Safety Controller State Machine Parameter Validation
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing methods for parameterizing state machines in safety controllers for industrial plants are complex and require frequent re-checking of safety-relevant functions, especially after product development, which can lead to inefficiencies and potential errors during parameter changes.
Innovation Solution
A method that provides an input mask on a user terminal for defining parameters for state machine function blocks, allowing user input to be transmitted to the safety controller, implemented, and displayed back to the user for validation, with options for verification or falsification, ensuring safe and efficient parameterization without requiring complex re-programming.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Adaptability or versatility
If parameterization is programmed by an application specialist during development, then the safety controller can be customized, but the process becomes complex and requires frequent re-checking of safety-relevant functions
Solution Approach 1:
The parameterization process is segmented into distinct functional modules: input mask generation, user input capture, parameter transmission, implementation in state machine, function description reading, and display. This segmentation allows each module to be independently managed and validated, reducing overall process complexity while maintaining customization capability.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements a feedback mechanism where the function description (including the implemented parameter) is read out and transmitted back to the user terminal for display. This allows application specialists to verify the parameterization result immediately, eliminating the need for frequent re-checking of safety-relevant functions and reducing process complexity.
2Adaptability or versatility
If parameterization is programmed manually during development, then safety-relevant functions can be customized, but time is lost due to frequent re-checking
Solution Approach 1:
The immediate feedback loop reads out the function description containing the implemented parameter and transmits it back to the user terminal for display. This allows application specialists to verify parameterization results in real-time, dramatically reducing the time lost to frequent re-checking of safety-relevant functions while maintaining full customization capability.
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs self-verification by automatically reading out and displaying the function description with the implemented parameter. This self-service mechanism eliminates the need for manual re-checking of safety functions, reducing time loss while preserving parameter customization ability.
3Reliability
If the function description is displayed back to the user, then errors can be verified, but additional transmission and display steps are required
Solution Approach 1:
The function description reading and display step creates a feedback loop that allows error verification. While this adds transmission and display steps, the feedback mechanism actually simplifies the overall process by enabling immediate verification, thereby reducing the need for iterative re-checking and improving reliability without significantly increasing complexity.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
Method for parameterizing a state machine of function blocks of a safety controller, comprising providing an input mask at a user terminal, capturing user input at the input mask, wherein the user input defines a parameter for a function of the state machine, transmitting the parameter to the safety controller, implementing the parameter in the state machine, reading a function description of the state machine comprising the previously implemented parameter, transmitting the function description to a user terminal, and displaying a function of the state machine based on the function description at the user terminal.