MTConnect Legacy Connectivity Needs Survey

I was thinking that many people may not know what MTConnect is, but they do know the needs they have on their shop floor in terms of real-time information.

Our theme of Computer Integrated Manufacturing is a term at least 25 years old, but the realization of that goal was often expensive and complex with the host of proprietary protocols and closed hardware and software architectures of the past. Although progress has been made in this area, the 3 million plus legacy machines still are not open - yet our need for their information is getting more necessary every year. That is where MTConnect comes in, if it can be applied to the virtual united nations of machines out there that all talk different languages (if they talk at all).

As such, I have made a short survey to start a real conversation about what CIM (and MTConnect specifically) may be able to help you with. I encourage you to spend a bit of time filling this survey out and thus share your thoughts on the matter. Thanks...

MTConnect Legacy Connectivity Needs Survey - Click Here

(or add into your browser - http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/XHBYQW5)

BOF - Birds of Feather Conference Notes on Legacy CNC Connectivity

At the MC2 MTConnect Conference last week in Cincinnati, they had a type of conference session known as Birds Of a Feather (or BOF) where anyone with a hot topic can reserve a room and see if others come to talk about the subject. Late in the game I signed up to lead a BOF on the topic of "Legacy CNC Connectivity Strategies". At 8:30 pm over 30 people showed up to talk about this subject that I moderated.

I started by giving an overview of the topic and highlighted the importance of this discussion to the advancement of the MTConnect cause. Here are the notes:

MTConnect Adoption Constraint - Legacy CNC Connectivity

1. People need to know that MTConnect exists - a job for the Institute. members and media;
2. Since almost all factory equipment is not natively compliant, we need legacy connectivity support now;
3. Once the data is available, we need applications to deliver the business value.

In the MTConnect Connectivity White Paper, three strategies were highlighted:

1. MTConnect Native Machines or Devices (where data can be derived from the device right away as a standard or optional feature with no other devices - e.g. Mazak and OKUMA so far on their latest controls);

2. MTConnect Translation Devices (where a separate device can be added to a machine tool to take a rich inherent protocol and convert it into Ethernet-based MTConnect XML data - e.g. DNC2, FOCAS, etc);

3. MTConnect Connection (or Bridge) Devices (where data needed for MTConnect is gathered in hard or soft I/O, eavesdropping, DNC dripfeeding, Fanuc MacroB DPRINT commands, etc).

Finally, in an open forum the following good ideas were made:

• Mazak has had a rich remote protocol option available on their Mitsubishi CNCs since 1996, but no one knew it and it needs to be translated to MTConnect;
• people "don't know what they don't know" about their machines;
• MTConnect should make available a resource guide for end users as connectivity solutions come on-line;
• An MTConnect sponsored forum could help an open source way to share connectivity information - it could act as a repository for connectivity knowledge base;
• Finally, it was mentioned that MTConnect needs to set up an "implementers group" to address these items, separate from the technical or evangelical group.

After a few compliments that this BOF was well run and informative, I left with a resolve to take on the leadership in this critical "missing link" of Legacy CNC Connectivity for the benefit of all. It will not be a trip, but an adventure I am sure...

MC2 - Information Technology Adopts Mfg

I listened to a fascinating keynote speech today at Day 2 of the MC2 Conference in Cincinnati from Chris Melissinos, VP Corporate Marketing at Verisign Inc

Chris proved to be an intelligent outsider looking at our industry and he brought encouragement and excitement to our efforts. With his background in Gaming at Sun Microsystems and a keen interest in Information Technology in general, Chris  added the following insights:

- the future is here - the Electrical Grid --> Computing Grid --> Manufacturing Grid
- we need to "tease the data out of the machine"
- when costs are driven down, distribution is driven up
- "No matter who you are, the smartest people don't work for you" - Quote from Bill Joy
- check out "MakerBot" at http://www.makerbot.com/ for a low cost ($1299) personal 3d printer to make your own parts
- we live in the "Age of Customization" - check out Ponoko http://www.ponoko.com for custom manufacturing at your fingertips - if you think it, they can make in a few weeks...

