Application File Quality Evaluation for Automation Deployment

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The complexity of application deployment in automation systems, involving multiple stakeholders and varying quality levels, makes it difficult to identify the cause of errors or problems, particularly in systems with reloadable applications from different manufacturers and formats, necessitating a method to assess the quality of individual applications or deployments.

Innovation Solution

A method for determining quality metrics of application files, evaluating them based on predefined criteria, and assigning a quality level to assess the functionality and security of automation components, including centralized or local quality level determination using a quality metric evaluation unit.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If multiple applications from different manufacturers and formats are integrated into the automation system, then the functionality and adaptability of the system are improved, but the complexity of application deployment and difficulty of error identification increase

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovefunctionalityVSAvoiddeployment complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the application deployment process into distinct evaluation stages: quality metric determination, criteria evaluation, and quality level assignment. Each application is independently assessed through these segmented steps, allowing complex multi-vendor applications to be systematically evaluated without overwhelming complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs preliminary quality evaluation of applications before they are deployed to the automation system. By determining quality metrics and assigning quality levels in advance, the system prepares and filters applications proactively, preventing deployment issues before they occur and simplifying the actual deployment process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Adaptability or versatility

If multiple applications from different manufacturers and formats are integrated into the automation system, then the functionality and adaptability of the system are improved, but the difficulty of detecting and measuring error causes increases

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovefunctionalityVSAvoiderror identification difficulty
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDifficulty of detecting and measuring

Solution Approach 1:

The patent assigns distinct quality levels (e.g., first quality level, second quality level, third quality level) to applications based on their evaluated metrics. These quality levels act as visual indicators or classifications that make it easy to identify and differentiate problematic applications from functional ones, simplifying error detection and diagnosis.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #32Color changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a feedback mechanism where quality metrics are determined, evaluated against criteria, and used to assign quality levels that provide information about application reliability. This feedback loop enables continuous monitoring and identification of applications that may cause errors, making troubleshooting more efficient.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Reliability

If quality metrics are determined and evaluated for each application file, then the reliability of the automation system is improved, but the productivity of the deployment process decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem reliabilityVSAvoiddeployment speed
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs quality metric determination and evaluation as preliminary actions before application deployment. By assessing quality levels in advance, the system ensures reliable deployment decisions are made upfront, preventing future reliability issues without requiring continuous monitoring that would slow down operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent evaluates specific quality metrics against predefined criteria rather than performing exhaustive analysis of all application aspects. This partial evaluation approach focuses on the most critical quality indicators, maintaining high reliability while avoiding excessive analysis that would significantly slow down the deployment process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP4687032A1A method for a quality level determination of an application file in an automation system
Publication Date: 2026.02.04 SIEMENS AG
  • EP4687032A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4687032A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4687032A1 patent drawing

AI summary

The invention relates to a method for a quality level determination of an application file (App, AD) for an automation component (AC, DMS) of an automation system (AS). The method comprises the following steps: determining quality metrics of the application file (App, AD) for the automation component (AC, DMS) of the automation system (AS), evaluating the determined quality metrics based on predefined criteria, and determining a quality level of the application file (App, AD) based on the evaluation result. The invention further relates to a corresponding automation component (AC, DMS) and an automation system (AS) with such an automation component (AC, DMS).