AutomationML AS A BASIS FOR OFFLINE - AND REALTIME-SIMULATION - Planning, Simulation and Diagnosis of Automation Systems

Olaf Graeser, Barath Kumar, Oliver Niggemann, Natalia Moriz, Alexander Maier

Abstract

The growing complexity of production plants leads to a growing complexity of the corresponding automation systems. Developers of such complex automation systems are faced with two significant challenges: (i) The control devices have to be tested before they are used in the plant. For this, offline- and hardware–in–the loop (HIL) simulations can be used. (ii) The diagnosis functions within the automation systems become more and more difficult to implement; this entails the risk of undetected errors. Both challenges may be solved using a system model, i.e. a joint model of the plant and the automation system: (i) Offline simulations and HIL tests use such models as an environment model and (ii) diagnosis functions use such models to define the normal system behaviour—allowing them to detect discrepancies between normal and observed behavior. System models cannot be modelled by one person in a single development step. Instead, such models must mirror the modularity of modern plants and automation systems. Here, the new standard AutomationML is used as basis for such a modular system model. But a modular system model is only a first step: Both testing and diagnosis require the simulation of such models. Therefore, a corresponding modular simulation system for AutomationML models is presented here; for this, the Functional Mock–Up Unit (FMU) standard is used. A prototypical tool chain and a model factory (MF) is used to show results for this modular testing and diagnosis approach.

