1769-SDN Error code 99 then Err & C1 & C2

skyfox

Lifetime Supporting Member
Join Date
Nov 2006
Location
CA
Posts
276
I have two identical systems that operate independently of each other. Both are CompactLogix systems with DeviceNet networks using the 1769-SDN Series B module. I designed the systems myself and ordered hardware for both at the same time. However, only one system got built initially. That first system has been working for over six months without any issues. Last week, I completed assembling the 2nd system (identical hardware, software, wiring, panel layout etc., etc.) but could not establish comms between 1769-SDN and the DeviceNet network. In trying to troubleshoot it, I pulled the SDN card from system #1 and used it on system #2. System #2 worked like a charm. That is Until I returned that borrowed 1769-SDN back to system 1. Both cards were set up with using identical scan list (same RSnetworx .dnt file and the PLC program was identical on both systems) Digging deeper.......I came to found out that 1769-SDN card that was working without any issues had Rev 4.1 Firmware installed on it and the module I couldn’t get to work, had a newer Firmware version (rev. 4.4) installed on it. So I did what every panicking individual normally does by frantically attempting to downgrade it to 4.1. The Decision was swift. Had a delay time of ZERO.

But than half way thru the process, it timed out.

Several repeat tries......yielded the same results.

Then I Power cycled. The 1769-SDN had traveled back in time to rev 1.0


Sooooo, in order to further complicate things and to slowdown RsLinx to frequent pauses and wait times exceeding 4 times that of an TRS-80 boot-up cycle with a 5 1/4 inch floppy running Microsoft Dos 0.000001, I decided to invite my 1770-KFD to the party. Much to my surprise, it did dance well with all of my DeviceNet nodes except for one. Yes. The pompous 1769-SDN.

The Primadonna is now complaining

99 (NO. I DON"T WANT TO CALL THE FACTORY. I NEVER WANT TO CALL THE FACTORY)

Err

C1

C2

I can’t re-flash it thru the backplane. (Or, can I with a different PLC Firmware rev?)
My 1770-KFD wants nothing to do with it. (Obviously, I figured it can’t flash something it can’t talk to)
RSNetworx won’t go online with it. When drilling down thru the comms path, It sees the 1769-SDN, but SDN won’t show it’s comm port to RSnetWorx. (No [+] sign next to 1769-SDN to drill down further to activate the “OK” button on RSnetWorx)

Is there any other way to Flash this thing or is the module Toast?

Rest assured that any help that I receive in resolving this matter will directly benefit the Local Microbrewery by me donating to it.

Cheers!

DeviceNet Error.png
 
Last edited:
Well, really, version 4.4 (Release Notes) is what you should have stuck with. There was a backplane bug with large I/O image modules (1769-SDN, Prosoft Modbus, that sort of thing) in CompactLogix version 20 prior to 20.018.

(Knowledgebase Article 508518, Access Level Everyone)

So upgrading your CompactLogix to 20.019, or 21.x or even a later version might make the backplane work better, allowing you to load firmware onto the 1769-SDN over the backplane.

Since you do have v20 installed on your computer, you might not want to go to v21, which is a big step (renamed Studio 5000, major rev up of RSLinx, major rev up of RSNetworx). So go with the latest available firmware, which is 20.019 according to the PCDC.

Related to microbreweries; there was a big windstorm last night and stuff always falls of boats and gets washed into my end of the lake, making scavenging a morning-after activity. Today's big win was an insulated growler from Bombing Range Brewing Company.
 
Thanks Ken for the reply.

The Tech Article says....

The anomaly is addressed in both the L2y and L3y in V21. It has been addressed for the L3y in V20.018, available for download on Firmware Upgrade page.


It says V20.018 is for L3y. My CPU is L2y. I will give it a go with a firmware upgrade on PLC to 20.019 and re-try to flash the SDN. I can always re-flash the CPU back to what I have now working on the other system. I couldn't get the SDN with V4.4 working with either of the two systems but SDN with version 4.1 works with both. SDN data tables for the scan list are pretty small. 15 bytes total for all three Mass-flow meters.

Before I go the re-flash thru the back-plane route, any Idea why I can't communicate with the SDN that now has Firmware Rev 1.0 with my 1770-KFD?

Thanks again for all your help.

Cheers. Hope you had time to fill that new find!
 
Last edited:
Looking thru the 1769-SDN Firmware V4.4 Release notes, it says enhancements are applicable ONLY to 1769-L3x and 1768-L4x controllers. Mine is a L2x. Is it possible the Rev 4.4 may have inadvertently introduced a bug for it to fail with L3x controllers?
 
I think this technote might be a little closer related to your specific issue?...

462381 - 1769-SDN: CompactLogix Compact Bus backplane communication issues
Access Level: Everyone

I remember posting that one a couple of weeks ago here somewhere for an issue to do with a revision 2.2 1769-SDN which might need flashing to 4.4 to resolve similar backplane anomalies?

