Device in a process system for detecting events

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 6397114
  • Patent Number
    6,397,114
  • Date Filed
    Monday, May 3, 1999
    25 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, May 28, 2002
    22 years ago
Abstract
A process device couples to a process control loop. The process device receives process signals. A memory in the process device contains a nominal parameter value and a rule. Computing circuitry calculates a statistical parameter of the process signal and operates on the statistical parameter and the stored nominal value based upon the stored rule and responsively provides an event output based upon the operation. Output circuitry provides an output in response to the event output
Description




BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION




The present invention relates to devices which couple to process control loops of the type used in industry. More specifically, the invention relates to detection of events in a process control system by monitoring process signals.




Process control loops are used in industry to control operation of a process, such as an oil refinery. A transmitter is typically part of the loop and is located in the field to measure and transmit a process variable such as pressure, flow or temperature, for example, to control room equipment. A controller such as a valve controller is also part of the process control loop and controls position of a valve based upon a control signal received over the control loop or generated internally. Other controllers control electric motors or solenoids for example. The control room equipment is also part of the process control loop such that an operator or computer in the control room is capable of monitoring the process based upon process variables received from transmitters in the field and responsively controlling the process by sending control signals to the appropriate control devices. Another process device which may be part of a control loop is a portable communicator which is capable of monitoring and transmitting process signals on the process control loop. Typically, these are used to configure devices which form the loop.




It is desirable to detect the occurrence of an event in the process control system. Typically, the prior art has been limited to a simple detection techniques. For example, process variable such as pressure is monitored and an alarm is sounded or a safety shutdown is initiated if the process variable exceeds predefined limits. However, in order to identify what event triggered the alarm, it is necessary to use complex models which are difficult to implement in a process environment where there is limited power and resources for large computations.




SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION




A device in a process control system includes an input which receives a process signal. The device includes memory containing nominal parameter values and rules. In one embodiment, a nominal parameter value relates to trained value(s) of the process signal and sensitivity parameter(s). Computing circuitry in the device calculates statistical parameters of the process signal and operates on the statistical parameters and the stored nominal parameter values based upon the stored rules. The computing circuitry provides an event output related to an event in the process control system based upon the evaluation of the rules. Output circuitry provides an output in response to the event output. In one embodiment, the statistical parameters are selected from the group consisting of standard deviation, mean, sample variance, range, root-mean-square, and rate of change. In one embodiment the rules are selected to detect events from the group consisting of signal spike, signal drift, signal bias, signal noise, signal stuck, signal hard over, cyclic signal, erratic signal and non-linear signal.




The device of the present invention includes any process device such as a transmitter, controller, motor, sensor, valve, communicator, or control room equipment.











BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS





FIG. 1

is a simplified diagram showing a process control loop including a transmitter, controller, hand-held communicator and control room.





FIG. 2

is a block diagram of a process device in accordance with the present invention.





FIG. 3

is a diagram showing application of rules to calculated statistical parameters and sensitivity parameters to provide a process event output.





FIG. 4

is a graph of a process signal output versus time showing various types of events.





FIG. 5

is a block diagram showing an inference engine operating on process events in accordance with the present invention.





FIG. 6

is a simplified block diagram of an inference engine for use in the present invention.











DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS




Process variables are typically the primary variables which are being controlled in a process. As used herein, process variable means any variable which describes the condition of the process such as, for example, pressure, flow, temperature, product level, pH, turbidity, vibration, position, motor current, any other characteristic of the process, etc. Control signal means any signal (other than a process variable) which is used to control the process. For example, control signal means a desired process variable value (i.e. a setpoint) such as a desired temperature, pressure, flow, product level, pH or turbidity, etc., which is adjusted by a controller or used to control the process. Additionally, a control signal means, calibration values, alarms, alarm conditions, the signal which is provided to a control element such as a valve position signal which is provided to a valve actuator, an energy level which is provided to a heating element, a solenoid on/off signal, etc., or any other signal which relates to control of the process. A diagnostic signal as used herein includes information related to operation of devices and elements in the process control loop, but does not include process variables or control signals. For example, diagnostic signals include valve stem position, applied torque or force, actuator pressure, pressure of a pressurized gas used to actuate a valve, electrical voltage, current, power, resistance, capacitance, inductance, device temperature, stiction, friction, full on and off positions, travel, frequency, amplitude, spectrum and spectral components, stiffness, electric or magnetic field strength, duration, intensity, motion, electric motor back emf, motor current, loop related parameters (such as control loop resistance, voltage, or current), or any other parameter which may be detected or measured in the system. Furthermore, process signal means any signal which is related to the process or element in the process such as, for example, a process variable, a control signal or a diagnostic signal. Process devices include any device which forms part of or couples to a process control loop and is used in the control or monitoring of a process.





FIG. 1

is a diagram showing an example of a process control system


2


which includes process piping


4


which carries a process fluid and two wire process control loop


6


carrying loop current I. A transmitter


8


, controller


10


, which couples to a final control element in the loop such as an actuator, valve, a pump, motor or solenoid, communicator


12


, and control room


14


are all part of process control loop


6


. It is understood that loop


6


is shown in one configuration and any appropriate process control loop may be used such as a 4-20 mA loop, 2, 3 or 4 wire loop, multi-drop loop and a loop operating in accordance with the HART®, Fieldbus or other digital or analog communication protocol. In operation, transmitter


8


senses a process variable such as flow using sensor


16


and transmits the sensed process variable over loop


6


. The process variable may be received by controller/valve actuator


10


, communicator


12


and/or control room equipment


14


. Controller


10


is shown coupled to valve


18


and is capable of controlling the process by adjusting valve


18


thereby changing the flow in pipe


4


. Controller


10


receives a control input over loop


6


from, for example, control room


14


, transmitter


8


or communicator


12


and responsively adjusts valve


18


. In another embodiment, controller


10


internally generates the control signal based upon process signals received over loop


6


. Communicator


12


may be the portable communicator shown in

FIG. 1

or may be a permanently mounted process unit which monitors the process and performs computations. Process devices include, for example, transmitter


8


(such as a 3095 transmitter available from Rosemount Inc.), controller


10


, communicator


12


and control room


14


shown in

FIG. 1

Another type of process device is a PC, programmable logic unit (PLC) or other computer coupled to the loop using appropriate I/O circuitry to allow monitoring, managing, and/or transmitting on the loop.




Any of the process devices


8


,


10


,


12


or


14


shown in

FIG. 1

may include event monitoring circuitry in accordance with the present invention.

FIG. 2

is a block diagram of a process device


40


forming part of loop


6


. Device


40


is shown generically and may comprise any process device such as transmitter


8


, controller


10


, communicator


12


or control room equipment


14


. Control room equipment


14


may comprise, for example, a DCS system implemented with a PLC and controller


10


may also comprise a “smart” motor and pump. Process device


40


includes I/O circuitry


42


coupled to loop


6


at terminals


44


. I/O circuitry has preselected input and output impedance known in the art to facilitate appropriate communication from and to device


40


. Device


40


includes microprocessor


46


, coupled to I/O circuitry


42


, memory


48


coupled to microprocessor


46


and clock


50


coupled to microprocessor


46


. Microprocessor


46


receives a process signal input


52


. Block input is intended to signify input of any process signal, and as explained above, the process signal input may be a process variable, or a control signal and may be received from loop


6


using I/O circuitry


42


or may be generated internally within field device


40


. Field device


40


is shown with a sensor input channel


54


and a control channel


56


. Typically, a transmitter such as transmitter


8


will exclusively include sensor input channel


54


while a controller such as controller


10


will exclusively include a control channel


56


. Other devices on loop


6


such as communicator


12


and control room equipment


14


may not include channels


54


and


56


. It is understood that device


40


may contain a plurality of channels to monitor a plurality of process variables and/or control a plurality of control elements as appropriate.




