Overview and Comparison of Asset Information Model Standards

Different organizations are currently working on concepts and standards pertaining to the integration of industrial automation devices into a communication network. For manufacturers, suppliers, integrators, and operators of automation components, the variety of available protocols for information e...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	IEEE access Vol. 11; pp. 99189 - 99221
Main Authors:	Miny, Torben, Thies, Michael, Lukic, Lina, Kabisch, Sebastian, Oladipupo, Kazeem, Diedrich, Christian, Kleinert, Tobias
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	Piscataway IEEE 2023 The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE)
Subjects:	Asset administration shell (AAS) Asset management Automation automation markup language (AML) field device integration (FDI) industrial automation device Industrial facilities Industries Information exchange integration standards module type package (MTP) OPC UA process automation–device information model (PA-DIM) Questions Representations Semantics Task analysis W3C W3C web of thing–thing description (W3C TD)
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	Different organizations are currently working on concepts and standards pertaining to the integration of industrial automation devices into a communication network. For manufacturers, suppliers, integrators, and operators of automation components, the variety of available protocols for information exchange raises the question of which standard to use. To address this question, this contribution provides an overview of different standards for the virtual description of an automation device in the context of device integration and presents a detailed comparison of the following selected standards: W3C WoT Thing Description, Asset Administration Shell, Digital Factory Framework, Automation Markup Language, Module Type Package, OPC UA Process Automation - Device Information Model, and Field Device Integration. These standards are compared with respect to four categories: 1) Representation of a property; 2) Representation of services; 3) Information modeling for direct automation device access; and 4) Mechanism for discovery. The comparison is summarized in an evaluation of the suitability of each standard for different use cases. Since none of the standards fully covers all use cases generic integration strategies are presented for combining the device information models. Finally, a description of a demonstration showcasing this integration, including an implementation as a proof of concept, concludes this contribution.
ISSN:	2169-3536 2169-3536
DOI:	10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3312286