JP7359090B2 - Plant alarm information management system - Google Patents

Description

The present invention relates to a system for managing alarm information in a plant where processing of metal materials is performed.

In plants where metal materials are processed, it is common to collect alarm information (failure information). Examples of alarm information include information indicating an abnormality in a computer that manages the entire processing process, information indicating an abnormality in processing equipment that performs the processing process, and information indicating an abnormality in a sensor installed in a processing line.

As a conventional technique for collecting alarm information, a system described in International Publication No. 2016/132479 is exemplified. This conventional system includes the above-mentioned computer, a controller that controls the above-mentioned processing equipment, and an alarm management device that collects alarm information from the computer and the controller. If the data formats of alarm information handled by the computer and controller are different, it takes time to analyze them. Therefore, in this conventional system, the alarm management device applies a common format to alarm information and extracts information necessary for analysis.

International Publication No. 2016/132479

When looking at the entire plant, the sources of alarm information can be roughly divided into three control hierarchies. An example of the first control layer is the layer including the computer described above. An example of the second control layer is a layer including the controller described above. Examples of the third control layer include processing equipment controlled by the controller described above and a layer including the sensors described above.

By separating the sources of alarm information by control hierarchy, when alarm information for the entire plant is collected, analysis focusing on the control hierarchy becomes possible. However, conventional analysis of alarm information has focused exclusively on identifying the cause of alarm information, and has focused on determining the extent to which each control layer had an impact on a failure that would shut down the entire plant. No one has conducted an analysis of this. Therefore, it can be said that there is a demand for the development of technology that enables evaluation from a different perspective than conventional ones.

One object of the present invention is to provide a technology that can automatically analyze how much influence each control hierarchy has on a failure that would stop the entire plant.

The present invention is an alarm information management system for a plant where a metal material processing process is performed, and has the following features.
The alarm information management system includes an upper control hierarchy, a middle control hierarchy, a lower control hierarchy, and an analysis device.
The upper control hierarchy manages the entire machining process. The upper control hierarchy outputs plant stop information when the machining process is stopped.
The intermediate control hierarchy is connected to the upper control hierarchy. The intermediate control hierarchy includes a group of controllers that control processing equipment constituting the plant and peripheral equipment thereof.
The lower control hierarchy is connected to the upper control hierarchy directly or indirectly via the intermediate control hierarchy. The lower control hierarchy includes a group of actuators and a group of special instruments provided in a machining line where the machining process is performed.
The analysis device is connected to the upper, middle and lower control hierarchies. The analysis device performs analysis processing of upper layer information, middle layer information, and lower layer information. The upper layer information indicates alarm information from the upper control layer. The intermediate layer information indicates alarm information output from at least one of the controller group and its peripheral devices included in the intermediate control layer. The lower layer information indicates alarm information output from at least one of the actuator group and special instrument group included in the lower control layer.
In the analysis process, the analysis device includes:
Based on the upper layer, middle layer, and lower layer information, calculate an alarm period for each control layer indicating the total time during which alarm information related to stopping the processing process is output;
calculating a shutdown period of the processing process based on the plant shutdown information;
Based on the alarm period and the stop period, the ratio of the alarm period to the stop period for each control layer is calculated as the degree of influence of each control layer on the stop of the machining process.

According to the present invention, analysis processing is performed in the analysis device. In the analysis process, an alarm period indicating the total time during which alarm information related to stopping the machining process was output is calculated based on the upper layer, middle layer, and lower layer information. Furthermore, a machining process shutdown period is calculated based on the plant shutdown information. Further, based on the alarm period and the stop period for each control layer, the ratio of the alarm period to the stop period for each control layer is calculated as the degree of influence of each control layer on the stoppage of the machining process. Therefore, according to the present invention, it is possible to automatically analyze how much influence each control hierarchy had on a failure that would stop the entire plant.

1 is a diagram showing a configuration example of a management system according to an embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of the flow of information while the entire plant is operating normally. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of the flow of information when a failure occurs in an actuator group. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of the flow of information when a failure occurs in a group of special instruments. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of the flow of information when a failure occurs in the intermediate control hierarchy. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of the flow of information when a failure occurs in an upper control hierarchy. It is a flowchart showing the flow of processing that is periodically performed in the analysis device. It is a figure explaining the calculation example of an alarm period and a stop period. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing a display example on a display device. FIG. 7 is a diagram showing another display example on the display device.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS A plant alarm information management system (hereinafter also simply referred to as a "management system") according to an embodiment of the present invention will be described below with reference to the drawings.

