This application claims priority to British Patent Application No. 1103680.3 filed Mar. 3, 2011, the teachings of which are incorporated herein by reference.
The present invention is concerned with a system and method for sampling a signal train comprising a series of signal pulses and determining the frequency or period of the signal train, Embodiments of the invention are particularly useful for determining the frequency of a signal train having a frequency which is dependent on an input, or measured parameter. Particular embodiments of the subject invention arc concerned with measuring the output frequency of vibrating element sensors in such a way as to reduce the effect of noise on determinations of the value of the parameter measured by the subject vibrating element sensors.
Vibrating element sensors may be used to measure pressure, density, force, viscosity and temperature. An example of such a sensor is described in GB 2,413,386. Examples are also the Weston 7881 pressure sensor and Weston 7825 fuel densitometer both manufactured by Weston Aerospace limited. Embodiments of the invention could also be used with Doppler radar where the frequency is proportional to the velocity of an object.
Vibrating element sensors, which include vibrating cylinder pressure and/or density sensors, provide an output frequency that is dependent on the measured parameter (e.g. pressure in a pressure sensor). The remainder of this application will refer to the measurement of pressure; however the same techniques would apply equally to the measurement of any other parameter using a vibrating element sensor, or any other sensor having an output signal with a frequency dependent on an input or measured parameter (for example, Doppler radar).
The sensor's output frequency must be determined or measured accurately, with low noise and sufficient resolution to meet the sensor's performance requirements
The frequency, or period, of the sensor's output signal is measured against an accurate high frequency reference clock. In the example shown in
The period T of the sensor signal in seconds is then given by:
where Fr is the reference clock frequency in Hz, Nc is the number of clock cycles and Ns is the number of sensor signal pulse cycles.
The resolution of the measured period is determined by the number of reference clock cycles in the measurement period. The resolution can be improved by increasing the frequency of the reference clock Fr, counting over a greater number of sensor cycles Nc (hence increasing the length of the measurement period), or a combination of both.
It is important to differentiate between genuine pressure variations and unwanted noise which does not relate to pressure changes. It is desirable to be able to measure the former but the latter should be minimised. For ease of understanding, the following discussion and explanation assumes the sensor input pressure is constant so that any noise referred to is unwanted and emanates either from within the sensor itself or as a result of external interference.
Noise on the sensor's output manifests itself as jitter on the edges of the measured signal pulses. The signal pulse edges 1 are shifted from their nominal ‘true’ position 3 by a randomly varying time.
The measured time between the start and stop sensor edges 1 is in error by Δt1+Δt2.
Assuming that this jitter error on each edge (Δtn) has a normal (Gaussian) distribution, it can be expressed as an error with standard deviation e. As this appears on both the start and stop edges the error in the measured time is given by:
E=√{square root over (e2+e2)} (2)
where E is the standard deviation of the error in the measured time between the start and stop edges.
The ‘root sum of squares’ assumption of equation (2) only holds true if the errors in the start and stop edges are truly independent and there is no correlation between them. As explained later, this hypothesis can be tested by making real measurements.
If the pressure is constant and the noise on each of the edges is independent, then the jitter time on the measurement between any two edges is given by E. If the time measurement is made over Ns sensor cycles, the time error Ep in the measurement of a single sensor cycle period (i.e. the period between consecutive signal pulses) is given by:
The total measurement time t between the start and stop edges of a sampling period is given by:
t=Ns.P (4)
where P is the period of a single sensor cycle.
Rearranging for Ns and substituting in the previous equation gives:
If the sensor is making repeated measurements that are t seconds apart then the sampling update frequency F is given by 1/t. So the above equation for the time error Ep can by written as:
Ep=E.P.F (6)
So if the noise on an edge is truly independent of the noise on other edges, it should be found that the jitter error, and hence the pressure noise, is proportional to the update rate of the measurement.
This shows a strong linear relationship between measurement noise and update rate, validating the hypothesis that the noise on a sensor output edge is independent of the noise on other sensor output edges.
Using the frequency measurement technique described above the known way of reducing the effect of noise has been to increase the sampling or measurement time and hence decrease the update rate. In some cases, where a fast update rate is not required, this is acceptable. However, in other cases, where for example the sensor forms part of a control loop, both a fast update rate and low noise are required.
