Guideline LifeCycle en

Life-Cycle-Management for
Automation Products and Systems

A Guideline by the System Aspects Working
Group of the ZVEI Automation Division
Total Cost of Ownership
Compatibillity
Migraation
Life-Cycle-Excellence
Timee in use
Life cycle
Spare part
Componen
nt exchaange
Services
Re-d
design
Know-how
IMPRINT
Life-Cycle-Management for Automation Products and Systems
A Guideline by the System Aspects Working Group of the
ZVEI Automation Division
Published by:
The German Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers Association (ZVEI)
Automation Division
Contact:
Dr. Markus Winzenick
Lyoner Strasse 9
60528 Frankfurt am Main
Germany
Phone: +49 (0)69 6302-426
Fax:
+49 (0)69 6302-386
E-mail: winzenick@zvei.org
www.zvei.org
Translation support:
www.targettraining.eu
Design:
NEEDCOM GmbH
www.needcom.de
ISBN: 978-3-939265-26-9
Frankfurt, September 2012
ZVEI - Zentralverband Elektrotechnik- und Elektronikindustrie e. V.
(ZVEI - German Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers Association).
This guideline was compiled with the utmost care.
ZVEI, however, excludes any liability for the contents.
Preamble
Within the German Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers Association (ZVEI) the Automation Division
concerns itself with topics and challenges of automation technology installations from the viewpoint of
producers and users. In this context, the management of automation products and the resulting (plant)
solutions, in regard to the entire life-cycle, is a topic that is increasingly encountered on todays agendas.
The System Aspects working group is well aware of the significance and scope of this topic and has
focused on addressing the respective issues in a coherent and comprehensive manner over the past two
years. In addition to the contributions of discussions at ZVEI conferences, trade fairs and congresses, the
compilation of the results as a compact, concise guideline has been and remains the main result of these
activities and endeavors.
This paper is intended as a structured introduction to the automation-specific aspects of Life-CycleManagement and is also intended as a compendium for professionals who have already dealt with the
topics in greater detail.
The authors
Dr.-Ing. Rolf Birkhofer
rbirkhofer@codewrights.biz
Gnter Feldmeier
gfeldmei@tycoelectronics.com
Johannes Kalhoff
jkalhoff@phoenixcontact.com
Claus Kleedrfer
claus.kleedoerfer@HARTING.com
Dr. Michael Leidner
michael.leidner@tycoelectronics.com
Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Ralf Mildenberger
ralf.mildenberger@siemens.com
Dipl.-Ing. Mathias Mhlhause
mathias.muehlhause@ovgu.de
Dr.-Ing. Jrg Niemann
joerg.niemann@de.abb.com
Dipl.-Ing. Reinhard Schrieber
reinhard.schrieber@siemens.com
Jens Wickinger
jens.wickinger@de.schneider-electric.com
winzenick@zvei.org
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Martin Wollschlaeger
martin.wollschlaeger@inf.tu-dresden.de
Additional involvement during the English translation process

are responsible for the key contributions to this guideline. Without their highly committed cooperation
far beyond the usual scope of activities within associations we would not have achieved the results
presented here. We would like to cordially thank all participants for their valuable contributions. In particular, we would like to acknowledge the dedication of the working group members Prof. Martin
Wollschlaeger and Reinhard Schrieber, who addressed the topics at hand and advanced the work on this
guideline in an untiring manner. As a result, the current version of this guideline is in line with the guidelines on Ethernet and Web Technologies in Automation.
Frankfurt am Main August 2012
Head of the ZVEI System Aspects Working Group
ZVEI Automation Division
Dr. Rolf Birkhofer
CONTENTS
Introduction
The current status
Requirements, influencing factors, industry-specifics
2.1 General requirements
11
2.2 Consideration of industry-specific requirements
13
2.3 Requirements of the chemicals industry
14
2.3.1 General industry characteristics
14
2.3.2 Life-cycle related requirements
14
2.3.3 Industry-specific economic aspects
15
2.3.4 Anticipated industry trends
15
2.4 Requirements of the energy industry
15
15
16
17
17
2.5 Requirements of the rail transport industry
18
18
18
19
20
2.6 Requirements in automobile manufacturing
20
20
20
21
21
2.7 Requirements in machine tool building
22
22
23
23
23
2.8 Industry-neutral aspects
24
2.8.1 Examples of external technical influences
24
2.8.2 Examples of the influence of standardization and legislation
24
2.8.3 Examples of socio-economic influences
25
2.9 Conclusions
11
25
Generic models for Life-Cycle-Management
28
3.1 Life-Cycle-Model
28
3.2 Integration model
30
3.3 Compatibility model
33
3.4 Life-cycle considerations for selected examples
36
3.4.1 Microprocessors
37
3.4.2 Web technologies
37
3.4.3 Field device integration
38
3.4.4 Standards and regulations
39
3.5 Conclusions
40
Strategies for Life-Cycle-Management
42
4.1 Last-time buy
43
4.2 Substitution
44
4.3 Re-design
45
4.4 Migration
46
4.5 Life-Cycle-Management services
48
4.5.1 Standard services
48
4.5.2 Service through special agreements
48
4.6 Comparison of the strategies
48
4.7 Plant user strategies
52
4.8 Conclusion regarding the strategies
53
Integrated Life-Cycle-Management
54
5.1 Proactive Life-Cycle-Management
54
5.2 Life-Cycle-Excellence
55
Summary
56
Figures
58
Tables
58
Bibliography
59
Index
60
Glossary
62
INTRODUCTION
Introduction
In todays automation applications an increasing divergence of the life-cycles of components, devices

and systems in comparison to the life time of overall plants is evident. The increasing functionality of
components, the advancing development of electronics and the innovation dynamics inherent to hardware and software are continuously shortening the life-cycle of individual automation components.
Certain semiconductor components are only manufactured for a short period of time, for example, and
subsequently abandoned. By comparison, the time in use of automation systems is considerably longer.
Moreover, there are considerable differences depending on the industry sector. The time in use of a
production line in the automobile industry is usually identical with the period of time in which a new
model is manufactured, which is around 7 to 8 years today. By comparison, the operational life of a
process plant in the chemical industry is typically some 15 years, while even 50 years may be reached
in the case of power plants and rail transport systems. In spite of the considerable differences between
the time in use of plants and the product life-cycles, the operation of the overall plant or system must
be ensured across the entire time in use of the plant both in terms of functionality, as well as in terms
of economic considerations. Consequently, this necessitates different strategies to maintain the availability of the plant, which extend to sophisticated migration strategies. As a result, considerable demands
are made on the delivery capacity of automation products and spare parts, as well as the provision of
services, such as maintenance and repairs. For example, when the planning of a new plant envisages
the usage of a newer version of an engineering system, the producer must ensure that this newer version
can also be employed for older products and systems already in use in the existing plant, and may have
to develop upgrades accordingly. To an increasing extent, this calls for close cooperation between the
partners along the value chain.
The presented situation illustrates that mastering these conflicting characteristics of Life-CycleManagement will become increasingly significant in automation, not least in the ongoing discussions
between end users and manufacturers as well as manufacturers and suppliers. The interaction between
global, legal and technical aspects including demands for high functionality and efficiency, as well as
the influence of IT technologies in automation - helps to demonstrate the scope of this topic.
In response to this situation, the System Aspects Working Group of the ZVEI Automation Division has
created this guideline. It is comprised of basic, complementary and consistent models and strategies for
Life-Cycle-Management in automation. These generic models and strategies are then applied to various
examples. All essential terms are defined in a glossary.
As a basis, in Chapter 2 typical industrial branches are analyzed, described and compared regarding the
Life-Cycle-Management requirements. Additionally, external influences are also addressed, for example
due to standardization and legislation.
INTRODUCTION
Based on this scope of requirements, Chapter 3 presents basic, generic Life-Cycle-Management models.
The Life-Cycle-Modell describes the typical phases of life of a product. Through the development of a
general model, new definitions were applied to previously ambiguous terminology such as life-cycle,
product history and life time. These new, clear definitions are necessary for avoiding misinterpretation.
The integration model describes the integration of components into a system and places the life-cycle
of components in a relationship to the life-cycle of the system. Lastly, the compatibility model presents
a procedure to evaluate alternative components, products and systems. The new methodology for the
development of a compatibility profile is an essential aid for decision making and risk minimization for
pproduct
pr
oduct Life-C
Cyc
ycle
le-Man
Manag
agem
emen
entt.
Life-Cycle-Management.
Based on these models, in Chapter 4, applied Life-Cycle-Management strategies are defined, compared
and demonstrated with the use of examples. In Chapter 5 the requirements, models and strategies are
combined to form a new, holistic Life-Cycle-Excellence approach.
Consequently, this document represents a consistent general guideline which is applicable to automation in various industrial sectors. The economic
ic ssignificance
igni
ig
nifi
ni
fica
fi
cannce of Life-Cy
ca
Cycl
Cy
clecl
e Ma
eM nagement is a recurring
Life-Cycle-Management
theme in all chapters of this guideline.
guidellin
inee. TThe
he key emphasis, however, is on the techni
icaal viewpoint as an
technical
addition to the existing, ma
main
inlly market oriented presentations. The definitions of generic mod
in
del
els,
s, terms,
mainly
models,
processes and strategi
gies form an indispensable foundation for a joint understanding between pl
gi
lan
ant
strategies
plant
users and manufa
facturers and between manufacturers and suppliers regarding Life-Cycle-Management.
fa
manufacturers
T H E C U R R E N T S TAT U S
1 The current status
Modern production facilities and installations are structured and subdivided into different functional
areas. These functional areas are assigned to instrumentation and control equipment that consist of a
multitude of individual components which form a distributed system. As shown in Figure 1, the components are assigned to different functional levels. Each of these components and its elements (microprocessor, capacitors, firmware, ... ) is defined by specific characteristics of its life-cycle. Awareness and
mastery of the life-cycles of the individual components and their interactions throughout the life time
of the plant Life-Cycle-Management represents the fundamental precondition for maintaining the
economical operation of the plant throughout the planned time in use.
Figure 1: Typical structure of an instrumentation and control system
Internet
Internet
Web-portal
LAN
el
Enterprise level
ERP
system
SCM
system
Sales
system
LAN
ons level
Plant operations
MES
Ethernet
ss
Process
control
oll
level
Diagnostic
system
Engineering
system
Central
monitoring &
operation
Archive
Ethernet
Automation level
evel
Automation
Controller
Field level
Distributed
I / O modules
Ethernet
Field bus
Field
device
Gateway
Actuator
Analytics
device
Sensor-actuator-bus
Sensor / actuator level

Binary I / O
modules
Local
monitoring &
operation
Actuator
The following example illustrates the influence of component life-cycles on economically maintaining
operations (Figure 2):
Figure 2: Example of the effects of component failure
In a computer which performs fundamental functions within a process control system of a plant that
has been operational for a number of years a graphics card needs to be replaced because of a defective component. Repair work is not possible. As this particular type of graphics card is no longer available, a suitable replacement must be used. While the replacement graphics card is functionally compatible, a graphics card driver that is compatible with the installed operating system does not exist. It is
also not possible to change the operating system as the applications (software) running on the process
computer have not been approved and released for use with the newer versions of the operating system.
A solution to this conflict could involve the replacement of all of the computers of the process control
system, including the operating system, upgrading of the application software and the adaptation of
applications to the altered conditions. Within the context of this these changes the employees have to
be retrained and a software maintenance agreement has to be made with a service provider.
This example illustrates the complexity of maintaining plant functionalities, and how extensive the
effects on the plant can be. These effects can also apply to parts of the plant that are operating
correctly and are not directly linked with the defective component. A comparable situation is discussed
by Hauff and Weigel [1].
One of the reasons that maintaining plant and system functions is so complex is the fact that over the
life time of a plant, the innovation cycles and the related life-cycle of components vary considerably
(Figure 3). The life time of the plant itself and the associated, specific requirements (such as the planning of maintenance cycles) are highly dependent on the respective industry the time in use of a
process plant, for example, is between 15 and 40 years, while a production line in automobile manufacturing is usually changed to meet new requirements of the production of a new model.
Figure 3: Life-cycles of plants and their components

Plant operators in particular do not evaluate the cost efficiency of their investments
solely based on the procurement costs
(planning and setting up), but increasIndustry
ingly they also consider the costs of mainsector
taining plant operation across the entire
coherent
life time (Life-Cycle-Costs). In this way, the
overall costs and the total benefits of a
project can be evaluated in a transparent
manner by including all of the follow up
costs. As various studies [2] have shown,
the costs for the operation of a system
Componentsmay exceed the procurement costs (initial
off-the-shelf
investment) many times over. This is due
(COTS)
to the long time in use of plants where
costs of operation and maintenance reoccur periodically. Therefore, the total costs
calculated across the life time of the plant also referred to as Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) [3]
assume the character of an iceberg, whereby the total volume is not readily visible (Figure 4).
3 years
20 - 50 years
Figure 4: The iceberg effect

Purchase price price-tag
Financial costs
Commissioning
Procurement costs
Training
Additional applications
Maintenance
Spare parts
At first glance only the purchase costs are

visible (the price tag), while the followup costs that are implicit in this investment usually remain concealed or tend to
be overlooked [4].
Taxes
Insurance
Spare parts storage
Personnel
Energy
Migration
Modification/dismantling
In summary, Life-Cycle-Management is
becoming an increasingly significant
topic in automation especially in the
discussions between end users and manufacturers as well as between manufacturers and suppliers. The interaction
between global, legal and technical
aspects including demands for high
functionality and efficiency, as well as
the influence of IT technologies in automation helps to demonstrate the scope
of this topic.
This guideline outlines and discusses the tasks which arise from this complex issue. This guideline is not
only a generic study but it takes into consideration varying situational requirements. Different industries
were analyzed in the interest of a better understanding of the task complexities and the differing
requirements. The chemical, energy, rail transport, automotive and machine tool building industries
provide a comprehensive overview of the scope addressed. The results of the analysis and the concrete
recommendations are also applicable for other industry sectors.
This guideline was created to define and introduce a consistent overall model for all relevant aspects in
the life-cycle of automation products and systems, including the definition of terms, roles and requirements. This guideline is based on existing experience, recommendations [5] and standards [6], [7]. It is
intended to help readers whether end users, manufacturers or suppliers in developing suitable
strategies for mastering the above outlined issues, as well as clearly representing the general conditions
and constraints.
10
R E Q U I R E M E N T S , I N F L U E N C I N G F A C T O R S , I N D U S T R Y- S P E C I F I C S
2.1
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
2 Requirements, influencing factors, industry-specifics
2.1 General
requirements
Driven by innovation in electronics and software technology, the functionality of automation components is continually increasing. The breadth of the functionality of components is a key sales argument.
This breadth is a result of meeting customer demands for flexibility, open systems, extensive application
areas, high availability and deliverability of components, with ever decreasing costs. At the same time,
producers improve their products not only in order to offer their customers new functions, but also to
improve applications, handling, operability and costs. As a result, the complexity of the system increases considerably due to the added complexity of the integrated components.
The increasing speed of innovation in hardware and software continuously shortens the life-cycle of
components however the life-cycle of systems cannot be shortened in a comparable manner as it
relates to the life time of the plant.
Not only do the life-cycles of components and systems differ, but they are also viewpoint-specific. This
is due to the perspectives of the different roles which work closely together for the planning, set-up and
operation of a plant. For example, for the use of a new version of an engineering system, the producer
must ensure that the new version can also be used with the installed device versions, or they may have
to develop and deliver upgrades. To maintain compatibility, not only could hardware and software
changes be necessary, but services, and possibly also contractual issues, must be taken into account.
Customers, suppliers and producers are partners within a value chain. Normally, this results in different
viewpoints such as that of the supplier or the customer. The producer of a product generally integrates
components which have individual life-cycles. When the producer sources these components from a
sub-supplier, the producer assumes the role of a customer. Take the case, for example, of a manufacturer of PC Ethernet cards that uses microprocessors, memory chips, ASICs and software drivers (e.g. for
an Ethernet protocol stack) as components of its product. These components are sourced as products
from various suppliers or third-party producers. It is important to note that these suppliers and their
products are less and less geared towards the automation requirements. As a result of worldwide rationalization and market changes, producers of basic components, such as semiconductors and operating
systems, are merging. This merging leads to consolidated product portfolios which often results in less
product specialization.
The importance of life-cycle aspects is increasing continuously for all industrial goods and systems with
long life times. This is due to the growing complexity of products and systems as well as the rising
application of generic components (COTS, components-off-the-shelf) that are made for the consumer
goods industry. However, compared with the consumer goods industry, the demand emanating from the
automation industry is so low that the respective requirements are hardly given consideration. Industries
such as home entertainment or mobile communication with considerably shorter product life-cycles
generally optimize their products with the goals of low cost and new functionality, rather than compatibility and long-term service. This has a major impact on the deliverability of components and spare
parts. Certain semiconductors, for example, are only produced for a few months and subsequently
d. Due to the low de
emand from the automation market, prolongation of production only for
abandoned.
demand
this industr
rofitable forr the major
ma r semiconductor
semiconduc manufacturers.
industry is not profitable
hich result from the long time in use of components, automation-specific
In additionn to requirements wh
which
pplication requirements inclu
iabilit safety and defined interfaces
application
include real-time behavior, ffunctional reliability,
(such as OPC, digital and analog
an og signal definitions). Many diverse standardization
tanda
activities address
rements e.g. PLC programming
prrogramming according
a
611
The activities extend from
these requirements
to IECC 61131-3
[8]. These
11
2.1
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
industry-specific standards all the way through to international regulations and standards. This is a
continuous process and an important precondition for ensuring the interoperability of components and
systems over the long term. To an increasing extent, the harmonization efforts are influenced by standards and specifications which come from outside of the automation area such as web technologies [9]
and security [10]. The standards which are developed for goods with short life times, especially in the
area of IT technology, are characterized by widely differing degrees of maturity, and, from the automation viewpoint, pose the risk of being incompatible with future innovations. However, the positive effects
achieved by the use of IT technologies outweigh the negatives. The widespread integration of these
technologies in many automation areas [11] leads to openness, flexibility, and increased functionality
of the components. This integration results in reduced costs and accelerated innovation, however it is
also accompanied by a lack of continuity from the viewpoint of the life-cycle of automation components
and systems. Automation users, producers and suppliers demand long-term usability for IT technologies,
or at the least a transparent migration strategy in order to ensure usability over the life time of the plant.
This becomes even more critical when there is a dependency on a certain technology.
The life-cycle in automation is additionally affected by legislation and normative constraints. The continued sale of products, and the development and production of new products, is affected by software
usage rights, open source license conditions, the internationalization of standards, national legislation
and international directives such as RoHS (Restriction of Hazardous Substances) [12]. These demands
may considerably affect strategies for maintaining long-term usability.
All of the influencing variables described so far impact the economic efficiency of a plant. Life-cycle
related evaluation methods aim to collect and analyze the entire cost related to automation equipment
that arise across the whole life time of a plant from planning to construction, erection, operations and
finally dismantling (TCO). With the help of such cost evaluations, it is possible to analyze the relationship between procurement cost (initial investment) and the resulting follow-up cost (operating and
maintenance costs). Decisions made in the planning phase, for example, may incur effects much later
during the systems time in use. This is precisely why the Life-Cycle-Costing (LCC) method was developed. In addition to transparently presenting the distribution of costs over time, the method also helps
to identify opportunities for optimizing economic efficiency. The aim of Life-Cycle-Costing is to determine what proportion of the total costs is incurred during the time in use, in order minimize TCO. This
forms the basis for optimizing the balance between the initial investment and operating and maintenance costs by selecting the most appropriate products. The commonly used term for this balancing of
costs is trade-off (Figure 5) [13].
Figure 5: Trade-off between procurement costs (initial investments) and costs for operating and maintenance
Costs
Procurement
costs
Costs
TRADE-OFF
Traditional cost
distribution
Time
Operating and
Maintenance costs
Dismantling
Costs
TRADE-OFF
Time
Time
12
2.2
C O N S I D E R AT I O N O F
I N D U S T R Y- S P E C I F I C R E Q U I R E M E N T S
In this context, the traditional production and sales cycles of individual components become less important, while the overall life-cycle of the investment becomes the main focus. Consequently, and in contrast to conventional cost analysis, with the Life-Cycle-Costing (LCC) approach the decision-making
process for the initial investment takes into account the long-term impact on the total system costs (TCO)
of performance capability, future usability and Life-Cycle-Costs. Because of the long time horizon, this
approach reveals hidden cost drivers, but also potential benefits throughout the entire life-cycle. Thanks
to the identification of cost drivers, it becomes possible to make target-oriented analyses of the processes and to improve economic efficiency through optimization and redistribution of services among
the value chain partners.
2.2 Consideration of
industry-specific
requirements
The industry-specific requirements related to Life-Cycle-Management of automation solutions differ due

