Unified Control Scheduling for Multi-Program Processor Allocation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing factory automation (FA) systems require multiple dedicated control devices for efficient processing, leading to redundancy and inefficiencies in synchronous processing between processors and execution of various programs.

Innovation Solution

A control device with one or more processors, featuring a storage unit for multiple programs, a program execution part, a parsing part, a command calculation part, a scheduler for resource allocation based on priority, and a priority changing mechanism to dynamically adjust processing loads.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If multiple dedicated control devices are used for different control functions, then processing efficiency is improved, but device complexity and redundancy increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocessing efficiencyVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent combines multiple control functions (ladder program execution, CNC control, robot control) into a single control device with one processor. Different programs are stored in storage units and executed by the same processor through dynamic priority adjustment, eliminating the need for multiple separate control devices and reducing system redundancy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The control device is designed as a universal controller capable of executing multiple types of programs (ladder programs, CNC programs, robot programs) with different execution cycles. The processor can adaptively switch between different control functions by adjusting task priorities, making a single device perform roles that previously required multiple dedicated devices.

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

2Adaptability or versatility

If multiple processors are arranged dispersively for different control functions, then functional versatility is improved, but synchronous processing becomes redundant and complex

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefunctional versatilityVSAvoidsynchronous processing complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges multiple processor functions into a single processor that handles all control tasks. By using a unified processor with dynamic priority scheduling, the system achieves synchronous processing of different control functions without the complexity of coordinating multiple separate processors.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The processor dynamically adjusts the priority of different control tasks based on real-time requirements. The priority changing part modifies task priorities adaptively, allowing the single processor to efficiently handle multiple control functions with different timing requirements without needing multiple dedicated processors.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Device complexity

If a single control device executes multiple programs with different execution cycles, then device integration is improved, but processing resource efficiency becomes challenging

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice integrationVSAvoidprocessing resource efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic priority adjustment where the processor allocates processing resources based on the execution cycle requirements of different programs. Tasks with shorter cycles (e.g., PLC control) receive higher priority during critical periods, while tasks with longer cycles (e.g., robot control) are scheduled accordingly, ensuring efficient resource utilization despite diverse timing requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the execution parameters (priority levels, execution cycles) of different programs dynamically. The priority changing part adjusts task priorities based on the specific execution cycle requirements of each program type, allowing the single processor to efficiently manage multiple programs with different timing characteristics.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Stability of the object's composition

If processing priority is statically assigned to different tasks, then system stability is improved, but adaptability to varying load conditions deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem stabilityVSAvoidadaptability to load conditions
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic priority adjustment where task priorities are not fixed but change based on real-time system conditions. The priority changing part continuously monitors execution status and adjusts priorities adaptively, maintaining system stability through controlled changes rather than rigid static assignment, allowing the system to respond to varying load conditions while preserving operational stability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback from the execution status of different programs to dynamically adjust priorities. The priority changing part receives information about task execution progress and buffer states, then modifies task priorities accordingly, creating a closed-loop control system that maintains stability while adapting to changing conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentEP3477405B1Control device
Publication Date: 2023.10.18 OMRON CORP
  • EP3477405B1 patent drawingFigure 1A~2
  • EP3477405B1 patent drawingFigure 3
  • EP3477405B1 patent drawingFigure 4~5B

AI summary

A configuration of a control device capable of efficiently operating multiple types of programs in different execution formats on a single control device is provided. At least a first task that has a first priority including processing execution performed by a program execution part and a command calculation part, a second task that has a second priority, lower than the first priority, including processing execution performed by a parsing part, and a third task that has a third priority including execution of a processing content different from the first task and the second task are set in a scheduler. The control device further includes a priority changing part monitoring a processing state of the parsing part, and when the processing state of the parsing part meets a predetermined condition, changing the second priority set to the second task corresponding to the condition.