Preferred embodiments of the present invention aim to reduce the effect of noise while avoiding the need in the prior art to reduce the update rate (or response time), or to at least provide an alternative method and system for noise reduction.
The present invention provides a method and system set out in claims 1 and 8 to which reference should now be made. Preferred features of embodiments of the invention are set out in the dependent claims.
The inventors of the subject application have realised that the jitter noise on the edge of a sensed signal pulse is independent of the noise on other sensed signal pulses, and that the fact that the jitter noise on a sensor edge is independent of the noise on any other edge opens up the possibility of alternative sampling methods to reduce noise without significantly increasing the overall measurement time. Embodiments of the invention are particularly useful where one is measuring signal frequency when the received signal is very noisy. Examples of noisy frequency signals include Doppler radar and vibrating element sensors.
If the samples had been end to end then the noise would have been reduced to E/2. Although this overlapping method does not give such a large noise reduction, the advantage is that the measurement time is only increased by one sensor cycle, rather than doubling the measurement time if the samples had been end to end.
In the general case, if there are n overlapping samples then the standard deviation of noise E″ becomes:
So if n=4, the noise is halved with an increase in measurement time of only 4 sensor cycles.
The method shown in
Embodiments of the invention will now be described by way of non-limiting example and with reference to the accompanying figures, in which:
Embodiments of the subject invention are implemented in routines executed by a data processor or computer. The routines may be embodied in software or hardware, and may be on a removable data carrier
Referring to
Ti=ti/Ns (9)
If the noise on the measurement of t is E, the noise on one cycle is:
Ep=E/Ns (10)
For the modified sampling method of
The average period of a single sensor cycle for interval i is then calculated as follows:
Ti=(ti1+ti2+ti3)/(3×Ns) (11)
If there are n overlapping samples the general case is:
As described above (see equations 7 and 8), if the noise on the measurement of t is E then the noise for the averaged overlapping samples will be:
and the noise on an individual period will be
The example discussed above with reference to
The embodiments of the invention discussed above measure the period between falling edges of the signal. Embodiments could also use rising edges or rising and falling edges. An embodiment using both falling and rising edges at the same time would require more complex signal processing but would allow one to obtain twice as many measurements in the same time.
The period T is measured by measuring the time between two edges at the start and finish of a portion of a pulse train. This is done by using a digital counter 6, a latch 7 and a clock oscillator 8 with a known frequency (see
The frequency output of the sensor 4 is used to latch the output of a free running counter driven by an accurate reference clock 8. When the counter 6 is latched the processor is notified that a reference count is available to be read. A fast CPU may be capable of processing timing data from every sensor cycle, in which case the divider 9 would not be used. However, where timing restrictions apply, a divider 9 could be implemented so that the reference clock is latched every A sensor cycles. The example discussed above with reference to
Software in the CPU 5 is used to calculate the number of reference clock counts (Nc) within each overlapping measurement interval t1, t2, t3 etc (Nc being a means of determining each time interval t1, t2, t3 etc) and to then calculate the average of the overlapping time intervals or periods t1, t2, t3 etc. Each interval contains the same number of sensor cycles Ns. Nc for each interval (tn) is calculated by subtracting the start and finish values of the free running clock. The averaged value of Nc is used to calculate the sensor's output time period as discussed above with reference to
The complete transducer, as shown in the block diagram of
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1103680.3 | Mar 2011 | GB | national |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5764045 | Hayashi | Jun 1998 | A |
7747222 | Nallapureddy et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7839153 | Joy et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
20040075425 | Horio et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040100245 | Oishi et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20070135057 | Nallapureddy et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20100264902 | Nallapureddy et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1746398 | Jan 2007 | EP |
2413386 | Oct 2005 | GB |
2008128762 | Jun 2008 | JP |
Entry |
---|
Search Report dated May 11, 2011 for related Application No. GB1103680.3, 2 pgs. |
Search Report dated Jun. 18, 2012 for related application No. EP12157683, 4 pgs. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130063127 A1 | Mar 2013 | US |