The invention relates to process control and, more particularly, to tracking changes in the configuration of process control devices.
The terms “control” and “control systems” refer to the control of a device or system by monitoring one or more of its characteristics. This is used to insure that output, processing, quality and/or efficiency remain within desired parameters over the course of time. In many control systems, digital data processing or other automated apparatus monitor a device, process or system and automatically adjust its operational parameters. In other control systems, such apparatus monitor the device, process or system and display alarms or other indicia of its characteristics, leaving responsibility for adjustment to the operator.
Control is used in a number of fields. Process control, for example, is typically employed in the manufacturing sector for process, repetitive and discrete manufactures, though, it also has wide application in utility and other service industries. Environmental control finds application in residential, commercial, institutional and industrial settings, where temperature and other environmental factors must be properly maintained. Control is also used in articles of manufacture, from toasters to aircraft, to monitor and control device operation.
Modern day control systems typically include a combination of field devices, control devices, and controllers, the functions of which may overlap or be combined. Field devices include temperature, flow and other sensors that measure characteristics of the device, process or system being controlled. Control devices include valves, actuators, and the like, that control the device, process or system itself.
Controllers generate settings for the control devices based on measurements from the field devices. Controller operation is typically based on a “control algorithm” that maintains a controlled system at a desired level, or drives it to that level, by minimizing differences between the values measured by the sensors and, for example, a setpoint defined by the operator.
In a food processing plant, for example, a controller can be used to maintain a soup stock at a simmer or low boil. This is done by comparing measurements of vapor pressure in the processing vessel with a desired setpoint. If the vessel pressure is too low, the control algorithm may call for incrementally opening the heating gas valves, thereby, driving the pressure and boiling activity upwards. As the pressure approaches the desired setpoint, the algorithm requires incrementally leveling the valves to maintain the roil of the boil.
Controllers may be networked or otherwise connected to other computing apparatus that facilitate monitoring or administration. The so-called S88 industry standard, described in Batch Control—Part 1: Models and Terminology (The International Society for Measurement and Control 1995), for example, defines a hierarchy of processing and control equipment (“equipment entities”) that can be used to model and control an automated manufacturing process. At the lowest level of the hierarchy are control modules that directly manipulate field devices (e.g., opening and closing valves) and, possibly, other control modules. At a higher level, equipment modules coordinate the functions control modules, as well as of other equipment modules, and may execute phases of the manufacturing process (such as setting controller constants and modes). “Units,” at still a higher level of the hierarchy, coordinate the functions of equipment and control modules. Process cells orchestrate all processing activities required to produce a manufacturing batch, e.g., scheduling, preparing and monitoring equipment or resources, and so forth.
The principal function of controllers is executing control algorithms for the real-time monitoring and control of devices, processes or systems. They typically have neither the computing power nor user interfaces required to facilitate the design of a control algorithm. Instead, the art has developed configurators. These are typically general purpose computers (e.g., workstations) running software that permit an engineer or operator to graphically model a device, process or system and the desired strategy for controlling it. This includes enumerating field devices, control devices, controllers and other apparatus that will be used for control, specifying their interrelationships and the information that will be transferred among them, as well as detailing the calculations and methodology they will apply for purposes of control. Once modeling is complete and tested, the control algorithm is downloaded to the controllers.
One well known process control system configurator is that provided with the I/A Series® (hereinafter, “IAS” or “I/A”) systems, marketed by the assignee hereof. These provide a graphical interface (FoxCAE) permitting an engineer to model a process hierarchically and to define a control algorithm from that hierarchy. Multiple editors are provided for defining and modifying modules within the hierarchy. A change management system, FoxCMS®, also marketed by the assignee hereof, provides for logging of configuration changes downloaded to controllers by the I/A Series system.
Though prior art process control configuration systems, particularly, the IAS systems and others sold by the assignee hereof, have met wide acceptance in the industry, there remains room for improvement. Such is the case, for example, with respect to the configuration of complex control systems, as well as with the tracking of changes to the configurations of those systems.
In this context, an object of the present invention is to provide improved methods and apparatus for control and, particularly, for tracking changes to configurations of control systems.
A further object of the invention is to provide such methods and apparatus as facilitate tracking changes made outside traditional process control model configurators.
Still yet a further object of the invention is to provide such methods and apparatus as can be used with a range control systems, whether pertaining to process, environmental, manufacturing, industrial or other such control or otherwise.
The foregoing are among the objects attained by the invention, which provides, in one aspect, a process, environmental, manufacturing, industrial or other such control system (hereinafter, “control system”) with enhanced change tracking. The system includes one or more configurable elements (e.g., controllers, field devices, etc.), a change tracking system that records of changes to those configurable elements (e.g., for compliance reporting, etc.) and a change detection system that responds to changes made to the configuration of those elements (e.g., outside the purview of a configuration editor), by inferring an identity of a person and/or device responsible for a change, the time of the change, and/or the reason(s) for the change. This is unlike prior art systems, in which that such information is typically specified by an editor or other configurator subsystem, e.g., in a data entry form (or widget) completed by the field engineer, operator or other who is making the change.
Inference Based on Live Lists of Users
Related aspects of the invention provide systems, e.g., as described above, in which the change detection system infers the identity of a person responsible for a change from a list of “live” users on a control network to which the element(s) are coupled. These live users are, for example, those that are logged-in and/or active on the network.
In such a control system, by way of non-limiting example, the change detection system can respond to indication that the configuration of a field device has been changed (e.g., outside the configurator) by querying the network for a list of users who were logged-in at the time of the change and, further, for example, by winnowing down that list to identify users with sufficient access and permissions to effect the change. The change detection system can, further, winnow down such a list to identify (a) users who are expected to make changes (e.g., field engineers), and/or (b) users who are not expected to make changes and whose log-ins might suggest surreptitious activity.
In related aspects of the invention, the change detection system winnow the live user list based on the result of queries to asset management, employment, IT or other databases and/or other stores of information about the control system, the devices and/or the people with potential access to it and/or responsible for changing it. Continuing the example above, the change detection system can access a maintenance database to discern which of the users on the live list were expected to make a detected configuration change. Alternatively or in addition, that subsystem can access personnel databases to identify users that scheduled to have been on vacation at the time the change was made.
Further related aspects of the invention provide systems, e.g., as described above, in which the change detection system infers the identity of a person responsible for a change from information resident on and/or supplied by the device that made the change. In such a control system, by way of non-limiting example, the change detection system can respond to indications that the configuration of a field device has been changed by querying a proxy or other software executing on the responsible device for the identify of the operator (or “user”) who made the change. Thus, for example, that resident software can query memory locations on the device for the user's identity and can return that to the change detection subsystem.
Alternatively, or in addition, the resident software can query the user of that device directly, e.g., by way of a pop-up dialog box or otherwise to ask his/her identity. As above, queries by the change detection system to the resident software and/or responses by it can be made at or around the time the change is detected or subsequent thereto.
Inference Based on Live Lists of Devices
Other aspects of the invention provide systems, e.g., as described above, in which the change detection system infers the identity of a person and/or a device responsible for a change from a list of devices that were “live” on the control network at the time of the change—and, more particularly, for example, from a list of those live devices that were in direct or indirect communications coupling with changed element.
These live devices are, for example, those that are actively coupled to the network and on which a user is logged-in (or in which a process capable of effecting the change is active)—or that, more generally, are sufficiently coupled to the changed as to enable a user (or process) to effect the change to the configurable elements.
In such a control system, by way of non-limiting example, the change detection system can respond to a change (e.g., made outside the configurator) by querying the network for a list of devices that are active and logged in to the control network to identify those capable of effecting a configuration changes. The change detection system can, further, winnow down the live list to identify workstations, personal computers, portable computers, personal digital assistants and other devices on which a logged-in user might effect the detected change. It can further include, of example, winnowing such a list to identify (a) devices from which a change is expected to be made (e.g., a plant floor-based workstation, and/or (b) unexpected devices from which a surreptitious change might be made (e.g., an unregistered portable computer or PDA).
In further related aspects of the invention, the change detection system can query one or more devices identified from the live list, e.g., to identify the user responsible for the detected change. Thus, for example, the change detection system can query memory locations on the device to identify logged-in users (or active processes) at or around the time of the change.
Inference Based on Enterprise, Control System or Other Databases
In related aspects of the invention, the change detection system can supplant or supplement querying of the live lists of users and/or devices with querying of asset management, employment, IT or other databases and/or other stores of information about the control system, the devices and/or the people with potential access to it and/or responsible for changing it. Continuing the example above, the change detection system can access a maintenance database to discern which of the devices and/or their respective users on the live lists were expected to make a detected configuration change. Alternatively or in addition, that subsystem can access an IT database to identify which devices on such a list are assigned to which users and/or to identify which devices on that list were previously reported as checked-out/lost/stolen (and, thus, may be the source of permitted vs. surreptitious activity). Alternatively or in addition, that subsystem can access a personnel database to discern which of those users whose job roles included making changes of the type detected were on duty at the time of the change.
Still further aspects of the invention provide methods for process, environmental, manufacturing, industrial or other such control system with enhanced change tracking that parallel operation of the systems described above.
These and other aspects of the invention are evident in the drawings and in the discussion that follows.
A more complete understanding of the invention may be attained by reference to the drawings, in which:
System Architecture
The system of
Workstation 11 represents an engineering workstation, personal computer, mainframe computer or other digital data processing device suitable for modeling and/or configuring a control system 5 (e.g., here, controllers 10A, 10B and other control devices, such as actuators 18, sensors 24, 26, and other field devices and/or the apparatus controlled thereby). Though illustrated as being carried out on workstation 11, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the modeling and configuration functions can be executed on suitably configured controllers 10A, 10B or other control devices (e.g., smart field devices or other control devices those having sufficient processing power and interfaces to provide the graphical and other configuration functions described herein). A discussion of the use of smart field devices and other control devices for modeling and control is provided, by way of example, in U.S. Pat. No. 6,788,980, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Control Using Control Devices That Provide a Virtual Machine Environment and That Communicate Via an IP Network,” the teachings of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Network 14 provides a medium for communications, real-time or otherwise, among and/or between the elements of the control system 5, including workstation 11, change tracking system 16, controllers 10A, 10B and other control devices 18, 19, 24, 26 and controlled apparatus. The network 14 also provides a medium permitting the downloading of control algorithms and other configuration information, e.g., to controllers 10A, 10B and other control devices 18, 19, 24, 26 (or controlled apparatus), e.g., from workstation 11. It can also provide a medium for uploading information from controllers 10A, 10B and other control devices 18, 19, 24, 26 (or controlled apparatus) to those other digital data processors 11, 16. Though illustrated to represent a LAN, WAN, or global network (Internet), those skilled in the art will appreciate that element 14 may represent any medium or mechanism through which control algorithms and configuration and other information may be transported, electronically, physically or otherwise, to and from and/or among the illustrated elements 10A, 10B, 11, 16, 18, 19, 24, 26.
Change tracking system (CTS) 16 logs changes to the control system 5, e.g., to controllers 10A, 10B and the other control devices (e.g., actuators 18, sensors 24, 26, and other field devices) or controlled apparatus. This can be for regulatory purposes, safety purposes, maintenance purposes or otherwise, which the system 16 can additionally support, e.g., via retrieval and reporting services (discussed below). That logged information can include, by way of non-limiting example, control algorithms, operational parameters, I/O assignments, and so forth. In the illustrated embodiment, CTS 16 comprises a conventional change tracking (or management) system of the type known in the art and/or commercially available in the marketplace (e.g., the FoxCMS®, marketed by the assignee hereof) as adapted in accord with the teaching hereof.
Exemplary Control Subsystem
An exemplary subsystem 12A including a control process is illustrated in greater detail in
Entities 29, 30, 32 comprise software components which may include, by non-limiting example, source, intermediate or executable code, databases, of the type conventionally used in the art for operating controllers, field devices, control devices and other control equipment. Referenced in this regard in the discussion below are software components, and process control systems in general, marketed as the I/A Series® systems (hereinafter, “IAS” or “I/A”) available from the assignee hereof Those skilled in the art will appreciate that methods and apparatus according to the invention can be used to model processes and configure control algorithms for use with other control systems, as well.
Configurator
The illustrated system utilizes a Control Algorithm Configurator, to model and configure control processes, as well as to logging downloaded configuration information for change tracking. That system can be constructed and operated in the manner of process control configurators of the type known in the art—as adapted in accord with the teachings hereof. Thus, by way of example, it can be constructed and, operated in the manner of the process control configurator (i) referred to as the “IDA Control Algorithm Configurator,” and the like, in aforementioned incorporated-by-reference U.S. Pat. No. 6,754,885, and/or (ii) referred to as the “Control Algorithm Configurator,” the “Configurator,” in incorporated-by-reference U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/474,942—either or both, again, as adapted in accord with the teachings hereof.
By way of overview, the Configurator employs objects (or other data and/or programming constructs) to represent the devices that make up the control system, the entities that define the control algorithms executed by those devices, the processes or systems being monitored and/or controlled by those devices and algorithms, as well as the entities within the configuration apparatus itself.
In the illustrated embodiment, the objects represent, by way of non-limiting example, field devices, field bus modules (FBMs), control devices, control processors, blocks, loops, compounds, bus masters, bus slaves, networks, field buses, historians, object type categories, object connections, parameter connections, display placeholders, graphical display entities, and reports—all by way of non-limiting example. They also represent entities of a control level hierarchy, e.g., sites, areas, process cells, units, and the like. Thus, by way of non-limiting example, the Configurator utilizes objects to represent the elements shown in
In the illustrated embodiment, the objects are stored in the database(s) and are referred to as the “model,” the “configuration model,” the “control system model,” and the like. Such a model is depicted in the object diagrams provided in the figures attached to aforementioned incorporated-by-reference U.S. Pat. No. 6,754,885 and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/474,942 and discussed therein, as well as by the graphical and textual representations thereof (typically, in the context of the editors), again, in the figures attached thereto and discussed therein.
Parameters define characteristics of each object and, therefore, of the element or entity the object represents. Depending on the type of object, these include inputs, outputs, alarm limits, control functions and display characteristics, among others. Each parameter can have attributes that define the parameter's value and other attributes. These include, for example, parameter name, parameter grouping, display label, data type, behavior, help information, edit type, data value range, formula definition, and display format.
Databases
The control system model can be stored in central databases and/or distributed among workstation 11, controllers 10A, 10B and other control devices, e.g., as disclosed in aforementioned, incorporated-by-reference U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,096,465 and 6,788,980, as well as in PCT Application WO03/89,995, entitled “Methods and Apparatus for Process, Factory-Floor, Environmental, Computer Aided Manufacturing-Based or Other Control System With Real-Time Data Distribution,” the teachings of which are also incorporated herein by reference.
In addition to modeling database(s), the illustrated control system can include and/or be coupled to one or more enterprise, control system or other databases of the type typically employed by or in connection with control systems. These include, for example, asset management, employment, information technology (IT) or other databases and/or other stores of information about the control system, the devices and/or the people with potential access to the control system—i.e., the control devices (e.g., controllers 10A, 10B, workstation 11, change tracking system 16, and the other control devices, such as actuators 18, module 19, sensors 24, 26, and other field devices) or the apparatus controlled thereby.
