Reference is made to co-pending application Ser. No. 11/543,349, filed Oct. 5, 2006, entitled “TWO-WIRE PROCESS CONTROL LOOP DIAGNOSTICS,” the content of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
The present invention relates to industrial process control and monitoring systems. More specifically, the present invention relates to diagnostics of industrial process control and monitoring systems which utilize two-wire process control loops to transmit digital data.
Industrial process control and monitoring systems are used in many applications to control and/or monitor operation of an industrial process. For example, an oil refinery, chemical processing plant, or paper manufacturing facility may have numerous processes which must be monitored and controlled.
In such industrial processes, process variables are measured at remote locations across the process. Example process variables include temperature, pressure, flow and the like. This information is transmitted over a two-wire process control loop to a central location, for example, a control room. Similarly, process variables can be controlled using controllers placed in the process. The controllers receive control information from the two-wire process control loop and responsively control a process variable, for example by opening or closing a valve, heating a process fluid, etc.
Various protocols have been used to communicate on two-wire process control loops. One protocol uses a 4-20 mA signal to carry information on the loop. The 4 mA signal can represent a zero or low value of a process variable while the 20 mA signal can represent a high or full scale value. The current can be controlled by a process variable transmitter to values between 4 and 20 mA to represent intermediate values of the process variable. A more complex communication technique is the HART® communication protocol in which digital information is superimposed onto a 4-20 mA signal. Typically, in such configurations a separate two-wire process control loop is required for each field device.
A more complex communication technique used on two-wire process control loops is generally referred to as fieldbus-based protocols, such as Foundation™ fieldbus. The process control loop is commonly referred to as a segment. In a Fieldbus protocol, all information is transmitted digitally and the analog current level on the segment is not required to carry information. One advantage of such a configuration is that multiple process variable transmitters or controllers can be coupled in parallel and share the same segment. Each device on the segment has an address such that it can identify messages which are addressed to it. Similarly, messages transmitted by a field device can include the address of the device so that the sender can be identified. In such Fieldbus based systems, all of the Fieldbus segments of the process control loop contain timers which are synchronized with a Link Active Scheduler (LAS). The LAS sends a time update on the loop and the individual field devices synchronize their clocks to the time signal.
A diagnostic field device for coupling to a two-wire process control loop of an industrial process control or monitoring system includes power supply circuitry configured to coupled to the two-wire process control loop and provide a power output to circuitry of the diagnostic device to thereby power the diagnostic device with power received from the two-wire process control loop. Digital communication monitoring circuitry is configured to receive a digital communication signal from the two-wire process control loop. Timing circuitry provides a timing output. Diagnostic circuitry diagnoses operation of the two-wire process control loop based upon the digital communication signal and the timing output. The diagnostics can also be placed in the field device.
The present invention is directed to diagnostics in a process control loop including diagnostics of the devices connected to the process control loop. In particular, the present invention provides diagnostics including detection of a failed or potentially failing component in a two-wire process control loop operating in accordance with a fieldbus based protocol in which timing signals, or communication signals which use timing to convey data, are transmitted on the loop.
The process control loop 18 illustrated is including a Link Active Scheduler (LAS) 24. (LAS) 24 is used to synchronize communication on loop 18. The Link Active Scheduler 24 can be located anywhere along loop 18, including in the field with field devices 12 or 14, or in the control room 20. During operation, the LAS 24 transmits time (clock) information on the loop 18. This time information is used by individual devices on the loop 18 to synchronize their internal clocks 26 and 28 shown in field devices 12 and 14, respectively. During operation, the Link Active Scheduler 24 provides clock information on loop 18 based upon internal clock circuitry 30. More specifically, the LAS 24 periodically sends a time update transmission on loop 18 which allows the individual field devices 12 and 14 on loop 18 to synchronize their internal clocks 26 and 28, respectively to the internal clock circuitry 30 of Link Active Scheduler 24.
