A process control system uses an asset optimization reporter to collect status information of dissimilar types pertaining to the assets of a process plant from various data sources of the plant including, for example, data tools, data collectors, and data generators. This status information is used
A process control system uses an asset optimization reporter to collect status information of dissimilar types pertaining to the assets of a process plant from various data sources of the plant including, for example, data tools, data collectors, and data generators. This status information is used to generate reports that may be displayed to various users, including maintenance persons, process control persons and business persons. The status information may be used as the basis for further types of status information and/or be categorized in based on an assessment of relative consequence, where each category has a spectrum of status quality values between a good status quality and a relatively worse status quality. The reports are generally displayed via a user interface routine that enables users to view the status information as a graphical representation having a leg of a normalized spectrum of values for each category arranged in order of the relative consequence, the relative status quality value being identified at a point on the respective leg.
대표청구항▼
1. A method of reporting status information regarding an entity within a process plant, the method comprising: categorizing one or more of a plurality of types of status information based on an assessment of at least one of a temporal consequence, a criticality consequence, a prioritization conseque
1. A method of reporting status information regarding an entity within a process plant, the method comprising: categorizing one or more of a plurality of types of status information based on an assessment of at least one of a temporal consequence, a criticality consequence, a prioritization consequence, or an availability consequence as a result of the status information such that each type of status information is associated with at least one of a first entity status category, a second entity status category, and a third entity status category, the status information pertaining to the entity and reflecting a condition of the entity,wherein the types of status information associated with the first entity status category have a relatively greater consequence than the types of status information associated with the second entity status category, and the types of status information associated with the second entity status category have a relatively greater consequence than the types of status information associated with the third entity status category, andwherein each entity status category has a spectrum of status quality values between a good status quality and a relatively worse status quality;generating a report on a processor that includes relative status quality values, wherein the report is indicative of the status of the entity and the values of relative status quality are determined for the entity status categories from the status information; anddisplaying the report to a user indicative of the status of the entity,wherein the display of the report includes a graphical representation indicative of the status of the entity,wherein the graphical representation comprises a leg for each entity status category,wherein each leg has a normalized spectrum of values, andwherein the relative status quality value is identified at a point on the respective leg. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein each leg comprises a number of increments measured from a common origin relative to one end of the spectrum of values to an endpoint relative to the other end of the spectrum of values, wherein each endpoint is normalized to be equidistant from the origin as other endpoints of the other legs. 3. The method of claim 1, wherein entity status values pertaining to each status category are proportionally assigned to a point on the respective leg and the point is linearly connected to a point of an entity status value of at least one other leg to define the graphical representation intersecting the legs for a combined display of each of the plurality of categories. 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the consequence comprises a temporal consequence. 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the consequence comprises a priority index. 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the consequence comprises an availability consequence. 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the consequence comprises entity criticality. 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the entity is a first entity, and one or more of the status information of the first type, the status information of the second type and the status information of the third type pertains to the status of a second entity. 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the status information of the first type, the second type and the third type each pertain to one or more of: entity availability, entity health, entity downtime, entity utilization, entity reliability, entity performance, entity age, entity failure, entity prioritization, entity instructions, entity history, entity location, entity description, entity type, entity specifications, entity alignment, entity function, entity details, entity identification, entity manufacturer, entity alerts, entity optimization, entity alarms, entity configuration, entity calibration, entity position, entity speed, entity tolerances, entity chatter, key performance indicators, use indices, work orders, service orders, parts orders, predictions, models, waste, safety, environment, utilities, quality, throughput, an economic analysis, an impact analysis, a production analysis, a cost analysis, a vibration analysis, a thermography analysis, a lubricant analysis, a chemistry analysis, a balance analysis, an ultrasonic analysis, monitoring information, operating equipment effectiveness, efficiency, task planning, task assignment, a corrective measure, help information, recommendations, instructions, diagnostic information, event severity, and event urgency. 10. The method of claim 1, wherein the legs comprise axes having polygonal representation of status categories having a spectrum of values between a good status quality and a bad status quality and normalized relative to the other spectrums of values. 11. The method of claim 1, wherein the status information of one entity status category comprises design status information, another entity status category comprises an operating condition information, and a further entity status category comprises a measure of entity health. 12. The method of claim 1, wherein the process plant includes a plurality of lower level entities, wherein the plurality of lower entities comprise a higher level entity,wherein receiving status information comprises receiving status information pertaining to the status of each of the plurality of lower level entities;wherein generating a report comprises generating a higher level report on a processor that includes relative status quality values, wherein the report is indicative of the status of the higher level entity and the values of relative status quality are determined for the entity status categories from the status information; andwherein displaying the report comprises displaying the higher level report to a user, wherein the display of the higher level report includes a graphical representation indicative of the status of the higher level entity, wherein the graphical representation comprises a leg for each entity status category, wherein each leg has a normalized spectrum of values, wherein the relative status quality value is identified at a point on the respective leg. 13. A system for reporting status information for a process plant having a plurality of entities, the system comprising: a computer readable memory;a display;a routine stored on the computer readable memory and adapted to be executed on a processor to categorize one or more of a plurality of types of status information based on an assessment of at least one of a temporal consequence, a criticality consequence, a prioritization consequence, or an availability consequence as a result of the status information such that each type of status information is associated with at least one of a first entity status category, a second entity status category, and a third entity status category, the status information pertaining to the entity and reflecting a condition of the entity and the relative consequences including at least one of a temporal consequence, a criticality consequence, a prioritization consequence, or an availability consequence, wherein the types of status information associated with the first entity status category have a relatively greater consequence than the types of status information associated with the second entity status category, and the types of status information associated with the second entity status category have a relatively greater consequence than the types of status information associated with the third entity status category, andwherein each entity status category has a spectrum of status quality values between a good status quality and a relatively worse status quality;a routine stored on the computer readable memory and adapted to be executed on a processor to generate a report on a processor that includes relative status quality values, wherein the report is indicative of the status of the entity and the values of relative status quality are determined for the entity status categories from the status information; anda routine stored on the computer readable memory and adapted to be executed on a processor to display the report to a user indicative of the status of the entity, wherein the display of the report includes a graphical representation indicative of the status of the entity,wherein the graphical representation comprises a leg for each entity status category,wherein each leg has a normalized spectrum of values, andwherein the relative status quality value is identified at a point on the respective leg. 14. The system of claim 13, wherein each leg comprises a number of increments measured from a common origin relative to one end of the spectrum of values to an endpoint relative to the other end of the spectrum of values, wherein each endpoint is normalized to be equidistant from the origin as other endpoints of the other legs. 15. The system of claim 13, wherein entity status values pertaining to each status category are proportionally assigned to a point on the respective leg and the point is linearly connected to a point of an entity status value of at least one other leg to define the graphical representation intersecting the legs for a combined display of each of the plurality of categories. 16. The system of claim 13, wherein the consequence comprises a temporal consequence. 17. The system of claim 13, wherein the consequence comprises a priority index. 18. The system of claim 13, wherein the consequence comprises an availability consequence. 19. The system of claim 13, wherein the consequence comprises entity criticality. 20. The system of claim 13, wherein the entity is a first entity, and one or more of the status information of the first type, the status information of the second type and the status information of the third type pertains to the status of a second entity. 21. The system of claim 13, wherein the plurality of entities are lower level entities and the process plant further includes a higher level entity that includes two or more of the lower level entities, the system further comprising: a routine stored on the computer readable memory and adapted to be executed on a processor to receive status information pertaining to the status of the higher level entity;a routine stored on the computer readable memory and adapted to be executed on a processor to generate a higher level report pertaining to the status of the higher level entity; anda routine stored on the computer readable memory and adapted to be executed on a processor to display the higher level report to the user, wherein the display of the higher level report includes a representation of the status information pertaining to the status of the higher level entity. 22. The system of claim 13, wherein the report further comprises status information pertaining to one or more of: entity availability, entity health, entity downtime, entity utilization, entity reliability, entity performance, entity age, entity failure, entity prioritization, entity instructions, entity history, entity location, entity description, entity type, entity specifications, entity alignment, entity function, entity details, entity identification, entity manufacturer, entity alerts, entity optimization, entity alarms, entity configuration, entity calibration, entity position, entity speed, entity tolerances, entity chatter, key performance indicators, use indices, work orders, service orders, parts orders, predictions, models, waste, safety, environment, utilities, quality, throughput, an economic analysis, an impact analysis, a production analysis, a cost analysis, a vibration analysis, a thermography analysis, a lubricant analysis, a chemistry analysis, a balance analysis, an ultrasonic analysis, monitoring information, operating equipment effectiveness, efficiency, task planning, task assignment, a corrective measure, help information, recommendations, instructions, diagnostic information, event severity, and event urgency. 23. A method of reporting status information regarding an entity within a process plant, the comprising: categorizing one or more of a plurality of types of status information based on an assessment of at least one of a temporal consequence, a criticality consequence, a prioritization consequence, or an availability consequence as a result of the status information such that each type of status information is associated with at least one of a first entity status category, a second entity status category, and a third entity status category, the status information pertaining to the entity and reflecting a condition of the entity and the relative consequences including at least one of a temporal consequence, a criticality consequence, a prioritization consequence, or an availability consequence; wherein the types of status information associated with the first entity status category have a relatively greater consequence than the types of status information associated with the second entity status category, and the types of status information associated with the second entity status category have a relatively greater consequence than the types of status information associated with the third entity status category, andwherein each entity status category has a spectrum of status quality values between a good status quality and a relatively worse status quality;receiving status information for at least a portion of the status types, the status information pertaining to the entity and each type of status information reflecting a condition;determining a value of relative status quality for the entity status categories from the status information;generating a report on a processor that includes the relative status quality values for the entity status categories, wherein the report is indicative of the status of the entity; anddisplaying the report to a user, wherein the display of the report includes a graphical representation indicative of a the status of the entity,wherein the graphical representation comprises a leg for each entity status category,wherein each leg has a normalized spectrum of values,wherein the relative status quality value is identified at a point on the respective leg. 24. The method of claim 23, wherein each leg comprises a number of increments measured from a common origin relative to one end of the spectrum of values to an endpoint relative to the other end of the spectrum of values, wherein each endpoint is normalized to be equidistant from the origin as other endpoints of the other legs. 25. The method of claim 23, wherein entity status values pertaining to each status category are proportionally assigned to a point on the respective leg and the point is linearly connected to a point of an entity status value of at least one other leg to define the graphical representation intersecting the legs for a combined display of each of the plurality of categories. 26. The method of claim 23, wherein the consequence comprises a temporal consequence. 27. The method of claim 23, wherein the consequence comprises a priority index. 28. The method of claim 23, wherein the consequence comprises an availability consequence. 29. The method of claim 23, wherein the consequence comprises entity criticality. 30. The method of claim 23, wherein the entity is a first entity, and one or more of the status information of the first type, the status information of the second type and the status information of the third type pertains to the status of a second entity. 31. The method of claim 23, wherein the status information of the first type, the second type and the third type each pertain to one or more of: entity availability, entity health, entity downtime, entity utilization, entity reliability, entity performance, entity age, entity failure, entity prioritization, entity instructions, entity history, entity location, entity description, entity type, entity specifications, entity alignment, entity function, entity details, entity identification, entity manufacturer, entity alerts, entity optimization, entity alarms, entity configuration, entity calibration, entity position, entity speed, entity tolerances, entity chatter, key performance indicators, use indices, work orders, service orders, parts orders, predictions, models, waste, safety, environment, utilities, quality, throughput, an economic analysis, an impact analysis, a production analysis, a cost analysis, a vibration analysis, a thermography analysis, a lubricant analysis, a chemistry analysis, a balance analysis, an ultrasonic analysis, monitoring information, operating equipment effectiveness, efficiency, task planning, task assignment, a corrective measure, help information, recommendations, instructions, diagnostic information, event severity, and event urgency. 32. The method of claim 23, wherein the legs comprise axes having polygonal representation of status categories having a spectrum of values between a good status quality and a bad status quality and normalized relative to the other spectrums of values. 33. The method of claim 23, wherein the status information of one entity status category comprises design status information, another entity status category comprises an operating condition information, and a further entity status category comprises a measure of entity health. 34. A method of reporting status information regarding an entity within a process plant, the method comprising: receiving a plurality of types of status information, the status information pertaining to the entity and reflecting a condition of the entity;categorizing one or more of the plurality of types of status information based on a logical sequential order such that the types of status information associated with a first entity status category are relatively greater in a logical sequence compared to the types of status information associated with a second entity status category, and the types of status information associated with the second entity status category are relatively greater in a logical sequence compared to the types of status information associated with a third entity status category, andwherein each entity status category has a spectrum of status quality values between a good status quality and a relatively worse status quality;generating a report on a processor that includes relative status quality values, wherein the report is indicative of the status of the entity and the values of relative status quality are determined for the entity status categories from the status information; anddisplaying the report to a user indicative of the status of the entity,wherein the display of the report includes a graphical representation indicative of the status of the entity,wherein the graphical representation comprises a leg for each entity status category,wherein each leg has a normalized spectrum of values, andwherein the relative status quality value is identified at a point on the respective leg.
연구과제 타임라인
LOADING...
LOADING...
LOADING...
LOADING...
LOADING...
이 특허에 인용된 특허 (124)
Agrawal Mukul (Plymouth MN) Orrock James E. (Eden Prairie MN) Patiath Pradip K. (Brooklyn Park MN) Rachor Lloyd A. (Brooklyn Park MN), Advanced equipment control system.
Holley Steven R. (Phoenix AZ) Cunningham David C. (Carefree AZ) Kral Kevin D. (Streamwood IL), Apparatus and method for minimizing limit cycle using complementary filtering techniques.
Boehling Warren A. ; Foskett Alan Morton ; Wheeler Alan Reid, Automatically configurable multi-purpose distributed control processor card for an industrial control system.
Bhat Naveen V. (Houston TX) Braden William B. (Houston TX) Heckendoorn Kent E. (Houston TX) Graettinger Timothy J. (Bethel Park PA) Federowicz Alexander J. (Pittsburgh PA) Dubose Paul A. (Chapel Hill, Control system using an adaptive neural network for target and path optimization for a multivariable, nonlinear process.
Rylander Karen S. (Minneapolis MN) Fant Karl M. (Minneapolis MN) Egli Werner H. (Maple Grove MN), Data projection system with compensation for nonplanar screen.
Aggers John R. (Apple Valley MN) Brindle Ralph C. (Minnetonka MN) Kidder Kenneth B. (Coon Rapids MN) Ullestad David C. (Brooklyn Park MN), Distributed environmental/load control system.
Call William L. ; Clawson Laurence A. ; Connolly Paul S. ; Freimark Ronald J. ; Gustin Jay W. ; Hodge Michael L. ; McGaugh Paul ; Moore Donald W. ; Rachlin Elliott H. ; Ramsdell Steven C., Emulator for visual display object files and method of operation thereof.
Suzuki, Tatsuya; Ohashi, Toshijiro; Miyakawa, Seii; Asano, Masaaki; Kubota, Takashi, Evaluation method and its apparatus of work shop and product quality.
Lake Harold ; Prentice David P. ; Greenup John ; Piper Charles ; Korowitz Simon, Industrial field controlling device with controller and expansion modules.
Bob Spriggs ; Bob Hayashida ; Ken Ceglia ; Diana Seymour ; Mike Peden ; Paul Richetta ; Matt Anderson ; Rich Bennington ; Daryl Frogget ; Scott Roby ; Mark Jensen, Industrial plant asset management system: apparatus and method.
Nasr Hatem N. (Edina MN) Sadjadi Firooz A. (St. Anthony MN) Bazakos Michael E. (Bloomington MN) Amehdi Hossien (Edina MN), Knowledge and model based adaptive signal processor.
Killpatrick Joseph E. (Minneapolis MN) Berndt Dale F. (Plymouth MN) Fritze Keith R. (Long Lake MN) Cary Gregory E. (Mounds View MN), Laser gyro dither strippr gain correction method and apparatus.
Keeler James D. ; Hartman Eric J. ; O'Hara Steven A. ; Kempf Jill L. ; Godbole Devendra B., Method and apparatus for preprocessing input data to a neural network.
Bonoyer John J. ; Flanagan Todd J., Method and apparatus for self-calibration of a coordinated control system for an electric power generating station.