1. Configuration Example of Alarm Information Management System FIG. 1 is a diagram showing a configuration example of a management system according to an embodiment of the present invention. In the example shown in FIG. 1, the management system 1 includes an upper control layer 2 (LV2), a middle control layer 3 (LV1), an actuator group 4, a special instrument group 5, an analysis device 6, It includes a display device 7 and storage devices 8a to 8e.

The upper control hierarchy 2 includes a group of computers and their peripheral devices that manage the entire processing process performed in the plant. Examples of peripheral devices for the computer group include a database and a router. The database stores information related to the processing process (for example, information on metal materials and information on processing conditions for metal materials). An intermediate control layer 3, an actuator group 4, a special instrument group 5, and an analysis device 6 are connected to the router. The peripheral devices of the computer group also include the storage device 8a. The storage device 8a stores various types of information outputted from the upper control layer 2 to the outside during the machining process or inputted to the upper control layer 2 from the outside.

The intermediate control hierarchy 3 includes a group of controllers that control the processing equipment that constitutes the plant and its peripheral equipment. Examples of processing equipment include a reheating furnace, a scale breaker, a rough rolling mill, a coil box, a crop cutting machine, a finishing mill, a runout table, a winding machine, and a conveyor. The storage device 8b is exemplified as a peripheral device of the controller group. The storage device 8b stores various types of information that the intermediate control layer 3 outputs to the outside during the machining process, or that is input to the intermediate control layer 3 from the outside.

The actuator group 4 (ACT) is a drive device such as a motor, a valve, a power supply device, etc. for driving processing equipment. The special instrumentation group 5 (SI) includes sensors and other instrumentation installed in the processing line. The actuator group 4 and the special instrumentation group 5 are connected to a common control LAN. This common control LAN is different from the control LAN connected to the upper control layer 2 and the control LAN connected to the intermediate control layer 3. The actuator group 4 and the special instrument group 5 are classified into the "lower control hierarchy (LV0)".

The actuator group 4 has a storage device 8c. The special instrumentation group 5 has a storage device 8d. The storage device 8c stores various information that is output from the actuator group 4 to the outside during the machining process or input to the actuator group 4 from the outside. The function of the storage device 8d is the same as that of the storage device 8c. Storage devices 8c and 8d may be omitted. That is, the actuator group 4 does not need to have the storage device 8c, and the special instrument group 5 does not need to have the storage device 8d.

The analysis device 6 is connected to the upper control layer 2, the middle control layer 3, and the lower control layer via the control LANs of the respective control layers. The analysis device 6 appropriately receives various information outputted by these control layers via the control LAN, and stores it in the storage device 8e. The analysis device 6 further periodically performs analysis processing using various information stored in the storage device 8e. The analysis device 6 further performs processing for displaying the results of the analysis processing on the display device 7. Details of the processing periodically performed by the analysis device 6 will be described later.

Alarm information and plant stoppage information are exemplified as the various information that the analysis device 6 receives from the three control layers described above. Alarm information is information regarding a failure output from any of these control hierarchies. Alarm information ranges from minor to serious, which can cause the entire plant to stop. The plant stoppage information is information output from the upper control layer 2 when the entire plant stops.

The display device 7 is connected to the analysis device 6. The connection method between the display device 7 and the analysis device 6 may be wired or wireless. When both devices are connected wirelessly, for example, the analysis device 6 is installed near the plant, and the display device 7 is installed in a control room away from the plant. For example, remote plant workers and product quality managers are stationed in this control room. The display device 7 displays the results of the analysis process performed by the analysis device 6.

2. Flow of Information in the Management System Next, in the configuration example of the management system described above, the flow of various information exchanged between the control layers or between the control layer and the analysis device will be described.

2-1. During Normal Operation FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of the flow of information while the entire plant is operating normally. In the example shown in FIG. 2, a processing command FPI is output from the upper control layer 2 to the intermediate control layer 3. The processing command FPI is information generated based on information related to the processing process. The intermediate control hierarchy 3 generates a control command CTI for the actuator of each processing equipment based on the processing command FPI. The control command CTI is output from the intermediate control layer 3 to the actuator group 4.