Diagnostic device also includes optional power supply circuitry 60 which couples to the two-wire process control loop 18 and can be configured to provide a power output for powering all of the circuitry within diagnostic device 50. Further, a memory 62 is provided for storing information. For example, memory 62 can be used for storing diagnostic data, data captured from process control loop 18, programming instructions for a microprocessor used in implementing diagnostic circuitry 54, various loop parameters, configuration data, etc. As mentioned above, the diagnostic circuitry can be implemented in a microcontroller, along with other supporting components.
During operation, the diagnostic device 50 monitors digital communications traffic on loop 18 using digital communication circuitry 52. The digital communication circuitry provides an output to diagnostic circuitry 54. Diagnostic circuitry 54 provides a diagnostic output related to a diagnostic condition of the process control loop, including devices on the process control loop, as a function of the received digital signal and the timing output 58 from the timing circuitry 56. Although it is possible to locate the diagnostic circuitry 54 in the control room 20 shown in
In one configuration, the loop timing data (LT) obtained at step 104 is related to the amount of correction needed to synchronize a field device, for example, field device 12 or 14 on loop 18, with the clock signal from Link Active Scheduler 24. In such a configuration the diagnostic output is a function of the amount of required correction. Further if the correction is required for only a single field device, the diagnostic algorithm output can provide an output indicating a problem is associated with a particular device. However, if similar synchronization errors are seen across numerous devices, the diagnostic output can indicate that there is a more global failure occurring, for example, a failure in loop wiring or in the Link Active Scheduler 24. Similarly, the diagnostic circuitry 54 can monitor trends in the relationship between the loop timing data (LT) and the internal timing information (LI). For example, if the amount of correction needed to maintain synchronization continues to increase, the diagnostic circuitry 54 can provide an output that there is an impending failure.
In another configuration, the diagnostic circuitry 54 monitors communication transmissions carried on process control loop 18 and identifies the occurrence of communication errors, for example, as exemplified by a bad data transmission, or by request for a retransmission of information. The diagnostic circuitry 54 monitors the process control loop and identifies, for example, a missed token pass, a live list appearance, or DLL (Data Link Layer) information request retries. A live list appearance is a request to re-connect to the network. If a DLL retry is requested for a response to a request, the error is in the receiver. If the first request is not seen, then the error is in the field device. This data can be monitored and statistically characterized. If a particular device in process control loop 18 shows a trend toward increased communication errors, diagnostic circuitry 54 can provide a predictive output to indicate an impending failure. If the diagnostic device 50 is implemented as an independent device, circuitry 24 is capable of providing diagnostic information related to particular devices and identifying whether a communication failure is due to an invalid or corrupt request on the process control loop 18, or due to an invalid, corrupt or missing response. Further, the diagnostic circuitry 54 can be configured to monitor for transmissions from the Link Active Scheduler 24. If transmissions are sporadic or stopped completely, the diagnostic circuitry 54 can make a determination that the LAS 24 is faulty and provide an output accordingly. Further, additional analysis can be provided if a particular communication error analysis is coupled with a hardware analysis. Some of which are explained in patent application Ser. No. 11/543,349, filed Oct. 5, 2006. For example, if an invalid PDU packet Network communication packet is associated with a detected increase in amplitude of the loop communication waveform, this can indicate that two devices are attempting to communicate simultaneously. Such information can be used to infer that an address assignment problem exists, or that there is a faulty device that is communicating incorrectly.
With diagnostic circuitry 22 including an independent timing circuit 56, the timing of all of the communications on loop 18 can be monitored, analyzed, and trends identified. This information can be reported either locally or remotely. Such timing measurements can be used to identify potential problems as well as possible degradations of the loop segment 18 or of individual loop devices such as field devices 12 and 14. Examples of specific measurements which can be monitored include:
Further, diagnostics can be implemented to indicate potential problems in individual devices. For example, a number of rejected write requests to a particular device can be identified and used as an indication of a failing device. Such diagnostic circuitry 54 can be used to read back information from field devices to obtain additional diagnostic data. This allows a user to service a specific device during routine maintenance and thereby reduces system downtime. In another example configuration, the diagnostic circuitry 54 is configured to read the MIB (Manufacturers Information Block) from certain process devices in order to access diagnostic data from that particular diagnostic device. Some of the information listed in the examples can only be accessed by using a proprietary data interface over the segment. For example, this data can be analyzed, along with electrical parameters measured from the process control loop, in order to provide enhanced diagnostics. Time stamping of occurrences using time data from timing circuitry 56 can be used to enable enhanced statistical analysis. The use of statistical analysis of events and communication timing provides the ability to predict potential failures prior to a catastrophic failure. The time stamping of event occurrences, and the application of statistical analysis to events, allows a device to provide an output indicating cause of the failure. This reduces diagnostic time and provides additional knowledge to the operator. This allows the operator to service the device prior to ultimate failure and enables improved statistical analysis.
Many of the above described diagnostics can be enhanced if the diagnostic circuitry 54 is coupled with a field device 12, 14 which can provide additional information such as the amount of correction required for synchronization with the clock 30 of the LAS 24. When coupled to, or in communication with, known process field devices, the diagnostic circuitry 54 can provide more accurate diagnostics because the particular operating parameters and capabilities of the field device can be accessed by the diagnostic circuitry 54 and incorporated into the diagnostics. The output from the diagnostic circuitry 54 can be in the form of a local display or other local output, provided remotely over an Ethernet connection, wireless transmission, cellular phone connection or the like, or can be transmitted on the process control loop 18, for example spontaneously or in response to a specific query such as Fieldbus query.
Although it is possible to perform some of these diagnostic techniques at the remote control room, such a configuration may lose timing information. For example, intrinsic safety barriers and repeaters can be used which may alter the timing data carried on a process control loop 18 when it reaches the control room 20. By placing the diagnostic circuitry 54 at a field location, the circuitry 50 is better configured to access real time data. The diagnostic information can be transmitted back to a central location, such as control room 20, displayed locally, transmitted using other techniques such as Ethernet transmissions, wireless or cell phone transmissions, etc.
In various aspects, the present invention includes a diagnostic device placed on a Fieldbus segment for use in performing diagnostics on other devices on the segment based upon timing information. The device can monitor some or all of the communication on a particular segment and may contain an internal, independent clock. The device 50 can provide time stamping of events on the process control loop. In other words, timing information from timing circuitry 56 can be associated with a particular data point or occurrence in the process. In a specific configuration, the device 50 can monitor the amount of correction required to synchronize individual devices during a time update from a Link Active Scheduler by comparing its internal clock to the time update. The device 50 can be configured to measure communication timing on the process control loop 18 such as the response time required by a particular device on the loop segment, token hold times, inactive time along the loop segment, timing which is not within compliance compared to network parameters, slot time violations, function block execution times, stale data indications, communication retries and other communication timing. The device can monitor loop communication and monitor DLL retries, missed token passes, claim LAS occurrences, live list appearances, etc. The device can be configured to monitor the loop 18 for communications to allow diagnostics on all of the devices on the loop based upon the number of rejected write requests to each device or the quantity of periodic writes to non-volatile memory required by a device. This can provide an indication of wear on the device. Further, diagnostic device 50 can be used to read data from other devices on the loop to obtain diagnostic information which is otherwise not transmitted. The diagnostic device can be configured to provide additional information, either locally or remotely, to enable some of the above diagnostics and can be used to perform statistical analysis based upon timing or other information. By monitoring trends in the diagnostic, the diagnostic device 50 can predict potential failures along the loop 18. The predictive information can be based upon trending, analysis, or other techniques. Such information can be reported back to the central control room 20 for use by an operator. The diagnostic device can continuously monitor the loop 18 or can periodically “wake up” and sample the loop to perform diagnostics.
In various aspects, the diagnostic circuitry 54 of the present invention provides an output which includes conclusions, or other information, as to the cause or source of a particular diagnostic condition. The device can be permanently located, for example, in the field and does not require additional support equipment such as a personal computer or the like. In some configurations, the diagnostic circuitry is completely powered with power received from the two-wire process control loop 18. Various types of diagnostics can be performed such as immediate response, including the minimum, maximum, standard deviation or mean. For example, identifying a single device with significant changes in its parameters which relate to timing can provide an indication that that device is failing. However, if, for example, other tokens are properly handled, then a problem can be identified as originating in the buffer handling system of the Fieldbus interface circuitry. Further, if multiple devices are demonstrating such problems simultaneously, it is likely that there is noise on a segment of the loop 18 or wiring problems.
Similarly, the token hold time or pass token responses can be monitored by device 50, including minimum time, maximum time, standard deviation or mean. A failure among multiple devices can indicate problems with a particular segment of the process control loop. On the other hand, immediate responses which are proper will imply changes in a particular devices processor loading because such responses are typically handled by the buffer subsystem in the device hardware.
In another example, stale data counts are monitored by device 50. This includes stale data counts which are greater than zero but less than the maximum allowed by a particular segment of loop 18. Changes in the number of stale data information published by field devices can be used to device 50 to provide an indication that the processor of a particular field device is overloaded. Similarly, DLL retries (counts per unit of time), if from a single device, can provide an indication that that particular device has detective sending or receiving hardware. However, increased counts across multiple field devices can provide an indication that there is a problem with a particular loop segment or with the intrinsic safety barrier. The above diagnostics are for example purposes and the present invention is not limited to those specifically set forth herein.
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. As used herein, a two-wire process control loop includes field devices coupled to the loop in addition to loop wiring.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3096434 | King | Jul 1963 | A |
3404264 | Kugler | Oct 1968 | A |
3468164 | Sutherland | Sep 1969 | A |
3590370 | Fleischer | Jun 1971 | A |
3618592 | Stewart | Nov 1971 | A |
3688190 | Blum | Aug 1972 | A |
3691842 | Akeley | Sep 1972 | A |
3701280 | Stroman | Oct 1972 | A |
3849637 | Caruso et al. | Nov 1974 | A |
3855858 | Cushing | Dec 1974 | A |
3948098 | Richardson et al. | Apr 1976 | A |
3952759 | Ottenstein | Apr 1976 | A |
3973184 | Raber | Aug 1976 | A |
RE29383 | Gallatin et al. | Sep 1977 | E |
4058975 | Gilbert et al. | Nov 1977 | A |
4083031 | Pharo, Jr. | Apr 1978 | A |
4099413 | Ohte et al. | Jul 1978 | A |
4102199 | Tsipouras | Jul 1978 | A |
4122719 | Carlson et al. | Oct 1978 | A |
4249164 | Tivy | Feb 1981 | A |
4250490 | Dahlke | Feb 1981 | A |
4255964 | Morison | Mar 1981 | A |
4279013 | Cameron et al. | Jul 1981 | A |
4337516 | Murphy et al. | Jun 1982 | A |
4383443 | Langdon | May 1983 | A |
4390321 | Langlois et al. | Jun 1983 | A |
4399824 | Davidson | Aug 1983 | A |
4417312 | Cronin et al. | Nov 1983 | A |
4423634 | Audenard et al. | Jan 1984 | A |
4459858 | Marsh | Jul 1984 | A |
4463612 | Thompson | Aug 1984 | A |
4517468 | Kemper et al. | May 1985 | A |
4528869 | Kubo et al. | Jul 1985 | A |
4530234 | Cullick et al. | Jul 1985 | A |
4536753 | Parker | Aug 1985 | A |
4540468 | Genco et al. | Sep 1985 | A |
4571689 | Hildebrand et al. | Feb 1986 | A |
4630265 | Sexton | Dec 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 |
4668473 | Agarwal | May 1987 | A |
4686638 | Furuse | Aug 1987 | A |
4696191 | Claytor et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
4707796 | Calabro et al. | Nov 1987 | A |
4720806 | Schippers et al. | Jan 1988 | A |
4736367 | Wroblewski et al. | Apr 1988 | A |
4736763 | Britton et al. | Apr 1988 | A |
4758308 | Carr | Jul 1988 | A |
4777585 | Kokawa et al. | Oct 1988 | A |
4807151 | Citron | Feb 1989 | A |
4818994 | Orth et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
4831564 | Suga | May 1989 | A |
4841286 | Kummer | Jun 1989 | A |
4853693 | Eaton-Williams | Aug 1989 | A |
4873655 | Kondraske | Oct 1989 | A |
4907167 | Skeirik | Mar 1990 | A |
4924418 | Backman et al. | May 1990 | A |
4926364 | Brotherton | 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 |
5019760 | Chu et al. | May 1991 | A |
5025344 | Maly et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5043862 | Takahashi et al. | Aug 1991 | A |
5047990 | Gafos et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
5053815 | Wendell | Oct 1991 | A |
5057774 | Verhelst et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5067099 | McCown et al. | Nov 1991 | A |
5081598 | Bellows et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
5089979 | McEachern et al. | Feb 1992 | A |
5089984 | Struger et al. | Feb 1992 | A |
5098197 | Shepard et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5099436 | McCown et al. | 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 |
5150289 | Badavas | 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 |
5216226 | Miyoshi | Jun 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 |
5340271 | Freeman et al. | Aug 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 |
5365787 | Hernandez et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5367612 | Bozich et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5369674 | Yokose et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5384699 | Levy et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5386373 | Keeler et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5388465 | Okaniwa et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5392293 | Hsue | Feb 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 |
5410495 | Ramamurthi | Apr 1995 | A |
5414645 | Hirano | May 1995 | A |
5419197 | Ogi et al. | May 1995 | A |
5430642 | Nakajima et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5434774 | Seberger | Jul 1995 | A |
5436705 | Raj | 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 |
5469749 | Shimada et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5481199 | Anderson et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5481200 | Voegele 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 |
5526293 | Mozumder et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5539638 | Keeler et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5548528 | Keeler et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5555190 | Derby et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5560246 | Bottinger et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5561599 | Lu | Oct 1996 | A |
5570034 | Needham et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5570300 | Henry et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5572420 | Lu | Nov 1996 | A |
5573032 | Lenz et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5578763 | Spencer et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5591922 | Segeral et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5598521 | Kilgore et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5600148 | Cole et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5608650 | McClendon et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5623605 | Keshav et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5629870 | Farag et al. | May 1997 | A |
5633809 | Wissenbach et al. | May 1997 | A |
5637802 | Frick et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5640491 | Bhat et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5644240 | Brugger | Jul 1997 | A |
5654869 | Ohi et al. | Aug 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 |
5672247 | Pangalos 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 |
5682317 | Keeler et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5700090 | Eryurek | Dec 1997 | A |
5703575 | Kirkpatrick | Dec 1997 | A |
5704011 | Hansen et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5705754 | Keita et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5705978 | Frick et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5708211 | Jepson et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5708585 | Kushion | Jan 1998 | A |
5710370 | Shanahan et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5710708 | Wiegland | Jan 1998 | A |
5713668 | Lunghofer et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5719378 | Jackson, Jr. et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5731522 | Sittler | Mar 1998 | A |
5736649 | Kawasaki et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5741074 | Wang et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5742845 | Wagner | Apr 1998 | A |
5746511 | Eryurek et al. | May 1998 | A |
5747701 | Marsh et al. | May 1998 | A |
5752008 | Bowling | May 1998 | A |
5764539 | Rani | Jun 1998 | A |
5764891 | Warrior | Jun 1998 | A |
5781024 | Blomberg et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5781878 | Mizoguchi et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5790413 | Bartusiak et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5801689 | Huntsman | Sep 1998 | A |
5805442 | Crater et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5817950 | Wiklund et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5825664 | Warrior et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5828567 | Eryurek et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5829876 | Schwartz et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5838187 | Embree | Nov 1998 | A |
5848383 | Yunus | Dec 1998 | A |
5854993 | Crichnik | Dec 1998 | A |
5854994 | Canada et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5859964 | Wang et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5869772 | Storer | Feb 1999 | A |
5876122 | Eryurek | Mar 1999 | A |
5880376 | Sai et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5887978 | Lunghofer et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5908990 | Cummings | Jun 1999 | A |
5923557 | Eidson | Jul 1999 | A |
5924086 | Mathur et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5926778 | Pöppel | Jul 1999 | A |
5934371 | Bussear et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5936514 | Anderson et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5940290 | Dixon | Aug 1999 | A |
5956663 | Eryurek et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5970430 | Burns et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5995910 | Discenzo | Nov 1999 | A |
6002952 | Diab et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6006338 | Longsdorf et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6014612 | Larson et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6014902 | Lewis et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6016523 | Zimmerman et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6016706 | Yamamoto et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6017143 | Eryurek et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6023399 | Kogure | Feb 2000 | A |
6026352 | Burns et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6038579 | Sekine | Mar 2000 | A |
6045260 | Schwartz et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6046642 | Brayton et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6047220 | Eryurek et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6047222 | Burns et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6052655 | Kobayashi et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6061603 | Papadopoulos et al. | May 2000 | A |
6072150 | Sheffer | Jun 2000 | A |
6094600 | Sharpe, Jr. et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6112131 | Ghorashi et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6119047 | Eryurek et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6119529 | Di Marco et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6139180 | Usher et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6151560 | Jones | Nov 2000 | A |
6179964 | Begemann et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6182501 | Furuse et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6192281 | Brown et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6195591 | Nixon et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6199018 | Quist et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6209048 | Wolff | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6236948 | Eck et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6237424 | Salmasi et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6260004 | Hays et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6263487 | Stripf et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272438 | Cunningham et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6289735 | Dister et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6298377 | Hartikainen et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6307483 | Westfield et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6311136 | Henry et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6317701 | Pyostsia et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6327914 | Dutton | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6347252 | Behr et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6356191 | Kirkpatrick et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6360277 | Ruckley et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6370448 | Eryurek et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6377859 | Brown et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6378364 | Pelletier et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6396426 | Balard et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397114 | Eryurek et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6405099 | Nagai et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6425038 | Sprecher | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6434504 | Eryurek et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6449574 | Eryurek et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6473656 | Langels et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6473710 | Eryurek | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6480793 | Martin | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6492921 | Kunitani et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6493689 | Kotoulas et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6497222 | Bolz et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6505517 | Eryurek et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6519546 | Eryurek et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6532392 | Eryurek et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6539267 | Eryurek et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6546814 | Choe et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6556145 | Kirkpatrick et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6567006 | Lander et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6594603 | Eryurek et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6597997 | Tingley | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6601005 | Eryurek et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6611775 | Coursolle et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6615149 | Wehrs | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6654697 | Eryurek et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6701274 | Eryurek et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6727812 | Sauler et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6738388 | Stevenson et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6751560 | Tingley et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6754601 | Eryurek et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6758168 | Koskinen et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6859755 | Eryurek et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6904476 | Hedtke | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6907383 | Eryurek et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6915364 | Christensen et al. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
