Reverse engineering the Fluke WireView identifiers

[andtfoot]

After recently purchasing the Fluke LinkRunner AT 2000 (thanks to TopLoser  ), I looked at getting more of the cable identifiers. After seeing the price (>$400).... bugger that.
I thought I'd see if I could make my own.

I was fully expecting some termination resistors, and maybe an EEPROM with the identifier number stored.

Instead I got this (please excuse blurry phone pics; my camera is at work):






I scanned the circuit board and whipped up a quick overlay:




I'll be figuring out the circuit shortly.
In the meantime, has anyone got any ideas on how the Identifier number might be set on this? There are 1 to 6 available, and this is #1.

[amyk]

The value of the resistors, almost certainly.

[dfmischler]

If it isn't the resistors then the units could be wired differently to the connector (i.e. three diodes could provide a three bit binary code quite easily).

[mikeselectricstuff]

Once you have a schematic I suspect it will be fairly obvious which parts will be used to distinguish units - almost certainly either a resistor value or a ratio of 2 resistor values,

[mcinque]

>400$?  This is the evidence that some manufacturers tend to easily overprice their accessories not for their quality but only because their brands are well known. 

[andtfoot]

>400$?  This is the evidence that some manufacturers tend to easily overprice their accessories not for their quality but only because their brands are well known. 

I should clarify, the $410 is for a set of 5 (#2 to #6), but that still means $82 each... 


I tend to agree with the suggestions of the resistors being used to set the number. I've thrown together a schematic, but with no values yet. For some reason what measure doesn't seem to match the markings. e.g:
R1 (the one on the far right of the top picture) measures 25.07k, but marked 390 (39R) or 39C(?) maybe
R6 and R9 measure 10.6k, but are marked 1432 (14.3k)
R12 measure 3.836k, but is marked 57B (?)

I might pull a couple out of circuit to double check, but I wouldn't have thought these would be affected.

[mikeselectricstuff]

Letters are equivalent to digits : 57B = 572 = 5K7
Low readings will be due to the parallel combinations
A bit puzzled about the large R's, unless it's a test load for 48V PoE

[mcinque]

I should clarify, the $410 is for a set of 5 (#2 to #6), but that still means $82 each... 

Much better  But still overpriced!

[andtfoot]

Letters are equivalent to digits : 57B = 572 = 5K7
Low readings will be due to the parallel combinations
A bit puzzled about the large R's, unless it's a test load for 48V PoE

Rightio, thanks.
I wouldn't have thought a resistor such as R1 would be affected by any parallel combinations. I'll have to double check after I've had a nap...
The Linkrunner measures PoE, but I don't think it spits out any. That said, these identifiers appear to be used across a few products so maybe something else does.


If I were to have a hunch based on an uneducated guess  I'd say that the Schottky diodes are being used as comparators of sorts; the voltage dividers made by the resistors are used to set which diodes are forward biased.
Another possible theory is that the large resistors are being used as a precision reference (why else would you have series-parallel like that of the same value, apart from increasing power capacity). Maybe the comparison between this and the other resistors is done at the LinkRunner end.

First thing I'll probably do after figuring out values is breadboard it and see if I can get a copy working. Then I can tinker......

[tinhead]

Letters are equivalent to digits : 57B = 572 = 5K7
Low readings will be due to the parallel combinations
A bit puzzled about the large R's, unless it's a test load for 48V PoE

wrong, 57B ist not 5k7 but 3k83

http://www.talkingelectronics.com/projects/ResistorsMadeEasy/SMD-Resistors-EIA-Markings.html

[andtfoot]

Letters are equivalent to digits : 57B = 572 = 5K7
Low readings will be due to the parallel combinations
A bit puzzled about the large R's, unless it's a test load for 48V PoE

wrong, 57B ist not 5k7 but 3k83

Could you please explain how you got that so I can see if it matches with the rest?

Edit: Hmm, found something that explains it a bit:
www.marsport.org.uk/smd/res.htm

[TopLoser]

Letters are equivalent to digits : 57B = 572 = 5K7
Low readings will be due to the parallel combinations
A bit puzzled about the large R's, unless it's a test load for 48V PoE

wrong, 57B ist not 5k7 but 3k83

Could you please explain how you got that so I can see if it matches with the rest?

http://www.hobby-hour.com/electronics/eia96-smd-resistors.php

Glad you like your new LinkRunner!

