Source: http://www.google.com/patents/US7006877?dq=ascentive
Timestamp: 2016-09-29 18:56:15
Document Index: 435665734

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 3', 'art 3', 'art 5', 'art 4', 'art 3', 'arts 3', 'art 3']

Patent US7006877 - Method for automatically recording an intervention in a production facility - Google PatentsSearch Images Maps Play YouTube News Gmail Drive More »Sign inPatentsA method and a system for automatically recording an intervention in a production facility (1) controlled by a control program (14). The production facility (1) includes a number of facility components (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 a –9 e). According to the method and the system, information about a status...http://www.google.com/patents/US7006877?utm_source=gb-gplus-sharePatent US7006877 - Method for automatically recording an intervention in a production facilityAdvanced Patent SearchTry the new Google Patents, with machine-classified Google Scholar results, and Japanese and South Korean patents.Publication numberUS7006877 B2Publication typeGrantApplication numberUS 10/922,983Publication dateFeb 28, 2006Filing dateAug 23, 2004Priority dateFeb 22, 2002Fee statusPaidAlso published asCN1639653A, CN1639653B, DE10207526A1, EP1476793A1, EP1476793B1, US20050113956, WO2003073186A1Publication number10922983, 922983, US 7006877 B2, US 7006877B2, US-B2-7006877, US7006877 B2, US7006877B2InventorsHarald Hammon, Werner HoeflerOriginal AssigneeSiemens AktiengesellschaftExport CitationBiBTeX, EndNote, RefManPatent Citations (12), Referenced by (2), Classifications (12), Legal Events (3) External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, EspacenetMethod for automatically recording an intervention in a production facility
US 7006877 B2Abstract
A method and a system for automatically recording an intervention in a production facility (1) controlled by a control program (14). The production facility (1) includes a number of facility components (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 a –9 e). According to the method and the system, information about a status of the facility component(s) (3–5, 6–8, 9 a –9 e) and information on whether this status exists in accordance with the control program (14) is retrieved from the control program (14, 15) and is recorded if this status does not exist according to the control program.
Thus, the object of the present invention is to provide a method with which previously unnoticed or hidden interventions in the production facility are now automatically detected.
According to exemplary, non-limiting embodiments of the present invention, a method and a system for automatically recording an intervention in a production facility with a number of facility components, which is controlled by a control program, is provided. The control program is configured to control the statuses of the facility components. In this method, information on a respective status of at least one facility component is retrieved from the control program and additional information relating to existence or occurrence of the respective status of one or more facility component according to the control program is also retrieved. If the respective status of one or more facility components does not exist according to the control program, the information regarding the respective status is recorded.
If an operator's authentication that can be electronically evaluated is required for the confirmation by the operator, a “security chain” in the fully automatic generation of the main modification log is complete. On the one hand, interventions in the production facility are automatically detected and a respective entry in the equivalent of the main modification log is automatically generated. On the other hand, based on an operator authentication that can be electronically evaluated, an associated entry is automatically generated, which shows who was working at the production facility when the intervention was detected or recorded. The two entries cannot be changed without the change being apparent. This ensures an unbroken documentation of the events in the production facility.
The line topology—analogous to roads and paths, e.g., for a route-planning program—can be easily represented by graphs, particularly the so-called directional graphs.
The phrase “according to the control program” as used herein refers, in particular, to the automatic operation of the control program. In other words, closings that occur or exist in accordance with the process that is automatically controlled by the control program are not taken into account, while closings that are not caused by the momentary status of the production process are. This distinction is necessary because even the latter type of closings can also occur under the control of the control program, e.g., when a facility part is switched to a setup mode and the actuation of the respective control elements brings about the respective closings. Such interventions, e.g., the closing of a line, are hereinafter referred to as “unexpected” interventions.
A deactivation, particularly an unexpected deactivation of a facility part that occurred with respect to the production process, expands the condition of the above-described rule. Thus, the rule is, for example, “if two nodes are (unexpectedly) closed and the facility part in which these nodes are located was (unexpectedly) deactivated, then this is evaluated as a replacement of each lines extending between the nodes.”
Advantageously, if a cleaning can be prompted for one or more line, an unexpected cleaning of a line is evaluated and/or respectively recorded as a previously performed replacement of the line. This corresponds to an additional rule, which is, for example: “If an (unexpected) cleaning of a facility component, a line or a line segment occurs, then this is evaluated as a replacement of the facility component affected by the cleaning.”
