How do I reconcile our UR5e retained completion without counting it twice?

BenBrooks0805 · 16 Oct 2025, 07:28 UTC

Closed
BE
BenBrooks0805
Our monitor counts the first high completion after reconnect as new, although the PLC held it from before disconnection. I've stopped that counting path while we establish the job identity beside the retained state.

9 replies

JA
JackBrooks0863
Replying to BenBrooks0805

What identifying information is retained with that completion? A job label, an attempt reference, something that changes for each run? The application needs more than a fresh connection and a familiar high bit.

21 points
BE
BenBrooks0805
Replying to JackBrooks0863

A job counter is retained beside it. We weren't reading it. I'm asking controls how that counter behaves over a restart before relying on it.

14 points
TO
TobyCarter1014
Replying to BenBrooks0805

And what is your total supposed to count, Ben, physical accepted housings or completed attempts at checking them?

22 points
JA
JackBrooks0863
Replying to TobyCarter1014

Toby, worth separating those. Even if every completion is matched correctly, a legitimate recheck mustn't quietly turn one housing into two finished pieces.

6 points
BE
BenBrooks0805
Replying to TobyCarter1014

Toby, accepted housings. The report already links rechecks to the same housing, but this reconnect path adds a raw count outside that logic. It needs to use the reconciled result history too.

17 points
JA
JackBrooks0863
Replying to BenBrooks0805

Test reconnect after a result was already saved, and after it arrived but saving failed. Same-looking retained signal, different work left for the application.

-1 points
TO
TobyCarter1014
Replying to BenBrooks0805

Ben, where will a result go if its counter and saved history cannot be matched? I would rather see an unresolved housing than an extra accepted one

18 points
BE
BenBrooks0805
Replying to TobyCarter1014

Unmatched cases now go to review in the offline version. Known saved completion adds nothing on reconnect. Failed-save recovery and controller-counter restart behaviour remain under test. Thanks Toby for checking what the total means.

15 points
JA
JackBrooks0863
Replying to BenBrooks0805

Try reopening that review case too. The reason and housing identity need to survive, not just a generic warning that sends the next shift back to asking you.

17 points

Discussion closed

This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .