Method and apparatus for negating effects of continuous introduction of risk factors in determining the health of a process control system

• US 10,438,144 B2
• Filed: 10/05/2015
• Issued: 10/08/2019
• Est. Priority Date: 10/05/2015
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Fisher-Rosemount Systems Incorporated (Emerson Electric Company)
• Original Assignee: Fisher-Rosemount Systems Incorporated (Emerson Electric Company)
• Inventors: Van Camp, Kim Ordean, Cruz, Rovertzonn C.
• Primary Examiner(s): Tecklu, Isaac T
• Application Number:
  US14/875,336
• Publication Number:
  US 20170097623A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,464 Days
• Field of Search: None
• CPC Class Codes: G05B 2223/06 Remote monitoring
• CPC Class Codes: G05B 23/0283 Predictive maintenance, e.g. involving the monitoring of a system and, based on the monitoring results, taking decisions on the maintenance schedule of the monitored system; Estimating remaining useful life [RUL] preventive maintenance, i.e. planning maintenance according to the available resources without monitoring the system G06Q10/06
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06 Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/0635 Risk analysis of enterprise or organisation activities
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 50/04 Manufacturing
• CPC Class Codes: Y02P 90/30 Computing systems specially adapted for manufacturing

Abstract

Negating effects of continuous introduction of risk in scoring the health of a process control system includes automatically and periodically assessing a risk for each of the process control systems, calibrating the center of a health score scale to the average risk assessments, and scoring the health of each process control system within the health score scale according to a nonlinear scale applied to the risk assessment. Introduction of a risk factor to a process control system increases the risk assessment, and elimination of a risk factor decreases the risk assessment. The same risk factor introduced to each of the of process control systems does not affect the health score of any process control system, and elimination of a risk factor has more of an effect on the health score towards the center of the health score scale than towards upper and lower limits of the health score scale.

Claims

1. A method of negating effects of continuous introduction of risk factors to a plurality of process control systems in scoring the health of a process control system among the plurality of process control systems comprising:

automatically and periodically assessing a risk for each of a plurality of process control systems, wherein each process control system has one or more risk factors associated with the process control system, wherein the introduction of a risk factor to a process control system each period increases the risk assessment for that process control system, and wherein the elimination of a risk factor from a process control system each period decreases the risk assessment for that process control system;

calibrating the center of a health score scale to the average of the risk assessments among the plurality of process control systems for each period by logarithmically scaling the average of the risk assessments to produce a calibration factor, wherein the health score scale is fixed by an upper limit and a lower limit by scaling the average of the risk assessments; and

generating, on a display of a computing device at a plant site of the process control system, a graphical indication of the health of the process control system within the health score scale that discards the same risk factors introduced to each of the plurality of process control systems in the period according to a nonlinear scale being applied to the product of the risk assessment for the process control system and the calibration factor, wherein the nonlinear scale has the upper limit as a scaling factor, and

wherein elimination of a risk factor from a process control system in a period has more of an effect on the health score for a process control system scored towards the center of the health score scale the previous period than for a process control system scored towards the upper and lower limits of the health score scale the previous period.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein each process control system is located at a plant site geographically separate from other plant sites of the plurality of other process control systems.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein each process control system is a member of the same product family of process control systems from a manufacturer.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein determining a risk assessment for each of a plurality of process control systems comprises weighting each of the risk factors associated with the process control system according to the type of risk factor and summing the weight values of the risk factors.

5. The method of claim 4, wherein the types of risk factors associated with a process control system include one or more of the following:

a Knowledge Base Article (KBA) stored in a database having an unread status, an uninstalled software update available for the process control system, an open action alert regarding a monitored health parameter of an asset of the process control system, an open service call regarding an operational impact on the process control system, and a life cycle status regarding hardware and/or software component of the process control system.

6. The method of claim 5, wherein Knowledge Base Articles include one or more of the following types:

a safety KBA about a potential safety issue for the process control system, a security KBA about a security issue for the process control system, and a process KBA about process disruption for the process control system,

wherein a safety KBA is weighted higher than a process KBA, and a process KBA is weighted higher than a security KBA.

7. The method of claim 5, wherein software updates include one or more of the following types:

a safety software update to address a potential safety issue for the process control system, a security software update to address a security issue for the process control system, and a process software update to address a process disruption for the process control system,

wherein a safety software update is weighted higher than a process software update, and a process software update is weighted higher than a security software update.

8. The method of claim 5, wherein service calls include one or more of the following types:

a first service call regarding a non-functional operation of the process control system, and a second service call regarding a functional but impaired or jeopardized operation of the process control system,

wherein a first service call is weighted higher than a second service call.

9. The method of claim 5, wherein life cycle status includes one or more of the following types:

a current/active status reflecting hardware and/or software that is supported by the hardware manufacturer or software developer, and a retired status reflecting hardware and/or software that is not supported by the hardware manufacturer or software developer,

wherein a retired status is weighted higher than a current/active status.

10. The method of claim 5, wherein the elimination of a risk factor from a process control system includes one or more of the following:

a KBA status indicated as in-progress, completed or not applicable for the process control system, a software update indicated as installed, in-progress, completed or not applicable for the process control system, an action alert status indicated as closed or downgraded for the process control system, a service call indicated as closed or downgraded for the process control system, and a retired status upgraded to a current/active status.

11. The method of claim 1, wherein calibrating the center of a health score scale to the average of the risk assessments comprises a logarithmic scaling of the average of the risk assessments to develop a calibration factor to apply to each risk assessment in scoring the health of each process control system.

12. The method of claim 1, wherein scoring the health of each process control system according to a nonlinear scale comprises scoring the health of each process control system according to an exponential scale.

13. The method of claim 1, wherein the risk factors include general risk factors pertaining to the plurality of process control systems and specific risk factors pertaining to particular ones of the plurality of process control systems, and wherein each risk factor includes an action category selected from a group comprising a required action category and an advisement category, wherein the required action category indicates that action must be taken at the process control system and the advisement category indicates information associated with improving process control system performance,

wherein the introduction of a risk factor having a required action category to a process control system each period increases the risk assessment for that process control system, and wherein the elimination of a risk factor having a required action category from a process control system each period decreases the risk assessment for that process control system,

wherein a general risk factor introduced in a period does not affect the health score of any of the plurality of process control systems, and

wherein elimination of a specific risk factor having a required action category from a process control system in a period has more of an effect on the health score for a process control system scored towards the center of the health score scale than for a process control system scored towards the upper and lower limits of the health score scale.

14. A system for negating effects of continuous introduction of risk factors to a plurality of process control systems in scoring the health of a process control system among the plurality of process control systems comprising:

a server adapted to register a process control system and a plurality of other process control systems to facilitate maintaining the process control systems, the process control system located at a first plant site geographically separate from other plant sites of other process control systems;

an interface in communication with the server and adapted to retrieve risk factors from a database in communication with the server based on monitoring of the process control systems, the risk factors including general risk factors pertaining to the process control systems and specific risk factors pertaining to particular process control systems;

a communication interface adapted to communicate risk factors to the process control systems, wherein each process control system has one or more risk factors associated with the process control system, and a risk factor includes an action category selected from a group comprising a required action category and an advisement category, wherein the required action category indicates that action must be taken at the process control system and the advisement category indicates information associated with improving process control system performance; and

a processor in communication with the interface, the server and the database, the processor adapted to automatically and periodically;

assess a risk for each of the process control systems, wherein, in each period, the introduction of risk factors having a required action category increases the risk assessment for that process control system, and wherein, in each period, the elimination of risk factors having a required action category decreases the risk assessment for that process control system;

calibrate the center of a health score scale to the average of the risk assessments among the plurality of process control systems for each period by logarithmically scaling the average of the risk assessments to produce a calibration factor, wherein the health score scale is fixed by an upper limit and a lower limit by scaling the average of the risk assessments; and

generate, on a display of a computing device at a plant site of the process control system, a graphical indication of the health of the process control system within the health score scale that discards the same risk factors introduced to each of the plurality of process control systems in the period according to a nonlinear scale being applied to the product of the risk assessment for the process control system and the calibration factor, wherein the nonlinear scale has the upper limit as a scaling factor;

wherein, in each period, the effect on the score by general risk factors having a required action category introduced to each of the plurality of process control systems is discarded by the calibration factor, and

wherein, in each period, the effect on the score by specific risk factors having a required action category introduced to or eliminated from particular process control systems is attenuated as the score approaches the upper and lower limits and amplified as the score approaches the center by scaling the risk assessment with a nonlinear scaling factor.

15. The system of claim 14, wherein each process control system is a member of the same product family of process control systems from a manufacturer.

16. The system of claim 14, wherein the processor is adapted to weight each of the risk factors according to the type of risk factor and sum the weight values of the risk factors.

17. The system of claim 16, wherein the types of risk factors associated with a process control system include one or more of the following:

a Knowledge Base Article (KBA) stored in a database having an unread status, an uninstalled software update available for the process control system, an open action alert regarding a monitored health parameter of an asset of the process control system, an open service call regarding an operational impact on the process control system, and a life cycle status regarding hardware and/or software used in the process control system.

18. The system of claim 17, wherein Knowledge Base Articles include one or more of the following types:

a safety KBA about a potential safety issue for the process control system, a security KBA about a security issue for the process control system, and a process KBA about process disruption for the process control system,

wherein a safety KBA is weighted higher than a process KBA, and a process KBA is weighted higher than a security KBA.

19. The system of claim 17, wherein software updates include one or more of the following types:

a safety software update to address a potential safety issue for the process control system, a security software update to address a security issue for the process control system, and a process software update to address a process disruption for the process control system,

wherein a safety software update is weighted higher than a process software update, and a process software update is weighted higher than a security software update.

20. The system of claim 17, wherein service calls include one or more of the following types:

a first service call regarding a non-functional operation of the process control system, and a second service call regarding a functional but impaired or jeopardized operation of the process control system,

wherein a first service call is weighted higher than a second service call.

21. The method of claim 17, wherein life cycle status includes one or more of the following types:

a current/active status reflecting hardware and/or software that is supported by the hardware manufacturer or software developer, and a retired status reflecting hardware and/or software that is not supported by the hardware manufacturer or software developer,

wherein a retired status is weighted higher than a current/active status.

22. The system of claim 17, wherein the elimination of a risk factor having a required action category includes one or more of the following:

a KBA status indicated as in-progress, completed or not applicable for the process control system, a software update indicated as installed, in-progress, completed or not applicable for the process control system, an action alert status indicated as closed or downgraded for the process control system, a service call indicated as closed or downgraded for the process control system, and a retired status upgraded to a current/active status.

23. The system of claim 14, wherein calibrating the center of the health score scale to the average of the risk assessments comprises a logarithmic scaling of the average of the risk assessments to develop a calibration factor to apply to each risk assessment to score the health of each process control system.

24. The system of claim 14, wherein the processor is adapted to score the health of each process control system according to an exponential scale.