Sensor input channel


54


includes sensor


16


, sensing a process variable and providing a sensor output to amplifier


58


which has an output which is digitized by analog to digital converter


60


. Channel


54


is typically used in transmitters such as transmitter


8


. Compensation circuitry


62


compensates the digitized signal and provides a digitized process variable signal to microprocessor


46


. In one embodiment, channel


54


comprises a diagnostic channel which receives a diagnostic signal.




When process device


40


operates as a controller such as controller


8


, device


40


includes control channel


56


having control element


18


such as a valve, for example. Control element


18


is coupled to microprocessor


46


through digital to analog converter


64


, amplifier


66


and actuator


68


. Digital to analog converter


64


digitizes a command output from microprocessor


46


which is amplified by amplifier


66


. Actuator


68


controls the control element


18


based upon the output from amplifier


66


. In one embodiment, actuator


68


is coupled directly to loop


6


and controls a source of pressurized gas (not shown) to position control element


18


in response to the current I flowing through loop


6


. In one embodiment, controller


10


includes control channel


56


to control a control element and also includes sensor input channel


54


which provides a diagnostic signal such as valve stem position, force, torque, actuator pressure, pressure of a source of pressurized air, etc.




In one embodiment, I/O circuitry


42


provides a power output used to completely power other circuitry in process device


40


using power received from loop


6


. Typically, field devices such as transmitter


8


, or controller


10


are powered off the loop


6


while communicator


12


or control room


14


has a separate power source. As described above, process signal input


52


provides a process signal to microprocessor


46


. The process signal may be a process variable from sensor


16


, the control output provided to control element


18


, a diagnostic signal sensed by sensor


16


, or a control signal, process variable or diagnostic signal received over loop


6


, or a process signal received or generated by some other means such as another I/O channel.




A user I/O circuit


76


is also connected to microprocessor


46


and provides communication between device


40


and a user. Typically, user I/O circuit


76


includes a display and audio for output and a keypad for input. Typically, communicator


12


and control room


14


includes I/O circuit


76


which allows a user to monitor and input process signals such as process variables, control signals (setpoints, calibration values, alarms, alarm conditions, etc.) along with rules, sensitivity parameters and trained values as described below. A user may also use circuit


76


in communicator


12


or control room


14


to send and receive such process signals to transmitter


8


and controller


10


over loop


6


. Further, such circuitry could be directly implemented in transmitter


8


, controller


10


or any other process device


40


.




Microprocessor


46


acts in accordance with instructions stored in memory


48


. Memory


48


also contains trained values


78


, rules


80


and sensitivity parameters


82


in accordance with the present invention. The combination of the sensitivity parameters


82


and the trained values


78


provide a nominal value


79


.

FIG. 3

is a block diagram


83


showing a logical implementation of device


40


. Logical block


84


receives process signals and calculates statistical parameters for the process signals. These statistical parameters include standard deviation, mean, sample variance, root-mean-square (RMS), range (ΔR) and rate of change (ROC) of the process signal, for example. These are given by the following equations:









mean
=


x
_

=


1
N






i
=
1

N



X
i








Eq
.




1






RMS
=



1
N






i
=
1

N



X
i
2








Eq
.




2










σ

=







standard





deviation


=
variance







=






S
2

=


1

n
-
1







i
=
1

N




(


x
i

-

x
_


)

2











Eq
.




3






ROC
=


r
i

=



x
i

-

x

i
-
1



T






Eq
.




4












ΔR=x




MAX




−x




MIN


  Eq. 5




Where N is the total number of data points in the sample period, x


i


and x


i−1


are two consecutive values of the process signal and T is the time interval between the two values. Further, x


MAX


and x


MIN


are the respective maximum and minimum of the process signal over a sampling or training time period. These statistical parameters are calculated alone or in any combination. It will be understood that the invention includes any statistical parameter other than those explicitly set forth which may be implemented to analyze a process signal. The calculated statistical parameter is received by rule calculation block


86


which operates in accordance with rules


80


stored in memory


48


. Rules block


86


also receives trained values


78


from memory


48


. Trained values are the nominal or (i.e., typical) statistical parameter value for the process signal and comprise the same statistical parameters (standard deviation, mean, sample variance, root-mean-square (RMS), range and rate of change, etc.) used in logical block


84


. In one embodiment, the trained values are provided by the manufacturer and stored in memory


48


of transmitter


40


during manufacture. In another embodiment, the trained values are periodically updated by addressing device


40


over loop


6


. In still another embodiment, input circuitry


76


may generate or receive the trained values or be used to transmit the trained values to another process device over loop


6


. In yet another embodiment, the trained values are generated by statistical parameter logical block


84


which generates, or learns, the nominal or normal statistical parameters during normal operation of the process. These statistical parameters are used to generate the trained values


78


in memory


48


for future use. This allows dynamic adjustment of trained values


78


for each specific loop and operating condition. In this embodiment, statistical parameters


84


are monitored for a user selectable period of time based upon the process dynamic response time.




Rules block


86


receives sensitivity parameters


82


from memory


48


. Rules logical block


86


provides examples of a number of different rules. Each sensitivity parameter value


82


provides an acceptable range or relationship as determined by the appropriate rule between the calculated statistical parameters


84


and the appropriate trained values


78


. The sensitivity parameter values


82


may be set by the manufacturer, received over loop


6


or input using input circuitry


76


. The sensitivity parameters are adjusted for the specific application. For example, in process control applications where high accuracy is required, the sensitivity parameters are set so as to allow only small variations of the process signals relative to the trained values. The use of sensitivity parameters allow the diagnostic and event detection decision making to be controlled based upon the particular process and the requirements of the user.





FIG. 4

is an example of a process signal versus time which shows different process events (e.g. normal, bias, drift, noise, spike and stuck) which are detected using the present invention. The process signal shown in

FIG. 4

is initially in a normal state and then moves to a bias condition. Next, the process signal goes through a drift condition followed by a noisy signal condition. Finally, a series of spike events occur in the process signal followed by a stuck condition. The rules used to detect these events are described below.




Drift




Drift occurs when a process signal changes over time from its true (i.e. nominal) value. One embodiment of the invention includes a rule which operates on a statistical parameter mean (μ), the trained parameter mean (μ′) and a tuning parameter alpha (α) to detect drift.




Drift sensitivity is controlled by a single sensitivity parameter, alpha (α). Alpha (α) represents a percentage above or below the normal mean signal level that is tolerable before a drift or event is detected. The following rule performed by rule calculation block


86


detects a drift event:




 if μ<μ′ (1−α) then a negative drift event






if μ>μ′ (1+α) then a positive drift event,






where μ is the current mean of the process signal from


84


, μ′ is the trained mean from


78


and α is the sensitivity parameter from


82


which defines the acceptable variations from the mean. Additionally, the mean is monitored over time. A drift event is only detected if, over a series of consecutive sampling period, the mean is moving away from the trained value. The trained mean (μ′) may be learned by training device


40


during normal operation of the process.




