Digitizing machine risk assessment v

Machine safety must be analyzed and assessed manually for every change Reconfiguration procedures for agile production or for matrix production are often not used or are used with strong restrictions in real operation, because a reconfiguration or new product of a production system always requires a renewed consideration and, if necessary, certification of the machine safety or a risk assessment. This includes both information security ("Security"), e.g. through a risk and threat analysis according to the IEC 62443 series of standards or VDI/VDE 2182 sheets, and functional safety ("Safety"), e.g. with a risk assessment according to applicable standards such as IEC 61508, IEC 62061, ISO 13849 or ISO 12100. Finally, a risk assessment according to DGUV (German Social Accident Insurance) must also be carried out for the workplace with the machine. All aspects are currently typically performed manually and time-intensively by experts in a cyclical (e.g. annual) or event-based process. Moreover, the topics of safety and security are almost always handled separately by companies. The interactions of the two domains are not considered at the moment and due to the mutual influence, the required safety cannot always be guaranteed. Furthermore, the holistic view of safety can also see assets such as know-how of the machines and the permanent fulfillment of the applicable standards. Furthermore, it can be observed that functional safety is increasingly realized via a common network infrastructure in software created links on networked controllers (PLC). In summary: Automatic reconfiguration technologies for production systems cannot be used efficiently today. The reason is the high effort for the necessary recertification of Safety & Security.

Automated checking of machine safety (Safety & Security) Making data machine-readable The goal is to develop an automatic assessment system of safety & security properties for adaptive / agile production and intelligent technical systems, with which the effort for safety assessment can be significantly reduced. The assessment will be a data-driven process combined with an expert system. For this purpose, the current procedure must be analyzed and information sources identified. From this, the data sources are to be determined and suitable semantics defined in order to be able to provide this as information in your digital twin (AAS). In the next step, the assessment system is developed using AI processes (knowledge graph or ontology), which uses the implemented knowledge to check compliance with requirements from standards and can identify hazards. This is done on the read-in data and information from the machine, the product and the production environment.

Flexible and dynamic production requires dynamic safety concepts Automation of the complex safety and security assessments (risk assessment algorithms/ verification routines) required along the entire life cycle of plants and systems, especially for the existing Self-X functionalities Formal description (semantics, information models) of safety and security functions, as well as of existing plant requirements Formalization of expert knowledge Definition of extended protection goals, The safety chain is considered as a whole, taking into account the various players (equipment manufacturers, system integrators, plant operators), with special consideration of the requirements and needs of SMEs Continuous monitoring of the current safety level, so that a statement on safety and security is possible in real time, e.g. in order to check the validity of existing certification.e.g. to query the validity of the existing certification