Building meaningful timed models of closed-loop DES for verification purposes

Abstract Formal verification methods require that a model of the system to analyze, in the form of a network of automata for instance, be built previously. Every evolution of this formal model must represent a real evolution of the modeled system; if the model contains indeed spurious evolutions, meaningless states, which do not correspond to physically possible states, can be reached and the verification results are surely not trustworthy. This paper focuses on construction of the formal model of a closed-loop system which can be represented as a Discrete Event System (DES) and where all evolutions and states are meaningful w.r.t. to the real system behavior. A closed-loop system is composed of a physical system to control, named plant, and a controller. A modular approach to build the plant model is presented in the first part of the paper; to prevent from meaningless evolutions and states in this model, a solution based on the concept of urgent edges is proposed and exemplified. Then, construction of the formal model of the closed-loop system is addressed; it is shown that restriction of the evolutions of this model to the only meaningful ones can be easily achieved by introducing variables that represent the modification of the inputs of the logic controller and the stability condition of the control specification.

[1]  Jean-Marc Faure,et al.  Building Meaningful Timed Plant Models for Verification Purposes , 2009 .

[2]  Béatrice Bérard,et al.  Verification of a Timed Multitask System With Uppaal , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering.

[3]  Kim G. Larsen,et al.  A Tutorial on Uppaal , 2004, SFM.

[4]  P. Lhoste,et al.  Grafcet : from theory to implementation , 1997 .

[5]  Wang Yi,et al.  Uppaal in a nutshell , 1997, International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer.

[6]  Valeriy Vyatkin,et al.  Formal validation of intelligent-automated production systems: towards industrial applications , 2006, Int. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag..

[7]  José Creissac Campos,et al.  Pattern-based Analysis of Automated Production Systems , 2009 .

[8]  Valeriy Vyatkin,et al.  A modeling approach for verification of IEC1499 function blocks using net condition/event systems , 1999, 1999 7th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation. Proceedings ETFA '99 (Cat. No.99TH8467).

[9]  Véronique Carré-Ménétrier,et al.  Modelling of a discrete manufacturing system by Parts of plant , 2009 .

[10]  Agata Janowska,et al.  Slicing of Timed Automata with Discrete Data , 2006, Fundam. Informaticae.

[11]  Jean-Marc Faure,et al.  Translating Grafcet specifications into Mealy machines for conformance test purposes , 2011 .

[12]  Jean-Jacques Lesage,et al.  Formal Verification of Industrial Controllers: with or without a Plant model? , 2006 .

[13]  Hanno Wupper,et al.  Timed automaton models for simple programmable logic controllers , 1999, Proceedings of 11th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems. Euromicro RTS'99.

[14]  Stefan Kowalewski,et al.  Direct Model Checking of {PLC} Programs in {IL} , 2009 .

[15]  Lothar Litz,et al.  Formal methods in PLC programming , 2000, Smc 2000 conference proceedings. 2000 ieee international conference on systems, man and cybernetics. 'cybernetics evolving to systems, humans, organizations, and their complex interactions' (cat. no.0.

[16]  Rajeev Alur,et al.  A Theory of Timed Automata , 1994, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[17]  Wang Yi,et al.  Formal Design and Analysis of a Gear Controller , 1998, TACAS.

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

[19]  Hans-Dieter Ehrich,et al.  Model Checking PLC Software Written in Function Block Diagram , 2010, 2010 Third International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation.

[20]  Wang Yi,et al.  UPPAAL - a Tool Suite for Automatic Verification of Real-Time Systems , 1996, Hybrid Systems.

[21]  Philippe Schnoebelen,et al.  Systems and Software Verification, Model-Checking Techniques and Tools , 2001 .

[22]  Olaf Stursberg,et al.  Verification of PLC Programs Given as Sequential Function Charts , 2004, SoftSpez Final Report.

[23]  Jean-Jacques Lesage,et al.  Validation and verification of grafcets using state machine , 1996 .

[24]  Philippe Schnoebelen,et al.  Systems and Software Verification , 2001, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[25]  V. Gourcuff,et al.  Improving large-sized PLC programs verification using abstractions , 2008 .

[26]  Timothy L. Johnson Improving automation software dependability: A role for formal methods? , 2004 .

[27]  José Machado,et al.  LOGIC CONTROLLERS DEPENDABILITY VERIFICATION USING A PLANT MODEL , 2006 .

[28]  José L. Martínez Lastra,et al.  On controller and plant modeling for model-based formal verification , 2005, 2005 IEEE Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation.

[29]  H.-M. Hanisch,et al.  Modeling of PLC behavior by means of timed net condition/event systems , 1997, 1997 IEEE 6th International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation Proceedings, EFTA '97.

[30]  A. Lobov,et al.  Application of UML in plant modeling for model-based verification: UML translation to TNCES , 2005, INDIN '05. 2005 3rd IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics, 2005..

[31]  S. Lampérière-Couffin,et al.  Formal Verification of the Sequential Part of PLC Programs , 2000 .