Not applicable—this invention was conceived and developed entirely using private source funding; this patent application is being filed and paid for entirely by private source funding.
Applicant incorporates by reference the disclosures of the following United States patent Publications:
US 2018/0077522 A1, published 15 Mar. 2018, entitled “Predicting Dryer Maintenance Using Machine Wearables”;
US 2017/0178030 A1, published 22 Jun. 2017, entitled “Method, System And Apparatus Using Field Learning To Upgrade Trending Sensor Curves Into Fuel Gauge Based Visualization Of Predictive Maintenance By User Driven Feedback Mechanism;”
US 2016/0245765 A1, published 21 Feb. 2016, entitled “Method For Accurately Measuring Real-Time Dew-Point Value And Total Moisture Content Of A Material”;
US 2016/0245279 A1, published 23 Feb. 2015, entitled “Real Time Machine Learning Based Predictive and Preventive Maintenance of a Vacuum Pump”;
US 2017/0051978 A1, published 23 Aug. 2015, entitled “Machine Learning Based Predictive Maintenance of a Dryer”;
US 2017/0011298 A1, published 2 Jul. 2015, entitled “Internet of Things Based Determination of Machine Reliability and Automated Maintenance, Repair, and Operation (MRO) Logs”;
US 2016/0313216 A1, published 6 Nov. 2015, entitled “Fuel Gauge Visualization of IOT Based Predictive Maintenance System Using Multi-Classification Based Machine Learning”;
US 2016/0291552 A1, published 2 Dec. 2015, entitled “System For Rule Management, Predictive Maintenance And Quality Assurance Of A Process And Machine Using Reconfigurable Sensor Networks And Big Data Machine Learning”;
US 2017/0160328 A1, published 2 Dec. 2015, entitled “Distributed IOT Based Sensor Analytics for Power Line Diagnosis”;
US 2016/0245686 A1, published 22 Dec. 2015, entitled “Fault Detection In Rotor Driven Equipment Using Rotational Invariant Transform Of Sub-Sampled 3-Axis Vibrational Data”;
US 2017/0201585 A1, published 13 Jul. 2017, entitled “Distributed Edge Processing of Internet of Things Device Data in Co-Location Facilities”;
US 2017/0060574, published 2 Mar. 2017, entitled “Edge Intelligence Platform and Internet of Things Censor Stream System”;
US 2017/0163444, published 8 Jun. 2017, entitled “Apparatus and Method for Using and Internet of Things Edge Secure Gateway”
US 2017/123425, published 20 Jul. 2017, entitled “Distributed Edge Processing of Internet of Things Device Data in Co-Location Facilities”.
The term “cloud” has become familiar not only to data processing professionals but also to anyone familiar with computer technology on anything more than a casual basis. The so-called “cloud” is made up of more than 10,000 data centers scattered over the world. In the next five years, driven by the need to get data, solutions and applications closer to the user, hundreds of thousands of scaled-down data centers are expected to sprout up at the edge of the Internet network, to form what is sometimes collectively called the “edge cloud”. Accordingly, edge cloud computing means computing that makes use of or is performed wholly or partially in such scaled-down data centers defining the “edge cloud”.
In todays networked world, data centers run by large entities such as Amazon, Google, Equinox, DRT, and the like are interconnected and stream data, information, and applications, namely software, over the Internet to end users. Large providers of content lease capacity in data centers or operate their own data centers. Global operations such as Amazon have one, two, or more data centers per continent. These large data centers may be considered to sit at the virtual center of the cloud, meaning they are all well removed, distance wise, from the end users.
There is burgeoning activity involving applications and content, which activities include streaming video to mobile devices, “wait-and-see” sensitive Internet computing, data, software applications, and security filters, all that need to be pushed into the Internet network, namely closer to the edge of the Internet network and therefore closer to the user, in order that these applications, data, software, etc., may be accessed quickly and may provide their data, information, results, etc., faster to the Internet users. This shift to “edge cloud computing” is necessitated by a number of factors, with latency, namely the delay before a transfer of data begins following an instruction for its transfer, being the most often cited reason. Cost is also always a concern.
Accordingly, growth of the edge cloud is driven by the need to get data and applications closer to users. Hence, the edge cloud, in the broadest sense, is composed of orders of magnitude more data centers, each desirably being scaled down and each desirably being a shorter distance from the relevant end users. The rationale for the edge cloud is that if an application runs on a processor at a location closer to the user, latency is reduced as the data traverses a shorter segment of the Internet network, thereby ultimately reducing the resources required. By contrast, when compared to the conventional centralized data center world, in a major metropolitan area when information, data, etc., travels from a data center to the end user, the information, data, etc., might have to go through many routers and run over thousands of miles of fiber optics on its journey to the end user. As a result the transport costs and potentials for delay are considerable. The edge cloud approach minimizes if not eliminates these delays and associated risks and reduces costs.
Computing using edge cloud is currently used in factories and in public clouds such as those operated by Amazon, AWS, and Rack Space, for low latency scalable computations in Industrial Internet of Things applications. Such computing strategy, namely using the edge cloud, has gained momentum recently in both academic and industrial applications. It is acknowledged in current computational strategy that edge cloud computing could bring several advantages to Internet of Things applications, such as permitting low latency real time analytics that are needed for industrial control, providing lower cost of data processing, and providing more efficient computation, all as compared to use of the public cloud.
Contrasting, the visualization available through the public cloud facilitates low latency downloads for mobile and web application users who may be accessing information and formatting and computing data anywhere in the world.
There are already millions of “things” in the world of the Internet of Things, connected together using and through the public cloud, which “things” do not use any edge cloud computational capabilities.
In one of its aspects, this invention provides a “hybrid cloud” inclusive architecture for use in edge cloud computing, which addresses both brown field scenarios and green field scenarios.
In another of its aspects, this invention provides an integrated hybrid cloud architecture allowing a system of sensors to work seamlessly both with and without edge cloud computing capability. This aspect of the invention is particularly useful for new Industrial Internet of Things entrants experimenting with a few Internet of Things sensors. The overhead cost of edge cloud computing may be too high for those entrants seeking to provide an introductory proof of some concept.
The following detailed description is merely exemplary in nature and is not intended to limit the described embodiments of the invention or uses of the described embodiments. As used herein, the words “exemplary” and “illustrative” mean “serving as an example, instance, or for illustration.” Any implementation or embodiment or abstract disclosed herein as being “exemplary” or “illustrative” is not necessarily to be construed as preferred or advantageous over other implementations, aspects, or embodiments. All of the implementations or embodiments described in the detailed description are exemplary implementations and embodiments provided to enable persons of skill in the art to make and to use the implementations and embodiments as disclosed below, to otherwise practice the invention, and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention, which is defined by the claims.
Furthermore, by this disclosure, there is no intention on the part of the Applicant to be bound by any express or implied theory presented in the preceding materials, including but not limited to the summary of the invention or the description of the prior art, or in the following detailed description of the invention. It is to be understood that the specific implementations, devices, processes, aspects, and the like illustrated in the attached drawings and described in the following portion of the application, usually referred to as the “specification,” are simply exemplary embodiments of the inventive concepts defined in the claims. Accordingly, specific dimensions and other physical characteristics relating to the embodiments disclosed herein are not to be considered as limiting as respecting the invention unless the claims or the specification expressly state otherwise.
As used herein, the term “Fog” means computation in the sensor electronics itself, while “Core” means computation in a central server. In accordance with the invention, for complex Industrial Internet of Things analytics, there are at least five layers of computation that are important. The five layers, or protocols of computation are as follows:
In the traditional edge of “Fog” computing paradigm, the “Fog” computation, either Fog 1 or Fog 2 as identified above, increases the cost of sensor electronics as they necessarily use at least one gigabit or more of random access memory and require at least one gigahertz or higher processor speed. Performing core computing in the public cloud as per computations Core 2, Core 2, and Core 3 above, increases the cloud computing costs. This invention addresses this problem by providing a edge cloud architecture as a system for merging layers of computation one through five, namely Fog 1 and 2, and Core 1, 2, and 3 as identified above, into the edge cloud by performing them in the edge cloud and thus reducing the cost of hardware and the cost of a cloud subscription simultaneously, through the single architecture in accordance with the invention.
In addition to the computations described in the five protocols identified above, analytics obtained from the third and fourth protocols, Core 1 and Core 2, are used in accordance with the invention to provide real time feed data to control systems. The edge cloud computation approaches in accordance with the invention use soft integration of the layer consisting of either the third or fourth protocol, namely Core 1 and Core 2 identified above, with the system of the factory. The invention provides such edge cloud protocol for integration of the control plan with the edge cloud computations.
Specific to the problem of predictive maintenance where feedback is required from the users of the adaptive predictive analytics respecting maintenance issues in a course of computing within protocols three and four above, the invention in one of its aspects runs local and global adaptive predictive analytics. The hybrid cloud architecture of the invention caters to both of those needs, namely the local protocol is optimally only a single edge cloud computation, whereas the predictive analytics global uses multiple feedback from plural edge cloud computational protocols.
Fog level computation, in sensor electronics within or attached to the sensors, is vulnerable to cyber-attack, since typically there are many such devices in a single factory. In factories that are resource limited, advanced security measures are difficult to implement. This makes the entire factory network vulnerable to cyber attack and is one of the weakest points of the Industrial Internet of Things. With edge cloud computing in accordance with the invention, and now in the course of using proprietary protocols in accordance with the invention, preferably sensor devices used in the practice of the invention are ones that talk only to the associated edge cloud and to nothing else. In this way a factory Wi-Fi or Ethernet network in accordance with the invention remains much safer and essentially immune from compromise of the sensor devices. The invention accomplishes this with the edge cloud architecture addressing the critical issue of network security by use of proprietary protocol layers, all as disclosed and claimed herein.
As described above,
Further regarding
As described above
As noted above,
In the practice of the invention each of the distributed computational layers described above requires three different data types. One of these data types is machine information or sensor information regarding which sensors are mounted on what kind of machines, the make or model of the machine, and the analytics required. This asset database includes unstructured text, image, and sound data captured from a machine for adaptive boosting of the analytics.
A second data type needed by each of the distributive computational layers is time series meta data processed from an earlier block in real time. So, as an example referring to
The third data type needed by each of the distributive computation layers is time series metadata stored from each block in a sensor time series database, with the data being from the relatively recent past. In the industrial and commercial contexts typically this will be data from the last two hours or two days of operation of the facility.
Each of the computational layers receives data via a broker service.
In the course of practice of the invention, data input to the edge cloud of interest can be raw sensor data, without layer A or layer B processing, or can be metadata generated by a computation in layer B. If a sensor with a Fog device is connected to the edge cloud, the sensor will send metadata directly to computing layer C for use thereby. Otherwise, raw sensor data is processed by and within layer A.
In the course of practice of the invention, metadata output from processing layers C, D, and E are preferably sent to the public cloud, and to a programmable logic controller/supervisory control and data acquisition system.
Raw sensor data is preferably input directly to edge cloud in one embodiment of the invention without processing by computation layers A and B. Alternatively, raw sensor data is metadata generated by computational layer B and then supplied to the edge cloud. In the embodiment of the invention where a sensor with a Fog device is connected to the edge cloud of interest, the invention sends metadata directly to layer C for processing. Otherwise in the preferred practice of the invention, raw data is processed in the edge cloud as it is received from computational layer A.
In the course of practice of the invention, metadata output from processing layers C, D, and/or E is sent to the public cloud, or to a programmable logic controller/supervisory control and data acquisition system, or to a hybrid programmable logic controller/supervisory control and data acquisition system, and/or to a real time listening service. Time series metadata is sent to be stored at a time series data base locally in the associated edge cloud. This time series database is synchronized and backed up with the time series database of the public cloud so that in the event of damage to the particular localized edge cloud of interest, no data is lost.
In the course of practice of the invention, visualization data, which can be JSON formatted data as required for analytic visualization, is sent to a visualization database in the public cloud.
The visualization data in another format is preferably sent to a mobile or other visualization device within the particular factory; these devices are preferably connected to the same subnetwork within the particular factory.
Yet another format of the visualization data, which will be formatted for an industrial bus, is preferably sent to the hybrid programmable logic controller/supervisory controller and data acquisition system.
The sensors comprise both “brown” sensors and “green” sensors, where “brown” denotes sensors lacking computational capability and associated electronics and “green” denotes sensors having computational capability with associated electronics being either built into the sensor or located immediately adjacent thereto as respecting the machine from which the sensor is harvests data.
The architecture illustrated in
Further in the practice of the invention, the asset data base not only stores all of the information about the machines required to build the analytic model provided in blocks C, D and E of
Although schematic implementations of present invention and at least some of its advantages are described in detail hereinabove, it should be understood that various changes, substitutions and alterations may be made to the apparatus and methods disclosed herein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims. The disclosed embodiments are therefore to be considered in all respects as being illustrative and not restrictive with the scope of the invention being indicated by the appended claims rather than by the foregoing description. All changes which come within the meaning and range of equivalency of the claims are therefore intended to be embraced therein. Moreover, the scope of this patent application is not intended to be limited to the particular implementations of apparatus and methods described in the specification, nor to any methods that may be described or inferentially understood by those skilled in the art to be present as described in this specification.
As disclosed above and from the foregoing description of exemplary embodiments of the invention, it will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art to which the invention pertains that the principles and particularly the compositions and methods disclosed herein can be used for applications other than those specifically mentioned. Further, as one of skill in the art will readily appreciate from the disclosure of the invention as set forth hereinabove, apparatus, methods, and steps presently existing or later developed, which perform substantially the same function or achieve substantially the same result as the corresponding embodiments described and disclosed hereinabove, may be utilized according to the description of the invention and the claims appended hereto. Accordingly, the appended claims are intended to include within their scope such apparatus, methods, and processes that provide the same result or which are, as a matter of law, embraced by the doctrine of the equivalents respecting the claims of this application.
As respecting the claims appended hereto, the term “comprising” means “including but not limited to”, whereas the term “consisting of” means “having only and no more”, and the term “consisting essentially of” means “having only and no more except for minor additions which would be known to one of skill in the art as possibly needed for operation of the invention.” The scope of the invention is, therefore, indicated by the appended claims rather than by the foregoing description and all changes which come within the range of equivalency of the claims are to be considered to be embraced within the scope of the claims. Additional objects, other advantages, and further novel features of the invention will become apparent from study of the appended claims as well as from study of the foregoing detailed discussion and description of the preferred embodiments of the invention, as that study proceeds.
This patent application claims the priority under 35 USC 120 of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 62/608,705 filed 21 Dec. 2017 in the name of Biplab Pal and entitled “Dryer Maintenance Prediction Method and Apparatus”.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4023940 | Shultz | May 1977 | A |
4131011 | Ling | Dec 1978 | A |
5150289 | Badavas | Sep 1992 | A |
5487225 | Downie | Jan 1996 | A |
5610339 | Haseley et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5825338 | Salmon et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5995561 | Yamasaki et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6104987 | Farnsworth | Aug 2000 | A |
6289606 | Gillette et al. | Sep 2001 | B2 |
6330525 | Hays | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6405108 | Patel et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
7406399 | Furem et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7882394 | Hosek et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7938935 | MacHattie et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
8021462 | Moretto | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8094034 | Patel et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8112381 | Yuan et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8126574 | Discenzo et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8150340 | Albsmeier et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8334784 | Patel et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8390299 | Laepple et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8405940 | Schweitzer, III et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8421475 | Thiim | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8433443 | Hagerty et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8560368 | Maity et al. | Oct 2013 | B1 |
8571904 | Guru et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8726535 | Garrido et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8868242 | Loutfi | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8920078 | Woolever | Dec 2014 | B2 |
9052216 | Kamel et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9062536 | Fischer | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9250275 | Patel et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9781243 | Huang | Oct 2017 | B1 |
10041844 | Brady | Aug 2018 | B1 |
20010038345 | Satoh et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020143421 | Wetzer | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20040102924 | Jarrell | May 2004 | A1 |
20040176926 | Edie | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040199573 | Schwarz et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050049834 | Bottomfield | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050222794 | Baird et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060137105 | Hong et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060168195 | Maturana et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060208169 | Breed et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060276949 | Beck et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070100518 | Cooper | May 2007 | A1 |
20070185685 | Lannes et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070193056 | Switalski | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20080103732 | Stoupis | May 2008 | A1 |
20080109185 | Cheung et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080289045 | Fryer | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080294382 | Lim | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090024359 | Bibelhausen et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090043518 | Roh et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090119243 | Yuan et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20100023307 | Lee | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100169030 | Parlos | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100199352 | Hill et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100295692 | Bjorn | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110016199 | De Carlo et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110131398 | Chaturvedi et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110137697 | Yedatore et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110216805 | Fernando et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110307220 | Lacaille | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120045068 | Kim et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120166142 | Maeda et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120209569 | Becourt et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120213098 | Sun | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120271576 | Kamel | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120290104 | Holt et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120330499 | Scheid et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120330614 | Kar | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130102284 | Storozuk | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130119047 | Driussi | May 2013 | A1 |
20130170417 | Thomas et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130173178 | Poczka et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130201316 | Binder et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130268469 | Sharma et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130287060 | Langdoc et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130304677 | Gupta et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130318022 | Yadav et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140129164 | Gorbold | May 2014 | A1 |
20140132418 | Lill | May 2014 | A1 |
20140163416 | Shuck | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140186215 | Shinta et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140207394 | Madden | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140223767 | Arno | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140244836 | Goel et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140262130 | Yenni | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140309805 | Ricci | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140314284 | Movellan et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140335480 | Asenjo et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140336791 | Asenjo et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140337429 | Asenjo et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20150026044 | Refaeli | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150039250 | Rank | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150094914 | Abreu | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150139817 | Kowalski | May 2015 | A1 |
20150181313 | Murphy | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150185251 | Heydron et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150233792 | Gao | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150233856 | Samuilov et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150247670 | Robertson et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150261215 | Blevins | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20160086285 | Jordan Peters et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160147205 | Kaufman | May 2016 | A1 |
20160189440 | Cattone | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160209831 | Pal | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160245279 | Pal et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160245686 | Pal et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160245765 | Pal | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160291552 | Pal et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20160299183 | Lee | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20160313216 | Pal et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20160349305 | Pal | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170006135 | Siebel | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170032281 | Hsu | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170060574 | Malladi et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170061608 | Kim et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170163444 | McLaughlin et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170201585 | Doraiswamy et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20200067789 | Khuti | Feb 2020 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
