The evolution of control architectures for automated manufacturing systems

Dilts, David M.; Boyd, N.P.; Whorms, H.H.

doi:10.1016/0278-6125(91)90049-8

Cited by 320 publications

(171 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

156

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We made a comparison in terms of the characteristics of the control architectures and their implementations. The advantages and disadvantages of the hierarchical and distributed architecture correspond to these described in [8].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

A comparative experiment of control architectures

Timmermans

Szakal

1996

Computers in Industry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents the results of two research projects in the CIM laboratory of the Cooperative Engineering Centre (CEC) in Amsterdam. IThe two projects involve the design and implementation of control systems for shop floor control.Two different designs for shop floor control systems are implemented in a scale model factory for PCB assembly and test. The first system is based on a distributed control architecture, and the second system is based on a hierarchical control architecture. This paper discusses the differences between the architectures and implementations of the two control systems. The benefits and disadvantages of different architectures and implementations are discussed in terms of functionality, performance, maintenance, software reuse and required infrastructure.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

A comparative experiment of control architectures

Timmermans

Szakal

1996

Computers in Industry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Normally, it has a centralised control that enables the deployment of optimal decision-making to cascade through the entire hierarchical dependencies. The disadvantages are mostly related to the computational limitations of the lower dependencies, delayed communications due to the increased number of middle dependencies, lack of the adapting the control strategy, and lack of reactivity capabilities (Dilts, Boyd, and Whorms 1991;Saharidis, Dallery, and Karaesmen 2006). However, more recently, control system architectures have migrated to heterarchical structures, where the control problem is solved through the emergent behaviour of cooperative decisional entities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pollux: a dynamic hybrid control architecture for flexible job shop systems

Jiménez

Bekrar

Zambrano-Rey

et al. 2016

International Journal of Production Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays, manufacturing control systems can respond more effectively to exigent market requirements and real-time demands. Indeed, they take advantage of changing their structural and behavioural arrangements to tailor the control solution from a diverse set of feasible configurations. However, the challenge of this approach is to determine efficient mechanisms that dynamically optimise the configuration between different architectures. This paper presents a dynamic hybrid control architecture that integrates a switching mechanism to control changes at both structural and behavioural level. The switching mechanism is based on a genetic algorithm and strives to find the most suitable operating mode of the architecture with regard to optimality and reactivity. The proposed approach was tested in a real flexible job shop to demonstrate the applicability and efficiency of including an optimisation algorithm in the switching process of a dynamic hybrid control architecture.

show abstract

“…Control models for manufacturing systems are usually based on implementation of three typical architectures: centralised architecture (Dilts et al, 1991), hierarchical architecture (Jones and McLean, 1986;Jackson and Jones, 1987) and heterarchical architecture (Lin and James, 1992;Gu et al, 1997;Macchiaroli and Riemma, 2002;Wong et al, 2006a). In centralized and hierarchical architecture there is a singular centralized controller, or a hierarchy of many, that is/are rigidly designed based on static system status and global objectives of the manufacturing system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In centralized and hierarchical architecture there is a singular centralized controller, or a hierarchy of many, that is/are rigidly designed based on static system status and global objectives of the manufacturing system. These two architectures are able to represent the physical hierarchy of a manufacturing system and also offer advantages such as global optimisation, predictability, and robustness in production planning and scheduling (Dilts et al, 1991;Chiu and Yih, 1995). Despite this, they lack operational flexibility due to centralized control.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agent-based hierarchical production planning and scheduling in make-to-order manufacturing system

Zhang

2014

International Journal of Production Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evolution of control architectures for automated manufacturing systems

Cited by 320 publications

References 27 publications

A comparative experiment of control architectures

A comparative experiment of control architectures

Pollux: a dynamic hybrid control architecture for flexible job shop systems

Agent-based hierarchical production planning and scheduling in make-to-order manufacturing system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About