SMART TRANSMITTERS - DIGITAL VS ANALOG

SMART TRANSMITTERS - THE FIELD SOLUTION

ROBERT L. WILSON
Honeywell Inc.
Industrial Controls Division
1100 Virginia Drive
Fort Washington, PA 19034

In 1983, higher levels of microprocessor integration permitted the

introduction of ST 3000 - the worlds first smart transmitter with digital electronics and the standard 4-2OmA transmission.
Since their introduction, smart transmitters - although selling at
a significant premium, - have been the fastest growing process
control segment. In the last 2-3 years, a number of smart sensors
and transmitters have been introduced worldwide and it now
seems assured that all future sensorkransmitter designs will be
smart.

Abstract-This paper will define Smart, review the advantages

of smart transmitters vs. conventional transmitters, and look at
key differences between competitive offerings. It will also
demonstrate the superiority and benefits of transmitters
operating in the digital communications mode and why all the
excitement about the coming International Field Bus Standard
(SP50).

WHY THE TREND TO SMART TRANSMITTERS?

Simply because a truly smart transmitter offers:

EVOLUTION OF THE PROCESS CONTROL PROBLEM

Accuracy improvement of at least 2: 1.
Stability improvement under varying operating conditions
(temperature, static pressure, etc.) of 3:l to 15:1.
Much greater rangeability - the range of spans over
which the transmitter will maintain specified accuracy and
stability performance.
Status information (validity)
Greater ease of specification and use.
Greater inherent reliability.
Significantly lower costs of ownership, operation and
maintenance.

Throughout the history of industrial instrumentation prior to the

1960s, recorders and controllers were considered to be the
limiting factor in improving process control. In 1958,
introduction of the first complete control system utilizing 2-wire
4-20mA transmission signals improved the situation significantly
and spurred the growth of control rooms covering more and
more process loops.
This was a major advancement but, through the early 1970s, the
biggest problem in large processing industries was still
considered to be the control room equipment. The stand-alone
miniature electric indicators, recorders and controllers prevalent
at the time were inaccurate and unreliable and required huge
control rooms. Equally important, the many operators required
to man this equipment still could not effectively control the
complete process - particulary during upsets.

In its simplest terms, there are three reasons why a user would
justify selecting one product over another:
Greater probability of improving the quality of his end
product,
Greater personnel or plant safety.
Lower total end-product costs.

Subsequent attempts at centralized control of the process with

large computers was equally unrewarding since computer failures
(frequent at the time) could shut down large portions of the
plant.

Except for the more technically innovative users, smart

transmitters were originally applied to the more demanding or
critical applications where the higher up-front costs were not an
important consideration. In almost every case, early users have
since upgraded other applications, or standardized on smart
transmitters entirely - including applications where high
accuracy is not a major factor.

SMART CONTROLLERS THE CONTROL ROOM SOLUTION

In 1975, the emerging field of microprocessor technology
permitted the introduction of TDC 2000 - a fully digital system
with distributed controllers, a greatly improved man-machine
interface that permitted relatively few operators to control the
entire process much more effectively, and a high level of control
security. The distributed controllers handled no more than eight
loops, and automatic-switchover back-up controllers provided
uninterruptable automatic control in the event of a failure.

In some areas of hazardous use, this was simply because the

remote diagnostics eliminated the need to send a crew into the
hazardous area to check out the transmitter. In most cases,
however, this was due to a recognition that smart transmitters
were much more cost effective than conventional transmitters.
In one published study, a major petrochemical company reported
that they had reduced the contractors installation and start-up
allowance for smart transmitters (vs conventional transmitters)
by 50%, and that more than 80% of all transmitter maintenance
work orders could be eliminated or significantly reduced by the
use of smart transmitters.

Since that time, TDC 2000 and similar Distributed Control

Systems have essentially eliminated the earlier control room
problems of inaccuracy, unreliability and poor operator control.
But the success of such modern control rooms refocused
attention on what then became the weak link in the process the field sensors and transmitters. These devices were equally
inaccurate and unreliable, but were also inaccessible,
inconvenient and costly to operate and maintain.
CH2764-9/89/0000-0061

$1.OO @ 1989 IEEE

A Honeywell survey of major users concluded that total start-up,

operating and maintenance reductions averaged about $2,000.00

61

signal on top of the continuously broadcast 4-2OmA PV signal.

This does not disrupt the process, but is considered a less
secure method.

per transmitter over a five-year period. Thats 5-10 times the cost
premium for a smart transmitter.

DEFINITION OF A SMART TRANSMITTER

ANALOG TRANSMITTER PERFORMANCE CONVENTIONAL VS SMART

There is no industry standard definition, but certainly a truly

smart transmitter should have the following characteristicsand
capabilities:

The great majority of differential pressure measurements are

covered by the range from 1-400 of water. Turndown reflects
the total range over which a single transmitter is designed to
operate and is a major consideration. With conventional
transmitters, a specific model must be selected to fit a specific
application in advance. If an error is made, or if the flow rate is
different than predicted, or if the flow rate subsequentlychanges
significantly,the transmitter must be removed and a different
model substituted. Smart transmitters are much more universal.
You can usually order one model, install it anywhere and re-span
(without recalibration) anytime.

Microprocessor-basedwith predominately digital

electronics.
Remote communication and configuration.
The ability to continuously monitor its operating
conditions and correct itself for potential errors such as
non-linearity, ambient temperature influence, static
pressure influence, etc.
High turndown and reduction or elimination of re-ranging
errors.
Continuous diagnostics of its sensing element (i.e., meter
body for pressure transmitters), and electronics as well as
the loop power supply and wiring.

Table I compares the turndown ratio for Conventional vs Smart

DP transmitters. Note that four conventional transmitters are
required to cover the 1-400 inH,O range of the ST 3000 smart
transmitter.

VARIATIONS IN SMART TRANSMITTERS

TABLE I
TURNDOWN RATIOS:
SMART VS CONVENTIONAL TRANSMITTERS

There are several truly smart transmitters currently on the market

that meet, to a greater or lesser degree, the above criteria. As
might be expected, some offer specificationsthat are
conservatively rated while others are considerably less
conservative making it incumbent on the potential user to select
carefully.

Min-Max Spans
(inH,O)
ST 3000 DP:

On the other hand, there are the not-so-smart or what we might

call pseudo-smart transmitters. These are simply conventional
transmitters with digital electronics and remote communication
and configuration. Therefore, they meet the first and second
criteria above, but are not self-correcting,do not meet the
turndowdre-ranging criteria, and have limited diagnostics that
do not include the sensor/meter body. Technical literature for
those pseudo-smart transmitters typically indicate that they can
be remotely re-ranged - presumably without recalibration.
However, it is left to the user to discover that, although this is
possible, very large errors will result.

Conventional:

Turndown
Ratio

1-400

400: 1

1-6
5-30
25-150
125-750

6: 1
6: 1
6: 1
6: 1

Almost all transmitters specify error in 070 Span. However,

whats really significant is the error of the reading currently being
taken. Consider in Table 11, for example, a transmitter spanned
at 400 inH,O and with a Reference Accuracy of 0.1070 Span. As
a Vo Span, the error is always 0.1%. However, as a percent of
Reading, the error is 0.1 Vo when reading at 400 inH,O, 0.2% at
200 inH,O, 0.4% at 100 inH,O, etc. For this reason, the errors
in subsequent Tables are specified in 070 Reading.

Therefore, these pseudo-smart transmitters do not offer the wide

range of performance, convenience and cost advantages of their
truly smart cousins. What you get is little or no performance
improvement and a very limited set of diagnostic and
configuration capabilities.

TABLE I1
COMPARING To SPAN VS To READING FOR A
TRANSMITTER SPANNED AT 400 INCHES OF WATER

One other significant difference in analog (4-2OmA) smart

transmitters is the digital protocol used when communicating
between the transmitter and its hand-held communicator. Some
transmitters (i.e., ST 3000) interrupt the PV signal during
communication and transmit a low baud rate, serial, digital pulse
stream varying between approximately 4-2OmA. This is
considered a very secure method, but has the disadvantage of
requiring that the loop be in manual during communication.
When communicating in the digital mode, this is not a
disadvantage since the PV signal is broadcast continuously.

Reading
400

200
100
50

25

Alternate methods include the high frequency FSK (frequency

shift keying) method which superimposesthe communication

62

Error
Span)

(070

0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1

Error
(070 Reading)
0.1

0.2
0.4
0.8

1.6

well. When reading at 50% of span, the digital performance (for

the specified conditions) is twice as good as performance of
ST 3000 in the analog mode and 14 times as good as a
conventional transmitter.

