WO2023007665A1

WO2023007665A1 - Detector state categorization device, detector state categorization method, and program

Info

Publication number: WO2023007665A1
Application number: PCT/JP2021/028172
Authority: WO
Inventors: 航伊藤; 潤一郎玉松; 聡篠崎; 一清涌井
Original assignee: 日本電信電話株式会社
Priority date: 2021-07-29
Filing date: 2021-07-29
Publication date: 2023-02-02
Also published as: JPWO2023007665A1

Abstract

The detector state categorization device (1) according to the present invention comprises: an on-site measurement result input unit (11) that receives, as input, inspection result information including whether or not an alert is issued when gases containing oxygen at different concentrations designed to predetermined values are blown to a sensor of an oxygen concentration detector being inspected, and measurement environment information of the sensor; a gas concentration correction unit (13) that corrects the design values of the oxygen concentrations to oxygen concentrations used when the gases are blown to the sensor, using the measurement environment information; and a detector state categorization unit (14) that categorizes a quality state of the oxygen concentration detector on the basis of the inspection result information and the corrected oxygen concentration value.

Description

Sensor state classification device, sensor state classification method, and program

The present invention relates to a sensor state classification device, a sensor state classification method, and a program for classifying the quality state of an oxygen concentration sensor having a sensor.

Conventionally, there is a zirconia oxygen concentration meter as a device that constantly measures the oxygen concentration of the target environment. In a zirconia oxygen concentration meter, when a voltage is applied to electrodes sandwiching a zirconia element, oxygen ions move in the element and the reaction generates an electric current. FIG. 11 shows the reaction characteristics (VI characteristics). When the voltage is increased from 0, the output value increases in the initial stage, but when the voltage is increased to a certain constant voltage value, there is a limit current region where the current value remains constant even if the voltage is increased thereafter. Since this limit current value differs depending on the oxygen concentration of the air in contact with the sensor, the oxygen concentration in the installation environment of the sensor can be measured by monitoring the output value. In addition, the oximeter has a threshold of oxygen concentration that causes oxygen deficiency (18% for the currently used one), and it is a mechanism to issue an alarm when the output value falls below that value. there is

Non-Patent Document 1 describes the structure, principle, characteristics, etc. of a limiting current type zirconia oxygen sensor that uses a zirconia solid electrolyte to achieve small size, low-temperature operation, and long life. Non-Patent Document 2 describes the characteristics of a limiting current type zirconia oxygen sensor as an exhaust gas sensor for a lean-burn gasoline engine aimed at improving the fuel efficiency of automobiles.

The zirconia oxygen concentration sensor makes it possible to measure oxygen concentration based on the above principle, but with continued normal use, the sensor will deteriorate due to various factors and will no longer indicate the true oxygen concentration. The deterioration patterns can be classified into the following three types.

Deterioration pattern 1 is aging deterioration of the zirconia sensor. The measuring device measures the oxygen concentration by the reaction of the zirconia sensor, but the oxygen ion conductivity of the sensor decreases with long-term use, making it difficult to react normally. At that time, the minimum voltage value at which the limit current value occurs (hereinafter referred to as the flat region start voltage) shifts to the high voltage side, and VI The characteristic graph changes. When the flat region start voltage shift progresses and exceeds the monitoring voltage value as shown in the graph of (3) in FIG. (defined as the occurrence of For example, in (4) of FIG. 12, the flat region start voltage and the monitoring voltage match in the graph for the oxygen concentration of 18%. In this case, the monitored voltage never crosses the flat region where the oxygen concentration is 18% or more, and is always (4) and the sensor output value at the start of the flat region where the oxygen concentration is 18% (limit current when the oxygen concentration is 18% value). Therefore, in this situation, when the actual oxygen concentration is 18% or higher, the sensor outputs 18% oxygen concentration regardless of the true oxygen concentration.

Deterioration pattern 2 is deterioration caused by thermal shock or mechanical shock applied to the zirconia sensor. In this case, a large amount of oxygen flows into the sensor, and the amount cannot be controlled, so the limit current value increases as shown in FIG. For example, in the situation shown in FIG. 13, the sensor outputs an oxygen concentration of 30% when the actual oxygen concentration is 18%. In such a case, an oxygen concentration higher than the true oxygen concentration is output, and even if the oxygen concentration in the environment where the equipment is installed is in a situation where it adversely affects the human body, there is a dangerous situation in which no alarm is issued. I am afraid of being invited.

Deterioration pattern 3 is deterioration caused by impurities clogging the gas diffusion holes of the sensor. The zirconia sensor reacts to the oxygen sucked through this gas diffusion hole and measures the oxygen concentration, but if this part is clogged with adhering impurities, it becomes difficult to suck in oxygen, so the oxygen concentration is output low. put away. For example, in the case shown in FIG. 14, the sensor outputs an oxygen concentration of 15% even if the actual oxygen concentration is 20%. Therefore, in the case of this deterioration pattern, a value lower than the true oxygen concentration is output, and in the actual environment, an alarm is issued even though there is no decrease in oxygen concentration that would affect the human body (hereinafter referred to as false alarm). called ) may occur. If the measuring device issues a warning, it is assumed that the installation environment is in a dangerous state, so it is necessary to improve the oxygen concentration by implementing ventilation, etc. However, if this deterioration pattern has occurred , the improvement of the oxygen concentration is unnecessary, which leads to unnecessary costs.

