Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Chemical Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compchemeng

Smart manufacturing and energy systems

Thomas F. Edgar a,∗ , Efstratios N. Pistikopoulos b
a
The University of Texas, Department of Chemical Engineering, 200 E. Dean Keeton St. C0400, Austin, TX 78712, United States
b
Energy Institute and Artie McFerrin, Department of Chemical Engineering, Texas A&M University, 3122 TAMU Room 200, College Station, TX 77843,
United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: While many U.S. manufacturing operations utilize optimization for individual unit processes, smart man-
Received 31 May 2017 ufacturing (SM) systems that integrate manufacturing intelligence in real time across an entire production
Received in revised form 19 October 2017 operation are not pervasive in industry. A vendor-agnostic SM platform is under development that inte-
Accepted 25 October 2017
grates information technology, models, and simulations driven by real-time plant data and performance
Available online 7 November 2017
metrics. By utilizing existing process control and automation systems, manufacturing organizations can
manage systems at a much lower cost, optimizing process knowledge and improving energy productivity.
Keywords:
Three case studies are presented: steam methane reforming to make hydrogen, optimization of a heat
Smart manufacturing
Advanced control
treatment furnace for metals processing, and a fuel cell system, all of which utilize high fidelity models as
Smart sensors a starting point for optimization and control. The Smart Manufacturing Leadership Coalition has led the
Process modeling national effort in SM, and the recently established National Manufacturing Innovation Institute funded
Energy efficiency by DOE, private industry, and state governments will be described.
Optimization © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Smart Manufacturing was validated at a 2006 NSF industry-

Smart Manufacturing (SM), as defined by the Smart Manufactur-
ing Leadership Coalition (SMLC) (SMLC Report, 2011) is the right
data in the right form, the right people with the right knowl-
edge, the right technology and the right operations, whenever
and wherever needed throughout the manufacturing enterprise.
Exploitation of data with SM changes the manufacturing approach
with advanced sensor, modeling, control, automation, and opti-
mization technologies. Production metrics for SM include product
quality, economics, sustainability/emissions, energy consump-
tion/efficiency, safety, and workforce performance. SM combines
operations technology (OT) with information technology (IT) to
accomplish manufacturing objectives by adding platforms, mod-
ularization and standards, automation and human-in-the-loop
management, data analytics, dashboards, real-time data and cloud
technologies, data sharing, infrastructure scaling, and information
security. SM business practices are stimulated by broad enterprise,
value chain and supply chain use of data assets, and a workforce
(smart workers) who can take advantage of this new manufacturing
environment.
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: tfedgar@austin.utexas.edu (T.F. Edgar), stratos@tamu.edu
(E.N. Pistikopoulos).
academic-government workshop as an emerging IT infrastructure
capability called “cyberinfrastructure” (Davis, 2006). The outcomes
of the 2006 Workshop were extended in 2008 where the first SM
operations and technology roadmap was developed (Davis and
Edgar, 2009). The roles of data, time, modeling, prediction, work-
force and the enterprise nature of SM emerged as key elements.
According to the 2006 NSF workshop report, “The Smart Plant is
composed of smart assets that not only provide their basic process
function but provide proactive feedback on the economic, environ-
ment, health and safety performance of that asset in aggregation
with the other assets and in the moment. Smart plants operate
to tighter specifications and involve a much greater understand-
ing of the processes, greater automation and decision support,
expanded use of automation, data and data interpretation, and a
new-generation workforce that is trained and oriented toward a
knowledge and information mindshare.”
In 2011, the Smart Manufacturing Leadership Coalition (SMLC), a
nonprofit business league comprised of industry, university, NGO’s,
and government agencies, was formed around the importance of
coupling manufacturing innovation and innovation in new prod-
ucts (SMLC Report, 2011). In a 2011 industry-focused SM workshop,
information and manufacturing intelligence are used to integrate
the voice, demands and intelligence of the customer throughout the
entire manufacturing supply chain. This allows a quick response
to the customer and minimizes energy and material usage while

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2017.10.027
0098-1354/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144
maximizing environmental sustainability, health and safety, and
economic competitiveness, aided by the ability of diverse devices,
machines, and equipment to communicate seamlessly.
More recently, SM was referenced in key national reports,
notably the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership (AMP) 2.0 reports
from the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
(AMP Report, 2014). There is closely analogous terminology in
national initiatives in other countries, notably Germany’s Industrie
4.0, China’s Intelligent Manufacturing and the European Union’s
Factories of the Future (Stephen, 2016). As a linchpin in a U.S.
manufacturing energy strategy, the U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE) has awarded the Clean Energy Smart Manufacturing Innova-
tion Institute (CESMII) led by the Smart Manufacturing Leadership
Coalition starting in 2017. This $140 million public-private partner-
ship focuses on increasing efficiency and accelerating the adoption
of smart manufacturing technologies such as advanced real-time
sensors, monitoring, data analytics, and digital controls in U.S. man-
ufacturing operations. Two key goals are to (1) demonstrate at least
15% improvement in energy efficiency in first-of-kind demonstra-
tions at manufacturing plants or major processes within five years
of Institute operation, supporting a goal of at least 50% improve-
ment in energy productivity in 10 years; and (2) develop tools
and technologies to reduce the cost of deploying Smart Man-
ufacturing in existing processes by 50% relative to the existing
state of the are within five years. In CESMII SM will encompass
machine-to-plant-to-enterprise real time sensing, instrumenta-
tion, monitoring, control, and optimization of energy; enables
hardware, protocols, and models for advanced industrial automa-
tion; requires a holistic view of data, information, and models in
manufacturing; leverages high performance computing for high
fidelity process models; significantly reduces energy consump-
tion and GHG emissions and improves operating efficiency with
20%–30% potential; and increases productivity and competitive-
ness across all manufacturing sectors with a special focus on
energy intensive and energy dependent manufacturing processes.
Energy use in these industries include Primary Metals (1608 TBTU),
Petroleum Refining (6137 TBTU), Chemicals (4995 TBTU), Wood
Pulp and Paper (2109 TBTU), Glass and Cement (716 TBTU), and
Food Processing (1162 TBTU), which totals about 20% of the U.S.
energy consumption of 95 quadrillion BTUs (Brueske et al., 2013).
Similarly, the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) has recognized
the importance of digital design and manufacturing for customized
products and has sponsored the Digital Manufacturing Design Insti-
tute (DMDI) led by UILabs. These two institutes are focused on the
role of data and next generation IT and are two of the ten current
national Manufacturing USA Institutes. SM is now linked or refer-
enced with digital product design, smart products, IoT (Internet of
Things), and IIC (Industrial Internet Consortium) which are parallel
efforts.
2. ASCPM: advanced sensors, control, platforms, and
models for manufacturing
A 2014 NSF Workshop President’s Council of Advisors on
Science and Technology (AMP Report, 2014) focused on contrast-
ing smart manufacturing with digital manufacturing and adopted
the acronym ASCPM (Advanced Sensors, Control, Platforms, and
Modeling) for manufacturing. Modeling is the underlying founda-
tion of ASCPM, as the lingua franca for simulating and analyzing
a physical system. Models can be used at every point in the
product life cycle. Design models are used to optimize a product
and investigate product quality, reducing the requisite amount of
expensive or impossible experimental validation. Models are also
used in manufacturing for control and operation and optimiza-
tion of supply chains. Models may also be used post-production
131
to examine equipment degradation, product quality, and disposal
issues. During the manufacturing process, mathematical models
tied to advanced sensing provide decision support. Models are also
necessary for control of the manufacturing process, use of online
fault monitoring methods, and implementation of state estimation
techniques. At a higher level, plant-wide or industrial-scale models
can also tie into product and process models to improve quality and
efficiency by supporting business decisions. Models are currently
used for many different applications, but there is still a need to
integrate modeling efforts across multiple scales, from the molec-
ular level to macro plant level, and to blend empirical (data-driven)
models with high fidelity models. The NSF Workshop on Smart
Manufacturing discussed key research areas in ASCPM, which are
summarized below:
(S) Sensors and Monitoring – Low-cost sensing technology
will play a key role in future development for smart manufactur-
ing. This measurement data is key to making improvements in the
manufacturing process. Smart sensing includes new sensing meth-
ods, real-time process analysis, wireless connectivity, and sensors
integrated with new cyber technologies. These advanced sensors
may be able to autonomously manage and evaluate sensor health,
continuously quantify measurement uncertainty, and support effi-
cient calibration procedures. Smart sensors enable a wide range of
advanced manufacturing capabilities. Product sampling for qual-
ity control testing can be reduced when advanced measurement
information is properly integrated into the production process.
Sensors provide information for validation and improvement of
models. A mathematical model has limited use until measurements
are used for model validation. As a system changes with time,
process sensor values can be used to update the process models,
allowing for various advanced manufacturing improvements. Addi-
tionally, better sensing leads to quantification of process variability
and uncertainty. Improvements in sensor capabilities and indus-
trial networking will provide large amounts of data. This “big data”
problem leads to issues related to visualization and informatics.
Without strong visualization and analysis techniques, big data can
result in limited usefulness. Data cleaning, compression, and data
security are also relevant issues that must be addressed. Practical
concerns include integration of new sensor systems with legacy
machines and processes. Data and models can be used to diag-
nose abnormal situations while helping in mitigation of negative
consequences.
(C) Control and Automation – Opportunities exist for smart
control and automation to support optimal decision-making, enter-
prise modeling, and process analytics, but current technologies
do not readily support rapid integration across various business
and production applications. Simulation-based control strategies
such as nonlinear model predictive control can be used to improve
the production process. Future control methods should better
support short-term scheduling, longer-term planning, and eco-
nomic optimization. Supply chain management and scheduling
challenges include improving the models used to represent the
manufacturing systems. More efforts should be directed towards
capturing, characterizing and mitigating uncertainty in the oper-
ation of manufacturing systems (caused, e.g., by variability of
orders and deliveries, but also, increasingly, by fast fluctuations
such as those observed in, e.g., energy prices). The use of histor-
ical data for improving system models and uncertainty models
should be extended, and methods for verifying the quality of solu-
tions obtained by accounting for uncertainty should be developed.
Moreover, these modeling and analysis efforts should be directed
towards systems of ever larger scale; as a complementary direc-
tion, significant work will be required to expand the capabilities
of current numerical optimization algorithms, such that very large
scale problems can be addressed in practical amounts of time.
132 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144
