Search found 27 matches
- 25 May 2026, 18:50
- Forum: GSD-Checker
- Topic: PROFINET GSD Editor returns error when attribute "AdjustSupported" is set to false
- Replies: 0
- Views: 2916
PROFINET GSD Editor returns error when attribute "AdjustSupported" is set to false
Hello, The GSDML file for the product we are developing is failing the check performed by the PROFINET GSD Editor V2.46. Checker complains about the attribute "AdjustSupported" when set to false (lines 85 and 90). imagem.png However, even with this issue in the GSDML, the relevant test run...
- 15 Apr 2026, 14:41
- Forum: Quality and Feedback
- Topic: General information fields are not being filled up
- Replies: 1
- Views: 5727
General information fields are not being filled up
Hello,
I've noticed a simple issue in the ART 2.46.0. After running the tests, when I press the button to print the Certification Report, fields in the General Information, right in the cover page, are not being filled up.
Anybody else?
Best Regards,
Luciano.
I've noticed a simple issue in the ART 2.46.0. After running the tests, when I press the button to print the Certification Report, fields in the General Information, right in the cover page, are not being filled up.
Anybody else?
Best Regards,
Luciano.
- 06 Mar 2026, 20:01
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: Read out Information (CLRPC) Test failure
- Replies: 2
- Views: 4360
Re: Read out Information (CLRPC) Test failure
Hello, Just upgraded my ETS system to the latest version, V2.46. Noticed there's a new test case, called "Read out Information (CLRPC)". To validate the installation, run it with my dut previously approved by 2.45. All test cases were cleared, except this new one. Based on the description...
- 25 Feb 2026, 19:33
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: Read out Information (CLRPC) Test failure
- Replies: 2
- Views: 4360
Read out Information (CLRPC) Test failure
Hello, Just upgraded my ETS system to the latest version, V2.46. Noticed there's a new test case, called "Read out Information (CLRPC)". To validate the installation, run it with my dut previously approved by 2.45. All test cases were cleared, except this new one. Based on the description,...
- 15 Jan 2026, 20:51
- Forum: Community Stack
- Topic: CS with FreeRTOS+lwIP and memory requirements
- Replies: 3
- Views: 7414
Re: CS with FreeRTOS+lwIP and memory requirements
Hi everyone, We've recently downloaded the Community Stack source code, and now we are performing tests and evaluating the results to create a proof of concept prototype. Community Stack targets a Linux system, but we are planning in using FreeRTOS + lwIP. Given the complexity of our (future) produ...
- 14 Jan 2026, 20:56
- Forum: Community Stack
- Topic: CS with FreeRTOS+lwIP and memory requirements
- Replies: 3
- Views: 7414
CS with FreeRTOS+lwIP and memory requirements
Hi everyone, We've recently downloaded the Community Stack source code, and now we are performing tests and evaluating the results to create a proof of concept prototype. Community Stack targets a Linux system, but we are planning in using FreeRTOS + lwIP. Given the complexity of our (future) produc...
- 15 May 2025, 21:12
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: Manual-DHT Testcase
- Replies: 1
- Views: 38931
Manual-DHT Testcase
Hello, Of all tests performed, only one is reporting 'Inconclusive', Manual-DHT. Screenshot 2025-05-15 160547.png Screenshot 2025-05-15 155522.png As a result, Certification Report shows one error. According to TCS_00000014_DHT document, page 11, "... a manual investigation shall ensure the con...
- 07 May 2025, 20:44
- Forum: Miscellaneous
- Topic: Different part number for ET200SP device
- Replies: 3
- Views: 135885
Re: Different part number for ET200SP device
Hello, I am about to place an order for a ET200SP (the "d" device) to finish my in-house tests. Requested my local representative for a "6ES7155-6AU01-0CN0" but they quoted me a "6ES7155-6MU01-0CN0". Comparing their datasheets the only important different is the fact t...
- 23 Apr 2025, 22:46
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: Netload Robustness for Security test
- Replies: 4
- Views: 63290
Re: Netload Robustness for Security test
Hi Luciano, 1. What exactly does the error message from the PLC say? 2. The Scalance X208 will not work for netload testing because it is a managed switch. An unmanaged "dumb" switch is needed for netload testing so the maximum network traffic is transmitted to the dut. The unmanaged swit...
