But I don't want to hold myself out as the sure-fire guru and have you rely on me when I can't dedicate enough time to help
I reserve these direct appeals for when I have given up hope and need a bigger gun
. I know you have an affinity for this and I also know you moved on to better and more interesting things, but sadly that's what most who know this stuff well have also done, so help at this depth this is difficult to find. Like these PLC's I myself am vintage so I can sympathize. Once this is worked out these PLC5's can begin to go away in favor of the 5380 and ethernet but till I get them talking well I cant start that process. AB support is unwilling to locate the elder statesman of DF1 assuming there is still one in their employ.
Can you get a longer capture of data, in either format, from the working-correctly PLC-5 so we can compare them ?
Sent several things as PM. The Wireshark captures might not be a good thing to publish even with our new $80k firewall.
You mentioned that "There are multiple KE's in both stations and they have different addresses.Can you explain a little more about that ?
There is an in use, fairly reliable but end of life radio (Esteem 192C) in place on one KE module (or direct to CH0) and the new radio (MDS Orbit MCR) is on a separate module. Each system is completely separate except of course for the remote PLC. Different freq, different polling PLC(a PLC5 on old one and an L81 on the new one) and different KE module with a different address (node, station, whatever
). I am assuming that the KE modules are "smart" enough to keep them separated. Maybe they arent?
Are they all on the same DH+ network in the station, or connected to individual PLC-5 controllers instead of being networked together on DH+ ?
On the remote end: same PLC5, same DH+ network, all in the same 7 slot rack.
Are there any PLC-5's that are connected directly to a radio with their Channel 0 serial ports ?
Not on this radio system, there are some on the old radio system and so there is a KE for the new system in the same rack.
Are there any 1785-KE modules that might have been decommissioned or disconnected from a DH+, but are still connected to a radio ?
No chance of that.
The double -ACKs and the and the DST=SRC and the Illegal Command reply suggest that maybe there's a 1785-KE out there connected to the radio network and configured for Station 11 (octal), but it's not connected to any PLC-5.
I can't argue, but I am not aware of it at all. And it only responds partially but repeatedly? How weird would that be.
The 1785-KE has its own DH+ Station address, which of course has to be different from all the other devices on the DH+ network. If a 1785-KE and a PLC-5 both had the same DH+ address, they would conflict and you would get a big obvious red light on the DH+ port and neither one would work.
Thinking that I had KE problem on this location I tried 3 different rev C KE modules and they all created the flashing red DH+ light on the plc 5 when installed even though the addresses I set were the same as the one removed (always address 70 or above). I thought that was just a version conflict but since the original rev B version worked... well didn't cause a red LED... I left it in. . . . That gives me pause...
...The two apparently duplicate "10 06" ACK messages arrive exactly 30 or exactly 40 milliseconds apart.
That would be the ACK timeout setting of the PLC51...
Again: it's wild conjecture, but the data you show is consistent with a DF1 radio network that has two devices at the same DF1 address
Heres some more wild conjecture... Can the communication to/from a PV600 to/from its local PLC5 make its way across the radio network? All the PV600s are on the same DH+ network as thier radios and if they all have the same station address, which is very likely, could they inadvertently reach out... or be reached out to? i.e. if I have a PV with address 11h(17d) that is responding to something on the DH+ network intended for another PLC.
The Master does have a node number (unlike Modbus). Often it's 0. In your case I think it's 254.
That is correct - 254.
I will do my best to refer to them either only by their DF1 Node numbers when we are discussing and analyzing the DF1 traffic, or explicitly as a "DF1 Node number" or a "DH+ Station number", or "DH+ Station number XX (octal)".
The PLX51 requires a decimal address for the DF1 node address in its MSG, the PLC addresses are Octal and the Opcodes for the address are Hex. Makes this so much easier to trace doesnt it.
I just got a notification that my new oven arrived today ! Gonna get on home.
A nice 6 burner Viking that requires a 1 inch gas line?
If you can provide a general arrangement diagram or description of the radio network, that would be great.
Polling Master (L81) - Ethernet fabric - Hilltop - PLX-51 ENI - MSD Orbit MCR (Serial Port)- MCR Orbit MCR (Serial Port) - 1785 KE - PLC5
Is the Prosoft module a PLX51-DF1-ENI, or a PLX51-DF1-MSG ? My guess is that it's the MSG version.
It's the ENI version in bridge mode.
Something to file away in your library is that the timestamps in the PLX51 are referenced to the boot time, not the RTC. Not a big deal when you are looking at a single transaction, but when you are trying to sort through a mess, an accurate timestamp would be really nice to have. So dumb...
Do you have logic in the ControlLogix that captures the Error codes from its Ethernet message to/through the PLX51 ? If so, what is the error code for the message to Node 17 that fails ?
No but I can watch it live and its 16#001 and 16#0204 Connection Failure
I could be completely barking up the wrong tree here, of course. I'd love to see what the Master traffic looks like if the DF1 Node 17 (PLC-5 DH+ Station 11 octal) gets disconnected at the 1785-KE serial port. If the "illegal command" message and the failed MSG instruction in the ControlLogix are still seen, then that suggests very strongly there has to be a duplicate DF1 node device on this radio network.
I will try that today and see where it takes me. You have given me some new thoughts I'll be back with whatever I find. If you glean any new info from the captures I sent, let me know. And again, many thanks for even stepping up.
.