started on sigma delta analysis

submission_thesis/CH3_FMEA_criticism/copy.tex

@@ -1,4 +1,6 @@
-\section{Origin of FMEA}
+\section{Historical Origins of FMEA}
+\subsection{FMEA designed for simple electro-mechanical systems}
+
 \section{Reasoning Distance}
 \section{Comparison Complexity}
 

submission_thesis/CH5_Examples/copy.tex

@@ -973,7 +973,7 @@ when it becomes a V2 follower).
 \end{figure}
 
 The {\fm} $DiffAMPIncorrect$ may seem like a vague {\fm}---however, this {\fm} is currently impossible to detect---
-in fault finding terminology~\cite{garrett}~\cite{mawokinski} this {\fm} is said to be unobservable, and in EN61508
+in fault finding terminology~\cite{garrett}~\cite{maikowski} this {\fm} is said to be unobservable, and in EN61508
 terminology is called an undetectable fault.
 Were this failure to have safety implications this FMMD analysis will have revealed
 the un-observability and  prompt re-design of this 
@@ -1669,6 +1669,9 @@ The following example shows the analysis of a mixed analogue and digital circuit
 
 
 
+\nocite{f77}
+\nocite{sccs}
+\nocite{electronicssysapproach}
 
 \begin{figure}[h]
  \centering
@@ -1698,6 +1701,105 @@ of the input voltage.
 The output of the flip flop, is now cleaned as an analogue signal
 (i.e. a digital 0 becomes a -ve voltage and a digital 1 becomes a +ve voltage)
 and fed into the summing integrator completing the negative feedback loop.
+
+\subsection{FMMD analysis of $\Sigma \Delta $ADC}
+
+The partslist for the $\Sigma \Delta $ADC
+
+$$\{ IC1, IC2, IC3 IC4 \} $$.
+
+IC1,2 and 3 are all Op-amps and we have failure modes from section~\ref{sec:opampfm}.
+
+$$ fm(OPAMP) = \{ HIGH, LOW, NOOP, LOW\_SLEW \} $$
+
+We examine the literature for a failure model for the D-type flip flop~\cite{fmd91}[3-105], the CD4013B~\cite{cd4013Bds},
+and obtain its failure modes, which we can express using the $fm$ function:
+
+$$ fm ( CD4013B) = \{ HIGH, LOW, NOOP \} $$
+
+The resistors and capacitor failure modes we take from EN298~\cite{en298}[An.A]
+
+$$ fm ( R ) = \{OPEN, SHORT\} $$
+
+
+$$ fm ( C) = \{OPEN, SHORT\} $$
+
+We now need to choose {\fgs}. The signal path is circular, but we can start
+with the input voltage, which is applied to $R2$, we can term this voltage $V_{in}$.
+$R2$ and $R1$ form a summing junction to IC1.
+$R1$ supplies the feedback voltage for the ADC, we can term this voltage as $V_{fb}$
+This can be our first {\fg}. For the symptoms, we have to think in terms of the effect
+on its performance as a summing junction and not be
+distracted by the integrator formed by $C_1$ and $IC1$.
+
+$$G^0_1 = \{R1, R2\}$$
+
+\begin{table}[h+]
+\caption{R1,R2 Summing Junction: Failure Mode Effects Analysis} % title of Table
+\label{tbl:sumj}
+
+\begin{tabular}{|| l | l | c | c | l ||} \hline
+ \textbf{Failure Scenario} & &  \textbf{failure result}         &   & \textbf{Symptom}          \\ 
+                           & &                          &   &                             \\
+               \hline\hline 
+  FS1: $R1$  $OPEN$        &  &   $V_{in}$ dominates input              &  &     $V_{in} DOM$                     \\    
+  FS2: $R1$  $SHORT$        &  &  $V_{fb}$ dominates input               &  &     $V_{fb} DOM$                     \\   \hline 
+  FS3: $R2$  $OPEN$        &  &   $V_{fb}$ dominates input            &  &     $V_{fb} DOM$                     \\  
+  FS4: $R2$  $SHORT$        &  &  $V_{in}$ dominates input              &  &     $V_{in} DOM$                     \\ \hline 
+
+\hline
+
+\end{tabular}
+\end{table} 
+
+
+From the analysis in table~\ref{tbl:sumj}, we can now create a derived component
+$SUMJ$ which has the failure modes from collecting its symptoms.
+We can state 
+
+$$ fm(SUMJ) = \{ V_{in} DOM, V_{in} DOM \} $$
+
+
+Following along the signal path, the next functional group is the integrator.
+This integrator is simply  by $IC2$. This performs the function of
+isolating the integrator from any load on its output. We can therefore include this as well.
+
+$$G^0_2 = \{IC1, C1, IC2\}$$
+
+
+
+\begin{table}[h+]
+\caption{IC1,C1,IC2 Buffered Integrator: Failure Mode Effects Analysis} % title of Table
+\label{tbl:intg}
+
+\begin{tabular}{|| l | l | c | c | l ||} \hline
+ \textbf{Failure Scenario} & &  \textbf{failure result }         &   & \textbf{Symptom}          \\ 
+                           & &                          &   &                             \\
+               \hline \hline 
+  FS1: $IC1$  $HIGH$        &  &    output perm. high            &  &   HIGH                 \\    
+  FS2: $IC1$  $LOW$         &  &    output perm. low            &  &   LOW                 \\   \hline 
+  FS3: $IC1$  $NOOP$        &  &    no current to drive C1            &  &   NO\_INTEGRATION                 \\  
+  FS4: $IC1$  $LOW\_SLEW$   &  &   signal delay to C1            &  &   NO\_INTEGRATION                 \\ \hline 
+
+  FS3: $C1$  $OPEN$         &  &   no   capacitance            &  &      NO\_INTEGRATION               \\  
+  FS4: $C1$  $SHORT$        &  &    no   capacitance             &  &       NO\_INTEGRATION                \\ \hline 
+
+\hline 
+  FS1: $IC2$  $HIGH$        &  &     output perm. high             &  &      HIGH              \\    
+  FS2: $IC2$  $LOW$         &  &     output perm. low              &  &      LOW              \\   \hline 
+  FS3: $IC2$  $NOOP$        &  &    no current drive            &  &      LOW              \\  
+  FS4: $IC2$  $LOW\_SLEW$   &  &    delayed signal            &  &      LOW\_SLEW              \\ \hline 
+\hline
+
+\end{tabular}
+\end{table} 
+
+
+From the analysis in table~\ref{tbl:intg}, we can now create a derived component
+$SUMJ$ which has the failure modes from collecting its symptoms.
+We can state 
+
+$$ fm (SUMJ) = \{ HIGH, LOW,  NO\_INTEGRATION ,  LOW\_SLEW  \} $$
 % ]
 % into
 % 
@@ -2044,8 +2146,9 @@ by separate wires and the resistance in those are effectively cancelled
 out by considering the voltage reading over $R_3$ to be relative.
 %
 The Pt100 element is a precision part and will be chosen for a specified accuracy/tolerance range.
-One or other of the load resistors (the one we measure current over) should
+One or other of the load resistors (the one we measure current over) should also
-be of a specified accuracy.
+be of a specified accuracy\footnote{It is common for standard surface mount resistors to have an 
+accuracy of $\pm 1\%$. Higher accuracy parts may be specified}
 %
 The \ohms{2k2} loading resistors should have a good temperature co-effecient
 (i.e. $\leq \; 50(ppm)\Delta R \propto \Delta \oc $).
@@ -2843,7 +2946,7 @@ This voltage range forms our input requirement.
 We can now examine a software function that performs a conversion from the voltage read to 
 a per~mil representation of the {\ft} input current.
 %
-For the purpose of example the `C' programming language~\cite{kandr} is used.
+For the purpose of example the `C' programming language~\cite{DBLP:books/ph/KernighanR88} is used.
 We initially  assume a function \textbf{read\_ADC} which returns a floating point %double precision 
 value which represents the voltage read (see code sample in figure~\ref{fig:code_read_4_20_input}).
 

submission_thesis/mybib.bib

@@ -191,8 +191,29 @@
 }
 
 
+@book{electronicssysapproach,
+  added-at = {2011-03-24T00:00:00.000+0100},
+  author = {Storey, Neil},
+  biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2b735c0730d88e197a34a649611f025c9/dblp},
+  interhash = {db538f6c4e7c703ae5b1bda8764e626a},
+  intrahash = {b735c0730d88e197a34a649611f025c9},
+  isbn = {978-0-13-129396-0},
+  keywords = {dblp},
+  pages = {I-XII, 1-645},
+  publisher = {Pearson / Prentice Hall},
+  timestamp = {2011-03-24T00:00:00.000+0100},
+  title = {Electronics - a systems approach (4. ed.).},
+  year = 2009
+}
 
 
+@PHDTHESIS{garrett,
+    AUTHOR = "Chris Garrett",
+    TITLE = "Functional diagnosis strategies for analog systems using heuristic programming techniques",
+    SCHOOL = "Brighton University, School of Electrical Engineering",
+    YEAR = "1989"
+}
+
 @PHDTHESIS{maikowski,
     AUTHOR = "Leo M Maikowski",
     TITLE = "Tolreranced Multiple Fault Diagnosis of Analog Circuits",