If the presence or absence of these deterioration patterns cannot be determined, (1) the alarm does not sound even when the measurement environment is oxygen-deficient, which poses a danger to the operator (due to deterioration pattern 2); 2) Although the alarm sounds, there is actually no oxygen-deficient state, so there is a problem that ventilation costs are wasted.

Currently, inspections are carried out by blowing gas with an oxygen concentration of less than 18%. According to this inspection method, it is possible to determine that deterioration pattern 2 has occurred, but other deterioration patterns occurrence cannot be determined. Also, as a method of ascertaining the deterioration pattern, it is conceivable to measure the VI characteristic graphs as shown in FIG. 11 to FIG. From the above background, in order to reduce waste during operation of oxygen concentration sensors, focusing on ventilation costs, it is required to judge the occurrence of various deterioration patterns in a simple process.

The object of the present disclosure, which has been made in view of such circumstances, is to provide a sensor state classification method that determines and classifies the presence or absence of various deterioration patterns in a simple process in order to reduce waste during operation of oxygen concentration sensors. An object of the present invention is to provide an apparatus, a sensor state classification method, and a program.

In order to solve the above problems, a sensor state classification device according to one embodiment is a sensor state classification device for classifying the quality state of an oxygen concentration sensor having a sensor, the oxygen concentration sensor to be inspected. A field measurement result input unit for inputting inspection result information including whether or not an alarm is issued when a gas with a different oxygen concentration designed to a predetermined value is sprayed on the sensor of and the measurement environment information of the sensor, and the measurement A gas concentration correction unit that corrects the design value of the oxygen concentration using environmental information to the oxygen concentration when the gas blows on the sensor, and based on the inspection result information and the correction value of the oxygen concentration, the a sensor state classification unit for classifying the quality state of the oxygen concentration sensor.

In order to solve the above problems, a sensor state classification method according to one embodiment is a sensor state classification method for classifying the quality state of an oxygen concentration sensor having a sensor. a step of inputting inspection result information including whether or not an alarm is issued when a gas with a different oxygen concentration designed to a predetermined value is sprayed on the sensor of the target oxygen concentration sensor, and information on the measurement environment of the sensor; a step of correcting the design value of the oxygen concentration using the measurement environment information to the oxygen concentration when the gas blows onto the sensor; and based on the inspection result information and the correction value of the oxygen concentration in the gas. and classifying the quality status of the oxygen concentration sensor by using a method.

In order to solve the above problems, a program according to one embodiment causes a computer to function as the sensor state classification device.

According to the present disclosure, the presence or absence of occurrence of various deterioration patterns can be determined and classified in a simple process without incurring wasteful ventilation costs.

1 is a block diagram showing a configuration example of a sensor state classification device according to an embodiment; FIG. 4 is a flow chart showing an example of a sensor state classification method performed by a sensor state classification device according to an embodiment; It is a flowchart which shows the procedure by which an operator manually implements inspection of a sensor. 4 is a table showing an example of a format in which an operator records inspection results; Fig. 10 is a flow chart detailing the procedure for classifying the quality state of a sensor; Fig. 3 is a table detailing the quality status of the sensors; 1 is a schematic diagram illustrating the quality state of a sensor less than 5 years old; FIG. It is a schematic diagram explaining the quality state of a sensor whose usage period is 5 years or more and less than X years. It is a schematic diagram explaining the quality state of a sensor whose usage period is 5 years or more and less than X years. 1 is a block diagram showing a schematic configuration of a computer functioning as a sensor state classifying device; FIG. 5 is a graph showing reaction characteristics (VI characteristics) of a zirconia sensor; 10 is a graph showing deterioration pattern 1 (decrease in output value due to aged deterioration of the sensor). 10 is a graph showing deterioration pattern 2 (increase in output value due to application of thermal shock or mechanical shock to the sensor); 10 is a graph showing deterioration pattern 3 (decrease in output value due to impurities clogging the gas diffusion holes of the sensor).

The sensor state classification device according to one embodiment will be described in detail below. The present invention is not limited to the following embodiments, and various modifications can be made within the scope of the gist of the present invention.

As shown in FIG. 1, the sensor state classification device 1 according to one embodiment includes a field measurement result input unit 11, a storage unit 12, a gas concentration correction unit 13, a sensor state classification unit 14, and a result display. a part 15; A sensor status classifier 1 classifies the quality status of an oxygen concentration sensor having a sensor. The sensor status classification device 1 may classify the quality status of an oxygen concentration sensor having a sensor using a zirconia element. Hereinafter, the "oxygen concentration sensor" is simply referred to as "sensor".

The on-site measurement result input unit 11 displays the results when gases with different oxygen concentrations designed to have predetermined values are sprayed on the sensor of the sensor i to be inspected (hereafter, i indicates a number that identifies each sensor). Check result information including presence/absence of an alarm and measurement environment information of the sensor is input. The inspection result information is obtained by spraying a gas with an oxygen concentration designed to be less than the threshold value at which the sensor i issues an alarm for a predetermined time, and spraying a gas with an oxygen concentration greater than the threshold value for a predetermined time. This information includes the result of checking whether or not the sensor i issues an alarm for each of the following cases. Specifically, the inspection result information includes the measured values of temperature, humidity, and air pressure in the installation environment, and whether or not an alarm is issued when the gas of two oxygen concentrations (values α and β) is sprayed on the sensor of the detector. , the oxygen concentration values α and β in the gas used for inspection, the service period x_i of the sensor, and the service life limit X of the sensor. The on-site measurement result input unit 11 transmits the acquired inspection result information to the storage unit 12 . The input record of whether or not an alarm has been issued is entered in check 1 in the case of gas with oxygen concentration value α, and in check 2 in the case of gas with oxygen concentration value β. In check 1, a check mark is recorded when there is no alarm, and no check mark is recorded when there is an alarm. In check 2, a check mark is recorded when there is an alarm, and no check mark is recorded when there is no alarm.

The storage unit 12 stores the inspection result information transmitted from the on-site measurement result input unit 11. In addition, the storage unit 12 stores the measured values of temperature, humidity, and atmospheric pressure, and the design values α and β of the oxygen concentration in the gas used for inspection, for each sensor i to be inspected. Send to The storage unit 12 also stores the oxygen concentration correction values α_i and β_i transmitted from the gas concentration correction unit 13 . After that, the storage unit 12 supplies the sensor state classification unit 14 with the oxygen concentration correction values α_i and β_i for each sensor i to be inspected, the result of check 1, the result of check 2, the usage period x_i of the sensor, Transmit the maximum number of years of use X. After that, the storage unit 12 receives the sensor state n_i for each sensor i from the sensor state classification unit 14 and stores it. The storage unit 12 also transmits the number of the sensor i and the sensor state n_i to the result display unit 15 .

The gas concentration correction unit 13 corrects the design values α and β of the oxygen concentration to the oxygen concentrations α_i and β_i when the gas blows onto the sensor using the measurement environment information described above. Specifically, the gas concentration correction unit 13 calculates the measured values of temperature, humidity, and atmospheric pressure for each sensor i to be inspected, which are transmitted from the storage unit 12, and the oxygen concentration in the gas used for inspection. are used to calculate correction values α_i and β_i of the oxygen concentration for each sensor i to be inspected. The gas concentration correction unit 13 also transmits the calculated oxygen concentration correction values α_i and β_i for each sensor i to the storage unit 12 .

The sensor state classification unit 14 classifies the quality state of the sensor i to be inspected based on the inspection result information transmitted from the storage unit 12 and the oxygen concentration correction values α_i and β_i corrected by the gas concentration correction unit. Classify n_i. Also, the sensor state classification unit 14 transmits the quality state n_i of the sensor i to the storage unit 12 .

The quality state n_i of the sensor i classified by the sensor state classification unit 14 is, as classified in FIG. 6, the normal state of the sensor i; ), occurrence of deterioration pattern 2 (increase in output value due to application of thermal or mechanical impact to the sensor), and deterioration pattern 3 (decrease in output value due to impurities clogging the gas diffusion holes of the sensor). Occurrence, or a combination of these conditions; refers to the condition in which sensor i is at its limit of use. Hereinafter, the "quality state of the oxygen concentration sensor (sensor)" will be referred to as the "sensor state".

The sensor state classification unit 14 classifies the output value as a decrease due to aging deterioration of the sensor when the minimum voltage value at which the limit current value is generated exceeds the threshold value. As shown in FIG. 12, when the oxygen ion conductivity of the sensor decreases due to long-term use and it becomes difficult to respond normally, the minimum voltage value at which the limiting current value occurs shifts to the high voltage side, and (1 )→(2)→(3). When the shift of the flat region start voltage exceeds the monitoring voltage value as shown in graph (3), the output value of the sensor decreases. For example, in (4), the flat region start voltage and the monitoring voltage match in the graph for the oxygen concentration of 18%. In this case, the monitored voltage never crosses the flat region where the oxygen concentration is 18% or more, and is always (4) and the sensor output value at the start of the flat region where the oxygen concentration is 18% (limit current when the oxygen concentration is 18% value). Therefore, the sensor outputs an oxygen concentration of 18% even though the actual oxygen concentration is 18% or more. The sensor state classification unit 14 classifies such a decrease in the output value as a decrease in the output value due to aged deterioration of the sensor.

The sensor state classification unit 14 classifies the increase in the output value due to the application of thermal shock or mechanical shock to the sensor when the increase in the limit current value exceeds the threshold. As shown in FIG. 13, when a large amount of oxygen flows into the sensor and the amount cannot be controlled, the limiting current value increases. For example, in the example of FIG. 13, the sensor outputs an oxygen concentration of 30% even though the actual oxygen concentration is 18%. In such a case, an oxygen concentration higher than the true oxygen concentration is output, so even if the oxygen concentration in the environment where the equipment is installed is in a situation that adversely affects the human body, there is a danger that an alarm will not be issued. There is a fear that it will lead to a situation. The sensor state classification unit 14 classifies such an increase in output value as an increase in output value due to the application of thermal shock or mechanical shock to the sensor.