References

  1. Allen, P., editor (2002). The OMG's Model Driven Architecture, volume XII of Component Development Strategies, The Monthly Newsletter from the Cutter Information Corp. on Managing and Developing ComponentBased Systems.
  2. Alur, R., Courcoubetis, C., Halbwachs, N., Henzinger, T. A., Ho, P.-H., Nicollin, X., Olivero, A., Sifakis, J., and Yovine, S. (1995). The algorithmic analysis of hybrid systems. THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE, 138:3-34.
  3. Brecher, C., Fedrowitz, C., Herfs, W., Kahmen, A., Lohse, W., Rathjen, O., and Vitr, M. (2008). Durchgängiges Production Engineering Potenziale der digitalen Fabrik. In Brecher, C., Schmitt, F. K. R., and Schuh, G., editors, Wettbewerbsfaktor Produktionstechnik: Aachener Perspektiven. Aachen AWK.
  4. Drath, R., Weidemann, D., Lips, S., Hundt, L., L üder, A., and Schleipen, M. (2010). Datenaustausch in der Anlagenplanung mit AutomationML. Springer.
  5. Gall, H. (2008). Functional safety IEC 61508 / IEC 61511 the impact to certification and the user. In AICCSA 7808: Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/ACS International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications, pages 1027-1031, Washington, DC, USA. IEEE Computer Society.
  6. Graeser, O. and Niggemann, O. (2009). Planung der Übertragung von Echtzeitnachrichten in Netzwerken mit Bandbreitenreservierung am Beispiel von Profinet IRT. In Echtzeit 2009 - Software-intensive verteilte Echtzeitsysteme GI-Fachauschuss, Boppard, Germany.
  7. IEC 62424 (2008). Festlegung für die Darstellung von Aufgaben der Prozessleittechnik in Fliessbildern und für den Datenaustausch zwischen EDV-Werkzeugen zur Fliessbilderstellung und CAE-Systemen.
  8. Khronos Group (2011). Collada - 3d asset exchange schema. http://www.khronos.org/collada/.
  9. Kühn, W. (2006). Digital factory: simulation enhancing the product and production engineering process. In WSC 7806: Proceedings of the 38th conference on Winter simulation, pages 1899-1906. Winter Simulation Conference.
  10. Kumar, B., Niggemann, O., and Jasperneite, J. (2010a). Statistical models of network traffic. In International Conference on Computer, Electrical and Systems Science.
  11. Kumar, B., Niggemann, O., and Jasperneite, J. (2010b). Test generation for hybrid, probabilistic control models. In Entwurf komplexer Automatisierungssysteme (EKA 2010). Magdeburg, Germany.
  12. Mellor, S., Scott, K., Uhl, A., and Weise, D. (2004). MDA Distilled: Principles of Model-Driven Architecture. Addison Wesley.
  13. Microsoft (2011). Managed extensibility framework. http://mef.codeplex.com/.
  14. Modelica Association (2011). www.modelica.org/.
  15. Modelisar project (2011). Functional mock-up interface. http://functional-mockup-interface.org/.
  16. MSDN (2011). Visual studio visualization and modeling sdk. http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/vsvmsdk.
  17. Niggemann, O. and Otterbach, R. (2008). Durchgehende Systemverifikation im Automotiven Entwicklungsprozess. In Tagungsband des DagstuhlWorkshops Modellbasierte Entwicklung eingebetteter Systeme IV (MBEES), Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany.
  18. Niggemann, O. and Stroop, J. (2008). Models for model's sake: why explicit system models are also an end to themselves. In ICSE 7808: Proceedings of the 30th international conference on Software engineering, pages 561-570, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
  19. PLCopen (2011). http://www.plcopen.org/.
  20. PNO (2007). Profinet specification iec 61158-5-10 (v2.1).
  21. Sproston, J. (2000). Decidable model checking of probabilistic hybrid automata.
  22. Stein, S., Kühne, S., Drawehn, J., Feja, S., and Rotzoll, W. (2008). Evaluation of OrViA Framework for ModelDriven SOA Implementations: An Industrial Case Study. In 6th International Conference on Business Process Management, Milan, Italy.
  23. Steiner, P. and Schmidt, F. (2003). Anforderungen und Architektur zukünftiger Karosserieelektroniksysteme. In VDI Berichte Nr. 1789.
  24. Strasser, T., Sunder, C., and Valentini, A. (2008). Modeldriven embedded systems design environment for the industrial automation sector. In Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics, Daejeon, South Korea.
  25. Streitferdt, D., Wendt, G., Nenninger, P., Nyssen, A., and Lichter, H. (2008). Model driven development challenges in the automation domain. In Computer Software and Applications, 2008. COMPSAC 7808. 32nd Annual IEEE International, pages 1372-1375.
  26. Supavatanakul, P., Lunze, J., Puig, V., and Quevedo, J. (2006). Diagnosis of timed automata: Theory and application to the damadics actuator benchmark problem. Control Engineering Practice, 14(6):609-619.
  27. Szulman, P., Assmann, D., Doerr, J., Eisenbarth, M., Hefke, M., Soto, M., and Trifu, A. (2005). Using ontologybased reference models in digital production engineering integration. In Proceedings of the 16th IFAC WORLD CONGRESS, Prague.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Graeser O., Kumar B., Niggemann O., Moriz N. and Maier A. (2011). AutomationML AS A BASIS FOR OFFLINE - AND REALTIME-SIMULATION - Planning, Simulation and Diagnosis of Automation Systems . In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Informatics in Control, Automation and Robotics - Volume 2: ICINCO, ISBN 978-989-8425-75-1, pages 359-368. DOI: 10.5220/0003537403590368


in Bibtex Style

@conference{icinco11,
author={Olaf Graeser and Barath Kumar and Oliver Niggemann and Natalia Moriz and Alexander Maier},
title={AutomationML AS A BASIS FOR OFFLINE - AND REALTIME-SIMULATION - Planning, Simulation and Diagnosis of Automation Systems},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Informatics in Control, Automation and Robotics - Volume 2: ICINCO,},
year={2011},
pages={359-368},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0003537403590368},
isbn={978-989-8425-75-1},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Informatics in Control, Automation and Robotics - Volume 2: ICINCO,
TI - AutomationML AS A BASIS FOR OFFLINE - AND REALTIME-SIMULATION - Planning, Simulation and Diagnosis of Automation Systems
SN - 978-989-8425-75-1
AU - Graeser O.
AU - Kumar B.
AU - Niggemann O.
AU - Moriz N.
AU - Maier A.
PY - 2011
SP - 359
EP - 368
DO - 10.5220/0003537403590368