Textile Rental Preview
Return to Preview
XML: What Is It and How Can It Improve My Business?
Data interchange between different plant systems can improve if they speak the same language
By George Ferencz and Larry Patton
In the last decade, the textile services industry has taken major leaps forward in adopting innovative technologies into plant operations. We now see incredibly precise mechanics run by advanced computer systems all helping to increase productivity, efficiency and ultimately profitability. But while these advances are remarkable, they’ve also been isolated. For as much data as these systems can collect, they have limited ability to share that information with other systems unless software interface programs are developed specifically for the data interchange. This means, simply, that the industry isn’t utilizing the full potential of its equipment and technologies, and as every operator knows today, maximizing assets is critical for success in our highly competitive industry.
So, what’s the industry to do?
TRSA and UTSA have teamed up to find an answer to that question. The two associations have brought together some of the brightest IT managers in the business from all of its market segments into a task force. Their goal is to see if the technology of XML could be used to allow greater data exchange between disparate systems in the plant.
What is XML?
XML, which stands for Extensible Markup Language, is simply a data format like tab-delimited or comma separated with which you may already be familiar. However, XML is more powerful than these formats because of its flexibility and structure. Instead of simply having a file that one system exports and another system understands because it knows, for example, that every tab or comma means a new field, XML provides for a richer conversation. Not only will XML allow two systems to share a piece of information, it will allow each system to know what that data means.
Standard methods of data interchange are like having a translator help someone talk with another person who doesn’t speak their language. So long as each speaks through the interpreter, both parties will understand the conversation though neither will understand what the other is saying. Consider that both are working in the same office. How productive would it be to rely on someone to translate every time they needed to communicate with one another? But what if each of could then speak a third, common language? That would be better and far more efficient. But learning a whole new language isn’t easy. It would take a lot of time and resources for both employees to learn the new language. One of the two could learn the other’s language, but again that requires a significant commitment. Instead, what if both only needed to learn specific keywords in order to do their jobs efficiently? That would save time and significantly reduce the amount of modifications each would have to make in order to do their job. Now imagine that this office had several more employees who each spoke a different language, how valuable would those keywords be then in order to keep operations running? Think of those keywords as XML.
How does the example above relate to a textile services operation? Let’s say you have two pieces of plant equipment, like a tunnel washer and a rail system, made by two different manufacturers. The two systems can share data by exchanging tab-delimited text files with, for example, the account number of the customer whose items are in a specific bag. The rail system sends out the flat tab-delimited file and the tunnel receives it. That works because the rail system knows the format in which the tunnel requires the data in order for it to understand that a particular load belongs to a specific customer. For this exchange to happen, the rail manufacturer must know the format the tunnel washer requires in order to interpret the data and program its system to export the data in that format. However, when this happens, the rail system doesn’t know what data it’s exchanging, so if we wanted the tunnel to exchange data back to the rail system, the tunnel manufacturer would have to program its system so that the rail system would understand the tunnel data. All companies do not monitor or use the same data, and may have different company needs; XML will allow much more flexibility for everyone to use what information they need and put it in their format. Currently manufacturers “customize” the interfaces many times over. With XML, the customization will certainly be reduced or possibly eliminated.
This process, though time and resource consuming, has been repeated many times in the industry by vendors in order to get systems to work with one another. Some may argue that if there is data interchange already occurring between systems, why do we need XML? Perhaps if the rail and the tunnel were the only two systems in the plant, XML may not be necessary. But what about the dryers, tunnel finishers, ironers, chemical injection systems, soil sorting equipment, route accounting and so on? Imagine repeating the steps the rail and tunnel manufacturer had to take for every connection between systems in the plant. Every point of exchange would require a manufacturer to program a different method of data sharing. This would mean literally dozens of exchange points in a typical laundry in order for full integration of systems. This mass development by vendors is very unlikely, even though integration of a laundry’s different systems would benefit textile service companies.
The ROI from integration
There are several reasons why textile service companies should work toward the integration of systems in their plants. The first is that with integration comes greater efficiency. As operators are seeing, continuous throughput is a key to maximizing plant productivity; when goods keep moving through the plant, more work gets done. In order to achieve this type of automation, systems need to tell the next system down the line what’s coming. Productivity in the plant also improves when operators accurately know what is happening in each step of the process. Second, more system integration allows for a reduction in labor. Systems that share data with one another require less manual interaction. For evidence of this, just look at the plants that have adopted continuous throughput and extensive automation, and you’ll see reductions in labor of upwards of 20%. Another important benefit of system integration is the increased control operators would have over their plants. Enhanced control results from an increase in data and the ability to use that data to maximize efficiency and better forecast the amount of labor necessary to run the plant. XML is not the magic bullet, but it does provide an opportunity to collect the data necessary to enhance production management.
Production management systems are a good example of how data integration equates to greater control and efficiency. One can increasingly find production-management systems in today’s modern laundry. Some of these systems monitor the efficiency of labor-intensive stations, like flatwork. Others monitor chemical, water and energy usage and have helped companies reduce or at least hold these costs in check. Regardless of their use, production-management systems are proving that information, especially when available in real time, can lead to increases in productivity and efficiency. As beneficial as these systems are proving to be, their implementation is limited because of the challenges developers of these products have in collecting data from disparate systems.
Through XML, these benefits can be realized. What can be done?
While complete integration of systems in a textile service company may seem unrealistic or, at least, very distant, consider the landscape of the industry 20 years ago. How many could have imagined the extent of automation and the prevalence of innovative systems in the industry? Similarly, who could have imagined the incredible increases in productivity and efficiency driven by those changes? The TRSA/UTSA XML Task Force agrees that not only is system integration possible, it likely will be necessary for textile service companies to stay competitive in the future.
How do we get from here to there?
First, the XML Task Force will begin by educating both operators and vendors about the benefits of system integration and how XML is a viable method for reaching that goal. Both associations will devote space in their publications to talk about this topic. Both will also conduct educational sessions to talk about XML, including at the upcoming TRSA Tech/Plant Summit and the UTSA Spring Plant Operations and IT Conference. The task force is currently working on a “proof of concept” example that will be presented at both association conferences.
Second, the Task Force will begin discussing what an XML protocol for the industry might look like. This would include determining what data needs to be exchanged between systems and how that data should be identified.
Third, the Task Force will seek to bring operators and vendors together to talk about the potential of XML. At the current time, there is a lack of understanding in the industry about how an XML protocol could help improve operations. Because of this, vendors do not feel the market forces pushing them toward developing a common language of data interchange. The Task Force hopes that through education, networking and outreach, both operators and associates will better understand how the technology can benefit each. TR
TRSA’s George Ferencz and UTSA’s Larry Patton are the staff liaisons to their respective association’s technology/IT committees. |