to the planned time in use of a plant - where the period of time extends from a few years in automobile
manufacturing through to several decades in the areas of energy and rail transport. Other requirements
which arise during the course of operations also diverge. The following sections look at the specific
requirements that are relevant for the life-cycles in the chemical, energy, rail transport and machine tool
manufacturing industries. General characteristics of the individual industries are described along with
the derived Life-Cycle-Management requirements. Each analysis is completed with the expected industry
trends. Table 3 shows an overview of the requirements which were derived from these analyses. Timerelated, technical and service requirements are presented for each industry.
One characteristic used to differentiate the industries is time. This includes the life time of the plant
from the conclusion of commissioning to dismantling, the time between possible production line
changes (to produce a different product), as well as the cycles for modernization and revisions of the
plant.
The technical requirements include compatibility (Chapter 3.3) of function-, device- and locationrelated properties. The following aspects are analyzed in the categories for the industries addressed:
Function-related properties:
Monitoring and operating, controlling, information management, interfaces, data types and data
formats
Device-related properties:
Mechanical and electrical
Location-related properties:
Setting and environment
The analysis is performed with a focus on the relevance of the properties to the product and system
life-cycles. The compatibility of data types and formats, for example, is essential for migration and
protecting investments. Further requirement clusters include the carrying out of and the maintenance
of documentation, qualification, certification and approvals for products and plants.
In addition to the technical and time-related requirements, service requirements also influence LifeCycle-Management. These include maintenance (e.g. repairs in the case of defects, including delivery of
spare parts if necessary), as well as troubleshooting and the correction of faults. Service requirements
also include update services for error correction and upgrade services for upgrading to newer versions
with improved or extended functionality.
13
2.3
REQUIREMENTS OF THE
CHEMICALS INDUSTRY
2.3 Requirements of
the chemicals industry

In this section, the term Chemical is used to represent process engineering and comprises chemical,
petro-chemical and pharmaceutical processes. Basically, there is a differentiation between continuous
processes and discontinuous processes (charges or batch processes). With regard to their life-cycles,
these two process classes have partially-differing requirements.
One of the key requirements of continuous production processes is that all interventions should be able
to be performed while the system is running, thereby ensuring high availability. At the same time, high
product quality and functional safety must be maintained.
Batch processes are becoming increasingly important the ever shorter periods of time that products
remain on the market, as well as the product diversity that consumers call for are just two of the many
reasons for this. Consequently, the process control system for a batch process must respond very flexibly.
High demands are placed on the plants Life-Cycle-Management and the respective automation solution
as a result of the need for consistent long-term product quality, the rapid response to altered market
conditions, the demands for traceability of production (compliance according to the Food and Drug
Administration FDA), the adherence to legislative regulations and standards, as well as the economic
and technological constraints to make flexible use of the production facilities and achieve optimal
capacity utilization.
To an increasing extent, plants must also be validated with regard to quality standards [5], sales
demands and legislation. The main aims are traceability of production and reproducibility of product
properties.
A common requirement of both process classes is that it must be possible to ensure protection of the
investment through incremental modernization of the production systems. There are numerous drivers
for the modernization of existing procedures and plants: higher productivity, better quality, lower costs,
quicker product launch or product change, and more environmentally friendly production processes and
technologies based on the optimal utilization of raw materials and energy. In order to achieve these
goals, processes must be optimized and plants and systems must be modernized and extended. An
incremental modernization strategy, coordinated between plant user and system manufacturer, ensures
that the value of the users installations is retained or increased in terms of hardware, application software and the know-how of the operating and maintenance personnel.
Another important requirement is the scalability of the instrumentation and control system. This is
important for adapting the system to the size of the functional area of the facility. Moreover, scalability
is the precondition for transferring an experimental or pilot plant to a production plant. The ability to
transfer a developed and tested application between scalable systems without repercussions is a significant benefit for the user.
These general industry characteristics lead to high demands for the process instrumentation and control
as well as for the Life-Cycle-Management. When changing instrumentation and control equipment, such
as replacing a defective product, high function-, device- and location-related compatibility requirements
must be fulfilled. This results in short plant downtime without additional effort for maintaining qualification. To ensure this, the instrumentation and control system must generate exact diagnostic information, e.g. which component is defective, where the defective component is and how the defect can be
rectified. This extends all the way through to preventive maintenance.
Comprehensive modernization steps require a migration strategy. Generally, an incremental approach is
taken enabling the modernization of the installation with minimal repercussions and only partial downtime in the relevant section of the plant. The migration strategy should be adaptable to the individual
characteristics of a specific plant, and must be flexible to the demands of the user. An important part of
the migration strategy is ensuring that the staff are qualified and regularly trained with regards to new
technology.
14
2.4
REQUIREMENTS OF THE
ENERGY INDUSTRY

On top of the costs which are relevant to all industries, additional costs for the fulfillment of regulations
particularly affect the chemical industry. This pertains specifically to costs arising for gaining FDA
approval (plant freeze, plant documentation, ...) but also costs for maintaining the approval (documentation of changes, process documentation, re-validation, ). Another chemical industry-specific
requirement is that devices must often fulfill explosion protection requirements. Here, approval costs,
building modifications and plant operation must also be considered.
The following industry trends can be derived:
Consistency and integration of the process control, plant- and enterprise-management levels (vertical
integration) enable better data integrity which is necessary for dealing with the rising quality
demands for increasingly more complex processes.
Thanks to higher performing field devices the process can be run more efficiently, resulting in
greater savings of energy and raw materials.
Due to distributed system architectures, automation solutions have more interfaces with complex
networks, including IT networks and the Internet. The open nature of these networks calls for efficient, high performance data security management.
Rapidly changing customer requirements result in shorter sales phases for products, increasing
product diversity, and declining batch sizes. Consequently, higher demands are made on modularity,
flexibility and the scalability of the instrumentation and control system.
2.4 Requirements of
the energy industry

The energy industry is usually subdivided into the industries of power generation, energy transport and
energy distribution. This chapter describes power generation demands which are typical for all sectors
in the energy industry.
Power generation utilizes different sources of primary energy such as fossil fuels (coal, gas and oil),
nuclear energy, wind, solar energy, hydro energy and geothermal energy. Depending on which primary
energy source is used and the respective process for energy conversion, the plants differ in terms of
electricity output, the utilization focus (e.g. base or peak load), and the geographic distribution. Today,
most of the power production worldwide is generated by centralized, large scale plants using fossil fuels
with up to 1000 MW per power station unit, and nuclear power plants with an output of up to 1600 MW
per unit. Wind energy currently has the greatest share of renewable energy sources. Wind energy plants
tend to be more modular and decentralized, frequently in the form of wind parks. At the time of publication, the maximum output per wind energy generator is 6 MW.
Power generation plants are characterized by typical shared properties:
Low product diversity
As opposed to many other process industries, there are a very limited number of products, i.e. electricity
and process heat (steam) and there are no product changes.
Continuous, non-interruptible processes
As a matter of principle, the processes are continuous and must be operated over a period of many
months without being interrupted. Consequently, control system changes must be made while the system is running without any repercussions to the process.
15
2.4
REQUIREMENTS OF THE
ENERGY INDUSTRY
Complex functionality
The sub-processes of a power station are physically closely related to each other, which means that an
event in one sub-process will quickly affect other functional areas of the plant. This complexity and the
demand for high efficiency call for specific instrumentation and control solutions.
High dynamic demands
Functional areas of the plant, such as turbine control, make extremely high dynamic demands on instrumentation and control systems.
High data volumes
In comparison with other production processes, power stations are characterized by very high data volumes. The process control system must be able to process this information in real-time and compress,
archive and present all the relevant data for the operator in both graphic and tabular form.
Highest demand for availability
Production downtimes in large power stations result in very high financial losses within a very short
period of time. Consequently, the most stringent demands are made on instrumentation and control
systems, and many components therefore have a redundant (back-up) design.
Very high safety requirements
For protection of people, machinery and the environment, power generation must comply with standards and laws stipulating very high requirements. In plants which use fossil fuels, boiler protection is
particularly relevant. In nuclear power plants, specific redundant architectures are employed which use
diverse technologies. The approval procedures for instrumentation and control systems require highly
intensive effort for both the construction and for changes during the life time of the plant.
Revisions at large time intervals
In order to minimize financial losses due to production downtimes, plant revisions are planned and
conducted at large time intervals, with the goal of the shortest possible downtime. All of the revision
activities which cannot be performed when the system is running are planned to be implemented during
plant revisions.
Very long time in use of the plant
Typically, power plants are in use for several decades, whereby periods of 40 years and more are not
uncommon.
These industry characteristics result in high demands made on the Life-Cycle-Management of instrumentation and control systems.
Time-related requirements
In order to be able to operate a power plant across several decades in a cost efficient manner, plant
users have very high expectations regarding the manufacturers ability to deliver products and services.
Technical requirements
High compatibility requirements must be met when making changes in the instrumentation and control
systems, such as in the case of replacing a defective product. These requirements are made up of function-, device- and location-related properties. Plant users expect producers to be able to provide original
products, substitutes or migration solutions during the entire life time of the plant. Due to increasingly
shorter innovation cycles for hardware and software components, manufacturers are confronted with
rising technical and economic challenges.
16
2.4
REQUIREMENTS OF THE
ENERGY INDUSTRY
Service requirements
In order to support power station users during the life time of the plant, producers offer standard services. Depending on the life-cycle phase of the process control system, these offerings consist of a
graded portfolio of services. These services range from spare parts stockpiling, to upgrades to newer
system versions and all the way through to the migration to a new process control system which partially reuses components and data.
In addition to these high Life-Cycle-Management requirements for instrumentation and control systems
in conventional power stations, the utilization of products in nuclear power plants must meet additional conditions:
Freeze of product versions and revised versions
The approval process for instrumentation and control systems in nuclear power plants is very complex
and extensive. The products that are certified for these applications cannot be modified, i.e. it is not
permissible to make changes to hardware, firmware and software.
Approval process and maintaining certifications
In order to enable the approval of products for application in nuclear power plants, standards and
regulations covering the entire development and production process must be adhered to. If product
changes (type) are unavoidable during the life-cycle, for example when components are no longer available, complex and extensive approval measures for maintaining the certification to also include the new
version or the new revised version will be necessary.
The requirements of the energy industry as described above make high Life-Cycle-Management demands
for plant users and producers alike. These demands require substantial cost and effort that must be
dedicated to plant-specific strategies and cost efficiency calculations. Of particular importance are:
Very high initial investments in instrumentation and control systems for planning, approvals, procurement, erection, commissioning and acceptance. Consequently, plant users require producers to
offer efficient and sustainable long-term strategies and support during the life time of the plant in
order to protect their investment.
Due to the long time in use of plants which can span several decades, considerable costs will arise
for modifications and optimizations of production processes and therefore also for instrumentation
and control systems. Particularly important are expenditures which arise from changes to regulations
and statutory requirements (such as environmental-related CO2 policies, safety standards) as well as
the optimization of plant efficiency and availability.
An additional substantial cost factor for plant operation includes the preventative and corrective
maintenance costs for ensuring proper functionality of the system (e.g. repair costs, spare parts). In
view of the long time in use of the plant, significant costs are also incurred for provision and maintenance of the infrastructure, documentation, repair know-how, and the supply and warehousing of
compatible, qualified components and spare parts. The negative aspect for the producer is that these
costs increase during the product (type) life-cycle while the turnover for selling the product (instance)
declines.
Another result of the extensive time in use but also for fulfilling statutory requirements is the
obligation to provide qualified personnel. Training costs that accumulate over the years, as well as
costs for maintaining personnel qualifications, represent a significant factor in the calculation of
economic efficiency.
With regard to calculations of economic efficiency, it must be kept in mind that many of the Life-CycleCosts show a non-linear increase over the time in use of the plant. This is true for both plant users and
producers.
17
2.5
REQUIREMENTS OF THE
RAIL TRANSPORT INDUSTRY

The Institute for Future Studies and Technology Assessment (IZT) developed the Integrated Technology
Roadmap Automation 2020+ for the energy industry [14] on behalf of the ZVEI.
In summarizing, the following trends can be derived:
Greater diversification of the primary energy sources utilized
Increase in the share of regenerative power generation within the energy mix
Increasing number of smaller power generating plants with decentralized distribution
Virtual power station configurations which integrate power plants of different types and sizes
Intelligent networks with new topologies (smart grids) and controllable load
More complex energy management systems
In view of these trends, it can be deduced that new products will emerge and that product diversity will
increase. Within the context of decentralization, favorably priced, short lived components-off-theshelf (COTS) will find increasing use. As a result, Life-Cycle-Management for automation systems and
products will have to adapt to meet these new demands.
2.5 Requirements of
the rail transport
industry

The term rail transport applies to both rail-bound transportation (rolling stock) and stationary equipment such as signaling.
Today, semiconductor based and software based systems are applied in modules for train and signaling
equipment. This is true regardless of the rolling stock area discussed (e.g. trams, urban railroads,
regional or high speed trains), or which signaling application field is used (e.g. GSM based technologies). For all applications, the gap is increasing between the average time in use (several decades) of
the systems (e.g. rail-bound vehicles and signal technology installations) and the length of time semiconductor or software components are deliverable (several years). In this context, the compatibility of
components must be ensured not only within a system, such as a subway train, but also systems of
different generations must operate together in coordination. The example of the Nuremberg subway
system clearly illustrates this situation. In Nuremberg, high-tech, driverless vehicles must operate
together in coordination with conventional rolling stock. It is evident in these cases that Life-CycleManagement holds exceptional significance.
From the user viewpoint, the supply of spare parts is of vital importance in terms of safety and system
availability. In order to ensure this, partnership-based cooperation between producers, suppliers and
users is necessary in order to define the optimal Life-Cycle-Management strategy for the individual
application scenarios.
The time in use of rail vehicles and signaling equipment spans
several decades. It is typical that in the middle of the time in use,
extensive modernization is carried out, whereby electrical equipment and interior fittings and equipment (e.g. seats and Internet
access) for passengers are replaced. In this context, it is important
that physical compatibility is maintained.
The time in use of rail vehicles and signaling equipment spans
several decades. It is typical that in the middle of the time in use,
extensive modernization is carried out, whereby electrical equipment and interior fittings and equipment (e.g. seats and Internet
access) for passengers are replaced. In this context, it is important
that physical compatibility is maintained.
18
2.5
REQUIREMENTS OF THE
RAIL TRANSPORT INDUSTRY
Within the time in use up to the point of modernization, when making changes, functional and physical
compatibility must be ensured. Users expect producers to provide deliverability of original products and
substitutes at least throughout the time in use up to the point of modernization, as well as migration
solutions for the modernization. Since the manufacturers typically have limited in-house production
depth in terms of systems, the delivery capability needs to be ensured contractually with the suppliers
of the individual system components.
The service requirements of the user are mainly focused on the safety and reliability of the systems. The
implementation of these demands is hampered by the imprecise values of reliability measures such as
MDBF and MTBF. As a result, analytical methods for reliability, availability, maintainability and functional safety (reliability, availability, maintainability, safety RAMS) are becoming increasingly important in the context of approvals.
The service portfolio is very extensive, and starts with preventive maintenance and extends all the way
through to a complete service of the system. These services are performed by various service entities,
whereby users are increasingly outsourcing these services. Adequate spare part supply is an essential
precondition, therefore obsolescence management measures [6] are becoming increasingly important.
Based on the specific objectives, Life-Cycle-Management strategies are applied such as demand-based
spare parts warehousing, partial modernization (e.g. the planned exchange of interior fittings and
equipment) or migration solutions within the context of complete modernization.
The economic viability of a rail transport system is impacted by considerably more parameters than just
the initial investment cost. Key influence factors include the following:
Efficient planning of all life-cycle phases and the efficient implementation of associated measures
across 30 years or more.
Standardization of components as a means of boosting economic efficiency. By applying proprietary
standards with long validity, users ensure the interoperability of systems that have been supplied in
different procurement phases and by different producers. This approach also significantly reduces
variant diversity.
Recording wear and tear data, i.e. collecting knowledge which is used for planning demandbased services and for forecasting (e.g. spare parts requirements).
Another financial aspect which needs to be considered is working out the most cost effective time
between modernization and new purchases of rail vehicles. In this context, the increasing passenger
comfort demands as well as increasing safety and environmental requirements play important roles.
Producers offer modernization as an alternative to purchasing new rail vehicles and systems. This
includes the exchange of components (e.g. bogies, drives, control systems, heating-, ventilation- and
air-conditioning-systems) or interior fittings with integrated passenger information and entertainment
systems.
Thanks to the customized service offers, the operator can transparently calculate the economic risk over
the entire life-cycle including the associated costs (Life-Cycle-Costing). The aim is to achieve partnership
based cooperation that enables clear regulation of expenditure. Experienced producers provide support
for the operators in order to develop and equip operating and maintenance facilities, develop and
qualify staff, as well as operate and maintain the respective systems.
19
2.6
R E Q U I R E M E N T S I N AU TO -
M O B I L E M A N U FA C T U R I N G

