DE102021129719A1 - Field device with a sensor - Google Patents

Abstract

The invention relates to a field device (100) with a sensor (110) which is set up in particular for validating a computer-implemented method for determining result values. The field device (100) has a detection unit (120) which is set up to detect raw sensor data. It also has a first evaluation unit (140a) and a second evaluation unit (140b), which are each set up to determine a second result value from the raw sensor data using a computer-implemented method. Furthermore, the field device (100) has a comparison unit (160), which is set up to compare the first result value with the second result value, and an evaluation unit (180, 280), which is set up to output an alarm if the first result value changes from differs from the second result value.

Description

field of invention

The invention relates to a field device with a sensor that is set up in particular for validating a computer-implemented method for determining result values. Furthermore, the invention relates to a method, a program element, a computer-readable medium and a use.

background

In order to evaluate data from a field device, in particular raw sensor data, there is at least one computer-implemented method on the field device which, for example, converts and/or processes certain raw sensor data in such a way that they are displayed as measurement data - or as another type of result values - transmitted and/or otherwise used. The procedure is occasionally updated, e.g. when an improvement to the procedure has been developed. It can be advantageous if it can be determined and/or validated that at least part of the previous functionality of the method has been retained in the updated method.

Summary

It is the object of the invention to provide a field device that can at least partially check an updated method. This object is solved by the subject matter CGS:THU of the independent patent claims. Further developments of the invention result from the dependent claims and the following description.

• eine Erfassungseinheit, eingerichtet zur Erfassung von Sensorrohdaten;
• eine erste Auswerteeinheit, eingerichtet zum Bestimmen eines ersten Ergebniswertes aus den Sensorrohdaten mittels eines ersten computerimplementierten Verfahrens;
• eine zweite Auswerteeinheit, eingerichtet zum Bestimmen eines zweiten Ergebniswertes aus den Sensorrohdaten mittels eines zweiten computerimplementierten Verfahrens, wobei das zweite Verfahren eine Aktualisierung des ersten Verfahrens beinhaltet;
• eine Vergleichereinheit, eingerichtet zum Vergleichen des ersten Ergebniswertes mit dem zweiten Ergebniswert; und
• eine Bewertungseinheit, die optional in dem Feldgerät angeordnet ist, eingerichtet zum Ausgeben eines Alarms, wenn sich der erste Ergebniswert von dem zweiten Ergebniswert unterscheidet.

One aspect relates to a field device with a sensor, the field device having:

• an acquisition unit set up to acquire raw sensor data;
• a first evaluation unit set up to determine a first result value from the raw sensor data using a first computer-implemented method;
• a second evaluation unit set up to determine a second result value from the raw sensor data using a second computer-implemented method, the second method including an update of the first method;
• a comparator unit set up to compare the first result value with the second result value; and
• an evaluation unit, which is optionally arranged in the field device, set up to issue an alarm if the first result value differs from the second result value.

The field device with the sensor can be used, for example, as a measuring device, for example for level measurement, for topology determination, for limit level determination, for flow rate measurement, for pressure measurement and/or for temperature measurement. The sensor can, for example, be designed as an impedance limit switch, a vibration limit switch, a high-frequency front end (e.g. as a radar front end), an ultrasonic front end, a LiDAR or laser front end or a radiometric front end and/or have one of these devices.

The acquisition unit can be set up to acquire raw sensor data, to control the sensor and/or for other tasks. The term "raw sensor data" is to be interpreted broadly; it can be understood as data that can be directly recorded by the sensor, data that can be present as intermediate results (e.g. after certain processing steps of the raw data and/or linked data), data that can come from the parameterization and/or others Data that can be present within the field device and/or on its means of communication (e.g. buses).
The sensor raw data of the sensor are available at an output of the detection unit. At least in the case of some field devices, the detection unit can already have carried out pre-processing and/or other steps for preparation, processing, etc. of the data that are supplied directly by the sensor.

In order to be able to display, transmit and/or use the raw sensor data as measurement data - or as another type of result values - the raw sensor data is sent to a first evaluation unit, which applies a first computer-implemented method to the raw sensor data and in this way the can determine the first result value. In at least some field devices, only the first result value can be used. The first computer-implemented method can, for example, have been transferred to a memory of the field device or the first evaluation unit during production of the field device, or can also originate from an earlier update of the first computer-implemented method.

If there is an update of the first method—in the form of the second computer-implemented method—the second computer-implemented method is transferred to the memory of the field device or the second evaluation unit. The For example, updating the first method may include an improvement of any type, such as a more efficient, faster, more accurate, or other method, a bug fix, an additional feature, and/or another improvement. The field device can have one or more memories and/or one or more processors, so that the second computer-implemented method can be executed on the same and/or another memory and/or on the same and/or another processor.