- 22 Apr 2025, 20:09
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: Netload Robustness for Security test
- Replies: 4
- Views: 63290
Re: Netload Robustness for Security test
Hello, I have some questions regarding this test. 1. A PC with Ubuntu to run the SL1-Tester was prepared and it's working fine. Followed the instructions given by the document "How to install and to run the security level 1 tester V2.43.0.0_V1.0.pdf". This is sorted now. 2. Using "no...
- 17 Apr 2025, 21:26
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: Netload Robustness for Security test
- Replies: 4
- Views: 63290
Netload Robustness for Security test
Hello, I have some questions regarding this test. 1. A PC with Ubuntu to run the SL1-Tester was prepared and it's working fine. Followed the instructions given by the document "How to install and to run the security level 1 tester V2.43.0.0_V1.0.pdf". This is sorted now. 2. Using "nor...
- 15 Apr 2025, 15:41
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: MRP Interop - Client (CLRPC) test question
- Replies: 4
- Views: 113964
Re: MRP Interop - Client (CLRPC) test question
Hello, I've put together the pieces required to run this test, one of the last before shipping for official certification. Read what I found about it, so my test setup mimics Figure 5-21 from PROFINET Test Specification. Only difference is, my 'b' device is a XC208 rather than X204IRT; don't think ...
- 10 Apr 2025, 19:28
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: MRP Interop - Client (CLRPC) test question
- Replies: 4
- Views: 113964
MRP Interop - Client (CLRPC) test question
Hello, I've put together the pieces required to run this test, one of the last before shipping for official certification. Read what I found about it, so my test setup mimics Figure 5-21 from PROFINET Test Specification. Only difference is, my 'b' device is a XC208 rather than X204IRT; don't think t...
- 27 Mar 2025, 19:19
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: AR-ASE S2 test failed
- Replies: 3
- Views: 92658
Re: AR-ASE S2 test failed
Hello, I need a helping hand concerning above mentioned test. My device is failing when I run AR-ASE S2 test, in the beginning of Scenario 1-4. Behavior 8, 9, 10 and 11, right in the sequence, are failing as well. AR-ASE and other behavior tests are ok. Log shows the following messages: 14:40:11 - ...
- 19 Mar 2025, 19:09
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: AR-ASE S2 test failed
- Replies: 3
- Views: 92658
AR-ASE S2 test failed
Hello, I need a helping hand concerning above mentioned test. My device is failing when I run AR-ASE S2 test, in the beginning of Scenario 1-4. Behavior 8, 9, 10 and 11, right in the sequence, are failing as well. AR-ASE and other behavior tests are ok. Log shows the following messages: 14:40:11 - A...
- 14 Mar 2025, 14:30
- Forum: Miscellaneous
- Topic: Different part number for ET200SP device
- Replies: 3
- Views: 135885
Re: Different part number for ET200SP device
Hello, I am about to place an order for a ET200SP (the "d" device) to finish my in-house tests. Requested my local representative for a "6ES7155-6AU01-0CN0" but they quoted me a "6ES7155-6MU01-0CN0". Comparing their datasheets the only important different is the fact t...
- 12 Mar 2025, 14:27
- Forum: Miscellaneous
- Topic: Different part number for ET200SP device
- Replies: 3
- Views: 135885
Different part number for ET200SP device
Hello, I am about to place an order for a ET200SP (the "d" device) to finish my in-house tests. Requested my local representative for a "6ES7155-6AU01-0CN0" but they quoted me a "6ES7155-6MU01-0CN0". Comparing their datasheets the only important different is the fact th...
- 26 Feb 2025, 16:49
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: IM5_Supported_ETS_ART_2.44.1_Problem
- Replies: 5
- Views: 74862
Re: IM5_Supported_ETS_ART_2.44.1_Problem
Hello, I'm having this exactly same problem when testing my device, but with the latest ART, version 2.45.0.2. Could it be a regression in test bundle? Does anybody experienced similar issue? Thanks. Yes, i see the same issue (message "According to the GSDML the 'IM5_Supported' is not set to '...
- 26 Feb 2025, 14:23
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: IM5_Supported_ETS_ART_2.44.1_Problem
- Replies: 5
- Views: 74862
Re: IM5_Supported_ETS_ART_2.44.1_Problem
Hello,
I'm having this exactly same problem when testing my device, but with the latest ART, version 2.45.0.2.
