U.S. patent application number 12/758134 was filed with the patent office on 2010-07-22 for system and method for carrying out an inspection or maintenance operation with compliance tracking using a handheld device.
Invention is credited to Albert Ho, Daniar Hussain, Adam Ierymenko, Marc Siegel, Christopher Tossing, Jeffery York.
Application Number | 20100185549 12/758134 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 42239966 |
Filed Date | 2010-07-22 |
United States Patent
Application |
20100185549 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
York; Jeffery ; et
al. |
July 22, 2010 |
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CARRYING OUT AN INSPECTION OR MAINTENANCE
OPERATION WITH COMPLIANCE TRACKING USING A HANDHELD DEVICE
Abstract
The present invention is a system and method for inspections and
compliance verification of industrial equipment using a handheld
device. An inspector first segments an inspected component into
logical inspection points. The inspector then scans a unique
machine-readable tag, such as an RFID tag, with a handheld device
at each logical inspection point. The inspector then takes a media
sample, such as a digital photograph, of the physical component
referred to by each corresponding logical inspection point. Then
the inspector associates the media samples with the corresponding
scan of the unique machine-readable tag. For each of the actions
the inspector carries out on the handheld device, a timestamp is
added that represents evidence of a date and a time of physical
visitation to the associated logical inspection point. The
inspector may then annotate the media samples in such ways that
substantiate inspector statements of problems with inspected
components found during inspection.
Inventors: |
York; Jeffery; (San Ramon,
CA) ; Siegel; Marc; (Boston, MA) ; Ho;
Albert; (Westford, MA) ; Tossing; Christopher;
(Ashland, MA) ; Ierymenko; Adam; (Jamaica Plain,
MA) ; Hussain; Daniar; (Pittsburgh, PA) |
Correspondence
Address: |
AMERICAN PIONEER VENTURES;ATTN: DANIAR HUSSAIN
845 Third Avenue, 6th Floor
New York
NY
10022
US
|
Family ID: |
42239966 |
Appl. No.: |
12/758134 |
Filed: |
April 12, 2010 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
12489313 |
Jun 22, 2009 |
|
|
|
12758134 |
|
|
|
|
61122632 |
Dec 15, 2008 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
705/301 ;
340/10.1; 705/317 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G06Q 10/087 20130101;
Y02P 80/20 20151101; G06F 3/04883 20130101; G06Q 10/103 20130101;
G06Q 10/0637 20130101; Y02P 80/21 20151101; G06Q 30/018
20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
705/301 ;
705/317; 340/10.1 |
International
Class: |
G06Q 10/00 20060101
G06Q010/00; H04Q 5/22 20060101 H04Q005/22 |
Claims
1. A method for ensuring compliance of industrial inspection,
comprising the steps of: segmenting one or more inspected
components into one or more logical inspection points; scanning one
or more unique machine-readable tags at each logical inspection
point; taking one or more media samples of the inspected component
at each logical inspection point; associating the media samples
with the corresponding scan of the unique machine-readable tag; and
evaluating one or more inspection criteria according to one or more
safety standards documents for one or more of the logical
inspection points, the safety standard documents containing one or
more safety code standards which an inspector can reference in
justifying a finding of a violation or a work order to correct a
violation.
2. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising: declaring
sub-optimal conditions of the unique machine-readable tags at each
logical inspection point, substantiated by corresponding media
samples, if condition warrants such declaration.
3. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising: annotating
the media samples in such ways that substantiate inspector
statements of problems with inspected components found during
inspection.
4. The method as recited in claim 3, further comprising:
substantiating inspector statements of problems with inspected
components by quoting standards from the standards documents.
5. The method of claim 3, further comprising: generating a new work
order item for any logical inspection point having a problem found
during inspection.
6. The method as recited in claim 3, further comprising: generating
a problem reminder that requires an inspector to revisit any
problem found during an inspection in a future inspection until the
problem is fixed.
7. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising: annotating
the media samples in such ways that substantiate inspector
statements of any inspected components passing inspection.
8. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the scanning of one or
more unique machine-readable tags and the taking of the media
samples at each logical inspection point is done by a handheld
device.
9. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the unique
machine-readable tags have limited maximum scan range, such that
the scanning of the tags requires physical proximity of an
inspector to the logical inspection point and implies proper
visitation made by the inspector to the logical inspection
point.
10. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising:
associating with the media sample and the scan of the unique
machine-readable tag a unique global positioning system (GPS)
location.
11. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising:
associating with the media sample and the scan of the unique
machine-readable tag a unique user-identification of an inspector
performing the inspection.
12. An industrial inspection compliance system, comprising: one or
more physical components marked to be inspected; one or more
logical inspection points segmented from the physical components,
having at least one unique machine-readable tag at each logical
inspection point; one or more inspection criteria according to one
or more safety standards documents for one or more of the logical
inspection points, the safety standard documents containing one or
more safety code standards which an inspector can reference in
justifying a finding of a violation or a work order to correct a
violation; one or more scanning devices which can read the unique
machine-readable tags at each logical inspection point; and one or
more media input devices which can capture media samples of
inspected physical components at each logical inspection point.
13. The system as described in claim 12, further comprising a data
storage area for storing information representing segmentation of
physical components as logical inspection points.
14. The system as described in claim 12, further comprising a data
storage area for storing information representing each scan
obtained by the scanning device, wherein each record comprises a
timestamp of each scan, and a unique identifier of the scanned
machine-readable tag.
15. The system as described in claim 12, further comprising a data
storage area for storing information representing the media samples
obtained by the media input device, wherein each record comprises a
timestamp of the taking of the corresponding media sample, and the
media sample itself.
16. The system as described in claim 15, wherein each record
further comprises associations with any media samples obtained by
the media input device.
17. The system as described in claim 16, wherein each record
further comprises associations with any scans obtained by the
scanning device.
18. The system as described in claim 12, further comprising a data
storage area for storing all versions of all components that have
ever been inspected by the system.
19. The system as described in claim 12, further comprising a data
storage area for associating with the media sample and the scan of
the unique machine-readable tag a unique user-identification of an
inspector performing the inspection.
20. An apparatus for ensuring compliance of industrial equipment,
having one or more inspected components segmented into one or more
logical inspection points, comprising: one or more scanning devices
which can read the unique machine-readable tags at each logical
inspection point; one or more media input devices which can capture
media samples of inspected physical components at each logical
inspection point; one or more processors for executing program
code; and one or more memories, operatively connected to the one or
more processors, for storing program code, which when executed by
the processors executes a process, the process comprising the
following steps: scanning one or more unique machine-readable tags
at a logical inspection point; taking one or more media samples of
the inspected component at a logical inspection point; associating
the media samples with the corresponding scan of the unique
machine-readable tag; and evaluating one or more inspection
criteria according to one or more safety standards documents for
one or more of the logical inspection points, the safety standard
documents containing one or more safety code standards which an
inspector can reference in justifying a finding of a violation or a
work order to correct a violation.
Description
REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
[0001] This application is a Continuation of co-pending application
U.S. Ser. No. 12/489,313, filed on Jun. 22, 2009, and entitled "A
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CARRYING OUT AN INSPECTION OR MAINTENANCE
OPERATION WITH COMPLIANCE TRACKING USING A HANDHELD DEVICE," which
claims priority from provisional application Ser. No. 61/122,632,
filed on Dec. 15, 2008, and entitled "A system, method and
apparatus for inspections and compliance verification of industrial
equipment using a handheld device," the entirety of which are both
hereby incorporated by reference herein.
[0002] This application is also related to co-pending application
Ser. No. 12/489,313, filed on Jun. 22, 2009, and entitled "A system
and method for carrying out an inspection or maintenance operation
with compliance tracking using a handheld device," application Ser.
No. 12/507,039, filed on Jul. 21, 2009 and entitled "A system and
method for cropping and annotating images on a touch sensitive
display device," and application Ser. No. 12/507,071, filed on Jul.
22, 2009 and entitled "A system and method for generating
quotations from a reference document on a touch sensitive display
device," which all claim priority from provisional application Ser.
No. 61/122,632, filed on Dec. 15, 2008, and entitled "A system,
method and apparatus for inspections and compliance verification of
industrial equipment using a handheld device," the entirety of
which are all hereby incorporated by reference herein.
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
[0003] The present invention is generally related to inspection
systems. More specifically, this invention relates to a system and
method for configuring and installing an industrial inspection
system assisted by a handheld device, which helps to ensure
compliance of the safety and security of industrial equipment fit
for business use. The present invention may be used to help prevent
accidents that can happen during usage of such industrial
equipment, as well as prevent negligent, missed or incomplete
inspections of such industrial equipment.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0004] National U.S. statistics show that approximately 20% of
accidents on construction sites involve cranes. "For the 11 years
1984-94, 502 deaths occurred in 479 incidents involving cranes in
the construction industry" (Suruda, p. 4), which amounts to an
average of 44 fatal crane accidents per year, with an average of
one human life lost per crane accident. The number of crane-related
deaths are on the rise since those statistics were compiled, due to
a number of factors, including an increase in the number of
construction projects, an increase in the size of the construction
projects, and an increase in the economic pressures to complete
construction projects on time and under budget, which have resulted
in shortcuts many consider to be unsafe.
[0005] A rash of crane accidents is occurring around the country
resulting in national and international news. Tight economic
conditions and high energy prices have led to large numbers of
large scale energy-related construction projects, such as the
extension and building of new oil refineries. These construction
projects are on extremely tight time and budget schedules because
of the economic realities of high energy, and specifically
petroleum, prices. The result has been an unprecedented number of
deadly, costly, and highly publicized crane accidents.
