Skill matching for industrial production machine control
阅读说明:本技术 用于工业生产机器控制的技能匹配 (Skill matching for industrial production machine control ) 是由 安德拉斯·瓦罗 古斯塔沃·阿尔图罗·基罗斯·阿拉亚 帕特里克·莱森 弗兰克·勒洛夫斯 彼得· 于 2018-08-09 设计创作,主要内容包括:在工业控制中提供自动技能匹配。将控制器(16)和机器(11)的接口(12、17)和/或生产过程(13、18)进行匹配。接口(12、17)的匹配链接除可选参数以外的参数以检查不兼容性。生产过程(13、18)的匹配使用机器(11)的过程(13)与控制器(16)的过程(18)的叉积来检查不兼容性。技能检查指导手动确认兼容性,从而减少停机时间并减少工程或编程时间。由于自动化的技能匹配,机器(11)更可能采用控制器(16)正确地操作。(Automatic skill matching is provided in industrial control. The controller (16) is adapted to the interfaces (12, 17) of the machine (11) and/or the production processes (13, 18). The matching of the interfaces (12, 17) links parameters other than optional parameters to check for incompatibilities. The matching of the production processes (13, 18) uses the cross product of the process (13) of the machine (11) and the process (18) of the controller (16) to check for incompatibilities. The skill check guides manual validation of compatibility, thereby reducing downtime and reducing engineering or programming time. Due to automated skill matching, the machine (11) is more likely to operate correctly with the controller (16).)
1. A system for skill matching in industrial control, the system comprising:
a production machine (11) in an industrial production line (10), the production machine (11) having a production machine interface (12) responsive to a plurality of first parameters and having a production machine process (13) responsive to first information;
a controller (16) of the production machine (11), the controller (16) having a controller interface (17) responsive to a plurality of second parameters and having a controller process (18) responsive to second information; and
a matching processor (14, 19) configured to first match the first and second parameters and to second match synchronization of the production machine process (13) to the controller process (18) based on an exchange of the first and second information between the controller (16) and the production machine (11), the matching processor (14, 19) being configured to indicate an incompatibility of the production machine (11) with the controller (16) based on the first match, the second match or both the first and second matches.
2. A system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the production machine (11) comprises a machine in the manufacturing process.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the controller (16) comprises a supervisor.
4. The system of claim 1, wherein the matching processor (14, 19) is part of the production machine (11).
5. The system of claim 1, wherein the matching processor (14, 19) is part of the controller (16).
6. The system according to claim 1, wherein the first and second parameters comprise a name, a value and a unit, respectively, and wherein the matching processor (14, 19) is configured to perform the first matching based on a compatibility of the name and unit of the first parameter with the name and unit of the second parameter.
7. The system of claim 6, wherein the compatibility is based on all of the first parameters linked to all of the second parameters except for at least one of the first parameters and the second parameters that are marked as optional.
8. The system of claim 6, wherein the first match is for the production machine interface (12).
9. The system according to claim 6, wherein the matching processor (14, 19) is configured to perform the first matching based on at least one substitution of names of the first and second parameters, names of linked variables, units of the first and second parameters, and names based on the linked variables and/or units.
10. The system according to claim 9, wherein the matching processor (14, 19) is configured to store an indication of at least one alternative.
11. The system of claim 6, wherein the match processor (14, 19) is configured to indicate the incompatibility as a missing name, value or unit, a mismatch in name, value or unit, or a combination thereof.
12. The system of claim 1, wherein the production machine process (13) and the controller process (18) comprise a step and a synchronization point, respectively, the synchronization point of the production machine (11) being responsive to the first information from the controller (16) and the synchronization point of the controller (16) being responsive to the second information from the production machine (11), and wherein the matching processor (14, 19) is configured to perform the second matching for synchronization based on the step and the synchronization point.
13. The system of claim 12, wherein the matching processor (14, 19) is configured to perform the second matching as a synchronous cross product of the controller process (18) and the production machine process (13).
14. The system of claim 13, wherein the matching processor (14, 19) is configured to perform the synchronization cross product based on a start of the steps of the production machine process (13) and the controller process (18) and a marking of a link between the steps as an internal or synchronization point.
15. The system of claim 13, wherein the match processor (14, 19) is configured to indicate the incompatibility based on the second match in which the synchronization cross product does not include one of the synchronization points of the production machine process (13) or the controller process (18) or does not include an endpoint of the production machine process (13) or the controller process (18).
16. A method for skill matching in an industrial control system, the method comprising:
comparing (72), by a processor (14, 19), a process model of a controllable industrial device with a process model of a supervisor of the controllable industrial device; and
based on the comparison, identifying (74), by the processor (14, 19), an incompatibility of the process model of the controllable industrial device with the process model of the supervisor.
17. The method of claim 16, wherein the comparing (72) comprises: generating a synchronization map of cross products of the process model of the controllable industrial device and the process model of the supervisor.
18. The method of claim 16, wherein the identifying (74) comprises: identifying the incompatibility as a point of synchronization of the process model of the controllable industrial device or the process model of the supervisor and/or identifying a termination of the process model of the controllable industrial device or the process model of the supervisor.
19. A method for skill matching in an industrial control system, the method comprising:
comparing (62), by a processor (14, 19), a parameter of an interface of a controllable industrial device with a parameter of an interface of a supervisor of the controllable industrial device; and
based on the comparison, identifying (64), by the processor (14, 19), an incompatibility of the interface of the controllable industrial device with the interface of the supervisor.
20. The method of claim 19, wherein the comparing (62) comprises: -comparing (62) the name, variable, value and unit of an interface of a controllable industrial device with the name, variable, value and unit of an interface of a supervisor-supervisor of said controllable industrial device, and wherein said identifying (64) comprises identifying (64) the name, variable, value or unit of an interface (12, 17) missing in one of the interfaces (12, 17) or the name, variable, value or unit of an interface (12, 17) having a different unit between the interfaces (12, 17).
Technical Field
The present embodiments relate to skill matching for controlling industrial production machines. A machine is added to the manufacturing process, such as for retrofitting, replacement, upgrading, or as part of an initial installation. The machine should be controlled by a controller. For proper operation, the information exchanged between the machine and the controller is matched. The information to be exchanged includes interface information (e.g., parameters) and process information (e.g., synchronization of functions). The functionality required by the production line controller is matched to the functionality provided by the machine.
Background
The matching of requested and provided functions is done manually. A programmer may take hundreds of engineering hours to ensure that interfaces and processes match. In some retrofit, repair or replacement situations, matching results in hours or days of downtime due to hidden parameter and skill incompatibilities.
Disclosure of Invention
By way of introduction, the preferred embodiments described below include methods, systems, and computer readable media for automatic skill matching in industrial control. The interfaces and/or production processes of the controller and the machine are matched. The matching link parameters of the interface to check for incompatibilities. The optional parameters may be matched or considered, but are optionally matched. The matching of production processes uses the cross product of machine processes and controller processes to check for incompatibilities. The skill check guides manual validation of compatibility, thereby reducing downtime and reducing engineering or programming time. Due to automated skill matching, the machine is more likely to operate properly with the controller.
In a first aspect, a system for skill matching in industrial control is provided. The production machine is in an industrial production line. The production machine has a production machine interface responsive to a plurality of first parameters and has a production machine process responsive to the first information. The controller controls the production machine. The controller has a controller interface responsive to a plurality of second parameters and has a controller process responsive to the second information. The matching processor is configured to first match the first and second parameters and second match the synchronization of the production machine process with the controller process based on the exchange of the first and second information between the controller and the production machine. The matching processor is configured to indicate an incompatibility of the production machine with the controller based on the first match, the second match, or both the first match and the second match.