Roadmap Automation 2015+ [15] on behalf of the ZVEI.
Optimization of logistics through networking of different transport carriers by way of consistent
management solutions.
Networking of the IT infrastructure of the respective carriers, with a trend to wireless systems.
Increasing demand for automation solutions, specifically those based on decentralized, heterogeneous system architectures with increasing integration of autonomous sub-systems.
Integrated methods for route and fleet management.
Increasing networking of rail transport infrastructure on all levels (local, regional, national and
international) with the aim of transitioning from simple administration to active management.
Growing significance of standardization as a result of the increase in networking and internationalization of rail transport infrastructures.
The share of short lived technologies is rising due to the increasing use of commercial hardware and
software components in control- and information-systems, and consumer electronics. The exception to
this rule is power electronics.
The trends presented clearly show the growing significance of Life-Cycle-Management for ensuring
interoperability and cost efficiency in this industry.
2.6 Requirements in automobile manufacturing

There is a significant difference in the time in use for manufacturing plants for automobiles and trucks.
Typically, trucks are produced in lower quantities than automobiles. However, the model cycle for a truck
is considerably longer (around 15 - to 20 years) than for a passenger vehicle (approximately 7 to 8 years)
and therefore truck manufacturing plants are also in use for longer periods. During the model cycle, a
model can be given a face-lift, whereby the manufacturing plants are adjusted accordingly. In the case of
automobiles this usually occurs once or twice per model, while trucks may undergo two to three face-lifts.
The manufacturing of automobiles can be broken down into various areas: press shop for the production
of automobile body parts, body-in-white assembly, paint shop, engine manufacturing, axle production
and final assembly. The body-in-white assembly processes are strongly dependent on the properties of
the vehicle model, as changes to the body usually require mechanical, machinery and automation
adaptations. Paint shop and final assembly are less affected by such changes.
Due to the frequency of model changes, manufacturing facilities can be modernized without impeding
ongoing production. As a result, new automation technologies can be adopted more rapidly than in
industries with less frequent product changes.
Based on these industry characteristics, the Life-Cycle-Management of the technical facilities must meet
the following requirements:
In the past, a new automobile model required the construction of new facilities (body in white and paint
shop), but, due to cost pressures, automobile manufacturers are currently pursuing new manufacturing
strategies. Previously, the time in use of a plant was linked to a particular model series. Today, there is
an increased tendency to produce several model series on the same plant facilities. In some cases, the
production of automobiles takes place sequentially at different sites, whereby manufacturing lines are
dismantled and set up again at a new location. This increases the time in use of a plant considerably
beyond the planned time. Both of these measures result in extending the time in use of plants and
systems from 7 years to 15 years on average.
20
2.6
R E Q U I R E M E N T S I N AU TO -
M O B I L E M A N U FA C T U R I N G
Due to cost pressure, producers are forced to standardize and
introduce standard components. The extended time in use of
plants described in the previous section, along with the usage of
standard components, such as industry-suitable PCs, requires
adapted Life-Cycle-Management strategies. As a result, there are
high compatibility requirements.
Because of the short times in use, producers of automation components traditionally offered standard services. However, because
the times in use are increasing, producers of automation components can now offer continuous service extending over a number
of years. The re-use of systems at other locations, or in manufacturing facilities for new models, applies to all automation components, including systems such as robots. Additionally, a number of producers offer refurbishment and reprocessing of used
products as a service.
In automobile manufacturing, the initial investment for a plant
or a production line is the financial focal point. However, the
Life-Cycle-Costs are becoming increasingly important in the
planning phase. The use of standard products and systems
reduces costs for warehousing and employee training. This also
leads to employee-related cost savings due to the capability to
deploy employees across different plants. Additionally, standard
components can typically be sourced more quickly from manufacturers.
Previously, different variants of a specific vehicle model were manufactured on several production lines.
Today however, these variants are produced on only one single manufacturing line. As a result, automobile manufacturing is now characterized by very flexible manufacturing processes and high throughput
rates. Another cost saving option is the use of modular- and platform-concepts. Here, different models
can be created by utilizing different combinations of modules and platforms (e.g. the chassis) with different car bodies. These platforms are even used cooperatively by different manufacturers. The fact that
these platforms are used for multiple applications ensures better manufacturing capacity utilization and
thereby lower production costs.
When considering costs, investments in modernization are assessed in comparison to the increasing
Life-Cycle-Costs of the existing system. The reuse of systems can lead to reductions of investment costs
of up to 40 %.
Cost savings achieved by increasing energy efficiency and the conservation of resources such as gas,
water and electrical energy are topics that are increasingly high on todays agendas. Under the heading
of intelligent load management for plant sections improvements in energy efficiency are addressed.
One such option is completely shutting down plant sections when they are not required.
Roadmap Automation 2015+ [15], including a section on the automotive industry, on behalf of the ZVEI.
In summarizing, the following trends can be derived:
Technology as a factor for competitiveness the key technologies of electrics, electronics and software are replacing mechanics and hydraulics in vehicles.
Contributions towards resource- and energy-efficient passenger transportation, for example through
the use of new materials, lightweight construction and new drive concepts such as electric- and
hybrid-drives.
21
2 R E Q U I R E M E N T S , I N F L U E N C I N G FA C TO R S , I N D U S T R Y- S P E C I F I C S
2.7 REQUIREMENTS IN MACHINE
TO O L B U I L D I N G
Product differentiation through buyer customization the individual design of a vehicle by way of
options is becoming more significant. This is associated with the diversification of the product range,
and thereby also with rising model and variant diversity.
Highly dynamic innovation of vehicle components, especially in the electrical-, electronic-, softwareand sensor-technology areas due to increased cooperation between automobile manufacturers, suppliers and providers of development services.
Shift in the share of value creation for vehicle components from automobile manufacturers to suppliers, especially in the electrical and electronics areas.
Development of cost efficient production processes and facilities as a result of higher pressure on
costs and flexibility.
Modularization of production through sub-processes which use networked mechatronic manufacturing components and IT solutions.
These anticipated industry trends will change and shift the application areas for automation and
thereby create new demands for automation technology Life-Cycle-Management.
2.7 Requirements in
machine tool building

The term machine tool covers a very wide scope. According to definition, a machine tool is a machine that
is used to machine parts with the use of tools. The range extends from a simple manual drilling machine
through to a complex manufacturing plant. Characteristic machining processes of machine tools include
forming, separating (e.g. cutting, machining and milling) and joining. When looking at life-cycle aspects
in this chapter, we exclude simple, usually manually operated machine tools (such as portable circular saws
and simple sanding machine). The following general statement can be made in terms of the life time of
machines:
Depending on the complexity of the machining processes and the precision requirements, the time in use
of machines extends from just a few years (e.g. high-speed milling machine), to several decades (e.g.
automatic cutting press).
When planning the time in use of a machine, the lot sizes to be processed are a key aspect. In the case of
high volume lot sizes, specifically adapted solutions are used for the tool (e.g. cutting tool), or in the case
of several manufacturing processes, for the machine tool (machining center, manufacturing plant).
Conversely, the time in use of the tools and/or the machines is very closely linked to the life-cycle of the
products which are produced, and with high volume lot sizes this is generally no more than a few years. As
these machines must ensure high availability, rapid spare parts provision is a very significant aspect.
Standard machine tools are used for lot sizes between one and
ten thousand units. Due to the flexibility of standard machine
tools, they can more easily be used to fulfill different procedures.
Because these standard machine tools are often set up as redundant in the manufacturing area, the downtime of a single
machine due to spare parts delivery delays is not so critical.
Moreover, it is noteworthy that machine tools are usually written
off financially after just a few years and they will periodically be
replaced by newer machine generations. It is becoming more
frequent that used machines are re-sold. Additionally, it is notable
that there is rapid technical progress, especially in the machining
center area. Machining centers that were regarded as highly productive several years ago are no longer competitive when considering the precision, speed and set-up times of the latest machine
generations.
22
2.7 REQUIREMENTS IN MACHINE
TO O L B U I L D I N G
Based on mechatronic components, modern machine tools are increasingly modular. The increasing standardization of such components provides advantages for the Life-Cycle-Management of the machines.
Due to the diversity of machine tools, it is difficult to define a typical application process or a typical
machine tool. Consequently, general industry-valid requirements cannot be defined.
Machine tools for small lot sizes, such as for tool making, are designed for longer time in use due to
their general-purpose nature and their typically lower capacity utilization. Therefore, life-cycle considerations are more relevant.
For high volume lot sizes, the costs per manufactured product or the production cycle time are important
factors for procurement of machine tools used in production processes. Since the time in use is generally so short, Life-Cycle-Costs play a subordinate role in the procurement decision.
Due to the increase in modularity and networking of modern machine tools, compatibility requirements
for Life-Cycle-Management are becoming more important. The machine components for modular
machines have shorter life-cycles, which results in higher demands for spare part management. In this
context, there is a differentiation between mechanical and electronic components. The procurement of
mechanical wearing parts such as spindle guides, drives or positioning systems is normally not a problem. However, procuring electronic components can be problematic as the control systems of older
generations are often specifically developed for the respective machines. Consequently, this makes
upgrading to a newer control system very difficult or even impossible.
Normally, there are regular planned production down-times in manufacturing processes. In these
periods of time, preventive maintenance can be performed. This preventative maintenance reduces the
need for unplanned servicing. As a result, it is less necessary to conduct maintenance during on-going
production.
Due to rapidly progressing technology, the availability of spare parts is becoming a less important factor
for the time in use of general-purpose machine tools. Rather, aspects such as maintenance cycles,
required auxiliary resources, cycle times, set-up times, and spatial and energy requirements are becoming more important.
To increase the economic efficiency of machine tools, attempts are made to extend the time in use. One
option is to re-use machine tools for other manufacturing applications, another option is to flexibly
adapt them to product changes (reconfiguration). A notable example is the re-use of machine tools,
robots and other processing systems in the automobile industry in connection with model changes.
Ultimately, the time in use of machine tools is primarily determined by economic considerations, with
the exception of legislation changes.
In view of rising energy costs, CO2 debates and legislative factors such as the EuP guideline (Eco-Design
Requirements for Energy-using Products), manufacturers and users of machine tools are forced to reduce
energy consumption. Additionally, the usage of environmentally hazardous substances must be reduced. An
example of this is the use of variable speed motors instead of conventional motors with gears. Since these
drives do not have gears, they are more compact and do not require transmission oil. In addition, direct
drives are more efficient and require less maintenance.
In summary, it is not possible to present a general industry trend, as the application areas and requirement
profiles of machine tools are too divergent. In future, machine tool manufacturing will be characterized
predominantly by the evolution of already existing concepts, such as modularity and networking, or the use
of environmentally friendly substances and more efficient components.
23
2.8 Industry-neutral aspects
2 . 8 I N D U S T R Y- N E U T R A L A S P E C T S
In addition to the industry-specific requirements described above, a number of additional, influencing

aspects need to be considered. Technical, economic or legal influences continually emerge and are
usually not foreseeable.
2.8.1 Examples of external technical influences

For about the last 20 years, standard technologies from the consumer and office area have been
adopted for use in automation. Examples include Ethernet as a basic system communication, Internet
or wireless technologies for data transmission and USB interfaces for exchanging data. In addition,
manufacturers of automation products are forced to respond to new programming languages, operating
systems or Internet technologies. In some cases, security solutions, such as virus scanners or automatic
updates, may even require the upgrading of software components. Examples show that, although the
manufacturers use these technologies, they have little influence on their development as their share of
the market is comparatively small. As technologies such as new operating systems have not been developed with automation applications in mind, there is almost no opportunity to influence further developments.
2.8.2 Examples of the influence of standardization and legislation
To meet legal requirements and to ensure quality and compatibility, norms and standards are adopted
to define product features. In particular, the European guidelines and their national implementation, as
well as international and national regulations play an important role. For example, the RoHS guideline
called for a ban on products containing lead substances which led to the introduction of lead-free soldering processes and the use of new electronic components. As a result, products had to be partially
adapted (re-design) or taken off the market entirely as previously used components, such as integrated
circuits and processors, were no longer available.
When norms and standards change as a result of technological developments, producers are forced to
adapt their automation products and their components accordingly. It is important to note that a particular automation product is usually not affected by just one standard. In fact, in most cases, country-,
industry- and application-specific norms and regulations are applicable when launching a product.
Typical examples include the European CE marking and special certification requirements such as the
CCC (China), the UL (USA) and the CSA (Canada). Additional industry- and/or application-specific regulations define special application requirements, for example in the food industry or in areas with explosion risks. All of these norms and regulations may be changed due to new country-specific legislation
or new industry-specific requirements, and may therefore require product modifications.
De facto standards are industrial standards that apply to products, in addition to the generally valid
norms and standards. These standards are defined by companies or organizations. As these de facto
standards are widely applied and help to ensure low cost levels, they are accepted worldwide. Examples
include standard operating systems, interface definitions and electronic components derived from de
facto standards (special processors, controllers, ASICs). Companies that define de facto standards solely
by way of their market position may change the de facto standard without coordination with other parties and within a short period of time. In this case, the changes have a direct and strong impact on the
Life-Cycle-Management of automation products. For example, new operating systems, changes to processor designs, or a new ASIC may mean that compatibility requirements are no longer fulfilled. Users
of the respective systems and plants must monitor these changes and respond to such situations through
appropriate Life-Cycle-Management strategies, such as stock-piling spare parts. Such changes can also
impact certification or the approval to operate the plant.
24
2.9 CONCLUSIONS
2.8.3 Examples of socio-economic influences

In addition to technological and legislative influences, socio-economic aspects are also significant. In
connection with current environmental discussions, the demand for energy efficient products and
manufacturing processes is growing. This has a direct impact on the use of the technologies deployed,
as well as on products and components. Similar effects result from the tightening of emission limits,
which directly impacts the materials and substances used, as well as production and disposal processes.
These socio-economic influences are not always the results of legislation, but are initiated and advanced
by public discussion and related trends. In order to maintain their market position, producers are forced
to respond and to adapt products and production processes accordingly.
Globalization of competition leads to globalization of manufacturing. The key drivers for this include the
demand for increased local content, the flexible response to currency fluctuations, and the reduction of
logistics costs (e.g. transportation and import duties). In addition, the process of economic consolidation
and economic crises can lead to far reaching changes in the area of supply. Company mergers, for
example, usually result in a revision and reduction of the product portfolio. In many cases, the required
components may become unavailable within a very short time frame. In extreme cases, such as bankruptcy of a supplier, components may become unavailable immediately.
Globalization is associated with the decentralization of development and the associated processes. This
is possible due to the increasing know-how in the emerging markets and is driven by the need to reduce
development costs.
Siemens press photo
These examples demonstrate that the majority of external influences are not usually foreseeable. This
results in risks as planning for these influences is problematic.
2.9 Conclusions
The requirements of the industries analyzed in this guideline (chemicals, energy, rail transport, automotive and machine tool) together with the industry-neutral aspects illustrate the complexities facing users
and producers. An initial impression of the specific characteristics and external influences of the respective industries can be derived from the general examination of each industry based on the general
industry characteristics, the derived life-cycle related requirements and the anticipated industry trends.
On closer examination, and in the course of discussions with experts, it becomes evident that there are
no great differences in the way industries approach this topic describing the requirements throughout
the life-cycle. This is also illustrated in Table 3 in which the Life-Cycle-Management requirements are
structured and the specific industry requirements are described. The outcome is a cross-industry presentation of the time-related, technical and service requirements.
Although there are similarities, differences can be seen in the value-range for a specific requirement
between industries (e.g. time in use of a plant can be between 5 and 50 years). The different industries
also use varying terminology (e.g. batch processes and continuous processes). Finally the users and
producers have different expectations regarding the required and described properties of components
and systems. With regard to life-cycles, there are significant variances in the requirements which could
be partially contradictory.
The time in use of the plant is the most important aspect, and it can be segmented into periods of
time from 5 - 10, 10 - 20 and 20 - 50 years. A concrete evaluation of time-related requirements involves
the examination of additional criteria, such as planned downtimes, that are derived from the type of
manufacturing process (continuous, discontinuous), product changes and revision cycles. This analysis
of time-related criteria leads to segmentation of the time in use of the plant. This segmentation influences the application of Life-Cycle-Management strategies during the time in use, such as re-design and
migration (Chapter 4). This is a key precondition for planning machine or plant (or associated component) changes with minimal impact on availability. The longer the intervals between the planned downtimes, the higher the demands on Life-Cycle-Management, the systems and components deployed. This
necessitates changes or updates during run time.
25
2.9 CONCLUSIONS
Additional requirements arise due to the need for qualification, certification and approval. The range
of these requirements extends from component-related requirements (e.g. producers declaration
according to CE) through to requirements affecting the system as a whole (e.g. nuclear power plant). In
the first case the producer would be able to declare each revision status of its products with relatively
little effort and expense. By contrast, in the second case a complex, expensive and time-consuming
qualification process for maintaining the certification must be followed. This is relevant not only to the
energy industry but also to many systems in the chemicals / pharmaceutical and rail transport industries.
Across all industries, compatibility, as described in detail in Chapter 3.3 is of exceptional significance.
The need to maintain the availability of machines and plants during their time in use with the least
possible effort and expense leads to compatibility requirements. The exchange of a component as
described in Chapter 1 must not result in the loss of system functions.
In addition to the requirements of individual industries, there are influencing variables that impact the
life-cycle such as innovation, which leads to technology change, and wildcards. These are only indirectly represented in Table 3, but they have a major impact on Life-Cycle-Management. Wildcards are
unexpected events such as standardization, legislation, leaps in technology or socio-economic influences. By contrast, the continuous innovation of a technology is a process which can largely be planned
for. Both aspects may lead to restrictions in the use of components or systems, and may call for suitable
Life-Cycle-Management strategies (Chapter 4).
Figure 6 describes the range of the requirements and influencing variables for the industries examined.
The inside green line and the outside yellow line reflect the minimum and maximum requirements
respectively. The closer the requirements and external influences are to the maximum line, the more
difficult they are to manage.
Figure 6: Typical ranges of variables which influence the life-cycle
Time in use of plant

Technology change
20-50 years
frequent
MAX
10-20
seldom
Wildcards
frequent
5-10
Revision cycle
seldom
2
5 years
MIN
10-20
100 %
Compatibility
26
20-50 years
Qualification /
Certification /
Approval
2.9 CONCLUSIONS
Producers and users have different points of view regarding the

described requirements and
influencing variables. From the
viewpoint of the user, the relevant requirements and influencing variables are the ones
that keep the risks and costs of
plants low over the entire time
in use. This is necessary for
achieving economic goals.
Consequently, the objectives
of the user are the replacement
of components without sideeffects, and the efficient expansion and optimization of
machinery and plants throughout the entire time in use.
Additionally, cost savings are
expected through introducing
new technology.
Essentially, the task of producers is to meet the requirements of users while ensuring that products
remain compatible despite their continued development. As can be seen from the industry trends, producers need to continuously innovate their product portfolio in order to meet the future demands of the
markets and their customers.
Therefore, from the viewpoint of the producer, the relevant requirements and influencing variables are
innovations through new technologies, competitive strength, and economic efficiency.
The relevance of Life-Cycle-Management depends on the producers business model (product, system or
plant supplier), the business area and the portfolio lines. Producers are increasingly required to be globally active. This results in additional complexity for Life-Cycle-Management. Demands for local content
result in regional sourcing of components and require a consistent strategy for ensuring compatibility
throughout the life-cycle.
Investments in automation must always take optimal economic efficiency into account. In the various
industries, analyzing the total costs of the plant over time (TCO) is becoming increasingly more common.
In addition to considering the initial investment costs, this approach also includes follow-up costs (i.e.
future operating, maintenance and dismantling costs) of the investment over a defined period of time.
This approach removes the boundaries between the individual phases in favor of a comprehensive,
holistic view. As a result, the decision is made to select the alternative which offers the lowest total costs
over time, including the planning, construction, set up, operation and dismantling.
The TCO paradigm leads to changes in decision making criteria and the producer-user relationship. The
goal of TCO is to give complete cost transparency, since the follow-up costs of various investment alternatives and/or service packages are included. This approach offers the potential for optimizing costs
through the cooperation of all participants.
27
G E N E R I C M O D E LS FO R L I F E - CYC L E - M A N AG E M E N T
3.1
L I F E - CYC L E - M O D E L
3 Generic models for Life-Cycle-Management
3.1 Life-CycleModel
In Chapter 2, the elaboration and summarization of the requirements from the considered industries
showed that a very wide range of factors affect the life-cycles of products and systems to varying
degrees. Consequently, the Life-Cycle-Model that will be developed in this chapter must take this into
account. In this context, the differentiation between product types and product instances is fundamental.
A type is characterized by an unambiguous product ID (e.g. the order number), a set of development
documents, manufacturing and test descriptions, and technical documentation. For approval of a type
for specific applications, certificates can be demanded and issued. This definition of a type is valid for
hardware products, software products, and products that are hardware/software bundles. Typically, the
right to use types is regulated in reproduction licensing agreements. All activities that are performed
regarding the development, maintenance, and service of a product, regardless of how often it is manufactured, refer to the product type. Configuration management is necessary for administering changes
in the type, which are expressed as versions and revised versions. All documents, programs, and tools
for the development, testing, manufacture, and service must be kept available.
Each produced unit of a type represents an instance of this type. The instance is always an individual
entity and can be identified by an unambiguous identifier (such as a serial number). The right to use
instances of software products is regulated by license agreements (see ZVEI Software clause for the
provision of standard software forming an integral part of supplies [16]). All activities for a product,
starting with manufacturing and including all services during the life time, refer to the product instance.
The typical life-cycle of a product (type) can be divided into various phases as shown in Figure 7.
Figure 7: Generic Life-Cycle-Model of a product (type)
Development
Sales
Development
After-sales support
Maintenance
Manufacturing
Service
28
Sales release
Delivery release
End of product sales
End of production
End of service sales
Product abandonment
3.1
L I F E - CYC L E - M O D E L
The life-cycle begins with the development phase, in which the product is developed as a type. The
development includes test activities, production and sales ramp-up, and trials (piloting) in the system
environment. When the specified technical and commercial criteria have been met, the product is
released for sale (Milestone 1: Sales release). Following the conclusion of successful testing, production
ramp-up and service preparation, the delivery release is achieved (Milestone 2). This enables manufacturing of the product, which means, in the context of the introduced terminology, the instancing of the
type.
The sales phase follows the development phase. The operational business with the product finishes with
the end of product sales (Milestones 3: Discontinuation). Typically, the end of production (Milestone 4)
is after the end of the active sales phase and depends on technical and economic conditions. Hardware
maintenance normally ends with the end of production. Maintenance of software (including firmware)
can be extended beyond the end of production.
The after-sales support phase begins with the end of product sales and finishes with product abandonment (Milestone 6). Service for the product begins with delivery release and ends with product abandonment. The end of service sales (Milestone 5) occurs in the after-sales support phase prior to product
abandonment. This means that all product-related deliveries and standard services provided by the
producer end with the product abandonment.
The sum of these phases for a type is called the product life-cycle. The term cycle is meant to express
that there is a recurring sequence in the context of the product evolution (Figure 8). These innovation
cycles result in new product versions or revised versions of the product. These versions and revised versions are highly relevant with regard to the compatibility and require version management conventions
that are agreed to by all producers, for example the NAMUR recommendation NE53 [17].
Figure 8: Evolution of products (type with version and revised version)
Product
evolution
P2.0
P1.1
P1.0
Development
Development
Sales
Pn.m
n: version
m: revised version
Development
Sales
Sales
After-sales support
After-sales support
After-sales support
Time
Typically, versions have an after-sales support phase. Generally, the latest revised version is maintained.
Process models are used to describe all activities required for managing a product life-cycle, enabling
concurrent workflows while ensuring fulfillment of required quality criteria. This process is usually
referred to as the Product Life-Cycle-Management process (PLM process) and comprises the type-related
sub-processes portfolio management, definition, realization, commercialization, and after-sales support.
29
3.2
I N T E G R AT I O N M O D E L
Each instance of a product has a life time (product life time) that starts with production (Milestone a),
for example the hardware manufacturing, and ends with disposal (Milestone f), e.g. scrapping. The
product life time can extend significantly beyond the end of the life-cycle of the product type (Milestone
6) (Figure 9). The essential section of the life time is the time in use, which begins at Milestone c, for
example with the software installation/activation, and ends with the decommissioning (Milestone e), for
example de-installation or irreparable defect.
The warranty period begins when the risk is passed to the customer (Milestone b), for example the
handover of a plant to the customer after acceptance, and ends in accordance with legal regulations or
customer contracts (Milestone d).
All product-related deliveries and standard services, provided by the producer, end with the abandonment of the product type (Milestone 6). After this point in time, measures are required to ensure that
the function is retained through compatible successor products or migration. Support can be extended
through individual service agreements.
Figure 9: Life time of a product instance
6
Product (Type)
Sales
b
Product (Instance)
After-sales support
d
Life time
Time in use
Disposal
Warranty period
Standard service
Service through individual service agreements
a
Product manufactured
Product abandonment
Start of warranty period for the customer
End of time in use (decommissioning)
Start of time in use
End of life time (end of disposal)
End of warranty period
Time
The documentation of activities related to the instance throughout its life time describes its history.
Archiving of all product history can be required beyond the end of the life time.
3.2 Integration model
30
A substantial portion of the PLM process involves the integration of components from third parties
(components not developed within the company). A system can be understood as a defined, structured
set of elements (components) which fulfills a function (system function) through interactions or interrelationships with each other (Figure 10). Systems can be hierarchically structured, which means that
they may consist of underlying systems (which are then considered components of the system above).
3.2
Figure 10: Hierarchical system structure
Examples:
System (n+1))
Component (n+1).1
Component (n+1).2
System function
System n
Component n.1
Component n.2
(n+1) Instrumentation
and control
(n+1).1 Control system
(n+1).2 Measuring transducer
n Measuring transducer
n.1 Housing
n.2 Connector
n.3 Electronics
Component n.3
System (n-1)
Component (n-1).1
Component (n-1).3
(n-1) Electronic
(n-1).1 Processor
(n-1).2 Memory
(n-1).3 System software
Component (n-1).2
The following example illustrates this. A measuring transducer system consists of hardware components, such as the housing, connector and electronics (which again represent a system consisting of
components such as capacitors, resistors, processor, memory, etc.). The "measuring transducer" system
is itself a component in the instrumentation and control system.
In the context of automation, limits are defined for the terms component and system. The lowest level
of the hierarchical system structure is represented by basic components, while the upper level is the
plants instrumentation and control equipment.
In the context of a value chain, the following levels can typically be defined:
Product
Partial solution
Plant.
31
3.2
The components are integrated into systems at each of these levels. This is shown in Figure 11.
Figure 11: General integration model in accordance with ARIS notation. Components are integrated into systems
Integration
step n-1
System-Life-CycleManager
Component 1
System developer
Integration
step n-1
finished
Component 2
System tester
Component 3
Integration
step n
Process
Manual
Instructions
System n
Integration
step n
finished
Activity
Input, output
Application
Development
Test
Role
Status
Integration
step n+1
Document
Application
Regardless of the level, each system has a life-cycle that can be depicted according to Figure 7 and that
is dependent on the individual life-cycles of the integrated components (Figure 12).
Figure 12: Life-cycle of components (types) with respect to the system (type) life-cycle
2
System
Component n
Component 2
Component 1
32
Delivery release
End of production
Product abandonment
3.3
C O M PAT I B I L I T Y M O D E L
System producers face a major challenge due to dependencies on the divergent life-cycles of components. The challenge must be overcome in order to allow continuous, evolutionary developments of the
system to meet compatibility demands.
The term system is frequently also used for a modular system (catalog) of products of one generation
(system generation) that are coordinated with one another. Expenditure is reduced by using products
from a modular system when components (types) are integrated into a system (type).
3.3 Compatibility model
In automation, compatibility is understood as the exchangeability, consistency, or equivalency of technical properties. The properties can be divided into different dimensions (views) [18]. These dimensions
represent:
automation-related functions,
devices that implement these functions,
and locations where the devices are used.
A diagram (Figure 13) is used to clearly show the relationship between these dimensions. It is divided
into three columns and contains all functions, devices, and locations, while showing their relationships
to one another.
Figure 13: Diagram mapping the dimensions function, device, and location [19]
Function
Process control
Engineering
Device
Location
Client
Computer peripherals
Control room
Alarm functions
Application server
Archiving
Network component
Communication
Electronics compartment
Controller
Diagnostics
Automation
Measuring, actuating
Input/output device
Field device
Field
From this mapping, compatibility requirements can be derived. Depending on the use case, these requirements can be combined to give different compatibility profiles. These profiles can vary substantially.
Typically, the customer formulates the requirements for the specific compatibility profile. This is dependent
on, for example, the plant type, product, product change, time in use of the plant, legal regulations, and
economic and strategic aspects. From experience of the producers, requirements, both function-related and
device-related, often overlap, limiting the variety of profiles. Location requirements can be derived from the
stipulated plant topology.
33
3.3
Typical compatibility requirements regarding function:

Results of the processing functions for measuring, regulating, controlling, diagnostics, etc.
Functional interfaces (such as data type and format, services)
Presentation (such as structure, resolution, color depth, aspect ratio)
Handling (such as operating sequence, menu structure)
Engineering (such as configuration, parameterization, data storage)
Information management (such as archiving of production data)
Communication services (such as time synchronization, security-related services)
Redundancy mechanisms
Typical compatibility requirements regarding device:
Construction and connection technique (such as physical dimensions, mounting, pin assignments)
Power supply
Handling (such as operating controls, exchange during operation)
Physical interfaces
Performance data (such as number of channels, memory, response time)
Certificates
Typical compatibility requirements regarding location:
Electrical environmental conditions (such as EMC)
Climatic environmental conditions (such as temperature, humidity)
Mechanical environmental conditions (such as vibration resistance)
Protection class
Explosion protection
The degree of compatibility (degree of exchangeability, consistency or equivalency) defines the fulfillment
of the requirements that are described in the compatibility profile. In practice, qualitative considerations have
predominantly been established. The following terms are used for the degrees of compatibility:
Full compatibility:
The component fulfills all requirements of the compatibility profile regarding function, device, and location.
Function compatibility:
The component fulfills the requirements of the compatibility profile exclusively regarding function.
Software compatibility:
The component fulfills the requirements of the compatibility profile regarding function with respect to
software. Software that has already been installed, which is identified by the software version, can be
transferred to a replacement device without additional effort (refer to forward compatibility, backward
compatibility).
Signal compatibility:
signal acquisition and processing. It can be put into operation without additional effort with regard to
these functions.
Data compatibility:
the specified data type and format.
Construction compatibility:
The component fulfills the requirements of the compatibility profile regarding device with respect to
physical dimensions, construction properties, and connection technique (including power supply) as well
as the requirements regarding location with respect to environmental conditions.
Connection compatibility:
The component fulfills the requirements specified in the compatibility profile regarding device with
respect to the connection technique.
34
3.3
Forward compatibility:
An existing component is regarded as forward compatible if it fulfills all of the requirements specified
in the compatibility profile of a new component. Synonym: upward compatibility.
Backward compatibility:
A new component that fulfills all of the requirements specified in the compatibility profile of an existing
component is regarded as backward compatible. It may have new features or extra functionality which
are not automatically utilized. Synonym: downward compatibility.
Table 1 illustrates the mapping of the above mentioned compatibility requirements to a required degree
of compatibility. It is evident that to fulfill certain degrees of compatibility, the component producer
needs to invest more effort to ensure the exchangeability, consistency, and equivalency. Meeting these
enhanced compatibility requirements can lead to increased demands in testing and certification, e.g. to
ensure compliance and interoperability of communication interfaces. This additional effort can substantially influence product cost.
Table 1: Mapping of compatibility requirements to the degree of compatibility
Construction
compatibility
Connection
compatibility
Functional interfaces
Presentation
Handling (functional)
Engineering
Information management
Communication services
Redundancy mechanisms
Construction and connection technique
Power supply
Handling (e.g. device exchange)
Physical interfaces
Performance characteristics
Certificates
Electrical environmental conditions
Climatic environmental conditions
Mechanical environmental conditions
Protection class
Explosion protection
Function
Device
Location
Data compatibility
Signal compatibility
Function compatibility
Results of processing functions
Requirement
Software compatibility
Full compatibility
Degree of compatibility
X
X
X
X
X
Based on Table 1, the degree of compatibility can be used to determine which specific requirements
must be met for a certain component. The individual criteria for these requirements must be specified
as quantitatively as possible. The target values for the criteria are used for the target profile (Figure 14).
This is compared to the actual profile, which is defined by a components properties.
35
3.4
L I F E - C YC L E C O N S I D E R AT I O N S F O R
SELECTED EXAMPLES
Figure 14: Compatibility assessment of alternative products

Actual profile
Requirements
Function
Monitor / operate
- Presentation update rate
Engineering
- PROFIBUS
***
Device
Connection technique
Energy consumption
Certificates
***
Location
Protection class
***
Target profile
Under-fulfillment
100 ms
1s
MS0
MS1
MS2
60W
40W
IP20
IP56
MS3
Over-fulfillment
20W
10W
Fulfillment
IP67
Checking the degree of fulfillment is an essential precondition for assessing a components compatibility. There is typically a difference between the actual and target profiles (non-fulfillment or over-fulfillment). Deviations must be assessed in terms of the technical and economic impact on a case by case
basis. In the case of individual criteria, the effort for fulfilling the required characteristics can be quite
substantial. Reductions in compatibility due to economic reasons can be one result. For example, when
exchanging a component in an automation system, it is easy to find another component that meets the
function requirements. However when special mechanical environmental conditions (strong vibrations,
contamination, etc.) or IT integration technologies such as FDT/DTM need to be taken into consideration,
additional compatibility criteria need to be fulfilled.
3.4 Life-cycle considerations