Bias




Bias is the result of a temporary drift “stabilizing” at a certain level above or below the expected signal level. Once the drift stops, the resulting signal has a bias, sometimes called an offset from the true/nominal value. A bias is detected using the same rule used for drift. Additionally, the mean is monitored over time. If the mean is not continuing to move away from the trained mean (μ′), then it is determined that the event is bias, not drift.




Noise




A different combination of a rule, tuning parameters and trained values detect noise in the process signal. Noise detection sensitivity is adjusted by adjusting the sensitivity parameter beta (β). Beta (β) is the amount the current standard deviation (σ) can be above the trained standard deviation (σ′) before detection of a noise event. For example, if the user desires to detect a noise event when the process signal is twice as noisy as the trained value, β should be sent to 2.0. Range (ΔR) is also used by the rule to differentiate noise from normal signal variations. An example rule for noise detection is:






if σ>βσ′






and






if


ΔR>ΔR


′ then noise detected.






Where σ and σ′ are the current and trained standard deviation ΔR and ΔR′ are the current and trained range, respectively, and β is the noise sensitivity parameter.




Stuck




Yet another combination of a rule, statistical value, tuning parameters and trained values detect a stuck condition in a process signal. A “stuck” process signal is one which a condition of the process signal does not vary with time. Stuck sensitivity is controlled by adjusting the sensitivity parameter


82


gamma (γ). A value for gamma (γ) is expressed as a percentage of the trained standard deviation (σ′) and represents how small a change in standard deviation from the trained value triggers detection of a stuck event. For example, if a user wishes to detect a stuck condition when the process signal noise level is half of the trained value, should be set equal to 50 percent (0.5). Further, range of the signal (ΔR) can be used to eliminate errors that arise with small signals. One example rule is:






(σ+Δ


R


)≦γ(σ′+Δ


R


′) then a stuck event is detected.






Spike




A different combination of a rule, a statistical value, trained value and sensitivity parameter is used to detect a spike event. A spike event occurs when the signal momentarily goes to an extreme value. Sensitivity to spikes in the process signal is controlled by adjusting a sensitivity parameter from δ stored in


82


. δ is the acceptable trained maximum rate of change (ΔP


max


) between two consecutive data points. For example, if the user wishes to detect any spikes that have a rate of change (ROC) from block


84


that is 30% greater than Δr


max


from block


78


relative to the trained value, δ from


82


should be set to 1.30. An example rule is:






if


ROC>δ·Δr




MAX


then a spike event is detected






Other rules include a cyclic rule to detect cyclical oscillations in the process signal and an erratic rule to detect erratic behavior in the process signal. It should be understood that other rules may be implemented to observe other events in the process signal and may use different formulas or computational techniques to detect and event. A rule may operate on more than one statistical parameter or on more than one process signal. For example, if a process variable such as flow rate exceeds a predetermined limit while another process variable such as process temperature spikes, a rule could determine that the process is overheating and an emergency shut down condition could exist. Furthermore, another type of rule is implemented in fuzzy logic in which the statistical parameter is operated on by a sensitivity parameter which is a membership function applied to the trained values.




All of the rules discussed herein provide a process event output based upon the operation of the rule. It should be understood that the process event output may have a plurality of discrete or continuous values based upon operation of the rule. Note that the combination of the sensitivity parameter and the trained value provides a nominal parameter value and that the rule operates on the nominal parameter value and the statistical parameter. The various process signals, parameters and trained values can be combined using weighted averages or appropriate fuzzy logic. Membership functions include, for example, trapezoidal and triangular functions. For example, the statistical parameter can be mapped onto the chosen membership function. These are then used during training to generate the trained values, and to generate the statistical parameters for use by the rules.




In one embodiment, the trained values are obtained by determining that the process is stable, and generating the statistical parameters for a selectable period of time. These are stored as the trained values. The selectable period of time should be about the same as sampling period or block used to generate the statistical parameters during operation. This process may be user initiated or automated.




The output of a rule can be transmitted over loop


6


, output on user I/O circuit


76


, stored for future use, used as an input to another computation such as another rule or a control function, or used in any appropriate manner. In another embodiment, the present invention monitors related process signals and performs comparisons and correlations between these signals. For example, in

FIG. 2

process signals such as the output of A/D converter


60


, compensation circuit


62


, and current I through loop


6


can be analyzed in accordance with FIG.


3


. For example, the plurality of process signals should all be within a desired tolerance between one another as set forth by the appropriate combination of sensitivity parameters, rules, and trained values.





FIG. 5

is a block diagram


100


showing inference engine


102


. Inference engine


102


resides in process device


40


, is part of loop


6


, and receives process variables


104


, control signals


106


and process events


108


. Process events are detected in accordance with the present invention. Inference engine


102


includes computation circuitry


110


and process data


112


. Process data


112


may comprise, for example, process history information such as logged process variables, control signals, process events or other process signals and may contain process specific information which further defines the process being monitored. Upon the occurrence of a process event, the inference engine


102


determines which component in the various process devices is faulty. Computation circuitry


110


analyzes process variables


104


, control signals


106


, process events


108


and other process signals to determine the cause of the process event. Computation circuitry operates in accordance with a series of rules such as those used in the known technique of an expert system. Computation circuitry


110


operates on all of the inputs including process data


112


and provides a faulty element output such as a warning signal. For example, if a drift event is detected, inference engine


102


operates to determine the cause of the drifts. For example, the drift may be due to a control setpoint which was changed in which case computation circuitry


110


determines that the control loop is operating properly. However, if the setpoint was not changed, the inference engine further analyzes the various inputs and, for example, checks the integrity of the device reporting a process event, such as a valve motor, pump, vibration equipment, etc., by running appropriate diagnostics. If the valve, for example, indicates that the valve is operating properly, the inference engine may then perform transmitter diagnostics to determine if a transmitter and associated sensors are operating properly. These diagnostics may observe information from the specific element being reviewed and may also observe information being received from other sources on the control loop such as upstream or downstream sensors, etc. Computation circuitry


110


uses any appropriate computational technique such a series of rules, fuzzy logic or neural networks. In a preferred embodiment, inference engine is implemented in a microprocessor and memory and may be located in a control room, at some remote location or in the field itself. Inference engine


102


may be implemented in any of the process devices


8


,


10


,


12


or


14


shown in FIG.


1


. The faulty element output can be provided to an operator or can be used by additional computational circuitry which performs further diagnostics on the loop.





