This project has moved and is read-only. For the latest updates, please go here.

Problem with graphics representation

Jan 5, 2014 at 4:18 PM
I'm using PMU CONNECTION TESTER. Namely data transmission through C37.118-2011 (with UDP connection). And I can't see the data displaying. I send configuration frame and it is displayed correctly (i mean all the values and names). Then I sent data frame. and data byte array was displayed correctly but I couldn't see it on graph plot and on the table, where:
               are shown.
By the way string "Time" is displayed correctly. But strings - "Frequency, Angle, Magnitude" show "0" everywhere.

I thought it was trouble with checksum, but checksum is correct
Jan 6, 2014 at 4:05 PM
What is your frame rate? There may be too many data drops to begin trending data.

What is your source device type?

Jan 6, 2014 at 6:01 PM
frame rate = 30 frames per second. I tried to change this value, but in vain....
Actually I tested not a device, but programm. Which I created in visual studio (so called PMU simulator). I mean - I created simple program, which firstly send configuration frame (it is received and displayed correctly) and then i send data frame in accordance with configuration frame... and data frame is received (I can see data ARRAY in PMU CONNECTION TESTER) but isn't displayed on graph plot and on the table.
Jan 6, 2014 at 6:11 PM
And I'm trying to understand how to work with PMU Connection tester, because now our company is developing multifunctional device, which includes PMU. And I'd like to use PMU connection tester to test our device in future.
So firstly I'm trying to test this tester with my simple simulator/
Jan 6, 2014 at 6:40 PM
Sure - I will say that the PMU Connection Tester, as a tool, is widely used throughout the industry as a "test tool" to validate protocol development.

The tool is known to work with:

SEL, GE, Arbiter, ABB, Ametek, Siemens, Alstom, Mehtatech, Hathaway, Macrodyne PMU devices as well as PDC devices such as ePDC and openPDC.

Given this diverse set of device protocol implementations from a wide variety of vendors - I will be less inclined to look for a problem in the PMU Connection Tester's protocol parsing implementation as a first step - although this is possible, I would look at other possible issues first.

Even so, there have been very few production implementations of IEEE C37.118.2-2011 (most all deployments are IEEE C37.118-2005) so there could may an issue there - are you using a configuration 3 frame or a configuration 2 frame to start the parsing process?

I think I would initially try the configuration 2 frame since it is the one that has been widely tested.

Jan 6, 2014 at 6:54 PM
I'm using configuration 1 frame.
In accordance with IEEE C37.118.2-2011 there are three configuration frames and I use configuration frame 1.
Jan 6, 2014 at 7:05 PM
Would expect CFG1 to work as well as CFG2...

If you want to send the CFG frame and a frame of data - I might be able to help you look for discrepancies in my spare time.