(P) Platforms and Standards – Machine-to-process-to-plant-
to-enterprise-to-supply-chain aspects of sensing, instrumentation,
monitoring, control, and optimization include hardware and soft-
ware platforms for industrial control and automation. A new
generation of networked-based information technologies, data
analytics and predictive modeling is providing unprecedented
capabilities as well as access to previously unimagined poten-
tial uses of data and information not only in the advancement of
new physical technologies, materials and products but also the
advancement of new, radically better ways of doing manufactur-
ing, processing materials and interoperating with material and
energy resources. The platform is the informatics infrastructure
that allows industry to develop and deploy relevant smart applica-
tions. This allows for consistent applications to be joined together,
even between businesses. Open interfaces, protocols, and stan-
dards will aid in platform development, allowing for plug-and-play
interoperability in the platform. A vendor-agnostic Smart Manufac-
turing (SM) platform could support reuse and ready application of
models and analytics at the level of need and readiness. The SM Plat-
form similarly should support a mechanism to identify, exercise,
and evaluate emerging manufacturing technologies from research
organizations, as model elements of larger scale commercial sys-
tem design emerge. The infrastructure allows for virtual test and
analysis in early design phases using model representations in a
free market library available to qualified commercial entities.
(M) Modeling – Process models and product models are moving
toward more complexity. Large-scale models attempt to provide
a much higher level of detail. Efforts to extend models from 1D
or 2D to 3D often lead to computational complexity. Increased
sensing and access to data leads to problems related to unstruc-
tured information, correctness verification, model clarity, and
model resilience. Development of large-scale, hierarchical, high
fidelity models presents challenges for process control and opti-
mization. Specifically, advancements could be made in control of
difficult (nonlinear, stochastic, hybrid) systems, planning, and use
of unstructured information. There is a perceived gap between
models used for process scheduling and for process control. Meth-
ods should also attempt to account for uncertainty in operations
in order to allow for robust operations. For example, historical
data could potentially be used for determining the extent of model
uncertainty. Uncertainty leads to difficulty in verification of pro-
cess control and optimization solutions. Additionally, uncertainty
in cost variability is rarely included in scheduling and optimization
work.
What are the new business opportunities with SM after 40 years
of IT applied to manufacturing? There is industry convergence on
advanced manufacturing business objectives/drivers − increased
demand dynamic manufacturing, market growth with higher
precision products and higher velocity, value-added products, rad-
ically increased economic, energy, material, asset and workforce
productivity, zero incidents and overall reduced energy usage
and improved environmental sustainability. There is also wide
agreement that next generation Information Technology (IT) of
interest to manufacturing includes network-based data, unprece-
dented modeling and prediction, and new ways of model-based
and data-based operational visualization, control and optimiza-
tion. Considerable IT discussion centers around new, extensively
deployed sensor-based measurements, high throughput connec-
tivity, IT clouds, data lakes and cybersecurity that go far beyond
today’s applied IT approaches in manufacturing. The list of existing
and expected commercial IT and OT technologies is staggering and
growing at an accelerated rate: e.g., high performance wireless and
wired networking, cloud-based data center, infrastructure, plat-
form and software as services, high performance computing, high
performance databases, IoT devices, advanced model-based con-
trol and automation, artificial intelligence, real-time, high-fidelity
modeling and high performance computing, visualization and vir-
tual reality.
3. Using SM to save energy
Many U.S. manufacturing operations are data rich and
knowledge poor, resulting in operating with a constrained
decision-making process, even in operations using sophisticated
modeling and control technologies. SM systems that integrate man-
ufacturing intelligence in real-time across an entire production
operation are rare in large companies, and virtually non-existent
in small and medium size organizations. An important example of
the need for SM systems is real-time management of energy con-
sumption. In U.S. industries, energy is frequently the second largest
operating cost; while approximately 30% for the energy deliv-
ered to a manufacturing site is lost as waste heat. Unfortunately
a cost-effective infrastructure to integrate manufacturing intelli-
gence in real-time across an entire production operation does not
currently exist, and business decisions are typically implemented
with incomplete knowledge of the relationship between product
output and energy use.
A smart system that not only sought to recover waste heat, but
also to generate less heat initially, would be a cost-effective tool
optimizing the relationship between energy use and product out-
put together. This demonstration of smart manufacturing to save
energy was the focus of a proposal funded by the U.S. Department
of Energy that was carried out by SMLC beginning in 2013. Led by
UT-Austin and involving ten different participating organizations
(industry, academia, NGO’s), the overall project objective was to
develop an industry-accepted SM Platform that can be scaled to a
diverse set of manufacturing operations. The project scope was to
(1) design and demonstrate the application of a prototype SM Plat-
form for two diverse commercial test beds, (2) demonstrate a 30%
reduction in waste heat generation at each of the test beds, and
(3) work with a group of leading automation and software ven-
dors to investigate low-cost commercialization of the technology
developed.
A new platform was created in the project to expedite model and
simulation development and deployment in a cloud-based environ-
ment using a novel workflow as a service capability. In addition,
energy productivity metrics and application toolkits were defined
so that they could be tailored to a specific business situation. The
project’s two test beds, one in a hydrogen production plant oper-
ated by Praxair and the other in a forging, heat treatment, and
machining operation at a General Dynamics (GD) plant, utilize
sensor-driven modeling, measurement, and simulation systems.
This allows energy productivity to be managed in real-time by an
energy dashboard throughout the plant and enterprise. The project
developed the most highly instrumented steam-methane reformer
(SMR) in the U.S. using infrared cameras and thermocouples. Real-
time data were streamed to high fidelity and reduced-order models
for analysis. A CFD model was parallelized in the SM Platform cloud
environment, with an increased speed of 5–10×. This is the first
real-time optimizing of business productivity of a steam reformer
using high fidelity and data-driven models to balance natural gas
flow to the reformer tubes. In this hostile environment, newly
installed infrared cameras outperform thermocouples in coverage,
accuracy, reliability, and cost effectiveness. The forging test bed
included new instrumentation for data capture analysis, modeling,
and simulation to be integrated into SM Platform workflows so that
business performance could be managed in real-time. Metrics were
developed in the SM Platform to drive improvements in energy pro-
ductivity, environmental performance, safety, asset management,
costs, and overall operations. Table 1 summarizes the impacts of
modeling, control, and optimization on the two test beds. The two
DOE test beds are discussed in more detail in Case Studies 1 and 2.
 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144 133

Fig. 1. Modeling spectrum and the models developed for the SMR furnace.

