The Industrial Software space continues to outgrow its labels!!!!

As the 2014 draws to a close, I seem to be sitting in a growing amount of long term strategic meetings both within Schneider-Electric and within customers and discussing the landscape of 2020 -2025. What immediately happens is the labels we have used for years for products, spaces, and roles no longer mean the same thing. We rapidly find ourselves setting up a glossary of labels and what they will mean in 2020-25 in order to gain alignment.

Putting a label on this space has been challenging because it has evolved over the last 20 years and will continue to change as many technologies converge towards an integrated industrial software platform strategy.

1990 - 2010: The label “MES” was first introduced in 1990 to refer to a point application at a single site (typically Quality Management). Over the next 20 years, more functionality was added to MES to keep pace with Automation trends.

2010-2015: In recognizing its evolution, some industry analysts have offered new acronyms like MOM (LNS Research), while others have redefined MES as follows:

“For many, MES is no longer a point application, but a platform that serves a dual purpose: integrating multiple business processes within a site and across the manufacturing network, and creating an enterprise manufacturing execution capability.”

-          Gartner Group, Vendor Guide for MES 2012

Today/Tomorrow: As the industrial computing paradigm shifts to the internet, the platform is now being leveraged for other assets distributed across the interconnected value chain while extending the rich optimization functionality via new applications to get more productivity in areas outside of manufacturing. This platform maybe on premise but is rapidly growing to been a hybrid of on premise and “off premise” (cloud) solutions that enabled the shift to “managed Solutions” with standards. Required to gain consistency, and transparency across the value generating assets.

We started to see this transformation in early 2000s when a simple activity such as Performance /OEE on a packaging line became dramatically more complex. A different solution when it went from one line to many lines on a plant, and then the same standards, downtime reasons across 100s of lines over multiple plants. It was then that I realized in the meetings internally I could not use the word MES generically and needed to become specific.

Another area we finding this is around the HMI (human machine interface) traditionally it was a window into my process/ PLC and that is what InTouch was famous for. Again in internal meetings and with customers I struggle when they use the term as we have completely different functions in the operational experience been referred too. The diagram below shows the landscape we face in Operational Experiences today in a typical industrial company; they are all often referred to as HMI.

Just last we in a design meeting we were defining the strategy for certain notifications to brought to attention. The architectural suggestion was to have the advanced asset application send events to platform alarm and event system; this will expose them across the enterprise. This is the correct answer, but people struggled with it as they had in their mind HMI/ Supervisory, yet when defining the approach I was not thinking supervisory. I was thinking roles and that operational planning, asset planning roles require these notifications. By putting them on the common event bus, they could be picked up their interface which is filtered for these events, or by workflow so that procedure who notify them.

Again it was simple case of labels and peoples understanding of labels, when we ended up on the white board it all became clear.  

  

In the diagram above a Process HMI is a basic screen with alarms typical of InTouch, this very different to Site based system which requires process awareness, alarms, but operational data such as asset state, production schedule, log books etc.

 It is much easier to avoid labels and define the situation. scenario / role, and start the meeting or strategy session laying out the landscape for discussion, gain alignment on the “desired outcome” and destination first, it makes it easier!!!!

Operational Manufacturing Interface (OMI) vs Human Man Interface(HMI) or SCADA

Over the last year, I have visited many sites, discussed with many peers the evolution of the Operational Experience in the Industrial Landscape. But over and over again I find myself in the much debate on the role and capability, as usual this is not anybody being incorrect it is a miss communication more often than not.

The traditional industrial user experience which has been owned by the Human Man Interface (HMI) or DCS workstation, where people control, monitor and interact with the process in a focused way. So in these discussions people use the HMI, but I find myself questioning what experience are they targeting or describing. More than often I pull up the diagram below to provide a reference for Industrial Operational Experience of today.

 An HMI for a process cell with a narrow focus is very different to the Operational Interface used in an Integrated Operational Center, and very quickly people see the different.

This does not mean the Time of the HMI is over, I fundamentally think it does it's job well, at the focused point at which a process cell and the human come together in a simple, clear and concise experience at a reasonable process to set up and sustain.

But as you move to the right of this diagram, increasing reason-ability, increased scope of control, increased value in decisions. No longer can you monitor the system, the system be an exception based bring to attention the critical items. The focus is on Operational Continuity, which goes beyond control to Optimization and performance, and effective alignment of the operational team. Understanding the operating boundaries set up by safety to humans and environment, and maintaining maximum operational/energy performance.

To achieve this, the user is looking at operational view/dashboard of the high level process with the ability to investigate situations onto surrounding operational view real estate for deeper focus, without losing the overall screen. This avoids missing situations, as this Center view is an exception based.   The ability to investigate and then share with others in the team, easily, and for dynamic live collaboration to exist between the site field staff and operational experts, production, maintenance etc no matter where they are.

The information, types of content used in these investigations are not standard process graphics of traditional HMI, they are to name a few:

Video, alarms, alarm event analysis, forms for data entry, and searching. Reports, documents, live collaboration tools, such as chat, video conference, and operational analysis tools to put events, data in the context of now, past and future for " what if" etc.