Table 111 compares total performance (error) for conventional vs

smart transmitters when exposed to an ambient temperature
change of 50F and a static pressure change of 1000 psi.
TABLE I11
PERFORMANCE OF CONVENTIONAL VS
SMART ANALOG TRANSMITTERS

TABLE IV
PERFORMANCE OF DIGITAL VS
ANALOG TRANSMITTERS

Conditions: Span at 200 inH,O; Reading at I00 inH20

(Error in % Reading)
Conventional

ST 3000
Analog

Reference Accuracy

0.40

0.20

Ambient Temperature
Influence (50F)

3.20

0.35

Static Pressure Influence

(1K psi)

2.19

Total (Worst Case)

5.79

0.95

Total (RSS)

3.90

0.57

Conditions: Span at 200 inH20;Reading at 100 inH,O

(Error in % Reading)
Conventional

ST3000
Analog

ST3000
Digital

Reference Accuracy

0.40

0.20

0.15

Ambient Temperature
Influence (50'F)

3.20

0.35

0.13

Static Pressure Influence

(1K psi)

2.19

0.40

0.20

Total (Worst Case)

5.79

0.95

0.48

Total (RSS)

3.90

0.57

0.28

0.40

Note in this example (far from worst case) that the RSS (root
sum square) errors for conventional transmitters are seven times
those for the analog ST 3000.

However, this does not demonstrate the major performance

advantage of ST 3000 in the digital mode. Since analog
transmitters specify performance errors in terms of Vo of Span, it
is important to set the span or upper range value of an analog
transmitter as low as possible. But when ST 3000 is operated in
the digital mode, it becomes a Yo of Reading device similar to
magnetic flow meters, positive displacement meters and most
precision laboratory instruments.

DIGITAL VS ANALOG TRANSMITTER PERFORMANCE

Significant additional performance improvements can be realized
when operating a smart transmitter in the digital communication
mode rather than the analog (4-2OmA) mode. Since all smart
transmitters utilize digital electronics, they must pass their digital
signal through a D/A converter to transmit the 4-2OmA analog
signal. This D/A converter is a major source of error and it is
by-passed when communicating in the digital mode.

For this reason, a digital ST 3000 can be spanned at its upper

range limit and left there regardless of the range of
measurements to be made. The impact of this on performance is
shown by Table V where, under similar operating conditions and
reading at 2.5% of span, a digital ST 3000 is 10 times as accurate
as an analog ST 3000 and 70 times as accurate as a conventional
transmitter.

Table IV is an expansion of Table 111 with a column added to

show the relative performance of ST 3000 in the digital mode as

TABLE V
PERFORMANCE OF DIGITAL VS ANALOG TRANSMITTERS AT A FIXED SPAN

Conditions: Span at 400 inH20;Reading at 400, 100, I O inH20

(Error in Yo Reading)
Reading at 400 inH,O

Reading at 100 inH,O

Reading at 10 inH,O

Conven- ST3000 ST3000

tional
Analog Digital

Conven- ST3000 ST3000

tional
Analog Digital

Conven- ST3000 ST3000

tional
Analog Digital

Reference Accuracy

0.20

0.10

0.075

0.80

0.40

0.15

8.00

4.00

0.30

Ambient Temperature (Influence

1.20

0.175

0.125

4.80

0.70

0.125

48.00

7.00

0.33

Static Pressure Influence (1K psi)

1.48

0.20

0.20

5.92

0.80

0.20

59.20

8.00

1.00

Total (Worst Case)

2.68

0.475

0.40

11.52

1.90

0.475

115.20

19.00

1.63

Total (RSS)

1.92

0.28

0.25

7.66

1.10

0.28

76.60

11.36

1.09

(50'F)

63

This effect is shown graphically in Fig. 1 which compares

Reference Accuracy for both a conventional transmitter and a
typical analog smart transmitter with ST 3000 operating in the
digital mode. With all three transmitters spanned at 400 inH,O

and reading at 25 inHIO, the Reference Accuracy errors for

conventional, analog smart, and digital ST 3000 transmitters are
3.2, 1.6 and 0.15% of Reading respectively.