Table 1
Smart Manufacturing Test Beds: Platform-enabled Modeling, Control, and Optimization Impacts.

Energy Use Optimization/Waste Heat Praxair Steam Methane Reformer (SMR) GD Heat Treatment Furnace (Metal parts)
Reduction

Distributed sensing, model-based control of
zone temperatures
Optimized sensor and actuator locations
High-fidelity models used to gain operational
insight (e.g., CFD)
Image analysis via array of IR cameras
Distributed actuation (70+ burners)
Hybrid (data/physics) reduced-order model
with data reconciliation
Optimization of burner flows
Optimal camera and automatic valve
placement (reduce number of MVs, CVS = $)
2-D modeling of radiation heat transfer
Dynamic part movement
Optimization of gas flow setpoints to decrease
energy use (8% natural gas reduction)
Heat recuperation reduces convective heat
losses (∼30% natural gas reduction)

4. Case study 1: steam-methane reformer
The steam-methane reformer (SMR) is a highly energy-intensive
process and typically consumes ∼105 GJ per day and was the subject
of the smart manufacturing research project described in the pre-
vious section. Mathematical modeling of SMRs is a crucial tool for
achieving high energy efficiency. The development of mathemati-
cal models was accompanied by online deployment for automation
and control purposes and supported by an IT infrastructure that
includes (1) capabilities for acquiring appropriate process data
via systematically placed sensors, (2) adequate high-performance
computational resources for just-in-time computations, and (3) a
user-friendly visualization interface for operator use. The model-
based computations were a sequence/workflow of calculations
being executed in series or parallel. An IT infrastructure allowed
intensive computations to be performed in the cloud and intercom-
munications between various components of the workflow, and
provided appropriate database management capabilities.
The SMR test-bed was challenging because the high temper-
ature environment makes temperature measurements difficult.
Common practice involves placing thermocouples on only a few
tubes (due to economic constraints); the resulting limited informa-
tion is insufficient for furnace balancing. Consequently, industrial
practitioners rely on separately optimizing the tube-side (e.g., by
monitoring the steam-carbon ratio) and the flue-gas side of the
furnace (e.g., by monitoring the oxygen content of the exhaust
gas). In this study an array of state-of-the-art infrared cameras
was installed around the furnace giving unprecedented continu-
ous stream of TWT (tube wall temperature) measurements (Kumar
et al., 2016a, 2016b).
The energy utilization of an SMR unit is related to the temper-
ature distribution of the reformer tubes that are suspended in the
SMR furnace. For a given SMR that is already in operation, the heat
distribution inside the furnace can be manipulated to influence the
temperature distribution. From a practical viewpoint, this can be
achieved by changing the fuel flow rate distribution through the
burners. Alternatively, it is also possible to use the fuel stream valve
positions itself to change the fuel distribution and hence influence
the temperature distribution. The temperature data obtained from
the infrared cameras were used to study the possibility of using
the fuel valve positions as manipulated variables to optimize SMR
energy utilization. Several experiments were performed where the
fuel valve positions were varied via a systemic methodology. These
data clearly suggest that the fuel stream valve positions are conve-
nient and effective for improving SMR energy utilization.
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models of the SMR firebox
provide exceptional insight in system operation, supplementing
the data obtained from the sensors described above. However,
the simulation (solution) times of CFD models are long (an SMR
model will be solvable within hours with reasonable computational
resources) and thus not appropriate for real-time decision-making.
Thus low-order models of the furnace that are amenable to on-line
use were developed. The model development efforts for the SMR
furnace were aimed towards finding a right combination of model
simplification and model accuracy such that the developed model
can be used for on-line optimization of SMR furnace. Several model-
ing methodologies were studied and employed as depicted in Fig. 1
below.
On one end of the modeling spectrum are high fidelity CFD
models where all the physical phenomena in the SMR furnace are
described using first-principles models over a very granular system
mesh. On the other hand lies the completely empirical approach
where the relationship between the input and output variables are
obtained using experimental data. As can be seen from the figure,
several combinations of these two approaches were considered.
The EC-SMR (egg-crate SMR) model is more of a first-principles
modeling approach vs. a purely data-driven OLS (ordinary least
squares) approach. While model parameters are estimated by min-
imizing the differences between the model predictions and the
experimental observations, the model structure is motivated by
physical behavior. Several disadvantages of data-driven OLS mod-
els exist:
1. OLS models are linear and may not capture nonlinearities well
2. It is not clear how to appropriately customize OLS models to
incorporate, if desired, the nonlinear interactions, fuel redistri-
bution.
3. Due to fuel redistribution, the fuel-stream valve manipulations
have both long-range effects (temperature changes observed
far away from the manipulated burner) and short-range effects
(temperature changes observed near the manipulated burner)
on the tube temperature distribution. It is crucial to appro-
134 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144

priately distinguish between these effects, particularly in the While the data driven models like the OLS model and EC-SMR
presence of noise in the temperature measurements, which is model are computationally very efficient, they have the drawback
obscured in the OLS model. of potentially poor model predictions when the plant deviates from
the conditions at which the model training data were collected.
The expression below represents the basic structure of the EC- Moreover, extensive sets of experimental data are not always
SMR model. It states that the change in tube-wall temperature of readily available for a statistically good estimation of the model
any ith tube due to closing jth valve by 1◦ is related via an expo- parameters. Therefore, in order to improve the model accuracy, we
nential form. Note that specification of an exponential kernel form again move to the left on the modeling spectrum diagram in Fig. 1.
is not an necessary requirement; the kernel should simply possess A physics-based furnace model was developed, with appropri-
the property that the kernel’s value diminishes as it goes farther ate simplifications, for furnace balancing (Kumar et al., 2016a).
from the jth valve. Burner specific parameters such as ˇj and f j A limited set of model parameters are defined which are fitted
allow different models to have different heating properties. Exper- using temperature measurements obtained from the infrared cam-
imental data shows that temperature changes around the burner eras. The use of a physics-based approach removes the need for
are not necessarily symmetric; the formulation below allows for several modeling assumptions made in empirical models, lead-
this non-symmetric behavior. ing to a lower number of estimated parameters. In this model the
⎧  2  various physical phenomena that occur in the SMR furnace are
⎪
⎪
xij kxj yij2 kyj
incorporated explicitly, though simplified forms are used. These
⎪
⎪
− −
⎪
2 2
xj yj
⎪
⎪ fj × ˇj e ifxij > 0, yij > 0 phenomena include radiation heat transfer, convection heat trans-
⎪
⎪ fer, energy transfer, species balance and reforming reactions inside
⎪
⎪  2 
⎪
⎪ reformer tube, etc. These phenomena are modeled for a discretized
⎪
⎪
xij yij2 kyj
⎪
⎪
− − furnace system where each reformer tube is divided into 15 sec-
⎪
2 2
xj yj
⎪
⎪ fj × ˇj e ifxij < 0, yij > 0 tions and the furnace region outside the tubes is divided into 360
⎨ subunits. The noteworthy feature of this model is the technique
Ti,j |p =1 =  2 
j
⎪
⎪
xij kxj yij2 used to describe/mimic the non-symmetric temperature distribu-
⎪
⎪ − −
tion observed in the real plant. Parametric perturbations in the
⎪
⎪
xj2
yj2