Respectively, if a pressure test can be prompted for one or more lines, an unexpected pressure test of a line is evaluated and/or respectively recorded as a previously performed replacement of one or more lines. The unexpected pressure test also corresponds to an additional rule, which is, for example: “If a pressure test of a facility component, a line or a line segment occurs (unexpectedly), then this is evaluated as a replacement of the facility component affected by the pressure test.”
FIG. 1 shows a simplified production facility 1 and a block diagram of an automation system 2. The production facility 1 includes a first container 3, e.g., for a starting material, a reactor 4 and a second container 5, e.g., for an end product. The two containers 3 and 5 and the reactor 4 are referred to as the facility parts for linguistic convenience only. Each facility part is connected to another facility part by one or more lines 6, 7, 8. These lines can be pipelines. Each line has a front and a rear opening. For example, line 6 has a front opening 6′ and a rear opening 6″. Similarly, line 7 has openings 7′ and 7″ and line 8 has openings 8′ and 8″. Hereinafter these openings are referred to as nodes for linguistic simplicity only. At each node, a line can be connected to another line or a facility part. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 1, the first container 3 has a front opening 8′, a rear opening 8″, and a line 8. The rear opening 8″ connects container 3 to the front opening 7′ of the reactor 4.
To isolate the lines 6–8, valves 9 a, 9 b, 9 c, 9 d, 9 e are provided at each node. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 1, valve 9 a is provided at a front opening 8′, 9 b between the rear opening 8″ and the front opening 7′, valve 9 c is provided at the rear opening 7″, valve 9 d is provided at the front opening 6′ and valve 9 e is provided at the rear opening 6″. Thereby, lines 6, 7, and 8 are isolated. Facility parts, lines and valves are hereinafter referred to as facility components or simply as components for linguistic simplicity only.
To close the line 6 between the reactor 4 and the second container 5, the two valves 9 d and 9 e provided on the line 6 must be closed. To close valves 9 d and 9 e, the control program 14 assigns appropriate output variables. In the data area 15, data are created for these output variables, which in combination represent the current status of the production facility 1. As illustrated in FIG. 1, data 15 has an input memory 15 and an output memory 17. The input memory area 16 and the output memory area 17 together, form the process image. A distinction should be drawn between the two memories. The input memory area 16 includes all the data recorded from the production process. The output memory area 17 includes all the data to be output to the production process. Each controllable component 9 a–9 e (the valves illustrated in FIG. 1), or each other component of the production facility 1 controlled by the control program 14 has a unique association in the output memory area 17. For example, for a component 9 a–9 e can assume only two states: open and closed, the component or its status is represented in the output memory area 17 by one bit: high and low. To close the two valves 9 d and 9 e, the respective bit in the output memory area 17 is occupied (for example, a high bit is occupied for open and a low bit is occupied for closed). The controller 10 cyclically outputs the entire content of the output memory area 17 to the production facility 1. In particular, one or more output means 12 outputs the content of the output memory area 17. A suitable output means 12 is, for example, a digital output module.
For each valve 9 a–9 e, two bits can be provided in the input memory area 16. The first bit stores information on whether the valve 9 a–9 e is opened—yes, no—and the second bit stores information on whether the valve 9 a–9 e is closed—yes, no. After the closing of the two valves 9 d and 9 e, this state can be detected by means of the statuses of the respective bits of the input memory area 16.
If, for example, the line 6 has become defective and needs to be replaced, both valves 9 d and 9 e must be closed because substances will otherwise leak from the reactor 4 or the container 5 or, for example, impurities could get into the reactor or the container. The closing of both valves 9 d and 9 e does not occur in the automatic mode according to the above premise. It is therefore established that as soon as the status “closed” is detected in both valves 9 d and 9 e, an intervention occurred in the production facility 1.
To improve the information content of such recordings, the system records which facility part 3, 4, or 5 or which facility component 3–5, 6–8, or 9 a–9 d is affected by this unexpected status. For this purpose, the information of the so-called facility identifiers is accessed. Facility identifiers are commonly used, for example, to distinguish components in a first facility part from those in a second facility part. The syntax and structure of facility identifiers is standardized.
