Soft PLC Safety Verification in Hyperconverged IT Infrastructure

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In hyperconverged infrastructures, the assignment of software controllers to computing resources can change during operation, making it difficult to verify safety characteristics and requiring a comprehensive check with every hardware change, which can prevent safety functions from being implemented or necessitate frequent rechecks.

Innovation Solution

A method to automatically check hardware and software properties as safety features during commissioning and restarts, ensuring the IT infrastructure meets fail-safe operation criteria by querying and verifying F-characteristics using software.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If comprehensive safety checks are performed with every hardware change in hyperconverged infrastructures, then safety reliability is improved, but system productivity and operational efficiency deteriorate due to frequent rechecks and potential shutdowns

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety reliabilityVSAvoidoperational efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs safety checks at predetermined moments (commissioning, restarts, cycle-oriented intervals) rather than continuously or with every hardware change. This preliminary action approach ensures safety verification happens proactively at appropriate times without disrupting ongoing operations, resolving the contradiction between maintaining safety reliability and preserving operational efficiency

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The control software executes safety checks in a cycle-oriented manner at regular intervals during operation. This periodic verification maintains safety assurance while allowing the system to operate continuously between checks, avoiding the productivity loss that would result from frequent or continuous verification interruptions

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

2Measurement precision

If comprehensive safety checks are performed with every hardware change, then measurement precision of safety characteristics is improved, but loss of time increases due to frequent verification requirements

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety characteristic verificationVSAvoidverification time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

Safety checks are performed at predetermined moments (commissioning, restarts, cycle-oriented intervals) rather than continuously or with every hardware change. This preliminary action approach ensures safety verification happens proactively at appropriate times without disrupting ongoing operations, resolving the contradiction between maintaining safety reliability and preserving operational efficiency

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The control software autonomously manages the timing and execution of safety checks without requiring external intervention or continuous monitoring. The system self-regulates verification frequency based on operational cycles and event triggers (restarts, commissioning), eliminating unnecessary verification time while maintaining adequate safety measurement precision

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Adaptability or versatility

If hardware abstraction through containers or hypervisors is implemented, then adaptability of control systems is improved, but reliability of safety functions deteriorates due to difficulty in verifying F-characteristics

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvehardware abstraction capabilityVSAvoidsafety function reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The control software actively queries and verifies safety characteristics (F-characteristics) of the underlying hardware and runtime environment during operation. This feedback mechanism ensures that even with hardware abstraction layers in place, the system continuously confirms that safety requirements are met, maintaining reliability while preserving the adaptability benefits of virtualization

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The control software acts as an intermediary layer between the abstracted hardware environment and the safety-critical control functions. It verifies that the runtime environment provided by containers or hypervisors meets safety requirements, bridging the gap between hardware abstraction and safety assurance

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentEP4679208A1Method for operating a cycle-oriented control software
Publication Date: 2026.01.14 SIEMENS AG
  • EP4679208A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4679208A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4679208A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The invention relates to a method for operating cycle-oriented control software (soft PLC) for the fail-safe control of automation processes, wherein the control software (soft PLC) is executed within an IT infrastructure (1), wherein, to verify the suitability of the IT infrastructure (1) for carrying out the fail-safe automation processes, hardware properties and/or software properties are queried and checked as safety features (M 1, ... , M n), and if the check is successful, it can be concluded that the prerequisites for fail-safe operation are met, and the control software (soft PLC) is then given a release (SZB) for regular operation; otherwise, a safe state is assumed.