FIG. 6

shows a block diagram


200


of a simplified, example inference engine such as engine


102


operating in accordance with a rule base. Upon the occurrence of a process event, at block


202


the inference engine


102


examines the process event to identify the specific event which was detected. If the event was a drift event, control moves on to block


204


. If the event was some other event such as spike, noise or bias, control moves to a rule base constructed in accordance with the specific event which was detected. At block


204


, the inference engine checks to see if the setpoint of the process was recently changed. If the setpoint was recently changed, an output is provided which indicates that the process is operating within its normal range and that the drift which was detected was due to the change in setpoint. However, if the setpoint was not changed, the inference engine moves on to block


206


to run further diagnostics. At block


206


, the inference engine instructs process device


40


to run on board diagnostics to further determine the cause of the drift. At block


208


, if the diagnostics run by device


40


identify the cause of the drift, the inference engine provides an output identifying a faulty component. However, if the diagnostics indicate that device


40


is operating properly, inference engine instructs related devices to run diagnostics at block


210


. For example, related devices may be upstream or downstream, controllers or transmitters. At block


212


, the inference engine determines if one of the related process devices is the faulty device. If the fault which caused the drift is one of the related devices, the inference engine provides an output identifying the device and faulty component. If none of the related devices are in error, the inference engine observes other process signals at block


214


in an attempt to identify known process conditions at block


216


. If the cause of the drift is due to a known process condition, for example, a fluid pressure drop caused by the filling of a reserve tank with process fluid. If the process condition is known, the specific condition is identified. If the process condition is not known, the operator is informed that a drift event has been detected whose cause cannot be identified. At any point in the flow chart


200


, based upon any of the various rules, the inference engine may initiate a shutdown procedure to shut down the process. As discussed above, actual inference engines will contain a much more sophisticated rule base and/or will employ more sophisticated forms of logic such as fuzzy logic and neural networks, specific to each process control application.




Although the present invention has been described with reference to preferred embodiments, workers skilled in the art will recognize that changes may be made in form and detail without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. For example, all of the various functions and circuitry described herein can be implemented in any appropriate circuitry including software, ASICs, fuzzy logic techniques, or even analog implementations. Further, the process device may include any number or combination of input and control channels and may operate on any number of process signals, alone or in their combination, and the rules may operate accordingly.



Claims
  • 1. A process device coupled to a process control loop configured to control a process fluid, comprising:a process variable input to receive a process variable of the process control loop, the process variable related to the process; a process event input to receive a process event generated by a process device on the process control loop related to an occurrence of an event in the process, the process event selected from the group of process events consisting of drift, bias, noise, stuck and spike; a control signal input to receive a control signal and to control the process fluid; and an inference engine coupled to the process variable input the control signal input and the process event input, the inference engine having a faulty element output which is a function of the process variable, the control signal and the process event, the faulty element output identifies a faulty component in the process which caused the process event.
  • 2. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine includes stored process data.
  • 3. The process device of claim 2 wherein the process data comprises process history information.
  • 4. The process device of claim 2 wherein the process data comprises logged process variables.
  • 5. The process device of claim 1 wherein the process event is detected with a rule.
  • 6. The process device of claim 1 wherein the process event is detected with a rule, a nominal parameter value and a statistical parameter.
  • 7. The process device of claim 6 wherein the nominal parameter value comprises a trained value and a sensitivity parameter.
  • 8. The process device of claim 6 wherein the statistical parameter is selected from the group consisting of standard deviation, mean, sample variance, root-mean-square (RMS), range, and rate of change.
  • 9. The process device of claim 1 wherein the process control loop is selected from the group consisting of two wire process control loops, three wire process control loops and four wire process control loops.
  • 10. The process device of claim 9 wherein the device is completely powered with power received from the process control loop.
  • 11. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine includes computation circuitry operating in accordance with a rule.
  • 12. The process device of claim 11 wherein the faulty element output is a function of a comparison of the control signal and the process variable.
  • 13. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine performs transmitter diagnostics in response to a process event.
  • 14. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine instructs a device on the process control loop to perform on-board diagnostics.
  • 15. The process device of claim 1 wherein the faulty element output comprises a warning.
  • 16. The process device of claim 1 wherein the faulty element output provides information to an operator.
  • 17. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine includes fuzzy logic.
  • 18. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine includes a neural network.
  • 19. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine examines the process event and identifies a specific event in the process control system.
  • 20. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine initiates a shutdown procedure to shut down the process in the process event.
  • 21. The process device of claim 1 wherein the process device comprises a transmitter.
  • 22. The process device of claim 1 wherein the process device comprises a controller.
  • 23. The process device of claim 1 wherein the process device comprises a communicator.
  • 24. The process device of claim 1 wherein the process device comprises a control room equipment.
  • 25. The process device of claim 1 wherein the process device comprises a PC.
  • 26. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine examines a plurality of process variables in response to a process event.
  • 27. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine identifies a known device condition in response to a process event.
  • 28. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine identifies a faulty component in response to a process event.
  • 29. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine comprises an expert system.
  • 30. The process device of claim 1 wherein the inference engine further provides a condition output which identifies a known process condition.
  • 31. A method of diagnosing a process controlled by a process control loop configured to control a process fluid, comprising:obtaining a process variable of the process control loop related to the operation of process; obtaining a process event related to an event generated by a process device on the process control loop in the process, the process selected from the group of process events consisting of drift, bias, noise, stuck and spike; obtaining a control signal used to control the process fluid; and computing a faulty element output related to a faulty element in the process control system in response to the process variable, the process event, and the control signal, the faulty element being the cause of the process event.
  • 32. The method of claim 31 wherein providing a faulty element output includes informing an operator.
  • 33. The method of claim 31 wherein providing a faulty element output comprises comparing the process variable, process event and control signal to process data.
  • 34. The method of claim 31 wherein the process data comprises process history information.
  • 35. The method of claim 31 wherein the process data comprises logged process variables.
  • 36. The method of claim 31 wherein the process event is detected with a rule.
  • 37. The method of claim 36 including detecting the process event by applying a rule using a nominal parameter value and a statistical parameter.
  • 38. The method of claim 37 wherein the nominal parameter value comprises a trained value and a sensitivity parameter.
  • 39. The method of claim 31 wherein providing a faulty element output includes instructing a process device to perform on-board diagnostics.
  • 40. The method of claim 31 including evaluating results of the diagnostics through on-board diagnostics residents in a process device.
  • 41. The method of claim 31 wherein providing a faulty element output includes identifying a component.
  • 42. The method of claim 31 wherein providing a faulty element output includes identifying a process condition.
  • 43. The method of claim 31 wherein providing a faulty element output includes applying fuzzy logic to the process variable.
  • 44. The method of claim 31 wherein providing a faulty element output includes applying the process variable to a neural network.
  • 45. The method of claim 31 wherein providing a faulty element output includes applying a rule to the process variable.
  • 46. A process device comprising a transmitter implementing the method of claim 31.
  • 47. A process device comprising a controller implementing the method of claim 31.
  • 48. A process device comprising a PC implementing the method of claim 31.
  • 49. A process device comprising control room equipment implementing the method of claim 31.
  • 50. The method of claim 31 including identifying a known process condition in response to the variable, process event and control signal.
  • 51. A computer-readable medium having stored thereon instructions executable by a microprocessor system in a process device to identify a fault in a process control loop configured to control a process fluid, the instructions comprising:obtaining a process variable of the process control loop related to operation of the process; obtaining a process event generated by a process device on the process control looprelated to an event in the process, the process selected from the group of process events consisting of drift, bias, noise, stuck and spike; obtaining a control signal used to control the process fluid; and computing a faulty element output related to a faulty element in the process control system in response to the process variable, the process event, and the control signal element in the process in response to the process variable, the process event, and the control signal, the faulty element being the cause of the process event.
  • 52. A process device coupled to a process control loop used to control a process fluid, comprising:a process variable input means for receiving a process variable of the process related to operation of the process; a process event input means for receiving a process event of the process controlled by the process control loop generated by a process device on the process control loop, the process selected from the group of process events consisting of drift, bias, noise, stuck and spike; a control signal input means for requiring a control signal used to control the process fluid; and inference engine means for providing a faulty element output as a function of the process variable control signal and the process event, the faulty element output identifying a faulty component in the process control system, the faulty element being the cause of the process event.
Parent Case Info

This is a Divisional application of U.S. Ser. No. 08/623,569, filed Mar. 28, 1996, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,143 entitled “DEVICE IN A PROCESS SYSTEM FOR DETECTING EVENTS”.

US Referenced Citations (164)
Number Name Date Kind
3096434 King Jul 1963 A
3404264 Kugler Oct 1968 A
3468164 Sutherland Sep 1969 A
3590370 Fleischer Jun 1971 A
3688190 Blum Aug 1972 A
3691842 Akeley Sep 1972 A
3701280 Stroman Oct 1972 A
3973184 Raber Aug 1976 A
RE29383 Gallatin et al. Sep 1977 E
4058975 Gilbert et al. Nov 1977 A
4099413 Ohte et al. Jul 1978 A
4102199 Tsipouras Jul 1978 A
4122719 Carlson et al. Oct 1978 A
4250490 Dahlke Feb 1981 A
4337516 Murphy et al. Jun 1982 A
4399824 Davidson Aug 1983 A
4517468 Kemper et al. May 1985 A
4530234 Cullick et al. Jul 1985 A
4571689 Hildebrand et al. Feb 1986 A
4635214 Kasai et al. Jan 1987 A
4642782 Kemper et al. Feb 1987 A
4644479 Kemper et al. Feb 1987 A
4649515 Thompson et al. Mar 1987 A
4707796 Calabro et al. Nov 1987 A
4736367 Wroblewski et al. Apr 1988 A
4777585 Kokawa et al. Oct 1988 A
4831564 Suga May 1989 A
4841286 Kummer Jun 1989 A
4873655 Kondraske Oct 1989 A
4907167 Skeirik Mar 1990 A
4924418 Backman et al. May 1990 A
4934196 Romano Jun 1990 A
4939753 Olson Jul 1990 A
4964125 Kim Oct 1990 A
4988990 Warrior Jan 1991 A
4992965 Holter et al. Feb 1991 A
5005142 Lipchak et al. Apr 1991 A
5043862 Takahashi et al. Aug 1991 A
5053815 Wendell Oct 1991 A
5067099 McCown et al. Nov 1991 A
5081598 Bellows et al. Jan 1992 A
5089984 Struger et al. Feb 1992 A
5098197 Shepard et al. Mar 1992 A
5099436 McCown Mar 1992 A
5103409 Shimizu et al. Apr 1992 A
5111531 Grayson et al. May 1992 A
5121467 Skeirik Jun 1992 A
5122794 Warrior Jun 1992 A
5122976 Bellows et al. Jun 1992 A
5130936 Sheppard et al. Jul 1992 A
5134574 Beaverstock et al. Jul 1992 A
5137370 McCulloch et al. Aug 1992 A
5142612 Skeirik Aug 1992 A
5143452 Maxedon et al. Sep 1992 A
5148378 Shibayama et al. Sep 1992 A
5167009 Skeirik Nov 1992 A
5175678 Frerichs et al. Dec 1992 A
5193143 Kaemmerer et al. Mar 1993 A
5197114 Skeirik Mar 1993 A
5197328 Fitzgerald Mar 1993 A
5212765 Skeirik May 1993 A
5214582 Gray May 1993 A
5224203 Skeirik Jun 1993 A
5228780 Shepard et al. Jul 1993 A
5235527 Ogawa et al. Aug 1993 A
5265031 Malczewski Nov 1993 A
5265222 Nishiya et al. Nov 1993 A
5269311 Kirchner et al. Dec 1993 A
5274572 O'Neill et al. Dec 1993 A
5282131 Rudd et al. Jan 1994 A
5282261 Skeirik Jan 1994 A
5293585 Morita Mar 1994 A
5303181 Stockton Apr 1994 A
5305230 Matsumoto et al. Apr 1994 A
5311421 Nomura et al. May 1994 A
5317520 Castle May 1994 A
5327357 Feinstein et al. Jul 1994 A
5333240 Matsumoto et al. Jul 1994 A
5347843 Orr et al. Sep 1994 A
5349541 Alexandro, Jr. et al. Sep 1994 A
5357449 Oh Oct 1994 A
5361628 Marko et al. Nov 1994 A
5365423 Chand Nov 1994 A
5367612 Bozich et al. Nov 1994 A
5384699 Levy et al. Jan 1995 A
5386373 Keeler et al. Jan 1995 A
5394341 Kepner Feb 1995 A
5394543 Hill et al. Feb 1995 A
5404064 Mermelstein et al. Apr 1995 A
5408406 Mathur et al. Apr 1995 A
5408586 Skeirik Apr 1995 A
5414645 Hirano May 1995 A
5419197 Ogi et al. May 1995 A
5430642 Nakajima et al. Jul 1995 A
5440478 Fisher et al. Aug 1995 A
5442639 Crowder et al. Aug 1995 A
5467355 Umeda et al. Nov 1995 A
5469070 Koluvek Nov 1995 A
5469156 Kogure Nov 1995 A
5469735 Watanabe Nov 1995 A
5481199 Anderson et al. Jan 1996 A
5483387 Bauhahn et al. Jan 1996 A
5485753 Burns et al. Jan 1996 A
5486996 Samad et al. Jan 1996 A
5488697 Kaemmerer et al. Jan 1996 A
5489831 Harris Feb 1996 A
5495769 Broden et al. Mar 1996 A
5510799 Wishart Apr 1996 A
5511004 Dubost et al. Apr 1996 A
5548528 Keeler et al. Aug 1996 A
5561599 Lu Oct 1996 A
5570300 Henry et al. Oct 1996 A
5572420 Lu Nov 1996 A
5573032 Lenz et al. Nov 1996 A
5598521 Kilgore et al. Jan 1997 A
5600148 Cole et al. Feb 1997 A
5623605 Keshav et al. Apr 1997 A
5637802 Frick et al. Jun 1997 A
5640491 Bhat et al. Jun 1997 A
5661668 Yemini et al. Aug 1997 A
5665899 Willcox Sep 1997 A
5669713 Schwartz et al. Sep 1997 A
5671335 Davis et al. Sep 1997 A
5675504 Serodes et al. Oct 1997 A
5675724 Beal et al. Oct 1997 A
5680109 Lowe et al. Oct 1997 A
5700090 Eryurek Dec 1997 A
5703575 Kirkpatrick Dec 1997 A
5704011 Hansen et al. Dec 1997 A
5705978 Frick et al. Jan 1998 A
5708585 Kushion Jan 1998 A
5713668 Lunghofer et al. Feb 1998 A
5719378 Jackson, Jr. et al. Feb 1998 A
5741074 Wang et al. Apr 1998 A
5742845 Wagner Apr 1998 A
5746511 Eryurek et al. May 1998 A
5752008 Bowling May 1998 A
5764891 Warrior Jun 1998 A
5781878 Mizoguchi et al. Jul 1998 A
5801689 Huntsman Sep 1998 A
5805442 Crater et al. Sep 1998 A
5828567 Eryurek et al. Oct 1998 A
5829876 Schwartz et al. Nov 1998 A
5848383 Yunus Dec 1998 A
5859964 Wang et al. Jan 1999 A
5876122 Eryurek Mar 1999 A
5887978 Lunghofer et al. Mar 1999 A
5923557 Eidson Jul 1999 A
5924086 Mathur et al. Jul 1999 A
5926778 Pöppel Jul 1999 A
5940290 Dixon Aug 1999 A
5956663 Eryurek Sep 1999 A
5970430 Burns et al. Oct 1999 A
6016706 Yamamoto et al. Jan 2000 A
6017143 Eryurek et al. Jan 2000 A
6045260 Schwartz et al. Apr 2000 A
6047220 Eryurek Apr 2000 A
6047222 Burns et al. Apr 2000 A
6119047 Eryurek et al. Sep 2000 A
6192281 Brown et al. Feb 2001 B1
6195591 Nixon et al. Feb 2001 B1
6199018 Quist et al. Mar 2001 B1
6263487 Stripf et al. Jul 2001 B1
6298377 Hartikainen et al. Oct 2001 B1
Foreign Referenced Citations (61)
Number Date Country
32 13 866 Oct 1983 DE
35 40 204 Sep 1986 DE
40 08 560 Sep 1990 DE
43 43 747 Jun 1994 DE
44 33 593 Jun 1995 DE
195 02 499 Aug 1996 DE
296 00 609 Mar 1997 DE
197 04 694 Aug 1997 DE
19930660 Jul 1999 DE
299 17 651 Dec 2000 DE