[0006] For example, on Jun. 18, 2008, a crane accident at a Texas
oil refinery killed four people and injured six others. The crane
was not scheduled to be operated that day. On May 30, 2008, a crane
accident in New York City killed two workers when the boom and cab
snapped off the turntable and fell, apparently because of a bad
weld in the rotating plate. Proper inspections were not carried out
on the crane, and the New York City Buildings Department Head was
fired by the Mayor over this and another preceding incident. On
Mar. 25, 2008, a crane accident in Miami killed two workers in the
fall of a 20-foot section that was being lifted to extend the
height of the crane. The safety personnel who made the safety rules
did not follow their own safety rules of evacuating the
construction management office in the event of a pick. On Mar. 15,
2008, a second crane accident in New York City killed seven people
when a piece of nylon webbing broke, dropping a six-ton metal
collar that was being installed. It dislodged the collar below,
disconnecting the crane from the building and allowing it to topple
over onto a residential building. Proper inspections were not
carried out on the crane, the construction site had numerous safety
violations, and neighbors, residents, and passer-by's complained
and lodged reports of unsafe activity and operation of the
crane.
[0007] Many parties have sought unsuccessfully to prevent crane
accidents, including OSHA, the construction industry, and various
researchers. Strong heavy construction industry growth, especially
in the oil, natural gas, and energy field, as a result of the high
price of crude oil and energy, has resulted in the hiring of many
workers, a large proportion of whom may be inadequately
trained.
[0008] It is evident that many crane hazards go unnoticed or that
efforts to prevent crane accidents are not effectively implemented.
Crane hazards on sites should be detected through rigorous
inspections of construction sites and eliminated through effective
preventive approaches.
[0009] Traditional approaches that have provided crane safety
equipment and proper training have not reduced the number of crane
accidents. Traditional crane safety training is not sufficient to
enable crane operators to detect and eliminate crane hazards.
[0010] Motivating crane operators, workers, independent
contractors, management, and apparently safety officers themselves
to fully follow all safety guidelines at all times is perhaps the
greatest challenge.
[0011] Texas has led the nation with 26 crane-related fatalities in
2005 and 2006, according to federal statistics. Cranes in Texas
operate without any state or local oversight.
[0012] Human lives are lost unnecessarily every year because
recognized and known safety procedures are not followed,
overlooked, or even ignored. Construction accidents are not only
bad for worker morale, but they bring bad press and hinder worker
recruitment. They are also huge financial and logistical
liabilities. Even with safety programs in place, historical claims
data indicates construction is a potentially highly risky venture
financially, especially in large industrial projects. The cost of
risk can be quantified--there has been a national average of 82
crane fatalities per year from 1997-2006 (Bureau of Labor
Statistics), and an average of 1 crane fatality per $8 B of
construction value (Construction Management Magazine). Direct &
indirect accident costs averaged at 3.8% of construction value,
which include workers' compensation payments, general liability,
and litigation expenses (Business Roundtable). In addition, for
every dollar of direct cost, there was $2.20 of indirect costs.
[0013] For example, Zachry Construction Company estimates that one
day's delay in the construction of an oil refinery or power plant
can cost Zachry over $300,000 in liquidated damages arising from
guaranteed delivery contracts with the plant owners. A fatality, or
any serious accident at a construction site, inevitably leads to
delays of multiple days or even weeks, disrupting construction
work, both for site clean-up, internal inspections, as well as OSHA
inspections.
[0014] Some costs may have balance sheet implications, yet are hard
to define, especially for large complex projects involving
petroleum. The time required to replace mission critical
infrastructure damaged in an accident is generally long. The
environmental impact can be large as well. For example, the oil
spill of the Exxon Valdez oil tanker in Alaska resulted in a
judgment of $2.5 B. The loss of corporate reputation and goodwill,
intangible and often unrecoverable assets, is substantial in the
event of a crane accident.
[0015] Cranes are but one example of industrial equipment that is
subject to inspection for compliance with safety or security
standards. Other possible industrial equipment includes vehicles
such as airplanes, buses, trains, subways, cars, ships, and trucks,
public buildings, privately-owned buildings, residential homes,
highways, train tracks, airport runways, ship harbors, bridges,
underground tunnels, shelters, dams, conventional power plants,
nuclear power plants, particle colliders, oil extraction sites, oil
refineries, communication towers, data centers, sewage systems,
water treatment plants, water wells, reservoirs, and any other
equipment or the like.
[0016] Examples of inspections on industrial equipment other than
cranes include the inspection of commercial airplanes with FAA
(Federal Aviation Administration) standards, the inspection of
communication towers with FCC (Federal Communications Commission)
standards, the inspection of dams with state dam safety standards
such as NJAC (New Jersey Administrative Code) 7:20, the inspection
of nuclear power plants with IAEA (International Atomic Energy
Agency) standards, and other similar inspections under various
public safety standards. Other inspection compliance requirements
are associated with renewable energy systems and distributed energy
systems, including wind turbines, solar photovoltaic, solar thermal
plants, co-generation plants, biomass-fueled power plants, carbon
sequestration projects, enhanced oil recovery systems, and the
like.
[0017] It is against this background that various embodiments of
the present invention were developed.
BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0018] The present invention is a method and a system for
inspections and compliance verification of industrial equipment
using a handheld device.
[0019] One embodiment of the present invention is a method for
ensuring compliance of industrial inspection. For the inspector,
this involves first segmenting one or more inspected components
into one or more logical inspection points. Then the inspector
scans one or more unique machine-readable tags at each logical
inspection point. Then the inspector takes one or more media
samples of the inspected component at each logical inspection
point. Then the inspector associates each media sample with the
corresponding scan of the unique machine-readable tag. Then the
inspector evaluates one or more inspection criteria according to
one or more safety standards documents for one or more of the
logical inspection points, the safety standard documents containing
one or more safety code standards which the inspector can reference
in justifying a finding of a violation or a work order to correct a
violation. The inspector can declare sub-optimal conditions of the
unique machine-readable tags at each logical inspection point,
substantiated by corresponding media samples, if condition warrants
such declaration. A timestamp is added for each action taken at
each logical inspection point, said timestamp representing evidence
of a date and a time of physical visitation to said logical
inspection point and associated action.
[0020] Another embodiment of the present invention involves the
additional step of either annotating each media sample in such ways
that substantiate inspector statements of any inspected components
passing inspection, or annotating each media sample in such ways
that substantiate inspector statements of problems with inspected
components found during inspection.
[0021] Another embodiment of the present invention involves
carrying out the method described, specifically the steps of
scanning of one or more unique machine-readable tags and taking of
each media sample at each logical inspection point, with a
multi-function handheld device.
[0022] Another embodiment of the present invention involves using
unique machine-readable tags that have limited maximum scan range,
such that the scanning of the tags requires physical proximity of
an inspector to the logical inspection point and implies proper
visitation made by the inspector to the logical inspection
point.
[0023] Another embodiment of the present invention involves
substantiating inspector statements of problems with inspected
components by quoting standards from a standards document.
[0024] Another embodiment of the present invention involves
generating a new work order item for any logical inspection point
having a problem found during inspection.
[0025] Another embodiment of the present invention involves
generating a problem reminder that requires an inspector to revisit
any problems found during an inspection in future inspections.
[0026] Another embodiment of the present invention involves
associating with the media sample and the scan of the unique
machine-readable tag a unique global positioning system (GPS)
location.
[0027] Another embodiment of the present invention involves
associating with the media sample and the scan of the unique
machine-readable tag a unique user-identification of an inspector
performing the inspection. The inspector may be identified by
scanning his ID tag, photographing his face, capturing his
handwritten signature, and the like.
[0028] Another embodiment of the present invention involves
correlating any subset of inspection data segmented as inspection
events, and activating one or more actions based on the correlation
performed in the correlating step.
[0029] The present invention also includes a related system by
which the method of ensuring compliance of industrial inspection
could be carried out. Such a system could be implemented as a
computer system, embodied in a handheld device using separate
unique machine-readable tags deployed throughout logical inspection
points on a physical inspected component. The system may include
integrated or separate hardware components for scanning of unique
machine-readable tags and taking of media samples of the inspected
component.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0030] The invention will be readily understood by the following
detailed description in conjunction with the accompanying drawings,
wherein like reference numerals designate like structural elements,
and in which:
[0031] FIG. 1 is a flowchart of a method for ensuring compliance of
industrial inspections, in accordance with one embodiment of the
industrial inspection system;
[0032] FIG. 2 is an illustration of an illustrative inspection
component, the mast section of a tower crane, which is segmented
into logical inspection points, in accordance with another
embodiment of the industrial inspection system;
[0033] FIG. 3 is a flowchart of a method of ensuring compliance of
industrial inspections, detailing the flow of usage of the software
on a handheld device, in accordance with yet another embodiment of
the present industrial inspection system;
[0034] FIG. 4 is a block diagram of a system, in accordance with
yet another embodiment of the present industrial inspection
system;
[0035] FIG. 5 is an illustration of a multi-functional handheld
device, in which some of the software and hardware components of
the system reside, in accordance with yet another embodiment of the
present industrial inspection system;
[0036] FIG. 6 is an illustration of inspectors in physical
proximity to an inspection component, carrying out an inspection
with handheld devices, in accordance with yet another embodiment of
the present industrial inspection system;
[0037] FIG. 7 is a set of diagrams of illustrative user interfaces
in an inspection system installed on different handheld devices, in
accordance with multiple embodiments of the present industrial
inspection system;
[0038] FIG. 8 is a diagram of an illustrative user interface of an
inspection system, in accordance with yet another embodiment of the
present industrial inspection system;
[0039] FIG. 9 is an illustration of an illustrative application of
the industrial inspection system for ensuring proper inspection of
wind turbines and other renewable energy systems, according to yet
another embodiment of the present industrial inspection system;
[0040] FIG. 10 is an illustration of a possible use-case of the
industrial inspection system in relation to a hand-held device with
a camera and a touch-sensitive display, such as an Apple
iPhone.RTM. or other like device;
[0041] FIG. 11 shows a flowchart for a process for cropping an
image or a quotation taken from a reference document on a handheld
device, in accordance with one embodiment of the industrial
inspection system;
[0042] FIG. 12 shows a flowchart for a process for annotating an
image or a quotation taken from a reference document on a handheld
device, in accordance with one embodiment of the industrial
inspection system;
[0043] FIG. 13 illustrates a process for cropping and/or annotating
an image or a quotation taken from a reference document on a
handheld device, in accordance with one embodiment of the
industrial inspection system;
[0044] FIG. 14 shows a hierarchy of projects, installations,
assets, and components in an industrial inspection system in
accordance with one embodiment of the present invention;
[0045] FIG. 15 shows a hierarchy of unique and non-unique assets as
well as components according to one embodiment of the present
invention; and
[0046] FIG. 16 shows a flowchart for installing and configuring the
industrial inspection compliance system on a handheld device, in
accordance with one embodiment of the invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
[0047] The industrial inspection system generally pertains to an
industrial inspection compliance system with which various methods
can be carried out to the effect of assisting in an inspection and
providing the means for compliance verification of a proper
inspection. For the purposes of the text describing this industrial
inspection system, an inspection may represent the process of
checking a physical component for safety, security or business
reasons, doing the same for compliance with industry standards and
guidelines, or a maintenance operation on a physical component for
those same reasons. These methods can generally be best executed by
a multi-function handheld device, carried to and used in the
physical proximity of an inspected component by the inspector.
