How do I set the number (%5) that the Auto-Naming starts with? Can I ? How does PAC control decide what number to start with?
How do I set the number (%5) that the Auto-Naming starts with? Can I ? How does PAC control decide what number to start with?
Seriously!? 
There is no way to control auto-naming other than what is there?
Consider this a wish-list item.
I have 400+ I/O to add to a new project and name (replacing an old GE PLC). This is going to be soooo tedious…
The IO unit export is a text file, maybe you can do something with that? It isn’t quite csv though. I have gone that route in the past.
Although when I export an IO unit in 10.3 (R10.3b) with groov IO, PAC Control crashes and I get an incomplete export 
(GRV-OMRIS-8 module is the culprit, reported to product support)
You replied to yourself before I could pass on the software engineers reply to my email asking the question on your behalf… (I’m a little bit slammed getting ready for tomorrows big webinar - you signed up for it right?)
Here is his comment and note the question…
%5 is filled in with the internal id of the object, making it guaranteed to be unique.
So if there are already 5 analog points in the strategy, and the last one is #8 (maybe some adding and deleting had occurred), the next id for an analog point would be #9.
What do you think the customer would like to do?
Sorry about that.
I am adding additional I/O to an existing PAC project to take over an old (starting to fail) PLC. I want to match the old naming convention so wire connections and logic will be easier to convert/migrate over. Old convention is I0001, I0002, etc., Q0001, Q0002, etc. Unfortunately, %5 just gives the point whatever the next available internal # is available so there is no way to start the numbering at 0001 or restart the numbering after finishing the inputs (I000x) and going to the outputs (Q000x).
Check out this old post from a couple years ago: Anyway to Export / Import Project Database (Variables /Tags) - #8 by Barrett
I can’t link directly to the post for some reason, but it is Barrett’s post about 8 entries down.
@philip (as usual) is right on the money.
The CLI is what you need @nickvnlr it will give you total control over naming your I/O points.
To clarify - I was referring to Barrett’s post about exporting the IO config and then adding additional entries using excel and then importing. I don’t believe the CLI allows the addition of IO points.
Thanks, this pointed me in the right direction. Here’s what I did;
It would be nice if there was a feature as part of the “Automatic Point Creation” that let the user better define the point names. Something like a photo importer.
Yes Philip that’s right. The only way to do the IO is tricky but better than doing hundreds of tags manually.
Re-read that post but the important part is:
*Once you are done with the edit, then save the excel file as a CSV file, if not it will not import. Next, change the file name to .OTG, then import it just like you exported it. I typically save the strategy and the OTG file in case something gets hosed up, I can delete it and start over again without starting over from beginning. It sounds like a real headache but it’s not too bad and you can add a rack full of 32 point modules in an hour instead of all day. The other major reason to do this is spelling accuracy and the ability to create a series of scripts for loading each variable from the RackX_fTable you use to get the rack. Unless I am going to use tables only, I do this at top of Main Loop.
The reason for this is because once it is imported, in excel it is not in CSV format which is the format that the OTG file is in. Therefore you have to save it as CSV type then change the extension to OTG.
Nick,
If you use the method of naming your IO tag names in the controller to a similar name in the controller such as: First_Point_di as an input point and then First_Point_din as an integer variable, then use scripting to load all the individual like named variables in the strategy after having block read them…then I use the same spreadsheet to create new sheets that create the script to load the variables. I also then copy those same sheets to do the CLI business and create all the like named variables for the strategy.
Btw, another really nice feature of doing all this is that you can provide a description of each variable and each IO point without any real effort, instead of having little or no description of anything in the entire strategy like most do…
This was a one time shot (hopefully). If I find myself doing this more often, I will definitely try to automate more of the process.
This just seems like a simple thing to implement in PAC project… Maybe there are underlying issues that would complicate this?? I am surprised there isn’t more of a call for it.
Like I have said before, the most useful features get ignored, the most useless ones, get top priority. I have never understood it either but I am certain it’s not because it is difficult…I think most of it is that those who provide it don’t have to use it to build anything. If they had to type in a couple thousand tag name and then deal with all the resulting typos, they would have added these features 30 years ago.
