COMMON PLANT MODEL FOR MODELING OF PHYSICAL PLANT ITEMS OF A PRODUCTION PLANT

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application claims the priority, under 35 U.S.C. §119, of European Patent Application EP 14195378.6, filed Nov. 28, 2014; the prior application is herewith incorporated by reference in its entirety.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Field of the Invention

The present invention relates to a common plant model for modeling of physical plant items of a production plant within a manufacturing execution system containing an engineering environment and a runtime environment.

As it is well known, a method for manufacturing processes planned by an enterprise resource planning (ERP) and produced by a shop floor, provides a manufacturing executing system (MES) for modeling, planning, scheduling and implementing the manufacturing processes and controlling the corresponding production steps at plant floor level. In the automation pyramid consisting of Level 0 to Level 4, the ERP system resides on the highest level at Level 4 which represents the enterprise level taking care for a rough production planning and purchase order processing. The MES system is located at level 3 representing the plant control level containing the detailed production modeling, planning, production execution, production data acquisition, KPI calculations, resources and quality management. The process control level is located at level 2 and containing supervisory control and data acquisition systems (SCADA) which are used for the controlling and observation of the production, the administration of production recipes and the archiving of the production data. At level 1 which represents the field level process signals and I/O modules as well as the field-bus are located thereby offering the interface to the technical production process via I/O signals. At level 0 representing the actuator/sensing level fast data collection of predominantly binary signals is typically fulfilled. Of course, the border of the diverse levels are floating according to the set-up and circumstance of the respective production facility (plant).

In particular, an enterprise resource planning system—hereinafter referred to as ERP—is a system including hardware devices and corresponding software applications for planning the business resources of an enterprise, i.e. material provisions, human resource managements, purchasing, orders, profits, finance, inventory controls, customer managements, etc., while the term “shop floor” at level 0 and 1 has been used to indicate a system supporting the control of single machines performing production actions and being involved in the manufacturing processes, for example by measuring the number of pieces produced per hour by each machine or the functioning parameters thereof, the quality of the pieces produced and so on.

A manufacturing execution system—hereinafter referred to as MES—is an intermediate layer at level 3 providing computing machines and software tools between the ERP upper layer and the shop floor lower layer, including a software tool for production order management, which receives requests of production from the ERP, and a software tool for production modeling, which supports the phases of selecting and managing the resources to be involved in the manufacturing processes, i.e. employees, machines and materials, in order to realize a planned manufacturing process within required time constrains.

Therefore, manufacturing execution systems being regulated by the ANSI/ISA/95 standard require modeling plant equipment for both scheduling and controlling activities. Therefore, the productive process typically consists of production request which define a request for production for a single product. The predefined product is identified by a production rule, each of which is divided in many segment requirements that represent simple productive actions which are controlled by the MES.

Thus, a production request (could be also called operation request or work order) contains at least one segment requirement; even it spans all production of the product. A segment requirement contains at least on material produced requirement with the identification, the quantity and the units of measure of the product to be produced. Usually, in MES, the user would like to modify the quantity of the product to be produced due to various reasons, such as machine down time, shortage of material, absence of personnel.

Another critical problem for the MES is to react immediately to the operation schedules developed by the ERP. In this activity, the creation of work orders from the operation schedule is one of the most challenging tasks in the interaction of the MES and the ERP and should be therefore operated under the best performance circumstances possible. Typically, a work order is rather complex in terms of execution steps, resources and parameter that its creation from scratch is very time consuming and often not compatible with the mostly tight manufacturing schedules.

Considering only the very few demands on an appropriate software structure for an overall system being enable to exchange data between the divers levels of the automation pyramid, today's software systems available cannot satisfy these demands. Currently, each system ERP, MES, SCADA and distributed control system (DCS) comprise their own modeling tools for modeling the physical equipment resources and the respective hierarchies which are therefore not done in a homogenous and permeable way. Therefore, in engineering as well in runtime the integration between the products of these different levels is difficult and error prone due to the necessity of keeping different planning models aligned.

Therefore, a significant need exist to provide a common plant model for the MES, SCADA and DCS systems of a production facility benefitting from an integration architecture which enables a stringent and persistent modeling of the physical resources of the production facility for all type of systems (MES, SCADA, DCS) that attach to the common plant model. In particular, this model shall have a special set-up in order to organize the physical plant items in hierarchies which serve their respective task/purpose.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

It is accordingly an object of the invention to provide a common plant model for modeling of physical plant items of a production plant that overcomes the above-mentioned disadvantages of the prior art devices of this general type.

The objective is achieved according to the present invention by a common plant model for modeling of physical plant items of a production plant. The common plant model containing:

a) a node type model aggregating different aspects for the modeling of a single physical plant item involving public interface parameters as well as automation parameters;

b) a number of nodes, each representing an instance of a node type;

c) a library model containing a project library and a global library, the libraries containing a node type model, a facet model and a rule model as well as a hierarchy model;

d) a wiring chart model defining the interaction between interface members of different facets of the nodes;

e) a graph model representing physical and/or logical connections between the nodes, wherein

f) the hierarchy model contains a number of hierarchy definitions;

g) each hierarchy definition contains a number of hierarchy levels and optionally a number of hierarchy level constraints among those hierarchy levels; and

h) each node is assigned to at least one of the hierarchy definitions and to at least one hierarchy level within the assigned hierarchy definition.

The common plant model therefore provides a standardized architecture for the modeling of the hierarchies for the physical plant items which can be used by a plurality of different user that are in a business relation to the physical plant items. In particular, the SCADA system and the DCS system have now access to the distinct modeling of their individual hierarchical needs within the environment of the MES which is with respect to the execution and the control of the production of the plant the predominant system.

A further preferred embodiment of the present invention may provide the node type model that contains:

a) a header providing an identity information of the node type;

b) a structure facet for high level representation;

c) optionally an automation facet for automation representation;

d) optionally one or multiple functional facets for different functional aspects;

e) optionally one or multiple wiring charts defining the relationship between the facets of two node connected by a wire; and

f) optionally one to multiple node views providing a view to node data exposed by the structure facet. This node type is mandatory within all systems using the common plant model wherein the structural facet is a mandatory element representing the public interface of the node.

In order to satisfy more than one demand on a specific hierarchy of the node, the node types can be defined for dedicated hierarchy levels within the defined hierarchies. In particular, one or multiple hierarchy levels can be assigned to a node type, thereby enabling guidance in an engineering system to create nodes in a selectable hierarchy at an intended level.

In order to enable an advantageous engineering on the node type and a re-use of diverse node type in terms of node type templates, the node types can be defined in the libraries and can contain attributes that are consumed by external applications, used for data representation or for implementing business logic.

In order to provide a support for the definition of a hierarchy, the hierarchy model may comprise a hierarchy model template that is used to define the hierarchy and the hierarchy levels. Using this template, standardized structures and definition are guaranteed which also enables the engineer to re-use existing hierarchy definitions. Therefore, a catalogue of hierarchy definitions can be project-wise and/or industry-wise defined wherein the engineer will select the hierarchy definition being useful for his specific task, such as line management, maintenance managements, real estate management, power supply wiring management etc.