⎪
⎪
fj × ˇj e radiative heat transfer into the reformer tubes are introduced and
⎪
⎪ ifxij > 0, yij < 0
⎪
⎪  2  these parameters are estimated using the plant experiment data.
⎪
⎪ xij yij2
⎪
⎪ −
ifxij < 0, yij < 0 The convenient update of the model parameters based on the
⎪
⎪
−
xj2
yj 2
current temperature distribution snapshot shows one of the advan-
⎪
⎪
⎩ fj × ˇj e tages of first-principles models over empirical deviation models of
SMR available in the literature. A deviation model by definition
Closing fuel valve of any burner will have an indirect effect, apart does not depend on the current state (TWT distribution) of the
from the direct effect given by the above expression, due to fuel furnace. New experiment data are generally required to update a
redistribution. The indirect effect through burner k is given by: deviation model or a completely empirical model if the plant con-
 ditions change considerably. The physics-based empirical model
fk |pj =1 × ˇk × ˚ik ∀bk =
/ bj developed can be updated if the TWT distribution changes by
Ti,k |p =1 = recomputing the radiative heat transfer perturbation parameters.
j
jk × fj × ˇk × ˚ik
Based on the favorable computational time, provision of conve-
 jk determines the fraction of fuel displaced from burner j that nient update of model parameters, and prediction capability over
reaches to burner k. ˚ik represents the exponential kernel. Assum- a diverse range of furnace operating conditions, the use of the
ing linear relationships between fuel flow rate and temperature physics-based furnace model is superior to the OLS and EC-SMR
changes, between valve positions and fuel flow rate changes, a final models for furnace temperature optimization.
expression for the temperature change of the following form for any The EC-SMR (egg-crate SMR) model, when used for furnace bal-
valve position changes is obtained. ancing, took about a minute to compute the optimal fuel stream
⎛ ⎞ valve position adjustments. Upon actual implementation in the

M

M
fj
plant, a 44% reduction in the standard deviation of the tube wall
Ti |p = pj × ⎝fj ˇj ˚ij + − ˇk ˚ik ⎠ temperature distribution was obtained. The application of the
M−1
k=1,k =
/ j physics-based empirical model takes about 35 min for furnace bal-
 j=1
 ancing calculations to execute; this was expected because of greater
∀i ∈ 1, 2, . . ., N
granularity of model description in this model which increases
In the above expression, M is the number of burners. the computational overhead. Note however that this is still an
A significant advantage of the EC-SMR model over an OLS model acceptable computation time because the furnace temperature dis-
is that it gives more spatially ‘smooth’ predictions for TWT changes. tribution does not change very frequently. In the furnace balancing
In OLS model predictions, a number of regions are observed where program with the physics-based model, the maximum tube wall
significant differences in the temperature changes for neighboring temperature was used as the optimization objective instead of the
(along a tube row) tubes are predicted, which is not reasonable. standard deviation. Simulated application shows a 20% reduction
Such ‘non-smooth’ behavior for OLS model predictions can be in the maximum temperature.
attributed to the lack of data or the number of experiments in the For the SMR, the infrared cameras allowed detailed investigation
training set used to fit the parameters. The plant measurements of TWT distribution relationship with the fuel distribution among
are subject to corruption due to various disturbances, leading to the burners (which, in turn, is manipulated through fuel valves)
abrupt differences in neighboring TWT changes. Such non-physical through an extensive set of experiments performed on the furnace.
behavior is then manifested in the model parameters estimated by An empirical SMR furnace model (Kumar et al., 2016a) was devel-
the OLS model, which can cause ‘non-smooth’ predictions. The EC- oped that allows in-situ measurement-noise filtering during model
SMR model, by virtue of its fuel-redistribution-based formulation, parameter estimation of an exponential response surface model.
is robust to such noise in the data, and thus gives spatially smoother Data-driven models were complemented with high-fidelity mod-
predictions. els, e.g., CFD models, to generate model predictions with greater
 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144
accuracy. Incorporating these high-fidelity models, required high
performance computing (HPC) resources to enable business deci-
sions in reasonable time. Unfortunately, HPC is still out of reach
of many manufacturers due to the high investment cost of setting
up a HPC infrastructure or the lack of expertise in launching an
analysis workflow (comprising multiple software packages) on a
cloud-based HPC tool. A MATLAB-based ‘Optimizer’ computed the
required adjustments in the valve positions using the SMR model
and the ANSYS Fluent-based CFD model verified the recommen-
dations before final implementation (Kumar et al., 2015). The SM
platform, described later, facilitated the assembly and deployment
of the workflow by providing an easy access to the HPC resources
and easy-to-use workflow service. Also incorporated in the SM Plat-
form layered cloud services are Workflow as a Service (WfaaS)
integrated with Software as a Service (SaaS).
An important aspect of SM was to present the data in a dash-
board. Such visualization and interpretation of data immerses plant
personnel in the decision-making process. Data visualization can
assist in process analysis, or it can be used for keeping the plant
personnel engaged by providing continuous plant performance
feedback. To provide real-time plant performance metrics, these
visual modules were interfaced to the data historian and manufac-
turing intelligence modules. Fig. 2 shows the operator dashboard
deployed for the SMR testbed. It shows the current TWTs and
the predicted optimal distribution along with the required valve
adjustments upon SMR model-based furnace balancing and is auto-
matically updated at regular intervals. Note that actual numeric
values have not been shown for proprietary reasons.
The SMP cloud-based IT infrastructure provides easy access to
the automation system under one umbrella and thus acts as the
enabler for overcoming the aforementioned limitations in adopt-
ing the best practices of SM (Davis et al., 2015). Cloud infrastructure
is attractive from a manufacturer’s viewpoint due to the provision
of low-cost scalable computing resources and the advantage of col-
laborating with third-party experts by connecting them with plant
data securely outside of plant premises. A typical case of furnace
balancing resulted in a 44% reduction in TWT non-uniformity.
Another distinguishing feature of the SM platform is
community-driven industrial App marketplace analogous to
smartphone Apps. Here, several customizable industrial process
solutions (process, control, optimization models) in the form of
standardized Apps are provided by App vendors. Manufacturing
users can use these standalone Apps or combine them to form and
execute composite workflows, e.g., furnace balancing solution.
Data-driven models like the SMR model can be easily customized
for a general furnace. Since the ‘right’ models are readily available
on a pay-per-use basis, it cuts down the development cost and
time, and thus allows quick low-cost deployment.
5. Case study 2: forging, heat treatment, and machining of
metal parts
A metal processing plant operated by General Dynamics in
Scranton, PA uses forging, heat treatment, and machining facil-
ities to make a variety of finished precision metal parts from
metal billets. It is a line operation comprised of upstream energy
intensive operations followed by downstream computer numer-
ical control (CNC) machining and finishing stations. The entire
line operation can be viewed as a set of modularized interop-
erable batch operations managed as a virtual enterprise, which
oversees the billet-to-finished-part properties to meet changing
production orders. Real-time measurement of geometrical toler-
ance changes of the metal parts leaving the forging press ensures
managed demand on the downstream machining, predicts mainte-
nance on the forging press and makes it possible to manage energy
135
losses due to downstream idling. Real-time measurement or qual-
ification of the metallurgical properties from the heat treatment
furnace makes it possible to dynamically optimize energy use in the
heat treatment operation, manage scheduling of the CNC machines,
and reduce defective parts by constraining temperature excursions
of the metal parts during heat treatment.
In metal processing plant, reheating and heat treating furnaces
account for 65%–80% of the overall energy use (Pellegrino et al.,
2004; Thedki, 2010). The energy use is intensified by inherent
furnace inefficiencies (20%–60%) and ineffective control strategies
(Thedki, 2010). Part temperatures, especially the core, cannot be
sensed and measured directly. Hence, in practice, the operators
tend to overheat the parts such that a minimum temperature
threshold required for processing is reached, which causes excess
fuel consumption. Another reason for overheating is that if some
portions of the fabricated part are not heated sufficiently, then the
entire part will not meet the quality standards, resulting in material
waste and the energy used to make the defective parts. Therefore,
the monetary gain in energy minimization while heating must be
balanced by the potential loss due to scrapping of defective parts,
although as shown below, both objectives can be achieved with
positive outcomes.
An austenitization furnace for heat treatment is a primary target
for advanced model-based analysis and control. The equation-
oriented model of the furnace under consideration is built around
a two-dimensional (2D) geometry to balance computational effi-
ciency with the ability to capture long range radiation interactions
(Heng et al., 2017; Ganesh et al., 2017a). The model neglects
the interactions between parts, loaded on an individual tray. The
ensemble of a tray and its contents is modeled as a rectangular
structure with equivalent metal mass and referred to as a part, and
the movements of the parts inside the furnace are captured. The
(nitrogen) gas-to-surface heat transfer occurs only through con-
vection and surface-to-surface heat transfer in the furnace loaded
with parts occurs only through radiation. The furnace is discretized
into a series of control volumes to calculate a discretized gas temper-
ature profile within the furnace. For temperature control purposes,
the adjacent burners are grouped together and the fuel flow rates
are adjusted simultaneously for each group of twelve burners. The
furnace is divided into four such groups of burners (four control
valves) referred to as temperature control zones. The middle insu-
lating surface of the ceiling of each zone has a temperature sensor
used for control. The inputs to the model are the dimensions of
the steel parts and its physical properties. The model evaluates the
energy consumption of the furnace and part temperature distribu-
tion as a function of time and position within the furnace (Heng
et al., 2017).
For burner surfaces, the temperatures and heat duties are the
input variables. A burner model relates the heat duty as a func-
tion of the fuel flow rate and assumes that the temperature of the
burner surface is constant. The overall energy balance equation for
part and insulation surfaces within the furnace is solved for the heat
duties and surface temperatures using a double iterative algorithm.
The computed heat duties define a Neumann type boundary con-
dition to evaluate the part temperature distributions. The resulting
two-dimensional unsteady state heat equation is solved using the
Crank-Nicolson finite difference technique. A proportional-integral
(PI) tracking controller controls the temperature of each zone by
appropriately adjusting the mass flow rate of fuel to the burners of
the respective zone. The temperature set points of the PI controller
directly affects the temperature distribution of parts in the furnace
and thus its energy consumption (Ganesh et al., 2016).
During the heat treating process, controlling the microstructure
in addition to temperature is important in achieving a defect-free
and structurally sound product. The microstructural changes occur
at smaller length scales (micro-scale) compared to the changes
136 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144

Fig. 2. Operator dashboard for furnace balancing.

Table 2
CESMII R&D Portfolio.

Early Stage R&D Technology Development Product Integration

• Advanced sensors • Reference architectures • Security requirements

• Models and computational tools • System configurations • Human-technology interfaces
• Data structures and configurations • System models • Data management
• Process controls • Interoperability standards • Process models
• Hardware • Business change management
• Software • Workforce skills development

in macroscopic variables like heat duty and temperature. Hence,

a multiscale modeling approach is used that bridges the calcula-
tion of macroscopic variables with the prediction of microstructural
evolution of the workpieces and its consequent effects on the hard-
ness and toughness of the quenched product (Table 2).
The trade-off between temperature distribution and product
quality of the metal parts must be addressed in optimizing furnace
operation. Steel is a polycrystalline material composed of many
crystallites or grains, and the crystallinity of a solid has impor-
tant effects on its physical properties. The boundary between two
grains is called a grain boundary, which is the single-phase inter-
face with identical crystals on each side of the boundary, except
in orientation. The grain boundary contains the atoms that have Fig. 3. Discretized regions of the part. The pentagons represent the precipitated
been perturbed from their original lattice sites and the impurities austenite grains.
in the crystal lattice and is a crystal structure defect. A system is
thermodynamically stable when it is in its lowest energy state.
Hence, as the number of grains per unit volume decreases, the the order of a few seconds, much smaller than the simulation time
average grain size per unit volume increases and the energy per step size of four minutes. Therefore, during furnace simulation,
unit volume decreases resulting in a state of higher thermodynamic after the temperature of a region exceeds the austenite transfor-
stability. Grain growth occurs by diffusion when the temperature mation temperature, the grain size is calculated as a function of
is high enough and the amount of time the material is subjected time and temperature. The size of the austenite grains determines
to heat treatment is long enough. The semi-empirical modeling of the toughness of the quenched product. As the grain size increases,
austenite properties has been described by Ganesh et al. (2017a). the brittleness increases and the toughness of the quenched prod-
The metal is assumed to be composed of 0.85% C, 0.62% Mn, 0.25% uct is reduced. In Fig. 3, the high temperature regions are the ones
Si, 0.03% Cr, and 0.03% Al (Anelli, 1992). close to the surface of the part and have larger grain sizes. On the
In the model, the part is discretized into regions, where the size other hand, the interior of the part has lower temperatures, thus
of a region is selected such that the temperature differences within smaller grains.
it is minimal and the grain size calculated at the maximum permis- The objective of the furnace is to heat the parts past the
sible furnace operation temperature is less than the dimensions of required temperature threshold with minimum temperature vari-
the region. A part with dimensions 1.25 m × 0.5 m is discretized into ations within the part, and avoid overheating. In order to ensure
6 × 3 regions. The transformation of steel to austenite is rapid and in toughness of the product, the austenite grain size must be kept
 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144
Fig. 4. Optimized Set Points – Grain Size Evolution of Part No. 20.
within an upper limit. The model (Ganesh et al., 2017a) is used to
solve a nonlinear program with the zone temperature set points
of the existing feedback controllers. The following optimization
problem is solved: min Energy Input per Part, subject to
1000K ≤ Tsp,i ≤ 1300K
Tsp,i + Tdiff ≤ Tsp,i+1
Tpart, exit ≥ 1100K
part, exit
≤ 0.05
T̄part, exit
dpart,exit ≤ 90m
where Tsp,i is the temperature set point of zone i, Tdiff is the enforced
temperature difference between adjacent consecutive (in the direc-
tion of part movement) zones. Tpart,exit is the minimum temperature
of the part at the exit of the furnace, T̄part, exit is the average of the
temperature distribution of the part,  is the standard deviation
in temperature of the part, and dpart,exit is the grain size at the exit
of the furnace. The objective function of the optimization problem
is the energy input per part. The zone temperatures are bounded
from both sides of the zone so that the obtained solution lies in
the austenite phase region. In order to ensure that the parts do not
lose heat to the furnace walls, a positive temperature difference
between adjacent consecutive zones is enforced.
The calculation of radiation interactions makes the model pro-
cedural, which is a considerable impediment in calculation of
gradients required by modern optimization solvers. Hence, a sur-
rogate model that captures the input-output relationships of the
detailed model was used for fast simulation and optimization pur-
poses (Myers et al., 2009). The input variables are the four zone
temperature set points. The output variables are the minimum and
the average part temperature distribution and the maximum grain
size of the part.
The optimal solution for the zone temperature set points are
[1012 K, 1042 K, 1184 K, 1214 K]. As shown by Ganesh et al. (2017b),
the minimum part temperature is 1088 K, the average part temper-
ature is 1155 K, the standard deviation of temperature is 50.5 K, and
the total enthalpy change is 1114 MJ. The coefficient of variation
(standard deviation over mean) in temperature of the part at exit
is 0.044, which is within the desired value of 0.05. Therefore, the
temperature differences within the part are minimal.
In Fig. 4 the grain size distribution of the 20th (middle of the
batch) part is shown as a function of its processing time. The surface
of the part will have higher temperatures and the interiors of
137
the part will have lower temperatures that increase gradually,
thus the regions that are close to the part surface will have larger
grain sizes and those in the core will have smaller grains.
The maximum grain size in the optimal operation mode is
73.80 ␮m compared to 93.60 ␮m in the heuristic operation mode.
Hence, the quenched product in the optimized case is tougher or
less brittle than the heuristic operation case, although in this case
energy can be saved while improving the part quality (3.5% less
energy).
6. Case study 3: renewable hydrogen production and utility
testbed (REHPUT)
As renewable energies gain more traction due to improving effi-
ciencies and decreasing costs, there will be a gradual shift away
from dependence on fossil fuels toward the deployment of carbon-
neutral energy technologies. The time and spatial variations of the
availability of some renewable energy source has created a need for
suitable energy carriers. One such energy carrier is hydrogen, which
also has enormous potential as a renewable fuel for vehicle mobil-
ity and electricity generation. Currently, 48% of global hydrogen
production is from natural gas through Steam Methane Reform-
ing (SMR) (Wang et al., 2014). Conventional electrolysis is energy
intensive because of the amount of energy required to produce one
mole of hydrogen:
237.2kJmol−1 48.6kJmol−1
H2 O + + ⇒ H2 + 0.5O2
Electricity Heat
Electrolysis for medium to large scale applications is currently
more expensive than SMR. However, integration of renewable
power sources like solar and wind with electrolysis can greatly
reduce its production cost (Lewis, 2007). The PEM (Portion Pro-
ton Exchange Membrane) electrolyzer is a relative new electrolyzer
technology with immense potential and controllability, with high
current densities, high voltage efficiency, good partial load range,
rapid system response, compact system design, and high gas purity.
The PEM smart manufacturing testbed at TAMU currently has a
fully integrated fuel cell rig as its hydrogen utility component. The
renewable hydrogen production and utility testbed (REHPUT) is
represented in Fig. 5. When fully integrated, REHPUT can produces
hydrogen using a PEM electrolyzer, purify the produced hydro-
gen, store hydrogen in a metal hydride, and use the hydrogen to
generate electricity.
The PEM electrolyzer used for REHPUT is made of four cells;
each cell is made up of the anode, the membrane electrode assem-
138 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144
Fig. 5. Schematic diagram of the REHPUT.
bly (MEA), and the cathode. Purified, deionized water flows into
the cathode to the catalyst-laced MEA. The voltage (theoretically
∼1.23 V per cell) from the supplied power creates a potential
that enables current flow. The current flow enables exchange of
electrons at the electrode and subsequent formation of H+ . The
hydrogen ions pass through the membrane from the anode to the
cathode dragging along some water molecules. The membrane is
a sulfonated polymer membrane (Nafion) characterized by high
proton conductivity, low gas crossover, relatively high operating
pressure and low membrane thickness. The proton H+ is reduced
to hydrogen molecules (gas) H2 at the cathode and is let off. Before
startup, the cathode has no water but as the operation proceeds,
water builds up in the cathode, thus the hydrogen gas produced
contains water in it. The gas is passed through a water separator
and dryer that removes about 80% of the water content. The exit gas
from the water separator still contain traces of water molecules and
oxygen. It is sent to a purifier for further processing. The hydrogen
purifier is a palladium membrane that allows exclusive passage
of the hydrogen gas. The process prepares the hydrogen gas for
compression and or storage.
The measured current across the electrode is used to estimate
the theoretical hydrogen produced. It is compared against the
actual flow of hydrogen produced. This essential data determines
the current losses and hence the efficiency of the system. Before
experimental operation, a model is developed to perform simula-
tions. The simulation provides information regarding the type of
data needed to validate the model and where to place the sensors.
Sensors are strategically placed in the system to capture the tem-
perature of the stack, the pressure of the hydrogen gas before and
after clean up, and the humidity of the hydrogen gas before and
after clean up.
Hydrogen can be stored as a compressed gas, a cryogenic liquid
and in a solid form. Hydrogen can be stored in a metal complex to
form a metal hydride. Absorption and desorption of hydrogen in
the metal hydride are exothermic and endothermic respectively.
The metal alloy used is the Lanthanum-Nickel alloy (LaNi5 ). During
the absorption process, the hydrogen gas enters the metal hydride
canister and diffuses to the surface of the metal alloy and perco-
lates into it. The rate of flow of hydrogen to the alloy surface is
fast since the alloy grains are loosely placed in the canister and the
storage pressure is usually higher than the equilibrium pressure
(usually >1 atm, a property of the alloy), i.e., the flow of hydrogen is
not the rate-determining step. The equilibrium pressure is used to
describe the sorption isotherm of the LaNi5 metal hydride alloy (see
Fig. 6a) since it is a well-studied material. The design of the hydro-
gen storage was done in collaboration with Hydrogen components
(HCI).
The hydrogen molecule adsorbs to the surface of the alloy
(physisorption) and the alloy consequently absorbs it (chemisorp-
tion) (Bérubé et al., 2007). The hydrogen starts accumulating within
the alloy lattice (alpha phase). The nucleation grows to saturation
(beta phase). The kinetics of the absorption is dependent on the
temperature and the pressure of the system. A lower temperature
decreases the Gibbs energy (favoring absorption), while a higher
temperature increases the Gibbs energy (favoring desorption). The
ratio of the hydriding pressure and the equilibrium pressure deter-
mines the hydriding rate and thus the rate of heat generation. To
maintain a faster filling rate, the heat generated should also be dis-
sipated at approximately the same rate. To control the temperature,
a jacket is built around the metal hydride canister. The jacket allows
the passage of coolant to remove the heat generated. Fig. 6b above
shows a P&ID of the metal hydride testing station that is fabricated
with thermocouples placed inside. The temperature of the coolant
and the flow rate are also important data needed for the modeling
of the hydrogen storage unit.
The fuel cell is the reverse of the electrolyzer. The test rig in
Fig. 7 is supplied with hydrogen gas (99.999%, 3 barg pressure) to
the anode. A thermal mass flow controller is used to measure and
control the hydrogen gas flow to the anode. The interaction of the
hydrogen gas and the catalyst in the anode produces H+ and elec-
trons. Air is supplied to the cathode and the oxygen from the air,
interacts with the protons and electrons generated at the anode
through the electrode/catalyst to produce water. Both gases are
humidified with deionized water. A regulation valve maintains a
given stoichiometric ratio with relation to the oxygen consumed.
Nitrogen is used to purge the system before and after the use to
prevent corrosion of the internal parts of the fuel cell. The gases
are fed to the plant using a pressure handling system and gas inlet
manifold. All the overpressure and exhaust gases from the fuel cell
stack are safely vented out of the lab by using the exhaust mani-
fold. This fuel cell pilot plant consists of 1 kW PEM fuel cell stack
made up of eight cells. The test bed is flexible so that developed
designs can be optimized rapidly and effective control policies can
be developed. Hydrogen can also enter the system from a recycle
loop from a dilution vessel (Manthanwar 2016).
7. PAROC framework
The PARametric Optimization and Control (PAROC) frame-
work enables the representation and solution of demanding
model-based operation optimization and control problems
using high-fidelity modeling, approximation techniques and
optimization-based strategies, including multi-parametric pro-
gramming (Pistikopoulos et al., 2015). The PAROC framework has
the ability to adapt to several classes of problems through its pro-
totype software platform.
The first step of the PAROC framework shown in Fig. 8 is high
fidelity modeling that correctly describes the various components
of the system. PSE’s gPROMS Model Builder software allows direct
communication with MATLAB through gO:MATLAB for further
analysis. Three high fidelity models describe the electrolyzer and
other hydrogen production peripheral units, hydrogen storage, and
 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144 139

Fig. 6. (a) Plot of the equilibrium pressure change with H/M at 25 Celsius. (b) P&ID of the hydrogen storage testbed.

