Machine tool controlling system for use with a distributed system

Abstract: A machine tool controlling subsystem for use with a distribut­ ed system comprises a plurality of such subsystems (11, 21, 41; 12, 22, 42...1n, 2n, 4n), each of which includes a machine tool, and a transmission medium (30) operatively associated with said subsystems for transmitting information to said sub­ systems. Each subsystem includes means (11, 12...1n) for in­ dependently determining whether or not the machine tool is operated based on the received information from said trans­ mission medium, and means (41, 42...4n) for operating said machine tool based on the determination of said independently determining means.

Description: This invention relates to a controlling system for a plurality of distributed mashine tools, included in subsystems which can execute a series of processing while keeping coordination among them. In a system including a plurality of distributed subsystems, those which should participate in the processing and the order of works to be processed by each individual subsystem have been determined by a central specific subsystem. Such a centralized system has been defective in that operational failure of the central subsystem leads necessarily to shutdown of the whole system. The prior art centralized system has also been defective in that a vast amount of information must be collected or stored in a single unit in order to readily grasp the status of each individual subsystem. The prior art centralized system has further been defective in that a modification of the central subsystem is required to deal with additional provision of a subsystem or subsystems and alteration of the function of the existing subsystem or subsystems, and, for that purpose, the operation of the whole system must be stopped. A distributed control system is disclosed in GB-A-2 049 243. In this system, each of the distributed controllers is programmed by the user to execute a fixed set of functions specific to that controller. The programming is carried out by selecting the desired functions from all functions the controller may perform. This system has the disadvantage that, once the controllers are programmed, the system may not flexibly respond to different situations occurring during operation. It is therefore an object of the invention to provide a distributed machine tool controlling system in which the subsystems optimize the processing sequence during operation. This object is solved with the system set forth in claim 1. The present invention will be apparent from the following detailed description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which: Fig. 1 is a block diagram showing the structure of a preferred embodiment of the system according to the present invention; Fig. 2 is a block diagram showing the structure of a preferred form of the coordinator employed in the system according to the present invention; Figs. 3a to 3g are flow charts of the steps of processing by the processor incorporated in the coordinator shown in Fig. 2; and Figs. 4 to 7 illustrate the operation of the coordinator shown in Fig. 2. Fig. 1 shows the structure of a preferred embodiment of the system according to the present invention. Referring to Fig. 1, the system includes a plurality of subsystems 1 to n (not shown) such as machine tools and/or robots. A workpiece is conveyed by a carrier running along a guide line extending from a warehouse, which is also a subsystem, to each of these subsystems. The workpiece is received and processed by one of the subsystems, and the processed workpiece is then loaded on the carrier again and conveyed to another subsystem to be further processed. Upon completion of a series of scheduled processing, the workpiece is finally delivered from the system. Suppose that a plurality of workpieces are conveyed to these subsystems, and some of these subsystems carry out the same function. Then, which one of the subsystems 1 to n should process one of the workpieces according to what order becomes a problem. In order to solve this problem, coordinators 11 to 1n are provided according to the present invention. As shown in Fig. 1, these coordinators 11 to 1n are interconnected through associated information transmission controllers 21 to 2n and an information transmission loop 30 for exchange of information therebetween. These coordinators 11 to 1n are also connected to associated subsystem controllers 41 to 4n respectively. Fig. 2 shows the internal structure of a preferred form of the coordinator 11. Referring to Fig. 2, the coordinator 11 includes an interface 52 connected to the information transmission controller 21, an interface 53 connected to the subsystem controller 41, a processor 51, an input/output buffer 54, file memories 55 to 58, and three kinds of timers 59 to 61. Figs. 3a to 3g are flow charts of the steps of processing by the processor 51 shown in Fig. 2, and Figs. 4 to 7 illustrate the operation of the coordinator 11 shown in Fig. 2. The operation of the coordinator 11 shown in Fig. 2 will be described in detail with reference to Figs. 3a to 3g and Figs. 4 to 7. The subsystems which are the machine tools and/or robots are designated by the reference numerals 1 to 5, and the subsystem which is the warehouse is designated by the reference numeral 6 herein. When now the power sources for the individual subsystems 1 to 6 are turned on, the subsystem controllers 41 to 4n shown in Fig. 1 transmit data indicative of executable functions of the machine tools and/or robots of respective subsystems i connected thereto, to the coordinators 11 to 1n respectively. The coordinator 11 stores the data transmitted from the controller 41 in the input/output buffer 54 (block 71 in Fig. 3a). When the data is indicative of functions executable by the associated subsystem i, the data is then stored in the executable function register file 55 provided to the coordinator 11 shown in Fig. 2 (block 72 in Fig. 3a). It is supposed, for example, that the subsystems 1 and 2 are the same machine tools and their executable functions are F₁ and F₄ as shown in Fig. 4. It is also supposed that executable functions of the subsystem 3 are F₂ and F₇, those of the subsystem 4 are F₃ and F₉, and those of the subsystem 5 are F₅, F₆ and F₈ as shown in Fig. 4. Suppose now that workpieces P₁ and P₂ are conveyed into the production system from the subsystem 6 which is the warehouse. Then, as shown in Fig. 5, the process flow data for processing the workpieces P₁ and P₂ is broadcast on the transmission loop 30 through the information transmission controller 26 shown in Fig. 1. The process flow shown in Fig. 5 indicates the procedure for working. For example, after execution of the function F₁ on the workpiece P₁, the function F₂ or F₃ can be executed, and, after execution of the function F₂ or F₃, the function F₄ can be executed on the workpiece P₁. On the other hand, the functions F₆, F₇ and F₈ can be executed on the workpiece P₂ in a relation entirely independent of execution of the functions F₁, F₂, F₃, F₄ and F₅ on the workpiece P₁. After execution of the functions F₅ and F₈ in the manner above described, the function F₉ is executed on both of the workpieces P₁ and P₂ to complete all the works on the workpieces P₁ and P₂. In the manner above described, the process flow data for processing the workpieces P₁ and P₂ is applied to the coordinator 11 through the information transmission loop 30 and information transmission controller 21 shown in Fig. 1. In the coordinator 11, the received data is stored once in the input/output buffer 54 shown in Fig. 2 (block 73 in Fig. 3b). The processor 51 decomposes the process flow data stored in the input/output buffer 54 into the individual processing functions and adds the processing functions of the processes forward and backward of each individual process thereto thereby making up subflows 201 to 209 as shown in Fig. 6 (block 74 in Fig. 3b). When any one or more of the subflows 201 to 209 indicating the flows of the individual processing functions coincide with those registered in the executable function register file 55 in the coordinator 11 (block 75 in Fig. 3b), those subflows are stored in the processing procedure store file 56 in Fig. 2 (block 76 in Fig. 3b). For example, the processing procedure store files 56 for the subsystems 1 to 5 are as shown in Fig. 7. Each of the processing procedure store files stores the data of a workpiece or workpieces to be processed by the corresponding subsystem, the processing functions of that subsystem (the function executed in each of its own processes), and the functions executed in the processes forward and backward thereof. When charging of a new workpiece into the production system or completion of a forward process is broadcast through the information transmission loop 30 (block 77 in Fig. 3c), each of the coordinators 11 to 16 searches its processing procedure store file 56 for finding whether or not the associated subsystem can process the workpiece and its own functions can be executed (block 78 in Fig. 3c). For example, when the coordinator 11 having made the above effort finds that the associated subsystem 1 can execute the function F₁ on the workpiece P₁, the timer 59 is started (block 79 in Fig. 3c), and the performance indices J₁ (1) and J₁ (2) at that time are calculated according to the algorithm stored in the file 57 storing the rule of coordination (block 80 in Fig. 3c). It is supposed herein that all of the coordinators 11 to 16 store the same coordination rule. The performance index J₁ (1) is, for example, expressed as follows: J₁ (1) = max {T 1A + T 1B + T 1C , T 1d } where T 1A : processing time required for execution of function F₁ on workpiece P₁ to be newly processed, T 1B : time required until complete processing of workpiece P₃ now being processed, T 1C : time required for preparation (scheduling) until execution of function F₁, T 1d : time required until conveyance of workpiece P₁ to subsystem 1 after completion of processing in forward process. Also, the performance index J₁ (2) is expressed as follows: J₁ (2) = max {T 1B + T 1C , T 1d } As a result, the performance indices J₁ (1) and J₁ (2) specified above are stored in the coordination process record file 58 together with the data of the workpiece P₁ and executable function F₁ (block 81 in Fig. 3c). Then, the data of P₁, F₁, J₁ (1) and J₁ (2) are broadcast on the information transmission loop 30 (block 82 in Fig. 3c). Similarly, when each of the remaining coordinators finds that the associated subsystem can execute its function on the workpiece, the individual performance indices are calculated to be broadcast on the information transmission loop 30. Thus, when a new workpiece is charged into the production system or processing in a forward process is completed, the processing request data D i is broadcast on the information transmission loop 30 from the coordinator i associated with the subsystem which can now execute its function. This data D i is given by D i = {P j , F k , J i (1) , J i (2) } where P j : workpiece j F k : executable function k J i (1) , J i (2) : performance indices calculated by coordinator i After reception of the data informing of charging of the new workpiece or completion of the work in the forward process, the coordinator i actuates the coordination monitoring timer 59. Until this timer 59 times a predetermined