Could it be a regression in test bundle? Does anybody experienced similar issue?
Thanks.
I'm having this exactly same problem when testing my device, but with the latest ART, version 2.45.0.2.
Could it be a regression in test bundle? Does anybody experienced similar issue?
Thanks.
- 07 Feb 2025, 13:13
- Forum: Getting Started - Automated RT Tester
- Topic: Setup required to pre-test a two-port PROFINET device with redundancy S2
- Replies: 5
- Views: 128374
Re: Setup required to pre-test a two-port PROFINET device with redundancy S2
The S2 tests using ETS do not require a special topology. They use the connections you describe. Test cases are skipped based on device characteristics in the GSDML file. Does the device's GSDML file include the attribute DeviceTypes with a value of "S2"? There are additional interoperabi...
- 06 Feb 2025, 17:55
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: PROFIsafe test returning a connection error
- Replies: 3
- Views: 45405
Re: PROFIsafe test returning a connection error
In your case the messages are only in the log, correct? In the report the tests are reported as skipped. I also see those ETS connection messages from time to time, and I usually ignore them... In the Certification Report those tests appear as "None", in red. PROFIenergy indeed appears as...
- 06 Feb 2025, 17:28
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: PROFIsafe test returning a connection error
- Replies: 3
- Views: 45405
Re: PROFIsafe test returning a connection error
In your case the messages are only in the log, correct? In the report the tests are reported as skipped. I also see those ETS connection messages from time to time, and I usually ignore them... In the Certification Report those tests appear as "None", in red. PROFIenergy indeed appears as...
- 06 Feb 2025, 13:27
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: PROFIsafe test returning a connection error
- Replies: 3
- Views: 45405
PROFIsafe test returning a connection error
Hello, Whenever I try to run the PROFIsafe test (under Additional Testcase -> Profiles), I get an error message saying: 09:12:21 - Starting Testcase: PROFISAFE V2.4 STARTUP 09:12:23 - Configuration Test step 2: No PROFIsafe capable submodule with the selected version PROFIsafe V2.4 is available in t...
- 04 Feb 2025, 20:57
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: TEDCheck (CLRPC)(Cisco) test failed
- Replies: 1
- Views: 32115
Re: TEDCheck (CLRPC)(Cisco) test failed
Hi, I have continued working on the tests and now one of the last sticking points is the TEDCheck (CLRPC)(Cisco) test. It's failing with the following error message (for both Standard and Legacy test): "No IPv4 address for remote entry 0.2.2 found in lldpRemManAddrTable" I am trying to fi...
- 03 Feb 2025, 17:16
- Forum: Specific Test Case Questions
- Topic: TEDCheck (CLRPC)(Cisco) test failed
- Replies: 1
- Views: 32115
TEDCheck (CLRPC)(Cisco) test failed
Hi, I have continued working on the tests and now one of the last sticking points is the TEDCheck (CLRPC)(Cisco) test. It's failing with the following error message (for both Standard and Legacy test): "No IPv4 address for remote entry 0.2.2 found in lldpRemManAddrTable" I am trying to fig...
- 31 Jan 2025, 13:37
- Forum: Getting Started - Automated RT Tester
- Topic: Setup required to pre-test a two-port PROFINET device with redundancy S2
- Replies: 5
- Views: 128374
Re: Setup required to pre-test a two-port PROFINET device with redundancy S2
Hello, I am currently working to pre-test a 2-port PROFINET device which supports System Redundancy S2. The 10m cables go straight from the IF1 and IF2 from the ETS to ports 1 and 2 of the DUT. With this basic setup I am able to run most of the tests the ART presents. However, those that involve re...
- 30 Jan 2025, 18:23
- Forum: Getting Started - Automated RT Tester
- Topic: Setup required to pre-test a two-port PROFINET device with redundancy S2
- Replies: 5
- Views: 128374
Setup required to pre-test a two-port PROFINET device with redundancy S2
Hello, I am currently working to pre-test a 2-port PROFINET device which supports System Redundancy S2. The 10m cables go straight from the IF1 and IF2 from the ETS to ports 1 and 2 of the DUT. With this basic setup I am able to run most of the tests the ART presents. However, those that involve red...