Latest News

Failover safety concept to avoid unnecessary machine interruptions 


According to ABB, annual cost savings of $300,000 can be achieved through improved uptime with its safety programmable logic controller (PLC).

Non-emergency machinery stops can be avoided with the arrival of a “failover” safety concept for use with the company’s PLC. The concept distinguishes between a real safety reaction to a hazard – when the machine must stop – and those that trip the machine during non-critical events. As such, the full spectrum of automated processes including factory assembly lines, hoist applications and transportation centres like airports and harbours can avoid significant, unnecessary downtime costs.

“According to several surveys, one minute of production line downtime costs an average of $20,000,” said Yauheni Veryha, product manager of AC500-S Safety PLC at ABB.

“If we assume that the average downtime and recovery, due to a safety device malfunction, takes 15 minutes, then the implementation of the failover concept can save $300,000 per year. If we take into account the required design time to implement the failover concept in the production facility, the customer could still be saving $200,000 in the first year and $300,000 every year afterwards.”

Traditionally, sensors or switches inform a safety control device about the presence of humans. The machine is then stopped, its speed reduced or the space of movement for robots or automatic guided vehicles (AGVs) is restricted. If communication to a safety sensor fails, or the device itself fails, a machine safe stop is usually initiated by the safety PLC. This will occur even though the sensor’s fault is only temporary and there is no real risk to human operators or nearby equipment. This leads to costly, unnecessary machine stops.

The failover concept provides an alternative to a direct safe stop. It is based on the concept that the transient failure of a safety device does not always need a safe stop, but can be temporarily and safely bridged by the re-configuration of the safety program’s logic execution and reaction to safety events – without compromising on the safety integrity level.

For instance, if the factory floor area that is protected by the AGV’s safety laser scanner using the AC500-S Safety PLC experiences a communication error, it will not necessarily trigger a safe stop. If redundant devices, such as a remote safety camera controlled by the central safety control station, are covering the same area, a safety stop will only be triggered if a real hazard is detected by this camera.

Safety network protocols like PROFIsafe support the recognition of communication errors and device faults. This provides the ability to distinguish between temporary communication errors and device faults, as implemented in AC500-S Safety PLC.

Send this to a friend