1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a novel converter and, more particularly, to a system incorporating a current to pressure (I/P) converter to control a valve using pressure as a control signal.
2. Related Information
It is desired in the art of automation to control fluid flow in an automation system by actuation of a valve. The typical control device is a valve positioner.
The typical system 100 is shown in
Notably, the system in
Many valve positioners in the market require that their input signals be pressure. Therefore, there is a great need to develop a system, where pressure is the controlled parameter, not valve position.
It is an object of the invention to provide a converter for converting an input signal into an output pressure
According to the foregoing objective, there is provided an x to pressure P converter that inputs a value x and comprises a valve system to control pressure P based on input value x such that the valve system has discrete open and closed positions, wherein no significant pressure variation is sensed in switching between positions.
While the x to P converter includes a valve system, it should be understood that this valve system is different than the valve which is controlled for, for example, controlling the flow of fluid in an automation system.
There is shown in
It shall be appreciated that the present invention, unlike the prior systems, utilizes pressure as the control signal. By contrast, the prior systems utilize a mechanical or electronic signal representative of the position of the valve.
In order to generate the control pressure, the present invention converts an input current into a pressure. Notably, the system utilizes the pressure output as a feedback, as contrasted with other systems, which use an electric signal as feedback.
The difference is not trivial. As indicated, many valve positioners receive a pressure input. Thus, the present invention represents a serious advantage that it has more flexibility in the marketplace to, for example, work with both existing and future positioner systems.
A system that utilizes pressure as the control signal, maintaining a high quality output, is a real challenge. As will be explained in more detail, the present invention does this by employing a pulse-width modulation technique to discretely position a valve system in an open and closed state. Unlike throttling, which maintains the valve in a state in between open and closed, the present invention ensures that no significant pressure variation is sensed between the discrete open and closed positions.
An advantage of this arrangement is that it reduces the effects of vibration, which are negated by the discrete open and closed positions. In a throttling type system, by contrast, vibration effects have a significant impact on valves that are maintained in an in between state because the valves are not fixedly closed or open.
Now with respect to
In the particular embodiment shown in
As mentioned the prior converters utilized a pressure valve that throttled, that is, varied the size of a pressure opening, to control pressure input. In other words, the old method always held the pressure valve open to a certain degree. The old pressure valve was never fully closed or fully open at any time. In the present invention, there is provided a novel valve arrangement for an I/P that forces the primary valve to discrete, fully open and fully closed positions. The secondary valve relieves pressure from the primary and allows, indeed assists, in changing the valves system between discrete states.
The invention of forcing the primary valve into the fully open or fully closed position is advantageous. The previous throttling method was subject to error arising from external vibration effects. Due to the fact that the prior valve was not in the extended position, the old valve concept was based on situating the opening to precise degrees. Obviously, external vibration translated to the valve and effected the opening of the old valve, thereby making it difficult, and introducing substantial error, to the resultant measured pressure in the previous method.
By contrast, the present invention alleviates the effect of vibration by ensuring that the primary valve is in a discrete open or closed state. This alleviates the vibration effect because the valve is physically supported by the structure of the valve. When the valve is fully closed for example, the leaf or diaphragm responsible for regulating pressure through the valve is biased against the structure of the valve itself. There is, thus, no possibility that vibration plays an effect on the valve.
Similarly, in the dual-valve system, when the first valve of the present invention is fully open, vibration has no chance to effect the valve opening status. In addition, the second valve relieves pressure in order to open the primary. In combination with the action of the primary, the dual valves act together to force the first valve leaf into the extended positions, thereby increasing the strength of the opening and closing of the valve and, further, reducing the effect of vibration.
In addition, another novel feature of the present invention is that it employs a pressure feedback system to boost the reliability of the pressure converted. Particularly in an input device such as the I/P converter, it is important that the input pressure created by the invention matches as precisely as possible the pressure indicated by the input current. This is not as critical in the prior technique, because the pressure produced is not the input pressure, but is the pressure that drives the actuator. The present invention creates an input pressure. Therefore, the pressure must be more accurate than ever before. As mentioned, the present invention employs the pressure as the feedback signal.
The microprocessor may also control the valve system to include dither. By controlling the timing of the supply and exhaust valves, small high frequency pressure variations can be created. These variations will not upset the state of the output system, but they introduce a margin of movement that reduces the error in mechanical systems due to inertial effects of causing a stationary object, to move. This mechanical error may take several forms such as dead band, the delay in moving the valve system toward the other state due to inertia. Also, backlash may occur, which is a violent change from one state to the other. Hysteresis may form, which is a difference in performance between one change of direction in comparison to the other. Also, static friction may occur, which is the sticking of the tendency of the valve to stick in one state.
In addition, the valve system may improve efficiency as follows. The valves appear electronically as capacitors. Most prior systems simply reverse the polarity of the valve. This prior practice is horribly inefficient because current is required to first reverse bias the valve and additional, requiring additional power, even before the valve can be switched. In the prior systems, this was normal because power was not a consideration. However, in the applications in which the present invention may be applied, power conservation would translate into a market advantage.
In the present invention, the microprocessor may drive the valve by pre-discharging the valve by shorting the effective terminals of the capacitor and the valve itself dissipates the excess current through the short circuit. In this manner, the system reduces the power consumption, allows a higher switching rate and reduces dead time. In addition, the system effectively decreases the size of the power supply, thereby reducing the cost of the system.
It shall be appreciated that the invention encompasses any number of embodiments that meet the objective of the invention so described. Although the invention has been described as a dual-valve, for example, it is within the scope of the invention to provide any number of valves in the system.
This application claims the benefit, for purposes of priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e), of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/317,838 filed Sep. 7, 2001.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4253480 | Kessel et al. | Mar 1981 | A |
4481967 | Frick | Nov 1984 | A |
4630632 | Johnson | Dec 1986 | A |
4951705 | Carey et al. | Aug 1990 | A |
5094260 | Stuart et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5370152 | Carey et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5699824 | Kemmler et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5887430 | Hirai et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
6003543 | Sulatisky et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6178997 | Adams et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6305401 | Uehara et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6308725 | Lawlyes et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6705199 | Liao et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6758233 | Sulatisky et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6772784 | Jones et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
20030056641 | Liao et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030168101 | Sulatisky et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030208305 | Junk et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040011411 | Thordarson et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO 0159537 | Aug 2001 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60317838 | Sep 2001 | US |