Control Function Block Testing with Automated Output Comparison

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current control function block testing procedures in industrial control systems are time-consuming and often fail to represent all possible scenarios, leading to unknown behavior during plant implementation, which can be harmful to productivity and safety.

Innovation Solution

An automated control function block testing system that includes a control function block and a testing block, which executes test cases, compares actual outputs with expected values, and gathers information on the function block's performance, reducing human error and capturing all possible scenarios.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If manual testing procedures are used for control function blocks, then testing can be performed with simple equipment, but the testing process becomes time-consuming and resource-intensive

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetesting setup simplicityVSAvoidtesting time
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual mechanical testing processes with an automated computer-based testing system. The control function block is automatically tested by a computer that executes test cases, compares actual outputs with expected outputs, and generates test reports, eliminating the need for manual engineer intervention in the testing execution process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The testing system performs self-testing where the control function block automatically executes test cases with various input values and compares its own outputs against expected results. The system autonomously identifies errors and generates test documentation without requiring external manual analysis for each test case.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Quantity of substance

If manual testing procedures are used for control function blocks, then testing resources can be minimized, but the testing coverage becomes insufficient and may miss critical scenarios

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetesting resourcesVSAvoidtesting coverage
Core Design Contradiction:
Quantity of substanceVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The testing process is segmented into distinct automated components: test case definition, automatic execution with multiple input values, output comparison against expected results, error identification, and report generation. This segmentation allows comprehensive coverage of all possible scenarios while maintaining efficient resource utilization through automated parallel processing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system automatically varies input parameters and test conditions to cover all possible scenarios that control function blocks may encounter during plant implementation. By systematically changing test parameters and executing multiple test cases with different input values, the system achieves complete testing coverage without proportionally increasing resource requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If comprehensive testing scenarios are implemented, then reliability of control function blocks improves, but testing complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol function block reliabilityVSAvoidtesting system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces complex manual testing procedures with automated computer-based execution. The computer automatically manages the complexity of comprehensive test scenarios by systematically executing test cases, comparing outputs, and generating reports, thereby achieving high reliability testing without requiring complex manual coordination.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

4Productivity

If automated testing is implemented, then testing speed and coverage improve, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetesting efficiencyVSAvoidtesting system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The automated testing system is designed as a universal platform that can test any control function block type through standardized test cases and output comparisons. The same automated infrastructure handles diverse testing scenarios, achieving high productivity across different control functions without proportionally increasing system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentEP4686996A1Automated control function block testing procedure
Publication Date: 2026.02.04 SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC SYSTEMS USA INC
  • EP4686996A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4686996A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4686996A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

An automated control function block testing system and method configured for testing a control function block are described herein. The control function block comprises a control function block type that corresponds to a function of the control function block used for controlling a process within an industrial plant. The control function block executes one or more processes (or test cases during testing) based on the control function block type. The testing block is configured to obtain a test value based on the control function block type, and transmit the test value to the control function block for executing the test case therewith. The control function block executes the test case with the test value to generate an actual output to transmit to the testing block. The testing block compares the actual output to an expected value to gather information regarding the control function block.