Re: [foxboro] CP60 FT Shadow will not stay running

Not the cause, probably, but the latest release for the CP60 I have seen 
(yesterday on the new installation) was 6.3.
This one came with the 6.3 software set though.
Regards,

Ron Deen

michael.telgenhoff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>1). We don't have a system alarm printer but I do have histspy set up for
>system messages so I will restart the shadow here and by tomorrow morning it
>should be offline and I will let you know what the message is.
>
>2). We have not had any trouble with not seeing any of the FBM's and all of
>the FBM's are online and running.  There is only one on the system but we
>have two controllers for a project early next year, I will install those now
>and try to load that database on those and see how it goes.  I can't really
>turn the FBM's off, at least not for awhile anyway, the next time there is a
>shutdown, that will be something I can look at.
>
>3). The station block shows version 6.2.1
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ron Deen [mailto:r.deen@xxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 3:36 PM
>To: foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [foxboro] CP60 FT Shadow will not stay running
>
>
> Doe anything show up on the system alarm printer?
>When both CP do not see any FBM's for a short while, the FT (at least with
>CP10,30,40) would go single.
>Is the problem related to only this FT pair?. Can it be reproduced with the
>DB in another pair? (I know there's only one in your system, but with a
>little help...)
>Does the CP fail with all FBM's OFFLINE? (assuming you can do this) If it
>stays online is this case it may be related to problems in the field wiring.
>What is the version Control software (shown in the "station block")?
>
>Many questions, no answers yet.
>
>Ron Deen
>
>michael.telgenhoff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx[1] wrote:
>Hello,
>I have a Fault Tolerant pair of CP-60's installed here. This is our
>first installation of CP-60's. Since we have started the process, I have
>not been able to keep the shadow module running for more than 24 hrs. I get
>the both processors married, online and then usually after about 3 hours,
>the shadow will fail. The primary continues to run and the process works
>fine but I am not longer redundant. I have tried using different
>controllers, a different Z connector, a different spot in the rack. Has
>anyone seen anything like this? We are running software NT V. 6.2.1 We
>have 3 CP-40 FT's on this system with no problem.
>
>In System management the fail mode says NOT FAILED and the SHADOW MODE says
>Off Line
>Hardware Revision is 0G
>EEPROM Revision is 3.02
>
>If I tell the shadow to go OFFLINE and then run EXEC ALL on the diagnostics,
>everything passes
>I can then hit restart and the controllers will go t o Married for about 3
>hours and then the shadow will go offline again.
>
>Thanks for any help.
>
>**********************
>Michael Telgenhoff Midland Plant Process Control Engineer
>Dow Corning Corporation Voice: 989.496.6855
>3901 S. Saginaw Rd. Pager: 989.926.2706
>Midland MI 48686-0995 Fax: 989.496.1897
>mailto:michael.telgenhoff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx[2]
>**********************
>
>
>_____________________________________________________________________
>This message has been checked for all known viruses by the 
>MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further information visit
>http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp[3]
>
>
>
>___________________________________________________________________
>This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by The Foxboro Company.
>Use the information obtained here at your own risk. For disclaimer,
>see http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html#maillist[4]
>
>list info: http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro[5]
>subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join[6]
>unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave[7]
>
>
>
>
>
>--- Links ---
>   1 mailto:michael.telgenhoff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   2 mailto:michael.telgenhoff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   3 http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp
>   4 http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html#maillist
>   5 http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
>   6 mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject= join
>   7 mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
> 
> 
>___________________________________________________________________
>This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by The Foxboro Company.
>Use the information obtained here at your own risk. For disclaimer,
>see http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html#maillist
>
>list info:   http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
>subscribe:   mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
>unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
>
>
>_____________________________________________________________________
>This message has been checked for all known viruses by the 
>MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further information visit
>http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp
>
>_____________________________________________________________________
>This message has been checked for all known viruses by the 
>MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further information visit
>http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp
>
> 
> 
>___________________________________________________________________
>This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by The Foxboro Company.
>Use the information obtained here at your own risk. For disclaimer,
>see http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html#maillist
>
>list info:   http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
>subscribe:   mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
>unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave
>
>


 
 
___________________________________________________________________
This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by The Foxboro Company.
Use the information obtained here at your own risk. For disclaimer,
see http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html#maillist

list info:   http://www.freelists.org/list/foxboro
subscribe:   mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join
unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave

Other related posts: