Search Results

The RTD (more commonly known as PT100) is one of the most used temperature sensors in industry. It is known to be the most accurate and repeatable sensor for low to medium temperatures (-300 to + 600 ° F.) RTD stands for Resistance Temperature Device. Quite simply, the sensor comprises of a resistor that changes value with temperature. The most common RTD by far is the PT100 385. This element measures 100 Ohms @ 0 degrees C (32 °F) and 138.5 Ohms @ 100 °C (212.0 °F). One of the greatest challenges for instrument engineers is dealing with the relatively low resistance of the device. This is because any stray resistance (in particular lead resistance) of RTD assembly can add a significant error to the measured resistance. To combat this, different lead compensation schemes were invented and have come to be known as 2 wire, 3 wire and 4 wire. The 2 wire technique The two wire RTD is the simplest form. The Lead R is the lead resistance of the wire connecting the RTD to the instrument. In this scenario the instrument is going to read a higher temperature than the true RTD temperature because the instrument measures: RTD + 2x Lead R For example if the lead resistance was 0.5 Ohms then the instrument would read 2.6˚C (4.7F) higher than it should. The only way to compensate this error is to manually adjust the offset of the instrument. This of course becomes tedious and prone to human error. Automatic lead compensation instruments were invented to address this problem. The compensation techniques use additional wires connected to the sensor to measure the lead resistance and negate its effects. The 3 wire technique The three wire lead scheme requires two measurements, the first measurement is V1 which gives a result for RTD + Lead R. The second measurement gives a result V2 for R Lead. Hence to get the true RTD measurement we simply subtract V lead from V lead + RTD leaving RTD. Hence for any Lead R value this scheme will automatically compensate out the lead resistance and give you the correct temperature. The assumption this technique makes is that the lead resistance is the same in each of the three wires. This is a very safe assumption to make in particular with modern manufacturing techniques used in wire production. In the practical examples section you will get more of a feeling how these errors stack up. The 4 wire technique This technique relies on a very high input impedance of the modern instrument so that in the sensor wire there is practically no current flow: this is a very valid assumption today. The RTD is sensed in the scheme with no error by measuring VRTD in one measurement. The advantage of this scheme is that it also compensates out any lead wire imbalances. Historically the 4 wire technique has been popular in Europe led by the German influence for absolute precision. In the North American market the 3 wire technique has been much more widely deployed in the past and even today outsell the 4 wire sensors by 3 to 1. This has been led by cost and practicality. Practical examples Headmount transmitter using 24 AWG wire to connect the RTD sensor to the transmitter with a probe length of 12” Headmount transmitter using 24 AWG wire to connect the RTD sensor to the transmitter with a probe length of 12” From the results above for headmount applications both 3 and 4 wire are excellent techniques for eliminating lead resistance effects. Furthermore, the long cable test also shows 3 to 4 wires to be perfectly adequate. Even if there is some wire imbalance, the calculated error puts it firmly in the uncertainty band of almost all industrial applications. Another question that is sometimes asked is: “ If I have a 4 wire RTD can it be used as a 3 wire RTD?” The answer is yes, leaving one wire disconnected from the 4 wire sensor will not add any error to the 3 wire system of lead compensation. However the opposite is not true. You cannot use a 3 wire RTD with a 4 wire instrument by simply shorting the 3rd and 4th wire together at the instrument. This will result in substantial lead wire resistance error. In conclusion 2 wire RTD inputs should be avoided altogether unless the wire lengths are short and you are using a low gauge wire to reduce the lead resistance. 3 and 4 wire compensation techniques have been proven over many years to provide an excellent means to automatically compensate lead wire resistance in RTDs. You would choose 4 wire if you are concerned with absolute precision over long lead lengths. Whereas it has been shown that the 3 wire technique is accurate for all practical industrial purposes and that it saves around 20% in wire cost over the 4 wire technique.