During operation of the plant, the special instrument group 5 detects the status of the machining process. Performance information HSD of the machining process detected by the special instrumentation group 5 is output to the intermediate control hierarchy 3 and the upper control hierarchy 2. The performance information HSD output to the intermediate control layer 3 is appropriately stored in the storage device 8b and used for calculations in feedback control and sequence control executed by the controller group. The performance information HSD outputted to the upper control layer 2 is appropriately stored in the storage device 8a and used for the management of the entire plant by a group of computers.

2-2. At the time of failure 2-2-1. When a failure occurs in the lower control hierarchy FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of the flow of information when a failure occurs in the actuator group 4. In the example shown in FIG. 3, alarm information ALM4 is output from the actuator group 4 to the intermediate control layer 3. Alarm information ALM4 is information regarding a failure of actuator group 4. Generation and output of alarm information ALM4 are performed in the actuator that is the source of the failure. The timing at which the alarm information ALM4 is generated may be the same as the timing at which the occurrence of a failure is detected, or the timing at which the operation of the actuator that is the source of the failure is stopped.

The intermediate control layer 3 outputs alarm information ALM4 received from the actuator group 4 to the upper control layer 2. The intermediate control layer 3 may output only part of the alarm information ALM4 received from the actuator group 4 to the upper control layer 2.

The actuator group 4 also outputs alarm information ALM4 to the analysis device 6. The analysis device 6 stores alarm information ALM4 in the storage device 8e as appropriate. When the alarm information ALM4 includes important information that would cause the entire plant to stop, the upper control hierarchy 2 generates plant stoppage information ALP and outputs it to the analysis device 6. The analysis device 6 stores the plant stoppage information ALP received from the upper control layer 2 in the storage device 8e as appropriate. That is, when the alarm information ALM4 is information related to plant shutdown, the alarm information ALM4 and the plant shutdown information ALP are stored in the storage device 8e. Otherwise, only alarm information ALM4 is stored in the storage device 8e.

The generation and output of the alarm information ALM4 may be performed in the intermediate control layer 3. In this case, the intermediate control hierarchy 3 detects a failure in the actuator group 4 based on the performance information HSD. When the intermediate control layer 3 generates alarm information ALM4, the intermediate control layer 3 outputs this to the upper control layer 2 and the analysis device 6. The operation example of the upper control layer 2 and the analysis device 6 that have received the alarm information ALM4 is the same as the example described just before.

FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an example of the flow of information when a failure occurs in the special instrument group 5. In the example shown in FIG. 4, alarm information ALM5 is output from the special instrument group 5 to the intermediate control layer 3. Alarm information ALM5 is information regarding a failure of special instrument group 5. Generation and output of alarm information ALM5 are performed in the special instrumentation that is the source of the failure. The timing at which the alarm information ALM5 is generated may be the same as the timing at which the occurrence of a failure is detected, or the timing at which the operation of the special instrumentation that is the source of the failure is stopped.

The intermediate control layer 3 outputs the alarm information ALM5 received from the special instrument group 5 to the upper control layer 2. Only part of the alarm information ALM5 received from the special instrumentation group 5 may be output to the upper control layer 2. The explanation up to this point is the same as the example shown in FIG. In the example shown in FIG. 4, alarm information ALM5 is further output directly from the special instrument group 5 to the upper control layer 2. That is, in this example, the alarm information ALM5 is output directly or indirectly from the special instrument group 5 to the upper control layer 2.

The special instrumentation group 5 also outputs alarm information ALM5 to the analysis device 6. The analysis device 6 stores alarm information ALM5 in the storage device 8e as appropriate. When the alarm information ALM5 includes important information that would cause the entire plant to stop, the upper control hierarchy 2 generates plant stop information ALP and outputs it to the analysis device 6. The analysis device 6 stores the plant stoppage information ALP received from the upper control layer 2 in the storage device 8e as appropriate. In this way, when the alarm information ALM5 is information related to plant shutdown, the alarm information ALM5 and the plant shutdown information ALP are stored in the storage device 8e.

The generation and output of the alarm information ALM5 may be performed in the intermediate control layer 3. In this case, the intermediate control layer 3 detects a failure in the special instrument group 5 based on the performance information HSD. When the intermediate control layer 3 generates alarm information ALM5, the intermediate control layer 3 outputs this to the upper control layer 2 and the analysis device 6. The example of the operation of the upper control layer 2 and the analysis device 6 that have received the alarm information ALM5 is the same as the example described just before.

