I'm piecing together a failed reference-plate check on our FR10 bench. In the merged export, the PLC acknowledgement appears before Python's request. Python restarted halfway through the session and reused the same job label.
The clocks disagree too. Or at least their displayed times do. How much of this attempt can I honestly reconstruct before I tell the next shift what happened?
I've had merged logs create a very convincing event order that never happened. Keep each source in its own order first. Find shared transitions and preserve the original files. The repeated job label means time sorting alone won't identify the attempt.
Separated them. Python has a startup line between the two uses of the label. PLC has one acknowledgement transition, but I don't yet know which request led to it.
The trace shows it went high before the application startup and stayed high. The restarted application logged its first observation as 'ack received'. That explains the duplicate acknowledgement line, though not whether the first attempt finished.
Treat that first attempt as uncertain unless a separate completion record identifies it. For the revised logging, distinguish observing existing state from receiving a new transition. Include an application-run identifier so a reused label doesn't look like one continuous attempt.
And keep the raw timestamps alongside any estimated alignment. Someone checking your reconstruction needs to see where the evidence stops and your interpretation starts.
Handover now says the first attempt's completion is unconfirmed and names the controls lead for reconciliation. We've retained separate source timelines. The logging change is agreed, but I can't recover a completion record that wasn't captured.