Method and system for automating issue resolution in manufacturing execution and material control systems

• US 7,440,932 B2
• Filed: 10/02/2003
• Issued: 10/21/2008
• Est. Priority Date: 10/02/2003
• Status: Expired due to Fees

• Current Assignee: International Business Machines Corporation
• Original Assignee: International Business Machines Corporation
• Inventors: Tomita, Yuji, Travagline, David L., Ramphal, Zhenya D., Gartland, Karl
• Primary Examiner(s): Hirl; Joseph P
• Application Number:
  US10/678,822
• Publication Number:
  US 20050075748A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,846 Days
• Field of Search: 706/46, 706/47, 706/48, 702/188, 702/180, 700/266
• US Class Current: 706/46
• CPC Class Codes: G05B 19/4189 characterised by the transport system
• CPC Class Codes: G05B 2219/31272 Avoid piling up, queue of workpieces, accommodate surges
• CPC Class Codes: G05B 2219/32239 Avoid deadlock, lockup
• CPC Class Codes: G05B 2219/45031 Manufacturing semiconductor wafers
• CPC Class Codes: Y02P 90/02 Total factory control, e.g. smart factories, flexible manufacturing systems [FMS] or integrated manufacturing systems [IMS]
• CPC Class Codes: Y02P 90/80 Management or planning

Abstract

Automatic error recovery systems and methods for automated manufacturing plants and factories are disclosed. Such facilities normally have multiple automated control systems, including an automated material handling system (AMHS), all of which run automatically, typically under the control of a computerized manufacturing execution system (MES). The disclosed issue resolution (ISR) systems and methods involve providing components, which may be supervised and operated by an issue resolution management (ISRM) system, if desired, that interfaces with the MES, AMHS, and/or production control system(s) which operate the tools and other stations within the automated factory. The components, which may be considered customized logic cells, may each be written for handling a specific kind of incoming error condition, problem or other issue that might occur and which is amenable to automatic resolution or recovery. These errors often occur between or across the boundaries of the various interactive systems and automated equipment. Each cell may cycle through a sequence of possible error resolution or recovery steps until the specific issue is resolved or until the sequence of steps is exhausted. Other components of the ISR system may provide results-oriented messages and/or facilitate the collection of data as to whether and which corrective commands from the ISR system resolved the reported error conditions automatically. The disclosed ISR systems and methods for resolving errors and other issues automatically helps improve the overall productivity of automated factories by reducing downtime and the need for human intervention to correct problems, thereby increasing factory throughput.

Claims

1. In an automated manufacturing facility for running automatic production and having a plurality of pieces of automated equipment designed to carry out certain tasks and having interactive control systems, an automated issue resolution (ISR) system for automatically attempting to resolve identified issues that interfere with automatic production, the ISR system comprising:

an automated issue resolution management (ISRM) system in communication with each of the interactive control systems, the ISRM directing attempts to automatically resolve issues including error conditions relating to the automated manufacturing facility and including a plurality of automated components whose operations the ISRM system is operable to coordinate, the components including;

a recognized issue list containing a listing of return codes for a set of issues associated with the automated equipment;

a first component for automatically checking the recognized issue list to determine whether a first reported issue brought to its attention is a recognized issue for which an automatic resolution appears to be available; and

a plurality of second components for commanding the taking of automated corrective actions by corresponding portions of the automated manufacturing facility in response to reported issues recognized by the first component, each of the second components is respectively dedicated to attempting to resolve a different recognized issue;

wherein one of the second components is selected, via a respective return code associated with the first reported issue, to direct a corresponding portion of the automated facility to implement an automated corrective action.

2. An issue resolution system as in claim 1, wherein the ISRM system further includes:

a third component for determining whether the automated corrective action appears to have resolved the recognized issue; and

a fourth component for logging whether the automated corrective action appears to have resolved the recognized issue.

3. An issue resolution system as in claim 1, wherein the second component of ISRM system further includes:

a first subcomponent for determining whether art automated corrective action appears to be able to be taken at present; and

a second subcomponent, in communication with the first subcomponent, for advising that an automated corrective action cannot be executed at present.

4. An issue resolution system as in claim 3, wherein the second subcomponent of second component is operatively arranged for advising via a first message that an automated corrective action cannot be taken because of a condition specifically identified in the first message.

5. An issue resolution system as in claim 4, wherein the second subcomponent of the second component is operatively arranged for advising via a second message that an automated corrective action cannot be taken because of at least one piece of automated equipment identified in the second message is not in automatic mode.

6. An issue resolution system as in claim 1, wherein the second component of the ISRM system further includes a first subcomponent for providing at least first and second courses of possible automated corrective action, and a second subcomponent for commanding the taking of the first course of possible automated corrective action, and then the taking of the second course of possible automated corrective action if needed.

7. An issue resolution system as in claim 1, further comprising:

a third component for determining whether the automated corrective action that was commanded appears to have resolved the recognized issue; and

wherein

the third component includes a first subcomponent for providing a first message indicating whether the commanded automated corrective action appears to have resolved the issue, and

the second component includes

a first subcomponent for providing at least first and second possible automated corrective actions, and

a second subcomponent for commanding the taking of the first possible automated corrective action, and then commanding the taking of the second possible automated corrective action if needed, and

a third subcomponent for receiving the first message provided by third component and deciding whether the second subcomponent needs to command the taking of the second possible automated corrective action.

8. An issue resolution system as in claim 7, wherein the ISRM system further includes:

a command memory for providing information pertinent to possible corrective actions with respect to at least a plurality of distinct recognized issues; and

a command sequencer for helping generate at least first and second commands to initiate automated corrective actions in sequence as needed.

9. An issue resolution system as in claim 7, wherein the ISRM system further comprising:

a fourth component for logging for future reference whether an automated corrective action that was commanded appears to have resolved the recognized issue;

a fifth component for providing a message indicating which automated corrective action that was commanded appears to have resolved the recognized issue; and

a sixth component, operatively arranged to receive a message from the fifth component, for logging for future reference at least part of the information contained in such received message.

10. In an automated manufacturing facility having interactive control systems which interface with pieces of automated equipment that carry out certain assigned tasks, an automated issue resolution (ISR) system in communication with the interactive control systems, the ISR system automatically attempting to resolve identified issues that interfere with automatic production, the ISR system comprising:

a first component for automatically checking a recognized issue list to determine whether a first issue reported to its attention is a recognized issue for which an automatic resolution appears to be available, the recognized issue list containing a listing of return codes for a set of issues associated with the automated equipment; and

a plurality of second components for automatically commanding the taking of automated corrective actions by corresponding portions of the automated manufacturing facility in response to reported issues recognized by the first component, each of the second components is respectively dedicated to attempting to resolve a different recognized issue;

wherein one of the second components is selected, via the return code associated with the first reported issue, to direct a corresponding portion of the automated manufacturing facility to implement an automated corrective action.

11. An issue resolution system as in claim 10, further comprising:

a third component for determining whether the automated corrective action that was commanded appears to have resolved the reported issue that was recognized; and

a fourth component for logging whether the automated corrective action that was commanded appears to have resolved the reported issue that was recognized.

12. An issue resolution system as in claim 10, wherein the second component further includes:

a first subcomponent for determining whether an automated corrective action is able to be taken at present; and

a second subcomponent, in communication with the first subcomponent, for advising that an automated corrective action cannot be executed at present.

13. An issue resolution system as in claim 12, wherein the second subcomponent of second component is operatively arranged for advising via a first message that an automated corrective action that is being commanded cannot be taken because of a condition specifically identified in the first message.

14. An issue resolution system as in claim 13, wherein the second subcomponent of the second component is operatively arranged for advising via a second message that the automated corrective action being commanded cannot be taken because at least one piece of automated equipment is not in full automatic mode.

15. An issue resolution system as in claim 10, wherein the second component of the ISR system further includes a first sub component for providing at least first and second courses of possible automated corrective action, and a second subcomponent for commanding the taking of the first course of possible automated corrective action, and then the taking of the second possible corrective action if needed.

16. An issue resolution system as in claim 10, further comprising:

a third component for determining whether the automated corrective action that was commanded appears to have resolved the recognized issue; and

wherein

the third component includes a first subcomponent for providing a first message indicating that the reported issue that was recognized no longer appears to be an issue, and

the second component includes

a first subcomponent for providing at least first and second possible courses of automated corrective action, and

a second subcomponent for automatically commanding the taking of the first course of possible corrective action, and then automatically commanding the taking of the second course of corrective action if needed, and

a third subcomponent for receiving the first message from the third component and deciding whether the second subcomponent needs to command the taking of the second course of automated corrective action.

17. An issue resolution system as in claim 16, wherein at least two of the second components each includes:

a first subcomponent for providing a least first and second courses of possible corrective action for its distinct recognized issue, and

a second subcomponent for commanding the taking of the first course of possible corrective action, and then commanding the taking of the second course of corrective action if needed with respect to its distinct recognized issue, and

a command memory for providing information pertinent to a plurality of courses of possible corrective actions with respect to distinct recognized issues, and

a command sequencer for helping generate at least first and second commands to initiate automated corrective actions in sequence as needed.

18. An issue resolution system as in claim 16, further comprising:

a fourth component for logging for future reference whether the automated corrective action that was commanded appears to have resolved the recognized issue;

a fifth component for providing a message indicating which automated corrective action that was commanded appears to have resolved the recognized issue; and

a sixth component, operatively arranged to receive messages from the fifth component, for logging for future reference at least part of the information contained in such messages.

19. An automated method of managing automatic recoveries from error conditions in an automated factory environment that has automated computerized control systems which control and supervise the operations of automated equipment therein, the method comprising the steps of:

(a) installing a supervisory program for managing attempts to recover automatically from selected error conditions reported by at least one of the control systems in the automated factory, the supervisory program including at least a plurality of sets of logic each dedicated to the resolution of a distinct recognized incoming error condition;

(b) determining, via a recognized issue list, whether incoming error conditions received by the supervisory program are recognized as issues for which an automatic resolution appears to be available, the recognized issue list containing a listing of return codes for a set of issues associated with the automated equipment;

(c) for the first incoming error condition that is so recognized in step (b), under the auspices of the supervisory program, accessing information associated with the incoming recognized error condition, via the logic corresponding the recognized error condition, to enable the generation of a first set of automated corrective commands; and

(d) under the auspices of the supervisory program, generating at least a first command for automated corrective action to be taken by a portion of the automated factory in an effort to resolve automatically the first recognized incoming error condition.

20. The automated method of recovering from error conditions as set forth in claim 19, further comprising the steps of:

(e) determining whether the automated corrective action taken appears to have resolved the recognized incoming error condition; and

(f) logging whether the automated corrective action which was taken appears to have resolved the recognized incoming error condition.

21. The automated method of recovering from error conditions as set forth in claim 20, further comprising the steps of:

(g) determining whether an automated corrective action is able to be taken at present; and

(h) advising that an automated corrective action cannot be executed at present.

22. The automated method of recovering from error conditions as set forth in claim 21, wherein step (h) includes:

advising at certain times via a first message that an automated corrective action cannot be taken because of a condition at least partially identified in the first message, and

advising at certain other times via a second message that an automated corrective action cannot be taken because of at least one piece of automation equipment is not in a required automatic mode.

23. The automated method of recovering from error conditions as set forth in claim 19, wherein the supervisory program has associated therewith a plurality of distinct recognized error conditions for which different sets of corrective commands associated with various automated corrective actions may be used in attempts to recover therefrom, and method further comprises, as part of step (d), the substeps of:

(1) selecting at least a first course of possible automated corrective action, and generating, based at least in part thereon, a first set of commands to initiate the first course of automated corrective action, and

(2) in the event that the recognized incoming error condition does not appear to have been corrected in response to the first set of commands, selecting a second course of possible automated corrective action, and thereafter generating, based at least in part thereon, a second set of commands to initiate the second course of automated corrective action.

24. The automated method of recovering from error conditions as set forth in claim 23, further comprising the steps of:

(e) for a second incoming error condition that is so recognized in step (b), under the auspices of the supervisory program, accessing information associated with that recognized incoming error condition to enable the generation of at least a first set of automated corrective commands via the supervisory program distinct from the first set of automated corrective commands generated in response to the first incoming error condition recognized in step (b); and

(f) under the auspices of the supervisory program, generating at least a first set of commands for initiating automated corrective action to be taken by a portion of the automated factory in an effort to resolve automatically the second recognized incoming error condition.

25. The automated method of recovering from error conditions as set forth in claim 24, that further comprises the following further steps:

(g) in the event that first incoming error condition does not appear to have been corrected in response to the first set of commands generated automatically to recover from that first incoming error condition, sequentially thereafter automatically commanding the generation of a second set of commands associated with a second course of possible automated corrective action for that first incoming error condition, and

(h) in the event that second incoming error condition does not appear to have been corrected in response to the first set of commands generated automatically to recover from that second incoming error condition, sequentially thereafter automatically commanding the generation of a second set of commands associated with a second course of possible automated corrective action for that second incoming error condition.

26. The automated method of recovering from error conditions as set forth in claim 19, wherein each of the plurality of sets of logic provide at least first and second courses of possible corrective action with respect to its distinct recognized error condition, and

the method further includes the steps of:

(e) for each distinct incoming recognized error condition, sequentially commanding the taking of the first course of possible corrective action for that error condition, and then commanding the taking of a second course of corrective action if the first course appears to have not resolved the error condition.

27. The automated method of recovering from error conditions as set forth in claim 26, wherein the supervisory program includes:

a command memory for providing information pertinent to a plurality of courses of possible corrective actions with respect to distinct recognized incoming error conditions, and

the method further includes the steps of;

(f) for at least a plurality of recognized incoming error conditions, logging whether the incoming error conditions appear to have been automatically corrected; and

(g) for at least a plurality of recognized incoming error conditions, logging which corrective commands out of a plurality of possible corrective commands appear to have been responsible for automatically effecting correction of the error conditions.

28. A computer program product, to be used in an automated factory environment that has automated computerized control systems which control and supervise the operations of the factory and pieces of automated equipment therein, for implementing an automated method for managing automatic recoveries from error conditions, the software product comprising:

a storage medium readable by at least one processing circuit and storing instructions for execution by the processing circuit for performing the method comprising the steps of

(a) installing a supervisory program for managing attempts to recover automatically from selected error conditions reported by at least one of the control systems in the automated factory, the supervisory program including at least a plurality of sets of logic each dedicated to the resolution of a distinct recognized incoming error condition;

(b) determining, via a recognized issue list, whether incoming error conditions received by the supervisory program are recognized as issues for which an automatic resolution appears to be available, the recognized issue list containing a listing of return codes for a set of issues associated with the automated equipment;

(c) for the first incoming error condition that is so recognized in step (b), under the auspices of the supervisory program, accessing information associated with the incoming recognized error condition, via the logic corresponding the recognized error condition, to enable the generation of a first set of automated corrective commands; and

(d) under the auspices of the supervisory program, generating at least a first command for automated corrective action to be taken by a portion of the automated factory in an effort to resolve automatically the first recognized incoming error condition.