for selected examples
The range of requirements for Life-Cycle-Management will be explained using several examples.
Figure 15: Examples of component life-cycles
Components
Connector
ASIC
Operating systems
Windows
Unix
Linux
Proprietary systems
Microprocessor
1 2 3 4
10
20
Life-Cycle length
(years)
36
3.4
SELECTED EXAMPLES
The lengths of life-cycles for component types differ significantly between components of different
classes (for example, connectors vs. ASIC) as well as between representatives of a given class (such as
operating systems: Windows vs. Unix). This fact is shown in Figure 15 by the length of the bar. The
weighted center is shown by the red point.
These differing life-cycles must be taken into consideration during the development of a product, seen
as a system made up of components. In order to ensure that a product is deliverable throughout the
planned life-cycle, suitable Life-Cycle-Management strategies must be applied (see Chapter 4).
3.4.1 Microprocessors
An outstanding example of a component with an application focus in the consumer area is the microprocessor. Originally employed in microcomputers, the application of microprocessors spread extremely
rapidly due to usage in PCs. The large increase in microprocessor quantities resulted in a downward price
spiral. Thanks to the large quantities and the extensive range of applications, the maturation process
was and will continue to be considerably accelerated. For example, the error in the floating-point
operation of the first version of the Pentium processor was quickly discovered, which led to a re-design
and exchange of the processors. The favorable price levels, the standardization effect, and the accelerated maturation process led to increased utilization in industry.
The advantages which result from these large quantities of microprocessors increasingly conflict with
automation requirements in terms of life-cycle. With the ever-quickening development of new processor
types and chip sets, due to consumer sector demand, automation faces the dilemma of keeping up with
these rapid development steps, while meeting the difficult requirement of delivering throughout the
length of the life-cycle. For a number of years, producers offered specific microprocessor models with a
longer life-cycle for industrial use (e.g., 80C186). Because the market share of components used in
automation is declining compared to the share in consumer applications, the processor manufacturers'
interest in fulfilling the specific requirements for automation is also declining. This makes it all the more
necessary to look for alternative technological solutions, for example based on application-specific
integrated circuits (ASICs or FPGAs). At best, such solutions mitigate this conflict, but they do not represent a permanent solution with regard to Life-Cycle-Management.
A further primary aspect with regard to industrial robustness is the requirement for automation devices
to operate without fans to ensure availability and freedom of maintenance (such as filter exchange due
to contamination). Increasing processor performance due to higher functionality leads to increased heat
dissipation which creates challenges for operating without cooling fans in automation. The development
of low-energy processors and chip sets for mobile consumer devices, such as notebooks and smartphones, offers alternatives, but these components also change too rapidly to be used in automation.
It is important to note that during the evolutionary innovation of microprocessors by the leading manufacturers, the requirements regarding function and software compatibility, as described in Chapter 3.3,
were largely fulfilled. In contrast, the compatibility requirements regarding device and location were
predominantly not met, particularly for construction and connection compatibility.
This example shows that microprocessors are critical components for automation from the point of view
of Life-Cycle-Management.
3.4.2 Web technologies
Over the years, web technologies have developed into quasi-standards and they are now also frequently
used in automation [20]. In automation, these technologies are widely established in the areas of
Human Machine Interfaces using browsers, and for remote access to automation components. The range
of uses is constantly expanding driven by technologies such as XML and Web-Services using SOAP.
Due to patchy infrastructure, low bandwidth and the limits of presenting dynamic data, it was virtually
impossible to use web-based applications for automation. The creation of a user interface for browsers
based on HTML Version 3.2 was very restricted. This had considerable disadvantages when compared to
the proprietary solutions for operator control and monitoring. Browser development was characterized
by continuous enhancement. These enhancements lead to functional compatibility problems regarding
Life-Cycle-Management.
37
3.4
SELECTED EXAMPLES
The widespread usage of the Internet generates high pressure for standardization. The World Wide Web
Consortium (W3C), as an independent organization, creates specifications to solve this problem which
in turn is a benefit for automation applications regarding Life-Cycle-Management requirements. This
widespread usage of the Internet also leads to rapid development, which presents challenges to LifeCycle-Management in automation. For example, the life-cycle of software solutions using web technologies is usually extremely short. New versions of products are often released after only one year, thereby
creating substantial problems for compatibility.
Most browsers currently available on the market fully conform to the W3C standard. Even in the consumer market, conforming to the standard is a decisive factor for market success. However, this is not
really applicable when referring to technologies for dynamic content. Solutions with JavaScript which
users can switch off or Adobe Flash are not immune to functional compatibility problems. The situation
is even worse in the case of the new presentation technologies that were recently introduced such as
XAML (extensible Application Markup Language). Because these technologies have progressed so swiftly,
not all browsers are able to correctly represent the content. The Microsoft Silverlight technology is one
example of this. For the currently available version, Silverlight 3, there are still very few browsers that
are capable of presenting such content. As a result, compatibility restrictions must also be expected here.
The short innovation cycles in Web technology, which contrast with the long time in use of machines and
plants, lead to special requirements for Life-Cycle-Management. New technologies and new versions of
software products are accompanied by steady growth in functionality, but the requirements regarding
compatibility are usually much lower in the consumer sector than in automation (Compatibility model,
Chapter 3.3). There are also risks involved when upgrading to new system versions which are mainly
software-specific but frequently require a hardware upgrade because the requirements the software
places on the hardware components (processor, memory) increase steadily.
It is expected that the technological developments of the Internet will lead to increasing requirements
on Life-Cycle-Management in automation. This is aggravated by the increasing number of Internet
applications with Web 2.0 and newer technologies which place the development focus more on new
application functionality than on retaining compatibility. As a result, clearly defined models and proactive strategies are necessary for the Life-Cycle-Management of such software applications in automation.
The increase in networking and integration using Web technologies produces additional requirements
on other levels, such as security, which can require different system architectures. Consequently, the area
of consideration for Life-Cycle-Management must be extended.
3.4.3 Field device integration
Field devices (transmitters and actuators) represent a substantial share of investment costs in automation. Information is traditionally exchanged as a standardized voltage or current signal via individual
wiring, or, in the case of devices with a bus interface, via services and data formats standardized in
communication protocols.
A feature of modern field devices is that their functional properties can be adjusted to the specific
application (such as measurement ranges, material properties). This necessitates configuration and
parameterization (engineering). Consequently, this means that there are additional requirements for
integrating smart field devices in addition to mechanical and electrical properties.
38
3.4
SELECTED EXAMPLES
This integration places demands on the communication, engineering, and information exchange.
Examples of communication properties are modulated digital information (such as in HART) or the
specific services of communication systems. To enable engineering, it is important that producers provide formal, textual description files (device descriptions) or adapted software components. The lifecycle aspects in this area are especially relevant because this area is not yet as standardized, homogenized or generally accepted as electric connection technologies, for example.
During the construction and commissioning of a plant, various producers deliver their field devices with
the appropriate description files and/or software drivers. The plant, including the integrated field
devices, is commissioned. The project-specific configuration data and parameters are centrally stored
and archived.
Technological progress and competitive pressure lead to dynamic advances in field devices and their
components. These advances in components include sensors for additional substances, new devices with
enhanced processor and memory technology or new diagnostic and operating functions. This requires
upgrades to the device electronics and firmware, as well as associated changes to the device descriptions
and software drivers. For efficiency reasons, device manufacturers start the production of new versions
on relatively short notice, meaning that only the latest version is deliverable. If a plant operator needs
to exchange a device or its electronic module, they frequently receive a different device version than
what was originally planned and installed. Generally a new driver version is also available for this version of the device.
Although the Life-Cycle-Management process for an upgrade to the electronics generally functions
smoothly, upgrades to the device description files often cause major challenges for the plant users [3]:
An un-repairable device is replaced, so that a mixed version landscape can develop over time.
Has it been ensured that a new driver version supports both new and older device versions?
Does the new driver/device description still fit the engineering system, the control system in use or
the Asset Management System? Is compatibility guaranteed?
Who ensures that the driver will also still work in future versions of the control system?
What are the upgrade possibilities if the user does not wish to use the new functions of the new
software driver/device description?
This shows that there is still a need for Life-Cycle-Management models and strategies for integrating
field devices. Different user organizations have recognized and begun to address this challenge. Up to
now, it has not been possible to achieve a comprehensive solution that satisfies the needs of producers
and users. There are however individual approaches, such as a device exchange as described by
PROFIBUS Profile V3.02 [21], which are exemplary and offer benefits for the field device integration
area.
3.4.4 Standards and regulations
As explained in Chapter 2.8.2, standards and regulations in particular have a considerable impact on
the life-cycle of a system and the components deployed. This was expanded on using the typical example of the prohibition of products containing lead in the course of the RoHS directive and the associated introduction of lead-free soldering processes.
39
3.5
CONCLUSIONS
The EuP directive (Eco-design Requirements for Energy-using Products) is a further, far more current
example. This is an EU framework directive for the energy-efficient and environmentallyfriendly design
of electrical products. This directive is not directly effective, but it will become effective through later
regulations regarding individual device groups. The first product-specific regulations for several individual product groups have already been prepared or are currently being prepared. The regulation for
electric motor technology is particularly significant for automation technology. According to Regulation
640/2009 [22], from 16 June 2011, only motors that fulfill at least efficiency level IE2 will be permitted
to be introduced to market. Starting in 2015, only the even more energy efficient IE3 motors, or IE2
motors in combination with electronic frequency converters, will be allowed to be put into operation.
Existing IE1 motors will then no longer be permitted to be introduced to market. A further energy efficiency class IE4 is also in the planning stage.
Therefore, the entire scope of automation is affected due to the broad range of application fields for
drives, not only in classic machine construction and plant engineering, but also for pumps, compressors
and valve controllers in the process industry. Even though more efficient motors consume less energy
and produce less heat, problems regarding the compatibility requirements demonstrated in Chapter 3.3
can arise when a device is exchanged. This affects compatibility requirements from the device view in
particular. From the viewpoint of the construction and connection techniques it is often not possible to
avoid structural changes in the plant. In addition, motors will increasingly tend to be electronically
regulated in future, which will also result in changes to the connection technique.
Moreover, the increasing use of frequency converters generally makes compliance with compatibility
requirements regarding location more difficult. Particular attention should be given to compliance with
EMC limits as prescribed by EMC requirements. This requires additional filters. In future, the increasing
use of regulated drives and the use of electronically controlled motors will also have an effect on the
voltage accuracy of the plant's power supply. In particular, the sinusoidal voltage curve is affected which
may cause problems for other devices and systems.
These planned regulations also apply to drives that are operated at a constant rotational speed. Thus, a
considerable drop in the market for contactors and soft starters is to be expected which will affect the
availability of spare parts of these products.
The EuP directive example illustrates that migration solutions will be unavoidable in many existing
applications. These solutions are typically associated with additional financial expenditure.
3.5 Conclusions
A generic Life-Cycle-Model was introduced in Chapter 3 which illustrates the fundamental lifecycle
aspects of automation systems and their components. A basic concept of the model is the distinction
between the type and instances of a system. A product type is subject to its own lifecycle that extends
from development through to product abandonment. However, a product instance that has been
installed in a plant has its own life time that differs from the type's life-cycle. The complexity of life-cycle
aspects depends on the complexity of the system but also on the time in use of the system and on the
life-cycle of the individual components. The examples used show that the tasks needed to manage these
aspects increase substantially if the system has a long time in use and/or the life-cycle of the components is short. The more these time frames diverge, the more important suitable Life-Cycle-Management
strategies are.
The producer is faced with conflicting challenges when developing and maintaining their product types.
On the one hand, products with a greater range of functions should be offered at lower prices which
primarily can be achieved through the use of COTS or established standards while on the other hand,
the industry-specific requirements still need to be fulfilled. In order to fulfill these requirements, producers must, in coordination with the users, offer custom-tailored products or services. Focusing on the
life-cycle, Chapter 2 illustrates the diversity and industry-specific nature of requirements for automation
components. The more component producers depend on other, often non-automation, suppliers, the
more difficult it is to maintain the product types throughout the required time frame. The only way to
reduce this dependency is by the long-term use of stable standards and re-usable partial solutions.
These measures need to already be in place by the beginning of the product development phase.
Producers can reduce their dependency on suppliers by carrying out their own development. This, how-
40
3.5
CONCLUSIONS
ever, is generally associated with higher product costs. In specific cases, for example when a complex
qualification process is necessary for retaining certification, a proprietary solution can offer advantages
that ensure the requirements are met over the long term.
Compatibility, as an objective measure for the exchangeability of a component, is essentially significant
for managing the life-cycle. For the assessment of exchange products, the complete collection of the
requirements regarding function, device, and location is necessary. This means that the user must provide an exact analysis of the component that needs to be replaced, so that it is possible to determine
the required degree of compatibility, and consequently the requirements, for the new components. At
this point, it is clear that coordination between the user, as the instance user, and the producer is indispensable.
In order for the producers to ensure long-term deliverability of products, they are forced to develop
strategies for comprehensively managing life-cycle aspects and minimizing the effects of disruptive
events. System, logistic, and contractual aspects for sourcing components must also be considered. The
producer therefore includes the expenditures for these strategies when calculating the product prices.
The following chapter presents and discusses established strategies and services for Life-Cycle-Management.
41
S T R AT E G I E S F O R L I F E - C YC L E - M A N A G E M E N T
4 Strategies for Life-Cycle-Management
When considering life-cycle aspects, the users main goal is the economical operation during the time
in use of the plant. Producers of products and systems must meet the life-cycle related requirements of
the users. Consequently, the producers have to meet complex technical challenges while complying with
their own economic constraints. Given that the length of the life-cycles of products (producer perspective) and plants (user perspective) usually diverge, Life-Cycle-Management strategies are needed to
address the resulting, conflicting interests.
Figure 16: Relationships between the partners in the value chain
Product/system
producer
User
2
Component
producer
Figure 16 illustrates the fundamental roles of the partners in the value chain and their relationships to
each other. Each element of this value chain can itself represent a value chain in the sense of the hierarchy from Chapter 3.2 (Figure 10). Customer-supplier relationships exist between partners in this value
chain and partners can take on multiple roles. The different roles result in different views and tasks
(Chapter 2.1).
Interface 1 in Figure 16 shows the relationship between the user and the producer of a system. Individual, application-based services (usually engineering and maintenance) are provided here. In the
context of the model described in Chapter 3.1, this is where products (instances) are created, configured
and parameterized.
In contrast, interface 2 represents the relationship between the product/system development and the
component supplier. In the context of a value chain, system development always includes the integration
of third-party components (Figure 11). With reference to the model described in Chapter 3.1, this is
where products (types) are developed and maintained.
Interface 3 represents the direct relationship between the user and the component producer. Because
this bypasses the support of the product/system producer it entails risks for the user. As changes are not
coordinated with the product/system producer, this can lead to compatibility problems. Integration tests
conducted by the product/system producer, with resulting releases and/or handling instructions, are
indispensable for ensuring compatibility.
The producers and users of automation products and systems have developed methods and strategies
that are intended to allow them to maintain both product types (Figure 7) and their delivered product
instances (Figure 9) within a system generation. This is done in order to ensure their usability over a
long period of time.
Maintenance methods have been introduced for ensuring the usability of instances (in accordance with
DIN 31051 [23], e.g. inspection, (preventive) maintenance, and repair). Last-time buy, substitution of
product types, re-design, and migration are specific strategies for preserving system usability. These
strategies are often employed in combination.
42
4.1
L A S T-T I M E B U Y
The applicability of the individual strategies varies depending on the producer and user. Various criteria
must be considered and assessed in order to select the suitable strategies. These include:
Compatibility:
Compatibility means the exchangeability, consistency, or equivalency of technical properties (Chapter 3.3).
Reaction time:
The reaction time is the period of time between the onset of an event which reduces usability and the
time when full usability is restored by means of the selected strategy.
Sustainability:
Sustainability describes how long usability can be ensured by means of the selected strategy, giving an
indication of how future-proof something is.
Effort:
Effort describes the amount of material, personnel and financial resources required for ensuring usability. Depending on the strategy, the amount of effort assigned to the producer and the user varies.
Innovation potential:
Innovation potential describes the capability of a system to be further enhanced through the addition
of new features (such as technology, serviceability, and profitability).
4.1 Last-time buy
Last-time buy describes the purchase and storage of an abandoned component. The storage conditions
must ensure compliance with the technical properties specified by the producer over a defined period
of time.
The last-time buy strategy is used after the components end of production (Milestone 4 as shown in
Figure 7) and is applied by the producer for covering the demand in manufacturing and repair of the
system and also by the user for stocking up on spare parts and for plant expansions. Last-time buy is
also used to extend the time until another strategy is used (such as substitution).
Figure 17: Ensuring delivery of a system through last-time buy of a component

2
System
Shortfall
Component 1
Component 2
Component n
2
Delivery release
End of production
Product abandonment
Ensuring Milestone 6
of the system
In Figure 17, the shortfall between the end of production of component 2 and the abandonment of the
system is covered by an increased stockpiling of component 2. It must be ensured here that the stock is
sufficient for the demand that arises during manufacturing and after-sales support. In addition to complying with the storage conditions, the last-time buy approach must also be considered from an economic point of view (committed capital, storage costs).
43
4.2
SUBSTITUTION
For example, the abandonment of an electronic part before the end of production can be countered by
purchasing a sufficient quantity. In this case, it may be necessary to store the parts under defined climatic conditions, for example, with a protective gas.
If the last-time buy strategy is inappropriate from a technical or economic standpoint, substitution or
re-design strategies may be required in order to fulfill the products life-cycle requirements.
Characteristics of the last-time buy strategy:
Compatibility:
No restrictions
Reaction time:
Short, fastest strategy
Sustainability:
Limited by physical properties (e.g. drying out of electrolytic capacitors) and

availability of know-how
Effort:
Costs for storage, capital commitment, costs of maintaining know-how
Innovation potential: None, because it preserves the status quo
4.2 Substitution
Substitution is a strategy whereby a component in the system is replaced with a compatible successor type
in such a way that there are no repercussions on the system. The basis for this is a requirement specification
which considers technical, economic, and regulatory aspects. Compliance with a compatibility profile as
described in 3.3 is crucial. This profile contains the relevant requirements and their value ranges for product
properties, for example, as specified in accordance with eCl@ss, ETIM, PROLIST [24].
Substitution always requires integration effort. Substitution with a large amount of integration effort, for
example due to a technology change, is classified as a re-design of the product type in the context of this
guideline. Typical reasons for substitution can be abandonment of hardware components or COTS products.
Innovation of the product type is not the goal of substitution.
Figure 18: Ensuring delivery of a system through substitution of a component

2
System
Shortfall
Component 1
Component 2' version x+1
Component 2 version x
Component n
Delivery release
End of production
Product abandonment
Ensuring Milestone 6
of the system
Figure 18 shows a shortfall for the system due to the end of production of component 2 in version x.
Substitution of a new version (x+1) for this component covers the shortfall.
For example, a change in the dimensions of a power supply can result in integration effort because
adapters need to be designed. As another example, when new software versions are introduced, changes
to the internal interfaces as a result of the new component require system integration effort.
44
4.3
RE-DESIGN
The use of standardized hardware and software interfaces (external and internal) within the system
architecture allows for and simplifies substitution, thereby having a large impact on the system integration effort.
Substitution is inappropriate when essential properties of the compatibility profile cannot be fulfilled.
As a result, substitution may not be justifiable for technical or economic reasons.
Characteristics of the substitution strategy:
Compatibility:
No restrictions
Reaction time:
Longer than last-time buy, typically shorter than re-design (depending on the
integration effort)
Sustainability:
Better than last-time buy, depends on the life-cycle of the successor type
Effort:
Costs for substitution (ensuring integration without repercussions), avoiding

last-time buy costs
Innovation potential: Limited, as it generally preserves the status quo
4.3 Re-design
Re-design is a strategy whereby a new version of a product type is developed. The new version typically
fulfills or exceeds the product specification, and therefore the compatibility profile, of a previous type.
This includes the activities for maintaining the required qualification and certification.
Typical causes for re-design for both producers and users are:
Abandonment of a component if the last-time buy or substitution strategies are not suitable solutions
Fulfillment of changes in standards and legal regulations (such as RoHS, environmental ordinances,
export laws)
Typical causes for re-design for producers are:
Optimization of manufacturing and testing technology
Improvement of profitability (re-design to cost)
Typical causes for re-design for users are:
Compatibility restrictions of a successor product
45
4.4
M I G R AT I O N
Figure 19: Re-design of a system due to end of production of a component

4
2
2
System version (x+1)

System version x
Component 1
Component 2 (new)
Component 2
Component n
2
Delivery release
End of production
Product abandonment
Life-cycle extension
In Figure 19, component 2 is replaced by the new component 2. This necessitates the development of
a new version for the system (version x+1) while taking into account compatibility requirements. This
can result in extending the systems life-cycle through postponing the end of production (Milestone 4)
and abandonment (Milestone 6). It must be noted here that the life-cycle of another component (component 1 in the figure) may determine the length of the life-cycle of the system. For example, abandonment of a processor can lead to a re-design of the system if substitution through a new type is not
suitable for technical reasons. There may be other causes for re-design, particularly due to wildcards
such as RoHS (see Figure 6).
Characteristics of the re-design strategy:
Compatibility:
Restrictions are to be expected
Reaction time:
Longer than substitution, typically shorter than migration (depending on the

integration effort)
Sustainability:
Better than substitution, depends on the life-cycle of the new system version
Effort:
Costs for development, testing, qualification, etc., including system integration;

avoidance of last-time buy costs
Innovation potential: Exists, new version can include new functions
4.4 Migration
Migration solutions are applied when the above-described strategies of last-time buy, substitution, and
re-design are not justifiable for technical or economic reasons.
Migration refers to:
The (partial) replacement of existing components with new components with extended or modified
functionality in an existing system configuration.
The extension of an existing system configuration through components of a new generation. This
generally includes a change of technology.
Generally, migration is necessary when the effort required to maintain and enhance the existing
system is not justifiable.
46
4.4
M I G R AT I O N
This strategy can be applied to different levels (Figure 20).

