Mr. Koch, you moderated the Big Data Analytics topic slot at the Summit accompanying the trade fair back in 2015. How has the topic developed since then, especially in the area of industrial applications?
Koch: In 2015, the event primarily offered basic information on the topic of big data analytics. In 2016, the audience wanted to know how projects that had already been realized had been implemented in concrete terms. They asked about success factors, specific experiences, collaboration across departmental boundaries or with external partners, analysis methods, underlying business models or the profitability of projects.

Klaus Koch, moderator of the Big Data Analytics topic slot

© Klaus Koch

To what extent was this development reflected in the speakers' presentations at the summit?
Koch: In addition to the introductory presentation, which also dealt with the necessary boundary conditions for successful 'big data analytics' implementations, four presentations provided concrete insights and experiences from various industrial fields of application. Two presentations documented the possibilities of automation technology providers who dealt with data acquisition and analysis in the context of energy management and preventive monitoring and maintenance. One presentation showed how 'big data analytics' methods can be used in mechanical engineering to determine the wear of punching tools in good time. Finally, the contribution from a manufacturing company described how productivity and quality could be increased through data analysis.

Which points were most important to the Summit visitors?
Koch: The participants indicated a high level of agreement every time the topic of 'cross-disciplinary collaboration' was raised: Fruitful and effective collaboration between the data analysts or IT specialists involved, on the one hand, and the people who contribute the application or technology knowledge, on the other, is a major challenge in realization projects. This aspect should be taken into account in every project. Furthermore, initial experience shows that pilot projects generally do not proceed as planned in terms of time and budget. However, as experience grows, this problem should hopefully resolve itself.

Has the topic of big data analytics really arrived in factory automation?
Koch: To answer this question, it is worth taking a look at the stands of the exhibiting companies: It was clear to see that many suppliers of automation technology, particularly among manufacturers of sensors, controllers and operating software, are trying to offer solutions for data analysis. Depending on the strategy of the individual companies, this ranges from the provision of sensor information to the provision of infrastructure solutions - such as a cloud - to complete 'big data analytics' solutions for specific fields of application.

In the context of big data analytics solutions, there is often talk of disruptive business models.
Koch: A lot is happening in this area, even if some people may not yet be aware of it. Let me give you an example: There are automation technology providers that offer plant operators prefabricated analysis solutions to increase plant availability and for preventive maintenance. This actually relates to the service business of machine manufacturers. Machine manufacturers who do not occupy this field themselves run the risk of losing significant parts of their service business.

Is big data analytics still relevant as a congress topic for the upcoming SPS IPC Drives?
Koch: Definitely! We also already have three topics in mind that could be a particular focus.

Safety & Security

Machine safety and IT security - two topics that can no longer be viewed in isolation from each other in the age of Industry 4.0. But how can the different requirements be reconciled? This is a question that is currently causing a stir in the IEC committees TC 65 (Security) and TC 44 (Machinery), among others. Bernard Mysliwiec from Mysafeautomation therefore began his introductory presentation in the 'Safety & Security' congress slot by outlining the current status of standardization - particularly with regard to IEC 62443 and IEC 61508 - and also provided answers to the following questions: How can security functions be attacked or protected in principle? When must cyber security be considered by the manufacturer of the machine, when by the operator and what role do the device manufacturers or technology providers play in this?

Keyword device development: While a generally established 'state of the art' has developed for the design, development and operation of safety-related control systems and comprehensive standards are available for this, IT security measures are often defined and implemented on an ad-hoc basis - according to the experience of Dr. Christoph Scherrer, Bachmann electronic. However, this is a mistake and no longer appropriate in the context of industry. In his presentation, he therefore discussed how experience and procedures relating to the design, implementation and verification of safety-oriented control systems in the automation sector can be transferred to the field of security as part of an integrated approach.

Dr. Martin Lange from Embex took the same line with his topic 'Secure field devices - secure in the future? Among other things, he highlighted the impact that the increasing threat of cyber attacks will have on the design of functionally secure field devices in the future. In particular, Lange explored the question of whether there are security measures that only need to be implemented in functionally secure field devices and not in standard components. The security focus was rounded off by Dr. Lutz Jänicke from Phoenix Contact Cyber Security. He focused specifically on the topic of communication and the secure exchange of information both within an organization and across company boundaries. He said that the unambiguous identification of the respective counterpart - for example by means of electronic keys - is indispensable for this in order to be able to ensure authenticity and confidentiality in accordance with the requirements.

Armin Glaser from Pilz concluded by addressing a problem arising from the fact that the factory of the future will increasingly consist of dynamically configurable systems. As things stand today, there is still a lack of standards for safety functions that are changed when individual machine modules are connected or removed. In order to solve this shortcoming, new procedures are ultimately required that include dynamic testing of functional safety when safety functions are changed.

Will sensors soon no longer need PLCs?

The experts on the topic of Sensor Technology 4.0 at the closing discussion: Bernhard Müller, Sick; Bernd Wieseler, Turck; Peter Wienzek, ifm; Volker Schütz, ifm; Benedikt Rauscher, Pepperl+Fuchs; Prof. Axel Sikora, Hahn-Schickard Gesel.

© Computers&AUTOMATION

One session at the Automation 4.0 Summit dealt with sensor technology for Industry 4.0. The five speakers highlighted various aspects of the topic: from new requirements for the sensors themselves, to communication with the server and the RAMI reference architecture model. The security of sensor communication was a lively topic of discussion. Peter Wienzek from ifm electronic emphasized that absolute security against external attacks can only be guaranteed if there is no connection to the outside. In this context, Bernhard Müller from Sick AG pointed out that the term 'cloud' is often misunderstood: The cloud's data storage does not have to be located on a foreign and distant server. Instead, it can also be a company-owned server located in the same building as the production facility.

In the concluding discussion, all speakers agreed that the PLC will disappear from automation in the foreseeable future. Edge computing - i.e. the processing of data directly at the sensor node - and direct communication between sensors and actuators already make an additional controller superfluous in many cases. Other applications still require a PLC, especially when real-time conditions need to be met. However, the speakers were confident that it won't be long before Industry 4.0 communication channels, such as OPC UA, also support real-time and other minor problems are resolved. Most of the speakers saw OPC UA as the upcoming communication standard for Industry 4.0. Only Bernhard Müller from Sick doubted that there could be a single communication standard at all. The different requirements of countless different applications could not be met by a single standard. Müller also sees OPC UA as a promising candidate, but he assumes that there will continue to be special solutions for special applications.