2-2-2. When a failure occurs in the intermediate control layer 3 FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an example of the flow of information when a failure occurs in the intermediate control layer 3. In the example shown in FIG. 5, alarm information ALM3 is output from the intermediate control layer 3 to the upper control layer 2. Alarm information ALM3 is information regarding a failure in intermediate control layer 3. The generation and output of the alarm information ALM3 may be performed in the controller that is the source of the failure, or may be performed in another controller that is connected to the source via the control LAN. The timing at which the alarm information ALM5 is generated may be the same as the timing at which the occurrence of a failure is detected, or the timing at which the operation of the controller that is the source of the failure is stopped.

The intermediate control layer 3 also outputs alarm information ALM3 to the analysis device 6. The analysis device 6 stores the alarm information ALM3 in the storage device 8e as appropriate. When the alarm information ALM3 includes important information that would cause the entire plant to stop, the upper control hierarchy 2 generates plant stop information ALP and outputs it to the analysis device 6. The analysis device 6 stores the plant stoppage information ALP received from the upper control layer 2 in the storage device 8e as appropriate. In this way, when the alarm information ALM3 is information related to plant shutdown, the alarm information ALM3 and the plant shutdown information ALP are stored in the storage device 8e.

2-2-3. When a failure occurs in the upper control hierarchy FIG. 6 is a diagram showing an example of the flow of information when a failure occurs in the upper control hierarchy 2. In the example shown in FIG. 6, alarm information ALM2 is generated and output in the upper control layer 2. Alarm information ALM2 is information regarding a failure in the upper control layer 2. The generation and output of the alarm information ALM2 may be performed in the computer that is the source of the failure, or in another computer (for example, a backup computer) that is connected to the source of the failure via the control LAN. It's okay to be hurt. The timing at which the alarm information ALM2 is generated is the same timing at which the occurrence of a failure is detected.

The upper control layer 2 also outputs alarm information ALM2 to the analysis device 6. The analysis device 6 stores the alarm information ALM2 in the storage device 8e as appropriate. When the alarm information ALM2 includes important information that would cause the entire plant to stop, the upper control hierarchy 2 generates plant stoppage information ALP and outputs it to the analysis device 6. The analysis device 6 stores the plant stoppage information ALP received from the upper control layer 2 in the storage device 8e as appropriate. In this way, when the alarm information ALM2 is information related to plant shutdown, the storage device 8e stores the alarm information ALM2 and the plant shutdown information ALP.

3. Processing performed by the analysis device Next, processing (analysis processing and display processing) that is periodically performed in the analysis device 6 will be described.

The analysis process is performed using alarm information ALM2 to ALM5 and plant stoppage information ALP stored in the storage device 8e. Note that the analysis target period (that is, the period for extracting alarm information and plant stoppage information) is set in advance. The display process is performed in conjunction with the execution of the analysis process. The display process is a process for displaying the results of the analysis process on the display device 7. A recording process is exemplified as another process that is performed in conjunction with the execution of the analysis process. The recording process is a process of storing the results of the analysis process in the storage device 8e.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart showing the flow of processing that is periodically performed in the analysis device 6. In the flowchart shown in FIG. 7, first, alarm information ALMn (n=2 to 5) and plant stoppage information ALP for the analysis target period are read out (step S1).

Following step S1, an alarm period APn (n=2 to 5) is calculated (step S2). Here, the alarm period APn is a period during which serious alarm information ALMn that causes the entire plant to stop is issued. Calculation of the alarm period APn is performed using the alarm information ALMn read out in step S1.

Following step S2, the shutdown period PDT for the entire plant is calculated (step S3). The suspension period PDT is calculated using the plant suspension information ALP read in step S1.

FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating an example of calculating the alarm period APn and the stop period PDT. In the upper part of FIG. 8, the states of three controllers PLCa to PLCc making up the intermediate control hierarchy (LV1) are depicted. "NML" indicates a normal state, and "BKDN" indicates a failure state. That is, FIG. 8 shows that the controller PLCa was in a failure state during the period from time t1 to time t2. It also shows that the controller PLCb was in a failure state during the period from time t3 to time t4, and the controller PLCc was in a failure state during the period from time t5 to time t6.

In the example shown in FIG. 8, it is assumed that the failure states of the controllers PLCa to PLCc are all serious enough to stop the entire plant. Then, the intermediate control layer 3 as a whole is calculated assuming that the period from time t3 to time t6 is an alarm period AP3. Note that if the time period from time t3 to time t6 includes a time period in which none of the failure states of the controllers PLCa to PLCc is a serious failure state, that time period is excluded from the alarm period AP3.

