jeffs

Specifically this is how I have the keep alive set up. SB 168 is set on powerup; SI 103 - 106 = 10 SI 107 - 110 = 20 My understanding of the parameters is that when they are set, the PLC automatically will take care of the rest. Let me know if I am doing something wrong.

I am using Port 0 and Port 2 in the ethernet settings. I have both the keep alive parameters set the same for all ports. Specifically I have; SB 168 is Set on Powerup SI 103 is =10 SI 104 is = 10 SI 105 is

i have a system that I integrated 15 new V570 PLC's communicating via ethernet/ modbus tcp. The system layout is as follows. I have one V570 Master that is acting as a monitoring station to the other 14 PLC's. This Master is using Port 0 setup as UDP to communicate over ethernet to the other plcs. I also have a PC running wonderware SCADA application that is monitoring my 14 stations. I am allowing this SCADA application to access my 14 stations via Port 2 setup as TCP Slave 502. 12 of the 15 are communicating over a radio connection and are working great. the other 3 are hardwired into the customers existing network. These PLC's have the issue that when I establish communication, they seem to hang and stop communicating after a week of operation. When I access info mode after the controller has stopped communicating, I can see that the PLC is receiving RX but not responding any TX on port 2. While port 0 is still operating fine. I can always get the PLC to start communicating again by pressing apply in the ethernet settings window but this is unacceptable. It seems like the port is seeing an open end on the ethernet and hangs up. I have set the auto reconnect parameters and the keep alive parameters are set to 10. This does not seem to work. How can I fix this issue?

I have a system that requires redundant plc control. I have a primary v570 doing all of the control/monitoring and a backup v570 with the exact same program waiting to take over if the primary controller fails. Does anybody have any recommendations on how I should implement this application? This system does not need a 'hot' standby but rather a 'warm' standby that when one controller fails the other takes over.