The foregoing modeling databases and other databases are represented for illustrative purposes only by elements 34A-34E in the drawings. Though shown distributed around the control system, these may be consolidated in fewer or distributed among more such devices or elsewhere or otherwise, all in the conventional manner known in the art.
Configurator Architecture
Referring to
The editors are used by the implementation creator to create and maintain standard control scheme definition objects distributed with the implementation and by users to create their own plant control schemes. The Project Manager allows the user to browse through the project configuration hierarchies and data. Interactions among the editors and the project manager/navigator are shown, by way of non-limiting example, in
The database, which may comprise one of aforementioned components 34A-34E, forms part of an object oriented database management system (OODBMS), which may be any type commercially available in the marketplace. The database can be deployed in a client/server configuration with a single centralized database per plant servicing multiple clients, or otherwise. In the illustrated embodiment, it resides on the workstation 11, e.g., or on a digital data processor coupled therewith.
A user can employ Configurator editors to create and maintain control scheme definition objects distributed with the implementation and to create their own plant control schemes. Thus, for example, a user can employ an editor to define one object as a descendant of another object at the time of configuration. An object so defined derives parameters from its ancestor which, in turn, derives parameters from its own ancestors, and so forth. Editors also facilitate definition, during configuration, of the association between parameters and their respective objects. Editors can also be used, by way of non-limiting example, to establish relationships between objects—for example, a user can employ an editor to select objects that represent field devices and indicate (e.g., via a drag-and-drop operation, a menu option or other command) that she wishes to establish a relationship with an object that represents a control processor.
To illustrate by way of a non-limiting example, an apparatus according to the invention for use in configuring process control systems can employ an object to model a “conventional” analog input (AIN) field device of the type used in a particular product. That object can include output, high-high alarm, high-low alarm and other parameters of the type used for modeling such devices. The Configurator can be used to define a further object, one that models an analog input device for use in high-temperature environments. That object can descend from the general AIN object and inherit its parameters, e.g., the high-high alarm and high-low alarm parameters. Configuration-time changes to the parameters of the general AIN object can automatically carry through to the high-temperature AIN object, thus, facilitating configuration of the process control system.
The editor can be used to define a further object, one that models an analog input device for use for high-temperature measurements (throughout). That object can descend from the general AIN object and inherit its parameters, e.g., the high-high alarm and high-low alarm parameters, along with their respective attributes—e.g., their alarm value and track attributes. The editor can be used, for example, to alter those attributes, e.g., changing the alarm values, say, for the high-low alarm of the new object.
An editor of the type employed by the Configurator is shown, by way of example,
In addition to recording changes requested by users, preferred Configurator editors record the identity of the person making the change, the time of the change, and/or the reasons for the change. The editors can query users to supply some or all of this information with each change and/or can infer it from application or system logs. Thus, for example, configuration editors can determine user identity from system files identifying the currently logged-in user and can determine time of change from the system clock, all by way of example. The editors can query users for the change justifications (reasons) at the time of each change and/or at the time an edit session is begun.
Download System
Returning to
Upon invocation, the Download Service of the illustrated embodiment transfers configuration information from objects in the model to the devices that they (the objects) represent. Continuing with the example, this includes transferring, to the respective bus masters, communications configuration information for their respective segments. (Of course, where objects representing other control system elements have been changed, instead or in addition, it means transferring information for them, instead or in addition, respectively). Downloads can go directly to the respective devices or can go indirectly, e.g., via other devices, such as controllers, field bus modules, as per convention.
At the same time, the Download Service logs those transfers to the change tracking system (CTS) 16. This includes logging the downloaded device parameters, as well (in some embodiments) as the identity of the person and/or device making the change, the time of the change and of the download, and/or the reasons for the change. These transfers to the CTS can be via RPC calls, via calls to functions the CTS exposes in an applications program interface (API), or otherwise. In the illustrated embodiment, the transfers to the CTS are effected by XML files.
By way of example, in connection with downloading configuration information to a device whose system i.d. is “FBM00222,” the Download Service can generate an XML file named, for example, “FBM00222.xml” that contains a listing of parameters downloaded to the device, as well as their respective values—or, referring to the Parameter Definition attribute set above, by including in the XML file the “name” attribute of each parameter for which a value is downloaded, as well as that “value” attribute, though, other attributes can be used instead or in addition.
In other embodiments, the Download Service can generate and the change tracking system 16 can accept change-tracking information in other formats (e.g., as appended parameters to HTTP calls on network 14, as fields of remote procedure calls, or otherwise) and/or grouped in other ways (e.g., one file per parameter changed, multiple devices per file, or otherwise).
Change Tracking System
As noted above, change tracking system (CTS) 16 logs changes to the control system 5, e.g., to controllers 10A, 10B and the other control devices (e.g., actuators 18, module 19, sensors 24, 26, and other field devices) and/or the apparatus controlled thereby. This can be for regulatory purposes, safety purposes, maintenance purposes or otherwise, which the system 16 can additionally support, e.g., via retrieval and reporting services (discussed below). That logged information can include, by way of non-limiting example, control algorithms, operational parameters, I/O assignments, and so forth.
CTS 16 accepts XML files generated, e.g., by the Download Service, the field bus module editor and/or the field device editor, that contain textual (e.g. ASCII) or other representations of configuration information downloaded to devices and named to match (or otherwise in accord with) those devices. The textual or other representations contained in those files includes names of the fields, parameters, etc., to which information is downloaded, as well as the values so downloaded. In other embodiments, the change tracking system 16 can accept the information to be logged in other formats (e.g., as appended parameters to HTTP calls on network 14, as fields of remote procedure calls, or otherwise) and/or grouped in other ways (e.g., one file per parameter changed, multiple devices per file, or otherwise) and/or transmitted in accord with other protocols and/or mechanisms.
Configurator Revisited
In addition to permitting configuration changes to be downloaded (and tracked) after completion of edit sessions, the illustrated Field. Bus Module editor includes a Direct Download feature, that permits users to make direct and immediate (or “real-time”) edits of configuration values stored in the bus master devices. Thus, for example, as the user defines and/or modifies parameter values using the editor's dialog boxes and other edit controls, the editor invokes the FDT or other interface (hereinafter, “interface”) of the corresponding device to cause those values to be loaded into it (the device) while, at the same time, updating the corresponding model objects so that they maintain an accurate representation of the device. The editor also logs the changes to the change tracking system 19, e.g., in the same manner as the Download Service logs transfers it makes to such devices (e.g., via the use of XML files), as discussed below.
The Configurator may incorporate other editors, with greater or lesser functionality than that discussed above in connection with
A further appreciation of the editors, download system, change tracking system (or “change tracking service”), and Configurator utilized in an embodiment of the invention may be attained by reference to incorporated-by-reference U.S. Pat. No. 6,754,885 and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/474,942.
As those skilled in the art will appreciated, other embodiments may utilize editors, download services and/or change tracking services that operate in other ways, known in the art or otherwise.
Enhanced Change Tracking
Illustrated control system 5, additionally, tracks configuration changes that are made outside the Configurator (and Download Service). Thus, for example, it can log to the CTS 16 changes made to configurable elements in the control system directly and/or indirectly (e.g., via other elements of the control system—other than the Configurator). In addition to logging those changes to CTS 16, the system infers the identity of the person (and/or device) responsible for the change, the time of the change and/or the reason(s) for the change. This is information that would normally be recorded by the Configurator and logged to the CTS along with the changes themselves. This is unlike prior art systems in changes made outside the configuration editor may be undetected or, if detected, lacks additional identity/time/reason information necessary for adequate record-keeping.
This is advantageous, for example, in tracking changes made to controllers, field bus managers, “smart” field devices and/or other control devices with embedded processors and/or other logic suitable for direct configuration via on-board keypads, etc. and/or via self-generated configuration interfaces (accessible by network 14 and/or segment 14a, wirelessly, or otherwise). Even for devices or apparatus that do not themselves provide for direct configuration, this is useful for tracking changes made to them via other devices, whether part of the control system or not. This can include, for example, tracking changes made by ad hoc, but permitted devices, as well as tracking changes made by rogue devices and/or in surreptitious manners.
As used herein, references to the “time” a change is made to a configurable element of the control system mean a date or time and, many embodiments, both. Moreover, the terms “users,” “operators” and like refer not only to persons that are utilizing workstations, personal computers, portable computers, PDAs, and/or other devices from which changes to configurable elements may be effected, but also to daemons and other processes that are executing autonomously (or otherwise) on such devices.
Referring back to
The configuration of CDS 30 shown here is by way of example. In other embodiments, the CDS 30 may be distributed among other devices of the control system and/or of the controlled apparatus. Alternatively, it may be consolidated in a single one of those device or in another element of the system (e.g., within change tracking system 16 or within a dedicated change detection system). Regardless, the components 30A-30D may be implemented in software executing on general purpose processors (embedded or otherwise) of their respective devices 10A, 10B, 11, 19; though, in other embodiments, they may be implemented on special-purpose hardware, instead or in addition, all in accord with the teachings hereof.
Operation of Illustrated CDS 30 is shown in
In step 50, the CDS 30 detects that a change has been made in one of the configurable elements of the control system 5—and, specifically, that the configuration of that element varies from that reflected in the control model. Typically, this indicates that a change to the element has been made outside the Configurator (and Download Service). This may be, for example, a change to workstation 11, though, of potentially greater import, it may be a change to network segments 14a, controllers 10A, 10B and the other control devices (e.g., actuators 18, module 19, sensors 24, 26, and other field devices) and/or the apparatus controlled thereby—some or all of which may be remotely disposed (e.g., from the workstation 11) and, therefore, potentially subject to unsupervised or even surreptitious change.
Changes may be detected in any of several ways, depending on configuration of the network 14, the capabilities of the respective configurable elements, and so forth. This includes polling one or more of the elements (step 52), responding to change alert signalling initiated by the elements themselves (step 54) and/or comparing the element configurations (a) during downloads initiated by the Configurator or operator and/or when a device or other element is added to or sync's with the control system (step 56).
In step 52, the CDS 30 queries each of one or more of the configurable elements on an ad hoc, sporadic and/or period basis, e.g., hourly or daily to determine if the configuration of that element has changed since the time of the last download from the Configurator. The query can be made via network 14 or other communications mechanism (e.g., a separate wired or wireless channel) in accord with the protocol employed by that network and/or communications mechanism and by the element being queried. Other queries discussed in the text that follows may be made via similar mechanisms or otherwise.
In the illustrated embodiment, the query takes place in a few phases. In a first phase (step 52A), the CDS queries each element for preliminary data indicating that a change has or might have been made to the element's configuration. Such a preliminary query can be for the value of a change flag stored on the element, for an identifier (e.g., version number or timestamp) of the current configuration stored on that device, for a checksum of that configuration, and/or for some other information from which the CDS 30 can discern that a change may have been made outside the configurator (but not necessarily what the change is).
The CDS can then compare that data with information maintained in the modeling databases regarding the configuration last downloaded from the Configurator (e.g., by the Download Service). If the comparison suggests that the configurations match or, put another way, that no change has been made to the queried element since the time of the last download from the Configurator—the CDS treats that configurable element as unchanged and proceeds with polling (e.g., entering a wait state until the next scheduled polling of that element or querying the configurable element in the polling sequence).
On the other hand, if the information gained by the CDS 30 in the first query suggests that that a change has been made to the queried element since the time of the last download from the Configurator, the CDS can proceed with a second phase of the query. See step 52B. In this phase, the CDS 30 queries the configurable element for detailed data regarding the element's current configuration. In the illustrated embodiment, this includes all or a portion of the configuration stored on the element, along with any associated information maintained by the element about that configuration (e.g., download timestamp, download port, etc.)
While in some embodiments, the CDS compares that more detailed data with correspondingly more detailed information from maintained in the modeling databases regarding the configuration last downloaded from the Configurator to verify whether indeed a change has been made (and, if not, ignores or logs the results of the preliminary phase 52A and proceeds with polling as above), in other embodiments it readies that data for logging to the CTS along with the “inferred” information discussed below in connection with steps 62-76.
As those skilled in the art will appreciate, a multi-phase query of the type exemplified in steps 52A-52B has the advantage of reducing the “administrative” load placed on the CDS 30, the configurable elements and the network 14 during polling. Accordingly, in some embodiments, the CDS performs the query in more than two phases. Likewise, in some embodiments, the CDS delays the second phase until such times as the normal operational load on the configurable elements and/or the network 14 is reduced. Notwithstanding the advantages of a multi-phase query, in some embodiments, querying is accomplished in a single phase.
Alternatively or in addition to the polling discussed above, the CDS 30 can detect that a configurable element has been changed via alert signalling received directly from that element indicating that its configuration has (or is being) changed. See step 54A. In this regard, smart field devices and/or other configurable elements may be equipped with native (or other) functionality that causes them to generate alerts whenever changes are made to their configurations via on-board keypads, etc. and/or via self-generated configuration interfaces accessible by network 14 and/or segment 14a, wirelessly, or otherwise. Such alerts can be received by the CDS 30 from the configurable element via network 14 or other communications mechanism, as above. In some embodiments, these alerts can include timestamps reflecting the time that changes are made.
Upon receiving such an alert, the CDS 30 queries the element that generated it for detailed data regarding that element's current configuration. See step 54B. As with step 52B, in the illustrated embodiment, this includes all or a portion of the configuration stored on the element, along with any associated information maintained by the element about that configuration (e.g., download timestamp, download port, etc.)
As above, in some embodiments, the CDS compares that more detailed data with correspondingly more detailed information from the modeling databases regarding the configuration last downloaded from the Configurator to verify whether indeed a change has been made and, if so, readies that data for logging to the CTS along with the inferred information gained in steps 62-76, discussed below. (As above, if the comparison reveals that no change has been made, the CDS can ignore the alert or simply log it).
With continued reference to step 54, in some embodiments, the alert signalling referred to above need not come directly from the element that has been (or is being) changed. Rather, the CDS 30 can respond to an alert received from a first element of the control system (e.g., a field bus module or a controller) indicating that a second element of the system (e.g., a field device) has been or is being changed by querying that second element as discussed above in connection with step 54B and readying the more detailed data obtained from it for logging, as discussed above.
Alternatively or in addition to polling and/or responding to alerts signaled by a changed element, the CDS 30 can be alerted by the Configurator that a configurable element of the control system (a) has been changed other than through operation of the Configurator and/or the Download Service, and/or (b) has been newly added to and/or sync's with the control system. See step 56.
In this regard, the Configurator can utilize the Download Service, or related functionality, to upload all or a portion of the configuration stored on the configurable element, along with any associated information maintained by the element about that configuration (e.g., download timestamp, download port, etc.), and can compare that data with corresponding information in the modeling databases regarding the configuration last downloaded to that element. The Configurator can do this (a) when a Configurator editor for the element is invoked, (b) when the Download Service is invoked to download editor-made changes to that element, (c) when an element is newly coupled to the control system and/or attempts to sync with it, or at another time. If it detects differences, the Configurator can notify the CDS 30 and can supply to it data for logging to the CTS along with the inferred information gained in steps 62-76, discussed below.
Though step 56 is performed by the Configurator in some embodiments, in others one or more aspects of those steps are performed by the CDS 30—for example, on being alerted by the Configurator that it (the Configurator) is being invoked to edit one or more objects in the control model pertaining to a given element. Alternatively, or in addition, the Configurator can query such an element in phases, e.g., as discussed above in connection with steps 52A-52B, alerting the CDS 30 that the element has (or may have been changed) after either step of the query
In step 60, the CDS infers information about the change to a configurable element detected in steps 50-56. That change is often referred to below, simply, as the “change,” the “detected change,” or the like. As above, this may be done in any of several ways, depending configuration of the network 14, the capabilities of the respective configurable elements, and so forth. This includes determining the time of change (step 62), inferring the identify of the device responsible for the change (step 72), inferring the identity of the person responsible for the change (step 74), and/or inferring the reason(s) for the change (step 76), e.g., based on queries to the changed device, the control system, enterprise databases and the like (steps 64-70). The inferences—and the queries upon which they are based—in connection with the illustrated embodiment are discussed below; other embodiments may make other inferences, instead or in addition, and may base them on other queries, instead or in addition.
In step 62, the CDS 30 responds to detection of a change to a configurable element by determining and/or inferring the time of the change. Specifics of the determination or inference vary with in accord with the manner of detection, the type of the configurable elements, and so forth.
Thus, for example, in the case of changes that are expected to be detected in real-time, e.g., changes detected in step 54 via alert signalling received directly from the changed element, the CDS 30 takes the time of alert as an estimate of the time of change. See step 62A. In instances where the CDS queries the CDS for more detailed data, e.g., as in step 54B, a timestamp or other information returned by the query can further inform the estimate of the time of change.
By way of further example, in the case of changes that are determined by polling, e.g., changes detected in step 52, the CDS estimates as the time of change (or, perhaps, more accurately, the period of change) the time interval since the configurable element was last updated by the Configurator (or Download Service) or since the last polling, whichever is later. Again, in instances where the CDS queries the CDS for more detailed data, e.g., as in step 52B, a timestamp or other information returned by the query can further inform the estimate of the time of change.
By way of still further example, in the case of changes to a configurable element that are detected by the Configurator, e.g., in step 56, the CDS estimates as the period of change the time interval since the configurable element was last updated by the Configurator (or Download Service). Again, in instances where the CDS queries the CDS for more detailed data, e.g., as in step 56, a timestamp or other information returned by the query can further inform the estimate of the time of change.
By way of still further example, the time of change may be indicated in an alert generated by a changed element or by another element of the control system. In such cases, the time of change can be determined directly from the alert.
In step 64, the CDS 30 queries the element whose configuration has been changed to discern the identity of workstation, personal computer, portable computer, PDA or other device that made the change. The CDS can also query the changed element for the identity of the person responsible for the change, as well as the reason(s) for the change, though such information would not typically expected to be stored in the changed elements (particularly, for example, if it is a controller or field device). Regardless, the querying of step 64 can be in connection with a more detailed data query, e.g., as of the type discussed above in connection with step 54B, and/or it can be a separate query from the CDS to that element.
In step 66, the CDS 30 queries the network 14 (and, more generally, the control system) for a “live list” of active devices on the local control network from which the identity of the person/device responsible for the change may be inferred. If the change is estimated (e.g., in step 62) to have recently occurred, the query is for currently or recently active devices. If the change occurred earlier, the CDS queries the control system for devices active around the estimated time of the change, e.g., as determined in step 62.
The query of step 66 is directed to net log lists, IP address tables and other indicia of devices (such as workstations, personal computers, portable computers and PDAs, to name a few examples) communicatively coupled to network 14 and, more particularly, to a network segment (e.g., 14B) on which the changed element resides. Depending on the configuration of network 14 and/or control system 5, the CDS directs these queries to intrusion detection apparatus, routers, switches, gateways and or other elements (not shown) of the network 14 that are responsible authorizing elements on the network, granting them identities (e.g., IP addresses) and/or otherwise permitted them to communicate with (and, more particularly, for example, to configure) to effect the detected change.
In step 68, the CDS 30 likewise queries the network 14 (and, more generally, the control system) for a list of “live” (or active) users on the local control network, also for purposes of inferring the identity of the person/device responsible for the change. As above, if the change is estimated (e.g., in step 62) to have recently occurred, the query is for currently or recently active users. If the change occurred earlier, the CDS queries the control system queries for users active around the estimated time of the change.
The query of step 68 is directed to user lists, process lists, and other indicia of users logged into network 14 and, more particularly, to a network segment (e.g., 14B) on which the changed element resides. Depending on the configuration of network 14 and/or control system 5, the CDS directs these queries to workstations and/or other elements (not shown) of the network 14 into which users may log for access, e.g., to the changed element.
In step 70, the CDS 30 queries control and “enterprise” databases for information from which can be discerned the actual or possible identity of the person responsible for the change and/or the actual or possible reasons for the change. The queried databases includes asset management, employment, IT or other databases and/or other stores of information about the control system, the devices and/or the people with potential access to it and/or responsible for changing it, along with maintenance schedules, etc. These may be databases and stores of the type discussed above in connection with elements 34A-34E and/or they may be other databases and stores that are directly or indirectly coupled to the control system and, more particularly, to CDS 30, e.g., via network 14 or otherwise.
The query of step 70 can be directed to, by way of non-limiting example, employee lists (including recent hire lists and recent termination lists) that include user names, vacation/sick/time-off lists, punch-card data or other time-in and time-out information, areas of technical responsibility, areas of responsibility of physical plan, plant and network access privileges, and so forth, along with maintenance schedules, repair logs, repair requests, and so forth.
In step 72, the CDS discerns the identity of the device responsible for the change, if not evident, e.g., from the query performed in step 64. By way of example, the CDS 30 winnows down the live list to identify workstations, personal computers, portable computers, PDAs and other devices on which a logged-in user might effect the change. By way of example, the CDS 30 can further winnow down the list to identify (a) devices from which a change is expected to be made (e.g., a plant floor-based workstation, and/or (b) unexpected devices from which a surreptitious change might be made (e.g., an unregistered portable computer or PDA).
By way of still further example, the CDS can winnow down the list of live devices by reconciling them against information gained in step 70 regarding the capabilities of those devices. This may lead to an indication of a likely device or devices, e.g., where the CDS determines that only one of the active devices on the same network segment (e.g., 14A) as the changed element is likely capable of effecting the change—such as may be the inference where the list of live devices on that segment includes a singe user-controllable device, such as PDA 40 or a portable computer, along with one or more controllers or field devices (which, as a general matter, are less amenable to direct user control).
Following winnowing, the CDS can query the likely device(s) for additional information from which an inference of responsibility may be drawn. This includes, by way of non-limiting example, user lists, process lists, and other indicia of users who used the device at or around the time of the change, network connectivity lists and other indicia of networks, etc., to which the device was coupled at about that time, and so forth.
In some embodiments of the invention, apart from the Configurator, only authorized devices may be used to configure the configurable elements (or at least selected ones of the configurable elements, e.g., those deemed mission critical). One such device here, a PDA (by way of non-limiting example) that is coupled to controller 10A—is illustrated in
In step 74, the CDS discerns the identity of the person responsible for the change. By way of example, the CDS 30 winnows down the live list to identify users with sufficient access and permissions to effect the signaled change, e.g., as determined from information gained in step 70. It can also use that information to winnow down the list to identify (a) users who are expected to make changes (e.g., field engineers), and/or (b) users who are not expected to make changes and whose log-ins might suggest surreptitious activity.
Combining the operations in steps 72 and 74, the CDS can infer a likely user (or users), e.g., as where the CDS determines that of plural devices active on the network at the time of the change, one was in use at that time by a logged-in user whose technical areas of responsibility included apparatus in the nature of the changed element and/or whose physical plant responsibilities include that element and/or who was scheduled to perform maintenance on that or nearby element.
The CDS can make other use of information from the enterprise or control databases in winnowing down the live list of users. By way of further example, it can access a maintenance database to discern which of the users on the live list were expected to make a detected configuration change. Alternatively or in addition, it can access personnel databases to identify users that were scheduled to have been on vacation at the time the change was made.
In step 76, the CDS discerns the reason (or possible reasons) for the change. To this end, the CDS 30 matches information gained in step 70 with information gained in steps 62 (and possibly steps 72 and 74) to identify maintenance requests, error logs or other indicia of reasons for a change. Thus, for example, if the configuration of an actuator 18 is changed (other than through action of the Configurator) following successive maintenance log entries suggesting faulty operation, the CDS 30 may infer that the reason for change was to replace (or repair) the faulty unit. The CDS 30 may corroborate the inferences with other information from the database and/or from the live user and live device logs, e.g., as where the field technician with responsibility for maintenance of the relevant portion of the plant was on duty and logged-in at the time of the apparent maintenance action.
As noted above, the inferences made in the illustrated embodiment and discussed above in connection with steps 62 and 72-76, are by way of example. Other embodiments may make other inferences instead or in addition to those discussed here, e.g., based on broken connections, incomplete processes, non-logged users, etc. Moreover, the aforementioned inferences may be based on queries other than, or in addition to, those discussed in steps 64-70. Thus, by way of example, the CDS can query one or more users whom it infers may have made the change, e.g., by way of a text message-based query, email-based query, pop-up dialog box or otherwise to ask his/her identity, their location at or around the time of the change, and/or for the reason for the change. Still, further, the “reason” inferred, e.g., in step 76, may comprise a multiple possible reasons—e.g., in instances where the change can be attributed to several possible causes (mutually exclusive or otherwise).
Regardless, in step 80, the CDS transmits the inference(s) to the CTS along with the other data discussed above in connection with steps 52, 54, and 56. As above, these transfers to the CTS can be via RPC calls, via calls to functions the CTS exposes in an applications program interface (API), or otherwise. In the illustrated embodiment, the transfers to the CTS are effected by XML files.
Described above are apparatus, systems and methods meeting the aforementioned objects, among others. It will be appreciated that the embodiments described herein are merely examples of the invention and that other embodiments, making changes to that shown herein, are within the scope of the invention. Thus, by way of non-limiting example, it will be appreciated that one or more of steps 62 and 76 may be executed by the CTS and/or other elements of the control system. Along these lines, for example, the CDS 30 may transfer the live lists of users and/or devices to the CTS which, itself, may execute one or more of the operations discussed above in connection with steps 72-76, by way of non-limiting example. In view of the foregoing, what we claim is:
This application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/474,942, filed May 29, 2009 now U.S. Pat. No. 8,127,060, entitled “Methods And Apparatus For Control Configuration With Control Objects That Are Fieldbus Protocol Aware,” and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/474,885, filed May 29, 2009 now U.S. Pat. No. 8,122,434, entitled “Methods And Apparatus For Control Configuration With Control Objects That Self-Define Tracked. Parameters,” the teachings of both of which are incorporated herein by reference. This application is related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/265,837, filed Nov. 6, 2008, entitled “Apparatus for Control Systems with Objects that Are Associated with Live Data,” which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 12/247,872, filed Oct. 8, 2008 and entitled “CONTROL SYSTEM EDITOR AND METHODS WITH LIVE DATA”, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/434,005, filed May 15, 2006 and entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONTROL CONFIGURATION USING LIVE DATA”, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 09/572,343, filed May 17, 2000, entitled “METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR CONTROL CONFIGURATION WITH VERSIONING, SECURITY, COMPOSITE BLOCKS, EDIT SELECTION, OBJECT SWAPPING, FORMULAIC VALUES AND OTHER ASPECTS” (now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,272,815), which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 09/448,223, filed. Nov. 23, 1999, entitled “PROCESS CONTROL CONFIGURATION SYSTEM WITH CONNECTION VALIDATION AND CONFIGURATION” (now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,089,530) and is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 09/448,374, filed Nov. 23, 1999, entitled “PROCESS CONTROL CONFIGURATION SYSTEM WITH PARAMETERIZED OBJECTS” (now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,096,465) and is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 09/448,845, filed Nov. 23, 1999, entitled “METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING OBJECT APPEARANCE IN A PROCESS CONTROL CONFIGURATION SYSTEM” (now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 6,754,885) and which claims the benefit of priority of U.S. Application Ser. No. 60/134,597, filed May 17, 1999, entitled “INTEGRATED DESIGN AUTOMATION CONTROL STRATEGY CONFIGURATOR ARCHITECTURE”; the teachings of all of the aforementioned applications (including the forms thereof published by the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the patents issued therefrom, including, by way of non-limiting example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,754,885, 7,096,465, 7,089,530, 7,272,815), are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3096434 | King | Jul 1963 | A |
3404264 | Kugler | Oct 1968 | A |
3665172 | Spaargaren et al. | May 1972 | A |
3701280 | Stroman | Oct 1972 | A |
3802590 | Culver | Apr 1974 | A |
3810119 | Zieve et al. | May 1974 | A |
3825905 | Allen, Jr. | Jul 1974 | A |
3959772 | Wakasa et al. | May 1976 | A |
4006464 | Landell | Feb 1977 | A |
RE29383 | Gallatin et al. | Sep 1977 | E |
4058975 | Gilbert et al. | Nov 1977 | A |
4096566 | Borie et al. | Jun 1978 | A |
4276593 | Hansen | Jun 1981 | A |
4302820 | Struger et al. | Nov 1981 | A |
4312068 | Goss et al. | Jan 1982 | A |
4323966 | Whiteside et al. | Apr 1982 | A |
4347563 | Paredes et al. | Aug 1982 | A |
4351023 | Richer | Sep 1982 | A |
4377000 | Staab | Mar 1983 | A |
4410942 | Milligan et al. | Oct 1983 | A |
4413314 | Slater et al. | Nov 1983 | A |
4423486 | Berner | Dec 1983 | A |
4428044 | Liron | Jan 1984 | A |
4435762 | Milligan et al. | Mar 1984 | A |
4443861 | Slater | Apr 1984 | A |
4456997 | Spitza | Jun 1984 | A |
4466098 | Southard | Aug 1984 | A |
4471457 | Videki, II | Sep 1984 | A |
4488226 | Wagner, Jr. et al. | Dec 1984 | A |
4493027 | Katz et al. | Jan 1985 | A |
4530234 | Cullick et al. | Jul 1985 | A |
4609995 | Hasebe | Sep 1986 | A |
4612620 | Davis et al. | Sep 1986 | A |
4615001 | Hudgins, Jr. | Sep 1986 | A |
4628437 | Poschmann et al. | Dec 1986 | A |
4633217 | Akano | Dec 1986 | A |
4639852 | Motomiya | Jan 1987 | A |
4641269 | Japenga et al. | Feb 1987 | A |
4641276 | Dunki-Jacobs | Feb 1987 | A |
4648064 | Morley | Mar 1987 | A |
4649479 | Advani et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
4663704 | Jones et al. | May 1987 | A |
4672530 | Schuss | Jun 1987 | A |
4675812 | Capowski et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
4682158 | Ito et al. | Jul 1987 | A |
4682304 | Tierney | Jul 1987 | A |
4683530 | Quatse | Jul 1987 | A |
4692859 | Ott | Sep 1987 | A |
4692918 | Elliott et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
4703421 | Abrant et al. | Oct 1987 | A |
4704676 | Flanagan et al. | Nov 1987 | A |
4709325 | Yajima | Nov 1987 | A |
4719593 | Threewitt et al. | Jan 1988 | A |
4727477 | Gavril | Feb 1988 | A |
4733366 | Deyesso et al. | Mar 1988 | A |
4740955 | Litterer et al. | Apr 1988 | A |
4742349 | Miesterfeld et al. | May 1988 | A |
4750109 | Kita | Jun 1988 | A |
4770841 | Haley et al. | Sep 1988 | A |
4790762 | Harms et al. | Dec 1988 | A |
4800512 | Busch | Jan 1989 | A |
4805107 | Kieckhafer et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
4806905 | McGowan, III et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
4816996 | Hill et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4817094 | Lebizay et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4839854 | Sakami et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4872106 | Slater | Oct 1989 | A |
4885707 | Nichol et al. | Dec 1989 | A |
4896290 | Rhodes et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
4897777 | Janke et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
RE33162 | Yoshida et al. | Feb 1990 | E |
4910658 | Dudash et al. | Mar 1990 | A |
4910691 | Skeirik | Mar 1990 | A |
4918690 | Markkula, Jr. et al. | Apr 1990 | A |
4924462 | Sojka | May 1990 | A |
4926158 | Zeigler | May 1990 | A |
4934196 | Romano | Jun 1990 | A |
4940974 | Sojka | Jul 1990 | A |
4958277 | Hill et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
4959774 | Davis | Sep 1990 | A |
4965717 | Cutts, Jr. et al. | Oct 1990 | A |
4965742 | Skeirik | Oct 1990 | A |
4965880 | Petitjean | Oct 1990 | A |
4991076 | Zifferer et al. | Feb 1991 | A |
4991170 | Kem | Feb 1991 | A |
5008805 | Fiebig et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
5050165 | Yoshioka et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
5068778 | Kosem et al. | Nov 1991 | A |
5089927 | Bulan et al. | Feb 1992 | A |
5089974 | Demeyer et al. | Feb 1992 | A |
5109692 | Fitzgerald | May 1992 | A |
5121318 | Lipner et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5122948 | Zapolin | Jun 1992 | A |
5124908 | Broadbent | Jun 1992 | A |
5129087 | Will | Jul 1992 | A |
5131092 | Sackmann et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5134574 | Beaverstock et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5136704 | Danielsen et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5138708 | Vosbury | Aug 1992 | A |
5140677 | Fleming et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5146589 | Peet, Jr. et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5150289 | Badavas | Sep 1992 | A |
5151930 | Hagl | Sep 1992 | A |
5151978 | Bronikowski et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5151981 | Westcott et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5159673 | Sackmann et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5162986 | Graber et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5163055 | Lee et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5164894 | Cunningham-Reid et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5166685 | Campbell, Jr. et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5167009 | Skeirik | Nov 1992 | A |
5168276 | Huston et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5168441 | Onarheim et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5170340 | Prokop et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5175698 | Barbanell | Dec 1992 | A |
5175829 | Stumpf et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5181978 | Ochiai | Jan 1993 | A |
5193175 | Cutts, Jr. et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5197114 | Skeirik | Mar 1993 | A |
5202961 | Mills et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5212784 | Sparks | May 1993 | A |
5218187 | Koenck et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5224203 | Skeirik | Jun 1993 | A |
5233615 | Goetz | Aug 1993 | A |
5245704 | Weber et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5249274 | Sztipanovits et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5251125 | Karnowski et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5255367 | Bruckert et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5257208 | Brown et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5258999 | Wernimont et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5271013 | Gleeson | Dec 1993 | A |
5276901 | Howell et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5283729 | Lloyd | Feb 1994 | A |
5289365 | Caldwell et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5291390 | Satou | Mar 1994 | A |
5295258 | Jewett et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5295263 | Kojima et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5297143 | Fridrich et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5301346 | Notarianni et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5302952 | Campbell, Jr. et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5303227 | Herold et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5303375 | Collins et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5303392 | Carney et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5307346 | Fieldhouse | Apr 1994 | A |
5307372 | Sawyer et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5307463 | Hyatt et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5309556 | Sismilich | May 1994 | A |
5310998 | Okuno | May 1994 | A |
5317726 | Horst | May 1994 | A |
5325339 | Yost et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5327144 | Stilp et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5335186 | Tarrant | Aug 1994 | A |
5335221 | Snowbarger et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5339362 | Harris | Aug 1994 | A |
5339680 | Bronkal et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5347181 | Ashby et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5349343 | Oliver | Sep 1994 | A |
5349678 | Morris et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5352033 | Gresham et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5353217 | Berghs et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5359721 | Kempf et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5361198 | Harmon et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5367640 | Hamilton et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5371895 | Bristol | Dec 1994 | A |
5377315 | Leggett | Dec 1994 | A |
5381529 | Matsushima | Jan 1995 | A |
5384910 | Torres | Jan 1995 | A |
5386373 | Keeler et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5386417 | Daugherty et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5390321 | Proesel | Feb 1995 | A |
5392280 | Zheng | Feb 1995 | A |
5392389 | Fleming | Feb 1995 | A |
5394522 | Sanchez-Frank et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5398331 | Huang et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5400140 | Johnston | Mar 1995 | A |
5405779 | McCabe et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5408603 | Van de Lavoir et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5410141 | Koenck et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5410492 | Gross et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5410717 | Floro | Apr 1995 | A |
5420977 | Sztipanovits et al. | May 1995 | A |
5421017 | Scholz et al. | May 1995 | A |
5422816 | Sprague et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5426732 | Boies et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5428734 | Haynes et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5428769 | Glaser et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5428781 | Duault et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5432705 | Severt et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5432711 | Jackson et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5434952 | Yen et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5434997 | Landry et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5437007 | Bailey et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5440237 | Brown et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5442639 | Crowder et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5442791 | Wrabetz et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5444851 | Woest | Aug 1995 | A |
5444861 | Adamec et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5450403 | Ichii et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5450425 | Gunn et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5450764 | Johnston | Sep 1995 | A |
5451923 | Seberger et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5451939 | Price | Sep 1995 | A |
5452201 | Pieronek et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5453933 | Wright et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5457797 | Butterworth et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5459825 | Anderson et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5459839 | Swarts et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5461611 | Drake, Jr. et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5461710 | Bloomfield et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5463735 | Pascucci et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5467264 | Rauch et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5469150 | Sitte | Nov 1995 | A |
5469570 | Shibata | Nov 1995 | A |
5475856 | Kogge | Dec 1995 | A |
5481715 | Hamilton et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5481718 | Ryu et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5481741 | McKaskle et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5483660 | Yishay et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5485617 | Stutz et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5485620 | Sadre et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5490276 | Doli, Jr. et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5491625 | Pressnall et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5491791 | Glowny et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5493534 | Mok | Feb 1996 | A |
5499023 | Goldschmidt | Mar 1996 | A |
5499365 | Anderson et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5499371 | Henninger et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5500934 | Austin et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5501608 | Scheer et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5504672 | Hardiman et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5504895 | Kurosawa et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5504902 | McGrath et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5509811 | Homic | Apr 1996 | A |
5513095 | Pajonk | Apr 1996 | A |
5513192 | Janku et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5513354 | Dwork et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5517645 | Stutz et al. | May 1996 | A |
5517655 | Collins et al. | May 1996 | A |
5519605 | Cawlfield | May 1996 | A |
5519701 | Colmant et al. | May 1996 | A |
5522044 | Pascucci et al. | May 1996 | A |
5526287 | French | Jun 1996 | A |
5526353 | Henley et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5530377 | Walls | Jun 1996 | A |
5530643 | Hodorowski | Jun 1996 | A |
5530868 | Record et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5531328 | Rochelo et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5534912 | Kostreski | Jul 1996 | A |
5535425 | Watanabe | Jul 1996 | A |
5537548 | Fin et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5539638 | Keeler et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5539909 | Tanaka et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5541810 | Donhauser et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5542039 | Brinson et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5544008 | Dimmick et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5544073 | Piety et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5544321 | Theimer et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5548528 | Keeler et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5549137 | Lenz et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5550980 | Pascucci et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5551047 | Mori et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5555213 | DeLong | Sep 1996 | A |
5555416 | Owens et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5555437 | Packer | Sep 1996 | A |
5555510 | Verseput et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5557559 | Rhodes | Sep 1996 | A |
5559691 | Monta et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5559963 | Gregg et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5561770 | de Bruijn et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5563400 | Le Roux | Oct 1996 | A |
5564055 | Asnaashari et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5566320 | Hubert | Oct 1996 | A |
5568378 | Wojsznis | Oct 1996 | A |
5570300 | Henry et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5572643 | Judson | Nov 1996 | A |
5572673 | Shurts | Nov 1996 | A |
5576946 | Bender et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5579220 | Barthel et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5579487 | Meyerson et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5581760 | Atkinson et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5586066 | White et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5586112 | Tabata | Dec 1996 | A |
5586156 | Gaubatz | Dec 1996 | A |
5586329 | Knudsen et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5586330 | Knudsen et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5587899 | Ho et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5594858 | Blevins | Jan 1997 | A |
5594899 | Knudsen et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5596331 | Bonaffini et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5596752 | Knudsen et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5598536 | Slaughter, III et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5598566 | Pascucci et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5600845 | Gilson | Feb 1997 | A |
5602749 | Vosburgh | Feb 1997 | A |
5604737 | Iwami et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5604871 | Pecone | Feb 1997 | A |
5608607 | Dittmer | Mar 1997 | A |
5608608 | Flint et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5611057 | Pecone et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5613148 | Bezviner et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5613164 | DiAngelo et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5613190 | Hylton | Mar 1997 | A |
5617540 | Civanlar et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5621871 | Jaremko et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5621890 | Notarianni et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5623592 | Carlson et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5623670 | Bohannon et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5627979 | Chang et al. | May 1997 | A |
5629872 | Gross et al. | May 1997 | A |
5629949 | Zook | May 1997 | A |
5630056 | Horvath et al. | May 1997 | A |
5630152 | DeLuca et al. | May 1997 | A |
5633811 | Canada et al. | May 1997 | A |
5642259 | Ma | Jun 1997 | A |
5642511 | Chow et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5648768 | Bouve | Jul 1997 | A |
5649121 | Budman et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5655092 | Ojala | Aug 1997 | A |
5659680 | Cunningham et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5659727 | Velissaropoulos et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5664101 | Picache | Sep 1997 | A |
5664168 | Yishay et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5671374 | Postman et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5671436 | Morris et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5673401 | Volk et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5676141 | Hollub | Oct 1997 | A |
5680404 | Gray | Oct 1997 | A |
5680409 | Qin et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5682317 | Keeler et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5682476 | Tapperson et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5687316 | Graziano et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5691897 | Brown et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5700090 | Eryurek | Dec 1997 | A |
5701414 | Cheng et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5701484 | Artsy | Dec 1997 | A |
5704011 | Hansen et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5706502 | Foley et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5708709 | Rose | Jan 1998 | A |
5708779 | Graziano et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5713045 | Berdahl | Jan 1998 | A |
5715178 | Scarola et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5716221 | Kantner | Feb 1998 | A |
5717880 | Imai et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5717925 | Harper et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5719761 | Gatti et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5724025 | Tavori | Mar 1998 | A |
5726911 | Canada et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5726912 | Krall, Jr. et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5727128 | Morrison | Mar 1998 | A |
5732074 | Spaur et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5732218 | Bland et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5734902 | Atkins et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5737529 | Dolin, Jr. et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5740429 | Wang et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5740441 | Yellin et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5742596 | Baratz et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5742762 | Scholl et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5745049 | Akiyama et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5746511 | Eryurek et al. | May 1998 | A |
5748467 | Qin et al. | May 1998 | A |
5748896 | Daly et al. | May 1998 | A |
5748912 | Lee | May 1998 | A |
5751574 | Loebig | May 1998 | A |
5752007 | Morrison | May 1998 | A |
5752008 | Bowling | May 1998 | A |
5752246 | Rogers et al. | May 1998 | A |
5754189 | Doi et al. | May 1998 | A |
5754772 | Leaf | May 1998 | A |
5754830 | Butts et al. | May 1998 | A |
5757925 | Faybishenko | May 1998 | A |
5758073 | Liang et al. | May 1998 | A |
5758075 | Graziano et al. | May 1998 | A |
5761033 | Wilhelm | Jun 1998 | A |
5761090 | Gross et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5761405 | Tadamura et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5761421 | van Hoff et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5761477 | Wahbe et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5761499 | Sonderegger | Jun 1998 | A |
5761518 | Boehling et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5764906 | Edelstein et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5768119 | Havekost et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5768510 | Gish | Jun 1998 | A |
5774378 | Yang | Jun 1998 | A |
5774670 | Montulli | Jun 1998 | A |
5777874 | Flood et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5778368 | Hogan et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5784557 | Oprescu | Jul 1998 | A |
5787247 | Norin et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5787272 | Gupta et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5787280 | Joseph et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5790791 | Chong et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5793963 | Tapperson et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5794071 | Watanabe et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796602 | Wellan et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5797038 | Crawford et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5801770 | Paff et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5801942 | Nixon et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5802389 | McNutt | Sep 1998 | A |
5805153 | Nielsen | Sep 1998 | A |
5805442 | Crater et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5805889 | Van De Vanter | Sep 1998 | A |
5805922 | Sim et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5809247 | Richardson et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5812394 | Lewis et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5815152 | Collier et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5815659 | Umetsu et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5815710 | Martin et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5822220 | Baines | Oct 1998 | A |
5828567 | Eryurek et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5828851 | Nixon et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5828882 | Hinckley | Oct 1998 | A |
5831669 | Adrain | Nov 1998 | A |
5832268 | Anderson et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5832418 | Meyer | Nov 1998 | A |
5835704 | Li et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5835712 | DuFresne | Nov 1998 | A |
5835724 | Smith | Nov 1998 | A |
5835789 | Ueda et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5838563 | Dove et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5838910 | Domenikos et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5838920 | Rosborough | Nov 1998 | A |
5838969 | Jacklin et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5839094 | French | Nov 1998 | A |
5841360 | Binder | Nov 1998 | A |
5841654 | Verissimo et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5841963 | Nakamikawa et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5841991 | Russell | Nov 1998 | A |
5844601 | McPheely et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5844796 | Araki | Dec 1998 | A |
5844804 | Schussler | Dec 1998 | A |
5845078 | Tezuka et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5845230 | Lamberson | Dec 1998 | A |
5847957 | Cohen et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5848274 | Hamby et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5848393 | Goodridge et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5854750 | Phillips et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5854944 | Catherwood et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5859966 | Hayman et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5862052 | Nixon et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5864773 | Barna et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5867704 | Tanaka et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5872973 | Mitchell et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5872992 | Tietjen et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5873089 | Regache | Feb 1999 | A |
5874990 | Kato | Feb 1999 | A |
5875430 | Koether | Feb 1999 | A |
5876122 | Eryurek | Mar 1999 | A |
5878415 | Olds | Mar 1999 | A |
5880775 | Ross | Mar 1999 | A |
5884014 | Huttenlocher et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5903455 | Sharpe, Jr. et al. | May 1999 | A |
5903894 | Reneris | May 1999 | A |
5905248 | Russell et al. | May 1999 | A |
5905963 | Lysejko | May 1999 | A |
5907675 | Aahlad | May 1999 | A |
5909368 | Nixon et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5909586 | Anderson | Jun 1999 | A |
5917822 | Lyles et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5917840 | Cheney et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5919247 | Van Hoff et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5920479 | Sojoodi et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5922050 | Madany | Jul 1999 | A |
5927398 | Maciulewicz | Jul 1999 | A |
5928345 | Tetzlaff et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5930768 | Hooban | Jul 1999 | A |
5935242 | Madany et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5935249 | Stern et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5940294 | Dove | Aug 1999 | A |
5940839 | Chen et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5946487 | Dangelo | Aug 1999 | A |
5950006 | Crater et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5950172 | Klingman | Sep 1999 | A |
5956484 | Rosenberg et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5956487 | Venkatraman et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5956716 | Kenner et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5959487 | Kawamura | Sep 1999 | A |
5960205 | Mao et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5960214 | Sharpe, Jr. et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5966304 | Cook et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5969967 | Aahlad et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5970430 | Burns et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5974497 | Teshome | Oct 1999 | A |
5975737 | Crater et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5978578 | Azarya et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5978933 | Wyld et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5980078 | Krivoshein et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5980090 | Royal, Jr. et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5982362 | Crater et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5982762 | Anzai et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987506 | Carter | Nov 1999 | A |
5988852 | Nakanishi | Nov 1999 | A |
5991795 | Howard et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5994998 | Fisher et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5995916 | Nixon et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6002104 | Hsu | Dec 1999 | A |
6006164 | McCarty et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6006171 | Vines et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6008985 | Lake et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6009103 | Woundy | Dec 1999 | A |
6014591 | Ikeda | Jan 2000 | A |
6014612 | Larson et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6016515 | Shaw et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6018627 | Iyengar et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6018816 | Tateyama | Jan 2000 | A |
6026336 | Sakurai et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6026352 | Burns et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6032151 | Arnold et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6032208 | Nixon et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
H1845 | Kelly | Mar 2000 | H |
6033257 | Lake et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6035264 | Donaldson et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6038271 | Olaker et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6038486 | Saitoh et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6044305 | Larson et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6047222 | Burns et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6049578 | Senechal et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6049775 | Gertner et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6052629 | Leatherman et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6055633 | Schrier et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6061603 | Papadopoulos et al. | May 2000 | A |
6070186 | Nishio | May 2000 | A |
6070250 | Yeager et al. | May 2000 | A |
6073109 | Flores et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6075863 | Krishnan et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6076124 | Korowitz et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6078320 | Dove et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6078848 | Bernstein et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6080207 | Kroening et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6085120 | Schwerdtfeger et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6088665 | Burns et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6094600 | Sharpe, Jr. et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6094655 | Rogers et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6094684 | Pallmann | Jul 2000 | A |
6095674 | Verissimo et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6097761 | Buhring et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6098116 | Nixon et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6104391 | Johnston, Jr. et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6104875 | Gallagher et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6105132 | Fritch et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108662 | Hoskins et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6112020 | Wright | Aug 2000 | A |
6112246 | Horbal et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6115468 | De Nicolo | Sep 2000 | A |
6115744 | Robins et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6129449 | McCain et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6129724 | Fleischman et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6131067 | Girerd et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6133914 | Rogers et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6134559 | Brumme et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6138140 | Yokote | Oct 2000 | A |
6138174 | Keeley | Oct 2000 | A |
6139177 | Venkatraman et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6140911 | Fisher et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6141794 | Dice et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6148346 | Hanson | Nov 2000 | A |
6148391 | Petrick | Nov 2000 | A |
6151625 | Swales et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6154875 | Tanaka et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6157864 | Schwenke et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6160484 | Spahl et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6167253 | Farris et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6167464 | Kretschmann | Dec 2000 | A |
6170007 | Venkatraman et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6173414 | Zumkehr et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6175556 | Allen, Jr. et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6176421 | Royal, Jr. et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6183289 | Lake et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6185611 | Waldo et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6192281 | Brown et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6195591 | Nixon et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6195694 | Chen et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6195774 | Jacobson | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6199068 | Carpenter | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6199195 | Goodwin et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6201996 | Crater et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6212440 | Suzuki | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6212575 | Cleron et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6212608 | Bak | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6216158 | Luo et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6218930 | Katzenberg et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6219708 | Martenson | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6226783 | Limondin et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6236909 | Colson et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6246748 | Yano | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6260187 | Cirne | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6263487 | Stripf et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6266716 | Wilson et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6266724 | Harari et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6268789 | Diamant et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6269473 | Freed et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272529 | Lum | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6272556 | Gish | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6282454 | Papadopoulos et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6282455 | Engdahl | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6285966 | Brown et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6289299 | Daniel, Jr. et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6295356 | De Nicolo | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6295513 | Thackston | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6298377 | Hartikainen et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6308317 | Wilkinson et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6311101 | Kastner | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6314448 | Conner et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6314464 | Murata et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6317701 | Pyotsia et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6324607 | Korowitz et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6327511 | Naismith et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6332163 | Bowman-Amuah | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6334161 | Suzuki et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6336142 | Kato et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6345295 | Beardsley et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6345382 | Hughes | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6348874 | Cole et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6349274 | Kay et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6349287 | Hayashi | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6353859 | McKeehan et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6353860 | Hare et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6360091 | Schellinger et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6366300 | Ohara et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6370448 | Eryurek | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6370573 | Bowman-Amuah | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6373841 | Goh et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6377543 | Grover et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6377859 | Brown et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6382226 | Larson et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6393050 | Liu | May 2002 | B1 |
6405099 | Nagai et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6405210 | Doyle et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6412070 | Van Dyke et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6418499 | Korowitz et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6424883 | Hosokawa et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6429885 | Saib et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6430564 | Judge et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6434594 | Wesemann | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6438182 | Olaker et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6442442 | Weinhofer | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6445962 | Blevins et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6449624 | Hammack et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6449715 | Krivoshein | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6480903 | Voutaz et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6480955 | DeKoning et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6487214 | Bachar | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6487558 | Hitchcock | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6493405 | Olaker et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6496892 | Lake et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6499048 | Williams | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6501995 | Kinney et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6510352 | Badavas et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6526455 | Kamimura | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6526516 | Ishikawa et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6532531 | O'Connor et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6557056 | Lanteigne et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6563420 | Brown et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
6574515 | Kirkpatrick et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6574694 | Chen et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6594692 | Reisman | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6598224 | Maeda et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6609147 | Matsuda et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6612022 | Gale et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6618754 | Gosling | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6622147 | Smiga et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6636900 | Abdelnur | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6640308 | Keyghobad et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6647495 | Takeuchi et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6654353 | Tokura et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6671763 | Korowitz et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6675193 | Slavin et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6687698 | Nixon et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6700869 | Falco et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6701284 | Huntley et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6718215 | Friedrich et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6718533 | Schneider et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6738388 | Stevenson et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6754885 | Dardinski et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6760687 | Apel et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6763370 | Schmeidler et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6775707 | Bennett et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6788980 | Johnson | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6789054 | Makhlouf | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6792321 | Sepe, Jr. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6799148 | Ling et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6799185 | Wallman et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6799195 | Thibault et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6806847 | Nixon et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6807558 | Hassett et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6826590 | Glanzer et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6832223 | Scheifler et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6850973 | Larson et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6853867 | Klindt et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6868538 | Nixon et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6874082 | Tateyama et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6888541 | Morse | May 2005 | B2 |
6895409 | Uluakar et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6928396 | Thackston | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6959356 | Packwood et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6978194 | McIlhany et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6983227 | Thalhammer-Reyero | Jan 2006 | B1 |
7020532 | Johnson et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7024282 | Coogan et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7032045 | Kostadinov | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7054793 | Moritz et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7076312 | Law et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7080366 | Kramskoy et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7086009 | Resnick et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7089530 | Dardinski et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7096465 | Dardinski et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7110835 | Blevins et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7123974 | Hamilton | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7127460 | Nixon et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7142322 | Lee | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7146231 | Schleiss et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7146408 | Crater et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7151966 | Baier et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7158513 | Wada et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7162510 | Jammes | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7177052 | Lapstun et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7199784 | Mathiowetz et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7245271 | Nixon et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7249330 | Roesner et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7272815 | Eldridge et al. | Sep 2007 | B1 |
7275062 | Deitz et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7337256 | Korowitz et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7356588 | Stineman, Jr. et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7486495 | Diederichs et al. | Feb 2009 | B1 |
7502656 | Thibault et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7574693 | Kemink | Aug 2009 | B1 |
7610354 | Adams et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7664574 | Imhof et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7720944 | Thibault et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7739361 | Thibault et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7882197 | Thibault et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7890927 | Eldridge et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7899070 | Thibault et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
20010007133 | Moriconi et al. | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20010007183 | Weder | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20010025307 | Venkatraman et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
20010034777 | Venkatraman et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010034778 | Venkatraman et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010034779 | Venkatraman et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010034780 | Venkatraman et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010034781 | Venkatraman et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010037489 | Stripf et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010044836 | Venkatraman et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010052109 | Nagashima et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020013629 | Nixon et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020049865 | Charnell et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020067370 | Forney et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020093980 | Trebes | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020133636 | Venkatraman et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020150156 | Calvin | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020165848 | Rautenbach et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020194393 | Hrischuk et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020198920 | Resnick et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030009250 | Resnick et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030051068 | Eldridge | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030115238 | O'Connor et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030167269 | Gupta | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030200351 | O'Connor et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030200369 | Musumeci | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030208558 | Venkatraman et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040103165 | Nixon et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040117534 | Parry et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040181294 | Deitz et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040221289 | D'Souza et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050028037 | Junk et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050138226 | Tateyama et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050149893 | Roesner et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050160263 | Naizhen et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050172258 | Nixon et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050283730 | Uyttendaele et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060129724 | Kostadinov | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060206860 | Dardinski et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060206866 | Eldrige et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060212146 | Johnson et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070006149 | Resnick et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070019560 | Brewer et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070061786 | Zhou et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070083552 | Allen et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070110835 | Maes et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070118805 | Kraus et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070244571 | Wilson et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070265089 | Robarts et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080040477 | Johnson et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080046598 | Johnson et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080052386 | Johnson et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080119951 | Thibault et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080120367 | Thibault et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080126500 | Thibault et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080133700 | Thibault et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080134215 | Thibault et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080148170 | Thibault et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080216169 | Naizhen et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080222276 | Thibault et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20090094326 | Thibault et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090118845 | Eldridge et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090118846 | Eldridge et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090125128 | Eldridge et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090125129 | Eldridge et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090125130 | Eldridge et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090125131 | Eldridge et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090132996 | Eldridge et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090164031 | Johnson et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090193347 | Takahashi et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090241086 | Saito et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090259751 | Thibault et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090319058 | Rovaglio et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100005425 | Kodosky et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100011127 | Johnson et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100011311 | Kodosky et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100076604 | Johnson et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100121999 | Isenmann et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100131084 | Van Camp | May 2010 | A1 |
20100222902 | Eldridge et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100223593 | Eldridge et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100305720 | Doll et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100305721 | Kostadinov et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110040390 | Blevins et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110093098 | Kostadinov et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0411869 | Feb 1991 | EP |
0592921 | Apr 1994 | EP |
0640905 | Mar 1995 | EP |
0660231 | Jun 1995 | EP |
1006691 | Jun 2000 | EP |
02159526 | Jun 1990 | JP |
09033647 | Feb 1997 | JP |
10019655 | Jan 1998 | JP |
11143511 | May 1999 | JP |
WO-9114324 | Sep 1991 | WO |
WO-9504314 | Feb 1995 | WO |
WO-9623377 | Aug 1996 | WO |
WO-9631047 | Oct 1996 | WO |
WO-9707486 | Feb 1997 | WO |
WO-9726587 | Jul 1997 | WO |
WO-9820649 | May 1998 | WO |
WO-9829804 | Jul 1998 | WO |
WO-9836518 | Aug 1998 | WO |
WO-9854843 | Dec 1998 | WO |
WO-0077592 | Dec 2000 | WO |
WO-03039098 | May 2003 | WO |
2010138412 | Dec 2010 | WO |
Entry |
---|
U.S. Appl. No. 09/721,409 filed Nov. 21, 2000, Venkatraman et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/260,859, filed Oct. 28, 2005, Keyghobad et al. |
“1995 World Batch Forum: Meeting of the Minds [Agenda],” (May 22-24, 1995) Newtown Square, Pennsylvania, (2 pages). |
“A sensation in supervisory control,” Manufacturing Systems (Windows NT in manufacturing Supplement), Oct. 1996, pp. 12A-24A. |
“AC I/O Modules Available for Low-Cost Automation Controller,” New Release, Control Technology Corporation, Jun. 28, 1989 (DialogWeb search result) (1 page). |
“Agenda,” ISA/SP50-1988-180, ISA Draft, May 3-5, 1988. |
“Agenda,” World Batch Forum 1994 (Mar. 6-9, 1994), Tempe, AZ, (9 pages). |
“Apacs Control System,” Power vol. 139, No. 6 (Jun. 1995) p. 81 (Dialog print-out). |
“Application of PRIAM Model to Safety Systems on Offshore Oil/Gas Platforms,” Silvertech Ltd., Jan. 9, 1995. |
“At Interop, Will ToasterNet Be on the Hot List?” Data Communications, vol. 19, No. 13, Oct. 1990, p. 214. |
“Automation Controller accepts Customization,” News Release, Control Technology, Jul. 12, 1985, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Automation Controller features fast 80186 Processor, Integrated Software,” News Release, Control Technology (US), Apr. 22, 1986, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Automation Programming Environment runs on IBM (R)-PC,” News Release, Control Technology (US), Mar. 29, 1988, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Automation System Monitors, Controls Fab HVAC, Other Systems,” Microcontamination (Aug. 1994). |
“Background Info on Mercury Project,” (no date available). |
“Breaking News for Invensys Software Systems Employees: iBaan and FactorySuite 2000 Integration Announced,” internal e-mail dated Mar. 23, 2001. |
“Briefs,” Network World, May 29, 1995, p. 19. |
“bsy's List of Internet Accessible Coke Machines,” web page print-out (Feb. 12, 1999) from http://www-cse.ucsd.edu/users/bsy/coke.html (1 page). |
“CAD/CAM Software creates Automation ‘Programming Environment’,” News Release, Control Technology (US), Oct. 3, 1988, (DialogWeb search result). |
“CMU SCS Coke Machine: Current Status,” web page print-out (Feb. 12, 1999) from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/.about.coke/ (1 page). |
“Compact System Combines Motion Control, Machine Control,” News Release, Control Technology, May 28, 1985, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Company Profiles: What Users Need,” Power vol. 139 No. 6 (Jun. 1995) p. 81. |
“Control System Features Plug-and-Play Technology, Scalability,” Chemical Processing (May 1996), p. 33. |
“Control system,” Power vol. 139, No. 4 (Apr. 1995) p. 114 (Dialog print-out). |
“ControlShell Version 5.1 User's Manual,” Real-Time Innovations, Jun. 1996, whole manual. |
“ControlShell Version 6.0 User's Manual,” Real-Time Innovations, Jan. 1999, whole manual. |
“DeltaV(tm) System: We Do Smart Plants.” Brochure issued by Fisher-Rosemount Systems (1998). |
“DeltaV.TM. System Overview: Do More.” Brochure issued by Fisher-Rosemount Systems (1998). |
“Disk Drive with Embedded Hyper-Text Markup Language Server,” IBM TDB, vol. 38, n. 12, Dec. 1995, pp. 479-480. |
“Dual-Axis Servo Module for Small Controller,” News Release, Control Technology (US), Sep. 11, 1990, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Editors' Product Picks,” Chemical Processing (May 1996), p. 34. |
“Embedded Systems Conference Addresses the Increasing Complexity of Electronic Systems Design; Technical Program and Exhibits Help Embedded Systems Design Professionals Keep Pace with Rapid Change,” PR Newswire, Dec. 27, 1995. |
“ErgoTech upgrades ErgoCim; first ‘plug and play’ component software for manufacturing,” Business Wire, Feb. 15, 1996. |
“Fisher-Rosemount Is: Managing the Process Better,” Fisher Controls International, Inc. and Rosemount Inc. 1993, (19 pages). |
“Gensym Announces Its Initiative for Leveraging Intelligent Systems with Internet/Intranet Technology,” Business Wire, Oct. 7, 1997. |
“Gensym introduces G2 WebMiner for accessing and reasoning about data from the World Wide Web,” Business Wire, May 15, 1996. |
“Gensym introduces Internet connectivity for its G2 family of intelligent real-time software,” Business Wire, Mar. 18, 1996. |
“I/A Series Model 51 FoxRemote II Installation and Configuration Guide,” Apr. 8, 1998 (Preliminary), pp. i-iv, 1-2. |
“Industries Fashion NASA Products Into Commercial Work”, Anne Eisele, Space News, v9, n14, p14, Apr. 6, 1998, 1 page. |
“Industry's top embedded operating software supports Java; pSOSystem enables Embedded Internet applications and Low-cost Internet appliances,” Business Wire, Feb. 1, 1996. |
“Inexpensive Automation Controller features Message Display Capability,” News Release, Control Technology (US), May 19, 1989, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Information technology in manufacturing,” Manufacturing Systems, vol. 14, No. 12, Dec. 1996, pp. 54-78. |
“Innovative Small Controller Family offers Full Integration,” News Release, Control Technology, Aug. 17, 1989, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Integrated Systems; Industry's top embedded operating software supports Java,” M2 Presswire, Mar. 4, 1996. |
“Intel, SunDisk offerings narrow flash focus,” Electronic Engineering Times, p. 10, Oct. 24, 1994. |
“Internet windows to the world,” New Media Age, Oct. 26, 1995, p. 4. |
“Introducing Bailey Evolution 90TM . . . The sound investment strategy for process automation,” Bailey 1990 (brochure). |
“Jim Henry's 1996 ASEE Paper,” web page print-out from http://chem.engr.utc.edu/Documents/ASEE-96-full.html (5 pages). |
“Linear Actuators offer Plug-Compatibility with Controller,” News Release, Control Technology (US), Nov. 21, 1985, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Low-Cost Automation Controller features Motion Control, Communications,” News Release, Control Technology (US), Mar. 7, 1988, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Make Your Automation Plan a Reality: MAX1000,” Leeds & Northrup Technical Overview, (approximately 1990). |
“Mitsubishi licenses Sun's Java tool,” Electronic Engineering Times (Dec. 11, 1995) p. 29. |
“Modular Valve Assemblies Connect to Controller with Ribbon Cable,” New Product Release, Control Technology (US), Jan. 8, 1986, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Multi-Tasking Controller provides High-level Instructions for Motion Control, Sequencing,” News Release, Control Technology Corporation, Aug. 22, 1986, (DialogWeb search result). |
“NCR Fieldbus Slave Controller Advance Information,” ISA-SP50-1988-161, ISA Draft. |
“New at IPC/92! Ethernet link provides Global PLC Registers,” News Release, Control Technology (US), Nov. 20, 1992, (DialogWeb search result). |
“New at IPC/92! High-Capacity Integrated Motion Controller,” News Release, Control Technology (US) Nov. 20, 1992, (DialogWeb search result). |
“New Equipment/Literature,” Control System vol. 139, No. 4 (Apr. 1995), p. 114. |
“New Open Architecture Group Works on Control Standards,” Control Engineering Online (Aug. 1997). |
“New Products Provide Interactive Graphics Over Web Using Netscape Plug-Ins and Java,” PR Newswire, May 20, 1996. |
“New Small Automation Controller features Precision Analog I/O Modules,” News Release, Control Technology (US), May 30, 1989, (DialogWeb search result). |
“New State-Logic Microcontroller,” News Release, Control Technology Corp., Jun. 1, 1996 (DialogWeb search result). |
“New Telemecanique Programmable Controllers Feature Multiple Programming Languages,” (Feb. 11, 1985). |
“On-Line Vending Machine and Catalog Product Icons,” IBM TDB, v. 38, n. 4 (Apr. 1995), pp. 113-116. |
“Operator's Console creates Friendly Machines,” News Release, Control Technology (US), May 19, 1986, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Operator's Console for Automated Machines,” News Release, Control Technology, Aug. 15, 1985, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Peter Beebee's Home Page” web page print-out (Feb. 12, 1999) from http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/htbin/ptbbgated/jwz/?fetch+personal%2Fmain.text.html (2 pages). |
“Pipeline: Announced,” InfoWorld, May 29, 1995, p. 45. |
“Plant Operations Framework,” AMR Report (May/Jun. 1995), (6 pages). |
“Plug-Compatible Controls and Actuators Speed System Development,” News Release, Control Technology (US), Jan. 13, 1986, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Policy Manual,” 1994 World Batch Forum (Mar. 6-9, 1994), (15 pages). |
“Process Manager Specification and Technical Data,” UC03-300 Sep. 1991 Honeywell, copyright 1990 (43 pages). |
“Programmable Controller offers control of Stepping and Servo Motors,” News Release, Control Technology, May 31, 1985, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Radio Field Bus,” ISA/SP50-1988-184, ISA Draft. |
“Real-Time Innovations Email NewsLetter,” Apr. 1998, http://www.rti.com/corporate/newsletter04-98, 2 pages. |
“Ricoh to sell world's first multimedia still camera,” Japan Economic Newswire, Feb. 21, 1995. |
“RTI Announces Major New Component-Based Programming System for Building Complex Electromechanical Systems”, PR Newswire, Mar. 16, 1998, 3 pages. |
“SDRD Using 1553B Data Link Services,” ISA/SP50-1988-243 (1988). |
“SECS-11 Communication Board Plugs into Automation Controller,” News Release, Control Technology, Aug. 26, 1985, (DialogWeb search result). |
“Signal Conditioners Designed for Fisher-Rosemount System Delta V,” issued by M-Systems Co., Ltd. (Dec. 1997). |
“Small Multi-Tasking Controller for Cost-sensitive Aplications,” News Release, Control Technology US, Nov. 8, 1988, (DialogWeb search result). |
“SP88 Mes Task-Force Europe Position Document,” 1994 World Batch Forum (Mar. 6-9, 1994), (pp. 1-30). |
“Special Topic: PC-Based Control,” A Supplement to Software Strategies, pp. 3-5, 7-8, 10-15, 20-21 (no date available). |
“Suggested Outline for Application Sub-committee Document: Fieldbus Architecture Subcommittee Document,” ISA/SP50-1988-175, ISA Draft. (1988). |
“Sun announces availability of Javatm Embedded Server 1.0,” Press Release dated Oct. 1, 1998, downloaded from java.sun.com website. |
“System Provides Stepping Motor Control in Workcell Environment,” News Release, Control Technology Corp., Dec. 5, 1986, (DialogWeb search result). |
“TDC 3000 Overview,” Honeywell, (approximately 1992). |
“TDC 3000 Process Manager.TM.: Process Connected Solutions for the Advanced Controls Requirements of the 1990s,” Honeywell, (approximately 1992). |
“The ‘Only’ Coke Machine on the Internet,” web page print-out (Feb. 12, 1999) from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/.about.coke/history—long.txt (3 pages). |
“The Object Primer”, Scott Ambler, pp. 1-248. Jan. 4, 1996. |
“The Switzerland Coke Machine Credits,” web page print-out (Feb. 12, 1999) from http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/htbin/coke/ (1 page). |
“Toshiba Integrated Control System,” Technical Manual Third Edition (Nov. 1990). |
“Tour an actual TribeLink via WebManage,” web page print-out from http://www.tribe.com/products/webmanage/quick—view.htm (printed on Jul. 12, 1999) (1 page). |
“Tribe Announces Revolutionary Use of the Internet; Launches Innovative Remote Management Solution; New WebManage Technology Provides Network Management via World Wide Web,” Business Wire, May 22, 1995. |
“Tribe Computer Works' Net Products Can be Managed via World Wide Web,” IAC (SM) Newsletter Database.TM., DataTrends Publications, Inc., No. 11, vol. 7, May 30, 1995. |
“Tribe Launches First Networking Device Capable of Being Managed via Internet Web Browser; TribeLink2 Enables Remote Computing and Internet Access,” Business Wire, May 22, 1995. |
“Tribe Launches Innovative Remote Management Solution; New WebManage Technology Provides Network Management Via the World Wide Web,” web page print-out (Jul. 12, 1999) from http://www.tribe.com/products/webmanage/wm—pr. (1 page). |
“TribeStar,” web page print-out from http://www.tribe.com/products/tribestar/index.htm (3 pages) (copyright 1996). |
“UDC 6000 Process Controller: From Stand-alone Control to Full System Integration Honeywell Has a Solution for You,” Honeywell, (Aug. 1992). |
“User Layer Structure,” SP-50 Technical Report (Jul. 25, 1990). |
“User Layer Technical Report,” ISA/SP-50 1990-389C, ISA Draft. |
“Wide-range, Fully Compatible Family of Process Automation & Management Systems,” Copyright 1993 by Elsag Bailey Group as an Unpublished Work, (24 pages). |
“Wizards wheel over SCADA systems; Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition,” Control and Instrumentation, No. 12, vol. 28, Dec. 1996, p. 23. |
“WWWF'94: Papers Received,” web page print-out (Apr. 7, 2000) from http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/SDG/IT94/Agenda/Papers-received.html (8 pages). |
Adler, David J. et al. “Does a Manufacturing Execution System Reduce the Cost of Production for Bulk Pharmaceuticals?” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (13 pages). |
Andrews, “15 MB in a Matchbook” (Jan. 1995) http://www.byte.com/art/9501/sec4/art5.htm. |
ANSI/ASME PTC 19.1-1985, “Part 1—Measurement Uncertainty”, Apr. 30, 1986, entire document. |
Ash, Raymond H. et al. “Strategic Needs in Batch Manufacturing,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (8 pages). |
Bader, F. P. “Building a Better Batch Control Foundation with IEC 1131-3 Control Languages,” 1994 World Batch Forum (Mar. 6-9, 1994), (23 pages). |
Batch Control. Part I: Models and Terminology. (Approved Feb. 28, 1995) ISA-S88.01 1995, pp. 1-128. |
Baxter, Richard V., Jr. “Implementing Open Networking in a Motor Drive,” The Imbedded Internet Workshop Real World Applications Session (Oct. 1, 1999) San Jose, CA. |
Beestermoller, H.J., et al. “An Online and offline programmable Multi-Loop Controller for Distributed Systems,” IEEE (1994), pp. 15-20. |
Benkhallat, Yazid, et al. “Interoperability of sensors and distributed systems,” Sensors and Actuators A vol. 37-38 (1993), 247-254. |
Benner, Stephen J. “MES in Batch Process Manufacturing. A MES Vendor view” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (8 pages). |
Berge, Jonas, “Using Ethernet is a no-brainer,” In Tech: The International Journal for Measurement and Control, pp. 36-39, Jul. 2000. |
Bernard, Viki, “Remote-access ware emerge: Shiva, Nortel, and Tribe leading list of innovators,” PCWeek, No. 21, vol. 12, May 29, 1995, p. 47. |
Berre, A., “Sharing of Objects in an Object-Oriented Language,” Proceedings on the 1986 International Workshop on Object-Oriented Database Systems, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1986. |
Bishop, Brian. “Realtime System-Design Tool Models Electromechanical Systems”, , Personal Eng & Instrumentation News, v15, n4, p. 21, Apr. 1998. |
Bristol, E H., “Not a Batch Language; A Control Language!” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (14 pages). |
Brown, Jerry et al. “Meeting the Challenge of Automation Technology,” 1996 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (11 pages). |
Brown, Jerry et al. “Trends and Opportunities in Batch Control System Architectures,” 1994 World Batch Forum (Mar. 6-9, 1994), (pp. 1-12). |
Browne, Malcolme W. “South Pole Ready for Internet Revolution,” The New York Times, Section C, col. 1, p. 1, Jan. 10, 1995. |
Brunn, P. “Collision Avoidance for Two Robots Sharing a Common Workspace,” (1995) The Institution of Electrical Engineers. |
Bullotta, Rick. “Designing Effective User Interfaces for Batch Processes,” 1994 World Batch Forum (Mar. 6-9, 1994), (pp. 1-19). |
Burton, P.I. “A personal history of batch control,” Measurement + Control vol. 27 (Apr. 1994), pp. 69-73. |
Burton, P.I., et al. “Field Bus Based on MIL-STD-1553B: Proposal to ISA-SP-50” ERA Technology Ltd. (Apr. 6, 1988) ISA/SP50-1988-148. |
Capetta, L., et al. “From Current Actuators and Transmitters Towards Intelligent Actuation and Measurement: PRIAM Approach,” BIAS 93, Milan, Italy 1993. |
Caro, Richard H. “Field Bus Applications,” ISA (1989) Paper #89/0569, pp. 989-994. |
Caro, Richard H. “The Fifth Generation Process Control Architecture,” ISA Transactions vol. 28 No. 4 (1989), pp. 23-28. |
Chettle, Tim. “Multiplexing techniques optimise data collection,” Electrotechnology (Oct./Nov. 1995). |
Choi, K.J. et al., “A Modeling Method of Software Configuration Change Control,” 1997, IEEE Online, “htttp:ieeexplorer.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=619990&userType=inst”. |
Cisco Systems, Inc., “Cisco Secure Wireless Plant: Security and Quality of Service for Industrial Environments,” Copyright 1992-2008. |
Coleman, Vernon. “National Electrical Manufacturers Association Field Bus Report to ISA SP50,” (Oct. 1988) ISA/SP50-1988-234. |
Computer Products “Unbundling the DCS” (approximately 1992). |
Conradi, R. et al., “Version Models for Software Configuration Management,” Jun. 1998, ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 30, No. 2. |
Control Technology Corp. News Releases, pp. 1-23, No Date Available. |
Cox, Mark J. and Baruch, Dr. John E. F. “Robotic Telescopes: An Interactive Exhibit on the World-Wide Web,” web page print-out from http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/SDG/IT94/Proceedings/Museum/cox/markcox.html (11 pages), 1994. |
Craig, Lynn W. “SP-88 Defines Batch Control,” INTECH Mar. 1994, pp. 34-37. |
Crowder, R. S. “A Communication Architecture for Automation & Control,” ISA, pp. 669-673. (No date available). |
Crowder, R. S. “Generic Data Link Transactions for Simple Devices,” Proposal to ISA SP 50 & IEC/SC65C/WG6 (Oct. 15, 1988) ISA Document. |
Crowley-Milling, et al, eds. “Proceedings,” 1995 International Conference on Accelerator and Large Experimental Physics Control Systems, Chicago, IL Oct. 30-Nov. 3, 1995, [cover pages]. |
Delahostria. Communication Model Application Layer. (Oct. 14, 1988) ISA/SP50-1988 247, ISA Draft. |
Delfino, B. and Pinceti, P. “Fieldbus Applications for Electrical Industrial Systems,” IEEE (1993), pp. 2084-2090. |
Demetratekes, Pam. “Go with the info flow; state-of-the-art automation in the food industry; includes related article on computer software for food processors,” Food Processing, vol. 57, No. 7, Jul. 1996, p. 47. |
Distributed Engineering, Institute of Computer-Aided Circuit Design-Test and Test Systems Division, University of Erlangen-Nurnberg, Germany, web page print-out (8 pages) (Oct. 1994). |
Dryden, Patrick, “Tribes WebManage Enables Remote Fixes,” ComputerWorld, May 22, 1995, p. 14. |
Duffey, C.K., et al. “High-Level Control Language Customizes Application Programs,” IEEE Computer Applications in Power (1991), pp. 15-18. |
Editing Committee Draft Application Layer, Version 12, Oct. 1991. |
Editing Committee Draft Application Layer, Version 6, Dec. 1990. |
Editing Committee Draft Application Layer, Version 8, May 1991. |
Elmer-Dewitt, Philip, “Snowballs in Cyberspace; With a modem and a soldering iron, you too can build an Internet site that is really cool and totally useless,” Time, Jan. 16, 1995, p. 57. |
ElRakabawy, et al., “Peer-to—Peer File Transfer in Wireless Mesh Networks,” University of Leipzig, Copyright 2007 (incl. English Abstract). |
Esprit Project 8244, “User Requirements for Intelligent Transmitters and Actuators,” European Intelligent Actuation and Measurement User Group, Nov. 24, 1995. |
European Office Action, EP Application No. 97305187.3, dated Sep. 22, 2010. |
Excerpt from the website of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers (SME)-CyberCut: A World Wide Web Based Design-to-Fabrication Tool, dated Sep. 16, 2010. |
Feiler, P., “Software Process Support Through Software Configuration Management,” Oct. 1990, Proceedings of the 5th International Software Process Workshop on Experience with Software Process Models, IEEE Computer Society Press. |
Ferraiolo et al., A Role-Based Access Control Model and Reference Implementation Whinin a Corporate Intranet, ACM, Feb. 1999. |
Fieldbus Inc. “The Foundationä fieldbus Primer,” Revision 1.1, Released Jun. 24, 2001, 36 pages. |
Fieldbus Standard for Use in Industrial Control Systems. Part 2: Physical Layer Specification and Service Definition. (1992) ANSI/ISA-S50.02. |
Fisher, Thomas G P.E. “SP88 Update-Now and the Future,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (59 pages). |
Foster, Kirsten. “surf's up; lights, camera, but no action; Steve is a Tech-Nomad. He wanders the streets with a camera on his head. And he wants you to join him,” The Independent (London), Aug. 13, 1995, p. 10. |
Foxboro Fieldbus Proposal (Presented to ISA SP-50 Committee Feb. 24, 1988) ISA/SP50-1988-123B, ISA Draft. |
Foxboro, “I/A Series A2TM Software-FoxCTS-Change Tracking Software-Product Specifications,” 1997-2003, pp. 1-8. |
Foxboro, “I/A Series Software FoxDraw,” 1996 (8 pages). |
Foxboro, “I/A Series Software-FoxCTSTM—Change Tracking Software-Product Specifications,” 1997-2006, pp. 1-12. |
Foxboro, “I/A Series-Object Manager Calls—Oct. 31, 1995,” pp. 1-124. |
Foxboro, “Intelligent Automation Series Human Interface Software”, 20 pgs., 1997. |
Friscia, Anthony et al. “MES: Manufacturing's Missing Link is a Tool for Change,” 1994 World Batch Forum (Mar. 6-9, 1994), (8 pages). |
Fuhr et al., “Wireless Technology Review: Radios, Frequencies, and Implications for Industry,” Wireless Technology Review, Feb. 2010. |
Fulcher, Jim and Dilger, Karen Abramic, “Soft control, Internet spark ISA/96,” Manufacturing Systems, vol. 14, No. 12, Dec. 1996, pp. 40-46. |
Furness, Harry. “Fieldbus: The Differences Start From the Bottom Up,” Control Engineering (Mar. 1994), pp. 75-77. |
Gaines, B.R. et al. “Mediator: An Intelligent Information System Supporting the Virtual Manufacturing Enterprise,” IEEE .RTM. 1995 (XP 000586326) pp. 964-969. |
George J. Thaler, et al., “Automatic Control Systems,” pp. 1-60, 1989. |
Gertz, Matthew, et al. “A Human-Machine Interface for Distributed Virtual Laboratories,” IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine 1 (1994) Dec. No. 4 (New York) pp. 5-13. |
Gillespie, David P., Ph.D. “Comprehensive Information Management: EPA, OSHA, and Beyond,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (14 pages). |
Gleick, James. “Fast Forward: Really Remote Control,” The New York Times, Section 6, col. 3, p. 42, Dec. 3, 1995. |
Goldberg, Ken et al. “Desktop Teleoperation via the World Wide Web,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 654-659 (1995). |
Goldberg, Ken, et al. “Beyond the Web: Excavating the Real World Via Mosaic,” (Conference Paper) The Mercury Project (Oct. 17-21, 1994). |
Goldberg, Ken, et al. “Beyond the Web: manipulating the real world,” Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 28 (1995) pp. 209-219. |
Goldstein, Ira and Hardin, Joseph, “Guest editorial,” Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 28 (1995) p. 1. |
Goodstein, L.P. et al., “Representation of Process State Structure and Control,” Apr. 1987, Riso National Laboratory. |
Grant, Dr. R. Peter, “The Impact of Reengineering on the Batch Manufacturing Workplace,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (5 pages). |
Greene, Tim. “Sahara puts Java to Management Test,” Network World vol. 13, No. 7 (Feb. 12, 1996). |
Gutierrez, Jose, “WirelessHART™: The Industrial Wireless Standard,” Measurement and Testing, Wireless Technology Focus, Jun./Jul. 2008. |
Gyorki, John R. “PLCs drive standard buses,” Machine Design (May 11, 1995), pp. 83-90. |
HART Communication Foundation Tech Note, “Peer to Peer Communication with WirelessHART,” HCF—LIT-129 Rev. 1.0, Sep. 5, 2008. |
HART Communication Foundation Tech Note, “Peer to Peer Communication with WirelessHART,” HCF—LIT-129 Rev. 1.1, Mar. 5, 2010. |
Hart Communication Foundation, “Wireless Hart Overview,” Copyright 2009, available at: http://www.hartcomm.org/protocol/wihart/wireless-overview.html. |
Hashemian, et al., “In-Situ Response Time Testing of Thermocouples”, ISA 1989, Paper #89/0056, pp. 587-593. |
Helson, Ron, Hart Field Communications Protocol, “Hart Tutorial: The Benefits of HART Protocol Communication in Smart Instrumentation Systems,” (no date available). |
Henry, “A Fault-Tolerant Interface for Self-Validating Sensors”, Oxford University, Digest No. 1990/145 (Nov. 1990). |
Henry, “A New Approach to Sensor Validation”, IMC, Mar. 17, 1992. |
Henry, “Intelligent Behaviour for Self-Validating Sensors”, Advances in Measurement, pp. 1-7, May 1990. |
Henry, et al., “A Standard Interface for Self-Validating Sensors”, Tech. Rep. 1884/91, OUEL, University of Oxford, Sep. 1991. |
Henry, et al., “Implications of Digital Communications on Sensor Validation,” Tech. Rep. 1912/92, OUEL, University of Oxford, Apr. 1992. |
Henry, et al., “Signal Processing, Data Handling and Communications: The Case for Measurement Validation,” Tech. Rep. 1912/92, OUEL, University of Oxford, Mar. 1992. |
Henry, Jim, Ph.D., P.E. “Implementation of Practical Control Systems: Problems and Solutions,” web page print-out from http://chem.engr.utc.edu/Documents/MACSCITECH/MACSCITECHpaper1.html (printed on Apr. 10, 2001) (22 pages). |
Henry, Jim, Ph.D., P.E. “LabVIEW Applications in Engineering Labs: Controls, Chemical, Environmental,” ASEE Conference, Anaheim, CA, Jun. 25-28, 1995, web page print-out from http://chem.engr.utc.edu/Documents/ASEE-95-full.html (22 pages). |
Hoek, A., Heimbigner, D., and Wolf, A.L.,“A Generic, Peer-to-Peer Repository for Distributed Configuration Management”, May 1996, Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Software Engineering Publisher, IEEE Computer Society. |
Holding, David and Wood, Graham. “Communications in microprocessor industrial implementation,” Microprocessors and Microsystems vol. 3 No. 10 (Dec. 1979), pp. 443-451. |
ICCard Design Sep./Oct. 1995. |
International Search Report & Written Opinion, PCT/US09/47901, Mailed Jun. 19, 2009 (11 pages). |
Invensys Operations Management, “The Trident's Main Processor and Communication Module Support Modbus, Ethernet, Peer-to-Peerr, and TriStation Protocols,” Trident Communication Capabilities, (no date available). |
Invensys, “FoxDraw Display Builder and Configurator”, 8 pgs., 2004. |
IRD Mechanalysis, Inc., “Model 816 Machinery Maintenance Data Collector,” 1983, 2 pages. |
IRD Mechanalysis, Inc., “Model 817 Machinery Maintenance Data Collector,” 1984, 4 pages. |
IRD Mechanalysis, Inc., “Model 818 Machinery Maintenance Data Collector,” 1985, 6 pages. |
Johnson, Dick. “Pressure Sensing Advances: Are They in Your Process' Future?” Control Engineering (Apr. 1995), pp. 67-72. |
Johnsson, et al., “High-Level Grafcet and Batch Control”, Nov. 1994, Symposium ADPM. |
Kelly, D. Mark. “Digital fieldbus cluster cuts plant's wiring costs up to 20%,” Intech (Apr. 1995), pp. 62-64. |