[andtfoot]

Ok, here is the latest with the values read off the components. I've also rearranged it a bit to try and find patterns in how the components are connected.

[andtfoot]

I finally found some schottky diodes and sat down with the breadboard.

I don't have the correct value resistors, so I tried the closest values I could:


Not close enough apparently...


I'll get a bunch of the correct resistors and try again (and double check my breadboard mess  ).
I couldn't measure the capacitors (value too small for my DMM), so I took a punt with 22pF ceramics. Maybe this is a good excuse to pick up an LCR meter, not that the value should be important. 

[amyk]

Could all the stray capacitance/inductance of a breadboard be enough to upset it?

[andtfoot]

Could all the stray capacitance/inductance of a breadboard be enough to upset it?

It's possible. I did connect the original module through the breadboard and it worked fine there, but it's obviously a lot neater.
I was hoping whatever signals it uses would be quite robust, given it may have to go ~100m of cable in normal usage. Some of the resistors are a fair bit out, so it can't hurt to try that first.

[Rerouter]

Just to pretty it up if you get anywhere with it, heres my take on the circuit,

[andtfoot]

Just to pretty it up if you get anywhere with it, heres my take on the circuit,

Thanks. The general layout looks like it will be easier to find patterns with. 
It looks like I'll probably concentrate on the 4 right-hand resistors (R4, R11, R12, R15) to start with.
One small error though, is the missing RJ-45 shield and how the last diode connects to it.


On other news....

Like a bought one! 
I started by compacting it all and shortening the wires; no good. Then swapped the resistors out for combinations that got me within 100R or so.
It means I can churn out a bunch of #1 units if I feel like.

Next step will be grab some scope shots, and start swapping values. I might also disconnect a few diodes one at a time to see if them conducting or not is determining the ID.

[andtfoot]

First bit of random discovery:

I can get the ID to change from #1 to #5 if I disconnect this wire going to pin 3 of D2.

[andtfoot]

First scope shots, with ground on pin 8, and probe on pin 1.
Idle, there seem to be random pulses (which aren't there when the tester is turned off). Could be something to do with the network testing side of things.


This is when doing a test:

[Rerouter]

based on the arrangement, try measuring across 4 and 5, i would imagine that should just be a fixed voltage,

(also i mistook that 9 to be 8, so the diode that curls around the right on my diagram is the diode to case)

[andtfoot]

based on the arrangement, try measuring across 4 and 5, i would imagine that should just be a fixed voltage,

(also i mistook that 9 to be 8, so the diode that curls around the right on my diagram is the diode to case)

Measuring with probe on 4, ground on 5.

No random pulses (which makes sense if it is a network testing signal).

[andtfoot]

I've had a fiddle around, swapping the 4 resistors going to the diodes, reversing the diodes, changing value of that series/parallel resistor set, etc.
No luck apart from that #1 -> #5 when disconnecting a wire thing (probably just coincidental) I posted earlier.

To be honest, I'm pretty lost where to start looking or what to try. Has anyone got any ideas they could throw at me please?


I've also ordered a batch of circuit boards from ITead matching the existing one. First time I have done that, so at least it's still a good learning experience. 

[Rerouter]

try moving the diodes connection from 6 to 7

and / or R4's connection to pin 6,

my head is screaming at me about the non symmetry in the diodes center connection

[tonyv]

Hi AndtFoot !

I'm also an owner of a LRAT2000, it is an outstanding piece of equipment. I also share your thoughts about that those little WireView adapters are very expensive, and actually overpriced.

I also own a Microscanner2. Its included cap/lid is also the receiver, if used with the LRAT2000 it is detected a WireView1, i will extract it and photograph it for you so you can compare.

But i discovered something, the integrated reception port of the LRAT2000 (the lateral RJ45 port) is detected as Wireview 7 with the Microscanner2 !!!

I think that you should open your unit and verify that portion of the circuit, i think that you may find a clue there.

Hope that this project is still alive !

[andtfoot]

Well... after a loooong time, I've finally got around to looking at this again. Thanks for the suggestions in the meantime.

I ended pulling apart the main unit (goodbye warranty ) to look at its loopback circuit.
It appears to be identical with the exception of R12, R11, R4 and R15 below (unit #1). They are double the value in the loopback.


