Depending on how the pool itself deals with these settings, it might cause the issue, but as far as I know, having two machines with the exact worker name online at the same time causes no problem, but it's possible that the worker had expired on the pool and no longer considered valid and thus the pool refuses it, this is why I like to use CKsolo pool as a second or third pool option since it requires no registration whatsoever, to me it's the most consistent pool, if it doesn't work, I rule out the pool problem.

Anyway, if the reg "crc error error" shows up again, it is still safe to assume that it's a connection issue, maybe your router/isp blocks the pool after a certain amount of packets if it shows up again, use DHCP settings on the miner, if it fails, use a public DNS like 8.8.8.8 and at last, try a different router.

I have received the same email, honestly, none of the gears mentioned here are worth sending to Bitmain for repair anymore, the cost of shipping outweighs the miner's price in most cases unless of course, you live next to their warehouse/facility, for me shipping from china is expensive, shipping TO china is even more expensive, the nearest location I could send to is the one in the Netherlands, and that still costs way too much, I usually either fix my own gears or simply get rid of them.



Maybe it's not just that they want to, they may have no choice, with 30% and more failure rate on these 17 series (Many still under warranty), and since Bitmain promised the large Chinese mining farms to even send their technicians to fix those miners on-site, they probably are running out of technicians, 30% of tens of thousands of gears to be fixed are enough to keep Bitmain busy.

I accidentally discovered that there are two hidden options in the S17 pro version, which are Voltage and Frequency.

To enable those, you need to inspect the "Miner Configuration page" and look for these lines:



All you need to do is remove the :none.



The hidden features will appear like so:



Available voltage values:


Available Frequency values
 

This will give you more abilities to play with your gear without having to use custom firmware, keep in mind that changing these values might cause harm to your miner if done wrong, don't change these settings unless you know what you are doing.

Nothing has changed since your last post.


You also have not mentioned anything regarding removing 2 hashboards and keeping only 1, so I can't help you troubleshoot anything unless you do that.


No, Apw3/7 have different voltage output, you can't do that.

If you want the recovery firmware you have to ask Bitmain to send it to you, although I am almost sure this has nothing to do with the firmware, this is most likely a bad PSU.

I think this particulate error:


Has to do with your internet connection or the pool itself, but since you tried a different pool then maybe a network problem, can you try to use DHCP settings and just to be safe, use a different ethernet cable.

Depending on how many gears you have, maybe overclocking them a bit will get your rate back to 6.8c ? also how long do you have for the warranty to be over? if not too long, maybe just void the warranty and send only the bad hashboard to Bitmain.

BTC

---

ETH:

---

LTC:

---

XMR:

---

اخي خالد ربما يمكنك اتباع طريقة مشابهة لنشر عنواين التحويل لتجنب الاخطاء عند النسخ وتسهيل التحويل من محافظ الموبايل.

Not sure what you mean by platform, if you are talking about the tools then you can browse their website, they have this tool works for all Bitmain Sha256 miners from T9 all the way to the latest 17 series.


Here is a video tutorial for Antminer S9 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WH7g61d90w&t=246s, fixing other versions will be nearly exactly the same, you will need the same tools, the only difference is that the chips models are different for certain miners, you can find all the tools in the video including the chips on their website or on aliexpress, the general tools can be found at any local shop near you, the chips and the fixture tools are special and only manufactured in China as far as I know.


Nop, you don't have to, the chances of all 4 sensors stop working are slim to nothing, this error happens because of a bad chip, you can refer to this topic for more details regarding the temp sensors

93 - mikeywith

Thanks.

كنت قد كتبت موضوع مشابه نوعا ما لهدا الموضوع https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5213124.0 الفرق الان ان الارقام تغيرت نظرا لان الدراسة توقفت في شهر 12- 2019 وسعر البتكوين في صعود منذ ذلك الوقت, موضوعك هدا فكرني بالموضوع الذي كتبته واعتقد انه يحتاج لتحديث, قمت في الموضوع بادراج دراسة في حال اشتريت مرة وحدة شهريا, اسبوعيا او يوميا, واعتقد نظرا لانه من الصعب ان تشتري يوميا, فربما تكون الدراسة المبنية على السعر الشهري او الاسبوعي اقرب للواقع من حيث التطبيق, مشكور جدا على هدا الموضوع اخ خالد.

This, without a doubt, is a bad hashboard, and by the way, boards showing 0 ASICs or anything less than what it should show (In this case 30 Asics) it's pretty normal to show all ASICs at some point, either after a reboot or when you move the board, here is a fun fact, many S9s boards I attempted to fix showed all Asics when I put the board on the table in a horizontal way, where the chips are sitting on the table, the moment I place them back in the miner vertically "standing", the board starts to act, sometimes it does mine well for a few days/weeks and then collapses again, sometimes by applying some pressure on the heatsinks I got some hashboards to work.

What you can conclude from the above is that some heatsinks/chips don't have perfect contact with the body of the hash board, so when they are cold, they seem to stick and contact, the board works, but when it gets hot, the heatsink/chip lose contact and errors start to show, in some cases and for whatever reason, the heatsink/chip does stick by itself and never show any errors again, but in most cases, it's only a matter of time till either the heatsink falls off the hashboard simply give you the same error.

So now my guess is that some chips/heatsinks on the hashboards are not in good contact, this is a common problem, in fact if you read the report coming in from the Chinese miners, one of the most common problem is what you are having now. If you want to investigate even further, you can buy Fluke 15b + f15b +, you can find it on Amazon too, but since you are going to be using the repair guide from zeusbtc, maybe it's a good idea to support them, but that's up to you of course, for now, you don't need the repair tools they sell, you can simply measure the resistance with the board unplugged, one or more chips will show some weird numbers, that will be a bad chip which needs replacement.