the fuel cell. Simulations of the models demonstrate the dynamic
phenomena and produces a saturation curve for the hydrogen stor-
age model and polarization curves for the electrolyzer and the fuel
cell at several temperature and pressure. Model validation using
experimental data tunes the model accuracy. Having a more accu-
rate model, we perform optimization on the model to improve the
performance metric.
All sensors and actuators are hardwired to a analog and digi-
tal data acquisition hardware. The controllers are connected to a
PC using ethernet and the operation of the system is controlled
through NI LabVIEW software.
The fuel cell rig (Fig. 7) is designed to use several PI controllers
but is adaptable to a real-time explicit model predictive control in
the PAROC framework. Although it is possible to use high-fidelity
models for optimal design decisions, their complexity may make
model-based strategies computationally expensive. Consequently,
it is necessary to simplify the representation of the model with-
out compromising its accuracy. In PAROC, this is addressed by the
following two approaches:
7.1. System identification
A series of simulations of the high-fidelity model for different
initial states is used to construct a meaningful linear state-space
model of the process using statistical methods. One of the most
widely applied tools within this area is the System Identification
Toolbox from MATLAB.
140 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144
Fig. 7. (a) Schematic diagram of the fuel Cell Rig (b) image of the fuel cell testbed.
7.2. Model-reduction techniques
While system identification relies on the user in terms of inter-
pretation of the data and processing of the results, model-reduction
techniques can automate the reduction process (Pistikopoulos
et al., 2015). The model reduction technique can be data driven
or model based model approximation (such as model linearization,
system identification) (Van Overschee and De Moor, 1994; Ljung
and Söderström, 1983).
After the model approximation step a state-space model is
obtained that is used for the development of receding horizon poli-
cies. The calculation of such policies, e.g. in the form of control laws
or scheduling policies, traditionally requires the online solution of
an optimization problem, which might be computationally infea-
sible (Pistikopoulos et al., 2015). Therefore, the PAROC framework
employs multi-parametric programming, where the optimization
problem is solved offline as a function of a set of parameters. In
addition, depending on the cost function and the characteristic of
the system considered, the complexity of the optimization prob-
lem changes considerably. The last step of the PAROC framework is
the closed-loop validation, i.e. the testing of the controller against
the original high fidelity model and the testbed. The closed loop
validation is an important procedure since it verifies the accuracy
and robustness of the controller. Depending on the outcome of the
procedure, the controller design is evaluated.
Applications of the PAROC framework on a fuel cell system and
a metal hydride system are shown in Figs. 9 and 10 below.
The first block shows the schematic and the polarization curves
for the fuel cell. The polarization curves are based on simulation
of the fuel cell model. The second block shows the model reduc-
tion step where the original high fidelity model is compared with
a more tractable model that is amenable for control studies. The
third block shows the solution mapping of the control actions at any
state within the allowable bounds. It gives a preconceived idea of
the possibilities of the system. The states could be actual measured
states or observed uncertainties in the system. The fourth block
represents the application of the control action and its comparison.
 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144 141

Fig. 8. PAROC framework for optimization and control.

Fig. 9. PAROC framework on a fuel cell system (Ziogou et al., 2013).

8. New DOE institutes
On January 3, 2017 the Smart Manufacturing Leadership Coali-
tion (SMLC) announced the launch of the Clean Energy Smart
Manufacturing Innovation Institute (CESMII). A public-private part-
nership, CESMII is headquartered in Los Angeles through support
from the City of LA and the University of California Los Angeles
(UCLA). CESMII launched in partnership with the Department of
Energy’s (DOE) Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO) within the
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)
The Institute will accelerate Smart Manufacturing adoption
through integration of advanced technologies and intelligence, rad-
142 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144
Fig. 10. PAROC Framework on a Metal Hydride reactor (Panos et al., 2010).
ically improving precision, performance, quality, sustainability and
energy efficiency. New and better manufacturing jobs for the exist-
ing and future workforce is a hallmark of Smart Manufacturing
permeating U.S. manufacturing. CESMII provides infrastructure and
services to every type and scale of manufacturer, provider or user
of Smart Manufacturing assets, no matter technical acumen, size,
or financial status
By combining manufacturing, digital, and energy efficiency
expertise, technologies developed by the Institute will give Ameri-
can manufacturers unprecedented, real-time control of energy use
across factories and companies, increasing productivity and saving
on energy costs.
CESMII includes a national network of Regional Smart Manu-
facturing Centers across the United States. Advancements in the
Institute’s technology focus areas of sensors, controls, platforms
and modeling will be interlinked by an open Platform and mar-
ketplace for Smart Manufacturing. The regions will leverage these
technologies and their service capabilities to form the virtual net-
work of linked resources targeted towards each region’s clean
energy, industrial and workforce objectives. Diverse projects will
accelerate RD&D and rapid and less costly adoption of shared solu-
tions. New contributors to revolutionary solutions are encouraged,
and have an enabling pathway to co-develop among themselves
and with existing technology and service providers. Academia,
community colleges and other organizations will have new avenues
to develop and certify the best skilled Smart Manufacturing work-
force in the world. Partners have engaged with CESMII to tap into
these resources and opportunities for wide impact.
To improve the productivity, performance, efficiency, and ulti-
mately the global competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing, the
CESMII Roadmap (Table 3): 2017–2018 outlines strategic objec-
tives, an R&D Portfolio, and near-term action plans for advancing
SM Business Practices, Enabling Technologies, SM Platform Infras-
tructure, and Workforce Development (https://www.cesmii.org/
technology-roadmap). SM has the potential to transform the U.S.
manufacturing sector into an engine for open innovation and skills
development, facilitating sustainable real-time business improve-
ments.
To facilitate implementation of new manufacturing solutions
and integration of operational technologies and information tech-
nologies (OT/IT), CESMII will address knowledge gaps and advance
innovation in SM technology, processes, and workforce as shown
below.
Test beds for smart manufacturing are a key component of
CESMII; some examples include:
• Shift error prone product forecasting to customer demand driven
production and reduce inventories in food industry
• Proactive supply chain management for predictive recipe man-
agement and chain of custody as a product value in food industry
• Sensors and controls for increased precision in specialty glass and
ceramic products
• Enhanced sensing, modeling and controls for optimizing black
liquor evaporators in pulp and paper
• Advanced controls across a microelectronics manufacturing sup-
ply chain to optimize material, energy and water use
• High temperature sensing and modeling for real-time precision
positioning of hot steel sheets in steelmaking plant
• Real-time optimization of aerospace sheet and plate manufac-
turing through in-situ sensing, integrated monitoring, advanced
control, adaptive modeling and predictive analytics
Another DOE institute called RAPID (www.aiche.org/rapid) was
established in 2017 as the tenth manufacturing institute and lead
 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144 143

Table 3
Key Initiatives in CESMII Roadmap.

Business Practices Enabling Technologies Workforce Development

To facilitate widespread SM integration,
develop a clear and compelling SM value
proposition; address and mitigate business
risks; and provide strategies, tools, and best
practices for SM integration and cyber security
• Assessment and Benchmarking
Through collaborative R&D, advance key SM
technologies—including advanced sensors,
data analytics tools, process controls, models,
and computational platforms—for integration
into robust, secure, and easy-to-configure SM
systems.
• Cross-cutting R&D and Reusability
To build and sustain a skilled and innovative
SM workforce with expertise in SM technology
and practices, develop, continuously update,
and deploy customizable, interdisciplinary
training resources and programs.
• SM Platform training

• Integration • Process & Controls • Technology & Marketplace Training

• Workforce Alignment • Sensors • Training Delivery

• Data, Modeling & Analytics

Table 4
Overview of RAPID Roadmap Research with Six Focus Areas.

Chemical and Natural Gas Upgrading Renewable Biproducts Intensified Process Modeling & Simulation Module Manufacturing
Commodity Processing Fundamentals

• Rxn/Separation • Selective Conversion • Primary Separation • Scale-Out Methods • PI Software Tool • Intensified
Components

• Non-Thermal Drivers • Separations • Water Management • Fundamental Data • Data Availability • Standard Designs
Acquisi-
tion/Modeling

• Batch Systems • Process • Couple Rxn/Spn/Hxt • Predictive Models • PI Assessment Tools • Distributed
Consolidation Processing

by AIChE. It consists of six focus areas with areas of emphasis as
identified in the 2017 RAPID roadmap shown below in (Table 4).
RAPID is less focused on operations and concentrates on process
redesign for process intensification (PI).
9. Conclusion
In this work we presented an overview of the smart man-
ufacturing initiative and how the implementation of its various
elements facilitates the integration of existing process control and
automation systems into manufacturing facilities and processes
in a controlled environment, optimizing process knowledge and
improving energy productivity. Smart manufacturing leverages the
technology advancement in IT and the expertise in operational
technology to bring an unprecedented, real-time optimization of
energy use across factories and companies, increasing productivity
and saving on energy costs.
Three case studies; SMR, Heat Treatment, and Electrochemical
Hydrogen Production and Utility were presented to demonstrate
the concept of smart manufacturing and the various aspects of the
ASCPM were implemented in these systems. High-fidelity models
and data from advanced sensors were used to describe the sys-
tems and improve the predictability of the developed models. The
energy intensive SMR testbed used infrared cameras that enabled
a detailed investigation of the TWT distribution and its relation-
ship with fuel distribution. Thus, an optimum location of the fuel
valve will enable effective supply of fuel in the furnace. The data-
driven models were complemented with high-fidelity CFD models
which provided insight in the system operation. The Heat Treat-
ment, which is also energy intensive, used optimization methods
to minimize energy usage by determining an optimal point that
uses the least amount of fuel while avoiding potential loss due to
scrapping of defective parts. The third case study employed the
use of PAROC to effectively control the storage of hydrogen and
its utilization in a fuel cell system. The PAROC framework enabled
the optimal flow of hydrogen while maintaining the temperature
in both the metal hydride system and the fuel cell system, thus
enabling energy savings. The three case studies demonstrated both
energy savings and productivity improvements through the use of
modeling, advanced sensors, control and optimization.
Through the CESMII initiative, technology solutions can be
made available to the community in the marketplace for smart
manufacturing. This will facilitate the implementation of new man-
ufacturing solutions and standards enabling the integration of
operational technologies and information technologies (OT/IT) in
the manufacturing sector.
Funding
This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy
[Grant No. DE-EE0005763].
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Hari Ganesh, Ankur Kumar, and
Michael Baldea for their assistance in research and preparation of
this manuscript.
References
Anelli, E., 1992. Application of mathematical modeling to hot rolling and controlled
cooling of wire rods and bars. ISIJ Int. 32 (3), 440–449.
Bérubé, V., Radtke, G., Dresselhaus, M., Chen, G., 2007. Size effects on the hydrogen
storage properties of nanostructured metal hydrides: a review. Int. J. Energy
Res. 31 (6–7), 637–663.
Brueske, S., Sabouni, R., Zach, C., Andres, H., 2013. U.S. Manufacturing Energy Use
and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis. http://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/
files/2013/11/f4/energy use and loss and emissions.pdf.
Davis, J., Edgar, T., 2009. Smart Process Manufacturing: An Operations and
Technology Roadmap. Smart Process Manufacturing Engineering
Virtualization Organization Workshop, Arlington, VA (November 2009. https://
smartmanufacturingcoalition.org/sites/default/files/spm - an operations and
technology roadmap.pdf).
144 T.F. Edgar, E.N. Pistikopoulos / Computers and Chemical Engineering 114 (2018) 130–144
Davis, J., Edgar, T.F., Graybill, R., Korambath, P., Schott, B., Swink, D., Wang, J.,
Wetzel, J., 2015. Smart manufacturing. Ann. Rev. Chem. Biomol. Eng. 6, 141
http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-
061114-123255.
Davis, J., 2006. Cyberinfrastructure in Chemical and Biological Process Systems:
Impact and Directions, Workshop Sponsored by NSF. National Science
Foundation (Arlington, VA, September 2006. https://
smartmanufacturingcoalition.org/sites/default/files/the norma language
application to solution of strong nonequilibrium transfer.pdf).
Ganesh, H.S., Edgar, T.F., Baldea, M., 2016. Model predictive control of the exit part
temperature for an austenitization furnace. Processes 4 (4), 53–67, http://dx.
doi.org/10.3390/pr4040053.
Ganesh, H.S., Edgar, T.F., Baldea, M., 2017a. Modeling, optimization and control of
an austenitization furnace for achieving target product toughness and
minimizing energy use. J. Process Control, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jprocont.
2017.09.008 (ISSN 0959-1524).
Ganesh, H.S., Taleff, E.M., Edgar, T.F., Baldea, M., 2017b. Simultaneous optimization
of material properties and energy efficiency of a steel quench hardening
process. In: Proc. American Control Conference, Seattle, WA, May.
Heng, V.R., Ganesh, H.S., Dulaney, A.R., Kurzawski, A., Baldea, M., Ezekoye, O.A.,
Edgar, T.F., 2017. Energy-oriented modeling and optimization of a heat treating
furnace. J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Contr. 139 (6), 061014.
Kumar, A., Baldea, M., Edgar, T.F., Ezekoye, O.A., 2015. Smart manufacturing
approach for efficient operation of industrial steam-methane reformers. Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res. 54 (16), 4360–4370.
Kumar, A., Baldea, M., Edgar, T.F., 2016a. Real-time optimization of an industrial
steam-methane reformer under distributed sensing. Control Eng. Pract. 54,
140–153.
Kumar, A., Baldea, M., Edgar, T.F., 2016b. On optimal sensing and actuation design
for an industrial scale steam methane reformer furnace. AIChE J. 62 (9),
3225–3237, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aic.15333.
Lewis, N., 2007. Toward cost-effective solar energy use. Science 315 (5813),
789–801.
Ljung, L., Söderström, T., 1983. Theory and Practice of Recursive Identification, vol.
5. MIT press, Cambridge, MA.
Manthanwar, A., 2016. Multiscale Design, Robust Optimisation and Control of Fuel
Cell Energy Systems. Doctor of Philosophy. Imperial College, London.
Myers, R., Montgomery, D., Anderson-Cook, C., 2009. Response Surface
Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments,
third ed. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
Panos, C., Kouramas, K.I., Georgiadis, M.C., Pistikopoulos, E.N., 2010. Dynamic
optimization and robust explicit model predictive control of hydrogen storage
tank. Comput. Chem. Eng. 34 (9), 1341–1347.
Pellegrino, J., Margolis, N., Justiniano, M., Miller, M., Tekdi, A., 2004. Energy Use,
Loss, and Opportunity Analysis. Technical Report. Energetics, Incorporated and
E3M, Incorportated.
Pistikopoulos, E.N., Diangelakis, N.A., Oberdieck, R., Papathanasiou, M.M., Nascu, I.,
Sun, M., 2015. PAROC – an integrated framework and software platform for the
optimisation and advanced model-based control of process systems. Chem.
Eng. Sci. 136, 115–138.
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), 2014.
Accelerating U.S. Advanced Manufacturing, Advanced Manufacturing
Partnership (AMP) 2.0 Steering Committee Report. https://www.whitehouse.
gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/PCAST/amp20 report final.pdf.
Smart Manufacturing Leadership Coalition Report, 2017. Implementing 21st
Century Smart Manufacturing, Workshop. Smart Manufacturing Leadership
Coalition Report, Washington DC (June 2011. https://www.
smartmanufacturingcoalition.org/sites/default/files/implementing 21st
century smart manufacturing report 2011 0.pdf).
Stephen, Ezell, 2016. A Policy Makers Guide to Smart Manufacturing. Information
and Technology Foundation (ITIF) (November 2016. https://itif.org/
publications/2016/11/30/policymakers-guide-smart-manufacturing).
Thedki, A., 2010. Energy Efficiency Improvement Opportunities in Process Heating
for the Forging Industry. E3 M, Incorporated.
Van Overschee, P., De Moor, B., 1994. N4SID: Subspace algorithms for the
identification of combined deterministic-stochastic systems. Automatica 30
(1), 75–93.
Wang, M., Wang, Z., Gong, X., Guo, Z., 2014. The intensification technologies to
water electrolysis for hydrogen production –a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 29, 573–588.
Ziogou, C., Pistikopoulos, E.N., Georgiadis, M.C., Voutetakis, S., Papadopoulou, S.,
2013. Empowering the performance of advanced NMPC by multiparametric
programming – an application to a PEM fuel cell system. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
52 (13), 4863–4873.