ISA88 Part 5 draft: Command, control, status, and functional strategy

We're seeking input on possible language in ISA88 Part 5 draft standard. Figures 6-12 follow, on functional strategy, and other concepts. Please provide comments to ensure the standard is understandable, appropriate, and useful across industries and areas of control, machine control, batch control, and continuous control, as well as flexible and scalable, across hybrid applications. See diagrams. Leave your comments.

05/13/2011


David ChappellA series of discussions follow seeking input on possible language in ISA88 Part 5 draft standard. Figures 6-12 follow with diabrams on functional strategy, and other concepts. Please provide comments to ensure the standard is understandable, appropriate, and useful across industries and areas of control, machine control, batch control, and continuous control, as well as flexible and scalable, across hybrid applications.

      Interactions between modules are generally not managed and are deeply imbedded within the FS as indicated in Figure 6: Traditional Modular Interactions.  In Module A of the Figure 6 example interaction with Module Z occurs from within the body of the FS automation and requires detailed knowledge of the interfaces provided by Module Z.

ISA88 Part 5 draft: Figure 6: Traditional Modular Interactions

  • Command and control can be implemented using simple logic or more sophisticated interfaces based on data types other than Boolean for exchange of command and control as represented in Figure 7 and Figure 8.

ISA88 Part 5 draft: Figure 7: Simple Logic Interface

ISA88 Part 5 draft: Figure 8: More Sophisticated Interface

  • Not all traditional implementations of commands by a module are fault tolerant, often providing little to no error checking or error recovery.
  • Not all modules are traditionally designed with a command and control interface that manages access by external entities as indicated in Figure 9: Interactions of multiple entities.
  • Traditional approaches generally require that if more than one entity requires the use of a module, those external entities must interact in a way that prevents unintended actions by the FS.

  • Traditional approaches often avoid using small reusable modules because they lack a standard approach for managing their interactions. Figure 10 and Figure 11 represent two approaches to automate the same system. The 2 module implementation minimizes module interaction where the 12 module implementation maximizes reusable modules.

ISA88 Part 5 draft: Figure 9: Interactions of multiple entities

Figure 11: Traditional Implementation with 12 modules

  • Figure 12: Some possible splits between Procedural and Basic ControlThe separation between equipment phase and equipment module procedural, coordination and basic control across modules is not always pure as represented in Figure 12. For the purposes of Part 5, procedural control is identified as any control that has a quiescent state that requires an external entity to issue a command to cause it to leave that state and carry out the intended functional strategy, at the conclusion of the execution of the functional strategy the quiescent state will be reentered.  Basic control does not have a quiescent state as part of its functional strategy and is capable of self direction from and to any state.

Do you understand the draft language? Is it useful across disciplines? Does anything confuse you or require additional explanations? Please comment below. Don't see the comment box? Click here and scroll down.

- David A. Chappell, Complete Manufacturing Automation associates - LLC

www.CMAa-LLC.com

chappell.da@gmail.com

Also read:

ISA88 Part 5 draft: Traditional automation designs for batch recipes

ISA88 Part 5 draft: Resource Manager implementation question, answer

Revised ISA88 Part 5 definitions



No comments
The Top Plant program honors outstanding manufacturing facilities in North America. View the 2013 Top Plant.
The Product of the Year program recognizes products newly released in the manufacturing industries.
The Engineering Leaders Under 40 program identifies and gives recognition to young engineers who...
The true cost of lubrication: Three keys to consider when evaluating oils; Plant Engineering Lubrication Guide; 11 ways to protect bearing assets; Is lubrication part of your KPIs?
Contract maintenance: 5 ways to keep things humming while keeping an eye on costs; Pneumatic systems; Energy monitoring; The sixth 'S' is safety
Transport your data: Supply chain information critical to operational excellence; High-voltage faults; Portable cooling; Safety automation isn't automatic
Case Study Database

Case Study Database

Get more exposure for your case study by uploading it to the Plant Engineering case study database, where end-users can identify relevant solutions and explore what the experts are doing to effectively implement a variety of technology and productivity related projects.

These case studies provide examples of how knowledgeable solution providers have used technology, processes and people to create effective and successful implementations in real-world situations. Case studies can be completed by filling out a simple online form where you can outline the project title, abstract, and full story in 1500 words or less; upload photos, videos and a logo.

Click here to visit the Case Study Database and upload your case study.

Maintaining low data center PUE; Using eco mode in UPS systems; Commissioning electrical and power systems; Exploring dc power distribution alternatives
Synchronizing industrial Ethernet networks; Selecting protocol conversion gateways; Integrating HMIs with PLCs and PACs
Why manufacturers need to see energy in a different light: Current approaches to energy management yield quick savings, but leave plant managers searching for ways of improving on those early gains.

Annual Salary Survey

Participate in the 2013 Salary Survey

In a year when manufacturing continued to lead the economic rebound, it makes sense that plant manager bonuses rebounded. Plant Engineering’s annual Salary Survey shows both wages and bonuses rose in 2012 after a retreat the year before.

Average salary across all job titles for plant floor management rose 3.5% to $95,446, and bonus compensation jumped to $15,162, a 4.2% increase from the 2010 level and double the 2011 total, which showed a sharp drop in bonus.

2012 Salary Survey Analysis

2012 Salary Survey Results

Maintenance and reliability tips and best practices from the maintenance and reliability coaches at Allied Reliability Group.
The One Voice for Manufacturing blog reports on federal public policy issues impacting the manufacturing sector. One Voice is a joint effort by the National Tooling and Machining...
The Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals an organization devoted...
Join this ongoing discussion of machine guarding topics, including solutions assessments, regulatory compliance, gap analysis...
IMS Research, recently acquired by IHS Inc., is a leading independent supplier of market research and consultancy to the global electronics industry.
Maintenance is not optional in manufacturing. It’s a profit center, driving productivity and uptime while reducing overall repair costs.
The Lachance on CMMS blog is about current maintenance topics. Blogger Paul Lachance is president and chief technology officer for Smartware Group.