Figure 20: Layer model for migration steps
System x
Migration level 1
Migration level 2
Client
Server
Client
Automation
Controller
I/O
Migration level 3
Migration level 4
System (x+1)
Client
Data
converter
G
Gateway
Client
Application
Server
Automation
Server
Distributed I/O
Field bus
Field
device
Field
device
Field
device
Field
device
The innovation cycles of the components of migration level 1, along with economic considerations, lead
to this level generally being the starting point for migration. The effort for migration increases from
level 1 to level 4. As a result, the frequency of migration decreases from level 1 to level 4.
Migration should not cause significant repercussions. To limit the repercussions, it is necessary to
develop suitable adaptation solutions while considering general regulatory conditions. The compatibility model presented in Chapter 3.3 is a means for assessing the repercussions. For migration, the fulfillment of the functional compatibility requirements is the focus. Examples of adaptation solutions in the
respective migration levels include data converters, gateways, proxies, virtualization of operating resources, and replacement of central I/O devices with field bus coupled distributed devices.
Migration is most appropriate when productivity gains or cost reductions are expected, for example from
new functions, standards or technologies. Migration offers the greatest innovation potential, but at the
same time it represents the most complex strategy. The migration from proprietary communication
interfaces to open field bus systems can be seen as an example.
Characteristics of the migration strategy:
Compatibility:
Preservation and expansion of the function, function compatibility is typically

fulfilled
Reaction time:
Depending on the migration level, can be considerably longer than re-design
Sustainability:
High level of sustainability due to the introduction of a new system
Effort:
Greatest effort, costs for development, testing, qualification, etc., including

adaptation solutions and system integration
Innovation potential: Greatest innovation potential because the latest, most advanced technologies
can be taken into consideration
47
4.6
4.5 Life-CycleManagement
services
4.5
L I F E - CYC L E - M A N AG E M E N T S E R V I C E S /
C O M PA R I S O N O F T H E S T R AT E G I E S
Life-Cycle-Management services differ from other services as they are provided throughout a contractually-defined period of time within the products (instance) time in use (Figure 9). In contrast to classic
services, an additional dimension is the period of time over which the service provider offers the defined
services or complete service package to the customer. These services could range from extending the
standard on-demand service up to providing a fully-customized service package. These customized packages can consist of defined hardware and software maintenance, as well as services (such as engineering). The objective of Life-Cycle-Management services is to maintain the customers system (instance)
throughout the time in use by ensuring that the utilized components can be maintained. Life-CycleManagement services may also cover the disposal phase (Figure 9). The services support the customer
in achieving their productivity and availability goals. Life-Cycle-Management services can essentially be
divided into standard services and services through customized special agreements. These services are
explained in more detail in the following.
4.5.1 Standard services
Standard services describe standardized, scalable services (product) that are provided without giving
consideration to specific customer requirements. These services end when the product (type) is abandoned see Figure 9. Update and upgrade services, the provision of spare parts and repair services are
examples of this. Standard services also include training offers, commissioning, and remote support
(such as telephone, hotline and remote maintenance).
4.5.2 Service through special agreements
Beyond the standard services, i.e. after the product type has been abandoned, individual agreements
often exist between the service provider and plant user in order to support the users strategy for plant
operation. These agreements differ from standard services in terms of the scope of services offered or
the respective period of time. Typically, such services or service packages are configured for a specific
customer and are defined in separate agreements (service contracts). Special agreements can ensure the
preservation of the status quo of the installed system (instance) e.g. by means of extended ability to
deliver spare parts or software support that continues beyond the end of sales for the type.
Special agreements provide additional benefits for the plant user. The additional costs for maintaining
know-how, for repair and test equipment, and for storing components need to be taken into account by
the service provider.
Technical feasibility and economic viability may limit the application of these services. Proactive LifeCycle-Management (Chapter 5) helps to recognize these limits at an early stage and enables the development of suitable strategies for a plant's time in use.
4.6 Comparison of the

strategies
In practice, these Life-Cycle-Management strategies are applied in various combinations. Life-CycleManagement should include a risk assessment and a definition of measures as early as possible.
Generally, this is a part of the product and system planning process. In practice, however, it is not possible to avoid unplanned events. External influences, such as a component fault or the abandonment of
components, play a crucial role here.
With the various strategies, the steps to be taken must be evaluated from technical, time, and economic points of view and the consequences must be considered. The following overview (Figure 21) is
intended as a starting point and can be used to provide orientation for selecting a suitable strategy or
combinations thereof. The typical characteristics (see Chapter 4.1 to 4.4) are rated from + to +++. The
weighting of the characteristics depends on the individual case, which makes a detailed analysis indispensable.
48
4.6
Compatibility
Reaction time
Sustainability
Effort
Innovation potential
Figure 21: Typical characteristics of the Life-Cycle-Management strategies
Last-time buy
+++
+++
Substitution
+++
++
++
++
Re-design
++
++
++
++
Migration
+++
+++
+++
Typical rating from (+) to (+++)
Because the considered components and systems differ greatly, it is important that the specific problem
is reflected by the respective strategies. Often multiple strategies are applied either sequentially or
simultaneously.
49
4.6
Example Exchanging a defective flowmeter

A technician in the plant receives an error message. Analysis shows that this is due to a device defect.
The defective device must be exchanged with a replacement device. The device is a flowmeter that communicates with the process control system via PROFIBUS PA. This is a typical scenario for maintenance
and repair, and leads to the following alternatives:
Alternative 1: Replacement of the defective device with an identical device from stock
The technician first attempts to replace the defective device with an identical device from stock (new
instance of the same type). This is an example of quickly remedying a fault in a manner that is possible
with the last-time buy strategy.
If this procedure is not possible, further actions are necessary:
1. Analysis
If replacement with an identical component is not possible, the technician attempts to find the most
compatible component. He/she does this by comparing the compatibility profile (Figure 22) of the
installed component (target profile) with the profile of possible replacement components (actual profile).
Figure 22: Comparison of the compatibility profiles
Target profile
Actual profile1 Actual profile2 Actual profile3
Requirements
Function
Monitor / operate
- Presentation update rate
Engineering
- Device description
- PROFIBUS
***
Device
Measuring tube length
Energy consumption
Certificates
***
Location
Protection class
***
Under-fulfillment
Over-fulfillment
1s
100 ms
GSD 3.0
MS0
4.1
MS1
MS2
5.1
MS3
300mm
IP20
400mm
IP54
IP67
2. Evaluation of the alternatives and decision on the implementation

Depending on the analysis, the following alternatives can occur:
Alternative 2: Replacement of the defective device with a fully compatible device
(Figure 22: Target profile = Actual profile 1)
In this case, the compatibility profile fulfills all relevant requirements and the technician has an alternative device with the same properties (instance of another fully compatible type, for example, from
another producer). When replacing the defective device, the technician sets the specific device parameters (communication network, linearization, sensor calibration, etc.). This is an example of remedying
a fault by using the substitution strategy.
50
4.6
Alternative 3: Replacement of the defective device with a compatible successor device

(Figure 22: Actual profile 2)
In this case, the compatibility profile fulfills or exceeds all relevant function-, device-, and locationrelated requirements (instance of another, compatible type with extended properties). Before the defective device is replaced, the compatibility of a successor type is checked in the system environment.
However, the extended properties shown in the profile are not applied. For example, the installed
engineering tool can be used to set the parameters of the replacement device. As a result, the existing
device parameters (communication network, linearization, calibration of the sensor, etc.) can be applied
to the new device. This is a further example of remedying a fault by using the substitution strategy.
Alternative 4: Replacement of the defective device with a successor device with deviations to the
compatibility requirements
(Figure 22: Actual profile 3)
In this case, the compatibility profile fulfills or exceeds only the relevant function- and location-related
requirements, but not the device-related ones (instance of another type with restricted compatibility).
In this example, because the measuring tube is longer, re-design steps in the plant are necessary
(Figure 23 physical changes to the pipe itself). Additional consequences include modifying the corresponding plant documentation.
Figure 23: Replacement of the defective device with a new device
Replacementt with iidentical

dentical compone
component
ent (new instance of the ssame type)
Replacement with compatible component (actual profile 1 or 2)
Replacement with a successor device withe deviations to the compatibility

requirements (actual profile 3)
As in alternative 3, the compatibility of the successor type is tested in the system environment before
the defective device is replaced, leading to the same results.
Once the alternative is selected, further steps include the activities for implementing the solution, the
adaptation of the plant documentation, and the initiation of the repair process for the defective device.
The example demonstrates that the exchange of a defective component calls for different measures,
depending on the degree of compatibility of the potential replacement component. The description
using compatibility profiles allows for systematic evaluation of all technically relevant features of alternative replacement components and supports the decision-making process.
51
4.7 Plant user strategies
4.7
P L A N T U S E R S T R AT E G I E S
Plant users are increasingly evaluating their investments in automation equipment, whether for new
installations or modernizations, in order to achieve long-term availability and productivity. This evaluation leads to the selection and the combination of Life-Cycle-Management strategies.
Experience and statistical examinations by producers of automation products show that plant users can
be divided into two basic categories with regard to their strategy, irrespective of the industry. The first
category follows the strategy of continual productivity optimization. In this category, the products
which the users produce, and consequently also their plants, are usually subject to tough competition
which leads to high pressure to save costs. Productivity increases are brought about by maximizing the
production quantity, while keeping the material and energy use constant. Alternatively, the resources
can be reduced (material, energy, etc.) while keeping the production quantity constant. Further considerations, such as consistently high product quality and plant availability, must still be ensured. Examples
of this category can be found in the energy industry (increasing the efficiency of a power plant) and in
automobile production (increasing the speed of a production line).
The second category of plant users follows the strategy of maintaining productivity. In these plants,
the focus is less on improved performance and more on maintaining the status quo for a long period
of time. This may be due, for example, to the companys specific market situation or intensive approval
procedures for certifying technical changes in the plant. Alternatively, if the user plans to dismantle the
plant, or invest at a later date, the user may only want to skim off the margins for the remaining time
in use of the plant. In this case, the technical equipment in the production process is largely decoupled
from the innovation cycles of the automation technology (hardware and software). Migration takes place
at large time intervals and usually only when the system's availability can no longer be ensured by
means of special service agreements for the planned time in use. Examples for this category can be
found in the power industry (long or extended time in use for power plants), in the pharmaceutical
industry (certified plants) and in the primary industry (market saturation).
The categories cannot always be distinguished this clearly, but these categories represent two extremes
that are frequently encountered in industrial production. These extremes are characterized by different
Life-Cycle-Management strategies which will be further described. Continuous life-cycle planning is
necessary in both categories.
Plant users in the productivity optimization category usually have long-term plans for migration in order
to exploit the potential of new technologies. Consequently, they prefer early migration to the latest
technology in order to use these innovations to gain a competitive advantage (technology leader). In
addition to making early upgrades to software and hardware components, these users also deploy external know-how (e.g. service specialists) in order to minimize down times and resulting productivity
losses.
Plant users who are primarily focused on maintaining productivity must ensure the long-term availability of their automation equipment by means of suitable Life-Cycle-Management strategies. The longterm support for the products is ensured through the strategies last-time buy, re-design, special LifeCycle-Management services, e.g. individual contract for life time extension, or any preventative and
emergency strategies that may be necessary.
The characteristic features of the two categories are shown in Table 2.
52
4.8
C O N C L U S I O N R E G A R D I N G T H E S T R AT E G I E S
Table 2: Fundamental characteristics of plant users
4.8 Conclusion regarding

the strategies
Productivity maintenance
Productivity optimization
Plant operating strategy
Skimming margins
Ensuring availability
Increasing productivity
Reducing costs
Increasing availability
Requirements on
Hesitant system
modernization
Long-term spare part
management
Future-proof and
compatible system
components
Continuous modernization
of the equipment in use
Technology strategy
Very late technology