201672991 | Dec 2010 | CN |
102539911 | Jul 2012 | CN |
103399486 | Nov 2013 | CN |
203362223 | Dec 2013 | CN |
203588054 | May 2014 | CN |
104036614 | Sep 2014 | CN |
1836576 | Feb 2012 | EP |
2186613 | May 2013 | EP |
2648393 | Oct 2013 | EP |
WO 2005086760 | Sep 2005 | WO |
WO 2010104735 | Sep 2010 | WO |
WO 2013040855 | Mar 2013 | WO |
WO 2013-041440 | Mar 2013 | WO |
WO 2013093942 | Jun 2013 | WO |
WO 2014044906 | Mar 2014 | WO |
WO 2014085648 | Jun 2014 | WO |
WO 2014089567 | Jun 2014 | WO |
WO 2014117245 | Aug 2014 | WO |
WO 2015022036 | Feb 2015 | WO |
WO 2016137848 | Sep 2016 | WO |
WO 2017-1234525 | Jul 2017 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US16/18820; dated Aug. 4, 2016. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US15/066547; dated Mar. 17, 2016. |
Sensors Drive Mobile IoT; Wong, William; Jan. 26, 2015; Electronic Design. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US16/028724; dated Aug. 22, 2016. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US16/18831; dated Aug. 12, 2016. |
Fault Detection in Kerman Combined Cycle Power Plant Boilers by Means of Support Vector Machine Classifier Algorithms and PCA by M. Berahman, et al., 3rd International Conference on Control, Instrumentation, and Automation (ICCIA 2013), Dec. 28-30, 2013, Tehran, Iran. |
Fault Monitoring and Diagnosis of Induction Machines Based on Harmonic Wavelet Transform and Wavelet neural Network by Qianjin Guo, et al., dated Sep. 2008, published at the Fourth International Conference on Natural Computation. |
Fault Diagnosis Method Study in Roller Bearing Based on Wavelet Transform and Stacked Auto-encoder, by Junbo Tan, et al., dated Feb. 2015, published by IEEE. |
A Diagnostic Expert System Embedded in a Portable Vibration Analysis Instrument by Dr. Robert Milne, et al., dated May 13, 1991, published at IEE Colloquium on Intelligent Instrumentation. |
Detection of Precursor Wear Debris in Lubrication Systems by Jack Edmonds, et al., dated May 2000, published by IEEE. |
Fault Diagnosis of Bearing Based on Fuzzy Support Vector Machine, by Haodong Ma, et al., dated Jan. 2015, published by IEEE. |
Investigation of the Mechanical Faults Classification using Support Vector Machine Approach by Zhiqiang Jiang, et al., dated Aug. 2010, 2010 Second International Conference on Intelligent Human-Machine Systems and Cybernetics. |
Impact Characterization of Multiple-Points-Defect on Machine Fault Diagnosis by Muhammad F. Yaqub, et al., 8th IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering, Aug. 20-24, 2012, Seoul, Korea. |
Detection of Generalized-Roughness Bearing Fault by Spectral-Kurtosis Energy of Vibration or Current Signals by Fabio Immovilli, et al., IEEE Transations on Industrial Electronics, vol. 56, No. 11, Nov. 2009. |
Intrinsic Mode Function Determination of Faulty Rolling Element Bearing Based on Kurtosis by Wei Kang, et al., Proceeding of the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Information and Automation, Lijiang, China, Aug. 2015. |
Condition Monitoring and Fault Diagnosis of Rolling Element Bearings Based on Wavelet Energy Entropy and SOM by Shuai Shi, et al., dated Aug. 2012, published by IEEE. |
Continuous Hidden Markov Model Based Gear Fault Diagnosis and Incipient Fault Detection by Jian-She Kang, et al., dated Jun. 2011, published by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). |
Study on Fault Diagnosis of Gear with Spall using Ferrography and Vibration Analysis by Wei Feng, et al., published in Aug. 2009 at the International Conference on Measuring Technology and Mechatronics Automation. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US2016/067814; dated Apr. 6, 2017. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US2016/067546; dated Apr. 11, 2017. |
Krishnamurthy, S. et al. (2008) Automation of Facility Management Processes Using Machine-to-Machine Technologies. In: Floerkemeier C., Langheinrich M., Fleisch E., Mattern F., Sarma S.E. (eds) The Internet of Things. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4952. DOI:10.1007/978-3-540-78731-0_5 (Year: 2008). |
Holler, J. et al. (2014). “From Machine-to-machine to the Internet of Things: Introduction to a New Age of Intelligence.” Chapters 2, 4, 5, 7, 10, 12. Academic Press. DOI:10.1016/B978-0-12-407684-6.00002-4 (Year: 2014). |
Azure IoT Edge open for developers to build for the intelligent edge, George, Sam; Azure Internet of Things; Nov. 15, 2017. |
Predix Edge Technology Product Brief, General Electric, 2017. |
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8089336/ Future Edge Cloud and Edge Computing for Internet of Things Applications—Janali Pan et al. |
Challenges and Solutions of Protecting Variable Speed Drive Motors; Aversa, et al.; Feb. 11, 2013; Presented at the 2013 Texas A&M Conference for Protective Relay Engineers. |
Dec. 21, 2018 Non-Final Office Action against Applicant's co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 14/833,111. |
Vasudevan, Shobha, “Still a Fight to Get It Right: Verification in the Era of Machine Learning”, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Rebooting Computing (ICRC), Washington, DC, 2017, pp. 1-8. (Year: 2017). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190265687 A1 | Aug 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62608705 | Dec 2017 | US |