This triggered a memory of a pattern I'd noticed earlier in unit #1:
The ratio of the the resistor leading to the diodes to the other resistor(s) that the diode is across is 1:5
e.g. R12 * 5 = R2,
R4 * 5 = (R3 + R8 + R5),
etc.
The ratio of the loopback unit is then obviously 1:10.

So I've ordered a bunch of resistors to suit ratios 1 through to 10; more experimentation to follow once these are received.
In the meantime, production of identifiers using parts I already have has begun...... 

[menkelis]

Just passing on some information, might be useful. I have a Fluke Lanmeter 683 and asked user Khashoggi
who also has/had a 683 a question on ID plugs (search for 'Lanmeter 630'  in Test Equipment).

I am happy to report I have identifiers 0,1,2,3,6 (similar small form factor)
And identifiers 8,9,11,12 which are double-width of the other
small form factor identifiers.

You appear to be using the T568A wiring so that is what I will
use. I'm using a Fluke 45 for these measurements and am rounding
from the thousands to the tenths-

ID 0
1-2 18.7K
2-3 16.6K
3-4 15.8K
4-5 14.1K
5-6 12.7K
6-7 11.2K
7-8 10.0K

ID 1
1-2 180.7K
2-3 80.7K
3-4 99.9K
4-5 180.6K
5-6 74.7K
6-7 INF
7-8 INF

ID 2
1-2 182.2K
2-3 82.2K
3-4 100.0K
4-5 182.2K
5-6 75.0K
6-7 INF
7-8 INF

ID 3
1-2 183.4K
2-3 83.5K
3-4 100.0K
4-5 183.4K
5-6 75.0K
6-7 INF
7-8 INF

ID 6
1-2 188.7K
2-3 88.7K
3-4 100.0K
4-5 188.7K
5-6 75.0K
6-7 INF
7-8 INF

ID 8
1-2 191.7K
2-3 91.2K
3-4 100.0K
4-5 191.7K
5-6 75.1K
6-7 INF
7-8 INF

ID 9
1-2 194.2K
2-3 94.2K
3-4 100.0K
4-5 194.2K
5-6 75.2K
6-7 INF
7-8 INF

ID 11
1-2 205.5K
2-3 105.3K
3-4 100.2K
4-5 205.5K
5-6 75.3K
6-7 INF
7-8 INF

ID 12
1-2 224.9K
2-3 125.2K
3-4 99.7K
4-5 224.9K
5-6 75.1K
6-7 INF
7-8 INF

[menkelis]

WireView Wiremapper Use and Interoperability - EtherScope
 
EtherScope ships with a far end adapter 1 labeled WireView.
 
The WireView far end adapter is used on installed cable links to obtain wiremap results.
 
EtherScope reads the adapter ID and reports the value on the Cable Verification screen.
 
Shown below are the wiremap adapters supplied with products:
•OneTouch
•OptiView Integrated Network Analyzer (Series I and Series II only)
•EtherScope
•LANMeter

Cable identifiers shown are all interoperable.

[andtfoot]

Some success! 

Tried a ratio of 6 first up (first number I pulled out of the bag of resistors).
No good.

Tried a ratio of 3, which led to...

ID of 2 found! 

Further testing of other ratios to follow........

[andtfoot]

Further testing of other ratios to follow........

Results of the rest of the ratios I bought resistors for are in:

ID	Ratio
1	5 (measured and based on original)
2	3
3	2
Loop	9
Loop	10 (measured and based on original)

When I get some time again I'll try some ratios between the whole numbers (e.g. 1.5).

[menkelis]

Well it's bee a while, and I just acquired a Fluke 620 LAN Cable Meter with the optional eight
cable-id plugs.

They look exactly like the cable-id plug that came with my  Fluke Lanmeter 683, but unfortunately
they are not the same beast.

The Lanmeter 683 reports mis-wired  ID when trying out the 620 cable-id plugs.
Trying the 'cable map' function reports open's and mis-wires on these id plugs.

The Fluke 620 reports invalid 'ohms' when trying out the Lameter cable-id plugs in it.

Not a 100% lost cause, as I can still use the 620 cable-id plugs as intended with the
620 cable meter for ID'ing unknown/unmarked cables.