Chris introduced the concept of "Edge Manufacturing - enabling Anytime, Anywhere Manufacturing" - and he saw people furiously write the term down he told me - cool...

MTConnect - What Does It Take To Make It Take Off...

At the MTConnect MC2 Conference, Dave Edstrom the MTConnect Institute Chair (and former CTO of Sun Microsystems) asked the "64,000" question of the TAG and Conference - which is...

What does it take to make MTConnect really take off?

The answer to this question can be summarized as follows:

1. Evangelism - people need to know that MTConnect exists
2. Legacy Connectivity Support 
With 99.9999% of the world not MTConnect Native, the real issue is connectivity - enabling the existing 3 million machine tools and their controls (+ the 3rd party add-ons) to talk MTConnect

3. Applications 

Real value starts when data transforms to information and this is the domain of the apps. As important as MTConnect is - as an open source XML-based Connectivity standard - people don't buy a tool, they buy a solution to a limitation (a problem in other words).

Ron Pieper from TechSolve (Cincinnati) pointed out that this legacy support is mission critical and that early adopter application makers cannot wait forever for MTConnect to take off. It is also arguable that MTConnect, introduced at the IMTS machine Tool Show in 2008 is no longer "emerging". in some ways a critical mass of application is now available - from machine monitoring to Overall Equipment Effectiveness to adaptive control to MRO maintenance extensions. 

All we need is to get to a "Tipping Point" (thanks Malcolm Gladwell) of 2% of the machine tool population - about 60,000 machines (2% of 3 million) - to make the tidal wave take over. We have seen this before with USB, Java, cell phone, fax machine use, the Net, etc. Any new technology goes through the "technology adoption curve", and I think we are in the "Chasm" about to hit the bowling alley of carefully targeted applications that succeed because of their focus.

We are committed to attacking this legacy connectivity support as the limiting constraint for this MTConnect innovation. The world needs this to be profitable, healthy and sustainable into the future.

At the MC2 Conference last night, I led a Birds of a Feather (BOF) breakout on this very issue. About 40 people showed up and this key point was discussed. Neil Desrosier from Mazak pointed out that since 1996 the Mazak's Mitsubishi controls have had the capability to deliver internal data with the CPU Link protocol - but nobody ever knew it. Once again, information is everything, but the proprietary protocols didn't help real manufacturers - only MTConnect a web centric open platform can achieve this goal.

The Connectivity report from MTConnect about legacy connectivity - check out http://www.mtconnect.org/media/7312/getting_started_with_mtconnect_-_final.pdf - points out that there are 3 type of machine tool connections:

1. MTConnect Native Devices
2. MTConnect Translation Devices - converting rich (but proprietary CNC remote protocols to MTConnect)
3. MTConnect Connection Devices - these bridge devices connect everything else with hard I/O, soft I/O etc

In the end, legacy connectivity is everything for the MTConnect "Anytime, Anywhere Manufacturing" dream to be realized.

MTConnect MC2 Conference Notes - Cincinnati Nov 7-8, 2011 - Day 2

I am here again at Day 2 of the MC2 MTConnect Technical Advisory Group in Cincinnati and want to keep everyone posted on what is happening.  Today the goal is to present the status of where the MTConnect XML Schema is at the moment.

Will Sobel feels that the standard has most of what people need for machine monitoring and inter-device communication on the shop floor. Next stage for Ver 1.3 could include the following items for May-June 2012 time frame:
- Accessory Equipment
- Metrology (popular choice)
- Parts
- Enhancement to alarms & Warnings

Other areas to look at:
- File Management
- Non traditional (like water-jet, etc)
- Enabling MTConnect write functions
- Operator Input

IMTS 2012 Machine Tool Trade Show - What to Do?

MTConnect not emerging anymore - but perhaps 2012 will be last time MTConnect will be added in. So MTConnect will be just an exhibitor using the same booth that MTConnect will be using with the Defense Manufacturers conference in December. A better focus on applications will be the highlight.

Notification Project Update:
Delivered by John Turner, Director of Tech, FA Consulting & Technology

Report of project called "Reduction of Unplanned Downtime in Defense Manufacturing MTConnect" Project steps included adding sensors with 76 Data Types extended to 2700. Tried to classify notifications from Project machines. Use this feedback to enhance the future MTConnect standard 1.3. All alarms could be classified in Release 1.2.

