Plant Control Simulation for Automatic Command Approval

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current plant monitoring control devices burden operators with the need to manually determine whether to implement control commands, especially when simulation results are unclear or when control actions other than setting value changes are required, such as valve operations or motor start/stops, without predicting the outcomes of these actions.

Innovation Solution

A plant monitoring control device that includes a simulator which predicts plant data changes after control commands are input, and automatically determines whether to implement the control, reducing operator burden by notifying the process control device of the control information only when the simulator confirms a favorable outcome.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the operator manually determines whether to implement control commands based on simulation results, then the control decision accuracy is improved, but the operator burden and decision time increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol decision accuracyVSAvoidoperator burden
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables self-service automation where the determination unit automatically decides whether to implement control commands based on simulator predictions, eliminating the need for operator intervention in routine decisions. The system serves itself by autonomously comparing predicted plant data with target values and executing controls without human burden.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback by continuously monitoring simulator prediction results and using this information to automatically determine control implementation. The feedback loop compares predicted outcomes with desired targets and automatically adjusts control execution, improving decision accuracy while reducing operator involvement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Adaptability or versatility

If the simulator predicts all control commands including valve operations and motor start/stops, then the prediction comprehensiveness is improved, but the system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprediction comprehensivenessVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The simulator is designed with universal functionality to handle multiple types of control commands including setting value changes, valve operations, and motor start/stops. This multi-functionality allows the single simulator to predict outcomes for diverse control actions without requiring separate prediction systems for each control type.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The system manages complexity by changing parameters dynamically - the determination unit selectively applies prediction based on control command types and current plant states. Not all controls require simulator prediction, and the system adjusts its prediction scope based on operational context, reducing unnecessary computational complexity while maintaining comprehensive coverage where needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Manufacturing precision

If the operator monitors multiple confirmation buttons and performs multiple operations, then the control precision is improved, but the operation time and burden increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol precisionVSAvoidoperation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The simulator performs preliminary action by predicting control outcomes before the operator executes the control command. This advance prediction provides the operator with forecasted plant data changes, allowing informed decision-making without requiring multiple confirmations during the actual control execution, thus reducing operation time while maintaining precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

4Productivity

If automatic determination of control implementation is implemented, then the productivity is improved, but the automation extent increases system complexity

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol implementation speedVSAvoidautomation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSExtent of automation

Solution Approach 1:

The automation system is segmented into distinct functional units: the simulator for prediction, the determination unit for decision-making, and the control execution unit for implementation. This segmentation allows automatic determination to improve productivity without overwhelming system complexity, as each segment handles a specific task independently and can be developed or modified separately.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentEP3276436B1Plant monitor/control device
Publication Date: 2021.07.28 MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORP
  • EP3276436B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3276436B1 patent drawingFigure 2~3
  • EP3276436B1 patent drawingFigure 4

AI summary

A plant monitoring control device (100) is such that when a control command is input by an operator into a process control device (300) that implements control of a plant (200), a simulator (2) is notified by a control unit (13) of control information in the control command. Furthermore, whether or not to implement the control is automatically determined by a determination circuit (131) of the control unit (13) based on a result of a predictive operation by the simulator (2), and when determining to implement, the process control device (300) is notified by the control unit (13) of the control information in the control command.