Hello, my colleague and I are currently working on synchronizing two ControlLogix racks with 7-slot chassis and identical modules. Despite successfully observing the secondary rack incrementing the IP addresses of its ethernet modules by +1 on each of the last octets, the secondary rack always displays "DISQ." This issue persists even though we have resolved similar setups in the past without the EN2TR module being involved. Our setup includes two identical ControlLogix 1756-L82e racks configured as follows: - Slot 0: 1756-L82e (CPU, v34.014) - Slot 1: 1756-RM2 (Redundancy module) - Slot 2: 1756-EN2T (Ethernet module, v11.004) - Slot 3: 1756-EN2TR (Ethernet module, v11.004) We have established connections using fiber pairs between the RM2 modules and have also attempted to connect CAT5 cables between the EN2T and EN2TR modules in each rack, yielding similar results. Initially, we encountered an error indicating that the EN2TR was not configured for IP swapping. This issue was resolved by assigning a different IP address to the EN2TR compared to the EN2T. While there are currently no errors and all connections indicate full compatibility, the status still shows as Disqualified. If anyone has any tips or suggestions on how to successfully synchronize these racks, we would appreciate the assistance. We have already attempted time synchronization, power cycling, and disconnecting other equipment, but are running out of solutions. Thank you for your help.
Today, I discovered that the traditional guideline stating that Redundancy bundles must start with subrevision .050 is no longer applicable! Have you connected the Ethernet modules to actual switches to enable communication between them, particularly the matched sets? Is there a specific reason for mixing both 1756-EN2T and 1756-EN2TR modules? Are you utilizing a DLR ring on the 1756-EN2TR's? Typically, the Redundancy Module Configuration Tool provides information on the reason for any qualification failure. Have you checked the event log for any indications of a failure in the qualification process? My assumption is that if you have not installed and configured your switches and are merely linking Ethernet modules together, the issue may be related to CIP Sync and the grandmaster clock selection. However, there should be some indication of this.
Ken Roach discovered that the old rule stating that Redundancy bundles begin with subrevision .050 is no longer in effect. Are the Ethernet modules connected to switches for communication, especially the matched sets? What is the reason for using a mix of 1756-EN2T and 1756-EN2TR modules? Are DLR rings used on the 1756-EN2TR's? The Redundancy Module Configuration Tool usually provides the reason for qualification failure. If switches are not properly installed and configured, issues with CIP Sync and grandmaster clock selection may arise. Regarding DLR setups, can only one EN2TR be set as supervisor and still maintain Redundancy? In the event of a rack failure, the other EN2TR would need to take over as the supervisor. It may be necessary to have a stratix function as the supervisor instead of either EN2TR. This setup raises questions about the redundancy protocol and if alternative solutions are available.
To ensure proper functionality, it is important to verify that the RM2 firmware matches the revision listed in the redundancy bundle. Next, confirm in the Redundancy Module Configuration Tool (RMCT) that SYNC is set to Always. RMCT can identify any modules causing SYNC issues. In cases where SYNC problems persist, removing both Ethernet modules from the chassis, leaving only the processor and RM2, can help. Additionally, double check the Time Sync settings on the processor and Ethernet modules to ensure they are in sync. It is recommended to keep Time Sync on for both, even if not needed. If RMCT gets stuck at 80%, this may indicate a time sync problem.
When considering the DLR supervisor feature, both EN2TRs can be equipped with Supervisor capability, although only one will serve as the Active Supervisor. It is unnecessary to designate another device as the supervisor. In my experience, issues with Supervisor activation are rare, unlike the frequent challenges posed by Time Sync synchronization.
I've encountered a similar issue before and I believe the problem might lie in your redundancy configuration. Based on your description, it sounds like the secondary ControlLogix is being disqualified due to a network related issue. It's possible that the two ethernet modules in one rack are creating a dual IP conflict. The ControlLogix L8 processors only allow one ethernet port on the processor to be used when in redundant mode. You might want to consider checking if both EN2T and EN2TR modules are required for your application, and if they are not, it might help to remove one of them. If redundancy is quite needed and both ENet modules should be used, look into establishing two different networks between the primary and secondary controllers, thereby handling each ENet individually and avoiding any conflicts. Always remember to check the whole configuration of your system after every change and also consider verifying firmware compatibility as a precaution. Good luck!
Sounds like you have quite a challenging problem here. From my experience, when dealing with ControlLogix Redundancy, it's crucial to make sure that all your firmware versions are identical. The firmware compatibility is maybe something to look into again. Also, double-check if there's anything else in your setup that could cause the discrepancy during synchronization. As a last resort, you could try resetting both the racks to factory default and setting them up again. It's a bit drastic but could clear up any hidden configuration issues. Good luck!
It sounds like you've been pretty thorough in your troubleshooting, but this issue makes me wonder about the redundancy configuration you have set up. Did you create the redundant I/O mappings in the project? As you probably know, both ControlLogix processors need the exact same configurations. If there is even a minor difference, one of the racks may be disqualified. Another thing to look into is firmware compatibility - both the primary and secondary processors should be running the same version. I hope this helps, and I'm looking forward to hearing about your progress in nailing down this pesky issue!
✅ Work Order Management
✅ Asset Tracking
✅ Preventive Maintenance
✅ Inspection Report
We have received your information. We will share Schedule Demo details on your Mail Id.
Answer: Answer: The "DISQ" status on the secondary rack may persist due to issues related to IP address configuration, network module compatibility, or synchronization settings. Ensure that the EN2TR module is correctly configured for IP swapping and has a unique IP address compared to the EN2T module.
Answer: Answer: Common reasons for the "DISQ" status include improper fiber pair connections between RM2 modules, incorrect CAT5 cable connections between EN2T and EN2TR modules, synchronization issues, or module compatibility problems. Verify all connections, configurations, and compatibility settings to troubleshoot the "DISQ" status.
Answer: Answer: To address the "DISQ" status problem, consider rechecking IP configurations, ensuring proper network module assignments, verifying synchronization processes, and confirming compatibility between modules. Additionally, seek advice from other users who have successfully synchronized similar setups for additional troubleshooting suggestions.
Join hundreds of satisfied customers who have transformed their maintenance processes.
Sign up today and start optimizing your workflow.