Voices: Rezabek

Measurement, Control Specialists Might Neglect End Users

Our Customer Focus is not Just the Investor Who’s Financing a Project or the Project Manager Beating the Drum to Meet Cost and Schedule

By John Rezabek

There goes Al.

Like many sites, we’re watching many years of knowledge and experience walk out the door. But Al was one of those board operators who made our instrument maintenance jobs more interesting. When he was on the DCS console, he’d have some obscure measurement he wanted us to check — points no one else seemed to care about. So our instrument tech might get a little cranky when Al was on day shift, and he had to climb around to verify or validate a reading that concerned only Al. Why did he worry about these measurements to which no one else paid much attention?

As measurement and control specialists, we might neglect to ask our "end user” why a particular measurement is useful or important. Did Al share his insights with any of his peers? And what happens when his much younger successor asks the old tech to climb a tower to verify a reading? Will he or she get the same respect, service and cooperation when they ask us to fix the funky troublesome measurement everyone else seems to tolerate or ignore?

For example, why don’t the two measurements on an intermediate storage tank agree? Our storage tanks have been fitted with redundant level transmitters in an effort to comply with overfill/spill protection concerns and process hazard analysis (PHA) recommendations. While secondary containment exists in the form of tank dikes and a closed sewer system, the consequences of a single erroneous measurement causing an incident justifies two transmitters on every tank. If you’re like us, you’re measuring the level with a couple differential pressure transmitters that have a quoted accuracy of some fraction of a percent. Why not expect the levels to agree consistently to the same tolerance? But so what if they’re off a few percent, so long as one or the other keeps us from exceeding the high-high level, or ensures the floating roof doesn’t rest on its stands when the level is low?

Many levels are among the most ubiquitous and perhaps some of the most uncertain measurements we make as I&C professionals. Many are expressed in percent, and the less jaded observer would justly ask us, "percent of what?” Sometimes we go to some pains to make the measured percent match a level gauge. Sometimes there isn’t a gauge glass or other independent indication of level. Our DP transmitter or radar/sonar/nuclear device is the only insight anyone has before some undesirable consequence ensues. If we’re not converting level to inventory (volume) for custody transfer, it can be one of the easiest measurements to write off as a "trend.”

The process plant workers who are headed for the golf course have been agents in the culture that determines what’s been tolerable or acceptable. Maybe your site has an "Al” whose sensibilities motivate him or her to be a gadfly for measurement certainty and validation. But too often, we’ve settled into a mutual comfort zone where smooth sailing through the shift is given priority over questions and forensics that might rock the boat. Will the same levels of compromise be passed on to our successors?

As providers of measurement and control, our customer focus is not just the investor who’s financing a project or the project manager beating the drum to meet cost and schedule. Whether you’re an engineer specifying a precision measuring device, a systems person devising HMI and control strategy or anyone in our discipline’s entire supply chain, your ultimate customer is Al and his crew mates. The CFO may be writing the checks, but plant managers lose sleep worrying about where their crews might take the plant. Shouldn’t our focus be to deliver the most truthful, precise and robust depiction of an otherwise inscrutable process?

If you’re still specifying and installing analog 4-20 mA control systems in the 21st century, do you think "future Al” will notice or care? Having interviewed and trained members of Gen X and Millennials to take the helm of highly hazardous processes, I’d say, "You bet!”

More from this voice

Title

Simplifying Fieldbus Device Calibration

Creative End Users Have Been Exploring the Use of 802.11 Wireless to Display their DCS Interface on a Wireless Laptop or Notebook PC

08/12/2009

Finally, Registered Hosts

"Compliant Host" Came to Be Because Users Were Seeking Objective Ways to Evaluate Different Hosts's Capabilities

07/13/2009

Certainty of Outcome with Fieldbus

What Are Some of the Key Areas Where Effort and/or Investment Are Needed to Obtain Sufficient Certainty of Outcome for Even the Smallest Project?

06/24/2009

DCS Disasters

This Month We Join an End User Who’d Like Her Off-Hours to Be Less Subject to Distress Messages from Her Place of Employment. Dang! Cletus Been in My DCS!

05/11/2009

Save Money. Calibrate Less?

Have Our Calibration Skills and Practices Quietly Migrated to Being Largely "Plug-N-Play.”"Or Are They "Plug-N-Pray?"

04/03/2009

Finding Freebies in Fieldbus

Can We Use the Standard Deviation Method to Flag a Suspicious Measurement?

03/02/2009

Training Wheels for Fieldbus

Even in Lean Times, There Are Ways to Get a Fieldbus Testbed If You Think Creatively

02/06/2009

Fieldbus on a Shoestring

Use the Wire You Have. Unless You’re Really Challenging the Limits of the Physical Layer, Ordinary Twisted/Shielded Pair Will Work Reliably

01/12/2009

Bubba and the Bus

The Rule of 20: If You Select a Tech at Random from a Group of 20, Can He or She Fix the Problem in 20 Minutes?

12/12/2008

Patches the Bad Dog

Why Can’t Patches the Dog Sit at the Firewall and Bite the Hand Off the Bad Guys Whenever He Spots One?

10/28/2008

Using Fieldbus in your HMI

Digitally Integrated Field Device Information Is Useful to Your Operator

10/06/2008

Will Wireless Replace Fieldbus?

Hardwired Instruments Are Going to Be Around Until a Generation of Plant Operators Retires

09/05/2008

Bus = Remote I/O?

Consider “Bussing” a Network of 8- to 12-Point Analog and Discrete I/O and Locating It Strategically Close to the Field Sensors

08/07/2008

Ready for Control in the Field?

When The Loop’s Valve Positioner Loses Power, the Loop Will Experience an Upset No Matter Where the PID Is Solved

07/01/2008

Fieldbus for Safety Instrumented Functions

FF-SIF Transcends the Limitations of Conventional Safety System Design by Introducing New and Innovative Ways of Thinking About Safety

06/12/2008

Playing the Field

If Most of Loops Are Distributed to Field-Solved PID, What Are the Chances You Could “Hot Swap” Your Host Just Like a Field Device?

05/04/2008

And the Cheapest Bus Is . . .

Bus ‘XYP’ Uses Cheaper Devices. Users Will Find It Cheaper Than Foundation Fieldbus

04/01/2008

Instrinsic Safety Obsolete Yet?

Like Most End Users, I Truly Value the Credibility and Security That Organizations Such as Factory Mutual, the Canadian Standards Association, CENELEC and Their Ilk Bring to the Devices We Use in Hazardous Environments. But Perhaps One Practice is Ready to Be Relegated to the ISA Museum of How We Used to Do Things. Here’s Why.

03/07/2008

Paving the Way for Bus Technology

I’ve Had Great Success on Projects, Especially Upgrades and Retrofits, Where I Was Able to Get an Experienced Board Person and/or Front-Line Supervisor Assigned to the Job

02/04/2008

Right Message, Right Person, Right Time

Data Doesn’t Always Equal Information. Why Can’t We Get Alarm Information to Our Operators in a More Meaningful Way?

01/03/2008