Switching from AXCESS to Netlinx

bob

Hi everyone,

I am about to transfer an Axcess based system to NI-700 master. Anyone could give some ideas as to what the minimum program modification is and where to start? Any hints?

Thanks,
Bob.

JustinC

The answer is what functionality you are wanting to use by moving to the NI-700. Technically if you make sure you don't use the Keyword "SWITCH" as a variable or device name in your axcess program the rest will work fine.

However you may want to move all your push statements to Button_Events.


Also, you will need to create data_events for your RS232 devices b/c the startup section will not setup the ports anymore.

And I believe device addressing will now need to be in the D:P:S format.

bob

Thanks, thats cool. I would first like to convert the processor changing as little as possible (but device addressing and serial port initialization) and see if everything still works :-). Later I will change all PUSH'es to Button_Events and at a later point optimize/extend the code.

I would also need on a Button_Event, to login to a remote (linux) server (to its IP address) and execute the "poweroff" command. Any Netlinx lines for doing that?

Thanks,
Bob

JustinC

That isn't too difficult, just open a server session on whatever port you need to and then send the commands out like its a serial port. You can use the Help function with the keywords IP_CLIENT_OPEN.

That will get you started, you can also do a search on this forum with some people having timeout issues with the port.

bob

In case anyone is interested, I have found a good manual descibing the conversion of Axcess to Netlinx code:
http://www.amx.com/techsupport/Programming%20FAQs/Converting%20AXCESS%20to%20NetLinx.pdf

Mark Epstein

JustinC wrote:

...you will need to create data_events for your RS232 devices b/c the startup section will not setup the ports anymore.

The configuration commands can be in DEFINE_START, but will only work if the device has already come online at that time. Adding a WAIT will usually solve this, but a ONLINE in a DATA_EVENT is certainly more elegant.

JustinC wrote:

And I believe device addressing will now need to be in the D:P:S format.

A device defined as

VOLUME = 96

will be treated at compile time as if it said,

VOLUME = 96:1:0