Examples of multi-function handheld devices include the Apple
iPhone.RTM., the Psion Teklogix Workabout Pro.RTM., the Motorola
MC-75.RTM., and the like, but the present industrial inspection
system is not limited to such devices as shown or described here.
One aspect of the industrial inspection system relates to scanning
unique machine-readable tags deployed at logical inspection points
defined by the inspector, and assigning a timestamp to the scanning
operation. Another aspect of the industrial inspection system
relates to taking media samples of logical inspection points
defined by the inspector, and assigning a timestamp to the media
sample capturing operation. Another aspect of the industrial
inspection system relates to reporting of sub-optimal conditions of
the unique machine-readable tags deployed at logical inspection
points if its condition warrants such a declaration. Another aspect
of the industrial inspection system relates to associating a media
sample with a corresponding scan of a unique machine-readable tag.
Another aspect of the industrial inspection system relates to
annotating a media sample in such ways that substantiate statements
of an industrial component passing inspection, or in such ways that
substantiate statements of problems found with the industrial
component.
[0048] These and other aspects of the invention are discussed below
with reference to FIGS. 1-8. However, those skilled in the art will
readily appreciate that the detailed description given herein with
respect to these figures is for explanatory purposes as the
invention extends beyond these limited embodiments.
[0049] FIG. 1 is a flowchart diagram of a method 150 for ensuring
compliance of industrial inspections, in accordance with one
embodiment of the present industrial inspection system. This
inspection method can generally be best executed by a
multi-function handheld device, carried to and used in the physical
proximity of an inspected component by the inspector. This method
generally begins at block 100 where an inspector would inspect some
industrial component within physical viewable proximity. The
component mentioned may include an article or machine, or groups of
articles or machines, which are marked to be inspected against
prevailing safety or security standards. This embodiment of the
industrial inspection system requires an inspector to be within
physical viewable proximity from the inspected component in order
to help ensure that the inspector has actually visited the
component. This requirement may be enforced by the fact that the
inspector will be unable to perform the operations on the handheld
device to carry out this method if he is not within physical
viewable proximity of the industrial component to be inspected.
This method assumes that the physical component has already been
logically separated into one or more logical inspection points as
shown in FIG. 2, which will be described in more detail later. This
method also assumes that the physical component has already been
tagged with unique machine-readable tags at each logical inspection
point.
[0050] Following block 100, industrial inspection method 150
proceeds to block 101 where the inspector selects a logical
inspection point to begin inspection. This may be done on the
device software by selecting from a list of physical components or
from a list of logical inspection points, depending on how the
inspector chose to configure the system. Alternatively, this may be
done by scanning the unique machine-readable tag deployed at the
logical inspection point to be selected, as in block 104.
[0051] Following block 101, industrial inspection method 150
proceeds to a decision block 103, where a decision is made if the
unique machine-readable tag is in a "sub-optimal" condition (if it
is not readable for whatever reason, it is considered to be in a
sub-optimal condition). In the situation where the unique
machine-readable tag deployed at the logical inspection point is
found to be in sub-optimal condition, the industrial inspection
method 150 proceeds to block 102, where the inspector may report
the condition that justifies the sub-optimal condition. This
reporting may be done in addition to or in lieu of scanning the
machine-readable tag. A sub-optimal condition includes the
condition of a tag being broken, the condition of a tag being
unable to be scanned for any reason, the condition of a tag being
absent for any reason, the condition of a tag being misplaced, or
any other unacceptable condition or the like.
[0052] In the situation where the unique machine-readable tag
deployed at the logical inspection point is not in a sub-optimal
condition, industrial inspection method 150 proceeds to block 104
where an inspector scans the unique machine-readable tag deployed
at the selected logical inspection point. A unique machine-readable
tag may be a barcode sticker, a high-frequency (HF) radio-frequency
identification (RFID) tag, an ultra-high-frequency (UHF) RFID tag,
or any other tag or the like that serves as a unique identifier for
a logical inspection point. The scanning of the tag may be done by
a corresponding tag reader either embedded in the inspector's
handheld device, or embodied in a separate dedicated device,
implemented in whichever way is necessary to read the corresponding
tag, whether by way of visual identification, radio frequency
identification, or the like, and store a record of the scanning
operation. Various other techniques of choosing the type of unique
machine-readable tag and its scanning are within the skill of one
of ordinary skill in the art.
[0053] Following block 104, industrial inspection method 150
proceeds to block 106, where a timestamp is assigned to the
scanning operation of block 104. The timestamp may be expressed as
a date and time pair, POSIX time, or any other representation that
is semantically consistent between any other timestamp assignment
made in the scope of this method. The general purpose of the
timestamp assignment is to seal a record of the point in time at
which the inspector executed an operation that is a critical
component to the proof of inspection. This step is important to the
goal of ensuring compliance of the industrial inspection process.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill would appreciate that block 104
may not only consist of the action of timestamp assignment, but
possibly also the action of timestamp verification, such as the
employment and execution of a digitally-signed timestamp, or any
other action of the like.
[0054] Following block 106, industrial inspection method 150
proceeds to block 108 where an inspector takes a media sample of
the selected logical inspection point. A media sample is defined to
be a photograph, a sequence of photographs, an ultrasonic image, an
infrared image, any other type of mechanically, chemically or
electromagnetically-obtained image, a video with an audio
component, a video without an audio component, or any other visual
or set of visual media or the like. The taking of a media sample
may be done by a media input component either embedded in the
inspector's handheld device, or embodied in a separate dedicated
device, implemented in whichever way is necessary to take and store
the media sample.
[0055] Following block 108, industrial inspection method 150
proceeds to block 110 where a timestamp is assigned to the media
sample taking operation of block 108. The timestamp assignment in
block 110 is of the same spirit and scope as the timestamp
assignment described in block 106.
[0056] Following block 110, industrial inspection method 150
proceeds to block 112 where the media sample taken in block 108 is
associated with a scanning of a unique machine-readable tag in
block 104. This association may take the form of a database join
table in which ID's of media samples are paired with ID's of unique
machine-readable tags, with the ID's having already been
established during the operations of scanning the unique
machine-readable tag and taking the media sample. For example, an
inspector may scan RFID (the unique machine-readable tag) tag
number 0039850921847576, the operation of which is recorded by his
handheld device software in a database table called "TagScans" that
has a primary key called "id" and assigns this record an "id" of 3.
Then the inspector learns from the device software that the RFID he
just scanned is referring to a particular joint of the mast section
of the tower crane he is inspecting, a logical inspection point he
had segmented previously. He then takes a photograph (the media
sample) of the vicinity of the RFID tag he just scanned, making
sure to capture a good shot of the joint, which is the logical
inspection point he intends to inspect. After taking the
photograph, the handheld device software first records the
photographing operation in a database table called "PhotoCaptures"
that has a primary key called "id" and assigns this record an "id"
of 8. Then it associates the two records just created from the RFID
scanning and photographing operations by creating a new record in a
database join table called "TagScansAndPhotoCaptures" with the
following (TagScanId, PhotoCaptureld) pair: (3, 8). The tag scan
and media sample are now logically associated, according to one
embodiment of the present industrial inspection system.
[0057] Following block 112, industrial inspection method 150
proceeds to decision block 113, where a determination is made by
the inspector if the logical inspection point successfully passes
the criteria established for the inspection. In the situation in
which the logical inspection point passes the inspection, the
industrial inspection method 150 proceeds to block 114 where an
inspector annotates the media sample taken in block 108 in such
ways as to substantiate his statement of the logical inspection
point passing inspection. When an inspector allows a logical
inspection point to pass inspection, he is making a serious
statement about the integrity of the physical component in the face
of safety or security standards. Therefore, the step described in
block 114 provides the means by which the inspector may add
supportive marks, indications, statements, or other data or
metadata or the like that serve to justify his statement of the
logical inspection point passing inspection.
