Ge | TNSA Bin Components

‘ge’ Tagged Posts

Bradley Hmi

Why we need the MIMOSA standard?
In the manufacturing software market today, there are many vendors involved in predictive maintenance (monitoring Predictive condition and health assessment of the assets). This is a true example of a fragmented market, where there is no clear leader with a market share dominant. The same situation exists to a lesser degree on the maintenance, while a handful of large manufacturers, none has a dominant market share in the EAM market, estimated at $ 2.1B.

The end result is that the prediction maintenance providers have rolled some custom interfaces for one or more EAM systems, and few formal alliances exist. When a customer expects to buy a predictive maintenance (PDM) of the product, have to check to see if the provider supports your EAM system. Moreover, now face the risk that if they upgrade their EAM system interface can break, and upgrade options are now limited by the supplier of PdM. This is the classic risk specialties, point to point integration solutions. His is the pain that open standards help solve.

The protocol standardizes the interface MIMOSA between systems of plant floor (including PDM) and EAM systems. MIMOSA standard is complementary to the OPC, which handles the communication aspect of real-time interface with devices of the plant. There is an organization called Open & M, which is collaboration between MIMOSA, the OPC Foundation, and the ISA SP95 committee.

Comparison of OPC
A good way to understand what is happening today is MIMOSA look similar evolution of the OPC standard in recent history. A decade ago, operations personnel had a problem – there were mixed team on the ground floor, including distributed control systems (DCS), PLC, motors, valves, and so on down the chain. With so many vendors of devices from different manufacturers had to worry that the sellers were supported by his HMI consoles, what low-level protocols can be used to close the gap. Along came the OPC standard (on the basis of past successes of the bus standards), which implements a protocol standardized plant communications devices.

Part of the reason the OPC standard to achieve widespread adoption is the 3rd party vendor products intervened and created a bridge to compatible devices. With these bridges, customers do not have to wait around for Allen Bradley compatible, as they could by OPC adapter for that device. The same is now happening with EAM systems. While some EAM vendors have dragged their feet, 3 other vendors have stepped in and built MIMOSA compliant bridges.

MIMOSA messaging protocol
An important step in the evolution of MIMOSA was in its progression from a storage device focused on the messaging protocol to a focus on the protocol. The original version of MIMOSA is based on a data model called CRIS, or common relational schema information. This was a model of data, including scripts database for SQL Server and Oracle implementations. XSD schemas are created that maps to the layout of CRIS but many vendors focused on the question of storage of the protocol.

Comparing the OPC protocol, it became apparent that there was a need for a messaging protocol to standardize the interface between plant floor systems and EAM systems. OPC standard interface devices to the plant floor data recovery real-time. What is needed for EAM systems is a messaging protocol that could do the same, use case, as the automatic creation of work orders, upload meters and the measuring points, the recovery of information assets, and the state audit of the jobs generated and work history. Since each supplier EAM had their own database of application, the interest was mainly in the messaging layer instead of a layer of additional storage. The Tech-Tech-XML XSD and XML-specifications web services service changed the focus to the messaging layer for integration.

The good news about today's solutions is that they can use the-xml-Tech web-based communication services to link EAM systems, but also influence the CRIS database capabilities for standardized reporting. As more suppliers for the construction of reliability analysis and reporting tools on top of CRIS, not everyone has to worry about pipes to connect to each database prioprietary EAM reporting.

How many Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) are compatible with today's systems in day?
Nearly all major EAM systems on the market today, including SAP, Maximo, Datastream, and the Indus, MIMOSA based adapters are available (in several cases, the adapters are associated companies). These adapters make MIMOSA EAM systems compatible, so that predictive maintenance and health providers can focus on their asset value, reducing unplanned downtime and maintenance of waste disposal, instead of focusing on the pipes and all EAM systems. This also benefits the client update that is protected and the risk of migration for the integration of EAM. The customer benefits also lower cost of integration.

About the Author:

The bottom line is, when rolling out a condition based maintenance or predictive maintenance program, look to see if the vendors support the MIMOSA standard protocol.– Alex Bates

Article Source: ArticlesBase.com – Operations & Maintenance Interoperability Using the Mimosa Open Standard