The two unexpectedly closed valves 9 d and 9 e are identified with the complete identifier, e.g., as follows: “production facility—3rd reactor—1st valve_discharge lock” and “production facility—3rd container—2nd valve_inlet lock.” The facility identifiers can be used to determine to which facility part 3, 4, or 5 the components 9 d and 9 e with the unexpected status belong. In the present example, the first unexpectedly closed valve 9 d (“valve_inlet lock”) belongs to the facility part 5 “container—2” and to the production facility 1 “production facility—3”. The second unexpectedly closed valve 9 e (“valve_discharge lock”) belongs to the facility part 4 “reactor—1” and likewise to the production facility 1 “production facility—3”. This information is used to record which facility part 3, 4, or 5 may be affected by the intervention in the production facility 1.
To further improve the information content of such recordings, the system needs to establish which facility components are affected by the unexpected intervention. Each line 6, 7, and 8 has a front and rear opening, particularly nodes 6′–8′ and 6″–8″, respectively, configured to be opened and closed. At each node 6′–8′; 6″–8″ the line 6, 7, or 8 meets another facility component or another line 6, 7, or 8. Information on the course of each line 6, 7, 8, its interconnections or connections with other facility components, is stored in a line topology. Thus, if it has already been established that the two valves 9 d and 9 e are unexpectedly closed, the line topology will indicate which facility components are located between these two valves 9 d and 9 e. In this case, it can be established that the line 6, which interconnects the reactor 4 and the second container 5, is located between the two valves 9 d and 9 e. Based on the unexpectedly closed valves 9 d and 9 e, it can be concluded that the intervention in the production facility 1 is related to this line 6. This detailed information is recorded. As a result, it is subsequently possible to document:
a) which unexpected status occurred (the two valves 9 d and 9 e were closed, although this was not provided according to the control program 14), b) which facility parts are/might be affected by the unexpected status (the respective facility identifier of the two identified valves 9 d and 9 e shows that the first valve 9 e belongs to the facility part with the second container 5 and the second valve 9 e belongs to the facility part with the reactor 4), c) and which facility component is specifically affected (the line topology, which contains information on all the lines 6, 7, 8 and their interconnections and connections with facility components, shows that the line 6 between the reactor and the second container 5 is connected to the two valves 9 d and 9 e; hence it can be determined that line 6 is isolated). FIG. 2 schematically shows a block diagram to illustrate the sequence of the method for automatically recording interventions in the production facility. A central mechanism 20 for detecting interventions in a production facility 1 (FIG. 1) has data available from a planning tool 21 and an automation tool 22. The planning tool 21 includes, among other things, information on all the facility parts (e.g., facility parts 3–5) and all the facility components (e.g., components 3–5, 6–8, and 9 a–9 e). The planning tool 21 further includes the line topology with information on all the lines 6–8 and their interconnections or connections to other facility components 3–5, 6–8, and 9 a–9 e. The automation tool 22 either includes the automation system 2 (FIG. 2) or provides access to the automation system 2.
In a first function component 23, relations between the facility components 3–5, 6–8, and 9 a–9 e and components of the control unit of the production facility 1 (FIG. 1) are determined. Components of the control unit are the controller 10 and, for example, control elements (not depicted) and facility components 3–5, 6–8, and 9 a–9 e, e.g., the valves 9 a–9 e, on which the automation system 2 (FIG. 2) acts directly. The first function component 23 ensures an operation, at least a logic operation between, e.g., the planning data relating to the valves 9 a–9 e and the data of the automation system 2 relating to the same valves 9 a–9 e. A second function component 24 is used to read data from the automation tool 22. The data supplied by the first and the second function components 23 and 24 are subjected to a consistency check 25. In this portion of the sequence, an intervention by the user is possible if problems occur during the consistency check 25.
A third function component 26 is used to determine proximity relations among the facility components 3–5, 6–8, and 9 a–9 e. The third function component 26 is used, for example, to determine which line 6 (FIG. 1) extends between the reactor 4 and the second container 5 and which of the two valves 9 d and 9 e (FIG. 1) can be used to close this line 6.
A fourth function component 27 is used to detect operations of the production facility 1. The fourth function component 27 provides, for example, process image data 15 that make it possible to detect whether a specific valve 9 a–9 e is open or closed.