[menkelis]

I now have a official set of 0 - 6 "cable identifier" plugs for my 683.
I opened up the ID #1 plug to see what it was like inside and have attached
a photo of it.

[coreyspeed]

I was wondering if anybody ever got any further on this project, I have just purchased a Fluke linkrunner, and would like the extra remote's, it looks like I can make ID's 1-3 and then try and produce the other values.

Also would you be able to provide the values used for ID 2 and 3 for resistors R12,R11,R4,R15. My Maths doesn't appear to be getting anywhere near the values for wireview 1

[coreyspeed]

Got hold of the Fluke Microscanner at work today and the WireMap top on the unit comes apart very easily.

Measured the capacitors and they read at 22pf.

Took some pictures appears to have more components then the listed on this thread.

[kamcm]

Coreyspeed, the item you pictured is a main Wiremap adapter instead of a WireView identifiers.

http://www.amazon.com/Fluke-Networks-CIQ-WM-Wiremap-Adapter/dp/B00094OWGA




======
May you please post more clear pictures with it?
I want to make one on my own. 
I recently purchased a Fluke CableIQ tester off eBay, but it didn't come with a Wiremap adapter.

Thanks

[coreyspeed]

Hi

Yes this is correct, I have a WireView number 1 as well, both are ID's appear as 1 on the units. I believe the extra components maybe for the F-Connector.

I am going to create a schematic this weekend to see how they compare to each other

Would be interested to know how the original poster removed the casing from the WireView with out damaging the casing, mine appears to be stuck in their.

[coreyspeed]

It  appears that the red section in the picture is R1 and R12 this is only connected to the F connector and therefore ID's this as number 1.

[timofonic]

I'm really intrigued about this. I didn't know there was so much tools for cablee impedance and such.

Could someone provide a layman introduction or  URLs about all this? Please, I'm curious...

[turbotim]

Hi There,
I know its been a long time, but did anyone manage to crack this one?

[andtfoot]

Hi There,
I know its been a long time, but did anyone manage to crack this one?

It's on my very long 'rainy day' list, but the 4 IDs I figured out of 7(?) possible is enough for my purposes so it's relatively low priority at the moment.

[sayit]

CableIQ wiremap tested
RK45 8pin
attach cable with WM Autotest->Port or cabling short Autotest not available
not join WM Autotest-> without wire map test OK
DIAG—>Continuity test all OK
Blinking  port light test OK
Telco 2pin (4-5)
attach cable with WM Autotest-> not find wire map continue no WM-> then yes->cable length ok

COAX
AUTO TEST MAP ID are “?” other OK

teardown main unit without LCD unit and checking use microscope
clean PCB board resolder any parts..
same work wiremap unit
But a not changes result.

Whats happen? please your help.

http://www.chitosecity.com/flukes/CIQ.pdf

[ben_r_]

Has anyone confirmed that this circuit is the same as the Remote IDs Fluke makes for the MicroScanner2?

[cmu2017]

Does anyone know how they check if some wires are crossed?

[jasom]

Hello, have someone photo of Fluke Microscanner2?

I have one with damaged one zener diode but I have not information about that model. (VR1 position)

[cmu2017]

What are the values of the diodes and capacitors on the  schematic made by user andtfoot

[andtfoot]

What are the values of the diodes and capacitors on the  schematic made by user andtfoot

For the diodes I used the Broadcom HDMS-2802-TR1G schottky.
https://au.element14.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&langId=43&urlRequestType=Base&partNumber=1056834&storeId=10184
I don't how important the actual value/part is, just that it's a schottky.

For the capacitor, I think I used a 10nF or 1nF ceramic; I can't check at the moment though to confirm. I don't think I could ever actually measure it from the original.

[cmu2017]

Ok, thanks 

[electroboy]

Fluke Main Wiremap
Hello Andfoot, I have a Fluke Networks Cable IQ qualification tester with this main wiremap, but it has a problem, the tester not recognizes it, when I connect it at far end it appears like nothing connected. The problem comes out because it got connected to a POE Ethernet switch by a partner at work.  My question is? Do you have the circuit for this main Wiremap? I also need help with this component, which is marked as WK3 and is SOT-23 package, CG marking code 3 pins SOT-23, I can’t find it and I don’t know if it is a transistor or a diode. Thanks a lot

[KuchateK]

Hello, have someone photo of Fluke Microscanner2?