Kissling, Jeffrey L. “Flexible Software Structure and Change Management,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (16 pages). |
Kline, “The Purposes of Uncertainty Analysis”, vol. 107, Journal of Fluids Engineering, pp. 153-160 (Jun. 1985). |
Ko, Diffu, “Trobe defines net management role for Web browser software,” Network World, May 22, 1995, p. 14. |
Kohler H. J., et al.,“Integrating UML Diagrams for Production Control Systems,” ACM p. 241-251, 2000. |
Kostas, et al., “Real-Time Voice Over Packet-Switched Networks”, pp. 18-27, IEEE Network (Jan./Feb. 1988). |
Koth, H. and Oeder, K. “The Advantages of Intelligent Field Modules for Nuclear Power Plant Operation and Maintenance,” Kemtechnik 60 (1996) 5-6, pp. 215-219. |
Lenhart, Gerald W. “A Field Bus Approach to Local Control Networks,” ISA, Paper #93-281 1993. |
Lenhart, Gerald W. “Fieldbus-Based Local Control Networks,” INTECH (Aug. 1994), p. 31-34. |
Leon, Mark, “Tektronix to add Web software on new printers,” InfoWorld, Dec. 4, 1995, p. 6. |
Loos, Peter. “Production Management-Linking Business Applications to Process Control,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (pp. 1-16). |
Loose, Graham. “Fieldbus—the user's perspective,” Measurement + Control vol. 27 (Mar. 1994), pp. 47-51. |
Loupos, Konstantinos et al., “VR, HF and Rule-Based Technologies Applied and Combined for Improving Industrial Safety,” Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4555, Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction, Ambient Interaction, pp. 676-680 (2007). |
Lu, S. et al., “An Object-Oriented Power Plant Adaptive Control System Design Tool,” Sep. 1995, IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 10, No. 3. |
Magnusson, B., Asklund, U., and Minor, S., “Fine-Grained Revision Control for Collaborative Software Development”, Dec. 1993, Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, ACM. |
Martin, “Design and Strategy for Distributed Data Processing”, Chptrs. 19 & 20, pp. 272-305 (1981). |
Maser, K. et al., “Development of a Wireless Global Bridge Evaluation and Monitoring System (WGBEMS),” Building of International Community of Structural Engineers, vol. 2, Proceedings of Structures Congress XIV Apr. 15-18, 1986, American Society of Civil Engineers, Chicago IL, 8 pages. |
Meeting Minutes, Ad Hoc Function Block Meeting, Jun. 14, 1990, Chapel Hill, NC (pp. 1-60). |
Meeting Minutes, Process Control Working Group of SP50.4, Jan. 21-23, 1991, Atlanta, GA (8 pages). |
Meeting Minutes, SP50, International Electrotechnical Commission, Technical Committee No. 65: Industrial-Process Measurement and Control, Sub-Committee 65C: Digital Data Communications for Measurement and Control and Working Group 6: Field BusStandard for Use in Industrial Control Systems, Feb. 28-Mar. 4, 1988, Scottsdale, Arizona (143 pages). |
Meeting Minutes, SP50, Signal Compatibility of Electrical Instruments, Dec. 5-7, 1990, Orlando, FL (64 pages). |
Meeting Minutes, SP50.4 Application Layer, Oct. 19-21, 1988, Houston, TX (96 pages). |
Meeting Minutes, Windows Working Group of Application Subcommittee, Mar. 1-3, 1989, New Orleans, LA (pp. 1-8). |
Mirabella, Orazio. “A Short Presentation of IEC Fieldbus Application Layer,” Informatics and Communication Institute, Engineering Faculty, University of Catania, Italy, Feb. 14, 1995. |
Miyoshi et al., “A Real-Time Java Server for Real-Time Match”, 1997, IEEE, pp. 319-325. |
Momal, F. and Pinto-Pereira, C. “Using World-Wide-Web for Control Systems,” from Proceedings 1995 International Conference on Accelerator and Large Experimental Physics Control Systems, Chicago, IL, Oct. 30-Nov. 3, 1995. |
Morel, G., et al. “Discrete Event Automation Engineering: Outline of the PRIAM Project.” BIAS '93, vol. 1, pp. 105-116, MILAN, Nov. 23-25, 1993. |
Mori, et al., “The PCMCIA Developer's Guide, Second Edition,” Sycard Technology 1994. |
Niagara Framework, http://www.tridium.com/products/niagara.asp, Feb. 10, 2005, 2 pages. |
NOAH: Network Oriented Application Harmonisation based on General Purpose Field Communication System. Project description rev. 1.0, Oct. 25, 1995. P-NET, PROFIBUS, WorldFIP. |
Nobuhiko, Tsuji, et al. “An Advanced Optical Fieldbus Instrumentation System Using 16×16 Reflection Type Optical Star Coupler and Low Powered Transmitter,” pp. 755-764, (1995). |
Notte, Angelo J. “Multitasking Capability Simplifies Process Control Design” Reliance Electric Company, approximately late 1980s. |
Object-Oriented Information Systems Planning and Implementation, David A. Taylor, Wiley Professional Computing, published Apr. 10, 1992, pp. 1-357. |
Ochoa, David. “Effects of Alliances and Acquisitions on the Batch Automation User,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (43 pages). |
Office Action mailed Dec. 26, 2002, U.S. Appl. No. 09/379,074. |
Office Action mailed Feb. 1, 2008, U.S. Appl. No. 10/765,006. |
Office Action mailed Apr. 23, 2002, U.S. Appl. No. 09/379,074. |
Office Action mailed Jul. 2, 2007, U.S. Appl. No. 10/765,006. |
Office Action mailed Sep. 24, 2003, U.S. Appl. No. 09/379,074. |
Output to Valve, Revision No. 1.4, Jan. 18, 1991, (Draft Document), Instrument Society of America. |
Owen, S., et al. “A modular reconfigurable approach to the creation of flexible manufacturing cells for educational purposes,” Fast Reconfiguration of Robotic and Automation Resources (Colloquium) Oct. 20, 1995, The Institution of ElectricalEngineers. |
Pace, Hugh W. “Valve Actuators Ready for Fieldbus,” Control Engineer (Oct. 1995), pp. 65-73. |
Pages from Aspentech.com website as of Jan. 1997, retrieved from Internet archive http://web.archive.org. |
Pages from Aspentech.com website as of Oct. 1996, retrieved from Internet archive http://web.archive.org. |
Pages from SL.com website as of Apr. 1999, retrieved from Internet archive http://web.archive.org. |
Pages from SL.com website as of Dec. 1998, retrieved from Internet archive http://web.archive.org. |
Pages from SL.com website as of Feb. 1997, retrieved from Internet archive http://web.archive.org. |
Pages from SL.com website as of May 2000, retrieved from Internet archive http://web.archive.org. |
Pappalardo, Denise, “Digi Introduces IP/IPX Router,” InternetWeek, Apr. 24, 1995, p. 15. |
Pappalardo, Denise, “Router Can Be Managed via Net,” InternetWeek, May 22, 1995, p. 6. |
Peshek, Clifford J., et al. “Recent Developments and Future Trends in PLC Programming Languages and Programming Tools for Real-Time Control,” IEEE Cement Industry Technical Conference (May 1993) Toronto, Canada, pp. 219-230. |
Petti, Thomas F. and Dhurjati, Prasad S. “A Coupled Knowledge Based System Using Fuzzy Optimization for Advisory Control,” IChE Journal vol. 38 (Sep. 1992) No. 9, pp. 1369-1378. |
Phinney, Thomas L. “An Analysis of Contending Proposals in ISA SP-50 for an ISA/IEC Field Instrument Bus,” ISA (1988) Paper #88/1489. |
Pinto, Jim. “The Great Fieldbus Debate—is Over,” Action Instruments (www.actionio.com) (originally published in Industrial Controls Intelligence, Nov. 1999). |
Preface: Field Bus Process Control User Layer Technical Support, Feb. 28, 1991. |
Press Release from Real-Time Innovation announcing ControlShell version 6.0 for sale/for use, Apr. 1998, 2 pages. |
Product Specification, I/A Series.RTM. RBATCH II, Aug. 31, 1994 (Revised Apr. 1995). |
Product Specifications, I/A Series(R) Software FoxGuard(TM) Manager for Triconex(TM) Safety Systems, Copyright 2000-2006, Invensys Systems, Inc. |
PROWAY-LAN Industrial Data Highway. (Approved Feb. 3, 1986) ISA-S72.01-1985. |
Redman, Jun, et al. “Intranet and the internal Web server: A standard user interface for integrating manufacturing applicaitons,”Proceedings of the Industrial Comuting conference, vol. 6, No. 1 (1996). |
Reklaitis, G. V. “Scheduling Approaches for the Batch Process Industries,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (17 pages). |
Renu Electronics Pvt. Ltd., “GWY-800 (HART Gateway) User Manual,” Rev. 0, Jul. 13, 2006. |
Report from IEC TC65 Working Group 6 Function Blocks, May 1, 1995. |
Robinson, D. et al., “Modelling and Synthesis of Configuration Controllers for Dynamically Reconfigurable Logic Systems Using the DCS CAD Framework,” 1999, Field-Programmable Logic and Applications, FPL '99, pp. 41-50. |
Rodriguez, Karen, “Tribe sets software,” Interactive Age, vol. 2, No. 15, May 22, 1995, p. 25. |
Rosenof, Howard P. “Dynamic Scheduling for a Brewery,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (6 pages). |
Scharf, Ronald, et al, “Using Mosaic for Remote Test System Control Supports Distributed Engineering,” Institute of Computer-Aided Circuit Design—Test and Testsystems Division, University of Erlangen-Nurnberg, Germany, web page print-out fromhttp://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/SDG/IT94/Proceedings/CSCW/scharf/scharf.html (8 pages), 1994. |
Schreiber Philip et al. “Process Automation Using SP88,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (7 pages). |
Schuur, C. “Comments on Analysis and Suggestions for ISA-SP50 as submitted to the SP50 Committee by Honeywell Inc.” (Mar. 11, 1988) ISA-SP50-1988-155, ISA Draft. |
Schuur, Chris and Warrior, Jay. “Phillips Token Passing Field Bus Controller Timed Token Mode,” ISA/SP50-1988-186, ISA Draft. (1988). |
Silverman, Dwight. “‘Attaboy’ for the best software and hardware of 1994,” The Houston Chronicle, Dec. 25, 1994, p. 2. |
Skabowski, E. L. “Recommendations for Consideration at Oct. 1988 Application Layer Subcommittee Meeting,” (Oct. 3, 1988). |
Slater, A. F. “Controlled by the Web,” Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 27 (1994) pp. 289-295. |
Smith, Chris. “Tektronix Pushes Ease-of-Use and Low Cost of Operation With Its New Phaser.RTM. Color Laser Printer,” comp.newprod forum (Jan. 11, 1996). |
Smith, S. et al., “Cyber Cut: A world wide web based design-to fabrication tool”, Journal of Manufacturing Systems, vol. 15/No. 6, Jan. 1, 1996, pp. 432-442. |
SNAP Foundation Template “Using the SNAP Development Environment,” Version 8.0, Chapters 1-4, 1997. |
Solvie, Michael J. “Configuration of Distributed Time-Critical Fieldbus Systems,” IEEE (1994), p. 211. |
Song, Jianping et al., “Challenges of Wireless Control in Process Industry,” Workshop on Research Directions for Security and Networking in Critical Real-Time and Embedded Systems, Apr. 4, 2006, San Jose, CA, USA; available at http://moss.csc.ncsu.edu/˜mueller/crtes06. |
Soreide, N. N., et al. “Mosaic access to real-time data from the TOGA-TAO array of moored buoys,” Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 28 (1995), pp. 189-197. |
Stapleton, Nick. “802.3 Working Group DTE Power via MDI Call for interest,” 3Com (Jul. 1999), (15 pages). |
Stein, R. et al. “Development of a Commercially Successful Wearable Data Collection System,” University of CA San Diego, Downloaded Jan. 12, 2009, 7 pages. |
Stevens, et al. “TCP/IP Illustrated, vol. 1. The Protocols,” TCP/IP Illustrated vol. 1, XP-002106390, pp. 85-96. (1994). |
Strack, Bob. “The Hawk is Soaring,” Chemical Processing (May 1996) p. 11. |
Strobhar, David A. “Evolution of Operator Decision Making,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (6 pages). |
Strothman, Jim and Ham, John. “Alliances, Fieldbus, Windows Stir ISA/94 Anaheim Pot,” INTECH (Dec. 1994), pp. 32-35. |
Strothman, Jim and Ham, John. “ISA/95 New Orleans: ‘Open’, NT winds (not Opal) blow strong,” INTECH (Nov. 1995), pp. 45-48. |
Table of Contents, Automation & Technology Department, 1993. |
Table of Contents, Automation & Technology Department, 1995. |
Table of Contents, Industrial Computing Society Conference ICS/95, New Orleans, LA, Oct. 1-6, 1995. |
Table of Contents, ISA '88 International Conference and Exhibit, Houston, TX, Oct. 16-21, 1988. |
Table of Contents, ISA '89 International Conference and Exhibit, Philadelphia, PA, Oct. 23, 1989. |
Table of Contents, Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Industrial Electronics Control and Instrumentation, vols. 1-3, Sep. 5-9, 1994, Bologna, Italy. |
Table of Contents, Proceedings of the 7th Mediterranean Electrotechnical Conference, vol. 1, Apr. 12-14, 1994, Antalya, Turkey. |
Table of Contents, Proceedings of the Industrial Computing Conference, vol. 3, Sep. 19-24, 1993, Chicago, IL. Industrial Computing Society. |
Taylor, Ken and Trevelyan, James, “A Telerobot on the World Wide Web,” printed from http://telerobot.mech.uwa.edu.au/ROBOT/telerobo.htm (14 pages) (1995). |
The Foxboro Company, “FoxCMS Change Management System Software,” 48 pgs., Aug. 14, 1996. |
Tinham, “Networks & surprises at C&I and ISA shows; Control and Instrumentation Exhibition and Conference; Instrument Society of America; includes related articles,” vol. 26; No. 6, p. 43; ISSN: 0010-8022 (Jun. 1994). |
Tinham, Brian, “Getting SCADA by web browsner? Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition,” Control and Instrumentation, No. 12, vol. 28, Dec. 1996, p. 5. |
Tobin, David. “Southeast Paper Installs Largest Foxboro Distributed Control System.” (No date available). |
Toner, Mike. “Web's view of world far and wide,” The Houston Chronicle, Nov. 5, 1995, p. 6. |
Tweney, “Java on Your Mobile Phone?”, http://www.business2.com (Mar. 14, 2002). |
U.S. Appl. No. 09/573,151, filed May 17, 2000, Linscott, Richard L. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/354,586, mailed Aug. 4, 2009. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/354,586, mailed Jul. 1, 2008. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/781,216, mailed Jan. 8, 2009. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/781,218, mailed Jan. 28, 2009. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/781,219, mailed Nov. 14, 2008. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office non-final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/354,586, mailed Jan. 8, 2009. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office non-final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/354,586, mailed Mar. 6, 2007. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office non-final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/354,586, mailed Nov. 1, 2007. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office non-final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/781,216, mailed Aug. 7, 2008. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office non-final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/781,219, mailed Jul. 14, 2008. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office non-final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/207,816, mailed Apr. 9, 2007. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office non-final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/207,816, mailed Jan. 10, 2008. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office non-final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/207,816, mailed Jul. 3, 2008. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office non-final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/207,816, mailed Oct. 4, 2006. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office non-final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/207,816, mailed Sep. 19, 2007. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office non-final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/781,218, mailed Sep. 15, 2008. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office non-final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/781,219, mailed Jul. 21, 2009. |
Van de Pol. “OmniChem: Real Time Production scheduling in a batch oriented environment,” 1994 World Batch Forum (Mar. 6-9, 1994), (23 pages). |
Vardy, Joel M. “Integrating Manufacturing Into the Corporate Reengineering Effort for the Batch Industries,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (23 pages). |
Wang, Lithui et al. “Agent-based Intelligent Control System Design for Real-time Distributed Manufacturing Environments”. Agent-basedManufacturing Workshop, Autonomous Agents '98. Minneapolis/St. Paul, May 9-13, 1998, pp. 152-159. |
Webb, Marcus. “Computer System Implementation, Batch Standards and Validation,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (11 pages). |
Weinert, A., et al. “RT/OS—realtime programming and application environment for the COSY control system,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A vol. 352 (1994), pp. 277-279. |
Welch, Nathalie, “Tribe to manage via Web; Tribe Computer Works Inc.'s TribeLink2 Product Announcement,” MacWEEK, vol. 9, No. 21, May 22, 1995, p. 18. |
WG1 List of Criteria (Appendix 1), (Oct. 21, 1988) ISA/SP50-1988-242, ISA Draft. |
Wilder, Clinton, “Network Management: Russing Nets Via The Web—Trib's WebManage uses popular interface,” InformationWeek, May 29, 1995, p. 62. |
Williams, Gary, “Wireless Plant and Backhaul in the Industrial Environment,” Invensys Operations Management, (no date available). |
Wolfe, Alexander, “Strong Brew,” Electronic Engineering Times, Apr. 8, 1996, p. 73. |
Wood, G. G. “Current Fieldbus activities,” computer communications vol. 11 (Jun. 1988) No. 3, pp. 118-123. |
Wood, G. G. “Evolution of communication standards for the process industry,” Measurement + Control vol. 19 (Jul./Aug. 1986), pp. 183-188. |
Wood, G. G. “Survey of LANs and Standards,” Computer Standards & Interfaces vol. 6 (1987), pp. 27-36. |
Wood, G. G. “The Argus Consul System for On-Line Computer Control,” Electrical Engineering Transactions (Mar. 1969), pp. 114-118. |
Wood, G. G. “The Challenge of Standards for Plant Communication,” IFAC Distributed Computer Control Systems (1982), pp. 191-192. |
Wood, G. G. “Towards digital information control,” Measurement + Control vol. 21 (Jul./Aug. 1988), pp. 179-180. |
Wood, Graeme G. “Data Transmission, Processing and Presentation,” pp. 46-54 (no date available). |
Wood, Graeme, G. “Standardisation Work for Communication Among Distributed Industrial Computer Control Systems—A Status Report,” INRIA (1984), pp. 67-69. |
Wood, Graeme. “Fieldbus Status 1995,” Computing & Control Engineering Journal (Dec. 1995), pp. 251-253. |
Wood, Graeme. “Generic Link Transactions for Simple Devices in Fieldbus.” ISA/SP50-1988-240 (Sep. 20, 1988). |
Young, Stephen L. “Technology . . . The Enabler for Tommorrow's Agile Enterprise,” 1995 World Batch Forum (May 22-24, 1995), (10 pages). |
Zeff, Joe. “Maui Sunset in Real Time (Modems not Optional),” The New York Times, Nov. 27, 1995, Section D, col. 2, p. 5. |
Zeller, A. and Snelting, G., “Unified Versioning Through Feature Logic,” Oct. 1997, Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, vol. 6, Issue 4, ACM. |
Hiertz, Guido et al., “IEEE 802.11s: The WLAN Mesh Standard,” IEEE Wireless Communications, pp. 104-111, Feb. 2011. |
User Guide for IntelaTrac 2000: Automated Field Data Collection Solutions, Rev. 1.0, Nov. 30, 1999. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110093098 A1 | Apr 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12474942 | May 2009 | US |
Child | 12904608 | US | |
Parent | 12474885 | May 2009 | US |
Child | 12474942 | US |