BIST SIS 5 with EM2040 MKII

[TeoMat91]

Hi to everybody,
i'm Matteo and i use to work offshore for a private company as a surveyor.
I found this community because i was looking for some info about BIST on the Kongsberg EM 2040 MkII single TX dual RX Mbes system. The reason of my worry is because our system is quite old and its starting to create more and more problem.

• I'm playing with BIST PLOTTER tool try to get the plot of the TX channel.

• I'm following the procedure (i'm using SIS 5) but probably i'm missing something, the BIST from TX channel via RX is not producing any data.

• We are using also a telnet session but it's not recording anything even if, on the terminal it is shown the test carrying on. That is the outcome from the TX channel via RX:

TX channels via RX - EM 2040
Test of TX Channels (via RX):

WARNING:
TX array is probably OK, but analysis of test data could not
be completed due to the following cause:

• Return echo level too low.

In order to get reliable test results, the following conditions should be met:

• The vessel should not be moving.
• The seafloor should be flat and uniform.
• The water depth should be in the range 5 - 20 m.

Do you have any suggestion?

Matteo.

[kjerram]

Hi Matteo, thanks for reaching out - it's good to hear from the commercial survey world as well.

1. What are the conditions while you're running your BISTs? Do they meet the Kongsberg recommendations in the text you shared?
2. Do other BISTs pass (e.g., System Info, RX Channels, all the 'link' checks)?
3. Has Kongsberg been contacted for technical support? This is a good platform for informal support, but not a substitute for manufacturer support.

If you do get a passing TX channels result, there will be a couple limitations for plotting with our Python tools:

1. The EM2040 BIST format does not include individual TX channels information like the lower-frequency systems. If that test passes, it will simply say the TX Channels BIST is OK.
2. The BIST plotter was developed primarily for deepwater systems (single TX / single RX) and does not currently support dual-TX or dual-RX BIST formats.

Others with dual-RX systems have written scripts that break out the BIST text file into separate text files - one for each head - and then feed each of those to the plotter. We'd like to add that capacity to the plotter at some point, but this could give you an idea for a workaround for now (e.g., it could even be done manually in a text editor for small batches of tests).

Let us know what you find - resolving these kinds of errors is helpful for all of us!

[TeoMat91]

Hi kjerram,
thank you for your quick response.

1. What are the conditions while you're running your BISTs? Do they meet the Kongsberg recommendations in the text you shared?
Not for the moment d/t we are acquiring data, I did an attempt just to see if something was outputted and can be read by the BIST Plotter. Anyway, as we use to do the BIST among the other daily routine checks also in port, i noticed the same outcome.

2. Do other BISTs pass (e.g., System Info, RX Channels, all the 'link' checks)?
All BIST passed.

3. Has Kongsberg been contacted for technical support? This is a good platform for informal support, but not a substitute for manufacturer support.
Yep, perfectly aware about it. My goal was/is to get more info about these health checks because kongsberg is not releasing to much. =)

4. The EM2040 BIST format does not include individual TX channels information like the lower-frequency systems. If that test passes, it will simply say the TX Channels BIST is OK.
ok got it.

5. The BIST plotter was developed primarily for deepwater systems (single TX / single RX) and does not currently support dual-TX or dual-RX BIST formats.
That was my concern, ok thank you.

Thank you for your time.

[TeoMat91]

Hi,
we use to run a telnet session, for each PU, using the command: telnet [PU'S IP ADDRESS] -f [filename].txt . Sometime is happens that what is shown on the terminal is not recorded in the txt file. Do you guys know any other command in order to retrieve different information?

Thank you.

[kjerram]

Hi Matteo, all of that sounds good, and thank you for the updates - we'd be interested to hear the solution from Kongsberg.

I don't think I have seen any cases where there's a difference between the telnet window and what is logged in the text file. That is very strange!

[TeoMat91]

Hi Kjerram,
yep, same same. We'll repeat the test once we will come back in port or during a weather stand by.

Cheers.