6970003 | Rome et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
7018800 | Huisenga et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7040179 | Drahm et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7058542 | Hauhia et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7085610 | Eryurek et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7098798 | Huisenga et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7099852 | Unsworth et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7171281 | Weber et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7254518 | Eryrurek et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
20020013629 | Nixon et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020032544 | Reid et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020077711 | Nixon et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020121910 | Rome et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020145568 | Winter | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020148644 | Schultz et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020194547 | Christensen et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030014536 | Christensen et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030033040 | Billings | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030045962 | Eryurek et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20040128034 | Lenker et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040199361 | Lu et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040249583 | Eryurek et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050072239 | Longsdorf et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20060075009 | Lenz et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060277000 | Wehrs | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070010968 | Longsdorf et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
999950 | Nov 1976 | CA |
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 |
199 05 071 | Aug 2000 | DE |
19905071 | Aug 2000 | DE |
299 17 651 | Dec 2000 | DE |
199 47 129 | Apr 2001 | DE |
100 36 971 | Feb 2002 | DE |
102 23 725 | Apr 2003 | DE |
0 122 622 | Oct 1984 | EP |
0 413 814 | Feb 1991 | EP |
0 487 419 | May 1992 | EP |
0 512 794 | Nov 1992 | EP |
0 594 227 | Apr 1994 | EP |
0 624 847 | Nov 1994 | EP |
0 644 470 | Mar 1995 | EP |
0 697 586 | Feb 1996 | EP |
0 749 057 | Dec 1996 | EP |
0 825 506 | Jul 1997 | EP |
0 827 096 | Sep 1997 | EP |
0 838 768 | Sep 1997 | EP |
1 022 626 | Oct 1997 | EP |
0 807 804 | Nov 1997 | EP |
1 058 093 | May 1999 | EP |
0 335 957 | Nov 1999 | EP |
1 022 626 | Jul 2000 | EP |
2 302 514 | Sep 1976 | FR |
2 334 827 | Jul 1977 | FR |
928704 | Jun 1963 | GB |
1 534 280 | Nov 1978 | GB |
1 534 288 | Nov 1978 | GB |
2 310 346 | Aug 1997 | GB |
2 317 969 | Apr 1998 | GB |
2 342 453 | Apr 2000 | GB |
2 347 232 | Aug 2000 | GB |
56-031573 | Mar 1981 | JP |
57196619 | Feb 1982 | JP |
58-129316 | Aug 1983 | JP |
59-116811 | Jul 1984 | JP |
59-163520 | Sep 1984 | JP |
59-176643 | Oct 1984 | JP |
59-211196 | Nov 1984 | JP |
59-211896 | Nov 1984 | JP |
60-000507 | Jan 1985 | JP |
60-76619 | May 1985 | JP |
60-131495 | Jul 1985 | JP |
60-174915 | Sep 1985 | JP |
62-30915 | Feb 1987 | JP |
62-080535 | Apr 1987 | JP |
62-50901 | Sep 1987 | JP |
63-169532 | Jul 1988 | JP |
64-01914 | Jan 1989 | JP |
64-72699 | Mar 1989 | JP |
11-87430 | Jul 1989 | JP |
2-05105 | Jan 1990 | JP |
3-229124 | Oct 1991 | JP |
4-70906 | Mar 1992 | JP |
5-122768 | May 1993 | JP |
6-95882 | Apr 1994 | JP |
06242192 | Sep 1994 | JP |
06-248224 | Oct 1994 | JP |
7-063586 | Mar 1995 | JP |
07234988 | Sep 1995 | JP |
8-054923 | Feb 1996 | JP |
8-102241 | Apr 1996 | JP |
08-114638 | May 1996 | JP |
8-136386 | May 1996 | JP |
8-166309 | Jun 1996 | JP |
8-247076 | Sep 1996 | JP |
8-313466 | Nov 1996 | JP |
2712625 | Oct 1997 | JP |
2712701 | Oct 1997 | JP |
2753592 | Mar 1998 | JP |
07225530 | May 1998 | JP |
10-232170 | Sep 1998 | JP |
11-083575 | Mar 1999 | JP |
2190267 | Sep 2002 | RU |
WO 9425933 | Nov 1994 | WO |
WO 9523361 | Aug 1995 | 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 9814855 | Apr 1998 | WO |
WO 9820469 | May 1998 | WO |
WO 9839718 | Sep 1998 | WO |
WO 9919782 | Apr 1999 | WO |
WO 0041050 | Jul 2000 | WO |
WO 0055700 | Sep 2000 | WO |
WO 0070531 | Nov 2000 | WO |
WO 0101213 | Jan 2001 | WO |
WO 0119440 | Mar 2001 | WO |
WO 0177766 | Oct 2001 | WO |
WO 0190704 | Nov 2001 | WO |
WO 0227418 | Apr 2002 | WO |
WO 03081002 | Oct 2003 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20090083001 A1 | Mar 2009 | US |