%< $5& $9,625< *5283                                                              2&72%(5 7KH ,QGXVWULDO (WKHUQHW 3URWRFRO...
6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã!                     à        6XSHUYLVRU                                                        ...
V†r…ÃGh’r…                                                                        9r‰vprÃQ…‚svyr†ÃPiwrp‡Ã    3URWRFRO6SHFL...
26, /DHUV                                                     6ƒƒyvph‡v‚        CUUQ AUQ                                 ...
à                                                                                     6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã!   Ã([HFXW...
6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã!   à                                   RPSHWLWLRQ 0RYHV WR 8SSHU /DHUV                          ...
à                                                                                   6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã!   Ãmon phys...
their multi-drop capability and resulting                                             (WKHU1HW,3               HYLFH1HW RQ...
Ethernet protocols have complementary        352),QHW                  352),EXV 3 352),EXV 3$ $6Ldevice networks as part o...
6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã!      à                                       third party Ethernet products but does not incorpo...
à                                                                                          6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã!     ...
6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã!   à                                   understanding with IDA and the IAONA group in late 2000 c...
à                                                                                   6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã!   Ãtions of...
6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã!   à                                   protocols for execution of real-time applications. It doe...
à                                                                                                             6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtv...
6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã!   à                                    Within the system itself, OLE and Active X are employed ...
à                                                                                            6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã!   ...
over IP and uses conventional 100BaseTXEthernet cable. PID and other field control                                        ...
6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã!   à                                   Convergence of the majority of the process control commun...
FRQQHFWRU IRU ,3 DQG H[FHVV RI                                                                     J YLEUDWLRQ            ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

The industrial ethernet protocol wars fieldbus revisited

1,898 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,898
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
91
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The industrial ethernet protocol wars fieldbus revisited

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
  2. 2. 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! à 6XSHUYLVRU ; 352),QHW 1(7:25. /(9(/ RQWURO +6( ,2 3 HYLFH + 3$ 73( 2) 21752/ 0DFKLQHU 3URFHVV Hr€‚…hqˆ€Ã‚sÃVqr…†‡hqvt /HDGLQJ ,QGXVWULDO (WKHUQHW RQWHQGHUV DQG 5HODWHG 1HWZRUNV 1HWZRUN (QYLURQPHQW 7HFKQRORJLHV 6SHFLILFDWLRQV 9HQGRU6SHFLILF 8‚svtˆ…h‡v‚ÃÉà 8‚svtˆ…h‡v‚ Hhhtr€r‡ÃT‚s‡h…r 6LHPHQV 5RFNZHOO 6FKQHLGHU
  3. 3. V†r…ÃGh’r… 9r‰vprÃQ…‚svyr†ÃPiwrp‡Ã 3URWRFRO6SHFLILF H‚qry…ÃGvi…h…’ (WKHU1HW,3 THUQà Hr†† 352),QHW ,$
  4. 4. 26, /DHUV 6ƒƒyvph‡v‚ CUUQ AUQ r‡p htvt Ir‡‚…xÃÉÃU…h†ƒ‚…‡ U8QDQÃV9Q ,QGXVWU 6WDQGDUGV GvxÃÉÃQu’†vphy @‡ur…r‡ ,QGXVWU 6WDQGDUGV $UH 2QO 3DUW RI WKH ,QGXVWULDO (WKHUQHW $UFKLWHFWXUHÇÃ6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒ
  5. 5. à 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! Ã([HFXWLYH 2YHUYLHZIndustrial Ethernet continues its march to lower levels of the plant hierarchyas both standards organizations and automation suppliers address criticismsof its suitability for plant floor applications. While Ethernet is an interna-tional standard, IEEE 802.3 specifies only the physical and data link layers ofthe 7-layer network stack. TCP/IP adds the further but minimal guaranteethat two devices can exchange data with one another. In the industrialautomation space, however, the lack of standard application and user layerstranslates to ongoing headaches concerning which devices may connect tothe network, how devices interoperate on the network, and what level offunctionality is supported.Ethernet’s rise in prominence comes after a protracted, decade-plus long bat-tle to standardize the process Fieldbus certification, and now many fear thatindustrial Ethernet protocol standardization will result in “Sonof Fieldbus.” Judging by today’s market profile, this fear of (WKHUQHW SURYLGHV D FRPPRQFieldbus revisited is well founded. The only solace lies in QHWZRUN PHGLXP EXW FRPPRQ DSSOLFDWLRQ ODHU SURWRFROV DUHavailability of common physical and network/transport layers UHTXLUHG IRU WUXH GHYLFHand the need to reconcile just three or four upper-level Ethernet LQWHURSHUDELOLWprotocols compared to the ten or more Fieldbus protocols.While the Fieldbus wars were fought all the way down to the level of com-peting network media or physical layers, availability of a common EthernetTCP/IP stack has largely moved the protocol wars to the higher-level appli-cation or “user” layers. This upper-layer functionality represents the newbattleground where the strategies of competing industrial Ethernet protocolssuch as EtherNet/IP, PROFInet, IDA, and Foundation Fieldbus diverge.Both IAONA and OPC are stepping in as third parties to try and mitigate thepotential for still another fieldbus war. After its initial founding as still an-other industrial Ethernet specifying body, IAONA has positioned itself as aneutral umbrella organization for the disparate industrial Ethernet factions.The OPC foundation, on the other hand, has announced its intention to ex-tend the existing OPC DA (Data Access) specification to allow run-timeinteroperability across systems based on disparate industrial Ethernet net-works. 8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒÃ‡Ã6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã
  6. 6. 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! à RPSHWLWLRQ 0RYHV WR 8SSHU /DHUV User layer functionality such as common device profiles and their associated object models is supposed to ensure device interoperability and interchange- ability. Common EtherNet/IP device profiles, for example, are designed to ensure that a replacement device is configured to produce or consume the same basic set of I/O data and exhibits the same network behavior as the original. This upper-layer functionality represents the new battleground where the strategies of competing industrial Ethernet protocols such as EtherNet/IP, PROFInet, IDA, and Foundation Fieldbus diverge. The competitive landscape parts even further at the network configuration level. While each protocol specifies some configuration parameters, vendors augment this functionality with their own proprietary network configuration tools that often add incremental functionality to their own devices or systems versus those of competitors. As more and more of the industrial network is standardized in first the industry standard Ethernet TCP/IP protocol, then the higher-level industrial Ethernet protocol specifications, these vendor- specific network configuration tools and associated software assume even greater importance in control system selection. When considering industrial Ethernet for control applications, varying inter- pretations of often-broad protocol specifications are leading some end users to implement homogenous vendor environments even when a common higher-level protocol is employed. This strategy stems from the bottom-line need for correct interpretation of control messages among plant $ELOLW WR PL[ DQG PDWFK GHYLFHV floor devices and concern that devices from different vendors, ZLWK IXQFWLRQDOLW IURP XSSHU ODHUV even those supporting the same protocol, may not interoperate. RI WKH LQGXVWULDO (WKHUQHW VWDFN LV In order for true interoperability to occur, all suppliers must im- QRW SDUW RI WKH LQLWLDO ,QGXVWULDO (WKHUQHW YDOXH SURSRVLWLRQ plement a common set of communication services in the same manner. Similar to the findings in the device network arena, the combination of these factors will result in most machines or control systems being implemented with a single Ethernet protocol, e.g., EtherNet/IP or PROFInet, rather than a mix and match of products supporting differing protocols. Consequently the value proposition for industrial Ethernet will initially stem not from an abil- ity to mix and match devices from different suppliers, but rather the commonality and incremental functionality detailed in ARC’s recent report on the Industrial Ethernet Value Proposition. Even at the supposedly com-ÇÃ6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒ
  7. 7. à 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! Ãmon physical layer a standard industrial Ethernet connector may prove elu-sive, although the efforts of standardization bodies such as EIA/TIA(Electronics Industry Association/Telecommunications Industry Association)may result in a standard physical layer connector suitable for industrial ap-plications.RPSHWLQJ $UFKLWHFWXUHV ,QFOXGH7UDGLWLRQDO HYLFH 1HWZRUNVIn spite of efforts designed to push Ethernet to the lowest levels of the auto-mation hierarchy, the reality is that most manufacturers will end up with acontinued cascade of automation networks from the supervisory throughcontrol and ultimately device levels. Traditional device networks such asPROFIbus DP and DeviceNet have established a firm foothold in the mar-ketplace and in the near term many manufacturers will continue to specifythese networks for their low cost, real-time, multi-drop capabilities. This isparticularly true as long as the cost of an Ethernet interface, plus power tothe device if necessary, exceeds the cost of a similar configuration using astandard device network. The star topology employed with Ethernet’s hub-and switch configuration also sendssome customers to device networks for (WKHUQHW 3URWRFRO RPSOHPHQWDU HYLFH 1HWZRUNV
  8. 8. their multi-drop capability and resulting (WKHU1HW,3 HYLFH1HW RQWURO1HWlower wiring cost. With the notableexception of the emerging IDA interface, )RXQGDWLRQ )LHOGEXV +6( )RXQGDWLRQ )LHOGEXV +most of the competing industrial ,$ 1RQH ,$
  9. 9. Ethernet protocols have complementary 352),QHW 352),EXV 3 352),EXV 3$ $6Ldevice networks as part of their overall HYLFH 1HWZRUNV :LOO RQWLQXH WR 3OD D .H 5ROH LQ WKHarchitecture. ,QGXVWULDO (WKHUQHW (UDInterestingly enough and as a reversal of the prior Fieldbus landscape, theprocess industries will likely end up with a single Ethernet standard – Foun-dation Fieldbus HSE and its associated H1 non-Ethernet device levelnetwork. The discrete or machine control side of the automation business, onthe other hand, has several competing protocols. Global PLC market leaderSiemens is promoting the PROFInet/PROFIbus combination while RockwellAutomation and Omron, among others, are moving forward withEtherNet/IP and its sister CIP-based DeviceNet and ControlNet interfaces.Long associated with the Modbus TCP technology that is widely adopted in 8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒÃ‡Ã6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã
  10. 10. 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! à third party Ethernet products but does not incorporate a true application layer, Schneider Electric is now positioning itself for the future by allying itself with the IDA organization. GE Fanuc, on the other hand, has assumed the same passive “pull” stance evidenced in the device network realm where they waited to see what the market and their projects demanded. Many of the industry leaders have pledged support for third party efforts designed to foster commonality across the competing protocols. EtherNet/IP and IDA have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to pursue common- ality through the umbrella IAONA organization, for example, and the sponsoring organizations for EtherNet/IP, Foundation Fieldbus HSE, and PROFInet have all lined up behind the OPC DX specification. In the near term, however, particularly as the fruits of these efforts take shape, single vendor industrial Ethernet environments will remain the norm. (WKHU1HW,3 7DNHV ,3 WR D +LJKHU /HYHO Official EtherNet/IP products first hit the market in the year 2000, but in re- ality Rockwell had already been shipping like products under the ControlNet over Ethernet moniker for some time. As this last label implies, EtherNet/IP represents migration of the upper-level CIP or Control Information Proto- col common to the ControlNet and DeviceNet networks onto the Ethernet physical media. As a media-independent protocol, CIP is capable of migrat- ing to further media such as FireWire or wireless networks. While EtherNet/IP is positioned as the 9HQGRUVSHFLILF RQILJXUDWLRQ 7RROV information-oriented supervisory inter- face designed to serve plant floor 8‚€€‚Ã9r‰vpr Q…‚svyr† ÉÃ6ƒƒyvph‡v‚ Piwrp‡† ,3 information to higher-level systems, the3URWRFRO protocol is designed to accommodate 8‚€€‚ÃHr††htvtÃQ…‚qˆpr…8‚†ˆ€r… real-time transfer of control messages as @phƒ†ˆyh‡v‚ well as non time-critical data transfers. 26, 8‚‡…‚yIr‡ 9r‰vprIr‡ /DHUV V9Q U8Q U…h†ƒ‚…‡Ãà 9h‡hÃGvxÃGh’r… U…h†ƒ‚…‡Ãà 9h‡hÃGvxÃGh’r… Xv…ryr††Ã This capability is evident in Rockwell’s DQ Av…rv…rà r‡p introduction of not only control-level 8‚‡…‚yIr‡ 9r‰vprIr‡ D@@@Ã! Qu’†vphyÃGh’r… Qu’†vphyÃGh’r… EtherNet/IP products, such as its new ControlLogix line of processors, but also )XWXUH I/O level products such as Flex I/O and 7KH ,3 3URWRFRO ,V RPPRQ WR WKH (WKHU1HW,3 MicroLogix controllers. The high- RQWURO1HW DQG HYLFH1HW 1HWZRUNVÇÃ6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒ
  11. 11. à 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! Ãbandwidth producer/consumer network also lends itself to incorporation ofsensors with high data content. Cognex, for example, recently announced afamily of EtherNet/IP-compatible networkable vision sensors.EtherNet/IP is able to accommodate both real-time and non time-criticalmessages through its encapsulation of both the UDP and TCP protocols.Critics contend that this approach creates significant protocol overhead, butit does allow control messages and data transfers to be handled through thesame network interface. Implicit messaging is used for real-time control andinterlocking via UDP, while non time-critical uploads and downloads useexplicit messaging over TCP. All set-up functions and incidental messagingalso employ the TCP protocol. While EtherNet/IP can accommodate real-time control, applications requiring strict determinism and user-definedscheduling are steered toward ControlNet.HYLFH 3URILOHV DQG 2EMHFW /LEUDU )DOO 8QGHU 29$ 6,*The EtherNet/IP SIG (Special Interest Group) within ODVA, or the OpenDeviceNet Vendor Association, is the keeper of EtherNet/IP-specific objectsand device profiles that go beyond the basic CIP specification. CIP deviceprofiles contain the object model for the device type in question, along withobject configuration data and the public inter-faces to that data. Sample control object types @‡r…ƒ…v†r Ds‚…€h‡v‚P…vr‡rqÃinclude Digital Input Point, Digital Output Point, Tˆƒr…‰v†‚…’ÃD‡r…shpretc., which are similar to the objects specified in G @ Bˆh…h‡rrqà Tˆƒr…‰v†‚…’ 9r‡r…€vv†€Ã Wother industrial network protocols. Electronic @ G D‡…v†vpÃThsr‡’ à F Xv…rÃData Sheets (EDS) are used to provide the infor- 8‚‡…‚y S Srƒyhpr€r‡Ã P 9vht‚†‡vp†mation necessary to access and alter the X U DP @configurable parameters of a device. At this Ipoint the specification does not include XML- 9r‰vprbased EDSs, which would be a logical next step, I@UXPSFÃAVI8UDPIbut common Internet protocols such as HTTP, 8‚‡…‚y Ds‚…€h‡v‚FTP, and SNMP are supported in the existing 3RVLWLRQLQJ RI ([LVWLQJ ,3EDVHG 1HWZRUNVspecification.Along with ODVA, sister group ControlNet International (CI) is a primarypromoter of EtherNet/IP, while the Synergetic-sponsored Industrial EthernetAssociation is also on board. Rockwell Automation, strategic partner Om-ron, and Cutler-Hammer are the leading players in the DeviceNet camp,although numerous other suppliers also belong to ODVA and/or CI and of-fer compatible products. ODVA also signed a memorandum of 8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒÃ‡Ã6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã
  12. 12. 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! à understanding with IDA and the IAONA group in late 2000 concerning in- dustrial Ethernet. This activity will not impact the existing EtherNet/IP specification but instead is designed to address areas of potential compatibil- ity that are not currently addressed in the competing protocols. (WKHU1HW,3 ,QGXVWULDO RQQHFWRU 2IIHUHG WR ,$21$ (,$7,$ EtherNet/IP’s physical layer specification directly states that the use of COTS Ethernet components may result in unsatisfactory performance in industrial control applications. A bayonet-style IP 65/67 industrially rated connector, really an encapsulated RJ 45, is specified instead. The group has offered this connector to IAONA and EIA/TIA for consideration as a possible common industrial Ethernet connector. 3XUH3OD ,$ 7DUJHWV LVWULEXWHG :HE EDVHG $UFKLWHFWXUH ZLWK ,QWHJUDO 6DIHW IDA, or the Interface for Distributed Automation, is a pure-play industrial Ethernet specification that promises to marry a real-time, distributed, web- based automation environment with an integrated safety architecture. As a pure-play protocol, the IDA industrial Ethernet vision encompasses all levels of the automation hierarchy, including the device level. This strategy differs from other competing industrial Ethernet protocols that have an accompany- ing, non-Ethernet-based, device network component. The IDA group was formed in the year 2000, soon after forma- ,$·V PDFKLQH FRQWURORULHQWHG tion of IAONA. In August of that year the two groups SXUHSOD LQGXVWULDO (WKHUQHW announced an intent to merge which was subsequently called SURWRFRO HPSKDVL]HV D GLVWULEXWHG ZHEEDVHG DUFKLWHFWXUH ZLWK off. While IAONA opted to pursue evaluation and rationaliza- LQWHJUDO VDIHW IHDWXUHV tion of existing industrial Ethernet protocols, the original founders of the IDA group chose to actually develop an indus- trial Ethernet specification. Like ODVA and its EtherNet/IP SIG, IDA has since signed a Memorandum of Understanding with IAONA whereby the groups will work towards defining areas of commonality among the compet- ing industrial Ethernet protocols. ,$ 0RGHOHG $IWHU ,( )XQFWLRQ %ORFN 6WDQGDUG The IDA protocol is based on the architectural elements included in the IEC 61499 Part 1: Architecture draft function block standard, but replaces por-ÇÃ6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒ
  13. 13. à 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! Ãtions of the IEC model with IDA architecture. Along with support of the fullsuite of Ethernet TCP, UDP, and IP-related web services, the IDA protocolspecification to date incorporates RTPS (real-time publish/subscribe) mid-dleware based on RTI’s NDDS (Network Data Delivery Service), IDAcommunication objects, and real-time and safety APIs. Real time applica-tions are executed on UDP using the RTPS middleware.(XURSHDQ 0DFKLQH RQWURO 6XSSOLHUV /HDG WKH :DIDA’s original founders include European suppliers Jetter, Kuka, PhoenixContact and Sick. Turck, AG-E, Lenze, Innotec, middleware technology pro-vider RTI and Schneider Electric have since joined IDA, with late arrivalSchneider as the “big fish” that every group of this nature needs as a mini-mum requirement for success. For Schneider, IDA offers an easy migrationpath to a distributed web-based architecture on the Ethernet network, a ca-pability their popular Modbus TCP protocol does not provide due to its lackof true user layer functionality.Representatives from these companies staff the five working groups cur-rently formed within the IDA organization: architecture, web, real-timecommunication, safety, and marketing. Activities of the architecture commit-tee are currently focused on infrastructure development in the followingareas: Application Model, Engineering Model, Presentation Model, ProcessModel, and HMI model. The web group is defining XML-based style sheets and data structures for web-based monitor-ing, visualization (HMI), diagnosis, control, and devicemanagement, as well as input and output. The real-timegroup is charged with development of the object model anddevice conformance requirements, while the safety group isworking on the definition of protocols and architectural ele-ments that support architectural safety features. Inclusion ofa safety API in the IDA specification is designed to precludethe need for a separate machine safety architecture. 7KH ,$ $UFKLWHFWXUHIDA issued its first white paper/specification earlier this year detailing thearchitecture definition to date and its intended direction. Proponents of thegroup point to the architecture’s emphasis on distributed, web-based capa-bilities and leveraging of the technology already available in today’smarketplace as the rationale behind development of still another industrialEthernet protocol. This is in contrast to non pure-play competing protocolsthat continue to employ a hierarchical structure and rely on non-Ethernet 8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒÃ‡Ã6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã
  14. 14. 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! à protocols for execution of real-time applications. It does, however, result in development of still another object library since the group has developed their own object model and accompanying object library. The protocol and its supporters lean heavily toward motion control and as- sociated applications in areas such as robotics, packaging, and machine control in general, so much of the object library and its associated functional- ity are expected to likewise emphasize real-time motion applications. The group states that their goal is not to define device profiles but instead their associated containers and XML-based interfaces. ,$ 7KH 352),QHW $OWHUQDWLYH IRU *HUPDQ 0DFKLQH %XLOGHUV The most likely scenario where manufacturing customers will encounter the IDA protocol is when buying machinery from European, particularly Ger- man, OEM machine builders who are not using PROFInet and its associated networks. When complete, the IDA architecture will allow leading-edge ma- chine builders to implement distributed, web-based machine control architectures with integral safety features. Inklings of this were already evi- dent at this year’s Hannover trade fair where IDA co-founder Kuka demonstrated IDA-based material handling robots and “Control Web” soft- ware for cell control applications that utilized the IDA architecture. Phoenix Contact (Ethernet hubs and switches), Lenze (intelligent standalone drives), and Bosch (integrated welding stations) all demonstrated supporting prod- ucts. 352),QHW ,V 127 352),EXV RYHU (WKHUQHW PROFInet is the industrial Ethernet communications profile from Profibus International and joins PROFIbus DP, PA, PROFIdrive, PROFIsafe, and other application and communications profiles in that stable of automation net- works. Unlike these other profiles, however, the PROFInet specification did not emerge as the expected PROFIbus protocol ported onto the Ethernet me- dium. Instead, PROFInet is a non real-time control-level architecture that bears no resemblance to existing PROFIbus networks. The new protocol lev- erages commercial Ethernet, Microsoft component technology, and other commercial elements such as XML. While this marked departure from the legacy PROFIbus architecture may come as a surprise for some, in reality itÇÃ6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒ
  15. 15. à 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! Ãdovetails nicely with the Component- 26, 352),QHW /DHUVbased Automation strategy currently pur-sued by primary Profibus supporterSiemens. Q…‚sviˆ† Q…‚svyr†)Ãà 8‚€ƒ‚r‡Ã V†r…ÃGh’r… 9QÃQ6ÃAHTÃr‡p @tvrr…vtÃH‚qryPROFInet supporters contend that they 6ƒƒyvph‡v‚ 98PHÃSQ8are not part of the industrial Ethernet Ir‡‚…xÃÉÃU…h†ƒ‚…‡ U8QDQÃV9Q“fieldbus wars” because PROFInet is a 9h‡hÃGvx Q…‚sviˆ† 9h‡hÃGvx @‡ur…r‡high-level interface designed for peer-to- Qu’†vphy ST#$ÃD@8Ã% $!ÃAvir… @‡ur…r‡peer or controller-to-HMI connectivityand is not targeting the device or I/O 352),QHW %HDUV 1R 5HVHPEODQFH WR 352),EXVlevel. PROFInet is however the Ethernet-based portion of an overall automation architecture that invokes the lower-level PROFIbus networks for real-time activity and is therefore included inthis discussion of industrial Ethernet networks.7KH 352),QHW $UFKLWHFWXUHPROFInet is designed to provide an environment that allows machine build-ers to develop an object-based distributed automation system using standardPROFInet engineering tools and vendor-specific programming and configu-ration software. The Ethernet portion of the PROFInet architecture employsTCP and UDP along with IP, plus the DCOM wire protocol for communica-tion between automation objects created by the various vendors.The system developer or machinebuilder will use the PROFInet engineer- (QWHUSULVH I‚ÃUv€rà 8…v‡vphying model to create COM-based 1(7:25. /(9(/automation objects out of devices devel- 6XSHUYLVRU Srhy‡v€rà 8‚‡…‚y 352),QHWoped in controller programmingsoftware. The tool will also be used to RQWUROconfigure PROFInet-based automation ,2 Xv…rÃsystems, including those containing 8‚pr‡…h‡‚…automation objects developed by others. HYLFHDevice descriptions developed usingvendor-specific development tools are 1(7:25. )817,21 RQWURO ,QIRUPDWLRQgiven COM interfaces and exported viaXML for use by other developers in their 352),QHW ,V 3RVLWLRQHG DV WKH (WKHUQHWEDVHG 6XSHUYLVRU RXQWHUSDUW WR WKH 5HDOWLPH 352),EXV DQG $6L 1HWZRUNVown systems. PROFInet supportersclaim that use of their vendor-independent object and connection editor canreduce engineering time up to 15 percent relative to traditional methods. 8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒÃ‡Ã6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã
  16. 16. 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! à Within the system itself, OLE and Active X are employed for object handling in the engineering and HMI environments. Machine builders or other system developers will use the programming or configuration software that comes with their controllers to create the actual automation objects and their functionality. For example, in the Siemens envi- ronment a machine builder would use Step 7 software to create object functionality specific to their machine and then the PROFInet engineering tool to turn it into a COM-based object for use in the PROFInet environment. As this example illustrates, the PROFInet concept hinges on implementation of the Microsoft-defined object interfaces rather than definition of the actual library of automation objects. PROFInet extends its component-based ap- proach to the device or I/O level by 352),QHWI‚Ã‡v€rp…v‡vphy incorporating devices on non-Ethernet automation networks, including real-time GvxvtQ…‚‘’à device networks, via proxy. With this con- 9r‰vpr cept, each I/O-level device is made into a COM-based automation object that can be Srhy‡v€r RIO recognized and manipulated in the PROFI- net environment. Ability to incorporate 352),QHW ,QFRUSRUDWHV 352),EXV HYLFHV E 3UR[ 7XUQLQJ 7KHP LQWR 20 2EMHFWV device networks by proxy is said to extend to both PROFIbus and non-PROFIbus device networks alike but to date this capability has not been demonstrated. $ *OLPSVH DW WKH 6LHPHQV 6WUDWHJ IRU 352),QHW With the development work on Stage 1 of the PROFInet protocol just com- pleted, the market will likely have to wait until the end of this year to see the first compatible products actually shipping. One of the earliest Siemens products announced by Siemens is their iMAP engineering software. iMAP marries PROFInet and Siemens’ Component-based Automation strategy and is a key part of the company’s emphasis on reducing engineering costs for builders of complex machines and others with similar engineering require- ments. Component-based Automation is a subset of the Totally Integrated Automa- tion strategy announced by Siemens several years ago. Component-based automation targets system modularization through the use of Microsoft- based component technology. Execution of this strategy in the machine con- trol segment is evident as the company goes to market with the PROFInetÇÃ6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒ
  17. 17. à 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! Ãarchitecture, accompanying SIMATIC and other controllers, and now iMAPengineering tools. Targeted at distributed machine control architectures,Siemens is positioning iMAP and PROFInet as the vendor-independent envi-ronment that joins distributed applications into an integrated solution andenables Component-based Automation.)RXQGDWLRQ )LHOGEXV +6( ([SDQGV ,WV+RUL]RQV %HRQG 3URFHVV RQWUROWhile Foundation Fieldbus H1 was designed to connect field-level processinstrumentation in harsh or intrinsically safe environments, FoundationFieldbus HSE (High Speed Ethernet) was introduced to the market as a con-trol level backbone. HSE maps the existing 26, )RXQGDWLRQ )RXQGDWLRQFoundation Fieldbus H1 protocol to UDP /DHUV )LHOGEXV + )LHOGEXV + +6(
  18. 18. over IP and uses conventional 100BaseTXEthernet cable. PID and other field control AAÃAˆp‡v‚Ã7y‚px†ÃÉà AAÃAˆp‡v‚Ã7y‚px†ÃÉà V†r…ÃGh’r…options are already built into Foundation 9r‰vprÃ9r†p…vƒ‡v‚† 9r‰vprÃ9r†p…vƒ‡v‚†Fieldbus via the user layer Fieldbus Func- 6ƒƒyvph‡v‚ Avryqiˆ† Hr††htrà Tƒrpvsvph‡v‚ Avryqiˆ† Hr††htrà Tƒrpvsvph‡v‚tion Blocks that are common to both H1 and Ir‡‚…xÃÉÃU…h†ƒ‚…‡ V9QÃU8QDQHSE. Foundation Fieldbus networks are 9h‡hÃGvx Avryqiˆ† 9h‡hÃGvxÃGh’r… D@@@Ã!Ã@‡ur…r‡standardized as Type 1 and Type 5, respec- Qu’†vphy D@8Ã% $ D@@@Ã!Ã@‡ur…r‡tively, of the multi-headed IEC 61158 Field-bus protocol standard. Unlike the H1 )RXQGDWLRQ )LHOGEXV +6( ,PSOHPHQWV WKH 6DPH )XQFWLRQ %ORFNV HYLFH HVFULSWLRQV DQG 8SSHU/DHU 3URWRFRO DVnetwork, HSE is not rated for intrinsically WKH 2ULJLQDO + )LHOG 1HWZRUNsafe operation.The contrast between the battle to establish the original Foundation Fieldbusprotocol stack and the relative lack of competition for HSE at the control levelis an irony not lost on many fieldbus watchers. The protracted path to speci-fication of the H1 standard was littered with turf wars involving virtuallyevery leading member of the process automation supplier community. TheHSE experience is shaping up to be much different, however, with the net-work emerging as a common Ethernet-based control level network alreadyincluded in the new system designs of many process automation suppliers.Emerson Process Management was among the first to publicly announcetheir intentions, but similar announcements are expected shortly. At thistime only HSE Linking Devices from ABB and SMAR have been certified bythe Foundation. 8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒÃ‡Ã6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã
  19. 19. 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! à Convergence of the majority of the process control community around the HSE standard results in process applications drawing largely from a single technology base while discrete machine control remains a contended field. Siemens, who serves both process and machine control customers, remains the primary process automation supplier not in the Foundation Fieldbus camp as the company continues to market their Profibus architecture, includ- ing Ethernet-based PROFInet and the field level Profibus PA network. :LOO +6( %H 8VHG DW WKH )LHOG /HYHO While HSE is designed mostly for use at the control network layer, some PAS/DCS suppliers are likely to extend the network into the field for use with their own I/O multiplexers and smart devices. Like other Ethernet pro- tocols vying for use at the device level, Foundation Fieldbus HSE will be used to connect field devices when the environmental, power supply, and safety requirements of Ethernet are all met at a lower cost than H1. The in- centive lies in eliminating the need for HSE Linking Devices by eliminating the two-tier H1/HSE architecture. Substituting an Ethernet switch for each Linking Device simplifies the network architecture and reduces the end cost. Ability to use HSE at the field level will also be advantageous on a perform- ance basis since the network was not designed to have other protocols running underneath it. 3UREOHP :RUNLQJ *URXS /LNHO 2XWFRPH RPPHUFLDO (,$7,$ :* $ VSHFLILFDWLRQ IRU D UXJJHGL]HG 5- FRQQHFWRU WKDW (WKHUQHW PHHWV ,3 DQG LV UDWHG LQ H[FHVV RI J YLEUDWLRQ FRQQHFWRUV $ EDUUHOWSH 0
  20. 20. FRQQHFWRU IRU ,3 DQG H[FHVV RI J YLEUDWLRQ 3RZHU WR ,((( DI 6SHFLILFDWLRQ IRU XS WR 9 : SRZHU GLVWULEXWLRQ ILHOG GHYLFH 1RW IRU LQWULQVLF VDIHW ,QWULQVLF 1RW DVVLJQHG ,6 VXSSOLHUV ZLOO SURGXFH EDUULHUV IRU +6( ZKHQ UH VDIHW TXLUHG 3RZHU OLPLWV IRU DI PXVW EH FRQVLGHUHG 2EVWDFOHV ,QKLELWLQJ 8VH RI )RXQGDWLRQ )LHOGEXV +6( DW WKH )LHOG HYLFH /HYHO )OH[LEOH )XQFWLRQ %ORFNV ([SDQG +6(V $SSOLFDWLRQ 6FRSH Recent additions to the Foundation Fieldbus function block library expand the scope of potential applications for the network. In September of this year the Fieldbus Foundation released specifications for fully configurable Flexi- ble Function Blocks (FFBs) that allow the system developer to specify both the number and type of I/O parameters plus the algorithm to be configured. These fully configurable FFBs complement the previously released pre- configured FFBs, designed largely for use with remote I/O, where the num-ÇÃ6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒ
  21. 21. à 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! Ãber and type of I/O were predefined but the algorithm is configurable. Thefully configurable FFBs, on the other hand, can be used for complex applica-tions such as batch control, coordinated drive control, PLC sequencing, andother tasks not accounted for in the existing library of standard or pre-configured Fieldbus function blocks. With the addition of this configurablefunctionality, the Fieldbus Foundation is positioning 100 MB HSE as the onenetwork for all types of automation applications.Although the Fieldbus Foundation organization is targeting applications be-yond process control, where the potential competitive field widens, theorganization has so far not joined the IAONA organization that seeks topromote commonality between the disparate industrial Ethernet protocols.This is also true of the Profibus User Organization (PNO), which is Founda-tion Fieldbus’ primary competition.,$21$ 6HHNV RPPRQ *URXQGThe mission of IAONA, or the Industrial Automation Open Networking Al-liance, has evolved since its original inception in November of 1999. Initiallyformulated as still another group targeting development and promotion ofan Ethernet specification in the industrial automation space,IAONA first pursued a merger with the IDA group and then ,$21$·V JRDO LV ´WR H[WHQG H[LVWLQJultimately re-positioned itself as a neutral umbrella organization FRPPRQDOLWLHV LQ WKH GLIIHUHQWfor the disparate industrial Ethernet factions. DSSURDFKHV WR LQGXVWULDO (WKHUQHW DQG SUHYHQW IXUWKHU LQFRPSDWLELOLWLHVThe first step towards this umbrella role was cemented in a EHWZHHQ
  22. 22. WKH H[LVWLQJ VROXWLRQVµMemorandum of Understanding signed with competing indus-trial Ethernet groups ODVA and IDA in November 2000. This agreementrepresents a long-term vision to eliminate the differences between associatedindustrial Ethernet protocols and guarantee a minimum level of interopera-bility. Potentially common areas not currently specified in existing protocolsare to be pursued jointly under the IAONA umbrella and implemented inmember protocols. In addition to its affiliation with ODVA and IDA,IAONA has extended membership invitations to other Ethernet groups suchas the Profibus User Group and the Fieldbus Foundation who have yet tojoin the organization. 8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒÃ‡Ã6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã
  23. 23. 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! à ,$21$ :RUNLQJ *URXSV In its original incarnation as an industrial Ethernet protocol propo- nent/developer, IAONA formed numerous working groups charged with developing various aspects of the technology. This organization was aban- doned with migration towards its new role as an umbrella organization, but under the current mandate new working groups have again formed to ad- dress potential areas of commonality within specific topics. The chairmen of :RUNLQJ *URXS 2EMHFWLYHV these Joint Technical Working Groups (JTWGs), along with representatives from IAONA Europe, IAONA US, 5HDOWLPH $VSHFWV RPPRQ VZLWFKLQJ SULRULWLHV FRPPRQ and partner associations such as ODVA and IDA form 73,3 VWDFNV WLPH the Technical Steering Committee that governs the VQFKURQL]DWLRQ IAONA organization. A separate marketing group is re- :HE 7HFKQRORJLHV $FFHVV UXOHV DQG VHFX sponsible for the seminars, trade fairs, and other ULW UHDOWLPH GDWD QHWZRUN GLDJQRVLV educational and promotional activities the group is un- SOXJQSOD HWF dertaking to advance the cause of industrial Ethernet. :LULQJ ,QIUDVWUXFWXUH RQQHFWRUV FDEOLQJ LQVWDOODWLRQ ZLUHOHVV While the IDA effort is broad in scope, it largely stays %OXHWRRWK away from trying to resolve the real-time protocol issues RQIRUPLW RPPRQ GHILQLWLRQV associated with industrial Ethernet and concentrates on WHVWLQJ LQWHURSHUDELO LW HWF higher-level concerns. IAONA’s stated first priority is to ensure that devices supporting competing industrial 6DIHW (QJLQHHULQJ 6DIHW LVVXHV KDU PRQL]DWLRQ ZLWK 789 Ethernet protocols don’t disturb each other when they are %,$ on the same network. Ultimately, development of a 3URILOHV HILQH DQG KDUPRQL]H common API that will allow communication between the GHYLFH SURILOHV incompatible industrial Ethernet object models is ,$21$·V -RLQW 7HFKQLFDO :RUNLQJ *URXSV IAONA’s long-term Holy Grail. 6HHN RPPRQDOLW LQ D 1XPEHU RI $UHDV 1HHG IRU HOLYHUDEOHV $OWHUV 0DUNHW 3HUFHSWLRQ IAONA sees itself as the neutral repository for common industrial technol- ogy, a position they’ve signaled should extend to industrial XML schemas as well. Many of IAONA’s activities will be focused on sanctioning various ex- isting technologies from other standards organizations and submissions of member companies. In the area of connectors, for example, the EtherNet/IP SIG within ODVA has proposed its new IP 67-rated industrial Ethernet con- nector for consideration by IAONA while IAONA itself has expressed support for CENELEC’s industrial Ethernet standardization effort. In other areas, however, such as their ultimate goal of developing a common industrial Ethernet API as a means of rationalizing important application- layer components such as object models and device descriptions, the JointÇÃ6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒ
  24. 24. à 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! ÃTechnical Working Groups will need to issue deliverables in the ,$21$·V +RO *UDLO LV VSHFLILFDWLRQform of specifications or guidelines. This will also be true for RI D FRPPRQ $3, WKDW ZLOO DOORZintermediate phases such as the management of duplicate IP GHYLFHV VXSSRUWLQJ FRPSHWLQJaddresses. As a result, there is a perception building in the REMHFW PRGHOV WR LQWHURSHUDWHmarketplace that IAONA could ultimately emerge as still an-other higher-level industrial Ethernet protocol.IAONA hopes to plow much of its output back into member protocols, par-ticularly in the uncharted areas of potential commonality, but the reality isthat it may be difficult to convince the participating Ethernet camps toamend or change their existing specifications. The strategy to develop acommon API for object-level communications rather than strive for a com-mon object model addresses this reality. In general, however, IAONA couldface an uphill battle convincing entrenched competitors to incorporate thegroup’s recommendations and specifications.23 -XPSV LQWR WKH )UD At the year 2001 ISA trade show the OPC Foundation announced its inten-tion to extend the existing OPC DA (Data Access) specification to allow run-time interoperability across disparate industrial Ethernet networks. Func-tioning independently of any specific industrial Ethernet real-time protocol,the new OPC DX (Data Exchange) will operate at a high level in the automa-tion architecture and enable peer-to-peer communication betweencontrollers, HMI, and other intelligent devices.OPC DX will be beneficial for customers faced with ; ;the need to exchange data within heterogeneous, (WKHUQHWnon-interoperable industrial Ethernet environments: ; ; ; ;for example, a packaging house with packaging lines 352),QHW +6( 2WKHUsupplied by different machine builders that support 3URWRFROV 23 ; 3URPLVHV 6VWHPOHYHO ,QWHURSHUDELOLW IRUcompeting Ethernet protocols. We know that OPC +HWHURJHQHRXV ,QGXVWULDO (WKHUQHW (QYLURQPHQWVDX will include the previously announced OPCXML architecture, and if DX lives up to its promises then each of the compet-ing Ethernet networks may access objects using this common protocol. OPCDX will function as a middle ground, allowing run-time read/write commu-nication between the controllers, HMI, and other high-level devices thatreside at the upper levels of the architecture. 8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒÃ‡Ã6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã
  25. 25. 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! à The initial OPC DX implementation will be based on the existing OPC DA specification plus its core Microsoft technologies COM and DCOM. The ul- timate intent is to migrate the specification to the Web Service Architecture and accompanying Internet, SOAP, XML, and Microsoft .NET technologies. The OPC Foundation is targeting December 2001 for availability of the speci- fication and sample code with prototype products expected at the Hannover Fair in April 2002. Most of the leading industrial Ethernet network consorti- ums, with the exception of IDA and IAONA, came out in support of OPC DX when it was first announced. The DX specification will not impact the speci- fications of the respective industrial Ethernet protocols. à à à I@UXPSFÃÉà à à à à à à U6SB@UÃ6Q US6ITQPSUà 6QQGD86UDPIà à à à I@UXPSFà TQPITPSTà QGD86UDPITà G6`@STà G6`@Sà P7E@8UÃHP9@GÃà 8PII@8UPSà TU6UVTà @‡ur…Ir‡DQà P9W6Ãà 8‚‡…‚yǂà U8QDQÃhqà Q…‚qˆpr…Ãà 7h†vpÃ8DQÃyvi…h…’à 7h’‚r‡†‡’yrÃDQà TuvƒƒvtÃà 8‚‡…‚yIr‡Ã r‡r…ƒ…v†rà V9QÇu…‚ˆtuà p‚†ˆ€r…Ã8DQà ƒyˆ†Ã@‡ur…Ir‡DQ %$%Ãrphƒ D‡r…h‡v‚hyà p‚‡…‚yÃyr‰ryà ƒ…‚‡‚p‚yÃà ƒ…‚‡‚p‚yȆrqÃvÃ †ƒrpvsvpÂiwrp‡†Ãhqà †ˆyh‡rqÃSEÃ#$à hqÃDqˆ†‡…vhyà r‡‚…xÃDPà rphƒ†ˆyh‡v‚Ã 8‚‡…‚yIr‡Ãhqà qr‰vprłsvyr†Ã @‡ur…r‡Ã6††Ã r‡‚…xÇv€r 9r‰vprIr‡0Ãuh†Ã p…v‡vphyÃhƒƒyv ht…rrqǂÃp‚ ph‡v‚†Ã ‚ƒr…h‡rÐv‡uà D6PI6à A‚ˆqh‡v‚Ã Avryqiˆ†Ãà 8‚‡…‚yÃÉÃDPà V9Qà Qˆiyv†uÃƈi Avryqiˆ†Ãsˆp‡v‚Ã SEÃ#$à 8r…‡vs’vtÃà Avryqiˆ†Ã A‚ˆqh‡v‚Ã r‡‚…xÃs‚…à †p…virÃs…‚€Ã iy‚px†ÃÉÃqr‰vprà CT@à ƒ…‚pr††Ã ‚…vtvhyÃà qr†p…vƒ‡v‚†Ã p‚‡…‚y0Ãyh‡ Avryqiˆ†Ãà pr‡…vpÃr‡r… †ƒrpvsvph‡v‚Ã ƒ…v†rà v‡rt…h‡v‚Ã D6PI6à A‚ˆqvtÃi‚h…qà Ch†Ãht…rrqǂà G‚‚x†Ã‡‚Ãr‘ G‚‚x†Ã‡‚Ãr‘‡rqà X‚…xvtǂh…qà Ch†Ãrq‚…†rqà Tƒrpvs’vtà vpyˆqrqà sˆp‡v‚Ãh†Ã ‡rqÃp‚€€‚ p‚€€‚hyv‡vr†Ã 8‚€€‚Ã6QDÉr…†ˆ†Ã 8@I@G@8Ãà Cv…†pu€hÃ rˆ‡…hyÃà hyv‡vr†Ã‚sÃr‘v†‡ ‚sÃr‘v†‡vtÃrs p‚€€‚Ã‚iwrp‡Ã rss‚…‡†Ã Er‡‡r…Ã@T@Ãà ˆ€i…ryyh… vtÃrss‚…‡†Ã s‚…‡†Ã†ˆpuÃh†Ã yvi…h…’à @‡ur…Ir‡DQÃuh†Ã I‚Ã $Ãà thv“h‡v‚Ã †ˆpuÃh†Ã @‡ur…Ir‡DQÃhqà ‚ssr…rqÇurv…à €r€ir…†ÃvÃ pˆ……r‡y’Ãs‚…à @‡ur…Ir‡DQà D96à vqˆ†‡…vhyÃà D6PI6Ã@ˆ…‚ƒrÃÃà @‡ur…I@UDQà hqÃD96à p‚rp‡‚…à hqÃD96à D96Ãà 6B@ÃEr‡‡r…à 9v†‡…viˆ‡rqà V9QÃU8QDQÃà Qˆiyv†uƈi 9r‰ry‚ƒvtÇurv…à à Tƒrpvs’vtà FˆxhÃGr“rà €‚‡v‚Ãp‚‡…‚yà †p…virÃs…‚€ÃSUDà ‚Ã‚iwrp‡Ãyh’r…Ãà †u‚vtà Qu‚rv‘Ã8‚ v‡uÀˆy‡vh‘v†Ã uh†Ãht…rrqǂà ƒh…‡vhyà ‡hp‡ÃTvpxà p‚‚…qvh‡v‚Ã p‚‚ƒr…h‡rÐv‡uà ƒ…‚‡‚p‚yà Tpurvqr…Ãà D6PI6à ƒ…‚qˆp‡†Ã @yrp‡…vpà QSPADr‡Ã Q…‚sviˆ†Ãà 8‚€ƒyr‘Ãà V9QÃU8QDQà 98PHÃXv…rà @€ƒuh†v“r†Ã SEÃ#$à Tƒrpvs’vtà VW D‡r…h‡v‚hyà €hpuvr…’à QSPADiˆ†Ã‚…à ƒ…‚‡‚p‚yÃSQ8à 98PHih†rqÃà łq ‚‡ur…Ãqr‰vprà ‚iwrp‡Ãv‡r…shpr†0à ˆp‡†Ãqˆrà r‡‚…x†Ãs‚…à hˆ‡‚€h‡v‚Ã‚iwrp‡†Ã `@à à …rhy‡v€rà qr‰ry‚ƒrqÃvÃp‚ ‡…‚yyr…ÃTX…Évhà QSPADiˆ†Ãs‚…Ã…rhy ‡v€rÃqr‰vprÃyr‰ryà ,QGXVWULDO (WKHUQHW 3URWRFRO RQWHQGHUVÇÃ6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒ
  26. 26. à 6S8ÃT‡…h‡rtvr†Ã‡ÃPp‡‚ir…Ã! Ã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·V WHFKQRORJ GULYHQHFRQRP$5 6WUDWHJLHV LV SXEOLVKHG PRQWKO E $5 $OO LQIRUPDWLRQ LQ WKLV UHSRUW LV SURSULHWDU WR DQG FRSULJKWHG E $5 1R SDUW RI LW PD EH UHSURGXFHG ZLWKRXWSULRU SHUPLVVLRQ IURP $5RX FDQ WDNH DGYDQWDJH RI $5V H[WHQVLYH RQJRLQJ UHVHDUFK SOXV H[SHULHQFH RIRXU VWDII PHPEHUV WKURXJK RXU $GYLVRU 6HUYLFHV $5·V $GYLVRU 6HUYLFHV DUHVSHFLILFDOO GHVLJQHG IRU H[HFXWLYHV UHVSRQVLEOH IRU GHYHORSLQJ VWUDWHJLHV DQGGLUHFWLRQV IRU WKHLU RUJDQL]DWLRQV )RU VXEVFULSWLRQ LQIRUPDWLRQ SOHDVH FDOO ID[ RUZULWH WR $5 $GYLVRU *URXS 7KUHH $OOLHG ULYH HGKDP 0$ 86$ 7HO )D[ (PDLO LQIR#$5ZHEFRP 9LVLW RXU ZHE SDJH DW $5ZHEFRP 8‚ƒ’…vtu‡Ã‹Ã6S8Ã6q‰v†‚…’ÃB…‚ˆƒÃ‡Ã6S8rip‚€Ã‡Ã
  27. 27. DPEULGJH 8. VVHOGRUI *HUPDQ 0XQLFK *HUPDQ +DPEXUJ *HUPDQ 7RNR -DSDQ %DQJDORUH ,QGLD %RVWRQ 0$ 3LWWVEXUJK 3$ 6DQ )UDQFLVFR $ 9LVLW $5ZHEFRP IRU FRPSOHWH FRQWDFW LQIRUPDWLRQ7KUHH $OOLHG ULYH ‡ HGKDP 0$ 86$ ‡ ‡ )D[

×