6.0 On-Line Prediction - Control of Batch Processes

6.
0 On-line Control of Batch

Processes
(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.
Differences from Control of Continuous Processes

• Finite time duration of batches
• Quality variables available only after completion of batch
– End point control of final quality
– Inferential control of quality using on-line data
– Control is effectively open-loop with respect to final quality
• Batches are time-varying and nonlinear
– Set-points are time varying (analogous to start-ups of continuous
processes)
– Effects of MV’s are time varying and highly nonlinear:
• MV’s have very different effects at different times during the batch
– Examples
• Product quality is specified for each product, not a variable

to optimize
– Typical chemical vs. refinery problem
– Hard constraints are not as important
1
Control of Batch Processes
• Levels of Control:
1. Automated recipe implementation: sequencing of steps, ingredient
additions, downloading pre-programmed set-point trajectories, etc.
2. Low-level control: Set point tracking of process variable trajectories
• (e.g. temperature control by manipulating coolant flow to jacket)
– PID controllers
3. High-level control: Model-based control over final product quality
• Main focus of ProSensus’ technology
• High Level Control: Operating strategies that adjust the operation

of the batch history in order to achieve some objective such as to
achieve predefined final product properties or to track pre-specified
process variable trajectories
Trajectory following control (Base level)

• Process variable trajectory set-points are either pre-specified or
obtained from the higher level product quality controller
• Want controller to track these set point trajectories
• Common approach – PID’s tuned

to give reasonable average
performance.
• MPC approach can do better
– looks ahead
– Handles nonlinearities due to
time varying dynamics
– Handles constraints
– But usually not worth effort
• Not many cases where very tight
control needed - PID OK
• Will not discuss here
– References in notes
2
High Level Control of Final Quality
• Assume vector of final attributes ydesired is specified for any product
• No desire to optimize this – once a grade is specified – control to it!
• Optimization may lead to new grades, but then control to new ydesired
• Exceptions are to maximize yields, etc.
• Control consists of on-line manipulated variable trajectory changes in response to
measurements collected from the system and their projected effect on product
quality
– Models: Both theoretical and empirical
• Will cover only empirical models (these often include theoretical calculations)
• For existing processes there is generally no advantage to theoretical models
• Types of control:
– Batch-to-batch (information from previous batch(s) used to adjust
next one)
• Only useful if there is a predictable batch-to-batch disturbance
– Within batch (information obtained during current batch is also
used for control)
• Much more powerful than batch-to-batch control
Theoretical Models for On-line Control ?

• Theoretical models useful for interpretation, design, and
off-line optimization
• Not useful for on-line industrial control unless can
successfully achieve all of the following steps
– Develop a good theoretical model
– Incorporate measurements on variables where have no good theory (eg
agitator power, pH, activity)
– Fit the model to process data
– Develop a non-linear observer for disturbance and state reconstruction
– Design a non-linear controller that can be implemented in real time
– Address the long term maintenance of such a complex control system
• But some approaches that use only the model necessary
and sufficient conditions for optimality are fairly simple
– D. Kozub and J.F. MacGregor, 1992. Feedback Control of Polymer Quality in
Semi-Batch Copolymerization Reactors, Chem. Eng. Sci., 47, pp. 929-942.
3
Control of final batch product quality via LV models
and mid-course corrections
• Empirical LV model approaches are much simpler and can
generally achieve equivalent results
• Objective is to control final product quality
– e.g. control of final particle size distribution (PSD)
• Using all data up to some decision time, predict final
quality with PLS model
• If predicted quality is outside a desired window, then
make mid-course correction(s) to the batch
– One-time adjustment: addition of a dose of reagent, raise
or lower temperature, etc.
– Or adjust trajectories for certain variables for rest of batch
– Or adjust end point (time) of the batch
– Analogy to NASA mid-course rocket trajectory adjustment in
moon missions
•
(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc. Continual frequent adjustments are generally not welcome
Prediction of Final Quality
• Prediction of final quality is a key

• Prediction can be done at any time during the batch with the
Landmark or BWU PLS approaches
– Use data available up to the current point of the batch
– Use models to predict the final product quality attributes or
other aspects of the trajectories that are important.
• Either different PLS models built at each decision interval for yfinal
• Or one overall model and missing data imputation to impute the
final scores (τnewT) for the current batch and get predicted final
T T
end properties as yˆ = τ newC
• In either case the PLS models can handle the large # of trajectory
measurements, using batch-wise unfolding.
4
Concept: mid-course corrective control
Final PSD
Prediction
On-line
measurements (Tr)
Trajectories
o
t2
*
Decision Points
t1
Reduced space
uc0 uc1 time
Off-line
measurements
Optimization of an objective at each decision point
Solve a Quadratic Programming (QP) problem at each

decision point based on all data available up to that point
MIN {( yˆ − y
mv
sp )T W1 ( yˆ − y sp ) + ( mv − mv sp )T W2 ( mv − mv sp ) + w3 SPE X + w4T 2 }
( yˆ , SPE , T 2 ) = PLS ( mv, x, z )
SPE X ≤ a1
T 2 ≤ a2
LB ≤ mv ≤ UB
Manipulated variable settings are defined at each decision point

using an optimizer.
5
Mid-course control of PSD (Simulation)
Typical training data: Normal batch histories and a few with
mid-course changes
-7
x 10 Training data region
1.4
1.2
- Target
1 : Training data
PSD (number)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
radius (nm)
Flores-Cerillo, J. and MacGregor, J.F. “Control of Particle Size Distributions in Emulsion Polymerization
using Mid-Course Correction Policies”, Ind. & Eng. Chem. Res., 41, 1805-1814, 2001
Mid-course correction control of PSD

Adjustments: emulsifier injection and batch end time adjustment
Control results in LV space PSD results for batch 2

Target
x 10
-8
Control of normalized PSD
9
After
8 2
control
Particle number distribution (mol/l-nm)
2 No Control
1
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
radius (nm)
6
Mid-course control – Mitsubishi Chemicals
(Similar principles in bioprocess applications)
• Chemical industry has many nearly identical batch control
problems
• Example: Mitsubishi chemicals (1999-2000)
– Emulsion polymerization (particles ~ 70 nm diameter)
– Fine control of final particle size distribution was critical
– Many disturbances arising from raw materials and impurities –
led to variations in nucleation of particles and hence variable
final particle size
– Multivariate PLS model built to model final diameter from
measured trajectories on process variables
• Historical batch data
• Few DOE runs
– Mid-course correction to achieve the desired diameter
• Control only taken if quality outside a desired window (~10-15%
of the batches needed control)
13
Control of Particle Size via mid-course correction

- Mitsubishi Chemicals (1999)
• Shown are trajectories of one variable from many batches
• At decision point – predict final quality attributes (Y) – if outside target
region – take action
Predicted Y’s
Heat release Decision point ?
trajectories
from Y2
different
batches
Action Y1
Time interval
Y. Yabuki, T. Nagasawa and J.F. MacGregor, “An Industrial Experience with Product Quality Control in Semi-Batch
Processes”, Computers & Chem. Eng., 24, 585-590, 2000.
7
Industrial results (Mitsubishi Chemicals)
Mid-course control : before and after implementation
ProSensus’ ProBatchCONTROL
• Mitsubishi application was done as an in-house proprietary

project
• ProSensus’ ProBatchCONTROL is a commercial system, proven
in industry.
– Uses the ProSensus OnLine Calculation Server (PSOCS)
– Implements mid-course corrective control
• Major control vendors don’t offer this capability
8
ProSensus On-line Calculation Server
• State of the art on-line server

– Platform independent (Java)
– Allows connecting simultaneously to multiple data sources,
including OPC, JDBC
• Connection to any system with such OPC server capabilities:
– All control system vendor DCS or PLC’s (eg. Siemens, Honeywell, Emerson,
Invensys, etc.)
– Any databases with JDBC (ODBC) connectivity
– Any PAT instrument system with OPC capabilities
– Allows for any type of calculations/optimizations to be
embedded and implemented
• Combining PLS and fundamental models
• Advanced on-line preprocessing of data
• Optimization and control
System Components
9
• This technology is a unique ProSensus product

– Based on making mid-course corrections at one or more
decision points during the batch
– Based on using PLS batch models
• Include all Z, X and Y data blocks appropriate to each
decision point
• May use different models at each decision point
• May use different objective functions at each decision point
– On-line batch monitoring is embedded for free
• Multiple mid-course points are also defined for monitoring
• Based on mid-course correction concepts
• Allows specification of any number of control points
• Objectives can be different at each control point
– Control of final quality attributes
– Control of trajectory features
– Etc.
• Control via QP optimizations at each control point
Steps to set up a typical online process monitoring/control

system
10
Commercial application – Food Industry
• Fortune 100 client in food processing industry

– Batch frying
• Objectives:
– Decision point 1: Control some initial heating trajectory
features important in developing good surface characteristics in
final product
– Decision point 2: Control all final quality attributes to their
desired values (eg. moisture, oil, by-products)
– Additional considerations:
• Finish batch in minimum time
• Ensure that process variables are in correct range to immediately
start next batch.
• Incorporate batch-to-batch feedback control
– All these objectives included in the ProBatchCONTROL
Application to Batch Preparation of Food

measure quality
& quantity
measure properties
mixer conveyor
food
conveyor liquid
measure process
data
heaters
heating medium
11
Batch Data and Control Design
Use entire trajectories AND vital measured values to perform calculations
At key Control Points

in the batch perform a
calculation and send
results to Level 1 for
batch adjustment
System Objectives:
•Meet desired quality
targets
•Reduce variability
start end •Increase productivity
CP1 CP2
Control action taken on every batch at each decision point

•Differs from Mitsubishi case where control decision only taken ~12% of
batches (when quality projected to be outside a window)
Results
• ProBatch Controllers have been running 24 hours/day on
several processes
– More than 120,000 batches have been controlled by
ProBatchCONTROL
– >99.9% up-time
– Stable and repeatable batch operation (operators rely on it)
• Benefits:
0.08
– Great reduction variance of 0.07

Target
– all product quality attributes 0.06 with ProBatchCONTROL

USL
0.05
>50% reduction in Std. Deviation 0.04
0.03
>75% reduction in MSE without
0.02
ProBatchCONTROL
0.01
0
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Quality attribute
12
Benefits
• Allowed for optimized targets

0.08
0.07
USL
• Set points of some variables shifted 0.06

optimize targets
0.05
• Much better quality 0.04
• Reduced batch time – increased 0.03
productivity 0.02
0.01
0
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Quality attribute
• Increased throughput/batch 35
30
• ~25% increased change/batch 25
20
Batch 15
10
25%
weight 5
-5
-10
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Time
• Data analysis/control study led to many other improvements

• Energy efficiency through equipment modification
• Quality improvements through better PLC operation
Control of Batch Bioreactors
• Current practices for bioprocess reactor control:

– Important decisions:
• harvest (end-point) determination, nutrient additions, etc.
– Review current practice
• Present an alternative approach to bioprocess reactor control
based on PCA/PLS:
– Use much more of the data in the decision making, especially
on-line data
• Illustrate the approach:
– Feasibility study on a bioprocess (Biogen Idec)
13
Typical Univariate Approach for Harvest
A
B
C
Day x
if A < VCD @ day X, then harvest @ E (hrs)

B > VCD @ day X but < A, then harvest @ F (hrs)
VCD @ day X < C, then harvest @ G (hrs)
Typical Univariate Approach for Harvest

Harvest based on Cell Viability at Day X
CV measured ~once/day)
Day x
CV @ day X (%)
if CV > A @ day X, then harvest @ E (hrs)
CV < A @ day X, then harvest @ F (hrs)
14
Typical Univariate Approach for Feed Addition
Feed Addition
Feed addition on VCD
timing based on VCD
Use red line as

criterion
Nutrient Feed Criteria
VCD
Time (Days)
If VCD> A @ day Y, then add Nutrients

Otherwise, wait an additional 24 hours
Batch Control in Bioprocess Industry
• Current Practice in Bioprocess Industries:

– Single parameter approaches based on daily discrete
samples
– No focus on consistent final product quality
– Do not use all available information:
• No use of raw material data, prior batch results, nor all the
discrete and continuous operation data from the bioreactors
• Better alternative is to use PLS batch models:

– To integrate all information available
– To perform on-line batch quality prediction and control
decisions (harvest time / nutrient addition)
15
Biogen Idec Study: Data available for each run
Runs
Z X1 X2 X3 Xharvest dis Xharvest, continuous Y
Data on Data on
early harvest
reactors reactor Quality data
Raw •Yield, FQA’s
material
properties
• Will show results using only harvest reactor data (discrete &
continuous) in this preliminary study
• But data from all stages should eventually be used
Harvest Determination (Biogen Idec)
• Problem:
– Harvest determination is based on few discrete daily measurements.
• CV, VCD
– Final product quality is not considered in real time for harvest
decision
• Final quality attributes (FQA’s) are available only many weeks
later after the separation stages
• Multivariate latent variable approach:
– Use the measured continuous process variable trajectories
• Smoothed
– Build PLS model relating batch trajectory data to product final quality
– Use PLS model to provide on-line predictions of final quality
– Harvest decision based on behavior of predicted quality attributes
over the last 12-24 hours of the batch
32
16
BiogenIdec: End-point determination
Presented with Biogen at Bioprocess International Summit, June 2007
Major issue is predicting the correct harvest time for the batch
– Maximize yield
– Maintain quality variables within specified limits
• Problem: quality variables available only 6 weeks later after the
separation/purification stages
– Data available:
• Cell viability and density at several discrete times during the batch
• On-line trajectories of pH, DO, temperature, etc.
• Final product quality attributes (Y) (6 weeks later)
– Multivariate PLS approach
• PLS model based only last 12 hours of BWU process trajectory data and
history of cell viability and densities to predict y’s
– Most relevant because it shows the behavior of the cells towards the end
• Start applying the model as approach end using moving window of the
most recent 12 hours to continually update prediction of final quality
– Terminate (harvest) when quality shows signs of deteriorating
PLS modeling : observed vs predicted (FQA1)

• Fit and Cross-validated predictions (R2, Q2) of two PLS models of FQA1:
a) Using both discrete (CV, VCD) and dynamic (continuous) process data.
b) Using the discrete data only.
Dynamic Static data

data only
R2 62.3 33.6
Q2 46.1 9.2
– Model that uses only the discrete biologics data (CV, VCD)
does not predict well
– Model that also uses the on-line time varying trajectory data
predicts much better
17
Dynamic PLS model: On-line Predictions
• Predicted time trends for final quality parameters ‘FQA1’ and ‘FQA2’ for 8
batches
• At each time point, starting at ~12 hours before the end of the batch,
the PLS model is used to provide a prediction of the end-of-batch values
of the two (key) quality parameters
• Predictions updated at every time interval (plots below)
Predicted Predicted
FQA1 FQA2
35
Scenario for Harvest determination

• Go into harvest mode once the multivariate PLS predictions
show the batch quality is (i) deteriorating or (ii) approaching
the specification limits
• Batch 08: Continue batch longer: FQA’s both still improving
Predicted Predicted
FQA1 FQA2
36
18
• Batch 24: Stop batch early: Both FQA’s deteriorating and
approaching specification limits
Predicted Predicted
FQA1 FQA2
37

• Batch 24: Stop batch early: Both FQA’s deteriorating and
approaching specification limits
• Batch 17: Stop batch early: Both FQA’s flat but at or above spec.
limits
Predicted Predicted
FQA1 FQA2
38
19
Summary
• ProBatchCONTROL can achieve many objectives

– End point control
– Control of key trajectory features
– Control of final quality attributes
• Achieved via use of one or multiple PLS models applied at
different decision points
– No incentive for continuous control.
– Generally only a few decision points are needed
• Several very successful applications
• ProSensus’ ProBatchCONTROL system offers a complete
commercial solution.
Contact details
Phone: (905) 304-9433
Email: info@prosensus.ca
Web site: http://www.prosensus.ca
20

6.0 On-Line Prediction - Control of Batch Processes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

6.0 On-Line Prediction - Control of Batch Processes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

6.

0 On-line Control of Batch

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

Differences from Control of Continuous Processes

• Product quality is specified for each product, not a variable

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

• High Level Control: Operating strategies that adjust the operation

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

Trajectory following control (Base level)

• Common approach – PID’s tuned

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

Theoretical Models for On-line Control ?

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

Prediction of Final Quality

• Prediction of final quality is a key

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

Optimization of an objective at each decision point

Solve a Quadratic Programming (QP) problem at each

Manipulated variable settings are defined at each decision point

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

Mid-course correction control of PSD

Control results in LV space PSD results for batch 2

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

Control of Particle Size via mid-course correction

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

• Mitsubishi application was done as an in-house proprietary

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

• State of the art on-line server

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

• This technology is a unique ProSensus product

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

Steps to set up a typical online process monitoring/control

• Fortune 100 client in food processing industry

Application to Batch Preparation of Food

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

At key Control Points

Control action taken on every batch at each decision point

– Great reduction variance of 0.07

– all product quality attributes 0.06 with ProBatchCONTROL

>50% reduction in Std. Deviation 0.04

• Allowed for optimized targets

• Set points of some variables shifted 0.06

• Much better quality 0.04

• Reduced batch time – increased 0.03

• ~25% increased change/batch 25

• Data analysis/control study led to many other improvements

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

Control of Batch Bioreactors

• Current practices for bioprocess reactor control:

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

if A < VCD @ day X, then harvest @ E (hrs)

Typical Univariate Approach for Harvest

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

Use red line as

If VCD> A @ day Y, then add Nutrients

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

Batch Control in Bioprocess Industry

• Current Practice in Bioprocess Industries:

• Better alternative is to use PLS batch models:

(c) 2004-2012, ProSensus, Inc.

Z X1 X2 X3 Xharvest dis Xharvest, continuous Y