In a second aspect, a method for skill matching in an industrial control system is provided. The processor compares a process model of the controllable industrial device with a process model of a supervisor of the controllable industrial device. The processor identifies an incompatibility of the process model of the controllable industrial device with the process model of the supervisor based on the comparison.
In a third aspect, a method for skill matching in an industrial control system is provided. The processor compares parameters of the interface of the controllable industrial device with parameters of an interface of a supervisor of the controllable industrial device. The processor identifies an incompatibility of the interface of the controllable industrial device with the interface of the supervisor based on the comparison.
The present invention is defined by the following claims, and nothing in this section should be taken as a limitation on those claims. Other aspects and advantages of the invention are discussed below in conjunction with the preferred embodiments and may be claimed later, either individually or in combination.
Drawings
The components and figures are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating the principles of the invention. Moreover, in the figures, like reference numerals designate corresponding parts throughout the different views.
FIG. 1 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a system for skill matching in industrial control;
FIGS. 2A and 2B illustrate examples of interface matching;
FIG. 3 shows an example output of the match from FIG. 2A;
FIG. 4 illustrates an example match of a production process;
FIG. 5 shows an example output of the matching from FIG. 4;
FIG. 6 is a flow diagram of an embodiment of a method for a skill matching interface in an industrial control system; and
FIG. 7 is a flow diagram of an embodiment of a method for a skill matching process in an industrial control system.
Detailed Description
Skill matching is performed automatically for the production machine. To simplify and speed up the replacement of machines or components in a production line, skill matching is used to detect any incompatibilities between production machines and the reasons that may lead to incompatibilities. Enhancements derived from logic programming and/or graph algorithms for the synchronized cross products of finite state automata unify to provide two examples of the goals of how to automatically perform incompatibility checks.
The task of skill matching can be divided into interface signature matching and sync matching. The machine provides a variety of functions that can be controlled by a supervisor. If machine-readable descriptions of the required functions from the supervisor side and the provided functions from the machine side are available, the time and resources required to find compatibility issues can be reduced by using interface signatures and sync matching.
The process models of the supervisor and the machine may be matched to each other using a synchronous cross product. The result of this match reveals incompatibilities with respect to synchronization and termination, and thus process incompatibilities can be resolved. Some incompatibilities may be resolved automatically, such as by adding links to matching end conditions in the process.
Enhanced unification for functionality in the process model can be used to match parameters requested by the supervisor and process parameters provided and accepted by the machine through interface signature matching. Interface matching produces an incompatibility list. Some of these incompatibilities may be addressed automatically by converters or adapters, minimizing the need for manual engineering.
Currently, matching is done manually, which means that a large number of parameters and synchronization steps are checked by engineers without enhancing the unity or synchronization cross product. In the event of a failure, upgrade, or other cause, skill matching based on enhanced uniform and/or synchronized cross products may significantly reduce the time to replace machines in a production line with new machines. This functionality may be integrated in the firmware of the supervisor or in the control software of the machine. The machine or controller operates in an improved manner due to skill matching. The nature of the machine interface can result in the need for skill matching.
FIG. 1 illustrates one embodiment of a system for skill matching in industrial control. When a
The system includes a
The system implements the method of fig. 6, 7, or another method. Fig. 2 and 3 illustrate example skill matching using enhanced unification, and fig. 4 and 5 illustrate example skill matching using a process of synchronized cross products.
The
The
The production machine interface 12 is responsive to a plurality of parameters. Each parameter has a name and a unit of measure. The parameter may be a constant or a variable. In one embodiment, a parameter includes a unit and a value or range of values, and may be expressed as a constant (literal) or a variable. In the example of fig. 2A, the parameters of the interface 12 are minimum and maximum temperature units, oven temperature units, heater temperature units, and dryer temperature units. The units of measurement are degrees fahrenheit and celsius. In the example of fig. 2B, the parameters of the interface 12 are minimum and maximum temperature units, set point temperature, timer, auto shut down, and power. The units of measurement are degrees fahrenheit, seconds, minutes, and watts. The "%" symbol designates a parameter as a variable. The parameter with a variable includes a variable name. Additional, different, or less information (i.e., characteristics) may be provided for each parameter. Additional, different, or fewer parameters may be provided.
