Voices: Rezabek

Tinker with Defaults to Get Value From Smart Devices

Empower Your Staff So They Can Show Thoughtful, Proactive Use of Intelligent Devices, says Writer John Rezabek

By John Rezabek

When our technician saw an alert, an instrument alarm of sorts that would typically show up in his AMS Device Manager alarm summary, he ignored it. It was a "travel accumulator” alert. Like an odometer for a valve, it expresses the totalization of valve travel. Like the one in your car, it’s not the best indicator of "service needed soon.” Typical automobile oil change guidance goes something like "8,000 miles unless your driving includes dusty, hilly, stop-and-go, etc. Then change every 3,000 miles.” We’re left confused about when to change the oil, and so it is with valves.

The right thing to do for our automobile might be to have our oil analyzed every 2,500 miles or so, and characterize its viscosity, contamination, oxidation, water, etc., to see how far along it really was from "like new” to "totally spent.” Maybe you can skip an oil change, or maybe it should have been changed at 1,000 miles. Like cars, valves vary greatly in the severity of their service, but the cost and complexity of maintenance, as well as the high cost of neglect, are orders of magnitude higher than a stop at the corner Quik Lube. Preemptive valve maintenance — the equivalent of the guy who changes his car’s full-synthetic oil every 2,500 miles — is difficult, dangerous and burdensome on operations and maintenance schedulers. Breakdown maintenance can have dire consequences for plant availability. Ideally, we want our smart positioners’ alerts to wake us up at the ideal time — long enough before a failure to plan and schedule a repair. Many times, this is well within the realm of possibility, but probably not with factory default alert settings.

Analyzing a setting or alert at any level of travel accumulation is a bit of a conundrum. Do we have any basis for determining at what "mileage” we want the "needs maintenance soon” lamp to light up? What does 1 million percent of travel represent?

Every fieldbus valve positioner I’ve seen and most of their HART brethren have some setting for a travel accumulation diagnostic, and if you don’t bother to change it or turn it off, it will come on at the default setting. All the Metso ND9000 positioners I’ve looked at have a default of 250,000 (percent, one would assume) and also have the same setpoint for actuator travel. So I get both at about the same time, assuming no slippage between actuator and valve stem. Does this mean the actuator needs service at the same time as the valve?

 Probably not. It’s not Metso’s fault. End users need to decide whether 1) we enable a given alert, 2) where exactly we want to set the alert and, oh yeah. 3) what priority do we give it? It would be nice to determine specific actions we want technicians to take. And when an alert comes in, and I decide I don’t care (yet), how do I reset it or raise it to a new threshold?

A Fisher valve (www.emersonprocess.com) positioner’s travel accumulation alert is set at 1 million. I don’t believe the folks in Marshalltown are implying that their valve will go four times as long as one from Neles. It’s just a different arbitrary default. HART and fieldbus positioners and fieldbus "placeholders” in DCS engineering tools all ship with a similar set of defaults for scores of diagnostic settings. There are 10 tabs of settings for a Fisher DVC6200, including alerts for supply pressure (high and low) and temperature (high and low), drive signal, travel and maybe 20 others. The default settings could leave the impression that most of them are set so they’ll never bother you.

If users want to get value from their smart devices, they’ll have to start tinkering with these defaults. Turn off the vague ones like travel accumulation. Enable and tighten up settings like supply pressure, travel deviation or stiction that have a chance of alerting us to a potential breakdown. Most important, train and empower your people, so they can demonstrate how thoughtful, proactive use of intelligent devices can have a real impact on reliability. That won’t come "by default.”

More from this voice

Title

Easy Oscilloscopes for All Buses

Troubleshooting Fieldbus Is Rarely Straightforward. One Might Need to Disconnect Segments and Shoot Them With Oscilloscopes and Meters

08/02/2011

Everyone, Do Your Own Math

The Incremental Costs to Add Spurs to These Fieldbus Segments make WirelessHART at Best a Break-Even Option in Many Circumstances

08/30/2010

Failed Bus Blame Game

If You Allow Yourself to Be Dour, Defeated and Critical of Your Selected System, You Could Be Headed for Disaster

04/09/2010

Fieldbus Flavor of the Month

We May Be Missing Real Innovation in Our Field. Lets Adopt the Latest Controls or Instrument or Network Technology Flavor

01/03/2013

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

Fieldbus is Dead! Long Live Fieldbus!

The Competing Communications Technology That Presumably Will Replace All These Buses, Including Process Fieldbuses, Is Ethernet

05/02/2013

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

Fieldbus Savings the Same in Dollars or Yuan

There's Been Too Much Hype About the Cost Savings of Fieldbus. The Same Thing Can Be Done With Remote I/O

06/11/2013

Fieldbus-Where's the Love?

How Does Fieldbus Bring Flux and Uncertainty Where There Used to Be Order?

02/14/2011

Fieldbus: Do Fence Me In!

Just Because You Can Put 12 Devices on Each Fieldbus Segment, Doesn't Mean You Should

01/14/2014

Fieldbus: Lion or Lamb?

Ways Fieldbus End Users Can Avoid Increasing Stress for Their EPC Consulting Firm

03/09/2011

Finally, Registered Hosts

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

07/13/2009

Finding Freebies in Fieldbus

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

03/02/2009

Foolproof Fieldbus II

Sometimes Our Well-Intentioned Attempts to Make a System "Foolproof" Create as Many Hazards as We Were Aiming to Prevent

11/07/2013

Forays into Fieldbus Technology Pay Off

Plenty of Training Resources Available to Get Team On Board

06/26/2014

How Can Incompatible DCS and Asset Management Suppliers Get Along?

One Throat to Choke: When a Site Has an Installed Base of Incompatible DCS and Asset Management Suppliers, It May Have to Revert to the Host's Offerings

09/04/2012

How's Your Fieldbus Resume?

What Kind of Qualifications Should You Be Displaying to Qualify for the Jobs That Are Available?

10/12/2009

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

Is Field-Based Control More Secure?

If We Hide Our Controls in Field Devices, Are We More Immune From the Infections of the Higher-Level Networks?

04/03/2013

Is Field-Based Control Really All That?

Recent Studies Shown That the Fieldbus-for-I/O-Only Approach Is Likely a Source of Compromised Performance and Unknown Latencies

02/02/2010