Replacing the chips is a whole different topic, but it's pretty doable if you have the tools, so if you plan on taking mining seriously and stacking more Bitmain gears, then it might be a good investment to buy all those tools, if not then just mine on with the board until it rest in peace.

Ok the last thing to try now would be using the old psu with the bad hashboard unplugged ( completely removed ) and there will be 2 outcomes

1 - The temp error disappears and the kernel log looks very different to the first time  = psu is good but the board causes the errors sometimes.

2-  Kernel log goes back to the unusal temp and voltage readings = psu is bad, the bad hash board made things even worse.

And regardless of what happens, it is now safe to assume the hashboard is bad, maybe not completely dead but bad, the fact it shows 22 asics (if that doesn't change) it means either chip 22 or 23 is bad, after the psu swap you can put it back, perform a few restarts and see if it still shows exactly 22 chips, i will guide you on how to troubleshoot the bad chip and if you are willing to invest in some tools, i will tell you where to start with replacing the chips and where to buy them.

Ignoring S19/S19 pro since we don't have any data about them yet, none of the gears you mentioned is reliable, miners are reporting 30% failure rate on the 17 series, Bitmain admitted the 17 series suck, some people got lucky and had a less failure rate, but whose words are more reliable, the Chinese large farms + Bitmain or a few random people on the internet like myself? it's up to you to decide.

I personally wouldn't be any gear before the halving, we are only a couple of days away, I will most certainly not buy an S19 at this price and even if price drops I will still wait a few months to hear about its robustness if it has a 30% RMA rate like the 17 series, I'll pass, I will be most likely buying MicroBT gears m21/m20 as they have proven to be more reliable despite the cost.

We don't know if he is actually typing that address without any spaces, or a space in the url itself, or maybe using a wrong password, anyone who seeks support must at least provide

1- A screenshot of the miner status page.
2- A screenshot of the pool settings (you can hide a few digits in the middle).
3- Kernel log.

Without these 3 and without a magic ball, I don't think it's possible to help anyone troubleshoot their miners, some people are too lazy to post these things and all they say is that "my miner isn't showing on the pool" well, good luck.

They can, and by doing so, you will void the warranty according to their reply to your question, you could still ask them, you lose nothing.

i think


mysticbitcoin, the problem with that you did is that you changed two aspects at once, now the results may be very misleading, was the bad board causing the issue, or was it the psu? you removed the hashboard and replaced the PSU, the logs changed, in the end, the results are not satisfying, kindly put the bad hash board back and keep the new/working PSU.

By the look of it, it seems like that is more than I need, I have yet to download the data I need and see if it fits in perfectly in my excel sheets, you did a great job.


It is there, he refers to it as ID > http://loyce.club/blockdata/id.txt


You are right indeed, but that difference in time is too small to be considered, updating the time in the block header probably takes a few milliseconds and since it doesn't affect the miner chances of solving the block and also keeping in mind that for miners' best interest the time is either exact or in the future (to make the best use of next difficulty adjustment) it's safe to say at least large mining pools make sure the time is rather in the future, not the past.

but really combining all these factors, small or large, makes the analysis a bit far from accurate, but I will do it either way.

Nop, can not start mining block N before everybody else knows about block N-1 ( ignoring network delays for certain nodes), block timestamps mean nothing in regards to the chain order. 



That is not what anybody else is thinking, you see having negative times between blocks only means 1 of 3

1- The clock is off (behind)
2-The clock of the miner who mined the previous block is off (ahead)
3- The miner doing that on purpose to

 a- hide the fact that they had enough time to include transactions but refused doing so. (this is what people are suspecting)

b- The miner wants to artificially increase the difficulty by tricking the protocol as if blocks were mined faster than they actually were (no logical reason for any miner to do so)

I am not good at C++ too, but I know it can't be 64 bit both singed and unsigned because 64 bits is 8 Bytes and thus it won't fit into the block header, so it must be 32, by quickly skimming the public class code


So no negatives here, only 0 and above, all the way to 4294967295 and that so happen to be equivalent to 02/07/2106 @ 6:28am (UTC) according to https://www.unixtimestamp.com/index.php, so in 86 years, some work and a fork will be needed to keep the blockchain going.

Given the context i think it is pretty clear what i mean is the quoted part, however you brought up an interesting point,
 the timestamps in the header are the seconds elapsed since 1st jan 1970, can unix timestamp be negative? I don't know.

Let's assume you managed to sequeze in a negative value and kept it at 4bytes, what will actually happen? Is there any piece in the code that specifically checks that?  The only issue is that timestamps - - timestamps will result in a timestamps that way far into the future, which then will be invalidated by this rule.

"Hope for the Best. Expect the worst".

I want nothing more than seeing BTC rise in value, but there is a reason why I think we are more likely to go down than up.


Don't count on your wallet to tell you the fees you need to pay, last night I was making a transaction and Coinomi suggested a bit over 70 sats per byte if I am not mistaken, I checked the unconfirmed transactions and figured out I could get away with just 5 sats, and it went through in no time, but hey, you should support miners, they are the backbone of BTC, tip them with high fees.

And why would any mod close a topic that is active and fits the board's rules and requirements? the fact that they haven't responded to your questions doesn't give any mod the right to close the topic, even if they personally tell you "We are not going to answer any of your questions" that will change nothing.

If you think they are doing something against the law - sue them. And if you think they are doing something against the community you can add a flag to their profile and ask DT members to support your flag.