[0058] In the situation in which the logical inspection point does
not pass the inspection, industrial inspection method 150 may
possibly proceed to block 116 where an inspector annotates the
media sample taken in block 108 in such ways as to substantiate his
statement of problems found with the logical inspection point. A
useful inspection will need to indicate how the physical component
is faulty, what codes in which standards that the fault violates if
there exists any applicable code or standard, what should be done
to remedy the fault, or any other supportive material or the like.
Therefore, the step described in block 116 provides the means by
which the inspector may add supportive marks, indications,
statements, or other data or metadata or the like that serve to
justify his statement of problems found with the logical inspection
point.
[0059] The process of annotating a media sample as described in
block 114 and 116 includes any step that helps to substantiate a
conclusive statement made by the inspector about a physical
inspected component. The conclusive statement generally refers to
either a statement of an industrial component passing inspection as
in block 114 or a statement of problems found with an industrial
component as in block 116, but may include any other conceivable
conclusive statement or the like. For example, if the media sample
taken is a photograph of a joint in the mast section of a tower
crane and the inspector determines that the joint is not properly
welded, the photograph is then annotated by the inspector to
visually show the location of the improper welding. In this case,
the inspector uses the touch screen capabilities of the handheld
device and the capabilities of the software to draw a red circle on
the digital photograph he took, encircling the segment of the
photograph in which the improperly-welded joint is visible. One of
ordinary skill would appreciate that drawing a red circle on a
photograph is but one of many possible ways to annotate a media
sample. Other methods include highlighting a segment of a
photograph with a bright color such as done in the physical
analogue of using a highlighter pen, creating and populating a
free-form text field with a connected pointer line superimposed on
a photograph and pointing to a specific point on the photograph,
drawing a thick black border around the form of an object
identified in an infrared image, making the same such annotations
on a series of video stills all belonging to the same video
sequence, superimposing text on a set of video stills to
effectively subtitle a video, or any other method of media sample
annotation or the like.
[0060] FIG. 2 is an illustration of an illustrative inspection
component, the mast section of a tower crane 200, which is
segmented into logical inspection points, in accordance with
another embodiment of the present industrial inspection system. The
diagram serves as an example of a possible industrial component
that must be inspected against safety or security standards, such
as those of ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers). Items
202, 204, 206, 208, 210, 212, 214 and 216 are welded joints on this
tower crane mast section, which in this case are the logical
inspection points for this physical inspected component. A logical
inspection point may include any physical sub-component of any
physical inspected component of the article or machine to be
inspected, even of the physical article/machine itself, or any
non-physical aspect of inspection that can somehow be mapped to a
physical component or sub-component of the inspected
article/machine. Logical inspection points may be defined by the
inspector before or during an inspection, whereby each physical
article or machine that is to be inspected has at least one logical
inspection point. For example, if the tower crane mast section 200
is to be considered the inspected physical article, the inspector
may choose to define each of the eight welded joints 202, 204, 206,
208, 210, 212, 214 and 216 as logical inspection points. In this
case, each of those items refers directly to a physical weld job
that needs to be inspected. Each logical inspection point will have
one or more associated unique machine readable tags, such as RFID
tag 218. For simplicity of illustration, only one unique machine
readable tag 218 is shown, even though each logical inspection
point may have one or more unique machine readable tags associated
with it. Non-physical logical inspection points for mast section
200 may include requiring that joints 202, 204, 206 and 216 have
the same horizontal height in order to maintain balance, requiring
that those same joints form a near-perfect square in a top-down
view, or any other inspection goals or the like.
[0061] FIG. 3 is a flowchart of a method 300 of ensuring compliance
of industrial inspections, detailing the flow of usage of the
software on a handheld device, in accordance with yet another
embodiment of the present industrial inspection system. This
inspection software can generally be best executed by a
multi-function handheld device, carried to and used in the physical
proximity of an inspected component by the inspector. This method
generally begins at block 301, where an inspector would begin
inspection of some industrial component within physical viewable
proximity. Block 302 designates the fact that the industrial
inspection cannot be completed unless the required scanning of each
machine readable tag and an associated media sample capture
operation are properly performed, or a properly documented reason
is provided providing an explanation as to why a particular
operation was skipped.
[0062] Following block 302, industrial inspection method 300
proceeds to block 304 where the main screen of the handheld device
software is presented to the inspector. This screen may contain
buttons, text links or any other objects that allow the inspector
to proceed with any aspect of the inspection.
[0063] Following block 304, a selection is made by the inspector
from the main screen of the handheld device. An inspector may
select a component for inspection from a drop-down menu, a list, or
the like, in which case industrial inspection method 300 proceeds
to block 306 (described below). An inspector may indicate that the
inspection is complete, in which case industrial inspection method
300 proceeds to block 318 (described below). Alternatively, an
inspector may simply scan a unique machine-readable tag, in which
case industrial inspection method 300 proceeds to block 305
(described below).
[0064] If industrial inspection method 300 proceeds to block 306,
the inspector chooses a general component to be inspected from a
list of components presented to him by the software. These general
components may either be whole physical articles or machines to be
inspected, physical sections of the article/machine, or logical
inspection points as described before. The list of components is
generally prepared by the inspector before the inspection, but the
software may allow the inspector to add new components during the
inspection if there is a need to do so. Any functions having to do
with on-the-spot component configuration, segmentation of physical
inspected components into logical inspection points, selection of
inspected component, or any other functions or the like, are within
scope of block 306.
[0065] Following block 306, industrial inspection method 300
proceeds to block 310 where the inspector explains the inability to
scan a unique machine-readable tag whose identification refers to
the component. Since the spirit of this industrial inspection
system pertains to compliance of inspection of industrial
equipment, and since the inspector is able to select a component
from a list of components in block 306, therefore bypassing the
need to be in physical proximity of the inspected component, the
inspector should be prompted to provide and record an acceptable
reason as to why he cannot scan a tag. Block 310 represents a step
in the inspection process that forces the inspector to explain why
he is unable to scan a tag that is deployed at an inspection point
for the purpose of ensuring that he is within physical proximity to
the inspected component. Possible reasons may include the condition
of a tag being broken, the condition of a tag being unable to be
scanned for any reason, the condition of a tag being absent for any
reason, the condition of a tag being misplaced, or any other
unacceptable condition or the like.
[0066] If industrial inspection method 300 proceeds to block 305,
the inspector scans a unique machine-readable tag deployed at the
selected logical inspection point. A unique machine-readable tag
may be a barcode sticker, a high-frequency (HF) radio-frequency
identification (RFID) tag, an ultra-high-frequency (UHF) RFID tag,
or any other tag or the like that serves as a unique identifier for
a logical inspection point. The scanning of the tag may be done by
a corresponding tag reader either embedded in the inspector's
handheld device, or embodied in a separate dedicated device,
implemented in whichever way is necessary to read the corresponding
tag, whether by way of visual identification, radio frequency
identification, or the like, and store a record of the scanning
operation. Various other techniques of choosing the type of unique
machine-readable tag and the scanning of it are within the skill of
one of ordinary skill in the art. The software then recognizes the
scanned tag's unique identifier and proceeds to retrieve all of its
associated data and begins the inspection process for the logical
inspection point associated with that particular tag.
[0067] Following either block 305 or block 310, industrial
inspection method 300 checks whether or not the selected component
has already been inspected. At this point, the process of selecting
an inspection component or a logical inspection point, either by
way of manual selection on the handheld device software or by
scanning a unique machine-readable tag that the software maps to a
particular logical inspection point, is assumed to have already
been completed. The next screen presented to the inspector by the
software is determined by whether or not the selection has already
been inspected.
[0068] If a determination is made that the selected component has
not been inspected, industrial inspection method 300 proceeds to
block 312, where the software guides the inspector to initiate the
process of inspecting the selected component. The inspection
process itself involves one or more iterations of taking a media
sample, as described in relation to block 108 of FIG. 1,
associating the media sample with a corresponding scan of a unique
machine-readable tag or of a logical inspection point in the system
as described in relation to block 112 of FIG. 1, and editing the
media sample as described above. Editing the media sample includes
the actions of cropping the media sample, making annotations on the
media sample as described in relation to blocks 114 and 116 of FIG.
1, or any other action that can be done on a media sample or the
like.
[0069] In block 312, after the inspector takes the media sample and
edits it as described above, the software presents the component
inspection screen to the inspector. From this screen the inspector
may choose to continue inspection of the same component, which may
include such actions as typing in notes, speaking into an audio
input device if one is available and is able to be interpreted and
stored by the software, taking another media sample, or take
another inspection action.
[0070] In block 312, industrial inspection method 300 may allow the
inspector to add a quotation from some standards or specifications
document, such as those of ASME (American Society of Mechanical
Engineers). The software will present the inspector with an
interface for navigating a document, on which he may carry out
document navigation and selection actions such as capturing a
screenshot of a section of the document, cropping the screenshot,
annotating the screenshot, selecting text, selecting a page, or any
other action or the like.
[0071] In block 312, industrial inspection method 300 may allow the
inspector to insert any text selection, screenshot, link, reference
of any sort, and the like, into any aspect of the inspection data
that is associated with the particular inspected component or
logical inspection point chosen in the particular iteration of
block 312. For example, if the inspector is currently inspecting a
welded joint of a tower crane mast section and he finds that the
welding job is not done properly, not compliant with the ASME B
30.5 standard, then in carrying out the action of block 312, the
inspector can navigate the ASME standard document to section B 30.5
and take a screenshot of the text of that particular section. He
can then draw a red line underneath the sentences that describe the
standard for a joint welding job that this particular joint does
not comply with. Then, he may crop the screenshot such as to
capture only the sentences he just underlined and then press a
button on the handheld device to insert this cropped screenshot as
an attachment to his inspection data for the joint of the tower
crane mast section.
