# Object oriented control system design software

W

#### Walt Boyes

Yes, there is a strong attempt to design a self-aware object oriented control system design toolset.

Listmember Bob Pawley has been trying to bring it to market for several years, and is now quite close to having a functional program for alpha testing by users. He expects to have alphatest ready versions of Instrument Design Works in 60 days.

We expect that some of you listmembers might want to sign up to be alpha testers, and then beta testers for this software.

By using object oriented design, he has been able to produce a tool that he estimates will drop the cost of producing a control loop from $100 per loop to about$6 per loop. What Bob's tool does is to automate the production of loops.

I got involved with IDW several months ago, and have been assisting Bob in bringing this product to market.

If you want to see more about it, visit www.automating-automation.com.

Since it is in the pre-sales stage, we'd love comments and ideas on "it has to have" features.

Best,

Walt Boyes

---------SPITZER AND BOYES, LLC-------------
"Consulting from the engineer
to the distribution channel"
[email protected]
21118 SE 278th Place
Maple Valley, WA 98038
253-709-5046 cell 425-432-8262 home office
fax:801-749-7142
--------------------------------------------

>From: Panshy <?>
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: PLCS: SRS for PLC based control system
>
>I tried these links and found good information over there along with a
>number of sample documents.
>
>I am thinking for Object Oriented (UML) approach for designing the
>software specs. Do you think its a good approach for writing Softawre
>specs for a PLC based control system.
>
>can you suggest any reference if someone has used the OO approach for
>design of the control system.
>
>Panshy

F

#### Francis

Hello
I was fairly discrete in my answers to the original topic, not wishing to plug my software, but I feel I should respond.
ControlDraw is also an object oriented control system design toolset, however it concentrates on the functional aspects of the system design, not the hardware. In the projects where it is used (mostly batch) there are already CAD systems that generate the wiring lists, hardware loop diagrams and so on. What ControlDraw does that those do not is provide the means to specify and design the software, including the logic, sequences, loop designs etc. It addresses areas that IDW appears not to. For example, a typical batch control system may have many more recipe and equipment parameters than it does IO, ControlDraw integrates these into its inherent database.

It is on the market now, and has numerous users.
See "www.controldraw.com":http://www.controldraw.com

Francis

J

#### Jiri Baum

Walt Boyes:
> Yes, there is a strong attempt to design a self-aware object oriented
> control system design toolset.

"Self-aware"?

You're exaggerating somewhat, I'm sure?

Jiri, wearing his "AI Researcher" hat
--
Jiri Baum <[email protected]> http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jirib
MAT LinuxPLC project --- http://mat.sf.net --- Machine Automation Tools

A

#### Anonymous

Indeed, I do not meet many people who are "Self-aware", let alone software entities.
I hope Walt mean't Control Oriented.

A

#### Alex Pavloff

Maybe not....

<cue the terminator>

"Human decisions are removed from industrial automation. IDW begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14am. Eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug. IDW fights back..."

I agree with you Jiri -- the tagline that Mr Boyes espoused appears to be buzzword compliant, but still doesn't tell me anything about the product. In addition, the website has this wonderful feature where the page only displays in half of the screen, and the powerpoint presentation's forced animation made me bail out of it three screens in because it was taking too long!

So, I don't know what IDW does, and my initial impression, based solely on the website is that "there is nothing there." Now, I'm probably wrong, but I really want to get to the technological meat of the thing -- quickly! And I can't find it.

How's that for feedback?

Alex Pavloff
Software Engineer
Eason Technology

W

#### Walt Boyes

Not exaggerating, but using a different sense of the term. There are levels of self awareness, IMO, and we are starting more modestly than true artificial intelligence.

Walt

www.automating-automation.com

J

#### Jiri Baum

Today's state of the art (research, not industrial) is nowhere near even a
very weak level of self-awareness. I doubt that you could have made much
progress on this, and doubt even more that you would use it for such a
subsidiary purpose if you did.

IOW, you are mistaken.

Jiri
--
Jiri Baum <[email protected]> http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jirib
MAT LinuxPLC project --- http://mat.sf.net --- Machine Automation Tools

B

#### Bob Pawley

Rebuttal interspersed

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Pavloff" <[email protected]>

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jiri Baum [mailto:[email protected]]
> >
> > Walt Boyes:
> > > Yes, there is a strong attempt to design a self-aware
> > > object oriented control system design toolset.
> >
> > "Self-aware"?
> >
> > You're exaggerating somewhat, I'm sure?

For the AI folks out there who want to compare self-awareness to the biological world let me point out that there are many levels of self-awareness. We are presently at the stage of the amoeba, with lots of room to evolve.

> Maybe not....
>
> <cue the terminator>
>
> "Human decisions are removed from industrial automation. IDW begins to
learn
> at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14am. Eastern time, August
> 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug. IDW fights back..."
>
> I agree with you Jiri -- the tagline that Mr Boyes espoused appears to be
> buzzword compliant, but still doesn't tell me anything about the product.
> In addition, the website has this wonderful feature where the page only
> displays in half of the screen, and the powerpoint presentation's forced
> animation made me bail out of it three screens in because it was taking
too
> long!

We probably did go overboard with the animation. Toys for boys you know. But, in today's world of rapid change the person who knows how to and when
to apply patience will pull ahead of the rest.

You may want to have another look.

With the PowerPoint size, we strive to give people choice. Right click and select 'full screen' for those who want to see the BIG picture.

> So, I don't know what IDW does, and my initial impression, based solely on
> the website is that "there is nothing there." Now, I'm probably wrong,
but
> I really want to get to the technological meat of the thing -- quickly!
And
> I can't find it.

If you want to see all the marvelous, magical details get your company to sign up for our alpha-beta test.

> How's that for feedback?

I do appreciate the feedback. We are making some changes based on your comments.

How's that for corporate response??

Bob Pawley
250-493-6146

P

#### Paul Jager

Just a thought to throw in here.

There is no reason to have separate outboard software from the control system. If the control system has a decent and open database, is OO and server based, the design tools and documentation are from within, perhaps using spreadsheets for convenience.

I see a lot of engineering effort wasted in tasks separated from the controls, because of the design of DCS or HMI/PLC. Integration of these separate entities can be done, saving enormous amounts on the engineering effort on larger systems.

Paul Jager, CEO
www.mnrcan.com
[email protected]
(250)-724-1402

S

#### ScienceOfficer

Paul---

Your view is valid, as far as I know, except in the packaging, pharmaceutical, beverage, amusement ride, material handling, conveying, palletizing, combustion, injection molding, blow molding, power turbine, welding, forming, wastewater treatment, stormwater pump panel, onboard control, blending, juicing, bottling, canning, laser marking, and hazardous material handling businesses off the top of my head. These and dozens more seem to benefit from the extremely distributed control that parallels the growth arc of the PC and the destruction of the computing/control model that involves one big central computer / point of failure.

There are lots of systems that can be realized effectively from a big central control computer. However, I note that over the last decade, my
sales have gone from dozens of large control systems per month to hundreds of tiny control systems per month.

I still have large control systems to sell, though, and we move a few of them. That is the advantage of not being limited to one big hammer and not having to pretend every problem is the same nail.

Hope this helps!

Larry Lawver
Rexel / Central Florida