The challenge was that system type of alarms required a lot of text string parsing to fit it into the alarm categories. John gave an example of an overheat alarm on the X axes which showed up 3 different ways depending on what view you looked at. The Servo Motor Overheat was the same as a Drive Alarm was the same as the System Alarm - 3 alarms from one event!

The basic alarm information is not tagged to subsystems of the machine. The existing MTConnect schema is 1 dimensional now. We need alarms tied to components - a 2 dimensional capability is needed in real life.

- define Additional "Systems" to represent the Device in More detail
- Add Component Type "Composition" to provide more detail
- add "CompositionID" to Source Attributes

Devices
|
Device
|
Components
|
----------------------------------------------------
|                       |                 |              |
Controller     Systems      Axes      Door
                       |
                    Hydraulics
                    Electric
                    Pneumatic
                    Coolant
                    Lubrication
                    Tool Management
                    Chip removal
                    Probe
                    Loader
                    Other...

There is a limit to the levels of details that need to be modeled. The Law of Diminishing Returns may come into play here. The existing standard had a state only before - OK, Warning, Fault. Now we can add the 2nd level of basic detail to describe the situation more clearly without the baggage of full device status - color the data in other words. XML is self-describing, but the Law of Diminishing requires a simplification for future applications.

CompositionID Definition (New):

A unique identifier that references a specific Composition Source.

An example (for a "SoftThermal (OVC)" Servo Axes Motor Overheat Alarm):
<Source componentID = "CONTROLLER"
  compositon ID = "MOTOR"
</Source>

Issue was raised that the machine tool builders could be overwhelmed with trying to classify all their alarms and that they wondered who would use it. I pointed out that the maintenance departments and the MRO community could really use this extension. We used the basic 16 alarm categories that Fanuc used, but stopped short of encoding the 900 possible alarms, some not even used by the machine tool builder. This is the sort of compromise that we have been talking about.

An open source piece of software called the "Classifier Application" made by Will Sobel (System Insights) will break down the alarm text strings down and add the ComponentID source automatically. This requires certain rules, but greatly enables the addition of source data into the flow. I call this a message "sanitizer" for ease of implementation.

Also there is a challenge of which bucket certain alarms should go in - e.g. E-STOP. Also there is a lot of cause and effect issues - what is the root problem that caused all the alarms?

With the increasing complexity of machines and the declining number of highly skilled maintenance people, this advance and extension into alarm classification and sequencing. This could really help with the future of machine tool maintenance and reduced warranty claims for machine tool builders.

OPC-UA & MTConnect Collaboration:

An exciting alliance is MTConnect linked to OPC (OLE for Process Control) which is a standard for the PLC-based automation sector. MTConnect linking with OPC opens up a rich series of mature and robust SCADA type applications. With a MTConnect Universal Machine Gateway one can link CNCs and PLCs to the Human Machine Interface (HMI) industry.

With a mapping of OPC variables into the MTConnect name space, one can extend the MTConnect platform for special situations. MTConnect is extensible with these type of custom extensions.

John Synder from Benet Labs Presented the "Production equipment Availaility" Report - which is available from AMT at http://www.amtonline.org/AboutAMT/WhatisManufacturingTechnology/productionequipmentavailabilityameasurementguidelinefourthedition.htm. It unfortunately costs money, but the report is a good one for deciphering availability standards.

MTConnect MC2 Conference Notes - Cincinnati Nov 7-8, 2011

I am sitting in the Hyatt Regency in Cincinnati and am happy to be back at the MTConnect Working Group Technical Advisory Group. Day 1 (Nov 7) is where the data and working groups get to meet - tomorrow (Day 2) will be the summary day. We are in a process to vote on introducing MTConnect XML Schema Ver 1.2 which ends Nov 30, 2011. Day 3 will be the first MTConnect Trade show and conference called MC2 (that ends day 4 - Thursday).

Section 1 - Standards Overview by Will Sobel from System Insights, Inc.

    Check out www.mtconnect.org for a free download of the the MTConnect standards
    Ver 1.1 Brought in Sensor Data - device, data item or 2nd/3rd level component
    Ver 1.2 Brought in Assets Detail
                * Part 1 - Overview & Protocol
                * Part 2 - Components & Data Items - work on sensors impacted this greatly
                                (moved from 76 data types, but after the statistics were put in with
                                30 different sensors - now have 2700 distinct data types
                * Part 3 - Streams, events, Samples & Condition
                                Minor changes - rearrangement

Mobile Assets:

Mobile Assets are something asscoiated with the manufacturing process that is not a component of a device, can be removed without harming the function o fthe device, and can be associated with other devices during their life cycle. A mobile asset does not have computational capabilities.

Cutting Tool:

Cutting Tool is an assembly of items for removing material from a work-piece through a shearing action at the defined cutting edge or edges. Follows ISO 13399 Standard.


-> Cutting Tool = Cutting Item + Tool Item + Adapter Item + Assembly Item (screws, etc)

Pull Stud (retention knob) not yet incorporated as a data item.
Interestingly, grinding is not yet been worked on...

Section 2 - Proposed Product Directory - by Paul Warndorf, VP Technology AMT

- Current Identifiers = Hardware, software Applications, Development Tools, Consulting Services, Training

Getting Started with MTConnect Connectivity Guide now available (something that we helped helped with). Click here - http://www.mtconnect.org/media/7312/getting_started_with_mtconnect_-_final.pdf

This report identified 3 types of
1. Native Devices
2. Translation Dependent Devices
3. Data Connection Dependent Devices  <--Nexas focus

Companies like Mazak have done a good job of describing how MTConnect can be implemented in Mazak Machine Tools - check out http://www.mazakusa.com/MTConnect/MTConnect_Brochure_7_15_2011_For_Viewing.pdf

Section 3 - Bar Feeding Group (MC2) - Randy Lewis, LNS America from Cincinnati, OH

Worked well with goals and deadlines - hard deadline for Mazak demo mid-October for integrating a LNS bar feeder via MTConnect to to a Mazak Machine Tool. Started with I/O, then more and more data. Demo went off without a hitch and the process led to enhanced automation possibilities.

Read - Read Concept = both bar feeder and machine tool cross read data simulates read/write as write is currently not supported. This format allows for equal automation components to cross-talk.

The I/O speed is quite fast - as fast as hard I/O - like 50 Milli-seconds, perhaps even faster with "push". Will Sobel pointed out that if you set the scan loop update to "0" no extra delays using a multi-threaded observer model (Report By Exception) rather than easier polling method. Randy was using local.host for this demo (one agent was handling both CNC and bar-feeder as the software was on the Mazak's PC).

Neil Desrosier from Mazak wrote the Mazak side of the bar-feeder and was impressed with the speed and openness and extensibility of the MTConnect solution. The MTConnect solution can add up the amount used and the amount available for better utilization and less scrap.

MACHINE TOOL              BAR FEEDER
                        Read
Agent+Adapter ------->      Client -------> PLC
|                                                                       |
|                                           Read                    |
CNC<----------Client         <------Agent/Adapter

Overview Video:

Check out https://github.com/mtconnect for source code for all demos.

MTConnect - A New World of Factory Floor Connectivity is Here

Submitted Online: Oct 20, 2011 by Tom Gaasenbeek 

Event: Call for Speakers - 2012 SME Annual Conference in Cleveland June 3-5

 

Biography - Who Are You:

As the CEO of Nexas Networks Inc., I am focused on providing Computer Integrated Manufacturing solutions. Since 1992, I have been striving to optimize manufacturing operations and provide innovative solutions for CNC control networking - first with Memex, then a public company called e-Manufacturing Networks and now with Nexas. Over 10 years, I was instrumental in developing the OMAC XML Schema for inter-machine connectivity - today that is a reality with MTConnect and I am excited to say ready for adoption. The world of Machine 2 Machine (M2M) connectivity is about to take off and we are dedicated to making this happen with MTConnect.

