Contenu connexe
Similaire à Time to Rethink Process Automation Systems
Similaire à Time to Rethink Process Automation Systems (20)
Plus de ARC Advisory Group
Plus de ARC Advisory Group (20)
Time to Rethink Process Automation Systems
- 1. Time to Rethink Process
Automation Systems
(CPAS 2.0)
Dave Woll
VP Consulting
ARC Advisory Group
dwoll@arcweb.com
- 2. From CPAS to CPAS 2.0
CPAS conceived in 2005
Issue: The introduction of internet technology to manufacturing
forced most of the suppliers to change their Control LAN and
ultimately innovate their entire systems. Users asked what to value
“everything looked the same”
Purpose: Develop an ARC vision of the ideal evolution of current
process automation systems. The Collaborative Process Automation
System (CPAS)
Deliverable: A detailed Outlook Study
CPAS 2.0 conceived in 2009
Issue: There has been an absence of real innovation in both the
system and field devices. Users have asked how to value what is
needed next
Purpose: Develop an ARC forecast of the ideal functional evolution
of process automation systems
Deliverable: A detailed Outlook Study
2
© ARC Advisory Group
- 3. Top 10 Automation Business Drivers
1. Create proactive culture
2. Improve asset utilization
3. Enhance human reliability
4. Improve equipment reliability
5. Unify business and operations
6. Respond to uncontrollable external variables
7. Responsible care requirements
8. Prevent cyber security threats
9. Deal with loss of experienced staff
10.What is the potential value
3
© ARC Advisory Group
- 4. CPAS Guiding Principles
Principles CPAS Response
ROA
Extraordinary Performance
Operational
Excellence Continuous Improvement
Proactive Execution
Flawless Execution Common Actionable Context
Single Version of the Truth
Automate every thing that
Autonomous Automation should be automated
Facilitate Knowledge Workers
Manage All Automation
Common Infrastructure Robust, based on Stds
Precision
4
© ARC Advisory Group
- 5. CPAS Looks at Automation Holistically
From… To…
Business
System
Enterprise System
Production Manufacturing
Management Work
ISA S95 Transactions Operations Processes
Management
Sensors, Actuators and Logical Devices
ISA S88
Real-Time
Control &
Events
Single Model with Distributed Processing and Shared Services
5
© ARC Advisory Group
- 6. We Need Smarter Field Devices
50 -75% of device downtime is caused by lack
of confidence in measurement
Most field devices do not quantify health or
estimate remaining usable life
Precludes operations from deciding run/shut
down.
Lost critical measurement usually results in
shut down
Active research, dearth of Products
• One product based on SEVA (self evaluating
technology BSI 7926)
6
© ARC Advisory Group
- 7. Systems Need to Become Truly Distributed
Current leading Distributed Control Systems
and the original CPAS are not true DCSs
Current DCSs are based on IEC61131-3 which
specifies programming languages and
architecture
The architecture is limited to a single domain
with all resources operating in unison
Resources cannot act autonomously
Current DCSs are a single model with distributed
processing and shared services
7
© ARC Advisory Group
- 8. System Resources Need to Operate Autonomously
When Necessary
Functionally changes the control level
(reconfigure) at run-time
Provides the foundation for “zero downtime
automation systems” and sustainable
operations
Supports the utilization of high level
autonomous agent (FIPA), reasoning and
modeling
Potentially offers the highest value
8
© ARC Advisory Group
- 9. IEC Standard 61499 Supplements IEC 61131
Single Model with Distributed Processing and
Independent Services
Example: The Smart Watchdog from Intelligent
Maintenance Systems IMS)
DCS Fieldbus PLC
IEC 61804 IEC 61158 IEC 61131-3
Configurability Open Connectivity Configurability
Distributed Functionality Standard Programming Languages
Function Blocks
Industrial Process
Measurement
and Control Systems
(IPMCS)
IEC 61499
High Level
Function
Truly Distribution Blocks
Reasoning
Autonomy
9
© ARC Advisory Group
- 10. Control Strategies are not Tied to
Specific Hardware
Control Strategies Must Transcend
Hardware
Required to support autonomy and
reconfiguration
Eliminates the need to position functions
into highly secure system levels
Runs across disparate platforms
complimented single size resource scaled by
number
Provides the opportunity to optimize
hardware cost and performance
10
© ARC Advisory Group
- 11. Secure On-Line Version Upgrades
At least one major version Load New
Load
Version
upgrade every year
Now requires a shut-down or at Evaluate
least a major vendor supported Abort
custom revision
ARC supports a three step on- Go
line version upgrade
Revert
Three step has crucial value
determining the new version is Accept
operating predictably before
committing to the process
Finished
11
© ARC Advisory Group
- 12. Need Business and Operations Unification
– Business to Planning
Normally the integration of disparate information
is largely custom work
This is the case when integrating SCM targets to
operations planning
Reference standards can eliminate the majority of
this customization. Specifically:
The SCOR model has been accepted as the
primary SCM reference model
S95 has been accepted as the primary
Operations Management reference model
There is a high correlation between the two
This integration will deliver higher Business to
Planning performance
12
© ARC Advisory Group
- 13. Need Business and Operations Unification
– Real-time Planning to Production
Market Signals
Capable/Profitable to
Model Update (10/Day)
LPLP Planner
Planner Promise in Real-time
24/7 Optimization,
Minimal Human Involvement
Real-Time
RTO
Optimization Autonomous Transition
Management
Operator involvement:
- On/Off
- Operating Band
Supervisory Supervisory Supervisory
Controller 1 Controller 2 Controller 3
(DMC) (DMC) (DMC)
Dynamic Planner
Dynamic Planner
Short Term Production Planning Based on Market
Demand and Production Capabilities
13
© ARC Advisory Group
- 14. Thank You.
For more information, contact the author at
dwoll@arcweb.com or visit our web pages at
www.arcweb.com