Automation Component Energy Management via Self-Service Feedback
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Industrial automation systems face complexity in managing energy consumption, particularly in reducing peak loads and adapting to changes in automation components and sub-processes, leading to high demands on operator knowledge and increased error frequency.
Innovation Solution
An automation component with a standardized interface and protocol for receiving control commands and outputting status messages, allowing a higher-level entity to negotiate operating states and manage energy consumption by encapsulating process knowledge within the component, enabling efficient switching between different operating states such as on, off, or partial load.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Loss of energy
If manual control of automation components is used to manage energy consumption, then energy saving measures can be implemented, but high demands on operator knowledge and increased error frequency occur
Solution Approach 1:
The automation component autonomously monitors its own operating parameters (temperature, pressure, flow rates) and determines whether switching to a second operating mode would violate operational limits. The component independently evaluates the feasibility of energy-saving switches and communicates only the decision-relevant information to the control device, making the system self-managing and reducing operator burden.
Solution Approach 2:
The automation component continuously provides feedback messages to the control device regarding its current operating status, operational limits, and the feasibility of switching to energy-saving modes. This feedback loop enables the control device to make informed energy management decisions without requiring operators to have deep process knowledge.
2Ease of operation
If automatic control devices are used to manage energy consumption, then operator knowledge requirements are reduced, but complexity of process knowledge and frequency of errors increase
Solution Approach 1:
The control system is segmented into independent automation components, each capable of autonomously evaluating its own operational limits and energy-saving potential. This modular approach distributes the control intelligence across multiple components rather than concentrating complex process knowledge in a central controller, reducing overall system complexity while maintaining automatic control benefits.
Solution Approach 2:
Each automation component independently determines whether switching operating modes would violate operational limits by monitoring its own parameters (temperature, pressure, flow rates). This self-evaluation capability eliminates the need for complex centralized control logic and reduces error frequency by localizing decision-making to the component level.
3Loss of energy
If automation components are temporarily switched off to reduce peak load, then peak load controlled load shedding is achieved, but impact on industrial manufacture or safety may occur
Solution Approach 1:
The automation component pre-monitors its operating parameters and determines in advance whether switching to a different operating mode would violate operational limits. By evaluating temperature, pressure, flow rates, and other critical parameters before switching, the system ensures that energy-saving actions will not compromise production continuity or safety.
Solution Approach 2:
The automation component continuously provides feedback to the control device about its current operating status and the feasibility of switching modes. This real-time information exchange enables the control device to make informed decisions about peak load management that maintain production reliability and safety while achieving energy savings.
Data Source
Figure 1~2
Figure 3
Figure 4
AI summary
The invention relates to an automation component (TP1, ... TP4) for an industrial automation arrangement, wherein the automation component (TP1, ..., TP4) is configured to control at least one plant section, process, or subprocess of the industrial automation arrangement, wherein at least two different operating states are alternately selectable for the at least one plant section, process, or subprocess, and wherein the operating states differ with respect to the respective power consumption of the plant section, process, or subprocess. The automation component (TP1, ..., TP4) is configured to receive requests for switching to one of the at least two different operating states, the automation component (TP1, ..., TP4) is configured to output acknowledgment messages (QM) in response to the requests, and the automation component (TP1, ..., TP4) is intended for the output of status messages (SM) about the currently activated operating states.