I first heard this when it related to control and automation with the early OMAC (when it still stood for Open Modular Architecture Controller). Some engineers thought totally open, integrated control would be nirvana. All controller parts from all suppliers could be interchangeable parts with programming available in the IEC 61131 standard. Any supplier’s programming application could be used interchangeably with any other supplier’s hardware.
Guess what? That didn't work. No supplier would sign up for that program. No one was even willing to sign up with the idea that they might displace the industry leaders. This, of course, would also derail any further technological advances. Even more humiliation came when someone showed up at an ARC Forum in Orlando, I think in 2001, with an “OMAC controller.” It was based on a generic IEC 61131 programming package and a CompactPCI computer. Trouble was, as I quietly pointed out to the guy who showed it, the supplier of the CompactPCI chassis did not follow the standard for CompactPCI.
Interoperability
Saner people prevailed. The movement toward interoperability grew rapidly. OPC is a stellar example. There was great need for sharing data. Engineers wanted to buy the human-machine interface (HMI) they thought best and match it with the controller they used. But building drivers for communication was expensive and time-consuming for HMI suppliers. So they gathered with Microsoft and developed a standard method of data exchange. OPC has grown since the early days, and the latest version, OPC UA, meets modern computing requirements. Everyone can innovate and everyone can communicate.
Standards have proved useful when applied appropriately. ISA95, the standard for integrating enterprise and control systems as described by the International Society of Automation (ISA), is actually a model that allows engineers and IT professionals to systematically describe their processes and relate the description to software applications that carry out that integration of data. I was told at a conference in mid-September that company requests for ISA95 training are growing rapidly.
Another group is working on a way to implement the ISO 15926 standard for data exchange that allows engineering design applications to share live data with databases and other applications while allowing each design supplier to continue to innovate and add value. Meanwhile, live data can flow from the design application, through the construction (as built) phase, and end up in operations and maintenance databases. As a living document, it becomes much simpler for a maintenance technician commissioning a new plant to find the specific information needed to commission or troubleshoot a device without the need to leaf through pages of pdf files that quite likely are terribly out-of-date. This is the OGI pilot demo that I have described before.
All this technology will never work as well as it could if we don't change our work processes to integrate the technology into the daily life of engineers, operators, maintenance techs and managers. It’s the people part that bring everything to successful plant operations and profitability. Let’s not forget the people interoperability part of technology interoperability.
I recently talked with Larry O’Brien, marketing director for the Fieldbus Foundation, about this topic. He pointed to the work recently begun by the ISA108 committee to develop standards for work processes. This is great news. It shows growth in ISA by recognizing the role of people in the process. No matter what pundits say about automation replacing people, we still need many skilled and trained people. And we need to build technology that people can use.