Just dropping pic of the VR1 if you still need it. I have same rev on the pcb as you.

Quick measurement: 3.3v on the plus side relatively to battery negative terminal. Let me know if you need more measurements.

[kripton2035]

[jasom]

KuchateK: Thanks so much, I have still this problem so now I can try to repair it. I will say if it works or no.

[jasom]

Hello, I have a new problem .Can anyone tell me what is circled smd on picture? Sign on it is "5T8 RRN"

Thanks

[kripton2035]

could you please check between the two schematics below.
there is a mix between pins 9,8 and 1 the schematics are not the same.
I tried both of them and none works for ID#1
can someone please confirm which one is the good one ?
thanks.

[kripton2035]

I can get the ID#1 on the fluke nettool 2 display, but it tells me wires 1-2-3-4 are not wired correctly.

[t523993]

I look for scheme for wiremap adpater to Fluke Microscanner I. Who have this scheme?

[hopto]

Hello. Can you take photos of the microscanner2 and CableIQ printed circuit boards  from all sides?

[martonbaksa]

Hey y'all,
You mention these WireView identifiers, are those compatible with the OneTouch Series II. According to the manual the part number for those is: N6600/RA but those don't look the same as yours, but I read on eBay that the newer ones are compatible with most older fluke units. I am not sure if I want to go down the road of making my own off these schematics unsure of if it will work.
Thanks,
Marton

[Nifty]

LinkRunner WIREMAP schematic
by Lawrence Billson
upverter.com/design/lawrencebillson/4ae5e357c2db7191/linkrunner-wiremap/

[ediaz]

Will be great if somebody share the info about this to be able to replicate the process and create new ids..

@andtfoot can you share the gerbers and the lasted info? if you can, thanks a lot I will post my summary here :-D

[ahrenolog]

Hello colleagues . The following analyzer came in for repair - Fluke Networks NetTool Series 2. There were charging problems. They asked me to make identifiers, I worked in the evenings for a week, that's what happened. https://youtu.be/v9sYhZtopYk

[jasom]

Hello, its some time but, if You still can do some measurements on this device. Can You please check what voltage is on U13 on pin 6 (Vin) when You press start button?
I have 3.2V
Thank You very much

[morphis]

@andtfoot Thank you for your initial work with the schematic.

I've been needing to repair my ID3 and ID4 WireView Cable ID units (Broken tabs).

So as I had to de-pot them I have some more info, and I've also measured the loopback inside my LinkRunner AT-2000.

Resistors R2, R3, R5-10, R13, R14 are the same values for each ID and the internal loopback

The internal loopback only has a single 14K3 (R4) between pin 4 and 5, Where as the Cable ID units have 4 resistors (R6-9) in the parallel-series arrangement.
Its also missing the pin-9 shield test components (R1, D5, C5).

So the only components that set the ID are R4, R11, R12 and R15

	ID0	ID1	ID3	ID4
R4	4.32K	8.66K	21.5K	34.8K
R11	1.69K	3.4K	8.45K	13.7K
R12	1.91K	3.83K	9.53K	15.4K
R15	2.15K	4.32K	10.7K	17.4K

Has anyone else have values for R4, R11, R12 and R15 from other IDs?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16VslfwP_YgZnVYq4AyuuF9MA8dwQInBXGkP8JXn2l00/edit?usp=sharing

[javier.lopez.vlc]

Hi, I know this topic is long overdue, but I cant find a schematic to replicate the Fluke Cableiq WireView adapter.

Has anyone gotten any information on this?

They want to charge me more than €200 for a piece of plastic and two connectors. An abuse.

Thank you for your time.

[AVENZ]

  Gracias por tu aportacion, fue de ayuda para hacer lo mismo en un equipo UNI-T UT685B. El texto impreso en el PCB marco 2 capacitores (C79 & C1) pero son resistencias realmente.
Intentare fabricar ID's con la informacion del Post pues hay demasiadas similitudes de diseño.
El UT685B no cuenta con ID's a la venta por el momento (Espero estar en lo correcto).
Saludos a todos.

CX=1nF
D=Diodo Schottky

[AVENZ]

Ya mande a fabricar la PCB, monte los componentes y fue todo un exito. Ahora toca fabricar otros ID`S.