period of time T (1) (block 83 in Fig. 3d), the coordinator i receives processing request data D j broadcast from some or all of the other coordinators j (j ≠ i) (block 84 in Fig. 3d) and stores the data D j in the coordination process record file 58 (block 85 in Fig. 3d). After a plurality of such processing request data D j are stored in the coordination process record file 58 of the coordinator i (block 86 in Fig. 3d), a suitable one of the coordinators must be selected from among the coordinators having broadcast the request data D j (blocks 87 and 88 in Fig. 3d). This is because the plural subsystems cannot simultaneously execute processing on the same workpiece. The situation requiring selection of such a suitable subsystem is classified into three cases. In the first case, there are two or more subsystems that can execute the same processing on the same workpiece, and a suitable one of them must be selected. In the second case, there are two or more subsystems that can execute plural functions on the same workpiece in parallel relation, and a suitable one of the functions must be selected as an earlier one. In the third case, there are two or more workpieces, and one of them to be processed earlier than the others by a subsystem must be selected. The method of coordination for these three cases will now be described. First case: Suppose that the coordinators 11 and 12 broadcast the processing request data for execution of the same function F₁ on the same workpiece P₁. Then, these data are respectively as follows: {P₁, F₁, J₁ (1) , J₁ (2) } {P₁, F₁, J₂ (1) , J₂ (2) } In such a case, the performance indices J₁ (1) and J₂ (1) are compared by a processor 51 in each coordinator according to the coordination rule stored in the coordination rule store file 57 so as to select the one which can complete processing on the workpiece P₁ within a shorter period of time. When, for example, there is the relation J₁ (1) < J₂ (1) between the performance indices J₁ (1) and J₂ (1) , the coordinators 11 and 12 determine to select the coordinator 11 for execution of the function F₁ on the workpiece P₁. If the relation J₁ (1) = J₂ (1) holds, one of the coordinators 11 and 12 is selected according to a predetermined (fixed) rule. In this manner, a suitable one of the coordinators 11 and 12 can be selected. However, only one of all the coordinators is selected since the coordination rule is common to all of them. Second case: Suppose that the subsystems 3 and 4 can execute plural functions in parallel relation on the same workpiece P₁. Then, the data broadcast from the coordinators 13 and 14 after completion of the function F₁ on the workpiece P₁ are respectively as follows: {P₁, F₂, J₃ (1) , J₃ (2) } {P₁, F₃, J₄ (1) , J₄ (2) } The two subsystems 3 and 4 carrying out the respective different functions F₂ and F₃ cannot simultaneously execute the functions F₂ and F₃ on the same workpiece P₁. Therefore, the function F₂ or F₃ to be executed earlier than the other is determined according to the coordination rule stored in the coordination rule store file 57. In this case, execution of the functions F₂ and F₃ requires naturally different processing times T 3A and T 4A . Therefore, the performance indices J₃ (2) and J₄ (2) each representing the period of time required until processing can be started are compared according to the rule so as to select the one which can start processing within a shorter period of time. When, for example, there is the relation J₃ (2) < J₄ (2) therebetween, the coordinator 13 is selected to execute the function F₂ on the workpiece P₁ earlier than the function F₃. If the relation J₃ (2) = J₄ (2) holds, one of the coordinators 13 and 14 is selected according to the predetermined (fixed) rule. As in the first case a suitable one of the coordinators 13 and 14 is only selected, and any other different ones are not selected in this second case too. Third case: Suppose that the subsystem 5 can now execute the functions F₅ and F₆ on the different workpieces P₁ and P₂ respectively. Then, the coordinator 15 broadcasts the following data after execution of the function F₄ on the workpiece P₁ and after charging of the workpiece P₂ into the production system respectively: {P₁, F₅, J₅ (1) , J₅ (2) } {P₂, F₆, J₅ (1) , J₅ (2) } Since the subsystem 5 cannot process the workpieces P₁ and P₂ at the same time, the workpiece P₁ or P₂ to be processed earlier than the other is determined according to the rule stored in the coordination rule store file 57. Therefore, the performance indices J₅ (2) and J₅ (2) each representing the period of time required until processing can be started are compared so as to select the one which can start processing within a shorter period of time. When, for example, there is the relation J₅ (2) < J₅ (2) therebetween, the function F₅ is determined to be executed on the workpiece P₁ earlier than the function F₆ to be executed on the workpiece P₂. If the relation J₅ (2) = J₅ (2) holds, one of the workpieces P₁ and P₂ is selected according to the predetermined (fixed) rule. As in the first and second cases, only one of the workpieces P₁ and P₂ is selected according to the algorithm in this third case too. The coordinator associated with the subsystem determined to execute processing on the workpiece as a result of the steps described above broadcasts execution of the required processing on the workpiece (blocks 89 and 90 in Fig. 3d). On the basis of this broadcast, each of the coordinators is informed of the fact that the specific subsystem executes the specific processing on the workpiece, and a flag indicating determination of the participating subsystem is attached to the processing request data stored in the coordination