The Future of Fieldbuses

Transcription

1 ARC European Industry Forum 2018 Workshop: The Future of Fieldbuses What we need to know about the impact of OPC UA, DDS and TSN Moderator Co-Moderator V4 May10, 2018

2 Panelists Stefan Bina EPSG Ethernet Powerlink Paul Brooks ODVA EtherNet/IP Angelo Corsaro OMG / DDS Georg Kroiss TTTech Hans-Georg Kumpfmüller FieldComm (FDI, FF, Hart) Peter Lutz Sercos International Heinrich Munz KUKA AG VISION, EXPERIENCE, ANSWERS FOR INDUSTRY ARC Advisory Group 2

3 How do OPC UA, DDS, MQTT and AMQP relate to each other? us/azure/iot hub/iot hub mqtt support us/azure/service busmessaging/service bus amqp dotnet cl mqtt bluemix iot node red app/ WP_Microsoft_Kooperation_en.pdf /en US/ac41dffc7e94476cada950d78494fb33.html DDS is a protocol for the IoT which enables network interoperability for connected machines, enterprise systems and mobile devices. topics/iot standards.htm Any chance of just one standard? VISION, EXPERIENCE, ANSWERS FOR INDUSTRY ARC Advisory Group 3

4 Will OPC UA over TSN reach out into the Fieldbus level and eventually reduce the variety of fieldbuses? Cloud Machine or Device (e.g. Controller)???? Machine or Device (e.g. Controller) Drive P T M M OPC UA and TSN on fieldbus level? VISION, EXPERIENCE, ANSWERS FOR INDUSTRY ARC Advisory Group 4

5 Will OPC UA over TSN prevail existing Ethernet based fieldbuses? OPC technologies were created to allow information to be easily and securely exchanged between diverse platforms from multiple vendors and to allow seamless integration of those platforms without costly, timeconsuming software development. We anticipate that OPC UA TSN will quickly reveal itself as a game changer in the field of industrial automation, being the first and only candidate for establishing a holistic communication infrastructure from the sensor to the cloud. ua tsn.pdf B+R, Schneider Electric, ABB, TTTech, GE, Huawei, Fraunhofer IOSB-INA, Phoenix Contact, Intel, Bosch-Rexroth, Cisco, Hirschmann, Moxa, Kalycito Infotech Different messages / perceptions about fieldbus level VISION, EXPERIENCE, ANSWERS FOR INDUSTRY ARC Advisory Group 5

6 The risk of competing OPC UA implementations Source: VDMA Will there be really only one harmonized OPC UA standard? VISION, EXPERIENCE, ANSWERS FOR INDUSTRY ARC Advisory Group 6

7 In Germany for example 3 associations are working on companion specifications and many more VDMA VDW ZVEI NAMUR? VDMA: Mechanical Engineering Industry Association VDW: German machine tool builders association ZVEI: German Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers Association And others: eg: TMC - Tobacco Machine Communication Working Group, EUROMAP - European plastics and rubber industry association, NAMUR - User Association of Automation Technology in Process Industries Risk of overlap and missing true harmonization VISION, EXPERIENCE, ANSWERS FOR INDUSTRY ARC Advisory Group 7

8 TSN Base Standards IEEE Published Base Standards 802.1Q AB AS-2011 / Cor AX BA-2011 / Cor Content Bridges and Bridged Networks Station and Media Access Control Connectivity Discovery (specifies LLDP Link Layer Discovery Protocol) Timing and Synchronization for Time-Sensitive Applications in Bridged Local Area Networks Link Aggregation Audio Video Bridging Systems (AVB) The Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) Task Group (TG) is a part of the IEEE Working Group (WG). The charter of the TSN TG is to provide deterministic services through IEEE 802 networks, i.e., guaranteed packet transport with bounded latency, low packet delay variation, and low packet loss. Both the base standards as well as amendments to the base standards are updated along with new requirements / technical evolutions. TSN represents a bundle of IEEE base standards and amendments VISION, EXPERIENCE, ANSWERS FOR INDUSTRY ARC Advisory Group 8

9 IEEE TSN Status (as of May 10, 2018) IEEE Published Content Note IEEE Projects / Contents 802.1Q amendments Qav 2009 Q 2014 Forwarding & Queueing for time sensisitive streams Qat 2010 Q 2014 Stream Reservation Protocol (SRP) Qcc Qca 2015 Path Control & Reservation Q Rev Qbu 2016 Frame Preemption Q Rev Qbv 2016 Scheduled Traffic Q Rev Qch 2017 Cyclic Queuing & Forwarding Q Rev Qci 2017 Filtering & Policing Q Rev published Published, but ongoing revision or update project has been rolled into / will be rolled into. Base Standard Which TSN standards are needed for hard real time motion control? Are all using the same? AS Rev Time Synchonization AX Rev Link Aggregation 802.1Q amendments (to the ongoing Q Rev project): Qcc SRP Enhancement & Performance Improvements Qcj Provider Backbone Services Qcp YANG Data model Qcr Asynchronous Traffic Shaping Qcy VDP Extension to support NVO3 Qcw YANG Data model for scheduled traffic, frame preemption, Per Stream Filtering and Policing Qcx YANG Data model for Connectivity Fault Management 802.1AB amendments: ABcu LLDP YANG Data Model Stand alone new TSN standards CM CS Time Sensitive Networking for Fronthaul Link Local Registration Protocol Virtual Station Interface (VSI) Discovery and Configuration Protocol (VDP) Extension NVO3: Network Virtualization Overlays VISION, EXPERIENCE, ANSWERS FOR INDUSTRY ARC Advisory Group 9

10 What is real-time???? > 1 ms 100 µs 3 ms 10 µs 400 µs 0,5 µs 15 µs Multi axis synchronous motion control applications with Jitter < 4 µs Is TSN fit for hard real time motion control applications? Some say: need to wait until all IEEE standards are published Others say: let s take what we have and test it out Source: IAONA real time classes: IAONA = Industrial Automation Open Network Alliance dissolved June 30, 2006 VISION, EXPERIENCE, ANSWERS FOR INDUSTRY ARC Advisory Group 10

11 Questions 1. As more and more data and being sent to clouds for analysis, what do current industrial networks have to do to support this level of data exchange? Is OPC UA the solution? How will OPC UA deal with message protocols like MQTT and AMQP? 2. OPC UA offers a communications protocol called publish/subscribe that could potentially replace existing master/slave protocols used by existing networks. How might OPC change industrial communications both at the controller to controller level and at the IO level? 3. Will we see purely standards based, universal industrial Ethernet emerge that replaces the existing versions of industrial Ethernet? If yes, in what time frame? 4. Considering the large installed base of industrial Ethernet nodes, will industrial network consortia offer a migration path from current networks to a future, universal fieldbus? Will this make current networks obsolete? 5. TSN (time sensitive networking) is heralded as the only universal solution for real time control in applications like hard motion control. Will TSN, for example, replace CIP Motion or Profinet IRT for this purpose? 6. Beside hard motion control, for what other applications is TSN useful? 7. For years, the non industrial world has used DDS as a universal protocol for communication among unlike devices. The Object Management Group (OMG) and the OPC Foundation have announced plans to cooperate. What is the nature of this cooperation? What activities between the two groups are currently being worked on? What can we expect in the near future? 8. Will there be two competing standards with OPC UA and DDS? 9. Are OPC UA and DDS oversized for small smart sensors? 10. The FieldComm Group encompasses a portfolio of communications standards for the process industries, including Foundation Fieldbus, HART protocol, and Field Device Integration. HART in particular has a HUGE installed base. What are the special requirements for industrial communications in process applications? Can we expect to see OPC UA, pub/sub, TSN or DDS integrated into any of these three technologies in the future? VISION, EXPERIENCE, ANSWERS FOR INDUSTRY ARC Advisory Group 11