Automation Bus Reply Scheduling for Shared Data Packet Assembly
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Complex fieldbus systems in automation networks are overly expensive and complex, making them inefficient for less complex applications, and they lack simplicity in protocol design and cabling, while party-line configuration bus systems require individual data telegrams for output data transmission from sensors.
Innovation Solution
A method for data communication in automation systems where an active participant initiates communication requests, and passive participants determine transmission times for response messages based on received data units, allowing multiple passive participants to send responses as a coherent data packet, reducing the need for individual addressing and protocol overhead.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Speed
If complex fieldbus systems are used for data communication, then communication speed and performance are improved, but system complexity and cost increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the communication protocol into essential functions only, separating the core data transmission mechanism from complex fieldbus features. This allows the system to achieve fast communication through simplified protocol processing while eliminating unnecessary complexity in protocol design and hardware configuration.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent extracts and removes unnecessary protocol overhead and complex features from the communication system. By taking out only the essential data transmission functions and eliminating redundant protocols, the system achieves high communication speed without the burden of complex system configuration and expensive hardware requirements.
2Device complexity
If party-line configuration bus systems are used, then cabling complexity is reduced, but data transmission efficiency deteriorates due to individual telegrams
Solution Approach 1:
The patent merges multiple individual data telegrams into a single collective data transmission frame. Multiple passive participants can transmit their output data simultaneously within one standardized frame structure, eliminating the need for separate individual telegrams while maintaining the simple party-line cabling configuration. This significantly improves data transmission efficiency without increasing cabling complexity.
3Reliability
If individual data telegrams are used for each sensor, then data transmission reliability is maintained, but protocol overhead increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent combines multiple individual data transmissions into a single collective frame while maintaining data integrity through standardized error checking mechanisms. The merged frame structure includes necessary reliability features such as checksums and acknowledgment protocols, ensuring data transmission reliability is preserved while dramatically reducing the number of separate protocol handshakes and overhead associated with individual telegrams.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
The invention relates to a method (100) for data communication between participants of an automation system (200), comprising: in a first receiving step (103), a first passive participant (203) and a second passive participant (205) receiving a write request (217) transmitted by an active participant (201); in a first determination step (105), determining a first transmission time (T1) for transmitting the first reply message (219) by the first passive participant (203); in a first reply step (107), transmitting the first reply message (219) at the first transmission time (T1); in a second receiving step (109), receiving the first reply message (219); in a second determination step (111), determining the second transmission time (T2) for transmitting the second reply message (221) by the second passive participant (205); in a second reply step (113), transmitting the second reply message (221) at the second transmission time (T2); in a third receiving step (115), receiving the second reply message (221); and, in an interpretation step (117), interpreting the first reply message (219) and the second reply message (221) as segments of a data packet (227).