Why do two catalogs list different sensing distances for the same sensor?
Because they are quoting different distances. IEC 60947-5-2 defines rated sensing distance (Sn), measured under lab conditions against a standard target — a 1 mm thick Fe360 mild steel square sized to the sensor face or 3×Sn, whichever is smaller. The standard then derates it: effective (Sr), usable (Su), and assured operating distance (Sa), which absorbs temperature, supply voltage and unit-to-unit tolerance and lands at or below 81% of Sn. One catalog publishes Sn, another publishes Sa, and neither says which. Store the number, the symbol and the reference target as separate fields and a 4 mm part and a 3.2 mm part stop looking like different sensors.
Do inductive, photoelectric and pressure sensors need separate schemas?
They need a shared spine and separate branches. Every sensor SKU carries the same core: sensor type, output type, supply voltage, body style, termination, operating temperature, IP rating, MPN, lifecycle status. Below that the specs diverge and should not be forced into one field. An inductive sensor has Sn, shielding and a target correction factor. A photoelectric has sensing mode (diffuse, retroreflective, through-beam), light source and range. A pressure sensor has pressure type (absolute, gauge, differential), span, accuracy in % FS, port style and wetted materials. Collapsing 'Sensing Range' across all three gives a filter returning mm, metres and psi in one dropdown.
What is the minimum set to publish a sensor on a parametric rail?
Sensor type, the primary range with its unit as a number, output type, supply voltage range, body style with thread size, termination style, operating temperature as numeric min/max, IP rating, MPN and lifecycle status. Ten fields, all normalized. That is enough for a buyer to filter to a shortlist. It is not enough for them to buy without a phone call — cable length, jacket material, shielding and target correction factor are what turn a shortlist into an order, and those are the fields usually still sitting in the PDF.
How should IO-Link sensors be modeled?
As a standard sensor record plus four fields: IO-Link version (1.0 or 1.1), COM mode (COM1 4.8 kBaud, COM2 38.4 kBaud, COM3 230.4 kBaud), minimum cycle time, and a reference to the IODD via vendor ID plus device ID. IO-Link is standardized as IEC 61131-9 and runs over the same unshielded 3-wire cable as a switching sensor, so integrators treat it as a drop-in — but only if they can confirm the master supports the version and that the IODD exists, before they order. A boolean 'IO-Link: Yes' does not answer that, and the buyer will go find a catalog that does.