The interface 12 is used to communicate with an interface 17 of the
The
Fig. 4 shows an example of a
The
The
The control interface 17 is formed from and/or responsive to a plurality of parameters. Each parameter has a name, a value, a range of values, and/or a unit of measure. The parameter may be a constant or a variable. In the example of fig. 2A, the parameters of interface 17 are minimum and maximum temperature units, oven temperature units, heater temperature units, and dryer temperature units. No units of measure are provided, but may be provided. The "%" symbols represent variables within the parameter definition. The parameter with a variable includes a variable name. Fig. 2B shows other parameters and corresponding definitions, including usage values. Additional, different, or fewer information may be provided for each parameter. Additional, different, or fewer parameters may be provided.
The control interface 17 is used for communication with the machine interface 12 of the
The
Fig. 4 shows an example of the
For skill matching of the interfaces 12, 17 and/or the machines and control processes 13, 18, the matching processor is configured to perform the matching. To install a
The matching processor is configured by firmware, software, and/or hardware. Instructions for configuring the matching processor are stored in memory 15, memory 20, and/or another memory. The matching processor performs the compare and identify actions of fig. 6 and/or 7 or other actions based on the configuration.
In one embodiment, the matching processor performs interface signature matching. The parameters of the control interface 17 are matched to the parameters of the machine interface 12. Each machine function is described by a parameter. As shown in fig. 2A and 2B, the parameters describe the requirements of controller 16 (left hand side) or the capabilities of the functions of machine 11 (right hand side). Interface signature matching matches parameters requested by
The interface skill matching is based on the compatibility of the names and units of the parameters of the control interface 17 with those of the machine interface 12. Other characteristics may be matched. In the example of FIG. 2A, the name of the parameter is used to match the name of the sum unit of the linked variable. In the example of FIG. 2B, the name of the parameter is used to match the name of the linking variable, value, and unit.
The skill matching of the interfaces 12, 17 uses enhanced uniformity. Instead of unifying between logical programming expressions, unification is made between the controller interface 17 and the machine interface 12. The unification employed in the logic programming system is modified to unify between the interfaces 12, 17 in the industrial control. Enhancements include changes to rules or instructions used in matching, such as to account for machine interface programming and/or parameters that do not necessarily match.
Each parameter may be uniquely identified by its name. All parameters should have matching pairs on both interfaces 12, 17 based on their identifiers (names). Otherwise, an incompatible error of the parameter is signaled, providing an identifier. A parameter defined as "optional" does not trigger an incompatibility error because no matched pair is required. In the example of fig. 2A and 2B, each parameter name in each of the interfaces 12, 17 is paired between the interfaces. There are no parameter names identified as optional. Incompatibility is not indicated based on name matching.
For matching, variables are uniquely identified by variable names. In the example of fig. 2A, "%" represents variables in the parameter definition. Other tags, whether embedded in a name or stored separately, may be used. Matching parameters from one interface 12 or 17 means that the parameter information (e.g. name, unit) matches the corresponding information of the matched parameters on the other interface 17 or 12. In the case where a value is provided, the variable is replaced with the value to obtain a match. Variable and/or unit names are used instead. A variable may be replaced with another variable or a specific value. Variables may be replaced with any number of other variables. A variable may be replaced by one and only one constant. Constants having the same value are equivalent. A constant matches another constant having the same value, otherwise a mismatch will occur.