process record file 58 (blocks 91 and 92 in Fig. 3d). After the specific subsystem has completed the required processing (blocks 101 and 102 in Fig. 3e), the coordinator of that subsystem erases the data of the corresponding contents in the files 56 and 58 and, at the same time, broadcasts completion of the processing (block 103 in Fig. 3e). As a result, each of the coordinators erases the specific processing request data recorded in the coordination process record file 58 (block 104 in Fig. 3e). The coordinator i o having broadcast charging of a new workpiece into the production system (block 109 in Fig. 3g) or completion of processing on the workpiece (block 103 in Fig. 3e) acts to set the coordination monitoring timer 59 so as to monitor whether or not a coordinator participating in later processing is determined (block 105 in Fig. 3e and BLOCK 110 in Fig. 3g). When the coordinator i o does not receive the data informing the determination of a participating subsystem (block 107 in Fig. 3f) in spite of the fact that the timer 59 has already timed a predetermined period of time T (2) T (2) > T (1) ) (block 106 in Fig. 3f), the coordinator i o decides that the coordinator to be selected is disabled or that no subsystem can execute the next process. Then, the coordinator i o broadcasts charging of the new workpiece or completion of the processing again. Thereafter, the same steps as those described above are repeated. When a subsystem which should participate in processing is not determined regardless of repetition of the above steps a predetermined number of times (blocks 95 to 98 in Fig. 3d), the coordinator i o instructs the carrier to convey the specific workpiece into the warehouse 6 (block 99 in Fig. 3d). On the other hand, when a subsystem i₁ which should participate in processing is determined, the coordinator i o instructs the carrier to convey the specific workpiece toward the subsystem i₁ (blocks 93 and 94 in Fig. 3d). As described already in the second and third cases, a workpiece P′ is determined to be processed later than another as a result of coordination, and a function F′ is executed on this workpiece P′ after execution of another function. In such a case, the processing request data requesting execution of the function F′ on the workpiece are broadcast from the individual coordinators after another function has been executed on this workpiece P′. Coordination processes executed thereafter are the same as those described hereinafter. The timers 61 and 60 are included in the coordinator 11 so as to monitor whether or not the coordinator 11 can communicate with the associated information transmission controller 21 and subsystem controller 41 respectively. The coordinator 11 decides that the communication is impossible when the controllers 21 and 41 do not respond to the transmitted data within predetermined periods of time T₆₁ and T₆₀ respectively. If the coordinator 11 is unable to communicate with these controllers 21 and 41, the files 54, 55, 56 and 58 are cleared. It will be understood from the foregoing detailed description of the present invention that, in a system including a plurality of distributed subsystems carrying out the same or different functions, the subsystems can individually judge the contents of a work and their own status so that a subsystem which should process the work can be readily identified. Therefore, a suitable processing procedure matching the situation can be readily found without the necessity for previously scheduling such a work processing procedure. Thus, the system can operate without being shut down and its reliability, expansibility and maintainability can be improved regardless of operational failure or whichever subsystem at whatever time, maintainance or expansion of any one of the subsystems, and charging of a new workpiece into the production system.

Claims: A distributed machine tool controlling system having a plurality of subsystems (11, 21, 41; 12, 22, 42; ...; 1n, 2n, 4n), each of which includes a machine tool (1 to 5), and a coordinator means (11, 12, ... 1n) connected with the coordinator means of other subsystems through a transmission medium (30), at least one of said subsystems including means (41, ... 4n) for applying to said transmission medium through its coordinator means (11, 12, ... 1n) information relating to one of more functions (F1, F2 ... F9) to be executed by the respective machine tool (1 to 5), wherein each coordinator means comprises: memory means (55) for storing data regarding the functions which are executable by the respective machine tool (1 to 5) and a rule for coordinating said functions, means for judging whether a function to be next executed is included in said data stored in said memory means, and means (51) for deciding whether said respective machine tool should execute said function on the basis of information received from the coordinator means of other subsystems via said transmission medium (30) and said rule stored in said memory means (55). The system of claim 1 wherein each coordinator means further comprises means (51) for determining when the function to be next executed is included in said stored data, an information on the present operating status of said respective machine tool and deciding on the basis of a comparison between said determined information on the present operating status and said information received from the coordinator means of other subsystems whether said respective machine tool should execute said function.

Inventors: IHARA HIROKAZU, MIYAMOTO SHOJI, MORI KINJI, IHARA, HIROKAZU, MIYAMOTO, SHOJI, MORI, KINJI
Applicants: HITACHI LTD, HITACHI, LTD.
Application year: 1983
Main classification: G05B19
IPC codes: G05B19