Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Methods of measuring the size and complexity of PLC programs in different logic control design methodologies

  • Original Article
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Currently there is a wide variety of logic control design methodologies used in industrial logic design. These methodologies include ladder diagrams, function block diagrams, sequential function charts, and flow charts, but driven by a desire for verifiability, academics are developing additional logic control design methodologies, such as modular finite state machines and Petri nets. Using these, important properties of programs can be verified and some logic can be generated automatically from a part plan. The main contribution of this paper is to define methods for measuring programs written in different methodologies, so that the performance of the methodologies can be compared.

We demonstrate these methods of measurement using four program samples that perform similar functions on the same machine, written in four logic control design methodologies: ladder diagrams, Petri nets, signal interpreted Petri nets and modular finite state machines.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lewis RW (2001) Modeling control systems using IEC 61499. The Institution of Electrical Engineers, London

  2. Nematron logic control software, http://www.nematron.com/OpenControl/

  3. Lewis RW (1988) Programming Industrial Control Systems Using IEC 1131-3 Revised Edition. The Institution of Electrical Engineers

  4. Cassandras CG, Lafortune S (1999) Introduction to discrete event systems. Kluwer, Dordrecht

  5. Holloway L (2000) Spectool, http://www.crms.engr.uky.edu/pages/spectool/

  6. Holloway LE, Guan X, Sundaravadivelu R, Ashley J Jr (2000) Automated synthesis and composition of taskblocks for control of manufacturing systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern 30(5):696–712

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Park E, Tilbury DM, Khargonekar PP (1999) Modular logic controller for machining systems: Formal representation and performance analysis using Petri nets. IEEE Trans Robot Automat 15(6):1046–1061

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Park E, Tilbury DM, Khargonekar PP (2001) A modeling and analysis methodology for modular logic controllers of machining systems using Petri net formalism. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern C 31(2):168–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gollapudi C and Tilbury DM (2001) Logic control design and implementation for a machining line test-bed using Petri nets. In: Proceedings of the ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition (Dynamic Systems and Control Division), New York

  10. Frey G (2001) SIPN, hierarchical SIPN, and extensions. Technical report, University of Kaiserslautern, Germany, http://www.eit.uni-kl.de/litz/members/frey/PDF/I19.pdf

  11. Minas M, Frey G (2002) Visual PLC-programming using signal interpreted Petri nets. In: Proceedings of the American Control Conference, pp 5019–5024

  12. Klein S, Weng X, Frey G, Lesage J, Litz L (2002) Controller design for an FMS using signal interpreted Petri nets and SFC: validation of both descriptions via model checking. In: Proceedings of the American Control Conference, pp 4141–4146

  13. Klein S, Frey G (2002) Control of a flexible manufacturing system using sipn. Reports of the institute of automatic control i23/2002, University of Kaiserslautern, Germany, http://www.eit.uni-kl.de/litz/members/frey/PDF/I23.pdf

  14. Uzam M, Jones AH, Yücel I (2000) Using a Petri-net-based approach for the real-time supervisory control of an experimental manufacturing system. Int J of Adv Manuf Technol, 16:498–515

    Google Scholar 

  15. Peng S, Zhou M (2001) Conversion between ladder diagrams and PNs in discrete-event control design — a survey. In: IEEE conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, pp 2682–2687

  16. Lucas MR, Endsley EW, Tilbury DM (1999) Coordinated logic control for reconfigurable machine tools. In: Proceedings of the American Control Conference, pp 2107–2113

  17. Endsley EW, Lucas MR, Tilbury DM (2000) Software tools for verification of modular FSM based logic control for use in reconfigurable machining systems. Japan–USA Symposium on Flexible Automation

  18. Shah SS, Endsley EW, Lucas MR, Tilbury DM (2002) Reconfigurable logic control using modular finite state machines: design, verification, implementation, and integrated error handling. In: Proceedings of the American Control Conference, pp 4153–4158

  19. Vankatesh K, Zhou M, Caudill RJ (1994) Comparing ladder logic diagrams and Petri nets for sequence controller design through a discrete manufacturing system. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 41(6):611–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee JS, Hsu PL (2001) A new approach to evaluate ladder diagrams and Petri nets via the if-then transformation. In: IEEE Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, pp 2711–2716, Tucson, AZ

  21. Halstead MH (1977) Elements of software science. Elsevier, Amsterdam

  22. Conte SD, Dunsmore HE, Shen VY Software Engineering Metrics and Models. Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, CA

  23. Green TR, Petre M (1996) Usability analysis of visual programming environments: a ‘cognitive dimensions’ framework. J Vis Lang Comput 7:131–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Tilbury DM (2001) Logic control testbed, http://www-personal.engin.umich.edu/˜tilbury/testbed

  25. Tim King Electronics, http://www.phoenix.org/tking/index.shtml

  26. Gilmore DJ, Green TR (1984) Comprehension and recall of miniature programs. Int J Man Mach Stud 21:31–48

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lucas MR, Tilbury DM (2003) A study of current logic design practices in the automotive industry. Int J Hum Comput Stud 59(5):725–753

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Engineering Research Center for Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-2125, USA

    M.R. Lucas & D.M. Tilbury

Authors
  1. M.R. Lucas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D.M. Tilbury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M.R. Lucas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lucas, M., Tilbury, D. Methods of measuring the size and complexity of PLC programs in different logic control design methodologies. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 26, 436–447 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-003-1996-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-003-1996-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation