Yet another "No Response from UCM" ETH01

[Pgordon]

I just upgraded an existing UCM from RS232 to ethernet by adding an ETH01 module, yet no matter what I do I cannot get Comfigurator to do anything other than say \"No Response from UCM\"... Here\'s what I\'ve done so far...

Starting point is a 100% funtioning system, 3 UCMS, all working, no comms errors reported etc.

UCM ID1 Comfort to Homeseer for monitoring & control
UCM ID2 = CBUS
UCM ID3 = Comfort to Comfigurator for programming. (formerly RS232, now ETH)

As mentioned, all working perfectly..

I plugged on the ETH01 module to UCM 3 (observed lights coming on)
I jumpered SW8-F
I connected the Ethernet port to my network switch
I installed & Ran DS Manager, it discovered the module no problem
I set the IP, Netmask, Gateway, and all other parameters as per UCM Manual
I can now PING the IP address of the UCM/Ethernet (I couldn\'t before)
I Ran Comfigurator - Options > Settings, and changed UCM Interface setting to Network, and set the IP to the UCM IP as just set in DS Manager


That, I believe, is all that should be required? - No changes to the number of modules or anything, since the number of UCMs is the same...

Comfigurator however, will not connect... I\'ve tried resetting the UCM several times, I tried REMOVING SW8-A & SW8-B (no difference). Nothing I do will illicit a connection from comfigurator to the UCM/ETH

Any thoughts?

UCM is running 5.156 I believe... (according to sticker on the chip)


Thanks

 

Paul G.
 

[Pgordon]

Update: I just upgraded my main Comfort and UCM firmwares to the latest (Ultra 6.011, UCMs 6.012). This has made no difference...
Is there *anything* else I need to do that I\'ve missed? - It\'s very frustrating... I think I\'m so near but so far...
I can PING the UCM, so it\'s definitely configured correctly as far as the IP settings go...

I can even TELNET to port 1001 at the UCM IP address, and the connection is accepted. Whilst doing this I can see the DS Manager reflects the connection status as \"TCP connection is established or being closed\" - all of which I do from the same machine running comfigurator, so that proves there\'s no firewall issue preventing the connection...

[juwi_uk]

Hi,

I might be wrong but I thought the convention was to have the UCM/Ethernet on ID 1. The UCMMAN says this below on page 6; dont know if you are then getting because you are on ID 3?

Julian

By convention, UCM ID=1 is reserved for reading/writing Comfort
configuration file using Comfigurator, because when this UCM ID is
disconnected, Comfort does not report “Communications Failure”, while with
UCM IDs 2 to 8, communications failure will be reported (From O4.141).
Other UCMs or types of UCM may be connected for interfacing to C-Bus, KNX,
Velbus or others. These other UCMs should be set to higher-numbered IDs, up
to 8. UCM IDs should be sequential, i.e. there should not be any missing ID
numbers, i.e. 1,2,3,4 and not 1, 3, 4, 5
If the ID is changed while power is on, RESET the UCM by pressing the RESET
switch SW1 on the UCM.
Make sure that no other UCM is set as ID=1 in the system, otherwise
there will be a conflict which will prevent proper communication.

[ident]

If yours is the UCM with RS232 built-in, and you plug in a ETH module, then you need to move a shunt in J2 from \"RS232\" to \"RS485\"
The new UCM does not have this J2 header/shunt as all submodules are pluuged in including RS232

The UCM/Ethernet can be used at any ID for Comfigurator although it is recommended that the ID 1 be used because a UCM at ID 1 can be removed without causing a Communications failure Trouble

[Pgordon]

Aha.. Yes that sounds like a likely culprit... Yes my UCMs both have built-in serial ports. I\'ll try that additional shunt shortly...

Thanks!

Paul G

[Pgordon]

Yup. - that did the trick... thanks for the help.

I may be wrong, but I didn\'t spot any mention of this point in the UCM manual that I was following when I did the install/config... is that a bit of an omission?

Thanks again...

Paul G.

[ident]

It depends on which manual you were looking at
The new UCM manual does not mention the jumper because it is no longer on new UCMs

[Pgordon]

Aha, yes that makes sense... I was using the very latest version of the manual from the website... Although I see that it does still include details for the older ETH01 module, as well as the newer 02...

I would always tend to use the latest version of the documentation, so for the sake of a couple of lines I do think it would be useful to include a mention of that other jumper in there as well.. - I don\'t suppose I\'m the only person to be caught out by it...

Thanks again.

Paul G.

[ident]

We will see if some comment can be added. The worry is that it may confuse other to see deccriptions of older versions and shunts which do not exist on their ucms