Comparison Of Reading Error

0.8

0.7

\
0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.
0.075% Span or 0.15Oh Reading whichever is smaller

25

50

100

200

Reading (Inches of Water)

Fig. 1. Comparison of reading error

64

3CO

400

A tire press application provides an excellent example of how this

capability can be utilized. Three pressures are measured or
controlled during the tread forming process: control at
approximately one psi which centers the tire in the press and is
the most critical, control at 5-8 psi shaping pressure and a read at
350 psi which forces the tire into the mold.

More important to this particular application is that the

maximum error of 0.05 psi is well within requirements and,
therefore, only one transmitter is required for the application
instead of two.

OTHER BENEFITS OF DIGITAL TRANSMITTERS

In this process, two conventional transmitters are normally used
to measure these widely different pressures. One conventional
transmitter, of course, is out of the question. Assuming a
possible 50 F temperature change, a conventional transmitter
spanned to cover 350 psi and measuring one psi could have
errors as high as 8 psi or 800% of Reading.

There are a number of other very important benefits of operating

a smart transmitter in the digital mode:
Lower Drift Rate
Elimination of Loop Errors
Continuous Diagnostics
Real Time Status Information (Bad PV)
Bi-directional Communication
Remote Configuration from the Operator Interface
Dual-range Displays
Access to a Secondary Variable

A single smart analog transmitter will have much better

performance, but the resulting error of one psi will still exceed
the required accuracy of 0.1 psi. But lets make the comparison
between ST 3000 configured to operate in the analog mode vs the
digital mode.
TABLE VI
USING ONE ST 3000 TRANSMITTER INSTEAD OF TWO
TO READ WIDELY DIFFERENT PRESSURES
Smart
Analog

Smart
Digital

Span (psi)

400

400

Highest Reading (psi)

350

350

Lowest Control Point (psi)

Reference Accuracy at 1 psi (psi)

0.4

0.02

Ambient Temperature Influence per

50F at 1 psi (psi)

0.7

0.03

Lower drift rate is achievable since the output D/A converter is

by-passed or eliminated. For ST 3000, this improves the drift rate
specificationfrom 0.06% URL per year to 0.02% URL. In
addition, the loop errors associated with the dropping resistor
and the A/D input to the digital receiving device are eliminated.
This means that the total loop accuracy under Reference
Conditions is twice that for a smart analog transmitter anywhere
within its operating region.

Total Error at 1 psi:

Yo Span
Vo Reading
psi

If a transmitter is communicating in the analog mode, this

presumes that the receiving device cannot interpret the digital
protocol and, therefore, only the PV signal (4-2OmA) is being
transmitted. Other information is available only on demand from
a hand-held communicator by connecting across the transmitter
signal lines.
In the digital mode, diagnostics are available at the operator
interface but, equally important, transmitter status information
(also known as Bad PV) can be continuously displayed to
alert the operator immediately of a fault condition.

0.01
5.00

0.28
110.00
1.10

0.05

Bi-directional communication provides for remote transmitter

configuration directly from the operator interface and essentially
lets the operator manage the complete loop.

Lets assume that both transmitters are spanned for 400 psi
(although, in the digital mode, ST 3000 could be spanned at its
upper range limit of 500 psi without influencing performance)
and that there is an annual ambient temperature variation of
50F.

Since ST 3000 can always be spanned at its upper range limit

without performance degradation, the operator interface can be
configured to display not only the normal operating range, but
the total range as well. During process upsets, this provides the
operator with an indication of just how far the process variable
has exceeded the normal limits.

The appropriate ST 3000 transmitter, when operating in the

digital mode, has a normal Reference Accuracy specificationof
0.15% Reading from 20 to 500 psi. When reading below the
turndown point of 20 psi, the specificationis 0.05 0.1
(20/RDG) in 070 Reading. Similarly, the specification for
Ambient Temperature Influence is 0.125% Reading above 50 psi.
For readings below that, the specificationis 0.075 0.05
(5O/RDG) in 70Reading.

In addition, the operator interface can be configured to display a

secondary variable from the transmitter such as (for ST 3000) the
meter body temperature.

WHATS SP50. AND WHY ALL THE EXCITEMENT?

Table VI demonstrates the enormous improvement in
performance that can be obtained by using ST 3000 in the digital
mode - particularly when widely different measurements must
be made. Note particularly that when spanned at 400 psi and
reading at one psi, the total error for the digital ST 3000 is only
0.01%Span.

