Data processing: generic control systems or specific application – Generic control system – apparatus or process – Having preparation of program
Reexamination Certificate
1999-03-12
2002-05-07
Grant, William (Department: 2121)
Data processing: generic control systems or specific application
Generic control system, apparatus or process
Having preparation of program
C700S266000, C707S793000, C709S241000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06385496
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates generally to process control networks and, more specifically, to the use of indirect referencing in process control routines to enable advanced process control.
DESCRIPTION OF THE RELATED ART
Process control networks, such as those used in chemical, petroleum or other processes, generally include a centralized process controller communicatively coupled to one or more field devices which may be, for example, valve positioners, switches, sensors (such as temperature, pressure and flow rate sensors), etc. These field devices may perform physical control functions within the process (such as opening or closing a valve), may take measurements within the process for use in controlling the operation of the process or may perform any other desired function within the process. Process controllers have historically been connected to field devices via one or more analog signal lines or buses which may carry, for example, 4-20 mA (milliamp) signals to and from the field devices. More recently, however, the process control industry has developed a number of standard, open, digital or combined digital and analog communication protocols such as the FOUNDATION™ FIELDBUS (hereinafter “Fieldbus”), HART®, PROFIBUS®, WORLDFIP®, Device-Net® and CAN protocols which can be used to implement communications between a controller and field devices. Generally speaking, the process controller receives signals indicative of measurements made by one or more field devices and/or other information pertaining to the field devices, uses this information to implement a typically complex control routine and generates control signals which are sent via the signal lines or buses to the field devices to thereby control the operation of the process.
Certain types of process control networks, such as those used in batch processes, typically include multiple sets of replicated equipment designed to have the same or similar equipment which performs essentially the same function within the processes. Thus, for example, a cookie manufacturing plant may have multiple sets of mixing equipment, multiple sets of baking equipment, and multiple sets of packaging equipment, with all of the individual mixers being capable of operating in parallel and of being connected to operate in series with any of the baking equipment and any of packaging equipment. In such a system, it is desirable to be able to use the same control algorithm or routine to control the operation of any particular set of replicated equipment to thereby reduce the number of control routines that must be created and stored within the controller. However, these control algorithms must be written so that, when executed, they specify the equipment of a particular unit being used at the time.
In some prior art systems, a generalized control routine using alias names (i.e., unspecified variables) to designate the specific equipment that varied from replicated unit to replicated unit was created in a workstation. To enable a system controller to perform the generalized control routine on a particular unit, the generalized program was instantiated using an alias resolution table created for a particular unit. Such an alias resolution table included a definition for each alias name used in the generalized control routine and was used to create an executable instance of the generalized control routine by substituting the values in the alias resolution table of the particular unit for the alias names in the control routine. This instantiated control routine was then downloaded into and stored in the controller and, thereafter, was used during run-time to perform a control operation (or phase) on the particular unit. However, using this system, the controller had to store a separate instantiated (resolved) control routine for each of the different ones of the replicated units, thereby requiring a lot of memory space within the controller, especially if the controller was used to control a large number of similar units and was being used to perform a lot of different operations or phases on each unit (as separate instantiated control routines were required for each phase for each unit).
In another prior art system, the generalized control routine was stored in the controller and was used during run-time to perform the programed operation or phase on any of the replicated units to which it was applied. In this case, the alias names were resolved on the fly during run-time using the alias resolution table for the particular unit being controlled. However, in this configuration, if a change was to be made to the generalized control routine that was currently being run by the controller, the run of that routine had to be aborted to enable a new generalized control routine to be downloaded into the controller. This resulted in the loss of the materials, time, etc. associated with the aborted run of the process.
Furthermore, neither of these known systems enabled a single generic process control routine with alias names to be applied across multiple or different classes of units or equipment. In fact, in these prior art systems, a control routine for a phase was limited to use with one unit class, i.e., one specific type of hardware unit, such as reactors, or mixers, etc. As a result, a first generic process control routine had to be created and stored to, for example, fill a reactor vessel while a second generic process control routine had to be created and stored to fill mixing tanks and a third one had to be created and stored to fill feeder tanks, resulting in the creation of many different generic control routines for performing essentially the same function on different types of hardware.
Likewise, none of these prior art systems enabled the generic control routine to account for differences between the equipment associated with different modules of a particular type of hardware unit. For example, if a first reactor unit had an electrical heating element associated therewith and a second reactor unit had a steam heating element associated therewith, a different generic control routine had to be developed for heating each of these reactor units to account for the differences in the control of the electrical heater and the steam heater, even though the process only required heating to be performed, with the type of heating being irrelevant. This problem generally occurs when additional units or modules (such as reactor modules) are added to a process control system at various times and, because of cost, new advances in hardware, etc., the newly added modules, while being designed to perform essentially the same function as the existing modules, have slightly different equipment associated therewith.
Still further, these prior art systems had no easy method of specifying a parameter to be identified during run-time of the process control routine for any phase of a process. In fact, in most prior art systems having indirect referencing, the alias resolution table was used to resolve alias names when the process control routine was configured or put into machine readable code, which was before run-time. To enable a variable to be changed or specified during run-time, one prior art system provided an addressing scheme, such as an address array, into which references or pointers could be, placed during run-time so that, when the control program reached an instruction referencing one of the addresses in the array, the program would go to the device or position referred to by the contents of the specified address. However, there was no way to tell if the contents of the referenced address pointed to a valid device or to a proper place within the control routine during run-time. If the pointer was invalid, the program would be suspended and not continue, which caused production to stop. Still further, this addressing scheme was complex and hard to use properly because it required a detailed knowledge of the address array holding the pointers and knowledge as to which address of the array was being used by the control routine at wh
Deitz David L.
Havekost Robert B.
Irwin William G.
Stevenson Dennis L.
Fisher-Rosemount Systems Inc.
Garland Steven R.
Grant William
Marshall Gerstein & Borun
LandOfFree
Indirect referencing in process control routines does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Indirect referencing in process control routines, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Indirect referencing in process control routines will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2868363