The method for calculating the alarm period AP3 is applied to calculating the alarm period in other control layers. Then, as shown in FIG. 8, the alarm period AP2 for the entire upper control layer 2 is calculated as the period from time t7 to time t8. Further, the alarm period AP4 for the entire actuator group 4 is calculated as the period from time t9 to time t10. Furthermore, the alarm period AP5 for the entire special instrument group 5 is calculated by adding the period from time t13 to time t14 to the period from time t11 to time t12.

In the example shown in FIG. 8, the stop period PDT is calculated as the period from time t3 to time t15. Time t15 is the time when the plant returns from the stopped state. Note that the reason why time t10 and time t15 do not match is because it took time to restart the plant.

Returning to FIG. 7 again, the explanation of the flow of processing performed by the analysis device 6 will be continued. Following step S3, the degree of influence IRn (n=2 to 5) is calculated (step S4). The degree of influence IRn is the ratio of the alarm period APn to the stop period PDT, and is calculated for each control layer (that is, IRn=APn/PDT). The series of processes from steps S2 to S4 corresponds to "analysis processing".

Following step S4, the analysis results are recorded and displayed (step S5). The processing in step S5 corresponds to "recording processing" and "display processing". FIG. 9 is a diagram showing a display example on the display device 7. As shown in FIG. In the example shown in FIG. 9, the degree of influence IRn is displayed as a pie chart as the analysis result. Further, below the pie chart, a time chart showing details of the alarm period AP and the stop period PDT is displayed.

FIG. 10 is a diagram showing another display example on the display device 7. In the example shown in FIG. 10, a bar graph is displayed below the pie graph. This bar graph subdivides the analysis target period (specifically, into 12 parts) and shows the total of alarm periods APn for each unit period UP1 to UP12 for each control hierarchy. Note that the unit period UP is exemplified by days, weeks, months, and years.

4. Effects According to the management system according to the embodiment described above, alarm information ALM2 to ALM25 for each control hierarchy and plant stoppage information ALP are aggregated in the analysis device 6. Then, by performing analysis processing in the analysis device 6, the degree of influence IRn of the control hierarchy with respect to a failure that would stop the entire plant is automatically calculated. Therefore, using this degree of impact IRn, it is possible to evaluate from a new perspective, such as which control hierarchy should prioritize the occurrence of failures in order to suppress the occurrence of failures that would shut down the entire plant. becomes. Furthermore, by displaying the degree of influence IRn on the display device 7, it is also possible to improve the convenience for the operator and quality manager who perform the evaluation.

1 Alarm management device system 2 Upper control layer 3 Middle control layer 4 Actuator group 5 Special instrument group 6 Analysis device 7 Display device 8a to 8e Storage device ALM2 to ALM5 Alarm information ALP Plant stop information AP1, AP2, APA, APS Alarm period APP Stop period CTI Control command FPI Processing command HSD Performance information

Claims (2)

An alarm information management system for a plant where metal processing processes are performed,
an upper control layer that manages the entire machining process and outputs plant stop information when the machining process is stopped;
an intermediate control hierarchy that is connected to the upper control hierarchy and includes a group of controllers and peripheral devices thereof that control processing equipment constituting the plant;
a lower control hierarchy that is connected directly to the upper control hierarchy or indirectly via the intermediate control hierarchy and includes an actuator group and a special instrumentation group provided in a processing line in which the processing process is performed;
Upper layer information connected to the upper, middle, and lower control hierarchies and indicating alarm information from the upper control hierarchies, and an alarm output from at least one of the controller group and its peripheral devices included in the middle control hierarchies. an analysis device that performs analysis processing of middle layer information indicating information and lower layer information indicating alarm information output from at least one of the actuator group and special instrumentation group included in the lower control layer;
Equipped with
In the analysis process, the analysis device includes:
Based on the upper layer, middle layer, and lower layer information, calculate an alarm period for each control layer indicating the total time during which alarm information related to stopping the processing process is output;
calculating a shutdown period of the processing process based on the plant shutdown information;
Based on the alarm period and the stop period, the ratio of the alarm period to the stop period for each control layer is calculated as the degree of influence of each control layer on the stop of the processing process. Information management system. The plant alarm information management system according to claim 1,
further comprising a display device connected to the analysis device,
The plant alarm information management system, wherein the analysis device further performs a display process of displaying the results of the analysis process, including the degree of influence of each control hierarchy, on the display device.

Images