SP50 is an acronym for ISA Standards and Practices Committee

50 which is made up of key international users and suppliers.
Simply stated, SP50 is chartered to develop a digital
communications protocol that is:

65

Other than What is it?, the most frequently asked question is

When will we see some real impact?

Non-proprietary (open)
Comprehensive
Universal

There has always been a doubt in some circles whether an

international standard could ever be agreed to. However, recent
progress seems to make this more of a probability that a
possibility. An optimistic forecast is as follows:

A number of other standards committees in other parts of the

world are pursuing essentially the same task. However, since key
members of these international committees are in positions of
power and influence on the SP50 committee, it seems likely that
their forthcoming SP50.standard will be adopted as the
international IEC Fieldbus Standard.

1989: A first draft covering the Physical Layer (the first

five of the above criteria) will be circulated for review and
some product development will begin.
Mid-1990: General specificationsadequate to finalize the
development of compatible products will be approved.
Late 1990: Commercial chip sets utilizing the Fieldbus
protocol will begin to appear.
1991: The first products offering Fieldbus compatibility
will reach the market.

For many years 4-2OmA and 3-15 psi have functioned as open
protocols universally adopted by manufacturers and users
worldwide. Unfortunately, such is not the case in the digital
world. Each smart transmitter manufacturer has his own unique
and proprietary digital protocol which greatly reduces the users
flexibility in configuring his control system with products from
different vendors and, if allowed to continue, could severely
hamper technological progress in the field.

SHOULD USERS WORRY ABOUT THE TRANSITION?

Adoption of a fieldbus standard will, therefore, provide the
mechanism for compatibility of digital instrumentation, and
thereby ease and accelerate the evolution to digitally integrated
loops. The technological advances and enhanced digital
integration that will undoubtedly result will pave the way for
major improvements in future process control systems.

There is probably no need for user concern about the timing and
transition problems. For many years, large plants will operate
with different segments utilizing analog, propriety digital or
fieldbus protocol.
Honeywells migration path is already set, and it is assumed that
other major process control equipment manufacturers will follow
a similar path.

STATUS OF THE SP50 FIELDBUS STANDARD

Several smart transmitter manufacturers have pressured the
committee to adopt their own proprietary protocols as the SP50
standard. Others, such as Honeywell, have taken the position
that no existing protocol will meet SP50 objectives and have
worked to achieve the best possible overall standard.

The present transmitter electronicsboard and interface

boards for TDC-3000, PLCs and other receiving devices
utilizing user-selectable analog or proprietary DE protocol
will continue to be available.
Alternate electronics and interface boards will be made
available offering user-selectable DE or Fieldbus
protocols.
All existing transmitters and control room equipment will
be field upgradeable at a moderate cost to utilize the
Fieldbus protocol.

It has now been decided by SP50 that no existing protocol will be

accepted as is, and this has paved the way for more rapid
progress by the committee.
The standard itself will be very complex. It will include such
criteria as:

SUMMARY
Network Topology
Modulation Techniques
Data Rates
Redundancy Requirements
Physical Media Types
Access Control (masterlslave vs peerlpeer or token
passing)
Message Format for User Interface

Since 1975, microprocessor-baseddigital electronics have

revolutionized process control. That year, the control room
revolution began with fully digital Distributed Control Systems.
In 1983 smart transmitters were introduced with digital
electronics and analog communication protocol that greatly
improved performance and lowered user costs. In 1987, the first
smart transmitters appeared with user-selectable analog or
proprietary digital protocol that provided the many advantages
of digitally-integrated control systems. These transmitters are
now rapidly replacing conventional transmitters.

In addition to the non-proprietary decision noted above, a

number of other decisions have been made:

By 1991, or soon thereafter, analog control loops will begin to

decline more rapidly as transmitters and receiving devices reach
the market with low-cost chip sets offering IEC Fieldbus
compatibility. It is expected that this will usher in a new era of
enhanced functionality and user benefits that will have a
dramatic effect on Process Control.

The protocol will be digital, serial, bi-directional and

multi-drop.
Two Field Buses: H1 with a moderate baud rate (3 1.25
Kb/Second) for process control; and H2 for
manufacturing automation with a higher baud rate (up to
1 Mb/Second).
Fieldbus control will be via an amalgamation of the
masterlslave and token passing methods.

66