Piche Stephen ; Keeler James David ; Hartman Eric ; Johnson William D. ; Gerules Mark ; Liano Kadir, Method for steady-state identification based upon identified dynamics.
Malloy ; deceased John R. (late of Drexel Hill PA by Virginia M. Malloy ; executrix) Olsen Arthur M. (Pennsburg PA), Method of digital process variable transmitter calibration and a process variable transmitter system utilizing the same.
Lu Zhuxin J. (Glendale AZ) MacArthur J. Ward (Scottsdale AZ) Horn Brian C. (Phoenix AZ), Method of multivariable predictive control utilizing range control.
Lu Zhuxin J. (19513 N. 73rd La. Glendale AZ 85308), Method of optimal scaling of variables in a multivariable predictive controller utilizing range control.
Scarola Kenneth ; Jamison David S. ; Manazir Richard M. ; Rescorl Robert L. ; Harmon Daryl L., Method of validating measurement data of a process parameter from a plurality of individual sensor inputs.
La Chance Ralph Edward ; Sardell Richard ; Landry Donald Francis ; Waibel Helmut, Methods and systems for providing electronic documentation to users of industrial process control systems.
Degeneff Robert C. (Niskayuna NY) Gutierrez Moises R. (Troy NY), Methods for generating models of non-linear systems and components and for evaluating parameters in relation to such non.
Britt Herbert I. (Cambridge MA) Joshi Amol P. (Marlboro MA) Mahalec Vladimir (Sudbury MA) Piela Peter C. (Brighton MA) Venkataraman Swaminathan (Waltham MA), Plant simulation and optimization software apparatus and method using dual execution models.
Hallee Donald O. (North Easton MA) Lake Harold (Sharon MA) Johansson Kenneth L. (North Grafton MA) Graves Thomas B. (Norton MA), Process control system with improved fault isolation.
Borchers Hans-Werner,DEX ; Otte Ralf,DEX ; Speh Rainer,DEX ; Weisang Claus,DEX, Process diagnosis system and method for the diagnosis of processes and states in an technical process.
Cheney M. Charles ; Korowitz Simon ; Slechta William M. ; Tobol Nathan H., Protection against communications crosstalk in a factory process control system.
MacArthur J. Ward (Minneapolis MN) Wahlstedt David A. (Minneapolis MN) Woessner Michael A. (Minneapolis MN) Foslien Wendy K. (Minneapolis MN), Receding horizon based adaptive control having means for minimizing operating costs.
Steinman Jethro F. ; Kanji M. Gulam ; Chehadeh Yahia C. ; Himmer Richard P. ; Rosa-Bian John J., System and methods for achieving heterogeneous data flow between algorithm blocks in a distributed control system.
Kessel William C. (Watertown MA) Laclaire John L. (Cambridge MA) Lui Andrew L. (West Newton MA) Locke Michael H. (Lakeville MA) Britt Herbert I. (Cambridge MA), System for displaying different subsets of screen views, entering different amount of information, and determining corre.
Bland Dennis L. (Phoenix AZ) Kast John R. (Phoenix AZ), System for making data available to an outside software package by utilizing a data file which contains source and desti.
Boehling Warren A. ; Peck ; III Stephen Albert ; Wheeler Alan Reid, System for replacing control processor by operating processor in partially disabled mode for tracking control outputs.
Bland Dennis L. ; Koontz Sean C. ; Fox Gary L. ; Strilich James A., Systems and methods for providing dynamic data referencing in a generic data exchange environment.
Sakakibara, Shinsuke; Nishi, Hiroji, Cell control system, manufacturing system, and control method which control manufacturing cell including plurality of manufacturing machines.
Eryurek, Evren; Hokeness, Scott N.; Harris, Stuart; Dillon, Steven; Rome, Greg; Westbrock, Jon; Kavaklioglu, Kadir, Integrated navigational tree importation and generation in a process plant.
Koshkin, Yuriy; Hansmann, Will; Heilman, Ben; Stock, Colleen; Johnson, Tod; Zernoveanu, Andrei, Systems, devices, and methods for deploying one or more artifacts to a deployment environment.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.