It appears as though you took a wrong turn at the fork in the road and I'm not sure if there is any turning back - Your CompactLogix 5370 L2 controller is at firmware revision 20.012, which according to the technote, is susceptible to the backplane communications issue when a 1769-SDN is present. Your 1769-SDN was at firmware revision 4.4, which, as Ken mentioned, corrected such issues at the scanner's end and should have been left at that. You then incorrectly attempted to backflash the 1769-SDN scanner, via the susceptible revision 20.012 controller backplane, which, according to the technote, can under certain circumstances reset the scanner module back to the factory default configuration; which it now appears to have done. You should have left the scanner module at revision 4.4 and just flashed the controller to the latest revision 20.x firmware and that might have been that.

But all that is just pointing out your possibly time pressured mistakes here, throwing some egg on your face and rubbing some salt in for good measure.

So, to in some way help you move forward, or more, prevent you from making certain other mistakes...

The first thing I would advise you to do is definitely flash the controller to the latest revision 20.x firmware so as to eliminate the backplane communications issue.

The second thing is the scanner module - by the way, the 1769-SDN is supposed to be at revision 4.4 minimum to support the 5370 controllers. If the scanner is reset to its factory default configuration (1.0), which it does appear to be, and even if your L2 controller is flashed to correct the anomaly, then you cannot attempt to flash it back to revision 4.x firmware via the backplane. Flashing via the backplane is not supported for the 1769-SDN scanner module until firmware revision 3.10 or later...

112964 - 1769-SDN firmware upgrade information
Access Level: Everyone

To attempt any flash of this apparently factory reset module, you would have to use a direct DeviceNet interface, such as your 1770-KFD. But, your 1770-KFD interface currently cannot "see" the scanner module. This is where I believe you have reached the point of no return. With the scanner module completely reset, and with it displaying an error 99, which means "Unrecoverable hardware failure", I believe it is no longer user flashable.

You can continue and try, if you want, but the above is fair warning - you cannot flash it over the backplane and it is most likely the 1770-KFD will never see it in its current state.

It's most likely a return or replace outcome, I reckon.

Regards,
George
 
Hi George,

You do present some valid points. However, about the eggs on my face. It is going to take some time to scrape it off and serve it back to you in a polite manner on clean platter so you can properly enjoy it. I am going to take a lesson from one of my most hated customers that requires a cool down period of at least 24 hours after an incident before the two involved parties interact with each other. Just so you know, I wouldn't have to make a wrong choice at the folk in the road if Rockwell didn't throw a nail strip in front of it. I will reply to you later. In the meantime, just so you know, using a similar analogy, I am not the type to upgrade the engine in my car to accommodate a Stereo module. If that is what you have come to expect from Rockwell, well, all the power to ya.
 
skyfox said:
...about the eggs on my face. It is going to take some time to scrape it off and serve it back to you in a polite manner on clean platter so you can properly enjoy it. I am going to take a lesson from one of my most hated customers that requires a cool down period of at least 24 hours after an incident before the two involved parties interact with each other...

Well, I have had a good nights sleep since but I was sorry to read your reply this morning as I feel you've picked me up all wrong here my friend.

"...most hated..."? I do hope you have not placed me in that category after my post? I was only trying to enlighten you and then assist you...

I was in no way being smart as in you had made a "stupid" mistake. You were under pressure of time, and I did make reference to that fact. I was simply outlining the chain of events that has led you to where you now are. This, while it does nothing to resolve your issue, is intended to at least make clearer to you what you did or what you should have done, and then move on to where you go next. This way, you at least better understand where you went wrong (if you hadn't already) and could avoid this possible mistake again in the future. It does other readers no harm to know this as well - public Forum and all that. It was purely intended to inform you of what has likely happened here and take some of the "head scratching", "what the heck did I do wrong?" type thinking out of the equation.

My "egg" & "salt" references were a humorous attempt at saying "Be quiet George. All you're doing is going on about what's been done in error and it is not helping to resolve the current status quo", which I then went on to deal with.

Please understand that you've flipped this egg wrong way up and all I was doing was positively attempting to assist you here. This is what I always strive to do.

Once again, humour, in textual form, has fallen as flat as it sits on the page.

skyfox said:
...If that is what you have come to expect from Rockwell, well, all the power to ya.

Trust me, what I have come to expect from Rockwell keeps me very busy; both here and in the "real world", cleaning up their many minor to major messes.

Regards,
George
 
Last edited:

Similar Topics

Hey Guys, I have a 1769-SDN DeviceNet I/O Scanner Module that is connected through a 1769-L32E Compactlogix controller the 1769-SDN is located in...
Replies
1
Views
1,593
Dear All, I am using Compact Logix PLC, 1769 SDN scanner with 52 slave devices for my network. Now,I am facing with a problem in my DeviceNet...
Replies
4
Views
6,094
I am facing a communication problem between 1769-SDN and powerflex 700.Compact logix PLC is showing Powerflex 700 node is not ready even with...
Replies
9
Views
5,467
All Found myself in a situation where I need to flash the 1769_sdn Devicenet module from 2.002 to 4.004. I uploaded from the module but it has...
Replies
11
Views
2,285
I am working on upgrading a system with a ML1500 that uses a 1769-SDN DeviceNet Scanner to a CompactLocix L24ER-QB1B. Due to cost, I need to...
Replies
2
Views
1,388
Back
Top Bottom