Cannot assign the FR10 bracket acknowledgement after our application reused the label

In the application log, yes. The PLC acknowledgement has no session identity from that application.

I'd show those as two attempts straight away. Calling them one job in the summary will have everyone arguing from the wrong starting point.

Retain the original logs and mark the acknowledgement unassigned. The within-source order may still be useful even where the clocks cannot be aligned reliably.

Is there a shared event that could anchor the clocks, without assuming this acknowledgement is it?

No reliable shared event found. There is a screen recording, but it begins after the application restarted and shows only the reused label.

Can the support summary show what is known about the physical bracket separately from what is known about each software attempt?

Ravi, that would help, provided the physical observation has its own source and time; the reused label should not be allowed to assign that observation by itself.

And leave the missing part visible. A complete-looking timeline can be very persuasive nonsense.

Ravi and Jane, the technician recorded the bracket identity after the restart, but not its condition before it. Both limits are shown separately beside the two attempts.

That's clearer than joining the logs into one sorted list. I keep seeing the prettiest chart win arguments it shouldn't even be entered in.

Who will decide whether more evidence can resolve the old event, rather than leaving the next shift to guess?

The integrator is reviewing it with our software maintainer. They have the originals and the unassigned acknowledgement; no conclusion returned yet.

Have they proposed distinct attempt identities for future restarts, while the old event stays open?