirement is small: the bottleneck is the GP, not the DF1 > line. If > he's actually getting real empirical results back showing a huge ==x2 > improvement when moving the DF1 connection from 9600 to 19.2K, then I'd be > both > surprised and suspecting his ABSCAN and compound configuration. " > > > and from our local rep: > > > " First, let's clear up any potential confusion. > > 1770-KF2 - Stand alone box w/ 120VAC power (from outlet) that converts DH+ > messages to RS-232C DF1 messages for communicating with the Foxboro. > > 1785-KE - PLC "slide-in" module that does the exact same thing. (It fits > in > a 1771 I/O chassis). > > The 1770-KF2 does NOT have an option for communicating at 19.2K > The 1785-KE DOES let you go 19.2K. > Other than that, they are the same beast. > > The only (potential) draw back to going to 19.2K baud on a 1785-KE module > is > the baud rate is less noise resistant. > It does work, though, and I have little or no problems with it handling > that > (blazing?!?!) speed! You shouldn't see any problems in your > installations, > since you guy's typically use well shielded cable for your serial > interfaces. > > Kirk, I know you have a lot of "KE" modules out there, but I do think you > are using some KF2 modules also, although I don't know where. The > Foxboro, > or any DCS, can not tell the difference between the two, since they're are > basically the same thing, only in a different housing." > > > > Kirk Carver > ExxonMobil Chemical > Beaumont Polyethylene Plant > PO Box 2295 > Beaumont, Texas 77704 > Phone: 409-860-1314 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - > > > > > David Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 09/06/2000 09:32:08 AM > > Please respond to "Foxboro DCS Mail List" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > cc:(bcc: Kirk D Carver/Beaumont/Mobil-Notes) > Subject: AB KF2 at 19.2 Kbaud? > > > > > > I have noticed that most of the Allen-Bradley KF2 modules I come across in > the field are running at 9600 baud. I also know of some instances where a > Foxboro Integrator 30 is communicating with AB KF2s at 19.2 Kbaud. Is > there any reason not to run the baud rate at 19.2K? You sure get a lot > more > I/O throughput that way. > > Regards, > David > > > --- > This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All > postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty > is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated > through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the > list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to > your application of information received from this mailing list. > > To be removed from this list, send mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > --- > This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All > postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty > is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated > through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the > list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to > > your application of information received from this mailing list. > > To be removed from this list, send mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any mail to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company. All postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no warranty is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold the list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur due to your application of information received from this mailing list. To be removed from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "
