1 MUST HAVE SHOULD HAVE COULD HAVE. 2 Module # C Functions that need to be considered for Batch...
-
Upload
margaretmargaret-garrett -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
1
Transcript of 1 MUST HAVE SHOULD HAVE COULD HAVE. 2 Module # C Functions that need to be considered for Batch...
1
MUSTHAVE
SHOULD
HAVE
COULDHAVE
2
Module # C Functions that need to be considered
for Batch Material Transfer Controls
presented by : Rodger Jeffery
company : Mettler Toledo
duration : 30 mins
3
BY FEEDING THE EXACT AMOUNT OF MATERIAL IN THE SHORTEST POSSIBLE TIME EVERY TIME
IN ALMOST ANY MARKET IN MOST APPLICATIONS WITH VIRTUALLY ANY MATERIAL
How does it improve manufacturing efficiency ?
4
Manufacturing Areas
• Batch
• Blend
• Formulate
• Dose
• Fill
Raw Materials
• Granules
• Powders
• Liquids
• Slurries
Primary Markets • Food & Beverage
• Chemical
• Specialty Chemical
• Pharmaceuticals
• Other Measurement
Tools • Scale Platform
• Load Cell systems
• Flow Meters
Where would it be applicable ?
5
Start Feed Stop Feed
Weight
Time
TargetWeight
StartingWeight
Fast Feed Cut Off
Feed Cut OffHistorical
PreactAND
Jog Mode
T1
• USE KNOWLEDGE OF PREVIOUS ERRORS • DEPLOY “BRUTE FORCE” ENGINEERING • TRY TO “THROTTLE” PROCESS VIARIABILITY• SLOW DOWN THE PROCESS
• USE KNOWLEDGE OF PREVIOUS ERRORS • DEPLOY “BRUTE FORCE” ENGINEERING • TRY TO “THROTTLE” PROCESS VIARIABILITY• SLOW DOWN THE PROCESS
T0 T2
T3
Jog
Historical Control of the Material Feed (Transfer) Phase
6
MUSTHAVE
SHOULD
HAVE
1. Managing the Material Transfer Phase
7
must-have functionmust-have functions
BASIC
should-have functionshould-have functions
BEST PRACTICES
Managing the Material Transfer Phase
8
Managing the Material Transfer Phase
# Scale
Devices
# Flow Meter
Devices
Max #
Devices
Max #
Materials
Q.i LITE
4 12 12 1000
Q.i 4 12 200 1000
DEMONSTRATION
2. “ SHOULD HAVE FUNCTIONS“ - for BEST PRACTICE
Historical Adaptive Pre-Act
Reasonableness checking
Slow Step Timer
Command states (status, error handling)
Material feed states (status, error handling, overflow)
Weigh/flow digital filtering
Diagnostics
Control Modes - Manual/Automatic control
Reset Capability
Estimated time to complete
Flow alarm management
1. “ MUST HAVE FUNCTIONS” - for MINIMUM OPERATION Material type (GIW, LIW) Control target management (fixed bias) Setpoint type (absolute, additive) Tolerance check Dump to empty (cut-off approach & setpoint) Pre-feed condition checks (stable scale, vessel
overflow) Post-feed check and report (for accurate & reliable
data) Drain time management Instrument zero shift management Interface driver for data between instrument and
controller Abnormal situation management
9
MUSTHAVE
SHOULD
HAVE
COULDHAVE
2. Optimizing the Material Transfer Phase - PAC
10
Start Feed Stop Feed
Weight
Time
TargetWeight
StartingWeight
DynamicSpill
Scale Reading
Actual Weight Fed
Historical Preact
• ACCEPT NATURAL PROCESS VARIABILITY• LEARN FROM THE PROCESS • ADAPT TO THE NATURAL PROCESS VARIABILITY• USE MODEL BASED - PREDICTIVE ADAPTIVE CONTROL
• ACCEPT NATURAL PROCESS VARIABILITY• LEARN FROM THE PROCESS • ADAPT TO THE NATURAL PROCESS VARIABILITY• USE MODEL BASED - PREDICTIVE ADAPTIVE CONTROL
Feed Cut Off
T0
Optimizing the Material Transfer Phase - PAC
11
must-have functionmust-have functions
BASIC
should-have functionshould-have functions
BEST PRACTICES
could-have functioncould-have functions
OPTIMIZER
Optimizing the Material Transfer Phase
12
2. “ SHOULD HAVE FUNCTIONS“ - for BEST PRACTICE
Historical Adaptive Pre-Act
Reasonableness checking
Slow Step Timer
Command states (status, error handling)
Material feed states (status, error handling, overflow)
Weigh/flow digital filtering
Diagnostics
Control Modes - Manual/Automatic control
Reset Capability
Estimated time to complete
Flow alarm management
1. “ MUST HAVE FUNCTIONS” - for MINIMUM OPERATION Material type (GIW, LIW) Control target management (fixed bias) Setpoint type (absolute, additive) Tolerance check Dump to empty (cut-off approach & setpoint) Pre-feed condition checks (stable scale, vessel
overflow) Post-feed check and report (for accurate & reliable
data) Drain time management Instrument zero shift management Interface driver for data between instrument and
controller Abnormal situation management
3. “BENEFICIAL FUNCTIONS”- for BEST PERFORMANCE
Adaptive Predictive Feed Control (PAC)
Overlapping feed management
Instrument cross check maintenance
Group Feeds
Adaptive 2 Speed Feed
Data Management
Material Feed Records
Error Logging
Material Path SPC Reports
Configuration Logging
Optimizing the Material Transfer Phase
…measure, manage, control, reporting
DEMONSTRATION
13
D
V0
V1
Deceleration ForceDeceleration Force
Material insuspension is offsetby (part of) thedeceleration force
Material In SuspensionMaterial In Suspension
D
V0
V1
Material in suspension varies dependent on initial velocity (V0), flow
rate and distance
Scale/Filter LagScale/Filter Lag
Dependent on filter time lag and flow rate
F = Filter time lag
Start Feed
Weight
Time
StartingWeight
R(t) = Scale Reading
ActualWeight Fed
F
WLAG(t)
W(t) = QMAX t
Dependent on the material transmission characteristics of the valve
TECHNOLOGY BREAKTHROUGH
THE 4 COMPONENTS OF DYNAMIC SPILLTHE 4 COMPONENTS OF DYNAMIC SPILL
14
SPILL
Flow QMAX
WLAG = QMAX • F
WSUSP = QMAX • g
WVLT = QMAX • KV
Total SPILL:Total SPILL (TS) = K 1 • QMAX + K2 • QMAX
2
NOTE: Total SPILL canbe negative
SUSPMAXDEC(1) WgQF -=·-=
)ADñ(52.2 /QF V3
MAXDEC(2)··-=
)Añ(62.2 /QTQFFF V2
MAXMAXDEC(2)DEC(1)DEC··-·-=+=
3. TECHNOLOGY BREAKTHROUGH
THE 4 COMPONENTS OF DYNAMIC SPILLTHE 4 COMPONENTS OF DYNAMIC SPILL
Simpler Engineering
+ Consistent Production
= Efficient Manufacturing
15
PAC algorithms for almost any feed characteristic
Acceptable ProblematicTarge
t
Target
1 Speed Feed - K1 or K2 (in-feed model based predictive adaptive control algorithm)
2 Speed Feed - K1 or K2 (in-feed model based predictive adaptive control algorithm)
1 Speed Feed - Spill Only (pre-feed preact control algorithm)2 Speed Feed - Spill Only (pre-feed preact control algorithm)
16
UNIONCARBIDE - UCAR
17
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1 3 5 7 9
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29
31
Qi - MP1 (Vib 1) BLH MP1
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31
Qi - MP5 BLH
Recipe - 4 ingredients
Ingredient 2 Feeder 1 MP1 206 kg
Ingredient 5 Feeder 5 MP5 155 kg
Ingredient 6 Feeder 6 MP6 284 kg
Ingredient 9 Feeder 8 MP8 180 kg
Batch Cycle time improvements
PRE Q.i 320 seconds
POST Q.i 170 seconds
Feed Control improvements
PRE Q.i < 0.9 kg at 3 sigma
POST Q.i < 0.25 kg at 3 sigma
Capital Savings
Engineering Effort 30% less
Overall Cost 20% less
UNIONCARBIDE - UCAR
18
Level 4: MEDIUM to LARGE – Advanced to Complex Automatic (Q.i)
This Metamucil plant applied the Qi technology early 2004.
With the previous system operations had to adjust 25 batches a week due to deviations in material additions.
The control system was reengineered using Honeywell’s PlantScape controller and 8 Qi matrollers.
Material Feed deviations were reduced to the point that only 1 batch a week requires adjustment.
This is a 25 to 1 improvement that has had a very positive impact on operations.
This Metamucil plant applied the Qi technology early 2004.
With the previous system operations had to adjust 25 batches a week due to deviations in material additions.
The control system was reengineered using Honeywell’s PlantScape controller and 8 Qi matrollers.
Material Feed deviations were reduced to the point that only 1 batch a week requires adjustment.
This is a 25 to 1 improvement that has had a very positive impact on operations.
19
20000 LBs Crutcher
TDC 3000 Standard Dev
(LBS)
Qi Standard Dev
(LBS)Delta (LBS) % Delta
DumpHi K1 221.62 36.54 185.08 83.51%Dump Hi K2 221.62 33.71 187.90 84.79%A-RECYCLE 55.63 36.34 19.29 34.68%
AC BASE 64.95 59.86 5.09 7.84%CARBONATE 10.30 11.88 -1.59 -15.39%
PASTE K1 23.87 19.34 4.53 18.98%PASTE K2 23.87 13.27 10.60 44.41%
Sulfate 10.37 12.48 -2.12 -20.40%
5000 LBs PW1
BRIGHT 24 3.10 1.81 1.28 41.36%HOT WATER 6.37 3.85 2.53 39.62%
LVP 9.00 2.67 6.33 70.35%POLYACRYLA 18.48 3.05 15.43 83.49%WET RECYCL 23.54 3.89 19.66 83.49%
600 LBs PW2
LIQUID PEG 0.87 0.56 0.31 35.81%
Augusta ABC June 30 2004 Deviations from Target
An example of the improvements brought by the Qi can be found in the 2004 re-control of the Augusta ABC. The Augusta ABC was using the advanced predictive material deliver techniques in the form of an older Honeywell TDC3000 control application and doing quite well with control (Lbs. deviation from target as a % of full scale with over 500 samples used to derive one standard deviation) ranging from 0.05% to 1.11%. In May of 2004 the TDC3000 was replaced by a Rockwell application using the Qi. As can be seen in the table “Augusta ABC June 30 2004 Deviations from Target” the Qi offers significant improvement for many of the materials over the traditional methods with a range of 0.04% to 0.30%. It also shows that the previous TDC3000 system was doing very well on several materials without significant changes from the Qi. The values in italics and blue indicate at least a 0.05% change, note all were positive improvements. The black values show relatively little change, all 0.03% or less with any negative changes 0.01% or less which would indicate minor process variations.