Exploring Interoperability Options for Automated Vehicles
Guest blog by Dr. Nicola Tomatis from MHI Member Company BlueBotics
As more and more businesses adopt automated guided vehicles (AGVs) and autonomous mobile robots (AMRs) the need to be able to mix and match brands in one growing custom fleet – called interoperability – is becoming increasingly pressing. There is more than one way to accomplish this however and making the right choices now can have significant payback in both the near and far term.
Why Interoperability Matters
A company’s initial AGV or AMR investment is often in a single vehicle, implemented as a proof of concept or beta project. Once they see a potential return on investment, however, organizations often look to expand their fleets, and as they look to automate new and different processes, they will likely want to integrate products from different vendors. This ability can help an organization to achieve new levels of material handling productivity and versatility, however it requires getting those different brands of vehicle to collaborate effectively, to work together seamlessly, which by default, they do not.
Typically, each brand of AGV or AMR has its own fleet management software. This is used to schedule and manage that vehicle’s missions. However, the fleet managers of different vehicle brands do not natively communicate between each other. For users who require multiple types of vehicles from different vendors then, this lack of collaboration can vastly complicate an AGV project – requiring the need to use and understand different fleet managers, navigate different virtual routes, or write custom programs to handle vehicle crossings.
So AGV/ AMR manufacturers and third-party integrators whose goal is to meet their customers’ needs and to allow multi-brand fleet operation, have the following primary options:
- • They can equip their systems with interlocks, also known as virtual traffic lights.
- • They can adopt one (or more) of the several evolving fleet interoperability standards.
- • Or they can implement a brand-specific automation platform which supports multi-brand vehicle operation today (without ruling out compliance with future standards.
Deploying Interlocks
The most-common method of making new vehicle arrivals work with existing on-site brands is to deploy a system of Interlocks, which function as virtual traffic lights.
Each vehicle must have a mechanism that enables it to talk to another vehicle using the same handshake protocol. Application design engineers then program the system with rules that prevent collisions at dedicated crossover points or within a plant’s different sections.
In operation, a vehicle that is about to enter a crossing point will notify an oncoming vehicle that it is coming and will block the shared path while in use. This would be the equivalent of a traffic light turning red to allow crossing traffic to pass. When the vehicle clears the area, it then unblocks the path and notifies the waiting vehicle, the equivalent of the traffic light turning green.
Providing the different brand vehicles have the same handshake protocol, interlocks are a reliable, cost-efficient solution to the interoperability problem. But as the number of vehicles and shared paths increases, matters do become more complicated. Unless each vehicle ties into a common navigation platform, users must implement interlocking across each crossing or node. The more potential crossings or segments involved, the more complicated, costly, and riskier the interlock solution becomes. A lack of widely accepted standards makes such issues even more difficult to resolve.
Interoperability Standards
As it matures, the robotics and material handling industries are evolving standards that will make easier for different brand systems to work together seamlessly. This could increase operational efficiency by making it easier for different brands to share data and procedures seamlessly. It could also reduce costs across the board by selecting from custom of the shelf components rather than having redesign new components for every application. And, as has happened with most other consequential technologies, the adoption of standards is expected to contribute to greater innovation and sector growth.
The most advanced standard for the robotics and material handling industry is VDA 5050, which the German automotive industry is driving in collaboration with VDMA Materials Handling and Intralogistics Association. VDA 5050 aims to enable all compliant AGVs to work seamlessly together in one multi-brand fleet. Also emerging is the MASSRobotics standard from the U.S., which focusses more on communication between AMRs themselves than their operations, and the AGV GB standard from the China Mobile Robot and AGV Industry Alliance (CMR).
Although still fairly basic in terms of the functionality it enables, VDA 5050 is still the most advanced standard today. And when fully mature could bring significant value to the industry. However, it is expected to be two or three more years before VDA 5050 evolves from its current second version to a final standard that can enable advanced mission scheduling, traffic control and other functions associated with modern single-brand fleet managers.
While many AGV vendors and third-party fleet manager providers today claim VDA 5050 compliance, since this standard is not yet mature, basing a fleet upon it in fact presents additional installation and operating challenges that users must therefore face on their own. Integrators will likely need to custom develop on top of the VDA 5050 base, developing their own ‘dialects’ to address the required functionality not yet covered fully by the standard. And by doing so, their customers may in fact face the prospect of costly upgrades for future compliance when the standard is finally ready.
Component-Specific but Brand-Agonistic
A vendor-specific navigation platform such as ANT server by BlueBotics offers final VDA 5050-level functionality for any vehicles driven by ANT navigation, enabling different brand solutions to work together seamlessly in a single fleet.
Vendors usual embed navigation software at the factory, but users, or system integrators retrofit existing systems. By deploying vehicles that are driven by the same advanced navigation technology.
AGV and AMR users can benefit from a single fleet management tool that offers a host of features across different brands of vehicle, including automatic traffic management which lowers commissioning costs significantly.
Summary and Conclusion
As the number of automated vehicles being deployed grows, and these deployments become larger and more complex, vehicle interoperability will become more and more crucial to effective operation.
If only a few AGVs or AMRs are involved, interlocks represent an inexpensive, reliable solutions. However, many applications involving different brands will likely be larger, more complex, and would require more sophisticated management.
Mature interoperability standards can undoubtedly, in future, play a role in managing such complex systems, but this lofty goal remains several years away.
In the meantime, choosing a vehicle fleet based upon a standard automation platform, but which will in future also be compliant with additional VDA 5050-based external vehicle models, can be a good way to equip users with a high-functioning mobile fleet and help adapt to their changing needs over time.
