More than half of the survey respondents identified the ability for controllers to handle additional machine control functions (54.7 percent) and lower hardware costs (51.4 percent) as top priorities, along with one controller for both machine control and operator interfaces (41.3 percent).
Al, Denis Wylie mentions energy monitoring becoming more important in the future. The survey shows that it is not a major consideration today. The reality is that energy consumption in the US, and the developing world, is going down. Older coal fired plants, the ones that would cost a lot to bring into compliance, are being shut down and not replaced. Basically, each generation of machine, whether it be a refrigator or a computer, uses less energy than the last. Just the process of replacing worn out equipment over time brings down usage without any special consideration. We are becoming more energy efficient by default. There are lots of other issues with machine control than energy, as the survey shows.
There is a move in machine control (via networking developments such as CIPenergy, PROFIenergy and SERCOS Energy) to more easily measure and control energy usage within manufacturing plants. One simple example of low hanging fruit is putting machines into a low power standby or sleep state during production pauses (lunch, breaks, etc.) which has been shown to reduce energy usage 20-30% during the pauses.
The question in the survey was intended to query users on how important reducing energy is perceived among users and machine builders. Basically one-third of the survey respondents identified energy as an area of potential improvement.
I think that Wylie's comment that focus on energy efficiency would be a growing factor is based on this technology moving forward and producing significant results.
I find it very interesting the slice of the pie that relates to satisfying the needs and desires of a generation of engineers who grew up playing video games. We'll see more and more of this in coming years. Smart vendors will deliver HMI that fits the upcoming generation.
Yes, there is a clear generational shift here. I was surprised by the size of the pie that related to age when it came to HMI. That may be a function of a growing number of young engineers entering the workforce.
Yes, 32.3% is a big piece of the pie, and it's directly called out as a generational issue. You could also make a case that the other pieces of the pie -- ability to zoom, keyboardless, more intuitive -- are at least partially age-related issues, even though they're not called out as such.
Rob, Charles, I disagree that the "generational" aspect has to do with people.
This article used pie charts and bar graphs to relate information to us. Mr. Fresher also put those percentages into text form in his paragraphs. Which method for conveying information was more useful, more intuitive, more quickly absorbed? We're inherently visual animals, and can take in a situation with a single glance at an overall image. Text is serial, one piece of information at a time.
It's not because younger engineers necessarily expect such interfaces, but the fact that they are simply more useful, more efficient.
If we placed two identical manufacturing machines side by side, with only the HMI being different (one with a text-only interface, one with a rich graphical interface), which operator and machine would be more productive? Want to place a bet? The text-based interface will take up more of an operator's time.