The comparison unit can compare the first result value with the second result value. For this, the first result value and the second result value can be written into a register, for example, and the comparison takes place after both result values are available. In one processor, writing to the first and second registers can take place one after the other, in the case of several processors, writing can also take place, for example, one after the other, or (at least almost) in parallel and/or be compared by a type of voter—as a comparator unit. The comparison unit can tolerate a predefined time offset between the first and the second result value, e.g. if one of the methods delivers the result value faster.

The evaluation unit can be arranged in the field device, for example; alternatively or additionally, the evaluation unit can be in a server and/or another device, e.g. in a mobile device, a control room, a cloud, etc. The evaluation unit can be implemented in different ways. For example, the evaluation unit can be designed very simply and/or follow a “no tolerance” strategy, so that an alarm is output if there is a single difference between the first and the second result value. For example, the evaluation unit can be designed to tolerate a certain (predefined) difference, e.g., a certain numerical difference, e.g., a deviation of 1%, 2%, or some other deviation. The evaluation unit can, for example, be designed in such a way that an alarm is only output when there are a certain number of differences and/or when a certain tolerance threshold is exceeded. For example, the evaluation unit can be designed in such a way that all differences are initially stored; afterwards, these differences can then be used, for example, as a basis for error corrections.

The manner in which the alarm is issued may depend on how the evaluation unit is designed and/or which strategy is implemented in the evaluation unit. For example, with a "no tolerance" strategy, the second evaluation unit can be switched off as soon as a single difference is detected, or its results can be evaluated with a "don't care". If a different strategy is selected, e.g. differences that have been detected and stored over a longer period of time can serve as the basis for error corrections and/or for test runs - e.g. in a simulation environment.

The field device is thus able to at least partially check an updated method. It can thus advantageously be used, for example, to validate new firmware, or firmware parts, of field devices, because the second evaluation unit runs “in parallel and in the background” so to speak, without disrupting the normal operation (productive operation) of the field device. If only "firmware parts" are to be considered, then the second method may only involve updating parts of the first method. If no differences are found, or - using a different strategy - the differences are below a predefined threshold, then the firmware (and/or other type of software that is intended to be validated thereby) can be marked as "validated". Alternatively or additionally--and depending on the hardware configuration of the field device--the first evaluation unit can then be switched over to the second evaluation unit and/or the second method can be used as productive software for the field device.

For field devices in which measurements only take place relatively infrequently - i.e. when there are sufficiently long pauses between measurements - even the processor and the memory of the field device can be used to carry out the method or methods as described above and/or below. A "sufficiently long break" is given if at least the following sequences can be carried out in the break between the measurements: Determination of the second result value; comparing the first result value with the second result value; issuing the alarm.

The field device thus opens up the possibility of comparison with real data on a potentially large number of devices in a wide variety of environments, which could not all be taken into account under laboratory conditions. New firmware can therefore be validated by operating and comparing productive software with shadow software running in parallel. As a result, the field device can carry out additional tests and thus, in particular, represent a supplement to testing in the test laboratory. Furthermore, temporal conditions can also be checked—possibly using additional hardware (for example another processor). for example whether determining the second result value from the raw sensor data using the second computer-implemented method takes longer, the same or shorter than using the first computer-implemented method.

In some embodiments, the evaluation unit is arranged in a housing of the field device (ie locally on the device) and/or the evaluation unit is collocated with the detection unit, the first evaluation unit, the second evaluation unit and the comparator unit. As a result, the evaluation of the comparison can advantageously take place on the field device. In practice, the result "new software or firmware with differences: yes/no" could be presented on a display of the field device. The new software or firmware can, for example, be used as productive software for the field device if no difference has been detected over a defined period of time (e.g. over a period of one month).

In some embodiments, the assessment unit is located on a server. The differences, deviations or results can be transmitted to a cloud system, for example, which can carry out an evaluation based on this data - e.g. including an evaluation of the quality of the new software or firmware.

The evaluation unit can be divided between, for example, the field device and a server. This means that resources such as CPU, memory and/or the available data connection can be used optimally.

In one embodiment, the comparator unit has a delay element that is set up for a time delay of the first result value and/or the second result value. Such a delay element can be used particularly advantageously if (also) temporal aspects are to be taken into account, e.g. whether the running time of the first or the second computer-implemented method is longer, the same or shorter, for example for determining the second result value from the raw sensor data.