Other features which are considered as characteristic for the invention are set forth in the appended claims.

Although the invention is illustrated and described herein as embodied in a common plant model for modeling of physical plant items of a production plant, it is nevertheless not intended to be limited to the details shown, since various modifications and structural changes may be made therein without departing from the spirit of the invention and within the scope and range of equivalents of the claims.

The construction and method of operation of the invention, however, together with additional objects and advantages thereof will be best understood from the following description of specific embodiments when read in connection with the accompanying drawings.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING

FIG. 1 is a schematic overview of a library model applied in a common plant model;

FIG. 2 is a schematic overview of a node type model applied in the common plant model;

FIG. 3 is a schematic overview of a facet model applied in the common plant model;

FIG. 4 is a schematic overview of a wiring chart model applied in the common plant model;

FIG. 5 is a schematic overview of a first example on the wiring chart developed according to the wiring chart model of FIG. 4;

FIG. 6 is a schematic overview of a second example on the wiring chart developed according to the wiring chart model of FIG. 4;

FIG. 7 is a schematic overview of the rule model applied in the common plant model;

FIG. 8 is a schematic overview of a third example of a wiring chart developed according to the wiring chart model of FIG. 4;

FIG. 9 is a schematic overview of the node model applied in the common plant model;

FIG. 10 is a schematic overview of a structure of a central repository within the common plant model;

FIG. 11 is a schematic overview of the hierarchy model applied in the common plant model;

FIG. 12 is a schematic overview of the hierarchy models according to the existing ISA-95 and ISA-88 standards;

FIG. 13 is a schematic overview of an example for the hierarchy according to the hierarchy model shown in FIG. 11;

FIG. 14 is a schematic overview of a node template to be used for the creation of nodes according to the node model shown in FIG. 9;

FIG. 15 is a schematic overview of a group model applied in the common plant model;

FIG. 16 is a schematic overview of a graph model applied in the common plant model;

FIG. 17 is a schematic overview of the management of movable equipment (plant items) within the common plant model;

FIG. 18 is a schematic overview of an integration model to integrate DCS and SCADA hierarchies into a MES hierarchy according to the hierarchy model shown in FIG. 11;

FIG. 19 is a schematic overview of a collaboration model to integrate DCS and SCADA hierarchies into the MES hierarchy according to the hierarchy model shown in FIG. 11;

FIG. 20 is a schematic overview of an example for a hierarchical distribution of nodes to different runtime servers;

FIG. 21 is a schematic overview of an example for a hierarchical distribution applying a single node selection;

FIG. 22 is a schematic overview of an example on a non-hierarchical distribution of nodes which typically represents an DCS use case;

FIG. 23 is a schematic overview of a runtime architecture and the integration of the common plant model into an over-all plant architecture; and

FIG. 24 is a schematic overview of the common plant model and the applications using the common plant model.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

In the following the object model of the common plant model—hereinafter referred to as CPM—is described from a realization independent perspective. The general idea for the creation and application of the CPM is to adopt a single software platform for the control and execution of a production process wherein MES, SCADA and DCS+ system are assigned to distinct tasks within the usually very complex realization of the software platform customized for a distinct manufacturing plant. The customized software platform is hereinafter also referred to as project.

The CPM aims to model and organize each relevant item in the physical manufacturing plant. A physical plant item could represent fixed equipment, movable equipment, tools, assets, etc. This specification uses the term “CPM Node” for physical plant items. The objective of a CPM Node is to aggregate different aspects for the modeling of single plant physical elements. The aggregation involves the public interface parameters, as well as the automation parameters. All CPM Nodes are characterized by a set of common parameters (unique identifier, name, display name for multilingual support, description, etc.) and by an additional set which is specific for each node type (level for tank, temperature for the oven, availability for a press-machine). CPM Node parameters can be consumed by external applications (e.g. UI, OEE.), used for data representation or for implementing business logic.

The following table provides a brief description of the most frequent plant items:

TABLE 1

Error! No text of specified style in document.

Type
Description

Plant structure
Physical production equipment

Equipment modeled in an ISA-95
(fixed location in the equipment hierarchy)

compliant hierarchy.
Example: Mixers, reactors, assembly lines,

etc.

Premises/Work centers

Areas/Cells where physical equipment and

other types of equipment are located. They

sometimes need to be cleaned (e.g. for Life

Science Industry) and maintained under

specific environmental conditions. They are

always “locations” for other resources.

Example: Receiving area, Weighing room,

Quality control room, and Sterile

manufacturing room.

Storage equipment

Equipment where materials are stored (e.g.

warehouse locations, buffer locations, tanks,

etc.)

Virtual lines

Temporary organization of physical

equipment for fulfilling a specific production.

Movable equipment
Containers

Equipment used to contain/transport
Any type of container, used to keep or move

materials.
material.

Containers can be moved between
Pallets

locations during manufacturing
A particular type of container

operations.
Other movable equipment

Tools can be attached on such
Movable tanks, AGVs, Forklifts

equipment.

They can be attached to physical

equipment.

They can contain other movable

equipment

Auxiliary Tools
Instruments

Instruments, devices and tools used for
They are not used to apply transformations,

executing manufacturing operations.
but they give measures and values on the

They can be attached to equipment (fixed
product (e.g. balances and thermometers).

or movable).
Tools

They are used in operations to transform the

product (e.g. filters, drills, mold for press

machine and cutters).

Workstation

The workstation represents the computer

station from which the operator accesses to

the applications. The workstation name is not

the computer name on the network but is a

logical name.

The physical ID (computer ID) must be linked

to only one logical ID (workstation name)

Printers

E.g. label printers

Additional devices

Any additional device that must be modeled

in the system, whose properties have to be

configured and used during manufacturing

operations.

FIG. 1 schematically shows a library model that is used in the CPM. A library according to this library model is an abstract object that has two concrete representations: a project library and a global library. A library generally contains predefined objects that can be reused (i.e. types and templates and hierarchy definitions) as well as any objects serving as master copies. he CPM foresees two types of libraries as mentioned above:

A Global Library is a project-independent library which can be used by several projects. A user can loosely couple global libraries to a project by means of the “shows” association. All thereby related global libraries can be used when working on a project. In practical Global Library aims to release product/industry specific Type definitions as explained hereinafter in more detail in order to meet a set of cross-functionalities (e.g. equipment types for food and beverage micro vertical industry).

A Project Library is a unique part of a project. It contains all project master data. A Project aggregates one and only one Project Library.

The objects that are comprised in a library are:

Types, e.g. see CPM node type model explained later in FIG. 9;

Template, e.g. see facet model, rule model explained later in FIGS. 3 and 7 resp.

Hierarchy definitions

The global library is provided by different automation specific products, such as MES, SCADA, DCS+, and can be specialized for micro-verticals (e.g. Food and Beverage, Automotive, etc.). Ech global library is versioned.

The objective of a project library is to manage/contain all types and templates and their proper set of functionalities relevant for a dedicated customer project. The project library is versioned, too.

A CPM Node Type as schematically shown in FIG. 2 and contained in a library, represents the main object type managed by the CPM and is used to model physical plant items. CPM Node Type contains:

Header, providing the identity information of the CPM Node Type (unique identifier, name, description, versioning, etc.);

One Structure Facet for high level representation;

Optionally one Automation Facet for automation representation;

Optionally one or multiple Functional Facets for different functional aspects;

Optionally one or multiple Wiring Charts defining the relationship between the Facets; and

Optionally one to multiple CPM Node Views providing a view to CPM Node data exposed by the Structure Facet, such as icon representation in plant displays, or so-called faceplates for detailed views.

As it can be seen here for the description of the CPM node type model the facet model plays an important role in the CPM object model and is therefore described later on with respect to FIG. 3. More information regarding the wiring chart model is given with reference to FIG. 4.

CPM Node Types can be defined for dedicated levels within defined hierarchies. Therefore, one or multiple Hierarchy Levels can be assigned to a CPM Node Type. This enables guidance in an engineering system to create CPM Nodes in a hierarchy at their intended level. CPM Node Type Templates support reuse of CPM Node Type template definitions for similar CPM Node Types inside a library. This increases ease of use in the CPM Node engineering workflow (e.g. creation and management of CPM nodes in the plant).

A CPM Node Type Header is defined as a set of information to uniquely identify a CPM Node Type. This information cannot be extended by users. The table below lists the relevant parameters:

TABLE 2

Error! No text of specified style in document.

Attribute
Description

Identifier
Unique identifier for system-internal use only (not

human readable)

Name
Canonical (mono-lingual) unique name used for

name-based addressing

DisplayName
Multilingual display name used for UI

Description
Additional multilingual description

Version
Version information

IsMovable
Defines if the physical plant item (i.e. equipment) is

movable

IsLocked
Protection flag in order to prevent node type modification

FIG. 3 schematically shows an overview on the facet model applied in the CPM. A Facet is configured to extend the CPM Node by exposing data and functionalities from different domains, related to the Facet scope, filtering and contextualizing them for the plant equipment. By means of a Facet, an external system is able to access to CPM Node information and enrich it by publishing proper business logic results (e.g. KPI calculation).

One of the most important facets is the Automation Facet which is a unique, but optional element intended as physical representation from the automation perspective. The Automation Facet relates to one or multiple Structure Tag Types in order to exchange data with the automation system. Thus, the Automation Facet in conjunction with a corresponding Structure Tag type acts like a wrapper to the automation system allowing to use the CPM Node Type for different automation system types.

At CPM Node instance level, the Automation Facet of the CPM Node relates to corresponding Structure Tag type instance inside the process image of the runtime system managing, controlling and executing the production process. Automation Facet Templates support reuse of Automation Facet template definitions for similar Automation Facets inside a library. This increases ease of use in the CPM Node engineering workflow.

The Structure Facet is a mandatory element representing the public interface of the CPM Node. Structure Facet defines the external CPM Node interface through the Interface Member that it exposes. External business logic or User Interface, through CPM Node structure facet, can:

Read and write parameters of a CPM Node; and

Define a subscription to a parameter of a CPM Node.

The Structure Facet may optionally relate to a Structure Tag Type in order to exchange data with the process image for interface member value persistency. At CPM Node instance level, the Structure Facet of the CPM Node relates to corresponding Structure Tag instance inside the process image of the runtime system. Depending on the configuration of the Structure Tag, IOWA services may apply additional functionality such as alarm condition monitoring and/or data logging.

A Functional Facets optionally enrich the CPM Node with additional functional aspects. Examples for Functional Facets are:

OEE: providing CPM node availability represented by any equipment by means “OEE Facet”.

Batch Control: assigns batch information to a CPM node representing a Unit via a “Batch Facet”.

Maintenance: calculation of operation hours, maintenance intervals by means of “Maintenance Facet”.

Material management: assigns material information including quantity to a CPM Node representing a storage location via a “Material Facet”.

MES, SCADA and DCS products deliver their required Function Facets via their own libraries. The Functional Facet is a logical container providing data interfaces for exchange data coming from different products or system sources to the CPM. It allows loosely coupling between different existing systems that interact with the CPM, moreover allows systems working independently of each other in a way that if one of them is momentarily slow or unavailable it doesn't slow down or kill the entire system (loose coupling).

The facet objective is to cover certain functionality (e.g. Automation System, Overall Equipment Effectiveness, Quality, Diagnostic, etc.) by offering a subset of data and functions filtered and configured for the CPM Node Type that is using it. Functional Facet Templates support reuse of Functional Facet template definitions for similar same or similar Functional Facets inside a library, e.g. the definition of an OEE or Material Facet which applies to a set of CPM Node Types within a library.

A Facet is an Interface that provides a set of Interface Members. Hence, each Facet is able to expose Interface Members. The table below lists the general information for interface member parameter definition:

TABLE 3

Error! No text of specified style in document.

Attribute
Description

Identifier
Interface member identifier (it must be unique)

Name
Interface member name

DisplayName
Interface member multilingual name

Data type
Interface member data type

Direction
Interface member binding direction

(input/output/input-output)

Read Only
It indicates if the interface member value cannot be

modified by users during execution

The Interfaces should accessible with a simple namespace string, something like mixerA.OEEFacet.Status.

A Decorator is an annotation that can be added to interface members. The purpose of the decorator is to extend the interface member. The interface member can be extended according to user specific needs. The table below lists the general parameters for decorator definition.

TABLE 4

Error! No text of specified style in document.

Attribute
Description

Identifier
Decorator identifier (it must be unique)

Key
Decorator key

Data type
Boolean, Integer, String decorators supported.

Value
Decorator value

CPM releases system decorators as well as offers the possibility to create new ones. Examples of default system decorator are listed in the following table:

TABLE 5

Examples for default system decorators

Decorator
Description

HMIRelevant
Suggest that interface member is originally designed to

be used for HMI system

NodeRelevant
Suggest that interface member is originally designed to

be published within the structure facet

PIM
Suggest that interface member is originally designed to

mirror back to Process Image (available only interface

members belonging to structure facet)

Restriction: Structure Facet only

Parts of the Structure Facet are “mirrored” back to the process image to support alarming, logging, and other aspects of tags without the need to re-implement all these features in the CPM runtime.

Interface member decorator are available:

At engineering for easier interface member manipulation.

At runtime for detecting improper data manipulation or instance marshaling rules.

Example of decorator use can be:

Read-only: value cannot be modified during execution, example: tank's capacity, equipment's mobility;

Read-write: value can be modified during execution, example: quantity in the tank, sterilization status)

FIG. 4 schematically shows a Wire Chart Model applied within the CPM. A Wiring Chart defines the interaction between Interface Members of different Facets. A Wire is drawn from one Interface Member to another. The Wiring Chart Model supports Rules in order the adapt values for Interface-specific needs.

FIG. 5 shows a first example for a Wiring Chart. If the interface members of two different facets don't require any data manipulation, the wiring is direct (e.g. IMb.2→IMc.2). If the interface members, which belong to different facets, require data manipulation, the wiring is done by means of a mediator object called rule (e.g. IMa.1→rule→IMc.1). This approach allows always specifying 1:1 connection between two interface members. The decoupling in two separate objects (rule and connection) allows writing reusable code, independent from the interface members and connection. Interface members connected by a wire must be of the same type of Interface members.

The wire bonding process is mainly used to propagate and align Facet parameters which are linked to a specific CPM Node. This aspect decreases the engineering effort and allows the engineer to re-use parameters already in place. Another aspect is data adaptation. The wire bonding process carried out by various kind of parameter: in case of a wired pair parameters needs some kind of data manipulation, a dedicated environment is offered to the Engineer to specify the conversion logic. The wiring is able to connect objects that expose their public interface as a list of interface members. A pair of interface member defines a Connection. The wiring connections and rules are organized within the wiring charts according to the Wiring Chart Model. The CPM Wiring Model, including wiring charts with rules and connections, is an optional part of the CPM Node.

A wiring chart has a list of rules and a list of connections. The wiring model is partitioned in several wiring charts in order to:

a) separate different project responsibilities (e.g. SCADA team and MES team working on the same CPM Node Type);

b) separate different product implementation (e.g. SCADA, MES, DCS) on the same project; and

c) manage complexity.

Since rule interface member and facet interface member are defined in the same way, it is possible to connect two or more rules using the same mechanism described in the previous paragraph as this is shown for a second wiring chart example in FIG. 6. The connection from Facet A, IMb.1 goes via a first rule (upper box) and a second rule (lower box) to Facet C, IMc.2. Both rules can be engineered independently.

FIG. 7 schematically shows rule model used within the wiring chart model which both are applied in the CPM. The Wiring rule is necessary when:

a) the wire between interface members requires any kind of data adaptation or manipulation in terms of rule; and

b) More than two interface member have to be connected.

Just as the facets also the rule exposes itself by means of interface members. The logic inside the rule is realized with a Script that can contain more than one Script Function. An authorized user can create a Script Function or use an existent one available in a Library. The script is meant to be stateless. In case of a state must be maintained between different of executions of the same rule a Local Variables must be defined. Because of rule is independent from connections and facet interface members, rules can be organized in libraries so that they can be reused as building blocks. FIG. 8 schematically shows a third example for a wiring chart involving the mechanism of variable and script. The example of FIG. 8 therefore can describe the following case:

The wiring chart involves the facets Facet A and Facet C through the mediator RULE;

The variable within the rule contains the counter value;

The script within the rule updates the current counter value with the value of the interface member rule.1 if the machine status is active (rule.2→1); and

The Counter is reset when the machine status changes from 1 to 0 (Facet A.2 passes from 1 to 0).

FIG. 8 now schematically illustrates the design of a CPM Node which represents the instance of the CPM Node Type. The CPM Node contains a CPM Node Header which provides its identity information (unique identifier, name, description, versioning, etc.). A CPM Repository controls the lifecycle of each single CPM Node. A CPM Node instance inherits all its structures (i.e. Structure Facet, Automation Facet, certain Functional Facets, and Wiring Charts) from the CPM Node Type. The reference to the CPM Node Type is valid throughout the entire lifecycle in order to apply type changes at runtime to the CPM Node instance. The configuration engineer may overwrite properties at CPM Node level in order to apply distinct behavior to the instance. Such properties are default values such as set-points, value ranges, and CPM Node Views (in case that multiple ones are defined for a CPM Node Type).

In order to reduce complexity, wiring charts and rules are not subject for changes at instance level. The CPM Node can be further extended with user defined parameters in order to meet customer needs. The CPM Node Header is defined as a list of information which objective is to uniquely identify a CPM Node. The table below lists the relevant parameters:

TABLE 5

CPM Node Header

Attribute
Description

Identifier
Identifier (it must be unique)

Name
Name

Display Name
Multilingual display name

Description
Additional description

Version
Version information

Hierarchy path
Node path according to selected hierarchies

list

Target system
System field for distribution specification (e.g.

CPMNode A1 will run on EV1)

Is Movable
It defines if the equipment is a movable equipment

Is Locked
Protection flag in order to forbid node type modification

The CPM Runtime environment manages a flat node repository that contains all CPM nodes. The objective of the CPM Node repository is to manage the CPM Node life cycle. So that, each time a CPM Node/s is created or imported (bulk import), automatically its/their instance is managed independently from the possible hierarchies that the CPM node/s shall belong to. According to possible domain models (e.g. production, maintenance, energy), it is possible to organize nodes in different hierarchies as schematically shown in FIG. 10.

Another outstanding improvement of the CPM is realized by the Hierarchy model which is schematically shown in FIG. 11. The CPM supports hierarchical object structures in order to organize equipment in different way in order to meet project and business process needs at the same time. This means that equipment (physical plant items) can be organized as a part of a production area (see also FIG. 10 lower left box for the production hierarchy). Similarly, the same equipment can be organized in a location structure where the objects fit into the physical/geographical context (e.g. it would show exactly where in the plant the Mixer is installed). Additional views could be defined by the user in order to organize the equipment for electricians, maintenance engineers so that they can work with appropriate views (see also FIG. 10, lower mid box and right box respectively). Whenever there might be the necessity to sort the nodes in a new hierarchy, a new hierarchy definition can be made by using a hierarchy model template. Within the hierarchy, the hierarchy levels can be defined as well as possible constraints among those hierarchy levels. In following the node types can be assigned to the required new hierarchy. Each node therefore comprises a respective assignment to a specific selectable hierarchy definition and to a distinct hierarchy level within this hierarchy definition.

Hence, the objective of hierarchy definition is to define several organizations (that can have different level of details) so that the user can organize its equipment according to functional/physical/logical aspects. In addition it is possible to specify constraints when defining hierarchies' structure (e.g. an Area cannot contain a Site).

The aim of hierarchy model is to support hierarchically organized structures. The CPM nodes, which belong to a unique repository, can be organized in different hierarchies. FIG. 12 shows an example of a combined view of ISA 95 and ISA 88 hierarchy models to describe the domain objects of the repository and the hierarchy. In this example Enterprise, site, area, work center, work unit are hierarchy levels.

Before a hierarchy can be built with CPM Nodes, it is necessary to specify a Hierarchy Definition. The engineering system can hide the need of Hierarchy Definition by means of default hierarchies (e.g. ISA 88/95, Parent-Child with no constrains). The Hierarchy Definition contains the Hierarchy Levels and the relationship to each other via parent-child link of the Hierarchy Level Constrains.

The tables below show an example of one Hierarchy definition:

TABLE 6

Hierarchy entity definition - Hierarchy Definition

Hierarchy Definition
Hierarchy Level

Equipment
Site

Hierarchy
Building

Line

Machine

The above table 6 lists the Hierarchy Levels for single Hierarchy definition (Equipment Hierarchy).

TABLE 7

Hierarchy entity definition - Hierarchy Level

Parent Hierarchy

Hierarchy Level
Level

Site
—

Building
Site

Line
Building

Machine
Line

The above table 7 lists the Hierarchy Constrains among Hierarchy levels. The “concrete” hierarchy is built using the CPM Nodes available in the CPM repository (see FIG. 13, right box). This example is shown schematically in FIG. 13.

The CPM Node Template is created from instances and contains all information, including Automation and Functional Facet configuration, of these instances and hierarchy definition. From the practical point of view, the user is able to reuse a CPM Node Template to create multiple CPM Node instances. Depending on the template it could be a simple unit with few equipment modules or an entire Packaging Line. FIG. 14 schematically illustrates an example of a packaging line, usually present in a bottling plant.

A Bottling packaging line template consists of a number of CPM Nodes, such as a:

Filler,

De-palletizer,

Pasteurizer, and

Palletizer.

Each CPM Node contains its structure facet and MES functional facets which are relevant for the Bottling process. In case of multiple facets contained in one CPM Node, the CPM Node contains wiring charts, too. The CPM Node instances, which are created from a CPM Node Template, still maintain the reference to their CPM Node Types.

The group model schematically shown in FIG. 15 allows a grouping of CPM nodes. This type of organization consists of grouping (statically or dynamically) a set of CPM Node both at engineering and at runtime phase. CPM Nodes can be manually added to a Group. A CPM Node can be assigned to multiple groups, too.

Typical examples are:

group CPM Nodes that belong to the same ERP cost center; and

group CPM Nodes according to maintenance teams.

TABLE 8

Group model

Attribute
Description

Identifier
Identifier (it must be unique)

Name
Name

Display Name
Multilingual display name

Description
Additional description

Version
Version information

FIG. 16 shows schematically the graph model applied in the CPM. The graphs are used to model the physical/logical connections between CPM Nodes. Each connection can contain an attribute list (time, cost etc.). The system recognizes all possible graphs by analyzing and filtering the connections among graph nodes.

The Graph model comprises:

Graph: graph definition in terms of unique identifier, name and display name;

GraphConnection: a couple of CPM Nodes are linked via Graph Connection link; and

GraphConnectionAttribute: each GraphConnection is further enrich with more than one attribute.

As an example, a graph is used as a constraint for the routings definition (e.g. packaging line).

Movable equipment is an important and mandatory feature especially in process and pharmaceutical industry. Movable equipment is uniquely identified and has the same properties/features as a static CPM Node (Name, Description, Facets and proper Interface members, etc). In addition to that movable equipment is moved from one hierarchy position to another one.

As for all other CPM Nodes, Movable equipment's life cycle is in charge of CPM Node Repository. From a hierarchical organization point of view, the Movable Equipment is:

assigned to a “Storage/Static location” (e.g. kitting area, Site etc.), see line for static location in FIG. 17 dynamically moved into new assigned location (in runtime move the equipment in the hierarchy), see line for dynamic location in FIG. 17.

“query-able” by path (hierarchical view) or by its general identity information by means of CPM Node Header addressable via path in the hierarchy showing current location.

With this concept, movable equipments can be addressed by fixed IDs (they will not be changed when the equipment moves) like:

- CPM-Path of the storage static location
- Unique Identifier

And it can be addressed/shown by changing IDs:

- CNS-path to the location

In the following, integration and collaboration scenarios are explained in more detail. From the project implementation point of view, four different scenarios are foreseen.

1. Greenfield Top Down, Implemented Using SIEMENS® Portfolio:

Top down from plant design perspective means a brand new CPM project where the CPM node composition can be enriched in any time with functionality coming from different automation system products.

This does not imply that the commissioning is done for all products at the same time (e.g. SCADA can be commissioned before MES)

2. Greenfield Bottom Up, Implemented Using SIEMENS® Portfolio:

A CPM project is already in place and, in a second time, additional functionality is added (e.g. MES project not designed in the first project phase and SCADA/DCS already in operation). CPM Nodes can be enriched with MES functions.

Please note that in case of regulated industries where the existing project is validated (“sealed”), there could be the case where a new validation is required or a “proxy CPM Node” has to be engineered (see scenario 3).

3. Brownfield Bottom Up, Implemented Using SIEMENS® Portfolio:

Different OEMs deliver part of the whole plant by independent CPM projects. In a second time, additional functionalities are requested on top of commissioned project. Example: MES on top of existing SCADA projects.

Unless there is an owner that takes the responsibility for changes the OEM system there is the need to create a new CPM project. The engineering effort could be mitigated if the source code of “sealed” project is available or “sealed” project structure can be only browsed for CPM project extension.

4. Brownfield, Bottom Up, 3rd Party Systems:

In this case none of the strategies can be applied because of third party systems that do not conform to CPM model at all. Only interface level approach can be applied (e.g. OPC). For the above mentioned scenarios, the following two models shall be applied.

First model is the Integration Model which is schematically shown in FIG. 18. The integrated model shall be applied in all not “sealed” systems. A “sealed” scenario is a system that cannot be modified from the engineering point of view. Typical example is a system released from OEMs which is a validated systems in regulated industries. In order to implement an integrated scenario, the systems must not be treated as “sealed” in order to extend CPM Nodes with Functional Facets coming from different automation system products.

As a specific feature of the integration model, the hierarchies of the SCADA and the DCS system are mounted to the hierarchy of the MES. Therefore, both SCADA and DCS comprise in its specific nodes the facets from the MES. A duplication of the divers hierarchies is omitted which leads to a break on the seal of the SCADA and DCS system.

The second model is the collaboration model which is schematically illustrated in FIG. 19. The collaboration model is the preferred model for application on all kind of “sealed” systems. Because the system cannot be modified from the engineering point of view, in the collaboration model exists the need to create proxy CPM Node (CPM node with attribute “proxy off” referencing CPM Node counterpart) representation of relevant objects of the sealed system. The system will provide transparent access to remote CPM Nodes belonging to the “sealed” system, but in the separated hierarchy. Non merger of hierarchy is done.

The engineering system shall support:

Copying the hierarchy (selected parts) from the lower level systems to the upper level system; and

Copying the structure facets (selected parts) from the lower level systems to the upper level system.

In this scenario, value to the present solution of Siemens® can be added by the propagation of later modifications on the Sealed System and possibly applying consistency rules in order to alert on conflicts.

Therefore, in the collaboration model, the SCADA and DCS hierarchies are imported and integrated into the MES hierarchy (e.g. hierarchy according to ISA-95 and ISA-88). MES facets are exclusively used in the MES only which is completely different from the integration model. Both the SCADA and the DCS systems remain sealed and the respective hierarchies are duplicated as it can be seen in FIG. 19 where the nodes of the SCADA and DCS systems are duplicated into the MES. In this regards, cross-node and cross-system wiring are required which means for example that MES facets have to be linked via the wiring to non-MES facets in the SCADA and/or DCS system.

In the present example, a single dedicated Engineering Instance is in charge of configuring hierarchies, groups and graphs and how CPM nodes belong to them. The full CPM Node configuration is then distributed, kept aligned and locally cached in all server stations by the CPM Runtime and the IOWA Name Service. This Engineering Instance (engineering system ES) is responsible to send each runtime server its proper configuration as this is shown in FIG. 20. If this runtime server is not accessible, the engineering system cannot download the new configuration to the target. A redundant configuration of the runtime server reduces the probability to not apply engineering changes as shown in FIG. 20

The distribution of the CPM Nodes to different runtime servers is supported and it can be performed according to one or both of the following strategies.

1. Selecting Higher a Level Hierarchy Node Containing Relevant CPM Nodes from One of the Hierarchies:

In case of distribution driven by a selected hierarchy, all child nodes of the selected parent node are distributed to the same target server station until a sub-ordinated node is distributed to another server.

Nodes not assigned to the distribution hierarchy may be highlighted to the user.

The central server can be a dedicated server station (as in the example) or even part of one of the “regular” server stations.

- This approach enables easy engineering in terms of distributing the CPM.

2. Selecting Single CPM Node from One of the Hierarchy

This example is schematically shown in FIG. 1. Even if the majority of CPM Nodes can be distributed according to the selection of a higher-level hierarchy node, certain, individual CPM Nodes may be distributed differently. Hence, the configuration engineer assigns single nodes to different systems (e.g. Line_22 to Server Station A). The configuration engineer configures one or multiple hierarchies, groups, and graphs and how CPM Nodes belong to them via a dedicated engineering system. The entire CPM Node configuration is then distributed to one or multiple runtime stations. This option enables high flexibility in terms of distributing the CPM.

Non-hierarchical distribution as schematically shown in FIG. 22 is a typical DCS+ use case. In contrary to the hierarchical distribution (see previous paragraphs) no dedicated runtime server station may exist as central server providing the common, higher-level hierarchy entity levels. A dedicated Engineering Station is in charge of configuring hierarchies, groups and graphs and how CPM nodes belong to them. The full CPM Node configuration is then distributed, kept aligned and locally cached in all server stations by mean of the CPM Runtime and the IOWA Name Service. This is necessary to provide a transparent view to the plant hierarchy to each client station, regardless to which server station a client station may be connected with. In this distribution mode, a dedicated runtime server exists as communication partner for the Engineering Station. If this runtime server fails, no parameterization is needed. FIG. 22 therefore describes how the previous example configuration is distributed to three peer runtime stations:

The Name Service of each runtime server represents the local process or work cell as well as “mounted” information concerning the process or work cells that have been distributed to the peer runtime stations. This is accomplished by means of so-called “mounted to” relations linking remote information to the local content:

System spanning information of the “Site” entity is therefore available at each server station.

A client station connected to any of the peer server stations is able to browse data of all peer server stations, hence the entire plant model, too.

Each name service is able to provide references to local and remote objects, so that a client is able to access objects in a distributed system.

This approach does not require a central server for a distributed CPM.

FIG. 23 schematically illustrates how the CPM is integrated into an Over-All Architecture of the bundle of software applications which execute and control the manufacturing process in the plant (Runtime Architecture). FIG. 23 therefore represents the relation between CPM and applications belonging to different products and the functional dependence of CPM from Scripting Framework (wiring chart execution engine), User Manager and Access Control component. Each single software system MES, SCADA and DCS+ now comprise both individual engineering and runtime systems which couple to the CPM. Therefore, none of these systems needs an individual system to model the production plan for its specific needs and demands. The engineering is therefore concentrated in the CPM which can be addressed from the engineering systems of the divers software applications (here MES, SCADA and DCS+). Each individual engineering specialist therefore bases his particular engineering work on the models described above and can therefore model his individual needs within the scope of models for the nodes, the facets, the rules, the wiring, the hierarchy and so on. Therefore, engineering now becomes completely transparent and permeable to all system engineers regardless for which specific software application they are working for.

GLOSSARY/ABBREVIATIONS

Term
Definition

ADI
Simatic IT ® data access interface

AGV
Automatic Guided Vehicle: Vehicles designed to transport goods,

connecting different machines within the warehouse

Automation Facet
The automation facet is in charge of collecting all the structured tag

types that the CPM Node needs for connection to automation

system.

CPM
Common Plant Model as shown in FIG. 24

CPM Node
It represents the equipment instance.

CPM Node Type
It represents the main object type managed by the Common Plant

Model (e.g. Valve, Mixer, Conveyor etc.)

CPM Node
It represents the template object that the user is able to reuse for

Template
CPM Node instances. It could represent simple (containing one

CPM Node instance) as well as complex (containing hierarchically

structured CPM Node Instances) objects (valve or packaging line

template).

Functional Facet
Functional Facets enrich the CPM Node with functional aspects

such as maintenance information, efficiency etc.

IOWA Runtime
Comprehends the runtime platform of IOWA

IPC
Inter Process Communication

MES
Manufacturing Execution System

OEE
Overall equipment effectiveness: OEE quantifies how well a

manufacturing unit performs relative to its designed capacity and to

the material produced, during the periods when it is scheduled to

run. It is also referred as key performance indicator (KPI)

PIM
Process Image

RDF
Runtime Data Format used by IOWA to store the configuration data

needed at runtime

Structure Facet
The structure facet is in charge of publishing the CPM Node

interface and hiding the complexity of the CPM Node structure.

WCEE
Wiring Chart Execution Engine

Architectural Significant Requirements

The following table lists all architectural significant requirements.

TABLE

Error! No text of specified style in document.

Title
Description

Definition
The term “node” used to identify single object as well as

objects that contain other objects. In the engineering

system, it is possible to create user-defined properties to

the CPM node type.

A node has an Id (unique), a path (unique) and name (not

unique) which is part of the path.

Scope
The common plant model includes information about all

static elements of the plant that need to be exchanged

between different components.

Remarks:

Static = lives longer than 1 day and is being defined by

using engineering methods.

The information is related to physical elements (Common

Equipment Hierarchy) as well as conceptual elements

(Common Master Data).

Hierarchy
The plant model is organized in a hierarchical fashion. It is

possible to navigate through the hierarchy via browsing. It

is possible to reference nodes via their hierarchy name.

Hierarchy name freely
Components using the common plant model should not

defineable
introduce constraints on this hierarchy name that could be

in conflict with other components, node names itself don't

have to be unique when the path name is unique.

Example: For nodes Vessel1/Outlet and Vessel2/Outlet, the

node name is duplicated but the path name is unique. The

system shall support this situation.

Node types
In order to support reuse the CPM supports a type concept

for nodes.

IDs as unchanging
As the path name of a node can be changing when moving

primary identifiers
it, the system shall keep a (non human-readable) unique

object id that keeps the original reference especially with

respect to historical data.

Nested node instances
Node instances may contain other node instances. When a

node instance contains other node instance it can be

considered as a folder.

Number of CPM
There isn't a hard coded limit in the SW regarding number

elements
of node type etc.

Engineering efficiency -
For engineering purpose a section of the hierarchical

Reuse of an hierarchical
structure is reusable as a template in order to create and

section
maintain multiple instances of a CPM items which are

composed of several nodes spanning over several

hierarchical levels. It shall be possible to propagate

template changes to the already existing instances which

are based on the template.

Use case:

In a plant there are 10 equal fillers. A filler in the CPM is

composed by 5 CPM nodes. A configuration engineer

creates the nodes defining the filler only once save it as a

template and creates based on this template the 10 filler

instances in the plant model. Changes in the template like

e.g. adding a node (structural change) and changing a

node's content can be applied to the already exiting

instances which are based on the template.

Node data - Data types
The data of an node may contain members of

type:

Simple data type (Boolean, Integer, Real,

String, etc.)

Enumeration

Structure

Array

Reference to object

Node data - Nested data
Array elements and structure elements may be

types
again from type ‘Simple data type’, ‘Structure’

or ‘Array’ (nested types).

Node data - Access path
Dynamic data of a node is managed in the process image.

The process image is considered to be an integral part of

the CPM. This means addressing of tags shall be possible

by using a nodes unique path + CPM leaf node name +

element path. (e.g. Plant/Section-1/Unit-1/Aggregate-

1/Pump-1.Response.Measuring_point.Speed)

It is possible to copy parts of the hierarchy without getting

uniqueness errors.

Runtime collaboration
To enable runtime collaboration between two or more CPM

servers, the data of a node may be retrieved from another

CPM server and vice versa.

Instance specific data
In a real plant there are often nodes that partly differ from

an already existing node types. E.g. a new unit has an

additional flap than the original “Flap” object type. To avoid

defining a completely new object type for this deviating kind

of unit, the node (representing this unit) shall have

optionally instance specific data and facets. Instance

specific data and facets only exist at the object instance

and not at the object

type. Nevertheless changes at the object type shall still be

propagated to the object instance even it this has object

specific data.

Instance specific data can optionally be taken over to the

object type.

Facets - general
In order to support cross-versioning, CPM shall act as a

repository and not include business logic. Facets of an

object represent the usage of the object's data (e.g.

alarming, archiving, audit, etc.) and can be attached or

integrated to nodes (e.g. by an product like SCADA 2015).

Facets can be used to expose the behavior of the node but

the implementation of the behavior is not part of the

Common Plant Model. Facets on a node are optional and

defined within the configuration of the type/node. Logic for

wiring of facets is not a problem and may be included with

CPM.

Single repository for
Engineering of a plant model is possible interchangeably by

engineering
any engineering system of SCADA, DCS or MES

independent whether the project starts as DCS, SCADA or

MES project. There is no necessity for entering data twice

or for synchronizing different repositories. This requirement

can be fulfilled best by using a single repository for

engineering data without forcing each product to adopt the

same language natively.

Single repository for
For a single (non-distributed system) there exists a single

runtime
repository for the common plant model at runtime,

independent whether the project starts as DCS, SCADA or

MES project. The intention of this requirement is

a) to avoid duplication of data in different parts of the

runtime and subsequent potential inconsistencies, and

b) to avoid synchronization overhead that could result if

information (e.g. concerning the same node) is spread

across several repositories.

Client notification
It is possible for components to register for certain objects

in order to get notified of runtime changes of dynamic

properties or of engineering changes of static properties.

System Type protection
The system shall distinguish between system defined node

types (types that come with a system library or with a

component) and user defined node types.

It is possible to customize system defined node types by

adding user defined properties. It is also possible to add

user defined node types. It isn't possible to change system

defined object types (the only exceptions are the user

defined properties), to delete system defined object types

or to modify system defined properties.

General types protection
It is possible to add protection flag to node types in order to

forbid node type modification.

Runtime type support
The common plant model supports types at runtime. That

means that a configuration change on a single node type

only forces the engineering system to update one single

object (the type object) at the runtime system. The

subsequent updates of the node instances are executed on

the runtime system.

Properties with dynamic
Nodes can have dynamic properties where the values

values
change at runtime such as e.g. process values, operator

input values or calculation results. Dynamic properties shall

have a timestamp (referring to time of last change) and a

quality code (quality code only for tags).

Properties with static
Nodes can have static properties with values defined during

values
engineering/online delta download. When downloading

changed static properties of an object, dynamic attribute

values shall not get lost.

User and system defined
There are user defined node types which are created

node types
during configuration and predefined system maintained

node types (e.g. coming from global or project library).

System/user defined
In the engineering the system distinguishes between

properties
predefined and user defined properties. For this reason a

reference to the “base” system type must be kept inside the

modified node type.

Schema driven for
A schema based description of the common plant model

equipment description
shall allow equipment type descriptions (meta data). The

schema shall apply to types, type relations and type

properties. It is possible to retrieve information about a type

including its customization from the schema.

The schema is also used for description of export/import

file formats.

Schema driven
A schema based description of the common plant model

versioning
shall include a version information of the common plant

model (meta data). The schema version information

includes in the export/import file formats.

Upgradable
It is possible to upgrade the system maintained part of the

common plant model to a new version without affecting the

customized properties.

Transactional delta
In the scope of CPM it is possible to create, modify or

change
delete a node at runtime. The modification must be

consistent inside one node. Processing (like e.g. execution

of calculations or component methods) for node that is

currently being changed is stopped in order to avoid

inconsistencies. Clients that have registered for

parameterization changes of this node are notified.

Hot standby redundancy
The common plant model supports a hot standby

redundancy scheme that supports engineering changes at

runtime (consistent online delta download) as well as delta

synchronization of dynamic properties. During a

redundancy failover, double processing of the same change

events for dynamic properties shall be prevented via

checking the timestamp of the last change. A calculation

shall not be executed again if the timestamp of the result

attribute indicates that it has already been done.

Transparent distribution
Within the context of one engineering system, it is possible

to distribute the common plant model across different

servers. For clients, this distribution is transparent. This

means that any client can access plant model data on any

server.

Cascading
It is possible to cascade common plant models that have

been engineered independently. This means that individual

installations/plant models can be integrated into a larger

model. This can be done with remodeling (remapping) or

via simple replication of information.

Note: As the individual parts of the cascaded system

continue to work unchanged, cascading typically involves

duplication of information in the different engineering

context of the higher level system.

User rights & roles
The system controls user access to objects in the common

plant model. The access control is object granular. Runtime

access rights: read/write. Engineering access rights: read/

update/create/delete.

If there is a primary node hierarchy defined in engineering,

access rights can be inherited by lower level nodes from

higher level nodes.

Node related version ID
Each node instance in the common plant model

automatically gets a new system maintained version

number after any engineering change/download. This

version number links the runtime representation of the node

to the engineering data. It can be used to make a

consistency check whether current runtime and current

engineering version are really the same.

Version labels for
The user can define a version label for a selection of nodes.

multiple objects
This label can be used to retrieve the individual node

versions from the version repository in the engineering

system. This is implemented similar to version labels as

used in source code control systems.

Consistency check
In case of offline engineering, the system provides the

possibility to compare runtime node versions with

engineering node versions in order to ensure that they

match.

Customization
Step 1: Customization of plant model via customizing node

types.

A set of customized node types can be collected in a

library.

Step 2: Creation of plant hierarchy/instantiation of nodes

Engineering libraries
Libraries can be handled independent of project (export/

import). The engineering system can distinguish between a

global library and a project related library. A new system

release can come with a new global library - installation of

this release shall not affect the project related library

Additional plant
The system supports multiple hierarchies. That means a

hierarchies
single node can be related to multiple hierarchies with

different address path.

Mobile equipment
The system supports movable equipment that means an

equipment can be associated to different location in the

plant. A “Movable equipment” has the same

properties/features as a static node (e.g. Name,

Description, Attributes, Facets, etc.). In addition to “fixed

equipment properties” mobile equipment provides a unique

readable identifier that does not belong to the location

where the mobile equipment is located. Mobile equipment

is represented in the hierarchical view (like the static ones)

in the current location.

Changes regarding
Engineering changes in the hierarchy like

hierarchical structure
adding/deleting/modifying/moving nodes does not result in

any engineering effort regarding the subordinated

nodes/objects in the

hierarchy (e.g. no manually renaming of objects, alarm

sources etc.). E.g. when moving a node in a hierarchy, all

the sub-nodes are also moved. Any references between

nodes remain unaffected. Moving a node from a position to

another in a hierarchy will not affect the relation of the node

in other hierarchies.

Inconsistent changes
Inconsistencies resulting from object/node changes in the

engineering (e.g. deleting data used by other objects) are

checked and reported by

the engineering system. Note: Of course this applies only, if

the engineering system cannot avoid the inconsistency

early on.

Approval of changes
Applying of changes in types/instances needs to

be optionally approved by configuration engineer in the

engineering system.

Engineering - general
Engineering allows to define object types, add, alter and

remove object type properties, instantiate objects from

objects types, add, alter, remove instance specific object

properties, define a hierarchical plant model.

Engineering approach
There are different approaches to creating a plant model:

Top Down (typical in DCS): Plant Model is created

synchronously with the automation;

Bottom Up: Several independently engineered units are

combined to form the plant, but no extra modeling

involved (not a real MES case)

Bottom Up + Top down (typical in SCADA): Several

independently engineered units are integrated into a top

down engineered plant model.

Node data
In the engineering system, it is possible to create user-

defined properties to the CPM node type. These properties

are optionally checked for uniqueness in engineering.

Properties marked for uniqueness cannot be changed at

runtime.

Node data constrains
These properties are optionally checked for constraints like

range checks. Details to be defined.

Decorator for equipment
It is possible to define a MES relevant-flag for SCADA parts

parameter
of CPM to be able to filter the automation facets for MES-

relevant parts only.

Dynamic or static
CPM gives the possibility to set if a property value can be

parameters
modified or not during the execution.

Static properties: value cannot be modified during runtime,

example: tank's capacity, equipment's mobility;

Dynamic properties: value can be modified during

execution, example: quantity in the tank, sterilization

status)

Persistency equipment
CPM gives the possibility to define if a parameter value has

parameters value
not to be permanently stored in CPM storage

Objects assignment
CPM is able to contain DPs/tags as well as additional

objects such as screens.

Connection between
It is possible to use the Common Plant model as screen

CPM and screen
topology.

hierarchy

Remote objects
CPM is able to access Objects of remote systems.

assignment from
Independently if remote systems comprise CPM or not.

distribution point of

view

CPM Distribution
CPM is distributed across several server nodes in a

hierarchical organization. A system on the bottom of the

hierarchy (for example a line) defines its own hierarchy. A

top level system must be able to combine the bottom

hierarchies into one, so there is a complete hierarchy

available in the top level system

CPM Online Engineering
Hierarchy and nodes of the CPM can be created and

changed during runtime.

Support of multiple
It is possible to create more than one hierarchy. e.g.

hierarchies
equipment

hierarchy, screen hierarchy, device hierarchy

Interoperability
It is possible to import and map equipment types and nodes

from third party system. E.g., The equipment is created

starting from a model coming from ERP or PLM and further

enhanced with SCADA/MES functions.

Access control
It is possible to define access rights for CPM by using user

roles definition, e.g.:

no change of “remote” parts of the CPM

Read-only

Rights per tree

Rights per node; lower nodes inherit from nodes above, if

they do not have their own permissions

Multi-language
Each node has a single-language name for identification,

and a multi-language display name

Interface/Wrapper
It is possible to define a wrapper between objects (e.g.

support
valve) in the PLC and CPM, to be able to map different kind

of implementations of one object in different PLCs/different

projects) to one implementation model in the CPM to make

standardization possible.

Data Access
Each system integrated in CPM is able to access data

exposed by the other systems.

Equipment relationships
CPM provides the possibility to define and organize

different relationships among nodes. The capability of

organizing the equipment is not always based on a

hierarchical structure. Other types of relationship must be

taken into account.

Hierarchy

Graph

Group

Node graph relation
CPM provides functional properties so that each graph

specification
relationship among nodes can be further detailed, e.g. the

connection between equipment can be plain or specialized

with:

Capacity (e.g. a pipe flow specification etc.)

Behavior (e.g. FIFO, LIFO, FEFO, etc.)

Topology

Object definition
The user is able to specify additional system properties that

characterize the node from a behavioral point of view. The

CPM node can be defined as:

tool,

fixed equipment

movable equipment

shared equipment among more equipment

etc.

Nodes with and without
CPM gives the possibility to define nodes with and without

automation relation
automation relation

Versioning
CPM manages plant version to allow that all changes

applied to the equipment structure are stored. This allows a

better controlling the compatibility and upgrade of existing

applications where the equipment has already been used.

Revision management
CPM provides the possibility to assign a revision number to

one or more CPM nodes under editing to allow grouping

and uniquely identify all changes.

Undoing of changes
CPM provides the possibility to undo object changes with

reference to a specific revision number

Side by side deployment
CPM provides the possibility to apply type changes either to

of CPM node types
all instances or to a subset.

Process related
CPM gives the possibility to define more than one

constraints
constraint so that a runtime object cannot be modified or

deleted.

Audit trail
CPM supports audit trail for actions or changes on the

system.

Electronic logbook
CPM provides information on the equipment history.

Manual entry into the logbook should also be possible. e.g.

Production activities, maintenance activities, calibration

activities, status changes.

CPM project type
It is possible to define physical objects within CPM either on

agnostic
green-field projects or brown-field projects., e.g.:

Greenfield Top Down with Siemens Portfolio (SCADA

and MES done in meantime)

Greenfield Bottom Up with Siemens Portfolio (first

SCADA then MES)

Brownfield Top Down with Siemens Portfolio (first

SCADA then MES)

Brownfield Top Down 3rd Party SCADA (first SCADA

then MES)

Interchangeable
Engineering of a plant model is possible interchangeable by

Engineering
any engineering system of SCADA, DCS or MES

independent whether the project starts with SCADA, DCS

or MES.

Hierarchy navigation
The CPM supports Hierarchy navigation starting from node

CPM supports SQL like
The user is able to query CPM data (nodes, hierarchies,

query
groups, graphs) including the current values in a relational

way.

Note: Queries support CNS-part in FROM (like already

available in WinCC OA for dpGroups). This enables the

restriction of query results (for current alarms and original

values) to a part of the CNS-tree

Import automation
It is possible to import automation facets from TIA-portal,

facets
from OPC-server, and from 3^rd-party PLC engineering tools

COMMON PLANT MODEL FOR MODELING OF PHYSICAL PLANT ITEMS OF A PRODUCTION PLANT

Information

Publication Number

Date Filed

Date Published

Inventors

Original Assignees

CPC

International Classifications

Abstract

Description

Claims

Priority Claims (1)