service oriented vs microservices

The problem of servo system selection: when "big package" meets "precise division of labor"

Imagine this scenario: On your production line, a robotic arm suddenly responds slowly. After investigating for a long time, I found that a certain functional module in the control system was slowing down the overall response speed. But that module is tightly tied to the motion control core, and if it moves in one place, the entire system must shut down. At this time, you may be thinking - it would be much easier if you could separate different functions independently for maintenance and upgrades like taking apart building blocks.

This is the actual dilemma faced by many factories. A huge servo system packages all functions - motion control, communication, safety monitoring - together. The advantage is that the initial integration is simple, but over time, problems arise: if there is a problem in one link, the entire system may be affected; if you want to upgrade a specific function, it often affects the whole system, resulting in high costs and long downtime.

Therefore, more and more people are beginning to pay attention to another idea: microservice architecture. To put it simply, each function of the servo system is split into independent and flexibly configurable "small modules". For example, tasks such as position control, temperature monitoring, and fault diagnosis can be turned into small focused units. They talk to each other through standard interfaces and each do what they do best.

What exactly can this "split" bring?

The most immediate is resilience. The traditional architecture is like an old-fashioned train. If one carriage breaks down, the entire train has to stop. The microservice architecture is more like a team of collaborative drones. One of them needs maintenance, while the others work as usual, and the entire system can still operate. Your production line no longer has to be completely paralyzed because of the adjustment of a non-core function.

Upgrading is also much easier. In the past, if you wanted to think about communication protocols, you might have to worry about the large code base of the entire system. What now? You only need to update the independent small module "communication", so testing and deployment are faster, and risks are more centralized and controllable. It's a bit like doing a partial renovation on a house instead of tearing it down and starting over every time.

There is also customization. Different production lines and different machines have different needs for servo functions. Some require ultra-high synchronization accuracy, while others are more concerned with energy consumption monitoring. After modularization, you can combine functional modules on demand just like building Lego. You don’t have to pay for functions you don’t use, and you don’t have to have redundant designs drag down performance.

However, is the more detailed the split, the better?

Of course not. Excessive splitting will lead to complex communication between modules and increased management costs. The key is to find balance—separating out those functions that do work independently, have clear boundaries, and often need to be individually adjusted or replaced. This requires a deep understanding of servo application scenarios, rather than splitting for the sake of splitting.

kpowerWhen thinking about this issue, focus more on "actual usability". We do not simply provide a bunch of scattered parts, but design a module family with clear internal logic and unified interface standards. Each module has been fully verified to ensure stability and reliability when working independently, and tacit understanding and efficiency when working together.

For example, on a precision assembly line, we have modularized motion control, visual positioning, and torque feedback respectively. When product specifications change and visual positioning parameters need to be adjusted, engineers only need to operate on the corresponding vision module. The motion control module still maintains its original precision operation, and the production rhythm is almost undisturbed.

This kind of design thinking actually comes from long-term on-site observation. Many failures do not come from core components, but from the chain reaction caused by too tight coupling of the system. By appropriately "untying" different functions, you can often achieve longer stable operation times and lower maintenance costs.

What would you choose?

If the working conditions you are facing are relatively stable and the functional requirements of the equipment remain unchanged for a long time, then an integrated design may be simpler. But if your production line requires frequent adjustments, rapid process iteration, or you have higher requirements for system reliability and maintainability, then you might as well look at the idea of ​​microservices.

It brings not only changes in the technical structure, but also flexibility in responding to changes. In today's manufacturing environment full of uncertainties, being able to quickly adapt to changes is itself a kind of competitiveness.

kpowerMany miles have been traveled on this road. We see that when the servo system is given a clearer internal structure, it appears more calm when facing diverse industrial scenarios. Just like a well-trained team, everyone performs their own duties and cooperates tacitly to complete complex tasks.

Perhaps, next time you hear the gentle buzzing of servo motors on the production line, you can think about it - is behind this a set of tightly bundled instructions, or a group of intelligent modules that perform their own duties and collaborate smoothly? Different choices point to different futures.

Established in 2005,kpowerhas been dedicated to a professional compact motion unit manufacturer, headquartered in Dongguan, Guangdong Province, China. Leveraging innovations in modular drive technology, Kpower integrates high-performance motors, precision reducers, and multi-protocol control systems to provide efficient and customized smart drive system solutions. Kpower has delivered professional drive system solutions to over 500 enterprise clients globally with products covering various fields such as Smart Home Systems, Automatic Electronics, Robotics, Precision Agriculture, Drones, and Industrial Automation.