In the example of fig. 2A, the parameter name minimum temperature unit in the control interface 17 is linked to the same name parameter in the machine interface 12. This parameter in the control interface 17 is the variable "% TempU". This parameter in the machine interface 12 is a unit of measurement- "degrees fahrenheit". Based on the substitution rules, "% TempU" is substituted for "degrees fahrenheit. Since the parameter "maximum temperature unit" is also associated with the variable "% TempU", degree fahrenheit "is assigned to the" maximum temperature unit ". Based on the link parameter name, the "maximum temperature unit" in the interface 17 is linked with the "maximum temperature unit" in the interface 12. Based on the substitution rules, the variable "% SPU" in "maximum temperature units" in the control interface 12 is substituted with "degrees Fahrenheit". Whereas "% SPU" is replaced with "Fahrenheit", the "heater temperature unit" of the control interface 17 is replaced with "Fahrenheit". By linking "heater temperature units" between the interfaces 12, 17, the variable "% HeaterUnit" is replaced with "degrees fahrenheit". Likewise, the parameter name "oven temperature units" in both interfaces will result in "degrees celsius" being substituted for "% oveninunit". "% OvenUnit" is also linked to the parameter "dryer temperature units", which corresponds to both the variables "% OvenUnit" and "% HeaterUnit". These two variables are replaced by "degrees fahrenheit" and "degrees celsius". Since a constant cannot have more than one value, there is incompatibility based on substitution. Fig. 2A shows a mapping of units in
In the example of fig. 2B, constants and units are included in the parameter definition. Parameter name minimum temperature in control interface 17 is linked to the same name parameter in machine interface 12. This parameter in the control interface 17 has two linking variables "% TempU" and "% MinT". The parameters in machine interface 12 are units of measurement- "degrees fahrenheit" and a value of "200". Based on the substitution rules, "% TempU" was substituted with "degrees fahrenheit" and "% MinT" was substituted with "200". Since the parameter "maximum temperature" is also associated with the variable "% TempU", degree fahrenheit "is assigned to" maximum temperature ". Based on the link parameter name, the "maximum temperature" in the interface 17 is linked with the "maximum temperature" in the interface 12. The variable "% MaxT" in interface 17 matches the value "500" from interface 12. The set point temperature parameter of interface 17 matches the set point temperature of interface 12. Based on the replacement rule, the variable "% SPU" of the "set point temperature" in control interface 12 is replaced with "degrees Fahrenheit", which was previously assigned to "% TempU". By linking the "timer" between the interfaces 12, 17, the variable "% TimeU" is then replaced with "seconds". The "auto-off" parameters of the two interfaces match in units ("minutes") and a value of 30 is assigned to the variable "% AutoOff" based on the matching rules. The "power" parameters of the two interfaces 12, 17 match, including the value "300" and the unit "watt". There is no incompatibility and thus a match indicates that the interfaces 12, 17 are compatible. Fig. 2B shows a mapping of units in
In the case of substitution, substitution information is stored for the variables, allowing the substitution of any variable to be tracked. A variable that is replaced with another variable will hold a replacement history, replacement variable, and/or constant for the other variable. This storage allows for tracking substitutions by various constants and/or variables for a given variable or constant. In the event that a variable signals an error, the stored alternative trace will provide an association history if the variable has been associated with a constant and matched with a different constant. The association history contains the current (or otherwise incorrect) association or stores the conflict (i.e., two conflicting associations). In the example of fig. 2A, one parameter has an associated error due to a mismatch between the values assigned to the variables% oveninunit and% HeaterUnit. Retaining the replacement history may display detailed information about the occurrence of incompatibility.
As a final step, the list of all variables in each interface 12, 17 not marked as optional is checked for association. Each variable should be assigned a unit and/or a value. For each variable that has no associated constant or unit, an error is issued. Other rules and/or checks may be used.