[0072] In addition to allowing an inspector to select an item from
a pre-populated checklist, which requires the inspector to go
through each item on the checklist, in one embodiment of the
present industrial inspection system, the inspector can also make a
free-form observation of a potential problem identified in the
course of the inspection that may not be on the pre-populated
checklist. If an inspector makes an observation of a potential
problem during an inspection, whether from a pre-populated list or
in free-form, the problem is logged by the inspection compliance
system so that any future visits to the same site require the
problem(s) noted in the previous inspection visit to be re-visited
before the next inspection can be satisfactorily completed.
Problems must be re-visited on subsequent inspections until they
are fixed; re-visiting the problem means visiting the area where
the problem was observed (and possibly swiping the machine readable
tags), possibly noting any changes (taking new pictures, notes,
etc. to describe changes), and optionally fixing the problems and
recording pictures, notes, and the like of the fix. Problems will
only be automatically populated into subsequent inspections until
they are fixed.
[0073] In addition to allowing the inspector to perform an
inspection, one embodiment of the present industrial inspection
system also allows the inspector to immediately offer to fix the
problem (e.g., repair the welding of a section of the crane mast),
and to automatically generate a bill to the customer for fixing the
problem. One embodiment of the present industrial inspection system
allows the inspector to automatically generate, using the handheld
device, a work items order for billing and accounting purposes,
allowing the inspector to carry out the corrective measure
immediately onsite without returning to the central office to
generate a new work order. The work items order includes a list of
the steps taken to fix each problem; a line item for each charge
associated with fixing each problem; and a picture taken before
and/or after the job is complete. The customer may then immediately
review the work items order onsite, sign the inspection report and
the work items order, and pay for both the inspection and the
charges associated with fixing the problems with the industrial
equipment, all before the inspector leaves the site.
[0074] Importantly, according to one embodiment of the present
industrial inspection system, the data associated with each
inspection is stored and versioned in a manner analogous to
versioning of source code. A virtual industrial equipment, and all
of its subcomponent(s), is versioned for each inspection, in such a
way as to ensure that the right information for each version of the
industrial equipment and all of its subcomponent(s) is always
associated with the correct inspection report. This also adds an
additional layer of accountability, as it is known at all times
where, when, and by whom each observation and change to the
equipment was made over all time. In order to reduce space
consumption on the hand-held device, only the current version of
the item(s) being inspected are stored in the handheld device, in
addition to any prior versions of the item(s) that are referenced
by the current version; that is, only the "shallowest closure
component" of the entire version tree is stored locally on the
handheld device. That is, the "shallowest closure component" is the
minimum set of versioned data necessary to fully represent the
components in question in their latest state, including whichever
earlier versions are referenced by the current state.
[0075] Returning to FIG. 3, if a determination is made that the
selected component has already been inspected, industrial
inspection method 300 guides the inspector to a component
inspection screen that shows filled-in data fields of the
inspection, or may contain buttons, links or other objects that
allow the inspector to navigate through his previous inspection. At
this point, the software may or may not allow the inspector to edit
or continue his previous inspection of the selected component.
[0076] Following block 312, industrial inspection method 300
proceeds back to block 304, representing the main screen, where the
process continues as described above.
[0077] If the inspector indicates that he has completed the
inspection, industrial inspection method 300 proceeds to block 318,
where the software checks that all components marked to be
inspected have gone through the required inspection procedure. If a
component has not gone through the inspection procedure, the
software will check that the inspector has provided an explanation
in lieu of the inspection procedure, a declaration of a missing
component, or has provided a reason as to why he did not carry out
the inspection procedure.
[0078] Following block 318, if a determination is made that the
inspector has not fulfilled the requirements checked in block 318,
industrial inspection method 300 proceeds back to block 304,
representing the main screen, where the inspector is instructed to
complete the inspection of the missing component(s) or to provide a
justification why the missing component(s) cannot or will not be
inspected. In this manner, the inspector is given a chance to
inspect missed components or edit already-inspected components.
[0079] Following block 318, industrial inspection method 300
proceeds to block 307, where the industrial inspection method 300
allows the inspection to end, since the software has determined
that the inspection process is complete because of the fulfillment
of all requirements checked by the software in block 318. If the
inspection requirements have not been completely fulfilled as
determined in block 318, the software should preferably not allow
the inspector to proceed to block 307 and end the inspection, since
this would be inconsistent with ensuring complete compliance with
the industrial inspection process.
[0080] In one embodiment of the present industrial inspection
system, not shown in FIG. 3, the industrial inspection method 300
includes an additional step of storing all versions of all
components that have ever been inspected by the system.
[0081] In one embodiment of the present industrial inspection
system, not shown in FIG. 3, the industrial inspection method 300
includes an additional step of associating with the media sample
and the scan of the unique machine-readable tag a unique
user-identification of an inspector performing the inspection.
[0082] In one embodiment of the present industrial inspection
system, not shown in FIG. 3, the industrial inspection method 300
includes an additional step of substantiating inspector statements
of problems with inspected components by quoting standards from a
standards document.
[0083] In one embodiment of the present industrial inspection
system, not shown in FIG. 3, the industrial inspection method 300
includes an additional step of generating a new work order item for
any logical inspection point having a problem found during
inspection.
[0084] In one embodiment of the present industrial inspection
system, not shown in FIG. 3, the industrial inspection method 300
includes an additional step of generating a problem reminder that
requires an inspector to revisit any problem found during an
inspection in a future inspection until the problem is fixed.
[0085] In one embodiment of the present industrial inspection
system, not shown in FIG. 3, the industrial inspection method 300
includes an additional step of associating with the media sample
and the scan of the unique machine-readable tag a location
coordinate, such as global positioning system (GPS) coordinates,
cell phone tower triangulation coordinates, and the like.
[0086] In one embodiment of the present industrial inspection
system, not shown in FIG. 3, the industrial inspection method 300
includes an additional step of associating with the media sample
and the scan of the unique machine-readable tag a unique
user-identification of an inspector performing the inspection.
[0087] FIG. 4 is a block diagram of an exemplary computer system
400, in accordance with one embodiment of the present industrial
inspection system. The computer system 400 may correspond to a
personal computer system, such as a desktops, laptops, tablets or
handheld computer. The computer system may also correspond to a
computing device, such as a cell phone, PDA, dedicated media
player, consumer electronic device, and the like.
[0088] The exemplary computer system 400 shown in FIG. 4 includes a
processor 408 configured to execute instructions and to carry out
operations associated with the computer system 400. For example,
using instructions retrieved from memory 414, the processor 408 may
control the reception and manipulation of input and output data
between components of the computing system 400. The processor 408
can be implemented on a single-chip, multiple chips, or multiple
electrical components. For example, various architectures can be
used for the processor 408, including dedicated or embedded
processor, single purpose processor, controller, ASIC, and so
forth.
[0089] In most cases, the processor 408 together with an operating
system operates to execute computer code and produce and use data.
Operating systems are generally well known and will not be
described in greater detail. By way of example, the operating
system may correspond to OS/2, Apple OS/X, Apple iPhone.RTM. OS,
Google Android.RTM. OS, DOS, UNIX, Linux, Palm.RTM. OS, Windows,
Windows Mobile.RTM., Windows CE.RTM., and the like. The operating
system can also be a special purpose operating system, such as may
be used for limited purpose appliance-type computing devices. The
operating system, other computer code and data may reside within a
memory block 414 that is operatively coupled to the processor 408.
Memory block 414 generally provides a place to store computer code
and data that are used by the computer system 400. By way of
example, the memory block 414 may include Read-Only Memory (ROM),
Random-Access Memory (RAM), hard disk drive, and the like. The
information could also reside on a removable storage medium and
loaded or installed onto the computer system 400 when needed.
Removable storage mediums include, for example, CD-ROM, PC-CARD,
memory card, floppy disk, magnetic tape, and a network
component.
[0090] The computer system 400 also includes a display device 410
that is operatively coupled to the processor 408. The display
device 410 may be a liquid crystal display (LCD) (e.g., active
matrix, passive matrix and the like). Alternatively, the display
device 410 may be a monitor such as a monochrome display, color
graphics adapter (CGA) display, enhanced graphics adapter (EGA)
display, variable-graphics-array (VGA) display, super VGA display,
cathode ray tube (CRT), and the like. The display device may also
correspond to a plasma display or a display implemented with
electronic inks.
[0091] The display device 410 is generally configured to display a
graphical user interface (GUI) that provides an easy-to-use
interface between a user of the computer system and the operating
system or application running thereon. Generally speaking, the GUI
represents programs, files and operational options with graphical
images. The graphical images may include windows, fields, dialog
boxes, menus, icons, buttons, cursors, scroll bars, etc. Such
images may be arranged in predefined layouts, or may be created
dynamically to serve the specific actions being taken by a user.
During operation, the user can select and activate various
graphical images in order to initiate functions and tasks
associated therewith. By way of example, a user may select a button
that opens, closes, minimizes, or maximizes a window, or an icon
that launches a particular program. The GUI can additionally or
alternatively display information, such as non interactive text and
graphics, for the user on the display device 410.
[0092] The computer system 400 also includes a tag scanning input
device 402 that is operatively coupled to the processor 408. The
tag scanning input device 402 is configured to transfer data from
the outside world into the computer system 400. The input device
402 is used to scan unique machine-readable tag 404. The unique
machine-readable tag 404 may be a barcode sticker, a high-frequency
(HF) radio-frequency identification (RFID) tag, an
ultra-high-frequency (UHF) RFID tag, or any other tag or the like
that serves as a unique identifier for a logical inspection point.
The scanning of the tag may be done by a corresponding tag scanning
input device 402 either embedded in the inspector's handheld
device, or embodied in a separate dedicated device, implemented in
whichever way is necessary to read the corresponding tag, whether
by way of visual identification, radio frequency identification, or
the like, and store a record of the scanning operation. Various
other techniques of choosing the type of unique machine-readable
tag and the scanning of it are within the skill of one of ordinary
skill in the art.
[0093] The computer system 400 also includes a media sample input
device 406 that is operatively coupled to the processor 408. The
media sample input device 406 is configured to transfer data from
the outside world into the computer system 400. The input device
406 is used to capture a media sample and may include cameras of
any sort, video camcorders with audio input, video camcorders
without audio input, infrared imagers, ultrasonic imagers, or any
other type of mechanical, chemical or electromagnetic imager that
can obtain visual media. This visual media could be a view of an
inspected component 403. The taking of a media sample may be done
by media sample input device 406 either embedded in the inspector's
handheld device, or embodied in a separate dedicated device,
implemented in whichever way is necessary to take and store the
media sample.
[0094] The computer system 400 also includes capabilities for
coupling to one or more I/O devices 420. By way of example, the I/O
devices 420 may correspond to keyboards, printers, scanners,
cameras, speakers, and the like. The I/O devices 420 may be
integrated with the computer system 400 or they may be separate
components (e.g. peripheral devices). In some cases, the I/O
devices 420 may be connected to the computer system 400 through
wired connections (e.g. cables/ports). In other cases, the I/O
devices 420 may be connected to the computer system 400 through
wireless connections. By way of example, the data link may
correspond to PS/2, USB, IR, RF, Bluetooth and the like.
[0095] The memory block 414 may include a tag scanning operational
program 416, which may be part of the operating system or a
separate application. The tag scanning operational program 416
generally includes a set of instructions that recognizes the
occurrence of a tag scan operation on unique machine-readable tag
404 and informs one or more software agents of the presence of
unique machine-readable tag 404 and/or what action(s) to take in
response to the unique machine-readable tag 404.
[0096] The memory block 414 may also include a media sample
capturing program 418, which may be part of the operating system or
a separate application. The media sample capturing program 418
generally includes a set of instructions that recognizes the
occurrence of a media sample capture operation of a view of
inspected component 403 and informs one or more software agents of
media obtained and/or what action(s) to take in response to the
media obtained.
[0097] Not shown in FIG. 4, in one embodiment, the system 400 may
also include a data storage area for storing all versions of all
components that have ever been inspected by the system. Not shown
in FIG. 4, in one embodiment, the system 400 may also have a data
storage area for associating with the media sample and the scan of
the unique machine-readable tag a unique user-identification of an
inspector performing the inspection. The memory block 414 may also
have any other necessary memory storage locations in order to
effectuate the method(s) of the present invention, as would be
recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art.
[0098] Not shown in FIG. 4, in one embodiment, the system 400 may
also allow the inspector to declare sub-optimal conditions of the
unique machine-readable tags at each logical inspection point,
substantiated by corresponding media samples, if condition warrants
such declaration. Not shown in FIG. 4, in one embodiment, the
system 400 may also allow the inspector to annotate the media
samples in such ways that substantiate inspector statements of
problems with inspected components found during inspection. Not
shown in FIG. 4, in one embodiment, the system 400 may also allow
the inspector to substantiate inspector statements of problems with
inspected components by quoting standards from a standards
document.
[0099] Not shown in FIG. 4, in one embodiment, the system 400 may
also allow the inspector to generate a new work order item for any
logical inspection point having a problem found during inspection.
Not shown in FIG. 4, in one embodiment, the system 400 may also
allow an inspector to generate a problem reminder that requires the
inspector to revisit any problem found during an inspection in a
future inspection until the problem is fixed. Not shown in FIG. 4,
in one embodiment, the system 400 may also allow the inspector to
annotate the media samples in such ways that substantiate inspector
statements of any inspected components passing inspection.
[0100] Not shown in FIG. 4, in one embodiment, the system 400 may
also allow the inspector to associate with the media sample and the
scan of the unique machine-readable tag a location coordinate, such
as global positioning system (GPS) coordinates, cell phone tower
triangulation coordinates, and the like, via an associated GPS
device (not shown). Not shown in FIG. 4, in one embodiment, the
system 400 may also allow the inspector to associate with the media
sample and the scan of the unique machine-readable tag a unique
user-identification of the inspector performing the inspection.
[0101] FIG. 5 is an illustration 550 of a multi-functional handheld
device 500, in which some of the software and hardware components
of the system reside, in accordance with yet another embodiment of
the present industrial inspection system. The handheld device 500
has a built-in display device 506, which corresponds to the display
device 410 described in FIG. 4. The handheld device 500 also has a
keyboard 508, which corresponds to I/O device 420 described in FIG.
4. The handheld device 500 also has an RFID scanner 502, which
corresponds to the tag scanning input device 402 described in FIG.
4. Lastly, the handheld device 500 has a digital camera 504, which
corresponds to the media sample input device 406 described in FIG.
4. The handheld device 500 presented is but one of many possible
illustrative embodiments of the handheld device of the present
industrial inspection system. One of ordinary skill in the art
would appreciate that any other configuration of components that
make up the handheld device 500, as well as any possible extensions
by other hardware components, are all within the spirit and scope
of the present industrial inspection system.
[0102] FIG. 6 is an illustration of inspectors in physical
proximity to an inspection component 200, carrying out an
inspection with handheld devices, in accordance with yet another
embodiment of the present industrial inspection system. The
inspectors 604 and 605 are standing around article 200, which in
this case is the mast section of a tower crane as shown earlier in
FIG. 2. Inspector 604 is in the process of inspecting the welding
of joint 212 of the mast section, while inspector 605 is in the
process of inspecting the welding of joint 208 of the mast section.
They are both using industrial inspection handheld device 500, as
presented in detail in FIG. 5.
[0103] Inspector 604 is more specifically in the process of using
industrial inspection handheld device 500, even more specifically
embedded RFID reader 502, to scan RFID tag 218 via radio frequency
communication channel 602. Since inspector 604 is within proximity
of the inspected component, the welding of joint 212, which also
serves as a logical inspection point for this inspection, he is
able to successfully scan the RFID tag 218 because it is within the
range of radio frequency communication channel 602.
[0104] Inspector 605 is more specifically in the process of using
industrial inspection handheld device 500, even more specifically
embedded digital camera 504 of FIG. 5, to take a photograph of a
view 606 of welded joint 208 of tower crane mast section 200.
Welded joint 208 in this case plays the role of both the inspected
component and the logical inspection point.
[0105] The diagram of the inspection system shown in FIG. 6 is but
one of many possible illustrative embodiments of the usage of the
present industrial inspection system. One of ordinary skill in the
art would appreciate that any other configuration, and
representation thereof, of a similar system in use, as well as any
possible extensions to the system, are all within the spirit and
scope of the present industrial inspection system.
[0106] FIG. 7 is a set of diagrams 700 of illustrative user
interfaces in an inspection system installed on different handheld
devices, in accordance with multiple embodiments of the present
industrial inspection system. User interfaces 702, 704 and 706
represent three possible embodiments of a user interface deployed
on handheld devices for taking a media sample and editing it. User
interfaces 702 and 704 are deployed on a Windows Mobile.RTM. device
while user interface 706 is deployed on an Apple iPhone.RTM.. User
interface 702 represents one possible UI design in which
tabularized pages allow the inspector to jump between sequential
stages of the inspection process. User interfaces 704 and 706 both
represent a possible UI design in which the inspector is presented
with iconographic buttons corresponding to the process steps of
taking a media sample and editing it. The diagrams presented in
FIG. 7 are but some of many possible illustrative embodiments of
the present industrial inspection system. One of ordinary skill in
the art would appreciate that any other configuration of objects in
a user interface, on any other handheld device, as well as any
possible extensions to the set of functions presented in the user
interfaces of FIG. 7, are all within the spirit and scope of the
present industrial inspection system.
[0107] FIG. 8 is a diagram of an illustrative user interface 800 in
an inspection system, in accordance with another embodiment of the
present industrial inspection system. It consists of an image box
802 which is used to display an image along with overlaid objects,
and a button group 806 that contains iconographic buttons for each
function that the inspector can execute during the process of
taking and editing a media sample. For example, if button 804 is
pressed, the software activates the handheld device's digital
camera and places the captured image in image box 802. Other such
functions that can be found in button group 806 include undo, redo,
zoom in, zoom out, delete, annotate with circle, annotate with
rectangle, annotate with line, choose color, and any other function
of the like. The illustrative user interface 800 is but one of many
possible illustrative embodiments of the present industrial
inspection system. One of ordinary skill in the art would
appreciate that any other configuration of objects in a user
interface, as well as any possible extensions to the set of
functions presented in the user interface 800, are all within the
spirit and scope of the present industrial inspection system.
[0108] FIG. 9 is an illustration of an inspector carrying out an
inspection of wind turbine 902 and wind turbine 904 in accordance
with yet another embodiment of the present industrial inspection
system. The inspector 906 is standing next to the tower and
foundation sections of wind turbine 904. The inspector 906 is using
industrial inspection handheld device 908 (shown in detail in FIG.
5). Inspector 906 is more specifically in the process of using
industrial inspection handheld device 908, even more specifically
having an embedded RFID reader, to scan RFID tag 912 on tower
section of wind turbine 904, via radio frequency communication
channel 910. Since inspector 906 is within proximity of the
inspected component, he is able to successfully scan the RFID tag
912 because it is within the range of radio frequency communication
channel 910.
[0109] The illustration shown in FIG. 9 is but one of many possible
illustrative embodiments of the usage of the present industrial
inspection system. One of ordinary skill in the art would
appreciate that many possible uses of the present industrial
inspection system are all within the spirit and scope of the
present industrial inspection system, including, but not limited
to, inspections of renewable energy systems and distributed energy
systems, including wind turbines, solar photovoltaic, solar thermal
plants, co-generation plants, biomass-fueled power plants, carbon
sequestration projects, enhanced oil recovery systems, and the
like.
[0110] Some embodiments of the present industrial inspection system
may contain a correlation engine and an alerting engine for
correlating and alerting on patterns of behavior that may indicate
potential patterns of improper inspection behavior. The correlation
engine correlates any subset of inspection data segmented as
inspection events, with other inspection data, as well as data
coming from numerous other sources, including data from sensors and
from third-party systems, as described in U.S. Pat. No. 7,382,244,
filed on Oct. 4, 2007 and issued on Jun. 3, 2008, and incorporated
by reference in its entirety herein. An alerting engine generates
one or more alerts and performs one or more actions based on the
correlation performed by the correlation engine.
[0111] FIG. 10 is an illustration of a possible use-case of the
present invention in relation to a hand-held device with a camera
and a touch-sensitive display, such as an Apple iPhone.RTM. 1000 or
other like device. Users of an Apple iPhone.RTM. 1000 may wish to
generate inspection reports directly on the iPhone.RTM. 1000
together with an RFID reader that is an accessory to the iPhone for
reading the machine-readable tags.
[0112] FIG. 11 shows a flowchart for cropping an image taken by an
imaging device or a quotation taken from a reference document using
a simplified process on the handheld device ("IMAGE INTERFACE").
Process 1100 begins at step 1102, where an image is taken by an
imaging device or an image is captured of a portion of the
reference document, or in some other way provided to the process
1100. In step 1104, the image is displayed on the touch sensitive
display or other display of the handheld device. In step 1106, the
user may click or tap (using a finger, a stylus, a mouse, or other
device) at a lower-left hand (LLH) location where the crop is to
begin. In step 1108, the user may click or tap (using the finger,
the stylus, the mouse, or other device) at an upper-right hand
(URH) location where the crop is to end. (Any combination of two
coordinates are also possible.) In step 1110, the image is cropped
between the LLH location and the URH location. Finally, in step
1112, the cropped image is displayed for the user's confirmation.
At this point (not shown), the user may cancel, undo, or accept the
cropping operation. The process ends in step 1114.
[0113] FIG. 12 shows a flowchart for annotating an image taken by
an imaging device or a quotation taken from a reference document
using a simplified process on the handheld device ("ANNOTATION
INTERFACE"). Process 1200 begins at step 1202, where the image is
retrieved from memory, retrieved directly from the IMAGE INTERFACE
of FIG. 11, or in some other way provided to the process 1200. In
step 1204, the image is displayed on the touch sensitive display or
other display of the handheld device. In step 1206, the user may
click or tap (using a finger, a stylus, a mouse, or other device)
at a LLH location where the annotation is to begin. In step 1208,
the user may click or tap (using the finger, the stylus, the mouse,
or other device) at an URH location where the annotation is to end.
In step 1210, the image is annotated between the LLH location and
the URH location. Finally, in step 1212, the annotated image is
displayed for the user's confirmation. At this point (not shown),
the user may cancel, undo, or accept the annotation operation. The
process ends in step 1214.
[0114] FIG. 13 illustrates a process for cropping images taken by
an imaging device or selecting and cropping quotations from a
reference document on the handheld device. FIG. 13 shows the image
selection step used to crop an image taken by an imagining device
or to crop a quotation from a portion of the reference document
1308. As explained in the co-pending patent application Ser. No.
12/507,039, which is herein incorporated by reference, a user may
use a hand 1312 (or a stylus, mouse, or other like device) to
select a first point corresponding to a corner of the image to be
cropped and via a simple hand movement, select a second point 1318
corresponding to an opposite corner of the image to be cropped. An
iconographic button 1314 may be depressed to UNDO the crop
operation and return to the captured image or the captured portion
of the reference document. A second UNDO operation may return the
user to the entire image or the entire reference document which may
be browsed for another selection.
[0115] Therefore, as shown in reference to FIGS. 11-13, a user of
the present invention may implement a selection, cropping, and
annotation operation on an image or quotation with very little hand
motion and very little input into the device, which is highly
desirable, or even mandatory, when operating in the field, for
example, during an inspection operation.
[0116] Now that the industrial inspection system and method of
operation has been described in great detail, a setup or
configuration operation for installing, setting up, and configuring
the industrial inspection system will now be described, with
reference to the parts of the industrial inspection system that
need to be setup.
[0117] The first radio-frequency tags were developed and patented
in the 1970s, which to date dominate the machine readable tags
available on the market. Thanks to this technological breakthrough,
new advancements in hardware and software continue to allow for
innovative and useful organizational systems to improve the
efficiency of business throughout the world. In particular,
antiquated pen and paper inspection systems lack the speed,
efficiency, and safety alerts that digital inspection systems
offer.
[0118] The foundation of a modern digital inspection system
provides a simple way to collect, analyze, and organize information
in a manner that remains user friendly. A supervisor implements the
hardware and software that future inspectors utilize to ensure
industrial safety and inspection compliance. The supervisor can be
the inspector himself. The first step in creating a useful
inspection system involves physically setting up the
machine-readable tags to the desired components, and inputting
relevant information into a software database by the supervisor.
Once the components are entered into a central database, an
organizational tree or hierarchy will setup how the components
relate to one another. The database software assigns unique tag
identification numbers to the machine readable tags which also
correlate to the physical assets. The virtual objects, which
represent relationships between physical objects, include projects,
installations, and storage areas while the physical objects include
assets and components.
[0119] Project, installation, and storage hierarchies, also known
as virtual objects, not only assist in inventory tracking, but also
show the end users how to assemble the final industrial product,
and ensure inspection compliance. The project is the location of
the construction site where the assets are stored and combined to
create the installation. The term installation in the crane and
construction-hoist industries refers to a particular installation
of a tower crane or hoist. The term storage area refers to the
location of the disassembled industrial equipment before or after
the assembly of an installation. The term logical inspection point
refers to the inspection locations input by a supervisor into the
inspection system that the inspector must inspect to ensure
compliance. The logical inspection point associates actions
required with any asset or relationship between assets. Each
logical inspection point may utilize machine readable tags when
needed, however, not all logical inspection points require a
machine readable tag. Typically, a logical inspection point
comprise inspection conditions that need to be satisfied, along
with actions such as recording a media sample, time stamp, location
coordinates, such as GPS or cell-phone triangulation and the like,
identification of the inspector, and an encrypted security
signature to confirm that inspection actions actually occurred.
[0120] In the case of an industrial rental company, the supervisor
should be a licensed and qualified person from the company that
installs and sets up the software and hardware for the rented
industrial equipment for use by subsequent inspectors. The
supervisor requires all necessary experience and safety knowledge,
such as specific inspection codes, required maintenance actions,
and any other relevant information required to ensure safety of the
industrial equipment. Before the industrial equipment leaves the
storage area, the supervisor must first input unique identification
numbers of all machine readable tags and identification numbers of
the unique assets that the tags refer to. The software organizes
this information into a database as a hierarchy of virtual objects
representing the physical assets associated with machine readable
tags that will attach to the components. The supervisor physically
attaches the machine readable tags to the associated components,
and can take media samples, a time stamp, location coordinates,
identification of the supervisor, and an encrypted security
signature for use to later compare and contrast to the same
information gathered by future inspectors. The media samples taken
by the supervisor assist the inspector in locating the tags to scan
with the tag reader, and can also verify the condition of the
equipment.
[0121] The software implemented with the central database allows
the supervisor to utilize pre-existing virtual components to setup
new installations. If an entry inputted already exists or remains
similar to an existing component in the system, the software
prompts the user to avoid redundant entries. For example, the
supervisor could input a control cabinet with identification number
AZ48, at that time creating the "control cabinet" type in the
system. Later, if he wanted to input another control cabinet with
identification number AZ49, he could choose the already configured
type "control cabinet" without having to create the type again. If
the user chooses to edit a pre-existing component type, the
database will create a new component with a unique identification
number preserving the pre-existing one. After the creation of the
basic organization framework, additional text-based information,
such as inspection code compliance forms, GPS locations, and media
samples of the physical assets, can be use with the inspection
process. Instead of simply checking off inspection criteria common
on traditional pen and paper solutions, the new method may in one
embodiment require that the inspector take media samples of the
inspection points along with recording location coordinates and
annotations to provide the database submissions to include proof of
inspection and feedback of any potential issues.
[0122] In order to ensure that a properly trained and authorized
inspector is actually carrying out the inspection (rather than a
surrogate, for example), various authentication methods may be used
to authenticate the inspector, including but not limited to,
biometric information, such as analogue signature, RFID swipe of
card badge, photograph of inspector, thumbprint, facial
recognition, eye retina scan, and the like. The inspector may be
required to submit a biometric authentication as part of starting
or ending an inspection report.
[0123] The interaction of hardware and software creates a virtual
version out of the physical elements being tracked or inspected
which makes the organization simple and easy. In one embodiment, by
requiring a media sample, time stamp, location coordinates,
identification of the inspector, and an encrypted security
signature versus a traditional check sheet, greatly decreases of
the chances of an industrial disaster. In the event that the
inspector discovers a safety violation, the process of reporting
the violation involves a database query for the component or
components involved. The inspector can then select from a
collection of violation templates previously created by the
supervisor. Standards incorporated in the violation templates allow
the inspector to select which codes correspond to the violation.
The templates can also prompt the inspector to annotate an
explanation of the violation. Citing specific code and annotating a
clear explanation ensures that there is no question as to required
follow-up actions. The violation template requires sections for the
inspector to input media samples, a time stamp, GPS location,
identification of the inspector, and an encrypted security
signature to confirm that part of the inspection.
[0124] For example, a storage area could comprise a warehouse
facility's loading dock or yard for long term storage, in which
crane assets are transported to the project. The machine readable
tags greatly assist in taking inventory of all of the crane assets
while awaiting future use and help keep track of the condition and
location before transportation to future projects. In this case,
the project represents the construction site in which a skyscraper
requires a crane. Once the crane assets arrives at the project, a
pre-installation inspection utilizing the machine readable tag
reader and central database software accounts for each asset by
taking an inventory and ensuring that the assets arrive undamaged.
After the inspection, information from the machine readable tags
assists the end user with the placement and assembly of the assets
to create the installation. During the assembly of the assets, the
machine readable tags interface with the reader to enforce logical
inspection points. For example, a three piece boom requiring
tightening of the bolts and also ensuring that the boom itself
remains perfectly straight and balanced. Overlooking these logical
inspection points in the past caused catastrophic safety failures,
which are now enforced by requiring a media sample, time stamp, GPS
location, identification of inspector, and an encrypted security
signature to prevent any tampering with the inspection report sent
from the onsite hardware to the central database. Upon completion
of the inspection, the software verifies all inspection
requirements to ensure that all machine readable tags were scanned
and that all required actions were completed. Once verified, the
software compiles the information into a user-readable report that
the device can email or print for local record keeping. This same
information remains stored on the mobile device, which also copies
the file to the remote central database to ensure redundancy of the
inspection information. The local copy of the remote database may
only synchronize from the remote database before the inspection,
and any changes to the local database need to be committed or
synchronized back to the main remote database only after the
completion of the inspection. The inspector's rights in the
information to the central database should constrain him to prevent
any tampering with existing templates created by his
supervisor.
[0125] According to one embodiment of the invention, the supervisor
and inspector can add and retrieve parts from a list of parts
previously uploaded into the central database. For example, how
does an inspector get a list of assets he is inspecting when he is
a part of the Department of Building (DOB), but an owner of the
crane is not a subscriber to the system? The crane being inspected
may not be configured for use with the industrial inspection
system, and may have no machine readable tags. In the inspection
industry, nobody is making a global database of parts that can be
assembled on the fly by inspectors, that is, a shared editable
database of industrial parts. Therefore, there would not be a need
to re-enter the information if someone has already entered
information about that particular industrial part before. For
example, a previous user may have already put in the name, the
make, the model, and the year it was first built for a particular
industrial part an inspector may discover in the field, hence
facilitating inspections, and particularly inspections on assets
that may not have been previously configured for use with the
industrial inspection compliance system.
[0126] According to one embodiment of the invention, the supervisor
and inspector can add and retrieve reference documents (RefDocs,
pending trademark), for example, crane manuals, part manuals,
specification sheets, and any other documents related to the
industrial equipment, into or from the central database. Then, the
supervisor or inspector can capture, crop, and annotate a
quotation, as previously described, from a PDF.RTM. of the
reference document, and insert into the annotated quotation into
the inspection template.
[0127] According to one embodiment of the invention, the industrial
inspection and compliance system may alert on various criteria,
such as patterns of events having to do with the inspectors,
patterns of events having to do with assets, as well as patterns of
events having to do with manufacturer's warranty, various regulator
frameworks, and even "campaign bulletins."
[0128] Examples of events having to do with inspectors include
schedule slips; logistics; the inspectors not being where they are
supposed to be; inspectors taking too long to do inspections;
inspector grading systems and performance metrics. Examples of
events having to do with assets include assets that have had
problems with them in the past (can now find out if a rented piece
of crane equipment had problems in the past); alerts on counterfeit
parts; when a tagged component isn't scanned when it leaves the
storage area, gets out to the field, and is scanned, but no entry
that it left the storage area; and scanning something that goes out
to ship but never arrives. Examples of patterns of events having to
do with manufacturer's warranty include maintenance within a
designated time frame; and any other regulatory framework having to
do with enforcing inspections, including federal, state, and local
regulator frameworks.
[0129] Other examples of alerts include "campaign bulletins," which
provide information that does not initiate a recall; however, the
manufacturer believes that it warrants attention to a particular
issue. This particular issue could help provide owners of assets
with helpful information on proper use of the equipment to prevent
potential disaster. Campaign bulletins can also include best
practices and guidelines to help prevent equipment failure sent
from the manufacturer to an equipment owner or renter.
[0130] Yet another example of alerts include statistical analysis
to alert if, for example, an operator is authorizing more missing
data than everyone else. For example, statistical analysis on users
making exceptions to the sampling of normally required unique data
object components at a higher than expected rate.
[0131] FIG. 14 shows an organizational hierarchy of projects,
installations, assets, and components in an industrial inspection
system. Element 1401 represents a project, which is, for example, a
location of the construction site where the assets are stored and
combined to create element 1403, which represents an installation.
The term installation in the crane and construction-hoist
industries refers to a single predetermined installation of a tower
crane or hoist. Element 1405 represents a non-unique asset, while
element 1407 represents a unique asset. Assets may be stored in a
storage area 1413 upon arriving and before being assembled into an
installation 1403. Unique assets may be further segmented into
components, such as element 1409. Dashed area 1411 surrounds unique
assets.
[0132] FIG. 15 shows a hierarchy of unique and non-unique assets as
well as components. Element 1501 encompasses any object or piece of
matter which are called assets, element 1503. Assets come in two
types: unique assets (element 1505) and non-unique assets (element
1507). Unique assets may be further subdivided into components
(element 1509). Everything in the universe 1501 is an asset 1503
that may be tracked. Unique assets have unique serial numbers
associated with each asset (e.g., each unassembled part of a crane
would be a unique asset and would have a unique serial number
associated with it). Unique assets may be further segmented into
one or more components (a unique asset is the sum of its
components, no more and no less). Every part of an asset is part of
one component, and components do not overlap. Each component may
have at most one machine readable tag. An asset may be composed of
only 1 component, but an asset may not have zero components. For
example, a crane boom (asset) may have a top component, a bottom
component, and a middle component. Unique assets may or may not
have associated machine readable tags.
[0133] Non-unique assets, in contract to unique assets, do not have
unique serial numbers associated with them. For example, a bag of
bolts or a box of bricks would be examples of non-unique assets.
Each non-unique asset may have at most one machine readable tag.
However, a non-unique asset may not be further broken down into
components. Each non-unique asset may be thought of as being made
up of one and only one component--itself! An installation is made
up of one or more unique assets (see above), and each asset belongs
to one and only one installation. An installation may also include
one or more non-unique assets (see above), and each non-unique
assets belongs to one and only one installation. In addition to
installations, a project may have one or more storage areas, which
are not part of any installation. Each storage area may have one or
more unique assets as well as one or more non-unique assets.
[0134] FIG. 16 shows a flowchart of a process 1600 for installing
and configuring an industrial inspection system on a handheld
device. The process starts at step 1601, and then moves to step
1603 which allows for the definition of storage area(s) and
installation(s). Next, step 1605 assets are assigned into either
storage areas or installations. In step 1607, the unique assets are
further segmented into components. Once all the assets are defined,
at step 1609, logical inspection points are assigned, which may
include inspection criteria and standard codes required to be
evaluated by an inspector. After completion of the inspection setup
information, in step 1613, tag locations are assigned for each
machine readable tag. Once physically attached, in step 1615, a
media sample of each machine readable tag is captured, which helps
locate the tag for future inspections. In step 1617, location
coordinates of the logical inspection points are captured to ensure
inspection compliance, and assist with inventory of the assets.
Inventory of the machine readable tags also assists with the
prevention of counterfeit assets being switched with authentic
assets. After all data required by the inspection setup are
collected, a unique data object is encapsulated storing all of this
information, as shown in step 1619. The process ends in step
1621.
[0135] In one embodiment, a data object is stored for at least one
logical inspection point, containing each of a machine readable
tag, a media sample, and a location coordinate of the logical
inspection point. According to one embodiment of the invention,
when one of these data is not available (due to a broken device,
bad gps signal, etc.), it is possible to store the absence of said
data as well, possibly requiring an operator signature or biometric
to authorize the missing data. For example, the unique
machine-readable tag serial number object can consist of either the
unique machine-readable tag serial number itself or an explanation
of why the unique machine-readable tag serial number was not
available along to a biometric or digital signature. In VB code,
Nullable(Of UniqueMachineReadableTagSerialNumber). For example, the
media sample object can consisting of either the media sample
itself or an explanation of why a media sample was not taken along
with a biometric or digital signature. In VB code, Nullable(Of
MediaSample). For example, the location coordinates object can
consist of either the location coordinates themselves or an
explanation of why the location coordinates were not available
along to a biometric or digital signature. In VB code, Nullable(Of
LocationCoordinates). An absence of any component of the unique
data object is may be replaced with an explanation of why it was
not included.
[0136] While the methods disclosed herein have been described and
shown with reference to particular operations performed in a
particular order, it will be understood that these operations may
be combined, sub-divided, or re-ordered to form equivalent methods
without departing from the teachings of the present invention.
Accordingly, unless specifically indicated herein, the order and
grouping of the operations is not a limitation of the present
invention.
[0137] While the invention has been particularly shown and
described with reference to embodiments thereof, it will be
understood by those skilled in the art that various other changes
in the form and details may be made without departing from the
spirit and scope of the invention.
* * * * *