In one embodiment, the evaluation unit is also set up to replace the first computer-implemented method with the second computer-implemented method according to a predefined criterion. So if a predefined criterion for "successful validation" is met, it is possible to "switch" from the first to the second evaluation unit, e.g. by changing one or more jump commands in the software of the field device. The second computer-implemented method can be used automatically as productive software according to certain criteria - such as time, number of measurement cycles, fillings, etc. - e.g. if the results correspond to the previous ones or exceed them based on certain criteria.

In one embodiment, the second evaluation unit, the comparator unit and/or the evaluation unit is also set up to be deactivated under a predefined condition. For example, the condition may include transferring new software. It can be advantageous to deactivate the comparison (etc.) of the evaluation units.

• • Bereitstellen, auf einer ersten Auswerteeinheit, eines ersten computerimplementierten Verfahrens zum Ermitteln eines ersten Ergebniswertes aus den Sensorrohdaten des Feldgeräts. Das erste computerimplementierte Verfahren kann dabei bereits im Produktiveinsatz sein. Das erste computerimplementierte Verfahren kann z.B. bei einer Herstellung des Feldgeräts in einen Speicher des Feldgeräts bzw. der ersten Auswerteeinheit übertragen worden sein, oder auch von einer früheren Aktualisierung des ersten computerimplementierten Verfahrens stammen.
• • Bereitstellen, auf einer zweiten Auswerteeinheit, des zweiten computerimplementierten Verfahrens zum Ermitteln eines zweiten Ergebniswertes aus den Sensorrohdaten des Feldgeräts, wobei das zweite Verfahren eine Aktualisierung des ersten Verfahrens beinhaltet. Das zweite computerimplementierte Verfahren kann dabei z.B. über ein Netzwerk, über eine drahtlose Verbindung wie Bluetooth etc., über ein Bussystem des Feldgeräts, über Speicherkarten (Sticks) etc. übertragen worden sein.
• • Vergleichen des ersten Ergebniswertes mit dem zweiten Ergebniswert. Dies kann z.B. über ein Vergleichen von Registerinhalten geschehen, in die jeweils der erste und der zweite Ergebniswert eingetragen werden.
• • Wenn sich der erste Ergebniswert von dem zweiten Ergebniswert unterscheidet, ausgeben eines Alarms. Der Begriff „Alarm“ ist dabei breit auszulegen. Je nach Strategie und Beschaffenheit der Hardware, kann „Alarm“ eine Meldung in einer Anzeige auf dem Feldgerät umfassen, ein Einschalten eines LED (Light-Emitting Diode), ein Ausgeben einer Nachricht (z.B. über ein Zweileitersystem oder einen anderen Bus), und/oder eine längere Sequenz von Aktionen, z.B. ein Auswerten eines oder mehrerer Unterschiede, ein Speichern der Unterschiede, ein Umschalten der verwendeten Produktiv-Software, und/oder weitere Aktionen umfassen.

One aspect relates to a method for checking a second computer-implemented method for determining a result value from the raw sensor data of a field device with a sensor. Verifying may include validating new firmware, software, and/or portions thereof. The procedure includes the following steps:

• • Providing, on a first evaluation unit, a first computer-implemented method for determining a first result value from the sensor raw data of the field device. The first computer-implemented process can already be in productive use. The first computer-implemented method can, for example, have been transferred to a memory of the field device or the first evaluation unit during manufacture of the field device, or can also originate from an earlier update of the first computer-implemented method.
• • Providing, on a second evaluation unit, the second computer-implemented method for determining a second result value from the sensor raw data of the field device, the second method including an update of the first method. The second computer-implemented method can be transmitted, for example, via a network, via a wireless connection such as Bluetooth, etc., via a bus system of the field device, via memory cards (sticks), etc.
• • Comparing the first result value with the second result value. This can be done, for example, by comparing register contents into which the first and second result values are entered.
• • If the first result differs from the second result, issue an alarm. The term "alarm" is to be interpreted broadly. Depending on strategy and hardware nature, "alert" may include a message on a display on the field device, switching on an LED (Light-Emitting Diode), outputting a message (e.g. via a two-wire system or another bus), and/or a longer sequence of actions, e.g. evaluating one or more differences, storing the differences, switching of the productive software used, and/or other actions.

In some embodiments, the method is performed on a variety of field devices. In the case of networked field devices in particular, new shadow software can be distributed widely before the actual release and tested under various conditions without disrupting actual operation. This can advantageously contribute to a particularly high test coverage during validation.

One aspect relates to a program element which, when executed on a field device with a sensor, instructs the field device to carry out the method as described above and/or below.

One aspect relates to a computer-readable medium on which the program element described herein is stored.

It should also be noted that the various embodiments described above and/or below can be combined with one another.

For further clarification, the invention is described using the embodiments shown in the figures. These embodiments are meant to be exemplary only and not limiting.

character list

• 1 schematisch ein Szenario mit einem Feldgerät gemäß einer Ausführungsform;
• 2 schematisch ein Feldgerät gemäß einer Ausführungsform;
• 3 schematisch ein Feldgerät gemäß einer weiteren Ausführungsform;
• 4 ein Flussdiagramm mit einem Verfahren gemäß einer Ausführungsform.

It shows:

• 1 schematically a scenario with a field device according to an embodiment;
• 2 schematically a field device according to an embodiment;
• 3 schematically a field device according to a further embodiment;
• 4 FIG. 12 is a flowchart showing a method according to an embodiment.

Detailed Description of Embodiments

1 FIG. 12 schematically shows a scenario with a field device 100 according to an embodiment. The field device 100 has a sensor 110, which is shown schematically as a radar sensor with a horn antenna in the exemplary embodiment shown. The radar sensor 110 is set up to measure a level 60 in a container 50 . Alternatively or additionally, the sensor 110 can be designed for topology determination, limit level determination, flow rate measurement, pressure measurement and/or temperature measurement. The sensor can be designed, for example, as an impedance limit switch, a vibration limit switch, a high-frequency front end (eg as a radar front end), ultrasonic front end, LiDAR or laser front end or a radiometric front end and/or have one of these devices. The field device 100 is connected to other devices via a line 195, for example to a server, a database, a control room, a mobile device and/or to one or more other devices. Alternatively or additionally, the field device 100 can have a wireless interface and a corresponding communication module (not shown). The field device 100 can have components such as those described in 2 and/or in 3 are shown.

2 12 schematically shows a field device 100 according to an embodiment. The field device 100 has a sensor 110, which is shown schematically as a radar sensor in the exemplary embodiment shown—without loss of generality. A detection unit 120 is connected to the sensor 110 and is set up to detect raw sensor data from the sensor 110 . The term "raw sensor data" is to be interpreted broadly. The raw sensor data is forwarded to a first evaluation unit 140a, which is set up to determine a first result value from the raw sensor data. For this purpose, the first evaluation unit 140a uses a first computer-implemented method. The first computer-implemented method can, for example, have been transferred to a memory of the field device 100 or the first evaluation unit 140a during the manufacture of the field device 100, or can also originate from an earlier update of the first computer-implemented method. The first result value can be present at an output 147 of the first evaluation unit 140a. A display unit (not shown), for example, which is set up to display the first result value, can be connected to the output 147 . Alternatively or additionally, output 147 may be connected to a bus interface 190 and/or to a wireless interface (not shown), and/or may be used in other ways.

The raw sensor data is also forwarded to a second evaluation unit 140b, which is set up to determine a second result value from the raw sensor data. For this purpose, the second evaluation unit 140b uses a second computer-implemented method. The second ver drive can come from a database or software repository 250 on a server 200, for example. The second method may have been transmitted over an interface 192 (and the bus interface 190 and a network 195), for example.

The second method may include updating the first method. The update may consist of or include a revision of the first procedure. The update may include, for example, a bug fixing and/or an improvement to the first method of any kind, such as a more efficient, faster, more accurate or other method, an additional or a reduced or deleted feature, and/or another improvement. The field device 100 can have one or more memories and/or one or more processors, so that the second computer-implemented method can be executed on the same and/or another memory and/or on the same and/or another processor. If, for example, a single memory and a single processor is used, then the determination of the first and the second result value takes place "quasi-parallel", i.e. one after the other, and the result values can be temporarily stored in a register, for example. If several processors are used, the determination of the first and the second result value can take place genuinely in parallel. A comparison unit 160 can then compare the first and the second result value. For example, the comparator unit 160 may be implemented as a computer-implemented method executing on the single processor, on one of the processors executing the first or second computer-implemented method, on a separate processor, and/or some type of voter. The result of the comparison - and, optionally, the first and/or the second result value - are available at an output 168 of the comparison unit 160 and can be forwarded, e.g. to the bus interface 190 and/or to a wireless interface (not shown). The output 168 is also connected to an evaluation unit 180 which is arranged in the field device 100 . The evaluation unit can pursue different strategies. This may depend on the amount of hardware with which the evaluation unit 180 is implemented. Alternatively or additionally, a further evaluation unit 280 can be used to evaluate the result values, which can be arranged on the server 200, for example. It should also be noted that the server 200 and/or the components 250 and/or 280 can be arranged on any device, e.g. in a cloud.

The evaluation unit 180 can issue an alarm of any type, in particular if the first result value differs from the second result value. The term "alarm" is to be interpreted broadly. Depending on the strategy and the nature of the hardware, "alert" may include a message in a display on the field device 100, turning on an LED (light-emitting diode), issuing a message (e.g. via a two-wire system or other bus), and /or a longer sequence of actions, e.g. evaluating one or more differences, storing the differences; this implementation is not shown. If, e.g. over a longer period of time, no differences were found (and/or based on other criteria), the productive software used can be switched over, e.g. via an interface 184. The switchover can be carried out, e.g. by changing one or more jump commands in be implemented in the software of the field device 100, or by transferring the second method to the first evaluation unit 140a, e.g. via an interface 145.

3 12 schematically shows a field device 300 according to a further embodiment. The field device 300 represents a simplified form of the field device 100 of FIG 2 In particular, a field device-internal evaluation unit was dispensed with. The evaluation of the result of the comparison by a comparator unit 160 - and, optionally, the first and/or the second result value - are available at an output 168 of the comparator unit 160 and are forwarded via a bus interface 190 and a network 195 to an evaluation unit 280. Otherwise, the same reference symbols as in 2 same or similar components.

4 shows a flowchart 400 with a method for checking a second computer-implemented method for determining a result value from the raw sensor data of a field device 100 (see FIG 1 until 3 ) with a sensor 110 according to an embodiment. In a step 402, a first computer-implemented method for determining a first result value from the raw sensor data of the field device 100 is provided on a first evaluation unit 140a. In a step 404, a second computer-implemented method for determining a second result value from the sensor raw data of the field device 100 is provided on a second evaluation unit 140b, the second method including an update of the first method. In a step 406, the first result value is compared with the second result value. If the first result value differs from the second result value, in a step 408 alarm issued. If the first result value does not differ from the second result value, in particular does not differ over a longer period of time, in particular the second method is used in step 410 instead of the first method.

Reference List

50

container

60

level

100

field device

110

sensor, e.g. B. Radar sensor

120

registration unit

140a

first evaluation unit

140b

second evaluation unit

145

interface

147

Exit

160

comparator unit

168

Output of the comparator unit

180

valuation unit

184

interface

190

bus interface

192

interface

195

network

200

server

250

Database, Software Repository

280

valuation unit

300

field device

400

flow chart

402 - 410

steps

Claims (11)

Field device (100) with a sensor (110), the field device (100) having: an acquisition unit (120), set up to acquire raw sensor data; a first evaluation unit (140a), set up to determine a first result value from the raw sensor data using a first computer-implemented method; a second evaluation unit (140b), set up to determine a second result value from the raw sensor data using a second computer-implemented method, the second method including an update of the first method; a comparison unit (160), set up to compare the first result value with the second result value; and an evaluation unit (180, 280), which is optionally arranged in the field device (100), set up to output an alarm if the first result value differs from the second result value. Field device (100) after claim 1 , wherein the evaluation unit (180, 280) is arranged in a housing of the field device (100), and/or wherein the evaluation unit (180, 280) is connected to the detection unit (120), the first evaluation unit (140a), the second evaluation unit (140b ) and the comparator unit (160) is collocated. Field device (100) after claim 1 , wherein the evaluation unit (180, 280) is arranged on a server (200). Field device (100) according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the comparator unit (160) has a delay element which is set up for a time delay of the first result value and/or the second result value. Field device (100) according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the evaluation unit (180, 280) is further set up to replace the first computer-implemented method with the second computer-implemented method according to a predefined criterion. Field device (100) according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the second evaluation unit (140b), the comparison unit (160) and/or the evaluation unit (180, 280) is/are also set up to be deactivated under a predefined condition. Method for checking a second computer-implemented method for determining a result value from the raw sensor data of a field device (100) with a sensor (110), the method having the steps: providing, on a first evaluation unit (140a), a first computer-implemented method for determining a first result value from the sensor raw data of the field device (100); providing, on a second evaluation unit (140b), the second computer-implemented method for determining a second result value from the raw sensor data of the field device (100), the second method including an update of the first method; comparing the first result value with the second result value; and if the first result differs from the second result, issue an alarm. procedure after claim 7 , wherein the method is executed on a plurality of field devices (100). Program element which, when it is executed on a field device (100) with a sensor (110), instructs the field device (100) to follow the method claim 7 to perform. Computer-readable medium on which a program element according to the preceding claim is stored. Use of a field device (100) with a sensor (110) according to one of Claims 1 until 6 for level measurement, for topology determination, for point level determination, for flow rate measurement, for pressure measurement and/or for temperature measurement.

Images