Hi Tom, I'll test it using CIN, but as far as I know, both ofl and cin fail together, but you never know. We get these failure/recovery errors also, but only in one case relating to one of the problem FBMs and never on the same time when the state alarm occurs. As far as i can see form the lists I pulled from this month, if the alarms occur for one FBM, all points fail together, max a few sec diff in the timestamps. We use 41/42, with 42 being an extender, so I would expect to see this fail also, but this is not always the case, sometimes we see the 42 fail seperately from the 41 and vice versa. Thanks & Rgds, Dirk "Badura, Tom" <tbadura@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent by: foxboro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 29/09/2010 14:58 Please respond to foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To <foxboro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> cc Subject Re: [foxboro] FCP270-FBM100 Dirk, We usually tie the DEVLM feedbacks directly to the CIN outputs of the PLB block rather than feeding them to an OFL in ladder logic. Don't know if this would explain or solve your problem but if it works... A few other thoughts. Do you receive any sysmon log errors related to these cards or FCM? We do receive periodic failure / recovery type errors logged on our ZCP270/FCM100E/FBM100 connections although I have not (yet) noticed any functional problems. Do all OFLs / connection points on the FBM / PLB fail together or just random individual points? Tom Badura Plastics Engineering Company tbadura@xxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________________________________ This mailing list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by Invensys Process Systems (formerly The Foxboro Company). Use the info you obtain here at your own risks. Read http://www.thecassandraproject.org/disclaimer.html foxboro mailing list: //www.freelists.org/list/foxboro to subscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=join to unsubscribe: mailto:foxboro-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=leave