Why this topic is important to this audience: Please provide any history, trends, etc. that make this presentation vital to current users or new users of the technology. *

Manufacturers today are in an intense battle - competing 24/7 with every corner of the world. As such, they know that real-time information and nimble systems are needed to profitably respond to market. Expectations are higher and so it is necessary to have everything under control - this needs real-time data gathering. Excellent communication is at the heart of manufacturing today. Legacy machines need a common language to talk and with MTConnect - an open source XML schema is now available with legacy machine adapters - to make this feat happen. This talk is about sharing the exciting world of MTConnect and the advances in Machine 2 Machine connectivity. 

Abstract: Please provide a 100 to 200 word abstract describing your presentation. Please be specific as possible as to what you will discuss—technologies or strategies covered, case studies cited, etc. *

1. The Case for M2M Communications - After a brief intro, I intend to start the presentation with a definition of M2M and current state of communications on the factory floor. We all know that real-time information is needed to make a profitable company, but rarely is the "automation" actually "automated" and communicating easily. JIT needs real-time information as do many other systems - but up to now that has been hard to achieve. Discussion here will highlight the cost of legacy systems and the desire to bridge this gap sooner than later.

2.  Factory Floor Communications - A survey of the various silos of data gathering such as Quality, Production, DNC, MES, MRP, ERP etc will highlight the challenges manufacturers have had over the years with management and the application of information technology on the factory floor. A consolidated approach is need - the stumbling block has been a common language. The Open Modular Architecture Controls (OMAC) group addressed this in the late 1990's, but it was not until MTConnect in 2007 that the movement gathered steam with the sponsorship of the American Machine Tool Association.

3. Introducing MTConnect - The Standard for Real-Time Connectivity - Today MTConnect offers a universal connectivity option for almost all factory floor equipment and instrumentation. This ease of use and implementation - like OPC was in the process control world - will usher in new capabilities of interactive, responsive controls, nimbleness in operation and vigilance. 

4. Implementation of MTConnect - Today & Tomorrow - As a visionary and founder of this movement, I see an exciting future for the adoption of MTConnect on the factory floor. From Overall Equipment Effectiveness to Lean Manufacturing, the benefits of a common language with legacy machine support will help today's manufacturers survive and thrive in this every-changing world.

Microsoft's Interest in CIM

Microsoft has actually been interested in, and has been sponsoring events in the Computer Integrated Manufacturing space for years.

When I was with the Global HMI Sub-Committee in OMAC (Open Modular Architecture Controls group), Microsoft had a MUG (Microsoft User Group). We are talking over 10 years ago, before OMAC joined ISA and when it was under the ARC people's direction. Back then, I was running an upstart company after I had coined a new name that quickly became a category, namely "e-Manufacturing". After writing the first widely accepted XML Schema with Dr. Stephen Lane-Smith, I was happy that it has been used in the last few years and added to by MTConnect (see MTConnect.org) with sponsorship from the American Machine Tool Association. I now am involved with MTConnect on their Technical Advisory Board.

Our dream of barrier-free connectivity is now coming to pass and Microsoft will be a player in this. Our software systems over the years have relied heavily on Microsoft products - at times this was trying, but at least a standard could be leveraged for all. Today our goal is to connect the millions of isolated machine tools and provide a cloud of "machine2machine" inter-connectivity and synergy. We look at the plant as one machine now, and are in some ways living up to the 1998 press in Modern Machine Shop we got under the Memex name as the suppliers of the "shop floor nervous system".

I want to leave with a thought - back in the DotCom days (yes we were one of them) I explained to people that wondered about this connectivity thing that what we were talking about was the equivalent of clicking buy on the Net and the machine would almost instantly start making the product you needed. Zero waste - made to order - ultra velocity of data flow and yet in your hands quickly. We want to leverage IT on the factory floor and with my team of over a dozen companies and with technology we have today, I do not see why we cannot have this "click-buy-make-ship" dream.

CIM Strategies - Today & Tomorrow

Over 20 years ago, I can remember Modern Machine Shop writing about Flexible Manufacturing Systems (FMS) and Computer Integrated Manufacturing (CIM) like they were the next big thing. If you remember, Microsoft was starting to get noticed outside of the computer community, and the '486 was a real breakthrough. With Lotus 123, VisiCalc and this new thing called Excel - the business and manufacturing world was starting to apply Information Technology (IT) to the factory floor.

I can remember giving a speech in June 1990 to the Computer Science senior class at Fanshawe college in London Ontario called "Computing in the 90's - Today & Tomorrow". In preparation for this speech, I paid a visit to the new Canadian Microsoft headquarters in Mississauga and was impressed with the passion the young people had there. If you can imagine, I was invited in and offered a Coke (not a coffee) and brought in to hear the latest release from a manager who had come back from Redmond. It was an inside peek into Microsoft Windows 3.1 Work Group Version. The use of separate operational windows, that were able to run as many programs as you had windows open, was a real trick in multi-tasking capability back then.

I might add that my discussion during that Fanshawe speech about our research on viruses had the students on the edge of their seats. I left thinking that these new computer science students were in for the ride of their lives in the '90s and that they "didn't know what they didn't know". Shortly afterwards (September 1990), I was like them in this regard when I went to my first International Manufacturing Technology Show (IMTS) trade show in Chicago.

On the trip to IMTS in 1990, I can distinctly remember asking my employer at the time (who I was helping at the trade show) just "what was a machine tool anyway". Bill Peiman, from Tulip Electronics who had worked for GE and had started making third party CNC memory upgrades, told me what CNCs were, but it wasn't until I walked the show and realized that machine tool controls were "just computers that run machines". I was used to networking, main frames, PCs and the computer sub-culture - and thus I found this application exceptionally interesting. Skip the nice graphics and print material, these machine tool controls actually made something!

From the $50k Pro-Engineer CADCAM Unix boxes to the expensive machine tools they made programs for, the only obvious gaping hole in this discrete manufacturing space was the lack of connectivity. The front office with all its networks and PCs could not talk well with the machine tools on the factory floor. Back then paper punch tape, and serial ports were the norm - with no network cables in sight (Novel, ArcNet, 10Base2 or 10BaseT). If you can believe it today, 20 years later, serial connectivity is still the norm and I wonder - "if you don't have broadband on the factory floor, how can you get true CIM or even FMS?"

Since 1990 then, I have been dedicated to bridging this gap. From Tulip, I went on to found Memex Electronics Inc. in Hamilton in 1992. In 2000 Memex morphed into a public company called e-Manufacturing Networks Inc.and later into Nexas Networks today (with a few other ventures in between). The purpose has always been to "InterNetwork factory floors to the world", but we have discovered some interesting things in the machine tool connectivity world. This blog will explore some of these ideas I hope.

In summary, the CIM strategies of "today and tomorrow" are influenced by the past and the legacy ideas and equipment. Knowing the trials and tribulations, the successes and false starts, the millions made and lost - all serve us want to reinvent CIM and make it a driver for the future. IT applied to the factory floor will play an ever more important part in the "automation of the automation" in my opinion. Keep posted as we explore these areas in the this blog today & hopefully tomorrow...

CIM, So What?

Computer Integrated Manufacturing (CIM) is a relatively old term, but is not really heard too much these days.

For the hard hit discrete manufacturing sector (you know those folks that make planes, trains and automobiles), the advance of technology on their factory floors has been steady, but I argue not fast enough. The key here is that we need to make products faster, better, cheaper and more efficiently and to that end we need integrated technology to fill the productivity gap. In short, we need more of IT (Information Technology) on the factory floor.

Missing until recently has been a common IT device communication language. I am happy to report that we now have that in part with the recent adoption of MTConnect XML Schema V1.01 (check out http://www.mtconnect.org/). This web-based, self-describing language easily allows for dissimilar devices to talk over the LAN or WAN to applications (like Overall Equipment Effectiveness or OEE software) or to each other. Missing as of yet are file management and write capabilities - but that is now allowed as valid "extensions".

Everything will be connected sooner than you think - my goal in this blog is to chart the course of CIM coming back into the forefront. Is CIM boring, irrelevent or useless? I think not.

Keep posted and we will try our hand at "automating the automation". Also, check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=674RpaMSYEw for a better insight.

Finally, welcome the "CIM Today" Blog ... we are up to something alright!

Tom Gaasenbeek