One of the rules used by the rule evaluator is, for example: “If two valves are closed unexpectedly (not according to the control program), then this is considered a replacement of each line located between them.” The rule can be expanded as follows: “if two valves are closed unexpectedly ( . . . ) and each facility part to which the valves belong, has been switched to manual or setup mode prior to that, then this is considered a replacement of each line located between the valves.”
The results of these or similar rules, which can be expanded and modified almost at will for a wide variety of applications, identify the detected interventions in the production facility 1, e.g., “line between reactor and second container replaced; <date>, <time>.” These detected interventions are entered in a main modification log 30 in an electronic form. The electronic main modification log 30 is, for example, a text file 30, which is stored on a suitable storage medium, e.g., a hard disk of a control computer (not depicted).
Thus, the intervention can be summarized as follows: A method is proposed for automatically recording an intervention in the production facility 1, which is controlled by a control program 14 and has a plurality of facility components 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 a–9 e. Information on a respective status of each facility component 3–5, 6–8, and 9 a–9 e is retrieved from the control program 14, and process image or data 15. Furthermore, information as to whether this status exists or occurs according to the control program 14 is retrieved from the control program 14. If this status does not exist according to the control program 14, this is evaluated and recorded as an intervention in the production facility. This exemplary method is related to the determination and recording of each facility part 3–5 or each facility component 3–5, 6–8, and 9 a–9 e to which the intervention relates. This information makes it possible to automatically keep a main modification log 30.
Patent CitationsCited PatentFiling datePublication dateApplicantTitleUS4251858Mar 6, 1979Feb 17, 1981The Boeing CompanyPaging, status monitoring and report compiling system for support, maintenance and management of operator-supervised automatic industrial machinesUS5093772 *Jan 4, 1990Mar 3, 1992Kao CorporationMethod of sequence controlUS6105520 *Apr 28, 1999Aug 22, 2000L&P Property Management CompanyQuilt making automatic scheduling system and methodUS6295478 *Aug 28, 1998Sep 25, 2001Nec CorporationManufacturing process change control apparatus and manufacturing process change control methodUS6381512 *May 27, 1999Apr 30, 2002Fanuc LtdMolding-condition recovery device in injection molding machineUS6487462Jan 22, 2000Nov 26, 2002G. George ReevesSelective process data logger with instant replayUS6871104 *May 15, 2000Mar 22, 2005Siemens AktiengesellschaftMethod for the production of an open-loop control block and said control blockUS20020072809 *Oct 24, 2001Jun 13, 2002Michael ZurawMicrocomputer control of physical devicesUS20030171827 *Mar 6, 2002Sep 11, 2003Keyes Marion A.Appendable system and devices for data acquisition, analysis and controlUS20040088065 *Oct 31, 2002May 6, 2004Bruno RobitailleCooperative smart itemsUS20040267395 *Sep 30, 2003Dec 30, 2004Discenzo Frederick M.System and method for dynamic multi-objective optimization of machine selection, integration and utilizationDE19614748A1Apr 15, 1996Oct 16, 1997Baumueller Anlagen SystemtechFault diagnostics system for electrical drives* Cited by examinerReferenced byCiting PatentFiling datePublication dateApplicantTitleUS7848828 *Dec 7, 2010National University Corporation Tohoku UniversityMethod and apparatus for managing manufacturing equipment, method for manufacturing device therebyUS20090081819 *Mar 25, 2008Mar 26, 2009Advantest CorporationMethod and apparatus for managing manufacturing equipment, method for manufacturing device thereby* Cited by examinerClassifications U.S. Classification700/19, 700/108, 700/110, 700/11, 700/169, 700/109International ClassificationG06F19/00, G05B15/02, G05B19/418Cooperative ClassificationG05B2219/31455, G05B15/02European ClassificationG05B15/02Legal EventsDateCodeEventDescriptionJan 19, 2005ASAssignmentOwner name: SIEMENS AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, GERMANYFree format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:HAMMON, HARALD;HOEFLER, WERNER;REEL/FRAME:016165/0558Effective date: 20041220Jul 10, 2009FPAYFee paymentYear of fee payment: 4Mar 7, 2013FPAYFee paymentYear of fee payment: 8RotateOriginal ImageGoogle Home - Sitemap - USPTO Bulk Downloads - Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - About Google Patents - Send FeedbackData provided by IFI CLAIMS Patent Services