The white paper " Trends in Remote Services & Monitoring ," published by PMMI in January 2024, takes a closer look at evolving landscape of remote services in the packaging and processing industry. Drawing insights from 144 end-user companies and 36 Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) in the USA, the report highlights the increasing adoption of remote technologies and the factors influencing this shift to this technology. Adoption of Remote Services End-users are progressively integrating various remote services into their operations, including: Virtual Factory Acceptance Tests (FATs):   Utilizing video conferencing and streaming, equipment suppliers conduct hybrid FATs, combining remote streaming with a minimal on-site presence to ensure machinery meets specifications. Remote Support:   When internal teams encounter challenges, they seek assistance from equipment suppliers through phone calls, video conferencing, or augmented reality, enabling detailed remote technical support. Remote Commissioning:  Employing video conferencing, end-user plants perform commissioning with remote guidance from equipment suppliers, sometimes using a hybrid model with limited on-site representation. Remote Training:  Equipment suppliers provide training to end-user technicians and operators remotely, eliminating the need for on-site visits. Remote IoT Monitoring Services:  Leveraging IoT technology and cloud computing, both end-users and equipment suppliers monitor machine performance, status, and behavior from a distance. Predictive Maintenance:  An advanced monitoring approach that assesses machines or components to predict potential failures, allowing for proactive maintenance. 4 Reasons to Invest in Remote Monitoring Systems Here are some things to consider when investing in remote services and monitoring: (1) Operational Efficiency:  Remote services reduce downtime and enhance productivity by enabling swift issue resolution without the delays associated with on-site visits. (2) Cost Reduction:  Minimizing the need for travel and on-site interventions leads to significant cost savings for both end-users and equipment suppliers. (3) Access to Expertise:  Remote services provide immediate access to specialized knowledge, ensuring that complex issues are addressed promptly. (4) Data-Driven Decision Making:  Remote monitoring and predictive maintenance offer valuable data insights, facilitating informed decisions and strategic planning. Adoption Barriers of IoT Monitoring System Despite the advantages, certain challenges hinder the widespread adoption of remote services: IoT Security Threats:  Allowing remote access to plant operations raises cybersecurity issues, necessitating robust measures to protect sensitive data. Infrastructure Limitations:  Some facilities may lack the necessary infrastructure or face compatibility issues with existing systems. Resistance to Change:  Cultural resistance and a preference for traditional methods can impede the acceptance of remote services. Addressing Skills Gaps Remote services play a crucial role in mitigating skills shortages by: Providing Remote Expertise:  Enabling access to specialized knowledge without the need for on-site presence. Facilitating Training:  Offering remote training programs to upskill existing staff efficiently. What These Trends Mean for Your Data Strategy The white paper suggests a continued shift towards remote services, with a hybrid approach combining remote and in-person interactions becoming the norm. This evolution is expected to enhance operational efficiency, reduce costs, and improve access to expertise across the industry. In other words, the "Trends in Remote Services & Monitoring" white paper underscores the transformative impact of remote technologies in the packaging and processing sector. By embracing these trends, companies can navigate the challenges of modern manufacturing and position themselves for sustained success. Start Your Data Strategy and Build a Remote IoT Device That Pays Off

If you need to get multiple signals from various types of sensors into a PLC or SCADA system  and you’re pushed for space , specify the new Zen RTU Mini from Define Instruments. The Zen RTU Mini goes where others cannot The  Zen RTU Mini  measures just 3.98 x 1.38 x 4.42″ fitting into tighter spaces, smaller enclosures and saving you DIN rail space! No need to run cables The Zen RTU Mini has a wireless option so you retain portability, and don’t need to spring for the cost of cabling. Universal input for maximum flexibility The Zen RTU Mini accepts TC, RTD, mA, mV, V, Frequency and Pulse. This reduces the number of separate instruments required for your application, further reducing costs and keeping things simple for troubleshooting and maintenance. Per-channel isolation for high reliability Each channel of the Zen RTU Mini is galvanically isolated ensuring a clean and steady signal in even the harshest of industrial environments. Don’t pay for channels you don’t need The Zen RTU Mini comes in 4, 12 and 16 channel options, so you only pay for what your application requires. Get the  full specs  »

Understanding your WiFi network and how to successfully get your IoT device on to your network can be tricky for the uninitiated. In this guide you’ll learn some networking basics to help you along. WiFi and Wireless, what’s the difference? Wireless is a generic term that just means there’s no wires. The term “wireless” tends to be used to describe a requirement i.e. “it needs to be wireless”, whereas WiFi is a particular standard, and one of several others like Bluetooth or Zigbee, for example. Access Point Mode or Station Mode? Typically devices can run in one of 2 modes: Access Point Mode or Station Mode (often called Client Mode). Station Mode (STA) is what most people would consider the normal mode for a WiFi device. A device uses Station Mode to join a network that already exists, exactly like your smartphone does when its connects to your WiFi network at home. In this instance your phone is running in Station Mode. In Access Point Mode (AP)  the device is the Access Point  and so becomes an entity that everything else can connect to, rather than it connecting to a network. In an industrial IoT context, Access Point Mode is generally for set up and then once configured the unit will exit AP mode and run in Station Mode for the rest of the  IoT application. Demystifying IP addresses An IP address is a string of digits that define the location of a device on a network. The address comprises of 4 groups of numbers separated by dots and it is very much like a street address in that it must be unique. IP addresses can be static or dynamic (more on this later). In a domestic scenario, typically when a device connects to your home network it is dynamically assigned one by the router from the addresses currently not in use. IP addresses have banded designations: a numerical range of addresses that have been reserved for specific uses. What does DHCP mean? DHCP stands for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol. It is a network protocol that allows a server to automatically assign an IP address to a device from a defined range of addresses. Basically, when a device logs on to your network and requests an IP address from the Access Point, it will be assigned one automatically from the remaining free addresses. At some point this IP address may get reassigned to another device, depending on network traffic – it’s not fixed. It may last for a couple of days or a couple of weeks depending on your network. However, if the device is being used every day it will likely keep the same IP address. Most networks have DHCP enabled and so during setup of Define Instruments  products with Wifi modules , if the “Use DHCP” checkbox in the WorkBench configuration software is ticked then your device can automatically be assigned a unique IP address. What are Port numbers? If your IP address is like a street address, a port is like a cubbyhole at that address where incoming mail is sorted: one for bills, another for letters, another for junk mail, etc. Different ports for different types of communications. For example: for Modbus, generally port 502 is used. That’s because this port number has been purchased by the Modbus Organization for exclusive use with devices using Modbus communications. Port numbers range from 1 to 65,535. A list of commonly known and registered ports numbers  can be found on Wikipedia . Where do I find which port number to use? Generally, this is determined by the protocol you’re using, e.g. MQTT has a specific port number (port 1883) and so do websites (port 80 for http) refer to the above link for guidance on the standard port assignations. Otherwise, talk to your System Admin and they can help you identify a port that is not in use by any other protocol on your network and can be dedicated to your IoT application.

In an emerging market initially there tends to be a glut of vendors, a plethora of early adopters who have spotted the opportunity to get in on the ground floor. But as the market matures, vendor numbers dwindle until typically only a handful remain. This natural attrition comes in many guises but one of the most the powerful is action from a major player. And this is what we have seen recently from communications giant Verizon and their launch of web-based IoT development platform, ThingSpace. Verizon says “ThingSpace is a gateway to a simplified IoT workspace and machine-to-machine (M2M) management center for prototype through production…to bring your IoT solutions to life, and to market.” While news of another IoT development platform isn’t much of an eyebrow-raiser  what is,  is the decision by Verizon to offer CAT-M1 modules from USD 6.50 each, and to allow free certification on their network and additionally provide 100 hours of expert help. The axe has fallen By its actions, Verizon has clearly indicated its intent to capitalize on the billions of IoT devices predicted to come online in the next few years, and by subsidizing hardware connections, its service becomes a very attractive option. Furthermore Verizon is one of the few companies who already have the infrastructure in place to support this. This latest move will likely secure substantial market penetration for Verizon while at the same time potentially culling several existing players from the market. This “market cleansing” action has significant impact for Sigfox and LoRa and may signal the death knell for these LPWA technologies in the U.S. market. READ:  The completely overlooked but drastic cost savings municipal water departments can achieve with this simple IIoT application The advantage is clear CAT-M1 has huge advantage over both SigFox and Lora in the type of applications that can be achieved with it. With a direct TCP connection from the sensor and no third-party servers, gateways or services required to connect to the internet, CAT-M1 is in a strong position to significantly reduce cost, complication and latency whilst still allowing for complete flexibility. The introduction of CAT-M1 modules at this price point means Verizon can now also compete in the simple, low-frequency (time), low-data applications that Sigfox and LoRa were invented for e.g. daily automatic meter reading. In my opinion any advantages that Sigfox or LoRa thought they had are now dwindling fast in the light of this power play by Verizon. The comparison table below summarizes some important points in determining which direction device manufacturers should head. Comparing Sigfox, LoRa and CAT-M1 Verizon CAT-M1 Sigfox LoRa Network operated by a Fortune 500 company? U.S. nation-wide coverage complete? Device operating in protected licensed frequency? Latency between web and device? (very good/good/poor) Battery life for simple applications (very good/good/poor) Hardware cost for simple applications* (very good/good/poor) * Simple application defined as obtaining a meter reading for an existing meter and posting to the internet once per day.

Compressed air is widely used in manufacturing plants across the United States. And, if your company relies on it, you’ll know that it’s as vital as electricity to ensure the continued running of your operations. For example, in an electronics manufacturing facility compressed air is used to power automatic assembly equipment and continuous air flow is critical to maintain production. Without reliable air delivery, manufacturing will cease and the resultant downtime could lead to tens of thousands of dollars in lost revenue. Given the “lifeblood” status of compressed air it is interesting to note that maintenance and monitoring of the system as a whole is, for the most part, overlooked. The servicing that does occur is usually focused on the hardware in the compressor room, which does need attention but is only a part of the overall system. Most problems occur in the piping distribution system. Typical issues are things like rust, leaks or incorrect pipe size and are typically straightforward to fix but without the monitoring of this piping, troubleshooting can be time-consuming and expensive. For full visibility of the entire compressed air system, sensors must be deployed in key locations inside your facility. These sensors should measure pressure, vibration, flow, temperature, humidity and power. The cost of lost pressure Around 2psi of air pressure equals 1% of a compressed air systems total energy cost. This means a system with less than optimum air pressure is wasting energy and wasting money. Pressure loss is commonly caused by: distribution pipe corrosion incorrectly sized piping incorrectly sized compressor capacity lack of compressed air storage Just one of these can result in your compressor working far harder than it should and will contribute to shortening the working life of the unit. Operational oversight also prevents time and money being wasted on taking action that appears to be the solution but in actuality is not. For example, one may conclude loss of pressure is due to your compressor capacity not being large enough for the task. But only after investing in and installing a newer, larger compressor, it is discovered that this does nothing to alleviate the pressure issues. Full visibility of the system could identify the real culprit – a corroded pipe – without such expense and also indicate exactly where pressure starts to drop. Of course, you could take pressure measurements manually with a pressure gauge but these readings only provide information for that one point in time. Publishing sensor data to the Cloud provides rich and detailed data giving you solid business intelligence to make better decisions. Dealing to the problems caused by humidity Excess moisture causes corrosion in pipes and damage to internal components impacting maintenance costs and raising the risk of downtime. It also causes problems in certain finishing applications and, in food and beverage applications, can breed harmful bacteria that spoils or contaminates ingredients or finished foods. All the more reason to get clear on the impact humidity is having on your facility. Measuring humidity in your plant allows you to take necessary action to mitigate its effects, reduce your costs and comply with any applicable health and safely regulations. Monitoring flow for first indications of issues As already stated, a common causes of pressure loss are incorrectly sized piping or corroded piping which restricts air flow in the pipe. Undersized piping is often overlooked as what was appropriate and correct at time of installation is in many cases now too small to keep up with current demand. Leaks can also cause your air system to run inefficiently, this can be caused by threaded connections during a less-than-careful installation. Over time a threaded connection will begin to separate, opening a space for air to pass through and escape. Monitoring flow data acts as an early warning mechanism beyond visual inspection because the inside of pipes corrode without noticeable decay of the pipe exterior. Poor flow readings indicate corrosion, threading or pipe size issues long before they become critical. Temperature monitoring as an overall indicator Monitoring the temperature of various components in your compressed air system provides an indication their overall health. By comparing current component temperatures to the manufacturers documented optimal working temperatures, one can see if the system is being over-worked or under is performing. Power consumption monitoring With the above sensors installed, the last metric to monitor is power consumption – do this by installing a current sensor. Used in conjunction with the data from the flow sensors the overall health of the compressed air system can be determined. And from this it is easy to calculate the cost per unit of your compressed air set-up. Increases in costs can reveal issues such as faulty controls, short cycling and unregulated spiking. Compressed air is the lifeblood of many production facilities Once the sensors and cloud monitoring is deployed, you finally achieve operational oversight of your system. With this comes insights on the idiosyncrasies and behavior of the system, component lifespan, real servicing requirements, usage profiles and whole lot more. Compressed is air is vital to so many manufacturers, what are you doing to safeguard your supply?

Remote Monitoring: The Need-to-Have A paper from Research Gate argues that remote monitoring has transitioned from being a competitive advantage to a necessity. Customers now expect manufacturers and service providers to offer real-time monitoring and support. Not having these capabilities can result in losing market share to more technologically advanced competitors. Moreover, regulatory and safety compliance in many industries is becoming increasingly reliant on real-time data. Remote monitoring ensures companies can meet these requirements while maintaining operational efficiency. The Path Ahead The study concludes that the future of industrial services lies in leveraging real-time data for decision-making. Remote monitoring is the foundation of this future, enabling companies to innovate and deliver superior value to their customers. Conclusion Remote monitoring in industrial services is no longer a "nice-to-have" feature—it is a "need-to-have" necessity for staying competitive in today’s market. Companies that embrace this technology will not only optimize their operations but also build stronger, data-driven relationships with their customers. As industries move toward greater connectivity, remote monitoring systems will be at the heart of this transformation.

This article explains LTE CAT-M1 in relation to its competing technologies and examines some of the pros and cons of each. The telecommunications industry now has a new, IoT-friendly standard: CAT-M1. CAT-M1, sometimes referred to as LTE-M1, LTE CAT M1 or CAT M, it is a technology that enables connection directly to a 4G network without a gateway, connecting IoT devices to the internet via the cellular network. The first advantage One of several technologies known collectively as an LPWA (Low Power Wide Area), the CAT-M1 network is operated by cellular network providers utilizing their own frequency bands. It is this ownership that is the first notable advantage over competitors such as SigFox and LoRa WAN. By controlling the devices that are able to use their network, telco’s have secured the long-term quality of this service. Meanwhile, competitors Sigfox and LoRa have opted to use unlicensed ISM (Industrial, Scientific, Medical) bands. The blessing and curse of unlicensed bands is that they are free for everyone to use. The blessing and curse of unlicensed bands is that they are free for everyone to use. This may jeopardize quality of service in years to come as neither Sigfox nor LoRa have any influence should the behavior of other users of these frequencies become harmful or disruptive to their customers. The use cases are different for different regions and some rules in some countries are not kind to LPWA networks. For more information on this please  see article by David Castells-Rufas, Adria Galin-Pons and Jordi Carrabina No need to shout loud Cellular network operators also have another advantage: they use cell technology. As a rebuttal competitors claim that their tech needs fewer “tower points” to provide coverage compared to conventional cell operators because it can transmit over longer distances. On paper, this would seem like an enormous benefit with regard to infrastructure costs. However, this is achieved by the devices transmitting on full power at all times. To get an idea of the implications of this, let’s relate it to human interactions. Firstly Sigfox and LoRa: Imagine a room half full of people. Certain individuals are permitted to shout messages to others across the room. They do so by following these rules: Messages can only be yelled once every 10 minutes Messages must be repeated 3 times (in case someone else is also yelling at that moment) As the room fills up the amount of messages that everyone is allowed to share has to decrease to accommodate the growing number of shouters. So this type of messaging works best with short one-way message payloads. But with cell technology human interactions would be more like the following: People in the room are split into small groups. They huddle together so there’s no need for shouting and relevant messages can be heard above the low volume of chatter from the other groups. Much more information can be shared this way. LTE CAT-M1 best positioned for the coming IoT revolution Until now the primary driver for cell network providers has been to service the insatiable human demand for live streaming HD video and music directly to mobile devices. But it has been determined that most IoT devices do not require this kind of bandwidth and so CAT-M1 has been optimized for this lower bandwidth IoT world. While the looming 5G promises bandwidth speeds of 1Gbit per second, CAT-M1 is happy to play at around 256Kbits per second. One of the by-products of this is a significant increase in coverage as by reducing RF bandwidth, signal-to-noise ratio increases. A report by AT&T  suggests that this technology can increase coverage by a factor of 7. In practical terms this means that in locations where 4G fizzles out CAT-M1 continues to work just fine. While 5G promises bandwidth speeds of 1Gbit per sec, CAT-M1 is happy to play at 256Kbits per sec. Consider the benefits of this coverage to devices in remote country areas or deep in the basements of buildings. Where once it was virtually impossible for signals to reach these locations CAT-M1 technology now makes it possible, and best of all there is no wait time while networks are built – they already exist! Some of the other advantages that CAT-M1 provides: Supports native TCP  which features TLS (Transport Layer Security), encryption and security certificates. Direct connection to leading cloud providers  like AWS, Microsoft Azure, Google cloud, et al without routing through third party servers. (Sigfox sends all data from Sigfox devices to their servers in France before redistributing it to other cloud providers.) Supports bi-directional data and always connected states . With latencies of less than a second this is perfect for alarm monitoring and remote-control applications. Bandwidth is enough to support voice calls and still photos . Also great for alarm systems Supports OTAU (Over The Air Updates)  essential for future-proofing IoT applications. By enabling software updates to be deployed remotely, it removes the need to visit the (possibly far removed) location. Initial and ongoing cost considerations Because CAT-M1 is a more complex unit than the likes of Sigfox, the amount of silicon required is greater and costs should therefore be higher. However some prices sighted have been as little as $6.50 US. It’s likely that this pricing is the result of telecoms subsidizing traffic to enter their network. In the free market the price is a more realistic $20 US per module but these prices are expected to fall over time. Some plans on offer start at $0.85 US per month for a limited data plan and $1.50 US per month unlimited data at 256Kbits per second. With such affordable choices an application with 150 sensors updating to the Cloud every minute could cost as little as 1 penny per month per sensor. Into the future CAT-M1 has been a valuable and welcome addition to the LPWA IoT landscape. Although it has arrived late to the party, it is well thought out and brings numerous advantages. It promises to be a reliable and well-maintained option. More akin to a Toyota Corolla than a pre-war Volkswagen Beetle.

Today, less than 5% of all data generated in the Consumer Packaged Goods (CPG) industry is analyzed for insights. This means that CPG manufacturing companies remain reactive rather than proactive in their approach to operations. Yet the answers to much sought after questions such as: “How can productivity be increased?, “How might operating costs be reduced?” And “How can the reliability of operations be improved?” are all within their grasp with the deployment of IIoT remote monitoring/condition monitoring. Yet the answers to much sought after questions such as“How can productivity be increased?” are within your grasp IIoT plays an important role in answering these questions because it enables CPG businesses to harness the richness of machine and production data over time, analyze it and gain insights to drive operational improvements. Condition monitoring of conveyor systems previously too costly to implement CPG production lines comprise of many small roller conveyor belts and hundreds of motors that drive these belts. Historically the problem for this industry was the cost of implementing condition-based monitoring on these motors was greater than the cost of the motors themselves. So motors were left to run to failure and only once the failure event had occurred would action be taken to replace them. This approach was crude and inefficient, and came with its own set of issues including: disruption, impact on productivity, wastage, and excess inventory. The end of roller conveyor motors running to failure With the emergence of IIoT, CPG manufacturers are now able to connect these motors to the Cloud for analysis using simple and very affordable wireless sensors. Condition monitoring of conveyor rollers, belt drives, bearings and other components of CPG machinery is now simpler and far more affordable. One simple IoT application for condition monitoring conveyors is to measure and monitor the temperature and vibration data from the conveyor motors themselves. Once monitoring has been implemented, trends such as wilder oscillations in vibration metrics and/or increases in temperature over time can be detected. Visualization of conveyor belt motor data over time yields insights By utilizing simple visual analytics it is possible for plant operators and managers to get answers to questions such as “Are all motors continuing to operate below a safe threshold in terms of vibration?”, “Are the motors exhibiting any unusual behavior in a sustained manner.” and “Is there a correlation with this in respect to temperature?” By studying the visual analytics, plant managers can quickly identify which conveyor motors are likely to fail and can schedule a planned shutdown to replace them. This is a very cost-effective and practical use of condition monitoring with IIoT to improve the cost of reliability. A bigger picture of the complete manufacturing environment At a higher level, this type of monitoring can also benefit the manufacturing company as a whole. Implementing IIoT condition monitoring solutions across multiple manufacturing facilities enables the comparison of each facility and its performance. Insights such as why one plant is more efficient than another or how operations might be scaled can be gleaned. IIoT monitoring, the Cloud and analytic technology offers manufacturing and production facilities a much bigger picture in terms of pathways to achieving a higher level of productivity and reliability of their operations.

The Zen series was designed as a data acquisition system for SCADA systems and PLC’s in the industrial arena. However it is quite different to the plethora of standard data acquisition products on the market. Much of the market is dominated by low cost, high sampling speed, multiplexed units. These were originally developed for controlled lab conditions and scientific use, and were typically connected to scientific packages like LabWindows™ and MATLAB. The Zen series architecture is built on industrial grade technology proven in the field for many years. So what’s the difference? First of all, the A/D type and sampling speeds are quite different. A PC card typically uses high speed SAR converters which have multiplexers on the front to increase channel count. Although you can get samples quicker, you may have to do a lot of post processing to get a usable reading. The multiplexer itself is not an ideal signal processing device and poses some challenges for the novice and expert alike. The issues relate to the time required for the inputs to settle on each multiplexer change, and how the input impedance of the signal can degrade performance. (Much has been written about this and is generally available, however it is beyond the scope of this paper to go into any further detail on this.) The analog industrial design engineer has known for many years that to get reliable results from signals that might travel ½ a mile through a plant normally requires a system that can distinguish low level signals from noise, which is sometimes an order or two larger than the signal itself. To combat this the integrating type of converters were invented. These include dual slope, voltage to frequency, and later the Sigma-delta converter. These A/D’s sacrifice signal bandwidth for noise rejection and rugged reliability. The Zen series has made use of the modern sigma delta A/D to become the workhorse of this new genre of SCADA accessories. However this is only the beginning of the story. Although the A/D is responsible for rejecting noisy signals like 50/60Hz hum, simply replacing the SAR converter with a sigma-delta converter in a multi-channel application would have little benefit. To really make a rugged industrial system requires every channel to be galvanically isolated from each other. This is exactly how the Zen series is designed. Every input channel is isolated magnetically and optically from all others. Each channel has its own A/D transformer and optocouplers, as well as important EMI filters. To really make a rugged industrial system requires every channel to be galvanically isolated from each other. Why use Isolation? Isolation solves many problems associated with industrial processes. Isolating power sources and sensor signals is the most effective method for eliminating undesirable ground loop currents and induced electrical noise. Some of the more common problems which isolation solves are: Cross Talk Cross talk is when the contents of one data acquisition channel appear on another. This can cause subtle to large measurement errors that can go undetected. The cause of this can be simply sharing a ground in where ground loop currents can flow depending on the size of the signal. This is converted to an unwanted voltage component by the impedance of the earth track. More subtly this can be due to a fast sampling multiplexer input capacitance and a “high” source impedance. Even a “high” impedance of only 100 ohms could be responsible for significant cross talk. Having an isolated channel with its own A/D stops these problems dead in their tracks. Cross talk is virtually unmeasurable between channels for isolated products in the Zen series. Read:  The drastic limitations of Sigfox and LoRa that nobody is talking about Common-Mode Voltage Each instrument will have a CMV specification relating the maximum voltage which can be tolerated on the inputs of channels relative to ground. A good way to visualize this is measuring a stack of 12V batteries typical in a telecom application. If you want to measure the cell voltage on top of the stack the negative of the A/D input will be 36V relative to the ground of the A/D. This is the common mode voltage. Now if, for example, the common mode voltage was rated at 50V, the system would be fine. However the + of the A/D in this case will be 48V – close to the 50V limit. If the voltage strays higher than the 50V limit due to noise or battery charging equipment, the CMV rating will be exceeded, which could distort and degrade the signal leading to an inaccurate reading or damage to the A/D. Having an isolated input practically eliminates this issue as the A/D ground will float up to the CMV. In this case the CMV limit will be the isolation break down voltage of the transformer and/or optocoupler. For example, the Zen series isolation breakdown barrier is above 3,000V AC, which is much higher than the expected CMV of most production applications. “The Zen series has broken the isolated price point to around $50 per channel – now there is no excuse not to isolate.” Common Mode Rejection Every time a measurement is made in the presence of a CMV a loss of accuracy will be encountered. The question is not if, it is how much. Going back to the stacked battery system we are trying to measure a 12V signal on top of a 36V common mode voltage. If you read the spec of your instrument you should find a DC CMR ratio. For a typical PC card A/D this could be 80dB. Now: 80dB = 20 log (VCMV in/ CCMV out) 80dB = 20 log (12V DC/ CCMV out) 10,000 = 12V DC/VCMV out VCMV out = 1.2mV error All in all, not too much of an error. However, if we now change the measurement by measuring the current drawn in the 48V system by using a 20mV shunt, the results now look like this: 80dB = 10,000 = 48V / VCMV out Error = 4.8mV (or 24%!) For a typical isolated system the DC CMR would be in the vicinity of 160dB or 100,000,000. Or in this case, 480nV – practically nothing. To add to this, AC common mode voltages are even more prevalent than DC CMV’s when you take into account noise sources such as unsnubbered contactors, motor brushes, inductive conducted and radiated electromagnetic fields (EMFs). Again, an isolated system has many advantages over a non-isolated system, as the isolated system will float to the common mode voltage. It’s not uncommon for an isolated conditioner to be able to measure the temperature with a thermocouple which is directly connected to a live mains feed. That is, the T.C. will be floating at 230V AC and still give a measurement accurate to 0.1°C! Furthermore, because high speed multiplexers are not used in the Zen series input modules, that the designer has the freedom of not having to worry about increasing the capacitance of the input. This opens the way for using modern feed through capacitors in common and differential mode EMI filters. These are designed to reject wideband noise and improve the CMRR. Not only that, but an inherent virtue of the isolated input is that the loop areas of any sensor wiring are kept to a minimum, reducing pickup. Conclusions The isolation of industrial signals preserves and protects valuable measurements, as well as expensive equipment, from the effects of ground loops, transient power surges, noise and other hazards present in industrial environments. In the past the only reason to purchase a non-isolating system was cost. Of course it is less expensive to have only a single A/D than 16 A/D’s, as in our 16 channel Zen units. However the cost of commissioning a system, and trying to work out cross talk issues and potential ground loop problems, will soon dissolve any savings made. That, combined with the added multitude of other protection benefits of an isolated system, really points to only one solution for the wise system integrator:  Isolate, Isolate, and if in doubt – Isolate again .

Energy costs for manufacturing facilities can be as high as 50% of OpEx (operating expenditure) so it is in the interest of all industrial companies to focus at least some of their efforts on energy management. Reducing energy consumption in your manufacturing plant has two advantages: significant savings in operating costs plus a reduced energy footprint – being more environmentally responsible is a good thing. Benchmark your current usage habits Of course, the first step in reducing energy costs is to get clear on your current energy consumption, and which areas of the business are using the most, and at what time. Unfortunately, not enough manufacturing companies are able to gain these insights because they simply aren’t monitoring their energy usage. Without real-time visibility of your varying energy needs, you cannot gain those significant insights which may translate into future operational changes for cost-saving. Installing smart meters provides the necessary real-time monitoring across different processes within manufacturing units. They measure current, voltage, units (Kwh) and power factor and this data can be collated in an  IoT Cloud Edge Gateway  and published to the Cloud. Limit the amount of data collected A Cloud Edge Gateway can “do math” to process data at the Cloud’s Edge, this has several benefits: Data can be processed in almost real-time so any action required is taken immediately rather than data making the round trip to the Cloud and back (this could be minutes or even hours) before action is taken. Sensitive data can be kept within the existing network, maintaining the integrity of your company’s security without further investment or additional hardware and avoiding issues related to VPNs, DNS or firewalls. Avoids a “data avalanche”. Stemming the flow of data and allowing only the vital and meaningful information to be carried to its final destination in the Cloud is more manageable and useful for human analysts. Filtering data at the Cloud’s Edge reduces bandwidth and therefore bandwidth costs. Not a big issue when you have 5 devices but when you have 500 or 5,000, it all adds up. The IoT platform can visualize this data into various charts and graphs to reveal peak demand, time-of-day spikes, seasonal trends, consumption patterns and other vital insights for each business unit/location. This programmatic approach means old school manual entry/pen-and-paper recording of data can be abandoned and cast aside as the inefficient, time-consuming and large-margin-of-error activity that it is. Uncovering potential savings tends to happen quite quickly after deployment as even basic information can be used to great benefit by the manufacturing company. Getting started with your IoT energy monitoring trial Begin with a pilot initiative monitoring one process or line, this way the required investment is kept low and the number of points of measurement is kept to a focused amount. This will also assist you in getting buy-in from your manager. It’s likely this will be viewed as a pet-project for your department and a sandbox to keep you engaged. For you it’s the chance to be seen as a pro-active employee interested in embracing new technologies and exploring new avenues for improvement and cost-saving in your department. Be clear on what you’re monitoring and why. What are you trying to accomplish? Be as specific as you can with this as “cost savings” is woefully vague. How much, in what ways and by when? Define your KPIs in discussions with your wider team, and remember to start simple and small –complexity and scaling can come later. How do you need to connect? Everyone’s equipment is different. Some may already have sensors, and some may need “sensoring” first. What signals do you need to collate? TC, RTD, mA, V, mV, Potentiometer, Frequency, Pulse, Counter? Get those answers then consider the physical connections you require: RS232, RS485, WiFi, Ethernet, Cellular connection, or Bluetooth. How many signals and from where? A small number of signals and signal types means your energy monitoring initiative will likely be straightforward. However, if you wish to monitor multiple signals from multiple machines you may want to consider adding a gateway device to concentrate all the signals in one place. Putting the data to use After connecting your equipment and getting the data flowing, visualizing the information and putting it into a meaningful context will reveal insights and opportunities by studying your equipment’s/line’s current “energy consumption profile”. Once enough data has been collected, you’ll get clarity on the energy usage fundamentals of your initiative and what types of changes are needed. Go for the small easy wins and perhaps one or two medium-term goals which may be more involved. Expanding your trial While conducting your energy monitoring trials it may be evident that you need to measure more than originally thought. Often these further requirements become obvious once you’re up and running rather than in the planning stage, this is new territory for everyone so don’t feel bad if something gets overlooked. Unless these additions prevent you from moving forward, save them for Phase 2 of your trial. From monitoring to managing Inevitably, successful energy monitoring trials grow and evolve into energy management policies for your business. Once trials conclude you can present the findings to your wider team and collectively draw some conclusions. Depending on the outcome this initiative may expand to further areas of the business, grow to monitor more machines or go deeper to conduct more sophisticated monitoring. It’s likely that once you understand the variables which affect your power bill they’ll be an argument for automating and controlling these to make your facility more energy efficient and to optimize the energy that is used (doing more with less). The checklist Sensors Energy meters Edge Gateway (depending on number of signals) Edge processing device (if not part of gateway features) Cloud Service Provider Data Visualization interface (dashboard) Considerations Try to keep your trial deployment as straightforward as possible and favor “Out-of-the-box” solutions  over others which may require you to become an expert on every element in the chain from sensor to Cloud to dashboard. Turnkey solutions are easier to pitch to management as they are provided by a singular vendor making procurement, deployment, troubleshooting and ongoing support far easier than dealing with multiple vendors. Aim for simple installations with good connectivity and potential for scaling/expansion. Also pay attention to the ease-of-use of the software/dashboard, there are many that are powerful but fewer that are intuitive, graphically pleasing and user-centric. Your choice of software is dependent on your choice of hardware so ensure they are compatible with each other. An all-in-one vertically integrated solution If you are attracted to a single solution which includes Edge Gateway, Cloud Service and web-based dashboard then  Define’s Energy Monitoring solution  should be on your list of possible options. Straight forward set-up of the IoT gateway device, Define Cloud Services and data visualization dashboard means you can be up and running within minutes rather than months. The availability of APIs within the solution enables connection to internal business systems such as your ERP or CRM and external data sources such as Google maps, weather data or market spot pricing, making it even easier to take your first steps towards energy monitoring and management within your facility.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)  are organic chemicals that are damaging to human health. Many VOCs are found in building materials and home improvement products and can off-gas (release their harmful emissions) into indoor air. Due to the risk to human health, VOC level compliance in consumer products is patrolled vigorously by Public Health Organizations. But in the recent past some companies have attempted to put profits before the health of their customers and it hasn’t turned out well for them. Here are some examples: Lumber Liquidators settles VOC non-compliance in flooring lawsuit for $36 Million dollars In 2017 Virginia-based Lumber Liquidators agreed to pay $36 Million to settle 2 class-action lawsuits accusing the company of selling laminate flooring containing dangerous levels of toxins. North America’s largest specialty retailer of hardwood flooring was heavily criticized in a  2015 report by CBSs 60 Minutes  for selling Chinese manufactured product that contained nearly 20 times the legal level of formaldehyde. It was estimated that “tens of thousands” of households in California and “hundreds of thousands” across the United States had installed the flooring. The report further alleged that the wood was falsely labelled as being CARB Phase 2-compliant, referring to the California Air Resources Board, which sets the standards for formaldehyde emissions in world flooring. Formaldehyde is a VOC and known carcinogen. It can cause myeloid leukemia and nasopharyngeal cancer at high levels and respiratory issues and well as eye, nose and throat irritation at low levels. Lumber Liquidators founder Tom Sullivan initially denied any wrong doing by the company, even going as far as  posting a rebuttal on Forbes.com  claiming a short-sellers conspiracy and that “Lumber Liquidators products are safe and only 15% of inventory is laminate from China”. But independent testing of a wide variety of samples showed the Chinese laminate averaged seven times the state standard and some were close to 20 times. Even today, the scandal continues to dog the company: as recently as Jan 21, 2020 shares in Lumber Liquidators Holding Inc slid about 10% after Morgan Stanley downgraded the stock to the equivalent of sell, citing competitive and operational headwinds stemming from the 2015 fallout. Benjamin Moore and 3 others settle allegations of misleading customers over VOC levels in “VOC-free” paints In 2017 four paint companies agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charges that they deceptively marketed products as emission-free or containing zero VOCs. The four companies: Benjamin Moore & Co, ICP Construction Inc, YOLO Colorhouse and Imperial Paints LLC were accused of misleading consumers over the VOC levels in their paint products. Some promotions even made explicit safe claims regarding babies, children and pregnant women all of which the FTC said were unsubstantiated. All of the paint products emitted VOCs during the painting process and while drying and the FTC said the companies did not possess the appropriate scientific evidence to prove their paints would not emit chemicals that could materially harm consumers. The FTC also claimed that the companies circulated misleading information to retailers selling their products leading customers to believe they may have been safer than they actually were. The wording in their adverts, packaging and TV commercials was called into question. Benjamin Moore’s TV ad showed painters in a nursery while a baby slept and included the voiceover: “If you want a paint with no harsh fumes; if you want a paint that is safer for your family and the environment, only this can. Natura by Benjamin Moore”. Imperial Paints claimed that its Lullaby paint was the “safest paint available” and “did not contain toxic chemicals”, and was “Newborn baby-safe. Pregnant mom-safe. Safe enough for kids to paint with.” ICP Construction claimed its Muralo BreatheSafe Paints were “free of VOCs” and “formulated with no harmful solvents and based on sustainable chemistry technology.” Ads claimed BreatheSafe was “ideal for nursing homes, schools, babies’ rooms and health care facilities.” To make matters worse both Benjamin Moore and ICP Construction displayed environmental seals on their packaging without disclosing to consumers that they had “invented” these and awarded them to themselves. In Benjamin Moore’s case, the company placed a “Green Promise” seal on its Natura paints but did not reveal that the official looking seal was in fact of the company’s own creation. ICP included an “Eco Assurance” logo on its BreatheSafe paints, giving the impression that the products were endorsed or certified by an independent third-party. In reality, the seal was created by ICP marketing department. The changes that were ordered for settling the case In settling the FTC charges, the companies agreed to four provisions designed to ensure they did not engage in similar conduct in the future. The companies were: Prohibited from making unqualified emission-free and VOC-free claims, unless both content and emissions are actually zero, or emissions are at trace levels, beginning at application and thereafter. Prohibited from making claims about emission, VOC levels, odor, and other environmental or health benefits, unless they are true and not misleading, and unless the companies have competent and reliable scientific evidence to back them up. Barred from providing third parties with the means of making false, unsubstantiated, or misleading representations about material facts regarding paints. Ordered to correct current unsubstantiated claims by sending letters to distributors, instructing them to stop using existing marketing materials and providing stickers or placards to correct misleading claims appearing on product packaging or labelling. Home Depot USA settles lawsuit for $8 Million over illegal VOC levels in paint In April 2013, Home Depot USA agreed to settle a lawsuit over VOC paint claims for $8 Million. The lawsuit filed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) alleged that the company sold thousands of gallons of paint and architectural coating that contained an illegal amount of VOCs – exceeding the limit of 50g of VOC per liter. The lawsuit was initially filed against Home Depot in July 2011. It came after Air Quality Management District (AQMD) inspectors found noncompliant paints at more than two dozen stores. AQMD said that the products were available at stores even after Home Depot management had been notified of the problem and that some of the products had been marked down for quick sale. Prior to the lawsuit, Home Depot had undergone SCAQMD investigations between September 2009 and April 2010; the agency had found violations in over 15 locations. SCAQMD alleged that Home Depot had continued to sell paint laced with illegal amount of VOCs even though it promised to have corrected the problem following a warning by the agency.