AnsweredAssumed Answered

Convert ERD Displays to use PI Tag names?

Question asked by knightk Champion on Dec 7, 2015
Latest reply on Dec 9, 2015 by knightk

I need to convert some PDI displays (ie. many) from nice AF ERD displays to use PI tag names. The reason is that the end users simply do not like working with AF attribute names, they want to see tag names. Has anyone done something similar in the past? I have converted PDI's which were using AF2 to be ERD fairly easily, but I am struggling here. My thinking is that if I first change all the E. tags to be the full AF2 pathname, then surely there is a way of programmatically invoking the "Use Pi point directly" option, and so I would end up with the actual tag names. The problem is that I can't set the tagname to an AF2 tagname using SetTagName. The tags say NO DATA and if I double click it says "unable to locate datapoint". If I then click AF2, it has the correct attribute already prepopulated, and simply clicking OK will fix it. Is there something I must first do to change the tag type? I am using this code...

 

sym.SetTagNameWithTagInfoType(NewtagName, pbTagInfoType.pbDataSet)

 

NewTagName is the attribute name with the "AF2." & ERD current context as a prefix (so it's getting something like AF2.\\SERVER\Root\Element|Value)

 

If I try this against a value which is directly looking at  PI Tag, it works fine, so I am wondering if theres some special handling that's needed when changing from the E. type tags to AF2?

 

Also...the "Use PI Point directly" attribute, can I enable this as I set my tag name from VBA?

 

I've explored other options such as exporting to SVG's and generating lookup lists and modifying the names by find/replace but there is a lot of manual effort involved in these steps so wanted something that will work slickly within ProcBook as I have a LOT of these to process. While using Element Relative made deploying a large amount of screens an easy task for me, the users seem to find the screens useless. Does anyone else have users that prefer tag names as opposed to AF? Some of this may be user training is required but there simply isn't the time for this just now. A common complaint is that they can no longer communicate the tag numbers quickly enough to colleagues who are not looking at PI (ie. DCS) I've always found Coresight a hard sell for this reason.

Outcomes