US 12,271,185 B2
Method for identifying a process-disrupting automation component in a concatenated automation assembly
Ralf Gross, Nuremberg (DE); Hans-Henning Klos, Weigendorf (DE); Benjamin Kohler, Bodenwöhr (DE); Vladimir Lavrik, Hessen (RU); Wolfgang Riedl, Nuremberg (DE); and Jens Schnittger, Lonnerstadt (DE)
Assigned to Siemens Aktiengesellschaft, Munich (DE)
Appl. No. 17/908,831
Filed by Siemens Aktiengesellschaft, Munich (DE)
PCT Filed Feb. 18, 2021, PCT No. PCT/EP2021/053956
§ 371(c)(1), (2) Date Sep. 1, 2022,
PCT Pub. No. WO2021/175604, PCT Pub. Date Sep. 10, 2021.
Claims priority of application No. 20161435 (EP), filed on Mar. 6, 2020.
Prior Publication US 2023/0113323 A1, Apr. 13, 2023
Int. Cl. G05B 23/02 (2006.01)
CPC G05B 23/0275 (2013.01) [G05B 23/0262 (2013.01)] 10 Claims
OG exemplary drawing
 
1. A method for identifying a process-disrupting automation component in an industrial automation arrangement having a plurality of concatenated automation components, a process disruption being determined in a first of the automation components and being examined in a first of the automation components by a first local analysis device, the method comprising:
determining, during a first step, by each automation component, at least one of (i) at least one automation component arranged upstream in the concatenation and (ii) at least one automation component arranged downstream in the concatenation;
sending, during a second step, by the first automation component, an interrogation message to at least one second automation component which is arranged upstream or downstream in the concatenation depending on a type of process disruption; and
taking, during a third step, by an analysis device of the second automation component, stored or measured key figures as a basis for deciding whether this second automation component has caused the process disruption;
wherein, if the second automation component has caused the process disruption, the method further comprises:
sending, during a fourth step, a response message to the first automation component; and
wherein, if the second automation component has not caused the process disruption, the method further comprises:
repetitively sending, during a fifth step, by the second automation component, the same interrogation message or a further interrogation message to at least one third automation component arranged upstream or downstream of the second automation component and processing the same interrogation message or the further interrogation message at the at least one third automation component;
forwarding respectively, during a sixth step, a response message received by an automation component to that automation component from which the automation component receiving the response message received the associated interrogation message; and
providing or outputting, during a seventh step, by the first automation component definitively receiving the response message, based on the content of the response message, information relating to the automation component which caused the process disruption.