0 122 622 Oct 1984 EP
0 413 814 Feb 1991 EP
0 487 419 May 1992 EP
0 594 227 Apr 1994 EP
0 624 847 Nov 1994 EP
0 664 470 Mar 1995 EP
0 807 804 Nov 1997 EP
0 825 506 Feb 1998 EP
0 827 096 Mar 1998 EP
0 838 768 Apr 1998 EP
1058093 May 1999 EP
2 302 514 Sep 1976 FR
2 334 827 Jul 1977 FR
928704 Jun 1963 GB
1 534 280 Nov 1978 GB
2 310 346 Aug 1997 GB
58-129316 Aug 1983 JP
59-116811 Jul 1984 JP
59-211196 Nov 1984 JP
59-211896 Nov 1984 JP
60000507 Jan 1985 JP
60-76619 May 1985 JP
60-131495 Jul 1985 JP
62-30915 Feb 1987 JP
64-1914 Jan 1989 JP
64001914 Jan 1989 JP
64-72699 Mar 1989 JP
2-5105 Jan 1990 JP
5-122768 May 1993 JP
06242192 Sep 1994 JP
7-63586 Mar 1995 JP
07234988 Sep 1995 JP
8-54923 Feb 1996 JP
8-136386 May 1996 JP
8-166309 Jun 1996 JP
08247076 Sep 1996 JP
2712625 Oct 1997 JP
2712701 Oct 1997 JP
2753592 Mar 1998 JP
07225530 May 1998 JP
10-232170 Sep 1998 JP
WO 9425993 Nov 1994 WO
WO 9611389 Apr 1996 WO
WO 9612993 May 1996 WO
WO 9639617 Dec 1996 WO
WO 9721157 Jun 1997 WO
WO 9725603 Jul 1997 WO
WO 9806024 Feb 1998 WO
WO 9813677 Apr 1998 WO
WO 9820469 May 1998 WO
WO 0070531 Nov 2000 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (117)
Entry
Microsoft Press Computer Dictionary, 3rd Edition, p. 124, 1997.*
Microsoft Press Computer Dictionary, 2nd Edition, 1994, Microsoft Press, p. 156.*
“Survey, Applications, And Prospects of Johnson Noise Thermometry,” by T. Blalock et al., Electrical Engineering Department, 1981 pp. 2-11.
U.S. application No. 09/576719, Coursolle et al., filed May 23, 2000.
U.S. application No. 09/799,824, Rome et al., filed Mar. 5, 2001.
“Internal Statistical Quality Control for Quality Monitoring Instruments”, by P. Girling et al., ISA, 15 pgs., 1999.
“Statistical Process Control (Practice Guide Series Book)”, Instrument Society of America, 1995, pp. 1-58 and 169-204.
“Time-Frequency Analysis of Transient Pressure Signals for a Mechanical Heart Valve Cavitation Study,” ASAIO Journal, by Alex A. Yu et al., vol. 44, No. 5, pp. M475-M479, (Sep.-Oct. 1998).
“Transient Pressure Signals in Mechanical Heart Valve Caviation,” by Z.J. Wu et al., pp. M555-M561 (undated).
“Caviation in Pumps, Pipes and Valves,” Process Engineering, by Dr. Ronald Young, pp. 47 and 49 (Jan. 1990).
“Quantification of Heart Valve Cavitation Based on High Fidelity Pressure Measurements,” Advances in Bioengineering 1994, by Laura A. Garrison et al., BED—vol. 28, pp. 297-298 (Nov. 6-11, 1994).
“Monitoring and Diagnosis of Cavitation in Pumps and Valves Using the Wigner Distribution,” Hydroaccoustic Facilities, Instrumentation, and Experimental Techniques, NCA—vol. 10, pp. 31-36 (1991).
“Developing Predictive Models for Cavitation Erosion,” Codes and Standards in A Global Environment, PVP—vol. 259, pp. 189-192 (1993).
“Self-Diagnosing Intelligent Motors: A Key Enabler for Next Generation Manufacturing System,” by Fred M. Discenzo et al., pp. 3/1-3/4 (1999).
“A Microcomputer-Based Instrument for Applications in Platinum Resistance Thermomety,” by H. Rosemary Taylor and Hector A Navarro, Journal of Physics E. Scientific Instrument, vol. 16, No. 11, pp. 1100-1104 (1983).
“Experience in Using Estelle for the Specification and Verification of a Fieldbus Protocol: FIP,” by Barretto et al., Computer Networking, pp. 295-304 (1990).
“Computer Simulation of H1 Field Bus Transmission,” by Utsumi et al., Advances in Instrumentation and Control, vol. 46, Part 2, pp. 1815-1827 (1991).
Web Pages from www.triant.com (3 pgs.).
“Progress in Fieldbus Developments for Measuring and Control Application,” by A. Schwaier, Sensor and Actuators, pp. 115-119 (1991).
“Ein Emulationssystem zur Leistungsanalyse von Feldbussystemen, Teil 1,” by R. Hoyer, pp. 335-336 (1991).
“Simulatore Integrato: Controllo su bus di campo,” by Barabino et al., Automazione e Strumentazione, pp. 85-91 (Oct. 1993).
“Ein Modulares, verteiltes Diagnose-Expertensystem für die Fehlerdiagnose in lokalen Netzen,” by Jürgen M. Schröder, pp. 557-565 (1990).
“Fault Diagnosis of Fieldbus Systems,” by Jürgen Quade, pp. 577-581 (10/92).
“Ziele und Anwendungen von Feldbussystemen,” by T. Pfeifer et al., pp. 549-557 (10/87).
“Profibus—Infrastrukturmaβnahmen,” by Tilo Pfeifer et al., pp. 416-419 (8/91).
“Simulation des Zeitverhaltens von Feldbussystemen,” by O. Schnelle, pp. 440-442 (1991).
“Modélisation et simulation d'un bus de terrain: FIP,” by Song et al, pp. 5-9 (undated).
“Feldbusnetz für Automatisierungssysteme mit intelligenten Funktionseinheiten,” by W. Kriesel et al., pp. 486-489 (1987).
“Bus de campo para la inteconexión del proceso con sistemas digitales de control,” TecnologIe,ía, pp. 141-147 (1990).
“Dezentrale Installation mit Echtzeit-Feldbus,” Netzwerke, Jg. Nr.3 v. 14.3, 4 pages (1990).
“Process Measurement and Analysis,” by Liptak et al., Instrument Engineers' Handbook, Third Edition, pp. 528-530, (1995).
“Improving Dynamic Performance of Temperature Sensors With Fuzzy Control Techniques,” by Wang Lei et al., pp. 872-873 (1992).
“Advanced Engine Diagnostics Using Universal Process Modeling”, by P. O'Sullivan, Presented at the 1996 SAE Conference on Future Transportation Technology, pp. 1-9.
“Sensor and Device Diagnostics for Predictive and Proactive Maintenance”, by B. Boynton, A Paper Presented at the Electric Power Research Institute—Fossil Plant Maintenance Conference in Baltimore, Maryland, Jul. 29-Aug. 1, 1996, pp. 50-1-50-6.