adoption
Very early technology

adoption
Plant management and

service strategy
Cost-optimized methods
for emergencies and
preventative measures in
order to prevent production
down times
Exploiting automation
potential to optimize
productivity
Personnel strategy
Cost-optimized management
of training and qualification
Retention of staff with
know-how
Performance-optimized
management of training and
qualification, taking adopted
technologies into consideration
strategy
Last-time buy
Substitution
Standard service
Service through special
agreements
As per productivity
maintenance with the
following additions:
Re-design
Migration
The strategies described in this chapter were not created for this guideline. Rather, the strategies were
defined and adapted with a focus on compatibility. They represent a pool of proven strategies from which
the appropriate strategies must be selected and applied according to a plants individual requirements
(Chapter 2). It is important to note that the strategies have different characteristics regarding compatibility, reaction time, sustainability, effort and innovation potential.
These strategies can be applied individually or in combination at different times throughout the time in
use of a plant. It is important to plan and implement a coordinated strategy for the system based on the
individual life-cycle considerations of the components. This must take the user strategies into consideration
(productivity maintenance or productivity optimization).
Mastering this complex topic requires superior technical, business, and organizational competencies for
plant users. The producers may offer support in this context, particularly in technical matters. Involvement
of the producers in the plant users strategic planning (e.g. for defining migration strategies) and implementation should lead to a long-term partnership with strategic competitive advantages. Furthermore,
contracts should be established at an early point regarding services provided through special agreements,
as an extension to standard services. For example, last-time buy of a component is only possible up to its
end of production.
To define an optimal Life-Cycle-Management strategy for a plant user, it is important to consider many
individual aspects in addition to the technical solution. To determine which strategy is best for specific
situations, comprehensive, holistic analyses of each plant are necessary. The usage of Life-CycleManagement offers an excellent opportunity for recognizing additional variables which could affect decisions, thereby providing greater overall benefit from the plant operation.
53
I N T E G R AT E D L I F E - C YC L E - M A N A G E M E N T
5.1
P R OA C T I V E L I F E - CYC L E - M A N AG E M E N T
5 Integrated Life-Cycle-Management
5.1 Proactive LifeCycle-Management
The previous explanations show that comprehensive Life-Cycle-Management begins as early as the planning
phase and includes thorough consideration of the requirements. In essence, this involves the active management of the life time of a plant including its components. This calls for proactive Life-Cycle-Management [1]
that according to IEC 62402 [6] begins already in the phase of the product development and supports
the lowest possible effort for migration and re-use of configuration data in the event of a technology change.
For this purpose, a Life-Cycle-Management mindset must already be present when a system is being developed, because foreseeable influences such as technology changes or changing regulatory requirements must
already be taken into consideration during this early phase [13]. This approach ultimately leads to an
expanded quality concept, because comprehensive planning also means planning ahead for the sustainability of the products and components and continuously anticipating replacement and re-use solutions. Thereby,
interoperability and compatibility are better anchored in the long-term development strategy. This has farreaching consequences for the structural and technical system and product design. To ensure long-term
sustainability, the diversity of system components should be minimized in favor of platform strategies. In
addition, the complexity can be limited by creating modular solutions based on stable and standardized
interfaces. Consistent development documentation of the product (type) based on standardized processes and
regulations is indispensable for achieving this.
Proactive Life-Cycle-Management also means the sustainable optimization of a plant throughout its time in
use. Measures for ensuring the sustainability of Life-Cycle-Management can only be based on intensive cooperation between users and producers. Thereby, analysis of the following factors is necessary:
the life time of the plant and the life time of the products that the plant manufactures,
the life time of the system components (e.g. based on probability of failure),
the supplier selection based on life-cycle relevant criteria, such as financial stability, availability of
second source, or ability to deliver,
the delivery terms and conditions for products and services, including those for software [16].
Proactive Life-Cycle-Management contributes substantially to minimizing the costs, which makes this
aspect an essential part of TCO considerations (Chapter 2.1).
Proactive Life-Cycle-Management results in changes to the evaluation criteria for decision-making processes and new opportunities for partnership-based relationships between users and producers.
Consequently, it is possible to cooperatively develop a strategy for the time in use of a plant at an early
stage. An optimized, plant-specific strategy is created by combining the goals of the user and the capabilities of the producer regarding the products that are employed and their life-cycle specific characteristics. The strategies described in Chapter 4 form the basis for this work.
This approach leads increasingly to strategic partnerships within the industries. This can result in the
introduction of new business models in which producers of instrumentation and control systems assume
the responsibility for the availability of the users production processes. In addition to the different cost
schedules, criteria for task allocation within the partnerships specifically includes the tolerable reaction
time, the available personnel resources, and, above all, the specific know-how.
Proactive Life-Cycle-Management also leads to requirements related to standardization. Only in this way
can requirements regarding compatible innovation be fulfilled from the outset with low effort. This
requires open, vendor-independent conventions for creating products and processes which can only be
defined in standardization committees.
In addition to standardization of technical content, it is necessary to develop uniform and accepted
methods for the holistic consideration, assessment, and calculation of TCO. Examples of approaches for
this can be found in [13] and [25]. This would allow evaluation and comparison of different strategies
with regard to economic aspects.
54
5.2 Life-CycleExcellence
I N T E G R AT E D L I F E - C YC L E - M A N A G E M E N T
5.2
L I F E - CYC L E - E XC E LL E N C E
The conclusions based on the different industry requirements (Chapter 2.9), the generic Life-CycleModel (Chapter 3.5), and the presented strategies for Life-Cycle-Management (Chapter 4.8) show that
Life-Cycle-Management in automation is highly complex and requires holistic consideration. This
includes application-, technical-, time-, and economic-aspects, as well as the use of common models
and standards, and the anticipation of wildcards. These considerations result in Life-Cycle-Management
strategy requirements (Chapter 4) which need to be fulfilled to achieve an individual,robust optimum.
It also became clear that successful Life-Cycle-Management has a great influence on the competitiveness
of products, systems, services and consequently the respective company.
In this context, three fundamental requirements regarding the robustness of the Life-Cycle-Management
of components, products, and systems can be identified.
Technical robustness:
To allow compatible system enhancement and substitution of components for a particular system generation, specific technologies must be selected and rules must be defined for the system development.
This calls for proactive measures, particularly the anticipation of changes due to technical innovations,
standards and regulations. It also includes the modularization of systems (Chapter 3.2), the definition
of open interfaces with long-term stability, and the definition of compatibility profiles for components
(Chapter 3.3). Technical robustness can only be achieved if the differing lengths of the life-cycles of the
various component types (Figure 15) are considered. Technical robustness also includes support for
changing the system generation with suitable migration solutions (Chapter 4.4).
Application robustness:
Application robustness describes the capability of a system to adapt to changes related to the operation
of the plant. For example, this includes product changes (batch), changes in production quantities,
changes to input materials, and changes to production processes or revision times. Also included are
changes which increase in the degree of efficiency or availability and changes due to standards, and
industry-specific stipulations.
Figure 24: Life-Cycle-Excellence
Economic robustness
Application robustness
Technical robustness
Economic robustness:
Economic robustness describes the capability of a system to adapt to changes in the economic goals and
constraints of the plant operation during the time in use. This includes external influences such as
altered economic conditions, market fluctuations, competitiveness, general legislative conditions and
changed business strategies and decisions. These goals and constraints can lead to changes in the
planned time in use of the plant, the plant operating models and, consequently, to changes in the criteria for selecting Life-Cycle-Management strategies.
Optimal profitability is always the highest priority when selecting suitable strategies.
Life-Cycle-Excellence is the term for managing the influencing factors for the robustness of the LifeCycle-Management of components, products and systems by means of holistic consideration (Figure 24).
Life-Cycle-Excellence is based on standards and the common models described in this guideline.
In the context of robustness, the dimension of time includes the life-cycle of types (components, products, and systems) and the life time of their instances. Life-Cycle-Excellence is achieved if the product
Life-Cycle-Management satisfies these demands throughout the entire time range sustainably. LifeCycle-Excellence can only be achieved by means of cooperative, continuous, and proactive Life-CycleManagement.
Models and standards
55
SUMMARY
6 Summary
The requirements in this guideline regarding Life-Cycle-Management for automation products and systems are industry-specific and highly complex. Singular initiatives of individual producers or users can
therefore only lead to limited success. Through analysis of the topic and creation of generic principles,
the neutral, cross-company working group developed a guideline useable across industries. The output
of the working group provides clarity in definitions which are necessary for cooperation between producers and users in Life-Cycle-Management.
Collecting and comparing the requirements of various industries in a structured manner shows that the
topic of compatibility is extremely important. In developing the Life-Cycle-Model, the difference
between the product type and its instances is introduced as an important aspect. The respective phases
and milestones of types and instances allow for a holistic view of Life-Cycle-Management aspects.
Consequently, a reference model is available, with additional practical examples, which can be used
for discussion and clarification of facts and requirements, both within a single company and between
companies (e.g. between plant users and manufacturers and between manufacturers and suppliers).
Typical strategies that companies are using underline the necessity of a proactive approach to Life-CycleManagement.
In creating this guideline, the focus was on formulating generic models which could be applied in practic
tice by all partners in the value chain. This also includes the use for internal company processes in
pr
product Life-Cycle-Management. As a result, automation-specific definitions, models, and strategies
nc
include:
a condensed representation of the influencing factors and their variance which was developed on the
basis of the detailed requirement analysis from the Life-Cycle-Management point of view. General
industry characteristics, specific requirements related to the life-cycle, economic aspects, and the
trends that should be expected were included for this comparison of industries.
the Life-Cycle-Model with its phases which can be utilized for the planning, implementation, and
maintenance of products and systems. The use of the introduced terms type and instance, allows
for differentiated perspectives of a products Life-Cycle-Management, irrespective of the integration
level of the hierarchical system structure.
the compatibility model which represents new methodology for analyzing the fulfillment of compatibility requirements with regard to a specific application from function-, device-, and locationview. This methodology improves the quality, sustainability, and documentation of decision-making
processes in the context of Life-Cycle-Management strategies.
new definitions of proven strategies for Life-Cycle-Management which are based on these generic
models. As a result, these strategies can be compared, assessed, and more selectively applied in
combination for the individual Life-Cycle-Management of systems.
Life-Cycle-Management services, including the producers know-how, which are crucially important throughout the plants life time. Life-Cycle-Management services comprise standard services and
services provided through special agreements. The effort for maintaining know-how and equipment
for repairing and testing, as well as for storing the components, increases as the products time in
use increases.
56
SUMMARY
proactive Life-Cycle-Management which already begins when a system is in the concept phase. The
focus here is on the selection of robust components, specifications, and technologies that consequently have long-term stability. This includes active participation in the development of standards
and norms in order to be able to efficiently ensure sustainable interoperability and compatibility.
Generally, decisions are made in accordance with the principle of profitability. By applying the described
models and strategies for the Life-Cycle-Management of products and systems in automation, the ability to calculate the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) is significantly improved.
The term Life-Cycle-Excellence was introduced for the holistic consideration and management of technical robustness, application-specific robustness and economic robustness.
The publication of this guideline and the resulting discussions at trade fairs, congresses and in other
working groups, have prompted active feedback from producers and users. All partners in the value
chain are affected by the challenges of Life-Cycle-Management and, without exception, welcome the
initiatives of the working groups contribution. The holistic, comprehensive, and methodical approach
fulfills the requirements for consistently addressing the topic. The authors look forward to a productive
dialog with users, producers and associations.
Professional Life-Cycle-Management enables differentiation in global competition.
57
F I G U R E S / TA B L E S
Figures
Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Figure 3:
Figure 4:
Figure 5:
Figure 6:
Figure 7:
Figure 8:
Figure 9:
Figure 10:
Figure 11:
Figure 12:
Figure 13:
Figure 14:
Figure 15:
Figure 16:
Figure 17:
Figure 18:
Figure 19:
Figure 20:
Figure 21:
Figure 22:
Figure 23:
Figure 24:
Typical structure of an instrumentation and control system

Example of the effects of component failure
Life-cycles of plants and their components
The iceberg effect
Trade-off between procurement costs (initial investments)
and costs for operating and maintenance
Typical ranges of variables which influence the life-cycle
Generic Life-Cycle-Model of a product (type)
Evolution of products (type with version and revised version)
Life time of a product instance
Hierarchical system structure
General integration model in accordance with ARIS notation.
Components are integrated into systems
Life-cycle of components (types) with respect to the system (type) life-cycle
Diagram mapping the dimensions function, device, and location [19]
Compatibility assessment of alternative products
Examples of component life-cycles
Relationships between the partners in the value chain
Ensuring delivery of a system through last-time buy of a component
Ensuring delivery of a system through substitution of a component
Re-design of a system due to end of production of a component
Layer model for migration steps
Typical characteristics of the Life-Cycle-Management strategies
Comparison of the compatibility profiles
Replacement of the defective device with a new device
8
9
10
10
12
26
28
29
30
31
32
32
33
36
36
42
43
44
46
47
49
50
51
55
Tables
Table 1: Mapping of compatibility requirements to the degree of compatibility

Table 2: Fundamental characteristics of plant users
Table 3: Industry-specific requirements
58
35
53
67
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bibliography
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
Hauff, T.; Weigel, O.: Langfristige Sicherstellung der Feldgerteintegration, In: EKA Entwurf
komplexer Automatisierungssysteme, conference transcript pp. 81-90, 15.-17. April 2008
Association of German Engineers: VDI 2884 Beschaffung, Betrieb und Instandhaltung von
Produktionsmitteln unter Anwendung von Life-cycle Costing (LCC), December 2005
Dressler, T.; Trilling, U.: Instandhaltung der Prozessnahen Technik Cost of Ownership, In:
Automatisierungstechnische Praxis edition 38, pp.42-46, February 1996
Niemann, Jrg: Mehr Produkterfolg mit Life Cycle Management. In: WB Industrielle
Metallbearbeitung edition 138 (2005), No 9, pp. 26-31
Namur: NE 121 Qualittssicherung leittechnischer Systeme, 2008
International Electrotechnical Commission: IEC 62402: Obsolescence management Application
guide, Genf, June 2007
German Engineering Federation: VDMA 34160 Prognosemodell fr die Lebenszykluskosten von
Maschinen und Anlagen, June 2006
International Electrotechnical Commission: IEC 61131-3 Programmable Controllers Part 3:
Programming languages, January 2003
ZVEI German Electrical and Electronics Manufacturers Association e. V.: Guideline Einsatz von
Web-Technologien in der Automation, September 2006
ZVEI German Electrical and Electronics Manufacturers Association e. V.: VDI/VDE 2182
Informationssicherheit in der industriellen Automatisierung, August 2007.
ZVEI German Electrical and Electronics Manufacturers Association e. V.: Guideline Ethernet in
der Automation, March 2003
European Council and Parliament: Directive on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous
substances in electrical and electronic equipment 2002/95/EC, 27 January 2003
Niemann, J.; Tichkiewitch, S.; Westkmper, E.: Design of Sustainable Product Life Cycles,
Springer Verlag, Heidelberg Berlin, 2009
ZVEI German Electrical and Electronics Manufacturers Association e. V.: Integrierte TechnologieRoadmap Automation 2020+, Energie, September 2009
ZVEI German Electrical and Electronics Manufacturers Association e. V.: Integrierte TechnologieRoadmap Automation 2015+, October 2006
ZVEI German Electrical and Electronics Manufacturers Association e. V.: ZVEI-Softwareklausel
zur berlassung von Standard-Software als Teil von Lieferungen. Ergnzung und nderung der
Allgemeinen Lieferbedingungen fr Erzeugnisse und Leistungen der Elektroindustrie, July 2004
NE53: Namur: NE53 Software von Feldgerten und signalverarbeitenden Gerten mit
Digitalelektronik, 2003
International Electrotechnical Commission: IEC 81346-2: Industrial systems, installations and
equipment and industrial products Structuring principles and reference designations Part 2:
Classification of objects and codes for classes. Genf, July 2009
Polke, M. (Hg.): Prozessleittechnik, Oldenbourg Verlag, 2nd edition, 1994
ZVEI German Electrical and Electronics Manufacturers Association e. V.: Einsatz von WebTechnologien in der Automation, September 2006
PROFIBUS User Organization e. V.: PROFIBUS Profile for Process Control Devices, Version 3.02,
April 2009
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 640 / 2009 of 22 July 2009 implementing Directive 2005 / 32 /
EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to ecodesign requirements for
electric motors
German Institute for Standardization: DIN 31051 Grundlagen der Instandhaltung, June 2003
International Electrotechnical Commission: IEC 61987-10: Industrial-process measurement and
control Data structures and elements in process equipment catalogues Part 10: Lists of properties (LOPs) for industrial-process measurement and control for electronic data exchange
Fundamentals, July 2009
Albert, W.: Total Cost of Ownership bei Prozessleitsystemen, In: ATP Edition, pp. 24-30,
January / February 2010
German Institute for Standardization: DIN 6789 Dokumentationssystematik; Aufbau technischer Produktdokumentationen, September 1990
59
INDEX
Index
A
after-sales support phase ..................................................................................................................... 29, 62
approval .............................................................................................................. 13, 15, 19, 24, 26, 28, 62
availability .................................................................. 11, 14, 16, 18, 22, 25, 37, 52, 53, 54, 62, 63, 64
B
backward compatibility ......................................................................................................................... 35, 62
C
certification................................................................................................................ 13, 24, 26, 28, 45, 62
compatibility ............................................................. 11, 13, 21, 23, 24, 26, 29, 33, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43,
44, 45, 46, 47, 53, 54, 56, 62, 64, 65
compatibility profile.................................................................................................. 33, 34, 50, 62, 63, 64
component ........................................................................ 30, 31, 37, 41, 44, 50, 53, 57, 62, 63, 64, 65
components-off-the-shelf ................................................................................................ 11, 18, 40, 44, 62
configuration management .................................................................................................................. 28, 62
construction compatibility .................................................................................................................... 34, 62
D
data compatibility ................................................................................................................................. 34, 62
degree of compatibility ................................................................................................... 34, 35, 41, 51, 62
delivery release ..................................................................................................................................... 29, 62
development ................................................................................................ 25, 28, 29, 37, 40, 46, 54, 62
development phase ................................................................................................................. 29, 62, 63, 64
device ..................................................................................................... 33, 34, 39, 40, 41, 50, 56, 62, 63
discontinuation ...................................................................................................................................... 29, 62
E
end of product sales ............................................................................................................................. 29, 62
end of production ..................................................................................................... 29, 43, 44, 46, 53, 62
end of service sales ............................................................................................................................... 29, 62
exchangeability ................................................................................................................ 33, 34, 35, 43, 62
F
forward compatibility ............................................................................................................................ 35, 63
full compatibility ................................................................................................................................... 34, 63
function .................................................................................... 30, 33, 34, 39, 41, 47, 56, 62, 63, 64, 65
function compatibility............................................................................................................. 34, 37, 47, 63
functionality............................................................................................................................. 62, 63, 64, 65
I
innovation cycle .................................................................................................................................... 29, 63
instance ........................................................................................... 28, 30, 41, 42, 48, 56, 62, 63, 64, 65
interoperability .......................................................................................................... 12, 19, 35, 54, 57, 63
L
last-time buy ............................................................................................................. 42, 43, 45, 50, 53, 63
life time ........................................................................................................ 10, 16, 30, 40, 54, 63, 64, 65
life-cycle.............................................................................. 6, 13, 25, 27, 29, 32, 37, 39, 53, 55, 62, 63
Life-Cycle-Costing........................................................................................................................... 12, 19, 63
Life-Cycle-Costs ................................................................................................................ 10, 17, 21, 23, 63
Life-Cycle-Excellence ...................................................................................................................... 55, 57, 63
Life-Cycle-Management ................................................................... 8, 13, 14, 24, 36, 37, 54, 55, 56, 63
Life-Cycle-Management strategy .................................... 26, 37, 40, 42, 48, 52, 53, 55, 62, 63, 64, 65
location ...................................................................................................................... 33, 34, 41, 56, 62, 63
60
INDEX
M
manufacturing ................................................................................................................................ 28, 29, 63
migration ................................................................................. 13, 17, 25, 30, 40, 42, 46, 52, 53, 54, 63
modernization cycle .............................................................................................................................. 13, 63
O
obsolescence management .................................................................................................................. 19, 63
P
phase of life........................................................................................................................................... 28, 63
plant life time............................................................................................................................ 9, 11, 13, 63
product ............................................................................................ 13, 22, 29, 30, 31, 56, 62, 63, 64, 65
product abandonment ................................................................... 11, 29, 30, 40, 43, 45, 48, 62, 63, 64
product change ......................................................................................................... 13, 14, 25, 33, 55, 64
product history ...................................................................................................................................... 30, 64
Q
qualification................................................................................................. 13, 14, 26, 41, 45, 46, 47, 64
R
reaction time ................................................................................................ 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 53, 54, 64
re-design .................................................................................. 25, 37, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 51, 52, 53, 64
revised version........................................................................................................... 17, 28, 29, 62, 64, 65
revision cycle .................................................................................................................................. 13, 25, 64
robustness ................................................................................................................................ 55, 57, 63, 64
S
sales phase ............................................................................................................................................ 29, 64
sales release .......................................................................................................................................... 29, 64
service ............................................................................................................ 9, 11, 13, 19, 25, 27, 28, 29,
30, 48, 52, 53, 63, 64, 65
signal compatibility .............................................................................................................................. 34, 64
software compatibility.................................................................................................................... 34, 37, 64
spare part................................................................................................................................. 17, 43, 48, 65
substitution ............................................................................................ 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 50, 53, 64, 65
sustainability ......................................................................................... 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 53, 54, 55, 65
system .................................................................. 27, 30, 31, 33, 37, 44, 53, 54, 56, 57, 62, 63, 64, 65
system generation ............................................................................................................ 33, 42, 55, 63, 65
T
time in use .............................................................................. 11, 13, 16, 18, 20, 22, 25, 30, 33, 40, 42,
48, 52, 53, 54, 62, 63, 65
Total Cost of Ownership ................................................................................................... 10, 12, 27, 57, 65
type ................................................................................................. 28, 29, 42, 48, 54, 56, 62, 63, 64, 65
U
update ...................................................................................................................................... 13, 25, 48, 65
upgrade...................................................................................................................... 11, 13, 23, 39, 48, 65
V
version........................................................................................................... 11, 29, 37, 44, 46, 62, 64, 65
W
wildcards .................................................................................................................................. 26, 46, 55, 65
61
GLOSSARY
Glossary
after-sales support phase:

approval:
availability:
backward compatibility:
certification:
compatibility:
compatibility profile:
component:
components-off-the-shelf (COTS):
configuration management:
construction compatibility:
control system:
data compatibility:
degree of compatibility:
delivery release:
development:
development phase:
device:
discontinuation:
disposal:
down time:
effort:
end of product sales:
end of production:
end of service sales:
exchangeability:
62
Phase in the life-cycle of a product (type) which begins at the end of the selling phase and
ends with product abandonment. Synonym: Product Phase-Out
Allowance or authorization from a regulatory authority to use a system.
Statistical characteristic of a technical system measuring the fulfillment of its specified tasks
over a defined period of time. This characteristic is calculated as the difference between the
time in use and the sum of the down times over the time in use.
When a new component fulfills all of the specified requirements in the compatibility profile
of an original component. Synonym: downward compatibility
Check to confirm compliance to standards and regulations for products, systems, solutions
and processes. The check is based on information from the development and qualification
process. When a compliance certificate is required, the check is generally performed by an
independent authority.
Exchangeability, consistency or equivalency of technical characteristics. The properties used
for compatibility analysis are grouped into the classes function-, device- and location-specific.
List of all compatibility requirements of a system, or a component of a system, dependent on
application specifics.
Autonomous element of a system which fulfills a defined sub-function.
Application-neutral hardware or software product, which is produced in a large quantity and
is deliverable from stock. Typical characteristics are low price, limited to basic requirements
and short life-cycle. Synonym: commercial off-the-shelf
Process of identification and administration of a systems structures and its components,
including all relevant data and rules, which are required for the production of the system
(type) throughout the entire life-cycle.
A nomenclature for explicitly identifying and naming versions and revised versions is
necessary for administrating the information.
Configuration management systems support the administration of information and the
workflow.
The component fulfills the requirements from the device view of the compatibility profile
related to physical dimensions, construction properties and connection technique (including
power supply) as well as the requirements of the location view related to environmental
conditions.
System for processing information and for controlling a plant.
The component fulfills the requirements from the function view of the compatibility profile
related to the specific data type and data format.
Fulfillment of the requirements described in the compatibility profile.
End of the manufacturing preparation process as part of the development phase, series
production can begin.
Activities related to the creation of a new product (type), or a new or revised version of a
product (type), including defining specifications, design, implementation, testing and
creation of the technical documentation.
Phase of the product life-cycle which begins with the decision to develop a product and ends
with delivery release of the product.
A physical component which is used to operate a function.
End of all active sales activities for a product.
Recycling or disposal of a product (instance) following the time in use, as the last phase of
the life time, with respect to regulations.
The time in which a plant, or part of a plant, is not available due to retrofitting or
maintenance activities.
The amount of material, personnel and financial resources required for a Life-CycleManagement strategy to ensure usability.
End of all active sales activities for a product (discontinuation)
Point of time when instances of a product (type) are no longer produced.
End of all active sales activities for services related to maintaining the product functionality.
Capability of a component to be replaceable with another component which fulfils the
defined compatibility profile.
GLOSSARY
fault:
Food and Drug
Administration (FDA):
forward compatibility:
full compatibility:
function:
function compatibility:
functionality:
hardware component:
innovation cycle:
innovation potential:
instance:
instrumentation and control:

interoperability:
lat-time buy:
life time:
life-cycle:
Life-Cycle-Costing (LCC):
Life-Cycle-Costs:
Life-Cycle-Excellence:
Life-Cycle-Management:
Life-Cycle-Management strategie:
location:
maintenance:
maintenance cycle:
manufacturing:
migration:
modernization cycle:
obsolescence management:
phase of life:
pin compatibility:
plant:
plant life time:
A malfunction of a component (instance) which prevents the fulfillment of the specified

functionality.
An agency of the United States Department of Health and Human Services. Responsibilities
include the regulation and supervision of food safety and pharmaceutical drugs.
When an original component fulfills all of the specified requirements in the compatibility
profile of a new component. Synonym: upward compatibility
The component fulfills all requirements of the compatibility profile from the function, device
and location view.
Conversion of input (material, energy, information) into output (material, energy,
information) taking parameters into account.
The component fulfills all requirements of the compatibility profile from the function view.
The capability of a component to fulfill a defined function or a set of functions.
Individual hardware component in a system.
Recurring cycle for the innovation of products and systems due to changes in technologies
and platforms.
Capability of a system to be further enhanced through the addition of new technical
characteristics.
1. An instance is a concrete, clearly identifiable component of a certain type. It becomes an
individual entity of a type, for example a device, by defining specific property values.
2. In an object oriented view, an instance denotes an object of a class (of a type).
The entirety of all technical equipment needed for measuring, processing, actuating and
controlling processes.
Capability of different systems to operate together in coordination.
A Life-Cycle-Management strategy in which instances of an abandoned component (type)
are purchased and stored.
Length of time from the end of the creation of a product (instance) to the end of disposal.
Length of time from the start of the development phase (type) to the end of the product
abandonment.
Method for transparently representing the allocation of the total costs (TCO) to the life-cycle
phases (planning and construction, operation including maintenance, dismantling, disposal),
to individual instances and to the time in which the cost is incurred.
Sum of all costs for plant user incurred after purchase up to the end of the life time of a
system (instance).
A holistic approach to managing changing conditions to ensure technical-, applicationspecificand economic-robustness of the Life-Cycle-Management for products (components
and systems).
Methods and activities for the planning, realization and maintenance of products for the life-cycle
of types and the life time of instances.
Strategy for applying Life-Cycle-Management methods to ensure the availability of a system
throughout the time in use.
Identifiable, limited space with specific properties where devices are installed.
Activities for ensuring the functional state of products and systems (instances) through
service, inspection and repair [21].
Period of time between planned maintenance activities.
Creation of instances of a product (type). Synonym: production
1. (Partial) replacement of existing components with new components with extended or
modified functionality in an existing system configuration.
2. Extending an existing system configuration through components of a newer generation.
This generally includes a change of technology.
Time between each period of modernization of technical equipment through new
technology, with the goal of maintaining or increasing value to the user.
Activities for managing the aging of a product (type) within the life-cycle by forecasting the
life-cycle of its components (types) and defining development and maintenance tasks [6].
A section of the life-cycle of a product (type) and/or life time of a product (instance).
The component fulfills the requirements from the device view of the compatibility profile
related to connection technique.
System on the highest aggregation level, facility for the production of commodities.
Life time of a plant, period starting with the end of commissioning and ending with the
dismantling of the plant.
63
GLOSSARY
plant revision:
plant user:
process control system:
producer:
product:
product abandonment:
product change:
product history:
product maintenance:
production ramp-up:
qualification:
reaction time:
re-design:
reliability:
repair:
replacement part:
revised version:
revision cycle:
robustness:
sales phase:
sales release:
service:
signal compatibility:
software compatibility:
64
Planned interruption of production for inspection and maintenance of technical equipment in

a plant.
User of a plant.
System for controlling a plant which applies chemical, physical or biological processes.
A company which develops a product (type), maintains it during the life-cycle and
manufactures instances of this type.
A commodity (goods or service) for operational business, with defined properties (type),
which is created (instance) in a value chain process [25] with reproducible quality. It is sold
during a defined period and is technically and logistically supported until product
abandonment. The value chain process can be a process for integrating components into a
system (integration process).
Products can be hardware, software, services or combinations thereof.
End of all deliveries and service for a product.
Changeover of a plant for the production of a different product, including all operational business
processes.
Documentation of activities which occur during the life time of a product (instance).
Maintenance of hardware and/or software to ensure the continued functionality of a product
(type and instance).
Preparation of a manufacturing process for the production of a product as part of the
development phase. This includes the preparation for procurement of components and
preparation for logistics.
Process for determining fulfillment of technical requirements for a product (type) according
to the specification.
Period of time from the onset of an event which reduces usability to the time when full
usability is restored through a Life-Cycle-Management strategy.
A Life-Cycle-Management strategy in which a new version of a product (type) is developed
which typically fulfills or exceeds the specification, and therefore the compatibility profile,
of a previous type.
Overall term to describe the availability and its influencing factors which are functionality,
safety, security, maintainability and availability of service.
Process for returning a defective product (instance) to the specified state.
A product component used to replace a defective component in a qualified repair process.
Defined status of a software or hardware version, including all of its integrated components,
which is explicitly identified by a revised version number. Revised versions are not unique
products and are generally not maintained or marketed as a new product. Rules for issuing a
revised version number are part of the product identification nomenclature of a system
(product line).
Basic rules for issuing a version number are:
1. error correction for a product to fulfill prescribed properties without breaching
compatibility requirements
2. manufacturing related changes to a product without breaching compatibility requirements
3. substitution of components of a product without breaching compatibility requirements
Period of time between plant revisions.
Capability of a system to continue to fulfill its function under changing conditions.
The period in which the product is actively sold.
Start (release) of active sales activities for a product.
The total of all supporting activities for products (types and instances). Standard services
end with product abandonment (type). Supporting activities after product abandonment are subject to
special service agreements.
related to signal acquisition and processing.
related to software.
GLOSSAR
spare part:
spare part delivery:
substitution:
sustainability:
system:
system generation:
system integrator:
time in use:
Total Cost of Ownership (TCO):
type:
update:
update service:
upgrade:
upgrade service:
user:
version:
wildcard:
Product for replacing a system component, which can not be repaired due to technical or
commercial reasons, to restore the functionality.
Service for delivery of spare parts (instances).
A Life-Cycle-Management strategy in which a type is replaced by a compatible new type
without repercussions for the system.
The measure of how future-proof something is; how long usability can be ensured by
applying a Life-Cycle-Management strategy.
1. A defined and structured set of components which fulfill a function (system function)
through interactions or interrelationships with each other. Systems could have a hierarchical
structure, i.e. they could consist of underlying systems (which are then considered
components of the system).
2. Name for a product line.
Specific product line, in a sequence of product lines, of interoperable products which are
based on a common set of rules and technologies.
A role in the value chain process which integrates components to form a system. It is
positioned in the value chain between producers and end-user. Depending on the integration
level, precise roles are often defined (e.g. product developer, plant engineer).
The portion of the life time in which a system (instance) or a component (instance) is
actually in use for its intended purpose.
Total costs for planning and construction (= investment costs), operation including
maintenance, dismantling and disposal of a system up to the end of the life time (= costs over
the life time).
1. A type denotes a component which can be used to form specific instances with clearly
defined characteristics.
2. In an object oriented view, a type denotes a class.
New revision of a version designed for error correction and/or minor functional
improvements. For software, an update is called a patch which can include bugfix for
general errors and hotfix for critical or urgent error corrections.
Service for implementing an update for an instance following a specified procedure.
Product for upgrading a component to a newer version with improved or enhanced
functionality. The term upgrade can apply to hardware and software.
Service for implementing an upgrade for an instance following a specified procedure.
A role at the end of the value chain process of a product and/or system in order to operate
the product and/or system.
Defined status of a product (type), including all of its integrated components, which is
explicitly identified by a version number. Rules for issuing a version number are part of the
product identification nomenclature of a system (product line).
Basic rules for issuing a version number are:
1. error correction for a product which results in unfulfilled compatibility requirements
2. product enhancement which results in unfulfilled compatibility requirements
3. product enhancement which results in fulfilled compatibility requirements (backward
compatible) sold as an independent product.
Unexpected event (discontinuity) which partially or fully invalidates forecasts, trends and
planning.
65
Table 3: Industry-specific requirements

Requirements
Description
Energy
Chemical
Batch process
Time in use of plant
portion of the life time during which the plant is actually

in use for its intended purpose
> 25 years
nuclear power plant > 40 years
typically 5 - 10 years
Product change
changeover of a plant for the production of a different

product, including all operational business processes
no product change
product changes possible

throughout the time in use
of plant
Modernization cycle
time between each period of modernization of technical

equipment through new technology, with the goal of
maintaining or increasing value to the user
typically 5 years
Revision cycle
period of time between plant revisions (planned

interruption of production for inspection and maintenance
of the technical equipment in a plant)
typically 12 months
in principle, possible between two

batches, typically < 1 year
Compatibility
exchangeability, consistency or equivalency of technical

characteristics
Function-related requirements
Monitoring and operating
information presentation, operating sequences and actions,

user interface to plant
15 years, time in use for nuclear power

plants
time in use of plant, 5 years

for PC-based system
Automation functions
measuring, controlling, monitoring and diagnosing
time in use of plant
Information management
archiving data, evaluating production and quality

data, providing data to MES and ERP systems
life time of plant, possible specific

regulatory requirements
typically life time of plant, possibly imposed by life time of the

produced product or specific
regulatory requirements
Interfaces
service and functions, addressing, data volumes,

quality of service, profiles
Data types and formats
structure, syntax and semantics of data
time in use of plant, supported by

conversion routines
time in use of plant, supported

by conversion routines
Constr. and connect. technique
physical dimensions, mounting, pin assignments
Power supply
electrical supply data, power consumption, uninterrupted

supply, grounding and shielding, overload protection
electrical-, climatic-, mechanical-environmental

conditions, protection class, explosion protection
Documentation
1. system documentation, e.g. device manual

2. plant documentation, e.g. plant configuration,
circuit diagrams, parts lists, application programs,
operating instructions
in accordance with regulatory requirements, typically life time of plant, content changes must be documented and,
where applicable, recertified
in accordance with regulatory

requirements, typically life time
of plant, content changes must
be documented and, where
applicable, recertified
Qualification
documented evidence of fulfillment of technical

requirements according to specifications
in the event of a change of ownership

and when there are changes during the
in the event of a change of ownership and when there are changes

during the time in use of plant
Certification; authorization
documented evidence of conformity with standards and

regulations for products, systems, solutions and processes;
allowance or authorization from a regulatory authority to
use a system (e.g. CE, FDA, explosion authorization, railway)
in accordance with regulatory requirements,

typically to be maintained throughout the
time in use of plant (nuclear power plant:
life time), main focuses are failsafe and
nuclear power plant applications

requirements, typically to be
maintained throughout the time
in use of plant, main focus is
failsafe
Repair
process for returning a defective product to the specified

state

life time); when necessary through special service agreements
time in use of plant; when

necessary through special
service agreements
Spare part delivery
service for delivery of spare parts

life time); original parts or compatible
(nuclear power plant: certified)
spare parts
time in use of plant; original

parts or compatible spare parts
Fault repair
measures for eliminating nonconformity in the behavior of

a product or system with respect to the specified behavior,
including fault analyses, fault elimination and additional
services
time in use of plant (nuclear power

plant: life time); when necessary
through special service agreements

service agreements
Update service
service for implementing an update for an instance

following a specified procedure

life time); when necessary through special service agreements; nuclear power
plant: update only after qualification and
certification where applicable

service agreements
Upgrade service
service for implementing an upgrade in the instance

following a specified procedure

life time); when necessary through special service agreements; nuclear power
plant: upgrade only after qualification
and certification where applicable

service agreements
Device-related requirements
Location-related requirements
Setting and environment
Rail transport
Continuous process
Rolling stock
Automobile manufacturing
Machine tool building
Signaling
typically 40 years
designed for 30 - 40
years; in reality 60 years
car: 7 - 8 years, HGV (Heavy Goods

Vehicle): 15 - 20 years
universal machine: typically 25 years

special machine: typically 5 years
product changes possible throughout the time in use of plant
no product change
(transportation service)
no product change
(transportation service)
car: 2 - 3 years (face-lifting)

HGV: 7 - 10 years
universal machine: designed for product

changes, special machine: limited
product changes
typically 15 years
inline with face-lifting
universal machine: typically 10 years,

special machine: in exceptional cases
typically 5 years
dependant on mileage,
typically < 1 year
typically 6 - 12 months
typically 12 months
time in use of plant, 5

years for PC-based systems
typically 15 - 20 years;
presently subject of international standardization
time in use of plant, 5 years for

PC-based systems, possibly upgrade
to increase productivity/quality
time in use of machine, 5

years for PC-based systems
time in use of machine
typically life time of plant, possibly

imposed by life time of the produced product or specific regulatory
requirements
life time of plant, possible

specific regulatory requirements
life time of plant, possible

specific regulatory requirements
typically life time of plant, possibly

imposed by life time of the produced product or specific regulatory
requirements
universal machine: within the typical life

time of the produced product special
machine: typically life time of machine,
possible specific regulatory requirements
universal machine: typically 10 years

special machine: in exceptional cases
time in use of plant, supported by

conversion routines
time in use of plant,

supported by conversion
routines

routines

routines
time in use of machine,

routines

requirements, typically life time
of plant, content changes must
be documented and, where
life time of plant, content

changes must be documented and, where applicable,
recertified

changes must be documented and, where

changes must be documented
life time of machine, content

changes must be documented

authorization documents in
accordance with national
requirements
authorization documents
in accordance with
national requirements

in the event of a change of ownership

and when there are changes during the

maintained throughout the time in
use of plant, main focus is failsafe
authorization documents in
accordance with national
requirements
authorization documents
in accordance with
national requirements

maintained throughout the time in
use of plant, main focus is failsafe
in accordance with regulatory requirements, typically to be maintained

throughout the time in use of machine

service agreements
dependant on contract;
time in use of plant; when necessary

time in use of machine; when necessary

time in use of plant; original parts

or compatible spare parts

service agreements
time in use of machine; when

service agreements

service agreements

service agreements

service agreements

service agreements

service agreements

service agreements

service agreements

service agreements

service agreements
Substitution
The German Electrical and

Electronic Manufacturers Association (ZVEI)
Automation Division
Lyoner Strasse 9
60528 Frankfurt am Main
Germany
Phone: +49 (0)69 6302-292
Fax:
+49 (0)69 6302-319
E-mail: automation@zvei.org
www.zvei.org
ISBN: 978-3-939265-26-9
Repair / Maintenance

Guideline LifeCycle en

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Guideline LifeCycle en

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Life-Cycle-Management for

Automation Products and Systems

Dr. Michael Leidner

Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Ralf Mildenberger

Dipl.-Ing. Mathias Mhlhause

Dr.-Ing. Jrg Niemann

Dipl.-Ing. Reinhard Schrieber

Dr. Markus Winzenick

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Martin Wollschlaeger

Additional involvement during the English translation process

Head of the ZVEI System Aspects Working Group

ZVEI Automation Division

Dr. Rolf Birkhofer

Dr. Markus Winzenick

The current status

Requirements, influencing factors, industry-specifics

2.1 General requirements

2.2 Consideration of industry-specific requirements

2.3 Requirements of the chemicals industry

2.3.1 General industry characteristics

2.3.2 Life-cycle related requirements

2.3.3 Industry-specific economic aspects

2.3.4 Anticipated industry trends

2.4 Requirements of the energy industry

2.4.1 General industry characteristics

2.4.2 Life-cycle related requirements

2.4.3 Industry-specific economic aspects

2.4.4 Anticipated industry trends

2.5 Requirements of the rail transport industry

2.5.1 General industry characteristics

2.5.2 Life-cycle related requirements

2.5.3 Industry-specific economic aspects

2.5.4 Anticipated industry trends

2.6 Requirements in automobile manufacturing

2.6.1 General industry characteristics

2.6.2 Life-cycle related requirements

2.6.3 Industry-specific economic aspects

2.6.4 Anticipated industry trends

2.7 Requirements in machine tool building

2.7.1 General industry characteristics

2.7.2 Life-cycle related requirements

2.7.3 Industry-specific economic aspects

2.7.4 Anticipated industry trends

2.8 Industry-neutral aspects

2.8.1 Examples of external technical influences

2.8.2 Examples of the influence of standardization and legislation

2.8.3 Examples of socio-economic influences

Generic models for Life-Cycle-Management

3.2 Integration model

3.3 Compatibility model

3.4 Life-cycle considerations for selected examples

3.4.2 Web technologies

3.4.3 Field device integration

3.4.4 Standards and regulations

Strategies for Life-Cycle-Management

4.1 Last-time buy

4.5 Life-Cycle-Management services

4.5.1 Standard services

4.5.2 Service through special agreements

4.6 Comparison of the strategies

4.7 Plant user strategies

4.8 Conclusion regarding the strategies

5.1 Proactive Life-Cycle-Management