Towards Semantic Integration of Plant Behavior Models with AutomationML's Intermediate Modeling Layer

AutomationML is an emerging IEC standard for storing and exchanging engineering data among the heterogeneous software tools involved in the engineering of production systems. One important subset of such engineering data is the plant behavior. To make this data exchangeable, AutomationML uses the existing industry data format PLCopen XML. However, at the development stages of production systems, the plant behavior is usually defined using other representation means, such as Gantt charts, impulse diagrams, and sequential function charts. To make such plant behavior models exchangeable, AutomationML introduces the so-called Intermediate Modeling Layer (IML) with corresponding transformation rules to decouple the employed modeling languages from the target format PLCopen XML. However, IML itself as well as the transformations from and to IML are only semi-formally described. This not only hinders the adoption of IML as a common language for representing plant behavior, but also renders impossible the composition of heterogeneous plant behavior models for carrying out integrated analyses of the global plant behavior. In this work, we aim at clarifying syntactical and semantical aspects of IML by proposing a metamodel and operational semantics for IML. This constitutes the first step towards formalizing and validating transformations between behavioral modeling languages currently employed in the production domain (e.g., Gantt charts), IML, and PLCopen XML. Having this foundation, we aim at utilizing IML as the semantic domain for the composition of heterogeneous plant behavior models.

[1]  Christiaan J. J. Paredis,et al.  Combining SysML and Model Transformations to Support Systems Engineering Analysis , 2011, Electron. Commun. Eur. Assoc. Softw. Sci. Technol..

[2]  Elisabet Estevez,et al.  Automatic transformation of logic models within engineering of embedded mechatronical units , 2011 .

[3]  Andreas Junghanns,et al.  The Functional Mockup Interface for Tool independent Exchange of Simulation Models , 2011 .

[4]  Stefan Biffl,et al.  Cross-disciplinary engineering with AutomationML and SysML , 2016, Autom..

[5]  Konstantin Kernschmidt,et al.  A SysML based design pattern for the high-level development of mechatronic systems to enhance re-usability , 2014 .

[6]  Nicole Schmidt,et al.  Data exchange toward PLC programming and virtual commissioning: Is AutomationML an appropriate data exchange format? , 2015, 2015 IEEE 13th International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN).

[7]  Stefan Biffl,et al.  Model-based co-evolution of production systems and their libraries with AutomationML , 2015, 2015 IEEE 20th Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation (ETFA).

[8]  Alexander Fay,et al.  Evaluation of the openness of automation tools for interoperability in engineering tool chains , 2012, Proceedings of 2012 IEEE 17th International Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation (ETFA 2012).

[9]  Marga Marcos,et al.  A Methodological Approach to Model-Driven Design and Development of Automation Systems , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering.

[10]  Birgit Vogel-Heuser,et al.  Possibilities and Challenges of an Integrated Development Using a Combined SysML-Model and Corresponding Domain Specific Models , 2013, MIM.

[11]  RenC David,et al.  Grafcet: a powerful tool for specification of logic controllers , 1995, IEEE Trans. Control. Syst. Technol..

[12]  Birgit Vogel-Heuser,et al.  Model-driven Engineering of Manufacturing Automation Software Projects - A SysML-based Approach , 2014, ArXiv.

[13]  Rainer Draht,et al.  Datenaustausch in der Anlagenplanung mit AutomationML , 2010 .

[14]  Valeriy Vyatkin,et al.  Software Engineering in Industrial Automation: State-of-the-Art Review , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics.