Home

Products

Solutions

Support

Contact Us

About Us

Philosophy
History
Clients
Partners
Resources
News
Newsletters
January 2006 -
February 2006 -
March 2006 -
April 2006 -
May 2006 -
June 2006 -
July 2006 -
August 2006 -
September 2006 -
October 2006 -
November 2006 -
December 2006 -
January 2007 -
February 2007 -
March 2007 -
April 2007 -
May 2007 -
June 2007 -
July 2007 -
August 2007 -
September 2007 -
October 2007 -
November 2007 -
December 2007 -
Subscribe -

Event Calendar
Careers
Privacy Policy

About Us

 

 

<- BACK to Newsletters Home

TiPS Newsletter - December 2006


Tuning In to a Better Frequency Analysis


We have lots of hallway conversations about alarm management here at the office. Recently, we were talking about performance benchmarks based on alarm activity. One of us jokingly suggested that beating an alarm activity benchmark is easy, just suppress all the alarms. You'd have a nice, quiet control room and your alarm activity reports would look fantastic! Of course, the operating team would be permanently paranoid, but hey - you're meeting your alarm performance goals - right?

That example's a bit extreme, but does a good job of illustrating how evaluating a unit's alarm performance using a rudimentary data analysis can be misleading.

So - If running a basic "top 10" report isn't good enough, what do you do? Fortunately, there are some simple ways to tune data analysis to produce results that are more indicative of a unit's alarm health.

Typically, you want to distill alarm analysis down to those alarms that truly impact the operating team's workload. From a purely data standpoint, correlating alarms with operator actions is a good way to add intelligence to an analysis. It's particularly valuable if you can filter the analysis to only include alarms with correlated operator moves.

In LogMate, this would be done using a modified "Related" analysis. The traditional use for a Related analysis is to find duplicate or redundant alarms. With a simple setting change, it will flag alarms with related actions and return only those alarms.

An alternative would be to manually identify either the alarms that are or are not important to operations and filtering the analysis accordingly. This is more time consuming, but can be more accurate.

This is a very valuable look at alarm data because it's identifying those alarms that really get the operators moving. It not only produces opportunities to tune alarms - it also highlights parts of the process that might benefit from better automation - all with an eye on reducing manual control moves and ultimately reducing variance in the process.

Talk Back on AlarmManagement.com

TiPS User Conference


Build a Stronger Automation Foundation
April 17-19, 2007
Marriott Convention Center
Austin, TX

The 2007 TiPS User Conference is coming to Austin, TX on April 17-19, 2007. Rich training sessions and presentations from industry leadership will ensure that all attendees leave energized and motivated to improve their operations.

Visit the conference website