The
This output is used for manual correction. The programmer may review and correct the programming of
In one embodiment, the matching processor performs synchronous matching. The
The matching checks for synchronization based on the steps (e.g., functions or process actions) of the
Fig. 4 shows an example. The matching may be between more than two devices. The matching between different machines may be routed through
Given the map, this matching uses the synchronous cross product of the
Any process for generating a cross product may be used. In one example, the cross product graph picks the start of the control process 18 (left supervisor graph) and the start of the machine process 13 (right machine graph) and creates new graph vertices as the start, combining (e.g., compositing) the original vertices into new vertices (e.g., start/ready). If there are no unmarked edges between the current vertex and the next vertex on
A new vertex is created and added to the synchronized
The
For example, missing synchronization points are detected by identifying states in the
In another example rule, after the synchronization
In another rule, after the synchronization
The
The output is used for manual correction. The programmer may review and correct the programming of
Any determined incompatibilities are indicated based on the interface match, the sync match, and/or any other match. Indicating an incompatibility of
The display 21 of fig. 1 is a monitor, liquid crystal display, plasma screen, projector, printer, or other device for outputting information to be viewed by an engineer or programmer. The display 21 is configured by the processor 19 or other processor to display any incompatibilities 22 or indicate compatibility. Interface and/or synchronization information may be output. For example, the images of fig. 3 and/or 5 are displayed together or sequentially. Other incompatibility information may be displayed, such as showing that no excessive error is required.
In alternative embodiments, incompatibilities are used to automatically or semi-automatically correct interfaces and/or processes. Linking a software converter or adapter to the parameter and/or change process to eliminate the incompatibility. The change may be displayed for confirmation by the programmer. The incompatibility may or may not be displayed as part of the correction.
The processors 14, 19 (e.g., matching processors) are configured by software, firmware, and/or hardware. The processors 14, 19 are each a single processor or a plurality of processors. A digital signal processor, an application specific integrated circuit, a field programmable gate array, a general purpose processor, a signal processor, a digital circuit, an analog circuit, other processing devices, or a combination thereof may be used as the processors 14, 19. Processors 14, 19 are configured to use data from interfaces 12, 17, memories 15, 20, and/or from communications between
The memories 15, 20 are each a cache, buffer, RAM, removable media, hard drive, or other computer readable storage medium. The memories 15, 20 are controlled or formatted by the respective processor 14, 19 or another processor. Each memory 15, 20 may be allocated.
The memories 15, 20 are configured to store data used by the respective processors 14, 19. For example, the storage interfaces 12, 17, the
In one embodiment, the memories 15, 20 store instructions for programming the respective processors 14, 19. The instructions for implementing the processes, methods, and/or techniques discussed herein are provided on a non-transitory computer readable storage medium or memory, such as a cache, a buffer, RAM, a removable media, a hard drive, or other computer readable storage medium. Computer-readable storage media include various types of volatile and nonvolatile storage media. The functions, acts or tasks illustrated in the figures or described herein are performed in response to one or more sets of instructions stored in or on a computer readable storage medium. The functions, acts or tasks are independent of the particular type of instructions set, storage media, processor or processing strategy and may be performed by software, hardware, integrated circuits, firmware, micro code and the like, operating alone or in combination. Likewise, processing strategies may include multiprocessing, multitasking, parallel processing and the like.
FIG. 6 illustrates one embodiment of a method for skill matching in an industrial control system. The machine and controller interfaces are matched. Enhanced unification is used, wherein parameters or characteristics of parameters are optional in the matching. The enhanced unification operates machine interfaces and corresponding machine interface parameters.
FIG. 7 illustrates another embodiment of a method for skill matching in an industrial control system. The synchronization functions between the devices are matched. For example, calls, control receptions, or confirmations between procedures for two or more devices are checked to ensure compatibility. It is checked whether the cross product map of the process is incompatible with the process used to form the cross product map.
The methods of fig. 6 and 7 are implemented separately or together for a given pair or set of devices. The method of fig. 6 may be performed without the method of fig. 7, and vice versa. Additional incompatibility checks may be performed.