When the decrease in oxygen concentration output by the sensor exceeds the threshold, the sensor state classification unit 14 classifies it as a decrease in the output value due to impurities clogging the gas diffusion holes of the sensor. The sensor reacts to the oxygen sucked through this gas diffusion hole and measures the oxygen concentration, but if this part is clogged with adhering impurities, it becomes difficult to suck in oxygen, so the oxygen concentration is output low. put away. For example, as shown in FIG. 14, the sensor outputs an oxygen concentration of 15% even if the actual oxygen concentration is 20%. Therefore, in the case of this deterioration pattern, a value lower than the true oxygen concentration is output, and an alarm is issued even though the actual environment does not have a decrease in oxygen concentration that affects the human body. there is a possibility. If the measuring instrument issues an alarm, it is presumed that the installation environment is in a dangerous state, so it is necessary to improve the oxygen concentration by performing ventilation, etc. , the improvement of the oxygen concentration is essentially unnecessary, resulting in unnecessary costs. The sensor state classification unit 14 classifies such a decrease in the output value as a decrease in the output value due to impurities clogging the gas diffusion holes of the sensor.

The result display unit 15 displays the information transmitted from the storage unit 12.

FIG. 2 is a flowchart showing an example of a sensor state classification method executed by the sensor state classification device 1 according to one embodiment.

In step S10, the operator manually inspects the sensor and records the inspection result information.

In step S20, the on-site measurement result input unit 11 inputs inspection result information.

At step S30, the gas concentration correction unit 13 corrects the oxygen concentration.

In step S40, the sensor state classification unit 14 classifies the state of the sensor.

Details of each step of the sensor state classification method will be described below with reference to FIGS.

(Implementation of detector inspection)
The details of performing the inspection of the sensors in step S10 will now be described. Clarify the installation year of the detectors to be inspected. Further, on-site inspection is performed based on the flow chart shown in FIG.

In step S101, the worker measures and records the temperature, humidity, and atmospheric pressure in the sensor installation environment.

In step S102, the operator records the value of the oxygen concentration in the gas used for inspection, the usage period of the sensor, and the usage limit of the sensor.

In step S103, the operator blows gas with an oxygen concentration value α onto the sensor of the sensor for t seconds. The oxygen concentration value α is set to be less than 18%, but assuming that the threshold value at which the sensor issues an alarm is A, in step 104 below, the oxygen concentration correction value α_i obtained using the oxygen concentration value α Any gas having an oxygen concentration value α that satisfies A>α_i may be used. Also, by setting the duration to t seconds, it is possible to change the time for which the gas is blown according to the individual difference of each sensor.

In step S104, the operator determines whether or not an alarm will be issued.

If no alarm is issued in step S104, in step S105, the operator places a check mark in check 1 and finishes the inspection.

If an alarm is issued in step S104, in step S106, the operator sprays gas with an oxygen concentration value β onto the sensor for t seconds. A gas having an oxygen concentration value β that satisfies A<β_i for β_i obtained by using β in step 30 below may be used.

In step S107, the operator determines whether or not an alarm will be issued.

If an alarm is issued in step S107, in step S108, the operator places a check mark in check 2 and finishes the inspection. On the other hand, if no alarm is issued, the inspection is terminated without adding a check mark.

The results of the inspections performed in steps S101 to S108 should be summarized as shown in the table in FIG.

(Input of inspection result information)
Details of the input of inspection result information in step S20 will be described. The field measurement result input unit 11 records the inspection results (temperature, humidity, air pressure, check 1 result, check 2 result for each target sensor No. i) performed in step S10 (steps S101 to S108) and Enter the oxygen concentration values α and β in the gas used for inspection, the usage period x_i of the sensor, and the usage limit years X. Here, the service life limit X is defined as the number of years until deterioration pattern 1 shown in FIG. 12 progresses to the state of (4). If the deterioration progresses any further, all values of oxygen concentration of 18% or more will be output as values of oxygen concentration of less than 18%, and the alarm will continue to be issued. In the following, m_1=1 if the check mark is attached to the check 1, m_1=0 if the check mark is not attached, m_2=1 if the check mark is attached to the check 2, and m_2=0 if the check mark is not attached.

(Correction of oxygen concentration)
Details of the correction of the oxygen concentration in step S30 will be described. Even if the gas is designed to have oxygen concentrations of α% and β%, the oxygen concentration of the gas will vary when it is actually sprayed onto the sensor due to the influence of the measurement environment of the sensor. Oxygen concentrations in gases are usually given on a dry basis. The gas that touches the sensor contains water vapor relative to humidity. Therefore, correction values α_i and β_i of the oxygen concentration of the gas actually blown onto the sensor are calculated from the following equations (1) to (3).

Here, P_i represents atmospheric pressure (kPa), P_i ^* represents saturated water vapor pressure (kPa), S_i represents relative humidity (%), and T_i represents temperature (°C).

(Classification of sensor status)
The classification of the state of the sensor in step S40 will be described in detail. Here, the results input in step S20 and output in step S30 are used to determine the state n_i of the sensor according to the flow chart shown in FIG. H}. The sensor status classification method of the present invention may classify the status of an oxygen concentration sensor comprising a sensor using a zirconia element. Details of each state are shown in the table of FIG.

In step S401, the sensor state classification unit 14 determines whether there is a check mark in check 1 of the inspection result. If there is a checkmark (m_1=1), no alarm is issued for the gas with the oxygen concentration α% (α_i% after correction), so the sensor state classification unit 14 determines that the sensor has the deterioration pattern shown in the graph of FIG. Having determined to be in state 2, the state of the sensor is classified as n_i=G. On the other hand, if there is no checkmark (m_1=0), the process proceeds to step S402.

In step S402, the sensor state classification unit 14 determines whether x_i>5 years for the usage period x_i of the sensor to be inspected. Here, the period of time when the VI characteristic of the current oxygen deficiency sensor is in the state of (2) in FIG. 12 is five years, so the number of years is set to five years. It is necessary to design the number of years according to the vessel. If the period of use is less than 5 years, it can be determined that the VI characteristic has not reached the state of (2) in FIG. 2, so it can be determined that deterioration pattern 1 has not occurred. (As a supplement, the state after (2) in FIG. 12 is defined as occurrence of deterioration pattern 1). If x_i>5 years is not satisfied, the process proceeds to step S403. On the other hand, if x_i>5 years is satisfied, the process proceeds to step S406.

In step S403, the sensor state classification unit 14 determines whether or not the correction value β_i>18+γ of the oxygen concentration value β is satisfied. Here, γ represents an allowable decrease in oxygen concentration output due to deterioration pattern 3. For example, if a decrease in oxygen concentration of up to 0.5 is permissible, then γ=0.5. Incidentally, as shown in FIG. 7, the judgment when the check 2 is checked changes depending on whether β_i>18+γ (region i) or β_i≦18+γ (region ii). If β_i>18+γ (region of i) is satisfied, the process proceeds to step S404. If β_i≦18+γ (area of ii), the process proceeds to step S405.

In step S404, if there is a checkmark in check 2 (m_2=1), the output of the oxygen deficiency sensor is expected to decrease by γ or more due to deterioration pattern 3 in FIG. The sensor state is classified as n_i=C (degradation pattern 3 only). On the other hand, if there is no check mark in check 2 (m_2=0), it cannot be determined whether or not there is an output decrease of γ or more, so the sensor state classification unit 14 determines that the state of the sensor is n_i=E ( classified as normal or deterioration pattern 3 only).

In step S405, if there is a checkmark in check 2 (m_2=1), it cannot be determined whether or not there is an output decrease of γ or more. classified as normal or deterioration pattern 3 only). On the other hand, if the check 2 is unchecked (m_2=0), the sensor state classifier 14 classifies the sensor state as n_i=A (normal) because there is no output drop of γ or more. do.　

In step S406, the sensor state classification unit 14 determines that deterioration pattern 1 shown in (3) of FIG. 12 occurs when the period of use is five years or more. After that, the sensor state classification unit 14 determines whether x_i>X is satisfied for the usage period x_i and the usage limit years X of the sensor. It is preferable to obtain the service life limit X from an experimental value or the like. If this condition is satisfied, the graph will be shown in (5) of FIG. 12, and the sensor will have determined that the oxygen concentration of 18% or more is all less than 18%, and the alarm will continue to be issued at all times. state. Therefore, the sensor state classification unit 14 classifies the state of the sensor as n_i=H (cannot be used because the usage limit has been reached). On the other hand, if the usage period is not five years or more, the process proceeds to step S407.

In step S407, the sensor state classification unit 14 determines whether β_i>18+γ. If this condition is satisfied, the process proceeds to step S408. On the other hand, if this condition is not satisfied, the process proceeds to step S411.

In step S408, in order to classify the state of the sensor, cases (i, ii, iii regions) as shown in FIG. 8 are performed. Here, y_i represents the progress of deterioration ((2)→(4)) as shown in FIG. , y_i=21. In the state (4), y_i=18 because the oxygen concentration of 18% or more is indicated as 18%. Also, 18(=A)≤y_i≤21. Moreover, y_i is calculated|required by the following formulas (4), for example.

Assuming that the progress from (2) to (4) in FIG. 12 is constant, y_i can be expressed in this way. Better to If β_i>18+γ is satisfied, y_i exists in any one of regions i, ii, and iii in FIG.

In step S408, the sensor state classification unit 14 determines whether y_i>18+γ (the region where y_i exists is i or ii in FIG. 8). If this condition is satisfied, the process proceeds to step S409. If this condition is not satisfied, that is, if y_i≦18+γ (the region where y_i exists is iii in FIG. 8), the process proceeds to step S410.

In step S409, the sensor state classification unit 14 determines whether or not there is a check in check 2 for the case where the region where y_i exists is i (1) and the region where y_i exists (2) in FIG. and classify the state of the detector.

(1) When the region where y_i exists is i in FIG. 8, the sensor output when the gas with the oxygen concentration correction value β_i is sprayed is β_i. At this time, if there is a checkmark of check 2 (m_2=1), the sensor state classification unit 14 can determine that deterioration of pattern 3 has occurred because there is definitely an output decrease of γ or more. Therefore, when there is a checkmark of check 2 (m_2=1), the sensor state classification unit 14 classifies the sensor state as n_i=D (

deterioration patterns

1 and 3 occur simultaneously). On the other hand, if there is no checkmark for check 2 (m_2=0), the sensor state classification unit 14 cannot determine whether or not there is an output decrease equal to or greater than the allowable deterioration value γ from pattern 3. For example, when β_i=18.6, γ=0.5, and y=18.7, the sensor recognizes 18.6 when the gas of β_i is applied. Therefore, even if the alarm does not sound, the sensor state classifying unit 14 cannot determine whether there is an output decrease of γ or more or an output decrease of γ or more and less than 0.6. Therefore, the sensor state classification unit 14 classifies the sensor state as n_i=F (only deterioration pattern 1 or both deterioration patterns 1 and 3).

(2) When the region where y_i exists is ii in FIG. 8, the sensor output when the gas with the oxygen concentration correction value β_i is sprayed is y_i. At this time, if there is a check mark for check 2 (m_2=1), the sensor state classification unit 14 can determine that deterioration of pattern 3 has occurred because there is definitely an output decrease of γ or more. Therefore, when there is a checkmark of check 2 (m_2=1), the sensor state classification unit 14 classifies the sensor state as n_i=D (

deterioration patterns

1 and 3 occur simultaneously). On the other hand, if there is no check in check 2 (m_2=0), the sensor state classification unit 14 cannot determine whether or not there is an output decrease equal to or greater than the allowable deterioration value γ according to pattern 3. For example, when β_i=18.7, γ=0.5, and y=18.6, the sensor recognizes 18.6 when the oxygen concentration correction value β_i is applied. Therefore, even if the alarm does not sound, the sensor state classifying unit 14 cannot determine whether there is an output decrease of γ or more or an output decrease of γ or more and less than 0.6. Therefore, the sensor state classification unit 14 classifies the sensor state as n_i=F (only deterioration pattern 1 or both deterioration patterns 1 and 3).

In step S410, the sensor state classification unit 14 determines whether or not there is a checkmark of check 2 for the case where the region where y_i exists is iii in FIG. 8, and classifies the state of the sensor. If the region where y_i exists is iii in FIG. 8, the sensor output when the gas with the oxygen concentration correction value β_i is sprayed is y_i. In this case, even if the check 2 is checked, the sensor state classification unit 14 cannot determine whether or not there is an output decrease equal to or greater than the deterioration allowable value γ from the pattern 3. For example, when β_i=18.6, γ=0.5, and y=18.3, the sensor recognizes 18.3 when the oxygen concentration correction value β_i is blown. Therefore, even if the alarm sounds, the sensor state classification unit 14 cannot determine whether the output has decreased by γ or more, or whether the alarm has sounded due to the output decrease of 0.3 or more and less than 0.5. Therefore, when there is a check mark of check 2 (m_2=1), the sensor state classification unit 14 determines that the sensor state is n_i=F (only deterioration pattern 1 or both deterioration patterns 1 and 3). Classify. On the other hand, if there is no check mark in check 2 (m_2=0), the sensor state classifying unit 14 can determine that the output decrease is definitely less than γ, so the deterioration is only pattern 1. Classify the state of the sensor as n_i=B (only degradation pattern 1 occurs)

In step S411, when classifying the state of the sensor, cases (i, ii, iii areas) as shown in FIG. 9 are performed. If the sensor has not been used for more than 5 years and does not satisfy β_i>18+γ, y_i is in any of regions i, ii, and iii in FIG.

In step S411, the sensor state classification unit 14 checks whether the region in which y_i exists is i (1), ii (2), and iii (3) in FIG. Determine if there is a 2 check mark to classify the state of the sensor.

(1) When the region where y_i exists is i in FIG. 9, the sensor output when the gas with the oxygen concentration correction value β_i is sprayed is β_i. At this time, if there is a check mark for check 2 (m_2=1), the sensor state classifying unit 14 cannot determine whether or not there is an output decrease equal to or greater than the allowable deterioration value γ according to pattern 3. For example, when β_i=18.4, γ=0.5, and y=18.7, the sensor recognizes 18.4 when the gas of β_i is blown. Therefore, even if the alarm sounds, it cannot be determined whether there is an output decrease of γ or more, or whether there is an output decrease of 0.4 or more and less than 0.5. Therefore, the sensor state classification unit 14 classifies the sensor state as n_i=F (only deterioration pattern 1 or both deterioration patterns 1 and 3). On the other hand, if there is no checkmark for check 2 (m_2=0), there is definitely no output decrease of γ or more, so the sensor state classification unit 14 can determine that deterioration of pattern 3 has not occurred. , and the state of the sensor is classified as n_i=B (only degradation pattern 1 occurs).

(2) When the region where y_i exists is ii in FIG. 9, the sensor output when the gas with the oxygen concentration correction value β_i is sprayed is β_i. At this time, if there is a check mark for check 2 (m_2=1), the sensor state classifying unit 14 cannot determine whether or not there is an output decrease equal to or greater than the allowable deterioration value γ according to pattern 3. For example, when β_i=18.3, γ=0.5, and y=18.4, the sensor recognizes 18.3 when the gas of β_i is blown. Therefore, even if the alarm sounds, it cannot be determined whether there is an output decrease of γ or more, or whether there is an output decrease of 0.3 or more and less than 0.5. Therefore, the sensor state classification unit 14 classifies the sensor state as n_i=F (only deterioration pattern 1 or both deterioration patterns 1 and 3). On the other hand, if there is no check mark for check 2 (m_2=0), there is definitely no output drop of γ or more, so the sensor state classification unit 14 can determine that deterioration of pattern 3 has not occurred. The state of the sensor is classified as n_i=B (only degradation pattern 1 occurs).

(3) When the region where y_i exists is iii in FIG. 9, the sensor output when the gas with the oxygen concentration correction value β_i is sprayed is y_i. At this time, if there is a check mark for check 2 (m_2=1), the sensor state classifying unit 14 cannot determine whether or not there is an output decrease equal to or greater than the allowable deterioration value γ according to pattern 3. For example, when β_i=18.4, γ=0.5, and y=18.3, the sensor recognizes 18.3 when the gas of β_i is blown. Therefore, even if the alarm sounds, it cannot be determined whether the output has decreased by γ or more, or whether the output has decreased by 0.3 or more and less than 0.5. Therefore, the sensor state classification unit 14 classifies the sensor state as n_i=F (only deterioration pattern 1 or both deterioration patterns 1 and 3). On the other hand, if there is no checkmark for check 2 (m_2=0), there is definitely no output decrease of γ or more, so the sensor state classification unit 14 can determine that deterioration of pattern 3 has not occurred. , and the state of the sensor is classified as n_i=B (only degradation pattern 1 occurs). In other words, if β_i>18+γ is not satisfied, the state of the sensor can be classified without determining whether y_i>18+γ.

According to the sensor state classification device 1, the presence or absence of various deterioration patterns can be determined in a simple process without spending unnecessary ventilation costs.

It is also possible to use a computer capable of executing program instructions in order to function the sensor state classification device 1 described above. FIG. 10 is a block diagram showing a schematic configuration of a computer that functions as the sensor state classification device 1. As shown in FIG. Here, the computer 100 may be a general-purpose computer, a dedicated computer, a workstation, a PC (Personal Computer), an electronic notepad, or the like. Program instructions may be program code, code segments, etc. for performing the required tasks.

As shown in FIG. 10, the computer 100 includes a processor 110, a ROM (Read Only Memory) 120, a RAM (Random Access Memory) 130, and a storage 140 as storage units, an input unit 150, an output unit 160, and communication An interface (I/F) 170 is provided. Each component is communicatively connected to each other via a bus 180 . The on-site measurement result input unit 11 in the sensor state classification device 1 described above may be constructed as the input unit 150 .

The ROM 120 stores various programs and various data. The RAM 130 temporarily stores programs or data as a work area. The storage 140 is configured by an HDD (hard disk drive) or SSD (solid state drive) and stores various programs including an operating system and various data. In the present disclosure, the ROM 120 or the storage 140 stores programs according to the present disclosure.

The processor 110 is specifically a CPU (Central Processing Unit), MPU (Micro Processing Unit), GPU (Graphics Processing Unit), DSP (Digital Signal Processor), SoC (System on a Chip), etc. may be configured by a plurality of processors of The processor 110 reads a program from the ROM 120 or the storage 140 and executes the program using the RAM 130 as a work area to control each of the above components and perform various arithmetic processing. Note that at least part of these processing contents may be realized by hardware.

The program may be recorded on a recording medium readable by the computer 100. A program can be installed in the computer 100 by using such a recording medium. Here, the recording medium on which the program is recorded may be a non-transitory recording medium. The non-transitory recording medium is not particularly limited, but may be, for example, a CD-ROM, a DVD-ROM, a USB (Universal Serial Bus) memory, or the like. Also, this program may be downloaded from an external device via a network.

Regarding the above embodiments, the following additional remarks are disclosed.

(Appendix 1)
A sensor status classifier for classifying the quality status of an oxygen concentration sensor having a sensor, comprising:
Input inspection result information including whether or not an alarm is issued when a gas with a different oxygen concentration designed to a predetermined value is sprayed on the sensor of the oxygen concentration sensor to be inspected, and information on the measurement environment of the sensor. correcting the design value of the oxygen concentration to the oxygen concentration when the gas blows onto the sensor using the measurement environment information, and calculating the oxygen concentration based on the inspection result information and the correction value of the oxygen concentration A sensor status classifier comprising a control for classifying the quality status of a sensor.
(Appendix 2)
The inspection result information is
When a gas with an oxygen concentration designed to be less than the threshold at which the oxygen concentration sensor issues an alarm is sprayed to the sensor for a predetermined time, and when a gas with an oxygen concentration designed to be greater than or equal to the threshold is sprayed for a predetermined time. , the information including a result of checking whether the oxygen concentration sensor issues an alarm.
(Appendix 3)
The control unit
3. The sensor state classification device according to

item

1 or 2, wherein when the minimum voltage value at which the limit current value is generated exceeds a threshold value, it is classified as a decrease in the output value due to aged deterioration of the sensor.
(Appendix 4)
The control unit
4. The sensor state classification according to any one of additional items 1 to 3, wherein when the increase in the limit current value exceeds a threshold, it is classified as an increase in the output value due to the application of thermal shock or mechanical shock to the sensor. Device.
(Appendix 5)
The control unit
5. The sensing according to any one of items 1 to 4, wherein when the decrease in oxygen concentration output by the sensor exceeds a threshold value, it is classified as a decrease in output value due to impurities clogging gas diffusion holes of the sensor. Vessel state classifier.
(Appendix 6)
The control unit
6. The sensor state classification device according to any one of additional items 1 to 5, which classifies the quality state of an oxygen concentration sensor having a sensor using a zirconia element.
(Appendix 7)
A sensor status classification method for classifying the quality status of an oxygen concentration sensor having a sensor, comprising:
The sensor state classification device determines whether or not an alarm is issued when a gas with a different oxygen concentration designed to a predetermined value is sprayed on the sensor of the oxygen concentration sensor to be inspected, and the measurement environment information of the sensor. correcting the design value of the oxygen concentration using the measurement environment information to the oxygen concentration when the gas is blown onto the sensor; the inspection result information and the gas classifying the quality status of the oxygen concentration sensor based on the oxygen concentration correction value in the sensor status classification method.
(Appendix 8)
A non-temporary storage medium storing a computer-executable program, the non-temporary storage storing the program for causing the computer to function as the sensor state classification device according to any one of appendices 1 to 6. medium.

Although the above-described embodiments have been described as representative examples, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that many modifications and substitutions can be made within the spirit and scope of the present disclosure. Therefore, the present invention should not be construed as limited by the embodiments described above, and various modifications and changes are possible without departing from the scope of the claims. For example, it is possible to combine a plurality of configuration blocks described in the configuration diagrams of the embodiments into one, or divide one configuration block.

1 sensor state classification device 11 on-site measurement result input unit 12 storage unit 13 gas concentration correction unit 14 sensor state classification unit 15 result display unit 100 computer 110 processor 120 ROM
130 RM
140 storage 150 input unit 160 output unit 170 communication interface (I/F)
180 bus

Claims

A sensor status classifier for classifying the quality status of an oxygen concentration sensor having a sensor, comprising:
Input inspection result information including whether or not an alarm is issued when a gas with a different oxygen concentration designed to a predetermined value is sprayed on the sensor of the oxygen concentration sensor to be inspected, and information on the measurement environment of the sensor. a field measurement result input unit;
a gas concentration correction unit that corrects the design value of the oxygen concentration to the oxygen concentration when the gas blows onto the sensor using the measurement environment information;
a sensor state classification unit that classifies the quality state of the oxygen concentration sensor based on the inspection result information and the oxygen concentration correction value;
a sensor status classifier comprising:
The inspection result information includes the case where a gas with an oxygen concentration designed to be less than the threshold at which the oxygen concentration sensor issues an alarm is sprayed to the sensor for a predetermined time, and the gas with an oxygen concentration designed to be greater than or equal to the threshold. 2. The sensor state classification device according to claim 1, wherein the information includes a result of checking whether the oxygen concentration sensor issues an alarm for each of the following cases:
3. The sensor state according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the sensor state classification unit classifies the sensor as a decrease in the output value due to aged deterioration when the minimum voltage value at which the limit current value occurs exceeds a threshold value. Classifier.
4. The sensor state classifier according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein when the limit current value rise exceeds a threshold value, the sensor state classification unit classifies the rise as an output value rise due to the application of thermal shock or mechanical shock to the sensor. 10. A sensor status classifier according to claim 1.
5. The sensor state classification unit according to claim 1, wherein when the decrease in oxygen concentration output by the sensor exceeds a threshold value, the sensor state classification unit classifies the decrease in the output value as a result of impurities clogging the gas diffusion holes of the sensor. A sensor status classifier according to any one of the preceding claims.
The sensor state classification device according to any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein the sensor state classification unit classifies the quality state of an oxygen concentration sensor having a sensor using a zirconia element.
A sensor status classification method for classifying the quality status of an oxygen concentration sensor having a sensor, comprising:
With the sensor state classifier,
Input inspection result information including whether or not an alarm is issued when a gas with a different oxygen concentration designed to a predetermined value is sprayed on the sensor of the oxygen concentration sensor to be inspected, and information on the measurement environment of the sensor. a step;
a step of correcting the design value of the oxygen concentration to the oxygen concentration when the gas is blown onto the sensor using the measurement environment information;
classifying the quality status of the oxygen concentration sensor based on the inspection result information and the correction value of the oxygen concentration in the gas;
A sensor status classification method comprising:
A program for causing a computer to function as the sensor state classification device according to any one of claims 1 to 6.