“Smart Field Devices Provide New Process Data, Increase System Flexibility,” by Mark Boland, I&CS, Nov. 1994, pp. 45-51.
“Wavelet Analysis of Vibration, Part I: Theory1,” by D.E. Newland, Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, vol. 116, Oct. 1994, pp. 409-416.
“Wavelet Analysis of Vibration, Part 2: Wavelet Maps,” by D.E. Newland, Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, vol. 116, Oct. 1994, pp. 417-425.
“Field-based Architecture is Based on Open Systems, Improves Plant Performance”, by P. Cleaveland, I&CS, Aug. 1996, pp. 73-74.
“Fuzzy Logic and Neural Network Applications to Fault Diagnosis”, by P. Frank et al., International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, (1997), pp. 68-88.
“A Fault-Tolerant Interface for Self-Validating Sensors”, by M.P. Henry, Colloquium, pp. 3/1-3/2 (Nov. 1990).
“The Implications of Digital Communications on Sensor Validation”, by M. Henry et al., Report No. QUEL 1912/92, (1992).
“Keynote Paper: Hardware Compilation—A New Technique for Rapid Prototyping of Digital Systems—Applied to Sensor Validation”, by M.P. Henry, Control Eng. Practice, vol. 3, No. 7., pp. 907-924, (1995).
“Neural Networks for Sensor Validation and Plant Monitoring,” by B. Upadhyaya, International Fast Reactor Safety Meeting, Aug. 12-16, 1990, pp. 2-10.
“Intelligent Behaviour for Self-Validating Sensors”, by M.P. Henry, Advances in Measurement, pp. 1-7, (May 1990).
“Integration of Multiple Signal Validation Modules for Sensor Monitoring,” by B. Upadhyaya et al., Department of Nuclear Engineering, Jul. 8, 1990, pp. 1-6.
“An Integrated Architecture For Signal Validation in Power Plants,” by B.R. Upadhyaya et al., Third IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control, Aug. 24-26, 1988, pp. 1-6.
“Neural Networks for Sensor Validation and Plantwide Monitoring,” by E. Eryurek, 1992.
“Programmable Hardware Architectures for Sensor Validation”, by M.P. Henry et al., Control Eng. Practice, vol. 4, No. 10, pp. 1339-1354, (1996).
“Application of Neural Computing Paradigms for Signal Validation,” by B.R. Upadhyaya et al., Department of Nuclear Engineering, pp. 1-18.
“Sensor Validation for Power Plants Using Adaptive Backpropagation Neural Network,” IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, vol. 37, No. 2, by E. Eryurek et al. Apr. 1990, pp. 1040-1047.
A Standard Interface for Self-Validating Sensors, by M.P. Henry et al., Report No. QUEL 1884/91, (1991).
“Development and Application of Neural Network Algorithms For Process Diagnostics,” by B.R. Upadhyaya et al., Proceedings of the 29th Conference on Decision and Control, 1990, pp. 3277-3282.
“Fuzzy Logic and Artificial Neural Networks for Nuclear Power Plant Applications,” by R.C. Berkan et al., Proceedings of the American Power Conference.
Parallel, Fault-Tolerant Control and Diagnostics System for Feedwater Regulation in PWRS, by E. Eryurek et al., Proceedings of the American Power Conference.
“Signal Processing, Data Handling and Communications: The Case for Measurement Validation”, by M.P. Henry, Department of Engineering Science, Oxford University.
“Software-Based Fault-Tolerant Control Design for Improved Power Plant Operation,” IEEE/IFAC Joint Symposium on Computer-Aided Control System Design, Mar. 7-9, 1994 pp. 585-590.
“Using Artificial Neural Networks to Identify Nuclear Power Plant States,” by Israel E. Alguindigue et al., pp. 1-4.
“Taking Full Advantage of Smart Transmitter Technology Now,” by G. Orrison, Control Engineering, vol. 42, No. 1, Jan. 1995.
“Automated Generation of Nonlinear System Characterization for Sensor Failure Detection,” by B.R. Upadhyaya et al., ISA, 1989 pp. 269-274.
“Application of Neural Networks for Sensor Validation and Plant Monitoring,” by B. Upadhyaya et al., Nuclear Technology, vol. 97, No. 2, Feb. 1992 pp. 170-176.
“A TCP/IP Tutorial” by Socolofsky et al., Spider Systems Limited, Jan. 1991 pp. 1-23.
“Approval Standards For Explosionproof Electrical Equipment General Requirements”, Factory Mutual Research, Cl. No. 3615, Mar. 1989, pp. 1-34.
“Approval Standard Intrinsically Safe Apparatus and Associated Apparatus For Use In Class I, II, and III, Division 1 Hazardous (Classified) Locations”, Factory Mutual Research, Cl. No. 3610, Oct. 1988, pp. 1-70.
“Automation On-Line” by Phillips et al., Plant Services, Jul. 1997, pp. 41-45.
“Climb to New Heights by Controlling your PLCs Over the Internet” by, Phillips et al., Intech, Aug. 1998, pp. 50-51.
“CompProcessor For Piezoresistive Sensors” MCA Technologies Inc. (MCA7707), pp. 1-8.
“Ethernet emerges as viable, inexpensive fieldbus”, Paul G. Schreier, Personal Engineering, Dec. 1997, p. 23-29.
“Ethernet Rules Closed-loop System” by, Eidson et al., Intech, Jun. 1998, pp. 39-42.
“Fieldbus Standard for Use in Industrial Control Systems Part 2: Physical Layer Specification and Service Definition”, ISA-S50.02-1992, pp. 1-93.
“Fieldbus Standard for Use in Industrial Control Systems Part 3: Data Link Service Definition”, ISA-S50.02-1997, Part 3, Aug. 1997, pp. 1-159.
Fieldbus Standard For Use in Industrial Control Systems Part 4: Data Link Protocol Specification, ISA-S50.02-1997, Part 4, Aug. 1997, pp. 1-148.
“Fieldbus Support For Process Analysis” by, Blevins et al., Fisher-Rosemount Systems, Inc., 1995, pp. 121-128.
“Fieldbus Technical Overview Understanding Foundation™ fieldbus technology”, Fisher-Rosemount, 1998, pp. 1-23.
