There are many different ways to test and verify that your machine and its automation system will work as intended prior to final fabrication, installation, and commissioning. Various test methods each have their advantages and disadvantages, and different machine builders employ disparate testing methodologies depending on particular circumstances.

The main testing methods are software emulation, hardware simulation, prototyping, and beta testing at a customer site. Many machine builders mix and match these test methods, and also employ different testing protocols for different machines.

The cover story in the June issue of Control Design covers machine test methods in detail, but we would like machine buidlers and system integrators to weigh in on-line.

What’s the best way to verify that your machine will work as intended prior to delivery at your customer’s plant?

A machine can be designed such that it is safe in all instances but virtually unusable in day-to-day plant operations. Such a machine will inevitably have some or all of its safety features disabled by plant operations and maintenance personnel. A machine can also be designed such that all shutdown decisions are left in the hands of operators, unfairly burdening them with split second life-or-death decisions.

The May issue of Control Design discusses these issues in detail (Proceed with Caution), but we would like to pose a question on-line. Namely:

1. Who bears primary responsibility for machine safety? Is it the machine buider or is it their customer?

Motor maintenance requirements are a big concern for users who need dependable machine uptime. Where’s energy consumption on your customers’ priority lists? Are they saying they want energy-efficient motors? Are they ready to pay the up-front premium?

Read our article Perfomance Spurs Motor Advances.

An OEM needs to add hydraulics to a newly designed module in its machine line, to move heavy loads relatively quickly and with precision. Can the OEM control hydraulic pumps and actuators with the same standard PLC that it uses for other machine control functions, or does this machine builder need to look into more specialized hydraulic controllers?

Manufacturers are placing more demands on the motors that power their equipment. Efficiencies that enhance production speed as well as energy savings are top priorities.

Examples from plastic extruder and industrial compressor builders demonstrate how recent changes in motor design and their enclosures are meeting the demand for ever-higher efficiency.

Motor maintenance requirements are a big concern for users who need dependable machine uptime. Where’s energy consumption on your customers’ priority lists? Are they saying they want energy-efficient motors? Are they ready to pay the up-front premium?

A Harley-Davidson motorcycle epitomizes untethered freedom.

So, it made perfect sense when its machining center for motorcycle power trains decided to make the plant’s vibration measurements wireless.

Does wireless sensing make sense for your operations? What’s holding you back? Or if you’ve already begun an implementation of a wireless monitoring system, where are you in evolutionary iterations?

Read our artcile Come on, and Take a Free Ride.

Is machine-mount I/O worth it? In your experience, are the higher material costs up front outweighed by the installation, configuration and eventual maintenance savings? Stand up, be counted, and let us know.

Want more? Read our April 2008 article Out of the Cabinet, on the Job.

We recently posted a case history written by Paolo Catterina of EUROelectronics (Die Is Cast for FPGA Control), an Italian company that delved into using FPGA-based controller technology to handle a particularly demanding control app for position and speed of an hydraulic cylinder on a diecasting machine.

I liked this article because it’s an example of a company that realized its tried-and-true, and overall quite satisfactory, PLC control scheme just couldn’t cut it for the speed and precision they needed, so it had to think very differently.

I won’t regurgitate the whole story line, but the decision to use FPGA technology revolved largely on the relationship they’d established over the years with National Instruments in Italy.

That’s all well and good when you indeed have a good relationship with a vendor and can genuinely explore whether that vendor’s flagship product really is right for you.

I wondered out loud if that’s the only way to get a group of basically conservative machine control professionals to put on pioneer hats and charge out ahead on their own.

Recall that a favorite machine builder definition of “pioneer” is “those guys out there on the prairie, lying face up with arrows in their chests.”

So, lacking that tight relationship that EUROelectronics has, what would it take for you to head out in the unknown to try a new technology that you think might give you a competitive advantage?

Read our April 2008 articles, “Die Is Cast for FPGA Control” by Paolo Caterina and “FPGA Can Speed Development.”
Do you use FPGA-based controllers? Take our Web poll.

We recently received an e-mail commenting on the Feb 08 “How to Build an Automation Professional” cover story. Here’s a summary:

“I think it was a very good idea to point out the need for training and education in the field of automation. You know how much new stuff is being developed requiring training at some level. As an employee of Pepperl+Fuchs and a Board Member of AS-Interface USA I would like to make the following comments/suggestion.

For many year we have offered our customers application specific training for our products. This means that once the customer has determined to purchase certain hardware components and systems from P+F, we are offering training that focuses on the exact application. We do that since we recognized that most professionals have very limited time and are much more open to a short and to the point classes.

From an AS-Interface USA point of view, you should know the following. In 2008 (for the third time) we have scheduled six all day ASi training seminars. These are highly technical hands-on seminars. It is very typical that application problems are discussed; sometimes off-line, sometimes with the entire group.

We had many participants telling us that initially they were afraid that this would be just another sales pitch with very little substance. After the seminars they told us that they learned a lot and liked the vendor neutral approach. Throughout the day, we have 4 speakers from competing companies and participants sometimes do not even know which company an individual works for. We take neutrality very serious.

Thanks again for pointing out the importance of education! I feel very passionately about education in general and it is my firm belief that knowledge will be our only chance to retain our standard of living in the long run. We will never be the cheapest but we can be the best.”

Helge Hornis, Ph.D.
Manager Intelligent Systems Group
Pepperl+Fuchs, Inc.
www.am.pepperl-fuchs.com

What do you think about Hornis’ statement that “We will never be the cheapest but we can be the best”. Is this the path to success, and is training an integral part of it?

Relays used to run computers until semiconductors took over. But computers with relay-based brains are making a comeback. Read “Different engines: The return of the mechanical computer” in Computerworld and discover how nanotech relays will make computers better in some demanding applications.