The methods of fig. 6 and 7 are implemented by the system of fig. 1 or another system. The person may perform
The actions of fig. 6 and 7 are performed in the order shown (numerically or top-to-bottom) or in another order. For example, acts 60 and 70 are performed after
More, different, or fewer acts than shown in fig. 6 and 7 may be performed. For example, actions are provided for remedying any incompatibilities automatically, semi-automatically, or manually. As another example, an action is provided for displaying incompatibility and/or associated information. In another example, acts 60 and/or 70 are not provided.
In acts 60 and 70, controllable industrial equipment is added, retrofitted or replaced. A manufacturing line for producing objects, chemicals, gases or other substances includes one or more pieces of controllable industrial equipment. A controllable industrial device is a machine or apparatus used for manufacturing or producing, for example, to change the state of an object. A controllable industrial device follows a process that alters the state in which the device can be controlled by a supervisor. The process is responsive to data from a supervisor.
Additions, modifications, or replacements form new interfaces and/or processes. The additional content may be used to initially install the manufactured product or to add functionality to existing manufacturing. The adaptation may alter the function or control of the device, thereby forming a different interface and/or process. The replacement is made by a device that is different in some respects, resulting in differences in the interface and/or process. Alternatively, the same interface and/or procedure is used.
In
The comparison follows a uniform rule. The rules include substitution rules (when to substitute, what to substitute, and/or track substitution by parameter), uniqueness of name rules, substitution of variables by variables or constants, checking whether all variables are substituted by constants, checking whether all parameters except optional parameters are paired between interfaces, and/or another rule. A unified rule links parameters between interfaces to ensure that the parameters have the same meaning or label (e.g., the same unit of measure) in different interfaces. Allowing optional matching allows some parameters to be used in an interface while not using linked or matched parameters in another interface. This facilitates machine interfacing by allowing independent operation of local parameters in the machine.
In
It is checked whether the unification is incompatible. Matching the same variable to multiple constants may indicate an error. Variables that do not match constants may indicate errors. This comparison identifies any inconsistencies between the interfaces. Using optional flags for parameters that are in one interface but not present in the other interface avoids indicating incompatibility.
In act 72 of FIG. 7, the processor compares the process model of the controllable industrial device to the process model of the supervisor of the controllable industrial device. The process models are compared to determine if the models are synchronized. Since the process may rely on communication between the controllable industrial control device and a supervisor (controller or control system), this comparison will determine whether the process models interact correctly, thereby avoiding conflicts or failures in the process models.
The comparison of the process modules is based on the generation of a synchronization map of cross products of the process model of the controllable industrial device and the process model of the supervisor. The synchronization map represents process models that operate together. Any missing communication, endpoint, or other functionality of a process in the cross product plot indicates an incompatibility.
In act 74, the processor identifies one or more incompatibilities of the process model of the controllable industrial device with the process model of the supervisor. The identification is based on the comparison. The comparison indicates any failure of synchronization between the process models.
The synchronization map is compared to each process model. Any synchronization error would indicate an incompatibility. A synchronization point in one of the process models (not in the synchronization map) may indicate an error. Lack of termination (e.g., an end state) of a process that is not in the synchronization model may indicate an error. Depending on the application, it may be required that at least one possible final state of the process is reachable, not necessarily all of these states. Any incompatibilities are identified in which one of the processes will not complete or synchronize or communications are unreachable.
Any incompatibilities identified from any comparisons are output so that a programmer may correct the interface or process model. Alternatively, the correction is performed automatically. After calibration, adding, retrofitting and/or replacing controllable industrial equipment in a manufacturing line will be performed with less downtime due to interface or process model incompatibility. Due to the validation of compatibility, controllable industrial equipment operates in manufacturing with supervisors using interfaces and process models.
Although the invention has been described above with reference to various embodiments, it should be understood that many changes and modifications may be made without departing from the scope of the invention. It is therefore intended that the foregoing detailed description be regarded as illustrative rather than limiting, and that it be understood that it is the following claims, including all equivalents, that are intended to define the spirit and scope of this invention.
- 上一篇:一种医用注射器针头装配设备
- 下一篇:缩放工具