“Hypertext Transfer Protocol—HTTP/1.0” by, Berners-Lee et al., MIT/LCS, May 1996, pp. 1-54.
“Infranets, Intranets, and the Internet” by, Pradip Madan, Echelon Corp, Sensors, Mar. 1997, pp. 46-50.
“Internet Technology Adoption into Automation” by, Fondl et al., Automation Business, pp. 1-5.
“Internet Protocol Darpa Internet Program Protocol Specification” by, Information Sciences Institute, University of Southern California, RFC 791, Sep. 1981, pp. 1-43.
“Introduction to Emit”, emWare, Inc., 1997, pp. 1-22.
“Introduction to the Internet Protocols” by, Charles L. Hedrick, Computer Science Facilities Group, Rutgers University, Oct. 3, 1988, pp. 1-97.
“Is There A Future For Ethernet in Industrial Control?”, Miclot et al., Plant Engineering, Oct. 1988, pp. 44-46, 48, 50.
LFM/SIMA Internet Remote Diagnostics Research Project Summary Report, Stanford University, Jan. 23, 1997, pp. 1-6.
“Managing Devices with the Web” by, Howard et al., Byte, Sep. 1997, pp. 45-64.
“Modular Microkernel Links GUI And Browser For Embedded Web Devices” by, Tom Williams, pp. 1-2.
“PC Software Gets Its Edge From Windows, Components, and the Internet”, Wayne Labs, I&CS, Mar. 1997, pp. 23-32.
Proceedings Sensor Expo, Anaheim, California, Produced by Expocon Management Associates, Inc., Apr. 1996, pp. 9-21.
Proceedings Sensor Expo, Boston, Massachuttes, Produced by Expocon Management Associates, Inc., May 1997, pp. 1-416.
“Smart Sensor Network of the Future” by, Jay Warrior, Sensors, Mar. 1997, pp. 40-45.
“The Embedded Web Site” by, John R. Hines, IEEE Spectrum, Sep. 1996, p. 23.
“Transmission Control Protocol: Darpa Internet Program Protocol Specification” Information Sciences Institute, Sep. 1981, pp. 1-78.
“Transmission Control Protocol DARPA Internet Program Protocol Specification”, by Information Sciences Institute University of Southern California, pp. 1-78, Sep. 1981.
“Thermocouple Continuity Checker”, IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 20, No. 5, Oct. 1977.
“Self-Validating Thermocouple”, by J. Yang et al., IEEE, pp. 239-253, 1997.
“Instrument Engineers' Handbook”, Process Management, pp. 266-333, 1969, 1982.
“The IEEE P1451.1 Object Model Network Independent Interfaces for Sensors and Actuators”, by J. Warrior, pp. 1-14, 1997.
“The Collision Between the Web and Plant Floor Automation”, by J. Warrior, 1997.
“Microsoft Press Computer Dictionary”, p. 184, 1997.
“emWare's New Licensing Structure Lets You Pay For Networking and Internet Capability Only When You Use It”, 3 pages from the Internet, Nov. 4, 1998.
“On-Line Statistical Process Control for a Glass Tank Ingredient Scale,” by R.A. Weisman, IFAC real Time Programming, 1985, pp. 29-38.
“The Performance of Control Charts for Monitoring Process Variation,” by C. Lowry et al., Commun. Statis.—Simula., 1995, pp. 409-437.
“A Knowledge-Based Approach for Detection and Diagnosis of Out-Of-Control Events in Manufacturing Processes,” by P. Love et al., IEEE, 1989, pp. 736-741.
“Smart Temperature Measurement in the '90s”, by T. Kerlin et al., C&I, (1990).
“In Situ Calibration of Nuclear Plant Platinum Resistance Thermometers Using Johnson Noise Methods,” EPRI, Jun. 1983.
“Johnson Noise Thermometer for High Radiation and High-Temperature Environments,” by L. Oakes et al., Fifth Symposium on Space Nuclear Power Systems, Jan. 1988, pp. 2-23.
“Development of a Resistance Thermometer For Use Up to 1600° C”, by M.J. de Groot et al., CAL LAB, Jul./Aug. 1996, pp. 38-41.
“Noise Thermometry for Industrial and Metrological Applications at KFA Julich,” by H. Brixy et al., 7th International Symposium on Temperature, 1992.
“Johnson Noise Power Thermometer and its Applications in Process Temperature Measurement,” by T.V. Blalock et al., American Institute of Physics 1982, pp. 1249-1259.
“Tuned-Circuit Dual-Mode Johnson Noise Thermometers,” by R.L. Shepard et al., Apr. 1992.
“Tuned-Circuit Johnson Noise Thermometry,” by Michael Roberts et al., 7th Symposium on Space Nuclear Power Systems, Jan. 1990.
“Development of a Long-Life, High-Reliability Remotely Operated Johnson Noise Thermometer,” by R.L. Shepard et al., ISA, 1991, pp. 77-84.
“Application of Johnson Noise Thermometry to Space Nuclear Reactors,” by M.J. Roberts et al., Presented at the 6th Symposium on Space Nuclear Power Systems, Jan. 9-12, 1989.
“A Decade of Progress in High Temperature Johnson Noise Thermometry,” by T.V. Blalock et al., American Institute of Physics, 1982, pp. 1219-1223.
“Detection of Hot Spots in Thin Metal Films Using an Ultra Sensitive Dual Channel Noise Measurement System,” by G.H. Massiha et al., Energy and Information Technologies in the Southeast, vol. 3 of 3, Apr. 1989, pp. 1310-1314.
“Detecting Blockage in Process Connections of Differential Pressure Transmitters”, by E. Taya et al., SICE, 1995, pp. 1605-1608.
“In-Situ Response Time Testing of Thermocouples”, ISA, by H.M. Hashemian et al., Paper No. 89-0056, pp. 587-593, (1989).
“Measurement of the Temperature Fluctuation in a Resistor Generating 1/F Fluctuation,” by S. Hashiguchi, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 22, No. 5, Part 2, May 1983, pp. L284-L286.
“Check of Semiconductor Thermal Resistance Elements by the Method of Noise Thermometry”, by A. B. Kisilevskii et al., Measurement Techniques, vol. 25, No. 3, Mar. 1982, New York, USA, pp. 244-246.
“A New Method of Johnson Noise Thermometry”, by. C.J. Borkowski et al., Rev. Sci. Instrum., vol. 45, No. 2, (Feb. 1974) pp. 151-162.