Key is the interaction between this content, with ability focus on the main screen and situation, then automatic relations across other content for rapid investigation and understanding is achieved for fast decisions.

This is NOT and HMI in the traditional sense and has caused us to term this new interactive, multi content environment in a new type of operational experience the " Operational Management Interface". This multi content environment will go across the operational control room to roaming expert maybe on a tablet, but different layout experience, and to the site.

The key is the interactive, collaboration experience across multiple content types to enable rapid decisions.

As you design for 2020 and operational workspace required over the next few years and for the next 20 years, ask yourself what is required by role, and activity.

Operational Transformation of Supervisory and Operational Landscape will Take Center Stage!!

As I sit waiting in another airline lounge ready to cross the Pacific again, my thoughts go to the key message that was delivered in Europe User Group Events 2 weeks ago, the event in Brisbane last Friday for the launch of Foxobro Evo(new Systems offering from Foxobro), and then in this weeks North American User Conference in Dallas.

The consistent message from customers to discuss, is “how do we deal with the changing operational culture”? I will be delivering 3 sessions on the operational transformation that is happening in the industrial world:

• Supervisory Transformation from HMIs to an Operational Landscape
• Information transformation from historians to Operation Information
• Operational Transformation from MES to Operational Management across sites

None of this is new, but the diagram below reflects the transformation at the supervisory level, where:

• Existing HMIs from 90s designed for the “island” process and the Gen X thinking are needing to reviewed, people are needing upgrade the technology, but with that transform.
• There is the transformation of the workforce to “digital native”, to shorter tenure ships in roles and locations, to multitasking as a natural work method.
• Operational practice transformation driven by competing in the “flat world” where decisions need to be now, inventory levels are minimum, product change is norm, new product introduction is rapid and across the world. Regulatory constraints impact and we from working on our own to working in teams, leveraging different roles, skills to make decisions and take actions faster and in more consistent way.
• Accountability and governance is growing
• Scope of management is growing, and the day in the life is changing, not behind one desk.

Why would you just upgrade to the latest version, when you probably have different HMIs from different vendors and version, done by different project teams all working in isolation limited interaction.

The move to modern operational experience system,  adopting the hierarchy, and object strategies for standards, embedding operational process, building in natural governance and intuition. Collaboration is natural including sharing, and the ability for the teams to virtual, so expertise is at the “finger tip”.

It is necessary to note that this is not just a vendor evolution, to me it is more and solution and cultural evolution and realization, where are you in this journey???

The reaction and discussion will be good, one of the areas we engaging in a series of sessions around operational world , roles, devices, “day in the life” in 2018-20.  The fact that the demand for these one on one sessions has been astounding is indicative of the change and awareness!! 

Navigation needs to be a Natural Act!!!!

Last week I visited some sites and engineering houses as they developed new systems. What struck me was the amount of time, and effort we put into designing a forced navigation between screens and windows. Even though, I knew this in my mind, I asked Why?.

In designing navigational buttons,  thereby enforcing a method of navigating through the application, which then now needs to trained to the people. Why cannot the system has Natural navigation built from the application model.

So what is this about?

Simple in today’s environment we have a couple of areas effecting the operational environment:

• Rotating people are in locations, role shorter times
• Increase in responsibility and decision making requirements, requiring a significant increase in data and information the operator must absorb or react over.

Last week I discussed Advanced Process Graphics, and how the new coloring scheme where only exception is shown is key to a person’s day, not the pretty pictures, providing a practical way to address the second point of more information. This starts not just in the screen design but down in the data and information source so the system is managing by exception.

The top point I raised is the rotating staff, discussing this last week with a couple of customers, this is a huge issue, I have spoken before about Operator Training Systems, but along with that must come a “natural” navigation. The users need intuitive navigation around screens, accessing the information they need, to make the decision, and take the required action. The interface may not be the desktop or control room experience it may start there, but it may also be at home, on the web, or roaming.

Consider screens and navigation designed for the desktop, now consider the Ipad, where the real estate is smaller, experience is “touch not click”, the desktop design will probably not be practical. Does this mean as a designer you have design different windows, and especially different navigation experiences or has the paradigm changed that this one window must be able to hosted in both environments, and the navigation/ layout for the experience changes. Yes the day of the HMI Application is over, it’s layout and windows been specific to location/ device and experience.

Layouts need to define where windows appear, layouts will be associated with the device and person. Example: I may have my desktop control experience, but I will have my Ipad control experience, and a different one for industrial, mobile device experience. Each with their own layout, and associated navigation, yet the same windows and information can be accessed.

Model driven navigation is required, so as you drill through the experience, to different levels of the model, the navigational experience must evolve driven from  the model. This allows the evolution of the model to happen, with no change required to operational experience as the new model extensions will be naturally available.

People often ask me why cannot the classic InTouch application work for the modern HMI, well the HMI products like InTouch, Citect, Ifix etc were built for local, one experience, one device, that is why we are evolving the InTouch experience to modern requirement. Next week I want continue the discussion on the "Intutive" navigation concept.