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

Attack of the Mutant Chicken Foot!

Consider a Simple "Chicken Foot" or "Star" Topology for Your First Fieldbus Job

04/04/2011

Fieldbus: Lion or Lamb?

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

03/09/2011

Fieldbus-Where's the Love?

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

02/14/2011

Muxes and Field-Sourced Power

If You're Doing Real Process Control Through the Mux, the Effort to Design and Install Geographically Separate Paths Might Be Worth It

01/11/2011

Millions Sold in Europe!

One Reason to Replace Old Systems Is Their Inability to Natively Interact with Smart Devices Speaking Open Protocols

12/06/2010

We Get It - Wireless Works

Can Anyone Remember an Instrument Technology That Was Marketed With Such Persistence and Zeal?

11/01/2010

The Island of Misfit Instruments

The Island of Misfit Instruments Could Become a Great Place for Learning and Help Shape the Future When the Aging Systems Will Be Replaced

10/05/2010

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

Wired or Wireless - Just DO It

Why Let Another Week Slip by with All Your Smart Devices Asleep on the Couch? Just Do It

07/13/2010

Can You Specify "Or Equal" with Fieldbus?

Does the Fieldbus "Checkmark" Confer Some Uniformity that Minimizes the Capabilities of One Vendor's Offering Compared to Another?

07/02/2010

Birds of a Feather

If You Recognize Your Peers and Competitors Attending or Presenting at a Trade Group Seminar, Then You May Have Found Your Home

06/02/2010

Wireless Control in the Field

Users Will Have to Exert Their Influence with Suppliers to Get Control in the Field Implemented in WirelessHART

05/05/2010

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

Surprise! Field-Based Control Beats DCS

It Is Evident That Device-Based Control Exceeds DCS-Based Control in Reliability and Performance

03/04/2010

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

New Guidelines for Fieldbus Systems

Experienced Users Concluded That the Effort of Classifying and Segregating Critical Service Loops Is Not Worth the Effort

01/08/2010

A Logical Path to Device Criticality

If You're Aiming to Improve the Usefulness of Your Digitally Integrated Intelligent Field Devices, There's Help Available to Help You Get Moving Down This Road

12/14/2009

Wireless or Fieldbus?

Is Wireless Easier to Integrate with Legacy Systems than Fieldbus? Since Wireless Emerged as Viable Option, Users Have Been Pleased to Find That Wireless Connects Easily with Their Old System

11/18/2009

How's Your Fieldbus Resume?

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

10/12/2009

Control Systems, We Know What You Need

We Know What It Is You Want, So Step Aside While We Give It to You

09/15/2009